Columbia University Libraries Digital Collections: The Real Estate Record

Real estate record and builders' guide: [v. 93, no. 2400: Articles]: March 14, 1914

Text version:

AND NEW YORK, MARCH 14, 1914 IKSillllllllllilillillliiiiStilillliiiitllllllltillllliliH SHOULD ELEVATORS HAVE SAFETY DEVICES ? The Herrick Bill Opposed on Various Grounds by Building Authorities and Representative Owners—Urged that Existing Buildings be Exempted. iSk lllilllllllilM^^ llllllliilillllilMK lllilllllllHI IV/I UCH opposition has developed to ■'"•'■ the Herriclc bill in the State Senate which provides that every passenger ele¬ vator, except those in private residences, shall be fitted with an automatic safety appliance so that the car cannot be started while the elevator door is open. The installations must all be made within one year, in both new and old buildings, under a penalty of five dollars per day for every day thereafter that the law is violated. The opposition is based on several grounds, principally because the law would be retroactive and affect existing buildings as well as those to be erected hereafter; and would therefore be a great hardship, as is claimed, upon the owners of existing buildings containing passen¬ ger elevators. Not only would the in¬ stallations be costly, but the safety- appliances would have the effect of slow¬ ing up elevator traffic and causing con¬ gestion. The president of an elevator manufacturing company agrees that this diminished efficiency would follow and that it would probably compel the in¬ stallation of more elevators in tall build¬ ings than is now necessary. The Superintendents of Buildings are all opposed to the bill as it stands, Supt. Miller of Manhattan holding that it would be quite impossible to equip every elevator in the city within the prescribed period of one year. A strong feeling prevails, moreover, that the owners of old buildings are being too severely treated by the Legislature, and that there should be more consideration shown for those buildings which com¬ plied with the building laws fully at the time of their erection. On the other hand, there are those among builders and owners who favor the fundamental principle of tlie bill, or some fair and moderate means through which elevators should gradually be equipped with safety devices. Driving Landlords Into Bankruptcy. B. E. Martin, president of the Build¬ ing Owners and Managers' .\ssociation. said he presumed that the bill in¬ tended to compel the installation of safe¬ ties for levers and doors of elevators, and if this was the purpose of the liill, he considered it entirely unnecessary. He added: "On referring to records you will find that the percentage of elevator accidents IS small, particularly such accidents as might be avoided by the devices in ques¬ tion. It is my belief that this bill would not have been brought before us but for the death of a prominent citizen re¬ cently through a very unsual elevator accident. "The fact of the matter is that after very careful investigation I have not found a device that is absolutely relia¬ ble. If the authorities continue to com¬ pel what many consider unnecessary ex¬ penses, to business and apartment build¬ ings in New York City, it will have a tendency to increase rents, or drive some poor landlords into bankruptcy. "I always have and will conti continue to support the authorities in their en¬ deavors to protect human life; however, it has not been proven that the devices referred to will assist in this good work." Favorable Opinions. John C. Knight, manager of the Met¬ ropolitan Building, said the elevators in that building had been protected by safety devices for over six years. He had advocated an installation of this kind and has been in favor of safety de¬ vices of this type. He added: "There may be some details about this bill with which I would not agree, but the 'hindwriting on the wall' has been plain, not only in this State but in several of the other States, that this device will soon be required. I think that at this time it is only appropriate to congratu¬ late those who have done this before they were required to." Messrs. Bing & Bing, large builders, said they thought the equipment of ele¬ vators with safety devices a- good thing, but that a little longer time than one year to install them would be advisable, as comparatively few elevators are at present equipped, and crowding the work into a short time would necessarily in¬ crease the expense. WUl Slow Up Traffic. Lawrence B. Elliman, of Pease & Elli¬ man, said it would mean delay for ele¬ vator traffic, and he was therefore op¬ posed to it: "This bill, as I understand it, requires the owner of the building to put some device on the gate of the elevator and the gate of the landing so that the ele¬ vator cannot be started until they are both closed. This would mean a great delay in the moving of people up and down in the building, and besides I do not know of any device which will do this and which would not be getting out of order all the time, when you consider the calibre of men operating the ele¬ vators in the city. "It would undoubtedly tie up the ele¬ vator system in the buildings very often and cause untold trouble between the landlord and tenants. Besides this, in my opinion, it is not necessary, as the number of accidents which happen in comparison to the number of people carried in the elevators in the city is very sinall." Supt. Carlin Opposed. Supt. Carlin, of the Brooklyn Bureau of Buildings, does not believe that an automatic device should control an ele¬ vator car, but he agrees that the doors to the elevator shaft should be con¬ trolled automatically by closing the mo¬ ment the car leaves the floor level. The automatic control called for in the bill cuts out the operating machinery. Sup¬ pose these devices had been in use in the .Ashe Building at the time of the fire when the shaft doors were pried open and the operator called and tried to re¬ spond but found that the car was out of his control, due to the shaft door be¬ ing opened, and therefore could not 'bring_ the elevator car up to the landing— if this had been the case, how many would have been saved of the number that actually were saved by the ele¬ vators? Supt. Carlin further said: "The operation of elevator cars should never be out of the control of the opera¬ tor and the responsibility put right up tu him. Automatic devices encourage care¬ lessness, and verv often fail to work when required and are very often the cause of accidents." An Estimate of the Cost. President E. B. Boynton, of the .Am¬ erican Real Estate Co., which owns many buildings, said when interrogated: "The evident intent of this bill is to make it impossible for an elevator to be moved when any door opening into the elevator shaft is ajar. A great number of elevators in New York City are elec¬ tric, and in order to conform with the requirements of this bill, in cases of electric elevators, it would mean pro¬ viding a switch or point of contact at each floor which would close when the door was closed and break the current connecting with the controller when any door is opened. Such an installation would probably not cost less than $25 per opening, and in the case of a 12- story building with three elevators the expense would be approximately $1,000 for an installation. "It is easy to imagine frequent re¬ pairs on an electrical outfit having so many points of contact which are fre¬ quently opened and closed, subjected to rough use. In case of the contact failing to work on any one of the floors, the elevator would be out of com¬ mission until this was repaired, and it could not be repaired while the elevator was in use. No elevator door can be repaired with this apparatus and still run the elevator. The expense of main¬ tenance on such an apparatus will neces¬ sarily be high. "A building which has now barely sufficient elevator service for its occu¬ pancy will, if this law goes into effect, be unable to handle the traffic because of the longer time each elevator will take in making the run from the ground floor to the top and return. "There is undoubtedly a strong feel¬ ing that some safety appliance should be applied to all elevators, but in my opinion this bill is not wholly satisfac¬ tory," Retroactive Consequences Objected to. G. Richard Davis, chairman of the Building Committee of the Allied In¬ terests, is opposed to the bill, for one reason because it is retroactive. "Such safety devices may be properly required on all new elevators installed," said Mr. Davis, "but on old ones there should be no such a requirement made until the present devices, which are still in their experimental stage, are per¬ fected. "Elevator enclosures and doors must be built to receive the present device. To be compelled to alter the present enclosures and doors, so as to make the safety device now on the market work properly, will be in some cases a prohib¬ itive expense. "There is no doubt that we will have to have some safety device on eleva-