In Monday's Call Sheet we asked readers for their take on the collapse of the stage at the Indiana State Fair on Saturday, which killed five and injured dozens more, just weeks after a similar accident at the Cisco Ottawa Bluesfest. Should the event industry respond to these two incidents? Should there be more regulation around outdoor staging, especially in extreme weather conditions?
Eric Todd, president of BML Blackbird Theatrical Services, a technical event production company based in Secaucus, New Jersey, sent this response:
The issue most likely isn't really the roof—it was the decision making process as to evacuation. A roof coming down with nobody in harm's way is an insurance claim, an investigation, and ultimately, everyone moves on. But there is no price on human life, and, unfortunately for many there, theirs will never be the same, because they lost loved ones or suffered injury or trauma.
Whatever confusion or inconvenience may have ensued had the police on site gotten inside and barked enough to start the evacuation, at least people would have been moving, and the bottom line is that some of those hurt would not have been.
Ultimately, this boils down to what information was known, by whom and when, and when and how they acted on it. It is never an easy decision to evacuate an event, just as it is a tough call to cancel or delay an event. Weather information is often wrong, so you want to be careful about putting too much stock in it, but anyone on site could have checked with police about where the weather was supposed to be coming from, among other things, and verified its condition 10 miles away. When it comes to a large crowd—which cannot move out of harm's way in mere seconds—they need to know what is going on; it has to be presented calmly and with very clear direction. In fact, the moment there was any indication of what was coming, evacuation plans should have been announced, along the lines of: "If we have to evacuate, here is what you should do immediately and without hesitation when announced." (Of course, they may have done everything right, and the weather simply blew in faster than anyone could react. I am sure this will all be discovered in the coming days.)
Ultimately, this comes down to judgment. The facts will come out as to who said what to whom when, then who heard what, what discussion followed, and who was consulted. The company that provided the roof structure is a very reputable company using equipment from a very reputable manufacturer. The company has put up roof systems like this countless times, and the manufacturer has produced hundreds of large roof structures like this. The conclusion that the roof system was not installed safely is not necessarily wrong, from a laypersons point of view, but the fact is that it is unfair to jump to until all the facts are known.
Typically, when significant wind is expected, it is not uncommon to lower a roof structure down as far as possible, to present a much smaller area—one which, if it were to topple from wind, would fall five to 10 feet in one direction, not 35 to 40 feet as in this case. In some cases, the side and rear covering (if used) is pulled or cut down when serious weather rolls in to minimize the wind loading on the entire structure. From time to time, the actual roof skin (covering) is cut, particularly if water starts pooling and presents a weight issue that could lead to safety problems. (There are solutions that help mitigate possible wind loading impact such as these, but each situation is different.)
From the images I have seen, it is not possible to tell if guy wires were installed—which are a key element and, in most cases, far more effective than ballast (dead weight). There is no way to know how the structure was finished when assembled. For example, was additional bracing installed after the roof itself was at full height, making it difficult to lower quickly? All anyone now can do is guess or point fingers without a full grasp of the facts, which is just wrong. There is no doubt that there are many unsafe structures out there, as well as safe structures in the hands of less than qualified personnel, and both of these possibilities are frightening, and it is all about caveat emptor in such cases. In this case, a very well-respected company was a part of this and should not be condemned without some very in-depth fact-finding.
I spent many years as one of the original members of the Entertainment Services and Technology Association rigging safety standards committee, which has written many standards which have been adopted by the American National Standards Institute on numerous aspects of rigging practices. This was a hot topic then and remains so today. There are certain standards now published that cover many aspects oftemporary roof structures. This does not mean that—even with the best roof, the best crew, and the best plans—poor judgment on the part of those in charge won't cause a tragedy like this.
What's your take? Send responses to [email protected].
