Agenda item

[To consider the Fire Safety Strategy for the Civic Halls by Tenos]. 

The Director for Regeneration referred Members of the Group to the current Civic Halls Fire Strategy document produced by Tenos which had been circulated with the agenda for the meeting.  He stated that there was a robust fire strategy in place as part of the overall scheme which exceeded current regulations based on the present designs.  The strategy did not include the provision of sprinklers.  It was deemed that these were not required.  If there was a need to look at sprinklers, they had advised the team they could be included, but there would be a programme delay and cost increase.    

The Head of Project and Works stated that the Tenos report was the most current they had; it was however based on the initial design scheme, which had evolved over the last few months.  They had worked with the independent Fire Safety Consultants and a new updated report would be available in the next few weeks. 

The Chair referred Members of the Group and the Director of Regeneration to Paragraph 7.24 on the Tenos report. The paragraph stated, “We have been instructed by our client (Space and Place Architects) to design the fire strategy on the basis that sprinklers will not be provided as this is an aspiration of their client.” The Chair expressed his utmost concern about this paragraph.  The Fire Safety Scrutiny Group had, in March 2018, made a number of recommendations to the Council’s Cabinet.  One of those recommendations was that sprinklers should be fitted in all major Council refurbishment projects, unless a report was brought specifically explaining the reasons why not.  He therefore found paragraph 7.24 of the report very strange, as it completely contradicted the recommendation from the Fire Safety Scrutiny Group.  He asked for a full explanation on paragraph 7.24 of the Tenos Report and wanted to know which person from the Council had given the instruction.  

The Chair referred Members of the Group to pg. 16 of the Fire Safety Strategy (pg. 34 of the agenda pack) where under the heading internal fire spread linings, there was a table (Table 6.1) under paragraph 6.3.  One of the recommendations from the Fire Safety Scrutiny Group to the Council’s Cabinet in March 2018 had been that only zero rated fire retardant materials would be used in refurbishment projects, the table however referred to materials that were not zero-rated.  He asked if his understanding was correct, that some of the materials that would be used in the Civic Halls refurbishment were not zero rated and some were actually class 3.  If this was the case, it would mean that a recommendation of the Fire Safety Scrutiny Group to the Council’s Cabinet had been disregarded. 

The Chair stated that the whole process of the Civic Halls had not been one which had stood the Council in good stead.  There had been a substantial increase in the budget from what had been originally set a few years ago, there had also been significant delays and it seemed clear that fire safety had not been at the heart of the refurbishment plans.  He was shocked that the Regeneration Department of the Council had commissioned a report by Tenos which effectively in paragraph 7.24 of the report had said that the Council had told fire safety experts not to consider sprinklers.  He thought this question should have been left for the fire safety experts to determine.  The Chair had recently attended a meeting with the Regeneration Department and the fire safety consultants from Tenos.  He commented that he had told the consultants from Tenos that he did not point any blame at them because they were using existing legislation in the compilation of the report.   He and Members of the Group had repeatedly stated that the current legislation was not fit for purpose, as the Hackitt Inquiry had concluded.  The Fire Safety Scrutiny Group wanted the Council to set its own fire safety standards in all areas of the work they undertook.  He was extremely disappointed that the Regeneration Department had not taken on the points the Fire Safety Scrutiny Group had consistently made and had been relayed to them on a number of different occasions. 

The Head of Project and Works responded that the Tenos Fire Strategy report had been written in March 2019 and Officers in collaboration with Tenos were now reviewing some of the materials in the design.  With reference to the meeting with the fire consultants prior to the Civic Halls Board meeting, she could confirm all of the Chair’s comments had been taken on board.  On the matter of sprinklers, if they were to be included in the design they would require approval for the funds.  They were trying to establish where paragraph 7.24 of the report had originated because she was not aware of a formal instruction given to put sprinklers in or out of the Civic Halls.  There was a natural break in the refurbishment project at the moment because the contractor had gone bankrupt.  In this natural break, they had time to re-evaluate the project, take on board the comments of the Group and go through the complete design.  The most important aspect was to take on the learnings from the last few months and move forward with the project. 

A Member of the Group complimented the Chair of the Group stating that he had done a remarkable job as Chair, which he thought was partly due to his extraordinary knowledge on fire safety matters.  He was glad that he had uncovered the anomalies in the Tenos Fire Safety Strategy document relating to sprinklers and fire retardant materials.  The Local Authority needed to take into account the views of the Fire Safety Scrutiny Group.  It was critical that the refurbishment of an iconic building and others across the city were dealt with appropriately in relation to Fire Safety.  There was now an ideal opportunity to improve fire safety at the Civic Halls and given the national inquiries following the Grenfell tragedy and all the previous work of the Fire Safety Group, it would be unwise not to press the case that sprinklers should be installed.  He was aware of the budget pressures, but he felt they should not take precedent over matters of public safety.  He believed that the project should not move forward without the approval for sprinklers.  The building needed to be as safe as it could be and sprinklers were a fundamental part of ensuring the highest standards of fire safety.   

Members expressed their frustration that the spirit of the recommendations from the group were not being adhered too.  The Grenfell tragedy was a wake-up call but it appeared in the instance of the Civic Halls it was not having an effect on the decisions regarding sprinklers and using zero rated fire retardant materials.

The Chair of the Group expressed disappointment with the former Interim Director of Place who had left the Council in March 2019.  This was because he had articulated to the Group at the last meeting that he had commissioned an independent report into whether sprinklers should be installed at the Civic Halls, but no report on this subject matter had materialised.  There was clearly a systematic block somewhere in the Council on sprinklers.  He wanted lessons to be learnt and for all future development and major refurbishment to include sprinklers, hard wired fire alarms and for zero fire rated retardant materials to be used.  If they were not going to be used, he wanted there to be a report explaining the reasons why not.  Dame Hackitt as part of her inquiry had noted that safety had been put aside in developments.  Attitudes to fire safety needed to change, she had declared the current regulations as not fit for purpose.  The Council needed to lead the way on fire safety and to not put costs before safety.  It was important that projects such as the i9 and the West Side Development were built to high fire safety standards, abiding by the existing not fit for purpose legislation was not good enough, as it had already been declared broken by Dame Hackitt.  

The Director of Regeneration said that to reassure the Group, the Fire Safety Strategy report for the Civic Halls was due to be updated and would certainly address the issues raised in paragraph 6.3 and 7.24.  A change to installing sprinklers could be accommodated, there would need to be a discussion, but it would have an effect on the programme timing and costs and mitigation would be required.  The Chair had met with Tenos to raise his concerns and they were updating the strategy.  The West Side project was in the early stages of design and so there was a lot more autonomy to put in the right future proofing levels for fire safety. The i9 scheme was already developed, contractors appointed and planning secure.  It was being delivered externally, if the project design was to be revisited, there was a risk that the project would not go ahead.  Accordingly, they would have to look at other measures such as retro fit and redesign as i9 had been designed to meet current legislation. 

A Member of the Group commented that as a new contractor needed to be appointed for the Civic Halls it was a perfect time to ensure that the Civic Halls refurbishment design included sprinklers and zero-rated fire-retardant materials.  There needed to be urgent talks to ensure the design ensured the highest standards of fire safety.  It was a waste of the group’s time if they were going to be continually ignored.  Members of the Group agreed with the comment. 

The Chair expressed disappointment that he had not been invited to meetings of the Cabinet, in his capacity as the Lead Member for the Fire  Authority, when an issue concerning fire safety had arisen, this was in violation of the recommendation that had been made and had been accepted by the Council’s Cabinet in March 2018.  On a positive note the Chair remarked that the Council was leading the way nationally on fire safety in a number of areas, such as the work being done by WV Living and Wolverhampton Homes.  It was the Regeneration Department which was not understanding the significance of the Grenfell Tragedy, the not fit for purpose current legislation and the work of the Fire Safety Scrutiny Group.   

Resolved: That the Chair of the Council’s Fire Safety Scrutiny Group on behalf of the Group arrange a meeting with himself, the Managing Director of the Council, the Director of Regeneration and the Leader of the Council to raise the importance of having sprinklers installed at the Civic Halls and using zero rated fire retardant materials during the refurbishment.