Lift shafts

There is a fire proof lift in a public building were disabled persons have regular meetings on the fourth floor. Should there be a limit on the number of disbled persons attending the meeting?

Richard,

in addition, (without getting too complicated at this stage) we would also challenge the assertion of the Fire Officer that the "premises does not comply because the travel distance from the dead end to the final exit is excessive".

What do they mean by that and how are they interpreting the Regulations?

Regards

Mike Kane

Richard,

From the information available, we would advise that the Fire Officer's responses must be clarified in writing.

The Fire Authority, as the Enforcing Authority cannot just require works to be undertaken on a whim of an individual Inspecting Officer.

The reasons for their rejection of aspects of the risk assessment must be clearly specified.

If both Fire Authority approval and Building Control approval was given when the building was built, then unless there has been material changes to the structure the consent should stand. The building owners should have "Completion Certificates" in their possession specifying that the works undertaken in 2005 satisfied the Building Regulations.

Don't be frightened to set up a meeting with the Fire Authority, they are part of the local authority and as a corporate body are not in the business of "bullying" or "picking on" individuals or organisations. They are there to uphold fire safety standards in the community in accordance with the Regulations and must act in a reasonable manner towards those they deal with and are, in fact, bound by rules as to their conduct towards others.

Good Luck

Mike Kane

Richard,

From the information that you have given me I would agree with you that you should challenge the fire officer but obviously if the company feel reluctant to do this you are in a catch 22 position. As you say sprinklers would be very costly as would a building link. There are a few problems associated with water mist and this may not be acceptable to the fire authority.
I think that the best thing to do at this stage is to write and request the fire officer to put his observations in writing and to outline what his specific objections are to the FRA and also ask him how a fire suppression system will help horizontal evacuation and which standard that he is using. If you write to the Chief Fire Officer this may also help.
Other than that if the company is not prepared to stand their ground then they will have to find a lot of money for the fire protection work which may not be necessary.

Regards Alan

Alan.
The Fire Officer, as I understand it, has had two previous FRA handed to him by the company and on both oaccaisions as deemed them unacceptable and insufficient. Mobility of the residents varies but it is planned that only ambulant persons will use the first floor in future. The suppresion was suggested as sprinklers but I would think aqua mist would be more suitable and less costly if installed at all. A link is a very expensive option. I agree to the best of my knowledge building regs are not retropestive.
I have been given nothing in writing only to say that a prosecution was short coming if the issues were not addressed.
My role has come about from a reccommedation and invitation to do a fresh fire risk assessment, which I have now done and which I believe has appeased the Fire Officer. Personaly I have suggested that the company challege the fire officer but they are reluctent to do so. There are other issues within the premises which do concern me and which can easily be addressed but the one in discussion is challenging if nothing other than the legalities of it all

Richard,
This sounds like a complex situation and you may need professional advice because the solution that the fire officer wants sounds very expensive – can you answer these questions please:
1. Do you have a Fire Risk Assessment (FRA) and was it undertaken by a “competent person”
2. Is the fire officer challenging the FRA and has he made these observations in writing?
3. What is the mobility of the residents?
4. What does the fire officer require as a fire suppression system eg sprinklers, water mist, gas etc?
5. What does the additional link entail?
Sorry to ask so many questions but something appears wrong here because Building Regulations are not retrospective and progressive horizontal evacuation does not usually require a suppression system.

Regards Alan

PS I will be out the country tomorrow for two weeks so apologies if I cannot respond.

Gavin
Thank you for taking time to respond. All comments arre welcome and have been useful, yours included. The fire officer from the fire serviceis asking for a supression system or a link to be built so that progressive fire ecavuation can be achieved. He is now saying the premises does not comply becasue of the travel distance form the dead end to final exit. The worst case is this. Once out of the bedroom on the first floor it is 9m to the fire door at the top of the stairs, some residents have to pass the lift shaft diredctly outside their bedroom to reach this fire door. The travel downstairs and out is a further 16m approx. The full travel distance once at the top of the stairs is two door protected, by this I mean one fire door is the to the bedroom and the second fire door at the top of the stairs. LDI fire detection is provided in these areas. I have managed to put off the possible prosecution by justifying the two door protection to the final exit but with a action plan having to be submitted stating that either a suppression sysyem or addional link will be provided in the near future. Again I stress that this was all passed some time go and now because Approved Doc B mentions progessive horizontal evacuation addiional improvements are said to be requied.

Richard, I found your question of interest and the responses from Alan extremely useful. I would have assumed that the Fire Service and Building Control were satisfied with the situation that you describe because as Alan has said, the lift shaft and lift doors are fire rated, that an adequate fire detection system is in place, that there are unobstructed means of escape, that the furniture and furnishing are of fire retardant materials and that the occupants would have sufficient time in which to evacuate from the building before the fire would have any chance of taking hold. Of course, the key point to this is ensuring that the fire detection system is subject to regular testing and maintenance and would work if the need arose. Regards, Gavin Thomas

Hi Richard,
It's better to be over cautious than not to question things and if you want any additional help please get in touch.

Regards Alan

Thanks Alan
It appears I may be over cautious in my assessment. I will try to clarify the statndard of the shaft and doors of the lift.
best regards
Richard

Richard,

I assume that the lift and area that you are describing is in the new build section which would have been built to comply with the Buiding Regs. As you have indicated that it has been inspected and passed by the Buiding Inspector and Fire Service I would think that the lift shaft was constructed as a "protected shaft" and that the doors will be "fire resisting". In this instance, if I have correctly understood your description, a fire on any floor could not spread to any other floor by way of the lift shaft - even if fire did manage to get into the shaft - it could not easily get out to one of the escape corridors because of the lift fire doors at that level.
If the lift was not provided with fire doors as was the case with some of the older doors then you would have a problem but I think in this instance it sounds ok. The lift shaft also will have some external ventilation and is probably provided with automatic fire detection.
I hope this helps but if not please get back to me.

Regards Alan

Alan. Thank you for your reply. One situation I have in mind is a res care premises, with an new build extension in 2005. It has a dead end situation at first floor level that leads to a single stircase exit that has two door protection to the final exit. On leaving a bedrooom clients would have to pass a lift within the dead end corridor to reach the fire door at the head of the stairs. This lift obvioulsy passes through a compartment floor and opens onto the corridor. A fire on the groung floor could pass smoke up throgh the well onto the second floor as there is no lobby on the ground floor either. It has been passed by the fire service and buidling control but I wondering how as it is not in a protected shaft. Am I missing something here. Thanks

Richard,

Not an easy question to answer without knowing all the facts because there are many answers and you have not specified the exact nature of your concern but I assume that it is related to fire spread.
As you say there are situations where lifts open opposite bedrooms but this may be because of:

1. The age and layout of the building.
2. The level of structural fire protection.
3. The level of automatic fire detection or other fire safety measures.
4. The provision of sprinklers or other fire suppression systems.
5. The occupancy of the building.
6. If the lift is specified as an evacuation or fire lift.

As you can see there are many possible answers and whilst they may be acceptable in some circumstances there are others where they would not be allowed.

egards Alan (mail@alanfcox.co.uk)

Are there occaisons when passesnger lifts are allowed in unprotected staircases and lobbies. I have seen quite a few lifts opening into areas oposite bedrooms or in ground foor reception areas that do lead directly outside.