The case for compulsory installation

Sprinklers save lives, but at a cost, says Andrew Mcfarlane

The inquiry into the Grenfell Tower tragedy is well under way and although it is sometimes considered trite to say so, lessons will be learned.

One of those will almost certainly concern the much-discussed issue of making mandatory the installation of sprinklers in residential accommodation.

Current Scottish regulations require sprinklers in high-rise residential buildings, which are those over 18m in height, approximately six or seven storeys.

In that context a further consultation on fire and building safety, which will better protect all homes, new-build, privately or socially rented or owner occupied, has been launched this month by the Scottish Government.

Around three quarters of all fire-related deaths arise at home.

An ageing population and, some claim, the cuts that have been applied to local authorities’ budgets have played a part in the increased number of deaths.

Certainly, evidence suggests that fire response times are getting longer, especially in the UK’S largest cities.

The cost of installing sprinklers in new homes – around £2,800 on average, comparable to new heating system or rewiring – is at the crux of the issue. But how much value do we place on human lives?

Regulation in Scotland requires sprinklers in care homes, hostels, hotels and other places of multiple occupancy but is there a case for Uk-wide regulation to make sprinklers mandatory in all new-build houses?

I would say yes. In the incidence of fire, a sprinkler system will reduce the damage to a property by an average of 80 per cent.

The expense is the real issue though, but the cost of installing sprinklers can be recouped by the householder within four years through lower insurance premiums.

In Vancouver, Canada, sprinklers have been 100 per cent effective in preventing fire deaths in new homes.

They have also been compulsory since 2011 in all new homes built in Wales.

The picture is made more complex, however, by the economics of the housebuilding sector.

With recent significant rises in the costs of building materials and a skills shortage set to be exacerbated by Brexit, housebuilders are already wary about building properties where their margins are squeezed.

That there is a screaming need for more new houses is indisputable; equally, it is hard to counter the argument that the extra cost of installing sprinkler systems in all new houses would increase builders’ expenses.

Following its 2005 review, a spokesman for the UK Department for Communities and Local Government said: “New regulation on housing needs to be balanced and proportionate.

“Making sprinklers compulsory in all new homes would add an estimated £2,000 to £3,000 to the regulatory cost of a new-build home, meaning fewer new homes, making home ownership less accessible especially for first-time buyers, and potentially pushing up rents in the private rented sector.”

And there you have it. Further investigation of the position in Wales and further drawing the attention of local and national governments to the issue can only be of value.

Let’s hear what the Grenfell inquiry has to say.