Are sprinkler retrofits really necessary? Why can’t we rely on just an effective and robust fire risk assessment?

I found this article quite interesting from BAFSA in that they sponsored a retrofit in Sheffield back in 2012 to underpin the benefits of active fire protection systems in residential tower blocks. In the wake of the Glenfell incident Sheffield council now appears to be leading the way on residential sprinkler retrofits having experienced the benefits of this pilot first hand, but have also added, primarily to assure residents, that their sustainable energy-saving and aesthetically pleasing cladding is also fire resistant.

I don’t believe a retrofit is required if there is substantial fire stopping material used in the compartmentalisation within residential tower blocks, nevertheless destruction caused by a fire which, despite its effective containment, can still obviously cause significant damage and bring not just inconvenience towards the resident but to his/her neighbours in terms of smoke damage, fear and trust. If sprinklers are installed however damage to an affected flat could be further minimalised but it is worth considering that the fire in the Glenfell tower was actually contained, but startling to us all, with thankfully no real blame attached, firefighters didn’t know that the cladding outside the building had caught light. In my opinion, sprinklers should be considered during a phase of refurbishment which will ultimately ensure minimal disruption to residents and reduced cost to the landlord.

This small blog piece has not dived into the political realm and will keep steer of the fallout from this tragedy. In short, there were recommendations by the Rt. Hon. Sir Eric Pickles via the coroner’s report in wake of the Lakanal Fire that appear to have been largely ignored. So, whatever body is latterly deemed responsible, it will no doubt benefit from the wrath behind the deregulated legislation which is that of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order. Is reliance on the fire safety order enough however? If so, heads will have to roll to justify the effects of deregulation. If not, legislation is very much required in the interests of all our health and safety.

Artwork credit: David McConochie as featured in the FT weekend, Saturday 25 June 2017 (www.davidmcconochie.co.uk)

Advertisements

Author: garyadweir

Professional I guess in Risk & Insurance, (Sport) Business & Politics until such times when I'm not a student. Quite happy for alternative views and arguments as I'm a professional at sitting on the fence but I may be professional at pushing a point. :-P

One thought on “Are sprinkler retrofits really necessary? Why can’t we rely on just an effective and robust fire risk assessment?”

  1. Question has to be why was a robust risk assessment not undertaken. If it had then unfortunately this incident may have not been so horrific and live could have been saved. Unfortunately, it is evident that the government stance by their actions to ignore the recommendations of the report undertaken with regards Lakanal Fire Incident were blatantly ignored.

    https://wordpress.com/post/homelessglobalspectator.wordpress.com/123

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s