New accommodations facility at CFB Esquimalt and plan to build more homes on military bases

[Brad Sallows]

A homeowner has to pay the costs of financing, upkeep, insurance, and taxes/fees.

A renter has to pay the costs of financing, upkeep, insurance, taxes/fees, and the owner's "profit".

A couple of things that keep rentals affordable are firstly that rental properties tend to be smaller than full-sized homes on lots, and secondly that many landlords have a capital stock that allows them to pay more up front and thus have lower financing costs. The latter is a benefit that is at least partly passed on to renters.

"Profit" isn't just money in the owner's pocket. There are at least two risk premiums profits have to cover. One is mitigation of the costs of bad tenants. Another is investment risk. It probably doesn't occur to most renters, but part of what they are renting is the owner's capital stock - without risk to themselves.

Potential landlords with only one premise to let are highly vulnerable to bad tenants and to costs imposed in jurisdictions that tend to favour tenants' interests. Consequently they are reluctant to rent in the first place.

 

[Good2Golf]

Dnd would not have to build to provincial or municipal codes. Just to federal code with consideration to those other codes if they make sense.

No. The various federal codes (building, plumbing, electrical, etc.) are not binding by themselves, they are used as the basis for Provincial (and municipal) codes, and may (are) amended/modified by all of those jurisdictions to each region’s needs, so there is no single set of Coast-to-Coast-to-Coast codes. It remains a federate of Provincial/municiapality legally binding codes that collectively span the extend of Canada’s territory.

The National Building Code actually can be far more onerous than Provincial and Municipal codes when it comes to housing. Where no standard is applicable in the National building code, it defers to the provincial.

No.

The NBC is not a binding code. The NBC is a ‘model code’ suggestion, which the Provinces and municipalities may use as a basis for creating their own binding codes.

Information archivée dans le Web | Information Archived on the Web

publications.gc.ca

Same with CE Code (electrical), etc. The only legally binding electrical codes, are those legislated by the provinces (and under those provincial laws, municipalities to further amend (but not supersede)).

 

[Quirky]

And you can't force good financial decision making - look at the trucks, trailers, boats and toys parked around the PMQ patches

Everyone and every posting location is different, don't assume that people buy toys and nice vehicles in lieu of a house. Some people are in heavy debt with toys in a house or a PMQ. Some people just don't want to buy property because they'll be posted again in 2-3 years and it's easier to move from a PMQ. Some got a massive VAC payment, or their parents died and left them a big inheritance, or they have good investments etc. Others don't care for home ownership and don't want to be house poor and prefer the toys and being able to travel. I've stopped making assumptions on people's finances a long time ago and frankly I don't care, let them make their own decisions.

 

[suffolkowner]

No. The various federal codes (building, plumbing, electrical, etc.) are not binding by themselves, they are used as the basis for Provincial (and municipal) codes, and may (are) amended/modified by all of those jurisdictions to each region’s needs, so there is no single set of Coast-to-Coast-to-Coast codes. It remains a federate of Provincial/municiapality legally binding codes that collectively span the extend of Canada’s territory.


No.

The NBC is not a binding code. The NBC is a ‘model code’ suggestion, which the Provinces and municipalities may use as a basis for creating their own binding codes.

Information archivée dans le Web | Information Archived on the Web

publications.gc.ca

View attachment 87363

Same with CE Code (electrical), etc. The only legally binding electrical codes, are those legislated by the provinces (and under those provincial laws, municipalities to further amend (but not supersede)).
View attachment 87365

but do Provincial codes apply to CAF/DND?

 

[rmc_wannabe]

but do Provincial codes apply to CAF/DND?

Anyone who has read the CFHA Occupancy Handbook knows that they don't.

Many things that would not pass civi side for builds, renos, or repairs are A-Ok for CAF/DND buildings.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

A homeowner has to pay the costs of financing, upkeep, insurance, and taxes/fees.

A renter has to pay the costs of financing, upkeep, insurance, taxes/fees, and the owner's "profit".

A couple of things that keep rentals affordable are firstly that rental properties tend to be smaller than full-sized homes on lots, and secondly that many landlords have a capital stock that allows them to pay more up front and thus have lower financing costs. The latter is a benefit that is at least partly passed on to renters.

"Profit" isn't just money in the owner's pocket. There are at least two risk premiums profits have to cover. One is mitigation of the costs of bad tenants. Another is investment risk. It probably doesn't occur to most renters, but part of what they are renting is the owner's capital stock - without risk to themselves.

Potential landlords with only one premise to let are highly vulnerable to bad tenants and to costs imposed in jurisdictions that tend to favour tenants' interests. Consequently they are reluctant to rent in the first place.

Not to mention that if renting a portion of your house, you also lose a portion of the enjoyment of the property, such as part of the yard, patio, driveway, access to that part of the house, etc. After my dad went into a home, we did Airbnb for a few years, the first two we actually made decent money, the 3rd year, not so much and it was not worth the level of work involved to keep a 5 star rating. My wife looked at the Residency Tenet Act and said "We are never renting fulltime" Basically as a Landlord here, your screwed. We may rent out to students in the future.

 

[Good2Golf]

but do Provincial codes apply to CAF/DND?

They should, as there is no Defence-specific building code legislate (whether on the basis of the NBC amended as the provinces TDI, or not). I don’t know what DND does for itself (or the rest of the GoC, for that matter).

 

[Blackadder1916]

They should, as there is no Defence-specific building code legislate (whether on the basis of the NBC amended as the provinces TDI, or not). I don’t know what DND does for itself (or the rest of the GoC, for that matter).

While this wasn't specifically one of the references I used back in the 1980s when I played around with facility planning, there were similar guidelines on my office bookshelf that I regularly referenced when reviewing construction or renovation plans.

Information archivée dans le Web | Information Archived on the Web

publications.gc.ca

TECHNICAL REFERENCE FOR OFFICE BUILDING DESIGN

2.1.1 Code and Standard Versions
The design solutions must comply with all applicable federal laws, regulations and the codes referenced therein. Consultants in all disciplines are expected to follow all regulatory and code requirements in force, at the place of the work. This document references the latest codes and standards in force at the time of issue / or revision of this document. The latest version of each enacted code shall be used. For all Standards referenced by the codes, the latest version (date) of the Standard shall be used unless the code references a specific version (date) of the Standard to be used. For a list of codes and standards referenced in this document, refer to section 14. This is not an exhaustive list of all applicable codes and standards.

2.1.2 Provincial Requirements
When provincially mandated inspections are required in order to facilitate a utility connection or ensure safety of a system through a provincial inspection, the provincially adopted version of a code or standard may be applied to the project.

 

[Blackadder1916]

While this wasn't specifically one of the references I used back in the 1980s when I played around with facility planning, there were similar guidelines on my office bookshelf that I regularly referenced when reviewing construction or renovation plans.

Information archivée dans le Web | Information Archived on the Web

publications.gc.ca

TECHNICAL REFERENCE FOR OFFICE BUILDING DESIGN

Further to above

How GoC standards apply to defense specific spaces was always a challenge back in the day, sometimes frustrating (usually because we - the military "we" - had difficulty, or pig-headedness, in accepting that an office is an office is an office) or sometimes humourous (as in the renovation of the Berger Building, where the Surg Gen branch was housed, in fitting our existing furniture into the cubicles or enclosed offices that the designers assigned when we went from 3 floors to 2).

I came across this, a more recent look at how GoC fit-up standards worked for a HQ organization.

An analysis of GC workplace fit-up standards for military operational headquarters design

https://cradpdf.drdc-rddc.gc.ca/PDFS/unc383/p814494_A1b.pdf

 

[childs56]

No. The various federal codes (building, plumbing, electrical, etc.) are not binding by themselves, they are used as the basis for Provincial (and municipal) codes, and may (are) amended/modified by all of those jurisdictions to each region’s needs, so there is no single set of Coast-to-Coast-to-Coast codes. It remains a federate of Provincial/municiapality legally binding codes that collectively span the extend of Canada’s territory.

Similar to IRP (industry recommended practices) BP (best practices). The national code sets guidelines to be used coast to coast. Setting minimum standards that should not be breached.
Again the Federal Government only needs to build to Federal practices. But they usually have agreements in place to follow local Code if possible.

 

[suffolkowner]

I think you would be hard pressed to build not to code. No ones building off the back of a Pizza Hut napkin. There's plans to follow, whether they make sense is a different story

 

[Good2Golf]

Similar to IRP (industry recommended practices) BP (best practices). The national code sets guidelines to be used coast to coast. Setting minimum standards that should not be breached.
Again the Federal Government only needs to build to Federal practices. But they usually have agreements in place to follow local Code if possible.

Not a single province has adopted provisions of the NBC recommendations without their own provincial changes into their respective legislations.

There is NO Canadian federal building code legislation. To say that the Federal government doesn’t need to follow a legislatively supported building code anywhere in the country does not seem accurate. If there is Federal legislation (ie. a law) enacting the NBC, I’d be interested to see it.

 

[childs56]

Not a single province has adopted provisions of the NBC recommendations without their own provincial changes into their respective legislations.

Many have adopted it with their own requirements. Makes sense as Alberta does not require Seismic restraints on Hot water tanks but BC does. Some places require screw piles where others do not. The national code may or may not specify those things. That is where specific requirements are made.

There is NO Canadian federal building code legislation.

Did I say that? They made a code that sets a minimum Industry standard. That has been adapted, often due to the feds doing the research/ testing as to products use and safety.

To say that the Federal government doesn’t need to follow a legislatively supported building code anywhere in the country does not seem accurate.

It is accurate. Usually the Fed Gov has signed agreements with the Provinces and Municipalities to be good neighbors and follow local requirements. I doubt any municipality has a set requirement for reinforced concrete bomb shelter, or work space for secure operations.

If there is Federal legislation (ie. a law) enacting the NBC, I’d be interested to see it.

IRP/ codes are important although they are not law they do and can result in being found guilty. If one is broken and found during investigation the court usually will ask why a minimum standard has been broken. Hopefully there is a sufficient answer justifying why the minimum code was not followed.
What has been found in BC, many Condos were built to the minimum standard with engineering exemptions that went below IRPs. This caused many issues with the roof leaks, mold and dry rot.

 

[lenaitch]

Not a single province has adopted provisions of the NBC recommendations without their own provincial changes into their respective legislations.

There is NO Canadian federal building code legislation. To say that the Federal government doesn’t need to follow a legislatively supported building code anywhere in the country does not seem accurate. If there is Federal legislation (ie. a law) enacting the NBC, I’d be interested to see it.

Although it's a few years old, a good summary from the NRC.

Model code adoption across Canada - National Research Council Canada

Under Canada's constitution, provinces and territories regulate the design and construction of new houses and buildings, and the maintenance and operation of fire safety systems in existing buildings. While the national model codes (Building, Fire, Plumbing, Energy Codes) are prepared centrally...

nrc.canada.ca

IRP/ codes are important although they are not law they do and can result in being found guilty. If one is broken and found during investigation the court usually will ask why a minimum standard has been broken. Hopefully there is a sufficient answer justifying why the minimum code was not followed.
What has been found in BC, many Condos were built to the minimum standard with engineering exemptions that went below IRPs. This caused many issues with the roof leaks, mold and dry rot.

I would be interested in how the highlighted part works in our legal system. Thirty one years in law enforcement and I don't recall coming across someone being "found guilty" when no law has been broken. Topics such as minimum standards and best practices might have a role in civil proceedings, but those are generally between two private parties, not the State, and those courts don't determine legal jeopardy.

 

[Good2Golf]

Many have adopted it with their own requirements. Makes sense as Alberta does not require Seismic restraints on Hot water tanks but BC does. Some places require screw piles where others do not. The national code may or may not specify those things. That is where specific requirements are made.

So if the National Building Code model doesn’t cover all the situations within the nation which should be addressed, if even in conditional form, doesn’t that seem problematic to you? Just leave it to each Province or Territory to cover the deficiency in the National model code? Many provinces building codes expand significantly beyond the National code due to its shortcomings. It is an issue long discussed in the construction industry in Canada, eg. National vs. Provincial Building Codes.

Did I say that? They made a code that sets a minimum Industry standard. That has been adapted, often due to the feds doing the research/ testing as to products use and safety.

…and the Provinces then needing to do additional research and testing to address code shortcoming, before enacting their respective revised code into their own laws.

It is accurate. Usually the Fed Gov has signed agreements with the Provinces and Municipalities to be good neighbors and follow local requirements. I doubt any municipality has a set requirement for reinforced concrete bomb shelter, or work space for secure operations.

Really? The NBC doesn’t have a section related to reinforced concrete bomb shelters, nor does it have a section for work spaces for secure operations.

So what legislation is the Federal Government following, if it choses not to follow a Provincial or Territorial building code law?

IRP/ codes are important although they are not law they do and can result in being found guilty. If one is broken and found during investigation the court usually will ask why a minimum standard has been broken. Hopefully there is a sufficient answer justifying why the minimum code was not followed.

If it was a non-Federal construction activity, the answer is clear - compliance with the respective Provincial or Territorial building code law is required. Failure to comply with such a law, should charges be laid by the Provincial/Territorial authorities, and if proven in a Provincial court of law, would result in applicable

What is the “non-law” broken and found ‘guilty’ construct you refer to? Found ‘guilty’ by what institution? What are the ramifications for an individual/company being found ‘guilty’ of not following a not-law?

What has been found in BC, many Condos were built to the minimum standard with engineering exemptions that went below IRPs. This caused many issues with the roof leaks, mold and dry rot.

What local municipal agency granted the builder such an engineering exemption? Was such an exemption permitted under the BCBC? BC has a legally-enforceable provincial building code. If it wasn’t adhered to, then there is a clear legal basis to hold the non-compliant builder to account.

 

[suffolkowner]

Some places require screw piles where others do not.

Screw piles just means your ground conditions are garbage. They do a lot of strange things in Alberta from what Ive seen foundation wise especially when they have literally mountains of stone nearby

Really? The NBC doesn’t have a section related to reinforced concrete bomb shelters, nor does it have a section for work spaces for secure operations.

So what legislation is the Federal Government following, if it choses not to follow a Provincial or Territorial building code law?

there's a Provincial code for bomb shelters?

 

[childs56]

I would be interested in how the highlighted part works in our legal system. Thirty one years in law enforcement and I don't recall coming across someone being "found guilty" when no law has been broken. Topics such as minimum standards and best practices might have a role in civil proceedings, but those are generally between two private parties, not the State, and those courts don't determine legal jeopardy.

Death/ injury of a worker, environmental issues.
Industry follow OH&S laws, codes etc.
Industry recommended practices have been used to find negligence in operations, building etc. Most are civil proceedings. But they have included recommended practices as standard procedures.
IRP have been used to prove companies have not follow established procedures in conducting business including building codes.

Two cases I was involved with providing information.
One included injury to a worker, a company did not follow the IRP for procedural precedence. They stated they followed OH&S rules/ requirements. Which were very vague of the requirements due to covering a general practice. At the time the approved IRP for the job task had just started to come out in detail but the procedures had been accepted as the normal way to operate by the majority of companies. The employer was found negligent for the workers injuries due to not following IRP. This set in motion a change in practice to ensure company and operators understood their legal liabilities in regards to operating equipment.

The other case where a manufacturer who did not build/ test the equipment to Industry specifications was found guilty in court and had to pay costs of the fixes/upgrades that were originally expected. This almost bankrupted the company. I was banned from their premises for two years until they realized I had given them all the requirements they needed to build the proper equipment and safeties, but they failed to take the advice given for IRP.

 

[childs56]

So if the National Building Code model doesn’t cover all the situations within the nation which should be addressed, if even in conditional form, doesn’t that seem problematic to you? Just leave it to each Province or Territory to cover the deficiency in the National model code? Many provinces building codes expand significantly beyond the National code due to its shortcomings. It is an issue long discussed in the construction industry in Canada, eg. National vs. Provincial Building Codes.

Similar to OH&S act, Traffic laws, Bylaws etc. There is a general framework that can not possibly cover everything possible. Hence why specific rule and regulations are added by the provincial and municple regulators.

…and the Provinces then needing to do additional research and testing to address code shortcoming, before enacting their respective revised code into their own laws.

Often testing is a mix between federal, provincial and manufacturing. Lots of provincial codes have been pushed from OEM and engineers who make a quick buck every few years recommending changes.

Really? The NBC doesn’t have a section related to reinforced concrete bomb shelters, nor does it have a section for work spaces for secure operations.

Did I say the NBC had a standard for bomb shelters? No I did not. The Fed Gov/DND will have a standard for doing so. The Explosives Act which is Federal will have some standards for explosives storage etc.

So what legislation is the Federal Government following, if it choses not to follow a Provincial or Territorial building code law?

NBC, Engineering practices, IRPs from similar builds.

If it was a non-Federal construction activity, the answer is clear - compliance with the respective Provincial or Territorial building code law is required. Failure to comply with such a law, should charges be laid by the Provincial/Territorial authorities, and if proven in a Provincial court of law, would result in applicable

What is the “non-law” broken and found ‘guilty’ construct you refer to? Found ‘guilty’ by what institution? What are the ramifications for an individual/company being found ‘guilty’ of not following a not-law?

Usually by the time they are found guilty the company has defunct and the owners started a new one. The BC condo scandal is a great example. So is the apartment foundations failures in Ab and BC.

What local municipal agency granted the builder such an engineering exemption? Was such an exemption permitted under the BCBC? BC has a legally-enforceable provincial building code. If it wasn’t adhered to, then there is a clear legal basis to hold the non-compliant builder to account.

the local town/ city.

 

[Fabius]

So if the National Building Code model doesn’t cover all the situations within the nation which should be addressed, if even in conditional form, doesn’t that seem problematic to you? Just leave it to each Province or Territory to cover the deficiency in the National model code? Many provinces building codes expand significantly beyond the National code due to its shortcomings. It is an issue long discussed in the construction industry in Canada, eg. National vs. Provincial Building Codes.

The NBC should not attempt to cover all situations. To try would be problematic.

Canada is a very large country and despite the article at the link bemoaning the 10 PBC applying to only 40 million, those numbers are spread across a very large geographical area with vast differences in climate and geology despite that article’s opinion.

Building codes for a relatively temperate, wet climate with geological rock and seismic conditions should be different than a cold, dry area with permafrost.

We have provinces for a reason.

 

[Bluebulldog]

Assuming that was on DND property, it would obvious that the municipal bylaws would not have jurisdiction. So long as your pool and fence complied with the National Building Code it would seem compliant, but who enforces that? The Housing Authority or are they just the landlord? Are there federal government building inspectors? The NBC is just a model (created by the NRC) but has no force in law unless and individual jurisdiction passed legislation to adopt it. Most provinces have their own building code legislation.

It would seem reasonable that construction on federal property follows the local building code. How would they expect local contractors and trades to be familiar with the minutiae of the NBC. How would they expect infrastructure to be connected to local utilities if it were not deemed compliant? Who would issue and Occupancy Permit (or whatever they call it locally)?

I know that the NBC does not apply on FNTs, but I don't know if it is for lack of anybody to enforce it or the band councils telling somebody wanting to enforce it to go pound sand. I've seen brand new builds on FNTs with obvious deficiencies.

There is NO Canadian federal building code legislation. To say that the Federal government doesn’t need to follow a legislatively supported building code anywhere in the country does not seem accurate. If there is Federal legislation (ie. a law) enacting the NBC, I’d be interested to see it.

The last two projects I've worked on, have extensively referenced NBC, CSA, and other more technical documents ( NSC standard for LVLII, and LVLIII) spaces.

There is often a dual reference to NBC, and in the case of one of my projects, Ontario. Much of the specs also reference CAN / ULC, ASHRAE, ASME, SMACNA, and other standardized technical reference documents and governing bodies.

So, to your statement, no. There is no NBC legislation. Most DND construction is typically guided by the specifications as issued, and inspected according to those.