BUILDING CODE COMMISSION

Similar documents
BUILDING CODE COMMISSION

BUILDING CODE COMMISSION

BUILDING CODE COMMISSION

British Columbia Building Code 2006 Division B Part 3 Fire Protection, Occupant Safety and Accessibility Section 3.2 Building Fire Safety

PROPOSED CHANGE TO THE 2012 BUILDING CODE O. REG. 332/12 AS AMENDED

BUILDING CODE COMMISSION

BUILDING CODE COMMISSION

Interim Amendments to Ontario s 2012 Building Code Retirement Homes. August 17, 2017

Building Standards Advisory Promoting construction of safe, healthy, habitable buildings

12/14/2013. Fire alarm and emergency power SPRINKLER HEAD

2012 OBC Changes. Summary of key changes to Life Safety and Fire Protection Systems for CFAA January 22, 2014

PROPOSED CHANGE TO THE 2015 ONTARIO FIRE CODE (O. Reg. 213/07, as amended current to January 1, 2015)

SAFETY CODES COUNCIL ORDER. BEFORE THE FIRE TECHNICAL COUNCIL On June 21, 2012

SANTA CLARA COUNTY Winchester Blvd., Los Gatos, CA (408) (408) (fax)

MECKLENBURG COUNTY FIRE MARSHAL S OFFICE

Recent Revisions and Proposed Key Changes to Fire Code

2. The Group F occupancy has have an a combined occupant load of 500 or more above or below the lowest level of exit discharge.

Short Term Accommodations Fire Code Requirements

Environmental Planning and Assessment Amendment (Smoke Alarms) Regulation 2006

DIVISION C ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

CFAA Technical Seminar Ontario Building Code Updates to 2015

Module 9: Ontario Building Code Fire Fighting Provisions

Secretary of State determination under article 36 of the Fire Safety Order

SECTION 907 FIRE ALARM AND DETECTION SYSTEMS

Motion Controlled Apartment Building Corridor Lighting

3.1 Introduction. 3.1 Introduction

E25 (D) Automatic controls for general means of egress lighting

ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD

FIRE ALARM AUDIBILITY IN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL OCCUPANCIES

PROPOSED CHANGE TO THE 2007 FIRE CODE (OFC)

CAN/ULC-S INTEGRATED SYSTEMS TESTING OF FIRE PROTECTION AND LIFE SAFETY SYSTEMS

Date of Authorization May 26, 2005 BMEC Authorization BMEC Application # A

~ j~z~_ ~. Kirk Caldwell Mayor

GROUP SR SPECIAL RESIDENCE (ASSISTED SELF-PRESERVATION) OCCUPANCIES

GUARDED STATUS INFORMATION and REQUIREMENTS For OWNERS AND OPERATORS Of REFRIGERATION PLANTS

CAN/ULC-S1001, INTEGRATED SYSTEMS TEST OF FIRE PROTECTION AND LIFE SAFETY SYSTEMS

A Building Manager s Guide to Maintaining Fire Code Compliance

TG FIRE DRILLS. Office of the Fire Marshal and Emergency Management

MAINTENANCE OF FIRE PROTECTION DEVICES WITHIN RESIDENTIAL SUITES OF MULTI-FAMILY BUILDINGS

Community Festival Permit Application - Cypriot Community of Toronto Inc. - Cultural and Wine Festival June 23 and 24, 2007

Project No Belleville Fire Hall/Headquarters and Emergency Operations Centre Section Belleville, Ontario Page 1 of 10

Frequently Asked Questions

GROUP SR SPECIAL (ASSISTED SELF-PRESERVATION) OCCUPANCIES

BY-LAW AMENDING THE BY-LAW CONCERNING THE SERVICE DE SÉCURITÉ INCENDIE DE MONTRÉAL (RCG )

Part 3 BUILDING CODE MYTHS & INTERPRETATIONS

Florida Building Code Chapter 9 Fire Protection Systems Advanced Course

Residential Care Facilities Requirements

HIGH-RISE RETROFIT ORDINANCES - NO and NO

Understanding and Managing Fire Safety in Housing Accommodation

Carbon Monoxide Detectors in New and Existing Buildings

Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Prevention Bureau Standard

Ontario Homes for Special Needs Association

ELEVATORS AND FIRE ALARM SYSTEM INTERFACES CANADIANFIRE ALARM ASSOCIATION 2011 ONTARIO ANNUAL TECHNICAL SEMINAR

Riverside County Fire Department Office of the Fire Marshal Market St., Ste. 150, Riverside, CA Ph. (951) Fax (951)

CAN/ULC S Integrated Systems Testing of Fire Protection and Life Safety Systems and Fire Protection Commissioning

For additional information regarding R-3.1 residential care facilities please contact (951)

Canadian Fire Alarm Association (CFAA)

VACAVILLE FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 420 Vine Street Vacaville, California (707)

Standard Operating Procedure Ottawa Fire Services. Fire Safety Plan Approval - Revised

ENERGY EFFICIENCY AFTER DECEMBER 31, 2016

VERIFICATION OF FIRE ALARM SYSTEMS

BOABC Level III Exams 7, 8, 9 and 10 Beginning April 1, 2015

Moreno Valley Fire Department Fire Prevention Bureau. New and Existing Fire Alarm & Signaling Systems Guideline

11:00 to 12:00 Secrets to achieving code-compliant strobe installations. Ralph Coco, Potter Canada Paul Jewett, Mircom Group of Companies

Fire Inspection Frequently Asked Questions

First Published in the Wichita Eagle on DELINEATED 10/02/2010 ORDINANCE NO.

CHAPTER II BUILDINGS PART 1 BUILDING CODE PART 2 FLOOD PLAIN REGULATIONS. See Ordinance 3251 on file in the office of the Manager.

MINOOKA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT Fire Prevention Bureau Fire Inspector Rodney Bradberry

El Reno Fire Department Fire Alarm Plan Review Worksheet

Residential Based Care Facility Guidelines

TRI-LAKES MONUMENT FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT

FIRE SAFETY PLAN. BUILDING NAME: Pathobiology / AHL BUILDING NUMBER: 089. DATE: 15-August-10 FPO #2

Maintaining Building and Fire Safety During Active Assailant Events and Other Terrorist Events

BCBC 2012 CHANGES TO PART 3

Housing Division Notice

Florida Building Code 2010

OWNERS RESPONSIBILITIES & CASE STUDIES ONTARIO FIRE CODE. John Percy, Public Education Officer Waterloo Fire Rescue

Dispute over the requirement for fire door signage to hotel suites at 124 Devon Street West, New Plymouth

LOCAL AMENDMENTS TO THE INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE 2006 EDITION

FIRE ALARM AUDIBILITY IN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL OCCUPANCIES. 1 of 7 11/12/ :26 PM

St. Vincent s Health System Page 1 of 6

780 CMR: STATE BOARD OF BUILDING REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS 780 CMR: MASSACHUSETTS AMENDMENTS TO AND THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE 2009

Fire Sprinklers Working Group Final Report

DUKE CLINIC SITE-SPECIFIC FIRE PLAN Part II General Statement. Fire Procedures

Changes to the 2018 Joint Commission Comprehensive Accreditation Manual for Hospitals (CAMH)

AD HOC HEALTHCARE COMMITTEE MEANS OF EGRESS WORK GROUP APPROVED CODE CHANGE DRAFTS CODE GROUP B MOE COMMITTEE

CHAPTER LOCAL AMENDMENTS TO THE INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE, 2000 EDITION SECTIONS

Use this guide to assist you when completing the Evacuation scheme application form.

CHAPTER 61G15-32 RESPONSIBILITY RULES OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS CONCERNING THE DESIGN OF FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS

Date Issued: December 14, 2017 Revision: 2.1

Glenwood Springs Fire Protection District Amendments to the 2009 International Fire Code

Bold items are particular to the City of Euless

THE BASICS OF FIRE ALARM PLAN REVIEW

FIRE PLAN. In order to assure the safety of patients, visitors and staff, a standard response to fire or the potential of fire is required.

Residential-based Care Facility R-4 Guideline

CAN/ULC-S561. To comply, or not to comply. actually it s not even a question! Underwriters Laboratories of Canada. By Alan Cavers & Brian McBain

BUSINESS PLAN: Fire Prevention & Education

2014 Alberta Building Code. Part 9 changes relating to Smoke and CO Alarms

Chubb Monitoring Solutions

NFPA 101 Life Safety Code Culture change 2012

Transcription:

Ruling No. 02-16-871 Application No. 2002-07 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 3.2.4.20.(2) of Regulation 403, as amended by O. Reg. 22/98, 102/98, 122/98, 152/99, 278/99, 593/99, 597/99, 205/00 and 283/01 (the Ontario Building Code ). AND IN THE MATTER OF an application by Michael Bonnah, G.M. of Operations & Logistics, West Park Hospital, for the resolution of a dispute with Bruce Ashton, Deputy Chief Building Official, City of Toronto, to determine whether the use of unlisted, alpha-numeric display devices forming part of the call station located in the nursing stations provides sufficiency of compliance with Sentence 3.2.4.20.(2) of the Ontario Building Code at the West Park Long-Term Care Facility, 82 Buttonwood Avenue, Toronto, Ontario. APPLICANT RESPONDENT PANEL PLACE Michael Bonnah G.M. of Operations & Logistics West Park Hospital Bruce Ashton Chief Building Official City of Toronto Len King, Vice-Chair Fred Barkhouse Donald Pratt Toronto, Ontario DATE OF HEARING June 20, 2002 DATE OF RULING June 20, 2002 APPEARANCES Allan Larden Larden Muniak Consulting Inc. Toronto, Ontario Agent for the Applicant Sait Toprak Manager, Plan Review City of Toronto Designate for the Respondent

-2- RULING 1. The Applicant Michael Bonnah, G.M. of Operations & Logistics, West Park Hospital, has received a building permit under the Building Code Act, S.O. 1992, c. 23, as amended, and is constructing a nursing home known as the Extendicare Long-Term Care Facility, West Park Hospital Site, 82 Buttonwood Avenue, Toronto, Ontario. 2. Description of Construction The Applicant is completing construction of a nursing home facility having a Group B, Division 2 occupancy classification. The structure is three storeys in building height and 4,450 m 2 in building area. The facility will be equipped with both a sprinkler system and a fire alarm system. The construction in dispute involves the visual signals required in addition to the requirements for fire alarm and smoke detection systems. It is proposed that a series of triple dome lights be located on the ceiling of the corridor in the immediate vicinity of each residential bedroom. A smoke detector located inside the residential room will actuate a red dome light in the corridor. The dome lights also activate when the nurses call buttons are pushed. A yellow light will appear if the nurses call is generated from the bathroom, a green light is illuminated if a call is initiated from the bedroom area. In addition to the triple dome lights in the bedroom corridors, wall mounted alpha-numeric display devices will be located at the nurses call stations and will identify the room in which a signal has been activated. These devices are not listed by ULC as an ancillary device to the fire alarm system. The displays, however, will indicate the room number and simultaneously provide an indication of the type of signal that has been triggered. A ceiling mounted strobe light is also proposed at each nurses call station. These lights will be triggered if a smoke detector is activated anywhere in the area of the home in which the nursing station is situated. Finally, it is proposed that an additional fire alarm annunciating device be located at the centrally located ground floor nursing station. This annunciating device will also identify the individual room in which a smoke detector has been activated. 3. Dispute The issue at dispute between the Applicant and Respondent is whether the proposed system of dome lights, together with the unlisted alpha-numeric display devices at the call stations, provide sufficiency of compliance with Sentence 3.2.4.20.(2) of the Ontario Building Code (OBC). This sentence requires that, in addition to the requirements for fire alarm and detections systems, visual signals from smoke detectors located in sleeping rooms of a Group B occupancy, must be provided to allow staff to easily identify the room or location of the fire alarm initiation. In this respect, a series of dome lights and alpha numeric display devices referred to as a Nurse Call System are being proposed. As noted above, dome lights will be situated outside each sleeping room and will light with a red indicator if activated by a smoke detector. In addition, a signal will appear at the alpha-numeric displays located at each nursing station and at the centrally located ground floor nursing station. These signals will identify the individual room in which a detector has been activated. The proposed alpha-numeric display devices, however, are not ULC listed. The system is not

-3- electronically supervised by the building base fire alarm system nor is it provided with a dedicated backup source of power. 4. Provisions of the Ontario Building Code 3.2.4.20. Visual Signals (2) In addition to the requirements for fire alarm and detection systems in this Subsection, visual signals from smoke detectors required in sleeping rooms of Group B occupancy shall be provided so that staff serving those rooms can easily identify the room or location of fire alarm initiation. (See Appendix A.) 5. Applicant s Position The Agent for the Applicant explained that the new nursing home is currently in the final stages of construction. It was during one of the final inspections that the design and function of the required visual signals was raised as an issue of concern by the Respondent. In January 2002 the Applicant was advised that a) the colour coding of the dome lights outside sleeping rooms was an issue, b) all of the dome lights could not be seen from the nursing stations, c) the alpha-numeric display system was not listed by ULC as an ancillary device to the fire alarm system, and d) the additional fire alarm annunciator at the ground floor nursing station did not satisfy the intent of the Code to require a visual display at each nursing station. The Agent submitted that, in his opinion, Sentence 3.2.4.20.(2) requires visual signals in addition to the fire alarm system. These signals, he argued, need not be ULC listed and form part of the fire alarm system. He referred to the Appendix note in the Code and suggested that there were two methods of compliance available. The first would be to provide visual signals in the corridor at the location of each sleeping room. This would be appropriate if staff could see each sleeping room from one spot. If this was not possible, signals are to be provided where staff are expected to be present, i.e. the nursing station. In this regard, the Agent argued that the building in question had been designed by employing both methods of visual signals anticipated by the Appendix note. The Agent for the Applicant explained that, because staff could not visualize all of the dome lights from one location, the alpha-numeric display would be used in conjunction with the corridor dome lights. He advised that staff of the facility are frequently walking through the corridors. As such, they felt is appropriate to use both types of visual signals to ensure the fastest possible response. In respect to the colour of the dome light on activation of a smoke detector, the Applicant argued that there is no basis for the Respondent s claim that the light should be amber in colour. He submitted that the red light proposed was more identifiable as an alarm or alert colour. Furthermore, the Agent argued that there is no requirement in the Code for the visual signal devices to be ULC listed or to be considered part of the fire alarm system. He submitted that ancillary devices, such as these alpha-numeric display devices, are to be activated by the fire alarm system but are not required to be part of the fire alarm system. In referring to an extract from the ULC Standard, the Applicant noted that a fire alarm may include other devices such as voice communications. Strobe lights or other visuals could be added if desired. This, he argued, supported the position that there was no requirement that these ancillary devices be listed and form part of the fire alarm system. In summation, the Agent submitted that the Nurse Call System proposed for this facility will serve

-4- to visually identify the room in which a smoke detector has been actuated. The Agent stated that other long term care facilities have been constructed throughout the province that have been equipped with the type of system proposed here. The dome lights outside the individual rooms will provide a visual signal in addition to the alpha-numeric display at the nursing station. Furthermore, the annunciator panel to be provided at the ground floor nursing station will provide staff in this location with information regarding the activation of a detector. Staff throughout the facility are also supplied with pagers that would indicate the room number and priority level of an activated signal. The Agent submitted that the Applicant is voluntarily exceeding the minimum requirements of the Code by providing both the dome light system and the alpha-numeric displays. He reiterated that there is no provision in the Code to require these ancillary devices to be ULC listed. 6. Respondent s Position The Designate for the Respondent submitted that, upon inspection of the facility, they had identified two areas of concern. Namely, the type of visual signals being proposed and the colour coding of those signals. The Designate advised the Commission that in 1990 the colour of visual signals became an issue with the Ministry of Health. In this respect he submitted that an amber signal has been the colour of choice for Toronto Fire Services in their effort to standardize operations with those of the Ministry, which has adopted this colour as being most appropriate. In respect to the visual signal system itself, the Designate argued that these devices are marketed as life safety systems. Staff have to be able to respond to the signal and will come to rely on its accuracy and efficiency. He argued that, because it is not ULC listed, there would be no control over maintenance, inspection or monitoring. As a way to ensure that the system is operating as designed, the Designate argued that it should be listed. To be consistent with past practices, the Designate stated that fire alarm annunciators at each nursing station, in addition to the alpha-numeric displays would satisfy their concerns. This would be a maintained system and part of the fire alarm system. Such a system would reliably alert staff immediately and would satisfy his concerns in respect to the potential for failure of the unsupervised system being proposed by the Applicant. In summation, the Designate submitted that by relying on these visual signals as a life safety system it is appropriate to ensure its effective operation. If staff are not able to properly respond to a signal, the response time of the fire department may be affected. To ensure continued maintenance, monitoring and inspection it is, therefore, appropriate to require listed devices to satisfy the provisions of Sentence 3.2.4.20.(2). 7. Commission Ruling It is the decision of the Building Code Commission that the use of unlisted, alpha-numeric display devices forming part of the call station located in the nursing stations provide sufficiency of compliance with Sentence 3.2.4.20.(2) of the Ontario Building Code at the West Park Long-Term Care Facility, 82 Buttonwood Avenue, Toronto, Ontario.

-5-8. Reasons i) The system of dome lights outside of each patient room, in addition to the alpha-numeric display devices, is sufficient to provide the visual signals required by Sentence 3.2.4.20.(2). ii) iii) The alpha-numeric display system will be used in conjunction with remote pagers supplied to the nursing staff which would identify the room where a smoke detector has been activated. An additional annunciator, which is capable of identifying individual smoke detector activation anywhere in the facility, is provided at the ground floor nursing station.

Dated at Toronto this 20th day in the month of June in the year 2002 for application number 2002-07. -6- Len King, Chair-Designate Fred Barkhouse Donald Pratt