Unsupported browser

For a better experience please update your browser to its latest version.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Steve Mackenzie

Recent activity

Comments (2)

  • Comment on: Glasgow School of Art sought to undermine Mac fire evidence, MSPs claim

    Steve Mackenzie's comment 11 June, 2019 1:02 pm

    Hi as one of the invited fire experts to the 17 Jan 2019 Scottish parliament hearings and one of which attacked directly by Glasgow School of Art - I’ll suggest the testimony stands where they were responsible for failing to protect the Mackintosh building, collections and Scotland’s legacy, not once but twice!

    Failing to identify and manage asbestos removal so it did not frustrate 2014 fire suppression installation.
    Failure to consider gaseous suppression for the archives as per the national maritime museum
    Failure to implement Buro Happolds 2006 / 2008 recommendations in a timely manner.
    Failure to program temporary or phased installation of the fire suppression and removal of the 2014 system in its entirety before the 2018 fire.
    Failure to present evidence on the scope and extent of the fire safety considerations.
    Defaulting to hiding behind the active and ongoing investigation.
    Attempts to discredit independent experts of which there are many and including those expert arguments which sought to inform the respondents next step, recovery or defence constructs.

    Look forward to expanding upon my expert testimony and evidence considerations during the full public inquiry which the Scottish Parliament had deemed necessary.

    DM @stevemcfirerisk for additional comments or opinions.

  • Comment on: Mac fire: How could it have happened again?

    Steve Mackenzie's comment 11 July, 2018 1:22 pm

    Its absolutely staggering that this was permitted to happen again. What possessed the client and contractors team to not incorporate a temporary or phased permanent fire suppression system!

    if anyone says it could not be done in the MAC then they have not kept abreast of key case installations outline in the following article & extracts below:

    http://www.buildingconservation.com/articles/firesup/firesup.htm

    One of the first sprinkler systems installed in a historic building in the UK was at Duff House, a William Adam masterpiece in the north of Scotland. This project, which was managed by Historic Scotland in the early 1990s, was designed to provide comprehensive protection for the building. The system was remarkably successful in discreetly placing the sprinkler heads so that they go virtually unnoticed.

    One of the most interesting of the more recent sprinkler systems is at Newhailes on the outskirts of Edinburgh. This delightful house of the Scottish Enlightenment by James Smith, 1686, was refitted and extended by William Adam from about 1720. Here the National Trust for Scotland has embarked on a fascinating conservation project. The philosophy of this project, ‘to conserve as found’, is at variance with the requirements for visitor access. The fire officer’s requirements started out being, frankly, horrendous but they virtually melted away when the intention of providing a sprinkler system was introduced. All involved in the project are agreed on one thing: if it can be done here, it can be done anywhere.

    Hence calls on Scottish Government, following or in parallel to the fire investigation, to conduct a public inquiry or at the very least review the Glasgow School of Art Case & protection of our historic buildings.

    Stephen Mackenzie

Job of the week

AJ Jobs