U.S. Fire Administration/Technical Report Series

Apartment Building Fire 

East 50th Street

New York City

USFA-TR-019/January 1988

Homeland

Security

U.S. Fire Administration Fire Investigations Program

T

he U.S. Fire Administration develops reports on selected major fires throughout the country. 

The fires usually involve multiple deaths or a large loss of property. But the primary criterion 

for deciding to do a report is whether it will result in significant “lessons learned.” In some 

cases these lessons bring to light new knowledge about fire--the effect of building construction or 

contents, human behavior in fire, etc. In other cases, the lessons are not new but are serious enough 

to highlight once again, with yet another fire tragedy report. In some cases, special reports are developed to discuss events, drills, or new technologies which are of interest to the fire service.

The reports are sent to fire magazines and are distributed at National and Regional fire meetings. The 

International Association of Fire Chiefs assists the USFA in disseminating the findings throughout the 

fire service. On a continuing basis the reports are available on request from the USFA; announcements of their availability are published widely in fire journals and newsletters.

This body of work provides detailed information on the nature of the fire problem for policymakers 

who must decide on allocations of resources between fire and other pressing problems, and within 

the fire service to improve codes and code enforcement, training, public fire education, building 

technology, and other related areas.

The Fire Administration, which has no regulatory authority, sends an experienced fire investigator 

into a community after a major incident only after having conferred with the local fire authorities 

to insure that the assistance and presence of the USFA would be supportive and would in no way 

interfere with any review of the incident they are themselves conducting. The intent is not to arrive 

during the event or even immediately after, but rather after the dust settles, so that a complete and 

objective review of all the important aspects of the incident can be made. Local authorities review 

the USFA’s report while it is in draft. The USFA investigator or team is available to local authorities 

should they wish to request technical assistance for their own investigation.

For additional copies of this report write to the U.S. Fire Administration, 16825 South Seton Avenue, 

Emmitsburg, Maryland 21727. The report is available on the Administration’s Web site at http://

www.usfa.dhs.gov/

Apartment Building Fire

East 50th Street

New York City

Investigated by: Randolph E. Kirby

This is Report 019 of the Major Fires Investigation Project conducted

by TriData Corporation under contract EMW-86-C-2277 to the United

States Fire Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

Homeland

Security

Department of Homeland Security

United States Fire Administration

National Fire Data Center

U.S. Fire Administration

Mission Statement

As an entity of the Department of Homeland 

Security, the mission of the USFA is to reduce life and economic losses due to fire 

and related emergencies, through leadership, advocacy, coordination, and support. 

We serve the Nation independently, in coordination with other Federal agencies, 

and in partnership with fire protection and 

emergency service communities. With a 

commitment to excellence, we provide public education, training, technology, and data 

initiatives.

Homeland

Security

Table of Contents

OVERVIEW. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

SUMMARY OF KEY ISSUES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

THE STRUCTURE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

CODES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

THE FIRE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Origin and Spread of Fire and Smoke. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Rescue and Evacuation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

FATALITIES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

INJURIES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

DAMAGE ASSESSMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

LESSONS LEARNED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Appendices. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Appendix A: New York Fire Report. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Appendix B: Statement of Katryna O’Neill (witness). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Appendix C: Floor Plan of First Floor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Appendix D: Floor Plan of Second through Ninth Floors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Appendix E: Floor Plan of Tenth Floor and Roof. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Appendix F: Copy of Dwelling Law Regulating Existing Structures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Appendix G: Medical Officer Field Record. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Appendix H: Fire Department Fatality Reports. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Appendix I: Units Used at the Fire. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Appendix J: Fire Department Dispatch Log. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Appendix K: List of Photographs and Slides. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

1

Apartment Building Fire

East 50th Street

New York City

(January 11, 1988)

Local Contacts: John B. Regan

Chief Fire Marshal

New York City Fire Department

250 Livingston Street

Brooklyn, New York 11201-5884

718-403-1493

Edward F. Kelly

Supervising Fire Marshal

Manhattan Command

212-319-1070

James L. Bannon, Jr.

Fire Marshal

Special Investigations Unit

Manhattan Command

New York City Fire Department

250 Livingston Street

Brooklyn, New York 11201-5884

718-935-9351

OVERVIEW

On January 11, 1988, at 2019, a fire in New York City was reported at 135 East 50th Street, a tenstory, 120 apartment unit building with professional offices on the first floor.

First arriving firefighting units were greeted by heavy smoke and flame coming from the lobby 

area. The two stairwells serving the upper floors of the building and located off the lobby area had 

their doors propped open and provided a path for smoke to rapidly fill the building, rendering the 

stairwells useless for evacuation.

Occupants were compelled to use a rear fire escape, which required some people to travel through 

smoke-filled corridors. Approximately 50 people were rescued by firefighters at the front of the 

building using ground ladders. Others remained in their apartments. Smoke spread throughout the 

building claimed the lives of four tenants, and injured at least two others. In addition, five firefighters were injured while fighting the fire.
2

The fire department utilized approximately 200 firefighters and 38 units. The fire was confined to 

the first floor and the situation was brought under control at 2216, approximately two hours after 

it started.

SUMMARY OF KEY ISSUES

Issues Comments

Cause Believed accidental; started in sofa in psychologist’s office on first floor of high-rise apartment 

building.

Detection/Reporting Building visitor and employees investigated and attempted to extinguish fire before reporting it.

Building occupants made aware of fire by other residents and by smoke penetrating their units.

Firefighting Heavy smoke throughout building, made search and rescue difficult. Five alarms needed to 

provide sufficient manpower.

Building Structure Sound construction coupled with quick and effective fire extinguishment prevented structural 

failure.

Pre-finished wood paneling in office area provided tremendous fuel load for rapid fire spread.

Doors Both stairway doors propped open, providing paths for heat and smoke to penetrate the building, led to fatalities.

Metal apartment doors had half-inch space below them for ventilation.

Fire Protection Equipment No smoke detectors in office of origin.

Building lacked minimum fire protection equipment – no alarm system, no illuminated exit signs, 

no emergency egress lighting, no panic hardware on doors.

Individual apartment units had battery-operated smoke detectors; however, majority were 

inoperable at time of fire.

No sprinkler system.

Code Compliance Building not subject to current code requirements for fire protection systems and devices as long 

as its use is not changed.

Building previously cited for propped open fire doors.

Evacuation Stairwells useless because of immediate smoke and heat penetration.

Exterior fire escapes available to occupants on north side of building only.

Occupants not having access to exterior fire escapes were rescued by firefighters from apartment windows on front of building.

Exit doors to roof had slide bolt locks, making them difficult to unlock under dark and smoky 

conditions. This probably contributed to two deaths.

Refuge Tenants who stayed put in their apartments behind closed doors were unharmed.

THE STRUCTURE

The building is located in the Borough of Manhattan, with other high-rise buildings bordering three 

sides. The only entrance to the building is on 50th Street. It was constructed in 1922, using poured 

concrete floor-ceiling assembly. It is brick-faced and approximately 100 x 70 feet. (For floor plans, 

see Appendices C, D, and E.) The building is equipped with a service elevator and a passenger elevator. The basement contains the heating system and laundry.
USFA-TR-019/January 1988 3

There are two stairwells (A & B) located on the east and west sides. Stairwells begin at the lobby 

entrance and terminate at the tenth floor, with exit doors opening on the roof. Windows are provided 

in both stairwells from ground level to the tenth floor, with a skylight at the top of each stairwell 

shaft. All apartment units from the second to tenth floors are served by a 50 foot central corridor 

between the two stairwells. There are several apartment units on each floor whose only entrances 

open directly into Stairwell B. The apartment separation walls and corridor walls are constructed of 

solid masonry materials with painted wall surfaces.

The first floor contains several offices which had been refurbished with prefinished wood paneling 

over drywall and plaster walls, and suspended tile ceilings throughout the offices and corridors. The 

office of fire origin was used by a psychologist. One third of the apartment units are rent-controlled 

(meaning very low rent), and the remainder are rent stabilized (meaning a somewhat higher rent).

There are exterior fire escapes located on the north side. Only the apartment units on that side have 

direct access to them.

All exit and apartment doors are metal fire doors, but they had been designed with a half-inch gap 

at the bottom to promote air circulation.

CODES

The building was constructed under the 1920’s New York Building Code and currently falls under 

the New York State Multiple Dwelling Law. As long as the existing use is not substantially altered, the 

building is considered to be in compliance and not subject to fire protection upgrading. The Fire 

Department of New York conducts fire safety inspections of all buildings of this type and on previous 

occasions cited the building owners for propping open fire doors.

The wood paneling in the doctors’ offices does not meet the current code; a sprinkler system would 

be required in the offices to be in compliance. However, the paneling was permitted as “decoration” 

over the old walls under the old code. Because the renovation did not exceed 20 percent of the cost 

of the building, the new code did not apply.

FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS

The building is equipped with a single 4-inch standpipe located in Stairwell A with a 2-1/2-inch 

hose valve located at each floor level. The building does not contain a sprinkler system, fire alarm 

system, emergency lighting, or illuminated exit signs.

Most, if not all, of the living units had a battery operated smoke detector. However, fire department 

personnel found that the majority of the detectors they were able to check after the fire either had 

dead batteries or were without batteries.

THE FIRE

The fire was discovered by a visitor, Katryna O’Neill. As she entered the apartment building at about 

2015 she smelled a faint odor of smoke. She proceeded to the waiting room of the psychologist’s 

office on the first floor where there was an even stronger odor of smoke, and called out to see if 

anyone was there. Receiving no answer, she walked down the corridor to the doctor’s area. When 

walking past office Room 103, she felt heat on her face, coming off the door. She then noticed heavy 

black smoke coming from underneath it. She started back toward the waiting room door and saw 
4

two men coming toward her – the building superintendent and the doorman. She reported the fire 

to them. They went directly to Room 103 and attempted to put out the fire. Mrs. O’Neill returned 

to the lobby and used the telephone located adjacent to Stairwell A to dial 9-1-1 to report the fire. 

The fire dispatcher asked her for the number she was calling from but the heavy buildup of smoke 

during the short time she was calling prevented her from reading the number on the phone. At this 

time she saw the superintendent leave the waiting room and head toward the elevator. (He later was 

rescued from a second floor front apartment by firefighters.)

At the same time, looking through the waiting room area in the doctor’s office, she observed the 

other man left in office Room 103 attempting to stamp out the fire with his feet. She then began 

knocking on the doors in the office complex yelling “Fire.” She went through the lobby to the outside of the building, and within seconds observed a doctor, a patient, and the doorman coming out 

through the front door.

The alarm was received by the fire department at 2019. First due units arrived on the scene within 

four minutes at 2023. When entering the lobby door, firefighters encountered heavy smoke rolling over their heads and coming from the direction of the waiting room area. A set of glass doors 

separating the waiting room from the lobby had completely melted.

Using a 2-1/2-inch handline, firefighters began to work their way down the corridor. A second 

handline was placed in operation in the lobby toward Stairwell A. (The door to Stairwell A had been 

left propped open, thus allowing smoke and heat to quickly fill the upper floors of the structure.)

At 2029, a second alarm was ordered. Those units would be committed to rescue. Upon arrival, 

they observed several tenants at the windows in the front of the building. Ground ladders were 

placed on the one-story foyer roof which via 50 occupants were eventually rescued. By this time, 

the public areas of the entire building were charged with heavy black smoke.

Firefighters beginning their search inside discovered a male victim on the landing of Stairwell B 

between the first and second floors. He was transported to the hospital where he later died. A 

second body (female) was found just inside her ninth floor apartment with the door open. It was 

surmised that she had attempted to leave her apartment, encountered heavy smoke, and went back 

inside where she was overcome. Her apartment had heavy smoke damage and was next to the stairwell. It also had a fire escape; she need not have gone into the corridor to escape.

Heavy smoke and the need for additional manpower were handicapping rescue efforts.

At 2047, a third alarm was ordered. These firefighters also were committed to the rescue operation. 

They attempted to use exterior fire escapes located at the rear of the building, but were hampered by 

occupants evacuating.

Two more bodies were found on the tenth floor landing of Stairway A at the door to the roof. Both 

of these people had lived off Stairway B and apparently went down the corridor and into Stairwell A 

looking for escape.

By this time, the fire had been extinguished, but the building was still charged with heavy smoke. A 

fourth alarm was ordered at 2115. Arriving units were used to augment personnel in rescue operations. Firefighters went through the building and instructed tenants to remain in their apartments, as 

the fire was under control and they were out of danger. At about this time the fire department communications center was receiving numerous calls from tenants reporting smoke in their apartments. They 

were advised the situation was under control and to remain in their apartments near windows.
USFA-TR-019/January 1988 5

Some of the tenants had stopped up their doorways with towels, rags, or whatever was handy to keep 

out the smoke. Most did not try to enter hallways filled with smoke. Some found only light haze in 

their corridor, but saw heavy smoke in the stairwell and went back to their apartments.

Apartments that did not response to firefighters’ knocks at the door had to be forcibly entered to 

make sure there were no casualties within. The doors to the apartment units are metal and each was 

equipped with various lock, which made entry laboriously difficult.

At 2142 a fifth alarm was ordered. The additional personnel were primarily used to augment the 

search and the general overhaul of the scene. A total of 200 firefighting personnel and 38 units 

participated in the incident. (See list in Appendix I.) The situation was considered under control 

(search operation completed) at 2216.

Origin and Spread of Fire and Smoke

The fire began in the upholstered sofa of a psychologist’s office on the first floor off the waiting 

room area. The cause of the fire is unknown and was still under investigation when this report was 

written.

The wood paneling utilized throughout the office complex allowed the fire to spread quickly while 

generating tremendous heat and smoke. The spread of smoke was exacerbated by the open stairwell 

doors from the lobby area, which allowed rapid movement through the upper stories. Heat from 

the fire broke the glass, in the mail chute which goes from the lobby area to the tenth floor. This 

provided another avenue for the smoke to travel upward.

Tenants attempting to exit the building from the upper stories unknowingly aided the spread of 

smoke by opening doors, which created drafts. The fire department also was of the opinion that several corridor doors on the upper stairwells were propped open and contributed to the heavy smoke 

damage throughout the building.

Smoke penetration into individual apartments was aided by the 1/2-inch gaps at the bottom of the 

doors. However, all who stayed in their apartments survived.

Flame damage was confined to the first floor. This was due to the quick and effective fire attack and 

the sound construction of the building.

Rescue and Evacuation

Approximately 50 people were removed from apartment unit windows located on the front of the 

building by firefighters using ground ladders. The rest exited by the fire escapes that were only on 

the rear side of the buildings or stayed in their apartments.

Apartments located in the rear of the building have direct access to the fire escapes by way of windows. The windows have metal security grates which had to be unlocked and opened. They may 

have provided obstacles to tenants evacuating the units. They were certainly an obstacle for firefighters attempting to gain entry for search and rescue.

As noted earlier, the two stairwells each begin in the lobby and terminate on the tenth floor with 

entrances from the stairwells to the roof. The two doors leading to the roof were latched with slide 

bolts. Two tenants who attempted to escape through these doors were unable to unlatch them in the 

heavy smoke. Their bodies were found at the doors. Further complicating escape were inadequate 

lighting in the stairwells and the absence of illuminated exit lights in the halls.
6

Several apartment units on each floor exit directly into Stairwell B. Obviously, in this situation escape 

was not possible through the smoke-filled stairwell. Also, many people residing on the front of the 

building would have had to use stairwells and corridors to gain access to other people’s apartments 

and the fire escapes. Because of the smoke-filled stairwells and corridors, these tenants were unable 

to use them.

FATALITIES

There were four fatalities, all residents of the building. The first victim (male) was found in Stairwell 

B on the landing between the first and second floors. He was alive when discovered by firefighters 

and died a few hours later at the hospital due to smoke inhalation and third degree burns. He lived 

in apartment 6J and apparently decided to go down his stairwell, where he was overcome.

The second victim (female) was found just inside her apartment, unit 9L. She was dead on arrival 

(D.O.A.) and was later determined to have died from smoke inhalation.

The third and fourth victims (one male, one female) were found on the tenth floor landing of 

Stairwell A at the door leading to the roof. Both victims were D.O.A. It was determined later that they 

had died of smoke inhalation. The male victim lived in apartment 10F; the female victim in apartment 9H. They probably left their apartments, found the stairwell full of smoke, crossed through the 

corridor to the other side of the building, saw smoke in the stairwell, and attempted to flee to the 

roof, but could not get out the door.

The location of the victims prior to the fire is not known for sure. However, the three victims found 

in stairwells—one downstairs and two at the roof—all had apartments that exited directly into 

Stairwell B. (See floor plans for exact location of the victims.)

INJURIES

Building Occupants – There were two occupants who received injuries requiring hospital treatment.

• The building superintendent, a 42-year-old male, was removed by firefighters from apartment 2E and transported to the hospital where he was treated for smoke inhalation and 

minor facial burns. He was kept in the hyperbaric chamber overnight and released the following day. He had gone by elevator to the basement to get a portable fire extinguisher, after 

having investigated the fire. Along the way he had taken in a good deal of smoke. When 

returning from the basement, the elevator stopped on the second floor. He staggered into 

the hallway, and was assisted into apartment 2E by occupants who were returning to their 

apartments after having tried to escape down the stairwell but finding it full of smoke. The 

superintendent apparently did not remember much of what happened after entering the 

elevator until he was outside the building.

• A second tenant, a 27-year-old male in apartment 6A, was removed by firefighters and transported to the hospital where he was treated for chest pains. He was released the following 

day.

An unknown number of building occupants were treated at the scene for smoke inhalation. None 

required hospital treatment.
USFA-TR-019/January 1988 7

Firefighters – Five fire service personnel were injured. One was admitted to the hospital for smoke 

inhalation and exhaustion; he was released the following day. Three required outpatient hospital 

treatment for smoke inhalation and/or minor burns to the ears and neck and lacerations. One 

off-duty lieutenant who joined the firefighting slipped in the street and fell into an open manhole, 

injuring a leg and an arm. An additional four firefighters who had come in contact with body fluids 

or who administered mouth-to-mouth resuscitation were checked by medical personnel at the scene 

and released. (The fire department now keeps records of such contacts.)

DAMAGE ASSESSMENT

Fire damage was confined to the first floor office and lobby areas. There was no damage to structural 

components due to the building’s sound construction and effective firefighting techniques. The partition walls in the office complex that had been covered by wood paneling were severely damaged as 

were the dropped ceilings and door components. The pre-finished wood paneling was composed of 

highly combustible smoke-generating materials and contributed to the tremendous amount of heat 

and smoke present in the first stages of the fire.

Smoke damage was heavy throughout the entire structure, especially in public areas.

The individual apartment entrance doors, having multiple locks, were subjected to considerable 

damage when firefighters had to force them open for search and rescue.

Dollar loss to the structure was extensive; the actual loss figure was not available at the time of this 

report.

LESSONS LEARNED

1. Codes for Existing Buildings – Regardless of when they were constructed, multiple occupancy 

residential buildings should be subjected to current fire codes regarding minimum installation 

of fire protection equipment. This building’s fire experience is testimony to the urgent need for 

such equipment. A simple set of panic hardware on the doors to the roof would probably have 

prevented two deaths. Smoke detectors in the doctors’ offices hooked to an alarm system would 

have detected the fire earlier. Whether or not required by codes, building owners should have 

enough sense of responsibility to provide at least a modicum of protection to their buildings.

2. Code Enforcement – Fire department inspection programs must be ongoing, thorough, and 

effective. This may require increasing the authority and resources available to inspectors when 

repeated violations of codes are encountered. The propping open of doors to the stairways 

contributed to all four deaths here and had been cited in previous inspections. Penalties for 

propped open doors are rarely significant enough or immediate enough to have impact on 

building operators and owners. In some countries, the owners and operators would be subject 

to jail terms if negligence in allowing propped open doors was proven.

3. Fire Safety Education – Owners and occupants of residential buildings must be made aware of 

the need not to circumvent the building’s fire defenses, such as by opening doors at the bottom 

of stairwells and opening doors from corridors into the stairwells. Information must be provided and posted in appropriate areas within such buildings explaining steps to take in case of 

fire or other emergencies. City-wide public education of apartment residents explaining what 

to do in the event of a fire would help, too. In New York City, WCBS-TV has run excellent programs showing what to do in a fire. All four fatalities might have been prevented if the victims 

had seen and heeded the message to quickly close your door if you find smoke in the corridor.
8

4. Building Operator Training – Building personnel made several basic mistakes that may well 

have contributed to the damages and could have caused their own deaths. Building operators 

need fire safety training to protect themselves and the people who depend on them.

In this fire, for example:

• The building personnel did not immediately report the fire.

• They did not close the door to the office suite with the fire, thereby, letting the smoke 

escape.

• The superintendent apparently did not realize he should not use an elevator in a fire or how 

fast a fire can grow. He went to fetch an extinguisher using the elevator and was overcome 

by smoke by the time he returned again on the elevator.

• Building personnel either allowed the stairway doors to be propped open or propped them 

open themselves.

5. Mail Chutes – Many old high-rise buildings have small chutes that are one continuous channel 

with open slots at each floor. These can be a channel for smoke transport between floors, especially when they have glass components that can break in a fire, as happened here. They need to 

be removed or improved with more fire-safe components.

6. Fire Department Manpower and Leadership – The Fire Department of New York demonstrated 

once again why adequate levels of well-trained manpower and good leadership can be so important in preventing a disaster. By getting large members of personnel to the scene quickly, the 

department was able to evacuate 50 people by ladder and search the building for victims while 

the firefighting attack stopped the spread of the fire and extinguished it. New York City has had 

an exceedingly good record in fighting high-rise fires.

7. Escape or Seek Refuge – In this particular fire it was not clear for a long time during the incident whether people should stay in their apartments or attempt to escape via ladders and fire 

escapes. The fire situation and the smoke situation were both uncertain, and the smoke throughout the building appeared highly ominous. The spaces under doors meant that smoke might 

enter every apartment, especially if windows were open, unless the doorways were stopped up 

by the residents – and not all of the residents did that. The fire department made an appropriate 

decision to get the people out while the smoke situation was uncertain. Later, when the danger 

seemed less, they went through the building and told people to stay in their apartments. There 

also was concern about stopping “jumpers.”

8. Desirability of Better Smoke Information – Most current commercial smoke and fire detection systems do not show whether apartment units (as opposed to public areas) have been 

infiltrated with smoke. This fire was a case where it would have been useful to have detection 

systems that indicated the presence of smoke within individual apartment units, to aid in decision about rescue operations.
9

Appendices

A. New York Fire Report

B. Statement of Katryna O’Neill (witness)

C. Floor Plan of First Floor

D. Floor Plan of Second through Ninth Floors

E. Floor Plan of Tenth Floor and Roof

F. Copy of Dwelling Law Regulating Existing Structures

G. Medical Officer Field Record

H. Fire Department Fatality Reports

I. Units Used at the Fire

J. Fire Department Dispatch Log

K. List of Photographs and Slides
10

Appendix A
11

Appendix B
12

Appendix C
13

Appendix D
14

Appendix E
15

Appendix F
16

Appendix G
17

Appendix H
18 U.S. Fire Administration/Technical Report Series

Appendix H (Continued)
19

Appendix I

UNITS USED AT THE FIRE

Equipment:

22 Engines

11 Ladder Trucks

2 Heavy Rescue Units

1 Satellite Unit C (High Volume Pumper)

1 Search Light Unit

1 Mask Service Unit

200 Personnel (approximately)
20

Appendix J
USFA-TR-019/January 1988 21

Appendix J (Continued)
22 U.S. Fire Administration/Technical Report Series

Appendix J (Continued)
USFA-TR-019/January 1988 23

Appendix J (Continued)
24 U.S. Fire Administration/Technical Report Series

Appendix J (Continued)
USFA-TR-019/January 1988 25

Appendix J (Continued)
26 U.S. Fire Administration/Technical Report Series

Appendix J (Continued)
27

Appendix K

LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS AND SLIDES

Photographs

1. Front of building and one story foyer.

2. Firefighters removing occupant from front of building.

3. Front of building showing windows where victims were removed by firefighters.

4. Doorway to roof on west side of building. Note slide bolt broken off (2 bodies found at base 

of door).

5. West corridor damage in office area.

6. Office on first floor. Note pre-finished paneling on walls and bars on windows.

7. Fire damage to rear office unit.

8. Fire damage to corridor in office area.

9. Mail chute on upper floor.

10. Fire damage to lobby area; note elevator door.

11. Entrance to floor from stairwell B; note heavy smoke damage.

12. Occupant being tended by fire service personnel.

13. Typical corridor on upper floor; note smoke damage.

14. Landing to roof exit where two bodies were found.

15. Doorway of stairwell A from lobby and telephone location.

16. Office #103, room of fire origin.

17. Point of origin in Room 103 – east wall.

18. Standpipe system and hose rack in stairwell A.

19. Typical window on rear of building; note folding security gate.

20. Security grate from typical apartment unit on rear of building.

21. Roof exit door from tenth floor. Note sliding bolt and heavy smoke damage.

22. Apartment entrance doors located off stairwell B.

23. Looking down from roof area to front of building on 50th Street.

24. Variety of locks on typical apartment door.

25. Newly installed panic hardware, after fire event.
28 U.S. Fire Administration/Technical Report Series

Photographs (continued)

26. Entrance from roof onto fire escape.

27. Looking down from roof on rear of building, showing fire escape location.

28. Floor plan shown on elevator door on upper floor.

29. Waiting room doors which had melted.

30. Half-inch gap at bottom of apartment doors.

Slides (in master copy at USFA)

1. Windows in stairwell.

2. Parapet wall around roof area.

3. Entrance doors into lobby from 50th Street.

4. Fire damage to ceiling in lobby area. Note the relative good condition.

5. Apartment entrance doors into stairwell B.

6. Entrance door onto roof, west side of building. Two bodies found on the landing.

7. Mail chute and box in lobby area; note broken glass in chute.

8. Rooftop apartment units in rear of building showing windows.
USFA-TR-019/January 1988 29

1. Front of building and one story foyer.
30 U.S. Fire Administration/Technical Report Series

2. Firefighters removing occupant from front of building.
USFA-TR-019/January 1988 31

3. Front of building showing windows where victims were removed by firefighters.
32 U.S. Fire Administration/Technical Report Series

4. Doorway to roof on west side of building. Note slide bolt broken off (2 bodies found at base of door).
USFA-TR-019/January 1988 335. West corridor damage in office area.
34 U.S. Fire Administration/Technical Report Series

6. Office on first floor. Note pre-finished paneling on walls and bars on windows.
USFA-TR-019/January 1988 357. Fire damage to rear office unit.
36 U.S. Fire Administration/Technical Report Series

8. Fire damage to corridor in office area.
USFA-TR-019/January 1988 37

9. Mail chute on upper floor.
38 U.S. Fire Administration/Technical Report Series

10. Fire damage to lobby area; note elevator door.
USFA-TR-019/January 1988 3911. Entrance to floor from stairwell B; note heavy smoke damage.
40 U.S. Fire Administration/Technical Report Series

12. Occupant being tended by fire service personnel.
USFA-TR-019/January 1988 41

13. Typical corridor on upper floor; note smoke damage.
42 U.S. Fire Administration/Technical Report Series

14. Landing to roof exit where two bodies were found.
USFA-TR-019/January 1988 43

15. Doorway of stairwell A from lobby and telephone location.
44 U.S. Fire Administration/Technical Report Series

16. Office #103, room of fire origin.
USFA-TR-019/January 1988 4517. Point of origin in Room 103 – east wall.
46 U.S. Fire Administration/Technical Report Series

18. Standpipe system and hose rack in stairwell A.
USFA-TR-019/January 1988 47

19. Typical window on rear of building; note folding security gate.
48 U.S. Fire Administration/Technical Report Series

20. Security grate from typical apartment unit on rear of building.
USFA-TR-019/January 1988 4921. Roof exit door from tenth floor. Note sliding bolt and heavy smoke damage.
50 U.S. Fire Administration/Technical Report Series

22. Apartment entrance doors located off stairwell B.
USFA-TR-019/January 1988 5123. Looking down from roof area to front of building on 50th Street.
52 U.S. Fire Administration/Technical Report Series

24. Variety of locks on typical apartment door.

25. Newly installed panic hardware, after fire event.
USFA-TR-019/January 1988 53

26. Entrance from roof onto fire escape.

27. Looking down from roof on rear of building, showing fire escape location.
54 U.S. Fire Administration/Technical Report Series

28. Floor plan shown on elevator door on upper floor.
USFA-TR-019/January 1988 5529. Waiting room doors which had melted.
56 U.S. Fire Administration/Technical Report Series

30. Half-inch gap at bottom of apartment doors.