Venice Stakeholders Association President Mark Ryavec Argues for Fire-Resilient Reforms Before Rebuilding in the Pacific Palisades
By Mark Ryavec
Governor Gavin Newsom is misguided in issuing an executive order to expedite rebuilding houses in the Pacific Palisades without first examining what happened there and applying lessons that may be learned to reform building codes and significantly increase the capacity of the local firefighting water system.
The governor recently issued orders to relax Coastal Commission permit requirements and environmental review for new construction as long as the replacement building is not more than 10% larger or taller than the original.
If the city of Los Angeles agrees, this will allow property owners to more quickly start rebuilding – with the same building materials and lax fire safety requirements that failed to protect over 10,000 homes.
I grew up in neighboring Santa Monica and know the community’s built environment from regularly hiking in the area. The majority of homes that were destroyed employed stucco for their exterior walls. Just a cursory online search reveals that standard stucco can only withstand extreme heat for about one hour. Thus, without a change in building codes, the governor is proposing to allow the use of the same building material that failed spectacularly.
There should be an examination by a city commission of experts to determine if standard stucco should be allowed, or limited to blocks that are a half mile or mile away from wilderness areas that are likely to be again overgrown in the next five to ten years with flammable grasses and chaparral.
In some of the few homes that survived, a fiberglass filament was added to the stucco mix, which boosts its ability to withstand heat. Another design element that was successfully deployed in some homes that withstood the fire are lumber and plywood that was coated with fire retardant during the framing stage. The city should consider making these mandatory.
There are other building materials, such as tilt-up concrete panels, full dimension 4-inch bricks (as opposed to thin brick veneer), 3-inch-thick stone walls, and metal, which when properly installed, withstand extreme heat for at least four hours, enough time for all surrounding foliage to burn out, leaving the house standing.
Asphalt roofing shingles, which contain a significant amount of petroleum, do not well withstand fire, and should be banned in favor of Class A fireproof installations like terracotta or concrete tiles or other fireproof materials. Similarly, the juncture of roof eaves with exterior walls is one of the locations most vulnerable to fire, so the city must adopt a requirement that these areas be properly sealed with fireproof material.
One of the most destructive aspects of this fire was the domino effect; the ability of the fire to jump easily from house to house where there were narrow side-yard setbacks. While very costly, now would be the time for the city to establish mini-fire breaks by purchasing lots every five or ten houses, and leaving them empty. This could also be accomplished by neighbors banding together to purchase lots of those who don’t want to rebuild, to establish fire breaks.
The intense heat seen in the Palisades cannot be exaggerated. An architect friend relates that the temperatures achieved in such a wind-blown fire can be several thousand degrees Fahrenheit. Often buildings burn well in front of actual flames as a result of the radiant heat causing spontaneous combustion. Despite brush clearance 100 feet all around a house he had designed, the property was ignited by the extreme heat from homes burning nearby. In this instance, the windows shattered and became the entry point for the radiant heat to engulf the home’s interior contents, burning the walls from the inside out. The house was 100% framed with noncombustible materials, including steel framing, and the roof. He told me that the only improvement that could have possibly saved it would have been a combination of a site-wide fire suppression system, at a cost of $50,000 to $75,000, and fire shutters on the windows. Certainly, the city should at least consider mandating the installation of metal shutters on all new construction in hillside areas.
Los Angeles’ own fire chief, Kristen Crowley, has recommended adding additional fire stations throughout the city. It is possible that several now-empty lots in the Palisades should be purchased for new stations, instead of proceeding quickly with rebuilding homes on them. And land at high elevations, previously the site of homes, will be needed for new reservoirs to address the evident lack of adequate reservoir capacity and water pressure.
Finally, there are some lessons that can be learned from the few positive developments seen in the Palisades fire. These include the ability of some homeowners to successfully defend their houses with shovels and water hoses and the survival of the Getty Villa. Shouldn’t these lessons be understood and incorporated in planning and building codes before anyone starts breaking ground for replacement homes? Even in advance of the thorough investigation I am calling for, the city council and mayor should direct the Department Building and Safety, in consultation with fire officials and experienced architects, to immediately publish a list of best practices, as described above, for building in hillside areas with historical fire risk.
Excuse the paraphrasing of this well-worn cliché, but doing the same thing, under the same building codes, and expecting a different result, i.e., a community that will withstand the next firestorm, is indeed the definition of insanity.
Mark Ryavec, president of the Venice Stakeholders Association, served as a legislative analyst for the city of Los Angeles, and the former Chief Deputy Assessor for Los Angeles County.
