How can we all be a part of making our buildings safer?

Four years on from the Grenfell Tower disaster, there is growing concern that little progress has been made with Building a Safer Future. Recent reports in June suggest that an estimated 700,000 people are still living in buildings with external combustible materials.

Of course, while the narrative surrounding the Grenfell Tower disaster is inexplicably sad, it is also not the only recent fire affecting a high-rise residential block. Earlier this year, over 120 firefighters were called to New Providence Wharf in Blackwall to tackle a blaze in one apartment but which spread to the external façade of two adjoining flats in a 19-storey tower block. Although there were no fatalities, the incident provided an urgent reminder of the potential fire risk in high-rise buildings.

While the remediation of dangerous cladding systems has been disappointingly slow, there has been some notable legislative changes made to improve fire and building safety, with several more on the way.

In December 2018, the Government enforced a ban on the use of combustible materials in the external walls of residential buildings over 18m tall. While this embargo has addressed some of the immediate concerns around fire safety in new buildings, it is well understood that – as urged by Dame Judith Hackitt in Building a Safer Future, Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety: Final Report – a radical rethink on the industries fire and building safety procedures is still needed.

大多数提议的大规模变化都出现在《建筑安全法案》(BSB)中，该法案的草案于2020年7月公布。法案颁布后，将对18米以上的高层住宅建筑制定一套更严格的新规定，对这些建筑的设计、建造和管理方式进行更严格的审查。在这三个阶段中的每一个阶段，BSB都将明确谁负责管理潜在风险，以及进入下一个阶段需要什么，从而在建筑的生命周期中收集重要信息的“金线”。

Significantly, it is expected that the new legalisation will place an enhanced set of duties on the principal designer, increasing their responsibility for ensuring fire and building safety. With the extended role requiring additional skills and competencies, there is an expectation that it will best be fulfilled by an organisation rather than an individual.

On joining Ryder three years ago, it was refreshing to find an architectural practice who not only identified that they as lead designer, were best placed to assume the principal designer role, but that the practice had proactively anticipated and considered how they might fulfil such a role, considering their collective existing skills, knowledge, and experience. This approach closely mirrored the foundational steps of the Health and Safety Executive’s plan for implementation - working towards the goal of the lead designer, assuming the principal designer responsibilities automatically.

To support companies with these changes, thought leading groups including the Association of Project Safety (APS) and the Designer’s Initiative on Health and Safety (DIOHAS) and Turner & Townsend have skilfully devised and hosted a wealth of presentations and webinars to create awareness of the changes and promote dialogue in the industry.

However, having attended many of these events over the past year, it is with a heavy heart that I sense the industry’s general reluctance to embrace what is coming.

虽然《商业行为准则》的初稿是为了给审查创造空间，但我们经常发现，此类活动的问答环节受到质疑。改善建筑和消防安全的信息——这样人们在他们的家里就会更安全，也会感到更安全——被简化为语义学上的不确定话语。

Why is this? I would reflect that for many of us involved in the principal designer role – and particularly for those who transitioned from the CDM coordinator post – there is feeling of déjà vu.

Since the inception of the CDM Regulations 2015, there has been a perceived lack of clarity, particularly with regards to the responsibilities, competency requirements and ultimately the liability associated with the principal designer role.

This well-storied stigma has seen many architectural practices and other types of lead designer shy away from the role, or at best outsourcing to a third party - negating the spirit of the regulations. The principal designer is best understood as the designer with control over the pre-construction phase of the project.

In the wake of recent tragedies, we cannot allow the BSB and the subsequent legalisation to suffer the same fate. Indeed, it is time to put our reservations aside, to lean into conversations and simply ask, how can we all be a part of making our buildings safer?