Urban Tulsa Weekly

JoeMommaBlake, 1/ 2/2010 - 2:36am
"If the whole state followed this same line of thinking, all rural mobile homes would be required to be anchored 30 feet into the ground with red-iron, reinforced with diamond plate and Kevlar exteriors and constructed with materials designed to withstand high winds and tornadoes. It's hypocritical to mandate hyper-vigilant safety in one residence, while ignoring the same principles in another. We have to assume that when people choose to move into a certain place, they take on the risks of that home along with the benefits. Want to live in a home that is truly mobile? That's fine. That's up to you. Just don't be surprised when it gets wiped off the planet some April. Want to live in a 90 year old three story apartment building close to downtown? Sweet. Just don't be upset when there aren't sprinklers inside. I think we need to be okay with people assuming some risk. We could simply make a law requiring potential tenants in those apartments to read and sign an agreement stating that they are aware of fire risks and lack of full fire protection. I'm pretty sure that wouldn't act as a deterrent. People will take risks. They choose to drive cars, jump out of helicopters and eat Chinese food delivery every day. Living is risky. It's not acceptable to create an urban core that has no affordable housing for the very people who most want to live in it. Sprinkler systems are expensive and either drive up the costs too much to offer affordable housing or they make the building worthless. I wish I felt like our current city government was inspired to take on this issue. As long as there are alarms and exits, people should be able to quickly leave in the event of a fire. Today's sprinklers seem as if they are designed to preserve the building itself, not just the people inside."