Ruling No.: 21-09-1583
Application No.: B-2021-03
BUILDING CODE COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF Subsection 24(1) of the Building Code Act, S.O. 1992, c. 23, as amended.
AND IN THE MATTER OF Sentence 1.1.2.7.(1) of Division A of Regulation 332/12, as amended, and Sentences 6.2.3.9.(1) and 11.3.1.2.(1) of Division B of Regulation 332/12, as amended (“the Building Code”).
AND IN THE MATTER OF an application by Karen Hack, for the resolution of a dispute with William Johnston, Chief Building Official, City of Toronto, to determine whether the proposal to replace the existing gas furnace with a high efficiency model in the basement of an existing 3 storey building, provides sufficiency of compliance for the HVAC system of the building with Sentences 6.2.3.9.(1) and 11.3.1.2.(1) of Division B when considering Sentence 1.1.2.7.(1) of Division A of the Building Code at 71 Oxford Street, Toronto, Ontario.
APPLICANT Karen Hack Head to Toe Health Centre Toronto, Ontario
RESPONDENT William Johnston Chief Building Official City of Toronto Toronto, Ontario
PANEL Stephen Wong, Chair Alexandra Chow Michael Egberts
PLACE via video conference
DATE OF HEARING May 14, 2021
DATE OF RULING May 14, 2021
APPEARANCES Demir Delen Senior Code Consultant City of Toronto, Ontario Agent for the Applicant
Lance Kaprielian Studio Limina Inc. City of Toronto, Ontario Agent for the Applicant
Imran Esmail Building Engineer City of Toronto, Ontario Respondent
Kai Wang Building Engineer City of Toronto, Ontario Designate for the Respondent
RULING
1. Particulars of Dispute
The Applicant has received a building permit under the Building Code Act, 1992, to replace the existing gas furnace with a high efficiency model in the basement of an existing 3 storey building, at 71 Oxford Street, City of Toronto, Ontario.
The subject building is an existing 3 storey building having a building area of 62.5 m2. The building is of combustible construction, and is not equipped with a fire alarm system, sprinkler system or standpipe and hose system. The building is a mixed-use building containing a Group C (residential) major occupancy on the second and third floor levels, a Group D (commercial) major occupancy on the main floor level and a Group F, Division 3, (storage) major occupancy within the basement. Each occupancy has its own entrance to serve its respective space.
Sentence 11.3.1.2.(1) of Division B of the Building Code requires the design and construction of a new building system, or the extension of an existing building system, to comply with all other Parts of the Code.
Sentence 6.2.3.9.(1) of Division B states that in a residential occupancy, air from one suite cannot be circulated to any other suite or to a public corridor or public stairway.
The dispute for the Commission to determine is whether the proposal to replace the existing gas furnace with a high efficiency model in the basement of an existing 3 storey building, provides sufficiency of compliance for the HVAC system of the building with Sentences 6.2.3.9.(1) and 11.3.1.2.(1) of Division B when considering Sentence 1.1.2.7.(1) of Division A of the Building Code at 71 Oxford Street, Toronto, Ontario.
2. Provisions of the Building Code in Dispute
Article 1.1.2.7. Division A - Existing Buildings
(1) Except as provided in Section 3.17. of Division B, Section 9.40. of Division B and Part 11 of Division B, if an existing building is extended or is subject to material alteration or repair, this Code applies only to the design and construction of the extensions and those parts of the building that are subject to the material alteration or repair.
Article 6.2.3.9. Division B - Interconnection of Systems
(1) In a residential occupancy, air from one suite shall not be circulated to any other suite or to a public corridor or public stairway.
Article 11.3.1.2. Division B - New Building Systems and Extension of Existing Building Systems
(2) Except as provided in Article 11.3.3.1. and Section 11.5., the design and construction of a new building system or the extension of an existing building system, shall comply with all other Parts.
3. Applicant’s Position
The Agent for the Applicant submitted that the subject building has been in existence for more than 100 years and that the existing furnace served the building for at least 18 years. Therefore, Part 11 of the Building Code is applicable, as per Division A Sentence 1.1.2.6.(1).
The Agent indicated that the existing building contains a Group D occupancy on the first floor and a dwelling unit on the second and third floors. However, the proposed work is only in the basement, which contains a furnace room, storage areas, a washroom and a kitchenette. The basement is classified as a Group F Division 3 major occupancy.
The Agent argued that even if the changes to the existing furnace (heating system) is deemed a new building system, Sentence 11.3.1.2. (1) of the Code states that the design and construction of a new building system must comply with all other Parts, "except as provided in Section 11.5.". The Agent stated that there is an exception in Section 11.5. Compliance Alternatives and it refers to not having to comply with Sentence 9.33.1.1.(1) which requires compliance with Part 6 Heating, Ventilating and Air-Conditioning when using Table 11.5.1.1.F Compliance Alternatives for Industrial Occupancies.
The Agent submitted that the Respondent is requiring compliance with Sentence 6.2.3.9.(1), which requires that in a residential occupancy, air from one suite must not be circulated to any other suite or to a public corridor or public stairway. The agent confirmed that there has been a change in major occupancy in this building.
The Agent submitted that in the past, the basement was a residence (Group C occupancy) and now it is used for mechanical and storage purposes (Group F, Division 3 occupancy). The Agent argued that even if this change is deemed to be a change in major occupancy, there is no reduction in performance level. He explained that in accordance with the Code, the hazard index for Group C is 3 and for F3 is 2. Therefore, in accordance with Clause 11.4.2.3.(1)(a) of the Code, there is no increase in hazard and no compensating construction is required. Further, the Agent maintained that as per Compliance Alternative F84 for Article 6.2.3.9. in Table 11.5.1.1.F, the existing air circulation system (ductwork) can remain as is.
The Agent also advised that Sentence 1.1.2.7.(1) of Division A of the Building Code states that if an existing building is subject to material alteration, the Code applies only to the design and construction of those parts of the building that are subject to the material alteration.
The Agent submitted it is the Applicant’s position that since the proposed renovation is located only in the basement of this building and no redesign or construction is proposed on the floors above ground, the proposed replacement furnace is not considered a new building system as per Sentence 11.3.1.2.(1) of the Code and therefore, Sentence 6.2.3.9.(1) is not applicable in this case.
4. Respondent’s Position
The Designate submitted that 71 Oxford Street in Toronto, Ontario is a 3 storey above grade and 1 storey below grade mixed-use building. He explained that the dispute arose when a new furnace was proposed to be installed in the basement of the subject building, which will serve all 4 levels of the building.
The Designate indicated that the mixed-use building has 3 distinct major occupancies, each having its own entrance to serve its respective space. The Designate advised that the occupancy types are storage below grade level, commercial at grade level and residential (one unit) that occupies both the second and third floors.
The Designated reported that the City has no prior record of any heating system being installed in this building, and therefore anything that is shown as existing on the proposed permit drawings, from the City's point of view, would be considered as ‘new’. The permit drawings provided state that the only HVAC work being proposed is an installation of a new furnace in the below grade level. When a furnace is installed, ductwork is required in order to allow heat from the furnace to be distributed throughout the space. However, the City has no knowledge of how the ductwork is distributed throughout this building.
The Designate advised that there is great concern that fire separations are being penetrated without the benefit of fire dampers. In addition, there is concern that based on the existing construction, the residential unit will share air with the commercial and storage spaces.
The Designate advised that there is no mention of where the thermostat is located in the building, which could potentially leave the residents at the mercy of the commercial or storage space user’s temperature settings.
The Designate submitted that the drawings provided are not in compliance with Sentence 6.2.3.9.(1) of the Building Code, which states, "In a residential occupancy, air from one suite shall not be circulated to any other suite or to a public corridor or public stairway". In addition, the Designate maintained that the drawings provided to the City do not show who is taking responsibility for this design.
In summary, the Designate submitted that since there is no record of any HVAC permit having been issued for the original HVAC system, and no building department record or knowledge of how the existing ductwork is distributed throughout this building, anything that is shown as existing on the proposed permit drawings, is deemed to be new construction. Therefore, it is the Respondent’s position that Sentences 11.3.1.2.(1) and 6.2.3.9.(1) of Division B of the Building Code are applicable to the proposed construction.
5. Commission Ruling
It is the decision of the Building Code Commission that the proposal to replace the existing gas furnace with a high efficiency model in the basement of an existing 3 storey building provides sufficiency of compliance for the HVAC system of the building with Sentences 6.2.3.9.(1) and 11.3.1.2.(1) of Division B of the Building Code when considering Sentence 1.1.2.7.(1) of Division A of the Building Code at 71 Oxford Street, Toronto, Ontario on condition that:
a) The existing fire separations between the three major occupancies are maintained and fire dampers are provided as required.
Reasons
i) Sentence 11.3.1.2.(1) of Division B of the Building Code requires the design and construction of a new building system, or the extension of an existing building system, to comply with all other Parts of the Code.
Sentence 6.2.3.9.(1) of Division B of the Building Code states that in a residential occupancy, air from one suite cannot be circulated to any other suite or to a public corridor or public stairway.
The Commission heard evidence that the current HVAC system in the building has been in existence for a minimum of 18 years with no substantial changes prior to the replacement of the existing gas furnace with a high efficiency model.
The Commission also heard evidence that the scope of work was limited to replacing the existing gas furnace with a high efficiency model and that the ductwork required for the replacement was minimal to facilitate the installation.
Based on the evidence, it is the Commission’s opinion that there is no extension to the existing building system and that the material alteration is considered to be minor and therefore, Sentences 11.3.1.2.(1) and 6.2.3.9.(1) of Division B are not applicable.
ii) The high efficiency furnace will provide an improvement to energy efficiency and air circulation in the existing building.
iii) The Commission heard the Applicant will provide the following safety measures, as compensating measures:
a. A duct-type smoke detector has been installed and interconnected with other smoke alarms in the building to shut down the furnace in the event of a fire.
b. A fire damper has been installed in the duct penetrating fire separation between the service room and the floor assembly above.
Dated at the City of Toronto this 14th day in the month of May in the year 2021 for application number B-2021-03.
Stephen Wong, Chair
Alexandra Chow
Michael Egberts