Ontario Uilding Officials Association

i P. 55

ONTARIO UILDING OFFICIALS ASSOCIATION

Issue 95/September 2012 OBOA Strategic Plan 2012+ CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIALS AND "...our association now has a strategic plan to RENEWABLE ENERGY PROJECTS See Chris Williams, p.5-9 guide it's decision-making and operations

AIRD & BERLIS LIP over the coming years..." This es E~~hi~hifo.....G" p _.._r . , . o Barristers and Solicitors i __ n ...... , . _ _ t referred to P. 56 PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE

Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing: - On-site Sewage System Study Project Advi- sory Committee

- Glass Panels in Balcony Guards Expert Advi- sory Panel

- Accessible Built Environment Enforcement Stakeholder Working Group Implementing the Plan - Next Edition of the Building Code Stakeholder The 2012 OBOA Board of Directors and Leadership Team Group continue to make great progress on implementing the new OBOA Strategic Plan 2012+. The new strategic plan is ef- - Training and Qualification Discussion Group fectively guiding the work of the association's Board, staff and volunteers to ensure that OBOA is best positioned to - Building Advisory Council achieve its full potential, and take Ontario's building official profession to the next level. Continuing with the theme of Office of the Ontario Fire Marshall: 'Implementing the Plan', I wish to highlight our progress in - Fire Marshall's Public Fire Safety Council respect to another Strategic Priority. - Vulnerable Occupancies Technical Advisory Committee Government Relations OBOA 2012+ Strategic Priority [SP4] 'Government Rela- - Ontario Fire Code Technical Advisory Com- tions'; the corresponding Strategic Goal being: mittee

• To be an active voice for the profession on building regulatory issues by drawing Industry/Professional Associations: on members' expertise and collaborating - Ontario Association of Certified Engineer- with other organizations ing Technicians and Technologist Institute of Engineering Technologists of Ontario Board To achieve this goal, the Board developed Implementation Strategies [IS] which include: - Engineers Architects Building Officials Joint Committee • leveraging our relationship with the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing - Ontario Municipal Administrators Association (MMAH) to secure results that address Municipal Management Accreditation Action members' concerns [IS4.1]; Team

• developing a program to mobilize subject matter expertise within the membership Education: [IS4.2]; - George Brown College School of Architectural Studies Program Advisory Committee • enhancing relationships/partnerships with CBOs/CBO groups [IS4.3]; and Our progress on achieving this goal through such involvement not only recognizes the progressively expanding • pursuing opportunities to collaborate with role of Ontario's Building Officials, but also demonstrates industry/professional associations [IS4.4]. OBOA's commitment to ensuring a safer and a more sustainable and accessible Ontario, while advancing the Build- Our progress on achieving this goal has involved represen- ing Official profession. [OBOA 2012+ vision statement: tation and participation on various MMAH, Office of the "Ensuring a safer and a more sustainable and accessible Ontario Fire Marshall, industry/professional associations, Ontario by advancing the building official profession".] and education sector task forces, panels, committees, and boards. Examples of this involvement include:

21 Ontario Building Officials Association i P. 57

Further, our work toward achieving this goal reinforces Government Relations has long been, and will continue to OBOA's mission to support the profession in ensuring a be a core activity for OBOA. We intend to continue building safer and a more sustainable and accessible Ontario by on the close relationship we have established with the Min- working with industry partners and providing a voice to istry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, and other industry policymakers. [OBOA 2012+ mission statement: "OBOA stakeholders and partners to ensure we provide an even supports Ontario building officials in ensuring a safer and more active voice to government on building regulatory is- a more sustainable and accessible Ontario by delivering sues and professional and educational related matters. training and certification, promoting uniform code application, working with industry partners, providing a voice to Respectfully submitted, policymakers, and advancing the profession':] Leo J. Cusumano OBOA President

Have you REGISTERED as a DELEGATE? • Have you REGISTERED your COMPANION? Have you REGISTERED for GOLF?

NOTE: Shuttle buses will run between Conference V W Sudbury, O Atari o Hotel (Holiday Inn) & overflow hotels Eg.Hampton Sun. Sept. 9th to Wed. Sept. 12th 2012 Inn, Homewood Suites & Travelodge.

Exterior Insulating Sheathing an online course for building officials

3 modules, each 10 minutes

Learning objectives:

• Identify the different types of EIS and their physical characteristics • Discuss concepts relating to: thermal bridging. psychrometrics and condensation, interstitial temperatures, vapour diffusion, airtightness and rain shedding. • Identify and understand EIS-related Code requirements

One year personal access for $59.00

!i coursesbywire Go to www.oboa.on.caltraining to register today!

SEPT 2012 I ISSUE 95 1 i P.58 —

NEVADA U Delegate Passport Prize Trip for 2 to Las Vegas A sponsored by

IPEX (Mike Speziale) I:- ..

41 Ontario Building Officials Association i P.59 - LEGAL CORNER

energy projects", what is a "renewable energy project" and whether there has been any regulatory jurisdiction left for municipalities. We shall then briefly touch on the role of the Chief Building Official, what is and now what is not applicable law as it relates to renewable energy projects and how Chief Building Officials should deal with this issue.

FORMER MUNICIPAL ROLE IN THE REGULA- TION OF ENERGY PROJECTS CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIALS AND Many energy projects would meet the definition of "build- RENEWABLE ENERGY PROJECTS ing" in the Building Code Act, 1992 and would also be July 27, 2012 considered "development" or a "use of land" as contem- plated by the Planning Act (e.g. hydro-electric generating stations, gas-fired generating stations, ethanol plants, wind INTRODUCTION turbines, etc.). These projects would therefore require con- As evidenced by appeals to the Ontario Municipal Board, formance to municipal planning and other regulatory by- Court applications, and the enactment of prohibitory by- laws and enactments, as well as a building permit in con- laws by various municipalities, there is a growing conflict formance with the Ontario Building Code and the Building between municipal governments and provincially sanc- Code Act, 1992. For example, under the Planning Act tioned renewable energy projects. The Green Energy Act, energy projects would have to conform to Official Plans, 2009 1 , enacted in the spring 2009, has taken away tradi- zoning by-laws and related by-laws enacted under Part V tional planning authority for many types of energy projects of the Planning Act; receive site plan approval pursuant to which meet the definition of a "renewable energy project'. section 41 of the Planning Act; if required, obtain a minor While certain types of energy projects were previously im- variance under section 45 of the Planning Act; and con- mune from municipal planning regulation, the Green En- form to whatever conditions are attached pursuant to the ergy Act, 2009 graphically brought home the fact that the subdivision and consent authorities as set out in Part VI of Province was no longer willing to permit prohibition or reg- the Planning Act. ulation of renewable energy projects at the municipal level. Unfortunately, the Green Energy Act, 2009, the various In addition, municipalities, through the Municipal Act, pieces of legislation that it amended and the regulations 2001, have some other authorities of a regulatory nature which spun off it have led to confusion as to what consti- which could be applied to energy projects. The authority tutes a renewable energy project and what, if any, municipal set out in subsection 10(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001, regulatory role there is left. which could be of interest if regulating energy projects include: As the custodians of building permits and the enforcers of the Building Code and the Building Code Act, 19922, it "... 5. Economic, social and environmental can be assumed that Chief Building Officials will be asked well-being of the municipality. to determine whether attempts by municipalities to regulate or prohibit renewable energy projects constitute "ap- 6. Health, safety and well-being of persons. plicable law", whether the project in question meets the definition of a "renewable energy project", whether the provincially imposed conditions have been met, and whether 8. Protection of persons and property, your municipal Councils will understand the independent including consumer protection. ..." role that Chief Building Officials are required to take, even There are also a few specific powers that could theoreti- when dealing with highly unpopular structures in their com- cally apply to regulate energy developments. These in- munity. clude: section 28 relating to the regulation or prohibition This article will provide some background and context by of public nuisances, and section 129 relating to the ability exploring the traditional municipal regulatory role of energy to regulate noise and vibration by by-law and section 129 permits a municipality to regulate or prohibit odour, dust projects through the Planning Aci 3, the change brought by the Green Energy Act, 2009 as regards to "renewable and outdoor illumination.

1 Green Energy Act, 2009,s.0. 2009, c. 12, Sched. A. 2 Building Code Act, 1992, 5.0.1992, c. 23. 3 Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13. 4 Municipal Act 2001, SO. 2001, c. 25.

SEPT 2012 IISSUE 95 1 5 .1

LEGAL CORNER CONT'D

Therefore, energy projects of many sorts were subject to which was then divided between the Ontario government comprehensive municipal regulation and control set out through several ministries and municipalities. The Green in both the Planning Act and the Municipal Act, 2001. Energy Act, 2009 carves out a new class of land use, a Some energy projects, however, had been treated a little "renewable energy project". The definition put forward by differently, even before the Green Energy Act, 2009 came the Green Energy Act, 2009 which found its way into vari- into effect. For example, subsection 62(1) of the Plan- ous other pieces of legislation, including the Planning Act, ning Act exempted all Hydro One projects approved under defines a renewable energy project as: the Environmental Assessment Act. These would involve most, if not all, Ontario hydro power generation facilities. In "... the construction, installation, use, op- addition, section 62.0.1 of the Planning Act exempted all eration, changing or retiring of a renewable energy undertakings approved under Part II of the Environ- energy generation facility; " 70 ment Assessment Acts or exempted under that Act if a A renewable energy generation facility is defined as: regulation under subsection 70(h) of the Planning Act was in effect. This broad exemption authority could apply to any "... a generation facility that generates energy project of any sort in the province whether public electricity from a renewable energy source or private. Only one project however, a gas-fired electrical and that meets such criteria as may be generating facility in the Township of King, has been desig- prescribed by regulation and includes as- nated by regulation. Restrictions or exemptions for energy sociated or ancillary equipment, systems projects from Planning Act control are also (confusingly to and technologies as may be prescribed by say the least) found in other pieces of legislation. For ex- regulation, but does not include an associ- ample, section 46.1 of the Electricity Act, 19986 provides ated waste disposal site, unless the site is permanent grandfathering for all electrical generating and prescribed by regulation for the purposes transmission distribution facilities that existed in 1999 of this definition;'t 1 from the Planning Act (query why this was not simply put into the Planning Act). The Ontario Energy Board Act, A renewable energy source is then defined as: 19987 in section 128.1 provides that that Act and regulation supersedes all municipal by-laws and other Acts. The "... an energy source that is renewed by Court in Union Gas Ltd. v. Dawn (Township) 8 in 1977 natural processes and includes wind, water, determined that such a provision meant that there was biomass, biogas, biofuel, solar energy, absolutely no municipal planning control over gas pipeline geothermal energy, tidal forces and such and transmission facilities subject to the Ontario Energy other energy sources as may be prescribed Board Act°. by the regulations, but only if the energy source satisfies such criteria as may be Therefore, prior to the Green Energy Act, 2009 with sev- prescribed by the regulations for that en- eral important exemptions, there was typical municipal ergy source; " 12 planning and regulatory control over energy generation projects. The current controversy flows not from these Regard, therefore, must also be had to regulations. exemptions but from the changes effected by the Green The Green Energy Act, 2009 establishes an entirely new Energy Act, 2009. land use regulatory scheme for such renewable energy projects. Firstly, the Planning Act is amended to remove its THE GREEN ENERGY ACT, 2009 application to renewable energy projects. The Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 was introduced for first reading in February of 2009 and fol- As well, the City of Toronto site plan authority no longer ap- lowing a fast-tracked legislative process, received Royal plies and neither do orders made under the Ontario Plan- Assent on May 14, 2009. It had a number of objectives, ning and Development Act, 1994 13 regarding ministerial including the creation of more than 50,000 "green collar" zoning and minor variance orders previously applied to re- jobs, encouraging energy conservation and positioning On- newable energy generating facilities or renewable energy tario to be a leading nation in the generation of renew- projects. able energy. It also sought to streamline and facilitate the Concurrently, a new part is added to the Environmental regulatory approval process for renewable energy projects

5 Environmental Assessment Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.18. 9 Ontario Energy Board Act, R.S.O. 1970, c. 312. 6 Electricity Act, 1998, S.O. 1998, c. 15, Sched. A. 10 Green Energy Act, 2009, s. 1(1). 7 Ontario Energy Board Act, 1998, S.O. 1998, c 15, Sched. B. 11 Ibid.; Electricity Act, 1998, S.O. 1998, c. 15, Sched. A, s. 2(1). 8 Union Gas Ltd. v. Dawn (Township) (1977), 15 O.R. (2d) 722, 2 12 Green Energy Act, 2009, s. 1(1). M.P..LR 23,76 D.LR. (3d) 613 (Div. Ct). 13 Ontario Planning and Development Act, 1994, SO. 1994, c. 23, Sched. A. 6 1 Ontario Building Officials Association P. 61

Protection Act74 being V.0.1 (Renewable Energy) creat- or operation. The regulation that was enacted pursuant to ing a new one stop approval regime for renewable energy this section, designates solar and geothermal generation projects exclusively through the Ministry of the Environ- facilities but not wind. ment. It exempts renewable energy projects from all other areas of the Environmental Protection Act and other There is an argument that there remains some municipal legislation such as the Ontario Water Resources Act15 so role, relying on the above-referenced authorities, to deal that only one single approval is required being pursuant with certain types of renewable energy projects, in particu- to section 47.3 of the Environmental Protection Act. The lar wind power. These of course have generally become criteria and requirements for such approvals are set out the most controversial of renewable energy projects. An in 0. Reg. 521/10. Under the regulation, municipalities important issue, however, remains that depending upon the are to be consulted (as are other people) and there is a extent of regulation (e.g. a de facto prohibition), whether formal public consultation process set up. The normal ap- they would in fact fall under section 14 of the Municipal peal process under the Environmental Protection Act and Act, 2001 as being in conflict with the Environmental Pro- the Environmental Bill of Rights is limited for renewable tection Act regime for renewable energy approvals. Re- energy projects so that a third party disputing a renewable cently, some municipalities have decided to test the limits energy project can have a hearing before the Environmen- and have enacted by-laws which regulate or in some cases tal Appeal Tribunal only if the party is able to establish that de facto prohibit wind farms. the undertaking would cause either serious harm to human health or serious irreversible harm to plant life, animal life APPLICABLE LAW, RENEWABLE ENERGY and natural environment. PROJECTS AND THE ROLE OF THE CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL In short, rather than being the primary regulator through As noted, most renewable energy projects would require a the land use planning process for renewable energy un- building permit to be issued by the Chief Building Official dertakings, municipalities have been relegated to the role pursuant to section 8 of the Building Code Act, 1992. As of commenting agencies with very limited ability to require is well known, subsection 8(2) sets out the prerequisites any sort of review of a decision by a Director regarding the (6) for a building permit and if they are met, there is no dis- issuance of a permit for the renewable energy project. This cretion on the part of the Chief Building Official to not issue truncated role for municipalities has not gone down well the permit. Of interest in this discussion is section 8(2)(a) in communities where controversial and unwanted projects which states that the proposed renewable energy project, (often wind farms) are proposed and approved through the building or structure must not contravene any other appli- Environmental Protection Act. cable law. The controversy over what constituted "other applicable law" was ended with the enactment of article IS THERE ANY MUNICIPAL ROLE LEFT? 1.4.1.3 of the 1997 Ontario Building Code which specifi- As noted above, there are some specific and some general cally enumerated the list of "applicable law" now found in municipal regulatory powers available which could apply to article 1.4.1.3 of the Building Code. While not altogether renewable energy projects under the Municipal Act, 2001. certain, it appears that the definition set out in article 1.4.1.3 While section 14 provides that municipal by-laws are of no is exhaustive. Applicable law includes, amongst many other effect if they conflict with Provincial legislation, regulations, things, development plans under the Ontario Planning and licences or approvals, the concept of conflict has to date Development Act, 1994, zoning and related by-laws made been narrowly applied by the Courts where the Courts be- under the Planning Act, site plan approval under section lieved that the municipalities were attempting to regulate 41 of the Planning Act, by-laws and other enactments pur- or prohibit, in the interest of public health and safety and suant to the development permit regulation under the Plan- environmental protection. 16 Prohibiting what other levels ning Act, and site plan approval provisions set out in the of government had permitted did not, in the Court's mind, City of Toronto Act, 2006 1 7 Notably, all of these planning necessarily amount to a conflict. authorities have been removed from the regulation of renewable energy projects. Significantly, article 1.4.1.3 was It should be noted, that subsection 5(1) of the Green En- amended to add section 47.3 of the Environmental Pro- ergy Act, 2009 allows the Lieutenant Governor in Coun- tection Act, with respect to the requirement for renewable cil, by regulation, to designate renewable energy projects energy approvals. It appears therefore that with respect which are not subject to any municipal regulation under use to a renewable energy project, if a permit has been issued

14 Environmental Protection Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.19. 17 City of Toronto Act, 2006, 5.0, 2006, c. 11, Sched. A 15 Ontario Water Resources Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. 0.40. 16 See Croplife Canada v. Toronto (City) (2005), 75 O.R. (3d) 357; and 114957 Canada Ltee (Spraytech, Societ€ d'arrosage) V. Hudson frown), 2001 SCC 40,1200112 SCR 241. SEPT 2012 ISSUE 95 7 P.62 I -

LEGAL CORNER CONT'D

by a director pursuant to section 47.3 of the Environmen- opposition, including by-laws which would not be included tal Protection Act then the only "applicable law" that the with "applicable law" prohibiting same. The roles and con- Chief Building Official needs to consider is section 47.3. flict between municipal Council and Chief Building Officials The situation is of course different for conditional permits has been explored at length in a series of articles in this as their "applicable law" means any general special Act and magazine by Mr. Longo and myself in 2008 and 2009. A all regulations and by-laws enacted thereto that prohibit Chief Building Official must operate independently of the the proposed use building. will or desires of Council and is to be guided only by the Building Code and the Building Code Act, 1992 in issuing Controversy could arise for Chief Building Officials in a permits or otherwise enforcing the provisions of the Build- couple of ways. Firstly, a municipality may enact a by-law ing Code Act, 1992 and the Building Code. The Courts regulating or prohibiting a wind farm development on the have come down very hard on Chief Building Officials, mu- basis of its general Municipal Act, 2001 authority, as set nicipal staff and Councils where it appears that the Chief out above. For a normal building permit, that would not ap- Building Official was influenced into taking a position that pear to be applicable law. However, if a conditional permit was at odds with the requirements of the Building Code were sought, it could be. It is possible as well, that a mu- Act, 1992 or the Building Code. nicipal Council may advance the proposition that the scope of applicable law as it applies to full permits is not entirely exhaustive and that a permit should not be issued. This is WHAT TO DO? tried from time to time. For example, see Simcoe (County) It appears possible that some municipal Councils and their District School Board v. Oro-Medonte (Township). 18 Chief Building Officials will be on collision courses regarding the issuance of permits for which certificate or approval Another area of controversy which could be advanced by a has been issued under section 47.3 of the Environmental municipal Council that was opposed to an energy project is Protection Act for-a renewable energy project. There may that it did not meet the precise definition of a "renewable be situations where such a project, particularly if it is a wind energy project". Given the rather complex and convoluted farm, could be on its face prohibited by-laws enacted by definitions (often requiring you to look at different Acts and a municipality pursuant to the Municipal Act, 2001. The regulations) could create some confusion. Another inter- role of the Chief Building Official, however, is to be guided esting question is, can a Chief Building Official go behind by what is set out in the Building Code Act, 1992 and a permission or approval issued by a director under section the Building Code. It appears clear that if the certificate 47.3 of the Environmental Protection Act to see that in fact of approval is issued by the Director under section 47.3 of all prerequisites were complied with leading up to the ap- the Environmental Protection Act, there should be no room proval? As well, there could be conditions attached to such for any other municipal regulatory by-law to be considered approval. Is it then up to the Chief Building Official to en- applicable law and so a building permit should be issued. sure that such conditions are properly fulfilled before issu- That may not make your municipal Council happy but it ap- ing a building permit? What if ongoing conditions or terms pears to be the law. of the renewable energy permit, such as noise monitoring, were violated? Could the building permit be revoked? Mr. Christopher Williams and his colleagues, Leo Longo and John Mascarin welcome your input regarding future A Chief Building Official may find itself in the unpopular articles. They can be reached at cwilliams@airdberlis. position of issuing a building permit which conforms to ap- com; [email protected] and jascarin@airdberlis. plicable law in the face of very express and clear municipal com.

18 Simcoe (County) District School Board v. Oro-Medonte (township) (2007), 2007 CarswellOnt 6799,56 M.P.LR. (4th) 231.

"You have the most importantrofession ~ that relates to publicublic safetsafety in the. world There is the appropriate statement that summarizes this statement: We are the Ontario Building Officials Association.

8 i Ontario Building Officials Association i P. 63 MMAH AWARDS

AWARDS AND RECOGNITION MMAH Building & Development Branch wins Partnership/Commu- nity Building Award ; Energy Implementation Project Team

From right to left: Deputy Minister William Forward, Heather Black, Honourable Minister of Municipal Af- fairs and Housing Kathleen Wynne, Stephanie Costantino, Cengiz Kahramanoglu, James Douglas, No- elle Richardson (selection committee), Ben Pucci. Ralph Digaetano on the team is absent.

The award recognizes the team responsible for delivering opment Branch staff. The stake holder group was formed new energy requirements of the Building Code which sup- to assist with the transition of the substantial energy con- port public policy goals around energy conservation and servation changes (SB 12). The stake holder group started the needs of the building sector. Energy Implementation to meet in-advance of the January 1, 2012 effective date. Project Team members worked in close partnership with In fact, the stake holder group continues to monitor the in- the sector to identify and respond to implementation is- dustry issues that arise with these changes and has revised sues, and prepare materials that have helped ensure that and created new documents to assist with the implementa- builders, designers and enforcement officials have the ca- tion. pacity to apply the new requirements. Team members have gone above and beyond the call of duty to provide a supe- For all the up to date documents and releases on energy rior level of customer service and ensure the success of an conservation, members are encouraged to continue visiting important government initiative. the OBOA website @ www.oboa.on.ca .

The implementation of new energy conservation code requirements included the creation of an industry stake hold- OBOA PROVINCIAL OFFICE er group. The industry group included membership of four 200 Marycroft Ave. Unit 8, stake holders; Ontario Building Officials Association, Large Woodbridge, Ontario L4L 5X4 Municipality Chief Building Officials Association, Ontario Home Builders Association and MMAH Building & Devel- (905) 264-1662 www.oboa.on.ca

SEPT 2012 1 ISSUE 95 ~ 9 P. 64 CHAPTER STUDENT SPONSOR

Conestoga College, 2012 Awards Banquet

From left to right: Sean Cook; Peter Finn Building Code Excellence Award (3rd year), Glen Good, Justin Massecar (1st year), Jim McCabe, Jarris Jantzi (2nd year). Absent Nathan Heyer (2nd year)

The OBOA Strategic Plan 2012+ includes a number of investment as this awareness will benefit the student down Strategic Priorities including Government Relations and the road; applying for building permits and/or working on a Public Awareness. In support of these two directives, I at- job site. The second benefit relates to the awareness and tended the Architecture Construction Engineering Technol- recruitment of students to the opportunity of a full-time ogy 2012 Awards Banquet in April. The main purpose of municipal building official. The OBOA continues to invest attending the banquet was to present building code awards time and money to raise awareness of this career oppor- on behalf of local building officials and the OBOA and to tunity as other construction sectors attempt to attract the promote awareness. Four awards were presented to stu- same student. dents that demonstrated a high proficiency in building code excellence. Mike Selling

Conestoga College is one post-secondary institution that Region D offers a 3 year diploma program for students and supports (Halton, Grand Erie, Niagara & graduates securing full-time employment with design pro- Wellington Waterloo Chapters) fessionals, construction companies and a building official career.

One of the benefits of participating in events such as the awards banquet is supporting learning and development ® The OBOA of code knowledge and increased awareness of Building Officials. Four students were recognized and rewarded for Internship Program... excelling in Building Code knowledge while the remaining students gained an appreciation in code knowledge. The The Start you Deserve learning and application of the Building Code is a good

10 Ontario Building Officials Association P. 65

PLANS EXAMINATION Need more resources for your plans review team? We can help!

Code compliance review and preparation of deficiency letters.

Technically experienced in all qualification categories.

Hire us for a single project or on an ongoing basis . RS M (Who are we?) We service all of Ontario. Building Consultants

Exterior Insulating Sheathing an online course for building officials

3 modules, each 10 minutes

Learning Objectives:

• Identify the different types of EIS and their physical characteristics • Discuss concepts relating to: thermal bridging, psychrometrics and condensation, interstitial temperatures, vapour diffusion, airtightness and rain shedding. Identify and understand EIS-related Code requirements

One year personal access for $59.00

r~ coursesbywire Go to www.oboa.on.ca/training to register today!

SEPT 20121 ISSUE 951 1 1 i P.66 - tW1ItI1 1LttIE

_=-- • Clear Top for easy visual inspection and cleaning • Fullport (Normally-open) Non-Flow Restricting • No problems with Blockages • Gate closes automatically when sewer starts to backup ~ r. • Cleaning-rod does not destroy the gate when feeding or retrieving cable • Normally-open design allows the free circulation of air throughout the plumbing system to the municipal sewer • Award-winning technology III■ • Eliminates Manhole or Expensive Vaults • lightest gate in the industry offers • Allows easy ground level access at any depths next-to-no flow-restriction • Removable seat and gate (Cassette) • Double-hinge gate design keeps allows full servicing of unit gate aligned to seat • Reflective sticker in body serves as • 0-ring seal guide for ease of cassette insertion • For SDR Pipe use SDR adapters • Cassette locks in body

• The cassette & receiver system is integrated into the inspection chamber. • This system allows the use of removable & re-insertable pressure test gate, normally opened or normally closed cassette for backflow prevention. • Cassettes are easilyy installed or removed from a nypy dep th with the extension handle eliminating the need for special tooling. • The cassette features a revolutionary light weight gate that offers next-to-no flow restrictions.The double hinged gate design y ll FLL keeps the backflow gate aligned for a perfect 0-ring seal. ®Pc® sA• P. 67

UPDATE

On May 24, 2012 The Supreme Court of Canada refused Leave to appeal the Davis v. City of Guelph decision (Case # 34637), which means the Court of Appeal decision stands.

Ted Allen Now it's over. Supervising Prosecutor Update on York v. Martin Grove Properties Region of York tedallen@yorkca Same thing, just when you think it is over, it isn't over. Update on Two Matters; This was the matter where the Ontario Court of Justice at the Justice of the Peace level and the Ontario Court of Davis v. City of Guelph - Justice at the Judge level, ruled that the limitation period in Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. the Building Code Act (BCA) applied to orders to comply. York v. Martin Grove Properties - On November 10, 2011 the Ontario Court of Appeal heard Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada the Regional Municipality of York v. Martin Grove Properties Update on Davis v. City of Guelph — Ltd. appeal matter, and reversed the decision of the two Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada lower courts. The decision says orders are irrelevant to the determina- Just when you think it is over, it isn't over. tion of the limitation period, and once an order to comply The Davis matter was the issue where the Superior Court has been issued, the municipality has one year from the of Justice determined that there was bias regarding the date that the order has not been complied with, to lay the city official who was dealing with a standing water bylaw charge, even if it has been greater than one year since the and a property standards bylaw, that the city entered the actual offence. property illegally to complete an inspection, that a swim- ming pool is a "dwelling", and that costs were to be shared Over yet? Not quite. by the homeowner and the municipality regarding the dam- Martin Grove Properties appealed the decision to the Su- age found concerning the pool. preme Court of Canada. On Thursday May 12, 2012, The The City of Guelph appealed the Judges decision and the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed Martin Grove's Leave Court of Appeal for Ontario reversed the lower courts rul- to Appeal application. That means The Ontario Court of Ap- ings, which meant there was no bias regarding the city em- peal decision stands. ployee, the city did not enter the property illegally, a swim- Now its over. ming pool is not a "dwelling" and that the Building Code Act does not give the Judge authority to require the municipal- Ted Allen ity to share costs. Supervising Prosecutor Region of York Over yet? Not quite. [email protected] The defence (Davis) appealed this decision to the Supreme This article does not constitute legal advice, is the opinion Court of Canada. This means Davis had to "Seek leave to of the author, and does not reflect those of the Region of appeal" which means the Judge must review the particu- York. lar circumstances of the case and determine if it is in the public interest, or for the due administration of justice, that leave be granted to proceed to the Supreme Court of Can- ada so as to have the appeal heard.

CBCO Certified Building Code Official "THE STEP ABOVE!"

SEPT 2012 ISSUE 95 13 i P. 68 OAA

In 2006, Architecture 2030 issued the American Institute of Architects (AIA) 2030 Challenge Education Program, a measured and achievable strategy to dramatically reduce global building sector energy consumption and GHG emissions by the year 2030.

These targets may be accomplished by implementing in- novative sustainable design strategies, generating on-site renewable power and/or purchasing (20% maximum) renewable energy and/or certified renewable energy credits. The 2030 Challenge and 2030 Challenge Education Program The AIA 2030 Challenge Education Program helps professionals create buildings that meet the energy efficiency In an effort to transform the global building sector from the goals of the 2030 Challenge. Ten 4-hour sessions offer major consumer of fossil fuels and contributor to green- strategies to reach 60% reduction in fossil fuel GHG emis- house gas (GHG) emissions to a central part of the so- sions, giving design professionals the knowledge and le- lution to the energy and climate change crisis, the 2030 verage to create next-generation, super-efficient buildings Challenge has been endorsed by the Ontario Association — and providing firms and individuals with the skills that of Architects (OAA) and Architecture Canada/RAIC as will set them apart in the marketplace. The program also part of its commitment to promote sustainable design as a includes the AIA's 50to50 program: Techniques for carbon recognizable skill of its members and other Canadian orga- and energy reduction in buildings; 50 strategies toward 50 nizations within the design and construction sector, such as percent fossil fuel reduction in buildings. the Ontario Building Officials Association (OBOA). Consequently, the OAA is currently negotiating a contract It was in 2009 that the OAAs Council approved a motion with Architecture 2030 to adopt and adapt the 2030 Chal- to adopt and advocate the 2030 Challenge, which now lenge Education Program to offer it as one of the Con- coincides with the first item of the mandate of the OAAs tinuing Education options. The OAA also intends to offer Sustainable Built Environment Committee (SBEC) — to the program to other organizations within the design and advance the principles and goals of sustainable built envi- construction sector, including the OBOA ronments by expanding and developing the membership's The AIA 2030 Challenge Education Program is a compre- knowledge, skills and understanding of sustainable design hensive curriculum developed by expert architects and en- matters. gineers. While the OAA is adopting and adapting the pro- The 2030 Challenge was created in the U.S. by Architec- gram, and although the outlines of the sessions, the core of ture 2030, an independent, non-profit, non-partisan re- the curriculum package (created in the U.S.) already exist, search organization, and was established in response to the information and organization of the program will largely the energy and global-warming crisis in 2002. Its mission stay the same. Smaller nuances in Canadian and Ontario's is to transform the global building sector from the major cultures, codes, measurement systems and technical sys- consumer of fossil fuels and contributor to GHG emissions tems, will need to be accounted for. to a central part of the solution to the energy and climate Notably, the program will firstly offer the opportunity for fa- change crisis. miliarizing the design and construction industry with con- Specifically, the 2030 Challenge calls on the global archi- temporary information on sustainability, and its assump- tecture and building community to adopt specific targets: tions and methods toward its attainment. Secondly, it will All new buildings, developments and major renovations also offer the opportunity for lively interchange — question- shall be designed to meet a fossil fuel, GHG-emitting, en- ing and debating those assumptions and methods and ergy consumption performance standard of 60% below the what they accomplish. regional average (or country average) for that building type. After all, the concept of sustainability, its adherents and At a minimum, an equal amount of existing building area practitioners are — as well they should be — no less vulner- shall be renovated annually to meet the same performance able to challenges to their assumptions and methods of im- standards. plementation. The rapid morphing of sustainability from rel-

141 Ontario Building Officials Association

alive obscurity to a populist notion, whether due to climate view of what is currently on the public's mind." change or natural or artificially-created resource shortages, e.g. OPEC's 1973 oil embargo — in itself, calls for alert, By adopting and promoting a unified program to address rational and (shall we say?) positive balanced skepticism. climate change and resource shortage, the design and construction industry can better position itself as a national In his fascinating book, Thinking, Fast and Slow, Daniel leader on climate and energy issues. Offering the program Kahneman cautions us: "Frequently mentioned topics pop- helps the members of the OAA and related organizations ulate the mind even as others slip away from awareness. to avoid, as much as possible, groping blindly through the People tend to assess the relative importance of issues by common — and populist — concepts, assumptions and the ease with which they are retrieved from memory — and methods of implementation of sustainability, and leverage this is largely determined by the extent of coverage in the reliable and effective policy changes and opportunities for media (including the Design and Construction media). In influence. turn, what the media choose to report corresponds to their

OBOA PROVINCIAL OFFICE 200 Marycroft Ave. Unit 8, Woodbridge, Ontario L4L 5X4 (905) 264-1662 www.oboa.on.ca

`\tip j ~ ri.~ • ~ tsQ~`~w±~ .... . _ ISOCLAD >' ~` t.so..~ anti± Q HD SERIES C

•

1 o ~ \ , d FOIL C

ISOLOFOAM HD

Jason Pongracz Territory Manager \ —1 '} C.: 226-979-0072 ISOLOFOAM [email protected] LEED GROUP

SEPT 2012 IISSUE95I 15 P. 70 SUDBURY

S~~reatcr Grand (it1 ni ;r''u:1 lhnrt 1'iil d t Ur,ul u11' n, ury

MESSAGE FROM THE MAYOR

As Mayor of the City of Greater Sudbury, I am pleased to welcome delegates from across ` ;! the province to the Ontario Building Officials

CO,RoS ;,,o,;SIN'V , Association from Sept. 9 to Sept. 12. 10411 RtI1'SfRI[l `. ~ #f. Sll l711(IRY ON I'3A 519 / I would like to extend the warmest of (:I' silo Sll(:(: A 201)11(11. 111&111' , welcomes to all of our visitors to our beautiful SLIL1RU111' ON 1'3A I community.

7i15.67d.4 155 t Building officials play a crucial role in every 7113 173.30%6 municipality. Greater Sudbury is in the midst of 4°"'"`},"'1l1° 1:u"",' trtvetgra idsndm in.ta a remarkable development boom right now and local building officials are on the front lines. We are indebted to these dedicated men and women for the incredible work they do.

This week❑ s sessions will be an excellent opportunity for you to network with officials from across the province, attend informative seminars and continue to build on the professionalism for which the OBOA is known.

Conference organizers have also put together an exciting list of activities in the community for you to enjoy. If your busy schedule allows, please take some time to sign up for them and get to know our community better.

On behalf of City Council and the City of Greater Sudbury, I hope your stay in our community is safe and productive.

Yours sincerely,

Marianne Matichuk Mayor

16 1 Ontario Building Officials Association i P. 71 —

Rick Bartolucci, M.P.P. Sudbur:'

Ontario

A personal message from Rick Bartolucci M.P.P. Sudbury.

Dear Members of the Ontario Building Officials Association:

First of all, welcome to Sudbury. While you're here please enjoy the incredible experience Sudbury holds in store for you and your colleagues.

Your Association is highly respected for its vital role in the professional development of building officials across Ontario. But more than that, you provide the confidence and support the building industry needs to meet their goals and the goals of the communities where they work.

Having first hand experience, being a former worker in the construction field, as a municipal councilor and as a provincial representative, I know how dependent we all are on your decision making skills and your professionalism. Thank you for both.

I hope this Conference meets your expectations as you network and learn from best practices on how to meet the needs of the population you serve.

Have a great time in Sudbury and good luck in your deliberations!

Yours truly,

Rick Bartolucci, MPP Sudbury

SEPT 2012 IISSUE95I 17 i P. 72 2012 AMTS

been working hard to provide some unique northern flavor to the Silent Auction items and of course the prizes for the Games of Skill Contest Fundraiser.

However, the AMTS is not all about having fun, golfing and socializing. The Technical Program Committee Chair, Jason Radley, has produced an interesting and impactful set of topics and industry leading presenters sure to provide you with a wealth of information to assist us in our professional growth. Further, Jason's group, thanks to Ron Kolbe and The 56th Annual Meeting and Training Sessions in the the Ministry, are providing some new and unique learning City of Greater Sudbury have finally arrived. All Commit- opportunities for the OBOA Membership at this AMTS, as tee Chairs have displayed amazing organization skills com- part of a new Technical Sessions format. bined with some unique and imaginative initiatives that will ensure your experience will be "Worth Every Nickel': We Now returning to the "Fun" aspect, Entertainment Com- cannot wait to show you this great northern City and the mittee Chair, Angela Lanteigne, with her "Camp Northern unique lifestyle it provides to us who live here and those Lights" Theme Night is ready to provide you fun, laughter visiting. and northern music, not just that night but all through the event ably assisted by Markku Makitalo, our "Hospitality" The City of Greater Sudbury not only boasts the largest Chair with Andre Guillot, our Transportation Chair, ensuring land area of any municipality in the Province of Ontario, but shuttle buses get you safe and sound between the hotels also contains over 330 fresh water lakes, more lakes than to the conference site; check the OBOA website for details. any other municipality in Canada. Angela just wants to remind you that camp attire should be The Sponsorship Committee would like to thank all the or- as comfortable as possible. Jeans, flip-flops, best fishing ganizations and municipalities who have generously pro- hat (mosquito netting is a definite plus), hiking boots, plaid vided assistance to us in helping finance our event so as to hunting jacket (a.k.a. Sudbury dinner jacket), water wings, provide you with a unique northern experience. At the writ- sunglasses, Bermuda shorts, etc., however remember you ing of this article, Committee Members continue to canvas will be photographed and pictures are forever) Also don't for the Chapter Chair Challenge to offer Cambrian College forget Angela's theme nite mantra "What happens at Camp Students the opportunity to attend our great conference, a usually ends up on facebook 'cause this sure ain't Vegas unique opportunity for us as an organization to help moti- Babyl': vate a new generation of Building Officials to our profession. Last but not least, our Companion Program Chair, Meredith Armstrong, from our Sudbury Tourism group is promising a The Golf Committee, led by Chair Ed Picco, has crafted unique northern experience such as on the Science North an event around the magnificent Timberwolf Golf Course "Cortina" cruise boat around one of Sudbury's landmark which was professionally designed by world renowned golf natural jewels, Ramsey Lake situated in the heart of our course architect, Thomas McBroom, and has hosted many City. New to this year's program we will be providing a sep- prestigious events including the 2003 Canadian PGA's Se- arate companion wine and cheese Ice Breaker from 7:00 niors' Championship. Further, Ed's group has worked with p.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Sunday Night, with games and prizes to our Breast Cancer Chair, Corrie-Jo Delwo, to create some assist us in getting to know you and each other. unique opportunities to assist us in the Breast Cancer fundraiser and allow you to snag some great prizes. Finally, I would like to express my appreciation and heartfelt thanks to all the volunteers that have worked tirelessly over Speaking of the Breast Cancer Committee, Corrie-Jo and the last year to strive to make your experience with us a her group have again continued the calendar initiative of memorable one. A special thanks to my Co-Chair for this the London Conference with the generous assistance of event, Sherri Budgell, for her amazing organizational skills Barbara Rusan-Cronmiller. Further, the Committee has

18 I Ontario Building Officials Association P. 73

and support, especially on the B.Ps on my To Do List". If to return again. We know that once we meet you in Sud- you see them during the course of your stay with their host bury, our northern hospitality as well as all the hard work committee paraphernalia, please give them a well deserved invested by our volunteers on the various events will prove thank you because we could not have done it without them. it to be "Worth Every Nickel".

The 56th AMTS is shaping up to be a great one. We hope Look forward to seeing you! to show you a unique northern city with its world-renowned 2012 Host Committee Chair, Guido Mazza attractions, urban comforts, natural beauty and four season outdoor adventure possibilities that will whet your appetite

OBOA AMTS 2012 City of Greater Sudbury

Greetings and Best Wishes from the President doubt further our knowledge and expertise, while the social activities are certain to foster relationships. On behalf of the OBOA Board of Directors and Leader- ship Team, I am delighted to offer greetings and best City of Greater Sudbury Mayor Marianne Matichuk, wishes to all delegates, companions, special guests, Members of Council, and the City's Leadership Team exhibitors and sponsors attending this year's Annual are to be commended for supporting the OBOA 2012 Meeting & Training Sessions in the City of Greater AMTS. On behalf of all those attending, we greatly look Sudbury. forward to the opportunity of visiting and learning more about Greater Sudbury. This year's AMTS should prove to be another great success. The efforts of the host committee, lead by Chair On behalf of the OBOA Leadership Team, please ac- Guido Mazza, OBOA CAO Ron Kolbe, and other vol- cept our best wishes for a memorable and successful unteers are to be commended. I would also like to ac- conference - we look forward to seeing you all! knowledge MMAH Building and Development Branch Director Brenda Lewis and her staff for their participa- Yours sincerely, tion and valuable contribution to this year's technical Leo J. Cusumano programs. OBOA President

The AMTS is an excellent opportunity to exchange ideas and information. The technical programs will no

2012 AMTS THEME NIGHT

Derek Edwards is proof positive that you can take the boy out of the country, but you can't take the country out of the boy. His award-winning rural humor has made him the hottest comedy property in Canada Identifying himself with the ordinary working guy, Derek Edward's comedic gift is making the ordinary extraordinary. As well as performing live to audiences from coast to coast, including the International Just for Laughs Festival in Montreal and the Just for Laughs Canadian Comedy Tour, Derek is currently developing a movie script based on a Vegas-inspired melange of absurdity (Magnum Opus).

SEPT 2012 1 ISSUE 951 19

P. 74 2012 AMTS EXHIBITORS

The Industries only 3rd Party ueoaTr rr Jim Boyer Quality Assurance Program Partner Ra}alp4 as sn rr. Olt..( IT Corp. re 6r2 rl Robert Aonstrong 4 1 1 . 29.1 filar P:G127 cioSuol 6469 Csvrla M4rtef D+,'etesmaNH,nr3u lId 2E.1t.:4Jt1Fd! arfai -- co t59,.,06 Piire, 81. Fk. P4,rV!rares —vo ra-a•LS 854095 — Td 958132122 02)11 0t1951. G71q+ 15.9491 a`.lcaaa!I CW 907.025123 0560 069.410.0955 rhsna P=4>'nclm —1—du Fe, 900135109 Gl:du I41C1 ti66922 to 256 9595619 en01,991n etui cda.Jakau F.. pxl30c61%0 wra+w (4 1,64,1 Oron .1024. 9090353 (dryer-' , rn0 540000 1rrxSrH¢u 4tevhutc)

Uwtu P80ERSFN Craig Ritchie t - rrr klaFeprt1sr401Rt,E9ltem(ered2 • ANhherwral So?e6on, Group Homa L4mter a e4ad n9 Matalarr, ItYNENE wt Hardw.rr, 6747 1952Ae99 taTJ. 06i5SC:ps 6606.09 W. (coakk ---- Store, umllcd Tel: S0S3814040 n1.770 34 Henry Toll F0001 60455-1125 Sueel Wen T 519 664 4615 Coll: 418.573-1311 SL Iamb) Fasr 063-3839142 ontud0 F 519 664 2322 000111 kehnz35255n19 mm Cawda n Ntr04.:Y.rea,.eu ,x+4053r3rm,a10 I:092 00 rre:ryn;rN+am the hyrrcna brs!otien System"

°} A , MAINLINE ISOLOFOAAM Mpac JASON PONGRACZ Bob Blelawski 1535 A1.ok Awew r-,,o, I2suTer ess c P,gra Stav7.+ 1 Nrnla.il ' ~ ]r 90515733504 404941 Ii i pc,Hl1 Y tr urt+ean . 1 1 0 IO For ITR775.117:6 Psa+er s+.. 531 C 1-$R•W1A`i90 (_111.7,9 5371 4.01-✓. +n:s2 )v [a;3 9.I.Pr1*1Am. j ('J1-11.TL{rolcilm ram ,:ra +:512'8 90777 x1 1 -fie w,u<., ~~: <'J e:T]999I t--++_actr.r r.ew tv r 41x..-,]0605 CvpXYr C 19.lfrl 9605 ( uflrr w'srvcn ~ l.+fx.. .i r203e 3-b 631901. Eer e. A`z—C-r3 15. ♦ .•. tesAwilU d 4 TO 1-1077.7244691

OWENS CORNING CANADA t U a P 0 n A T 1 0 9 41 DOLPHIN DRIVE SCARBOROUGH, ONTARIO td1L INS Tel: 705 726 9499 416 752 2059 FAX 416 755 2271 Keven Rector 0059aenc lac I Hoblec 7056274504 TOLL FREE 8009339992 ores, ray.bro tr ~ INTERNET isabold orrpa9n¢9csemcormeg Tedmicallervices Manager Fa 7057252110 corn 1I Toll Free; 8664606299 Regional Ode, Seeder MSGovern ke Tn5nudura com T (250) •r75-r600 Eel. 270 fl ISABELLE CHAMPAGNE, CTR 10.27l1oe u,anrd,00rIr.oNa4o 140953 AOEA SALES MAI4AGER MITARiO sF*vaLo'0?nugms•niconl INSUTATL\G SYSTEMS 6USBD:55 .Canada

UtliePersonai Richard eaumparinor P•F•B C1lyor@(Iti111T3 ?G,,'•• Carro4.4'ION133 Dam .Mnr6oSdV.p /dra - Pll.sti F b Ltd yiteTllS PREFERRED RATES .7. I 1014e6.573)., 007 IC • sClifford Strassbulger Only available to OBOA members IF 402 Cum.loan R,vd .1- 9I5 ~~i_yn:7 Tn gel yetn g1Od1 nntl 1-11130-476.8737 t12rtr]1rc. 47n0.,::a T14s.a:--r1•ir. easy quota... NIL-142 Ccl6 FPi q 7.1cr,. just CALL or CL(CK Www.thepersonal.comioboa Phnne -W621.5 49 3-o, =.r, rla-.•nix 90!, v n:t4..*4:. ♦.0, k, r. 4,::tenxar f P4 e.ehrt•, rr+:l Yloc: l-1062-'•!L x751 Err,,rl r+l-av)•.I ,:r ,,:•..,,n h:~ cr,.n.,rvrl ry,ry, e".rJEw tOsy Flo: ws .v-edr..emiraneE.aot&v:4cm:;C:q:r

20 Ontario Building Officials Association i P. 75

ot TARION 000611.005001.119916011! Ph'ree ~ •wr CU.Rnv1:e G-by prery , Smnl 6xurr&4 Cnh,n' IrO -.•1P'- ~:xa~ Mml,.vn•:i^ .rnrlNnstab. Fcx.r•Ov11a1.5'r TarionWan;ntyCorpoladon W8 sappolt al www.Print3.net "'"'`°"`"~aR,a.l.a laeldea nu+;•:41G229.9200 IT • w Cus orner Centre Tear profelt' •calwwdP «ndle-' i016rr. 5.877.592.7466 .Sveck C:r.-case Isar Saleoi Prinl3.not •r.aa.~l. 5950..9 • W&F;a^1FafflU*QfrtnaadtSOA F:xao cnlr, 1119 09 PIrOOp67-505-0526 1-866-783-5306 nr4 Fr , 1-416.220-3353

U5P Si RUCtI;RdL Jaen Raid w cc, r, _CT060 Telhnica15.t05 Ro nto 509 0610

Canada 0111.1 221 R.100n Pr: 6w.1r Ph 905.6699955 eat. 26 1rornmltull Co11905.541.7343 fa5da L4J 809 1.900.01693965 urpcanncctars.cuin y14dOQTLVailartcom

Lluko Llerhar, P.Ena. i.•.1 Rkav;tr - OnLU 1

Ent recr4d'.5'od . ndeds c. GR0.~LAOOL[]5 0+CA900RCOro Jim Predeeah Flrs Pr0lec7Wn Sr-0UoIni Balsa Cascade [1.np,1n 1911:.1 ;011141111 Onlano 6.1.$19101 1411 r• , .51913)1211 111111 (Canada) Corpontitn

Salta %'load Products 2260 k4adwpb'o 899910141 kith[/auea. ONION (ISO M' 0110 1tan 1911 tic Cpnla!Patnxr lOrsi. 159 II 1c,an 0dI LSC4E5 T EO0J63d451 IF 100.363-4169 E 1Fnl.pnd601h Q191l.eom I www.hlltl.ea of as 40279 s 167 .07 4.0-536522 650 NwO7noad. 711014 OnirnO 11902 nli ISO toot 81101 TEEEO mlrkaorhYCbccc1 coo60OPmcaD

ROXUL Tin Better 1l19n1rdlu,S A Specialty Firestop CcnactorOlo

o1h1 Keith Brebner Paraic Lally L.c]xdlu wr/ n(r•ncg cwL <.zS•!w.<0 ta*fda 111111 hfinlmlDirufor 84474:44: Ro4clu tJlrniar N1[Y`N C—HF.1awe,CECO,CRRO,ASeT T: SIIlN./99t 4411 S: SII.I7l.1M RSM a1.u0s>us. ep,5•i 1.,•a St: IOIII 947 ROXUL INC, • G0&ams S,sult 7cn,00 5 W0051 as FIRESTOP 119f 11' I+ SIPUPf111 n>:n rOrvt pim 1 0901 73-523 SOLUTIONS L• IS+elurjmleura r Ctl 6t5~6TS'.27 wn):'01,5r-wi

Rick Ward, C.E.T. Zurn Engineered Water Solutions- RINO15tIAtzlun# ' Air Solutions rrdPdrJlsaI.sapcsM000 - . -... - 416.453.0055 Cst nerd5Thonal1l coin

eultr aynemt Slmpron Stranpdit Ctatdt, United Strat Padazis eta_ 1,•-'ap fPE1,TSi262 OK Ira S *.—cd Willow 50920'. 09 465505 industries Limited ZUR Zurn TrO Fine: 1-000-567-6411 - QQR alln 5014565935 Y1 20011(39s lne llrle .05.455.7274 Fat 3544 Nashua Drive 15410 x3139)151-6187 e s C I0 1019) 671.1701 5909995099 C4a, nnuri, F._•s. 9169r6 11o100 Mississauga, Ontario roC7\a www.zum.com (905) 405.8272

SEPT 20121 ISSUE 95121 P. 7 6

2012 AMTS EXHIBITORS CONT'D

CAST IRON SOIL PIPE DIVISION ,amvic CANADIAN FOUNDRY ASSOCIATION

GREGG PURINTON ' I N2i 470 IION1.I6IJ 701, 674 7669 NvoFoeoPaeo : ... TPory Manager BILL MONAGHAN j r 4%6.7974T0 Regional Isles D.reOn. - SECRETARY I9.W,GER

110% MS.krnI1 Cell: (519) 654-6091 T:2S&4159604 ,210 .- T6-flA. ON Cl SOS 6652035 Cn04. PATH 2E2 Tel. (510) 621-5141 *v]UrnZiI.1ftkCCSp.lOrCO(fl WMItMl6I1t4&flt.LtUI 20 ISHERWOOD AVE. 94 Foe (519)621-9271 Wrni.3ni.tOmje4e1tOm - - !,e_Ynn CPA195IDGE. ONTARIO PAR 019 bln0009112nlE.Ogel,.cPAn

Dryvit Systems Canada 129 Ringwood Dr. StotulF,IIIe, Ontario L4A8J2

JoIiii Smith, Joe Amodeo Phone: 519-239-8464 1 Web: (Iryvlt.ca

Henry )llIsli.I Asa%'14I(011 of ('IjO. Es t(s,IdlllltA

Oarklark Radu JOE INNOCENTE M96ESAUGN 01 LOT 2L3 MANAGER OF 509.5106 SCIENCE SERVICES Cl)EtrIOCTIC'fl FrC47C1N To9j$ope: 905-676.792() -075.29 East / C 416100 9703 II) C6rp r. Cth 04. 11,1511 61157-Nfl lJl5l*0 A19041 68 EARl 1,8ToWnTO. 66 MOM 110 Faeom.ie 6Ck-1178.:1760 T0.416701026 C0.418-578-12*0 C11,Rcp976-5S34563 coe (RINc11.R5con 97.04 :ow.wh,, AR

011talioOnsftte 'iiteo%isociaIIo,i Denis Orendt (91r4cH 'A 10 flo6 l3P. ctho,g. ON KOA 403 Www.00wfl.org

Nk9R5.373-7l03 90$3 -2772 G0 372-0322 IE4ARI113E9O49 STARTING OFF CR11505 17115*5109 'Permanent wAR(cw9let8etvkfng through onsit., 0,oalmenC" ereflO .11l1,

'.Ii 111 Will THERM 0 thVuPi rI Th

stylist CRAIG HOLZSCHERER 107062 613.392.4326 75151,111 t.l9r.reIo 94.51 thsmeo. 00 NIP 2H7 Iooldngstellorijgrnail.con. u. 519-651-3496 11711543766 ("5196319533 e.g 55*78-0360 www.stelladot.comikrIs Unoke IIy thonA.enon9An.eee.nlgt.cn 47 Main Street - www.tho.meeon.forLro Consecon, ON kOKITO

22 1 Ontario Building Officials Association P. 77

Wood Preservation Canada O Preservation du bois Canada Martin Tauvotte Ts_hni:al tarukcs CoordnKer Coorienn_rew desscrvwoa la

202- 2141 Thurston Drive Audio & Video phone (705) 789-2447 Ottawa, Ontario. Canada K1G 6C9 TEL 613-737-4337 FAX 613-247-0540 E quip pine n t jeauaysynlpadco.ca mri- 1,mgsr....r o ..nwrrcer,.v..vtio ca Rental cServices wwxvje-audiavistd.ca

We are the Ontario Building Officials Association. Like Architects, Engineers and others, our members are dedicated and trained professionals, ensuring public safety for the

/ c people who live, work, learn and play in Ontario. Building Knowledge. Growing Communities.

7oUthv o

biC' L' Conference Hote Holiday Inn - Regent St. Sudbury, Ont.

SEPT 2012 1 ISSUE 95 123 MARK BOYD

Footings and Columns and Beams, Oh my! By Mark Boyd, P.Eng.

Top 4 Reasons You Should Read This Article: is that the 1.5KPa (31 psf) in A-Table 9.23.4.3 is a typo — it 1. The steel beam spans in Table 9.23.4.3 are should be 0.5KPa (1 Opsf). 1.5KPa (31 psf) just seems ri- part of a long-standing conspiracy diculous to me. More on this later.

2. The column footing sizes in Table 9.15.3.4 Next conundrum — what is the correct live load to use for are fraught with danger Part 9 floors? Well, there certainly is a variety to choose from: 3. Standard adjustable steel columns sold by virtually every lumberyard are basically use- 1.4KPa (30psf) for bedrooms (Table 4.1.5.3) less 1.9KPa (40psf) for stairs and other areas 4. A bit of controversy can be very educational (Table 4.1.5.3) 2.4KPa (50psf) maximum, as noted for: Follow the Yellow Brick Road Sometimes as a structural engineer using Part 9, I feel like Structural Design Requirements and Applica- Dorothy in the Wizard of Oz; torn away from Kansas and tion Limitations (9.4.1.1.(2)) dropped in a strange world where things don't make sense. Although some things seem familiar, and we appear to be Footings (9.15.3.3.(1)(c)) speaking the same language, I become confused and dis- Columns (9.17.1.1 .(1 )(a)(ii)) oriented. I just want to get back home where the laws of physics and engineering actually apply. According to A-Table 9.23.4.3, the correct live load for single storey homes is 1.9KPa. Well, Recently, I had occasion to double check a steel floor beam alrighty then, let's go with that in Table 9.23.4.3. OK, so the first thing the engineer has to do is determine the loads on the beam; dead loads, live loads, etc. Now here's a challenge: I dare you to show me I like simple. Let's start with simple one spot in the OBC where it clearly states without contra- diction, what the dead load is supposed to be on a conven- Example 1: tional Part 9 floor. I double dare you. I can't find it anywhere The drawing below is a plan examiner's dream -- the per- in Volume 1. Volume 2 states the following: fect Part 9 one storey house.

A-9.15.2.4.(1) Preserved Wood Foundations — a.. .t ., Design Assumptions: Dead Load = 0.47KPa 3m (1 Opsf) noc, ;rout r-3 icbte-E - Eems A-Table 9.23.4.3 Spans for Steel Beams: Dead 3m /' Load = 1.5KPa (31 psf) Cc .fi"

A-Table 9.23.4.4 Concrete Topping: Dead Load = 0.5KPa (1 Opsf) without concrete but 1.3KPa (27psf) with concrete topping S'pr 3p 3 U, Apparently floors with concrete topping (A-9.23.4.4) weigh less than floors without (A-

Table 9.23.4.3)? Who knew? I love Ozl r i it 1---lt So what's a poor engineer to do? Well, the I joist industry favours a 1 Opsf dead load (let's say 0.5KPa), so I decided to run with that. My theory (yet to be confirmed, I must add)

24 I Ontario Building Officials Association i P. 79

Table 9.23.4.3 - One Storey Supported

i i ,v.yep~ ! 21 t• 3 !? _ ),_-* ~•. ak%S:w. [- lie 4r3ii t)aCics- 41).:7 1S a! 2 ii 89 1. _ s__ j a• __) WV.. 4I tS ti t) i) }g i i': ! is l 1) h',,'; _. )1 ♦ fY S! 26 ~ : .3 1 s 5! -. 75 {! 14 fii TI 1-. - - 1/.7 - f

X 1411 — S14 ) 1I Id7

Cr!'t r.M ha ,,i4 , {i;e Se:)•12 te. tSs. tvu Cre:::l. d..S lBa t,.1=-.rhs A•vt t: ~i,

The floor joists and the beams are all simple spans. That Time to seek an audience with the Wizard means they bend into "smiley faces" under the applied With a mixture of fear and excitement, I e-mailed the Min- loads. See the two smiles for the floor joists and the other istry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MAH) with my find- two for the beams? ings. Within a couple of hours I received a reply (read in a So in order to double check the one storey, steel floor deep, frightening voice for effect — flames are optional); beams in Table 9.23.4.3, I used the following design as- "There are many elements in Part 9 that do not withstand sumptions (see Appendix A-Table 9.23.4.3): the scrutiny afforded Part 4". As it turned out MAH was already aware of the situation. What? The provincial and na- Simply supported beam spans (and simple span tional Code people already knew about it? Someone else

floor joists as per Mark Boyd) had already laid claim to my discover. Talk about sponta- Laterally supported top flange neous ego deflation. Yield strength = 350MPa Deflection limit= L/360 So I asked a reasonable question: why is the Table still in Live load =1.9KPa (40psf) (one storey only) the Codes if everyone knows it's wrong? The response: Dead load = 0.5KPa (1 Opsf) (as per Mark Boyd because of heavy lobbying by Home Builders' Associations. since 1.5KPa seems just plain wrong!) Many people are aware the beams in Table 9.23.4.3 are over-spanned, but no one is prepared to address it Seri- ously??? Is everyone really that afraid to stand up to the Drum Roll, please Home Builders' Associations? Does this remind anyone As suspected, I found that some of the one storey beams of the Wicked Witch of the West? Where's a pail of water in Table 9.23.4.3 failed. How many you ask? Well, let's see when you need it? — 1,2,3,...... 63. Wow, all of them! That's correct, all of the beams failed. And remember, they failed with my 0.5KPa (1 Opsf) dead load. If I had used the 1.5KPa (31 psf) dead What did I find out about the load as in A-Table 9.23.4.3, they would have crashed harder beams for two storeys? than Dorothy's house! Frankly, I didn't even bother to look at them. Table 9.23.4.3 assumes the live load on the second floor is 1.4K Pa (30psf) The chart below shows the allowable spans for the steel because all the rooms upstairs are bedrooms. How realistic beams in Table 9.23.4.3, along with what I calculate the is that, anymore? There are second floor bathrooms, laun- allowable spans should be, based upon all of the require- dry rooms, offices, media rooms and oh yeah, stairs. Is it ments specified in the OBC. still reasonable to assume the second floor has less load- ing simply because there are some bedrooms? Remember waterbeds? Just like everything else from the 70's, they are Am I actually the Scarecrow? attempting a comeback, too. Should I be asking for a brain? Were the spans I calculated actually correct? How could Call from a client: "There are point they be so much lower than the values in the OBC? I start- loads on the beam...... ed to think maybe I was missing something. Maybe I made Typical renovation scenario. Homeowner wants to open up a stupid mistake because this Table has been around for- a load-bearing wall between the first and second floor re- ever. Fearing I might just embarrass myself by mentioning sulting in point loads on the basement steel beam (not over this to anyone else, I sent it off to a colleague to review and a column, of course). Designer says the original basement he agreed with me. Hmmm. Had I unearthed a previously beam is adequate, but not over-sized, under the current overlooked error in the Code? I've got to admit, I was feel- Code, without considering the point loads. Without even ing pretty darn proud of myself -- chest all puffed out like hearing the rest of the information I can tell him with 99% the Cowardly Lion with his medal!

SEPT 20121 ISSUE 95125 . . s MARK BOYD CONT'D

certainty the basement beam won't work. The designer Example 3: asks how I can know that so quickly? "Easy", I reply, "the Let's repeat Example 2, but this time we will use a continu- beam never met the Code requirements for load and de- ous beam as shown below. The floor joists are still simple flection in the first place, so adding the point loads is like spans. This is a realistic scenario because almost every throwing gas on a smouldering Scarecrow': contractor would order a 6m long beam and throw a post under the middle. Let's be serious for a moment How can an engineer seal a beam which he or she knows ion f9 ~ does not meet the load and deflection requirements clearly printed in the Code? If a client asked me to seal Table 9.23.4.3, I would have to refuse because all of the beams

are over-spanned. If a client asked me to seal a point-load- is_y ed beam that fails, I would also have to refuse. Mr. and Ms. CBO, are you starting to wonder about the sealed, point loaded, steel floor beams you're getting from engineers?

While we're still exploring Oz, let's talk about footings and columns In Example 1, we considered simple span floor joists and simple span steel floor beams. That may happen in Oz, but Take a look at the deflected shape of the continuous beam. rarely in the real world. Let's work out the load on the col- Instead of two smiles, this time we see a smile, then a umn and the required footing area: frown, then another smile. The frown is extremely important to an engineer, but the Code is silent on the whole issue. Example 2: Go ahead, look up "frown" in the index — I'll wait. See? Nada. Specified (unfactored) Live Load = 1.9KPa (40psf) (A Table 9.23.4.3) Your grandma may have told you "a frown weighs you Specified (unfactored) Dead Load down" — or maybe that was just mine. In structural terms, = O.5KPa (1 Opsf) (as assumed by Mark Boyd) this is very true. The frown increases the load from the Tributary Area on Column beam on the interior support, i.e., the column. A structural = 14.7m 2 (1 58ft2) (4.9m x 3m) engineer will tell you the frown in that continuous beam Allowable Soil Bearing Pressure just increased the load on that column by 25% (trust me, = 75KPa (1568psf) (9.15.1.1.(1)(a)(i)) my grandma is really smart). Can you find that little gem anywhere in the OBC? No, no you can't. Thanks, grandma. Specified (unfactored) Load on Column = (1.9KPa + 0.5KPa)( 14.7m 2) Specified (unfactored) Load on Column = 35.3KN (7940#) < 36KN (8093#) (9.17.3.4.(1)) _ (1.9KPa + 0.5KPa)( 14.7m 2)(1.25) Therefore an Adjustable Steel Col- (due to the frown) umn is ACCEPTABLE = 44.1 KN (9920#) > 36KN (8093#) (9.17.3.4.(1)) Area of Column Footing Therefore an Adjustable Steel Col- = (1.9KPa + O.5KPa)( 14.7m2)/(75KPa) umn is NOT ACCEPTABLE = 0.47m2 (5.1ft2) > 04m 2 (4.3ft2) (Table 9.15.3.4) Therefore the minimum footing area Area of Column Footing in Part 9 is NOT ACCEPTABLE _ (1.9KPa + 0.5KPa)( 14.7m 2)(1.25)/(75KPa) 0.59m2 (6.4ft2) > 0.4m 2 (4.3ft2) Now would be a good time to discuss that whole "what's (Table 9.15.3.4) the correct dead load" question again. If the proper dead Therefore the minimum footing area load Is 1.5KPa (31 psf) as in A-Table 9.23.4.3, then the ad- in Part 9 is NOT ACCEPTABLE justable steel column fails like a Tinman in the rain (50KN or 11250#) and the area of the footing in Table 9.15.3.4 is Example 4: as undersized as Dorothy's little dog, Toto (0.67m 2 or 7.2ft2). Further support for my contention that the 1.5KPa (31 psf) Let's repeat Example 3, but this time we will use a continu- dead load in A-Table 9.23.4.3 is a typo. Just sayin'. ous beam and continuous span floor joists. Unlike builders

26 I Ontario Building Officials Association