Signed in as:
filler@godaddy.com
Signed in as:
filler@godaddy.com

Everything that’s burned in LA was in an identified Fire Hazard Zone — moderate, severe, very severe. We didn’t know how hazardous fire was when we first built our neighborhoods, but we do now.
The insurance companies know this; their catastrophe modeling clearly shows dense housing to be such an issue that they are canceling policies on apartment buildings and condo developments — even in cities without greenery between.
The state knows this. Endless reports delivered to the legislature and the governor describe in detail how fire is spread. Experts speak about it in every interview.
Yet the state has required even the most dense communities to increase housing stock enourmously, regardless of safety concerns. These facts are being ignored in laws and policy.


Every city’s fair share means something else. Density in small towns without evacuation egress means death. It doesn’t matter: the state demands every city grow by at least 15%. Adding density to neighborhoods in hazards areas puts EVERYONE at risk. Legislation to eliminate hazard maps is on the way — AGAIN!

By law the state produces maps that assign hazard assessments to all areas of state and local jurisdictions. The maps were recently released. Last year there was a legislative effort to eliminate the maps, which allow localities to restrict development in Very High Fire Hazard Zones — VHFHZ. The reason? To keep cities from “getting out of their fair share housing” with the maps. The 2011 map for Malibu is at left.

Mitigation is importantly and can greatly improve the chances of structures from burning. But it doesn’t help you survive if your evacuation roots are inadequate

Besides hundreds of laws taking planning control from cities and giving it to for-profit developers, localities have been saddled with housing mandates to hugely increase housing stock — there are consequences to not “making the numbers.” These numbers do not comport with reality of population projections or actual need. They are largely designed to produce market rate housing. The state refuses to revise numbers to take pressure off of areas that cannot safely support mega growth.
Besides evacuation, fire, flood, landslide and earthquake considerations,, cities may have a lack of infrastructure, sustainable water, adequate sewage facilities, schools, etc. to absorb larger populations. The cities receive no state aid for upgrading infrastructure— and in some areas geographic constraints make it impossible. The mandates still stand.


Older towns, like Mill Valley, were built before cars. Roads are very narrow — built for horses — and they curve and wind through dense terrain. They are barely wide enough for a single car to pass in some cases.
Lots were originally small and have been built up with larger homes over the past 30 years, adding to the strain. Situated between a marsh and a mountain, sewage services are limited. Traffic is already at capacity several times a day — an evacuation would be hundreds of times worse.
Tourist traffic clogs Highway 1 throughout the summer, eliminating that roadway as an evacuation route to
Many areas on the west side of this map already face many hours of evacuation delays. Adding density closer to the freeway? That will serve to slow the passage down.
Put new development where it fits: anreas with transit, infrastructure, annd low level hazards.
Adding density to neighborhoods in hazard areas puts EVERYONE at risk.
There is a need for housing in California, but not at “every level.” .Housing is hard to find if you’re a moderate to a very low income earner. But laws encourage huge developments full of luxury units everywhere.
We use cookies to analyze website traffic and optimize your website experience. By accepting our use of cookies, your data will be aggregated with all other user data.