Why Peabody wants more info from government to tackle second staircase dilemma

All new development should achieve the highest standards of fire safety.

This is Peabody’s starting point in relation to the government’s consultation on mandatory second staircases in buildings over 30 metres. This aligns with the Mayor of London’s position which is reflected in the decision to reference the government’s consultation stance as the London Plan policy.

We support the principle that anything that makes things tangibly safer for residents and the emergency services in the event of a fire is to be welcomed.

But the nature of significant changes like this means there are also a range of considerations and challenges that need to be appraised.

Boards and committees of developers and housing associations will have been looking again at their tall buildings which are already under construction and considering their options and the impact of redesigns. We are no different and are proceeding with caution.

We are carefully considering the impact of redesigning all our future tall buildings that have not yet started construction. It is not an insurmountable challenge, but decisions do need to be taken carefully and thoughtfully. This deliberative process is not unique or new. We are used to adjusting to legislative changes and adapting designs to changing guidance as part of delivering often complicated, large scale mixed tenure and multi-phase projects.

Our first priority is safety. The GLA (Greater London Authority) has made clear that all schemes approved before the consultation started will be honoured in terms of planning decisions and grant support.

This is a sensible and welcome approach. Where tall building schemes progress with compliant single staircases it is important to realise that they meet all current safety standards. 

“Our first priority is safety.”

Both government and the GLA have an important role, with us, in providing assurance to residents, investors, insurers and mortgage providers that the highest safety standards are compatible with single staircase buildings that are well designed, constructed and maintained.

For buildings which are quite far along in their construction any significant redesign obviously carries huge practical and viability implications. For those at an earlier stage we are looking at where it may be practicable to make changes.

Often the level of affordable homes in a scheme is measured by habitable room, but if a second staircase is needed the impact of the loss of space needs to be fully understood to ensure we are not diluting the number of affordable homes being created. The government knows the proposals could mean fewer affordable homes being built, and we need to balance this very carefully. 

“If a second staircase is needed the impact of the loss of space needs to be fully understood to ensure we are not diluting the number of affordable homes being created.”

Once you add in the land constraints and revisiting planning requirements you could be looking at significant delays, fewer affordable homes, higher costs and lower surpluses to reinvest without necessarily achieving significant tangible safety outcomes.

In addition to safety appraisals, we are reviewing each scheme individually and carefully in relation to its design, construction journey, and the impact on affordability for residents (for example, increased service charges by adding additional staircases and lifts).

For tall buildings that are at an early stage and not yet on site we have more time to obtain clarity and plan for the challenges ahead. It will be interesting to see the long-term effects - whether this means fewer tall buildings being proposed, or indeed whether it might see increased applications for exceptionally tall, wide buildings as developers seek to offset a second staircase with more residential above. 

“In addition to safety appraisals, we are reviewing each scheme individually and carefully in relation to its design, construction journey, and the impact on affordability for residents (for example, increased service charges by adding additional staircases and lifts). “

The eventual consequences of the proposals are not yet clear and will not become clear until the outcome of the current consultation is known.

More immediately, as the consultation closes, we would welcome clarity from government around the purpose and technical requirements of second staircases.

We support the principle of providing safe routes and better access for safety crews, but we do need much more technical guidance and information from government if we are to avoid significant delays to the continued delivery of much needed new, energy efficient and affordable homes.

We will continue to work with the GLA and partners to ensure the highest levels of safety whilst trying to sustain progress in delivering good quality, new, affordable homes.

Phil Jenkins, executive director of development, Peabody