Access for fire appliances

[CivvyFSO]

Thanks for all your comments guys.  I was aware of the reason 20m was the figure and it is obviously a little ridiculous in this day and age.   I had also thought of the options mentioned thank you.  It is not possible to put in any sort of additional slip/road/way as the site is VERY narrow.  I might have to persuade the Architect to lose a few parking spaces.

As I suspected: There possibly is space there to acheive it, it is just that the space would be more profitable to be used as parking. Don't get me wrong, the financial aspect is a strong one, but it is a far cry from something being impossible.

It is an easy one to get excited about, especially when it is taken in context with "reversing a horse". But it really all boils down to where you set your limits. 20m is quite specific in the document, and as I said before, it is a recent document. Is 35m ok? That is almost twice the suggested distance.... Is 50m ok? Is 100m ok?

Would the appliance be reversing out onto a busy main road? If not then my personal limit may be extended slightly. Then again, you make a hammerhead near houses and it will probably get used as parking anyway. Each problem should be looked at on it's own merits.

[slubberdegullion]

What is the point of having a guidance book if we're just going to chuck it away?  Adherance to the standard generally means that all aspects of the building are as reasonably safe as can be expected.  Dropping below the standard means that the level of safety drops unless there is some other compensating feature.

Who knows where the 20m (60 feet) rule for reversing came from, maybe it was to do with horses, maybe not.  What is certain is that there are many numbers in ADB that appear to have arbitrary origins but that have persisted into todays publication because they have stood the test of time.

Consider the following:

I have known one fire-fighter in my FRS who was killed whilst watching a fire appliance reversing.  

I have heard of a similar incident in another FRS.  I guess there are others I haven't heard of.

Appliances rarely attend even house fires on their own so there are likely to be multiple appliances in attendance.  The problem of reversing long distances compounds with each additional vehicle attending.

There is not an endless supply of fire appliances in any given area.  Appliances need to make themselves available as soon as possible after an incident.  With a multiple attendance and restricted access we could have all the appliances on site trapped by the last vehicle to arrive.

This problem has raised its head many times before and there are answers that satisfy all parties.  Consider things like:

A turning area some way along the route.

Utilising to the maximum the allowable 45m to all parts of the building when assessing where the appliances have to get to.

Talk nicely to the FRS and see if they'll bring an appliance to the site to assess access.

Residential/domestic sprinklers.


Please don't just throw away the standards we have, remember we're talking about people's safety.

Stu