4 ms·

Countries with better fire records tend to have far more multi family housing than the US. Most of our code does not exist because of any sort of scientific ve

Countries with better fire records tend to have far more multi family housing than the US. Most of our code does not exist because of any sort of scientific vetting of ideas. It's mostly just winging it and trying to ban any housing except single family detached housing. Why are two stairs so much more important than being close to a staircase? Why is having a loooong hallway with dozens of families using the same staircase better than having immediate access to a stairway and only a handful of families using the staircase? Nobody ever showed that two means of egress are safer, they just went by gut.

bluGill 3y ago
> Nobody ever showed that two means of egress are safer, they just went by gut. That also implies the inverse: nobody has shown that one means is safer, they just went by gut. Is being close to a stair really better worse than have two choices for exits it the open question and so far everyone seems to be asserting one or the other withing actually showing anything. I can show that new US apartments with two stairways, and a lot of other modern safety features are safer than older ones with one stairway and also missing many other safety features. This is not compelling evidence that two stairways is better than one since I'm not aware of anyone controlling on other safety features, but it is enough to demand some real studies before getting rid of that one feature.
- epistasis 3y ago
  > That also implies the inverse: nobody has shown that one means is safer, they just went by gut. But this directly contradicts the entire point of requiring two staircases: that it would be safer. The modern data we have shows that in countries with single stair exits and lots of people living in these units, they are safe, safer than the general outcome. The question is about one particular rule, not repealing all the safety advancements, and that one bad rule is two staircases. The data we have shows it's safe. I don't think there's any study that could be proposed that would satisfy critics, because ultimately this is not about safety, that's just a smokescreen. The point is to block convenient apartments, and whenever one safety study has been done exactly to the critics request, it will immediately be found lacking and an entirely different study will be demanded, or a new reason fabricated to shroud the true motivation: block convenient small apartments from being built.
jeffbee 3y ago
The people who invented fire codes did it on the expressed grounds that it was a superficially acceptable way to ban apartments. See Lawrence Veiller's 1914 'A Model Housing Law' and research Veiller's prior utterances.
- epistasis 3y ago
  Exactly, thanks for bringing this up. I should have mentioned because I just came across this Reddit comment with a damning quote: https://old.reddit.com/r/yimby/comments/18g5dh6/why_north_america_cant_build_nice_apartments/kd2rqfq/ https://old.reddit.com/r/yimby/comments/18g5dh6/why_north_am...

bluGill 3y ago

> Nobody ever showed that two means of egress are safer, they just went by gut. That also implies the inverse: nobody has shown that one means is safer, they just went by gut. Is being close to a stair really better worse than have two choices for exits it the open question and so far everyone seems to be asserting one or the other withing actually showing anything. I can show that new US apartments with two stairways, and a lot of other modern safety features are safer than older ones with one stairway and also missing many other safety features. This is not compelling evidence that two stairways is better than one since I'm not aware of anyone controlling on other safety features, but it is enough to demand some real studies before getting rid of that one feature.

epistasis 3y ago
> That also implies the inverse: nobody has shown that one means is safer, they just went by gut. But this directly contradicts the entire point of requiring two staircases: that it would be safer. The modern data we have shows that in countries with single stair exits and lots of people living in these units, they are safe, safer than the general outcome. The question is about one particular rule, not repealing all the safety advancements, and that one bad rule is two staircases. The data we have shows it's safe. I don't think there's any study that could be proposed that would satisfy critics, because ultimately this is not about safety, that's just a smokescreen. The point is to block convenient apartments, and whenever one safety study has been done exactly to the critics request, it will immediately be found lacking and an entirely different study will be demanded, or a new reason fabricated to shroud the true motivation: block convenient small apartments from being built.

jeffbee 3y ago

The people who invented fire codes did it on the expressed grounds that it was a superficially acceptable way to ban apartments. See Lawrence Veiller's 1914 'A Model Housing Law' and research Veiller's prior utterances.

epistasis 3y ago
Exactly, thanks for bringing this up. I should have mentioned because I just came across this Reddit comment with a damning quote: https://old.reddit.com/r/yimby/comments/18g5dh6/why_north_america_cant_build_nice_apartments/kd2rqfq/ https://old.reddit.com/r/yimby/comments/18g5dh6/why_north_am...