DECISION NO. 2004RA006-143
Date: October 27, 2004
SUBJECT MATTER
The issue before the tribunal was an application made by the fire
department for authorization to do work relating to an Inspection Order
served on the owner of a mixed use residential, commercial and assembly
building. The Inspection Order required that a second exit be provided from
a second floor area by June 18, 2004. The previous second exit was
compromised as a result of a fire.
Five residential units situated on the second floor of the premises are now
located within a dead-end corridor and served by only one exit. Temporary
alternative accommodation was provided by the fire department for occupants
of the affected units until this second means of egress is provided.
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES
This 2500m², two storey (plus basement) building was constructed in 1947 and
is of combustible construction. The exterior walls of the building are
concrete block, brick or stucco on wood frame. The roof and floor assemblies
are boards on joist.
The building is generally occupied as commercial on the first floor and
residential on the second floor. The second floor includes thirteen
apartments in the North Wing and five apartments in the South Wing. The
south end of the building also has four apartments on the second floor that
are vacant because of a recent fire. The southeast portion of the building
has both floors gutted and under reconstruction due to this fire. The roof
of this portion has been removed and partially covered with tarps and
plastic.
The North and South Wings of the building have floor assemblies that are
boards on joist with gypsum wallboard sheathing on the underside. The
corridors serving the apartments and the exit stairs are separated from the
remaining floor area with gypsum wallboard on wood stud wall assemblies. The
apartments are separated from each other and other floor areas by wall
assemblies constructed with gypsum wallboard on wood studs. Suite doors are
a solid-core wood type and are provided with self-closing devices. Doors
accessing exit stairs from the floor area are labelled and provided with
self-closers.
The second floor of the North Wing is provided with two exits that include
the east exit stair and the central exit stair. The South Wing is currently
provided with a single exit, which is the central exit stair. A previous
second means of egress from this wing is locked off as it leads through the
fire-damaged area to the south, which is under reconstruction.
Fire safety equipment, such as the fire alarm system and in-suite smoke
alarms are in place throughout the occupied portion of the building but not
in the portion of the building under reconstruction or the second floor
vacant apartments in the south end. The power supply and services have also
been shut-off in the vacated portion of the building. Sprinklers are
provided and in service on the ground floor and basement of the North Wing
and part of the South Wing.
This building falls within Section 9.5 of the Fire Code which requires that
each floor area to be served by a minimum of two exits.
APPLICANT’S POSITION
The fire department indicated that the owner is not likely to comply with
the Inspection Order since the timelines for an appeal have passed and there
is no sign of action being taken by the owner at the premises. Since the
issuance of the Inspection Order, the fire department has received no
communication about the owner’s intent despite repeated attempts to contact
him. The fire department filed an application to the Commission on September
27, 2004 for authorization to do work. The fire department believes that the
application is consistent with criteria set out in subsection 33.(4) of the
FPPA, 1997, and failure to provide the exit
endangers the occupants of the residential portion of this property. The
fire department is therefore seeking the Commission’s decision to grant the
authority to do the minimum acceptable measures as proposed therein at the
owner’s expense.
RESPONDENT'S POSITION
The owner’s business manager was at the hearing to collect information for
the owner, and stated that he did not have the authority to make decisions
on matters relating to financial commitments. He also provided additional
information about an ongoing dispute over claims for the fire damages, and
that it was the owner’s intent to let the Inspection Order compliance date
lapse until sale of the property could be arranged. He also stated that the
owner has undertaken all safety measures to the property required by the
fire department as a result of the fire, except the provision of the
required second exit.
COMMISSION'S RULING
The Commission ruled that the application for authorization to do work be
granted in accordance with the minimum acceptable measures as follows:
The Fire Department shall complete the work within one month.
REASONS
The Tribunal has heard the evidence to the effect that the owners had ample
opportunity to implement the Inspection Order. The work is necessary to ensure
life safety of the occupants and the visitors at the building. The reasons given
at the hearing by the Respondent for not implementing the order are not
acceptable to the Commission in view of the life safety of the occupants of the
residential units on the second floor. The Tribunal believes that the work must
be completed to ensure the safety as mentioned above.