‘Thousands of new homes in Wales won’t have sprinklers’
SOME house builders are using a loophole to avoid having to comply with new fire safety measures, an Assembly committee meeting has been told.
Wales became the first country in the world in 2011 to pass legislation making it compulsory for sprinklers to be introduced in all newly built homes.
The law affected all new homes from January 1, 2016, but it has now been revealed that “many thousands” of homes that are yet to be built could avoid having to adhere to the policy.
During an Assembly committee meeting yesterday, cabinet secretary Carl Sargeant said some large building companies were trying to avoid the law.
He said that “many thousands” of homes yet to be built will be affected.
“My understanding is that there are many thousands of homes that are yet to be built that have effectively circumnavigated the sprinkler measure.
“My personal view is that is inappropriate. We’ve had discussions about how and if we can close that loophole”.
In questioning about whether sprinklers should be retro-fitted
during the equality, local government and communities committee to properties, Mr Sargeant said: “There are some big industry builders who hate the thought we’re introducing sprinklers anyway and are doing everything they can to circumnavigate the system. I would personally like to close the loophole.”
Government official Neil Hemmington said: “The reference from the cabinet secretary about the activity of some of the big house builders is that they pre-registered the sites before 2016, which meant they locked themselves into an earlier set of building regulations.”
He was asked by Labour’s Jenny Rathbone how many buildings had “got under the radar”.
Mr Hemington said that there wasn’t an exact number available.
Mr Sargeant interjected and said he believed there were “many thousands” of homes affected but that he would try to calculate a more accurate number.
At yesterday’s committee hearing, they were told that for it to be recorded as work having begun at a site, all builders had to do was submit a basic plan to authorities.
When the law was introduced there were concerns from homebuilders that introducing sprinklers was not cost effective and would stunt house building in Wales due to the cost of installing the systems.
The meeting was the latest evidence-gathering session in the wake of the Grenfell tragedy.
Mr Sargeant also told the committee there would be no rushed decision about whether to extend sprinkler laws to be retro-fitted in properties.
Concerns were raised about the cost of the sprinklers, which has gone up in the wake of the tragedy.
Jeremy Miles AM asked if any conversations had been had to overcome issues of availability or cost as Newport City Homes, which had properties found to have potentially dangerous cladding, had reported the cost of retro-fitting was “very high”.
Mr Sargeant said there is a cost of between £1,000 and £1,200 per unit.
“That’s a significant cost if you have a high-rise block.”
But he warned that there had to be some caution shown about mass introduction of sprinklers.
“I think early on in the actions post Grenfell there was a pressure for authorities to take some sort of action. One of those was to remove ACM whatever. If you had ACM it was coming off. There was a period of time.
“There was a big pressure on the market for removal.
“What we do know now is if you expose the ACM, actually it has potential higher risk than leaving it on. So it has to be done properly.
“I am a big supporter of sprinklers... we should be basing it on fact about why it is the right thing to put sprinklers into these buildings, rather than putting them in because it feels right, and that’s difficult when there is public pressure.
“I will not be bounced into a decision that is not being based on fact.”
A spokeswoman for Newport City Homes said the cost of the sprinkler installation is commercially sensitive so they were unable to release it.
She said: “The installation of sprinklers in our tower blocks will be incorporated into our maintenance programme, which means there will be no additional cost to residents.”