11–20 of 95 posts
The challenge is going to be convincing fire departments and insurance agencies that theyre safe enough to not prevent.
I suspect the 6 story and shorter buildings will end up having an alternative design where the stairwell and possibly certain walls are concrete, poured around the same time as the foundation, but the remaining structure is engineered timber. The challenge is going to be convincing fire departments and insurance agencies that theyre safe enough to not prevent.
There's a fantastic article about the challenges here: https://www.enr.com/articles/50905-milwaukees-25-story-ascen...
tl;dr: Insurance companies might be hesitant but it's often a matter of getting the right signoffs. Change may well be on the horizon, however.
Yet, on the other hand, the safety doctrine unnerves me:
> 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.
Why can't we have both multiple staircases and fire-retardant construction? The Grenfell Tower disaster was horrific, and although the subsequent building regulations that limit height were clearly reactionary in nature, I can't see people being comfortable with the 'stay in your room' safety advice after this kind of event. People are going to follow their instincts and head for the stairs, and things are not going to be pleasant if there's A: only one and B: it's blocked.
One idea that comes to mind is building entirely fire-resistant steel and glass bridges between medium high-rise buildings. If you're too high up to use the emergency out-door stairs, but the (single) interior staircase is blocked, you could move sideways to your neighbours. Security and privacy concerns about having easy access to neighbouring properties could be mitigated by having safety-glass dividing doors with emergency hammers next to the lock. The lock could itself be opened by mutual agreement of both sides in non-emergencies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For timber frame buildings, maybe. But in modern concrete fire resistant compartmentalized building it does not make sense at all.
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.
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.
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 E…
My 30+ story building has two concrete stairwells wrapped around each other, which seems like a super efficient way to achieve the current legislation
In Tokyo there can be one stairwell, and then the balconies have foldable ladders in their floors. How about that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
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?