Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Admin  
#1 Posted : 17 August 2009 14:53:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Buzz Does anyone find there is quite a lot of variation between what is required by building control regarding fire signage, and what is required by British standards/Fire Order?
Admin  
#2 Posted : 18 August 2009 13:58:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Simon Walsh. In theory there should be no, or very little variation of substance that cannot be dealt with through consultation. Building Control and Approved Inspectors do ask for the Fire Authorities views on building design and fire safety precautions for new builds and other items of interest to the Fire Authority. If there is any disagreement then this should be ironed out between them before final approval is given. Where both parties cannot agree then in planning terms Building Control have the final answer, unless you want to appeal. Does anyone else have another view?
Admin  
#3 Posted : 19 August 2009 21:02:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Buzz What if the disagreement is not between the fire officer and BC? What if the fire signage is completely inadequate in the bld, yet it's gone through the BC route, been approved, the fire officer has walked round and the building's been handed back over?!
Admin  
#4 Posted : 19 August 2009 22:56:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Simon Walsh. Who else is disagrees? The only people who can enforce fire safety requirements are Building Control at consultation stage as they can say 'We want X, Y and Z before approval is given", or the fire authority? If someone else disagrees with areas such as signage on what basis are they disagreeing?
Admin  
#5 Posted : 20 August 2009 13:39:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By marcusblack Compliance with building regulations does not necessarily mean compliance with any statutory H&S / Fire regulation. Building regs approved documents provide GUIDANCE on meeting MINIMUM standards which may not meet the needs of the individual building and it's use. Even new builds with a completion certificate from building control will require risk assessment and in my experience will usually require additional work. I once found a large retail unit with a steel beam running across a protected stairway at a height of 1.7m and the exit from a 80 cover public cafe with the door opening against the direction of travel. Although not to spec, the building had been passed by an Approved Building Inspector and had it's completion certificate. I had an interesting conversation with the director of the retailer regarding who was liable under the RRO. A full risk assessment is the only way to identify the requirement of a specific building and it's occupants. Regards, Mark
Admin  
#6 Posted : 20 August 2009 13:50:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Buzz Hi Mark, Yes this is very similar to what's happened. The building has been built and inspected by the fire officers and building control, yet the fire risk assessment has identified insufficient fire signage. On visiting the building I totally agree. It's not just a case of 'you could do with a sign there' (being picky), the lack of fire signage is extremely obvious and certainly does not comply with BS 5499-4! This just makes me question the whole process really and as a client, who would end up in court over something like this when we're relying on other 'competent' people to do the job for us!
Admin  
#7 Posted : 20 August 2009 14:34:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Messy Shaw The bottom line is that (as a general rule) BC approval looks mainly at the building, whilst FRA looks at the building and how it is occupied. Consider a new build range of 3 identical warehouse unit. You know the type of thing, warehouse with a small office building at the front/side. The developer sends the plans to the LA for BC approval. The BC people considered them to be warehouses and tick all boxes. 18 months later, the fire service go and have a look at the finished & occupied buildings. unit 1 is a nut and bolt distributors unit 2 is a children's soft-play centre unit 3 fills & distributes LPG cylinders All the same building, but put to uses with wildly different risks. As a result, there is bound to be different (and additional) provision in unit 2 & 3 that were perhaps not considered during the BC process
Admin  
#8 Posted : 20 August 2009 15:28:00(UTC)
Rank: Guest
Admin

Posted By Buzz Yes I agree with what you're saying. But i'm specifically talking about fire signage, and on the whole this does not vary from the start!
Users browsing this topic
Guest
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.