Automat!c Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 Hello Guys & Gurls I work within a college as the music and performing arts techincian, In the summer time we usally go dark (getting ready for new terms etc) but we got a outside theatre company using the space in July with out me as the duty tech .The company is bringing in their own tech bods Lx , Sfx, Sm etc. I asked for a Set ground plan which they told me did not exsite .. But looking at some set models (on the company web page). It looks like the set is going to be right in front of the fire doors, I told my manager about this and he told me that . The company is using a curtain as wings and thats will be enough to meet with H&S . The venue seats, 45 some on raked rostrume and two lines on the floor . The studio has one door on the front of the building for audience and the other double set of door is at the back on Up Stage Right about 2meters from the back wall. I just want to asked your advice if this possible , can a company put sets in front of fire exits ,with a curtain as wings at the side of the set, put in more seating from 45 to 60 , would you let a company lose on your space ? Ta Ginger x ps. newbie here pss . the set is a box set 3 walls one door on two of the walls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiLL Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 Is it the only fire exit? (other than the main entrance). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ynot Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 With public in the building the rules are more stringent. The number of exits you MUST have available goes up with the number of bodies in the space, and you should be able to Google that for your local authority. But there MUST be at least 2 clearly defined exits.If the emergency exit is the only one other than the main doors and the set is physically blocking that door, (and presumably the punters won't be able to see it or signs denoting it as an exit) then I'd say that is a likely breach of fire safety regs. It is hard to judge these things sometimes without knowing the venue at all, but I'd certainly bone up on what's what in the FR world and check what the house fire policy is (and they MUST have a policy, by law). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonathanhill Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 If, as your post suggests, this exit the company are proposing to block is the second fire exit for the building, then no, you cannot block it, or reduce its efficiency to allow people to evacuate within 150 seconds. As your post suggests that there are only two fire exits, each one must be capable of evacuating the whole of the persons within the building, that is audience, performers, technicians and FoH staff, within 150 seconds. Your Fire Risk Assessment should contain the relevant information regarding exit volumes and evacuation times. E2a: As Ynot notes above, the Fire Risk Assessment is required by law, and the onus is on the building operator/owner to compile and complete this, it is no longer within the remit of the Fire and Rescue Service. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themadhippy Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 From chatting to the local fire bod,if you have x exits assume only x-1 can be used Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonathanhill Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 A thorough fire strategy report will have calculations regarding the means of escape, the numbers of persons that can evacuate through the means of escape, the time for that number to evacuate and any issues that may arise. All of these calculations will assume that one fire exit will be unusable, generally the one with the largest capacity. I have a copy of a fire strategy report and the subsequent fire risk assessment that I can put online when I get back from Hay if people are interested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richard Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 Actually the yellow book states that you can have up to 60 people in the space with only one exit which only needs to be a minimum of 900mm wide. Since you can argue that the second exit is still available for the cast you could probably get away with 60 + cast in the space HOWEVER.. Assuming your venue has a premises license the council will have signed off certain plans of the venue, with certain conditions. If they have stated that both exits must be available, or that the venue has a maximum capacity of 45 then that is what it is unless you can get them to issue a deviation to the license (which assuming the audience exit leads to a place of safety they should be OK to do). I'm not sure what the relevance of the black for the wings, unless you are saying they will be creating a route behind a curtain from the auditorium to the fire exit (ie around the set) in which case if they sign this as a fire exit route, it is lit to .2 lux and it is kept clear I would expect that this would be fine as the fire exit route. Again however you would need to check this with the licensing authority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jivemaster Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 Some academic premises have a full public performance premises licence, others rely on only having internal use of the hall and not having a premises licence. Someone (usually the Head of the establishment) should be the licence holder and it's their job to check that the terms of the licence are met. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kerry davies Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 Richard be very careful what you specify as 60 persons or less. This will include staff, cast, everybody. In the case of theatre where there are extra hazards such as lowered lighting levels in the audience, lighting equipment, set and other hazard enhancing possibilities then I always went for "higher risk" which lowers evac times and numbers of occupants. At least two exits should be provided if a room/area is to be occupied by more than 60 persons. This number of 60 can be varied in proportion to the risk, for a lower risk there can be a slight increase, for a higher risk, lower numbers of persons should be allowed.The thing with the OP is that there is a fire exit there for a reason. Obstructing, restricting or removing it can't just be done without a complete rethink on the fire risk assessment. If the original RA was done in conjuntion and with approval of a fire service officer then so should any amendment to that RA. If it is part of any licensing conditions or insurance policy parameters the same applies, it can't be messed about with. Breach of fire RA at my old college theatre workplace led to the insurance company suspending ALL insurance cover for the entire site until it was put back to "normal."Guide for small and medium places of assembly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonathanhill Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 Whilst it is true that rooms with a capacity of less than 60 do not need secondary or tertiary exits, and are permitted to have fire doors that open against the flow of evacuation traffic, it is generally accepted that such rules are used only for ancillary areas. Whilst it is true that rooms with a capacity of less than 60 do not need secondary or tertiary exits, and are permitted to have fire doors that open against the flow of evacuation traffic, it is generally accepted that such rules are used only for ancillary areas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramdram Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 The only "problem" with this business of being compliant (which seems to be the buzz word of the moment) is if you have to evacuate a wheel chair. It may be that wheel chairs should be out last, but, in the panic who's to say that someone might be scared witless and shove granny-in-chair through a exit first and get stuck? We had in our venue, before the F&R compliance bod did his visit (complete with "solicited advice") one or two instances of granny-in-chair being wheeled in through the backstage area (really) because granny-in-chair could not see or hear too well and did not want to sit on the apron reserved for wheelchairs. The DM said that if necessary in a case of evacuating the theatre he would pick up granny, take her out and forget the wheelchair...but...he seemed to have not quite twigged he might be elsewhere when the fire broke out and helping someone else...why put yourself in such an invidious position? The policy now is that granny-in-chair sits on the apron...like every other wheelchair user. So it may be that the licensing folk are quite happy that there is the one fire exit for the numbers available. So far so good but is this really adequate? In the same vein as above it might be we or you or anyone has a group of disabled folk in, who in addition are special needs, of all ages...we do and they are parked on said apron the exit gates are two metres wide and evacuation would not be too much of an issue. But, in the Studio theatre there is only one ramped exit. I would suggest that it is all very well to be compliant but leaving yourself only one fire exit needs a bit of RA when it comes to multiple wheelchair users. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonathanhill Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 The evacuation of mobility impaired persons, including wheelchair users should be documented within the venue Fire Risk Assessment. Generally adequate supervision from FoH staff is all that is required, which should include a briefing before each show. As far as the example above with a DM bodily removing a mobility impaired person from their chair and the evacuating them from the building, I can see a couple of issues, namely the lack of dignity of the evacuee and tying up of the DM when they should be overseeing the evacuation of the whole audience, not just one member. I am relieved that this was not deemed compliant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ynot Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 As far as the example above with a DM bodily removing a mobility impaired person from their chair and the evacuating them from the building, I can see a couple of issues, namely the lack of dignity of the evacuee and tying up of the DM when they should be overseeing the evacuation of the whole audience, not just one member. Not to mention that a) said granny may be rather large and weighty (no offence intended to grandparents out there...) and lifting may not be physically practical....and b) that should DM/SM manage to pick up granny, but consequently drop her en route to the exit and doing significant damage to older bones and bodywork, then surely that is a risk too far... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramdram Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 Too flippin right Ynot, "we" were a bit too indulgent in the past but now that has been rectified. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulears Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 The college are having a visiting company in without the AV technician. First sign that they don't appreciate what this person does, safety wise. It also suggests that they might not actually have a premises license. Not uncommon. My old college opened their new centre and got Rick Wakeman to open it. Only a day or two before they realised nobody had applied for the license! All the answers are in the license. Depending on how much you like your job, I'd tell your boss you think it could be unsafe, but as you're not there on the day, you're sure he'll do the risk assessment and make his own mind up. Then say no more. Better still, send it to him in an email. Back covered. Go off on holiday and don't worry. keeping the day spare, and making sure that at some point they will have to call you out because they're stuck. They will be stuck, won't they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.