So as you would expect, I've been hastily reading about the history of exterior fire escapes and why they came into fashion and then went out of fashion again.
For example:
"(in 1915) The Committee on Safety to Life of the National Fire Protection Association... urged that no outside egress be allowed on buildings over six stories high. This introduced the idea, already accepted by experts, that height itself, apart from how a building was used, should be a criterion for determining the type of emergency exits required."
And as you would also expect, I'm wondering why we suddenly seem to be going all-in re: "no balcony" units, if safety is such a top concern. On lowrise buildings wouldn't any balcony potentially represent an additional escape route during a disaster?
Considering how we do things nowadays, is there really any chance of a productive cost-saving by eliminating one interior stairwell in new construction but then adding a multi-level exterior staircase? That's ultimately what we're talking about here, isn't it?
I was also reading what modern fire escape fabricators say. They say modern external fire escapes are cost-effective and easy to maintain. Back in the day we decided external fire escapes were maintenance nightmares that would have questionable reliability during an actual emergency. So... if methods and materials have improved then why haven't we reconsidered our rejection of those more traditional kinds of fire escapes?
Methinks this is actually a much more interesting topic than I ever gave it credit for being. Anyway, we'll talk much more about this during the VV holiday bash.