Posted By Crim
The guide to the offices and shops fire risk assessment under the heading Mobility impairment, (4.1 page 65) suggests that;

"Normal lifts may be considered suitable for fire evacuation purposes, subject to an adequate fire risk assessment and development of a suitable fire safety strategy by a competent person".

The premises I have in mind is a low risk shop that has a passenger lift provided to enable disabled people to access the first floor.

The stairs between ground and first floor do not have a "refuge" and to carry down these stairs could be very difficult considering manual handling, small number of available staff, etc.

I am considering the use of the lift for a fire evacuation but would appreciate some input from other safety professionals who have experience of this scenario.

Posted By Crim
Thank you, I have downloaded BD2466. I would still appreciate some views.

Posted By Messy Shaw
I am in favour of the use of standard lifts (subject to a full RA and control measures etc) as perhaps in may cases, the risk is over hyped.

The basic truth is that on most occasions, in most lower rise buildings, the likelihood of injury to a person carrying or assisting another downstairs is far greater than the likelihood of injury by a problem when using the lift.

In the past assessors and fire service auditors have approached this issue from a 'you can't have it unless you can prove it's safe' mentality. I consider that by using this document, that negative attitude will change and we will see a more 'can do' attitude being demonstrated by all

I worked on the initial stages of a job (although I never saw it when it was finished) where such a strategy was employed and the key part of the revised system was a L1 intelligent alarm system which would only permit the lift to be used where the corridors it served (and the lift motor room) were deemed free of smoke - That is, the detection is those rooms was not actuated. If they were, the evacuation procedure would revert to the old fashioned carry/assist down.

Posted By Crim
Means of escape for disabled persons
BS 5588-8: 1999 [3] deals with means of escape for disabled persons. It mentions the use of lifts but stipulates that they should only be considered for evacuation purposes if suitable safety measures have been included in the lift’s design. Evacuation lifts are considered and recommendations made regarding the design features needed. These are similar in nature to the measures required for fire-fighting lifts. It is important to note that evacuation lifts are not to be reserved solely for use in the event of an emergency. They should also be used as regular passenger lifts but should not be used as goods/service lifts. This is to ensure that they can be brought into use as evacuation aids as quickly as possible.
BS 5588-8: 1999, with respect to lifts, includes, though not exclusively, the requirements that:
• evacuation lifts should be provided with an associated refuge
• any lift provided for the evacuation of disabled people should be either a fire-fighting lift or an evacuation lift
• an evacuation lift should conform to the relevant recommendations in BS 5810 and BS 5655-1 or BS 5655-2 (now BS EN 81-1 [18] or BS EN 81-2 [19])
• an evacuation lift should be clearly identified
• evacuation lifts, their associated machinery, construction (shafts, refuges, lobbies, etc), power supplies and evacuation routes should be afforded the same level of fire protection as required for the building itself
• evacuation lifts include an ‘evacuation lift’ switch to isolate lift landing call controls, defer all control to the lift car controls and activate the lift communication system, for operation of the lift by an authorised person

The above taken from BD2466 probably means I will not be able to count the lift for evacuation, but I will wait and see.

Posted By Ron Hunter
"National Standards are not mandatory".......try that argument with a LA Building Control Department!
On that, are modern approaches to Building Warrants etc. actually aligning with the Standards relating the RFSO etc.?

Posted By D. Hilton
Ron
I suggest you make reference to Approved Document B

The Approved Documents are intended to
provide guidance for some of the more common
building situations. However, there may well be
alternative ways of achieving compliance with
the requirements.
Thus there is no obligation to adopt any
particular solution contained in an Approved
Document if you prefer to meet the relevant
requirement in some other way.

Posted By J Knight
Darren,

The .pdf is a great document, very good call,

John

Posted By Crim
Hydraulic lift, it will "fail safe" to ground floor. No smoking premises with AFD, smoke detectors, break glass points, permanently staffed by two or three staff. Escape in two directions, fire officer agrees with low risk.

It's a betting shop.

Evac chair in case staff decide not to use the lift.

Posted By Crim
Correct Darren,

I suppose the proof of the pudding will be when the fire officer calls to audit my fra?

Fingers crossed eh?

Posted By seanc
to true!
i am honestly still surprised that you feel you can use the lifts, i understand your reasons for doing so, and personally having worked on a lot of hydraulic lifts i can tell you that they are less predictable then a traction lift.
so it will self lower to the ground floor, what makes it stop level at the floor? most hydraulic lifts travel below the bottom floor when they are parked overnight at the lowest level,if that happened in your case the lift car would go further down the shaft trapping the people in the lift, who would open the doors if it did manage to finish level with no power? and Hilton can i say that i wouldn't respond to a thread against H&S bigwigs unless i was completely confident in what i was saying.
what experience have you got on elevators?
please do not belittle my thoughts on this matter, i thought this was a discussion forum, to air ones views?

Posted By seanc
Crim,
I have no doubts that you have covered every angle and will get approval.
i must pick you up on one point though, EVERY lift has under and over travel, the lift has to be able to under travel before it hits the buffer in the pit, so i am afraid that your lift will go below floor level quite easily, especially if there is no power.
if it goes too far down the lift car door skate will not interlock with the landing doors, trapping anybody in the lift(unless they are trained in how to manually open the doors from the inside).

Posted By seanc
Crim
the lift door has a skate ( a metal strip) which interlocks with the landing door when at floor level, the landing doors are not powered in any way, the lift doors have a motor above them that opens the lift doors and consequently the landing doors, if at floor level.
and you are correct, crow bars seem to be the fire brigades favourite method of opening landing doors!!

Posted By Crim
I think you are reading too much into this lift?

It's a small passenger lift, hydraulically operated and the landing doors are the lift doors also.

To control the lift the passenger has to push up/down and keep hand on the button.

Mountains and molehills come to mind!

Thanks anyway.

Posted By Crim
Nice one Bob, why didn't I think of that.

Thinking outside the box - literally.

It is enclosed though?

Posted By Crim
Sean, please don't shout! It is not a simple platform lift as it is enclosed and travels from one floor to another, up and down, not just to raise up a few steps in a corridor. That type is a definate no no in an evacuation.

I would like to ask, anyone who is against the use of a lift to evacuate people with impaired mobility to suggest a few alternatives, let's see if you have the answer.

After all what we are trying to do here is get disabled persons up to a lounge so that they can share the same facilities as "able" people.

Is the real alternative simply to not allow these people access all areas?