The overwhelming majority of voters in Los Angeles County helped strengthen building standards for home construction in high-risk areas following the catastrophic Palisade and Eton fires in January, according to a new poll from the UC Berkeley Institute co-hosted by the Times.
80% of these voted support stricter building standards to make the home more fire resistant, even if added to the cost. Seven in 10 wanted more restrictions to curb wildfires and home building in Neon’s neighbourhoods.
“This is a major event in LA’s history,” said Mark Dicamillo, voting director for the UC Berkeley Institute of Government Studies. “It has had a big impact on what people think they have to do in terms of making homes safer.”
Almost 13,000 households were chased by two fires, destroying 56% of the Pacific Pallisard property and almost half of the structures in Altadena.
Implementing more robust building standards and growth restrictions could have a direct impact on homeowners in Palisade and Altadena, but voters who voted in these communities supported both ideas extensively.
They supported stronger building standards in the Palisade and Eton fire zones at 85% and 82% respectively, and supported support from people outside the area. Regarding home construction restrictions, 61% of those surveyed in the Eton area were similarly supportive, and 65% of voters in the Pallisard Fire Zone.
These two issues weigh heavily in Tracy Alexander’s mind when she decides whether to rebuild the house she lost to the Palisades fire.
Alexander and her husband have lived on Alphabet Street in Pallisard for nearly 30 years. She said that she and all her neighbors would want to remake with more fire safe materials, but no one knew how expensive it would be. The other questions she wrestles with are more existential.
“Part of that is the economics of reconstruction,” Alexander said. “Part of that is, ‘Do I want to live in a fire zone?’ It’s difficult to analyze. ”
State and local officials have not yet decided whether there will be changes to building standards for rebuilt homes. The current code for new reconstructed properties of high-risk fire zones requires critical measurements, such as ignition-resistant materials and multi-pan or window upgrades.
A Berkeley IG poll found broad support for many policy ideas, including fire protection payments and tax increases to build sophisticated housing in urban areas.
The most popular proposal was that with 84% support, policymakers prioritizing support for low- and middle-income families evacuated by the fire. Palisades in the Pacific had the highest home value in Los Angeles, with Altadena people above the county’s median. However, it does not always indicate the economic status of fire victims. A home that is often worth more than $1 million before a fire was purchased for less than half of that decades ago. Additionally, a quarter of the lost home was an apartment, another apartment complex, or a mobile home.
Almost two-thirds of voters voted to provide significant funding to city and county fire departments, even if it meant raising taxes. Voters were split more evenly, with 46% support and 43% against. This is about the idea of creating a tax structure where people living in high-risk fire areas need to pay more for public services.
“Right now, fire prevention is a priority for Los Angeles residents,” DiCamilo said. “If they support tax payments, that’s the area.”
To compensate for the restrictions on housing construction in fire-prone communities, county voters supported greater production of high-density housing in urban areas, supporting 55% support compared to 30% opposition.
Twin findings – curbing construction in high-risk areas and promoting it in safer areas – reflects preliminary research.
A 2019 Berkeley IGS poll has imposed restrictions on growth in wildfire regions from three-quarters of California voters, including 79% of LA counties. Last year, a poll from the Los Angeles Business Council Institute found that 81% of city voters supported approval for apartments with public transport and affordable housing near existing high-density urban areas.
Although most policy proposals did not find any significant divisions between age, race, gender, or other demographic factors, there were significant partisan differences in the level of support for many ideas. Still, the majority of GOP voters (traditionally regulated instability) were investigated, imposing more restrictions on strengthening building standards and developing high-risk areas.
One policy idea that voters disliked on the vote was allowing fees to be raised if insurers could provide more widespread fire coverage. More than half of those surveyed opposed the idea, compared to 39% of support.
Insurance coverage emerged as one of the most famous issues shortly after the fire. Last month, state insurance secretary Ricardo Lara declined the 22% emergency fee hike proposed by State Farm General, California’s largest home insurance company.
“When it comes to the cost and affordability of living in California, you can imagine premiums coming closer to the top of voters’ minds,” DiCamilo said. “That’s where resistance really comes.”
The Berkeley IGS poll was conducted online in English and Spanish between 5,184 registered voters in Los Angeles County from February 17-26. The estimated error margin for the survey is 2% points, which is larger for demographic subgroups.
Source link
