NEW FIRE SAFETY GUIDANCE FOR BLOCKS OF FLATS

[kurnal]

I would hope that the guidance will apply throughout the UK despite the quirks of the local fire safety legislation and the definition of what constitutes domestic premises. How the guidance is applied and the legal powers to enforce it will be very different. But a dangerous building in Scotland needs fixing just as it does in Newcastle.
The Scottish Legislation cannot be intended to allow Owners to ignore general basic fire precautions just because there is no duty to carry out a fire risk assessment.

I would assume that there is also an equivalent to the old English Public Health Act (1936?) covering fire safety standards in such buildings. No doubt someone will enlighten us. 

[wee brian]

You could say that about so many things Brian. Smoke dispersal as per CP3 may work if the winds in the right direction and of the right strength. In an existing building it wont be practicable to incorporate anything else that will work so I say make sure that what you have got is maintained in good order. Its been considered safe enough almost 50 years. Whose to say that in 20 years time someone else will come along and prove a BRE shaft doesn't work or make a fuss about the design being based on a small fire and a door 10% open? What about the arsonist with a petrol can who leaves the doors open for maximum effect? How far do you go?

I think if you maintain the original approved installation the building will be as safe as it can be taking into account character, nature, layout. If practicable to improve it do so, one alternative may be a containment approach.

But I think if you dont maintain it- eg by sealing up the vents it will be somewhat less safe than when it was built and you may have to review the evacuation strategy.  

I think containment may be a whole lot safer - with any luck Colin will be able to come up with something that we can all work with.

[Ricardo]

Of course in Scotland the "Act" and the "Regs" do not operate in isolation, to one another

[Big T]

An important yet poisoned challice Colin. I'm sure you will get a reasonable hearing at a kangaroo court once published! I hope the guide does everything that everybody hopes it will, and more and be prescriptive yet risk based. I certainly don't envy you.

Joking aside, the guidance document is certainly needed in the residential arena, specifically by large registered social landlords. We spend so much time argueing with fire services over bunkham and flim flam. I hope that with CFOa supporting the document it will provide some much needed risk based examples for enforcing authorities in some of the more rural brigades (no offence) who don't have the incredibly high quantity of high rise residential premises that the urban brigades have and therefor in some instances lack the indepth knowledge of these premises and how they were designed to perfom.

I suppose that enforcing authorities won't come into my office with a well thumbed Lacors guide anymore to discuss failings in purpose built flats. Such a shame, they really used to make me smile.....

[longjohn]

Well done, long overdue

[jokar]

Big T, surely not as an IO said to a friend of mine recently BS 5588 is not an extant document anymore we have to use BS 9999 for residential blocks!

[Northern Uproar]

...or the IO who tried to insist on AFD and sounders in all common areas of flats to initiate a full evacuation, because if it wasn't needed in the Building Regs, 'we can get them under the RRO'. The same officer also said that disabled refuges and EVCs in un-managed flats were 'good practice', without being able to tell me who was supposed to be at the other end of the intercom!

A full document to this specific building type will be welcome, as hopefully it will give a common guidance, and would remove the confusion that appears to exist when applying the FSO to flats, and the 'its our brigade policy' type arguments to recommendations over and above ADB recommendations. Some developers have told me that they've spent thousands complying with fire officer's requests because they wanted to get designs passed in the Br consultation and didn't want any claims from their clients if there's any enforcement action once occupied, without being able to question whether the requests would have a proportional increase in the building's safety.

Interestingly (or maybe not), has anyone dealt with flats in the Isle Of Man? There is a separate set of fire regulations for Flats, which asks for common alarms (with a heat detector in each kitchen) and manual call points which initiate full evacuations. Extinguishers are also expected in common areas.

[William 29]

Will the guide cover sheltered accomodation as well?

[wee brian]

Big T, surely not as an IO said to a friend of mine recently BS 5588 is not an extant document anymore we have to use BS 9999 for residential blocks!

It just gets worse.... I suspect you know but just in case. 5588-1 is still extant (but very out of date) BS 9991 is being drafted now as a replacement.

[jokar]

Principles for fire alarms are the same at all times.  However, the need for a fire alarm may be different for differing premises types and depends upon the evacuation strategy.

[Northern Uproar]

So why are we being given 'new fire safety guidance for blocks of flats'?

Largely because the existing guidance for flats is within a 'Sleeping Accomodation' guide, that also applies to Hotels etc, and the sections that refer to flats is based on Approved Document B/BS 5588 arrangements, but give little advice on flats whose design pre-dates these standards. There also confusion on what areas the FSO applies (such as Sheltered Housing - does having a care plan for resisdents make it a care home? Is a roof void over a line of terraces a 'common area'?). Hopefully the guides will address these types of issues before we go back to 'Tombstone Legislation' following an incident because of grey areas in and between published guidance where a building does not quite fit.

[Shaun Doyle]

Hi,
Changing tack for 30 seconds, trying to link threads when this new guidance is prepared, it may be prudent to include "student accommodation" as these are now classed as "flats" and have been subject to various intrepretation until the court ruling and considering the inference of the governments literature / understanding of  "paying guests" for the summer periods, when there are short term lets and a common understanding that the Fire Safety Order then applies.

Put all this in a timber framed building, which has not been built that well or maintained, makes this in practice a recipe for potential diaster. (Although timber framed building issues when during construction phase has hit the head lines, there being not much for on going maintenace and protection of the structure). A fire in part of a building controlled by one trype of legislation, can spread to a different part being controlled by another piece of legislation, in a building type which timber frame characterises the over risk. (I would add if maintained well etc it is acceptable form of construction). The danger is when it is not, and in the current period of recession and lack of funding are all factors that impact on this sceranio.

Dare I say it and using common sense (although this has no bearing in law), as much as certain groups want it and others don't; an "audit of the standard of fire safety" in a building whether parts fall under certain legislation is something that should be undertaken and whether it has a name tag of FRA or some other name / check. Surely its making sure (a check) that the protection from fire for the normal users is the objective. From a  a parent's perspective and considering youg people in most types of student accommodation, or any other flat and keeping users safe is not the objective?

Just a few thoughts.

[tmprojects]

Do i sense a tincey wincey bit of cynicism towards the quality of IO's?