Facing the Challenges of Managing Safety Cases for High-Rise Large Panel Blocks and Concrete Structures

Preparing submissions for Safety Case Reports for all High-Risk Buildings is a recognised challenge, but for legacy estates built in the 1950s and 1960s, when different construction techniques were piloted, especially for high-rise flats, additional challenges often arise in the form of Large Panel Systems (LPS). These have subsequently been substantially remodelled (including a 20+ storey brick envelope of a concrete frame) and have been managed or mismanaged in many ways since their design and first occupation, often without ongoing monitoring of their inherent stability and consideration of their future safety in the event of a tragedy.

Collating and analysing design and specification details can only start when you have found the core data sources, which are often “lost” when organisations merge or change (frequently without accurate archives). This therefore requires perseverance, lateral thinking, and time. Without this core information, how can any safety evaluation be made regarding current structural safety- especially in light of new legislation on damp and mould, which is often found in these poorly insulated and poorly heated structures?

Most clients are not aware of what should be considered in completing an assessment of safety. They can refer back to the publication in 2012 of Review of International Research on Structural Robustness and Disproportionate Collapse, which provides a baseline for asset owners (and their advisors) to consider structural risk assessments. Asset owners should ask themselves and record not only what information is available but also who is competent to complete and record these reviews.

Having a review is no guarantee of “safety.” If an asset has not been maintained, or even if there are records of structural investigations. These alone, without an ongoing commitment to review structural safety, do not demonstrate compliance.

It is not impossible to obtain a certificate from the regulator for such buildings, but it requires a considered and resourced approach from the building owner to investigate and identify all the risk issues, not just structural, and the ability to demonstrate how these multi-faceted structural and housing management issues are identified, managed, and coordinated. The reality for building owners who have not maintained or considered the need to provide additional reinforcement or evaluated the physical life of an asset will have a profound impact on the economic life of their asset base and needs to inform finance and business planning by the freeholder.

Despite these regulatory and business challenges, what we as custodians of these homes should never forget is that we have a higher obligation to the residents of these buildings and the wider community to consider their safety when reviewing the technical and corporate challenges these buildings represent.