4 ms·

> Does Strasbourg not have any fire regulations that require fireman accessible power cut-outs, automatic extinguishers etc? I think it's a safe bet it doesn't

by ovi256 5y ago

> Does Strasbourg not have any fire regulations that require fireman accessible power cut-outs, automatic extinguishers etc? I think it's a safe bet it doesn't, because that building passed fire safety review and was approved as such.

kube-system 5y ago
I think it’s a valid question; inspections themselves can be failure points.
michaelt 5y ago
I can't speak for Strasbourg, but here in the UK you don't get an inspection by the local building inspector or fire department - instead, you hire a fire risk assessor of your choice, on the free market. So if you're not in compliance, you don't need to bribe anyone or cheat - you simply have to hire a friendly dumbass who'll check the basics but won't ask too many questions.
- xxpor 5y ago
  Mark this one up as something else that's been privatized in the UK that's shocking to me as an American. This sort of stuff is always run through the government (the level depends on the state). Insurance companies might impose additional requirements, but then they'll send out their own inspectors.
  - j16sdiz 5y ago
    The inspector is a chartered engineer, and is liable if your building don't confirm to the fire code.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  >Instead, you hire a fire risk assessor of your choice, on the free market. That sounds a lot better than the one size fits all crap we get in the US. If you are trying to do anything other than take over an existing and operating industrial site that's grandfathered in or run a warehouse for some sort of boring and non-reactive goods it tends to be a terrible maze of conflicting and irrelevant requirements.
  - xxpor 5y ago
    Note the OP said the inspectors were privatized, not the actual building codes. The only difference is the private inspectors sound like they'll let you skate by on some stuff. You find the same dynamic in states with private emissions inspections. Spend any time on a car enthusiast website and everyone knows "the guy" to go to that'll pass your obviously illegal emissions equipment bypass...
    - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
      >Note the OP said the inspectors were privatized I know exactly what he said and that's why I said exactly what I said. >The only difference is the private inspectors sound like they'll let you skate by on some stuff Government building inspections are incredibly onerous unless you're a homeowner building a deck or a developer building cookie cutter houses or offices. You run into all sorts of stupid edge cases depending on what the facility being built is intended for and you need to get clarification on what you should do. Have you ever actually tried to get government clarification about something? They need to be dragged kicking and screaming, often through a courtroom to ever clarify anything in writing because nobody wants to set a precedent or take the responsibility of making judgement calls. Having professionals who will take the responsibility of those judgement calls is a massive net plus. The fact that your knee jerk response is to frame professionals using judgement their jobs as "letting you state by" is just crazy. Would you say the same thing if the context was a PE crunching numbers, finding something that didn't pass the default rules and then using their judgement to conclude it was fine because of other situational details? People do their jobs satisfactorily the overwhelming majority of the time. Being on the government payroll doesn't make public inspectors immune from playing favorites or making screw ups. It just means the oversights follow a different pattern. Everyone's experienced plenty of government inspectors who don't do their job because it's Friday and they want to GTFO. > Spend any time on a car enthusiast website and everyone knows "the guy" to go to that'll pass your obviously illegal emissions equipment bypass... If the vehicle code were written the way the building code and occupational health and safety code is that's the only way any commercial vehicle that isn't a cookie cutter box truck would ever pass an inspection.

by ovi256 5y ago

kube-system 5y ago

I think it’s a valid question; inspections themselves can be failure points.

michaelt 5y ago

I can't speak for Strasbourg, but here in the UK you don't get an inspection by the local building inspector or fire department - instead, you hire a fire risk assessor of your choice, on the free market. So if you're not in compliance, you don't need to bribe anyone or cheat - you simply have to hire a friendly dumbass who'll check the basics but won't ask too many questions.

xxpor 5y ago
Mark this one up as something else that's been privatized in the UK that's shocking to me as an American. This sort of stuff is always run through the government (the level depends on the state). Insurance companies might impose additional requirements, but then they'll send out their own inspectors.
- j16sdiz 5y ago
  The inspector is a chartered engineer, and is liable if your building don't confirm to the fire code.
throwaway0a5e 5y ago
>Instead, you hire a fire risk assessor of your choice, on the free market. That sounds a lot better than the one size fits all crap we get in the US. If you are trying to do anything other than take over an existing and operating industrial site that's grandfathered in or run a warehouse for some sort of boring and non-reactive goods it tends to be a terrible maze of conflicting and irrelevant requirements.
- xxpor 5y ago
  Note the OP said the inspectors were privatized, not the actual building codes. The only difference is the private inspectors sound like they'll let you skate by on some stuff. You find the same dynamic in states with private emissions inspections. Spend any time on a car enthusiast website and everyone knows "the guy" to go to that'll pass your obviously illegal emissions equipment bypass...
  - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
    >Note the OP said the inspectors were privatized I know exactly what he said and that's why I said exactly what I said. >The only difference is the private inspectors sound like they'll let you skate by on some stuff Government building inspections are incredibly onerous unless you're a homeowner building a deck or a developer building cookie cutter houses or offices. You run into all sorts of stupid edge cases depending on what the facility being built is intended for and you need to get clarification on what you should do. Have you ever actually tried to get government clarification about something? They need to be dragged kicking and screaming, often through a courtroom to ever clarify anything in writing because nobody wants to set a precedent or take the responsibility of making judgement calls. Having professionals who will take the responsibility of those judgement calls is a massive net plus. The fact that your knee jerk response is to frame professionals using judgement their jobs as "letting you state by" is just crazy. Would you say the same thing if the context was a PE crunching numbers, finding something that didn't pass the default rules and then using their judgement to conclude it was fine because of other situational details? People do their jobs satisfactorily the overwhelming majority of the time. Being on the government payroll doesn't make public inspectors immune from playing favorites or making screw ups. It just means the oversights follow a different pattern. Everyone's experienced plenty of government inspectors who don't do their job because it's Friday and they want to GTFO. > Spend any time on a car enthusiast website and everyone knows "the guy" to go to that'll pass your obviously illegal emissions equipment bypass... If the vehicle code were written the way the building code and occupational health and safety code is that's the only way any commercial vehicle that isn't a cookie cutter box truck would ever pass an inspection.