Dead End Corridor

[Growler]

Building regulation submission has a ground floor 11 metre dead end corridor serving three offices along either side, single occupancy building. TD furthest office to final exit just over the 18 metres. The proposal is to leave the corridor un-protected but provide full BS 5839 Pt 1 AFD to all rooms, the corridor itself and out. Am I correct in stating that it is a requirement that the corridor  has to be made up with FD30(s) doors / walls as stipulated in  Approved Document B & BS:9999 and therefore the proposal is not acceptable under 'Building Regulations'. The AFD method is of course clearly acceptable under risk assessment supported by the CLG guidance for Offices and Shops (fig 30), and of course functional requirement could come into play I suppose, just wondered if any BCO's had a view.

[AnthonyB]

The 'either/or' choice is only in ADB for non dead end corridors where there are multiple tenants with rooms off.

ADB & even BS9999 are not mandatory, all that has to be done is to demonstrate why an alternative solution can still meet the functional standards, which depends on which AI you use and their opinion.

[Growler]

Thanks AnthonyB, just checking I was not missing something obvious.

[lyledunn]

Sounds like the original design was poorly thought through. I dont think that it is reasonable to use the functional requirement line when the issue could have been designed out.

[Dinnertime Dave]

The use of AFD for dead ends has been accepted by BCO for at least 10 years to my knowledge.

My knowledge is based on being a fire safety officer dealing with building regulation submissions. Haven't been doing it for 4 years, but can't see it would have changed.

[Revol]

In my experience most building control bodies who have the intelligence to think for themselves rather than doggedly say 'well it says in the book' would accept AFD in lieu of FR in this situation.