The electric vehicle charging requirements of the Ontario Building Code come into effect on January 1, 2018.

Contact Alek Antoniuk for ALL three presentations (2.5 hrs long) to your firm or organization for only $750 + HST before Dec. 31, 2017.

There is a special discount for municipal building departments and building officials' organizations.

Electric Vehicle Charging Stations - Ontario Building Code 2017 -  Slide 1Retirement Homes - Ontario Building Code 2017 -  Slide 1Part 9 Houses - Ontario Building Code 2017 -  Slide 1
Electric Vehicle Charging Stations - Ontario Building Code 2017 -  Slide 2Retirement Homes - Ontario Building Code 2017 -  Slide 2Part 9 Houses - Ontario Building Code 2017 -  Slide 2



What will the Ontario Building Code require for electric vehicle charging stations, beginning on January 1, 2018 .......?

by    Alek Antoniuk, OAA
        www.CodeNews.ca
        November 15, 2017
NEMA 5-20R Ontario Building Code - Electric Vehicle Charging

What will the Ontario Building Code require for electric vehicle charging stations, beginning on January 1, 2018 .......?  That was a controversial question discussed on Tuesday, November 14, 2017, when Alek Antoniuk delivered a seminar to the Wellington Waterloo District Chapter of the Ontario Building Officials Association on the major changes to the Ontario Building Code that are contained in O. Reg. 139/17.

The 20/80 rule in the requirements of O. Reg. 139/17 is ambiguous when it comes to buildings that contain parking spaces.

Here is a copy of a slide that was reviewed at the meeting:



For a presentation or consultation on the electric vehicle charging station requirements, contact Alek Antoniuk at +1-416-856-0241





Professional Design and Review of Buildings in Ontario . . . Unfinished Business



by    Alek Antoniuk, OAA
        www.CodeNews.ca
        August 31, 2017

In the Beginning

In 1984, the Professional Engineers of Ontario (PEO) and the Ontario Association of Architects (OAA) essentially divided up the professional design “pie” so that PEO licence holders and architects gained the exclusive right to design and conduct general reviews of significant buildings in Ontario. This exclusivity is shared in a carefully negotiated arrangement between professional engineers and architects that is set out in complementary provisions of the Professional Engineers Act, 1984 and the Architects Act, 1984.  Both statutes were enacted in 1984. A Joint Practice Board of the two professions is supposed to help avoid confusion and conflicts between them.

In 1984, the Ontario Building Code, a regulation made pursuant to the Building Code Act, was amended to reflect the division of the design and general review “pie” between professional engineers and architects.  The Ontario Building Code contained a Design and General Review Table, which reflected the design and general review divisions embedded in the Professional Engineers Act, 1984 and the Architects Act, 1984.  Where an application was made for a building permit, a municipal building official would check the drawings to ensure that the design was prepared in accordance with the Ontario Building Code’s Design and General Review Table.  For 22 years, between 1984 and 2007, this arrangement worked very well because municipal building officials would not issue building permits if the design drawings contravened the Design and General Review Table.

The Government Fixes Something That Ain’t Broken

Bill 124, the Building Code Statute Law Amendment Act, 2002, proclaimed on July 25, 2003, amended the Building Code Act to require all building officials and all designers submitting designs for the purpose of obtaining a building permit to be qualified and registered by the government, effective January 1, 2006.  Needless to say, this upset a lot of professional engineers and architects, since they already considered themselves to be qualified to design buildings and they did not appreciate more government red tape.

Professional Designers Challenge the Government

The PEO, supported by the OAA, challenged the Ontario government’s authority to regulate the practice of the province’s professional engineers under the Building Code Act.  The PEO) applied for a judicial review of Bill 124 to clarify the exclusive jurisdiction of self-regulating professions.  In 2007, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice confirmed the exclusive jurisdiction of the PEO and the OAA to regulate the practice of engineering and architecture, respectively.  The Court declared that the professional qualification and registration requirements of the Building Code Act and Ontario Building Code do not apply to any holder of any licence or certificate issued under the Professional Engineers Act.  That was the good news.

Unintended Consequences

Unfortunately, the Court also found that the Building Code Act did not provide sufficient authority to allocate responsibility for the design of buildings between members of the professional engineering and architectural professions in the Ontario Building Code.  The effect of this decision was to invalidate the Ontario Building Code’s Design and General Review Table.  In other words, the proverbial “baby was thrown out with the bath water”.

In December, 2007, the PEO and the OAA recognized the mess that was created and issued a joint bulletin, entitled “Design and General Review Requirements for Buildings in the Province of Ontario”, which encapsulated the scopes of practice contained in their legislation.  This joint bulletin was sent to all Ontario chief building officials on January 3, 2008 to be used as a guide.  Although the joint bulletin was useful because it contained a table that could be easily referenced to determine whether professional design was required for a building permit application, it was unenforceable by municipal building officials. 

After the 2007 Ontario Superior Court of Justice decision, municipal building officials could no longer demand that certain buildings had to be designed by professional engineers and architects.  Indeed, a building official could not refuse to issue a permit for a 20 storey residential condominium building where a non-professional designer, who was qualified and registered under Bill 124, prepared the design. 

The simple solution to this absurdity would have been to amend the Building Code Act to reinstate the Ontario Building Code’s Design and General Review Table.    The OAA and the building officials’ organizations supported this simple solution.  Of course, the PEO would not permit this.  The PEO had won the court case and there was no way they would back off on this point.

Although municipal building officials continued to have the authority to refer plans to the PEO and the OAA for enforcement of the Professional Engineers Act and the Architects Act, municipal building officials had no authority to enforce those statutes.

Neither of the two main Ontario associations representing building officials took part in the2007 judicial review.  The Ontario Superior Court judges had to rely only on the arguments presented by the PEO, the OAA, and the Ontario government.  Had the Ontario Building Officials Association or the Large Municipalities Chief Building Officials been involved, one can only speculate that the outcome of the case would have been different.

Professional Design Table Removed From the Ontario Building Code

In response to the Court’s decisions, the 2012 Ontario Building Code (O. Reg. 332/12), which came into effect on January 1, 2014, deleted the “professional design table” from Section 1.2.1., “Design”, of Division C.  A version of this table was relocated to Section 1.2.2., “General Review”, of Division C of the 2012 Ontario Building Code to apply only to general review requirements, since the 2007 Ontario Superior Court of Justice decision did not address general review.   

The 2012 Ontario Building Code is silent on when professional design is required for a building.  All references to an “architect” or a “professional engineer” have been replaced by a “suitably qualified and experienced person”.

The Government Fixes Something That Is Broken

Finally, 7 years after the Ontario Superior Court of Justice decision, the Ontario Legislature passed the Building Opportunity and Securing Our Future Act (Budget Measures), 2014 and the Act received Royal Assent on July 24, 2014.  Schedule 3 of the Act amended the Building Code Act, 1992 to establish the requirement for professional design of buildings. 

Schedule 3 amended the Building Code Act to update the list of conditions under which chief building officials may refuse to issue building permits.  Schedule 3 of the amendment permits chief building officials to refuse to issue permits where “the Architects Act or the Professional Engineers Act requires that the proposed construction of the building be designed by an architect or a professional engineer or a combination of both and the proposed construction is not so designed.”

The effect of this amendment to the Building Code Act is that a municipal building official has to read the Architects Act or the Professional Engineers Act in order to determine whether to issue a building permit.  Plus ça change!  Now, instead of consulting the old Design and General Review Table, a municipal building official has to interpret the professional design Acts!

In the meantime, the PEO continues to maintain its long held view that building officials are not authorized to adjudicate between professional engineers and architects with respect to which professional designer is required to be involved in the design of a building.  Clearly, this is an unresolved issue that was not addressed by the 2014 amendments to the Building Code Act.


Green Energy Ain't Perfect.

by    Alek Antoniuk, OAA
        www.CodeNews.ca
        July 18, 2017


We often fall into the trap of believing what politicians want us to believe, regardless of whether it is true or not.  We were promised a green economy which would be a nirvana for everyone.  Today, the Globe and Mail reports that 340 real people will lose their jobs in spite of the corporate welfare provided to green energy firms to set up industries in Ontario.

We need to re-examine many of the "truths" we have been fed, especially about climate.  Climate change models that change every week are not a basis for investing trillions of dollars for an unproven outcome.

Why an East London Bethnal Green Solar Panel Fire is just as likely in Ontario, Canada.

by    Alek Antoniuk, OAA
        www.CodeNews.ca
        July 9, 2017

Following the 2003 Ontario general election, which was won by the Ontario Liberal Party, led by Dalton McGuinty, Ontario's civil servants were tasked with dismantling the Common Sense Revolution championed by Premier Mike Harris.  By 2006, civil servants in the Building and Development Branch were given instructions to remove all PERCEIVED barriers to "certain green technologies" in the Ontario Building Code.  At that time, I was the Manager for the technical development of the Ontario Building Code and, as a civil servant, it was my duty to obey the orders of the Central Committee Cabinet.

The Code Development Unit staff produced a list of changes that could be implemented to fulfill the wishes of the respresentatives elected by the people of Ontario.  Although I did not recommend any of the proposed changes that our Unit drafted, the policy and political wonks accepted all of them.  The most ill-advised change that was accepted was to permit combustible solar collectors on roofs of buildings required to be of noncombustible construction:

3.1.5.24.  Combustible Solar Collector Systems

(1) A combustible solar collector system is permitted to be installed above the roof of a building required to be of noncombustible construction.

All of the changes were incorporated into Ontario Regulation 349/06, which amended the 1997 Ontario Building Code.  So there you have it - in the name of making Ontario green, the code change increased the fire hazard of buildings in Ontario.  The permission to install combustible solar collectors applies to roofs of high rise buildings as well as low rise buildings.  There is no height limit.......!

The U.K.'s Express reported on July 9, 2017 that:

"A block of flats in Bethnal Green, east London, caught fire last Sunday with around 80 firefighters attending the scene and initial suggestions are that the solar panels appear to have caught fire."

If it can happen in Bethnal Green, it can just as easily happen in Ontario.



Available: Amendment Package #6 for the OBC Compendium

by    Alek Antoniuk, OAA
        www.CodeNews.ca
        June 30, 2017

Amendment Package #6 (July 1, 2017 update) for the Compendium Version of the Ontario Building Code is now available for free downloading, as Publication Number 510159, from the ServiceOntario Publications website. This package includes the changes arising from O. Reg. 139/17, parts of which are scheduled to come into effect on July 1, 2017 and January 1, 2018.

Follow this direct download link to the free 412 page amendment package.

The most significant Ontario Building Code changes that will come into effect on July 1, 2017 include:

I'm not making this up .... See Section 53.(2) of O. Reg. 139/17:

   53(2)  Article 6.2.4.7. of Division B of the Regulation is amended by adding the following Sentence:

   (14)  In a house containing two dwelling units, return-air from one dwelling unit may be recirculated to the other dwelling unit, provided a duct-type smoke detector is installed in the supply or return air duct system serving the entire house which would turn off the fuel supply and electrical power to the heating system upon activation of such detector.

There you have it!  In the next new house in Ontario, you will have the opportunity to smell the excrement and urine and body odours of your neighbour, as they are blown directly into your own living room.  Of course, the smell of  your neighbour's burning hemp will alleviate the other smells.



Why a London Grenfell Tower fire is less likely in Ontario, Canada

by    Alek Antoniuk, OAA
        www.CodeNews.ca
        June 14, 2017

When the Canadian Commission on Building and Fire Codes (CCBFC) published the 2005 edition of the National Building Code (NBC), one of the most significant changes was to permit combustible components in the cladding of tall sprinklered buildings of unlimited height.

Following the changes to the 2005 NBC, there was pressure on Ontario to follow the lead of the CCBFC.  Ontario’s Chief Building Official and Director of the Building and Development Branch, David Brezer, P. Eng. and the Branch’s Code Development Manager, Alek Antoniuk, OAA reviewed the NBC changes and were not convinced that the combustible cladding changes were proven to be safe.  Branch staff recommended that the Ontario government not proceed to change Ontario’s Building Code to permit combustible cladding in buildings of unlimited height.  It was deemed prudent to refrain from amending the Ontario Building Code for at least one code cycle in order to see the experience of other jurisdictions that had implemented the change.

Therefore, Ontario kept a height restriction of 6 storeys for sprinklered buildings and 3 storeys for unsprinklered buildings in Sentence 3.1.5.5.(1) of Div. B of the Ontario Building Code.  Ontario remained one of the few jurisdictions in North America with restrictions on the height of buildings with combustible cladding.

Ontario’s caution was justified as a significant number of buildings around the world have experienced cladding fires.  Although these buildings are protected by automatic sprinkler systems, standard sprinkler systems are ineffective against fires on the exterior of buildings.  Ontario’s 6 storey limit is based on the ability of emergency responders to use fire hoses on the exterior of the building to control cladding fires.

It will be interesting to see whether other jurisdictions will align their building codes to match Ontario’s wise choice made over a decade ago.





About this site:

Alek Antoniuk, OAA

This web site is developed by
Alek Antoniuk, OAA, BCIN #14661
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
cell: +1-416-856-0241
e-mail:
Alek Antoniuk's e-mail address in a graphic
The e-mail address is a graphic to ward off spam robots .....!  
Note that there is a "." (dot) between "alek" and "antoniuk".!

Alek Antoniuk, the principal of CodeNews Consulting Corp., Consulting Architect,
provides the following fee-based services to assist you:

Privacy:

Unlike Google, this site does not use or care about cookies and does not track you.  See the HTML source code of this page, to convince yourself......!

Piracy:

It takes a lot of work to maintain this site as one of the most valued repositories for current information on Building Codes in Canada.
The content of this site is copyrighted and may not be reproduced unless specifically permitted by the author, Alek Antoniuk.
You are permitted, of course, to provide links to this site.

Final words and images:

“The fundamental question of our time is whether the West has the will to survive.
  Do we have the confidence in our values to defend them at any cost?
  Do we have enough respect for our citizens to protect our borders?
  Do we have the desire and the courage to preserve our civilization in the face of those who would subvert and destroy it?"
Donald Trump, President of the United States of America
July 6, 2017, Warszawa, Polska

© 2017
Last updated on:  17-NOV-2017