Hotels and leisure buildings present some particularly demanding fire safety challenges and, if a fire breaks out, they have the potential to deliver some devastating casualty statistics. Graham Lowe explains.

When the Regulatory Reform (fire safety) Order 2005 consigned fire certificates to the history books, many pundits predicted that hotels and boarding houses would be among the first to ‘have their collar felt' by the new legislation. Among the arguments put forward to support this assertion was the belief that many in the hospitality business used the fire and rescue service's visit to issue a fire certificate as a fire safety health check and gave only a limited amount of thought to the subject in the intervening months. The view was that many in the industry had become used to being told what to do, and took action only when told to do so.

Were these soothsayers correct? Well, certainly hotels, pubs, restaurants, and sports and leisure clubs all figure prominently on the Fire Safety Order's offenders' list. At the same time we have had, among others, the Penhallow Hotel fire in Cornwall, one of the worst UK hotel fires in recent history.

Historically, hotels have always sprung to mind when fire safety is under review. Indeed, it was a fire at a hotel in Saffron Walden on Boxing Day 1969, resulting in the death of 11 people, that gave the final impetus to the passing of the Fire Precautions Act in 1971. In 1972, hotels and boarding houses were the first premises to be designated as requiring a fire certificate under the Act.

Many – but by no means all – of the Fire Safety Order prosecutions relating to hospitality premises fall into a category that we could, loosely, sum up as ‘housekeeping' issues: Fire doors wedged open often, somewhat ironically, using portable extinguishes as the prop; obstructed escape routes; and the storage of combustible materials seem to top the list with monotonous regularity. However, poorly selected, sited, installed or maintained fire detection and alarm devices are also still too prevalent. It would be pure speculation to say whether there is a fire disaster time-bomb ticking away out there and, if there is, when it might go off with devastating consequences.

Detection options.
While providing unmistakable and unambiguous warning of a fire is a must, it is equally important that those affected have the clearest possible indication of what they should do. While detection and alarm devices have a vitally important role to play in achieving these objectives, so too does effective emergency lighting, clear exit route signage, and easily understood evacuation routes and procedures. Staff training – and regular retraining – is also absolutely vital.

In terms of the detection and alarm technology, this has to be swift – false alarms need to be minimised if not eliminated, and the location of the outbreak should be clearly identified. So it is important for the right sensors, sounders and manual call points to be installed – and, of course, maintained – in the right locations. The appropriate British Standard is BS 5839; in particular Part 1 (Fire detection and fire alarm systems for buildings. Code of practice for system design, installation, commissioning and maintenance) and Part 8 (Fire detection and fire alarm systems for buildings. Code of practice for the design, installation, commissioning and maintenance of voice alarm systems).

In the past few years the market has experienced a number of improvements to detection devices that have boosted their reliability and ability to distinguish between a real fire, environmental pollution and other conditions that might otherwise have initiated a false alarm. An example is Hochiki's flat response high performance chamber technology that is incorporated into all of its optical sensors and detectors. This provides the device with the optimum sensitivity to both smouldering and flaming fires. The incorporation of false alarm management tools, such as our ARM (Alarm Reduction Management), has also drastically improved immunity to false alarms. However, it is critically important to take into account a number of factors that are specific to hotels and leisure buildings when deciding between one technology and another.

Unfamiliar territory
Hotels are often unfamiliar to guests and visitors. To put this into some sort of perspective, the UK had 32.8 million visits by overseas residents in 2007, according to the Office for National Statistics. Many of these would have spent at least one night in a hotel bedroom, having had little awareness of evacuation routes from the building and no familiarity with the hotel's fire safety regime. Then there are occasional visitors to consider – contractors unfamiliar with the site may be working, occasional suppliers may be making deliveries, and utility providers may be servicing equipment.

Voice alarm systems can play a major role in overcoming some of these obstacles, giving clear directions, zone by zone, on the appropriate course of action that should be taken. Until recently though, these systems had been the preserve of larger organisations and buildings, due to their relatively high cost. However, the arrival of such systems as Hochiki's compact FIREvac made the technology available to a much wider marketplace.

However, we now live in a multi-cultural society, where English is not everyone's native tongue. In England alone, says the Office of National Statistics, around 15% of the population is now ethnic, a proportion of which may well find English difficult to understand in an emergency. Added to this must be a proportion of the millions of overseas visitors whose command of English may also not be adequate. So, voice alarms are not a panacea, although voice announcements in languages other than English may make a major contribution in areas of the country where a particular ethnic community predominates.

Voice alarms can also play an important role by informing occupants when not to evacuate. Examples of this are where a phased evacuation is in operation or following an explosion that is suspected to have been caused by terrorist action. In certain cases, the safest course of action is possibly to remain in the building, rather than wholesale evacuation which could expose everyone to the danger of a second explosive device targeted at the building's fleeing occupants.

It is also necessary to satisfy the needs of staff and visitors with disabilities. However, it must be recognised that disability comes in many forms; we have something of a misconception that all disabled people are wheelchair bound. So voice alarms are unlikely to be of much use to a deaf person or an individual with severely impaired hearing and the UK's Disability Discrimination Act says: "...a body discriminates against a disabled person if, for a reason which relates to the disabled person's disability, it treats him less favourably than it treats or would treat others to whom that reason does not or would not apply..." This implicitly requires that disabled people must be able to safely exit the building in the event of fire. In addition, the evacuation of disabled people should be considered in a fire risk assessment under the Fire Safety Order.

It is important to ensure that the alarm can be raised in a manner that is suitable for everyone working in or visiting the building, so they can take the appropriate action. Hearing impaired people are unlikely to be aware of an alarm unless the system has some form of visual warning indication in every area of the building where they may be. Similarly, visually impaired people may well feel confused if a conventional sounder alone is used. Publicly Available Specification PAS 88: 2008 Guidance on accessibility of large hotel premises and hotel chains provides information for those seeking to meet the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act.

The culture or lifestyle of a hotel's guests or leisure venue's users also has to be taken into account. For example, a hotel that is predominantly used by the elderly may well find that its guests become easily panicked, disorientated and take longer to respond to an alarm. Venues that attract younger customers have at least to consider that there may be a greater propensity for them to be under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

The message is clear: architects needs to work very closely with fire engineers and should have a very clear understanding of the use and occupancy of the building. The same detailed consideration needs to be given to existing buildings, particularly when they undergo a "material change of use".

The human factor
The response of occupants to an automatic fire alarm is often anything but automatic, and time is often squandered on non-evacuation activities. Fire engineers call this phase the pre-movement time, during which occupants are attempting to figure out what is happening and what, if anything, they should do. Some, particularly since the advent of mobiles, make telephone calls; a few are even unable to resist the temptation to investigate the reason for the alarm. Many will ponder whether the alarm is a test or a false alarm – it will certainly not always be accepted as a genuine alert of a fire.

Even when they do get around to evacuating, they may well not make an immediate start. They may first return to their hotel room or changing room to rescue personal belongings, or attempt to warn and muster family or friends before starting evacuation. In any event, critical time is lost. But why? Some will cite the prospect of it being a false alarm; others will not wish to come across as panicking; a number will simply wait to be told what to do, or simply have no idea what to do. 

Clearly there are too many factors for there to be a single detection and alarm solution that is suitable in all circumstances and is appropriate to every type of hotel and leisure building. What is evident, though, is the importance of weighing up all of the factors that will, or at least should, influence the final decision.

Detection and alarm technology continues to become more robust and reliable, but it must be seen as part of a fully integrated solution, one that is based on dynamic risk assessments that take all of today's circumstances into account. Perhaps the best approach to adopt is to see fire detection as a means to an end and constantly ask the question: "Will this solution ensure the safety of the next visitor at reception?" 

Graham Lowe is UK sales manager of Hochiki Europe.
Tel: +44 (0)1634 266566 or email news@hochikieurope.com. www.hochikieurope.com.