Reply to Thread New Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
|
Austin American-Stateman: http://www.statesman.com/news/local/...45.html?page=2
Perry said he also would seek a major disaster declaration from the federal government. A spokesman for Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Austin, said that Federal Emergency Management Agency officials will be on the ground in Central Texas this morning. As Perry returned to his home state from the presidential campaign trail, fires that had started a day earlier continued burning in at least two Central Texas counties. ... Retired Austin Assistant Fire Chief Kevin Baum, who studied the city's wildfire risk about eight years ago, likened the danger to "sleeping with a stick of wet dynamite." "We've had some pretty epic wildfires over the years, but what is different today is that we have urban sprawl that is intermingled with wildland vegetation," he said. Lake Travis Fire Rescue Chief Jim Linardos added: "The entire state, especially Central Texas, is under siege right now. We are going to do the best we can. That's the only promise I can make. |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
|
With the explosive population growth in Texas over the past several years, it would seem that increased building density would dictate new building standards to minimize the spread of fires.
I've not seen any indication that standards have evolved, just lots of political grandstanding on Perry's part about how he's actualy done way with lots of regulations and made it a lot harder to sue businesses when a consumer has a problem. Businesses certainly welcome that, but sometimes regulations and legal recourse have their place. If some of the homes that burned were promised to be resistant to things like embers hitting the roof but instead lit up like matchsticks, should the builder and materials-makers bear any responsibility? In California, many areas have instituted things like bans on certain roofing materials that look pretty but burn too easily, standards on wall materials, etc. Then again, we implement home standards to accommodate the possibility of earthquakes as well as fires. But as a result, we see a lot fewer homes destroyed in fires and a lot fewer homes destroyed in earthquakes. Other states point at us as an example of "job-killing regulations" run amok in home building standards, but this is precisely why those regulations exist. |
![]() |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|