Fire safety problems rarely appear without warning.
Across construction projects, many issues discovered during installation, inspection and handover can be traced back to decisions made much earlier.
A fire strategy falls behind the design. An escape route changes during coordination. A compartmentation detail remains unresolved. A specified product is substituted without the fire safety implications being properly reviewed.
By the time these issues reach site, correcting them can become considerably more difficult and costly.
PB Fire Safety supports projects throughout the RIBA stages, from early fire strategy development and design reviews through construction-stage inspections, verification and handover.
So, where are projects still falling short?
RIBA Stage 2: Is Fire Safety Being Considered Early Enough?
Stage 2 establishes fundamental decisions about the building, making early fire safety input important.
An absent or underdeveloped fire strategy can leave the wider design team working with assumptions about escape, compartmentation, firefighting access and evacuation that have not been sufficiently tested.
Architectural layouts, structures, MEP requirements, cores, stairs, risers and circulation all interact with fire safety.
Early fire engineering input gives the project team time to identify conflicts while there is still flexibility in the design.
The question for project teams at Stage 2 is simple: are your key fire safety principles established early enough to influence the design?
RIBA Stage 3: Has the Fire Strategy Kept Up With the Design?
Stage 3 brings design development, and designs change.
Rooms move, doors are repositioned, service requirements develop and circulation arrangements are adjusted. Yet the fire strategy can remain based on an earlier version of the project.
A seemingly modest layout change could affect travel distances, exit capacity, protected routes or evacuation arrangements.
Fire strategy documents therefore need to remain active project documents. When the design changes, teams should consider whether the assumptions and requirements within the strategy need reviewing too.
When was your fire strategy last checked against the current design?
RIBA Stage 4: Have the Fire Safety Details Actually Been Resolved?
By Stage 4, broad design intentions need to become buildable technical details.
Compartmentation is a good example. Showing a compartment line on a drawing does not resolve every interface, particularly where services penetrate it or where walls meet soffits.
Doors, ducts, dampers, risers and penetrations need coordination, with the proposed construction capable of achieving the required fire resistance.
PB Fire Safety’s fire stopping surveys can identify deficiencies in penetration sealing, compartmentation and passive fire protection.
Responsibility matters too. Fire safety requirements cross architectural, structural, MEP and specialist subcontractor packages. Without defined ownership, teams can assume somebody else has resolved an interface.
Does everyone on your project know who owns each fire safety action?
RIBA Stage 5: Does What Is Being Built Still Match the Strategy?
Construction introduces site changes, substitutions and installation decisions.
An opening moves. A service route changes. A product described as “equivalent” replaces the specified product.
Each decision may require review where it affects the fire safety design.
Product substitutions deserve particular attention. Fire doors, cavity barriers and fire stopping systems can rely on specific tested or assessed configurations and installation requirements. A procurement substitution can therefore have wider technical consequences.
Evidence is equally important. Photographs, inspection records, certificates, product information and marked-up drawings can help demonstrate what was installed.
Regular construction-stage reviews allow discrepancies to be identified while work remains accessible, rather than after passive fire protection has been concealed behind walls, ceilings and finishes.
Could your project demonstrate today that the installed fire safety measures match the agreed design?
Handover: Can You Prove What Was Built?
Handover should provide the building owner with reliable information about the completed building.
An as-built fire strategy needs to represent the building that was actually constructed. Changes to layouts, products, compartmentation or fire safety systems need to feed into the final information.
Accurate Golden Thread information is particularly important for projects falling within the Building Safety Act regime, but good records have value across every project. Responsible Persons and facilities teams need dependable information to understand and manage the building after occupation.
The final question is perhaps the most important:
Does your handover information describe the building on site, or the building that existed on the drawings months earlier?
Keep Fire Safety With the Project
A fire strategy should follow the project as the design develops and construction progresses.
For project teams, that means regularly checking whether design changes affect the strategy, compartmentation interfaces have been resolved, substitutions have received suitable review and installation evidence is being retained.
Finding these issues earlier gives teams more opportunity to resolve them before they become expensive construction or handover problems.
PB Fire Safety provides fire engineering support across the RIBA stages, including Fire Strategy Reports, design reviews, construction-stage inspections, verification and handover support.
If your project is currently at RIBA Stage 2, 3, 4 or 5, it may be worth asking one more question:
Does your current fire strategy still match your current project?
Book a project fire strategy review with PB Fire Safety.