• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Let em Burn

mtlogcabin

SAWHORSE
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
9,530
Location
Big Sky Country
DETROIT - The Detroit Fire Department could adjust to a looming 15 percent budget cut by allowing some abandoned buildings burn to the ground, according to the city's top fire official.

Executive Fire Commissioner Donald Austin said his is creating three proposals for Mayor Dave Bing to consider when making deep reductions to the 2012-13 budget, likely to be below this fiscal year's $183 million. Detroit is going through a state-monitored budget overhaul under a deal reached between Gov. Rick Snyder and city officials, an alternative to a state-appointed emergency manager.

"I'll give (Bing) every penny I can without cutting people," said Austin, a former Los Angeles assistant fire chief who became head of Detroit fire operations last May.

[h=1]Detroit stands out from other large U.S. cities and will need to take drastic steps to meet its service needs, he said.[/h]

"Name another city in the United States that lost 200,000 people in 10 years," said Austin, citing U.S. Census figures. "So we're in a unique position. And I believe it takes unique approaches to deal with situations that are not the norm."

Wide swaths of Detroit's once-teeming neighborhoods now consist of scattered occupied homes, surrounded by boarded-up structures, burned-out husks and weed-covered vacant lots.

One of Austin's proposals would allow vacant buildings to burn if they're more than 50 percent ablaze — as long as they're not a risk to inhabited structures and the weather is favorable. Austin said about 40 to 60 percent of the fires in Detroit are in vacant structures.

Another proposal is to ask the U.S. Navy's construction division, the Seabees, to level 10,000 vacant and dilapidated homes.

And a third is to create a demolition unit in the fire department, Austin said, using heavy equipment to level the remnants of newly burned buildings. The unit would be similar to a tractor company Austin created in Los Angeles to cut breaks around wildfires, maintain hillside fire roads and overhaul large industrial fires.

"When these houses burn up and there's no value left, I can get my firefighters, with proper training, to raze that house — get rid of it," he said.

Detroit Fire Fighters Association President Daniel McNamara said he opposes Austin's idea of letting vacant homes burn, unless they're on a predetermined demolition list, as is the case in Flint.

"If we could have that kind of communication, we wouldn't have this kind of discussion right now," McNamara said.

  • Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
 
wow, souinds like their code enforcement division is lacking either manpower, motivation, staffing or caring, or maybe it's beyond that. doesn't look good. motor city , turned rust city,
 
Its no fault of code enforcement or manpower, actually from what I know they have a fairly responsive code enforcement office. The large majority of homes for sale are owned by Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae due to the shear amount of bank forclosures being dumped back onto the government due to backed up loans. Well, thats the short of it.
 
Having been in Detroit for ICC meeting a few years back it is not just abandoned houses that are the issue they also have a large number of abandoned high rises and factorys. Many of these structures are abandoned with years or decades of unpaid taxes and the land under them is not worth what the demolition costs would be. There is no way for the city to recover the costs of demolition and disposal from the long gone owners. Tax leins don't work when there is no value left.

Many of the recyleables have already been removed.

Interior attacks are often too dangerous in these often structurally deficient before the fire buildings. Letting them burn when it can be done safely both reduces unneccessary risks to firefighters and cheaply removes hazardous structures.

http://statter911.com/2010/06/12/old-packard-plant-burns-again-in-detroit-considered-largest-abandoned-industrial-site-in-the-nation/
 
I can understand their point. When I was in the fire service we have a standard of care when it came to fighting fires:

1. risk a little to save a little (abandoned buildings typically were little)

2. risk a lot to save a lot (occupied structures were a lot)

3. bring your people home

Our priorities on abandoned building fires were protect the exposures (other buildings and people) first and initiate an exterior attack on the fire building. Pre-planning and fire department inspections goes a long way.
 
GBrackins...sorry for the OT, but every time I look at your avatar I get hungry. I haven't had DD coffee and donut holes since I moved back from Montreal (rumor has it we will get one in the area in the near future), even though my appearance may say otherwise.
 
Sounds perfectly reasonable...Detroit is warning its building owners it can't work miracles.
 
I vote for burning the structures and NOT to have the Seabees go in to do the

dirty work of demolition. Once this threshhold is crossed, then other U.S.

cities could also put their names on a waiting list.

Let's see, who's next? New Orleans still has alot of demo work to do after

Hurricane Katrina, as does Houston. I think there's some demo work that can

be done in New York, Los Angeles, Atlanta, Miami, El Paso, Chicago, and there

is most definitely a heck of a lot of crap to remove in Washington D.C.

* Parent to new Navy "A" School graduate: "So you've graduated from your training school.

Where are your orders to?

* Young graduate: I'm not sure, some 3rd world place called Detroit I think! :confused:
 
Papio,

want me to ship you some DD coffee? I'm sure UPS runs your way.

I have one about 2 blocks from my home office (nice little walk on a fine New England spring morning). and another one about a mile a way, and another about a 1-1/4 miles. Nothing like a fresh cup and a warm glazed donut with jimmies, yum-yum
 
GBrackins said:
Nothing like a fresh cup and a warm glazed donut with jimmies, yum-yum
Thanks GB...I think I might have to recuse myself from the plan review now if those drawings every come across my desk.
 
So how does abandoned buildings being let burned to the ground save money? Are they cutting staff? if not wheres the savings, water, fuel.
 
David Henderson said:
So how does abandoned buildings being let burned to the ground save money? Are they cutting staff? if not wheres the savings, water, fuel.
if you respond to an abandoned building and let it burn down you only tie up personnel and equipment once, the more you go the more you tie up resources. what happens when you're at the same building for the third time and get another fire? if there are not enough personnel on-duty you have to initiate a recall (overtime). I believe that is where they are talking about costs. The department I was with was small, so we often had to do a recall to be able to handle any other emergencies that came in.
 
Top