Modest Suggestions for Los Angeles

As I write this, the fires are—once again—burning in Los Angeles.  So far, an estimated 20,000 homes and businesses have been lost, the fires are still burning, and the weather forecast predicts the high winds, that so rapidly spread the conflagration early on, will return this weekend.

I have a few suggestions for California.

First, before the fires, consider that several communities were already experiencing a severe housing shortage, which has been now made much worse as close to a hundred thousand people have just been made homeless in three days.  The fastest method to help these people is to stimulate the private sector of the economy by dropping rent control.  While there has never been a sound economic reason to impose rent control, right now there is an obvious reason to end it.

In cities where rent control has been dropped, large numbers of previously unavailable rental units quickly enter the market when the owners are no longer worried about government control of their property.  When Buenos Aires dropped rent control, available housing increased by more than 175% in the first six months afterward.  A more modest increase in housing occurred when Cambridge, Massachusetts eliminated rent control.  There is no reason to believe that Los Angeles would not have a similar outcome.

Note.  While Los Angeles needs more housing right now, regardless of cost, it is worth noting that the increase in the number of housing units in Buenos Aires created competition and lowered the cost of housing.  Price controls, whether on goods or housing, always, always, always creates shortages at higher prices.

California will rebuild.  Though there are places where homes have repeatedly burnt down in the last half century, it’s a given that, human nature being what it is, reconstruction of those homes will probably start within weeks.  Perhaps the county might consider mandating the new homes be more fire-resistant.  I would suggest the following:

• Fire-Resistant Roofing: Using Class A, fire-rated materials like metal, concrete, or slate for roofing can dramatically decrease the likelihood of fires spreading.  Compared to the common composite shingles widely used, Class A roofing costs twice as much but the roofs last at least twice as long.  Much of the cost difference will be recouped through lower utility bills since Class A roofing keeps the house cooler in summer, thus requiring less air conditioning.  

• Landscaping and Design: Creating defensible spaces, using non-combustible materials like rock mulch, and ensuring proper ventilation can also prevent fire spread.  In neighborhoods with extensive loss, perhaps every other lot should remain vacant.  The replanting of pine or palm trees should be prohibited.  

• Exterior Materials: Materials like brick and fiber cement siding are inherently fire-resistant.  Brick walls, for instance, can withstand fire for one to four hours, depending on construction.  Insulated concrete form construction is already used in commercial buildings; the county should encourage its use in residences, too.  While roughly 5% more costly than stucco, the improved insulation will lower utility bills and quickly recoup the investment.

• Government should get out of the insurance business.  While government should continue the existing coverage for current homeowners, no new policies should be issued.  If private companies won’t offer insurance for a high-risk construction project, perhaps the building should not be built. 

• And keep the damn brush in the canyons cut.  Perhaps you could employ some of the homeless to do this.  If the land is privately owned, create stiff fines for the failure to keep the brush down.

One last comment:  We all saw the television coverage about fire hydrants not having enough water pressure to fight fires, and I’m sure that there will be long and heated discussions about how to correct this in the future.  But everyone should be aware of how little protection those neighborhood fire hydrants actually offer.  

That typical red fire hydrant in your neighborhood can deliver—at most—500 gallons per minute.  That may sound like a lot of water, but it is barely enough to fight a single-house fire.  Suppose we have a two-story home that’s fully ablaze. The amount of water required to extinguish a fully involved fire in a 2,000-square-foot, two-story house depends on several factors, such as the fire's intensity, the structural materials, and the fire department's strategies.  However, we can estimate water needs by using standard firefighting guidelines.

A common formula used in firefighting is the National Fire Academy (NFA) Fire Flow Formula:  The necessary water flow (in gallons per minute or GPM) = Square footage of the home divided by 3.  As a general guide, for a fully involved fire, add an additional 25%. So, for our arbitrary 2,000 square foot home, we need 667 gallons per minute, which is more than the typical neighborhood fire hydrant is capable of delivering.  If it is a fully-involved fire that we want to suppress before it spreads to neighboring structures, we would need 834 gallons per minute.

If several houses are burning at once, the typical neighborhood fire hydrant provides only a drop in the bucket (no pun intended).  Such a hydrant is better than nothing at all, but it is inadequate to handle the kind of disaster that is occurring in California.

Fire hydrants have a color code.  A red bonnet or cap on a fire hydrant means it delivers up to 500 gallons per minute.  An orange bonnet means it delivers twice that—up to 999 gallons per minute.  A green hydrant can deliver up to 1499 gallons per minute, while a blue hydrant can deliver between 1500 and 2000 gallons per minute.  

In those California canyons, where the dangers from Santa Ana winds are an annual occurrence, perhaps the city should think about either putting in higher capacity water lines and hydrants or limiting the number of homes that can be built there, as well as rewriting construction codes to bring them in line with current fire resistance technology.