8 ms·

‘One step at a time’: entrepreneur buys stairwell in London to help startups

46 points by samwillis 3y ago

xwdv 3y ago
Hate to be a downer but I think this idea would be a fire hazard. The stairwell just isn’t made for this use or capacity. It’s a transient, liminal space.
- willcipriano 3y ago
  Then don't use it? What if we put a big sticker on it with your comment so everyone is aware of the risk?
  - sandworm101 3y ago
    Fire codes are not just about users. Think of responders. One cannot opt out of fires codes meant to protect the firefighters who may well have to rescue people from stairwells. For instance: no clutter like office desks to trip them up. Or, no combustibles in an open, vertical, space that fire could use to spread.
    - olalonde 3y ago
      Firefighters are responsible for protecting themselves. If a situation is too dangerous, they can prioritize their safety first.
      - danielheath 3y ago
        They are literally responsible for putting themselves at some risk to save others. Discovering a situation is unsafe for firefighters once they are already in it is the norm, not the exception, when fire code violations are present.
      - sandworm101 3y ago
        Maybe if they know, but nobody keeps a record of which codes are being followed and which are not in each paticular room. Firefighters rely on building codes. They dont have time to read through user-generated exceptions documents before responding to a fire. Even if they did, such practices are akin to sovcits opting out of obeying laws they dislike. Safety codes are meaningless if not apllied to all.
        willcipriano 3y ago
        The firefighters can also read the big sticker. We will make it fireproof. We will include the fact that fire fighters will be slower to respond because they too will read the sticker, on the sticker. Or better yet one of those "child inside" stickers but "no firefighters" so they know the building had opted out.
        sandworm101 3y ago
        Ok. They can just ignore the people inside screaming for help. They opted out of fire codes by going into the building. They chose to burn. Utterly ridiculous.
- defrost 3y ago
  Isn't made to be used in what capacity? “One idea I’m playing around with is: someone starts at the bottom of the stairs and pitches their idea to me and if, by the top of the stairs, I like it, I fund their business.” It sounds like it was purpose built for that.
- throwaway154 3y ago
  Perhaps install a staircase for the staircase. It's just a matter of permissions.
- labster 3y ago
  It should be safe if there is a clearly marked exit route, fire doors every seven steps, and a fire escape ladder.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- krisoft 3y ago
  > Hate to be a downer but I think this idea would be a fire hazard. Which idea? What use and what capacity? The ideas in the article run a wide gamuth of different uses and proposed capacities. You are right if they would stuff the staircase full of stuff and a crowd to achieve the same density as a normal shop that would be probably unsafe. But that is far from the only thing which is mentioned in the article. One plan he mentions is a sort of meeting space where people pitch him while walking up the stairs. That would be what? No extra obstruction in the staircase and a max occupancy of 5? (How many people do you realistically want to pitch simultaneously?) There is nothing unsafe about that. The other plan he mentions is to make the stairs his private office. I don’t see the floorplans but I don’t see why you couldn’t turn the space into an office with an occupancy limit of let’s say 3. Basically an overgrown garden shed. To do that you might need to do some construction work. The very fact that he has a list of ideas going from hard to easy means to me that he is aware of the very constraint you are mentioning. About his more ambitious ideas: if he has sense he should sit down with an engineer who is well versed in the local safety regulations. Clearly the more obstructions you design in to the space the more limit you need to put on capacity. You can also imagine putting limits on how high people can go. You don’t need to use all of the stairs. You can for example use ground floor and the first landing as popup store, second landing as “crew only” storage space and block of the rest of the stairs. How many people can you let in the building then? Once he knows the shape of the limits he can work within he can start thinking to find a program which can safely work within those limits.
- inhumantsar 3y ago
  It looks like the stairwell was built large to support the apartments next to it. Without the large number of occupants who would have to be able to safely exit thru them, maybe they could probably have some small tables/desks in there? More likely tho it's a publicity stunt for the founder networking organization he runs.
mark212 3y ago
Maybe it's because I'm American, but my first thought was ... there's a separate building and it's just the stairs? So if they sold it, how would the people in the building next door get up and down? How does a structure that's just stairs have a separate title that can be sold? The entire premise of this is so incomprehensible to me. Brits -- is this a common thing?
- camkego 3y ago
  Agreed, it seems like the article is missing some background that most people won't have.
- zarzavat 3y ago
  > How does a structure that's just stairs have a separate title that can be sold? You can sell any subdivision of land. Happens all the time, e.g. a house on a large plot of land is demolished and the land divided into land for multiple new houses. Or two neighbours might exchange some land if the border is not convenient. Is this not a thing in the US?
  - Dalewyn 3y ago
    It certainly is. What parent is asking is whether selling just the stairs in a building, or happenstances to that effect, are common in Britain.
    - zarzavat 3y ago
      It’s not common, that’s why there’s a news article about it. But they aren’t buying the stairs. The stairs are worthless. They’re buying the land underneath. As far as I understand the stairs are disconnected from the adjacent property and unused. edit: here’s the first article when it was still up for sale: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jul/30/step-to-riches-disused-stairwell-in-london-could-be-yours-for-just-20000 https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jul/30/step-to-rich...
      - 3y ago
throwaway154 3y ago
Background article, from a week ago when this property was up for sale: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jul/30/step-to-riches-disused-stairwell-in-london-could-be-yours-for-just-20000 https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jul/30/step-to-rich...
klntsky 3y ago
> he was not interested in developing the stairwell in order to sell it: “I don’t want to contribute to increasing the prices of rent and housing for people. I don’t think it’s net-positive for society. How is taking risk trying to increase the amount of wealth not positive? I would understand if he said "I have a better plan for this place than developing it for sale", but this line of thinking...
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- ryanmcdonough 3y ago
  Because his positive is providing a free space for people to build businesses not to immediately enrich himself. He said “I have a better plan than developing it” without having to say that and making a statement about the state of rent pricing in the UK. What concerns you about this line of thinking? Without it we wouldn’t have food banks that could service 100s of people, why not just build another cafe where there is a food bank and give 5 people a job rather than 100s food? Both need to exist (sadly for the food banks) in this world.
  - jabradoodle 3y ago
    It is a weird line of reasoning though. Converting this to a living space isn't the same as buy to let etc, you'd be creating new housing where there isn't any.
    - ryanmcdonough 3y ago
      The issue in the UK isn’t specifically a lack of housing, if a home builder built a new estate of houses, only a small proportion have to be affordable housing, the rest come in at the ridiculous prices already in place locally. A business building 200 new houses in an area won’t bring down the house prices down at all.
- krisoft 3y ago
  > I would understand if he said "I have a better plan for this place than developing it for sale", but this line of thinking... But that is what he says. Earlier in the article it describes exactly what he plans to do with it. Namely “hoping to get permission from the local council to turn it into a pop-up shop, office or “live-work space” that entrepreneurs can use – potentially for up to a month at a time – free of charge.”
goodpoint 3y ago
Owns a 2 millions house and buy a stairwell for 20k. This reads like a parody.
- gambiting 3y ago
  The entire thing reads like The Onion article. This is just a cherry on top “I own a £2m mansion not too far away, but I think I actually prefer the staircase."

46 points by samwillis 3y ago

xwdv 3y ago

Hate to be a downer but I think this idea would be a fire hazard. The stairwell just isn’t made for this use or capacity. It’s a transient, liminal space.

willcipriano 3y ago
Then don't use it? What if we put a big sticker on it with your comment so everyone is aware of the risk?
- sandworm101 3y ago
  Fire codes are not just about users. Think of responders. One cannot opt out of fires codes meant to protect the firefighters who may well have to rescue people from stairwells. For instance: no clutter like office desks to trip them up. Or, no combustibles in an open, vertical, space that fire could use to spread.
  - olalonde 3y ago
    Firefighters are responsible for protecting themselves. If a situation is too dangerous, they can prioritize their safety first.
    - danielheath 3y ago
      They are literally responsible for putting themselves at some risk to save others. Discovering a situation is unsafe for firefighters once they are already in it is the norm, not the exception, when fire code violations are present.
    - sandworm101 3y ago
      Maybe if they know, but nobody keeps a record of which codes are being followed and which are not in each paticular room. Firefighters rely on building codes. They dont have time to read through user-generated exceptions documents before responding to a fire. Even if they did, such practices are akin to sovcits opting out of obeying laws they dislike. Safety codes are meaningless if not apllied to all.
      - willcipriano 3y ago
        The firefighters can also read the big sticker. We will make it fireproof. We will include the fact that fire fighters will be slower to respond because they too will read the sticker, on the sticker. Or better yet one of those "child inside" stickers but "no firefighters" so they know the building had opted out.
        sandworm101 3y ago
        Ok. They can just ignore the people inside screaming for help. They opted out of fire codes by going into the building. They chose to burn. Utterly ridiculous.
defrost 3y ago
Isn't made to be used in what capacity? “One idea I’m playing around with is: someone starts at the bottom of the stairs and pitches their idea to me and if, by the top of the stairs, I like it, I fund their business.” It sounds like it was purpose built for that.
throwaway154 3y ago
Perhaps install a staircase for the staircase. It's just a matter of permissions.
labster 3y ago
It should be safe if there is a clearly marked exit route, fire doors every seven steps, and a fire escape ladder.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
krisoft 3y ago
> Hate to be a downer but I think this idea would be a fire hazard. Which idea? What use and what capacity? The ideas in the article run a wide gamuth of different uses and proposed capacities. You are right if they would stuff the staircase full of stuff and a crowd to achieve the same density as a normal shop that would be probably unsafe. But that is far from the only thing which is mentioned in the article. One plan he mentions is a sort of meeting space where people pitch him while walking up the stairs. That would be what? No extra obstruction in the staircase and a max occupancy of 5? (How many people do you realistically want to pitch simultaneously?) There is nothing unsafe about that. The other plan he mentions is to make the stairs his private office. I don’t see the floorplans but I don’t see why you couldn’t turn the space into an office with an occupancy limit of let’s say 3. Basically an overgrown garden shed. To do that you might need to do some construction work. The very fact that he has a list of ideas going from hard to easy means to me that he is aware of the very constraint you are mentioning. About his more ambitious ideas: if he has sense he should sit down with an engineer who is well versed in the local safety regulations. Clearly the more obstructions you design in to the space the more limit you need to put on capacity. You can also imagine putting limits on how high people can go. You don’t need to use all of the stairs. You can for example use ground floor and the first landing as popup store, second landing as “crew only” storage space and block of the rest of the stairs. How many people can you let in the building then? Once he knows the shape of the limits he can work within he can start thinking to find a program which can safely work within those limits.
inhumantsar 3y ago
It looks like the stairwell was built large to support the apartments next to it. Without the large number of occupants who would have to be able to safely exit thru them, maybe they could probably have some small tables/desks in there? More likely tho it's a publicity stunt for the founder networking organization he runs.

mark212 3y ago

Maybe it's because I'm American, but my first thought was ... there's a separate building and it's just the stairs? So if they sold it, how would the people in the building next door get up and down? How does a structure that's just stairs have a separate title that can be sold? The entire premise of this is so incomprehensible to me. Brits -- is this a common thing?

camkego 3y ago
Agreed, it seems like the article is missing some background that most people won't have.
zarzavat 3y ago
> How does a structure that's just stairs have a separate title that can be sold? You can sell any subdivision of land. Happens all the time, e.g. a house on a large plot of land is demolished and the land divided into land for multiple new houses. Or two neighbours might exchange some land if the border is not convenient. Is this not a thing in the US?
- Dalewyn 3y ago
  It certainly is. What parent is asking is whether selling just the stairs in a building, or happenstances to that effect, are common in Britain.
  - zarzavat 3y ago
    It’s not common, that’s why there’s a news article about it. But they aren’t buying the stairs. The stairs are worthless. They’re buying the land underneath. As far as I understand the stairs are disconnected from the adjacent property and unused. edit: here’s the first article when it was still up for sale: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jul/30/step-to-riches-disused-stairwell-in-london-could-be-yours-for-just-20000 https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jul/30/step-to-rich...
    - 3y ago

throwaway154 3y ago

Background article, from a week ago when this property was up for sale: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jul/30/step-to-riches-disused-stairwell-in-london-could-be-yours-for-just-20000 https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jul/30/step-to-rich...

klntsky 3y ago

> he was not interested in developing the stairwell in order to sell it: “I don’t want to contribute to increasing the prices of rent and housing for people. I don’t think it’s net-positive for society. How is taking risk trying to increase the amount of wealth not positive? I would understand if he said "I have a better plan for this place than developing it for sale", but this line of thinking...

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
ryanmcdonough 3y ago
Because his positive is providing a free space for people to build businesses not to immediately enrich himself. He said “I have a better plan than developing it” without having to say that and making a statement about the state of rent pricing in the UK. What concerns you about this line of thinking? Without it we wouldn’t have food banks that could service 100s of people, why not just build another cafe where there is a food bank and give 5 people a job rather than 100s food? Both need to exist (sadly for the food banks) in this world.
- jabradoodle 3y ago
  It is a weird line of reasoning though. Converting this to a living space isn't the same as buy to let etc, you'd be creating new housing where there isn't any.
  - ryanmcdonough 3y ago
    The issue in the UK isn’t specifically a lack of housing, if a home builder built a new estate of houses, only a small proportion have to be affordable housing, the rest come in at the ridiculous prices already in place locally. A business building 200 new houses in an area won’t bring down the house prices down at all.
krisoft 3y ago
> I would understand if he said "I have a better plan for this place than developing it for sale", but this line of thinking... But that is what he says. Earlier in the article it describes exactly what he plans to do with it. Namely “hoping to get permission from the local council to turn it into a pop-up shop, office or “live-work space” that entrepreneurs can use – potentially for up to a month at a time – free of charge.”

goodpoint 3y ago

Owns a 2 millions house and buy a stairwell for 20k. This reads like a parody.

gambiting 3y ago
The entire thing reads like The Onion article. This is just a cherry on top “I own a £2m mansion not too far away, but I think I actually prefer the staircase."