Theatre Fire Escapes

Progress, Volume XII, Issue 5, 1 January 1917, Page 854

Theatre Fire Escapes

Interesting case in Auckland An appeal by the Gaiety Theatre, Ltd., proprietors of Everybody’s Theatre, against the decision of the superintendent of the Fire Board, in refusing a certificate as to the means of cgcape in case of fire, was heard by Mr. F. V. Frazer, S.M., recently, reports the Auckland “Herald.” Mr. H. H. Ostler, instructed by Mr. G. E. L. . Alderton, appeared for the appellant and Dr. 11. D. Bamford, instructed by Messrs Earl and Kent, for the superintendent. In opening the case for the appellant company, counsel said the onus was on him to prove that there were sufficient safeguards in case of accident. Ashley Hunter, civil engineer and architect, said he had inspected the theatre. In addition to the main exit there were two exits into Fort Street. The theatre was practically fireproof, the floors being the only combustible material in it. Using one exit the theatre could be emptied in five or six minutes, and using the three exits it could be emptied in three minutes. Witness based his calculations on the assumption that the rate of progress was one mile an hour. With Regard to the stairs entering the vestibule at right angles witness said the same conditions occurred in nearly every other theatre. Witness could not, however, see the slightest danger from this, in view of the size of the exits and the limited seating accommodation. Witness, did not think the tea-rooms would cause any obstruction.

He considered the theatre one of the safest in Auckland. To Dr. Bamford: His calculations were mathematical, and he had not allowed for the human element. He considered the New Zealand public was not prone to panic. He did not think the removal of the tea-room would minimise a panic. Evidence was given by George Selwyn Goldsboro’, architect; George Wilfred Allsop, president of the Auckland branch of the New Zealand Institute of Architects; William Arthur Gumming, president of the New Zealand Institute of Architects; and Norman Wade, architect, to the effect that they considered the theatre was adequately safeguarded. Walter Parry, manager of the Victoria Insurance Company, said he was willing to quote the lowest rate for a public risk policy for the theatre. Superintendent C. A. Wooley, of the Auckland Fire Brigade, said he had inspected the building. When it was first —before the tea-rooms were started—he regarded the open space as a place of safety, as the whole audience could congregate there. He considered the erection of the balustrade was a source of danger in the event of a panic. The slightest pressure on anybodv passing would send them over the balustrade. He also objected to the people coming downstairs meeting at right angles those coming from the ground floor. Emergency exits were not of much use, as people generally went out the same way as they entered. Witness considered no one could say how long it would take to leave a theatre in the case of a fire, as people were apt to lose their heads. At this stage Mr. Ostler asked if the superintendent would be satisfied if the balustrade of the tea-rooms was raised and the level of the back exits altered. Mr. Wooley replied in the affirmative, and the matter was then, adjourned for a fortnight for the work to be done.