Wild Fire

The devastating wildfires in California are a reminder of how ruthlessly indiscriminate nature is. The frequency of extreme weather events is clear evidence that the global climate is changing, and with devastating effects. Climate change has undoubtedly exacerbated the LA situation but there are many other factors involved, and given the amount of predictive scientific research on the subject it is strange that pre-emptive steps are not taken to mitigate such disasters.

Wild fires are not new to Los Angeles, indeed the LA Emergency Management Department’s website opens with the statement:

“Los Angeles is prone to many natural and man-made threats. Los Angeles is particularly vulnerable to the destructive affects of wildfires, flooding, mudslides, earthquakes, and extreme heat. Because of the many threats faced, the importance of readiness as a City and for residents cannot be overstated.”

So it is surprising that in Los Angeles reservoirs and hydrants were dry, water-hungry agriculture is still practised and ground cover and brushwood was not cleared, as was traditionally done.

The architecture of the city must also be to blame, timber framed buildings that have been extended to the boundaries of their suburban plots explain the rapid pace of the destruction. As we have seen in the aftermath of the Grenfell tragedy, when the rebuilding begins it will have to be done differently, with building codes rewritten to mitigate against future catastrophe.

In 1666 436 acres, which equated to 80% of the City of London, was destroyed by fire, 13,200 homes were lost, the infrastructure of the city was wiped out. “The Act for the rebuilding of The City of London” was passed by parliament on 1667, which totally transformed the way buildings could be constructed and how they would look. In future all buildings would be masonry or brick, party walls were introduced, overhangs or jetties were banned, street widths were defined and building heights controlled. We still adhere to the bones of these regulations today.

It will be interesting to see whether California will introduce similar measures, it seems inconceivable that the rebuild will be like-for-like timber framed construction. The similarities do not end there, like London the infrastructure that supports the dwellings will have been destroyed, and as in 1666 there will be a huge demand for skilled labour to enable the rebuild. Furthermore, the cost of reconstruction will run into billions complicated by the fact that each house is a separate insurance claim.

As I write, the fires are still burning, the UK is being battered by 100mph winds which will no doubt leave a trail of structural damage and flooding. The future is going to be unpredictable, and we will need to adapt our thinking and our construction techniques once again to suit a very different climate.

This seems to be lost on the Labour government who are fixated with sloganeering and cheap soundbites. Building 1.5 million homes in 5 years is not only unachievable, the carbon cost and environmental impact is potentially devastating. Whilst a relaxation of some of the planning regulations may be welcome, there needs to be a comprehensive and impartial review of housebuilding policy to ensure that what we build from now on will still be here in 100 years.