2. Escape route, emergency manual cranks and parapet height <60cm

Thank you for your messages!!! Sometimes I’m really glad to be able to let it all out and then also get nice responses, that feels really good!!

I couldn’t bear it and called the building authority immediately and was lucky to get a young lady on the line who is currently studying something related to fire protection.

The thing about the parapet is nonsense, it was and still is 120cm, the window size is at least 90cm in width and 120cm in height in BW, at least in the clear dimensions.

The lowering of the height could be because the lintel in your case did not meet the minimum window size requirement anymore and therefore had to be made lower. I have to clarify that for myself, although I don’t think so because we have increased room heights which should rule that out. Still, it’s outrageous that this wasn’t discussed with us, instead they just lowered all the windows, there are other ways to solve this for that one window.

But the lady did confirm the thing about the 2nd escape route, here the legislator just didn’t think it through. Even for one room (which also counts as a living room) another escape route is mandatory. What can you say...

And the thing about the emergency manual cranks comes from the electric shutters, although this is nowhere anchored in writing, it is basically criticized in the building application, so it has to be included. For external blinds it always depends on the caseworker, here a “slip-through” could even work, meaning trying your luck without, and if it goes badly, just add it later.

That’s what we’re going to try now and then see...

Thanks again for your answers!


Do you really have radio motors on your Roma slats? In their technology (download from the homepage) it explicitly says not to use them with radio motors.

The legislator has certainly taken the second escape route into consideration. Especially in 1-room accommodations, otherwise one quickly ends up in a deadly trap in the event of a fire.

Out of curiosity, I actually googled again just now: even in NRW an escape window must be at least 90x120, and the orientation doesn’t even matter. Our window is much larger, but has two sashes with a mullion, so probably only the one sash that opens directly counts. We didn’t discuss the parapet further since we have 60 or 45 cm anyway (and wanted it that way). After reading it just now, it really seems to work with a normal parapet height as well – so just as you want it.

Yes, we have radio motors. We didn’t install the emergency hand cranks, so I can’t tell you if they work, but I trust the statements of our building partner. We noted the spot where the square drive is so we can retrofit it if necessary. Of course, it would be stupid if only then it turns out it doesn’t work :eek: For practical purposes, both the roller shutter people and the fire department told us that in a real emergency nobody cranks around but simply kicks the roller shutters out. We haven’t tried that either so far ;)

The legislator has indeed taken the second escape route into account. Especially in one-room accommodations, otherwise you quickly have a death trap in case of fire.

I don’t understand that. You’re trying to tell me that it actually makes sense not to designate another rescue route 4 meters further on in the same direction, when the front door of a room faces east? Okay...
There are certainly situations where it does make sense, but in that case the wording of a regulation should definitely be more detailed here, because in my case I still see it as total nonsense (especially since a 2nd escape route does not represent an escape path; if the fire department had to rescue me, they could just open the front door next to it).

Out of curiosity, I actually googled again just now: even in NRW an escape window must be at least 90x120, whereby the orientation is even irrelevant. Our window is considerably bigger, but has two sashes with a mullion, so probably only the one sash that can be opened directly counts. We didn’t discuss the sill height further since we have either 60 or 45 cm anyway (and wanted it that way). After having looked it up just now, it really seems to work with normal sill height as well – so exactly how you want it.

Yes, we have motorized drives with radio control. We didn’t install the emergency crank handles at all, so I can’t tell you if they work but I trust the statements of our construction partner. We have marked the spot where the square drive is to possibly retrofit it later. It would of course be annoying if it turned out it doesn’t work :eek: For practical purposes, both the roller shutter people and the fire brigade told us that in a real emergency nobody cranks them but the roller shutters are simply kicked out. We haven’t tried that yet either ;)

Very cool :cool:. The idea not to punch through the drive is also a good idea, I’ll definitely remember that :).

I don't understand that. You want to tell me that in a room where the front door faces east, it actually makes sense not to designate another escape route 4 meters further on that leads in the same direction? Okay... There are certainly situations where it does make sense, but in that case, the wording of a regulation should definitely be more detailed here, because in my case I still see it as complete nonsense (especially since a second escape route is not an emergency exit; if the fire department had to rescue me, they could just as well open the front door next to it). Very cool :cool:. The idea not to break through the recording is also a good idea, I will definitely remember that :).

If the door should be blocked by falling debris or because you can't find the key in the smoke or whatever – then you can still break a window. Also as the fire department – if the person to be rescued blocks the door from inside, they can break the window. One escape route is simply not enough.

I don’t understand that. You want to tell me that in a room where the front door faces east, it actually makes sense to not designate another escape route 4 meters away that also leads in the same direction? Okay... There are certainly situations where that makes sense, but in that case, the wording of a regulation should definitely be more detailed here, because in my case I still see it as total nonsense (especially since a 2nd escape route does not constitute an emergency exit; if the fire department had to rescue me, they could just as well open the front door next to it).

The second escape route is not defined by the distance to the first one, but by the fact that there is a second one ;-) Because the first escape route, as close as it may be, can be blocked by the fire incident.

But you correctly recognize that it is about a second RESCUE route, not an ESCAPE route. Be glad about that, otherwise you would have to install an exterior staircase on the upper floor as well ;-)

Tip: If you don’t have habitable rooms, this does not apply. Keyword: basement as pure utility space. But if you want to rent living space there, for example, then it obviously conflicts with that.

You are just pissed off here, maybe rightly so, because neither the builder nor the planner paid attention to this aspect. That is annoying, but actually well known and documented. It is no big deal to provide a 2nd escape route on the upper floor, even with external attachments. For basements, there are also solutions via shaft systems etc. A few hundred thousand builders before you have already managed this, you can manage it too.