Fire access on private access road

[Fred F]

Hi all,

 

My plot is at the end of a straight private access road which is 5m wide but with hardstanding of 3.2m width and the rest grass verge. This is below the 3.7m required but should be straightforward to get a fire engine down. Do you think this would be acceptable for building control?

 

If not, what would my options be? Hydrant would not be ideal.

 

Thanks.

[nod]

It tends to be planners that use this to stop a development You can only apply and see what there objects are If any 

[Russell griffiths]

Our private, track was measured at 3.0 m are you sure they want 3.7m

 

[ProDave]

Our public single track road is only 3 metres wide tarmac with a bit of grass either side.  Bin lorries and fire engines have no problem.

 

I think you will need to provide turning space for a fire engine on your plot.

[kandgmitchell]

You need to find Approved Document B Fire Safety Volume 1 - Dwellings on-line. Try the planning portal. Then read up Requirement B5 which sets out the criteria for access to the new dwelling for the Fire and Rescue service.

[scottishjohn]

how far are yuo from a fire hydrant?

 Iwas over 200m =so i have to build a fire pond  and that could mean a 40000 litre pond 

if fire regs are same  as here 

 

[Fred F]

Thanks for all the responses. 3.7m did indeed come from Approved Document B. See p99 of this document: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/639ae7e98fa8f5069839c7d7/Approved_Document_B__fire_safety__volume_1_-_Dwellings__2019_edition_incorporating_2020_and_2022_amendments.pdf

 

There is space to turn using a hammerhead. I think the main constraint is width of the track.

 

I wondered whether people had had any luck convincing the local fire service to accept a track that was less wide than strictly required?

[ETC]

Do you think if there was a fire at your house the fire service would stop to measure the width of the laneway or worry if there was a turning head at the end? They’d just plough - literally plough through the road - and everything in their way - to get to the house and when they’d finished they’d plough on back to the station.

[Fred F]

9 hours ago, ETC said:

Do you think if there was a fire at your house the fire service would stop to measure the width of the laneway or worry if there was a turning head at the end? They’d just plough - literally plough through the road - and everything in their way - to get to the house and when they’d finished they’d plough on back to the station.

Yep but we need to get it signed off by building control, don’t we?

[kandgmitchell]

2 hours ago, Fred F said:

Yep but we need to get it signed off by building control, don’t we?

Yes you will. Start with the 45m dimension, can a fire appliance get close enough without using the track? If not then contact the local fire service and get some advice about the access. As Table 13.1 says not all fire service vehicles are standardised so if the Fire Service are satisfied with the arrangements then BC aren't going to argue.

[Fred F]

9 hours ago, kandgmitchell said:

Yes you will. Start with the 45m dimension, can a fire appliance get close enough without using the track? If not then contact the local fire service and get some advice about the access. As Table 13.1 says not all fire service vehicles are standardised so if the Fire Service are satisfied with the arrangements then BC aren't going to argue.

The house will be about 70m away from the highway unfortunately. Sounds like we'd better speak to the fire service! Thanks

[ETC]

9 hours ago, kandgmitchell said:

Yes you will. Start with the 45m dimension, can a fire appliance get close enough without using the track? If not then contact the local fire service and get some advice about the access. As Table 13.1 says not all fire service vehicles are standardised so if the Fire Service are satisfied with the arrangements then BC aren't going to argue.

Good luck getting the fire service to advise you on access for their vehicles - they’ll tell you to talk to BC.

[ETC]

12 hours ago, Fred F said:

Yep but we need to get it signed off by building control, don’t we?

Yes you will but BC won’t be measuring road widths and turning circle dimensions - if you can get a concrete lorry onto and off your site you’ll get a fire engine and an ambulance on and off as well.

[scottishjohn]

On 01/12/2024 at 22:43, Fred F said:

Hi all,

 

My plot is at the end of a straight private access road which is 5m wide but with hardstanding of 3.2m width and the rest grass verge. This is below the 3.7m required but should be straightforward to get a fire engine down. Do you think this would be acceptable for building control?

 

If not, what would my options be? Hydrant would not be ideal.

 

Thanks.

do you have planning  yet ?

cos that when i got caught with needing a fire pond -due to distance from a fire hydrant --200m being max distance 

it was a conditon of planning+ BC  and they directed me to the fire brigade 

 they came and looked and then we had a  discusion on size of pond 

 this ended up with a 5000litre pond dropped from 40000 due to stream running through  it and the shape of my ground and lack of flat area 

 as for width --do you really want the fire engine to get stuck in mud in the  haste to get to your property --thats why the width is what it is 

good luck  hope you find a solution 

[kandgmitchell]

14 hours ago, ETC said:

Good luck getting the fire service to advise you on access for their vehicles - they’ll tell you to talk to BC.

If I recall correctly the Fire Services Act requires Fire and Rescue services to provide advice to the public on how to prevent fires, means of escape etc etc. It can't be too much of a stretch for them to advise here. I've found the individual officers very helpful in the past and I'd certainly start there.

[scottishjohn]

1 hour ago, kandgmitchell said:

they’ll tell you to talk to BC.

and they will bow to what ever the firebrigade say 

 so yes talk to local fire officer first  and get a feel for what they will want

[Gordo]

A regular fire engine will NOT be 3.7m wide. if the were they wouldn't be able to navigate a lot of public roads. So obviously the 3.7m includes a healthy tolerance that the fire brigade may waver in your circumstances ie the driveway is relatively straight with no sharp bends possibly or 3.7m clear width between barriers / fences / buildings  along access road. Id wait to see if BC raise the issue before offering fire brigade solutions tho.

Edited December 5 by Gordo

[GEO-PAR]

I'm in a similar situation but even worse.  I have a 2.3 to 2.4 metre wide track leading to my site.  Fire hydrant is about 120-150 metres away from the build (at the end of said track, which I only have access across).  Consulted one private fire engineer and he pretty much told me I was screwed.  Just consulted another and he said he's seen things like this all the time and we'll be able to work out an engineered strategy with Cat 2 sprinklers.  I'm having sleepless nights though as halfway through the build (building regs flagged it earlier this year but I just thought it would be a case of sticking in sprinklers.  Things have been manic but just got around to engaging a sprinkler company to design a system and it was flagged I have a much bigger issue with regards to Part B and BS9991).  The only thing that's giving me a little hope is that there's already houses a little further down the track so I'm thinking the fire service must have a strat for those houses. 

 

Good luck but doesn't sound like the end of the world in your case! 

[Gordo]

9 hours ago, GEO-PAR said:

a much bigger issue with regards to Part B and BS9991

what is this problem?

 

I like the FE thinking about fire suppressant system but dont think it would compensate for lack of fire hose. Don;t know if it will wash but worth a try. i mean how would the fire authority fight the fire and stop it spreading without water. Sprinklers are usually about safe means of escape, unless they can be convinced the sprinklers could contain/limit the fire.

[GEO-PAR]

2 hours ago, Gordo said:

what is this problem?

 

I like the FE thinking about fire suppressant system but dont think it would compensate for lack of fire hose. Don;t know if it will wash but worth a try. i mean how would the fire authority fight the fire and stop it spreading without water. Sprinklers are usually about safe means of escape, unless they can be convinced the sprinklers could contain/limit the fire.

Yeah I've had the same thoughts.  There must be a strategy in place for the other houses though (which are much older and wouldn't even have sprinklers).  My FE said he's going to phone the fire department to investigate. Scary stuff when you're mid way through a build. 

Edited Thursday at 00:11 by GEO-PAR

[kandgmitchell]

Don't forget that the older houses would not have been subject to the requirements of Part B when they were built. I doubt there is any "strategy" for dealing with a fire in those houses other than the ingenuity of the fire crews attending the situation.

[GEO-PAR]

9 hours ago, kandgmitchell said:

Don't forget that the older houses would not have been subject to the requirements of Part B when they were built. I doubt there is any "strategy" for dealing with a fire in those houses other than the ingenuity of the fire crews attending the situation.

I appreciate what you're saying that if they're existing, they don't have to meet current building regs but from speaking to various people, it seems like the fire department must have a strategy for all existing houses.  Otherwise you wouldn't get household insurance etc etc. I don't know for definite though, so you may well be right.  

 

I've had a good look at regs again and the 90m rule appears to be more of a BS9991 thing (which I understand you can decide to use this or ADB).  I'm going to adhere to ADB, which states you have to provide an additional hydrant if your house is over 280m2 AND +100 metres from an existing hydrant.  I'm more than 100 metres, but not over 280m2.  Thus, in theory I feel I shouldn't be affected.  I'm therefore hoping a Cat2 sprinkler will satisfy requirements. 

 

 

[Gordo]

1 hour ago, GEO-PAR said:

I appreciate what you're saying that if they're existing, they don't have to meet current building regs but from speaking to various people, it seems like the fire department must have a strategy for all existing houses.  Otherwise you wouldn't get household insurance etc etc. I don't know for definite though, so you may well be right.  

 

I've had a good look at regs again and the 90m rule appears to be more of a BS9991 thing (which I understand you can decide to use this or ADB).  I'm going to adhere to ADB, which states you have to provide an additional hydrant if your house is over 280m2 AND +100 metres from an existing hydrant.  I'm more than 100 metres, but not over 280m2.  Thus, in theory I feel I shouldn't be affected.  I'm therefore hoping a Cat2 sprinkler will satisfy requirements. 

 

 

if you own say 30m of land between your new house and boundary, you could argue there is no need to fight fire as it wont spread. just let it burn. After all they are not there to preserve property mainly life. 

 

With regards to which standard/code should be used. The AD is the code that is "presumed to comply" with the regulations. The BCO can actually insist on a higher standard if deemed it appropriate to comply with the regulations. They do not have to (actually they shouldn't) accept any lower standards, in piecemeal fashion that is quoted in any other code. Unless they consider it to be at least equal to the provisions in the AD. if that makes any sense. Read the actual regulations first for the context of what is provisions are required for the fire and rescue service. Then formulate your argument based on that with referance to the various codes. The fire and rescue services input can not be underestimated here.

Edited Thursday at 23:27 by Gordo

[scottishjohn]

10 hours ago, GEO-PAR said:

  I'm therefore hoping a Cat2 sprinkler will satisfy requirements. 

looked at this, but the cost to get an approved design done by an apporved fire engineer was £6000 before you get to fitting the system 

 then there were questions about flow rateof water supply and maybe need for  a much larger water supply pipe  or a fire pond + pump to supply it 

 the fire brigade were fairly adamant that the costs +on going inspection coosts  would make it  a non starter 

 so we came back to a firepond 

 

 but none of that will get round your road problem  and possibly space at house for turn round and distance to siituate the fire engine  from the house 

 i would get a quote to widen the road  to what they want first  then look at it again

 it should all start with a visit from local fire officer for his views and suggestions ,as he will be the man that signs it off,,,

 

[saveasteading]

A 10m3 water tank and a turning head should suffice.