No. My comments were directed at supporting the provision of a lobby on both staircases. (Remember I am an FSO, I am hardly likely to argue the case for less protection.
)
The original post made reference to the ff stair being able to accommodate all the persons in the building, hence the claim to need less protection for the other stair. I was trying to make the point that regardless of the ff stairs capacity persons will use both stairs to escape, so both stairs should be subject to the same level of protection as is suggested by ADB.
It seems like (As Kurnal said) the applicant is almost thinking that since they do not have to discount the lobbied ff shaft when working out vertical escape there is no reason to protect the other stair with lobbies.
