Re: Re: How Did Benson & Forsyth Do This?

@wearnicehats wrote:

I knew this had been brought up before

https://archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?t=3690

this is also relevant

http://historical-debates.oireachtas.ie/D/0620/D.0620.200605300173.html

Thanks wearnicehats, should have looked properly for that.
Somehow I don’t think B&F would be likely to have a chat about the issues raised if I were to call them.
Its interesting though:
“the Commissioners of Public Works requested a detailed report from the Gallery’s architects, Benson & Forsyth who advised that the stairs were in compliance with the relevant building regulations”.

Simple really.
Just depends on your attitude to risk.

missarchi noted earlier: “everyone so worried about not getting sued these days there is not much room for architecture…”
I think on balance I would be prepared to take a risk and go with more than 16 risers if I felt there was a justifiable design reason and I had taken some form of compensatory measure(s).
However, shouldn’t the question really be whether my client wants that risk of a resultant claim thrust upon him?
He may be supportive of my design intentions, but I am certain he will have no appetite for even having to defend against a single claim from that inevitable chancer.
As an architect it is my duty to not place him in that potential position.
Four little spills on the Gallery stair already. The big one will come one day after a few glasses of vino in the upper restaurant (when it reopens).
I doubt whether a presiding judge would accept B&F’s reassurances.