Loft conversion- open plan staircase

[kurnal]

I have posted this on behalf of a potential new member - I will call him Lucifer. He cannot post himself due to the current embargo on new members and emailed me with the following question. ( I will phone you tomorrow Lucifer)

Dear Kurnal
I have seen some of your comments on www.fire.org.uk and have a query of my own (unfortunately they are not allowing anyone to sign up at the moment).  I have a project that has just started on site (loft conversion) and the client wants to create an open stair at ground floor.  However, there is no way of separating at first floor.  The kitchen is separated.  I have been trying to see if anyone has over come this scenario yet using the updated Part B.  The client is keen to avoid sprinklers (but I don't think there will be a choice).  Have you had any experience of this scenario yet?  I saw a comment regarding HTM88 (being no expert I may have completely miss understood) and a view that it is ok to escape past a fire.  Is this a strategy that could be adopted?
                       
                       Thank you in advance for any help you may be able to offer.

[Izan FSO]

I have posted this on behalf of a potential new member - I will call him Lucifer. He cannot post himself due to the current embargo on new members and emailed me with the following question. ( I will phone you tomorrow Lucifer)

Dear Kurnal
I have seen some of your comments on www.fire.org.uk and have a query of my own (unfortunately they are not allowing anyone to sign up at the moment).  I have a project that has just started on site (loft conversion) and the client wants to create an open stair at ground floor.  However, there is no way of separating at first floor.  The kitchen is separated.  I have been trying to see if anyone has over come this scenario yet using the updated Part B.  The client is keen to avoid sprinklers (but I don't think there will be a choice).  Have you had any experience of this scenario yet?  I saw a comment regarding HTM88 (being no expert I may have completely miss understood) and a view that it is ok to escape past a fire.  Is this a strategy that could be adopted?
                       
                       Thank you in advance for any help you may be able to offer.

Sprinklers would not solve the issue of means of escape as the ecsape route could become untenable before the sprinklers operated. I assume it is a domestic property? Velux type window esacpe??

[messy]

Loft Velux window escapes are no longer acceptable under ADB which now demands a protected route to the final exit.

However, I know of a case in a London Borough where the planning Dept insisted on a domestic sprinkler system for an identical problems (Victorian terraced house with a wall removed to make an 'open plan' design). The punters would have preferred a drop down fire curtain to create a virtual protected route, but the planners were obsessed with sprinklers

£8,500 worth of sprinkler later, the Boro Planners were happy and final cert was issued.

Mind you, as the system was installed merely to get 'permission' for the loft, the house owner has no plans to maintain the sprinklers and may actually disconnected them.

The householders reckoned that even with an £8,500 extra (unexpected) spend on the loft extension, with London prices, it's still much cheaper than moving

As so often with FS provision in dwellings, it's just an exercise - an example of red tape gone mad. As it's unenforceable, it's a complete waste of time and money which actually presents rise in risk for the householders.

It was the same with Velux windows in kids loft rooms (which were often locked) and self closers (I got mine third-hand for my loft extension and then passed them on).

[kurnal]

Well for the first time Messy I find myself disagreeing with one of your posts.

An open plan stair is bad enough in a two storey building but I think they are dangerous as you go higher and the new ADB outlawing those stupid vellux roof rescue windows is a Good Thing. I also recognise that if a fire door is provided and then left open as many are then its all a waste of time and money.

In a couple of difficult cases like this we have found alternative solutions - though bending the rules to some extent. For example bringing the new stair serving the second floor  down to the first floor where it terminates in a lobby.From the lobby there are two doors- one fire door leads to the head of the open plan stair to the ground. Another fire door leads to a first floor room with access to a useable window exit. This will not be universally acceptable to all building inspectors.

Another solution is a water mist installation in the ground floor rooms- this is more universally accepted.

If I encountered an existing 3 storey building with an open plan stair then I would probably recommend full automatic  detection to LD1 for safety of the residents but this would not be accpetable in a conversion.

[Rex]

Kurnal
You already answered your friend in relation to loft conversions,  with regard to HTM 88, it is a Health Technical Memorandum that has nothing to do with means of escape from loft conversions- it is to do with fire safety standards to support people living within the community with health problems- hope this helps.

[Midland Retty]

A water mist system is a viable solution -  however it is far from perfect because whilst they are capable of controlling flame spread they can't prevent smoke travel

As Messy points out another issue here is whether or not the householder would maintain the water mist system properly anyway.

Preferred solution in my opinion would be to protect staircase from attic to first floor level if possible, and then use escape windows.

[messy]

Kurnal

I don't understand what part of my post you disagree with. I am not anti escape windows, and your solution of a 'cut off' door & lobby on the first floor would be the type of solution I would prefer.

The provision of complicated engineered solutions is often - if not always- reliant on the quality of the maintenance. In domestic terms, I see a (domestic) sprinkler system as rather complicated for the average householder to maintain, and perhaps a little expensive to have a competent engineer in periodically. After all, how many households fail to get their gas boilers and cars serviced properly?

So for a planning authority to insist on sprinklers, water mist or curtains in a domestic situation, is what I am referring to as 'red tape'. It looks good on paper, but will it work when asked to?

I (like most who frequent this board) would always go forthe most effective option. Perhaps water mist is the most efficient proposal, but would it be effective? Without servicing it's as much use as a chocolate fire door.

As punters will  tend to keep their doors maintained (if not closed), doors and escape windows are much more effective (ie reliable)

[kurnal]

Hi Messy
The only thing I disagreed with in your post was your honesty in accepting as inevitable that people would not maintain safety systems.

I guess in reality experience has  proved  you to be right - I still naively cling to a belief that If I recommend a fire safety solution for someones home then its there for their safety and nothing whatsoever to do with pleasing the building inspector. And I will use every avenue to convince them of that fact- and understand the reason for it.   Of course when they sell up and move on its unlikely that this will be passed on to the next occupier.  

Ever the eternal optimist I admit to being regularly dissapointed but keep on bangin my head against that wall.  And an open door is no more effective than a chocolate sprinkler system and in the most deprived areas window exits are likely to be nailed up to deter burglary. Tis a hiding to nothing.

[ian gough]

Not a lot to maintain though - especially if the sprinklers are fed from Towns main. And what's 'complicated' about a BS 9251 domestic sprinkler?

[messy]

What's complicated about picking up the phone to arrange an annual service on your domestic gas boiler?

Millions should and don't. At least with the boiler, if it stops working (usually on the coldest day of the year) you know - straight away and get it sorted.

The same could not be said for dom sprinklers, which may have failed years ago but as Mr & Mrs Householder have forgotten about servicing it, they won't know until their backsides are getting a touch warm.

That's why I reckon that relying on domestic sprinklers as an engineered solution is iffy at best

[ian gough]

Much better to rely on open doors then eh?

For your information (and London have some good statistics on this) failures of sprinklers is very rare (and we don't want to say this too loud - but a lot are not maintained!). Also, many projects where sprinklers are installed are run by housing associations who have suitable contracts in place. One local authority 'up north' even have their own people trained to maintain sprinklers as it is not that difficult.

But of course, for the private householder it is down to them (mind you, they often sort these things out when they want to sell) - and no solution is perfect.

Finally, if you are still a serving officer in London, I might point out that your views must be personal - as I can assure you they are not the views of LFEPA.

[Midland Retty]

Dear Ian

Do you work in the sprinkler industry by chance?

I can't argue with anything you have said, however generally members of the public are more aware of keeping their doors closed at night as a common sense precaution to mitigate the effests of fire.

Take a family living in a house for a good 5 to 10 years who during that time forget to get their sprinklers checked will you guarantee those sprinklers will work when required?

The other point here is money. People will always find more urgent things to spend their hard earned cash on rather than fork out to service their sprinkies. But doors are always there.


Im not deliberately trying to be argumentative, but there's no point in having super dooper protective measures if they're not maintained properly, atleast by having regular maintenance you can be pretty sure that the device in question will work.

[ian gough]

Yes I do work with the sprinkler industry (although not exactly in it). However, I've seen enough fatal fires in domestic buildings (usually as a result of a flashover) to know that 'fire doors' are not as simple and reliable as some might think. And before the 'passive folk' get upset I emphasise the word 'domestic' - fire doors often do excellent jobs in commercial buildings.  

Can I suggest you go and look at some 3 storey dwellings in parts of the West Mids where you can expect fires and see how many doors are likely to be closed at night - that's if they are still there in their frames!

[Midland Retty]

Yes I do work with the sprinkler industry (although not exactly in it). However, I've seen enough fatal fires in domestic buildings (usually as a result of a flashover) to know that 'fire doors' are not as simple and reliable as some might think. And before the 'passive folk' get upset I emphasise the word 'domestic' - fire doors often do excellent jobs in commercial buildings.  

Can I suggest you go and look at some 3 storey dwellings in parts of the West Mids where you can expect fires and see how many doors are likely to be closed at night - that's if they are still there in their frames!

No need to suggest Ian, I do see plenty of 3 storey dwellings in the West Mids area

 I both inspect them and see many post fire - mainly HMOs rather than private domestic dwellings - During inspections I find most of the doors are closed because they access tenant's bedrooms and they want privacy or security, granted the door accessing teh common living areas (living room and kitchen) are often a jar when I walk round.

In private dwellings the doors are more likely to be left open and I have no arguments with that Ian.

But lets not forget that sprinklers dont stop smoke spread (especially not in the incipient stages) and even with a sprinkler system fitted householders should still be closing doors at night regardless.

[wee brian]

Finally, if you are still a serving officer in London, I might point out that your views must be personal - as I can assure you they are not the views of LFEPA.

Point of order chairman!  

Ian, nobody is talking on behalf of their employers here and your comment was perhaps a little out of order. And I'm sure you would be the last person to say that the views of any particular FRS are without question.