Building Egress: Exit Stairs

[Guest]

Currently the only escape provisions in buildings are there serving as emergency exits for fire safety but are not exactly friendly to the elderly, or the handicapped for that matter. We also know that to simultaneous evacuate of all occupants rapidly from a tall building to a remote location requires the most time when fatigue becomes a limiting factor to the physical act of descending long flight of stairs. For these reasons, how should safety evaluation criteria be for staircases? Is it legal by Human Rights legislation or the Disability Discrimination Act (or by some other act) to just leave the poor unfortunate less abled people at the refuge in a blazing building waiting for someone to come to get them out? What priority should it be given in the development of new egress feature that will meet the evacuation needs of everyone? How can we measure the price that people are willing to pay to save lives when they can afford to work and live a luxurious high-rise environments? Just like fire insurance, the preventive steps taken against a high consequence event would be worth the effort.

Any views? :?:

[Guest]

The question is at what expenses are stakeholders prepared to fork out from their own pockets or from the tenants to provide possible unconventional solutions :idea: :

1) Lifts designed for fire egress?
2) EvacChair that need 1 helper to move the disabled down the stairway?
3) EvacShute that allow self-escape for all

[Chris Houston]

My view is that there are an increasing amount of postings on this forum that appear to be from people who have an interest in promoting evac-shutes.

[Chris Houston]

*Concearned about the occupants of your building?
*Worried about how they will get out?

Now, a new invention from Chris Houston industries, can solve your problem: Stairs.

This wonderful new patented invention, usualy made of concrete, is the ideal solution to all your escape needs.  The "Stairs" can be used even when there is no fire, thus allowing your occupants familiarisation.

The stairs will be encapsulated in an "escape staircase" which will be smoke, heat and fire resisting for more than enough time for people to calmly walk down them.

Available from all good builders.

(Sorry Gents, Couldn't resist it)

[Guest]

Chris Houston:

"more than enough time for people to calmly walk down them" - you are thinking more for youself and not the less fortunate!

If that is the reality, i think all the research institutes on lifts for evacuation, evacchair, evacshute, .......can put a stop of their effort to find alterntive solution!

[Chris Houston]

I'm not going to get into a debate with an anonymous poster, in order to help them promote their products.  

But, just because a building has stairs doesn't mean people will leave wheelchair users in refuge points.  Most wheel chairs users will be able to self evacuate in an emergency, and most able bodies people will be willing to assist.  

I'd sooner people used stairs than jumped down plastic chutes.

I'm not selfish, I'm realistic and unbiased (I've got nothing to sell.)

[logan_lewis]

Lifts designed for means of escape in case of fire are a real possibility and I believe NIST http://www.nist.gov have done some work post September 11th.

Chutes...seems unlikely that they will ever be acceptable to enforcers - in the same way that throw-out ladders are not.  People are just not conditioned to dropping (albeit aided by friction) vertically - unless they are paying good money for it !

A balance has to be found between stairs and lifts.  Without lifts, evacuation of tall buildings will be mean having significant management resources needing to "stand ready" and in the event of a fire potentially putting other people in danger in the process.  Without stairs (which has been discussed before!) total dependence on lifts could see casualties.

[Guest]

Why are there an increasing amount of postings on the issue of:
1) evacuation of mobility impaired persons?
2) debating on lifts for used in evacuation?
3) debating on the used of evac-chairs on stairways?
4) debating on the used of evac-shutes?
5) debating on the the used of para-chutes, throw ladders, descending device, etc?
in this forum?

Does that appears to be people who are aware of the pros and cons of stairs - especially for evacuation, concerning of those who are less fortunate during mass evacuation, aware of the hazards of evacuation, seeking and providing solutions,..... ?

While lifts designed for means of escape in case of fire are a real possibility but has it been legislated for use, or tested for use in actual fire, or guarantee that it will function for fire egress?

While there have been support and against on the used of evac-chairs, evac-chutes, etc posted in this forum, but why are people still paying good money for it even though it seems unlikely that they will ever be acceptable to enforcers?

My personal view is the combination use of stairs, evac-chairs, lifts, evac-chutes in the event of mass evacuation. Logan Lewis had rightly pointed out the likely consequences of going without lifts and without stairs for evacuation of tall buildings. Evac chair and shute can provide "last chance" to escape in the event of a disaster, but without them and total dependence on stairs and lifts could also see more casualties when the conventional exits are no longer available.

When mobility impaired occupants acknowledged that evac chairs are there for them or evac chutes are there as an alternative escape route when the conventional exits are no longer serviceable and useable, it increases their feelings of security in trying circumstances. I dont think people in life threatening situation will fear of jumping in the shute or fear  the slight bruises from friction if they can get out alive!

My personal view is that all human beings should have the RIGHT in attempting to get out of any danger. Therefore, they should be provided with viable options to take: stairs, evac-chairs, lifts, evac-chutes, etc to get out in threathening situations.

Finally, sustainability, mobility and identity are without doubt the three critical considerations determining how buildings of tomorrow are designed and constructed. The buildings of tomorrow will not be complete without the designed for accessibility as well as egressibility for every person to get out during emergency evacuation!

Any objections to my personal views!

[Giovanni]

Unbiased.
In an ideal world everything would be new and purpose-built. In reality however, the vast majority of our buildings and workplaces were never designed with the prospect of the Disability Discrimination Act as is now the case.
What we are left with is buildings which must allow free and complete access to people regardless of disability but create a massive headache in relation to emergency egress.
Without wishing to kick off the proverbial political football, I must say I find some of the DDA quite patronising to diabled people. They are far more aware of their limitations than us able-bodied types.
Emergency egress is a crucial part of any fire risk assessment, if however as will be the case in many situations the FRA contradicts the DDA must we be forced then to put people in an area where evacuation could be considered a major problem? Is this really a breach of an individuals rights?
I think an element of common sense is needed here.
Disabled people I have had this discussion with for the most part would be quite happy to work in a location which allowed them quick egress in an emergency rather than be stuck on the fifth floor and dependant on the help of others to escape, just because it is their right to be there. Their major concerns seem to revolve more around transportation systems such as trains and buses and their inaccessibility, not so much workplaces.
Gio.

[Guest]

This is a global FACT and not a MYTH:

Combined with an ageing population, the proportion of building users with some forms of physical disability in high rise built environment cannot therefore be underestimated. The incapability of providing emergency egress for people who either have difficulty or downright impossible to use exit stairs in the event of a major evacuation when lifts were considered unsafe increase the risk factors of injuries and fatalities to this group of people.

All the prevention, safety and security measures would not guarantee that a major evacuation would not occur due to fire, accident, major power outage, terrorist attack.... And to the certainty that future emergencies cannot be predicted, so what element of common sense or measures could be needed for this group of people who have made it in, how to get them out quickly in the event of evacuation?

As Giovanni pointed out that:
"buildings which must allow free and complete access to people regardless of disability but create a massive headache in relation to emergency egress"

My question: should this issue be a concern for the FSM, the FRA, the DDA, the Achitects, policy makers, the stakeholders or....?

[Guest]

Whether it is a concern or not, depends on what the problem is?  It all sounds very dramatic, but in real terms is there really a problem?

Are building owners prepared to fork out for expensive measures?  What will be the benefit?

[Guest]

Evac-shute system would be an alternative way of getting down  if the FRA accepts it as a valid means of escape in its own right. If it is only a supplement, then we have to rely on the conscience of owners and developers to provide the system. In cost-conscious and efficient UK, developers are unlikely to be so civic minded.