BB100 schools guide

[p.b.morgan]

Dear all,

The consultation document on schools went on line earlier today. Go to

http://www.dfes.gov.uk/consultations/

It is much smaller than AD-B and has lots of pictures courtesy of many members of this forum.

This is an update of BB7 which was withdrawn eight years ago. Please have a look. (I'll be the one dealing with the comments after they have been sent in to the Dept of Education).

[pd]

Penny,

Congrats on getting your guidance together. I saw an early draft some time ago.

How does this guide sit with the 'Education Guide' being drafted by BRE on behalf of the ODPM? I note that you refer to the RRO and accept that your guide deals more thoroughly with design than the ODPM Guide is likely to. However, there  will still be huge overlap between the two guides.

[p.b.morgan]

Believe that the education guide you refer to is the management guide being produced as part of the RRO suite of guides. You will see that BB100 has very little on management; in early discussion with the first authors of the guides we agreed to leave 'hooks' as in the best soap operas for them to pick up. So I am hoping there will be very little overlap.

[Ken Taylor]

I am pleased to see the arrival of draft BB100 - having long lamented the departure of BB7 and worked with architects of a similar disposition. I've not had time to read the draft properly yet, but, whilst welcoming the pictures, notice the lack of line drawings that made BB7 so memorable. The reintroduction of the 12m direct distance in addition to the 18m travel distance should get things back to where they were (particularly in view of the tendency of schools to clutter rooms to an extent that makes any egress tortuous). The stated need for emergency lighting throughout is also particularly notable and will have implications for budgets.

Presumably School Facilities Guide 6 will be revised to accord with BB100 and the expected RRO-based guide?

[colin todd]

Why would one want EL throughout a school?

[p.b.morgan]

Originally it was felt there was no need for emergency lighting at all as schools were only in use in day light hours. With community use and noting some darker corners of England and Wales it was felt that EL would be useful in the event of a power cut , fire etc. The throughout was put in to reflect these possible needs.

[colin todd]

has anyone thought what this will cost and risk assessed it for cost/benefit. This remains, I assume, a fire standard not a H&S standard, so the EL must be intended to be there to deal with a situation when a fire has taken out the normal lighting cct. So first of all we need a fire. Then we need a situation that the fire has grown to such an extent that BEFORE EVACUATION (caps for emphasis-not shouting) the lighting cct has been taken out by the fire. But wait. This is not just any old fire. it is a fire that occurs in a darker corner of E&W presumably after 4pm in the Winter. Possibly in a  school which is NOT used by the community in the evening-or certianly not the whole school. So just in case, we put EL throughout (!!!) at huge cost beccause it might be useful. And this is good engineering?

[Chris Houston]

Most schools are used by the community frequently.  Most also lack comprehensive fire detection.

People can be working in remote parts, perhaps on upper floors, doing dance classes, yoga or whatever.

Time for a risk assessment!

[colin todd]

We werent talking about AFD. Which would you rather they spent their money on. AFD or EL.

[Chris Houston]

Sprinklers!

I mentioned AFD (automatic fire detection), becuase this is what would stop a fire growing before they knew.

I mostly manage property risks, so EL (emergency lighting) isn't really something that is relevant to this.

Most large school fires happen at night.  Although, I accept that all fires start as small fires and grow into large ones when they are not noticed.

My personal opinion is that all new high schools should be fully sprinkler protected.

[p.b.morgan]

Chris, why just high schools? We stress the need for Risk Assessments of particular schools in particular areas and do not discriminate for any age group. Strictly the design guide applies to schools with pupils aged 3-16 years. This includes 'through' schools, infant, junior, middle and secondary.

I understand that work is about to start on the cost benefits of installing sprinkler systems in schools. No-one doubts the usefulness of sprinklers but the costs are in the order of 5% of new build, perhaps equivalent to around £170,000 for a typical school building. For local authority schools there may be several choices that need to be made based on available funds.

Where sprinklers are fitted we had fun pointing out that they shouldn't be so obvious that pupils are tempted to set them off!  We have tried to think through the implications of what we are proposing so are very grateful for your comments and suggestions.

[Paul Grimwood]

Sorry to use this thread - Penny - I am trying to contact you. I would be very grateful if you would e-mail me at your convenience at Fire4242@aol.com

Many thanks
Paul Grimwood
www.firetactics.com

[Chris Houston]

About 20% of the schools in the UK are high schools, but about 50% of the major fires occur in them.

I am convinced the a cost benefit analysis would be of benefit to the decision makes and I would be very interested to provide any assistance especialy to ensure that all costs associated with a fire are covered and that all benefits from sprinkler systems are realised.  Designers are given more freedom when sprinklers are installed too.

Penny, given my employers insure the vast majority of schools and have done since local authorities n eeded to buy insurance, I would like to point out that the setting off of a school sprinkler system has never actually happened in the UK that we are ever aware of, they have however recently saved two schools one of which was full of pupils at the time.

Recessed heads are almost invisible and the plate won't drop off them until the temperature hits 58 degrees.  No chance of vandalism there.

As for the implications of sprinkler discharge, none really.  Any cost would most likely be covered by insurance.

I'll drop you a line, would be good to chat about this on the phone.

[Ken Taylor]

Obviously I would be happy to see AFD, sprinklers, EL, entry control, good security, CCTV, etc, etc - but with schools it all comes down to available funding and how best to spend it. Somehow early warning by AFD seems more immediately attractive in terms of getting them out before the smoke reaches them than EL in case the fire has cut-off the power or sprinklers once the requisite temperature has been reached.

To be fair to the drafters, I see that they do refer to AFD and suggest L2 as a minimum level for  fire detection/warning - but perhaps something stronger than mere suggestion (eg strong recommendation) would be more effective?

I also find the phrase 'An alternative approach for schools is to treat all lifts as necessarily being evacuation lifts..' to be rather vague. In view of the issues, risks  and difficulties in getting teachers and caretakers to carry disabled children and teachers down stairs, could we not, at least, be saying that all new passenger lifts in schools of two or more storeys should be constructed to this standard unless an equally safe and effective provision can be made and that serious consideration should be given to converting existing lifts to that standard?

[martyn brandrick]

Chris, cannot agree more with your point re sprinklers.  The document basically shoots down the need for sprinklers.  The statement 'were a threat of arson is likely'. show me a school not at threat. With more schools being built from PFI/PPP money with a 25 year life expctency surely sprinklers are essential.  The issue of vandalism is old hat.  the peron who strikes a head will be easily caught, as the soaking wet fool in the corner. its down to brokers and FRS to lobby education boards and enlighten them.