Author Topic: Vehicular Access  (Read 5699 times)

Offline GB

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 234
Vehicular Access
« on: January 05, 2010, 10:15:57 AM »
I have an extra care development of self contained apartments. The development has an L1 fire alarm system and is fully sprinklered throughout which is monitored and has a 24 hour on site warden. A dry riser is provided within each stairwell with access to each inlet within 18m.

ADB 16.3 states that there should be vehicle access for a pump appliance within 45m of each point of every apartment. There does not seem to be any allowance made for an extra care development that is fully sprinklered including common areas. I have looked at BS 9999 and again no allowance made.

I appreciate the physical effects of fire fighting but surely an allowance has to be made for the monitored sprinklers?

I am aware of an increase to 60m where sprinklers are present for buildings excl blocks of flats - does anyone know of a similar reference for sprinklered flats?

Offline nearlythere

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4351
Re: Vehicular Access
« Reply #1 on: January 05, 2010, 10:35:13 AM »
I have an extra care development of self contained apartments. The development has an L1 fire alarm system and is fully sprinklered throughout which is monitored and has a 24 hour on site warden. A dry riser is provided within each stairwell with access to each inlet within 18m.

ADB 16.3 states that there should be vehicle access for a pump appliance within 45m of each point of every apartment. There does not seem to be any allowance made for an extra care development that is fully sprinklered including common areas. I have looked at BS 9999 and again no allowance made.

I appreciate the physical effects of fire fighting but surely an allowance has to be made for the monitored sprinklers?

I am aware of an increase to 60m where sprinklers are present for buildings excl blocks of flats - does anyone know of a similar reference for sprinklered flats?
GB. I assume that your building does not meet the suggested 45M (should) rule so that is why you have posted.
Look at it this way. What is the alternative? Knock it down and redesign to meet the recommendation for 45M?
If you did not have the additional measures you describe would you consider providing them as sufficient compensatory factors.
If you are carrying out a FRA I would consider the L1, sprinkler and 24 warden as a very good control measure.
We're not Brazil we're Northern Ireland.

Offline GB

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 234
Re: Vehicular Access
« Reply #2 on: January 05, 2010, 11:12:10 AM »
The problem is that the building is currently being constructed (almost complete!!) and the issue has been raised by the Fire Safety Authority (I had hoped it would have been before now but....)

The sprinklers and monitored L1 system has gone in as standard as it is the clients preference to sprinkler all developments.

The roads and staircases have all been formed and I am looking for some reference to the 60m depicted elsewhere in ADB for buildings that are not blocks of flats. ::)

Offline Phoenix

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 677
  • Get a bicycle. You will not live to regret it
    • MetaSolutions (Fire Safety Engineering) Ltd.
Re: Vehicular Access
« Reply #3 on: January 05, 2010, 12:03:00 PM »
GB,

You state that each staircase has a dry riser with vehicular access to within 18m of each inlet.  This is all you need, provided that the internal distances (from outlets to accommodation) are satisfied - and they should be if all staircases have risers. 

Paragraph 16.3 is for buildings that are not fitted with fire mains.  Yours is.  End of problem.


Stu


Offline CivvyFSO

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1583
Re: Vehicular Access
« Reply #4 on: January 05, 2010, 12:23:32 PM »
Wot Stu said.

Apart from; until the floor is over 18m there does not seem to be any particular distance stipulated. Bit of an ommission in my opinion.