Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Planning for fires in theaters, stadiums, and other entertainment venues
Fighting fires in entertainment venues is a considerable challenge due to the extreme life safety hazard they present. The largest loss of life in a single-building fire in the United States before the World Trade Center attack took place on December 30, 1903, at the newly constructed Iroquois Theater in Chicago, Illinois, when 603 people, mostly children, were killed. The Iroquois fire spread from the stage into the theater, which, like other theaters of that era, was designed for live stage shows. Many of these theaters were later converted into movie theaters, although they continued to be used for occasional live performances, and were generally larger than theaters constructed later as movie theaters. The Iroquois Theater itself was considered safe for 1,724 occupants, although it contained an estimated 1,900 at the time of the fire.
Much has changed to improve life safety at entertainment venues of all kinds since the Iroquois fire. Older venues were seldom protected by automatic sprinklers; modern facilities, by contrast, are usually protected with automatic sprinkler systems. Many theaters, concert halls, and similar facilities have exit doors located at the front to facilitate evacuation.
These different spaces require different approaches to fire control strategy and tactics. Modern theaters, for instance, often include multiple smaller spaces where movies are shown. While those spaces hold fewer people, thus reducing life-safety and property-loss risks and making it easier to confine and extinguish a fire, they also create a complex layout with multiple internal exposures and potential hazards that make it more difficult to find a fire and efficiently advance hose streams into the fire area.
To address these challenges, fire departments should develop pre-incident plans showing a building’s interior layouts and exit locations, and assign firefighters to direct patrons to the closest safe exits. The pre-incident plan should also include the calculated rate of fire flow for each compartment.
While old theaters continue to host live entertainment, acts that draw large audiences have moved to even larger venues, such as sports stadiums and arenas that can hold many tens of thousands of patrons. Some outdoor sports facilities can hold more than 100,000. As a result, entertainment facilities still have the potential for large loss-of-life fires.
In 1963, for example, a propane-fed fire and explosion at the Indiana State Fairgrounds Coliseum killed 74 people. In 1985, 56 people died and 300 were injured at a fire in a 77-year-old grandstand at an outdoor soccer stadium in Bradford, England.
When a fire occurs in the patron seating area of an open, outdoor facility, a well-ventilated, rapidly spreading fire should be expected; smoke exposure, a major life hazard in interior fires, should be minimal, although, as noted above, that is not always the case. Evacuating these large facilities requires considerable time.
Inside a domed stadium holding tens of thousands of people, the problems encountered during a fire would be greatly magnified and would include a potential collapse of the dome roof. The large open areas and high ceilings of arenas, which, though smaller than stadiums, can often seat several thousand people, allow a considerable quantity of smoke to rise above patrons, creating a potential ventilation problem as well. As with the larger older theaters, a large fire in an arena could be impossible to extinguish if built-in protection is not provided or is ineffective. Should that prove to be the case, the best tactic may be to facilitate evacuation through available exits, including exit paths not normally available to patrons.
These and other potential tactics, such as keeping an up-to-date schedule for facilities hosting live events, must be determined during pre-incident planning.
Fighting fires in entertainment venues is a considerable challenge due to the extreme life safety hazard they present. The largest loss of life in a single-building fire in the United States before the World Trade Center attack took place on December 30, 1903, at the newly constructed Iroquois Theater in Chicago, Illinois, when 603 people, mostly children, were killed. The Iroquois fire spread from the stage into the theater, which, like other theaters of that era, was designed for live stage shows. Many of these theaters were later converted into movie theaters, although they continued to be used for occasional live performances, and were generally larger than theaters constructed later as movie theaters. The Iroquois Theater itself was considered safe for 1,724 occupants, although it contained an estimated 1,900 at the time of the fire.
Much has changed to improve life safety at entertainment venues of all kinds since the Iroquois fire. Older venues were seldom protected by automatic sprinklers; modern facilities, by contrast, are usually protected with automatic sprinkler systems. Many theaters, concert halls, and similar facilities have exit doors located at the front to facilitate evacuation.
These different spaces require different approaches to fire control strategy and tactics. Modern theaters, for instance, often include multiple smaller spaces where movies are shown. While those spaces hold fewer people, thus reducing life-safety and property-loss risks and making it easier to confine and extinguish a fire, they also create a complex layout with multiple internal exposures and potential hazards that make it more difficult to find a fire and efficiently advance hose streams into the fire area.
To address these challenges, fire departments should develop pre-incident plans showing a building’s interior layouts and exit locations, and assign firefighters to direct patrons to the closest safe exits. The pre-incident plan should also include the calculated rate of fire flow for each compartment.
While old theaters continue to host live entertainment, acts that draw large audiences have moved to even larger venues, such as sports stadiums and arenas that can hold many tens of thousands of patrons. Some outdoor sports facilities can hold more than 100,000. As a result, entertainment facilities still have the potential for large loss-of-life fires.
In 1963, for example, a propane-fed fire and explosion at the Indiana State Fairgrounds Coliseum killed 74 people. In 1985, 56 people died and 300 were injured at a fire in a 77-year-old grandstand at an outdoor soccer stadium in Bradford, England.
When a fire occurs in the patron seating area of an open, outdoor facility, a well-ventilated, rapidly spreading fire should be expected; smoke exposure, a major life hazard in interior fires, should be minimal, although, as noted above, that is not always the case. Evacuating these large facilities requires considerable time.
Inside a domed stadium holding tens of thousands of people, the problems encountered during a fire would be greatly magnified and would include a potential collapse of the dome roof. The large open areas and high ceilings of arenas, which, though smaller than stadiums, can often seat several thousand people, allow a considerable quantity of smoke to rise above patrons, creating a potential ventilation problem as well. As with the larger older theaters, a large fire in an arena could be impossible to extinguish if built-in protection is not provided or is ineffective. Should that prove to be the case, the best tactic may be to facilitate evacuation through available exits, including exit paths not normally available to patrons.
These and other potential tactics, such as keeping an up-to-date schedule for facilities hosting live events, must be determined during pre-incident planning.
Monday, November 29, 2010
No Excuses
Cost-cutting is no reason to ignore testing and maintenance of fire alarms.
Recently, a national fire alarm system service company reported that many of its long-term clients have made the dangerous decision not to test and maintain their fire alarm systems as a way to cut costs in this "down" economy. And many clients who will continue with testing have chosen not to repair fire alarm equipment that the testing finds defective.
This report is very dismaying. Codes and standards establish a minimum level of protection and a minimum level of inherent reliability for an installed system. Most professionals clearly understand that testing and maintenance are critically important to a fire alarm system’s continued operation. The recently adopted 2010 edition of NFPA 72®, National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code®, reinforces the importance of testing and maintenance in Chapter 14, stating, "To ensure operational integrity, the system shall have an inspection, testing, and maintenance program."
The depressed economy understandably affects people in many different ways, but those responsible for protecting the occupants of their buildings must understand that cutting costs by not maintaining fire alarm systems allows those systems to become less reliable. This reduces the life safety capabilities of the systems, and has the potential for putting the occupants in those buildings at greater risk.
The latest version of NFPA 72 reinforces the requirements of previous editions, which hold owners responsible for maintaining the fire alarm systems installed in their buildings. Section 14.2.2.1 clearly states that the "property or building or system owner or the owner’s designated representative shall be responsible for inspection, testing, and maintenance of the system and for alterations or additions to this system."
Owners should also understand that NFPA 72 requires the prompt correction of all system defects and malfunctions found. And if the owner uses a third-party testing and maintenance firm and that firm does not correct a defect or malfunction at the conclusion of its inspection, testing, or maintenance, the firm must inform the system owner or the owner’s designated representative of the impairment in writing within 24 hours.
Fire alarm systems typically monitor the operational status of other important fire protection systems, such as automatic sprinkler systems. If the owner chooses not to maintain the fire alarm system, then two important fire protection systems that provide life safety might become adversely affected.
Experts define "mission effectiveness" as the measure of the degree of certainty that the system will achieve its intended objective. Four factors affect mission effectiveness: design, equipment, installation, and maintenance. Based on quantitative assessments and a basic understanding of reliability principles, installation and maintenance represent the two factors that have the most impact on mission effectiveness. If, for example, the design, equipment, and installation all achieve a reliability factor of 0.98, but the owner fails to maintain the system, resulting in a maintenance reliability factor of 0.40, the entire system reliability has been reduced to a factor of 0.38. If building owners understood this relationship, they would be far less likely to make a decision to not maintain their fire alarm systems.
It is important that local enforcement officials remind owners of their code-required obligation to maintain their fire alarm systems and ensure that these systems remain operationally reliable. No matter how "bad" the economy may become, cutting costs by failing to maintain critical protective systems will have serious consequences. No amount of savings can ever make up for a potential loss of life or destruction of property because an owner has chosen to not maintain a protective system.
Cost-cutting is no reason to ignore testing and maintenance of fire alarms.
Recently, a national fire alarm system service company reported that many of its long-term clients have made the dangerous decision not to test and maintain their fire alarm systems as a way to cut costs in this "down" economy. And many clients who will continue with testing have chosen not to repair fire alarm equipment that the testing finds defective.
This report is very dismaying. Codes and standards establish a minimum level of protection and a minimum level of inherent reliability for an installed system. Most professionals clearly understand that testing and maintenance are critically important to a fire alarm system’s continued operation. The recently adopted 2010 edition of NFPA 72®, National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code®, reinforces the importance of testing and maintenance in Chapter 14, stating, "To ensure operational integrity, the system shall have an inspection, testing, and maintenance program."
The depressed economy understandably affects people in many different ways, but those responsible for protecting the occupants of their buildings must understand that cutting costs by not maintaining fire alarm systems allows those systems to become less reliable. This reduces the life safety capabilities of the systems, and has the potential for putting the occupants in those buildings at greater risk.
The latest version of NFPA 72 reinforces the requirements of previous editions, which hold owners responsible for maintaining the fire alarm systems installed in their buildings. Section 14.2.2.1 clearly states that the "property or building or system owner or the owner’s designated representative shall be responsible for inspection, testing, and maintenance of the system and for alterations or additions to this system."
Owners should also understand that NFPA 72 requires the prompt correction of all system defects and malfunctions found. And if the owner uses a third-party testing and maintenance firm and that firm does not correct a defect or malfunction at the conclusion of its inspection, testing, or maintenance, the firm must inform the system owner or the owner’s designated representative of the impairment in writing within 24 hours.
Fire alarm systems typically monitor the operational status of other important fire protection systems, such as automatic sprinkler systems. If the owner chooses not to maintain the fire alarm system, then two important fire protection systems that provide life safety might become adversely affected.
Experts define "mission effectiveness" as the measure of the degree of certainty that the system will achieve its intended objective. Four factors affect mission effectiveness: design, equipment, installation, and maintenance. Based on quantitative assessments and a basic understanding of reliability principles, installation and maintenance represent the two factors that have the most impact on mission effectiveness. If, for example, the design, equipment, and installation all achieve a reliability factor of 0.98, but the owner fails to maintain the system, resulting in a maintenance reliability factor of 0.40, the entire system reliability has been reduced to a factor of 0.38. If building owners understood this relationship, they would be far less likely to make a decision to not maintain their fire alarm systems.
It is important that local enforcement officials remind owners of their code-required obligation to maintain their fire alarm systems and ensure that these systems remain operationally reliable. No matter how "bad" the economy may become, cutting costs by failing to maintain critical protective systems will have serious consequences. No amount of savings can ever make up for a potential loss of life or destruction of property because an owner has chosen to not maintain a protective system.
Sunday, November 28, 2010
Saturday, November 27, 2010
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Monday, November 22, 2010
We do not want you to be uninformed, brothers, about the hardships we suffered in the province of Asia. We were under great pressure, far beyond our ability to endure, so that we despaired even of life. Indeed, in our hearts we felt the sentence of death. But this happened that we might not rely on ourselves but on God, who raises the dead.
Sunday, November 21, 2010
Friday, November 19, 2010
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Crowd Management Safety Guidelines for Retailers
Crowd-related injuries during special retail sales and promotional events have increased during recent years. In 2008, a worker died at the opening of a "Black Friday" sale.
Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, employers are responsible for providing their workers with safe and healthy workplaces. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) encourages employers to adopt effective safety and health management systems to identify and eliminate work-related hazards, including those caused by large crowds at retail sales events.
OSHA has prepared these guidelines to help employers and store owners avoid injuries during the holiday shopping season, or other events where large crowds may gather. Crowd management planning should begin in advance of events that are likely to draw large crowds, and crowd management, pre-event setup, and emergency situation management should be part of event planning. OSHA recommends that employers planning a large shopping event adopt a plan that includes the following elements.
Planning
Where large crowds are expected, have trained security or crowd management personnel or police officers on site.
Create a detailed staffing plan that designates a location for each worker. Based on the size of the crowd expected, determine the number of workers that are needed in various locations to ensure the safety of the event (e.g., near the door entrance and throughout the store).
Ensure that workers are properly trained to manage the event.
Contact local fire and police agencies to determine if the event site meets all public safety requirements, and ensure that all permits and licenses are obtained and that local emergency services, including the local police, fire department and hospital, are aware of the event.
Designate a worker to contact local emergency responders if necessary.
Provide legible and visible signs that describe entrance locations, store opening times, and other important information such as the location of major sale items.
Prepare an emergency plan that addresses potential dangers facing workers, including overcrowding, crowd crushing, being struck by the crowd, violent acts and fire. Share emergency plan with all local public safety agencies.
Train workers in crowd management procedures and the emergency plan. Provide them with an opportunity to practice the special event plan. Include local public safety agencies if appropriate.
Pre-Event Setup:
Set up barricades or rope lines for crowd management well in advance of customers arriving at the store.
Make sure that barricades are set up so that the customers' line does not start right at the entrance to the store. This will allow for orderly crowd management entry and make it possible to divide crowds into small groups for the purpose of controlling entrance.
Ensure that barricade lines have an adequate number of breaks and turns at regular intervals to reduce the risk of customers pushing from the rear and possibly crushing others, including workers.
Designate workers to explain approach and entrance procedures to the arriving public, and direct them to lines or entrances.
Make sure that outside personnel have radios or some other way to communicate with personnel inside the store and emergency responders.
Consider using mechanisms such as numbered wristbands or tickets to provide the earlier arriving customers with first access to sale items.
Consider using Internet lottery for "hot" items.
Locate shopping carts and other potential obstacles or projectiles inside the store and away from the entrance, not in the parking lot.
If appropriate, provide public amenities including toilets, washbasins, water and shelter.
Communicate updated information to customers waiting in line. Distribute pamphlets showing the location of entrances, exits and location of special sales items within the store.
Shortly before opening, remind waiting crowds of the entrance process (i.e., limiting entry to small groups, redemption of numbered tickets, etc.).
During the Sales Event:
Make sure that all employees and crowd control personnel are aware that the doors are about to open.
Staff entrances with uniformed guards, police or other authorized personnel.
Use a public address system or bullhorns to manage the entering crowd and to communicate information or problems.
Position security or crowd managers to the sides of entering (or exiting) public, not in the center of their path.
Provide crowd and entry management measures at all entrances, including the ones not being used. If possible, use more than one entrance.
When the store reaches maximum occupancy, do not allow additional customers to enter until the occupancy level drops.
Provide a safe entrance for people with disabilities.
Emergency Situations:
Do not restrict egress, and do not block or lock exit doors.
Know in advance who to call for emergency medical response.
Keep first-aid kits and Automated External Defibrillators (AEDs) available, and have personnel trained in using AEDs and CPR onsite.
Instruct employees, in the event of an emergency, to follow instructions from authorized first responders, regardless of company rules.
Crowd-related injuries during special retail sales and promotional events have increased during recent years. In 2008, a worker died at the opening of a "Black Friday" sale.
Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, employers are responsible for providing their workers with safe and healthy workplaces. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) encourages employers to adopt effective safety and health management systems to identify and eliminate work-related hazards, including those caused by large crowds at retail sales events.
OSHA has prepared these guidelines to help employers and store owners avoid injuries during the holiday shopping season, or other events where large crowds may gather. Crowd management planning should begin in advance of events that are likely to draw large crowds, and crowd management, pre-event setup, and emergency situation management should be part of event planning. OSHA recommends that employers planning a large shopping event adopt a plan that includes the following elements.
Planning
Where large crowds are expected, have trained security or crowd management personnel or police officers on site.
Create a detailed staffing plan that designates a location for each worker. Based on the size of the crowd expected, determine the number of workers that are needed in various locations to ensure the safety of the event (e.g., near the door entrance and throughout the store).
Ensure that workers are properly trained to manage the event.
Contact local fire and police agencies to determine if the event site meets all public safety requirements, and ensure that all permits and licenses are obtained and that local emergency services, including the local police, fire department and hospital, are aware of the event.
Designate a worker to contact local emergency responders if necessary.
Provide legible and visible signs that describe entrance locations, store opening times, and other important information such as the location of major sale items.
Prepare an emergency plan that addresses potential dangers facing workers, including overcrowding, crowd crushing, being struck by the crowd, violent acts and fire. Share emergency plan with all local public safety agencies.
Train workers in crowd management procedures and the emergency plan. Provide them with an opportunity to practice the special event plan. Include local public safety agencies if appropriate.
Pre-Event Setup:
Set up barricades or rope lines for crowd management well in advance of customers arriving at the store.
Make sure that barricades are set up so that the customers' line does not start right at the entrance to the store. This will allow for orderly crowd management entry and make it possible to divide crowds into small groups for the purpose of controlling entrance.
Ensure that barricade lines have an adequate number of breaks and turns at regular intervals to reduce the risk of customers pushing from the rear and possibly crushing others, including workers.
Designate workers to explain approach and entrance procedures to the arriving public, and direct them to lines or entrances.
Make sure that outside personnel have radios or some other way to communicate with personnel inside the store and emergency responders.
Consider using mechanisms such as numbered wristbands or tickets to provide the earlier arriving customers with first access to sale items.
Consider using Internet lottery for "hot" items.
Locate shopping carts and other potential obstacles or projectiles inside the store and away from the entrance, not in the parking lot.
If appropriate, provide public amenities including toilets, washbasins, water and shelter.
Communicate updated information to customers waiting in line. Distribute pamphlets showing the location of entrances, exits and location of special sales items within the store.
Shortly before opening, remind waiting crowds of the entrance process (i.e., limiting entry to small groups, redemption of numbered tickets, etc.).
During the Sales Event:
Make sure that all employees and crowd control personnel are aware that the doors are about to open.
Staff entrances with uniformed guards, police or other authorized personnel.
Use a public address system or bullhorns to manage the entering crowd and to communicate information or problems.
Position security or crowd managers to the sides of entering (or exiting) public, not in the center of their path.
Provide crowd and entry management measures at all entrances, including the ones not being used. If possible, use more than one entrance.
When the store reaches maximum occupancy, do not allow additional customers to enter until the occupancy level drops.
Provide a safe entrance for people with disabilities.
Emergency Situations:
Do not restrict egress, and do not block or lock exit doors.
Know in advance who to call for emergency medical response.
Keep first-aid kits and Automated External Defibrillators (AEDs) available, and have personnel trained in using AEDs and CPR onsite.
Instruct employees, in the event of an emergency, to follow instructions from authorized first responders, regardless of company rules.
Friday, November 12, 2010
Who’s Qualified?
Why training is key for improving fire alarm system operational reliability.
The 2010 version of NFPA 72®, National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code® , states in its "Fundamentals" chapter that "Fire alarm systems and emergency communications systems installation personnel shall be qualified or shall be supervised by persons who are qualified in the installation, inspection, and testing of the systems." The code further states that qualified personnel includes those "who are factory trained and certified for fire alarm system installation and emergency communications system installation of the specific type and brand of system and who are acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction."
The writers of the code expect that employers, whether they work as manufacturers or installing companies, will make an effort to train their technicians, technical representatives, installers, or maintainers to meet the intent of what the code deems "qualified."
But what is "technician training"? What does it mean, what does the code require, and how does this training affect the operational reliability of a fire alarm system?
Since the code requires the use of qualified technicians, it stands to reason that qualified technicians will be properly trained to do their jobs. That training can take many forms. Various technical schools offer instruction with some "hands-on" installation training, and most of these schools teach the concepts of electrical wiring and equipment installation. However, many do not offer extensive specific training in fire alarm system installation.
Yes, a good fire alarm technician should first know the proper electrical installation methods as they pertain to wiring and electrical equipment. Such knowledge will give a technician the foundation to learn the specifics of fire alarm systems installation. But most fire alarm technicians do not take such a path. Typically, they receive on-the-job training, which can be excellent. However, employers must ensure that the training follows a predetermined and measurable plan. In addition, the "journeyman" who instructs the new technician must have an excellent understanding of the code and possess full knowledge of proper fire alarm system installation techniques. The journeyman must also have the skills to train another individual properly. Some states and unions have formal apprenticeship training programs that include both classroom and on-the-job training.
The training does not stop there. A technician must also receive training on the proper installation techniques of the specific fire alarm system equipment he will install and maintain. This includes programming for the newer, microprocessor-based fire alarm systems. Equipment-specific training helps ensure that a technician will understand and follow the manufacturer’s installation instructions.
Fire alarm system manufacturers offer system-specific training with various levels of detail. For instance, a sales representative can simply offer a "lunch-and-learn" hour of product awareness training. Dealers and distributors will likely receive more detailed training on a manufacturer’s products, usually conducted at the manufacturer’s training facility. This type of training requires a commitment by the dealer or distributor to pay the technician’s expenses and, of course, lose the technician’s time while he or she attends the training program.
The four elements of fire alarm system operational reliability: design, equipment, installation, and maintenance. Of these four elements, installation and maintenance have the biggest impact on a system’s reliability. Because training plays an important part in proper alarm system installation and maintenance, it greatly affects a system’s operational reliability. Ensuring that fire alarm system technicians receive proper training will significantly improve that operational reliability.
Why training is key for improving fire alarm system operational reliability.
The 2010 version of NFPA 72®, National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code® , states in its "Fundamentals" chapter that "Fire alarm systems and emergency communications systems installation personnel shall be qualified or shall be supervised by persons who are qualified in the installation, inspection, and testing of the systems." The code further states that qualified personnel includes those "who are factory trained and certified for fire alarm system installation and emergency communications system installation of the specific type and brand of system and who are acceptable to the authority having jurisdiction."
The writers of the code expect that employers, whether they work as manufacturers or installing companies, will make an effort to train their technicians, technical representatives, installers, or maintainers to meet the intent of what the code deems "qualified."
But what is "technician training"? What does it mean, what does the code require, and how does this training affect the operational reliability of a fire alarm system?
Since the code requires the use of qualified technicians, it stands to reason that qualified technicians will be properly trained to do their jobs. That training can take many forms. Various technical schools offer instruction with some "hands-on" installation training, and most of these schools teach the concepts of electrical wiring and equipment installation. However, many do not offer extensive specific training in fire alarm system installation.
Yes, a good fire alarm technician should first know the proper electrical installation methods as they pertain to wiring and electrical equipment. Such knowledge will give a technician the foundation to learn the specifics of fire alarm systems installation. But most fire alarm technicians do not take such a path. Typically, they receive on-the-job training, which can be excellent. However, employers must ensure that the training follows a predetermined and measurable plan. In addition, the "journeyman" who instructs the new technician must have an excellent understanding of the code and possess full knowledge of proper fire alarm system installation techniques. The journeyman must also have the skills to train another individual properly. Some states and unions have formal apprenticeship training programs that include both classroom and on-the-job training.
The training does not stop there. A technician must also receive training on the proper installation techniques of the specific fire alarm system equipment he will install and maintain. This includes programming for the newer, microprocessor-based fire alarm systems. Equipment-specific training helps ensure that a technician will understand and follow the manufacturer’s installation instructions.
Fire alarm system manufacturers offer system-specific training with various levels of detail. For instance, a sales representative can simply offer a "lunch-and-learn" hour of product awareness training. Dealers and distributors will likely receive more detailed training on a manufacturer’s products, usually conducted at the manufacturer’s training facility. This type of training requires a commitment by the dealer or distributor to pay the technician’s expenses and, of course, lose the technician’s time while he or she attends the training program.
The four elements of fire alarm system operational reliability: design, equipment, installation, and maintenance. Of these four elements, installation and maintenance have the biggest impact on a system’s reliability. Because training plays an important part in proper alarm system installation and maintenance, it greatly affects a system’s operational reliability. Ensuring that fire alarm system technicians receive proper training will significantly improve that operational reliability.
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Monday, November 8, 2010
Saturday, November 6, 2010
Inspections
Inspections: what some contractors may consider a necessary part of the job, others may consider a
bane to their profession. In either case, inspections are an important aspect of building regulation. Unlike
plan reviews, which ensure compliance with the code prior to construction, inspections ensure compliance
with the code during construction.
The contractor is responsible for complying with the code, and inspections are a continuation of that, since they are probably the most common interface between the contractor and code compliance.
The Authority for Inspection
To start, it is important to understand where the authority for inspections lies. In Section 104 of the
2006 International Building Code (IBC), the duties of the building official are defined, and they include
the duty to “make all of the required inspections.†Now, the building official will not perform each
inspection personally, and the code recognizes that, so the code has added provisions that give the
building official the authority to accept reports from “approved agencies or individuals.â€
Approved agencies and individuals include the inspectors employed by the building department, or those provided by a private firm hired by the building department. You can expect the latter instance to occur if either the building department is so small that they do not have the necessary funds to keep inspectors on the payroll, or the workload has exceeded the building department’s capacity to provide the required
inspections with the staff available.
Another important item to understand is the building official’s access to the project site. In IBC
Section 104.6, it states that the building official is authorized to enter the project to enforce the
requirements of the code. If permission is denied, then the building official has the right to rely on local
law enforcement to gain entry, but only after a warrant is obtained from a court having jurisdiction.
Enforcing the right of entry is seldom used since most owners and contractors are cooperative when it
comes to building inspections.
Required Inspections
Specific inspections required by the code are described in IBC Section 109. Per this section, and as
applicable to the specific project, the following inspections are mandatory:
ï‚· Footing and Foundations: Conducted when footing excavations are complete and reinforcing steel
is in place.
ï‚· Concrete Slab and Under-Floor Construction: Conducted when all reinforcing steel, conduit,
piping accessories, and other items are in place but before concrete is placed.
ï‚· Lowest Floor Elevation: Submittal of flood hazard documentation as set forth in Section 1612.5.
ï‚· Frame Inspection: Conducted when framing, including fire-blocking, bracing and sheathing, is
complete. All rough-ins for electrical, plumbing, and other concealed systems must be installed and
approved.
ï‚· Lath and Gypsum Board: Conducted after interior and exterior lathing and gypsum board is in
place, but before plastering or gypsum board joints and fasteners are taped and finished.
ï‚· Fire-Resistant Penetrations: Conducted before joints and penetrations in fire-rated assemblies are
concealed.
ï‚· Energy Efficiency: Ensures compliance with the International Energy Conservation Code as
referenced in Chapter 13 of the IBC. This includes building insulation R and U values, fenestration U
value, and HVAC and water heating efficiency to list a few items.
ï‚· Final Inspection: Conducted when all work required by the permit is completed.
As previously stated, the inspections listed are mandatory if applicable to the project (i.e., there is no
reason to have a footing and foundations inspection if the project is a tenant improvement). However,
these are not the only inspections that a building department will conduct. Section 109.3.8 specifies that
inspections of any construction work are authorized by the building official “to ascertain compliance with
the provisions of this code and other laws that are enforced by the department of building safety.â€
Special Inspections
The building official, or his designee, may not be the only person inspecting the jobsite for code
compliance. The building code also requires what are termed “special inspections†in Chapter 17.
Special inspections are inspections performed by individuals who have expertise in the area of the
inspection. For the most part, they are structurally related, including welding, high-strength bolting, and
precast erection. However, some are not, such as sprayed fire-resistant materials and exterior insulation
and finish systems (EIFS). Additionally, jurisdictions may require other types of special inspections
beyond those required in the code.
Typically, when submitting a set of documents to a jurisdiction for plan review, you need to include
applicable forms or certificates that identify the owner’s special inspectors for the required special
inspections. It is not important to know what special inspections are necessary when submitting plans for
a plan review. In most cases, the reviewers will identify what special inspections are necessary, and may
even attach the required forms to your return submittal.
In response to governmental members of the International Code Council, the International
Accreditation Service has developed an IBC Special Inspection Agency Accreditation Program. The
program is based on the requirements of IBC Chapter 17 and applicable portions of ISO/IEC 17020,
General Criteria for the Operation of Various Types of Bodies Performing Inspection. The program,
established in late 2004, requires special inspection agencies to develop and operate under a quality
assurance system that is documented in a manual. The accreditation also requires the agency to go
through a field assessment to determine if it is competent to perform specific inspections or types of
inspections.
Inspection Liability
I’m sure many of you out there have had at least one bad experience regarding building inspections.
There are personal stories, newspaper articles, and television news reports about buildings “passing
inspection†that have been discovered later to have had multiple violations of the building code. Some
reports have indicated that inspectors spend only minutes on the jobsite, which is commonly referred to as
a “windshield inspectionâ€; staying only long enough to sign the inspection card. As with most news, the
negative travels faster and gets more attention than the positive, so it is difficult to accurately establish how prevalent below-standard inspections are across the nation.
Even if only a fraction of these negative experiences are true, it is nonetheless hard to place the blame
on the building inspector or the responsible building department. Building department budgets rarely
increase (if at all) at a rate comparable to the increase in construction activity. Thus, more inspections are
required per inspector. To compensate, building departments must either have their inspectors spend less
time on each project site, conduct inspections to fit the their own schedules (something that builders and
developers would surely protest), or hire an outside inspection firm on a temporary basis if budget
permits.
Although understandable, it would not be in a jurisdiction’s interest to perform substandard
inspections, regardless of its budget and schedules. The reason: public entities, such as building
departments and inspectors, do not have immunity from acts of gross negligence.
Working as a Team
As previously mentioned, inspections are an important part of enforcing code compliance in the field.
As a contractor, if you agree and accept that fact, then you have taken the first step in developing a
positive working relationship with your building inspector. To take it to the next level is to consider the
building inspector a member of the construction team, along with subcontractors, the owner, the architect,
and engineers. To keep that team together, here are some suggestions for working with your building
(and special) inspector:
ï‚· Give the inspector plenty of advance notice when requesting an inspection. Most, if not all, building
departments and special inspection agencies have established a minimum notification period. Keep
that in mind when preparing your 2- or 3-week “look ahead†schedule.
ï‚· If you have scheduled an inspection, but will not be ready for whatever reason, please let the
inspector know (before the inspector is on site) and reschedule the inspection. Cancellation of an
inspection should follow the jurisdiction’s or inspection agency’s procedures.
ï‚· Be familiar with the code. It will prevent surprises during an inspection if you catch any problems
first. Also, inspectors may sometimes take the most restrictive interpretation of the code, and you
might be able to convince the inspector that the item is in compliance.
ï‚· Be cooperative with the inspector. Cooperation is a two-way street, but you do not want to be the
reason for its failure. Do not be confrontational in explaining yourself, but, if necessary, ask the
inspector where in the code the requirement is stated (the inspector can only enforce what is in the
code). You may be correct in your position on an item, but how you relay that to the inspector may
be the difference between a delay of only a few hours and a delay of up to several days.
As long as there are codes regulating building construction, there will be inspectors. Nevertheless,
building construction continues to increase and the demand on building department services grows along
with it. In April 2004, the International Code Council conducted a survey of building safety officials in
15 of the nation’s largest metropolitan areas. The concerns most often mentioned were the “increase[d] work load, shortage of resources and insufficient budget to perform work.†In a statement following the survey, ICC CEO James Lee Witt said, “The increased demand for services offered by building departments and insufficient budgets can affect the long-term safety of a community. If buildings aren’t built to code, or there aren’t ample resources to conduct building inspections, public safety is at risk.â€
Although budgeting for building department resources is not a responsibility of the contractor in the
field, having an understanding of the issues affecting building departments is important. How the public
interacts with inspectors has a direct impact on building department resources. Working cooperatively
can only help both the building department and the contractor. Another concern mentioned by all 15 of
the surveyed building officials was their perception regarding public opinion of their work. The building
officials felt that a building department’s existence is necessary and beneficial to the community;
however, they recognize that their enforcement duties are met with resistance from consumers and
industry professionals to some degree. Through a more interactive and cooperative relationship with the
building department and its inspectors, we can help change that perception for the better.
Inspections: what some contractors may consider a necessary part of the job, others may consider a
bane to their profession. In either case, inspections are an important aspect of building regulation. Unlike
plan reviews, which ensure compliance with the code prior to construction, inspections ensure compliance
with the code during construction.
The contractor is responsible for complying with the code, and inspections are a continuation of that, since they are probably the most common interface between the contractor and code compliance.
The Authority for Inspection
To start, it is important to understand where the authority for inspections lies. In Section 104 of the
2006 International Building Code (IBC), the duties of the building official are defined, and they include
the duty to “make all of the required inspections.†Now, the building official will not perform each
inspection personally, and the code recognizes that, so the code has added provisions that give the
building official the authority to accept reports from “approved agencies or individuals.â€
Approved agencies and individuals include the inspectors employed by the building department, or those provided by a private firm hired by the building department. You can expect the latter instance to occur if either the building department is so small that they do not have the necessary funds to keep inspectors on the payroll, or the workload has exceeded the building department’s capacity to provide the required
inspections with the staff available.
Another important item to understand is the building official’s access to the project site. In IBC
Section 104.6, it states that the building official is authorized to enter the project to enforce the
requirements of the code. If permission is denied, then the building official has the right to rely on local
law enforcement to gain entry, but only after a warrant is obtained from a court having jurisdiction.
Enforcing the right of entry is seldom used since most owners and contractors are cooperative when it
comes to building inspections.
Required Inspections
Specific inspections required by the code are described in IBC Section 109. Per this section, and as
applicable to the specific project, the following inspections are mandatory:
ï‚· Footing and Foundations: Conducted when footing excavations are complete and reinforcing steel
is in place.
ï‚· Concrete Slab and Under-Floor Construction: Conducted when all reinforcing steel, conduit,
piping accessories, and other items are in place but before concrete is placed.
ï‚· Lowest Floor Elevation: Submittal of flood hazard documentation as set forth in Section 1612.5.
ï‚· Frame Inspection: Conducted when framing, including fire-blocking, bracing and sheathing, is
complete. All rough-ins for electrical, plumbing, and other concealed systems must be installed and
approved.
ï‚· Lath and Gypsum Board: Conducted after interior and exterior lathing and gypsum board is in
place, but before plastering or gypsum board joints and fasteners are taped and finished.
ï‚· Fire-Resistant Penetrations: Conducted before joints and penetrations in fire-rated assemblies are
concealed.
ï‚· Energy Efficiency: Ensures compliance with the International Energy Conservation Code as
referenced in Chapter 13 of the IBC. This includes building insulation R and U values, fenestration U
value, and HVAC and water heating efficiency to list a few items.
ï‚· Final Inspection: Conducted when all work required by the permit is completed.
As previously stated, the inspections listed are mandatory if applicable to the project (i.e., there is no
reason to have a footing and foundations inspection if the project is a tenant improvement). However,
these are not the only inspections that a building department will conduct. Section 109.3.8 specifies that
inspections of any construction work are authorized by the building official “to ascertain compliance with
the provisions of this code and other laws that are enforced by the department of building safety.â€
Special Inspections
The building official, or his designee, may not be the only person inspecting the jobsite for code
compliance. The building code also requires what are termed “special inspections†in Chapter 17.
Special inspections are inspections performed by individuals who have expertise in the area of the
inspection. For the most part, they are structurally related, including welding, high-strength bolting, and
precast erection. However, some are not, such as sprayed fire-resistant materials and exterior insulation
and finish systems (EIFS). Additionally, jurisdictions may require other types of special inspections
beyond those required in the code.
Typically, when submitting a set of documents to a jurisdiction for plan review, you need to include
applicable forms or certificates that identify the owner’s special inspectors for the required special
inspections. It is not important to know what special inspections are necessary when submitting plans for
a plan review. In most cases, the reviewers will identify what special inspections are necessary, and may
even attach the required forms to your return submittal.
In response to governmental members of the International Code Council, the International
Accreditation Service has developed an IBC Special Inspection Agency Accreditation Program. The
program is based on the requirements of IBC Chapter 17 and applicable portions of ISO/IEC 17020,
General Criteria for the Operation of Various Types of Bodies Performing Inspection. The program,
established in late 2004, requires special inspection agencies to develop and operate under a quality
assurance system that is documented in a manual. The accreditation also requires the agency to go
through a field assessment to determine if it is competent to perform specific inspections or types of
inspections.
Inspection Liability
I’m sure many of you out there have had at least one bad experience regarding building inspections.
There are personal stories, newspaper articles, and television news reports about buildings “passing
inspection†that have been discovered later to have had multiple violations of the building code. Some
reports have indicated that inspectors spend only minutes on the jobsite, which is commonly referred to as
a “windshield inspectionâ€; staying only long enough to sign the inspection card. As with most news, the
negative travels faster and gets more attention than the positive, so it is difficult to accurately establish how prevalent below-standard inspections are across the nation.
Even if only a fraction of these negative experiences are true, it is nonetheless hard to place the blame
on the building inspector or the responsible building department. Building department budgets rarely
increase (if at all) at a rate comparable to the increase in construction activity. Thus, more inspections are
required per inspector. To compensate, building departments must either have their inspectors spend less
time on each project site, conduct inspections to fit the their own schedules (something that builders and
developers would surely protest), or hire an outside inspection firm on a temporary basis if budget
permits.
Although understandable, it would not be in a jurisdiction’s interest to perform substandard
inspections, regardless of its budget and schedules. The reason: public entities, such as building
departments and inspectors, do not have immunity from acts of gross negligence.
Working as a Team
As previously mentioned, inspections are an important part of enforcing code compliance in the field.
As a contractor, if you agree and accept that fact, then you have taken the first step in developing a
positive working relationship with your building inspector. To take it to the next level is to consider the
building inspector a member of the construction team, along with subcontractors, the owner, the architect,
and engineers. To keep that team together, here are some suggestions for working with your building
(and special) inspector:
ï‚· Give the inspector plenty of advance notice when requesting an inspection. Most, if not all, building
departments and special inspection agencies have established a minimum notification period. Keep
that in mind when preparing your 2- or 3-week “look ahead†schedule.
ï‚· If you have scheduled an inspection, but will not be ready for whatever reason, please let the
inspector know (before the inspector is on site) and reschedule the inspection. Cancellation of an
inspection should follow the jurisdiction’s or inspection agency’s procedures.
ï‚· Be familiar with the code. It will prevent surprises during an inspection if you catch any problems
first. Also, inspectors may sometimes take the most restrictive interpretation of the code, and you
might be able to convince the inspector that the item is in compliance.
ï‚· Be cooperative with the inspector. Cooperation is a two-way street, but you do not want to be the
reason for its failure. Do not be confrontational in explaining yourself, but, if necessary, ask the
inspector where in the code the requirement is stated (the inspector can only enforce what is in the
code). You may be correct in your position on an item, but how you relay that to the inspector may
be the difference between a delay of only a few hours and a delay of up to several days.
As long as there are codes regulating building construction, there will be inspectors. Nevertheless,
building construction continues to increase and the demand on building department services grows along
with it. In April 2004, the International Code Council conducted a survey of building safety officials in
15 of the nation’s largest metropolitan areas. The concerns most often mentioned were the “increase[d] work load, shortage of resources and insufficient budget to perform work.†In a statement following the survey, ICC CEO James Lee Witt said, “The increased demand for services offered by building departments and insufficient budgets can affect the long-term safety of a community. If buildings aren’t built to code, or there aren’t ample resources to conduct building inspections, public safety is at risk.â€
Although budgeting for building department resources is not a responsibility of the contractor in the
field, having an understanding of the issues affecting building departments is important. How the public
interacts with inspectors has a direct impact on building department resources. Working cooperatively
can only help both the building department and the contractor. Another concern mentioned by all 15 of
the surveyed building officials was their perception regarding public opinion of their work. The building
officials felt that a building department’s existence is necessary and beneficial to the community;
however, they recognize that their enforcement duties are met with resistance from consumers and
industry professionals to some degree. Through a more interactive and cooperative relationship with the
building department and its inspectors, we can help change that perception for the better.
Friday, November 5, 2010
What’s Happenin’ in the Hood?
Earlier in this century the term “neighborhoodâ€
had a very specific cultural
connotation. For the most part neighborhoods
were clearly defined; families were
founded and sustained in specific areas.
Personal lives evolved up to and including
the time when a person went off to
seek their fortune and/or find a new
neighborhood at some other place in the
world. And, if you look far enough back
you would likely discover that most
neighborhoods were driven by a combination
of economics and ethnicity. The
whole idea that people a lot like each
other liked to live close to each other was
not a tarnished thought. It was a reality.
Over the last 50 years, the concept of
neighborhoods has taken on a slightly
different connotation. Based upon land
use practices that started becoming
popular in the 1950s, neighborhoods
were not so much grown, as they were
literally planned out and created by land
use planners. The idea of individual
homes sprouting up along a thoroughfare
that was popular in the 1800s was
replaced by the idea of thousands of
homes being built in specific areas,
accompanied by a differentiation
between residential and commercial
property that more or less sanitized the
areas. Neighborhoods began to take on a
different distinction.
Developers, however, not wanting to
lose the concept of neighborhoods,
often gave fancy names to areas that
were created out of a marketing effort
rather than have a cultural consequence.
Fancy names like “The Oaks – Quail
Run – Turkey Trot,†etc. began to define
neighborhoods differently. Many
neighborhoods became areas in which
there were total strangers bound by an
artificial boundary all moved in because
they could afford to.
As this phenomenon evolved, the fire
service was evolving simultaneously. The
neighborhood firehouse in the old
neighborhood was a place for gathering.
In many places, the local firehouse was a
center of many activities in the community
that reflected the value system of that
neighborhood. Over time that image was
subsequently replaced by a first-in district
for a firehouse that may or may not be
that connected to the people. Often fire
stations served multiple neighborhoods
and had no identity with any specific
neighborhood at all. In fact, many
neighborhoods removed their fire station
to a location somewhere on the main
thoroughfare or in the commercial areas
instead on the residential streets.
Although most fire officials have been
slow to recognize the consequence of this
phenomenon, it is actually being reflected
in the response patterns of their engine
companies. In many cases the demands
being placed on companies stretch the
original reason for a fire company being
placed in an area to begin with.
For example, while a lot of energy and
effort has been put into the study of an
appropriate placement of fire companies
so that they cover the ground in a
certain amount of time or within a
certain amount of distance, there has
been very little statistical correlation
between what occupancies and what
densities there are in neighborhoods that
drive the demand on a fire station. It is
not uncommon to see a fire station
being built today for the primary reason
of providing coverage that has very little
to do with fire and mostly to do with
emergency medical services.
This is a field that needs to be more
thoroughly explored with regard to
deployment analysis. A specific time and
a specific distance is altogether appropriate
to provide coverage, but it is of little
use unless it is actually supported by a
review of the demand in that area also.
The reason that this is true is that fire
department equipment is being deployed
to minimize the losses of life and
property and not to merely cast an
umbrella across the landscape. Therefore,
clearly understanding nature and the
types of calls that increase demand on an
individual company is very much a part
of risk management and risk mitigation.
For example, I have been involved in
conversations in which individuals have
expressed concern that putting residential
sprinklers into housing tracts
reduces the need for a fire department.
Unless those same people who are
sprinklered have engaged in some other
form of reducing the possibility of
cardiac arrest, falling off a ladder or
crashing their car into another car or a
fire hydrant on the street corner, then
that particular neighborhood is not
overprotected just because there are
sprinklers and a fire station within a
reasonable driving distance.
Part of the vocabulary of risk management
includes the idea of risk tolerance.
That is, just exactly how much will
people put up with before they want to
see it done away with? This happens to
be a factor that has a lot to do with the
attitude people have towards their own
property, towards their neighbors, and
in some cases towards community as a
whole. Therefore, there are certain
neighborhoods that generate the types
of calls that force a deployment plan.
From a standpoint of protecting
neighborhoods there are the three “Rs.â€
They are: roads, roof tops, and response
patterns. Neighborhoods should be
looked at in a very specific fashion to
determine the mix of those three
components as it relates to the demand
that they will place upon the fire service.
First-in districts should be analyzed from
a standpoint of how many road miles are
contained within their area so that the
number of roof tops and the number of
responses can be looked at as a function
of how to get to the location of emergency
responses as quickly as possible.
There are trends in land use that are
going to start affecting this. In many
communities it has already occurred. For
example, the concept of dealing with
energy and water demand as well as
more appropriate use of land has
resulted in a reversal of planning
principles used for the last 50 years. For
many years, we have attempted to do
everything we can to separate the
residential occupancy from commercial
occupancies by zoning the land and
parceling them out. Today, there is a
renewed interest in the idea of mixed
occupancy and allowing residential and
commercial to be not only in the same
general area but in effect stacked one on
top of the other. This is likely to create a
different kind of neighborhood.
In a recent metropolitan newspaper, the
local fire department was being chastised
for buying bigger and bigger fire trucks
when, in fact, the land use policy
planners are trying to create smaller and
smaller streets. One cannot help but
wonder whether there is a collision
course that is going to result in public
policy being formulated that compromises
what many people think of the
standards that should be applied.
Another aspect of the concept of a
neighborhood is reflected in the governance
that often is generated by commonality.
For example, it is not uncommon
for certain neighborhoods to have
a “homeowners association†– or a “businessman’s
association†– or for that
matter just an association. The creation
of these types of concepts often creates
artificial boundaries that will be a
reflection of attitude and economics.
Most often homeowners associations are
created to restrict change in an area and,
in some cases, homeowners associations
are pitted against one another when it
comes to reacting to growth management
issues in a community.
Lastly, what I would say about the
concept of neighborhoods is that it
may be the most reliable source of
establishing expectations in a community.
As was noted earlier, neighborhoods
generally mean commonality.
Commonality often means that the
expectation of emergency service in a
specific area is based upon the community’s
perception of the level of service.
In the final analysis what the term
neighborhood means to emergency
services is that the typification of a
neighborhood is almost always reflected
in the expectations being placed on a
fire department.
One of the tools for helping with this
typification is called “Community
Tapestry: The Fabric of America’s Neighborhood.â€
For more information on this
product, call 1-800-447-9778, or visit the
Web site at www.esri.com/tapestry.
This particular software program can be
used to define areas in such a way that
they can be color coded and/or categorized
for purposes of reviewing a
particular response pattern. Comparing
those response patterns with neighborhood
typification may lead into an
insight regarding changes that need to
be made in all forms of mitigation
strategy. That can include as insignificant
an aspect as what programs go on
in the schools all the way up to and
including what kind of response time is
needed to prevent unnecessary loss of
life and property.
So, the next time someone says, “How is it
going in the ‘hood?’†you will be better
prepared to answer the question.
Earlier in this century the term “neighborhoodâ€
had a very specific cultural
connotation. For the most part neighborhoods
were clearly defined; families were
founded and sustained in specific areas.
Personal lives evolved up to and including
the time when a person went off to
seek their fortune and/or find a new
neighborhood at some other place in the
world. And, if you look far enough back
you would likely discover that most
neighborhoods were driven by a combination
of economics and ethnicity. The
whole idea that people a lot like each
other liked to live close to each other was
not a tarnished thought. It was a reality.
Over the last 50 years, the concept of
neighborhoods has taken on a slightly
different connotation. Based upon land
use practices that started becoming
popular in the 1950s, neighborhoods
were not so much grown, as they were
literally planned out and created by land
use planners. The idea of individual
homes sprouting up along a thoroughfare
that was popular in the 1800s was
replaced by the idea of thousands of
homes being built in specific areas,
accompanied by a differentiation
between residential and commercial
property that more or less sanitized the
areas. Neighborhoods began to take on a
different distinction.
Developers, however, not wanting to
lose the concept of neighborhoods,
often gave fancy names to areas that
were created out of a marketing effort
rather than have a cultural consequence.
Fancy names like “The Oaks – Quail
Run – Turkey Trot,†etc. began to define
neighborhoods differently. Many
neighborhoods became areas in which
there were total strangers bound by an
artificial boundary all moved in because
they could afford to.
As this phenomenon evolved, the fire
service was evolving simultaneously. The
neighborhood firehouse in the old
neighborhood was a place for gathering.
In many places, the local firehouse was a
center of many activities in the community
that reflected the value system of that
neighborhood. Over time that image was
subsequently replaced by a first-in district
for a firehouse that may or may not be
that connected to the people. Often fire
stations served multiple neighborhoods
and had no identity with any specific
neighborhood at all. In fact, many
neighborhoods removed their fire station
to a location somewhere on the main
thoroughfare or in the commercial areas
instead on the residential streets.
Although most fire officials have been
slow to recognize the consequence of this
phenomenon, it is actually being reflected
in the response patterns of their engine
companies. In many cases the demands
being placed on companies stretch the
original reason for a fire company being
placed in an area to begin with.
For example, while a lot of energy and
effort has been put into the study of an
appropriate placement of fire companies
so that they cover the ground in a
certain amount of time or within a
certain amount of distance, there has
been very little statistical correlation
between what occupancies and what
densities there are in neighborhoods that
drive the demand on a fire station. It is
not uncommon to see a fire station
being built today for the primary reason
of providing coverage that has very little
to do with fire and mostly to do with
emergency medical services.
This is a field that needs to be more
thoroughly explored with regard to
deployment analysis. A specific time and
a specific distance is altogether appropriate
to provide coverage, but it is of little
use unless it is actually supported by a
review of the demand in that area also.
The reason that this is true is that fire
department equipment is being deployed
to minimize the losses of life and
property and not to merely cast an
umbrella across the landscape. Therefore,
clearly understanding nature and the
types of calls that increase demand on an
individual company is very much a part
of risk management and risk mitigation.
For example, I have been involved in
conversations in which individuals have
expressed concern that putting residential
sprinklers into housing tracts
reduces the need for a fire department.
Unless those same people who are
sprinklered have engaged in some other
form of reducing the possibility of
cardiac arrest, falling off a ladder or
crashing their car into another car or a
fire hydrant on the street corner, then
that particular neighborhood is not
overprotected just because there are
sprinklers and a fire station within a
reasonable driving distance.
Part of the vocabulary of risk management
includes the idea of risk tolerance.
That is, just exactly how much will
people put up with before they want to
see it done away with? This happens to
be a factor that has a lot to do with the
attitude people have towards their own
property, towards their neighbors, and
in some cases towards community as a
whole. Therefore, there are certain
neighborhoods that generate the types
of calls that force a deployment plan.
From a standpoint of protecting
neighborhoods there are the three “Rs.â€
They are: roads, roof tops, and response
patterns. Neighborhoods should be
looked at in a very specific fashion to
determine the mix of those three
components as it relates to the demand
that they will place upon the fire service.
First-in districts should be analyzed from
a standpoint of how many road miles are
contained within their area so that the
number of roof tops and the number of
responses can be looked at as a function
of how to get to the location of emergency
responses as quickly as possible.
There are trends in land use that are
going to start affecting this. In many
communities it has already occurred. For
example, the concept of dealing with
energy and water demand as well as
more appropriate use of land has
resulted in a reversal of planning
principles used for the last 50 years. For
many years, we have attempted to do
everything we can to separate the
residential occupancy from commercial
occupancies by zoning the land and
parceling them out. Today, there is a
renewed interest in the idea of mixed
occupancy and allowing residential and
commercial to be not only in the same
general area but in effect stacked one on
top of the other. This is likely to create a
different kind of neighborhood.
In a recent metropolitan newspaper, the
local fire department was being chastised
for buying bigger and bigger fire trucks
when, in fact, the land use policy
planners are trying to create smaller and
smaller streets. One cannot help but
wonder whether there is a collision
course that is going to result in public
policy being formulated that compromises
what many people think of the
standards that should be applied.
Another aspect of the concept of a
neighborhood is reflected in the governance
that often is generated by commonality.
For example, it is not uncommon
for certain neighborhoods to have
a “homeowners association†– or a “businessman’s
association†– or for that
matter just an association. The creation
of these types of concepts often creates
artificial boundaries that will be a
reflection of attitude and economics.
Most often homeowners associations are
created to restrict change in an area and,
in some cases, homeowners associations
are pitted against one another when it
comes to reacting to growth management
issues in a community.
Lastly, what I would say about the
concept of neighborhoods is that it
may be the most reliable source of
establishing expectations in a community.
As was noted earlier, neighborhoods
generally mean commonality.
Commonality often means that the
expectation of emergency service in a
specific area is based upon the community’s
perception of the level of service.
In the final analysis what the term
neighborhood means to emergency
services is that the typification of a
neighborhood is almost always reflected
in the expectations being placed on a
fire department.
One of the tools for helping with this
typification is called “Community
Tapestry: The Fabric of America’s Neighborhood.â€
For more information on this
product, call 1-800-447-9778, or visit the
Web site at www.esri.com/tapestry.
This particular software program can be
used to define areas in such a way that
they can be color coded and/or categorized
for purposes of reviewing a
particular response pattern. Comparing
those response patterns with neighborhood
typification may lead into an
insight regarding changes that need to
be made in all forms of mitigation
strategy. That can include as insignificant
an aspect as what programs go on
in the schools all the way up to and
including what kind of response time is
needed to prevent unnecessary loss of
life and property.
So, the next time someone says, “How is it
going in the ‘hood?’†you will be better
prepared to answer the question.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)