Brandon Donnelly

Daily insights for city builders, delivered every morning at 6 AM ET. I’m Brandon Donnelly — a Toronto-based real estate developer and founder of Globizen. I’ve been writing here since 2013.

Subscribe

Tag: building code

  • BC now allows single egress stair buildings up to 6 storeys

    The province of British Columbia made the following announcement this week:

    The Province has updated the BCBC to remove the [building] code requirement for a second egress, or exit, stairwell per floor in buildings up to six storeys. This change will make it possible to build housing projects on smaller lots and in different configurations, while allowing more flexibility for multi-bedroom apartments, more density within areas of transit-oriented developments and the potential to improve energy efficiency in buildings. Previously, the BCBC called for at least two egress stairwells in buildings three storeys and higher.

    This is meaningful progress. And BC is the leading the way in Canada. But from a global perspective, we are not leading the way. This is us catching up.

    As part of this building code change, the province commissioned a report on single egress stair building designs. In this report, they looked at various jurisdictions from around the world:

    Their non-exhaustive findings:

    There are at least 30 jurisdictions with SES building design requirements that permit midrise buildings with a building height of at least 5 or 6 storeys. In addition, the Center for Building in North America (www.centerforbuilding.org) reports that 8 US states have passed legislation into law, or are reviewing possible options for doing so, to allow larger SES buildings when their Building Code is next revised. In most cases these revisions are intended to allow SES buildings of up to 6 storeys.

    For example, Seattle already allows up to 6 storeys. Belgium, New Zealand, and Australia allow up to 9 storeys (driven by a maximum height in meters). And Finland allows up to 18 storeys, according to the report.

    Though keep in mind that building codes are complicated and often have frustrating gray areas. There may be other requirements that need to be met in order to achieve these heights.

    It’s great to see BC making these moves. Now watch for other provinces to follow suit.

  • Elevators in North America are broken

    It was not my intention to make this building code week on the blog, but for some reason that has happened. So let’s continue. Here is an interesting guest essay — about elevators — written by Stephen Smith for the New York Times.

    Stephen is the founder and executive director of a Brooklyn-based non-profit called the Center for Building in North America. And what they do is conduct research on building codes, specifically in the United States and Canada, and then advocate for reforms.

    Here’s what he thinks about elevators (taken from the above essay):

    Elevators in North America have become over-engineered, bespoke, handcrafted and expensive pieces of equipment that are unaffordable in all the places where they are most needed. Special interests here have run wild with an outdated, inefficient, overregulated system. Accessibility rules miss the forest for the trees. Our broken immigration system cannot supply the labor that the construction industry desperately needs. Regulators distrust global best practices and our construction rules are so heavily oriented toward single-family housing that we’ve forgotten the basics of how a city should work.

    Here’s how the US compares to a few European countries:

    Nobody is marveling at American elevators anymore. With around one million of them, the United States is tied for total installed devices with Italy and Spain. (Spain has one-seventh our population, 6 percent of our gross domestic product and fewer than half as many apartments.) Switzerland and New York City have roughly the same population, but the lower-rise alpine country has three times as many single-family houses as Gotham — and twice as many passenger elevators.

    And here’s a set of cost comparisons:

    Behind the dearth of elevators in the country that birthed the skyscraper are eye-watering costs. A basic four-stop elevator costs about $158,000 in New York City, compared with about $36,000 in Switzerland. A six-stop model will set you back more than three times as much in Pennsylvania as in Belgium. Maintenance, repairs and inspections all cost more in America, too.

    If you’re interested in this topic, I would encourage you to give the full article a read. It’s highly relevant to our ongoing discussions around missing middle housing. If cities, like Toronto, hope to build a lot more apartment buildings (especially smaller-scale ones), they are going to need affordable and plentiful elevator options.

    (Thanks to Michael Visser for sharing this article me.)

  • Building code change request

    Point access blocks (or single-stair buildings) are now an important part of today’s discussions around housing supply in Canada. They are seen as a way to encourage more and different types of housing — something we have been talking about on this blog for years. Here and here are two recent posts.

    This week, I discovered the work of Conrad Speckert, who works at LGA Architectural Partners and has become a leading voice for this movement. Conrad completed his M.Arch at McGill University and, as part of his thesis project, he developed this website called Second Egress.

    Since then it has grown to become a major resource for point access blocks. But most importantly, it has evolved into a catalyst for change. On April 18, 2022, he and David Hine (of David Hine Engineering) submitted this code change request to the Canadian Commission on Building and Fire Codes.

    The ask: Allow a single means of egress for multi-unit residential buildings up to 6 storeys. (The current maximum is 2 storeys.) Well done, Conrad and David. This is a massively important request with far-reaching benefits, and so I would encourage all of you to check out his website and spread the word.

    P.S. My second favorite part of his site is a section called Manual of Illegal Floor Plans. It’s a catalog of highly livable single-stair buildings from around the world; all of which would be currently illegal to build in Canada.

  • B.C. wants to permit single-stair buildings

    Point access blocks, which are also known as single-stair buildings, are getting a lot more attention here in Canada. And B.C. looks like it might be one of the first provinces to relax its building code. Here’s an excerpt from a recent Globe and Mail article:

    Canada’s building code, which provinces have generally gone along with, has required two staircases per apartment building since 1941. But B.C.’s Ministry of Housing last week published a research report outlining the optimal conditions for single staircases.

    “We are definitely moving forward with this,” said Ravi Kahlon, the Housing Minister, who hopes to introduce the legislation allowing the change in the fall.

    Mr. Kahlon said that the option of “single-egress” buildings, as they’re also called, will be confined to areas where there is professional fire services (as opposed to rural-style volunteer departments) and good water supply, as is the case in Seattle. That city has allowed single-stair buildings since 1974.

    In this case, the proposed change is expected to be limited to six storey buildings that have no more than four apartments per floor. That still feels fairly limiting, but it’s at least a step in the right direction.

    I have been spending some time looking at the feasibility of small six-storey apartments (here in Toronto), and I can tell you that it’s not easy to make the math work. You need to optimize, everything. Minor assumption changes can really blow up the model.

    I don’t think that this change will magically fix that. But it’s still meaningful progress. And if we keep chipping away at this housing problem, we might actually get there.

  • The case for point access blocks

    We have spoken before about buildings, such as this 6-storey one in Paris, that were allowed to be built with only a single exit stair. This is noteworthy because, here in Canada, if you were to try and build an equivalent 6-storey building on an equivalent 100 square meter site, you would be required to have two exit stairs. And that would create more non-leasable space and make it even more challenging to develop such a small building.

    It is for this reason that single-stair buildings have been getting an increasing amount of attention as of late. They are seen as a way of encouraging more missing middle housing.

    So where are single-stair buildings currently allowed? Below is a map from Seattle-based Larch Lab showing the maximum number of storeys for point access blocks (what they call single-stair buildings) around the world. Based on this, Canada is one of the most conservative countries on the planet when it comes to required exiting (I don’t want to speak for any of the grayed-out countries). It also shows that much of the world allows 6 or more storeys.

    Larch Lab is a major advocate for point access blocks and they have this policy brief outlining the problem and the opportunities. One of their most interesting statistics has to do with minimum project size inflation. As recent as 2000, only about 13% of all multifamily completions in the US had more than 50 units. Today, this number has jumped to more than 55% of all new multifamily buildings, meaning we are quickly losing our ability to build small and intimate.

    Point access blocks can help with this.

    Of course, the reason we have exiting requirements in our building codes is because of life safety. But there’s research to suggest that this level of redundancy may not be needed in certain buildings. According to the above policy brief, the average death rate (caused by a building) in point access block countries like Switzerland, France, Italy and Germany, is significantly lower than that of the US. On top of this, almost no countries in the EU require buildings less than 28m tall to be sprinklered. The US does.

    All of this said, I don’t think that single-stair buildings are a silver bullet for missing middle housing. It is just one important ingredient in a complicated recipe. And as evidence of this, we can look to Seattle. The 2018 Seattle Building Code allows point access blocks up to 6 storeys, which is a rare occurrence in the US. However, the city appears to be still working on missing middle reform. Presumably other ingredients are still — missing.

    Image: Larch Lab

  • Ontario allows wood frame buildings up to 6 storeys

    Yesterday it was announced that, starting January 1, 2015, the Ontario Building Code would be changed to allow wood frame buildings up to six storeys. Previous to this, the highest you could go was 4 storeys. 

    This change has been in the works for a number of years. And it’s already allowed in most of Europe and in other places in Canada, such as British Columbia. So it’s nice to see this finally happen here in Toronto.

    The reason this is a big deal, and worthy of a blog post, is that it changes the cost structure for mid-rise buildings. Simply put, wood frame buildings are cheaper to construct compared to reinforced concrete and other buildings materials.

    Some people think this just means developers will make greater returns. But I don’t think that’s the case (see microeconomics). The real opportunity here is to spur mid-rise development on sites that – before this change – would have been previously un-developable. That is, you just couldn’t make the numbers work.

    As much as mid-rise buildings make a lot of sense from an urban design standpoint, it’s not always easy to find good mid-rise development sites. Mid-rise buildings are generally less efficient to build compared to towers and you have a lot of fixed costs that don’t scale down just because you’re doing a smaller project.

    So what this change in cost structure will, hopefully, do is allow more product to enter the market. And since many big urban centers operate with perpetual supply deficits – precisely because it’s often so hard to build – this should actually help with affordability.