BB100 schools guide

[Goodsparks]

I think the level of emphasis is put into the incorporation of sprinkler systems is about right, however there could be more encouragement for inclusion in new builds.

As a relatively small LA with 52 schools, the cost to retrofit sprinklers even on a rolling programme would be unachieveably high.

[Chris Houston]

Schools are, on average, set on fire every 7 years.  They are all at risk by being a school.

Vandalism isn't a problem, like I've said, it's yet to happen in the UK every, it it were, it would be paid for by insurance and a recessed head would not be accessible to a pupil.

I've never spoken to a FRS who is not in favour of school sprinklers.  School's generaly have their insurance bought for them via council's who tend not to use insurance brokers.

[Lloydy]

Just a point on the cost of sprinklers in school. I have just been involved in a project for a rebuild of a school (because of a fire). The cost of the sprinklers came in at £93k. Cost of rebuild £7.7m.

[Chris Houston]

Just a point on the cost of sprinklers in school. I have just been involved in a project for a rebuild of a school (because of a fire). The cost of the sprinklers came in at £93k. Cost of rebuild £7.7m.

Add cost of hiring temporary accomodation for three years, bussing kids about, loss of community facilities, loss of uninsured personal (pupils and teachers contents.)

Ask the teaching staff what they lost, 20 years of home made teaching aids, 5 months of coursework per pupil.

Add cost of stress, staff moral, school reputation damage.

[Paul]

I can feel a tear forming................from the heart stuff......Brilliant!!

[wee brian]

How many books/ decent school dinners can you buy for £93k ?

[AnthonyB]

But the books are no good when burnt to ash and the dinner's unpalatable from a smoke stained kitchen.........

Property protection doesn't matter - until it happens to your property! by then it is too late.

[pd]

Frankly I am still astounded that we are arguing over relatively small additional costs. I know everything, (even life) has a value these days and the logic is sometimes difficult to argue against when comparing different outcomes of spending cash on this or that. (Cost benefit analysis wouldn't support riding a pushbike, I'd hazard).

This relatively small additional cost would
1. Reduce insurance costs
2. Restrict environmental damage (440000 cubic metre warehouses in revised ADB)!!!
3. Restict the huge social costs of school (or commercial blg) burning down
4. Assist in the protection of life
5. Reduce fire service resource needs (Heresy, I know)
6. Reduce risk to those fewer firefighters
7. Probably protect old ladies in their Scottish Care Homes (bit of a misnomer that)

Bloody engineers...know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.

The government should legislate (they do for everything else), to force buildings of a certain size/risk/heritage/social value (we can make the detail later) to fit sprinklers...then they wouldn't burn down.

[Graeme]

They are all at risk by being a school.

not to mention also by the Art teacher having a fly puff in his store room.I have had a call out from this before.

[Lloydy]

Its disappointing in the least to see the stance taken by BB100. Nevertheless, many Local Authorities now see the benefits of fitting sprinklers into educational buildings. They themselves, increasingly, specify sprinklers despite the lack of any legislative requirement. The more this happens, the more sprinklers will be seen by neighboring Authorities as an essential part of the specification , particularly in new build, extensions and refubishments.

[fred]

Whilst I fully support the provision of sprinklers in schools for property protection, I don't really understand on what basis the new CFOA publication "Sprinklers in Schools" makes this claim :-

"The provision of sprinkler installations within educational establishments offers the potential for
significant improvements in both life safety and property loss. "

Life Safety ?

Can anyone enlighten me ?

[Chris Houston]

It surely means that the provision of a fire sprinkler system reduces the liklihood of someone dying in a fire in a school.  Simple as that.

[Tom Sutton]

I would be interested to know how many students have lost their lives in day schools say over the past ten years.

[Paul]

Surely Fred you see that providing active fire supression actually can save lives and prevent the total loss of buildings, if not please present your rationale??

[Chris Houston]

I would be interested to know how many students have lost their lives in day schools say over the past ten years.

There have been a few recent near misses, but in the past 10 years the figure is zero.

Now, given the current rate of arson attack (one every 8 years) in UK schools and given the increasing frequency of daytime arson attacks, would you propose we tackle the issue now, or wait for some deaths?

I hope no one suggests we can over look life safety in any type of building that no one has died in recently!