I am looking for some clarification on the application of the various assessment tools to demonstrate compliance with NZBC when pertaining to sleeping care occupancies.
Section 1.1.5, C/AS2 states that SI invariably requires a Fire strategy requiring moving to a safe place within a building and then states that Acceptable Solutions does not allow for Stay in place strategies related to Operating theatres, ICU’s, Hyperbaric Chambers, Delivery rooms and Recovery rooms.
Section 1.1.4. C/AS2 also states that other than where permitted for risk group SI and for early childhood centers, delayed evacuation strategy is outside the scope of C/AS2
On the other hand C/VM2 section 1.2 excludes all buildings with managed evacuation and buildings where evacuations is not direct to the outside. There is no reference to delayed evacuation
My query is
- Can we use C/VM2 for buildings with delayed evacuation?
- What is the definition of “Managed Evacuation”? Are schools (especially primary or day care centers) considered managed evacuation because small kids (especially below 5 yr olds) are not expected to up a go to a safe place when the fire alarm goes off, they will generally be guided by a teacher or teacher aide. what about staff managing movement of patients in an A&E Centre, doctors clinic or dentist? what about Police stations with detention facilities or courtrooms - are these occupancies considered to be managed evacuation?
- What is the definition of a Recovery room? Is a hospital ward considered a recovery room? What would not be a recovery room?
- Further to point 2 above, Section 1.1.5 to implies that one could use C/AS2 for care facilities that do not have critical care i.e. if people can be moved to an adjacent firecell it applies. Therefore can clinical spaces that have medical wards be designed using C/AS 2 if a medical ward is not classified as a recovery space?
- Further to point 2 above, Accident & Emergency clinics are classified as Risk Group CA. These occupancies can also have people that may be recovering after a minor procedure and may require managed evacuation, so do these then sit on the borderline of assessment via C/AS or C/CM and performance based design? Then there are imaging facilities that could have people that may need managed evacuation
My reason for these questions are because under C/AS or C/VM you only need to meet the requirements of the relevant solution whereas if we attempted the design via performance based design then there seems to be very onerous requirements to be satisfied where it pertains to vulnerable occupancies.
For example - A care home qualifies under Section 1.1.5 , to be assessed using C/AS2 and therefore all you need to consider is the prescriptive requirements of C/AS2. If then we proceeded to do this design by C/VM for any reason then it will head down a performance based route because it becomes managed evacuation. Performance based design will then require a whole raft of requirements like staff number ratios, vulnerability of occupants, time to get an occupant ready to move, time it takes an occupant to move, how many staff are required per occupant etc. etc.
I am not sure if I am overcomplicating the assessment approach. Any feedback is appreciated