The Danger of Adding Houses, or Fuel, to the Fire

I love Santa Barbara and its surrounds, and I remember well
my visits over the years when my son went to college there. Your community
shares very similar issues with fire danger as my foothills community of Grass
Valley. Indeed, we share with all Californians the statewide impacts of
increasing super fires. Please join me in letting our state legislators know
that any state programs designed to increase housing stock needs to recognize
rural challenges.

I’ve written to Governor Newsom and our state legislators,
asking that in the process of promoting more housing construction, that they
please avoid adding fuel in the form of housing to our rural fire dangers.

Any failure to address the conflict of adding housing to
dangerous rural areas is an issue that is or should be of concern for all California
residents — every resident statewide is already paying for the ever-increasing
costs of fire prevention, firefighting, and fire recovery via statewide
“socialized” higher taxes and insurance and utility bills, and these costs will
only go up. Any state legislation promoting unconstrained housing development
in fire-prone areas borders on criminal negligence.

At the risk of being labeled an alarmist, note these
excerpts from our 2018-2019 Nevada County Grand Jury report “Facing Year-long
Fire Seasons: Are We Prepared?” which is aimed specifically at local fire dangers.
The report pointedly focuses on fire prevention, with little to offer on the essentially
insurmountable challenges of effective firefighting and evacuation. Regarding
evacuation, for example, the Grand Jury suggests residents consider evacuation
routes including “dirt roads, trails, pastures, drainage ditches, etc.”, which
is fine for those young, adventurous types with high-clearance 4-wheel-drive
vehicles, but that’s of little comfort to Grass Valley’s predominate population
of senior citizens driving sedans.

Additional excerpts:
•  the communal and individual
responsibilities pertaining to fire remain immense
•  some fire experts believe that Nevada
County is just as vulnerable as Butte County … others say it is not a matter of
“if” but “when” the next big wildfire will occur”
•  of the County’s 600 miles of County
roads and 2,200 miles of private roads, up to 75 percent of the roads in the
county may not be maintained with best practices and some private roads are
simply considered “no go zones” for fire engines and other emergency response
vehicles if a fire occurs”
•  in 2018, only $442 was spent on zoned
evacuation planning, in which areas are evacuated in a staggered fashion. There
is no comprehensive County fire evacuation plan

•  and, to my point, many
communities in the county were simply not built with evacuations of a scale
commensurate with their current populations in mind. This problem deepens as
communities continue to grow.

Add to that our new paradigm of addressing high wind/fire
danger days with pre-emptive and highly disruptive regional power shut-offs,
with their attendant homeowner impacts on well-water pumps, refrigeration,
medical devices and the like, and community impacts on businesses, traffic
lights, medical services, etc., one has to ask, “is this the best we can do?”

Before our legislators go forward without addressing rural fire
dangers, they should ask their millions of urban constituents if they are happy
subsidizing housing developments that are typically not even affordable to most
rural residents. Consider this a plea to remember the old trope that one size
does not fit all and, that, in the process of mitigating one problem, you are
not exacerbating another. Or, if you prefer, please do not add fuel to the

Terry Lamphier is a
former Nevada County supervisor and former Grass Valley planning commissioner.

The post The Danger of Adding Houses, or Fuel, to the Fire appeared first on The Santa Barbara Independent.

Main Source

You might also like More from author

Comments are closed.