Can't get building permit for basement reno

[Mark K]

If you decide to lower the floor hire an engineer. Handled wrong there could be safety concerns.

 

[cda]

Thinking if 1952 built house

Go through the appeals process

Point out age

Basement was basically finished when you bought it

You are not making it any hazardous

 

[ADAguy]

Thinking if 1952 built house

Go through the appeals process

Point out age

Basement was basically finished when you bought it

You are not making it any hazardous

Not so, it still remains hazardous to ones head!

 

[cda]

Not so, it still remains hazardous to ones head!

But that hazard is already there,

If need be paint the yellow and black stripes on the low stuff!!!

 

[rgrace]

I've seen this in my jurisdiction many times. House built in 1954, at some point someone wants to finish the basement and finds out that the basement was never designed to be finished, so they do so without going through the permitting process. Years go by and the tax admin department does a field assessment and indicates a finished basement, and starts taxing based on that. This does not make the finished basement legitimate or safe. Now you (a new owner who bought this problem) wants to add two bedrooms down there (yea ... den ... right) and have an entire family take up residence in this unsafe dwelling unit you wish to create. Also, why construct such a huge, finished storage room when a large storage room already exists down there (the cellar)? Lower the floor/raise the ceiling, whichever, fix the stairs, provide EERO, provide an exit directly to the exterior (code required or not, it will provide a necessary level of safety for the family you move in there - its hard to tell what's going on at that landing), provide smoke detectors, arc-fault protection, etc. if you want to occupy and sleep in this basement.

 

[ADAguy]

Tell like it "really" is RG.
He wants what he wants but will now have to pay for it.

 

[tmurray]

Hi,

I'm trying to get a building permit for my basement reno in Ontario. The basement is already finished and has a kitchen and two piece bathroom. The ceiling height in most areas is 6'9" except it's 5'11 under the beam which runs the entire length of the basement and 6'2" under some duct work which runs along half of the beam.

In my plans I've placed two rooms on one side of the beam with a hall in-between with doors opening into the rooms. One room is labelled as bedroom, and the other is labelled as den. The bathroom is currently in the middle of the room and under the duct work. I'd like to move it over against an exterior wall and the bedroom (where it's not under any ducts) and add a shower.

There is OBC 9.5.3.1:
Basement height
2100 mm (6'10.68) over at least 75% of the basement area except that under beams
and ducts the clearance is permitted to be reduced to 1950 mm (6'4.77")

C102 an exemption for older houses:
ln a house,
(a) minimum room height shall not be less than 1 950 mm (6'4.77") over the required floor
area and in any location that would normally be used as a means of egress, or
(b) minimum room height shall not be less than 2 030 mm (6'7.92") over at least 50% of the
required floor area, provided that any part of the floor having a clear height of
less than 1 400 mm (4'7.12") shall not be considered in computing the required floor
area.

The proposed alterations work perfectly for my intended use. The reviewer has told me that because the space is being renovated as a habitable space (although the fact that there's a kitchen and bathroom should already make it habitable space) she can't approve it because the beam and duct work are too low. Is there any way I can get the application for building permit approved?

If I choose not to build the rooms, will I be able to get the bathroom work approved?

Any help is appreciated!

Thanks,
Corey

OK,

I disagree with the reviewers interpretation of 9.5.3.1.

The intent of the code is to require minimum ceiling height over the minimum room area required by the code (or percentage based on the situation), not the whole area you have provided. I did not to your area calculations, but you look like you exceed the minimum areas, so the reduced ceiling areas may not even need to be accounted for.

Additionally, you might want to reference the objective and functional statements from the national code, which mirror the OBC and have the intent fully articulated as follows:

Intent 1:
To limit the probability that an inadequate ceiling height of rooms or spaces [i.e. less than 2.1 m high] will lead to collision with protrusions from ceilings, such as lighting fixtures, ceiling fans and low door heads, which could lead to harm to persons.

Intent 2:
To limit the probability that an inadequate clear height of rooms or spaces [i.e. less than 2.0 m high] will lead to collision with protrusions from ceilings, such as lighting fixtures, ceiling fans and low door heads, in areas used infrequently or for a limited time, or where occupants are unfamiliar with the space, which could lead to harm to persons.

Intent 3:
To limit the probability that an inadequate ceiling height of rooms or spaces [i.e. less than 2.1 m high] will lead to collision with protrusions from ceilings, such as lighting fixtures, ceiling fans and low door heads, in an emergency, which could lead to delays in the evacuation or movement of persons to a safe place, which could lead to harm to persons.

Intent 4:
To limit the probability that an inadequate clear height of rooms or spaces [i.e. less than 2.0 m high] will lead to collision with protrusions from ceilings, such as lighting fixtures, ceiling fans and low door heads, in an emergency, in areas used infrequently or for a limited time, or where occupants are unfamiliar with the space, which could lead to delays in the evacuation or movement of persons to a safe place, which could lead to harm to persons.

Based on this information, you can eliminate the hazardous construction in these reduced ceiling areas and probably provide some piece of mind tot he plan reviewer.

 

[ADAguy]

To do so would still require structural alterations to floor supports or floors to allow one to transition between areas.

 

[tmurray]

To do so would still require structural alterations to floor supports or floors to allow one to transition between areas.

Not necessarily. You just need to ensure there are no fans/light fixtures/etc. You could even slope the ceiling in that area, so it not 90 degree corner at the bulkhead. Since we have an objective based code, the AHJ is a lot more free to accept alternatives that still address the identified issues, particularly with existing construction.

 

[ADAguy]

"Eh"? so an AHJ can approve this, thereby certifying previously non-compliant remodeling?

 

[tmurray]

"Eh"? so an AHJ can approve this, thereby certifying previously non-compliant remodeling?

I don't know that it is non-compliant when it was done. The code permits us to allow something to remain when, in the AHJ's opinion, it does not pose a serious life safety risk, provided it met code when it was done.

Again, I am unconvinced that the dropped ceiling area is a code violation, because the minimum ceiling height appears to have been met for the minimum room area in the remainder of the space. If this was the intention of this code section, many buildings with half storeys would not be possible as a significant amount of the floor area contains sloped ceilings.