History: Pitch

(Starkey: History Story Pitch)
As I wrote in my budget line, building code changes in Manhattan have often pitted safety concerns against ones related to the cost of building in an undeniably expensive city. I’m interested in how these two arguments relate. The story will examine each major era of change in the city’s building code, starting with the period in the early 20th century after the Triangle fire. The landmark changes in 1937 and 1968 were written largely with builders’ economic concerns in mind. Fireproofing standards are weaker now than they were in the 30s, according to experts quoted in media reports. Structural columns in high-rises only must last two hours in a fire, not four as required before, a change made because building became too costly. After the 2001 attacks, it seems, these two sets of concerns have again been set against each other as the city continues to embark on its fourth major era of building code change. This is a story about the history of change, and how changes brought the city’s code to where it is today and where it will go in the future. I have already contacted people at Cornell, where professors and students embarked on arguably the most comprehensive Web-based project to study the Triangle Fire, which happened on this campus. I will interview people like Monica Gabrielle, chairwoman of the Skyscraper Safety Committee, who called the structural column dilemma “the dumbest thing I have ever heard.” I will interview Steven Spinola, former president of the Real Estate Board of New York who told The New York Times, “We’re not ashamed to admit to say we are interested in the dollar.” And I will attempt to interview people in the middle, like Patricia Lancaster, the building commissioner. This passage from The New York Times in 2004 perfectly presents the point I hope to expand upon.
“To test just what cost differences the new codes might make, city officials are studying building projects now in progress to compare prices under the old and model codes, said Ms. Lancaster, the buildings commissioner. If a certain part of the model code turns out to be significantly costlier, she said, the city will reconsider that provision. Despite the focus on the bottom line, she said, ''I am committed to ensuring that the new code is as safe or safer than the code today.’”