Architects: Post Grenfell Recommendations

Leading architecture firms, including Foster + Partners, have come together to endorse the Grenfell inquiry’s final report and put forward an action plan in response

The Architectural Technical Leads Group (ATLG), which includes more than 330 individuals from 190 practices, said this week (25 November) that it welcomed the findings, published in September, and has listed a set of ‘immediate priorities’ for industry-wide change.

It is thought this is the first time practices have collectively endorsed the findings of the years-long inquiry into the deaths of 72 people at Grenfell in June 2017.

The inquiry’s final report set out recommendations for the construction industry, architecture and government to avoid another disaster of this scale. These included further progress on changes to architectural education, a review of existing regulations, and a new building safety regulator.

The group, which includes members of AJ100 practices such as AHMM, Allies and Morrison and PRP, said it was working on detailed recommendations as part of the RIBA and other bodies’ commitments to responding to the disaster.

It added: ‘Since the publication of the report the key bodies of the architectural design community, ARB, RIBA and CIAT, have made commitments to revise the codes of conduct to which we all work, and to improve training processes and the competence of designers.

‘The ATLG supports these proposals. The ATLG is gathering evidence and will work to release detailed recommendations in cooperation with other industry bodies in support of the report. In the short term, we have identified a series of immediate priorities.’

A timeframe for implementing the recommendations has yet to be set out. However, the ALTG unveiled its draft recommendations and is welcoming feedback on five key recommendations for the government and the profession (outlined below).

The ATLG was set up earlier this year in response to the 2023 Building Regulations, which introduced a second-staircase rule for tall buildings in the wake of Grenfell.

The RIBA has previously said it will ‘take time’ to look at the Grenfell inquiry’s findings, with board chair Jack Pringle saying in September:

‘As the inquiry also notes, RIBA has taken steps since June 2017 to improve education and training in our profession. With the benefit of these comprehensive findings, and as recommended, we will review the measures already introduced.

‘Many of the report’s insights and recommendations, particularly on the role and responsibilities of an architect, have great relevance for our members. We will take time to study them in detail, update our members, and continue to play an active role in the creation of a safer built environment.’

ATLG draft post-Grenfell suggested priorities

Strengthened guidance for clients

There continues to be evidence of clients unaware of their duties and those of the Building Regulations principal designer (BRPD), and failing to allow sufficient time, expertise and resources to projects. This contributes to unrealistic and fragmented design programmes and processes.

We call for enhanced plain English guidance detailing clients’ and teams’ statutory duties at each step to allocate sufficient time and to enable adequate resource throughout all design stages to facilitate compliant designs that are safe, sustainable and accessible.

Clear gateway guidance and provision of adequate resources for the Building Safety Regulator

The group has identified that the current guidance and messaging on the gateway requirements is inconsistent and incomplete, resulting in excessive detail being thrown into submissions and slowing approvals. We call for clear guidance on the extent of detail required for gateways 2 and 3, including any processes needed for post-gateway 2 design development, and to communicate real processing times to allow clients and contractors to allocate appropriate programmes. We ask that sufficient resources are provided for the Building Safety Regulator to perform its regulatory functions effectively.

Transparency and lower-cost availability of safety standards

The group sees the high cost of the safety-critical standards documents referenced in the Approved Documents as a key barrier to compliance. We call for the standards required to achieve safe buildings to be made available at low or no cost, making this critical information fully accessible to all stakeholders.

Update and extend the Approved Documents and manual

The group feels the structure and arrangement of the Approved Documents remains inconsistent and difficult to cross-reference and to track amendments. We call for an overhaul of the Approved Documents and manual in consultation with the industry to provide comprehensive technical guidance documents with clear recognised routes to Building Regulations compliance.

Construction products information and guidance

The group needs accurate, timely, and complete product and system information from suppliers and manufacturers, including the information needed to support commonly used interfaces. We call for manufacturers and suppliers to provide comprehensive information through mechanisms such as material passports, that all test information be made public, and that they commit to provide standardised test data to support commonly used interfaces.

We ask that the government implement a duty to warn if manufacturers know their products are being used in non-compliant arrangements.

Source: Architects Journal

0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *