Residential Care Home

[grueber]

Hi All
Is it acceptable for bedrooms to be located opening directly into a stairwell enclosure at 1st floor level in a single staicase serving 1 upper floor. The doors are FD30s S/C. Is going through building Regs as the 2 new bedrooms are part of a new extension. Does it require double door protection ? concerns are the doors could be held open without appropriate devices and comprimising the MOE to the upper floor bedrooms. Just another quick question Self closing/free swing devices on bedroom doors are they required in residential care homes? emergency procedure is for progressive horizontal but only 2 staff and 25 residents on a night, not comfortable when majority of doors have no S/C fitted.

Thanks

[CivvyFSO]

Self closers/swing free are definitely required unless a sprinkler system is provided.

[grueber]

Thanks Civvy
Worrying that a number of care homes are fitted without probably all over the country and rely on the old protected area status/alternative means of escape strategy. Is more concerning that they rely on their evacuation strategy and number of staff on a night.

[kurnal]

Not sure from your posting on the nature and layout of the building. Is the single staircase serving just the two bedrooms or is there other accommodation up on the first floor?

Clearly PHE is not appropriate if there is only a single staircase in that part of the building.

The arangements and layout at the bottom of the staircase is of equal or greater importance than that at the top. Is it enclosed and are there options for escape from the base of the staircase?

All bedroom doors should have swing free closers and if the doors open into the single staircase this should be a Grade A device in accordance with BS7273 pt 4.

The evacuation strategy must be appropriate to the minimum staffing levels and this will determine the size of the protected areas. In general terms I agree that those running on 2 staff and 12 rooms are pushing their luck too far in my opinion.

 

[colin todd]

Big Al, what have I told you before about your quick fire advice and resulting errors?  What am I to do with you! It makes no difference whether it is single staircase or not as to use of Grade A.  All staircases in res care should have Grade A- single staircase or not.

It just goes to show, you get what you pay for in this world.  Free advice is all very well, but..........

[kurnal]

Colin you imply my advice was wrong? Would literally following my advice have led to any non compliance?

Yes my responses are often a bit hasty - accepted. And not fully considered and rounded I agree. I often  tend to answer the direct question without spending too much time deliberating on potential cross cutting issues.  And occasionally its total tosh as we both well know. But whilst imperfect it is not usually too far off the mark I think. Where else are people able to gain such help and support?

I believe it is also generally appreciated that  when people ask for advice someone has to put their head over the parapet and give the first answer and then a discussion results. The original poster can then make up their own mind. We all accepted the terms and conditions of the forum when we signed up and the very explicit caveats therein. I personally feel at ease with that.

I am usually up there within the earliest responses. Your wisdom and advice in answering the posters enquiry would be most welcome. To be honest your  constructive criticisms of the subsequent responses are also enlightening and equally welcome. From my point of view  I try to give practical hands on common sense and pragmatic advice.  Too many years in the fire brigade to change now.

  

[colin todd]

I know, I know, Big Al, when the building is burning end to end and people are hanging out of the windows (as used to happen in your day before Post War Building Studies fixed things), you just had to squirt the water first and ask pertinent questions later. However, if one sets oneself up as a free advice bureau, altruistically to work out other consultants' problems for them, so that they can earn more in this time of recession (though in an earlier posting, you did-admirably in my opinion- acknowledge that it is not entirely altruistic and that you do it as a form of advertising your extensive knowledge), one should really take the time and trouble to ensure the advice that they are selling onward is actually right. 

This is why I rarely bother, as I have never intended firenet to be my shop window, and I can't be bothered to take the great care and trouble that would be necessary properly to answer very specific queries on premises with which I am not familiar, such as to avoid liability for everyone involved.

However, each to their own. I will of course continue to try to save you from yourself, as a mark of respect for your advancing years, and will try to help those who deserve it (such as my good chums in the fire and rescue services) when they need help with understanding background and philosophy of requirements and recommendations, as opposed to doing their job for them and getting it half cocked.

[kurnal]

(though in an earlier posting, you did-admirably in my opinion- acknowledge that it is not entirely altruistic and that you do it as a form of advertising your extensive knowledge)

No Colin you read that one wrong. Of course I use firenet as a shop window for my services but not to try and impress potential clients with my technical knowledge.  Rather to show an underpinning belief in common sense and an ability to find pragmatic and practical solutions to real everyday problems.

If it isn't common sense it isnt heath and safety.

[colin todd]

 Of course I use firenet as a shop window for my services


[/quote]

Why "of course", big Al?

[kurnal]

"Of course" in the context of confirming something  that is obvious. Why else would I put my email address and company name at the bottom of all my posts?

We wander way off topic - apologies to Grueber for the diversion.

[grueber]

Sorry Kurnal didnt explain it too well, the new bedrooms are to be located within the staircase with the door opening directly into the stairwell. There are 3 bedrooms and a dining room on the 1st floor (all existing) with a door at the top of the staircase, at ground floor level it is a protected route leading to final exit. Looking at the new extension of the 2 bedrooms it doesnt meet AD B 4.34 (a) and page 101 of the resi care guide which states it should have lobby/protected approach.

Thanks

[kurnal]

Hi Gruebar

Not sure that 4.34a applies from your description? (more than one storey above the ground storey?)

Personally I find page 101 of the Res care guide confusing as it seems to imply  that if you have an  three storey building and can meet the travel distance for a single direction then an unprotected staircase would be OK (which of course it would not!)

I am not certain that I understand the layout of the building but it sounds to me that this may be a small extension of an existing building which may already of an unsatisfactory design and will be made disproportionately worse by the extension. For example in the event of a fire in one of the new bedrooms can we guarantee that staff would be able to reach the existing bedrooms  and in the event of smoke in the stairway would persons be trapped behind the existing screen without an alternative means of escape?

We have not established the size and nature of the care home and I am assuming that 0.23 and 0.24 of the ADB do not apply. From our comments on PHE and the difficulty of staff moving up to 12 persons horizontally in a building, the logistics of evacuating 5 persons downstairs is a much bigger problem.

 I would start from the basis that it is essential for the developer to identify the proposed evacuation strategy for the extended building  in accordance with ADB 3.39. Failure to identify an effective strategy may result in  additional requirements or restrictions being imposed under the FSO on completion.

[Tom Sutton]

 Of course I use firenet as a shop window for my services

Why "of course", big Al?

Colin - Maybe a little CPD on HTML wouldn't go a miss.

[grueber]

correct 0.23 and 0.24 ADB do not apply. The exisitng layout is ground floor approx 350 m2 with a single staircase leading up to 1st floor bedrooms/dining room approximately 50 m2 which is a protected route and double door protection at 1st floor level. The extension is to create another floor at 1st floor level but to break into the stairwell and create 2 bedrooms with only single door opening into then stair, would be so much easier to have just extended onto the original 1st floor landing where the other bedrooms/living room are.

Surely 4.34 does apply as has only one story above ground (2 Storey) unless i am mis understanding the definition.

Sorry is a complicated layout and so much easier with plans than trying to describe, the basic principle is the 2 new bedrooms have their doors opening into a stairwell without double door protection via a lobby or corridor.

Thanks

[kurnal]

4.34(a)
....where the stair is the only one serving a building (or part of a building) which has MORE THAN one storey ABOVE ..... the ground storey.....

(Capitals used only for emphasis of the key words.) Hope this helps.