Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By geecee
Cursory remark by fire service some years ago that laminate wall boards in corridors should be removed or treated with fire retardant etc.
Seems reasonable until you look at the cost - I now look after h & s for this premises and this is in 'fire safety file' though was never mentioned on insurance audit etc.
While much of the corridor is part of main escape route, most areas have an alternative means of egress - even an external route from first floor! However one room without optional exit opens directly onto corridor.
Now I have a price for £4000 just to buy fire retardant coating at cost oprice (appox. 130 sq. metres) which seems an unrealistic option to appease the fire service as the trustees have very little money.
If we are to expect similar premises to sort fire safety we must provide realistic fixes. I have drafted a fire risk assessment and cannot easily overturn this statement without asking them to remove the wallboards and re-plaster.
Yet there are no cloakrooms, no machines or other sources of ignition in the corriddor and it has three points of exit - can anyone help PLEASE......
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Alan Hoskins
Would not the detection and alarm system mitigate against this?
Once the people are out it is the insurance company that would need to worry...
I'm not a fire person though, so just an opinion...
Alan
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By geecee
Thanks for that Alan - forgot to add that the building has fire alarm & detection etc.
However how can we calculate if evacuation will outweigh the risk of rapid fire spread via the timber wall boards
All comments welcome on this one - even those from Sean Mc!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ashley Wood
What sort of building is this? Is it a school? How many people are in the building?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Son of SkyWalker
Are there sprinklers?
This would mitigate any risk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By geecee
Sorry - it is a 'club' with communal activities for up to 200 persons.
No risk areas such as the small kitchen, electrics or machinery etc. are adjacent to the coridor,
Toilets, lounge, link corridor and stairs to small office plus games room do open onto it but most have alternative exits.
There are no ignition risks in the corridor.
Thanks again....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By geecee
sorry - no sprinklers eiter
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Crim
You could ask the fire service to re visit for a second opinion? Chances are it will be a different officer to the original and you may get a different recommendation.
If the original recommendation is supported I think you should seriously consider getting the job done as you suggest the corridor is accessed by various rooms and rapid fire spread is likely if there was a fire.
Don't be under the misapprehension that you can make part of a building fire proof as there is always the chance of arson, especially in a social club situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Philip Beale
Could one option be to plaster board on top of the laminated walls? i would have thought it would be cheaper given the cost of plaster board.
Phil
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Philip Beale
Could one option be to plaster board on top of the laminated walls? i would have thought it would be cheaper given the cost of plaster board.
Phil
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Ashley Wood
what about producing a fire strategy for the building as a whole and then arguing the case with the fire authority. A consultant would produce a strategy that takes into consideration all active and passive measures and looks at ASET & RSET. If you are talking about a cost of several thousands to replace the problem, it has got to be worth spending a lesser figure to produce a fire strategy. The consultant would be able to negotiate with the fire service as well. I am a fire consultant so I won't hide behind some cloaked words, but there are plenty of competent consultants available. Take a look at the Institution of Fire Engineers consultant register.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By shaun mckeever
Geecee
although the club has 200 persons you seem to indicate that with the exception of one room all other areas have an alternative means of escape. How many people occupy that room? What floor are we talking about? The corridor where there is only one way out, does it have afd? What about the travel distance? I assume that as a club all persons are awake, alert and familiar with the building. Once you can answer these you should be able to calculate the time to detection, you can calculate the time for persons to evacuate and you can calculate the time for fire development. If your time to evacuate is significantly less than the time the fire takes to threaten the escape route then you may be able to justify to the fire authority that applying the fire retardant is onerous.
I would be careful about using the words 'appease the fire service'. It is not about appeasing the fire service, it is about occupant safety as well as firefighter safety.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.