“The NBS shouldn’t be the sole way for business owners and tenants to assess the risk to their people and business when signing up to a building” says TwentyTwo’s Paul Mautz.
NBS is considered by most as the ‘go-to’ tool for determining building seismic performance and life safety. But, Paul argues, it only measures a limited scope of risks about a building’s resilience and more information is needed for leaders to make informed and intelligent property decisions.
When considering risk to life and safety of people – and even business continuity, Paul believes we need to think about the wider risks while on the floor (for example, danger from overhead plant and equipment), when exiting the building (stairwell restrictions) and risks once people are outside (falling parapets, canopies).
While there is various building information that is useful to understanding risk – for example, fire reports and IQP reports and inspections, no one report currently covers it all.
The answer, Paul says, is an easily understood rating tool based on life safety criteria that gives business owners the information they need when signing up to a new building – a tool that goes further and considers all aspects – non-structural risks, the seismic rating, a building’s design and the wider risks of occupying and exiting the building.
Of course, there would be a few challenges involved in developing such a rating tool. What’s the criteria? How do we quantify and measure it? And who decides the importance of each component?
How will it work? “That’s down to the experts!”…
Watch Paul’s video for his thoughts in detail…
