5 ms·

Beautiful house and there was a day I would have been extremely jealous but... I live in Oregon and in 2020 chose to (was not officially in an evac zone but th

by cols 5y ago

Beautiful house and there was a day I would have been extremely jealous but... I live in Oregon and in 2020 chose to (was not officially in an evac zone but the smoke was awful) evacuate when the horrible Beachie Creek and Lionshead [0] fires ripped through the Santiam Canyon. Houses that my wife and I had looked at possibly purchasing were torched, as well as some of the most pristine ancient forest I've seen [1]. My outlook about living in the forest drastically changed after these events. The Beachie Creek fire reached 130,000 acres overnight at a growth rate of 2.77 acres per SECOND. [2]. You couldn't pay me enough money to live in a forest at this point. It's just too damn dangerous. Also, the flat roof seems problematic. Everyone I know in the PNW who has owned a flat roof has had issues with it due to pooling water. That far north, I imagine snow accumulation would also be a really big problem in terms of stress on the roof. [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santiam_Fire https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santiam_Fire [1] - https://www.opb.org/article/2021/09/02/oregon-field-guide-opal-creek-after-beachie-creek-fire/ https://www.opb.org/article/2021/09/02/oregon-field-guide-op... [2] - https://inciweb.nwcg.gov/incident/7001/ https://inciweb.nwcg.gov/incident/7001/

rootusrootus 5y ago
Funny, I've actually considered buying property in that area now that it's been cleared of houses. With a bit of planning, it should be possible to make it more resistant to another wildfire roaring through. I'd still build myself a couple of contingency plans anyway, of course, and buy good insurance.
- cols 5y ago
  Good luck to you! It is truly beautiful out there, even still. If you clear out an acre or two around your house and have some kind of fire line you'd probably be fine. I'd be concerned about the road to your house and how accessible it is to a major hwy. Several folks died after being trapped on North Fork Rd and it's not hard to see why. It's a super tight, two lane road that goes for miles and miles. After the fire started, there were apparently miles of treefall up and down the road. No way you get out from that even on a dirt bike.
  - chris1993 5y ago
    Unfortunately even a clear couple of acres won't protect against ember attack. The house can be built to be fully fire-resistant and you're still faced with stay-or-go decisions when the next fire arrives.
    - prawn 5y ago
      Do American houses in risky areas have roof-sprinkler systems? To keep the roof wet to deny embers a foothold? https://www.google.com/search?q=roof+sprinkler+fire+australia&source=lnms&tbm=isch https://www.google.com/search?q=roof+sprinkler+fire+australi...
      - harambae 5y ago
        They're starting to be required on most Maine homes. I don't know all the details, but it came up recently in a discussion with my builder. I think this link is for commercial, but there's something analogous... https://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/25/title25sec2463.html https://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/25/title25se...
pbuzbee 5y ago
Yes, I'm also looking at buying a house in California, but I too am afraid to buy a home anywhere that could realistically burn in the next 10-30 years. It's a shame since it rules out many of the best (and more affordable) areas of the state.
- sliken 5y ago
  Designing a house to survive a fire isn't that hard. You need a defensible space, pick the right materials (don't go with cheap wood tile that takes 1 oz of burning pine needles to light, like in Paradise CA). If in a particularly high risk area I've seen insurance require things like a watering system for the roof, including onsite water (not depending on water pressure) and pump (not requiring grid power). Not a particularly big expense if designing a new home. The main problem with these big fires is they can send sparks for a good ways, and most roofs (even with no trees nearby) end up with leaves and/or pine needles collect in the roof, which are great tinder for starting the house on fire. If 50 homes light up within 20 minutes the fire departments are helpless, which then of course starts the cycle anew with a new launch of embers.
- njarboe 5y ago
  Almost everywhere in California could burn in the next 10-30 years. Huge fires around LA every year. The Oakland hills fire burned down thousands of homes. Santa Rosa burned twice in three years. Santa Cruz, etc. Maybe somewhere in the central valley or the Mojave desert would meet your requirements.
  - throwaway48375 5y ago
    The desert burns too. Source: I live there
    - njarboe 5y ago
      I guess much of the land that burns around L.A. is classified as a desert by some. I was thinking more of the Mohave or Death Valley areas where there is much less fuel to burn and preventing structures from burning is a bit easier.
willidiots 5y ago
I live in the forest in rural norcal and everything you say rings true. We had a huge fire come within 3 miles of us last year. This year's obviously going to be just as bad given the prolonged dry winter. The neighborhood is aggressively managing the fire risk, yet it seems it'll never be enough. It can happen anywhere though. I have immediate family who lost their home to a fire last year - they lived in a town of 20,000 people, among grasslands in the suburbs. IMHO California and PNW homes need to be rethought, starting now - much like how we stopped using unreinforced bricks due to earthquakes. Stop building houses out of flammable materials. Use intumescent coatings. Intentionally fireproof your landscaping. I was hoping that was the focus of this article but.. nope.
- bogomipz 5y ago
  >"Use intumescent coatings." Can you say what would be some good and/or practical choices for this?
paulryanrogers 5y ago
Why not build with concrete and stucco?
- potatolicious 5y ago
  You could but would it make enough of a difference? Having the structure remain standing, but the entire landscape be totally destroyed (including all major infrastructure like power) doesn't seem like much of a victory. Not to mention a large portion of damage from wildfires is smoke damage, which your concrete house isn't immune to. A fully concrete/steel home would likely remain structurally sound, but you're still dealing with intense property damage for everything inside and most probably uninhabitability due to lost infrastructure in the area. Not to mention during a wildfire you'd still have to evacuate.
  - stickfigure 5y ago
    My property (rural acreage an hour north of SF) burned twice in the last two years. Black hills everywhere. But looking around now you'd never notice. Whether or not your home burns makes a huge difference. PG&E had the poles replaced in a week. If you've cut and mowed defensible space, your house will be fine and life goes on like normal. The problem is, folks love their tree-shaded homes and love building at the tops of ridges. At least in my district, mandatory evacuation is not actually mandatory and (I say this as a firefighter) we aren't going to force you off your property. Especially if it looks like you're prepared. But you really need to be prepared. It's not hopeless - you really can make a huge difference but you have to put the work in long before the fire arrives.
    - bonestamp2 5y ago
      Aside from all the big prep ahead of time, when we evacuate for a fire, is there anything we should be doing at the time of evacuation to help our house survive or easier to partially save... leave interior doors open/closed, leave drapes open/closed, leave hall lights on for firefighters or off to prevent electrical shorts, etc? I've also heard that the fire hydrants are typically on a different water infrastructure from household supply... is that true? If that's true, should I turn my lawn sprinklers on to help make my landscaping less flammable?
gideon_b 5y ago
Pemberton had historically high snowfall last month, followed by a massive rain event. If the roof didn't have issues in January it's probably not going to have issues for a very long time. Pemberton is in a rain shadow. Owl creek gets some snow, more than town, but not much. Much less than Whistler. Fully agree on the fires. I live in the woods on a steep slope and it's not ideal. Pemberton has insane fire risk. The pool might help with that, you can get agricultural water cannons and use the pool water to soak the roof and surrounding land.

by cols 5y ago

rootusrootus 5y ago

Funny, I've actually considered buying property in that area now that it's been cleared of houses. With a bit of planning, it should be possible to make it more resistant to another wildfire roaring through. I'd still build myself a couple of contingency plans anyway, of course, and buy good insurance.

cols 5y ago
Good luck to you! It is truly beautiful out there, even still. If you clear out an acre or two around your house and have some kind of fire line you'd probably be fine. I'd be concerned about the road to your house and how accessible it is to a major hwy. Several folks died after being trapped on North Fork Rd and it's not hard to see why. It's a super tight, two lane road that goes for miles and miles. After the fire started, there were apparently miles of treefall up and down the road. No way you get out from that even on a dirt bike.
- chris1993 5y ago
  Unfortunately even a clear couple of acres won't protect against ember attack. The house can be built to be fully fire-resistant and you're still faced with stay-or-go decisions when the next fire arrives.
  - prawn 5y ago
    Do American houses in risky areas have roof-sprinkler systems? To keep the roof wet to deny embers a foothold? https://www.google.com/search?q=roof+sprinkler+fire+australia&source=lnms&tbm=isch https://www.google.com/search?q=roof+sprinkler+fire+australi...
    - harambae 5y ago
      They're starting to be required on most Maine homes. I don't know all the details, but it came up recently in a discussion with my builder. I think this link is for commercial, but there's something analogous... https://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/25/title25sec2463.html https://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/25/title25se...

pbuzbee 5y ago

Yes, I'm also looking at buying a house in California, but I too am afraid to buy a home anywhere that could realistically burn in the next 10-30 years. It's a shame since it rules out many of the best (and more affordable) areas of the state.

sliken 5y ago
Designing a house to survive a fire isn't that hard. You need a defensible space, pick the right materials (don't go with cheap wood tile that takes 1 oz of burning pine needles to light, like in Paradise CA). If in a particularly high risk area I've seen insurance require things like a watering system for the roof, including onsite water (not depending on water pressure) and pump (not requiring grid power). Not a particularly big expense if designing a new home. The main problem with these big fires is they can send sparks for a good ways, and most roofs (even with no trees nearby) end up with leaves and/or pine needles collect in the roof, which are great tinder for starting the house on fire. If 50 homes light up within 20 minutes the fire departments are helpless, which then of course starts the cycle anew with a new launch of embers.
njarboe 5y ago
Almost everywhere in California could burn in the next 10-30 years. Huge fires around LA every year. The Oakland hills fire burned down thousands of homes. Santa Rosa burned twice in three years. Santa Cruz, etc. Maybe somewhere in the central valley or the Mojave desert would meet your requirements.
- throwaway48375 5y ago
  The desert burns too. Source: I live there
  - njarboe 5y ago
    I guess much of the land that burns around L.A. is classified as a desert by some. I was thinking more of the Mohave or Death Valley areas where there is much less fuel to burn and preventing structures from burning is a bit easier.

willidiots 5y ago

I live in the forest in rural norcal and everything you say rings true. We had a huge fire come within 3 miles of us last year. This year's obviously going to be just as bad given the prolonged dry winter. The neighborhood is aggressively managing the fire risk, yet it seems it'll never be enough. It can happen anywhere though. I have immediate family who lost their home to a fire last year - they lived in a town of 20,000 people, among grasslands in the suburbs. IMHO California and PNW homes need to be rethought, starting now - much like how we stopped using unreinforced bricks due to earthquakes. Stop building houses out of flammable materials. Use intumescent coatings. Intentionally fireproof your landscaping. I was hoping that was the focus of this article but.. nope.

bogomipz 5y ago
>"Use intumescent coatings." Can you say what would be some good and/or practical choices for this?

paulryanrogers 5y ago

Why not build with concrete and stucco?

potatolicious 5y ago
You could but would it make enough of a difference? Having the structure remain standing, but the entire landscape be totally destroyed (including all major infrastructure like power) doesn't seem like much of a victory. Not to mention a large portion of damage from wildfires is smoke damage, which your concrete house isn't immune to. A fully concrete/steel home would likely remain structurally sound, but you're still dealing with intense property damage for everything inside and most probably uninhabitability due to lost infrastructure in the area. Not to mention during a wildfire you'd still have to evacuate.
- stickfigure 5y ago
  My property (rural acreage an hour north of SF) burned twice in the last two years. Black hills everywhere. But looking around now you'd never notice. Whether or not your home burns makes a huge difference. PG&E had the poles replaced in a week. If you've cut and mowed defensible space, your house will be fine and life goes on like normal. The problem is, folks love their tree-shaded homes and love building at the tops of ridges. At least in my district, mandatory evacuation is not actually mandatory and (I say this as a firefighter) we aren't going to force you off your property. Especially if it looks like you're prepared. But you really need to be prepared. It's not hopeless - you really can make a huge difference but you have to put the work in long before the fire arrives.
  - bonestamp2 5y ago
    Aside from all the big prep ahead of time, when we evacuate for a fire, is there anything we should be doing at the time of evacuation to help our house survive or easier to partially save... leave interior doors open/closed, leave drapes open/closed, leave hall lights on for firefighters or off to prevent electrical shorts, etc? I've also heard that the fire hydrants are typically on a different water infrastructure from household supply... is that true? If that's true, should I turn my lawn sprinklers on to help make my landscaping less flammable?

gideon_b 5y ago

Pemberton had historically high snowfall last month, followed by a massive rain event. If the roof didn't have issues in January it's probably not going to have issues for a very long time. Pemberton is in a rain shadow. Owl creek gets some snow, more than town, but not much. Much less than Whistler. Fully agree on the fires. I live in the woods on a steep slope and it's not ideal. Pemberton has insane fire risk. The pool might help with that, you can get agricultural water cannons and use the pool water to soak the roof and surrounding land.