Joint Committee on Housing, Local Government and Heritage debate -
Tuesday, 21 May 2024

Building Regulations (Fire Safety): Discussion

An Cathaoirleach

We have convened this afternoon to consider the review of Part B (Fire Safety) of the building regulations. We are joined, from the building standards unit of the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage, by Ms Sarah Neary, principal adviser, Mr. John Wickham, senior adviser, and Mr. Eoin O'Dowd, adviser. From the building control division of Dublin City Council, we are joined by Mr. Pat Nestor, senior building surveyor, and Mr. Alan Isdell, senior executive building surveyor. From Dublin Fire Brigade, we are joined by Mr. Dennis Keeley, chief fire officer, and Ms Mary O'Brien, assistant chief fire officer. I thank them for their attendance and for assisting committee members to get an understanding of what exactly we have done with Part B as part of this review process. The committee had a series of meetings a year and a half or two years ago where we looked a dereliction and vacancy, as well as the whole issue of Part B and how it comes into the refurbishment and reuse of buildings, especially when building with timber and other modern methods of construction.

Before we begin, I will read a note on privilege. I remind members of the constitutional requirement that they must be physically present within the confines of the place in which the Parliament has chosen to sit, namely, Leinster House, to participate in public meetings. The witnesses attending in the committee room are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their contributions to today's meeting. This means they have an absolute defence against any defamation action for anything they say at the meeting. Members and witnesses are expected not to abuse the privilege they enjoy and it is my duty, as Chair, to ensure the privilege is not abused. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in respect of an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative they comply with any such direction. No witnesses are attending remotely.

Members and witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against either a person or entity outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

I invite Ms Neary to make her opening statement on behalf of the Department.

Ms Sarah Neary

I thank the committee for the invitation to attend today’s meeting and for providing us with the opportunity to update members on the Department’s review of Part B of the building regulations dealing with fire safety. I am the principal adviser of the building standards advisory unit. I am accompanied by my colleagues from the Department, Mr. John Wickham, senior adviser, building standards, and Mr. Eoin O’Dowd, adviser, building standards.

Following the completion of a comprehensive review of Part B of the building regulations, the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage signed the Building Regulations (Part B Amendment) Regulations 2024 on 26 March 2024. These regulations amend Part B of the second Schedule to the Building Regulations 1997 to update fire safety requirements for buildings other than dwelling houses and apply from 1 May 2025, subject to the transitional arrangements cited.

The comprehensive review undertaken by the Department took into account a range of issues, including common and emerging building trends; developments and events from a global perspective; matters relating to external fire spread, external fire resistance, internal fire resistance, cladding systems and sprinklers; and the review into the tragic Grenfell Tower fire. In carrying out the review, specific regard was given to the holistic requirements of the building regulations in Ireland; the framework of administration set out under the building control regulations, fire safety, the planning system and health and safety laws; policy documents outlining national strategy and objectives; and Irish policy and practice in respect of evacuating buildings in addition to international fire safety requirements.

The building regulations, including Part B, are expressed in broad performance terms and do not set limitations on the use of materials. For example, the building regulations do not prohibit the use of timber products in construction at any height providing compliance with the performance requirements can be met and demonstrated. Guidance on compliance with the various parts of the building regulations for non-complex, common buildings is given in a suite of technical guidance documents. To accompany the recent Part B regulations, Technical Guidance Document B 2024 - Fire Safety - Volume 1: Buildings other than Dwelling Houses, along with a final regulatory impact analysis, was published on the Department’s website.

As part of the review process, the Department established a consultative committee to examine the proposed changes to the previous Technical Guidance Document B. It then undertook a public consultation between January and April 2023 seeking comments on a draft version of the building regulations, Technical Guidance Document B and the regulatory impact analysis. Submissions were received from 163 respondents containing over 4,100 individual comments.

It is expected that the changes made to Technical Guidance Document B 2024 will enhance the clarity of provisions relating to the fire safety design of buildings in Ireland. The changes consolidate existing provisions into one seamless document, applying a single common technical language in respect of fire safety and thereby improving understanding and compliance. Of particular note in TGD B 2024 are the following: a range of design options are introduced to enhance flexibility while maintaining minimum standards with respect to fire safety in the built environment; provisions relating to facades are strengthened to inhibit the spread of fire on the face of a building; minimum standards of fire safety in buildings are strengthened for the most vulnerable in society, that is, the elderly, those who sleep in buildings and also those in buildings with a non-sleeping risk but with very fast fire growth rates; a specific section has been created in the TGD to support the reuse of existing buildings by simplifying, clarifying and rationalising fire safety requirements for such buildings; and another specific section has been created for sprinklers to enhance and support the objectives of fire safety for people in and around buildings.

The provisions of technical guidance documents are primarily intended for common, non-complex buildings. Adherence to the approach outlined in a TGD is regarded as prima facie evidence of compliance with the requirements of the relevant part of the building regulations. The adoption of approaches other than those outlined in the TGDs is not precluded, provided the relevant requirements of the building regulations are complied with. Those involved in the design and construction of a building may be required by the relevant building control authority to provide such evidence as is necessary to establish that the requirements of the regulations are complied with.

To provide clarity on the relevant provisions of the building regulations and a pathway for alternative approaches to demonstrate compliance with the second Schedule to the building regulations, the Department has published an information note on alternative approaches to demonstrate compliance with the building regulations. This information note contains a specific appendix in regard to alternative approaches to compliance with Part B (Fire Safety).

The building regulations are subject to ongoing review in the interests of safety and the well-being of persons in the built environment, and to ensure that due regard is taken of changes in construction techniques, technological progress and innovation. The Department takes an evidence-based approach to inform technical advancement of the building regulations and TGDs. In this context, a steering group on fire safety research has been established to explore certain issues further and to work in collaboration with fire authorities to develop appropriate solutions.

To conclude, I again thank the committee for inviting the Department here today. My colleagues and I look forward to engaging with members on the issue and are happy to answer any questions.

Mr. Pat Nestor

I thank the Chair and committee members for the invitation to assist their consideration of the recent review of Part B of the building regulations. I am the senior building surveyor and head of building control in Dublin City Council. I am joined by my colleague, Alan Isdell, senior executive building surveyor and chartered surveyor.

Dublin City Council welcomes the introduction of the recently revised Part B of the building regulations and the accompanying revised Technical Guidance Document B - Fire Safety – Volume 1 Buildings other than Dwelling Houses. This follows the successful introduction and application of Technical Guidance Document B Fire Safety - Volume 2 Dwelling Houses, which was issued in 2017. These combined documents now provide clear and up-to-date guidance on the application of Part B of the building regulations across a wide range of building types.

The building control section of Dublin City Council carries out the statutory functions of the building control authority. We manage the submission of commencement notices and seven-day notices, applications for disability access certificates and dispensations or relaxations of the application of the building regulations to construction works. Our colleagues in Dublin Fire Brigade assess and determine applications for fire safety certificates and we work closely together on these matters.

Building control is part of the planning and property development department of Dublin City Council and, together with our colleagues in forward planning, development control and planning enforcement, a coherent and co-ordinated approach to the regulation of the development of the built environment is implemented in Dublin city, as is appropriate for a large urban local authority.

Our building control section includes chartered building surveyors, chartered building control surveyors, registered building surveyors and building inspectors along with an experienced administration team. As well as managing the statutory functions already mentioned, the inspection of active construction sites is a high priority in accordance with Dublin City Council policy.

We receive in the order of 1,200 notices of construction projects commencing within the city council area per annum. Projects are selected for inspection in order of priority. We aim to inspect 100% of new build multi-unit housing developments, as well as a large proportion of new builds and other works to schools, hospitals, nursing homes, places of assembly and other high risk projects.

For 2022 and 2023, the building control section carried out 2,690 inspections of live construction projects; 912 of these were focused on compliance of the construction work with Part B of the building regulations. My colleague beside me here, Alan Isdell, leads the team that focuses on inspecting works for compliance with Part B, including the conditions of the granted fire safety certificate. When selected for inspection, a site is visited by building control officers from the early stage of construction and then on a regular and recurring basis through to completion. This activity is primarily supportive and encouraging of the construction industry’s efforts to comply with the building regulations and it also allows effective enforcement of the regulations where this proves necessary. Where defects are discovered they are usually addressed promptly and it is only a very small number of construction projects which become such a serious concern that formal enforcement action is deemed necessary. At all times, responsibility for compliance lies with the building owners, the builders and designers.

Dublin City Council building control section made a detailed submission during the public consultation of the draft volume 1 of technical guidance document B on fire safety. This submission was informed by our experience through inspections carried out on site and we are pleased to see our submission informed the final published document. Section 7, on existing buildings, which supports the adaptive re-use of existing building stock, is particularly welcome.

Compliance with the requirements of Part B may be demonstrated by following the guidance in technical guidance document B or by using an alternative approach. A supplementary information note was also issued at the time when the new guidance document B volume 1 was published.

This supplementary information note provides guidance on alternative approaches for demonstrating compliance, allowing some flexibility in dealing with newer materials and innovative approaches that may arise in the rapidly advancing areas of new building technologies and modern methods of construction. However, it is quite challenging to demonstrate that the building regulations are complied with using alternative approaches.

The new technical guidance document B is much expanded, being in the order of twice the size of the current document, and provides guidance for a great range of non-complex building uses and provides a reference in the Irish context and greater clarity where different guidance was used previously.

In 2014, the building control amendment regulations introduced mandatory certification of a building's design, appointment of competent professional persons to act as assigned certifiers, appointment of competent builders, mandatory inspection during construction by competent professional persons and mandatory certification of the completed buildings or works.

The system is colloquially known as BCAR, building control amendment regulations, and is intended to ensure compliance with the requirements of the building regulations. The BCAR system emphasises record-keeping and accountability, leading to improved compliance and quality on site.

In the intervening ten-year period, there have been numerous revised technical guidance documents published, including Part L on conservation of fuel and energy, Part F on ventilation, Part M on access and use, and volume 2 of Part B on fire safety of dwelling houses. These new or improved requirements of the building regulations have been integrated into current building design and construction. Continued public oversight and vigilance is necessary and we recommend continued support for on-site inspections by building control authorities and continuing research and investment in new building technologies to ensure clear guidance in the use of innovative construction methods is developed.

I thank the Chair and committee members for their time and consideration on these issues.

Mr. Dennis Keeley

I thank the Chair and members for the invitation and I welcome the opportunity to attend and discuss fire safety issues and specifically the review of Part B, fire safety, of the building regulations and publication of the new technical guidance document B in March this year. I am the chief fire officer for Dublin Fire Brigade, DFB. I am accompanied here today by my colleague, Mary O’Brien, who is the assistant chief fire officer.

Dublin Fire Brigade provides the function of the fire authority for four Dublin local authorities, namely, Dublin City Council, Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council, South Dublin County Council and Fingal County Council. This includes the administration of Part B of the building regulations in the Dublin region. The functions of a fire authority are prescribed in the Fire Services Acts 1981 and 2003, to make provision for the prompt and efficient extinguishment of fire, to establish and maintain a fire brigade and to make provision to respond to calls. The principle objectives of Dublin Fire Brigade are to respond and deal with fire and medical emergencies as statutorily obliged. Additionally, our objective is to promote fire safety through education and advice, to help ensure fire safety standards are being adhered to in existing buildings. We are tasked to act as regulators to enforce the building control regulations and to ensure the compliance with building regulations is achieved through good building design practice by competent professional designers. Consequently, our role is to ensure best practice in terms of fire safety in both new and existing buildings.

The Fire Services Acts 1981 and 2003 and building control legislation provide us with powers of inspection and enforcement. The Building Control Acts 1990 and 2007 govern the design and construction of buildings. The legislation provides for the making of the building regulations and building control regulations and the setting up of building control authorities with powers of inspection and enforcement. The second schedule of the building regulations sets out the 12 distinct parts of the building regulations, Parts A to M, including fire, which is addressed specifically in Part B. The building regulations are not prescriptive but are performance-based regulations.

Dublin Fire Brigade administers Part B of the building regulations in Dublin City Council and provides this service for Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council, South Dublin County Council and Fingal County Council. Each part of the building regulations is supported with a technical guidance document and Dublin Fire Brigade primarily deals with technical guidance document B, TGDB. Works carried out in accordance with TGDB are assumed to demonstrate prima facie evidence of compliance with building regulations.

The Building Control Regulations, 1997 to 2023, set out procedures and controls which require owners, builders, and registered construction professionals to demonstrate through their statutory register of building control activity that the works or buildings concerned have been designed and constructed in compliance with building regulations. Building control regulations apply to the construction of new buildings and to existing buildings that undergo an extension, a material alteration or a material change of use, with some exceptions. It is a statutory requirement of the building control regulations that a fire safety certificate must be sought and obtained for the construction, material alteration, and material change of use or extension or both to a building. Dublin Fire Brigade, working in conjunction with the building control authorities of the four Dublin councils, process approximately 1,400 fire safety certificate applications per annum.

A fire safety certificate application, once granted, indicates that a building, if built in accordance with the design which was submitted, will be in accordance with the building regulations. It is the responsibility of the designer, the builder and the owner to ensure that the building is built in accordance with the fire safety certificate and the building regulations. Designers rely on the guidance in technical guidance document B to demonstrate compliance with building regulations. TGDB provides prima facie evidence of compliance with building regulations. Dublin Fire Brigade welcomes newly published Technical Guidance Document B - Fire Safety - Volume 1 Buildings other than Dwelling Houses of March 2024 with transitional arrangements until May 2025 and additionally, the information note on alternative approaches to demonstrate compliance with the building regulations and the final regulatory impact assessment.

I acknowledge the significant work that has gone into its development and publication. This is a very significant and welcome milestone for the fire safety sector. It is a significant document and the implications of it will be teased out in the months to come. There are many changes with a notable move towards an adoption of sprinkler systems in certain occupancies like nursing homes, apartment buildings and student accommodation greater than 15 m in height, which Dublin Fire Brigade particularly welcomes. The fire authorities, particularly those in large cities and towns such as Dublin, Cork, Galway, Waterford and Limerick, are delighted to support the newly established research group within the Department's building standards section. Dublin Fire Brigade is actively supporting this research group, working collaboratively with colleagues and with the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage. Dublin Fire Brigade understands the output of the research group is to provide a basis of understanding that will underscore further guidance on emerging construction methods and building designs. I hope this learning will inform the development of new guidance and inform the updating of the TGDB in an agile way going forward.

The scope of the newly published technical guidance document B 2024 does not extend to complex buildings and therefore, prima facie compliance with building regulations cannot be achieved through TGDB. Guidance to these types of buildings is provided in the information note on alternative approaches to demonstrate compliance with the building regulations. This includes the following: buildings with difficult site conditions, buildings with unusual occupancy or high levels of complexity, very large or very tall buildings, engineered timber buildings, some buildings that incorporate modern construction methods and existing buildings such as, for example, buildings of architectural or historical interest. I hope that guidance on these buildings will be included in the considerations of the research group. It should be noted that technical guidance document B provides guidance on the use of non-combustible construction of buildings, which it limits to 11 m. Again, this is prima facie guidance on compliance with building regulations. Most designers adapt their designs to achieve this prima facie compliance. Dublin Fire Brigade continues to ensure that it is best informed from a national and international perspective of any testing and test data, as well as evidence that will expand its understanding on the fire safety challenges of the design and construction of buildings, including the uses of modern methods of construction, MMC, in particular cross-laminated timber, CLT. It should be noted that for light gauge steel 2D and 3D volumetric and modular construction, it is vital that work both off-site in the factory setting and the on-site assembly is carried out by competent persons to ensure that the design intent is achieved. It is important to remember that the safety of people in buildings is paramount. It is the very tenet of the building regulations. This includes everyone, either the people using or living in the building, as well as the firefighters who may have to deal with a fire in a building constructed on MMC.

Regardless of how a building is designed and constructed, the structural integrity should be achieved and maintained as intended in a fire event. I am aware that there is an interdepartmental and industry steering group on timber and construction to examine a range of topics in this area and that the role of this group is to develop a forum with government and industry to examine how to increase the use of timber in construction while ensuring building safety and property protection, to examine regulatory and standardisation standards challenges and to maximise the use of home-grown timber in construction. Sub-committees were created and working groups formed around specific themes. The Chief Fire Officers Association, with representation from Dublin Fire Brigade, is supporting a sub-thematic group titled Timber and Construction - Thematic - Mass Engineered Timber. I am hopeful that this research will result in the development of national guidance in this area, which will address the issues and challenges in relation to MMC and, in particular, fire safety. This guidance is needed and would be very beneficial to promote consistency across the industry and for all stakeholders. In conclusion, Dublin Fire Brigade welcomes the publication of technical guidance document B 2024 and the information notes. We remain available to offer assistance in progressing fire safety guidance towards the continued improvement of current and future design and construction of buildings in Ireland. We welcome the opportunity to work with the Department and other stakeholders in the development of areas for further research to reflect the changes brought by innovative design and from the consequent new guidance and more frequent updates of TGDB.

Guidance on the area of MMC and other complex buildings will be very beneficial for all stakeholders to ensure that we continue to deliver a safe built environment in Ireland. I would like to thank the committee for the opportunity to discuss these issues here today.

An Cathaoirleach

Thank you very much Mr. Keeley. We will now go to the members who will have seven-minute slots, that is, seven minutes to ask the question and to answer the question as well.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

I thank all the witnesses for being here today and for the work that they do, which is often in some ways unheralded until it comes into focus. I do not think anybody will mind me singling out members of the fire service and the work that they do both in Dublin, which I am very familiar with, and across the whole country in respect of both full-time and retained fire services. What the regulations hope to do is to avoid the very serious incidents we have seen, one of which has made me most interested in this area, namely, the incident in the Metro Hotel in Ballymun. It brought to mind two questions. The first is on the materials that are being used in the design of buildings, and in particular the cladding, which I believe is the one that has got most focus with its combustible nature. The second element is the ability of the fire services to deal with extinguishing a fire at a height. I might go to Ms Neary first on the issues around the regulations and how we might address that issue of combustible cladding, combustible materials being used in buildings and the complexity that height provides in that scenario. I will come back to the chief on the ability of the fire brigade to respond in an incident.

Ms Sarah Neary

I thank the Deputy. I might just hand over to Mr. O' Dowd on the details of the cladding and combustible materials because that has informed a lot of the changes relating to technical guidance document B of 2024 and particularly to cladding and the international evidence and information that is out there now. I might ask Mr. O'Dowd to come in on those changes.

Mr. Eoin O'Dowd

That is a very interesting question on cladding systems. Incidents that have occurred throughout the world were foremost in our thoughts but did not limit our thoughts on the redevelopment in 2024 of Part B of the building regulations and the technical guidance supporting them. Included in the modifications to the legal text, the functional requirements are set out under the second schedule to the building regulations, which is regulation B4 on external fire spread. The 2024 amendment includes a new sub-clause to that legal requirement to inhibit fire spread on the face of the building. What this means is that irrespective of the approach used, that is the requirement that must be met. In support of meeting that functional requirement, section 4 of technical guidance document B, on external fire spread, has been updated whereby for all buildings with topmost floor height measured from the ground level to the deck of the floor above 15 m, the external facade system from the lowest level must achieve a reaction to fire classification to a European class system. We term this a class A2, which is tantamount to being of limited combustibility.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

To clarify that point, because it is interesting, taller buildings must reach that particular standard going forward?

Mr. Eoin O'Dowd

The technical guidance document provides the prima facie guidance that the whole wall build up from the outermost face to the innermost face, with the exception of specific elements, must achieve that reaction to fire classification. However, there are also methods of proof of conformity for such systems, termed as full-scale fire tests. The technical guidance document does permit a full-scale fire test, provided that these test characteristics are met and that the system provided on the building is the system that was tested and is certified as being such.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

As this is an incredibly technical area, let me try and stay with Mr. O'Dowd. In colloquial terms, one might call that a combustible fire system and a non-combustible fire system.

They are very generic terms. Is it correct that there have been products on the market that do not reach that standard? To date, have cladding systems been used that do not reach that standard?

Mr. Eoin O'Dowd

If we could separate what we term the components of a system versus a system built up itself, all components that are placed on buildings must be proper materials under parity of the building regulations. Under those requirements, we have a pan-European system of classification called the CE mark, for which many construction products, known as harmonised products, must meet and declare parts through its documentation before being placed on the market. We do have other methods of classification. When we refer to in the technical guidance document the reaction to fire classification, it is that classification of the individual components that make up the wall element.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

It is not an assessment of a system.

Mr. Eoin O'Dowd

No, that is for the individual components. However, there are methods of test for other products where they are placed on the market, but that test is quite robust. It is carried out by institutions that are accredited.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

In comparison to other international regulations, perhaps where there is more experience with higher buildings over a longer time, where does Mr. O'Dowd believe these newer guidelines fit within the spectrum of protection? Are they on the more lenient end? Are there countries with higher levels of protection?

Mr. Eoin O'Dowd

When looking at the particulars of fire safety in buildings we do not just look at the specific components; we look at the whole building in a holistic approach. We take all the elements in context. Ireland through its external facade reaction to fire classification requirements and legal provisions is well-placed and proportionate internationally, but we do have our own metrics in terms of compartmentation or detection and evacuation in buildings, for which the technical guidance document gives robust details.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

I apologise for cutting Mr O'Dowd off. I will ask Mr. Keeley a question. I am wondering about the Metro Hotel fire specifically as it is the most high-profile high-rise building in the city. What learnings have the fire service taken from that incident? What changes have been made and does he think must be made?

Mr. Dennis Keeley

I thank the Deputy. The Metro Hotel fire was visually quite spectacular. It is a very tall building and it was quite a large fire. The performance of the building and the compartmentation was reasonably good. It was a very difficult and challenging fire for crews because of the height and the wind presenting particular challenges. The spread of the fire, if my memory is correct, could not be attributed to cladding or external cladding. Let us be clear on that. We in Dublin Fire Brigade and nationally have been looking at high-rise stroke complex buildings. It is not just high-rise buildings that have presented these challenges. Conclusions were reached regarding that particular fire. We have taken control of two new turntable ladders in Dublin. Traditional turntable ladders are 30 m but these are 42 m, which gives us additional height. They provide a very necessary function when required. The premise of firefighting in high rise is internally. That may be alien to the general public in the sense that when they see quite a spectacular fire, the idea of sending firefighters into the building can seem strange. That goes to the heart of good building design. The expectation is that the building is designed to facilitate through a fire shaft, access and egress - egress for the residents and those who are working there and access for firefighters who, using control, training, methods and equipment suitable for the task, can take control of the fire from below. That is the importance of the components of a building and their functionality.

Deputy Paul McAuliffe

I am sure my colleagues will continue on that point but I have stretched the Chair's patience with regard to time.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

I thank all of our witnesses for their presentations. This is a particularly important session given the seriousness of the issues at hand. I apologise for the fact that some of us will be participating in a Dáil session on the Government's housing plan, starting at 4:15 p m. I will go straight to the questions. Mr. Keeley might remember that last year there was some coverage in one of the Sunday newspapers about a significant number of fire certificate requirement appeals that were being overturned by the board. They dealt in particular with nursing homes, underground car parks and sprinkler systems. From what he said in his presentation, it seems that issue has been resolved to the satisfaction of the Dublin Fire Brigade in that the types of conditions that had been applied to fire certificates previously, which were not in the original regulations but were international best practice, have been progressed significantly in the new technical guidance document. Is that correct or is there still a way to go?

Mr. Dennis Keeley

There is a bit of a way to go. As the Deputy quite rightly said, Dublin Fire Brigade lobbied for a number of years for the use of sprinklers in nursing or care homes, which often resulted in contractors and owners putting sprinklers in. However, those decisions were often appealed to An Bord Pleanála. The changes in TGD B, as has been indicated, essentially establish that requirement and its recognition of the benefits. We are not quite there with underground car parks, which were also part of those discussions at the time, but we continue to require sprinklers in underground car parks.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

For clarity, what Mr. Keeley is saying is that in multiple occupancy buildings, for example, student accommodation over a certain size, nursing homes within residential areas and communal areas of buildings, sprinklers will be a requirement but with car parks it will still be the same situation as it was prepublication of the revised guidelines?

Mr. Dennis Keeley

It is, yes.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

That is unfortunate.

Will Ms Neary clarify that when she uses the phrase "dwelling houses" in the 2024 technical guidance document, she is referring to houses as opposed to multi-unit developments? Am I correct that these regulations that we are discussing apply to residential buildings?

Ms Sarah Neary

Yes.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

On the issue of timber, I appreciate that, as Ms Neary said, the requirements of the building regulations do not prohibit the use of timber products in construction at any height, although her spoken remarks are different from the text as she rightly went on to say, "provided they can demonstrate compliance". The reality is, in the real world it is virtually impossible to demonstrate compliance of buildings, particularly of a complex nature. In fairness to the Dublin Fire Brigade representatives, they give us much more detail in that sense. When I read the Dublin Fire Brigade presentation, there is a frustration that given that we have very significant carbon emissions reductions targets to achieve in a built-up environment, and that means we have to use lower-carbon building materials, including greater use of timber and given there is going to need to be greater use of timber in high-rise, higher-density, more complex buildings, what I am hearing today that nothing has really changed, other than there will be more research and advice. It seems such a wasted opportunity. I ask Ms Neary to respond to that, particularly with reference to the six types of complex buildings that Dublin Fire Brigade ha outlined in page 3 of its submission. How long are we going to be waiting before architects and developers, whether public or private sector developers, who want to use these products that are used in almost every other European capital city, have the clarity and certainty in the regulations and guidelines to allow them to move towards those lower-carbon building technologies?

Ms Sarah Neary

I thank the Deputy. I wish to make clear that the Department is very supportive and working on the sustainability of construction-----

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

I only have two and a half minutes and I do not want to be rude to Ms Neary because we have had this back and forth with other officials. We know the Department is supportive and wants to do the right thing but the question is: when are we going to be in a situation where the people who have presented to this committee who want to create complex buildings with lower-carbon, timber-based products will be able to do so? We do not have agrément certs or demonstration projects and we have no clarity in these guidelines that I can see. We have a commitment to do more research. When is that going to change?

Ms Sarah Neary

There is a little bit more than that. Part B does not prohibit that. The information note that was produced with the suite of documents that have travelled with part B sets out alternative routes to compliance. That includes first principles from the perspective of fire safety and agrément certification, which is possible.

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

It is very complex and time-consuming. Would it not have been better if it was in the regulations?

Given how much time has been taken to produce these regulations, even though I know it is important because they are complex and we have to get them right, it seems to be such a missed opportunity. Would it not be better if they were in the regulations?

Ms Sarah Neary

In the construct of the regulations, we have the technical guidance documents, which are geared towards non-complex buildings. In timber construction, there is a limit in the technical guidance of four storeys effectively, that is, the 10 m or 11 m mark for the top storey. That represents more than 90% of building in Ireland, and while we are moving towards higher and medium-rise buildings, the guidance and the information to date in technical guidance documents is geared towards common, non-complex buildings. In light of that, the move towards sustainable products and the decarbonisation of the construction industry, the timber and construction steering group was set up. It is an interdepartmental and industry group-----

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

We know this, and the group is doing good work. The question is when we will have the clarity, the guidelines and the regulations that are required.

Ms Sarah Neary

A number of us around the table here are working on thematic group 2 of that, which is looking at regulations, standards and compliance, and a tender will go out shortly for an in-depth look at it. Other parts of Europe have produced extensive guidance on, for example, cross-laminated timber, and that is required to be applied to the Irish conditions. We need safe buildings - we all agree on that - particularly with regard to fire safety when using combustible materials. Second, we want our buildings to perform in the Irish climate, and water-ingress protection and so on are vital. We have all been involved in other reports that have shown these things have not been done right in the past, and we want to make sure we have the guidance in place-----

Deputy Eoin Ó Broin

There is no timeline, however, for that as yet. Is that what Ms Neary is saying?

Ms Sarah Neary

I do not have a timeline but I know the tender will go out shortly. There is always the first-principles route as well for bespoke buildings, and all that work has to be shown to prove they can perform in these conditions.

Senator John Cummins

I thank the witnesses for attending. They are the experts and we are the politicians, so the questions I am going to put forward will be in layman's terms. I have looked at the area of timber construction and nearly 90% of new-build construction in Scotland, whose climate is not too dissimilar to our own, is timber based, and it has gone higher than the 11 m that has been mentioned. Are we saying what has been done in Scotland is wrong or is somehow inferior to what we are seeking to achieve in Ireland? Why can we not take the practice of our nearest neighbour and apply it in Ireland? Mr. Nestor and Ms Neary might wish to take that.

Ms Sarah Neary

I am happy to come in on that. The figures we have at the moment suggest in or around 50% of residential housing in Ireland is built with timber frame, so there is still a way to go even on the common building types without going above the 10 m or 11 m. We have a way to go even in respect of using more timber at that level. Under the Government's approach, there is an extensive initiative at the moment to promote modern methods of construction, including timber frame, and there is a commitment relating to social housing. Construct Innovate, the construction technology centre, has been developed, which can support modern methods of construction, and there is a demonstration park in Mount Lucas. There is also the roadmap for public procurement. All these measures are heading in that direction, supporting the greater use of timber, and that is where we want to go.

Senator John Cummins

What about the higher rise element of that? This goes to the point Deputy Ó Broin made about the guidance, notwithstanding the ability to be able to go through first principles.

Ms Sarah Neary

The interdepartmental group is working with industry in five thematic areas and that is all about increasing the use of timber in construction. The one that relates specifically to what we are discussing today concerns regulations and standards and we are working on that group. As I said, a consultation is going out to tender-----

Senator John Cummins

It just seems slow. Does Mr. Nestor wish to comment?

Mr. Pat Nestor

Certainly, for two- or three-storey housing, timber frame and the use of timber materials is very common. I believe there are about 17 registered timber frame manufacturers in the country, so the capacity does have a limit. Timber frame is very widely used in two- and three-storey housing, which is the predominant type of housing countrywide. For apartment blocks, we see up to four storeys of timber frame in Dublin city. It requires a high level of attention to detail to get the construction and fire-stopping right and the cavity barriers correctly fixed and placed properly, with proper materials, in a resilient way in order that they will not fall away in two or three years. It is so important for the safety of the people in the building and, in the event of a fire, for the safety of responding firefighters that the building perform. The attention to detail is very important.

Senator John Cummins

In the case of living over a shop, for example, it is commonly pointed out it is very hard to apply current regulations to older buildings and that that is an impediment to bringing a lot of these buildings back into use. Mr. Keeley and Mr. Nestor might like to comment on that. We have seen excellent examples in my county, Waterford, through the repair and leasing scheme and so on, which have brought these older buildings back into use. Is there a case to be made for compartmentalisation in older buildings where there are short distances to exits without reaching the gold standard? I know we have to be mindful of safety but is there a different way by which we can address vacancy in older buildings? As I said, our guests are the experts and we are here to listen.

Mr. Dennis Keeley

We are a regulator. While I can see the benefits of the reuse of those types of premises for bringing life back into cities and towns, we assess fire certificates and changes of use based on the current legislation and the current guidance and it is very difficult for us as regulators to deviate from that. I recognise the need for change and the advantages that would ensue with the adaptation of a lot of premises in our cities and towns but it is very difficult to deviate from that.

Senator John Cummins

What about compartmentalisation?

Mr. Pat Nestor

A lot of the obstacles to the conversion of buildings are merely perceived, and the guidance on section 7, on existing buildings, in the new technical guidance document will be most useful for designers and owners of buildings who are looking to adapt their premises. A few years ago, "Bringing Back Homes", essentially a textbook for exactly that type of work, was published and is extremely useful. The building regulations are useful for adapting existing buildings for reuse, within the requirements and without compromising safety, and the fire safety certificate process is very robust. The obstacles are often perceived rather than real.

Senator John Cummins

Sprinkler systems were mentioned. Is it the case a sprinkler system has to have its own, tanked source of water and that it cannot be connected to the mains for use in new apartment complexes?

Mr. Eoin O'Dowd

I think I can answer that. The provisions for sprinklers were originally introduced in an amendment to Technical Guidance Document B in 2020. The particulars for the systems, given they are an essential life safety system, require certainty in use and performance. For that reason, there is a provision within the then technical guidance document and in the 2024 version that there is a tank or a dedicated supply and that there is redundancy in pumps and facilities provided to ensure there is a continuity of service. The provision for the building regulations are separate, with provision of water in buildings generally. They are designed to ensure that reliability in use of an essential system.

Senator John Cummins

So it is the case that for use of the sprinkler system for X period of time in any new apartment complex, it has to have X capacity of water in its own right. Therefore, if we look at city centre and brownfield sites, we are looking at significant excavation under or on top with regard to the provision of its “own source” of water for the sprinkler systems. Is that the case?

Mr. Eoin O'Dowd

The provisions of the guidance give a minimum threshold for volume of storage but the final value is dependent on the particular sprinkler flow and water movement within the unit for a specific number of sprinkler heads operating for a specific period of time, and it is consistent with standards that have been published on the same guidance on these islands.

Senator John Cummins

It seems like that is quite an engineering task to have to overcome when we are looking at density and requirements in constrained city centre sites. It is what it is, of course, but it adds significant cost to any build in terms of a viability measure in city centre sites.

An Cathaoirleach

I will invite Deputy O'Callaghan to go next because he has business in the Chamber as well. I will then go back to Senator Boyhan. I thank Senator Boyhan.

Deputy Cian O'Callaghan

I appreciate that very much. I thank everyone who has come in. I wish to ask the Department about the use of highly combustible materials. Is it the case that developers can still use highly combustible materials in residential buildings?

Mr. Eoin O'Dowd

The provisions of Technical Guidance Document B 2024 give certain thresholds for certain precautions to take effect following on from the publication of the regulations themselves in the second schedule. For specific buildings – this includes all buildings with floor height over 15 m – the whole external wall build-up, including any insulating products within it, has to meet the minimum reaction to fire classification of class A2, which can only be achieved by following a robust series of tests termed the European classification system. It is consistent throughout the 27 EU member states.

For buildings below these thresholds, the external wall make-up is permitted to have a reaction to fire classification in keeping with the current guidance. However, at height, the general products that may be found in the external wall have to meet that classification, or where a full-scale destructive test has been carried out in past to specific characteristics, which is limitation of flame spread in a given a period of time. Then that system, but only that tested and certified system, may be placed on a facade.

Deputy Cian O'Callaghan

Mr. O’Dowd is saying that for lower buildings, highly combustible materials can be used, and for higher buildings, a developer can only use highly combustible materials if it has been tested as part of a system that prevents the spread of fire. Is that the situation?

Mr. Eoin O'Dowd

There is a table of classification of reaction to fire of construction products for the key thresholds below the 15 m mark and above the 15 m mark. However, other characteristics come into play, including the distance of the building to a boundary to another site, where additional characteristics, such as fire resistance, also come into effect for the given buildings. It is a complex system of characteristics that come into effect, but those would be the key thresholds.

Deputy Cian O'Callaghan

One of the difficulties in Grenfell, for example, was systems failure. It was not just highly combustible cladding; it was systems failure. There were many issues with it. One of the issues that came up in Grenfell was the smoke toxicity. As I think most people would know, it is generally smoke that kills people, not usually fire. Smoke toxicity levels in the building materials is one of the issues. There was a 2004 report from the UK’s Building Research Establishment that noted that only two countries in Europe did not regulate smoke toxicity levels in building materials properly, and those two countries were the UK and Ireland. As I said, there were many factors in the Grenfell Tower but one of the factors was smoke toxicity levels from building materials. Regarding the changes made in part B, are smoke toxicity levels in building materials now regulated or not? What is the situation?

Mr. Eoin O'Dowd

That is an interesting question. First and foremost, the production of toxic products as part of a fire is a function down to fire dynamics – the function of what is burning in the materials of the room and the building, but also how it is burning and the availability of oxygen. As part of our building regulations, we have a comprehensive layering of protection systems in place and the provision of what can be termed as perhaps one of the most complex and comprehensive requirements for early detection and a warning to facilitate means of escape out of our buildings. In limited reaction to fire, we have our lining materials, our compartmentation requirements and ventilation in our residential buildings. There are the combustibility provisions that currently exist in the guidance document and that through the 2024 amendments come into effect for the tall buildings, or buildings with a topmost floor height above 15 m. In addition to that, there are other provisions contained within the technical guidance document to support the important objectives of fire safety, such as the suppression systems that seek to control fire growth. There is-----

Deputy Cian O'Callaghan

Returning to my question, are smoke toxicity levels in building materials regulated or not? With Grenfell, unfortunately, as with many disasters, multiple things went wrong. The "stay put" policy was obviously one of the issues, but there were multiple failures. Unfortunately, when there is loss of human life, it is often when several things have failed. If the answer is that it is not regulated but there are these other things in place, one of the reasons it is regulated in other countries is because if other systems fail, then at least smoke toxicity levels in the building materials will not be an issue. Are they regulated or not? I understand they are part of a system - I understand that.

Mr. Eoin O'Dowd

For certain buildings over the 15 m mark, there is a requirement of a reaction to fire classification of A2 unless you have that test. We understand the question of smoke toxicity is being examined. It was examined by the European Commission in 2017. It looked at smoke toxicity as an essential characteristic of products under the construction product regulations. Along with other recommendations from that report, it recommended that it would be beneficial to look at it as a pan-European system. We are aware that smoke toxicity is being examined as part of an ongoing review to improve document B – the TGDB counterpart. We will be paying close attention to this research and we will also commit to further examine the question of smoke toxicity in construction products as part of our own fire safety research group.

Deputy Cian O'Callaghan

I appreciate those commitments but given that smoke toxicity levels in building materials are regulated throughout Europe – we are an outlier on this – given there is the 2004 report from the UK’s Building Research Establishment that noted this problem, and given that 72 people lost their lives in Grenfell Tower where one of the many issues was smoke toxicity levels, surely we should be properly regulating smoke toxicity levels in building materials in Ireland now and not just having it on a list of things to look at.

Mr. Eoin O'Dowd

As we said, in respect of the layering of protections, including the early detection, especially through the TGDB 2024, all of our dwelling houses have a comprehensive detection system, which means that by the time a fire grows to a certain size, that system will have gone into full alert, initially for those flats most at risk, then for the entire building, should it grow to a sufficient size.

Deputy Cian O'Callaghan

The concern relates to when these things fail. If all the early detection systems, compartmentalisation and everything else works, there will not be an issue. The problem is that tragic loss of life occurs when different systems fail. When something is missing, for example, the compartmentalisation, it becomes a matter of life and death.

Ms Sarah Neary

Mr. O'Dowd mentioned the construction products regulation. It regulates all of the rules around the marketing of construction products on the market. We need to conform with European assessment methods in relation to any performance requirement. We cannot bring in regulations or further requirements on products in advance of going through the standardisation process.

Deputy Cian O'Callaghan

Every other European country has regulated smoke toxicity levels in the building materials in residential construction since at least 2004. Saying that we cannot do it because of European regulations when regulation is in place in every other European Union country seems to be a bizarre answer.

Ms Sarah Neary

In its report, the European Commission stated it wanted to take a harmonised view of it and that is what the CPR does. It harmonises the assessment methods for it for products and the rules.

Deputy Cian O'Callaghan

I understand harmonisation, but every other country is regulating this and has done for decades.

Senator Victor Boyhan

I welcome the witnesses. On a positive note, they are the experts and professionals and this is a highly specialised area. Clearly, the administrative procedures for the demonstration of compliance in respect of the individual buildings or works are set out in the building control regulations. That clarity is important and it is worth saying that. The responsibility for compliance with building regulations rests first and foremost with the building owners, developers, builders and designers. We need to emphasise that and we need to be clear because clarity is needed here. The responsibility for the enforcement of compliance with the building regulations rests with the 31 local building control authorities. I know Mr. Nestor does not speak on behalf of the County and City Management Association, CCMA, or the 31 local building control authorities collectively. Dublin City Council has a strong record on compliance and monitoring of all this. Are there sufficient resources and expertise available to Mr. Nestor and his team in Dublin City Council in this area?

Mr. Pat Nestor

Yes. In Dublin City Council, we have adequate resources to carry out the function effectively of enforcing the requirements of the building control regulations. It is a policy of Dublin City Council to ensure the resources are in place. On the level of inspection of construction sites, over the past ten years, we have been inspecting consistently between 70% and 80% of all new buildings constructed in Dublin city. As I said previously, once inspected, we make regular inspections, on a recurring basis, from commencement through to completion. In Dublin City Council we have the resources. The national building control project is hosted by Dublin City Council. Year on year, the statistics reported by the National Oversight Audit Commission of local authorities show that inspection rates across the country are increasing. It seems to be an area of increasing priority.

Senator Victor Boyhan

I thank Mr. Nestor. Ms Neary is with the Department. Is she satisfied there are full resources available? Are there no additional demands coming from any of the 31 authorities regarding resourcing the compliance of the building regulations? Has the CCMA contacted her or shared any concerns with her regarding the resources necessary to be fully compliant with these new regulations?

Ms Sarah Neary

As the Senator said, clarity around the provisions of the regulations in the first place is provided through the development of technical documents on the building regulations, so that people know what is expected in order to comply. In terms of looking at building control in the broadest sense, the introduction in 2014 of the rules around building control, the administrative processes, roles and responsibilities and professional involvement from design into construction was a step change in the process in the industry and has increased compliance. In line with that is the building control management project that Mr. Nestor mentioned. That shared service, operated by Dublin City Council, has five pillars, working on compliance, support-----

Senator Victor Boyhan

I understand. Is Ms. Neary aware of the CCMA's concerns regarding resources?

Ms Sarah Neary

I will outline what we are doing at the moment with the CCMA. The programme for Government included a commitment to look at the establishment of a building standards regulator. Last year, a desktop study was done of the systems of building control around Europe and other regulators within Ireland that are successfully operating.

Senator Victor Boyhan

Could Ms Neary share that with the committee? It is important.

Ms Sarah Neary

We certainly can share it. I wonder whether it is on our website but we can certainly share it with the Senator.

Senator Victor Boyhan

Did the CCMA raise any other concerns about resources? I am conscious of time. I am aware it has been in touch with the Department.

Ms Sarah Neary

Earlier this year, a steering group was set up to look at the building standards regulator, taking a strategic view of scope, function and how it would work. The CCMA is engaging with us in that forum.

Senator Victor Boyhan

Again, it would be helpful for us to understand that engagement, if Ms Neary could share any of the information on that. I am privy to some of it because people have shared it with me, but the committee would be interested in that.

Ms Sarah Neary

The group is finalising its report. Over the next little while, we will have a report which we will be happy to share.

Senator Victor Boyhan

I thank Ms Neary. I turn to the chief fire officer. Deputy Cian O'Callaghan put his finger on it. There have to be concerns about smoke toxicity. I know there were other issues in the case of Grenfell, but smoke toxicity is of concern. As an expert in this area, does Mr. Keeley have any knowledge of buildings in the greater Dublin area that currently have similar cladding to that used on Grenfell Tower? Is he aware of any building with similar cladding and, if so, could he share that information with the committee?

Mr. Dennis Keeley

I am not aware. The task force within the Department commissioned a review of buildings nationally. Dublin participated in that. We identified a number of buildings and we engaged with the review over the last couple of years regarding any issues that were identified. We are continuing to work with a small number that remain. The majority had either confirmed the type of cladding that were of concern and confirmed the type of cladding they were using, which was not of the type the Senator referred to. There were a small number where there were some issues around the cladding. We are working with a small number of those, probably less than a handful.

Senator Victor Boyhan

Has that engagement progressed? People are living in these premises or they may be commercial or industrial premises. There has to be concerns. As chief fire officer, Mr. Keeley would clearly be concerned. I would like to know more about how all that is progressed. Can Mr. Keeley assure us that none of these premises is residential?

Mr. Dennis Keeley

We can assure the Senator that none of them is residential and all of them have been progressed or are progressing.

Senator Victor Boyhan

Dublin Fire Brigade is continuing to progress them.

Mr. Dennis Keeley

We are continuing to engage with them. As I say, it is a very small number. It may actually be just one or two. One of them may be empty and the other one is in the process of changing.

Senator Victor Boyhan

I thank Mr. Keeley.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Senator Boyhan. I will take the next slot. As I mentioned, the committee have held a series of meetings on dereliction and vacancy in which the refurbishment and reuse of older three- and four-storey buildings came up. We also did a series of meetings on modern methods of construction, which also threw up some difficulties. I note that somebody commented on perceived versus real difficulties. This session is very helpful for the committee in dealing with the technical side of the issue. Is it true that there is still a height limit for the use of building with timber because the technical guidance does not change that? Is that true? Could someone clarify that?

Ms Sarah Neary

The technical guidance has not changed in that respect.

However, the work of the interdepartmental and industry group on timber in construction has five thematic areas. One of these looks at regulations and standards, particularly regarding cross-laminated timber, CLT.

An Cathaoirleach

This is another stage in the progression of Part B, with the consultation we have had and the new issuance of Part B. There is still more work to be done on engineered timber. Ms Neary made a point about the percentage of residential dwellings done with timber frame. That tends to be the inner leaf of the building, with the exterior still tending to be done with concrete and blocks. We need to move to a point where there is more timber construction in buildings for residential use rather than just the conventional timber frame that we have had for a long time. Height limits for the use of timber still exist but the working group is looking at this. Is that correct?

Ms Sarah Neary

It is not a legal restriction. The building regulations are open to all processes but compliance has to be demonstrated.

An Cathaoirleach

One of the points made was that while the regulations do not stop people from doing it and there is a way to do it, it is really difficult and very challenging so why go through the hassle rather than go the conventional route and build with blocks and steel. Construction has a carbon impact that has to be balanced out.

Ms Sarah Neary

That is why this interdepartmental and industry group has been formed to look at how these systems can work and be safe from a fire perspective and perform as we expect buildings to perform.

An Cathaoirleach

A complex building would be an engineered timber building using CLT or glue laminated timber, GLT, to build multiple storeys. The committee has seen evidence of six- and eight-storey buildings in other European nations and an example of a 14-storey building in Helsinki. I accept what Ms Neary said about rain ingress into buildings through the cladding but they are using standardised European materials. Does she foresee that we could extract from those countries that have led on this and be able to apply the same standards and processes here? Are we trying to reinvent or are we taking from those countries? Can we not learn from those who are doing it well?

Ms Sarah Neary

That is part of the work of the thematic group. It is looking at other countries which have substantial documentation detailing all of the requirements to make sure the buildings work. We want to apply the same rigour to the buildings here. We have done it as a country for timber frame construction in IS 440 and, prior to that, timber frame manufacturers went through the Agrément process. When there is a substantial enough industry there is a kind of a consolidation and a standard can be formulated. Up to as recently as 2020, we produced supplementary guidance on the fire details in relation to floors, walls and roofs. They are needed to get this right.

An Cathaoirleach

I completely agree. We do not want a rush to try to do something that we will regret over the course of the next ten or 20 years, either because the buildings are not done to a proper standard or we have a fire disaster because we were trying to rush things. I fully accept that we need to have standards and a systematic approach so that Ms Neary's colleagues can expect the same result from every building they have to go into. I accept that and I am not trying to rush or push anybody along. In some of our meetings, a sense of frustration came across. I have met people who produce volumetric and modular buildings in Europe. It seems to be problematic to import and construct such buildings. Can I purchase a volumetric or modular building manufactured in France, Poland or Lithuania, bring it here and apply for planning permission and, if so, will it comply with building standards if it has the European conformity, CE, mark?

Ms Sarah Neary

For innovative forms of construction like that, there is not a harmonised standard, so there is a different process-----

An Cathaoirleach

It is not innovative in the country where I am buying it, only here. Is that the case?

Ms Sarah Neary

Yes, but anyone building in Ireland must meet Irish building regulations. All the work that goes into producing a CE mark is transferable into Ireland and is accepted as reliable information. Then, it is about assessing the information for compliance with the building regulations. Agrément certification carries out that function. A means of demonstrating is by going to Agrément and providing all the documentation. Agrément certification carries out an assessment to say what it complies with, what levels it can work to in Ireland and what exposure conditions, etc. That transposes into a ten- or 15-page document on how it can be used here

An Cathaoirleach

How long would that process generally take? I have met people who are producing these buildings in Europe. We could produce them here. There is plenty of capability in Ireland to produce these. I am not saying that we have to import them from Europe but there is a ready-made model there. I am just wondering how long the Agrément certification takes?

Ms Sarah Neary

I do not want to speak for the National Standards Authority of Ireland, NSAI, but I think the answer might be that it depends on the level of preparedness of the company. The authority has 17 building systems certified. That has grown from a low, single-digit figure ten years ago. This is definitely an area of growth and something that is supported by Housing for All. There are a number of initiatives, some of which I mentioned earlier, on the promotion of modern methods of construction and the accelerated delivery of the number of social homes, including the Mount Lucas Housing for All demonstration park. That is trying to encourage-----

An Cathaoirleach

I accept that progress is being made and that we are going in the right direction. The sense of frustration I have is that we seem to be doing so very slowly. I would counter that by saying that we need to do it right, rather than quickly and wrong. This is where it comes back to whether they are perceived or real difficulties that we are hearing from people who work in this area.

Senator John Cummins

I want to go back to the issue of sprinkler systems. Mr. Keeley said that he had argued for the sprinkler systems to be installed in the nursing home setting. I would not disagree with him on this point. In Mr. Keeley's experience of dealing with fires in the course of his career, has there ever been a situation where the public water supply was not available?

Mr. Dennis Keeley

Hydrants might fail on occasion or water pressure might be very low.

Senator John Cummins

For that very reason, the fire tenders have tanks with sufficient capacity to manage until the next hydrant is reached.

Mr. Dennis Keeley

I am not absolutely sure about the point the Senator is making but the premise of the sprinkler system would be early detection to inhibit the growth of a fire, before the arrival of the Fire Service. That either extinguishes the-----

Senator John Cummins

Where I am going with the question is the requirement to have tanked or elevated storage or reservoir storage for sprinkler systems. If the public water main is available to the Fire Service, then it is available to the building prior to the arrival of the Fire Service. To go back to the Department, I am really questioning the need for tanked or reservoir storage for sprinkler systems on apartment complexes, when a public water source is available. Talk me through the rationale. Is Mr. Keeley aware of the cost involved in that?

Mr. Eoin O'Dowd

The cost analysis was carried out as part of the 2020 additional guidance to Technical Guidance Document B - Fire Safety - Volume 2 Dwelling Houses and informed the publication of that document. In terms of the provision of a suppression system, in that version of the document, it was in the case of specific modifications for the internal layouts of what we term open-plan flats. Here we would typically have a protected-entrance hallway that the suppression system works in place of.

In the same vein, the travel distance within common corridors was lengthened by means of suppression systems where they are provided. Those systems are an essential life-safety system. Not unlike our other life-safety systems provided in buildings, our fire alarm or smoke control systems have redundant backups by means of battery or generator systems. With those suppression systems, given their essential characteristics for life safety and control of the growth of a fire pending the arrival of the fire services, it is essential the redundancy is-----

Senator John Cummins

I am not questioning the importance of the system; I am questioning the source and supply of what goes into that sprinkler system. Is Mr. O'Dowd aware of any situation where a sprinkler system has not been able to avail of a public water source?

Mr. Eoin O'Dowd

Any systems installed and specified, whether to the older British standard or the new European 12845 standard, would have a typical redundancy built in for those essential life-saving characteristics. They do not rely on a dedicated supply. Depending on the height of the building, the pressure to get water to those heights is critical. These buildings could be of any height. Our new technical guidance document for the comprehensive provision refers to a 15 m-plus height, which has a significant requirement of head pressure for pumping. Those supplies must be there. In their absence, you depend on the water in the pipework. These are essential systems that were found prudent as part of the public consultation. That principle was generally supported through the 2020 and the 2024 public consultations for such systems in buildings.

Senator John Cummins

On the perceived versus the actual and the guidance on older buildings, it is a topic I have done a huge amount of work on in my county. Mr. Nestor touched in the opening round on the fact much of it can be got around in bringing older buildings back into use. There are still difficulties with some and it seems there is a conflict involving one arm of the Department that is trying to activate older buildings over shops, derelict pubs and former commercial units. We have introduced new exemptions from planning to turn vacant pubs into residential developments of below ten units and we put that threshold on it for a reason. Obviously, everything has to comply with fire guidance. Is there not a conflict still in certain areas where the difficulty is the fabric and make-up of an old building in a city centre is hamstrung by some of the guidance?

Ms Sarah Neary

Working with existing buildings is more complex than a new build. There is no doubt about that. In the context of part B, we wanted to deal with that. Section 7 is a new section that deals with works to existing buildings. It takes a cascading approach on dealing with them to incorporate the most of what is in a new build. Where that is not possible, cascading means down and we can go into that in more detail.

Senator John Cummins

Yes, please, particularly around access arrangements. The biggest hurdle, particularly in city centres where a ground floor is commercial and it is residential above, is access to the street and exiting the building when it comes to fire.

Ms Sarah Neary

The Senator mentioned the competing agendas. I will hand over to Mr. Wickham, who works closely with other sections of the Department on a number of initiatives.

Mr. John Wickham

There are a number of cross-divisional pieces that feed into this from planning and fire safety to building control. In 2018, I chaired the working group on the reuse of existing buildings, which produced a publication called Bringing Back Homes. It was published in 2018 to try to demystify and clarify how the regulations apply to the low-hanging fruit of properties in our villages and towns that can be brought back into use. The second edition of Bringing Back Homes was published in April of this year and reflected the updated policy position and any changes that happened in the interim. As Ms Neary said, in the new technical guidance document B, section 7 has put flexibility in place whereby if the guidance towards new build cannot be satisfied, a range of measures can be adopted. The Senator spoke of access and egress. For instance, the width of stairs can sometimes be perceived as a problem. There is flexibility in that as long as the occupancy is less than 50, the stair width can be reduced compared to that of a new building. Regarding spread-of-flame linings, historical standards could be applied as opposed to trying to make them comply with new standards. In that context and notwithstanding compensating measures that can be looked at, the scope is broadened out for those designing these solutions and our colleagues assessing the applications on the other end. It is in black and white in the technical guidance document.

Senator John Cummins

Is that practical document fully taken on board when inspections occur?

Ms Mary O'Brien

Section 7 in TGD B is welcome and is necessary to help existing buildings achieve compliance with building regulations. The use of compensatory measures is sometimes necessary to obtain that compliance. A pragmatic approach to these buildings, while trying at all times to achieve compliance, is important.

Senator John Cummins

I assume the witnesses would dismiss the assertion that a pragmatic approach may be taken by one inspector and not by another. The problem with something not being black and white, notwithstanding the document asking for a pragmatic approach to be taken on an older building, is one fire inspector could be of a view to work with people to do this, but another fire inspector could say, "No, we want X, Y and Z". The difficulty for a builder in that circumstance is not just time, but money and financing. By the nature of a project on an older building, once the building is opened up, people do not know what you will be faced with. Cost is a big barrier. Everything has to be safe but the pragmatic approach the witnesses refer to is the most important thing when working with a builder on an older building, otherwise we will continue to have empty buildings forever. We can talk about 100,000 units until the cows come home but they will remain like that unless we are pragmatic in applying the regulations.

Mr. Dennis Keeley

The point the Senator made is very valid. I speak only on behalf of Dublin and the process. Applications such as the one the Senator described are complex.

They are relatively rare, particularly the really complex ones. They are an opportunity for colleagues to share insight and often seek advice. We regularly have workshops, toolbox workshops and continuous professional development workshops, CPDs, with staff, particularly on the unusual events. We recognise that consistency within our fire authority is really important and has been a bone of contention in the past. I think that has to be acknowledged. It can be difficult for engineers and consultants who are trying to deal with Dublin Fire Brigade to ensure consistency. However, we have been working on that for many years now. We have reached a very good point on that.

The complex buildings and the complex fire certs are used as case histories, workshops or CPDs, but whether its a workshop or having a cup of coffee in the canteen, colleagues will share advice. Often, the canteen is the best location for running that out. I would like to think that pragmatic approach and understanding of the difficulties that the broad industry faces is recognised by colleagues within the fire authorities as a means of trying to find solutions. A pragmatic means, if it can be achieved, can then become a benchmark for colleagues. That happens across fire authorities, not just within the fire authority. There is regular communication to try to aid that consistency.

Deputy Francis Noel Duffy

I thank the witnesses for their commitment to evolving Part B to cater for mass-timber buildings. I appreciate that and think we are going in the right direction. I understand the conservative position we need to take relative to over jurisdictions where developments, as the Chair, Deputy Matthews, said, have reached eight storeys and well above that. That said, with the revised Part B technical guidance documents, can a client work, through their fire officer, with the fire department to achieve four to eight storey mass-timber buildings, whether they are apartments or offices, under the current legislation to achieve a fire cert?

Ms Sarah Neary

Yes, they can.

Deputy Francis Noel Duffy

It is as simple as that. It can be done.

Mr. Dennis Keeley

It is up to the designer to demonstrate compliance. We have talked about the various innovative ways that can happen but, yes, it can. It is a challenge at times. It is difficult. As a chief fire officer, I would say the balance is between the technical design and construction of the premises and fire officers and firefighters who have to use that building if there is a well developed fire. How is that building is going to perform with this new method of construction? That is the balance. I want as much information and as much research as possible to assess, so I can input into both the training for firefighters and equipment for firefighters. There is a balance and there is a tension between the two.

Deputy Francis Noel Duffy

To date, that has not happened. There has not been anything built over three storeys with cross-laminated timber, CLT, or purely CLT.

Ms Mary O'Brien

No.

Deputy Francis Noel Duffy

It is possible. Is that what the witnesses are saying? I know I have worked on a building that has achieved a fire cert in Dublin, but to go above three storeys is very much possible under the current regulations.

Ms Sarah Neary

Under the regulations, as long as compliance with all parts of the building regulations can be demonstrated and achieved on site, yes.

Deputy Francis Noel Duffy

Fair enough. Perfect, that is great.

An Cathaoirleach

I just have one follow up question on that. In a lot of the research and in the meetings we have had on dereliction and vacancy, there was talk about the establishment of what was called a one-stop shop. If someone wanted to go in and change a building's use from commercial, a three or four storey building, into residential, we have taken away the requirement for planning permission for that in certain conditions. One may not need a conservation certificate if it is not a protected structure, but one will need an accessibility cert and a fire cert. It was about the capability of somebody going in with all their paperwork on the one day and getting these things assessed, which I believe happens in Northern Ireland. At the moment, those are all separate processes. We were told it can be onerous and it can put people off doing it.

I suppose what we have to think of is always adhering to high standards but trying to make processes such that it is attractive for people to do it. As Deputy Duffy pointed out, yes, one can go more than three storeys in CLT in this country under the guidance, but it is incredibly difficult and an awkward thing to do, so why would somebody do it? That is the thing we are trying to address. If there is a three or four storey building at the moment, with timber staircases and timber floors in it, can that be refurbished into residential? Can those old timber staircases and old timber floors be used at the moment under Part B?

Mr. Eoin O'Dowd

Under the provisions of section 7, which was specifically designed to provide that sense of clarity and consistency, as Ms Neary and Mr. Wickham have said, in a tiered approach, we would advocate trying to comply with sections 1 through to 6 of the principal document. If that does not work, in section 7 there are very explicit, prescriptive provisions that may be applied in respect of the building. Even if that does not work, the next approach is taken, which are compensating measures to achieve the objectives of fire safety. The section brings together what is already in the document and it enhances it substantially for the likes of the four storey Georgian or the living over the shop style buildings. Included in it is clarity in respect of existing timber stairs where it states the stairs can be used. It is explicitly stated provided that they are safe for transit of individuals in a building. The provisions on timber floors in a building of any height are also contained within the document. It is not limited to that threshold to which we have previously spoken. That is actually in the current technical guidance document. It could already be found, but it is now found in a distinct, bespoke section, constructed specifically to answer those questions.

An Cathaoirleach

I will have to read it as I have not read it yet. Does Mr. Wickham have a comment?

Mr. John Wickham

I was going to add a comment on the one-stop shops. It has been a concept that has been discussed along with its benefits, etc. The working group on the reuse of existing buildings did put together its expertise to try to come up with the manual, called Bringing Back Homes, to demystify the layering of regulations and how they apply to typical building scenarios. For instance, a disability access certificate is not needed for the reuse of a building containing a flat. That was a regulatory change back in 2018. Measures were put in place to reduce some of the bureaucracy that was there, and to give clarification on some of the things that were perceived as being a problem as well. In essence, that has worked really well among building control and those avoiding solutions of reuse to try to get matching expectations. That is one of the core objectives; making sure the regulations are well understood and that they can be applied without unnecessary delay when it comes to the processing of fire certs or applications.

At this point in time in 2024, we have consolidated all that we have available to us in the context of section 7 in terms of providing flexibility. We also do not want to stop there. We are researching the topic. Within the next couple of weeks, we will have awarded a contract through Construct Innovate for academic research to look into the perceived versus the actual impediments to the reuse of existing buildings. That is a ten-month contract that will hopefully give further evidence that we can inform our decision-making going forward.

An Cathaoirleach

That is very helpful. Bringing Buildings Back is a really good document and the witness is right that there was a new version of it released recently. That is excellent.

I do not see anybody else indicating to ask questions. On behalf of the committee, I want to thank all the witnesses for the work they are doing in this area. I know we can be quite demanding because we want to see action quickly on it, but the witnesses are responsible for making sure it is done properly and appropriately and to a very high standard. I appreciate the work the witnesses have done and I appreciate them taking time out of their roles today to assist us.

The joint committee adjourned at 4.50 p.m. until 11 a.m. on Tuesday, 28 May 2024.