We can't keep pushing Californians into the wildland-urban interface with our exclusionary zoning policies. It is risking people's lives and our planet.https://twitter.com/Scott_Wiener/status/1063490441025327104 …
most Californian communities started controlling open space and housing unit growth in the 1970s and 1980s. I would guess that Paradise did the same, and is probably controlled & appreciating.
-
-
this seems relevant. WUI is fastest type of land-use growth in the us between 1990 and 2010 http://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/early/2018/03/06/1718850115.full.pdf …
-
"Many people in the fire's path were low-income, elderly, and chose to live in the communities in part because it was more affordable than most of the rest of California."https://eu.redding.com/story/news/2018/11/17/camp-fire-evacuees-fema-homes-paradise-california/2032893002/ …
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
So, that’s a case where exclusionary practices was... good, maybe? Is there a map of where’s acceptable and where isn’t, in terms of natural disaster risk?
-
yes we should probably not have people be building out into high risk fire areas, but we should definitely increase density and allow more people to live in land that's more defensible.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.