To the editor: I’m positive there may be going to be a push to enhance constructing codes now that we now have skilled these devastating fires. Let’s remember the fact that nothing is free. (“The challenge now is deciding how to rebuild safely in areas destroyed by fire,” editorial, Jan. 19)
It’s logical that we want higher fireplace codes to guard our properties. We additionally want codes that require earthquake-resistant development since we’re in earthquake nation.
And we want photo voltaic mandates since we wish to decrease fossil-fuel use. And we would like all-electric properties to keep away from the hazard of gasoline stoves and fireplaces. And we would like drought-resistant yards for water shortages. And we would like intensive environmental research to guard the setting. And we would like an in depth allowing course of to verify every little thing is finished appropriately. And we would like properties to be reasonably priced.
Sorry, however the final level shouldn’t be appropriate with the others.
I’m not taking sides on this debate. Moderately, I’m simply stating that we probably can’t get every little thing we would like, and arduous selections must be made.
David Fractor, Tarzana
..
To the editor: After each catastrophe, there are all the time those that say victims shouldn’t be allowed to rebuild within the affected areas.
However what are victims purported to do when town of Los Angeles is already constructed out with a 500,000-housing unit scarcity? In the meantime, nearly each nook of Los Angeles is weak to some kind of catastrophe — earthquake, flood or fireplace.
Again within the early Nineteen Seventies, there was an city planning motion referred to as Design with Nature. As an alternative of avoiding nature, let’s return to designing with it.
Stewart Chesler, Granada Hills
The author is knowledgeable city planner.
..
To the editor: It’s unclear why Gov. Gavin Newsom suspended California Environmental High quality Act rules for tasks rebuilding within the wake of the L.A. fires. CEQA wouldn’t apply to those tasks, because the legislation already exempts changing or rebuilding present buildings, constructing small buildings equivalent to single-family properties and setting up housing tasks in infill areas.
Thus, Newsom’s government order is pointless. It won’t speed up L.A.’s restoration as a result of most rebuilding tasks aren’t regulated by CEQA. What the order will do, sadly, is feed the false narrative that CEQA is someway exacerbating the state’s housing disaster.
The order additionally threatens to weaken constructing codes. These codes presently defend public well being and security, together with by making buildings extra fire-resistant. Why would we wish to shortly rebuild properties that might pose a menace to residents?
Constructing codes defend Californians from public well being risks equivalent to air and water air pollution. Additionally they work to sluggish local weather change, which is fueling these fireplace disasters.
With efficient management, L.A. can rebuild in a manner that protects folks’s well being and security. CEQA doesn’t stand in the best way.
Michelle Black, Santa Monica
The author is an environmental lawyer.
..
To the editor: Robin Abcarian’s column, “California’s cycle of fiery destruction and reconstruction is older than you might think,” supplied the identical previous options.
Get up, California. The heavyweight company leaders within the state have to step ahead and kind a process power to analysis, consider and make suggestions on rebuilding, firefighting and total administration of the state assets.
Present California leaders have proven their incompetence.
Raymond Holm, Thousand Oaks
