Spring 2012 Newsletter Volume 36, 2012 Dale Wagner: Editor Saskatchewan Building Officials Association Inc. President’s Report 2012 Spring Conference Humboldt, Saskatchewan Bella Vista Hotel March 29, 2012 It’s been a nice winter, in my area construction carried on relatively unhampered. Not an awful lot has happened since we met in Prince Albert last fall. The association held its annual training sessions in Saskatoon in early February albeit with a few hitches, the Part 3 training had to be cancelled at the last minute due to an instructor falling ill. We felt that it was already too late in the season to try to reorganize another session date this winter or spring. This incident high-lights a serious need for more local trainers. I hope we can attract a few more people to become trainers. I want to thank Chad Dale and Chris for running the Part 9 sessions. I attended the SUMA convention and trade show on behalf of the SBOA. As you know the Ministry of Corrections Public Safety and Policing very generously provides the SBOA with space within their booths, I would like to thank Bill Hawkins once again for their support. We were also granted space at the SARM conference but unfortunately we weren’t able to attend, Chris was able to set up our display so our name was there at least. If anyone is able to spare a few hours to work at these conference trade shows please let us know. Next year’s conventions are both in Saskatoon. This Spring Vice-President Chris Gates and I will be attending the spring meetings of the Alliance of Canadian Building Official Associations in Halifax, and next fall we will be attending the fall sessions in Sudbury. At ACBOA we continue to work towards creating a common level of training, and code enforcement for all Canadian Building Officials. We are also creating strategies to raise the profile and the value of Building Officials. I would like to remind you once again that it will be election time again at next fall’s SBOA conference in Saskatoon. We have asked Doug Mulhall to act as nominating chairman for this year’s elections. I encourage anyone that is interested in taking a position on the executive to let Doug know by phone or email that you are interested. As you know I will be stepping down next fall and as well LeRoy is also stepping down so we know for sure that we need at least two new faces on our executive. As always this is your SBOA so if have any suggestions or concerns please let us know. Thank you and I hope we will see you in Saskatoon in the fall. Dan Knutson AScT, CCBO President SBOA Mayor Malcolm Eaton giving greetings
Transcript
Spring 2012 Newsletter Volume 36, 2012Dale Wagner: Editor
SaskatchewanBuildingOfficialsAssociation Inc.
President’s Report 2012 Spring ConferenceHumboldt, SaskatchewanBella Vista Hotel
March 29, 2012
It’s been a nice winter, in my area construction carried on relatively unhampered. Not an awful lot has happened since we met in Prince Albert last fall. The association held its annual training sessions in Saskatoon in early February albeit with a few hitches, the Part 3 training had to be cancelled at the last minute due to an instructor falling ill. We felt that it was already too late in the season to try to reorganize another session date this winter or spring. This incident high-lights a serious need for more local trainers. I hope we can attract a few more people to become trainers. I want to thank Chad
Dale and Chris for running the Part 9 sessions. I a t tended the SUMA convention and trade show on behalf of the SBOA. As you know the Ministry of Corrections Public Safety and Policing very generously provides the SBOA with space within their booths, I would like to thank Bill Hawkins once again for their support. We were also granted space at the SARM conference but unfortunately we weren’t able to attend, Chris was able to set up our display so our name was there at least. If anyone is able to spare a few hours to work at these conference trade shows please let us know. Next year’s conventions are both in Saskatoon. This Spring Vice-President Chris Gates and I will be attending the spring meetings of the Alliance of Canadian Building Official Associations in Halifax, and next fall we will be attending the fall sessions in Sudbury. At ACBOA we continue to work towards creating a common level of training, and code enforcement for all Canadian Building Officials. We are also creating strategies to raise the profile and the value of Building Officials. I would like to remind you once again that it will be election time again at next fall’s SBOA conference in Saskatoon. We have asked Doug Mulhall to act as nominating chairman for this year’s elections. I encourage anyone that is interested in taking a position on the executive to let Doug know by phone or email that you are interested. As you know I will be stepping down next fall and as well LeRoy is also stepping down so we know for sure that we need at least two new faces on our executive. As always this is your SBOA so if have any suggestions or concerns please let us know. Thank you and I hope we will see you in Saskatoon in the fall.
Dan Knutson AScT, CCBOPresident
SBOAMayor Malcolm Eaton giving greetings
EDUCATION COMMITTEE REPORT - Fall Conference, March 29, 2012Business Meeting ReportOverview: The role of the Education committee is to support training opportunities for our members. I am pleased to report on the following activities in that pursuit.Item 1: Building Code Training For Canadians Series 1 The Building Code Training for Canadians program serves as the entrance point for most individuals entering a career as a Building Official in Saskatchewan. The BCTC program is currently recognized as one of the qualifications required for obtaining a Building Official Class 1 license and is recognized by the Alliance of Canadian Building Officials Association as meeting the National Occupation Standards for education at the “housing” stage of the National Certification Program.
Item 2: New BCTC Program BCTC Program Update: The new material is scheduled to be reviewed and edited by the BCTC Committee, Building Standards and the Southeast Regional College in the coming months. The completed course material is scheduled to be rolled out this year.Item 3: 2012 Training Courses This year the SBOA offered two five day training courses from February 6th through 10th. The courses scheduled were Part 9 – Building Classification and Construction and Part 3 – Life Safety Systems. Unfortunately due to a last minute illness with the ACBOA facilitator the Part 3 course had to be cancelled. Further ACBOA recognized their error in providing the incorrect course material and offers its apologies for the issues arising with the Part 9 course.Please contact Chad Freeland at [email protected] if you are interested in becoming a course facilitator for the SBOA!
The following students successfully completed the Building Code Training for Canadians - Series 1 course since our fall 2011 conference and were in attendance: Stephan Germann, David Cooper and Kevin Chaisson.
Recipient of National Certification Certificate: Presented to Garvin Todosichuk by Gary Martens Certification Chairman.
The following people successfully passed their challenge exams: Left to right: Anita Lepard, Errol Castle, Heather Petrychyn, Amanda Kaufman, Reg Churko. On behalf of the SBOA, Congratulations!
Howard Arndt ..........................................................SiltonCrystal Bueckert ....................................Saskatoon 2011Kayla Carr .......................................................SaskatoonAinoul Chowdhury ........................................ Moose JawDavid Cooper ..................................... Prince Albert 2011Antonia Cunningham ........................................... ReginaDave Dynna ................................................ Prince AlbertDale Feser ..........................................................EstevanDon Figley ......................................................SaskatoonStefan Germann .................................................. ReginaRonald Hitchens .................................................. ReginaStephen Hove ...................................................... ReginaCurtis Jerome ...................................................... ReginaKatarina Knezevic ...........................................SaskatoonEugene Lefebvre ................................................. ReginaMichael Leonard ..................................................YorktonJason McDonald ....................................Saskatoon 2011Kyle McDonald .................................................... ReginaBrent Monroe ......................................................EstevanGary Neufeld .......................................................YorktonHeather Petrychyn ............................................... ReginaVelda Rupchan ......................................Saskatoon 2011Walter Schroeder .......................................Emerald ParkGrant Sobush .................................................KindersleyDon Stewart ......................................................... ReginaBrian Turple ....................................................SaskatoonJason Wall ......................................................SaskatoonBrian Wilkinson .................................................... ReginaVince Wood ......................................................... ReginaPeter Wotherspoon .............................................. ReginaMahabub Zaman .......................................... Moose Jaw
SBOALIST OF NEW MEMBERS
SBOA Business MeetingMinutes and reports from the
executive and committee chairman were presented and adopted.
Building Code Training for Canadians - Series 1 - 1995
This course provides the education and licensing exam requirements to obtain a Class 1 Building
Official License.
“A comprehensive home study of the National Building Code of Canada one & two unit
dwellings.”
Contact: Michelle LokkenSoutheast Regional College, Weyburn District Campus
Presented by Heather Petrychyn, Assistant Chief Building Official This presentation was on Secondary Suites, which shows the changes in the National Building Code of Canada 2010 (NBC 2010). The previous NBC 2005 did not address secondary suites and the requirements were more restrictive. In the presentation we were shown a side by side comparison between the 2005 and the 2010 codes. The changes make it easier to implement secondary suites in existing houses and encourage home owners to comply with the conformance compared to what the 2005 code required. With the increased growth in Saskatchewan comes the shortage of affordable housing and the relaxation of certain items in the 2010 code still address the health, safety and fire issues for these secondary suites. This workshop was very well received and the afternoon went by very quickly for the jammed room of regulatory attendees.
If you are golfers but don’t know who David Feherty is, think of any Irish Robin Williams, who was a professional golfer and is now a TV commentator for Golf Channel and has his own show. The stuff that just rolls off of his lips is so funny that for a few years they wouldn’t even let him do the Masters coverage for fear he would offend the Masters Committee.
“That ball is so far left, Lassie couldn’t find it if it was wrapped in bacon.”On Jim Furyk’s swing -- “It looks like an octopus falling out of a tree.”“That was a great shot -- if they’d put the pin there today.”“All you need for a happy life is good health and a bad memory.”Describing a player’s tee shot -- “Everything moves except his bowels.”
Secondary Suite workshop
Wednesday March 28, 2012Secondary Suites
Thursday March 29, 2012Polycore Canada
This presentation was facilitated by Mark Cunningham who is the CEO of Polycore Canada Ltd.
What is Polycore?- Solid blocks of Styrofoam, with integrated steel studs for structural strength used to build everything from houses to industrial buildings.- Wrapped envelope design eliminates thermal bridging- Engineering design selects all steel for specific needs of the buildingThe Product:
✦ faster, easier, better, greener, and usually less expensive than others
✦benefits of a custom system with the advantage of standardization✦simple, easy to use, and applicable for all styles of building
envelopesThis type of a building requires an engineered design and installers are monitored by the company and the design engineer of the structure. The company has just secured their first distributor in Saskatchewan and should become more prevalent.
Todd Russell, Sue Lynn Levigne and Mark Cunningham
Thursday March 29, 2012Building Official Orders and the Appeal Process
Presented by William Hawkins, Chief Building Official.
The presentation was aimed at licensed Building Officials and was fact filled to help when faced with contraventions of Building and Accessibility Standards. The presentation covered the following points:
✦Proof of compliance✦Work covered contrary to Order✦Unsafe conditions✦ Imminent danger✦Hints to good Order writing ❂Appeal board ❂Exemptions from Accessibility Standards✦Appeal of Building Official’s Orders✦Execution of Orders
It was stressed throughout the presentation on how crucial it is for the Building Official to ensure good Order writing is critical in gaining compliance with the NBC. SBOA would like to thank Bill for a very informative presentation.
I was out walking with my grandson. He picked up something off of the ground and started to put it in his mouth. I took the item away from him and asked him not to do that. “Why” my grandson asked. “Because it’s been on the ground; you don’t know where it’s been; it’s dirty, and probably has germs,” I replied. At this point, my grandson looked at me with total admiration and asked, “Grandma, how do you know all this stuff?? You are so smart.” I was thinking quickly and said to him. “All grandmas know stuff. It’s on the Grandma Test. You have to know it, or they don’t let you be a grandma.” We walked along in silence for 2 or 3 minutes, but he was evidently pondering this new information. “Oh, I get it!” He beamed, “So if you don’t pass the test you have to be the grandpa.” “Exactly,” I replied with a big smile on my face.
Our final presenter of the day was Blair Nutting who is the Vice President of Pink Wood from Calgary, Alberta.
This presentation was very fitting after following the presentation on problems with lightweight construction and the advantage of residential sprinklers. There are three main enemies of lightweight joists and truss and they are termites, mould growth and fire. While termites are not a problem in Saskatchewan the other two enemies definitely are a major enemy. Pink wood coats lumber that delays fire spread and mould growth.
Intumescent coatings swell when exposed to heat.Types
Hard expanding char○ Used for protecting exterior steel, piping etc.
Soft char or “thin film intumescents”○ The coating swells, forms a char and
insulates the substrate.○ The fire resistance depends on thickness
of the char which is a direct correlation to the applied thickness or wet film thickness. (measured in mils or thousandths of an inch)
The devastating fires in Edmonton have spurred the changes in both Alberta Building Code and the National Building Code.
This prompted the cities of Edmonton and Calgary to require the use of exterior gypsum or fire rated sheathing
Edmonton requires sheathing to pass CAN/ULC S101 pilot scale test (Thermal barrier greater than 15 minutes)
Calgary requires testing to CAN/ULC S102 flame spread test (must be less than 25)
Alberta Home Builder’s Association is attempting to have fire
Thursday March 29, 2012Pink Wood Construction
rated wood sheathing accepted within the HIRF regulations of the building code.
After the presentation we were invited to go outside and see how the intumescent coating of engineered I-joists compared to uncoated joists compare when exposed to flame. The regular joists burned through in around 4 minutes and the coated joists lasted more than 15 minutes proving how well the product works. This was an excellent presentation and coincides with the changes required in the National Building Code 2010 and the National Fire Code 2010.
Dale Wagner and Blair Nutting
Demonstration of floor joists exposed to fire
These discussions were facilitated by William Hawkins, Len Semko, Margaret Ball, Marvin Meickel and Heather Petrychyn.
This presentation was jam packed and the attendees were told to hang on to their hats as there was so much material to cover. Due to the last Provincial election it had been one year since the Building Standards Unit (BSU) had been able to present to our membership at our conference. The following is a list of topics that was covered in the Code Panel:
✦ BSU Overview✦ Protection of Adjacent Buildings❂ National Building Code (NBC) - Part 8❂ National Fire Code (NFC) - Section 5.6❂ Fire Safety Plan❂ High Intensity Residential Fires (HIRF)❂ Spatial Separations❂ Installing Water Curtains❂ Construction Methods and Materials
✷Gypsum Sheathing✷Temporary Fire Barrier (Fire Tarpaulin)
❂ Sequence of Responsibility
✦Exit Signs✦Change in Care Occupancies
✷Classification is now a B3✷New definition of non-ambulatory is:
Capable of Self Preservation means that a person is capable of recognizing and responding to an emergency given their physical, cognitive and behavioural abilities, and is able to arise and walk, or transfer from a bed or chair to a means of mobility, and leave the building or move to a safe location on their own without the assistance of another person.
✦Foundations and Damp proofing ✦Clear Height over Stairs, Ramps and Landings – Part 9✦Other News from BSU
❂2010 Codes Adoption is delayed❂Care Homes Guide will soon be completed❂Advisory Committee, Licensing of Building Officials❂Building and Accessibility Standards Appeal Board
Renewal❂Emergency Changes to the NBC 2010For revisions and errata go to http://www.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/
eng/ibp/irc/codes/revisions.html
As you can see there was a full agenda and one that should not be missed in the future.
Thursday March 29, 2012Building Standards Code Panel
William Hawkins, Len Semko, Margaret Ball, Heather Petrychyn, Marvin Meickel and Gary Martens.
Sandy Hutchison who is a Radiation Specialist w i th Hea l th Canada did a very informative presentation. Radon comes from the natural radioactive decay of uranium to form radioactive gas. Radon cannot be detected by human senses because it is colourless, odourless and tasteless. Inside buildings, radon can accumulate to high levels to become a health concern:
• ranging from 30 – 2000 Bq/m3• average = 45 Bq/m3
Bq/m3 = Becquerel per meter cubedBq = one disintegration per second Radon levels in soil vary greatly and radon easily enters buildings. It can build up to high concentrations. The factors affecting radon levels:
The only known health effect of radon exposure is the initiation of lung cancer. World Health Organization estimates six to 15 per cent of lung cancers are attributable to radon Canadian Cancer Society estimates 25,300 new lung cancer cases in 2011 in Canada:
• 900 cases (680 deaths) in Manitoba• 690 cases (570 deaths) in Saskatchewan
Remedial measures should be undertaken in a dwelling whenever the average annual radon concentration exceeds 200 Bq/m3 in the normal occupancy area. The higher the radon concentration, the sooner remedial measures should be undertaken. When remedial action is taken, the radon level should be reduced to a value as low as practicable. The construction of new dwellings should employ techniques that will minimize radon entry and will facilitate post-construction radon removal, should this subsequently prove necessary. 15.8 per cent of homes in Saskatchewan tested above 200 Bq/m3Parts 5, 6 and 9 for Protection from RadonIngress The new Health Canada guideline of 200 Bq/m³ for indoor radon concentration has been referenced in the Appendix. Parts 5 and 6 of the NBC 2010 now require that engineers and designers consider radon protection in their designs. Air barrier requirements in Part 9 were consolidated and prescriptive measures on providing a rough-in for a future radon mitigation system added. For more information go to www.healthcanada.gc.ca/radon
Friday March 30, 2012Health Canada Regional Radiation
Dan Knutson & Sandy Hutchison
Thursday March 29, 2012Canadian Automatic Sprinkler Association
Presented by Sean PearceIn this presentation Sean talked about today’s homes and lightweight construction of floor and roof systems. He also talked about residential sprinklers and how they would save lives and substantial damage due to fire. The Canadian Automatic Sprinkler System Association has had tests conducted on how lightweight construction has caused for increased fire deaths and loss of property.Interesting facts
• The time to loss of tenability (conditions would make it improbable that occupants would survive the fire) in the test scenario was in all cases reached before the floor systems collapsed.
• The report did not identify set times for required response and evacuation in a residential fire. We are concerned that this decreased time is such that the elderly, those with mobility impairments, and the very young may not be able to safely evacuate in the required time. This is being reflected in current Ontario fire statistics where 42% of fire fatalities are in seniors and in children.
• The study shows that time to safely evacuate is significantly less than the public may expect – approximately 2 ½ minutes from activation of the smoke alarm.
• Each occupant is likely to have a different time required for escape because of different characteristics and behaviours of the occupants among other variables. In fire situations, occupants may not necessarily begin evacuation immediately upon recognizing the warning from smoke alarms. They may spend time in various pre-movement activities, such as confirming the existence of a fire, attempting to fight the fire, warning and gathering family members, gathering valuables and donning warm clothes in winter, etc. If occupants get involved in these various pre-movement activities rather than begin evacuation immediately, they may miss the window of opportunity to evacuate safely under certain circumstances.
• Perhaps the most satisfactory basis of comparison is in terms of time available for the escape of a hypothetical person in the house
Sean Pearce and Jerry Wintonyk
when the fire starts. In similar work it has been the practice to regard 300°F or 150°C as a threshold; below this temperature a person stands a chance if he can find a way out, but above it he rapidly becomes a victim.
• The period from the start of the fire until a temperature or 300°F has been attained in any particular part of a house may thus be regarded as the “survival time, as limited by heat”. There are, of course, other aspects of a fire which may prevent escape, perhaps before heat does so. Carbon monoxide or lack of oxygen in the atmosphere may lead to loss of consciousness. Dense smoke may prevent the victim from finding his way to safety. In other reports in this series, survival times as limited by these other factors are derived. Naturally the significant survival period is the shortest of the survival times as limited by each of these effects of this fire.
The test results prove that residential sprinklers would indeed save lives and greatly reduce property loss. Most people do not realize that from the time of a fire and the first alert of a smoke alarm hardly allows enough time to exit a house. It also shows the extreme dangers that fire suppression personal face in fires where lightweight construction has been used.
Recently, when I went to McDonald’s I saw on the menu that you could have an order of 6, 9 or 12 Chicken McNuggets. I asked for a half dozen nuggets. ‘We don’t have half dozen nuggets,’ said the teenager at the counter. ‘You don’t?’ I replied. ‘We only have six, nine, or twelve,’ was the reply. ‘So I can’t order a half dozen nuggets, but I can order six?’ ‘That’s right.’ So I shook my head and ordered six McNuggets.
I was checking out at the local Wal-Mart with just a few items and the lady behind me put her things on the belt close to mine. I picked up one of those ‘dividers’ that they keep by the cash register and placed it between our things so they wouldn’t get mixed. After the girl had scanned all of my items, she picked up the ‘divider’, looking it all over for the bar code so she could scan it. Not finding the bar code, she said to me, ‘Do you know how much this is?’ I said to her ‘I’ve changed my mind; I don’t think I’ll buy that today.’ She said ‘OK,’ and I paid her for the things and lef t . She had no clue to what had just happened.
The S.B.O.A. wishes to thank the following Sponsors:
CMHC and Building Standards
We would also like to thank all those individuals and organizations that donated prizes for the conference. Your support is greatly appreciated.
GERALD HOWARD ALEXANDER – It is with utmost sadness that we announce the passing of Gerry Alexander on Sunday, February 5, 2012 at the age of 70. Gerry was active in the Saskatchewan Building Officials Association and the Canadian Building Officials Association acting as president for both organizations. He formed many professional relationships and lifetime friendships during his time with these associations.
The presenter for this session was Christine de Groot, P. Eng. and evaluation officer for CCMC.The CCMC mandate is:
Facilitate market acceptance of new, innovative products Help Officials determine their conformity to codes (Prov./Ter.
regulates construction) Help practitioners determine the product performance Enhance quality of construction Facilitate exports Stimulate R&D investments
Code explicit requirements shall be addressed. These requirements shall be addressed in relation to a product’s intended use, based on scientific justification and linked to objectives.Evaluation criteria could be established on anticipated Code changes that have been approved by the Canadian Commission on Building and Fire Codes.Once a requirement (other than proponent requested claims) is established for an intended use, then that requirement shall be addressed for all similar products or materials, with the same intended use.Proponent requested performance claims beyond Code explicit requirements shall be based on scientific justification.CCMC evaluates two types of products:Standardized listings and Innovative reports, The listing is compliance to a standard and the report is compliance to the National Building Code.
The listing must meet all the requirements of the standard. Compliance to a standard does not mean compliance to NBC
(code may have other requirements).
The presentation was very interesting and we would like to thank Christine for better informing our membership. For more information visit http://www.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/ccmc-ccmc/index.html
Friday March 30, 2012Canadian Construction Materials Centre (CCMC)
Christine de Groot and Chris Gates
The presenter for this session was Desmond Shubert who is a fire service instructor and a Fire Chief. In this presentation Desmond showed file footage from the devastating fire in Edmonton May 30th, 2002. The fire caused $21,000,000.00 in losses and left 300 people homeless. The problems with construction sites are lightweight construction that is not protected with interior or exterior finishes during the construction stages. This causes for large surface to mass ratios, which provides for a larger chance of fire and fire spread. The other problem is the fire protection devices such as sprinkler systems, fire alarm systems and all components that alert and protect people cannot be in place till the end of construction. Another problem is the accessibility of fire apparatus to a construction site because of fire access lanes not being in place during construction. The NBC 2010 will be addressing some of the problems but obviously not all of the issues that make new construction and the construction sites very vulnerable to the dangers of fire. SBOA would like to thank Desmond for your dynamic presentation.
Desmond Shubert and Chad Freeland
Demonstration of Poly Core building materials and fire from a building of regular construction materials.
Friday March 30, 2012Lakeland College Emergency Training Centre
When do we classify a residence as a single family dwelling and when do we classify it as a multiple tenancy occupancy or secondary suite? The story starts when I received a permit application and full set of drawings for a single family dwelling. Construction proceeded normally and a few months down the road the municipality called me and asked if I knew what the intent of the use of this particular home was because they noticed in the plumbing permit that the basement was going to have a kitchen. I explained to them that the original drawings did not show any basement development and that they may want to contact the owner to apply for a basement development permit if that is their intent. At that time we could find out their intent of the use of the basement. I also said that it is not uncommon for people to have a kitchen in the basement and use it for family gatherings. After the municipality queried the owner on the basement development, the owner stated that her children were going to reside in the basement. The owner is an elderly woman and stated that her family was going to live in the basement. Her 2 daughters are in their 50’s and this is where the questions and grey areas start. I have heard all of the arguments and some are somewhat reasonable. I think all of us would agree that we allow or have allowed our own children to sleep in the basement and would not expect that our home would be anything but a single family dwelling. I am sure we have had relatives or friends spend a week or more in our basements. So do we have to consider these areas as secondary suites or multiple tenancies? I would say no but where do we draw the line on who can reside in a basement suite and for what period of time? There is a shortage of affordable housing in Saskatchewan and many immigrants moving into the province with no place to live. I seem to get a few basement development permit applications per month where a brother from another country is staying with family for a month till they get on their feet and find someplace to live. How about the woman who is having marital problems and moves into the basement of her sister and their family? How about the elderly mother who is lonely and moves into a basement suite with her family? As you can see we have a lot of grey areas to deal with and the people who do not want to be code compliant because of cost always come back to us saying that it is family! My question is since when has society decided that their own family does not require the same safety as the person paying rent? The changes in the NBC 2010 have relaxed the requirements for secondary suites somewhat but have not defined how you classify a secondary suite using the examples I have listed above. The biggest obstacles are obviously exiting, heating each suite without ducting and separations between suites. The 2010 NBC has defined a secondary suite by the following: Secondary suite means a self-contained dwelling unit with a prescribed floor area located in a building or portion of a building of only residential occupancy that contains only one other dwelling unit and common spaces, and where both dwelling units constitute a single real estate entity. (See Appendix A and Article 9.1.2.1. of Division B.) A secondary suite is a self-contained dwelling unit of a prescribed maximum total floor area that is part of a building containing not more than two dwelling units (including the secondary suite) and any common spaces such as common storage, common service rooms, common laundry facilities or common areas used for egress. Secondary suites are typically created within an existing single dwelling unit—commonly
Several years ago, we had an Intern who was none too swift. One day she was typing and turned to a secretary and said, ‘I’m almost out of typing paper. What do I do?’ ‘Just use paper from the photocopier’, the secretary told her. With that, the intern took her last remaining blank piece of paper, put it on the photocopier and proceeded to make five ‘blank’ copies.
A mother calls 911 very worried asking the dispatcher if she needs to take her kid to the emergency room, the kid had eaten ants. The dispatcher tells her to give the kid some Benadryl and he should be fine, the mother says, ‘I just gave him some ant killer!
Editorial by Newsletter Chairperson Dale Wagner
“Grey Area”called a “house”—either constructed as an addition to an existing house or incorporated during the construction of a new house. A secondary suite may have more than one storey and may be on the same level as the principal dwelling unit of the house or be above or below it. Examples of buildings where secondary suites are permitted include individual detached houses, or where the secondary suite is located in a portion of a building, semi-detached houses (half of a double) and freehold row houses. Where a building has multiple occupancies, the secondary suite can only be created in a portion of the building that is of residential occupancy. Apartment buildings have more than two dwelling units and are therefore not permitted to have secondary suites. National Building Code of Canada 2010 Volume 1 Division A A-5 A-1.4.1.2.(1) Division A Neither dwelling unit in a house can be strata-titled or otherwise subdivided from the remainder of the house under Provincial or Territorial legislation. This means that both dwelling units are registered under the same title. Secondary suites are also referred to as “accessory suites” or “secondary units” by various jurisdictions. Now as you can see there is no place in this definition that clearly allows a Building Official to determine when you should call a space a secondary suite. It does not talk about what is family or how to ascertain the exchange of rent money. If anyone has some clear defined suggestions to ensure consistent compliance I welcome the advice. Please forward comments to any SBOA executive so that we can hopefully gain a consistent resolve.This editorial is solely the opinion of the writer and does not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Saskatchewan Building Officials Association or our membership.
A MEMBER OF THE ALLIANCE OF CANADIAN BUILDING OFFICIALS ASSOCIATION
SASKATCHEWAN BUILDING OFFICIALS ASSOCIATION INC. P.O. Box 1671
Education ChairpersonChad Freeland CCBO Coordinator of Building Research & Code EnforcementSaskatchewan Ministry ofGovernment Services1920 Rose StreetRegina, Sask. S4P 0A9306-787-0757 [email protected]
President Dan Knutson A.Sc.T. CCBO Engineering Assistant Engineering Department City of Swift CurrentP.O. Box 340Swift Current, Sask. S9H 2J1 306-778-2740306-778-6202 (fax) [email protected]
Book rooms early as a block of rooms is only held for a period of time.
S.B.O.A. Fall CONFERENCE October 24-26, 2012
Saskatoon Travelodge 106 Circle Drive,
Saskatoon, SK S7L 4L6 306-242-8881, 306-665-7378 (fax)
1-888-278-4209www.travelodgesaskatoon.com
S.B.O.A. Newsletter
is published twice a year for the information of our association members. Its purpose is to inform the members about conference topics and up-coming events. Comments, story ideas and suggestions about contents and format as well as any retirements or deaths, should be directed to:Dale Wagner Newsletter Chairperson
P.O. Box 35Hague, Saskatchewan
S0K 1X0Home: (306) 225-2265Fax: (306) 225-2196
e-mail:[email protected] for details for the Building Standards Workshop
