35
INDUSTRY VIEWFINDER
Accountability for Fire Safety post-Building Safety Act
Executive Summary The Grenfell Tower fire was the most devastating single event of its type to occur in the UK’s built environment since the Second World War. Following the disaster, in which 72 people lost their lives, a range of pledges and proposals have been put forward by the Government to try and redress failings identified across the construction industry, including the key area of professional accountability in projects. Two key themes have emerged on accountability issues in the post-Grenfell period: one, that the chain of responsibility was far from clear in ‘higher risk’ projects (over 18 metres), when it came to overseeing specification of buildings for ensuring fire safe designs are built. Secondly, that the construction products testing and compliance regime, alongside the Building Regulations themselves, was riddled with holes when it came to ensuring fire-safe buildings. This troubling situation led to the Government taking a range of measures, from commissioning Dame Judith Hackitt’s report, to a raft of legislative moves via the Building Safety Act, which became law in June this year (although will be implemented in phases for 18 months). It is claimed the Act will bring about the biggest changes in procurement of building safety in the last 40 years, introducing a clearer chain of responsibility, as well as tighter regulations, a national construction products regulator, and potentially a greater role for architects.
The new regime is looking to clarify as well as enhance and improve the accountability framework, and thereby professional responsibilities. But what do architects think of the new concepts, such as bringing in a Principal Designer who will be the guardian of the much-discussed new ‘Golden Thread’ of project data – which will theoretically run uninterrupted and un-tampered with through projects. With the laudable goal being to preserve the ‘original design intent,’ some designers believe it should be the mechanism for constant and rigorous inspection of the design as it progresses to construction. One of the other key developments is that the
“Do you believe that lack of accountability on fire safety within project teams is the major issue preventing a robust safety regime in ‘higher risk’ residential projects?”
industry now has a National Regulator for Construction Products. We surveyed our architect readership in summer 2022 to discover their views on this subject – including searching questions on how they felt about the current state of design and procurement when it comes to fire safety in projects. But also, how aware were they of the new changes aimed at safeguarding building occupants in future, and what were their thoughts on the potential new roles, in particular for architects, in this challenging but crucial new professional landscape. We also managed to get the expert input of an architect closely involved with fire safety issues, Richard Harrison, of the
ADF SEPTEMBER 2022
WWW.ARCHITECTSDATAFILE.CO.UK
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
