FireNet Community
FIRE SERVICE AND GENERAL FIRE SAFETY TOPICS => Fire Safety => Topic started by: jasper on April 20, 2007, 11:08:47 AM
-
I have a building that is basically two storey with an open (double return) staircase to the front and protected alternatives to the rear, the ground floor corridor is a 'U' shape with offices on the external walls, it has already been identified that the office walls / glazing and door are of insufficient fire resistance and the frs agree and have asked for the photocopier to be removed i.e. no sources of fuel or ignition within an open stair which is understandable. The problem I have is that there are plans for a large office/reception to be constructed on the left ground floor side, removing existing walls and basically make the whole area open to an open plan staircase. My question is how (through the building regs) is this situation acceptable when the photocopier isn’t? Also I have seen the proposed pans and the architects have stated they have not even looked at the rest of the building as far as fire safety and compliance, can this be done? As there is basically a material change of use?
your views/opinions on this would be gratefully received
-
If each office has an alternative and there is no way a fire could take out both routes, and if travel distances are met from both floors ( ground being possible inner rooms?) I dont see a problem with the photocopier and probably not the reception either.
-
I agree with Kurnal. Just because a FRS agrees with you it doesn't mean they are right.
What exactly is the risk that you are worried about?
-
Kurnal - the offices do not have alternative routes out, only through the ground floor open area of the open staircase
wee brian - I am worried about a fire starting in the new ground floor office and taking out the first floor of this staircase which has offices directly onto the stair
-
Although I work in the FRS Safety environment I have to say that some of my safety colleagues are absolute clowns and should not be allowed anywhere near a building with a clipboard and pen.
Thats is my view and would probably be the view of many others if they were open and honest enough.
Best thing to do is get good advice - from a non FRS source.
-
Now that makes sense. You had said that there were alternatives at the rear. I take it that these first floor offices cant get to them.
You could regard them as inner rooms if the travel distances and early warning are OK. You may want to ask Building Control If they have any recollection of the Job. They may be able to tell you why they gave it the OK.
-
Jasper,
Do you mean a change of use or a material alteration? Forgive me if I am teaching you how to suck eggs, a Material Alteration is internal alterations to the layout, refurbishments, etc (the explanation of a material alteration is just too damn long to detail fully!!!), whereas a Material Change of Use occurs when a building changes its use (office to shop, shop to residential, etc.)
If the building is existing and an alteration has taken place, the benchmark for Building Regulations compliance is that the level of compliance is no worse than it was prior to the works commencing. This can result in many scenarios, even more so with the introduction of the RRO, that could demonstrate compliance with the Building Regulations but fall foul on a fire risk assessment.
There is now a conflict due to the dynamic status of the RRO and the approach of the Bulding Regs which is a bit more flexible towards existing situations.
Any decent Building Control Body (BCB) should advise the client/architect that compliance with regs can be achieved, but would also advise them where issues may still exist regarding fire safety.
The only scenario I can possible percieve where this may be okay is BS5588 Part 11 Clause 10 - Small premises, but there are a lot of issues/restrictions to consider.
I think this is a problem that we will be seeing increase on internal alterations work, the provisions in Regulation 16B for provision of fire safety information should address changes of use and extension/new build works, and create a bit of synergy between the two processes.
-
thank you for the response saddlers, sorry for the the misinformation it is actually a 'material alteration'