Ruling No. 04-27-982 Application No. 2004-19 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 9.8.8.8.(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, 283/01 and 220/02 (the Ontario Building Code ). AND IN THE MATTER OF an application by Edward Leerdam, IBM Canada, for the resolution of a dispute with John DeVries, Chief Building Official, Town of Richmond Hill, to determine whether the as-constructed exterior deck serving a Group C occupancy, which is comprised of a composite material referred to as Life-Long Decking that is manufactured by Brite Manufacturing Inc., will provide sufficiency of compliance with Articles 9.8.8.8. and 4.1.10.1. of the Ontario Building Code at 193 Sunset Beach Road, Richmond Hill, Ontario. APPLICANT RESPONDENT PANEL PLACE Edward Leerdam IBM Canada Richmond Hill, Ontario John DeVries Chief Building Official Town of Richmond Hill John Guthrie, Chair-Designate Gary Burtch Fred Barkhouse Toronto, Ontario DATE OF HEARING June 17 th, 2004 DATE OF RULING June 17 th, 2004 APPEARANCES Andrew Rush Brite Manufacturing Inc. Agent for the Applicant Morris Lucchetta Manager of Inspections Town of Richmond Hill Designate for the Respondent
-2- RULING 1. The Applicant Edward Leerdam, IBM Canada, has received an Order to Comply under the Building Code Act, S.O. 1992, c. 23, as amended, to rectify certain alleged deficiencies at 193 Sunset Beach Road, Richmond Hill, Ontario. 2. Description of Construction The Applicant is the owner of a one storey Group C dwelling for which a permit was issued for the construction of a deck in the rear yard of the subject property. The subject deck has been constructed and measures 24.15 m 2 (260 ft 2 ). The construction in dispute involves the materials used in the construction of the subject deck and the installation of the guard. The deck has been constructed using hollow 5/4 deck plank composite material, referred to as Life-Long Decking, manufactured by Brite Manufacturing Inc. The materials used as both the deck planks and guard have been have undergone testing by Intertek Testing Services NA Ltd. and have been certified by a professional engineer as meeting the performance measures specified in the Code. The materials, however, are not listed in the Supplementary Guidelines to the Building Code nor has the product received approval from either the Canadian Construction Materials Centre (CCMC) or the Building Materials Evaluation Commission (BMEC). 3. Dispute The issue at dispute between the Applicant and Respondent is whether the use of Life-Long Decking, manufactured by Brite Manufacturing Inc., provides sufficiency of compliance with Articles 9.8.8.8. and 4.1.10.1. of the Building Code (OBC). Sentence 9.8.8.8.(1) specifies that, except as permitted in Sentence 9.8.8.8.(2), guards are to be constructed in accordance with Article 4.1.10.1. Article 4.1.10.1. specifies the minimum construction requirements in respect of loads on guards. Sentence 9.8.8.8.(2) states that, where guards are to be constructed in accordance with the Supplementary Guidelines, they shall be deemed to comply with Sentence 9.8.8.8.(1). The subject deck and associated guard are constructed of a composite material not referenced in the Supplementary Guidelines. As such, the Respondent questions whether the deck and guard, as installed using the subject material, will possess the necessary characteristics to perform their intended functions. 4. Provisions of the Ontario Building Code 9.8.8.8. Construction of Guards (1) Except as permitted in Sentence (2), guards shall conform to the loading criteria in Article 4.1.10.1. (2) Guards constructed in accordance with the requirements in the Supplementary Guidelines shall be deemed to satisfy the requirements of Sentence 9.8.8.8.(1).
-3-4.1.10.1. Loads on Guards (1) The minimum specified horizontal load applied inward or outward at the top of every required guard shall be (a) 3.0 kn/m (200 lb/ft) for means of egress in grandstands, stadia, bleachers and arenas, (b) a concentrated load of 1.0 kn (225 lb) applied at any point for access walkways to equipment platforms, contiguous stairs and similar areas where the gathering of many people is improbable, and (c) 0.75 kn/m (50 lb/ft) or a concentrated load of 1.0 kn (225 lb) applied at any point, whichever governs, for locations other than described in Clauses (a) and (b). (2) Individual elements within the guard, including solid panels and pickets, shall be designed for a concentrated load of 0.5 kn (113 lb) at any point in the element. (3) The loads required in Sentence (2) need not be considered to act simultaneously with the loads provided for in Sentences (1) and (4). (4) The minimum specified load applied vertically at the top of every required guard shall be 1.5 kn/m (100 lb/ft) and need not be considered to act simultaneously with the horizontal load provided for in Sentence (1). 5. Applicant s Position The Agent for the Applicant noted that Brite Manufacturing Inc. is a relatively large organization involved in the manufacturing of wood composite decking. He stated that they have been producing the subject product for approximately seven years and have been selling within Ontario for the last four years. They have investigated approvals through CCMC but, in other municipalities, the officials have accepted drawings stamped by a professional engineer as equivalent to the Code requirements. The Agent submitted that extensive testing has been conducted by Intertek Testing Services NA Ltd. on the composite material and the railing system. He referred to the engineering report submitted as evidence, noting that the composite material had been tested for, among other things, structural load, to determine deck board span; creep relaxation; mechanical fastener testing; freeze-thaw resistance; durability; coefficient of friction; fire resistance; resistance to termites; low temperature effect, etc. The Agent noted that the Town had issued an Order to Comply in connection with the subject deck, which listed contraventions with the Building Code in connection with the deck installation and materials, guard height and guard installation. The Agent confirmed that the guard height will be remedied, but disputed the Order in connection with the installation and material requirements of the Code. He submitted that the subject deck had been installed in accordance with the manufacturers guidelines and while this material is not listed in the Supplementary Guidelines, in his opinion, testing has shown that sufficiency of compliance with the Building Code requirements will be achieved. 6. Respondent s Position The Designate for the Respondent submitted that the composite material that has been used in the construction of this deck is not recognized by the Building Code. He advised that the Town had issued a permit based on the provision of wood guards. He suggested that the manufacturer should more appropriately have this product evaluated by a body such as CCMC. This would provide assurance to municipal building officials in respect to material performance and installation requirements. He pointed out that, if proven to be an effective alternative, a Minister s Ruling could be issued to recognize the product for province-wide application.
-4- The Designate submitted that, in his opinion, the guards have not been installed in accordance with the Code requirements and, therefore, cannot be accepted by the municipality. He specified concern with the connections and balusters. Further, he reiterated his position that the material is not referenced in the Building Code and has not being accepted as equivalent by the Town. He noted that the municipality does not have the resources to throughly examine and analyse testing documentation in connection with this innovative product. 7. Commission Ruling It is the decision of the Building Code Commission that the as-constructed exterior deck serving a Group C occupancy, which is comprised of a composite material referred to as Life-Long Decking that is manufactured by Brite Manufacturing Inc., will provide sufficiency of compliance with Articles 9.8.8.8. and 4.1.10.1. of the Ontario Building Code at 193 Sunset Beach Road, Richmond Hill, Ontario, on the condition that: a) An independent third-party engineer, who is knowledgeable of the materials regarding the composite deck and guard in question, approves the design and construction details of the exterior deck and guard at dispute. 8. Reasons i) During the hearing, it was advised that the Applicant party is prepared to correct the deficiencies with respect to the guard height and connectors. ii) iii) Upon fulfilment of the above cited condition, the Commission is satisfied that the asconstructed exterior deck at 193 Sunset Beach Road, Richmond Hill, Ontario will provide sufficiency of compliance with Articles 9.8.8.8. and 4.1.10.1. of the Ontario Building Code. This decision is site-specific and only applies to the exterior deck located at 193 Sunset Beach Road, Richmond Hill, Ontario.
Dated at Toronto this 17th day in the month of June in the year 2004 for application number 2004-19. -5- John Guthrie, Chair-Designate Gary Burtch Fred Barkhouse