Concern: “[There is an] increased likelihood of significant injury and mass casualties in limiting occupants to a single exit in the event of a fire or other emergency.”

Response: Single-stair buildings are one of the world’s most common types of urban buildings and have a strong safety record, due in part to their small size, making exiting in an emergency much easier and quicker. As we discuss here, a growing consensus now considers a second stairway to be an outdated safety measure and one that’s far less effective than other modern solutions such as sprinklers and fire-rated doors and walls.

Concern: “A national proposal to permit mid-rise buildings to be served by a single exit stairway was reviewed and overwhelmingly rejected by the International Code Council (ICC) Technical Committee.”

Response: This is inaccurate: The Committee actually recommended that local municipalities decide upon their own standards. Accordingly, a growing number of cities, states, and countries are legalizing or exploring mid-rise single-stair buildings.

Concern: “Eliminating a stairwell may lead to unsafe exposure of fire conditions to occupants and cause counterflow and congestion with occupants and firefighters attempting to use the same stairs.”

Response: A single-stair building is far less likely to see congestion on the stairs in an emergency. Our proposal to limit single-stair buildings in Austin to six floors and four units per floor would lead to a maximum of 20 households using the stairs in an emergency, compared to 100+ households per stairway in an average double-loaded building. And a single-stair building’s much shorter corridor would make it much likelier residents would be out of the building before the fire service arrived.

Concern: “AFD’s ability to perform rescue from high windows is limited by a relatively small number of ladder trucks.”

Response: The roll out of midrise single-stair buildings would likely come at a modest pace, easily within AFD’s ability to acquire new ladder trucks.

Concern: “[Single-stair buildings may] be developed in residential areas that may not have sufficient water flow and pressure to suppress a fire in a five-story building.”

Response: Any new development has to meet City fire requirements, including a fire flow test where water pressure is tested at the site.

Concern: “A single stairway has the potential to create bottlenecks that may result in delayed services to patients or injured first responders.”

Response: Single-stair buildings’ small size means most people will be out of the building by the time that the Fire Department arrives.

Concern: “A need for a stretcher-accessible elevator in buildings with a single stair may be necessary if a single stair code amendment is passed.”

Response: Austin’s firefighters are already trained and required to be able to carry people on stretchers down stairways.

Concern: “The best chances for survival in an active shooter situation require occupants to exit a building immediately if possible. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security states that facilities should have at least two evacuation routes. Eliminating a stairway reduces paths of evacuation for occupants attempting to flee a life-threatening emergency [such as…] an active shooter.”

Response: The document AFD links to does NOT say facilities should have at least two evacuation routes. In fact, the document suggests a shelter-in-place strategy as a valid response to an active shooter.

Concern: “Austin is not facing the same population density challenges as Seattle and New York. This allows Austin time to seek solutions for more middle-scale density with fewer life safety implications.”

Response: Our goal is to legalize six-story single-stair buildings before - not after - significant development occurs, so that these buildings can be part of Austin’s built landscape.

Concern: “A shift in staircase design requirements is unlikely to have a measurable impact on the number of housing units built. It is not guaranteed that additional units constructed would be offered at a price that would improve housing affordability.”

Response: Mid-rise single-stair buildings are common around the world and have unique housing supply benefits, including the ability to build them on smaller lots where larger apartment buildings wouldn’t fit. This is why a growing number of jurisdictions are allowing them or may in the near future. In any case, that these requirements might have a modest impact on housing supply is hardly a strong reason against single-stair reform.