In the past six weeks, many shareholders have asked questions about how the proposed lobby renovations will function in practice and raised serious concerns relating to accessibility and safety. Our buildings are home to thousands of people, ages 0-100, who need to move around with wheelchairs, walkers, canes, strollers, push carts, shopping bags, and dogs. Introducing new stairs; longer paths to reach the park, bus, subway, and grocery store; and complicated ramps that have multiple 90° turns (as you can see in the diagrams below) will make life more difficult from day to day.
These new designs will put lives at risk in an emergency, when every second counts. In a truly catastrophic situation (like a fire), folks need to do more than just exit the building; we would all need to be able to quickly get out and get away—thousands of people will need to get to a truly safe spot, which means leaving the immediate vicinity.
Here’s the proposed plan for Building 1, where the new straight path incorporates stairs, so they’ve added a ramp that requires making multiple 90° turns:
The proposed new entrance to Building 1; the stairs appear midway up the straight path, and the ramp requires making four sharp turns in short succession
To get more insights into how our collective safety might be compromised if these plans move forward as-is, we spoke to a paramedic who lives in SPC and who has a lot of concerns with the current designs. Read what they had to say in their own words below.
What might happen when someone needs a stretcher
“Our elevators are able to accommodate a stretcher with the head of the stretcher sitting up. So, God forbid, if there is a cardiac arrest and the patient is being transported out of their house in an unconscious state, we use a backboard or something of that nature to put them on the floor. That's around 6 feet tall, laying flat. So regarding the turns on the ramp, you need to be able to turn something that's 6 feet flat without bumping into or rubbing against any railings or metal fencing [which is standard with narrow ramps].”
How first responders would get in during a larger emergency
“Then there is the concern about the smaller entrance size. If, God forbid, the building has to do some sort of evacuation — whether it’s the gas or if there's a fire — people are not going to be able to get out while emergency personnel is going into the building through the same small entranceway.”
“Coming into the buildings, steps are going to be annoying for the fire department because they've got to carry all their gear. Using a ramp is going to be a waste of time because they're going to have to make a zigzag, as will EMTs. Paramedics and police officers typically just take the steps anyway, but it's not a good idea. The turns that I'm looking at in the sketches are not wise turns when it comes to that.
From an ambulance perspective, we would literally have to not take the patient on a stretcher, which we would never do in a cardiac arrest or with an unconscious person — whether it’s diabetes or anything that would cause somebody to be unconscious, like a stroke or an overdose. We would have no way of doing it. We would have to carry them on some sort of device on the steps, which would be detrimental to the patient and a waste of time.”
[In case you missed it: The architects and designers of SPC weigh in on the lobby renovations]
How lower ceilings can impact emergency access
“These are legitimate, legitimate problems. I mean, you're going to have an entranceway that is around 8 feet tall. When firefighters are bringing in their tools, their tools are pretty large; instead of the 14-foot ceilings that we now have in the main entrance, you're going to have things scraping against the ceilings, the door width. If they can't get their tools in, they're busting those doors.”
How the new designs could affect children
“I've had young patients whose parents have brought them downstairs [to meet an ambulance, for example]. For a mom to come running out of a building because her child has croup, and not go down the stairs because she would fall so she's going to take a zigzagging ramp as opposed to the rainbow paths we have now, is asinine. I think that it would be very off-putting for people. I know that there are one or two people that are looking to move into Seward Park whose children do have medical issues — they saw me coming from work, saw my uniform, and said, ‘Oh, you live in the building; that makes us feel safe because our child has XYZ.’”
🚨 A few things you can do right now 🚨
Share this post with any neighbors who you think would want to know how these plans make us less safe.
Let the Board know that you’d be okay with a brief pause to refine the designs, find ways to reduce costs, and take shareholder feedback into account in a more structured and transparent way. You can email them directly at [email protected].
Ask five of your neighbors or friends in SPC to add their name to this list (and select “yes” on the first question). We’re trying to get to 500 units to show the Board that a large number of shareholders are unhappy with the current design and process and would like to see changes made. (Almost 400 units have signed on so far!)