Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Could housing be cheaper and better if we stop building so many staircases?

slate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 309 posts

Re: Could housing be cheaper and better if we stop building so many staircases?

#161

Post by jfoster »

Gigablah wrote: post #65
voisin wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> just because you wanted to milk 4 apts instead of 3 on a floor. You realize that this would mean the three residents would have to pay more for their unit, right? It isn’t just developers “milking” condo buyers or tenants. It has to do with efficiency.

People pay more for units all the time for various reasons - location, orientation, superstition, etc. I’m sure they’ll add “not suffocating to death during a fire” to the list.

It does not guarantee that you won't encounter a deadly fire. It just adds one extra escape route for this extremely rare event. You could also add an escape slide for each apartment.

Re: Could housing be cheaper and better if we stop building so many staircases?

#163

Post by ineedasername »

0xdeadb00f wrote: post #69
stickfigure wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A security camera in the building showed that Tanimoto tossed a bag, probably containing petrol, at the emergency exit. Tape is also believed to have been used to impede the use of the door. It is believed this was done so that clinic occupants would have a hard time evacuating. Investigators also found evidence of additional traps in the building.[21][22] The suspect was found to possess a knife, and blocked a perso…

To be fair, one person has less of a chance of blocking all 5 exits if that many exists and they're spaced out well enough

You don't have to plan for malice, just plan for a fire where it is probably a lot less likely for exits at both sides of the building to be blocked.

Re: Could housing be cheaper and better if we stop building so many staircases?

#164

Post by kube-system »

unethical_ban wrote: post #107
skybrian wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fire codes were recently changed and now buildings with 4 or 5 wooden floors are becoming common: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/5-over-1

This is a fascinating thing for me, and it makes me want to truly study architecture. Though, like so many pieces of art and society, America my home seems to be sliding further from anything that doesn't optimize for money, or... optimization. But the idea of code defining form, and how we can meld safety, efficiency and beauty together - that's interesting to me. I found this article [1] on the wiki page of 5-over-…

There’s plenty of old architecture that is utilitarian and for the poor. I think much of our romanticism for old architecture in the US is seen though the lens of survivorship bias. Construction in the US is fairly cheap and we tear down things down often, especially if it’s ugly. I’d rather look at the average US 5-over-1 than a Spanish corrala

Re: Could housing be cheaper and better if we stop building so many staircases?

#165

Post by lenkite »

aaron695 wrote: post #116
bluefirebrand wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah but one person who is setting fires could torch a stairwell, effectively blocking it without being there.

People setting these fires are not experts. Let's say a lot of them are garbage and you only hear about the rare occasions it works. Let's say 10% of the time the fire is good enough to kill. Two stair wells means only 1% of the time you get a kill. Lighting two fires is also harder, you need more planning and stuff. So that probably equals out a bit for the better fire lighters. If it's Mossad doing it then sure it'…

"Police quoted witnesses who saw a man walking into the clinic with a paper bag, which he put on the floor, right next to a heater by the reception desk, and kicked it. Liquid poured out, caught fire and the whole floor was in flames and smoke."

Don't really need to be an expert in starting fires.

Re: Could housing be cheaper and better if we stop building so many staircases?

#166

Post by ineedasername »

The whole time I was reading this I couldn't stop thinking, "Sure, we can get more usable space if we ignore modern fire safety precautions."

And also "pushing apartment capacity a few % points isn't really going to move the needle much on the housing crisis in many areas."

Re: Could housing be cheaper and better if we stop building so many staircases?

#167

Post by ineedasername »

afirement wrote: post #52

I live in a London apartment building with a single staircase, which is standard here. The difference in principle seems to relate to “what happens when there’s a fire?”. Here, we don’t need to escape if there’s a fire in the building[1], because regulations demand walls, floors and doors that can withstand many hours of fire, which provides more than enough time for the fire service to attend and extinguish the fire…

The building solidity may deal with the fire itself, but what about the smoke? How do you keep that from asphyxiating you?

Re: Could housing be cheaper and better if we stop building so many staircases?

#168

Post by Gigachad »

neilwilson wrote: post #83

Perhaps the solution is not to have apartments, and instead spread people and activity out across the country. Particularly pertinent in the Covid era when we have seen what living on top of each other leads to.

I’d infinitely prefer to live in an apartment which is in walking distance from everything I need than some remote house where I have to drive all the time.

I find the current price and size of apartments to be perfectly fine.

Re: Could housing be cheaper and better if we stop building so many staircases?

#169

Post by sgtnoodle »

kube-system wrote: post #134
CheezeIt wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn’t want to pay 33% more for that extra increment of safety. I drive a car, after all.

The premium that you pay extra for the safety equipment in your car is likely more than 33%. We would have many new cars for 4-digit prices if not for the large number of safety systems required on cars.

Cars are designed to intentionally accelerate you to speeds that easily kill you, though, and carry along a vast amount of stored energy. Buildings are designed to stand still and generally not be flammable. The expected value calculations are seemingly quite a bit different.

Re: Could housing be cheaper and better if we stop building so many staircases?

#170

Post by Gigachad »

dpc050505 wrote: post #130
Pxtl wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That might work if not for climate change.

the way we currently live in urban areas doesn't work either when you account for climate change.

Appartments buildings are orders of magnitude more efficient. Even on just heating and cooling. Not to mention the reduction in powered transport needed.
Post reply on HN