Fire shuts down I10 in LA 7

[spsalso]

A fire under the freeway:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R53bBD9TbxQ

A visual visit to that area using Google Maps shows an enormous amount of flammables placed under the freeway, including wood, tires, and vehicles. It's been my impression that California DOT did not allow that sort of thing, for reasons that might currently appear obvious.

I wonder why this usage was allowed.

I am reminded of that other recent fire, where a freeway on the east coast was taken out:

https://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=507741

CADOT was kinda put on notice that fires underneath a freeway were, uh, a problem.



spsalso

 

[spsalso]

An excellent photo provided by Caltrans:

Still no word on why Caltrans allowed the pallets to be stacked under the freeway.


spsalso

 

[davefitz]

A similar fire occurred 25 yrs ago below the I-95 overpass in newark NJ, and it closed I-95 for over 1 yr. That fire originated in a junk recycling pile. The rebuild of I-5 could be improved using faster setting, fireproof geopolymer concrete. Alternatively the support pillars and underside of the overpas could have added a steel "radiation shield" in areas with a homeless populations. Better yet, spend as much money building homeless shelters as we spend supplying overpasses for cars.

"...when logic, and proportion, have fallen, sloppy dead..." Grace Slick

 

[Debirlfan]

Homeless were affected, but it doesn't sound like they were the main problem.

https://www.wfsb.com/2023/11/13/los...rtation-after-massive-fire-closes-interstate/

 

[azcats]

What are the wide flange members that were under this area?

Google Maps Link

 

[spsalso]

The "main problem" was the property owner allowing hazardous/dangerous materials to be placed under the freeway by leasees.

From Debirlfan's link:

"California Secretary of Transportation Toks Omishakin said storage yards under highways are common statewide and across the country. He said the practice would be reevaluated following the fire."

There's nothing wrong with the practice. There IS something wrong with not inspecting properties to make sure they are being properly used. Especially when having been put on notice with the June gas truck fire and the Newark fire mentioned by davefitz, above.




spsalso

 

[JLNJ]

The IBC does not let you store anything in a stairwell because it might one day catch fire.

I'm surprised that Omishakin portrays storage yards under highways as "common". "Common" maybe as in "don't blame me".

 

[IRstuff]

I'm surprised that Omishakin portrays storage yards under highways as "common".

But they are; I've seen them in San Francisco as well, specifically under portions of the approaches to the Bay Bridge

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[spsalso]

I just drove up and down Perry Street, next to those approaches (using Google). It's nearly exclusively vehicle parking, much of it appearing to be diesel buses and/or government vehicles.

Didn't see any pallets.

Omishakin says storage yards are common. That is what is called a "red herring". The problem isn't whether storage yards are common under freeways. It's whether they contain dangerous materials (and why that was allowed), something he didn't appear to address.

No dangerous materials--no fires under freeways.

Or, put another way: You could store a LOT of sand and gravel under a freeway without risking a big fire.



spsalso

 

[IRstuff]

Pallets are only marginally more flammable than cars; I could see a bunch of cars getting burned by an arsonist, intentional or otherwise.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[spsalso]

Well, we've certainly seen cars burning on ships, lately.


spsalso

 

[spsalso]

"...the state authorities said they now believed that arson had caused the huge fire..."

I look forward to hearing why they believe this.


"When asked by reporters why the flammable material was allowed to be stored under the bridge, the governor said, “That’s all being assessed.”

I look forward to hearing the results of that assessment. Seems to me that it wouldn't take over 24 hours.


"Newsom said the tenant of the site is in violation of their lease. “We’re in litigation, their lease has expired and we have been aggressive in addressing concerns as it relates to the lease itself,” he said.

Officials believe the tenant “subleased the space … with multiple subleases, that’s part of the litigation posture,” Newsom said."

Is it this pesky litigation that obstructed the removal of flammable materials? Could not the Attorney General of California have figured out a way to remove the materials? Apparently not.



spsalso

 

[TugboatEng]

Are pallets defined as hazardous material? From experience I know that they are excellent for starting fires but they meet no criteria that would cause them to be labelled as hazardous. The key here is that there may have been no enforceable rule that an AG could act on.

Pallets really should get special consideration under NFPA 704. Smolderability? Doesn't really fit in with the classical flash point and fire point definition.

I can see it now, every pallet labeled; Do not store pallets within 100 feet of homeless encampments.

 

[dik]

I would have thought that with the large surface area and non-confinement that they would be much more flammable than automobiles.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[TugboatEng]

A car can auto-ignite, a stack of pallets cannot. In other words, it's more difficult to set a car on fire than a pallet but the car is more likely to catch on fire than the pallet. As this is being called an arson it's unlikely a car was a cause.

 

[FacEngrPE]

If this was a building and the owner decided to change the basement parking garage into a paint manufacturing facility, codes compliance or the Fire Marshall would declare the use to be non complying.
The inability to eject the subleasors may be a quirk of California's tenant laws, and the wording of the lease.

 

[spsalso]

Comparing pallet storage and car storage (numbers approximate):

Wood has a BTU content of 9000/lb
A pallet weighs 40 pounds
A pallet is 6" thick
A stack of pallets 18' high contains 36 pallets
A stack of pallets weighs 1440 pounds
There are 13 M BTU in a stack of pallets
A pallet occupies 14 square feet
Stacked pallets contain roughly 1 M BTU per square foot


Gasoline has a BTU content of 125,000 BTU per gallon
A car has a typical gas tank of 15 gallons
A car holds 1.8 M BTU
A car occupies 85 square feet
A car contains roughly .02 M BTU per square foot


Note the difference between 1 and .02


spsalso

 

[spsalso]

"The inability to eject the subleasors may be a quirk of California's tenant laws, and the wording of the lease."

There will, of course, be a variety of legal documents filed to attempt that ejection. And those documents are on file.

So a person could find out the time line and other details.

If a person looked.

Also of interest would be whether there was mention that the cause was non-payment of rent, or non-compliance with a safety directive.



spsalso

 

[LionelHutz]

Does California have overly excessive commercial tenant protection? As a commercial leaser, they should be able give the notice as per the lease and the day after the notice date they should be able to start clearing the area without suffering legal issues. If the lessee doesn't pay rent they should be able to start clearing the area the day after rent was due.

 

[kjoiner]

It sounds like they did not learn from GDOT when the I85 bridge near downtown Atlanta collapsed. That fire was due to people starting a fire that became significantly larger due to GDOT storing items such as large spools of polyethylene conduit and numerous other flammable items under the bridge.

A few years ago, the bridge on Cheshire Bridge road, only a few miles from the I85 bridge, was destroyed because someone started a fire which then set off a gas line.

The I85 bridge was rebuilt in record time but Cheshire Bridge took a few years.

 

[spsalso]

California apparently brought suit with the leasor for non-payment of rent about a year ago.

I've seen no indication that California brought suit based on improper and dangerous storage on their property.

There is a legal concept called "civil asset forfeiture". It is commonly used by various government agencies to take large sums of cash from people who have such. It is done immediately on discovery of the cash. It has also been used to take cars from drivers who are involved in "side shows".

Civil asset forfeiture could have been used in this case. Immediately.


spsalso