March 30, 2007The Corinthian BallroomFor Saturday, we're taking on the difficult issue of the Corinthian Ballroom. The Fire Board of Appeals rejected the fire marshal's citation requiring the owners of the building to create a second exit to the street and lifting a business-ending occupancy limit of 49 on the facility. But the safety issues remain - and as Roanoke tries harder to preserve older buildings, these issues will undoubtedly arise again. |
SearchQuick Thought
Recent comments
Monthly archivesCategories
Latest columnsToday's editorials
Letters to the editorAbout this blogThe Roanoke Times editorial staff engages readers in a respectful dialogue and exchange of opinion, including our virtual editorial board where you can discuss tomorrow's editorials today. Read more about the editorial staff .....Advertisement.....
|
March 30, 2007
The Corinthian Ballroom
For Saturday, we're taking on the difficult issue of the Corinthian Ballroom. The Fire Board of Appeals rejected the fire marshal's citation requiring the owners of the building to create a second exit to the street and lifting a business-ending occupancy limit of 49 on the facility.
But the safety issues remain - and as Roanoke tries harder to preserve older buildings, these issues will undoubtedly arise again.
Comments
[March 30, 2007 12:19 PM]
MarkOThings change, codes change, people change, technology changes, and buildings change. What was once safe can become unsafe in a new day, under new circumstances. I am glad that the fire department is doing its job and informing those it serves to protect. Also glad that there are forums to take concerns and rulings before to get clarification. The system does work, sometimes. I do wonder though that the insurance companies won't have issues now with the building something else to be of concern for the owners.
[March 30, 2007 2:54 PM]
WarrenBusiness concerns should never trump life safety issues. As MarkO above pointed out, codes, buildings, etc, change over time. We know better now how to protect building occupants. Also, there is no such thing as a "fireproof" building unless it is completely devoid of furnishings. This should be a matter of doing what is right for safety, not deciding an issue based on emotions or business potentil. All of those things become noise if, as the City attorney pointed out, there are bodies piled up at the exit.
Perhaps the City should consider an injunction while they appeal the local board's decision to the State Technical Review Board.