Potential Danger.
Is it only me or are some extremely important issues so obvious but an absolute age is taken to do anything to rectify them? We live in a fast-paced and policy-driven society whereby much is done to seemingly show that people are put at the heart of political momentum yet it has taken months for an in-depth inquiry to return a result that does not adequately address the problem of flammable cladding on the outside of tall buildings. The reported pictures of the actual fire clearly show the fast spreading flames jumping from floor to floor with no proper flame retardant barrier.
Banning the use of any flammable cladding to the outside of any tall building could have been imposed the day after the original fire had taken place. I think it is an insult and a disgrace that this obvious action is not put into place now and that such an inappropriate length of time has been taken to investigate the highly influential issue.
What is the point of an in-depth enquiry that fails to address one of the major influencers in a situation and what is worse is that the author of the inquiry ironically has suggested that a ban on flammable materials would have been the correct action, although that was not incorporated in her own official findings.
This situation is as serious as it can get and when final decisions on the material used is conducted on a desktop simulation that does not include an actual real fire situation, this surely indicates that the findings of a report do not match the required needed response.
Using flammable material plus creating an artificial wind space between the original structure is the ideal creation to facilitate and spread flames up the outside of a tall building. Tall buildings naturally, because of their structure, create an updraft of air. Making a space for any flame to jump from floor to floor is an obvious design fault. What is clearly frustrating for people is that you do not have to have technical training to easily see an obvious issue and point it out, you do not need to have had the qualifications to have witnessed a horrendous misuse of funds or need to have had experience in planning to know that what happened must not ever happen again.
When are the authorities actually going to do? What many people can see and state unequivocally is that the current building regulations in regard to tall buildings with cladding that is not fit for purpose, needs to be rectified.
The practice of aesthetically patching up ageing and tall buildings by turning them into potential Roman candles should never have taken place in the first place. The fact that current building regulations do not appear to have any influence to stop future tragedies is unbelievable, shocking and it does shame those who should be in a position to put a stop to it. It is not enough to simply give an overall report of identifiable hazards, potential danger to many lives is a subject for a needed visible response and this can only be through a practical demonstration of improved building regulations.
There is nothing more important than foundations for life being put as paramount in any political arena. If obvious issues are not put right in favour of looking at a more subtle and again lengthy approach to how buildings are maintained, then there is a vital missing factor at the heart of our government and that is one which would deem it unable to acknowledge the potential harm that could be inflicted. There is a potential danger in the building and maintaining policies of tall buildings and this is one that has to be revised.
Banning the use of any flammable cladding to the outside of any tall building could have been imposed the day after the original fire had taken place. I think it is an insult and a disgrace that this obvious action is not put into place now and that such an inappropriate length of time has been taken to investigate the highly influential issue.
What is the point of an in-depth enquiry that fails to address one of the major influencers in a situation and what is worse is that the author of the inquiry ironically has suggested that a ban on flammable materials would have been the correct action, although that was not incorporated in her own official findings.
This situation is as serious as it can get and when final decisions on the material used is conducted on a desktop simulation that does not include an actual real fire situation, this surely indicates that the findings of a report do not match the required needed response.
Using flammable material plus creating an artificial wind space between the original structure is the ideal creation to facilitate and spread flames up the outside of a tall building. Tall buildings naturally, because of their structure, create an updraft of air. Making a space for any flame to jump from floor to floor is an obvious design fault. What is clearly frustrating for people is that you do not have to have technical training to easily see an obvious issue and point it out, you do not need to have had the qualifications to have witnessed a horrendous misuse of funds or need to have had experience in planning to know that what happened must not ever happen again.
When are the authorities actually going to do? What many people can see and state unequivocally is that the current building regulations in regard to tall buildings with cladding that is not fit for purpose, needs to be rectified.
The practice of aesthetically patching up ageing and tall buildings by turning them into potential Roman candles should never have taken place in the first place. The fact that current building regulations do not appear to have any influence to stop future tragedies is unbelievable, shocking and it does shame those who should be in a position to put a stop to it. It is not enough to simply give an overall report of identifiable hazards, potential danger to many lives is a subject for a needed visible response and this can only be through a practical demonstration of improved building regulations.
There is nothing more important than foundations for life being put as paramount in any political arena. If obvious issues are not put right in favour of looking at a more subtle and again lengthy approach to how buildings are maintained, then there is a vital missing factor at the heart of our government and that is one which would deem it unable to acknowledge the potential harm that could be inflicted. There is a potential danger in the building and maintaining policies of tall buildings and this is one that has to be revised.
No comments have been added yet.
