Author Topic: Escape distances. (Read 11580 times)

safetycompliance · « **on:** December 05, 2005, 07:36:05 PM »

Can anyone please tell me where I might find details of the suggested or legally imposed maximum distance an escapee can travel before reaching a fire exit. This is for an elderly ladies residential facility.

They have been advised that it is preferable to remain in their room behind a 30 minute fire door and await rescue rather than try to reach the fire exits. I would very much appreciate the comments from the forum on this.

Most grateful to all.

Robert

wee brian · « **Reply #1 on:** December 05, 2005, 08:39:43 PM »

Robert

You have asked the millio dollar question. At the moment old folks homes are a very hot topic.

In the main they are designed for progressive evacuation. This does involve assistance from the staff but if the residents are able then they could/should make their own escape.

However, there are doubts about whether this really works when the chips are down and some people think a stay in your room policy may be better, I'd be interested to know who suggetsed this.

In terms of the max distance their are a number of guides available, the old Home Office "Draft" Guide was available on the ODPM website but now I can't find it.

colin todd · « **Reply #2 on:** December 06, 2005, 12:55:02 AM »

If you want the latest (confirmed) thinking on the subject of res care fire safety, can I suggest you look at the Scottish guidance in SHTM 84. If you want the likely to be future guidance, you could try to get hold of one of the illicit copies of the draft guidance that will be available under the RRo, or you could download the Scottish equivalent draft guidance from the Scottish Exec website. In your position, my money would be on SHTM 84.

jayjay · « **Reply #3 on:** December 06, 2005, 12:24:55 PM »

Remaining in the room behind a 30 minutes fire door sound like the "Stay Put" advice to residents in flats or shelterd housing, never heard of this being recommended in a residential care or nursing home.

colin todd · « **Reply #4 on:** December 06, 2005, 01:46:11 PM »

It is sometimes recommended (and even adopted) but its not good advice.

ian gough · « **Reply #5 on:** December 06, 2005, 05:44:13 PM »

There is no 'stay put' policy being recommended in the Residential Care Guide under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order. It was debated however, and 'delayed' evacuation may be included in line with 'progressive horizontal evacuation' procedures.

Furthermore, reliance upon rescue by the fire service is similarly not allowed for or accepted. This is a common perception by many of an acceptable policy in such risks.

As Brian says: 'Draft guide to fire precautions in existing residential care premises' is still in being. In sleeping areas where persons of any age are dependent on the assistance of staff to escape (and when escape is possible in more than one direction)- max travel within a room = 9m and total distance = 18m. For one direction only = 6m and 12m. There are other circumstances though - so you need to read the book.

colin todd · « **Reply #6 on:** December 06, 2005, 05:57:35 PM »

Ian, No one should really be applying the draft green guide today. It is way out of date from current thinking.

dave bev · « **Reply #7 on:** December 06, 2005, 08:06:56 PM »

can a currant think? what would be the raison for doing so?

dave bev

colin todd · « **Reply #8 on:** December 07, 2005, 12:50:49 AM »

As a representative of an organization that sometimes seems to have a raison d etre that is a bit old fashioned (though realizing that, while on these boards you do not rep them, but are just good old Davey fae Essex) it would not be clear to you, Davey.

ian gough · « **Reply #9 on:** December 07, 2005, 09:54:46 AM »

Colin, I'm quite aware of the weaknesses in the Green Guide, however, it has not yet been withdrawn. Moreover, the question was specifically about travel distances and I wasn't aware that the 'other' guides were wildly different on this point.

Ken Taylor · « **Reply #10 on:** December 07, 2005, 10:14:16 AM »

You say that this is a 'residential facility'. Whilst residential and nursing care will require fire plans that may ultimately involve evacuation, housing for elderly tenants is another matter and will depend upon the local situation. For example, we have separate housing blocks on a site with nursing and residential care buildings where a fire in a care block will not require evacuation in a housing block. Pupose-built housing constructed to Building Regs should normally provide sufficient fire protection from external fires until the brigade arrive to take charge of things. Has the local fire officer approved the particular plans for the 'facility' in question?

colin todd · « **Reply #11 on:** December 07, 2005, 01:40:40 PM »

Yes, Ian but its still a draft!

ian gough · « **Reply #12 on:** December 07, 2005, 02:29:39 PM »

But an English & Welsh one!

colin todd · « **Reply #13 on:** December 07, 2005, 07:20:08 PM »

I rest my case. That is why I referred the gentleman to Scottish guidance that is somewhat more modern than early 1980s. Fire doesnt behave differently in SCotland.

safetycompliance · « **Reply #14 on:** December 07, 2005, 09:35:25 PM »

Well, what can I say. A real host of replies to my question. I am most grateful to all of you who took the time to help. I was reluctant to mention originally that the building in question is in fact a convent for elderly nuns who seem to be retired from active work 'Nunnery

' I am told by the administrator that the local fire service representative made the suggestion that residents should 'stay put. I am not happy with that decision and may well seek face to face advice with the local fire service. Thank you again for your support. Compliments of the season to all.

Robert

News:

Author Topic: Escape distances. (Read 11580 times)