Heritage is not a constraint. It’s a condition.

There is a tendency, when dealing with historic buildings, to treat heritage as a constraint on fire safety. The narrative is familiar: interventions are limited, alterations are restricted, and therefore risk must be accepted. While there is some truth in this, it is an incomplete and, at times, unhelpful framing.

Heritage does not remove the need for fire safety. It changes the way in which it must be achieved.

In practice, this requires a shift away from reliance on prescriptive solutions and towards a more considered application of fire engineering principles. The question is not whether a particular measure can be applied in the same way as in a new building, but how the underlying objective can be met in a manner that respects the existing fabric. This demands a more nuanced understanding of the building as a system, including how fire might develop, spread, and be controlled within it.

Too often, however, the presence of heritage constraints leads to a form of risk normalisation. Limitations are identified, but not always balanced by compensatory measures. In some cases, this results in an implicit acceptance of higher risk without a clear articulation of how that risk is being managed. In others, it leads to a reluctance to intervene at all, on the basis that any change is undesirable.

Neither position is satisfactory. Heritage should not be used to justify inaction, nor should it be seen as incompatible with effective fire safety. It is simply one of the parameters within which engineering judgement must be exercised.

Well-managed historic buildings demonstrate that this balance can be achieved. They do so not by replicating modern construction standards, but by applying a coherent strategy that integrates detection, management, compartmentation, and response in a way that is appropriate to the building. This requires engagement, expertise, and clarity of purpose.

This is not a critique of any specific project or approach, but a reflection on how heritage is often framed in fire safety discussions. Reframing it as a condition, rather than a constraint, allows for a more constructive and technically grounded response.