Posted By shaun mckeever
I am involved with a building which has three external escapes and a Category 'M' fire alarm system. The building was constructed circa 1950 and the windows adjacent to the external exits are not fire resisting. It was recommended in a recent fire risk assessment to upgrade the windows. The building is 'T' shaped and has a single protected internal escape. It has 8 floors above ground. The landlord has had a quote for replacing the windows which is in excess of £300k (they are not gold plated!). What other solutions are available?

Posted By steven bentham
Split the job in half, do the lower floors first and then in the next 18 months put a budget forward for the higher floors.

Check on the floors you are leaving for phase 2, that you have no high risk fire situations.

Increase protection on rubbish areas (internal and external), make sure kitchen areas are fully compliant, make sure the areas are non smoking.

Make sure your exit routes are well marked and kept clear. Do fire drills regularly. Do audits to ensure fire risks are kept to a minimum.

If its been around since the 1950's at least you are making progress.

Posted By Sam Roberts
Here we go again trying to cut costs where safety is involved, If there is a safety issue with the building then the Landlord should get it sorted now whatever the cost.

The reply from the person who suggests doing half now and the other half in 18 mths must have a guilty concsience every month when he collects his salary if that is the sort of suggestions he puts forward in his working day.

And the person who suggested chutes, well what can you say to him, or was he joking.

Notice to all Employees in this building, in the event of a fire all workers on the lower floors should have no problem evacuating the bulding, those on the upper floors, 'your on your own, best of luck'

WHAT PRICE SAFETY


yours in safety

Sam

Posted By Advanced Safety
Whatever the cost! Are we not forgetting reasonably practicable. I do agree that safety has to be paramount, but also has to be realistic.

If cost is no object, why not give each floor 3 Fire Wardens walking all areas constantly and give each person a personal fire extinguisher. All avenues should be explored, not just the obvious!

Posted By GT
Shaun,

In respect to the windows in close
proximity to the external escape routes,
which could affect the means of escape.
There is a given distance (below - and to the side )
where windows should be of a fire resisting structure,
unopenable etc.
Please check this distance with( building regs )
and the number of windows involved then review
the assessment of the number of windows that are
required to be protetced against the estimate,
it may not be all windows that require updgrading.

Mervyn, what has happened to the recipes ? and please
behave as you are wicked!! haha Hic !
open another bottle.


GT

Regards

Posted By Is Kismet
Sam, you wrote:

"Here we go again trying to cut costs where safety is involved, If there is a safety issue with the building then the Landlord should get it sorted now whatever the cost."

And what if the Landlord can't afford such an outlay?

And don't you think it might be right to discuss alternative ways?

And don't you think it might be reasonable to look at other viewpoints?

Have you ever been in business Sam, or even had control of your own budget?

Or perhaps you are in an organisation where money is no object and you don't have to think about resources?

Whatever, I like you to put some thought into these questions, and perhaps come up with a more reasonable response.

Posted By Is Kismet
I've read your message again Sam. I must apologise, I realise now your response is a joke.

Posted By Simon Walsh Grad IOSH
Fire resisting glazing in windows is required for windows that are within 1.8m of the external fire escape. That is contained in Approved Document B, however the Building Regulations are not retrospective documents and you cannot (as far as I understand it) impose new standards on old buildings unless you are making a material alteration to the building.

A possible solution would be to enclose the external escape with fabrication that would give you a certain amount of fire protection, say 1 hour? Perhaps this would cost less than 330k?

Posted By Sam Roberts
Reply to: Is Kismet

Afraid I wasnt Joking!!!!!!


yours in safety

Sam

Posted By shaun mckeever
Does anyone think upgrading the fie alarm system may offer an alternative solution?

Posted By shaun mckeever
GT

Thought someone would never ask! Of course you need more information.

The building is an office block. It is 'T' shaped and divided into 3 wings. At the centre where the two sections of the 'T' intersect there is an internal protected staircase. Each wing has a separate entrance into the protected staircase. The only way to get from one wing to the other is through the protected staircase. The travel distances within each wing dictates that there needs to be an alternative escape from each wing hence on the far end of each there is an external escape. All floors are open plan offices. The number of windows (as asked by Ashley) I am not sure of but I would estimate 70+. The building is normally occupied 9-5 m-f. There is 24 hour on site security (1 person). The maximum number of occupants is approximately 100 per floor. If you apply the guidance in Approved Document 'B', BS5588 or the guidance released to support the RRO then yes they do need to be protected but neither of these are prescriptive nor is there any scientific basis for the 1.8m.

There are enough people on this forum claiming they can do fire risk assessments. This should be enough informaton for any budding fire risk assessors to suggest an alternative solution.

Posted By Is Kismet
You misunderstand Sam. I didn't say you were joking, I said your response was a joke.

Posted By Jeffrey Watt
Shaun

Probably not the answer you want mate but just a thought, could the offending windows not have rs doors on fuseable links mounted on the inside. Yep probably buck ugly and maybe as expensive as building them up but it might start another train of thought. Plus no one allowed to leave stuff on window sills....nightmare.

Just a suggestion

Jeff

Posted By shaun mckeever
Jeffrey, perhaps not roller shutters but certainly you have triggered a train of thought in my mind. I'll keep it to myself for the time being and let this thread run a little longer before I tell you what it is. I don't want to influence others thinking at this moment.

Posted By Crim
Gosh - I just read all contributions so far and it really is interesting. Most points are valid but I have to say some of you are not really talking sense. The new Regs will soon be upon us and they require the building manager/owner etc. to provide a Fire Risk Assessment. This assessment will take into account the use of the building i.e. low risk office etc. and what fire hazards and risks are present. Then what precautions are already in place and you are allowed to use some common sence when writing down your assessment.

You will have to consider how likely it would be for a fire to develop and would a fire affect all three/four staircases at any one time. If that happens then nobody will escape except those on the ground floor and no fire risk assessment would account for that! If that is unlikely then it would be reasonable to accept that there are long distances between each staircase and they all lead into different areas therefore you should have practice evacuations at least twice per year and seal off one escape route each time so that occupiers can familiarise themselves with using different routes. Fire Wardens are a good idea, appointed to look after their own escape route and advise people which route to take, (or not to take), in a fire evacuation. They would be instructed to check their exit route immediately the fire alarm sounded and report on its availablity ASAP.

There is so much more to consider but the above is a starting point. Once a good quality procedure is in place you can then look at alterations to the building and if they are really necessary.

You could look at installing a Drencher system which would provide water down the face of the building or even a sprinkler system, but I do know they are quite costly.

Posted By Farmer
This is getting technical -- the cost of upgrade appears dear-but RRO allows for heirachical test to be applied to the risk control measure-- approved doc B is guidance but generally would act as an ACOP so a similar engineering solution would need to be considered and if not thought reasonably prac decision making process documented on the solution applied. The stairs are considered a protected route leading to place of safety and as such must have at least 30 mins Fire resistance -- unless some other system is appled such as sprinklers or improved alarm/detection systems there is no risk trade off and as such protection of the route appears only option

The option for covering the exposed area of stairs with a fire resistant material on the window side may be a cheaper option - but may impact upon lighting and ventilation - full enclosure should be avoided as a smoke chimney effect may ensue

Posted By shaun mckeever
Crim, going off the debate a bit. I'm a litle concerned at the suggestion that disabled persons should be placed in a refuge to await rescue by the fire service. Have I misintepreted what you meant?

It is late and perhaps I have not read it properly.

Posted By GT
Shaun, Brick up from inside the building.
No scaffolding.
70 windows x 2 metrs square/window= 140 sq m

inside and outside skin= 280 metrs.

Surely wont cost 300k

Perhaps there is another issue here that
you have not disclosed.

We are talking hypothectically of a fire
breaking out in one of the 24 floors,
isolating possibly 50 people getting to
the normal internally protected escaped
route.

However, at the end of the day management
/ owners have to evaluate whether they want
to use the building (in compliance with
legislation ) or not.

Does this building have an existing Fire
Certificate under previous Fire
Precautions Act 1971?? If not why not?

Regards

GT

Posted By GT
Hi Shaun, Thanks for this information. I am still missing something here.
To take you back to the original posting:

I am involved with a building which has three external escapes and a Category 'M' fire alarm system. The building was constructed circa 1950 and the windows adjacent to the external exits are not fire resisting. It was recommended in a recent fire risk assessment to upgrade the windows. The building is 'T' shaped and has a single protected internal escape. It has 8 floors above ground. The landlord has had a quote for replacing the windows which is in excess of £300k (they are not gold plated!). What other solutions are available?

If there are no requirements from the local authorities
(as they cant be applied retrospectively) under
the act and the landlord has lived with this risk
factor for 41 years why the change of heart? Change of use?

Has the advent of the new regs risk assessment
stirred fear or is it an insurance aspect.

I agree that early detection will buy some time apsects
but with one protected route and the other although
not protected in accordance with guidance is only
going to be used by those affected by fire on that
floor. Perhaps the reason why it has been
accepted by all and sundry. Why now the change?
Are you being asked as a consultancy to improve
the status quo?


GT

Posted By steven bentham
Sam

I guess I need a career change but perhaps others probably do as well.

I used to be indecisive but I am not so sure now.

Thank you for the advice.

Steve