Impact on Fire Safety from the 1946 Hotel Fires
When the LaSalle Hotel in Chicago, Illinois, and the Winecoff Hotel in Atlanta, Georgia, opened their doors, they were regarded as high-end hotels, being the “most comfortable” and “absolutely fireproof.”[1] However, as time passed these claims proved false as both buildings eventually burned down. The lack of enforced fire safety codes on these aging structures had a more significant role in why these fires were able to spread. These disasters showed how the absence of proper building standards can be as dangerous as the fires themselves.
The LaSalle Hotel, which opened in 1909 and claimed to be the “most modern and safest hotel west of New York,” yet lacked fire exits, sprinklers, and alarms[2]. These flaws would show on June 5, 1946. A blaze broke out in the building. The guests inside were trapped, unable to escape due to the missing safety precautions, resulting in 61 deaths. Six months later, another hotel, the Winecoff Hotel, which was built around the same period also marketing itself as being high-end and fireproof, yet had the same lack of building codes, burned down with 119 guests becoming the “most tragic fire in the country”[3] according to the New York Times.
The tragedies at the LaSalle and Winecoff Hotels showed the consequences of the lack of stricter regulations. These events made a widespread understanding that safety measures are there to preserve the safety of the people. The Winecoff Hotel and the LaSalle Hotel fires changed how building standards are seen, regulated, and maintained to ensure the safety of future generations.
When the LaSalle Hotel opened its doors on September 9, 1909, it was praised by articles like the Chicago Examiner for its twenty-two-story height, its speedy construction of sixteen months, its gorgeous woodwork on the second floor, and its fireproof construction, detailing its steel frame implanted on 105 concrete caissons[4]. The LaSalle Hotel was very modern at the time, but thirty years later, on June 5, 1946, it could not prevent a fire from spreading from the lower floors to the higher .
According to the Chicago Tribune, when the first firefighters tried to enter the burning LaSalle Hotel, the mezzanine from the first floor fell on top of them, giving the fire time to spread to the second floor[5]. As the woodwork began to feed the fire, the stairwell served as a chimney, sucking up the smoke, blocking the building’s stairwell. With the stairs blocked, the firefighters had no choice but to rely on rescuing the guests by ladder, carrying the guests down slowly. According to the New York Times, it took four hours to bring the fire under control, but by then, sixty-one lives were lost[6].
After the fire ended, the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation reported that some guests on the upper floors could escape through a single fire escape located away from the fire, which prevented smoke from entering[7]. This allowed the firefighters to be able to get inside and save some of the guests. This disaster could have been far worse without that staircase, something the Winecoff Hotel did not have.
The Winecoff Hotel was a fifteen-story tall building, built in 1913. Despite the lack of sprinklers, fire escapes, and alarms, it was well known for advertising itself for its fireproof design [8]. In the book The Winecoff Hotel Fire: The Untold Story of America’s Deadliest Hotel Fire by Sam Heys and Allen B. Goodman, has a guest asking a bellboy about fire exits and he replied “Oh, we don’t have fire exits. This hotel is fireproof.”[9]
The fire began at 3:15 a.m. on December 7, 1946, but firefighters were not alerted until 3:42 a.m. This delay allowed smoke to rapidly rise on the building’s sole staircase, reaching above the fifth floor. Due to the smoke, the firefighters could not enter the stairs, forcing them to use ladders to rescue guests[10]. However, according to the Ellis Hotel’ National Register of Historic Places Registration Form, the ladders could not reach above the fifth floor[11]. The guests on the higher floors had to either stay inside or drop down to a net, which was not reliable enough, leading to the deaths of thirty guests.
The LaSalle Hotel and the Winecoff Hotel disasters had similar features that caused their fires. Still, the stark difference was how the Winecoff Hotel had only one staircase, compared to the LaSalle Hotel having an emergency exit, the delay of the firefighters, and their equipment being unable to be used. Regardless, both fires shared the same flaw of underestimating the dangers of fires, as they were designed during an era when buildings were not constructed with ease of escape in emergencies as a priority.
Fire safety was seen differently in the early twentieth century when the Winecoff and LaSalle Hotels were built. At the time, terms like “fireproof construction,” according to Atlanta, Burning by Daniel B. Moskowitz, focused solely on preserving a building’s structural integrity, overlooking the flammable materials within[12]. This idea was taken advantage of by the Winecoff Hotel[13], which ironically upheld this definition as the building was remodeled and is still in use today as the Ellis Hotel[14]. Nevertheless, the term “fireproof” was even labeled as misleading by the National Board of Fire Underwriters[15], due to fire safety measures such as accessible fire exits and stairwells, being a critical flaw in such claims.
Another way fires were seen differently is that, according to Manning Bill’s Grandfather Clauses are like Old Shoes; old buildings, such as the Winecoff and the LaSalle Hotel, could avoid having to make fire paths and exits[16]. These clauses allowed the hotels to advertise themselves as “fireproof,” despite being constructed before technological advancements such as sprinklers or proper safety infrastructure became standard.
Fighting fires in hotels was different in the past. At the LaSalle Hotel, thick smoke blocked a stairwell, leaving firefighters to rescue guests standing on ledges. Maurice Webster’s, “What is Fireproof”, described how fires at the Winecoff Hotel was able to spread rapidly through open shafts, acting like chimneys and filling bedroom corridors with smoke. These buildings were set up in a way which unintentionally created problems when there was a fire.
The Winecoff and LaSalle Hotels were constructed during an era when fire codes primarily focused on preserving a building’s structural integrity rather than ensuring the safety of its occupants[17]. The focus on what fire codes did change over time as seen with the 1908 edition of the Chicago Municipal Code, a collection of local Chicago laws in place, on how buildings are labeled as “fireproof” when the building’s floors and stairs are incombustible[18]. The 1937 edition would instead call those requirements “fire-resistive” while also going into more detail on how a building should be laid out to make leaving more efficient[19].
Despite these changes, they did not affect the Winecoff and the LaSalle Hotel. This was because these buildings could use grandfather clauses, and even then, retrofitting buildings, changing the building’s interior to follow rules can be expensive and time-consuming[20]. This is why there were no sprinklers, open stairways, or fire exits in the hotels. Failing to update these laws allowed the hotels to operate with outdated views. Consequently, these flaws were big contributors to why lives were lost by how it prevented firefighters from being able to enter the burning buildings. After these fires, local governments gave in to the pressure of the number of lives lost to ensure that future buildings were not only structurally sound but updated olders buildings to ensure the safety of its guests.
The LaSalle and Winecoff Hotel fires changed their respective states’ fire codes. These fires showed flaws in building codes, primarily based on escape routes and how misleading the term “fireproof” is on advertisements. Atlanta’s local governments introduced several reforms to improve safety and prevent similar disasters. Three months after the Winecoff Hotel Fire, the Building Officials’ Conference of America had a meeting, and James H. Mooney, the president of the organization, gave recommendations to all buildings urging improvements on vents being installed to prevent smoke from suffocating guests, including more stairways, even how the buildings paint and decorations should only be fire-resistive[21]. Since these were recommendations, there was no legal change until the anniversary of the Winecoff Hotel Fire. The Atlanta, Georgia, government made a law forcing more significant buildings to be inspected and “be certified for compliance with safety regulations.” If not, the city forces the business to shut down and would have to fix itself to comply with safety regulations. Georgia also included features that revised their building code and increased the number of fire marshals[22].
Chicago had immediate changes following the LaSalle Hotel Fire; several nightclubs and theaters near the hotel were forced to shut down for not complying with fire safety procedures. The critical issue was how the LaSalle Hotel was inspected a week ago and did “…comply with orders of the Fire Department in safeguarding the premises.” This suggests that inspectors overlooked the age and flammability[23] Both hotel fires changed how fire code enforcement is maintained to suit the needs of the people inside the building rather than the building itself.
The LaSalle and Winecoff Hotel fires, tragic events that claimed many lives, played their roles in highlighting the need for changes to fire safety regulations. The disasters were chronologically close. They showed how flawed the existing codes are, showing the dangers of prioritizing the safety of a building is to fires over the safety of an occupant. Both fires showed local governments that it was necessary to re-evaluate their fire codes to feature essential safety features in other public buildings.
After these catastrophes, new laws allowed stricter force changes by shutting down businesses that failed to meet these new updated safety standards. These reforms were made to prevent these types of fires from happening again. The LaSalle and Winecoff made their mark on fire safety standards by maintaining stronger regulations and a commitment to their enforcement. While the cost of this immense change was devasting, the reforms made from this are still used and continue to protect more lives, showing how vital fire safety is to prevent future disasters.
“I hereby declare upon my word of honor that I have neither given nor received unauthorized help on this work” – Estevan Panchi
[1] Hotel Winecoff, illustration, accessed November 29, 2024, http://www.winecoff.org/search?q=fireproof%27.
[2] Ron Grossman, “Fire at the LaSalle Hotel in 1946 Exposed Safety Hazards,” Chicago Tribune, June 5, 2016, https://www.chicagotribune.com/2016/06/05/fire-at-the-lasalle-hotel-in-1946-exposed-safety-hazards/.
[3] “127 Killed by Fire in Atlanta Hotel; Many Die in Leaps: The Winecoff Hotel in Atlanta as It Burned Early Yesterday Morning.” New York Times, December 8, 1946, https://umw.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/127-killed-fire-atlanta-hotel-many-die-leaps/docview/107563857/se-2.
[4] “Opening of the New Hotel LaSalle,” Chicago Examiner, September 9, 1909, 10th edition, no.10, accessed November 11, 2024, https://cdm16818.content.oclc.org/digital/collection/examiner/id/5460/rec/3.
[5] Grossman, “Fire at the LaSalle.”
[6] Louther S. Horne, “58 Die in Chicago Hotel Fire; 200 Hurt by Flames, Smoke: Panic Sweeps 22-Story LaSalle–Most of Victims Suffocated–Many Jump into Nets or Are Rescued by Ladders 58 Perish in Fire at La Salle Hotel Scores Saved by Ladders Surmise on Origin Unconscious Nearly Hour,” New York Times, June 6, 1946, https://umw.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/58-die-chicago-hotel-fire-200-hurt-flames-smoke/docview/107688221/se-2.
[7]Memorial Monday — LaSalle Hotel Fire Kills 60 Civilians and 1 Firefighter in Chicago,” video, 4:51, YouTube, posted by Nffftv, June 24, 2024, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-OSY3PNC7Q
[8] Sam Heys and Allen B. Goodwin, The Winecoff Fire : the Untold Story of America’s Deadliest Hotel Fire (Atlanta, Ga.: Longstreet Press, 1993) (Page 1, 58, 62,71, 87, 97, 103, 142, 171)
[9] Heys and Goodwin, The Winecoff, (Page 97).
[10] Stephen J. Spignesi, Catastrophe! : the 100 Greatest Disasters of All Time (New York: Citadel Press, Kensington Pub., 2004), (Page 267, 268, 269).
[11] National Park Service, National Register of Historic Places Registration Form: Winecoff Hotel, Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia (United States Department of the Interior, February 5, 2009).
[12] Daniel B. Moskowitz, “Atlanta, Burning,” American History 55, no. 2 (June 1, 2020): 50–59, https://research-ebsco-com.umw.idm.oclc.org/c/mcjyvo/viewer/html/cetdusjyrv.
[13] Hotel Winecoff.
[14] Ellis Hotel, “Ellis Hotel History,” Ellis Hotel, accessed October 22, 2024, https://www.ellishotel.com/about-us/history
[15] Building Code Recommended by the National Board of Fire Underwriters, New York, 4th ed. (New York, NY: National Board of Fire Underwriters, 1915).
[16] Bill Manning, “Grandfather Clauses Are Like Old Shoes,” Fire Engineering 156, no. 7 (July 1, 2003): 8, https://research-ebsco-com.umw.idm.oclc.org/linkprocessor/plink?id=120a3261-c37d-368f-9002-226c4ab46725.
[17] “‘Fireproof’ Meaning Explained,” The Washington Post (1923-1954), February 16, 1947. https://umw.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/fireproof-meaning-explained/docview/151930180/se-2.
[18] Edgar Bronson Tolman, Revised Municipal Code of Chicago of 1905 (Chicago, IL: FORGOTTEN BOOKS, 2022).
[19] Barnet Hodes, ed., Chapters of the Municipal Code of Chicago Relating to Buildings (Chicago, IL: Chicago : Lawyers Co-operative Pub., 1937)
[20] Niemczak, Peter, and Anna Stefańska. “Why Do Chicago Buildings Not Retrofit?” Acta Scientiarum Polonorum. Architectura 22 (2024): 159–70. https://doi.org/10.22630/ASPA.2023.22.16.
[21] “Fire Escapes Held Limited in Value: Building Officials, Citing Blaze in Winecoff Hotel, Advocate Interior Secondary Egress,” New York Times (1923–), March 9, 1947, https://umw.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/fire-escapes-held-limited-value/docview/107788827/se-2.
[22] “Building Fire Law in Force in Georgia: New Safety Code, Setting Up Strict Licensing, Is Result of Winecoff Hotel Tragedy,” New York Times, December 8, 1947, https://umw.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/historical-newspapers/building-fire-law-force-georgia/docview/108036658/se-2
[23] Horne, “58 Die in Chicago Hotel Fire,” New York Times, June 6, 1946.