Sheltered housing again!

[A J]

Hi,
Your thoughts on the following would be appreciated..

A scheme of 8 blocks consisting of ground  and first floor, constructed of solid walls and floors. two flats on ground  and two flats on the first floor. door entry system at the front door and a bin store (secured with slated doors and locked). Corridor has fire doors on both floors and also the bin store area. There is AFD in the flats and in the escape route.

There are not any smoke detectors in the common areas,  the escape route is sterile and with fire doors in the building and also the stay put policy the scheme operates I wonder if they are required.
However looking at table 1 -part 2 of the sleeping accommodation guide it states that sheltered accommodation requires an L2 system in the common areas

If a fire was to start in the bin area no one in the flats would be aware, The only ignition source would be arson, so if the bins are kept secure and the fire doors kept shut then would  it be suitable under the RRO not to install smoke detectors in the common areas.

 Am I correct or am I missing something?

[kurnal]

I think you are right, especally as it is a two storey block and window exits can be assumed.  Above two storeys the bin store may become more of an issue.

[A J]

Thanks Kurnal for putting my mind at rest...again!

[Big T]

The recommendations in 5588 pt 1 31.1 / 31.2 would suggest otherwise.

In addition to the smoke detectors in the flats there should be a system to warn of a fire in the communal areas. especially with the specific risk you have identified.

In sheltered accomodation L1 or L2 is required.

[colin todd]

Fire does not really know or care if  people behind front doors are ancient (like Kurnal) or young and fit (like me). BS 5588-1 was never logical on this issue. But one should not rush into giving advice without knowing all the information. Sheltered housing is tricky-some at one extreme it is simply a speical case of a block of flats. At the other, it looks like res care (though it is not actually res care of course).

[jokar]

If this is a new build then ADB or BS 5588 part 1 would apply.  If it is existing it has been built to an accepted standard and therefore the CLG guidance where necessary can be applied.  If the evacuation strategy is defend in place then a part 6 system is acceptable in the dwellings, it is after all a horizontal blck of flats.

[A J]

The blocks were built in 1976,  a defend in place strategy is adopted within the scheme, if a fire was to start in the bin area, it would be contained within the compartment if of course the fire door was not wedged open! With the scheme manager addressing this problem is the detection still relevant?

[kurnal]

Still sounds ok to me dopps.  Yes there is a benchmark for new builds that says something else but we cant and should not apply new build standards to existing.

Reasonably practicable is what its all about. After all there are tens of thousands of buildings exactly like the one you are describing that dont have fire doors or detection in the dwellings or fire doors to the refuse sore. For those substandard buildings we would probably aspire to the standards you have described.

[kurnal]

Theres always lots of things that we could do to make places safer. Sheltered housing should be exactly that. And a key element of sheltered housing should be support and supervision, all too often totally lacking in these schemes. The most retrograde step was the removal of the wardens from these schemes. Wardens played such a key role not only in terms of fire safety but also in terms of social support and welfare.

Its such a contrast to the way other countries do things- take Paris for example where they still have full time attendants in every public toilet. But we cant provide care and supervision to our vulnerable and eldery parents.

[Big T]

I have always thought that the requirement was a bit off when you consider that the only difference was that the people behind the front door were a bit older. Mind you you should remeber that sheltered accomodation doesn't always mean old.

I thought the theory of an alarm in sheltered was to ensure that fire brigade response was punctual so that safe evacuation could be carried out if required by alerting a call centre or the scheme manger (some palces do still have wardens Kurnal, your home just isnt a very good one!)

I agree that modern buildings would be built to that standard but are the requirements as per the 1991 5588 pt 1 all that different? to those that preceded it?

When we consider that we should be assessing and then upgrading where necessary where do we draw the line? If we change the use of a building from general needs to sheltered we would normal put an alarm system in. Is this wrong?

[kurnal]

I have always thought that the requirement was a bit off when you consider that the only difference was that the people behind the front door were a bit older. Mind you you should remeber that sheltered accomodation doesn't always mean old.

I thought the theory of an alarm in sheltered was to ensure that fire brigade response was punctual so that safe evacuation could be carried out if required by alerting a call centre or the scheme manger (some palces do still have wardens Kurnal, your home just isnt a very good one!)

I agree that modern buildings would be built to that standard but are the requirements as per the 1991 5588 pt 1 all that different? to those that preceded it?

When we consider that we should be assessing and then upgrading where necessary where do we draw the line? If we change the use of a building from general needs to sheltered we would normal put an alarm system in. Is this wrong?

Lots of food for thought Big T

In some areas the former sheltered housing provided for older people is now used for anyone with a housing need and the mix of people with substance dependancies and displaced persons has led to a serious decline in the quality of life for those older people for whom the housing was originally conceived and a reduction in the community facilities available- especially voluntary groups, luncheon clubs, social meetings etc that were the original strenths of these schemes.

I only have experience of carrying out risk assessments in local authority directly controlled housing, with very little experience of work in the private sector or arms length housing providers.  We may have to assess the councils entire housing stock and its always against a very limited budget for improvements. Whilst we try and remain objective and focus on benchmark standards it is very difficult not to compare todays building against last weeks rather than against the benchmark standards document.  

In the main resident wardens are rare, roving wardens used in some areas mobilised from a control centre. The better authorities link the domestic fire alarm system to the control room- where this is the case there is a major benefit in putting detection in the common areas too.

So many of the buildings we visit date from the 60s and 70s with inappropriate doors, travel distances, glazing, wall linings etc.

[jokar]

In these cases where a detection and alarm system have been utilised for the communal areas and in the case of older blocks to 5839 1988 or earlier versions, where do the residents go when the alarm goes off?  Back to their homes, out on the street, who lets them back in, who controls the evacuation?  The FRS with their eyes on false alarms will not want to attend UwFS for ever and some FRS are now sending the letters for non attendance at some premises.  How soon can a roving warden attend, what about at night.  If the communal alarm goes off at night whta do the residents do, tip out, stay in their homes, not hear the alarm as it is staff only alert?  Are we not in danger of making everything really complicated and disproportionate to the risk.

[A J]

very interesting point jokar, With these buildings being part of a complex where the only assembly point would be at the community centre staffed 9-4 would it cause more harm for Fred & Flo to assemble in the cold and wet rather than to wait to be assisted to evacuate if required by the FRS or scheme manager.
I agree Kurnal, if the schemes were monitored by live in wardens it would make everyones life a whole lot easier however, with the risk being minimal and with the construction and compartmentation of the premises being sound I feel that the introduction of additional detection in the common areas may cause more harm than good.

[Ashley Wood]

I have done a lot of work with the private sector and the one thing that comes up time and time again is the age of residents. The life expectancy of a resident has now far exceeded what was envisaged for a 'sheltered' scheme. Some schemes have almost become residential care homes but without the care. There appears to be different categories of schemes as well i. e sheltered, sheltered extra care, sheltered extra care for the elderly. a lot of residents of normal sheltered schemes are now in their 80's even 90's and sizeable proportion end their days in the scheme. It seems that the level of manning is not keeping up with the age increase, so perhaps the level of protection needs to be higher?

[wee brian]

Such as?

More AFD will just frighten them. They still cant get out.  

You could increase the fire resisitance but 1 hour really is plenty.  

Sprinklers would be nice but what problem are you trying to resolve? The compartmentation will do the trick for people in the other flats and its touch and go as to whether they would help a 90 year old much anyway.

Treat em like flats and get the CFS guys to take away their chip pans - QED