4 ms·

Single-stair egress costs lives. It shouldn't be allowed. They were right to ban them, no matter how 'ugly' or costly it makes the buildings.

mynameisvlad 2y ago
On its own? Sure. But they are rarely found in a vacuum. Per the article: > American approaches aim to make combustible light wood-frame buildings easier to escape by providing multiple paths of egress; European codes, by contrast, require fire-resistant materials and compartmentation to prevent fires from spreading in the first place. Statistically, the evidence is clear: fire-death rates are consistently lower in Europe than in the U.S. and Canada. It's almost as if disproving this statement is the whole point of the article or something.
- josephcsible 2y ago
  Sure, Europe's requirements save more lives than the US's overall. But we should take the best of both rather than abandoning the good parts of US standards. Saying we should stop having multiple paths of egress because more fire-resistant buildings save more lives is like saying we should stop having air bags because seat belts save more lives.
  - avisser 2y ago
    > Saying we should stop having multiple paths of egress because more fire-resistant buildings save more lives is like saying we should stop having air bags because seat belts save more lives. And completely ignores the housing shortage that's troubling almost everywhere in America.
    - LegitShady 2y ago
      two stair egress isn't causing a housing shortage.
      - mynameisvlad 2y ago
        From TFA: > The argument, in short, is to re-legalize single-stair apartment buildings, also known as “point-access blocks”—a typology that was once commonplace and remains so in much of the world, including the European Union, where fireproof single-stair designs are allowed. If combined with zoning reform, such code reform would enable attractive, light-filled multifamily housing to be built cost-effectively on countless urban sites that would otherwise be developed as single-family homes.
  - mynameisvlad 2y ago
    Nobody said we should stop using a single form except the person I was replying to, who suggested that single-stair egress should never be used: > Single-stair egress costs lives. It shouldn't be allowed. They were right to ban them, no matter how 'ugly' or costly it makes the buildings.
sokoloff 2y ago
Spreading out housing more also costs lives, just indirectly. (Increases costs, pollution, land usage, travel distance/time/risk, etc.) Very few things have a single, simplistic effect in the complex world system.
- stuaxo 2y ago
  More hours driving = more deaths on the road.
helloooooooo 2y ago
For timber frame buildings, maybe. But in modern concrete fire resistant compartmentalized building it does not make sense at all.
- pphysch 2y ago
  Most of the new 4-6 story apartment buildings I see going up in USA are all timber frames, at least in the residential floors.
  - vajrabum 2y ago
    That is most likely part of the reason why US multi-story buildings are less safe than European ones. I know that Europeans find the idea of wood frame buildings to be a little scary. Like wny do you do that?
    - vezuchyy 2y ago
      At least in Canada, there were multiple researches on the topic and the only benefit of a timber frame is a speed and simplicity of construction. Given that they normally end up with a very similar price tag for new constructions, I don't see why consumer would prefer timber...
      - LegitShady 2y ago
        because the amount of firms who can build timber frame buildings is far far greater than the amount of firms who can build concrete buildings, which leads to more competition and also more housing being constructed.
    - wahern 2y ago
      If you look at the data, I don't think structural and framing material has much if anything to do with fire deaths. Japan also has a high proportion of wooden framing, for single family homes about the same as the U.S. This is less so for multi-story, but if you look at the numbers the fire death rate in Japan is nearly identical between single-family and multi-story dwellings. Fire death rates in Europe, even Western Europe, vary significantly across countries even with similar building practices. In the US fire death rates have dropped precipitously in the past quarter century despite continued reliance on wooden construction. What seems to matter are other factors, such as fire warning, fire suppression, and general fire safety knowledge. But also things like electrical systems, kitchen design, cooking methods, etc.
ericd 2y ago
For most people, housing costing more means spending years more of your life working. Is a tiny risk reduction worth that? It wouldn’t be for me. The risk of additional years of commuting is probably higher.

mynameisvlad 2y ago

On its own? Sure. But they are rarely found in a vacuum. Per the article: > American approaches aim to make combustible light wood-frame buildings easier to escape by providing multiple paths of egress; European codes, by contrast, require fire-resistant materials and compartmentation to prevent fires from spreading in the first place. Statistically, the evidence is clear: fire-death rates are consistently lower in Europe than in the U.S. and Canada. It's almost as if disproving this statement is the whole point of the article or something.

josephcsible 2y ago
Sure, Europe's requirements save more lives than the US's overall. But we should take the best of both rather than abandoning the good parts of US standards. Saying we should stop having multiple paths of egress because more fire-resistant buildings save more lives is like saying we should stop having air bags because seat belts save more lives.
- avisser 2y ago
  > Saying we should stop having multiple paths of egress because more fire-resistant buildings save more lives is like saying we should stop having air bags because seat belts save more lives. And completely ignores the housing shortage that's troubling almost everywhere in America.
  - LegitShady 2y ago
    two stair egress isn't causing a housing shortage.
    - mynameisvlad 2y ago
      From TFA: > The argument, in short, is to re-legalize single-stair apartment buildings, also known as “point-access blocks”—a typology that was once commonplace and remains so in much of the world, including the European Union, where fireproof single-stair designs are allowed. If combined with zoning reform, such code reform would enable attractive, light-filled multifamily housing to be built cost-effectively on countless urban sites that would otherwise be developed as single-family homes.
- mynameisvlad 2y ago
  Nobody said we should stop using a single form except the person I was replying to, who suggested that single-stair egress should never be used: > Single-stair egress costs lives. It shouldn't be allowed. They were right to ban them, no matter how 'ugly' or costly it makes the buildings.

sokoloff 2y ago

Spreading out housing more also costs lives, just indirectly. (Increases costs, pollution, land usage, travel distance/time/risk, etc.) Very few things have a single, simplistic effect in the complex world system.

stuaxo 2y ago
More hours driving = more deaths on the road.

helloooooooo 2y ago

For timber frame buildings, maybe. But in modern concrete fire resistant compartmentalized building it does not make sense at all.

pphysch 2y ago
Most of the new 4-6 story apartment buildings I see going up in USA are all timber frames, at least in the residential floors.
- vajrabum 2y ago
  That is most likely part of the reason why US multi-story buildings are less safe than European ones. I know that Europeans find the idea of wood frame buildings to be a little scary. Like wny do you do that?
  - vezuchyy 2y ago
    At least in Canada, there were multiple researches on the topic and the only benefit of a timber frame is a speed and simplicity of construction. Given that they normally end up with a very similar price tag for new constructions, I don't see why consumer would prefer timber...
    - LegitShady 2y ago
      because the amount of firms who can build timber frame buildings is far far greater than the amount of firms who can build concrete buildings, which leads to more competition and also more housing being constructed.
  - wahern 2y ago
    If you look at the data, I don't think structural and framing material has much if anything to do with fire deaths. Japan also has a high proportion of wooden framing, for single family homes about the same as the U.S. This is less so for multi-story, but if you look at the numbers the fire death rate in Japan is nearly identical between single-family and multi-story dwellings. Fire death rates in Europe, even Western Europe, vary significantly across countries even with similar building practices. In the US fire death rates have dropped precipitously in the past quarter century despite continued reliance on wooden construction. What seems to matter are other factors, such as fire warning, fire suppression, and general fire safety knowledge. But also things like electrical systems, kitchen design, cooking methods, etc.

ericd 2y ago

For most people, housing costing more means spending years more of your life working. Is a tiny risk reduction worth that? It wouldn’t be for me. The risk of additional years of commuting is probably higher.