Jump to content

Southern CA Fires- Extreme Santa Ana Winds


Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Chopper said:

I think analysis of the various public policy decisions that led to this point will be quite interesting, which is why I posted what I thought was a pretty fair article. As someone whose family and friends lost their houses in the Palisades fire, my antenna were raised to any bs. I also provided what I thought was a very neutral description. I'm skeptical of NIMBYs in as general a sense that can possibly be framed though so perhaps I missed seeing a bias that you see. 

If anything it seems like less density and more fire breaks would have only increased the price of housing in that area, while also cutting against public support for additional infrastructure. 

 

I too have family, friends, and employees who lost their homes or have been displaced during this mess.  It's a tragedy. 

To be clear, I wasn't arguing for lower density, just pointing out that the only thing that can potentially contain a wildfire like that is fire breaks, and when housing is piled up that becomes nearly impossible unless they're built into development plans.  

Edited by Samson's Wig
  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Samson's Wig said:

I too have family, friends, and employees who lost their homes or have been displaced during this mess.  It's a tragedy. 

To be clear, I wasn't arguing for lower density, just pointing out that the only thing that can potentially contain a wildfire like that is fire breaks, and when housing is piled up that becomes nearly impossible unless they're built into development plans.  

Correct.  If you were to give anyone with any expertise in wildfires a map of these areas pre-development, and said "now, build me a neighborhood that isn't vulnerable to wildfire," the FIRST thing they'd tell you is "that can't be done."  If you dialed back your request to "okay, build me a neighborhood that is defensible and much less likely to all burn up in a wildfire," then the #1 and #2 moves would be lower density and firebreaks.  Then some things with lesser returns, like no wooden fences and sealed attics, and a higher density of hydrants fed by larger water storage.  And regular vegetation management activities and budget (to maintain firebreaks and limit fuel in areas that aren't firebreaks).

Shit can be done.  None of it makes anything mother nature-proof.  But those things can mitigate the harm.  But then, those things are incompatible with 1) supplier demand for profit, and 2) consumer demand for more houses in the nice neighborhood.  And, they cost money.

We don't do planning.

Just reacting and fingerpointing.  Those are our things.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Samson's Wig said:

I too have family, friends, and employees who lost their homes or have been displaced during this mess.  It's a tragedy. 

To be clear, I wasn't arguing for lower density, just pointing out that the only thing that can potentially contain a wildfire like that is fire breaks, and when housing is piled up that becomes nearly impossible unless they're built into development plans.  

Yes, exactly, I've seen to word "fortifications" used over the past couple weeks. 

Having read a couple of weeks ago that the native oak trees help slow or resist fire, I'll be especially interested to learn the impact of non-native vegetation and whether there's any related recommended policy changes. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Correct.  If you were to give anyone with any expertise in wildfires a map of these areas pre-development, and said "now, build me a neighborhood that isn't vulnerable to wildfire," the FIRST thing they'd tell you is "that can't be done."  If you dialed back your request to "okay, build me a neighborhood that is defensible and much less likely to all burn up in a wildfire," then the #1 and #2 moves would be lower density and firebreaks.  Then some things with lesser returns, like no wooden fences and sealed attics, and a higher density of hydrants fed by larger water storage.  And regular vegetation management activities and budget (to maintain firebreaks and limit fuel in areas that aren't firebreaks).

Shit can be done.  None of it makes anything mother nature-proof.  But those things can mitigate the harm.  But then, those things are incompatible with 1) supplier demand for profit, and 2) consumer demand for more houses in the nice neighborhood.  And, they cost money.

We don't do planning.

Just reacting and fingerpointing.  Those are our things.

You're not wrong in principle, but in Altadena, we're talking neighborhoods that were over 100 years old. This wasn't some recent, ill-advised development.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Foosters said:

You're not wrong in principle, but in Altadena, we're talking neighborhoods that were over 100 years old. This wasn't some recent, ill-advised development.

Oh, definitely a fair point re Altadena, and plenty of other areas.  In plenty of cases, we built/developed without being fully aware of/preparing for the risks.  Shit happens, that's no small part of things.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Foosters said:

You're not wrong in principle, but in Altadena, we're talking neighborhoods that were over 100 years old. This wasn't some recent, ill-advised development.

Yep, someone posted a video from what looked to be the 50's or 60's showing how deadly and unpredictable the Santa Ana winds are and how they threaten all the surrounding communities.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Houses in California fire zones need to be rebuilt out of concrete - there are numerous products from cinder blocks to insulated concrete forms. The land is already so expensive it can be economically viable. And you really can’t tell except at doors and windows where the exterior walls are 15-18 inches deep. Reduce the use of flammable materials, full stop. Not sure the impact from earth quakes. Energy efficiency would soar. 

Edited by troph
  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Sbbruin said:

Hydrants are not designed to battle widescale wildfires burning through neighborhoods.  The winds and the speed of spread was just way to much to battle.  And air drops weren't possible in those winds

Yeah, this seems obvious.  A single house, maybe an adjacent house or two, but at some point the water flow just isn't enough when an entire neighborhood is burning.  People WANT that level of protection but they sure don't want to pay for it.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, troph said:

Houses in California fire zones need to be rebuilt out of concrete - there are numerous products from cinder blocks to insulated concrete forms. The land is already so expensive it can be economically viable. And you really can’t tell except at doors and windows where the exterior walls are 15-18 inches deep. Reduce the use of flammable materials, full stop. Not sure the impact from earth quakes. Energy efficiency would soar. 

I was thinking about that and wondered how fire resistant the 3D printed concrete houses are.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, troph said:

Houses in California fire zones need to be rebuilt out of concrete - there are numerous products from cinder blocks to insulated concrete forms. The land is already so expensive it can be economically viable. And you really can’t tell except at doors and windows where the exterior walls are 15-18 inches deep. Reduce the use of flammable materials, full stop. Not sure the impact from earth quakes. Energy efficiency would soar. 

 

I was going to post something similar, but wasn't sure how it would go over. 100 year old homes on small lots is a recipe for disaster in fire prone regions. ICF, steel construction, or even polyurethane SIPs with fiber cement board siding and non-wood shingles would perform better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Bevo said:

 

I was going to post something similar, but wasn't sure how it would go over. 100 year old homes on small lots is a recipe for disaster in fire prone regions. ICF, steel construction, or even polyurethane SIPs with fiber cement board siding and non-wood shingles would perform better.

No fault re what was there, compassion and sorrow for what was lost, but we have to build back with more resilience.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Or more probably, you won't be able insure a flammable house

Our house is ICF and stucco exterior with a metal roof and we were denied coverage by all but one insurer and rates went up 70-80% year over year. Nothing is insurable anymore.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, troph said:

Our house is ICF and stucco exterior with a metal roof and we were denied coverage by all but one insurer and rates went up 70-80% year over year. Nothing is insurable anymore.

My parents had to resort to the CA Fair Plan for their all stucco exterior with clay tile roof. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a ton of fire-resistant building materials and claddings out there - anything suitable for type I or II construction (and even heavy and mass timber due to the fire protection obtained through char rate). Don't use insulated metal panels for external cladding even though they're allowed; that shit burns. Any exterior insulation - a good idea - should be mineral wool ("fluffy rocks") or other non-combustible material. Avoid having attics and soffits that need venting - again, this can be accomplished by exterior insulation or otherwise keeping them within the building envelope as conditioned (heated) space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, troph said:

Houses in California fire zones need to be rebuilt out of concrete - there are numerous products from cinder blocks to insulated concrete forms. The land is already so expensive it can be economically viable. And you really can’t tell except at doors and windows where the exterior walls are 15-18 inches deep. Reduce the use of flammable materials, full stop. Not sure the impact from earth quakes. Energy efficiency would soar. 

That sounds reasonable but that is not going to happen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, UTGrad98 said:

My wife's parent's house in Mexico is built entirely out of concrete, including the roof. I think only the front door is wood. Sliding glass doors in the back. Built almost 40 years ago.

Yep. About the only place you'd see a wooden building in Mexico-- and rare at that-- is in a border town.

I got to see a ton of house building in Colima in 2003 right after an earthquake. They'd build square pillars (castillos) out of brick, put cinder block walls between them, and do the roof in concrete as well. Leave a little "garden" thingy with a separate roof on it, you have some kids and pop that off, garden becomes the staircase for the new second story.

Top it all off with some heavy plastic Moorish trimmings, you're in business.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My wife and I drove through upper Altadena west of Lake this afternoon.  The destruction is complete there.  I mean blocks and blocks and blocks of utter and complete devastation, with not one house standing.  And then drove through other areas closer to us and still just mass destruction.  It is incomprehensible how bad it is.  I can’t absorb it.  It’s surreal.  Whatever people in Texas think it is, it’s a million times worse.  

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...