767948 Ontario Ltd. v Bradford West Gwillimbury Fire and Emergency Services, 2023 ONFSC 22

FIRE SAFETY COMMISSION

Tribunals Ontario

COMMISSION DE LA SÉCURITÉ-INCENDIE

Tribunaux décisionnels Ontario

Citation: 767948 Ontario Ltd. v Bradford West Gwillimbury Fire and Emergency Services, 2023 ONFSC 22

Date: 2023-07-07

Appeal under section 26(1) of the Fire Protection and Prevention Act, 1997, S.O. 1997, c. 4.

Between:

767948 Ontario Ltd.

Appellant

and

Bradford West Gwillimbury Fire and Emergency Services

Respondent

DECISION AND ORDER

PANEL: Rocco Iamello, Member Claudine Wilson, Member

Ronny Katz, Member

APPEARANCES:

For the Appellant: Arthur LeBlanc, Officer of Corporation

For the Respondent: Michelle Davies, Inspector Paul Barritt, Inspector,

Bradford West Gwillimbury Fire & Emergency Services

Held by videoconference: May 24, 2023, Appellant attended via teleconference.

OVERVIEW

1The appellant, 767948 Ontario Ltd., owns the building located at 40 Toronto Street in the Town of Bradford West Gwillimbury, a residential occupancy known as LeBlanc Rest Home (the “Building”).

2On January 13, 2023, Inspector Michelle Davies of Bradford West Gwillimbury Fire & Emergency Service (the respondent) conducted an inspection of the Building. Inspector Davies issued an Inspection Order identifying seven contraventions of the Fire Code, pursuant to clause 21(1)(g) of the Fire Protection and Prevention Act, 1997¹ (“FPPA”). The Inspection Order (“Order”) was served on the appellant and on Arthur LeBlanc, Officer of the Corporation on January 26, 2023, by regular letter mail and by personal service.

3On February 20, 2023, Arthur LeBlanc requested a Fire Marshal Review of Item 3 of the Inspection Order, exercising his rights as described under s. 25 of the FPPA. The Fire Marshal refused to consider the request and referred the matter to the Fire Safety Commission (the “Commission”) pursuant to clause 25(4)(a) of the FPPA.

4The appellant requests the Commission to rescind item 3 of the Order.

5The respondent requests the Commission to confirm item 3 of the Order, as the library is an obstruction and combustible material in the corridor poses a risk to occupant life safety.

THE ISSUE

6Should the Commission confirm, amend, or rescind the Order or make such other order as the Commission deems appropriate?

THE POSITIONS OF THE PARTIES

APPELLANT:

7The appellant submits that the space was specifically designed for its current use.

1. The residents of the Building would be devastated if the library was removed;
2. The library is not a fire hazard, but a therapeutic pastime for the residents;
3. The shelving unit, writing desk, and chair are recessed into the west wall, leaving a 5’-3” unobstructed passageway as a means of egress;
4. A maximum of eleven residents use this corridor on their way to the elevator. The area is served by a second means of egress; and
5. The library has existed for 26 years with no concern expressed by the respondent.

8The appellant further submits that the library is a source of enjoyment and social activity for the residents.

RESPONDENT:

9Item 3 of the Order stated that the bookcases, desks and chairs located in the hallway of the second floor of the Building presented an obstruction to the timely movement of persons accessing the exit in an emergency, and furthermore that the hallway was not designed for the storage of combustible materials (including furnishings and books) or the occupancy of persons sitting to read. Inspector Davies required the combustibles to be removed from the hallway, and to maintain it free of obstruction by February 20, 2023. The following are the contraventions cited:

1. Sentence 2.4.1.1.(2), Division B of the Ontario Fire Code (“OFC”), which states:

Combustible materials shall not be accumulated in any part of an elevator shaft, ventilation shaft, means of egress, service room or service space, unless the location, room or space is designed for those materials.

2. Sentence 2.7.1.7.(1), which states: