I think you are correct. This will create an even bigger separation between the truly rich who cannot only paying cash but also are comfortable self insuring. All the poor people (most people) who can't do that are not going to have that option.
Carolla says good luck getting a permit to rebuild in Palisades
13,630 Views |
115 Replies |
Last: 4 days ago by BigRobSA
HTownAg98 said:OaklandAg06 said:
What will be interesting to see unfold is how the new zoning laws from 2022 that basically make it impossible to build single family homes impacts rebuilding, since most of the structures that burned were single family homes.
I would imagine there is some kind of grandfathering clause that will allow a rebuild of similar square footage for situations like this.
Don't count on it. They live their building regs there
An $10mil+ asset you don't have insured for loss?Quote:
Point is, a lot of the people who own and build these super expensive houses don't need insurance or a mortgage.
That makes no sense to me.
I understand not needing a mortgage.
MouthBQ98 said:
Sounds worse than Austin where you literally have to get permits to use permits.
In Arizona, I once had to pull a permit to erect a sign to post all my permits on.
It was a piece of plywood on 4x4 posts and I had to get a permit to erect it.
HTownAg98 said:OaklandAg06 said:
What will be interesting to see unfold is how the new zoning laws from 2022 that basically make it impossible to build single family homes impacts rebuilding, since most of the structures that burned were single family homes.
I would imagine there is some kind of grandfathering clause that will allow a rebuild of similar square footage for situations like this.
Suzanne Somers lost her home to fire in Palisades in 2007. She was not able to rebuild because of the bureaucracy. Carolla mentions it in his vid. It's 100 times worse now. Your are dealing with those whose religion is climate change and mother earth.
B-1 83 said:
Fires don't knock on your door and ask who you voted for, and I'm guessing the guy in the MAGA hat on FOX who lost everything didn't vote for this. A bunch of these homes and businesses were in the middle of town and not in the middle of 10,000 lbs per acre of dry brush, and you have to feel sorry for folks getting pounded like this. .
While true, for the most part, they probably supported these policies that contributed to the situations that resulted in what were witnessing. The old axiom "people get the government they deserve" applies here.
But watch the insurance companies get bailed out by "socializing" these losses across all of America in the coming years.
Monkeypoxfighter said:Sometimes I see these mansions built along and in canyons, surrounded by brush and I just shake my head thinking "Dumbass. It's just a matter of time." Then there's these homes and businesses destroyed in the middle of town that you just don't expect this sort of thing to happen to. How can you plan against this happening again?B-1 83 said:
Fires don't knock on your door and ask who you voted for, and I'm guessing the guy in the MAGA hat on FOX who lost everything didn't vote for this. A bunch of these homes and businesses were in the middle of town and not in the middle of 10,000 lbs per acre of dry brush, and you have to feel sorry for folks getting pounded like this. .
The common issues between here and the Hawaii fires is that once they started getting to urban and suburban infrastructure, there was A LOT more fuel in the form of houses and businesses and once fire crews started tapping hydrants everywhere, they found they had no water anywhere because the system was designed to fight singular fires, not douse entire neighborhoods or a whole city. Also, as houses and businesses burn, their supply lines are no longer capped by valves and fixtures, so they became a leaking sieve for the overall system. It's not a lack of water, per se, it's a lack of water pressure.
I think urban and suburban planning for fire prone areas will need to incorporate those lessons. They'll need dedicated fire mains and pumps to maintain pressure and flow to the outskirts of the city/suburbs to 1) ensure adequate pressure and volume even if every hydrant is tapped and 2) isolate firefighting water from water systems that may be damaged by buildings burning down. These should be primarily tied to freshwater supplies but also have secondary ocean intakes of freshwater is low. Also, I think there's potential for outdoor fire suppression systems. Think giant sprinklers that aren't necessarily trying to put out a fire, but just get everything wet enough that embers won't immediately light things on fire or will be snuffed out in the air. I see these working similar to indoor systems, where they are a last resort and only turn in localized areas if the fire gets too close.
I think speed and response will also be a key factor. Fires like these can spread insanely fast. Watching for them in drought and high winds and nipping them in the bud should be a priority. For one, have drones with thermal cameras doing an overwatch of areas around the city. You don't need someone watching them all the time, they just need to pop an alert it there's a hotspot. Have them in the air when there're winds and dry conditions. There should also be plans in place to have firefighting planes on standby and ready to begin dropping water or ******ant within x hours. Same for deploying firefighters. There needs to be a plan in place to that gives them autonomy, authority, and priority to do whatever they think is best.
It's a good idea in theory to have dedicated mainstream for fire response, but an insanely costly idea. You start digging and the cost goes through the roof.
One of the biggest issues they face is they don't know exactly, or at what depth, existing power/water/sewer/telecom lines are. When I sat on my local MUD board we had an AT&T sub contractor shooting fiber lines and they punched through one of our 8" force mains. Directly under a street owned by the county. The fix was about $25k and involved permits, tearing up the street, replacing the busted line, and pouring new concrete. To fix 2 1.5" holes.
If that new infrastructure isn't installed before or at the same time as the rest of the water system youre talking billions to retrofit.
One of the biggest issues they face is they don't know exactly, or at what depth, existing power/water/sewer/telecom lines are. When I sat on my local MUD board we had an AT&T sub contractor shooting fiber lines and they punched through one of our 8" force mains. Directly under a street owned by the county. The fix was about $25k and involved permits, tearing up the street, replacing the busted line, and pouring new concrete. To fix 2 1.5" holes.
If that new infrastructure isn't installed before or at the same time as the rest of the water system youre talking billions to retrofit.
aTm '99
Logos Stick said:HTownAg98 said:OaklandAg06 said:
What will be interesting to see unfold is how the new zoning laws from 2022 that basically make it impossible to build single family homes impacts rebuilding, since most of the structures that burned were single family homes.
I would imagine there is some kind of grandfathering clause that will allow a rebuild of similar square footage for situations like this.
Suzanne Somers lost her home to fire in Palisades in 2007. She was not able to rebuild because of the bureaucracy. Carolla mentions it in his vid. It's 100 times worse now. Your are dealing with those whose religion is climate change and mother earth.
She sold the vacant lot and one adjoining it to a developer who built a $40MM mansion on it.
Quote:
She sold the vacant lot and one adjoining it to a developer who built a $40MM mansion on it.
Carolla is correct, that they'll all be ticked off. But he's incorrect they'll change their voting habits.
These people are Dems. They wont change. They'll just hope the next Dem is better than the last. That's all.
But what's ironic to me, is how smart all these people think they are. They snub their noses at the rest of the world, but they're too dumb to realize these type of issue failures, until it negatively affects them. Smart people realize it BEFORE they suffer the consequences, and avoid the problems.
These people are Dems. They wont change. They'll just hope the next Dem is better than the last. That's all.
But what's ironic to me, is how smart all these people think they are. They snub their noses at the rest of the world, but they're too dumb to realize these type of issue failures, until it negatively affects them. Smart people realize it BEFORE they suffer the consequences, and avoid the problems.
Do Californians not have any recourse about the reservoirs? If it is true they VOTED for them, on what basis has their construction been denied by the government? Isn't that what state legislation is for--- implementing something voted on? How have they accounted for the inaction?
If only rooftop water towers were not so unsightly and aesthetically disruptive to the Feng shui. They just could not have LA looking like ear 20th century east coast cities.AlaskanAg99 said:
It's a good idea in theory to have dedicated mainstream for fire response, but an insanely costly idea. You start digging and the cost goes through the roof.
One of the biggest issues they face is they don't know exactly, or at what depth, existing power/water/sewer/telecom lines are. When I sat on my local MUD board we had an AT&T sub contractor shooting fiber lines and they punched through one of our 8" force mains. Directly under a street owned by the county. The fix was about $25k and involved permits, tearing up the street, replacing the busted line, and pouring new concrete. To fix 2 1.5" holes.
If that new infrastructure isn't installed before or at the same time as the rest of the water system youre talking billions to retrofit.
tommyjohn said:An $10mil+ asset you don't have insured for loss?Quote:
Point is, a lot of the people who own and build these super expensive houses don't need insurance or a mortgage.
That makes no sense to me.
I understand not needing a mortgage.
It's was mid 8 figures and more like $50+ million, but yeah. Insuring it would have cost over $1 million a year. For most stuff you'd insure against, there's no point. If you need roof repairs because of hail or have a water leak or something else, it's probably not going to be $1 million. Even if it is, it's not going to be every year.
On top of that, when you're talking about those kinds of costs and ultra wealthy people who have exotic income and tax strategies that the average person has no need for, you have to consider the cost of making that money liquid and the opportunity cost of taking it out of whatever asset it's in.
Back of the napkin math on just the opportunity cost of not having that money in the market every year and 5% annual premium increases has you spending $40+ million in 15 years. That's assuming you can do it all tax and fee free.
A standard residential lot in Los Angeles like where I lived is 1/6th of an acre. 6950 sq. ft.doubledog said:
Cali should rebuild every other house. The housing is just too crowded together for a fire zone.
Right now they have a maximum density of ~ six units per acre. My house sits on an acre of land, I cannot see how anyone could build six houses on it, unless they built upward.
2 story houses were the exception in my 1940s built neighborhood. Most were 1 story, 2-3 bedroom houses.
And, for the longest time (until Newsom overruled local cities in 2019), there were Floor Area Ratio requirements such that you could only build on something like 45% of your property. That's from memory, I don't have the exact regulations in front of me.
Also, in my neighborhood, you had to have at least two off-street parking spaces.
Tony Franklins Other Shoe
Joined:
May 6, 2014
Posts:
31,213
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Probably not. After Harvey in Rockport, if you had to rebuild you had to meet the new minimum height distance. Our house had damage on the roof and one wall, not rebuilt, so it's still at the old height requirements. I'd imagine any home destroyed will need to meet current codes.HTownAg98 said:OaklandAg06 said:
What will be interesting to see unfold is how the new zoning laws from 2022 that basically make it impossible to build single family homes impacts rebuilding, since most of the structures that burned were single family homes.
I would imagine there is some kind of grandfathering clause that will allow a rebuild of similar square footage for situations like this.
Person Not Capable of Pregnancy
I'm hoping the super rich will see red because they will be competing against A LOT of other super rich people for permits and crews. Like you said, they're probably used to things going their way. But when the permit department processes a few permits a day and billionaires are already in line, it might be a while before anything happens for the people that aren't billionaires.ABATTBQ11 said:
They also don't have an army of lawyers and assistants or a personal contractor to navigate the bureaucracy. Rich celebrities and those deep blue, ultra wealthy Democrats won't get fed up with the red tape because they won't see it. They'll be far removed from the delays and costs in one of their other homes living their lives and just getting updates on other people's headaches. It's the middle and upper middle class in some of the neighborhoods that have been burned down that will get shafted and have to deal with this because they don't have a second home and they aren't special enough to be at the front of the line.
Tony Franklins Other Shoe
Joined:
May 6, 2014
Posts:
31,213
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Sold in 2016, built in 2021. So at least 3 years from permits to start of construction.HTownAg98 said:Logos Stick said:HTownAg98 said:OaklandAg06 said:
What will be interesting to see unfold is how the new zoning laws from 2022 that basically make it impossible to build single family homes impacts rebuilding, since most of the structures that burned were single family homes.
I would imagine there is some kind of grandfathering clause that will allow a rebuild of similar square footage for situations like this.
Suzanne Somers lost her home to fire in Palisades in 2007. She was not able to rebuild because of the bureaucracy. Carolla mentions it in his vid. It's 100 times worse now. Your are dealing with those whose religion is climate change and mother earth.
She sold the vacant lot and one adjoining it to a developer who built a $40MM mansion on it.
Person Not Capable of Pregnancy
Tony Franklins Other Shoe said:Probably not. After Harvey in Rockport, if you had to rebuild you had to meet the new minimum height distance. Our house had damage on the roof and one wall, not rebuilt, so it's still at the old height requirements. I'd imagine any home destroyed will need to meet current codes.HTownAg98 said:OaklandAg06 said:
What will be interesting to see unfold is how the new zoning laws from 2022 that basically make it impossible to build single family homes impacts rebuilding, since most of the structures that burned were single family homes.
I would imagine there is some kind of grandfathering clause that will allow a rebuild of similar square footage for situations like this.
I covered this in the other thread regarding being Substantially Damaged and what rules kick in. A smoldering pile of rubble is 100% sub dammed.
aTm '99
Lot of codes are written so that if 51% of the value of your house is damaged, you have to rebuild to ALL current building codes and rules. If California has seismic requirements for residences in their codes, hold on to your butts. Only the super rich will be able to rebuild.Tony Franklins Other Shoe said:Probably not. After Harvey in Rockport, if you had to rebuild you had to meet the new minimum height distance. Our house had damage on the roof and one wall, not rebuilt, so it's still at the old height requirements. I'd imagine any home destroyed will need to meet current codes.HTownAg98 said:OaklandAg06 said:
What will be interesting to see unfold is how the new zoning laws from 2022 that basically make it impossible to build single family homes impacts rebuilding, since most of the structures that burned were single family homes.
I would imagine there is some kind of grandfathering clause that will allow a rebuild of similar square footage for situations like this.
I'm hoping that all the insurance companies trying to pull out of Texas are about to realize after paying LA policies that cover increased cost of compliance that maybe Texas aint so bad.
The Party is always exempt from the rules that their lessers live by. It is part of why they love communism. It won't surprise me if Kalifornia makes lots of exceptions for these people. These are their core.BQ_90 said:HTownAg98 said:OaklandAg06 said:
What will be interesting to see unfold is how the new zoning laws from 2022 that basically make it impossible to build single family homes impacts rebuilding, since most of the structures that burned were single family homes.
I would imagine there is some kind of grandfathering clause that will allow a rebuild of similar square footage for situations like this.
Don't count on it. They live their building regs there
Did that happen in the Austin area?
How it should work: if you want to build or buy something overly risky, insurance should say no and/or give you a quote which reflects. Then, when attempting to finance it, the bank should see its uninsurable and similarly refuse to participate or set terms which correspond to the risk.Tony Franklins Other Shoe said:Probably not. After Harvey in Rockport, if you had to rebuild you had to meet the new minimum height distance. Our house had damage on the roof and one wall, not rebuilt, so it's still at the old height requirements. I'd imagine any home destroyed will need to meet current codes.HTownAg98 said:OaklandAg06 said:
What will be interesting to see unfold is how the new zoning laws from 2022 that basically make it impossible to build single family homes impacts rebuilding, since most of the structures that burned were single family homes.
I would imagine there is some kind of grandfathering clause that will allow a rebuild of similar square footage for situations like this.
Can you build in a guaranteed disaster zone that insurers won't touch? Sure - just pay cash and know it'll eventually be taken from you.
It depends on the local ordinances. Most will allow you to rebuild to whatever site development standard you had at the time the improvements were built (FAR, impervious cover, etc), but will require the structure to meet current building codes.
Oh, I fully expect Biden* will send them pallets of cash before he leaves. After all: this isn't Appalachia we're talking about - these are CALIFORNIANS!Ellis Wyatt said:The Party is always exempt from the rules that their lessers live by. It is part of why they love communism. It won't surprise me if Kalifornia makes lots of exceptions for these people. These are their core.BQ_90 said:HTownAg98 said:OaklandAg06 said:
What will be interesting to see unfold is how the new zoning laws from 2022 that basically make it impossible to build single family homes impacts rebuilding, since most of the structures that burned were single family homes.
I would imagine there is some kind of grandfathering clause that will allow a rebuild of similar square footage for situations like this.
Don't count on it. They live their building regs there
These are Surf front communities being burned to the ground. I am not a genius nor wealthy, but I do understand how to look at a map.
What is that HUGE BEAUTIFUL blue area that butts right up to all these water front houses/communities?
Imagine a water pump system used for instances like these, where the Pacific freakin Ocean was able to be used to put out these type fires that seem to happen more often with increased populations. Perhaps a valve that could be used in situations like this where the Pacific Ocean could be pumped into the current pipes so that water would be available to fight the spread of these devastating fires.
We will call it the Common Sense Valve.
What is that HUGE BEAUTIFUL blue area that butts right up to all these water front houses/communities?
Imagine a water pump system used for instances like these, where the Pacific freakin Ocean was able to be used to put out these type fires that seem to happen more often with increased populations. Perhaps a valve that could be used in situations like this where the Pacific Ocean could be pumped into the current pipes so that water would be available to fight the spread of these devastating fires.
We will call it the Common Sense Valve.
HTownAg98 said:Logos Stick said:HTownAg98 said:OaklandAg06 said:
What will be interesting to see unfold is how the new zoning laws from 2022 that basically make it impossible to build single family homes impacts rebuilding, since most of the structures that burned were single family homes.
I would imagine there is some kind of grandfathering clause that will allow a rebuild of similar square footage for situations like this.
Suzanne Somers lost her home to fire in Palisades in 2007. She was not able to rebuild because of the bureaucracy. Carolla mentions it in his vid. It's 100 times worse now. Your are dealing with those whose religion is climate change and mother earth.
She sold the vacant lot and one adjoining it to a developer who built a $40MM mansion on it.
14 years later!
AlaskanAg99 said:
It's a good idea in theory to have dedicated mainstream for fire response, but an insanely costly idea. You start digging and the cost goes through the roof.
One of the biggest issues they face is they don't know exactly, or at what depth, existing power/water/sewer/telecom lines are. When I sat on my local MUD board we had an AT&T sub contractor shooting fiber lines and they punched through one of our 8" force mains. Directly under a street owned by the county. The fix was about $25k and involved permits, tearing up the street, replacing the busted line, and pouring new concrete. To fix 2 1.5" holes.
If that new infrastructure isn't installed before or at the same time as the rest of the water system youre talking billions to retrofit.
I understand the utility issues. California doesn't seem to mind spending billions though. There's also the question of the economic cost of a fire raging through LA. I've seen cost estimates for the damage so far around $50 billion. A $20 billion retrofit or installation seems kind of worth it.
That said, the vast majority of utilities all compete for space pretty close to the ground because that makes them cheaper to install and easier to service. Something like this would probably require tunneling beneath all of that because that's the only way you'd ever have room. For the kind of flow you'd need, you'd want pipe sizes on par or larger than the existing mains considering they can't keep up already.
ObviousLazyRiverIsObvious
Joined:
Jul 28, 2014
Posts:
2,467
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BigRobSA said:
How do you misspell the guy's name in your own OP?
It is Carolla. A Corolla is a Toyota sedan.
And a fine one at that.
HTownAg98 said:
It depends on the local ordinances. Most will allow you to rebuild to whatever site development standard you had at the time the improvements were built (FAR, impervious cover, etc), but will require the structure to meet current building codes.
It took 5 years. Facts trump feelings.
On a much smaller scale, I had someone evaluating an aspect of a property I was about to buy. He owned 15 or 17 rent houses, don't remember the actual number but around that many. The subject of insurance came up and he said he didn't have any. His premise was that he could totally lose one house every year or year and a half and be out the same amount of money as he would have paid in insurance premiums. He had been doing that for like 11 years.ABATTBQ11 said:tommyjohn said:An $10mil+ asset you don't have insured for loss?Quote:
Point is, a lot of the people who own and build these super expensive houses don't need insurance or a mortgage.
That makes no sense to me.
I understand not needing a mortgage.
It's was mid 8 figures and more like $50+ million, but yeah. Insuring it would have cost over $1 million a year. For most stuff you'd insure against, there's no point. If you need roof repairs because of hail or have a water leak or something else, it's probably not going to be $1 million. Even if it is, it's not going to be every year.
Emotional Support Cobra
Joined:
Feb 5, 2003
Posts:
38,083
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Tony Franklins Other Shoe said:Probably not. After Harvey in Rockport, if you had to rebuild you had to meet the new minimum height distance. Our house had damage on the roof and one wall, not rebuilt, so it's still at the old height requirements. I'd imagine any home destroyed will need to meet current codes.HTownAg98 said:OaklandAg06 said:
What will be interesting to see unfold is how the new zoning laws from 2022 that basically make it impossible to build single family homes impacts rebuilding, since most of the structures that burned were single family homes.
I would imagine there is some kind of grandfathering clause that will allow a rebuild of similar square footage for situations like this.
This- my parents' home survived Harvey except for some external superficial damage mostly from flying debris. After months of dealing with TWIA, they put the cost of scraping the lot into a savings account and did not reinsurance the house for windstorm.
The house went from the biggest on the street to the smallest as the rebuilds are all concrete monoliths 4' above sea level.
Anyway. I feel awful for the entrenched old-timers who have lost everything and will have to walk away. It is truly a beautiful place to live and my wishful thinking is that the scales will be removed from their eyes and they realiz finally why people are voting Trump. It was never about the social issues!!!
MouthBQ98 said:
Did that happen in the Austin area?
When? I mean if it burned to the ground and you're building, you do have to come to current code.
"The Travis County Code in Texas includes regulations for substantially damaged buildings. These regulations require that the cost of repairs to a damaged building is equal to or greater than the building's market value.
Explanation
Substantial damage
A building is considered substantially damaged if the cost of repairs is equal to or greater than the building's market value.
Compliance
Substantially damaged buildings must be brought into compliance with current codes and regulations. This may include elevating the building. "
100% loss seems to equal market value. Harris is 50%.
Https://www.austintexas.gov/edims/pio/document.cfm%3Fid%3D213084&ved=2ahUKEwjBivyLjOmKAxXy_skDHRYODgQQFnoECC0QAQ&usg=AOvVaw1OMvrw6GB_BNScRCbq82ce
Travis County calls out 50% in this letter regarding flooding.
It's possible different types of damage have different levels to qualify.
aTm '99
Tony Franklins Other Shoe said:Probably not. After Harvey in Rockport, if you had to rebuild you had to meet the new minimum height distance. Our house had damage on the roof and one wall, not rebuilt, so it's still at the old height requirements. I'd imagine any home destroyed will need to meet current codes.HTownAg98 said:OaklandAg06 said:
What will be interesting to see unfold is how the new zoning laws from 2022 that basically make it impossible to build single family homes impacts rebuilding, since most of the structures that burned were single family homes.
I would imagine there is some kind of grandfathering clause that will allow a rebuild of similar square footage for situations like this.
Of course.
Logos Stick said:HTownAg98 said:
It depends on the local ordinances. Most will allow you to rebuild to whatever site development standard you had at the time the improvements were built (FAR, impervious cover, etc), but will require the structure to meet current building codes.
It took 5 years. Facts trump feelings.
The fact remains that someone was able to pull the permits and get it built. That it took five years to get permits and build it is ridiculous and I'm in agreement with you on that.
Featured Stories
See All
75:17
2h ago
2.1k
No. 11 A&M looks to right the ship on Saturday night vs. LSU at Reed
by Olin Buchanan
7:01
5h ago
1.8k
'We like it': Gavin Grahovac addresses the hype surrounding A&M in '25
by Ryan Brauninger
8:22
5h ago
1.3k
63:07
6h ago
2.7k