Not always. Electrification can increase peak electrical demand, particularly where gas-fired heating is replaced with heat pumps, but the impact depends on plant selection, efficiency and operating strategy.

Existing electrical headroom, load diversity and opportunities to shift or reduce demand should be assessed first. In some cases, thermal storage or staged plant operation can reduce peak demand enough to avoid or defer a costly incoming supply upgrade.

Evacuation lifts are most relevant where stairs alone do not provide an equitable or practical means of escape, particularly in taller buildings or buildings used by people with limited mobility. They must be designed as part of the overall fire strategy with appropriate fire protection, power, controls and operational procedures.  

A fire engineer is usually needed when the fire-safety design can't be fully resolved through standard prescriptive requirements. This is common in buildings that are complex, mixed-use, high-rise, made of timber or being modernised. 

Early fire engineering input can also help when architecture, structure or building services create unusual constraints.

An existing fire strategy may still be suitable if the building use, occupancy, layout and fire-safety systems remain broadly unchanged and the original assumptions are still valid. Any significant refurbishment, change of use or increase in population should trigger a review.  

It's important to verify the basis of the existing strategy rather than assuming it remains appropriate. Incomplete documentation may mean parts of the strategy need to be reassessed. 

A performance solution is an alternative way of meeting the required fire-safety. It's used where the building design doesn't fit neatly within standard code provisions. 

Performance-based solutions are supported by engineering analysis, evidence and documentation that demonstrate an equivalent or acceptable level of safety to prescriptive provisions. 

Late engagement can limit the options available and increase the risk of redesign. Layouts, structure, facades and services may already be fixed, leaving the fire engineer to work around decisions rather than help optimise them.  

This can lead to additional fire separation, plant, smoke control, exits or approval work that may have been avoided earlier. It can also create program risk if the fire strategy identifies issues after design coordination or approvals are already underway. 

Batteries and electric vehicle (EV) charging can introduce risks associated with: 

• thermal runaway 

• fire spread 

• smoke 

• toxic gases  

• difficult suppression conditions.  

The level of risk depends on battery type, location, charging arrangement, ventilation and separation from other areas.  

Fire strategy should consider detection, containment, ventilation, access for emergency services and the interaction with sprinkler and smoke-control systems. These risks are best addressed as part of the overall building design. 

The main risk is assuming that the original fire strategy still suits the refurbished building. Early review helps identify where existing arrangements can remain and where upgrades or new performance solutions are needed. 

Key issues include: 

• the condition of existing fire separations 

• changes in use or occupancy 

• evacuation routes 

• smoke control 

• structural fire performance  

• whether existing systems still align with current requirements.  

Poor thermal comfort is often caused by drafts, uneven air distribution, excessive solar gain, hot or cold surfaces, badly located sensors, ineffective humidity control, poor zoning and controls that respond slowly to change.

Monitoring and system testing can show whether the issue is localised or a broader design problem.

Mixed-use buildings bring different occupancies, risk profiles, operating hours and ownership boundaries into one development.  

Interfaces between residential, retail, hotel, office or transport uses need to be clearly defined. A coordinated fire strategy is important so that one part of the development doesn't compromise another. 

The main challenges are usually: 

• evacuation 

• compartmentation 

• smoke movement 

• fire-service access  

• interaction between different fire systems.  

Safe egress should consider people who may not be able to use stairs independently during an emergency. This may involve accessible evacuation routes, protected refuge areas, evacuation lifts, communication systems and clear operational procedures. 

A fire engineer should be engaged as early as possible, ideally during concept design. Early involvement gives the fire engineer a chance to influence layout, egress, compartmentation, structure and services before those decisions become difficult or expensive to change. 

It also allows performance-based solutions to be explored where they can add real value. Engaging later often means working around fixed design decisions rather than helping shape a more efficient, compliant and practical solution from the outset. 

Your aim should be to make common changes possible, such as subdividing floors or changing occupancy patterns, without major modifications to central plant or base-building systems.

Designing for adaptability includes sensible zoning, modular plant, accessible distribution routes, flexible controls and enough spare capacity where there’s a clear reason to provide it.

Tenancy metering and after-hours operation should also be considered early.

Our approach, as engineers, is to build in enough flexibility that common future changes don't trigger a complete redesign. That means considering likely changes in occupancy, tenancy layout, fire loads, evacuation routes and services.  

Performance-based fire engineering can reduce cost by replacing prescriptive measures with solutions that are more proportionate to the actual risk. That that might mean avoiding unnecessary fire walls, reducing structural fire protection, rationalising smoke control or simplifying egress arrangements.  

The best savings usually come from integrating the fire strategy early when it can influence the design rather than being used to solve problems after major decisions have already been made. 

Fire engineering helps demonstrate that the alternative solution delivers an acceptable level of fire and life safety through analysis, modelling and clear documentation. This can help preserve open spaces, visual connections, atriums, facade treatments or other important architectural features that might otherwise be constrained.  

Fire engineering can streamline approvals by identifying likely departures from prescriptive requirements early and documenting a clear path to compliance. Early engagement with relevant authorities can also reduce uncertainty around complex or unusual solutions.  

It also helps avoid late redesign when a compliance issue is discovered after the architecture is already developed.  

It’s possible to reuse existing plant in a refurbishment where it still has useful life, and sufficient capacity and efficiency. Existing chillers, air-handling units, pumps, ductwork and controls should be assessed against the refurbished building’s future loads and operating requirements.

Retaining plant can save cost and embodied carbon.

Possibly. Electrification doesn’t always require a full mechanical replacement.

Existing pumps, air-handling units and distribution systems may still be usable if they’re compatible with lower-temperature heating and future loads. High-temperature heat pumps are also available on the market that can be closer to a direct swap out for existing gas fired boilers.

We recommend assessing the whole system rather than replacing components one by one. Retaining functional plant where it makes sense can reduce capital cost and embodied carbon while still moving the building toward an all-electric future.

Yes. Fire engineering can provide alternatives to prescriptive requirements where the proposed design can be shown to achieve the required safety outcome. This may support the architecture, evacuation strategies or more efficient use of space.  

Yes, performance-based fire engineering can reduce the need for overly conservative separation, additional stairs, oversized lobbies or other space-consuming measures where an alternative solution can be shown to provide equivalent safety.  

Early coordination with the architect and services team is important because the biggest space efficiencies are usually found before the building layout is fixed.