Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nothing is 100 percent in life, but unlikely is probably right.
The whole point of the article was to state the different building codes in Vancouver since the 1970's when taller apartment blocks were being built. The idea that only one staircase, non-ventilated etc exists in a 1974 building has NOT and can NOT happen in Vancouver. Will that be enough? Time will tell, but I can tell you that over the years any apartment fire in high-rises in Vancouver have been contained so far.
As for the Titanic, it's a myth that it was stated to be unsinkable. The movie didn't help that assertion. What was actually said was that it was " practically unsinkable ".
Nothing is 100 percent in life, but unlikely is probably right.
The whole point of the article was to state the different building codes in Vancouver since the 1970's when taller apartment blocks were being built. The idea that only one staircase, non-ventilated etc exists in a 1974 building has NOT and can NOT happen in Vancouver. Will that be enough? Time will tell, but I can tell you that over the years any apartment fire in high-rises in Vancouver have been contained so far.
As for the Titanic, it's a myth that it was stated to be unsinkable. The movie didn't help that assertion. What was actually said was that it was " practically unsinkable ".
The fire didn't happen in Vancouver; it happened in London. And whatever the issue in London, people were trapped in the building. It shows it can still happen. I would have thought London and the UK in general would have had better building codes than that.
It's funny that people are blaming the private contractors. Many times on this forum, various posters have spoken out against regulations, saying that the developers know best.
The fire didn't happen in Vancouver; it happened in London. And whatever the issue in London, people were trapped in the building. It shows it can still happen. I would have thought London and the UK in general would have had better building codes than that.
It's funny that people are blaming the private contractors. Many times on this forum, various posters have spoken out against regulations, saying that the developers know best.
Vancouver was mentioned by me in response to your to your question. You do remember why you posted?
"So what do you density advocates think of this? Little kids trapped, people trying to jump from high floors, etc."
It was to point out ( it was fairly obvious ) that building codes COUNT and the differences between codes CAN make a difference and that it has NOTHING to do with DENSITY. Your comment was not about density in just London, it was about anyone who supports density ANYWHERE.
Nowhere in my posts have I even mentioned private contractors.
Vancouver was mentioned by me in response to your to your question. You do remember why you posted?
"So what do you density advocates think of this? Little kids trapped, people trying to jump from high floors, etc."
It was to point out ( it was fairly obvious ) that building codes COUNT and the differences between codes CAN make a difference and that it has NOTHING to do with DENSITY. Your comment was not about density in just London, it was about anyone who supports density ANYWHERE.
Nowhere in my posts have I even mentioned private contractors.
(Ignoring snark, ignoring that the senior mods don't want us to use red)
Got ya! But several people on this very thread have mentioned that it was the fault of the private contractors!
"It can't happen here" is a favorite meme. As I heard once (well, more than once) on a different subject, "everyone whose "business" had this problem thought it would never happen at their place".
I do agree that building codes are important. I have argued that over and over again on this forum. But you'll never have a perfect one, and Vancouver needs to get their heads out of the sand if they think "it'll never happen here".
(Ignoring snark, ignoring that the senior mods don't want us to use red)
Got ya! But several people on this very thread have mentioned that it was the fault of the private contractors!
"It can't happen here" is a favorite meme. As I heard once (well, more than once) on a different subject, "everyone whose "business" had this problem thought it would never happen at their place".
I do agree that building codes are important. I have argued that over and over again on this forum. But you'll never have a perfect one, and Vancouver needs to get their heads out of the sand if they think "it'll never happen here".
First I've heard that mods don't want red to be used. I suggest they remove the red option.
Vancouver doesn't have it's head in the sand, the is why the building codes are so strong. Can it happen here? I said nothing is 100 percent. The article itself says " unlikely " not impossible.
I'm not really sure the point of you post? Are you suggesting because of what happened in London, that density advocates have something to answer for?
Your comment about children seemed to suggest that.
Nothing is 100 percent in life, but unlikely is probably right.
The whole point of the article was to state the different building codes in Vancouver since the 1970's when taller apartment blocks were being built. The idea that only one staircase, non-ventilated etc exists in a 1974 building has NOT and can NOT happen in Vancouver. Will that be enough? Time will tell, but I can tell you that over the years any apartment fire in high-rises in Vancouver have been contained so far.
As for the Titanic, it's a myth that it was stated to be unsinkable. The movie didn't help that assertion. What was actually said was that it was " practically unsinkable ".
Objective of the article was to protect Vancouver residential tower occupancy and "strata" sales.
You can debate with yourself as to whether the Titanic was marketed as "unsinkable" or "practically unsinkable". Were you there? Certainly people were led to believe it was luxurious and safe. There should be no dispute however that the ship sank.
The statement from the Vancouver fire expert is eerily similar to the hype about the Titanic. The article was sales puffery to protect occupancy rates in residential towers and strata (condo) sales.
The fire didn't happen in Vancouver; it happened in London. And whatever the issue in London, people were trapped in the building. It shows it can still happen. I would have thought London and the UK in general would have had better building codes than that.
So would I. That's why I think it's more likely that proper procedures weren't followed, when this building was renovated.
Ohio's building code is based on the International Building Code. (the IBC isn't binding, and each jurisdiction is free to adopt--or not--whatever they like from it) And, in this code is chapter 34, which is an analysis of an existing building, that is being considered for a renovation, to determine whether its code deficiencies can be grandfathered in, or whether they need to be corrected, during the renovation.
In this building, the first red flag would be the single stair. I don't think a single stair in a building this size has been legal in Ohio for many decades. But, that wouldn't necessarily be a deal-killer, if it could be shown that the building was still reasonably safe in other ways, (e.g. a sprinkler system, fire ratings between units, etc.) and if the intended new use was not going to place additional burden on the building's safety. (e.g. not going to make the stair narrower, not going to add units, not going to remove the sprinkler system, etc.)
I don't think there is a code official in Ohio (probably the US) that would have approved of this kind of renovation, where additional units were added, without providing/maintaining sufficient fire ratings between units, and providing additional means of egress.
Quote:
It's funny that people are blaming the private contractors. Many times on this forum, various posters have spoken out against regulations, saying that the developers know best.
There is a difference between local zoning ordinances (parking requirements, setbacks, etc.) and the building code. (proper number of exits, sufficient egress width, fire ratings, etc.) Many of us have spoken out against zoning regulations, but very few have spoken out against the building code.
Objective of the article was to protect Vancouver residential tower occupancy and "strata" sales.
You can debate with yourself as to whether the Titanic was marketed as "unsinkable" or "practically unsinkable". Were you there? Certainly people were led to believe it was luxurious and safe. There should be no dispute however that the ship sank.
The statement from the Vancouver fire expert is eerily similar to the hype about the Titanic. The article was sales puffery to protect occupancy rates in residential towers and strata (condo) sales.
No fire/code official I know would have made such a statement if they didn't think it was true.
Going to be an interesting story. Las Vegas is getting close to requiring fire sprinklers in all new construction. Likely by next year.
Buildings of all height can be erected so there's no need for fire sprinklers at all, and in earthquake areas, like Las Vegas/California, if a quake strikes, the water gets shut off, Adios to the building and occupants!
As an example, the cylindrical Marina towers in Chicago were erected with concrete, even the separations between the units, so what could possible burn besides the contents. High rises are built with that in mind, one unit burns out, and it doesn't effect any neighboring units, just like the townhouse I live in, fire walls between the units. 2 have gone up in flames in this 433 unit complex, built circa 1970, in the 21 years I've lived here, and no displacement of residents. The last fire, as the fire raged, an elderly woman sat in her unit watching TV, and was forced out, temporarily, with her screaming: There's fire walls between these units, let me get back to my TV program!
The culprit to this London disaster was the cladding/insulation added to this 1964 building in a refurbishment attempt.
The clock is ticking on all these newer fire traps being built clear across the country, where they're allowing 4-5 floors of wooden construction atop a 2nd floor concrete pad, including 2 of them in Las Vegas, where, a no brainer, fire sprinklers will be a necessity! Functional unless a quake strikes and the water is cut off!
Objective of the article was to protect Vancouver residential tower occupancy and "strata" sales.
You can debate with yourself as to whether the Titanic was marketed as "unsinkable" or "practically unsinkable". Were you there? Certainly people were led to believe it was luxurious and safe. There should be no dispute however that the ship sank.
The statement from the Vancouver fire expert is eerily similar to the hype about the Titanic. The article was sales puffery to protect occupancy rates in residential towers and strata (condo) sales.
The statement from the expert stated facts about our building codes. Building codes is a major point of the London story.
Purpose of the article? Doubt anyone was worried that people would stop living in towers in Vancouver because of an event overseas.
I have been a Titanic buff for over 48 years. I've read enough to know. One doesn't " have to be there " to know history.
"Is it true that the Titanic was really believed to be “unsinkable” back in 1912, or was that belief a product of latter day myth-making? In the example quoted above, Titanic writer Walter Lord claims that the White Star line never advertised her as such. He also quotes London Times journalist Philip Howard, who wrote in 1981:
I can find no contemporary evidence that the Titanic was regarded as virtually unsinkable until after she had sunk … With hindsight we have created the myth because it makes a more dramatic metaphor."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
