The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
Five Minutes in the Street: The View from the Front Seat
Let's take a look at a Type III building with a mixed occupancy.
A three story, 30 x 100 structure. Observations and analysis of building features, conditions and situations are mission critical when addressing an evolving and dynamic fire incident scene. Risk Assessment skills are important and must be expanded well beyond the limitation of conventional size-up alone.
Here we have a structure, that has no immediate fire conditions obvious, however you’re in the front seat , and here's your view…. Looking at the images presented;
What are you seeing, what is a concern, what’s your risk assessment and analysis of this structure and the occupancy?
What’s Obvious in your view, What isn’t?
Describe what you can assume about the Building
What are the expected hazards for this type on structure?
What's your view telling you?
How will this building perform under fire conditions?
How will this building perform under normal, non-fire conditions?
Just give us your view (point)
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on
-
RFD,
Two questions...
What's the occupancy in the Delta exposure and does it face the cross street?
How bad was the rest of the building when the facade collapsed?
OK, technically that's three questions, so here's a fourth.
What will I get if I call the phone number on the Bravo exposure awning?
-
Permalink Reply by rfdjumper on
-
All I did was reverse lookup of the phone number on El Cibao. From there I researched articles on 170 Smith St.
http://outside.in/places/170-smith-street-brooklyn
The NYC Building Profile on the property including citations.
http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/PropertyProfileOverviewServlet?bo...
There are a few good articles on what happened, with pictures. If you followed the google map links in my last post you'll be able to see the aerial view, and the street view, which will answer all your questions, except number 4.
That's
http://www.menupages.com/restaurantdetails?restaurantid=28148
-
-
Nicely done, thanks.
And...if you hit Google Earth for a lot of what my department protects, you'll get terrific photos of the tree canopy over a lot of the structures.
I haven't fought a taxpayer or row house fire in a long time...it's amazing how quickly it comes back when Chris makes you concentrate.
-
Permalink Reply by Christopher J. Naum, SFPE on
-
Well since we have a team that would put CSI Miami, CSI Las Vegas and New York, Quincy, Columbo, MacGiver, Magnum, Detective Popyeye Doyle, Jason Bourne and Jack Bauer all to shame, at least we made this interesting....I hope I can still get some mileage and replies out of this (LOL).......We got way too much technology at our finger tips...(another LOL and ROTF)
-
-
The sad thing is I know of MANY buildings very much like the one shown, they maybe not immediately falling down, but they show stresses with their integrity in question especially under fire loads and they are fully occupied with 4-8 apartments each. City firefighting at its best! -sarcasm-
-
-
Since our forensic team has uncovered the renovations that have been completed on this structure, since the time that it became compromised and sustained partial collapse....we'll switch the focus to the front seat view of the building, that has been renovated and altered. With that being said, the same questions apply-EXCEPT address them for a Type III altered structure....with extensive modifications. I'll add that you can assume that there will be Engineered Structural floor system components added......(the current trend...)
-
Permalink Reply by rescueortruck on
-
What I see is a squaters dream and a druggies dream, an old building that probably has an old fire escape at the back to gain entry with. Risk Assessment building collapse, it is already showing sign of stress and it's age, if there was a fire there it would spread quickly because of the age, it probably has old wood floors. The obvious is that the building is a write off and would more then likly be arson if there was a fire, the stress cracks and the brick crumbling. Hazards would be the building it's self and the needles from the druggies the building next to it the bars on the front door and the windows, Etc. My view is telling me insurance claim. Under fire conditions it would burn quite well probably collapse.
-
Permalink Reply by Al Huelsenbeck on
-
Brothers everything that has been said about this building I believe to be correct. Side A is open and clear with a street wide enough for a tower ladder that could provide more essential information. The roof unseen from the street can tell us if we have a potential "common cockloft" situation that can be found in row structures with continious roof lines. This should cause us to order a line to Divison 3 in exposure B if the Videomania is the building of origin with a top floor fire or significant fire that may cause vertical and ultimately laterial extension. Even if the common cockloft is not the case there is likely to be multiple violations of the common wall that should raise concern for the IC.
90% of my Battalion is made up of two and three story ordinary row dwellings which can make for some interresting jobs. This is a great scenerio thank you for allowing me to share all your thoughts.
-
-
Two basic additional problems result from the addition of the engineered structural components.
1) The engineered system adds a lightweight component to the structure, with all the attendent problems. The most obvious is the potential for truss voids in the floor and roof support systems that didn't normally exist in construction of this type and age.
2) The second problem is the mixed construction leads to what I call the Zipper Problem. Basically, if part of the construction is new and part of it is old, the two are not always tied together as strongly as they should be. In other words, we've created a zipper that connects the new and old parts of the building. A fire can unzip the zipper in a hurry, leading to the stuff on at least one side of the zipper falling on us.
We need to know what's on both sides of the zipper, and realize that the two sides may behave very differently when exposed to fire.
-
Permalink Reply by John on
-
Possible building colapse, gate on the door and steel across the front window, looks as if this building should be condemned, a very high risk if it caught fire, a definite defensive fire as long as not occupied and if so gotta assesses the risk of sending crews in, if at all. a fire fighters nightmare if people are trapped.
-
Permalink Reply by Tony P on
-
I find these discussions fascinating! And more than ever glad that I live out in the 'burbs. Fair enough that gives me the urban interface issues, but I'm still glad we don't have much at all in the way of old buildings and virtually nothing above two storeys!
I read on and learn...
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
