Non-retroactive characteristics of the Ontario Building Code 1

[Junior3ng]

Hello all,

I am currently conducting a building condition assessment, and have come across building code issues but also recently learned that the building code is not retroactive, meaning that it does not apply to existing buildings, it only applies to new construction. For my project, I see current building code "violations" however they are not considered a violation because it is an existing building.

A few questions that I have:

1.What if the recent code has increased loads or make structural regulations more strict that the current existing structural members demand is greater than the capacity (a few percent), or some requirements are not met? Based on my understanding of the "not retroactive" nature of the code, shouldn't the new codes not be applicable to the design of the existing building, meaning using the old building loads is sufficient? On the other hand, I am sure the development of the code is researched and there is a reason for increasing regulations based on recent conditions, since the time of construction, so in that sense, the building may not be structurally adequate based on the new regulations/loads/etc.​

2. At what stage is the "grandfathered in" building considered acceptable/unacceptable? Would the judge of this be safety? But in that case, is not the most recent building code regulations the definition of what is considered "safe", based on research and past experience? If so, then wouldn't all older buildings be considered unsafe with the updates of new codes? If not, then how does one determine what is considered objectively safe if it is stated that it does not have to be in accordance with recent code?​

3. In the case, for example, an existing building has current code violations, and as per the "not retroactive" nature of the code the current code is not applicable, what would happen in the case that the building has a fire and the provided egress, which is in accordance with the code at the time of construction, is not sufficient for current code and people are injured/die?​

I guess overall, i do not understand the not retroactive nature of the code as it is my understanding that it outlines the minimum safety requirements of designs which changes over time to match new research and experience/failures. I also understand that it is not practical to upgrade all buildings to meet the new code requirements. So where is the middle ground on accepting recent code violations or structural members over-capacity based on new loads?

Apologize for the lengthy response, i wanted to provide complete information and my thoughts.

Any advice is greatly appreciated, thanks to all

 

[BrentG]

You have a very thoughtful question. I think you have also given the answer:

I also understand that it is not practical to upgrade all buildings to meet the new code requirements.

In general, the building codes have minor (rather than drastic) changes in each cycle. In the cases where there are significant safety concerns identified later (aluminum wiring causing fires, asbestos insulation causing cancer, insufficient seismic capacity, etc.), each building owner has to make a risk assessment on their own.

 

[Enable]

OBC is my governing code and you have the gist correct. It's only applicable to new construction and applies to existing in the case of retrofits that fall under Part 11 (see here).

However, a BIG BUT in this discussion is what municipalities have enacted as by-laws since they are actually the government entity entrusted with enforcement of the OBC and that is done via that mechanism. It also means they can enforce items not strictly required by the OBC (e.g., elimination of grandfathering in certain situations). For instance, if a municipality has enacted a by-law that all guards, to name a common example, shall comply with the design provisions in the OBC without due regard to new vs existing then that means all existing must comply with the current OBC design loads (there is no grandfathering). This is similarly true if some major update in the OBC says we've been doing something wrong for 30 years and a municipality decides, nope, not waiting for a problem to arise this is getting sorted now (i.e, they enact a by-law requiring compliance with this new provision).

So really, it depends on the municipality you are working in and what they require in their by-laws as far as compliance with the OBC. EDIT - Life safety (e.g., fire) tends to be done this way a lot more commonly than structural design elements. Also, insurance companies usually require compliance with new provisions or relatively new provisions, and that is a private sector mechanism that forces owners to retrofit.

 

[Enable]

Also, since you're still very much learning I think it's best to take a look at what others have produced previously. From your past threads it seems like your employer may not be the best to ask (sadly) but the good thing about the open(ish) nature of our government is that reports and the like are made publicly available.

So go take a look at what other, large type firms, are producing for municipalities. Not because they are gospel - they hardly are - but at least it will give you an idea how they handle such things. Below are a few reports from big names in our area.

Condition Assessment Examples

WSP
RJC
McINTOSH PERRY

By the way since you're in my locale and you've expressed trouble with mentorship at your firm, I'd be happy to help with questions you may have (here or in-person or zoom or whatever).

 

[dik]

Does Ontario still have a Part 11? Have you taken a look at this to see if applicable.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[Junior3ng]

BrentG - Thank you for the reply, i see, maybe the codes wont have any major changes between editions, and if they do, it may be made publicly known for professionals so they may act on it. I have not been advised by the facility/municipality regarding requirements with OBC updates.

Enable - Thanks for the replies and the examples, i would like to go through them. The municipality has not advised of whether they have a by-law that requires them to always be up to recent building code, however, i still think its worthwhile notifying the client that a few items with the building code violations observed in site, although it is not retroactive and not required by law to update, that they are still a violation on the current code, for knowledge purposes and let them act on the information however they like.

TOO ALL - Yes, unfortunately i have not had the best mentorship available to me, the seniors are available for questions however there are things i don't know that i don't know (for example i didnt know about Part 11 of the OBC and i dont know if my seniors/boss knows about it), and that's where i feel a mentor is valuable to a junior engineer. I am curious how things are done in your firm/the industry elsewhere? The way i see it, as a junior, i feel that I would have two "jobs", which i think is to 1.-assist and make the senior engineers life easier, whatever that entails without turning into an assistant (which is to conduct subsequent site visits once i learn what is expected of me, doing the detailed calculations that the senior is comfortable in, creating the report for reviews), which would allow me to see how the profession is conducted, and 2.- to learn as much as I can to develop myself to both become independent (i am not far off from certification which is a little intimidating as i do not feel competent/close to it) and pass on correct education when it is my turn to be a mentor for other juniors.

I appreciate your offer and will definitely reach out-thank you so much

dik - Yes, i believe it does, i will look through it and see what i can find. Thanks for the reply

 

[dik]

Part 11 was extremely useful... I basically allowed an existing structure to be modified as long as it wasn't weakened in the process... as long as what you did was an improvement. Grandfathering but in Code. Few engineers really used it... was very helpful sometimes.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik