Games Monitor

Skip to main content.

Aftermath 2012 - LLDC Cladding Safety Report June 2017 'No inadequacies have been identified'

Following the recent article in Inside Housing which reported

Aluminium composite material (ACM) cladding, which was judged to be a major contributor to the spread of fire at Grenfell Tower in 2017, has still not been removed from 11 of the residential blocks in the East Village of Olympic Park in Stratford, east London.

ACM was discovered only this summer on two of the blocks. Landlord Triathlon Homes said this had been found in “limited places” and was “no immediate safety concern to residents”.

The East Village, which housed 17,000 athletes, was converted into 2,800 homes across 65 blocks after the games and was seen as a key part of the ‘London 2012 Olympic Legacy’ and regeneration of Stratford.

I decided to look back at an Environmental Information Request I made back in June 2017:

1. Please provide information regarding the fire safety precautions in East Village housing and in Chobham Manor. Are all the blocks of flats, 'affordable' (all categories) and non-affordable, fitted with sprinklers or are some units not fitted with sprinklers? Please specify which units are not fitted if this is the case.

2. If the blocks are fitted with sprinklers are they fitted in the flats or in corridors, staircases and communal areas, or both?

3. Please provide information regarding tests which have been carried out since the recent catastrophe at Grenfell Tower to establish that materials used in block construction, in particular any cladding used, are safe.

4. What plans has the LLDC made to rectify any inadequacies in fire safety, if that is necessary?

5. Have recent events led to any concerns about fire safety in any other structures in or around the Olympic Park? Has the LLDC conducted any fire safety inspections on other non-housing sites?

6. Will the LLDC be reviewing designs or materials for future construction projects?”

The LLDC replied:

Since the Grenfell Tower fire we have undertaken a range of assessments including:

o Review of DCLG guidance;
o Review of planning permissions given by LLDC;
o Audit of as built materials;
o Site specific visits to assess risks by independent advisor;
o Collation of fire risk assessments;
o Agreement with insurers on the risk associated with each property.

No inadequacies have been identified.

The Cladding Screening Test Result report and an accompanying letter from the Department of Communities and Local Government, sent by the LLDC as part of their response, are attached.

The Test report said the cladding tested fell within Category 1.


BRE and Exova Warringtonfire have undertaken the following on behalf of DCLG.

This report sets out the result of screening which indicates whether the core of the sample provided has properties which indicate flame retardant properties based on testing in BS EN ISO 1716:2010. As the purpose of this testing was to quickly and reliably screen the core material, the full procedures set out in the BS EN ISO 1716:2010 test standard have not been followed as they are unnecessary to determine which type of panel you submitted for testing. These results should therefore be considered to provide a high degree of certainty as to the type of panel screened.

You should check carefully the location of the sample on the building using your reference details or other records. You should read the following guidance in full before making any decisions based on the results of screening.The result indicates the performance achieved for the core in terms of a category.

The report showed CAT 1.

Category 1 means that the result is in line with the requirements for a material of limited combustibility

An Annex in the accompanying letter from the Department of Communities and Local Government included the following statements:

If it is determined that the insulation within Aluminium Composite Material (ACM)1 is unlikely to be compliant with the requirements of the current Building Regulations guidance, it is essential that you


implement the following interim mitigating measures to ensure the safety of residents, pending replacement of the cladding....

If the building is not protected by a suitable suppression system you must consider the need for interim measures. The measures adopted need to be based on an assessment of the risk by a competent person, but the following must, at least, be considered.

Residents to be advised to ensure all smoke alarms are present and working in their flat; to report concerns about fire safety measures in the building (eg presence of combustible materials in escape routes) to their landlord and, understand the purpose of any interim measures begin taken.

Closure of car parks in which a vehicle fire could impinge on cladding.

Provision of a temporary communal fire alarm system, comprising smoke detectors in circulation areas and plant rooms, and fire detectors (possibly heat detectors, rather than smoke detectors) in conjunction with fire alarm sounders in each flat. This will enable the entire block to be evacuated simultaneously in the event of fire. This option is unlikely to be suitable for tall blocks, in which a large number of people would need to use escape routes at the same time. The system may comprise a wireless system, using radio to link devices.

Provision of a fire watch by appropriately trained patrolling security officers/wardens.

In the case of the most serious risk, consideration must be given to moving all residents out of the block until satisfactory remedial work has been done.

Of course Inside Housing continued to propagate the falsehood that the former Athletes’ Village was an Olympic Legacy, failing as always to point out that the housing would have been built anyway as part of the Stratford City project and would have included 4,500 units if the Olympics had not come and not the 2818 units it was reduced to and would not have cost the public purse £275 million because of the debacle with LendLease.

LLDC EIR response re cladding June 2017 17-039 Annex A_redacted.pdf253.45 KB

| | | |