A FRR for the exit that is greater than the floor for mid-rise only is inconsistent with current education material and OBC application. Non-combustible stairwells with a fire resistance rating of 1.5 hoursĪlthough we support the requirement for non-combustible stairwells, the 1.5 FRR is inconsistent with the floor rating and this differs from other applications of the existing OBC. From experience, we understand that not all sites are the same, some parallel and others perpendicular with the street.ħ. Such variations are seen as a possible source of inconsistency for enforcement. We are cautious regarding implementing the 10% requirement for mid-rise only, as this differs from other sections in the code. Minimum requirements for building perimeter facing one street Restricting the building area of mid-rise wood frame buildingsĪlthough we have no objection to the restriction on building area, we would encourage harmony with the NBC wherever possible.Ħ. We have no concerns with the proposed height restrictions, and recommend that the regulations be clear for sites that are not flat, for purposes of measuring the maximum height.ĥ. Restricting the height of mid-rise wood frame buildings We would encourage further discussion and clarification regarding this item prior to implementation.Ĥ. Car rental, small tool repair and construction offices have a history of sliding into Group F2 uses. If permitted, we believe OBC Part 11 will require amendment and would expect these be clear and concise for consistent code application and enforcement.Īllowing parking garages (Group F3) up to the second storey, provided they are ancillary to the primary residential and/or commercial occupancy of the building, brings in question ongoing use and maintenance. Such variations are seen as a possible source of inconsistency for code enforcement. Inclusion of a two hour separation will assist in reducing such issues however, this varies from the existing Major Separation Fire Separations Table (T3.l.3.l) and elsewhere in the code. We are cautious regarding some assembly combinations with a corresponding Group C use as it is understood that increased risk and conflicts between uses will occur. Building Officials are familiar with and comfortable in approving and inspecting these occupancies in similar structures. We have no concerns with Group C and D occupancies being permitted in various combinations. The non-High Building classification will assist in providing consistent application of the regulations by design professionals and building officials. Limiting the building height to six storeys to avoid interpretation as a "High Building" and for fire safety equipment are sound reasons. Increasing the maximum number of storeys for wood frame buildings from four to six At this time the OBOA is not commenting on the policy decision to allow wood frame buildings to six storeys.ġ. It is our position moving forward that OBOA is solely commenting on the proposed amendments, and limiting our input to areas of code enforcement and consistency of enforcement. Through the participation and opportunity of the fall consultations with industry stake holders, we both gained a thorough and complete understanding of proposed amendment. Prior to commenting on the potential amendments, the OBOA wanted to acknowledge the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) staff for hosting mid-rise framing consultations last fall.
The above item is part of the Regulatory Registry Posting dated March 20, 2014. On behalf of the Ontario Building Officials Association (OBOA), please accept this letter as our comments related to the Potential Building Code Amendments for Mid-Rise Wood Frame Buildings Up to Six Storeys. RE: Potential OBC Amendments, Mid-Rise Wood Frame Buildings
#ONTARIO BUILDING CODE WOOD BUILDINGS PROFESSIONAL#
Continuing Professional Development program.Inter-provincial Certification Equivalency Assessment.Prior Learning Assessment Review (PLAR).
0 kommentar(er)
