safety & security

different inputs make to the outcome. Whilst a number of factors, such as site location and past incidences of fire may be outside the designer’s control, other areas such as site and building security, lighting, cctv, enhanced compartmentation, improved fire alarms and better management can improve the score. One difficulty in using the tool is that a number of inputs are slightly subjective or may not be known at the design stage and designers could take an optimistic view whilst the regulatory bodies may take a slightly more pessimistic view leading to differing outcomes.

Sprinklers

The importance of the risk assessment was highlighted in the 2007 announcement by Jim Knight, former minister for Schools; “…it is now our expectation that all new schools will have sprinklers fitted. Any exceptions to this will have to be justified by demonstrating that a school is low risk and that the use of sprinklers would not be good value for money.”(3)

at least £58m per year is spent on direct losses from school fires

This policy, it is envisioned, is applied

through the use of employer’s requirements, even though BB100 expressly states that “…the provision of sprinklers is not a requirement of the Building Regulations.” This is clearly therefore a property protection issue and one for which BB100 makes no apologies, particularly as it is mostly public money that funds schools, coupled with the fact that at least £58m per year is spent on direct losses from school fires. Actual fire deaths in schools to date have been extremely small. In fact only a single person has died in recent years in nearly 15,000 fires; a 57 year old male, killed on a Saturday in 1997. Nonetheless, the potential for multiple fire deaths always exists, hence the need for caution in design. Other than sprinkler provision, the

effects of the risk score are limited. BB100 does not vary the guidance in areas such as travel distance, policy on dead ends or fire alarm provision for example, so standard guidance applies. BB100 could have been made more flexible in line with BS9999, based on ‘risk profile’, rather than rely on sprinklers as a panacea; however this may be entering the realm of fire engineering. The usual dispensations on fire rating, boundary distances and compartment sizes do still apply where sprinklers are fitted.

62 edbmagazine.co.uk

Radley College in Abingdon, an NHBC project.

Refurbishment

An area of BB100 that is often queried is how extensions and how major refurbishments are covered – it may not be practical to install a large sprinkler tank to an existing site and building constraints may make retro installation cost prohibitive.

An answer to this question may be

found in the BRE’s second spreadsheet tool to BB100; ‘Cost Benefit Analysis - covering the use of sprinklers in schools’. This tool helps users decide if sprinklers represent good value for money. Unfortunately the BRE’s own 86-page guide to the spreadsheet describes the tool as ‘...rather daunting at first sight’,

which it certainly is and begs the question as to which member of the project team would complete it. As with the FRA tool, the outcomes appear heavily in favour of sprinklers, in line with BRE completed impact assessments. By partnering with local authorities NHBC has been able to see both sides of school design and operation whilst recognising that not all schools are the same. As such it is difficult to apply guidance wholesale to projects and a flexible risk-based approach is of benefit.

(1) BB100 2007, available free at www.teachernet.gov.uk/fire (2) Approved Document B - Volume 2, 2006 Edition. (3) BB100 2007, foreword Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100