Sprinklers/watermist
ground in Croydon. As the building was not fitted with sprinklers, the fire destroyed every item in the 1,198 rented units, and had an impact on customers’ mental health. In the case of the GSA fire, the effects were much broader and costlier. This particular fire had occurred four years after the art school’s blaze in 2014, which destroyed the main library and the original stone masonry. With experts debating the feasibility of
another restoration and estimating a rebuild figure of at least £100m on top of the £35m for the current reconstruction, the true cost here is clearly considerable. It is a haunting reminder that fire does not discriminate and remains a significant threat to our heritage, which in the case of the GSA fire may tragically be lost. Insurance covers some of the costs of fire,
but never all of the costs. The loss of a nation’s most coveted art school is a great cultural tragedy which cannot easily be resolved. Restoring an institution of this size is a huge cost to the public purse, and the wider costs can include lost local productivity, tax revenues or jobs, as well as the social costs which are felt most at local level. Therefore, it is no wonder that many in
the fire sector are welcoming the recognition provided by the consultation paper that property protection could be a consideration of the ADB guidance. The current system has been the cause of too many precious buildings being destroyed by fire, leading to both huge social and economic costs
as homes, businesses and schools are needlessly destroyed.
What needs to be done?
Currently, the ADB document is designed to ensure life safety, which of course is always paramount in the case of fire. But this limitation to life safety considerations alone means that if all occupants or employees evacuate safely in the case of a fire, the outcome as far as the Building Regulations are concerned is a ‘success’, even if the building is badly damaged or destroyed. The public response to each of the fires mentioned above highlights this failing of the system. Moreover, the life safety focus means that
even when ADB guides the use of fire sprinklers, which could protect a building in the event of a fire, the condition can be circumvented. This was demonstrated in the case of the Gardman warehouse: the 40,000m2
warehouse did not
feature sprinklers, even though the guidance from ADB for such warehouses is 20,000m2 This was possible because the designer of
.
the warehouse was able to show that all occupants would be able to evacuate from the building safely in the case of a fire, thereby meeting the regulations’ life safety condition. When a fire started, the occupants were able to evacuate, but the building was destroyed. It is therefore essential to see the impact of fire more holistically – as a disaster that threatens not only lives, but also communities, businesses and economies.
FOCUS
www.frmjournal.com MARCH 2019
23
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
