For more information on County CERT membership and training, call (408) 808-7800 or email mailto:[email protected]
The City of Santa Clara also offers training through the CERT Citizens’ Academy Program. This program is sponsored through a partnership between Santa Clara City Officials, Fire Department Staff, and Firefighters' Local Union #1171 for the citizens of Santa Clara. The Santa Clara CERT program is designed to help the citizens of Santa Clara to be self-sufficient after a major disaster, when the scope of incidents can be overwhelming, and the need for a well-trained civilian work force can be invaluable.
The program began in 1995, and an estimated 1,500 participants have taken part since (City of Santa Clara 2023).
For more information on City CERT membership and training, call (408) 615-4942 or email [email protected]
Figure B.9. Example of a narrow mountain community road.
6.2 p. 258 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | B-31
Figure B.10 Some areas have been identified as having extremely limited ingress and egress, and in an emergency, residents may need to evacuate through locked gates.
Animals and Livestock
In the event of a wildfire, it is important that residents, fire responders, and the County have a plan for evacuation of pets and livestock. Evacuation planning often neglects to describe how animals will be evacuated and where they will be taken. The loading of horses, for example, during a fire and smoke situation, and transport of stock vehicles down narrow roads under stressful situations, can be very difficult. Public education could emphasize the need for individuals to have a plan for the evacuation of pets in addition to their family, ensuring a lack of planning doesn’t slow or prevent evacuation.
The County is fortunate to have the Santa Clara County Large Animal Evacuation Team, which is a volunteer resource of the CA OES and available upon request by first responders responsible for emergency incidents. Volunteers are sworn in as disaster service workers and are kept up to date with training sessions, including the ICS 100, IS 200, and IS 700 courses (Santa Clara County 2023e).
The Large Animal Evacuation Team website provides helpful information guiding livestock owners in the event of a natural disaster including wildfire. A few of these documents are listed below:
What to do with a horse in fire, flood, and earthquake:
http://www.scclaet.org/Download/What%20to%20do%20with%20Horse%20in%20Fire%20Flood%20Eart hquake.pdf.
6.2 p. 259 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | B-32
The Agricultural Pass Program (Section 2350 of California Food and Agricultural Code) allows for agricultural workers carry out essential agricultural activities in restricted areas upon passing the vetting process. For more information on The Agricultural Pass Program, please see Appendix A “Legislative Direction”.
Wildland Fire Safety for Your Livestock and Pets: http://www.scclaet.org/Download/Animalevacuation.pdf.
Please see Appendix G for additional resources regarding evacuation preparation.
PUBLIC EDUCATION AND OUTREACH PROGRAMS
Public education and outreach programs are a common factor in virtually every agency and organization involved with the wildfire issue. A primary goal in the original Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan is to provide a tool that helps educate the public and provide guidance in treating areas of concern. The plan states that “A combination of property owners and community awareness, public education, agency collaboration, and fuel treatments are necessary to fully reduce wildfire risk.” (Santa Clara County 2016).
LOCAL AND STATE PROGRAMS
Santa Clara County FireSafe Council
The Santa Clara County FireSafe Council is a 501 (c)3 nonprofit with a 20-year history that aims to mobilize the people of Santa Clara County to protect their homes, communities, and environment from wildfires (Santa Clara County FireSafe Council 2023).
The Santa Clara County FireSafe Council’s education and outreach programs work to motivate and educate individuals, public and private agencies and companies that share a common, vested interest in preventing and reducing losses from wildfires. The Santa Clara County FireSafe Council has a board of directors and advisory board with deep expertise across the wildfire ecosystem and has led some of the most complex hazardous fuel reduction projects in the region.
Santa Clara County FireSafe Council programs and projects are focused on protecting the 14 designated communities at risk; it works actively in the community and offers education and outreach programs as outlined on its website (http://www.sccfiresafe.org). Target audiences for outreach include adult and youth residents in the WUI, youth in schools and outdoor education programs, landscaping and tree contractors, businesses, and civic organizations with ties to interests at risk from wildfire.
Santa Clara County FireSafe Council offers a community chipping program that is designed to assist residents and communities in their efforts to create and maintain adequate and safe defensible space by processing or disposing vegetative material such as brush and tree branches. The following types of scheduled chipping services are offered through the program:
• At Home Chipping – Residents submit an application for chipping services to be performed at their homes. Brush must be prepared in advance of the chipping appointment and must meet all specified guidelines
• Community Chipping Piles – Residents drop off piles of brush at a specific location and chipping is performed on a scheduled date
6.2 p. 260 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | B-33
• Drive Up Chipping Event – A date the community has previously selected, at a location within the community, residents drive the brush up in their own vehicle and it is chipped on the spot.
A link to the Chipping Program Registration can be found here: https://www.chipperday.com/lah Santa Clara County FireSafe Council was recently awarded a County Coordinator Grant. This grant, to the amount of $175,000 will allow the County to lead County-Wide collaboration and coordination among all wildfire mitigation groups (Santa Clara County FireSafe Council 2023).
Additionally, Santa Clara County FireSafe Council has formed an exclusive partnership with the leading wildfire sensor manufacturers, N5 Sensors and Dryad Networks. Through early detection, these sensors aim to dramatically cut firefighting costs, prevent economical damage, reduce risk and insurance, and save human life and wildlife. As part of this agreement, the council will handle consulting, pilot testing, sales, and implementation for both companies in Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, and San Mateo Counties.
South Skyline FireSafe Council
The South Skyline FireSafe Council is another non-profit organization whose is mission is to provide education and outreach programs for fire prevention and preparedness to residents in the Santa Cruz Mountains west of San Jose (South Skyline FireSafe Council 2023). The Council sponsors two valuable programs:
• Free Chipping Program: In the spring and fall, the South Skyline FireSafe Council will send professional crews to member homes and turn brush and trees into chips to be used as mulch or ground cover.
For questions contact Ed Hayes at [email protected], John DeLong at [email protected], or Monty Boyer at [email protected] • Home Advisory Program: The South Skyline FireSafe Council offers free home advisory reviews of defensible space as well as homes and other structures within SSFCS boundaries. Results will help inform wildfire mitigation decisions and all personal information remains private.
For questions and to schedule a home advisory visit email: [email protected] Santa Clara County Fire Department (SCCFD)
A top priority for the SCCFD is to educate the community on fire, life safety, and preparedness. SCCFD offers comprehensive fire preparedness training programs in the following cities: Campbell, Cupertino, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, and Saratoga. The Community Education Office of the SCCFD will connect individuals interested in learning more about fire to organizations and agencies within Santa Clara County (SCCFD 2023). SCCFD offers several community education programs involving fire including:
• Fire extinguisher training
• Fire station tours
• The Youth Firesetter Intervention Program (YFIP)
6.2 p. 261 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | B-34
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space Authority (Midpen)
Neighbor Defensible Space Permits
For those who choose to live in the wildland-urban interface, creating defensible space and hardening your home are some of the most important things you can do to protect your property. Neighbors can apply for a free permit allowing them to reduce vegetation on Midpen land, within 100 feet of occupied structures, to create defensible space around homes (Midpen 2021).
Application Process:
• Obtain a free fire hazard inspection from your local fire agency. • Fill out this online form: https://mrosd01.wufoo.com/forms/x1chgtwr0g3f6r5 • Midpen staff will schedule a site visit with you to discuss your project and program details.
Program Details
• The occupied structure should be in compliance with applicable planning, building, and zoning laws.
• Applicants and contractors must have general liability insurance and any required licenses. • The cost of vegetation removal and any required environmental review are the applicant's responsibility.
• Other requirements may be identified in the permit for consistency with Midpen’s resource management policies and practices.
NATIONAL PROGRAMS
Ready, Set, Go!
The Ready, Set, Go! Program, which is managed by the International Association of Fire Chiefs, was launched in 2011 at the WUI conference. The program seeks to develop and improve the dialogue between fire departments and residents, providing teaching for residents who live in high-risk wildfire areas—and the WUI—on how to best prepare themselves and their properties against fire threats (International Association of Fire Chiefs 2021). The County utilizes the Ready, Set, Go Program for their public outreach with a focus on making communities “fire adapted”.
The tenets of Ready, Set, Go! as included on the website (http://www.wildlandfirersg.org) are:
Ready – Take personal responsibility and prepare long before the threat of a wildland fire so your home is ready in case of a fire. Create defensible space by clearing brush away from your home.
Use fire-resistant landscaping and harden your home with fire-safe construction measures. Assemble emergency supplies and belongings in a safe place. Plan escape routes and ensure all those residing within the home know the plan of action.
Set – Pack your emergency items. Stay aware of the latest news and information on the fire from local media, your local fire department, and public safety.
Go – Follow your personal wildland fire action plan. Doing so will not only support your safety but will allow firefighters to best maneuver resources to combat the fire.
6.2 p. 262 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | B-35
National Fire Protection Association
The NFPA is a global non-profit organization devoted to eliminating death, injury, property, and economic loss due to fire, electrical, and related hazards. Its 300 codes and standards are designed to minimize the risk and effects of fire by establishing criteria for building, processing, design, service, and installation around the world.
The NFPA develops easy-to-use educational programs, tools, and resources for all ages and audiences, including Fire Prevention Week, an annual campaign that addresses a specific fire safety theme.
The NFPA’s Firewise Communities program (www.firewise.org) encourages local solutions for wildfire safety by involving property owners, community leaders, planners, developers, firefighters, and others in the effort to protect people and property from wildfire risks.
The NFPA is a premier resource for fire data analysis, research, and analysis. The Fire Analysis and Research Division conducts investigations of fire incidents and produces a wide range of annual reports and special studies on all aspects of the nation’s fire problem.
National Interagency Fire Center
The National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC) provides a wide array of fire resources and services.
The National Interagency Coordination Center offers communication assistance to over 32,000 firefighters and 50 major events at one given time (NIFC 2021c). The Predictive Services Group creates wildfire forecasts and predictions from fuel and weather data. The NIFC has a Remote Automated Weather Base with over 2,000 weather stations which help inform the Predictive Services Group.
The National Wildfire Coordinating Group, which is nested under the NIFC, provides operational coordination to federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial partners (NIFC 2021c). The NIFC also has a training branch where training curriculums are developed to be used across the nation. For those too young to participate in the standard trainings, the NIFC offers FireWorks, an educational program designed for kids K-12. The program teaches children topics such as wildland fire science, ecosystem fluctuations, human interaction on the environment, and other environmental science topics (NIFC 2021d). The NIFC also provides public education resources (NIFC 2021e):
• Wildfire Readiness – Home
• Wildfire Readiness – Business
• Wildfire Readiness – Farm and Ranch
• Weekend Wildfire Preparedness
• What to Do if a Wildfire is Approaching
• Wildfire Risk – Community
• Prepare and Protect Your Home
• Prepare Your Community
• One Less Spark, One Less Wildfire
• Only You Can Prevent Wildfires
6.2 p. 263 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | B-36
U.S. Fire Administration’s WUI Toolkit
The U.S. Fire Administration (USFA) is an entity of FEMA that aids in the preparation for and response to fire. Their WUI toolkit consists of a list of websites and other information regarding risk assessments, public outreach, and community training. Find the toolkit here: https://www.usfa.fema.gov/wui/.
Wildfire Research Center (WiRē)
Wildfire Research Center (WiRē) is a non-profit organization that works with local wildfire services to achieve community-tailored pathways which reduce risk to wildfire while simultaneously promoting pathways to fire adaptation. WiRē’s mission states that fire adaptation is “about living with fire”, while “creating safe and resilient communities that reduce wildfire risk on their properties before a fire, and supporting effective response when fires threaten a community.” WiRē states that wildfire is an integral component of many ecosystems, and that fire must be allowed, when safe, as to ensure the health of forests. Core to WiRē’s approach are four main concepts: 1) residents are critical actors in the WUI wildfire problem; 2) action is central to adaptation; 3) people and their decisions are complex; and 4) decisions are not made in a vacuum. To achieve its goals and serve communities, WiRē will typically conduct a “rapid wildfire risk assessment,” which assesses what contributes to wildfire risk, such as, building materials, vegetation near homes, background fuels, local topography, and access to emergency fire services. Additionally, they also conduct “social surveys”, which assess residents’ perceptions about wildfire, wildfire risk, risk mitigation behavior, and assess their willingness towards taking action to reduce wildfire risk.
For more information, please visit https://wildfireresearchcenter.org/.
6.2 p. 264 of 557
APPENDIX C:
Community Risk-Hazard Assessments for
WUI Communities
6.2 p. 265 of 557
This page intentionally left blank.
6.2 p. 266 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | C-1
2016 VS. 2023 ASSESSMENT PROCESS
In the 2016 CWPP, WUI communities were assessed via the NFPA 1144 assessment forms. Many of the WUI communities were revisited in 2023 but not formally reassessed and therefore 2016 NFPA 1144 scores are presented throughout. While the 1144 assessments were not revised in 2023, the desktop risk-hazard assessment (described in Chapter 3) generally finds that all communities display an elevated risk from the 2016 assessment. In addition, SWCA toured most WUI communities with the Santa Clara County Wildland Division Fire Chief during April 2023 and confirmed the increase in risk. The information presented in this appendix can be used in jurisdictional annexes.
Please refer to Chapter 2, Fire Environment, and Chapter 3, Risk-Hazard Assessment, for additional information.
POLYGON SUMMARY STATISTICS DEFINITIONS
Total 2016 Score: This is the score that the community received in the 2016 CWPP, which assessed communities using the NFPA 1144 Assessment form. These scores were developed from the negative and positive attributes that were identified during the NFPA 1144 survey that was conducted for the 2016 CWPP assessments.
Rating: This rating is based on the Total 2016 score. A lower score is associated with lower wildfire risk whereas a higher score is associated with high wildfire risk (Low X-49, Moderate 50-70, High 71-111, Extreme 112+).
Building Density: Building is quantified by units per square mile. Building density is a critical factor in assessing wildfire risk because higher building densities can result in a greater risk of fire spread and increased difficulty in firefighting and evacuation efforts due to structures. Conversely lower densities may signify that a community is more prone to risks associated with WUI environments, such as higher fuel loads and increased difficulty in firefighting and evacuation efforts due to infostructure limitations.
Dominant Fuel Type: The dominant vegetative fuel type plays a significant role in determining wildfire risk, as different fuel types varying characteristics that can influence the behavior and intensity of wildfires. The dominant fuel type was identified as a specific fuel code used in the wildfire assessment modeling process for each community.
Percent of Community by Modeled/Calculated Wildfire Risk Inputs (Drive Time from Fire Station):
This percentage indicated the proportion of the community that is within each increment of drive time from the nearest fire station (0 mins to 15 mins). Fire station response time is a critical factor in addressing wildfire risk. The time it takes for firefighters to reach a wildfire incident directly impacts their ability to initiate suppression efforts and mitigate the fire's spread. Additionally, this can be used to identify areas where infrastructure investments may be needed to increase wildfire response capabilities.
6.2 p. 267 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | C-2
COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT SUMMARIES
Figure C.1. Planning area WUI community polygon delineations.
6.2 p. 268 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | C-3
ALMADEN VALLEY
WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE COMMUNITIES
ALMADEN VALLEY POLYGON SUMMARY STATISTICS
Community Polygon Background
Community Polygon Name: Almaden Valley *New
Almaden information is included in CWPP Annex #1
Total 2016 Score: 90 Rating: Moderate
Building Density (Building Units per square mile): 383.63 Percentage of Wildfire Hazard: (lowest relative hazard (1) to highest relative hazard (6)) (based on 2023 desktop wildfire hazard assessment data) (based on 2023 desktop wildfire hazard assessment data):
1: 3.00%; 2: 9.30%; 3: 8.29%; 4: 20.83%; 5: 24.58%; 6: 33.99% Dominant Fuel Type
Grass Grass/Shrub Shrub Timber Understory Timber Litter GR2
Percent of Community by Modeled/Calculated Wildfire Risk Inputs Drive Time from Fire Station
0-5 mins: 16.91%
5-10 mins: 17.16%
10-15 mins: 18.09%
>15 mins: 47.83%
1144 Survey Summary Highlights
Positive Attributes (Low Scores)
• Good separation of adjacent structures
Negative Attributes (High Scores)
• Narrow road width
• One road in and out
• Unsurfaced road with greater than 5% grade
• Poor fire access, dead end spurs, lack
turnaround
• Street signs are present, some are nonreflective
• Adjacent fuels: Moderate with high flammability
• High concern topographic feature
• Moderate fire weather potential
• Building set back
• Water unavailable
• Response: Station >5 miles from structure
• Internal sprinklers: For new build properties
• Both utilities aboveground
6.2 p. 269 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | C-4
Fires Within Polygon Based on Recent Fire History
• Austria Gulch Fire, 1961
o Extends into Lexington Hills, Uvas Casa Loma, and south outside of the planning area • Almaden Fire, 1988
• PG & E #2 Fire, 1989
• Loma Fire, 2016
o Extends into Lexington Hills and Uvas Casa Loma
6.2 p. 270 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | C-5
CUPERTINO
WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE COMMUNITIES
CUPERTINO POLYGON SUMMARY STATISTICS
Community Polygon Background
Community Polygon Name: Cupertino Total 2016 Score: 81 Rating: High Building Density (Building Units per square mile): 410.92 Percentage of Wildfire Hazard: (lowest relative hazard (1) to highest relative hazard (6)) (based on 2023 desktop wildfire hazard assessment data):
1: 8.88%; 2: 14.35%; 3: 9.30%; 4: 14.85%; 5: 28.56%; 6: 24.06% Dominant Fuel Type
Grass Grass/Shrub Shrub Timber Understory Timber Litter TU5
Percent of Community by Modeled/Calculated Wildfire Risk Inputs Drive Time from Fire Station
0-5 mins: 28.86%
5-10 mins: 5.00%
10-15 mins: 0.36%
>15 mins: 65.78%
6.2 p. 271 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | C-6
1144 Survey Summary Highlights
Positive Attributes (Low Scores)
• Surfaced roads but some steep routes
• Good visible house markers
• Well signposted
• Surfaced, maintained roads
• Reasonable water supply via hydrants but low
pressure in some areas
• Irrigated lawns and landscaping
• Under Santa Clara County Fire Department
jurisdiction
• HOAs for some subdivisions that can facilitate
community organizing
• New construction, 7A compliant
Negative Attributes (High Scores)
• Some heavy fuel loading adjacent to homes
(on both public and private property) as a result
of thick underbrush and continuity of tree
crowns
• Thick fuels in canyon (on public and private
property)
• >30 feet of defensible space around most
homes, but <100 feet around many
• Steep grades and varied topography
• Building construction includes wood siding,
wooden decks, and fences that can act as fuses
from vegetation to homes
• Adjacency of some residential structures
• Some homes >5 miles from fire response could
result in slow response time
• Some gated dead-end roads
• Single lane, narrow roads
• Wood shake roofs present
• Propane tanks aboveground
• Number of wineries and CVAR
• Heavy population density
• Some homes have limited set-back from slope
Fires Within Polygon Based on Recent Fire History
• NONE
6.2 p. 272 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | C-7
EAST FOOTHILLS/MILPITAS
WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE COMMUNITIES
EAST FOOTHILLS/MILPITAS POLYGON SUMMARY
STATISTICS
Community Polygon Background
Community Polygon Name: East Foothills/Milpitas Total 2016 Score: 68 Rating: Moderate Building Density (Building Units per square mile): 639.21 Percentage of Wildfire Hazard: (lowest relative hazard (1) to highest relative hazard (6)) (based on 2023 desktop wildfire hazard assessment data):
1: 5.47%; 2: 22.11%; 3: 21.31%; 4: 23.71%; 5: 18.44%; 6: 8.95% Dominant Fuel Type
Grass Grass/Shrub Shrub Timber Understory Timber Litter GR2
Percent of Community by Modeled/Calculated Wildfire Risk Inputs Drive Time from Fire Station
0-5 mins: 35.91%
5-10 mins: 16.91%
10-15 mins: 4.67%
>15 mins: 42.50%
6.2 p. 273 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | C-8
1144 Survey Summary Highlights
Positive Attributes (Low Scores)
• Good fire response resources from San Jose
Fire Department and CAL FIRE
• Roadside fuel treatments in progress
• Large open space areas break up residential
areas
• Good yard hygiene for most homes, landscaped
yards
• Non-continuous light fuels
• Sparse population in more rural areas
• Grazing helps in fuel reduction in some areas
where appropriate
Negative Attributes (High Scores)
• Diverse WUI, from distinct interface with heavily
urban area to scattered residences in an
intermix
• Different planning needed for each type
• Scenic roadways may increase ignition
potential—ignition concerns related to Sierra
Road—fireworks etc.
• CVAR: Grand View Restaurant, Lick
Observatory, Copernicus Peak communications
site, Alum Rock Park
• >30 feet of defensible space around most
homes, but <100 feet around many
• Mix of construction types—building construction
includes wood siding, wooden decks, and
fences that can act as fuses from vegetation to
homes
• Wood shake roofs and older construction in
some areas
• Many dead-end spur roads
• Topographic concerns, rolling hills and some
steep slopes
• Grassland fuels that are highly dynamic and
impacted by seasonal climate fluctuations
• Flashy shrub fuels present on slopes below
homes
• Slow response times to some more remote
homes in the valley
• Improvements to road networks needed
• Car ignition potential is high concern
• No distinct neighborhood associations to use to
develop common interest for neighborhood
level interactions for Firewise or CERT
Fires Within Polygon Based on Recent Fire History
• Isabel Valley Ranch Fire, 1951
o Extends into Mt. Hamilton-San Antonne Valley
• Sheriff Fire, 1979
• Ford Road Fire, 1979
• Shea Fire,1997
o Extends into Henry W. Coe State Park
• Melech Fire, 1999
• Silver Fire, 2004
• Ranch Fire, 2011
• Sierra Fire, 2016
• Felipe Fire, 2017
• Lariat Fire, 2017
• Piercy Fire, 2021
6.2 p. 274 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | C-9
EAST GILROY
WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE COMMUNITIES
EAST GILROY POLYGON SUMMARY STATISTICS
Community Polygon Background
Community Polygon Name: East Gilroy Total 2016 Score: 72 Rating: High Building Density (Building Units per square mile): 21.14 Percentage of Wildfire Hazard: (lowest relative hazard (1) to highest relative hazard (6)) (based on 2023 desktop wildfire hazard assessment data):
1: 0.67%; 2: 6.57%; 3: 38.44%; 4: 21.40%; 5: 17.74%; 6: 15.18% Dominant Fuel Type
Grass Grass/Shrub Shrub Timber Understory Timber Litter GR2
Percent of Community by Modeled/Calculated Wildfire Risk Inputs Drive Time from Fire Station
0-5 mins: 2.34%
5-10 mins: 5.23%
10-15 mins: 6.64%
>15 mins: 85.78%
1144 Survey Summary Highlights
Positive Attributes (Low Scores)
• Generally good roads
• Good separation of adjacent structures
• Response: Station <5 miles from structure
Negative Attributes (High Scores)
• Some limited access roads to individual
properties
• Street signs are present, some are nonreflective
• Adjacent fuels: Moderate with high flammability
• Concerning topography around structure
• Non-combustible siding, combustible deck
• Both utilities aboveground
• Moderate history of fire occurrence and severe
weather
• Non-combustible sidings but combustible decks
present
6.2 p. 275 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | C-10
Fires Within Polygon Based on Recent Fire History
• Bollinger Ranch Fire, 1961
o Extends into Henry W. Coe State Park and east outside of the planning area • Wolfe Fire, 1980
• Squirrel Fire, 1989
• Redfern Fire, 2000
• Casa Fire, 2000
• Lick Fire, 2007
o Extends into Mt. Hamilton-San Antone Valley, Henry W. Coe State Park, and east outside of the planning area
• Bull Head Fire, 2008
• Pacheco Fire, 2009Bridal Fire, 2018
• Crews Fire, 2020
• SCU Lighting Complex Fire, 2020
o Extends into Mt. Hamilton-San Antone Valley, Henry W. Coe State Park, and outside of the planning area to the north and east
• Paseo Fire, 2021
6.2 p. 276 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | C-11
GILROY
WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE COMMUNITIES
GILROY POLYGON SUMMARY STATISTICS
Community Polygon Background
Community Polygon Name: Gilroy Total 2016 Score: 48 Rating: Low Building Density (Building Units per square mile): 410.56 Percentage of Wildfire Hazard: (lowest relative hazard (1) to highest relative hazard (6)) (based on 2023 desktop wildfire hazard assessment data):
1: 7.91%; 2: 62.31%; 3: 18.44%; 4: 7.14%; 5: 3.65%; 6: 0.55% Dominant Fuel Type
Grass Grass/Shrub Shrub Timber Understory Timber Litter Non-Burnable NB3
Percent of Community by Modeled/Calculated Wildfire Risk Inputs Drive Time from Fire Station
0-5 mins: 36.17%
5-10 mins: 46.68%
10-15 mins: 6.84%
>15 mins: 10.30%
1144 Survey Summary Highlights
Positive Attributes (Low Scores)
• Light fuels
• Open space: Henry Coe Range
• Rolling hills and less extreme grades
• Large lots and good separation
• Good defensible space around most homes,
some <100 feet
• Good access
• Maintained roads and plentiful turnaround
space
• Good signage
• Low fire occurrence
• Hydrants available but density is low
Negative Attributes (High Scores)
• Livestock evacuation concerns
• Gated properties could impede access to
emergency responders
• Mix of construction types—building construction
includes wood siding, wooden decks, and
fences that can act as fuses from vegetation to
homes
• CVAR: Farms, grazing, orchards, vineyards,
commercial property
• Some poorly rated roof materials
• Some homes >5 miles from organized fire
response
• Aboveground utilities
• Some oil and gas infrastructure
Fires Within Polygon Based on Recent Fire History
• NONE
6.2 p. 277 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | C-12
LEXINGTON HILLS
WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE COMMUNITIES
LEXINGTON HILLS POLYGON SUMMARY STATISTICS
The Lexington Hills polygon includes the following communities which were individually assessed in 2016:
• Chemeketa Park (131, Extreme), Aldercroft Heights (116, Extreme), Redwood Estates (93, High), Summit Road (88, High) and Call of the Wild.
The table below accounts for the entire polygon. For information on the individual sub-communities (Chemeketa Park, Aldercroft Heights, Redwood Estates, Summit Road, Call of the Wild), please see Annex 1- Chapter 1, and Lexington Hills CWPP (2009) for detailed analysis and recommendations.
Community Polygon Background
Community Polygon Name: Lexington Hills
Building Density (Building Units per square mile): 8.87 Percentage of Wildfire Hazard: (lowest relative hazard (1) to highest relative hazard (6)) (based on 2023 desktop wildfire hazard assessment data):
1: 1.43%; 2: 0.88%; 3: 6.17%; 4: 10.49%; 5: 18.67%; 6: 62.36% Dominant Fuel Type
Grass Grass/Shrub Shrub Timber Understory Timber Litter TU5
Percent of Community by Modeled/Calculated Wildfire Risk Inputs Drive Time from Fire Station
0-5 mins: 7.95%
5-10 mins: 12.78%
10-15 mins: 10.94%
>15 mins: 68.34%
Fires Within Polygon Based on Recent Fire History
• Austrian Gulch Fire, 1961
o Extends to Almaden Valley, Uvas Casa Loma, and south outside of the planning area • Lexington Hill Fire, 1985
o Extends to Uvas Casa Lomas and south outside of the planning area
6.2 p. 278 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | C-13
LOS ALTOS HILLS
WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE COMMUNITIES
LOS ALTOS HILLS POLYGON SUMMARY STATISTICS
Community Polygon Background
Community Polygon Name: Los Altos Hills Total 2016 Score: 90 Rating: High Building Density (Building Units per square mile): 290.12 Percentage of Wildfire Hazard: (lowest relative hazard (1) to highest relative hazard (6)) (based on 2023 desktop wildfire hazard assessment data):
1: 3.38%; 2: 19.78%; 3: 26.65%; 4: 27.28%; 5: 18.63%; 6: 4.28% Dominant Fuel Type
Grass Grass/Shrub Shrub Timber Understory Timber Litter TU5
Percent of Community by Modeled/Calculated Wildfire Risk Inputs Drive Time from Fire Station
0-5 mins: 44.23%
5-10 mins: 33.69%
10-15 mins: 1.77%
>15 mins: 20.31%
1144 Survey Summary Highlights
Positive Attributes (Low Scores)
• Los Altos Hills County Fire District jurisdiction
• Good separation of adjacent structures, larger
lot sizes
• New construction, 7A compliant
• Hydrants in most but not all areas
• Surfaced roads primarily
• Limited recent fire history
• Open space areas could serve as shelter-inplace in event of evacuation Negative Attributes (High Scores)
• Heavy concentration of eucalyptus trees—
treatment program available
• >30 feet of defensible space around most
homes, but <100 feet around many
• Some areas have poor yard hygiene
• Mix of construction types—building construction
includes wood siding, wooden decks, and fences
that can act as fuses from vegetation to homes
• Single-lane, narrow roads in some areas
• Some private roads with poor road maintenance
and limited turnaround for fire apparatuses
• Narrow gates
• Many old structures with wood shake roofs/siding
• Heavy fuel loading adjacent to homes as a result
of thick underbrush and continuity of tree crowns
• CVAR: Farm, retirement homes, open space
areas, community horse barn
Fires Within Polygon Based on Recent Fire History
• NONE
6.2 p. 279 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | C-14
LOS GATOS
WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE COMMUNITIES
LOS GATOS POLYGON SUMMARY STATISTICS
Community Polygon Background
Community Polygon Name: Los Gatos Total 2016 Score: 87 Rating: High Building Density (Building Units per square mile): 476.29 Percentage of Wildfire Hazard: (lowest relative hazard (1) to highest relative hazard (6)) (based on 2023 desktop wildfire hazard assessment data):
1: 2.08%; 2: 18.78%; 3: 16.11%; 4: 17.45%; 5: 30.09%; 6: 15.40% Dominant Fuel Type
Grass Grass/Shrub Shrub Timber Understory Timber Litter TU5
Percent of Community by Modeled/Calculated Wildfire Risk Inputs Drive Time from Fire Station
0-5 mins: 40.95%
5-10 mins: 34.84%
10-15 mins: 8.93%
>15 mins: 15.28%
1144 Survey Summary Highlights
Positive Attributes (Low Scores)
• Many newer 7A compliant homes
• Good signposting, though some non-reflective
• Less than 5 miles from fire response
• Good yard hygiene for most homes, landscaped
yards
• Many larger lots with good separation between
structures
• Number of open space areas to break continuity
• Good visible house markers
• Reasonable water supply via hydrants but low
pressure in some areas
• HOAs for some subdivisions that can facilitate
community organizing
Negative Attributes (High Scores)
• Lots of new development
• Cultural Values at risk
• Very narrow, steep, and windy roads and
driveways
• No turnaround on many roads and driveways
• Heavy fuel loading adjacent to homes as a
result of thick underbrush and continuity of tree
crowns
• Topographic concerns, steep grades
• Poor roof materials, some wood shake
• >30 feet of defensible space around most
homes, but <100 feet around many
• Mix of construction types—building construction
includes wood siding, wooden decks, and
fences that can act as fuses from vegetation to
homes
• Narrow or no staging area for apparatuses,
would block evacuation routes
• Many dead ends spurs
Fires Within Polygon Based on Recent Fire History
• NONE
6.2 p. 280 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | C-15
MONTE SERENO
WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE COMMUNITIES
MONTE SERENO POLYGON SUMMARY STATISTICS
Community Polygon Background
Community Polygon Name: Monte Sereno Total 2016 Score: 70 Rating: High Building Density (Building Units per square mile): 10.50 Percentage of Wildfire Hazard: (lowest relative hazard (1) to highest relative hazard (6)) (based on 2023 desktop wildfire hazard assessment data):
1: 1.60%; 2: 13.52%; 3: 19.53%; 4: 23.89%; 5: 28.51%; 6: 12.95% Dominant Fuel Type
Grass Grass/Shrub Shrub Timber Understory Timber Litter TU5
Percent of Community by Modeled/Calculated Wildfire Risk Inputs Drive Time from Fire Station
0-5 mins: 74.86%
5-10 mins: 17.18%
10-15 mins: 0.00%
>15 mins: 7.97%
1144 Survey Summary Highlights
Positive Attributes (Low Scores)
• New construction, 7A compliant
• Property owners have implemented some
defensible space work and fuel reduction
• Good access on lower slopes
• Good proximity to emergency responders
• Well-maintained, surfaced roads
• Irrigated lawns and landscaping
• Reasonable roofing construction
• Under Santa Clara County Fire Department
jurisdiction
Negative Attributes (High Scores)
• One way in and out
• Long windy road with steep grade
• Confusing road layout
• Limited turnaround space for fire access and/or
narrow driveways
• Heavy fuel loading adjacent to homes as a
result of thick underbrush and continuity of tree
crowns
• Reasonable water supply via hydrants in lower
elevation areas, but hydrants needed at higher
elevations; encourage water tanks outside of
urban service area
• Building construction includes wood siding,
wooden decks, and fences that can act as fuses
from vegetation to homes
• Some homes have limited setback from slope
• >30 feet of defensible space around most
homes, but <100 feet around many
Fires Within Polygon Based on Recent Fire History
• NONE
6.2 p. 281 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | C-16
MORGAN HILL
WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE COMMUNITIES
MORGAN HILL POLYGON SUMMARY STATISTICS
Community Polygon Background
Community Polygon Name: Morgan Hill Total 2016 Score: 79 Rating: High Building Density (Building Units per square mile): 431.30 Percentage of Wildfire Hazard: (lowest relative hazard (1) to highest relative hazard (6)) (based on 2023 desktop wildfire hazard assessment data):
1: 7.94%; 2: 20.22%; 3: 29.50%; 4: 21.20%; 5: 14.78%; 6: 6.35% Dominant Fuel Type
Grass Grass/Shrub Shrub Timber Understory Timber Litter GR2
Percent of Community by Modeled/Calculated Wildfire Risk Inputs Drive Time from Fire Station
0-5 mins: 47.58%
5-10 mins: 20.60%
10-15 mins: 0.23%
>15 mins: 31.59%
6.2 p. 282 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | C-17
1144 Survey Summary Highlights
Positive Attributes (Low Scores)
• Firewise sign
• Active community in Santa Clara County Fire
Safe
• Council and fire prevention activities
• Open space areas break continuity and active
fuel programs
• Surfaced and maintained roads
• Mostly good yard hygiene and maintenance of
property
• Morgan Hills City Water hydrant system
• Good signage, some non-reflective
• Weed abatement projects in effect
• HOA assists with community organizing
• Majority belowground utilities
Negative Attributes (High Scores)
• Dry flammable vegetation type adjacent to
homes and below homes on slopes
• Popular with visitors, potential large numbers
during summer months
• One road in and out, evacuation concerns
• Narrow roads within residential areas may have
limited turnaround space
• Small lots, limited separation between
structures
• Some steep driveways
• Some dead-end spurs
• Some wood shake roofs
• One Engine Company close, but other
resources are at some distance
• Topographic concerns—significant slope and
limited setback for many homes
• Single-access subdivisions
• >30 feet of defensible space around most
homes, but <100 feet around many due to small
lots
• Mix of construction types— building
construction includes wood siding, wooden
decks, and fences that can act as fuses from
vegetation to homes
Fires Within Polygon Based on Recent Fire History
• Paseo Fire, 2021
6.2 p. 283 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | C-18
MT. HAMILTON-SAN ANTONE VALLEY
WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE COMMUNITIES
MT. HAMILTON-SAN ANTONE VALLEY POLYGON
SUMMARY STATISTICS
Community Polygon Background
Community Polygon Name: Mt. Hamilton-San Antonne Valley Total 2016 Score: 84 Rating: High Building Density (Building Units per square mile): 1.11 Percentage of Wildfire Hazard: (lowest relative hazard (1) to highest relative hazard (6)) (based on 2023 desktop wildfire hazard assessment data):
1: 0.74%; 2: 0.53%; 3: 10.53%; 4: 20.55%; 5: 33.45%; 6: 34.21% Dominant Fuel Type
Grass Grass/Shrub Shrub Timber Understory Timber Litter GR2
Percent of Community by Modeled/Calculated Wildfire Risk Inputs Drive Time from Fire Station
0-5 mins: 0.56%
5-10 mins: 0.72%
10-15 mins: 1.23%
>15 mins: 97.49%
1144 Survey Summary Highlights
Positive Attributes (Low Scores)
• Light adjacent fuels
• Good separation between adjacent structures
Negative Attributes (High Scores)
• Narrow road width
• Two roads in and out but access still a concern
• Surfaced road with greater than 5% grade
• Poor fire access, dead-end spurs, lack
turnaround
• Street signs are present, some are nonreflective
• Defensible space: >70 feet to <100 feet around
structure
• High concern topography
• Severe fire weather potential
• History of fire occurrence
• Building not set back >30 feet to slope
• Response: Station >5 miles from structure
• No internal sprinklers within construction
• Aboveground utilities
6.2 p. 284 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | C-19
Fires Within Polygon Based on Recent Fire History
• Trout Creek Fire, 1950
• Mount Stakes Fire, 1950
o Extends east outside of the planning area
• Isabell Valley Ranch Fire, 1951
• Menzel Fire, 1952
• Saunders Fire, 1952
• Bollinger Ridge Fire, 1961
o Extends into Henry W. Coe State Park, East Gilroy, and east outside of the planning area • Beauregard Fire, 1963
• Shanti Ashrama Fire, 1952
o Extends south outside the planning area
• Shearer Fire, 1954
• Isabel Burn Escape Fire, 1954
• Fletcher Fire, 1955
• Venable Fire, 1955
• N3 Cattle Co. Fire #2, 1971
• N3 Cattle Co. Fire #3, 1971
• Sweeny Fire, 1982
• Nunes Fire, 1984
• Devil Fire, 1985
o Extends north outside of the planning area
• Long Gulch Fire, 1990
• Mines Road Fire, 1996
• Kincaid Fire, 2003
• Kincaid Fire, 2004
• San Antone Fire, 2004
• Canyon Fire, 2006
o Extends east outside of the planning area
• Ledeit Fire, 2008
• Hamilton Fire, 2003
o Extends north outside of the planning area
• Lick Fire, 2007
o Extends into Henry W. Coe State Park, East Gilroy, and east outside of the planning area • SCU Lightning Complex Fire, 2020
o Extends into East Gilroy, Henry W. Coe State Park, and east outside of the planning area
6.2 p. 285 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | C-20
PALO ALTO
WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE COMMUNITIES
PALO ALTO POLYGON SUMMARY STATISTICS
Community Polygon Background
Community Polygon Name: Palo Alto Total 2016 Score: 95 Rating: High Building Density (Building Units per square mile): 17.89 Percentage of Wildfire Hazard: (lowest relative hazard (1) to highest relative hazard (6)) (based on 2023 desktop wildfire hazard assessment data):
1: 0.37%; 2: 1.77%; 3: 15.53%; 4: 22.68%; 5: 38.49%; 6: 21.16% Dominant Fuel Type
Grass Grass/Shrub Shrub Timber Understory Timber Litter TU1
Percent of Community by Modeled/Calculated Wildfire Risk Inputs Drive Time from Fire Station
0-5 mins: 0.92%
5-10 mins: 2.93%
10-15 mins: 7.49%
>15 mins: 88.66%
1144 Survey Summary Highlights
Positive Attributes (Low Scores)
• Surfaced roads and adequate width and
turnaround
• Low slope in most areas, some steep sections
• Adjacent wildland to west and north are grass
and managed every year by the City of Palo Alto
• Mixed construction—stucco and wood
• Large lot size reducing adjacency issues
• Adequate water supply via hydrants
• Organized HOA to deliver strong safety message
and take action
• Good visible house markers
• Well signposted
• Irrigated lawns and landscaping
• New construction, 7A compliant
• Most homes have Class A roofs
• Community that is active in Santa Clara County
• Fire Safe Council
Negative Attributes (High Scores)
• Landscaping concerns due to density of thick
junipers and pines in close proximity to homes
• Wildlands to the south are heavy untreated
brush
• Power lines aboveground
• Homes old enough that there is no
requirement for interior sprinklers
• Older homes with single-pane windows prone
to breaking in wildfire
• Presence of some wood shake roofs put
homes and neighborhoods at risk
Fires Within Polygon Based on Recent Fire History
• NONE
6.2 p. 286 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | C-21
SARATOGA HILLS
WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE COMMUNITIES
SARATOGA HILLS POLYGON SUMMARY STATISTICS
Community Polygon Background
Community Polygon Name: Saratoga Hills Total 2016 Score: 90 Rating: High Building Density (Building Units per square mile): 120.15 Percentage of Wildfire Hazard: (lowest relative hazard (1) to highest relative hazard (6)) (based on 2023 desktop wildfire hazard assessment data):
1: 1.14%; 2: 4.99%; 3: 6.36%; 4: 15.20%; 5: 35.45%; 6: 36.86% Dominant Fuel Type
Grass Grass/Shrub Shrub Timber Understory Timber Litter TU5
Percent of Community by Modeled/Calculated Wildfire Risk Inputs Drive Time from Fire Station
0-5 mins: 8.28%
5-10 mins: 16.80%
10-15 mins: 6.48%
>15 mins: 68.44%
1144 Survey Summary Highlights
Positive Attributes (Low Scores)
• Santa Clara County fire water resources
are good except for any Lexington Hills
commuters
• Surfaced road with greater than 5% grade
• Low fire weather potential
• Low fire occurrence history
• Large building lots with good separation
Negative Attributes (High Scores)
• Coyote brush has encroached on savannas
• Two or more roads in and out but access still concern • Narrow road width
• Poor fire access, dead end road spurs, lack of
turnaround
• Street signs are present, some non-reflective
• Defensible space: >30 feet to <70 feet around
structure
• Adjacent fuels: Medium
• High concern topography
• Non-combustible siding/combustible deck
• Building set back <30 feet to slope
• Water: Available via hydrants, some pressure issues
• Response: Station >5 miles from structure
• Internal sprinklers: Some new homes (7A compliant)
• Utilities: One aboveground, one belowground
Fires Within Polygon Based on Recent Fire History
• Stevens Fire, 2007
6.2 p. 287 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | C-22
STANFORD
WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE COMMUNITIES
STANFORD POLYGON SUMMARY STATISTICS
Community Polygon Background
Community Polygon Name: Stanford Total 2016 Score: 58 Rating: Moderate Building Density (Building Units per square mile): 79.17 Percentage of Wildfire Hazard: (lowest relative hazard (1) to highest relative hazard (6)) (based on 2023 desktop wildfire hazard assessment data):
1: 4.80%; 2: 42.77%; 3: 37.26%; 4: 12.74%; 5: 2.34%; 6: 0.10% Dominant Fuel Type
Grass Grass/Shrub Shrub Timber Understory Timber Litter GR2
Percent of Community by Modeled/Calculated Wildfire Risk Inputs Drive Time from Fire Station
0-5 mins: 21.17%
5-10 mins: 78.77%
10-15 mins: 0.00%
>15 mins: 0.07%
1144 Survey Summary Highlights
Positive Attributes (Low Scores)
• Adjacent fuels are light
• Surfaced roads and adequate width and
turnaround
• Low slope in most areas, some steep sections
• Adjacent wildland to west and north are
maintained grasslands
• Mixed construction—stucco and wood
• Large lot size reducing adjacency issues
• Adequate water supply via hydrants
• Organized HOA to deliver strong safety
message and take action
• Good visible house markers
• Well signposted
• Irrigated lawns and landscaping
• New construction, 7A compliant
• Most homes have Class A roofs
Negative Attributes (High Scores)
• >30 feet of defensible space around most
homes, but <100 feet around many
• Landscaping has some junipers and pines but
lower levels than adjacent Palo Alto
• Power lines are aboveground
• Homes old enough that there is no requirement
for interior sprinklers
• Older homes with single-pane windows prone to
breaking in wildfire
• Presence of some wood shake roofs put homes
and neighborhoods at risk
Fires Within Polygon Based on Recent Fire History
• NONE
6.2 p. 288 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | C-23
UVAS CASA LOMA
WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE COMMUNITIES
UVAS CASA LOMA POLYGON SUMMARY STATISTICS
Community Polygon Background
Community Polygon Name: Uvas Casa Loma Total 2016 Score: 88 Rating: High Building Density (Building Units per square mile): 131.47 Percentage of Wildfire Hazard: (lowest relative hazard (1) to highest relative hazard (6)) (based on 2023 desktop wildfire hazard assessment data):
1: 1.69%; 2: 2.64%; 3: 5.61%; 4: 18.59%; 5: 26.18%; 6: 45.28% Dominant Fuel Type
Grass Grass/Shrub Shrub Timber Understory Timber Litter TU1
Percent of Community by Modeled/Calculated Wildfire Risk Inputs Drive Time from Fire Station
0-5 mins: 10.82%
5-10 mins: 21.74%
10-15 mins: 11.59%
>15 mins: 55.84%
1144 Survey Summary Highlights
Positive Attributes (Low Scores)
• Good separation of structures
Negative Attributes (High Scores)
• One road in and out
• Narrow road width poor fire access, dead-end
spurs, lack turnaround
• Unsurfaced road with greater than 5% grade
• Street signs are present, some are nonreflective
• Adjacent fuels: Moderate with high flammability
• Defensible space: >30 feet and <70 feet around
structure
• Defensible space: >30 feet and <70 feet around
structure
• Topography within 300 feet of structure: 41%
• Topographic features: High concern
• History of high fire occurrence: Moderate
• Severe fire weather potential: Moderate
• Building set back less than 30 feet from slope
• Response station >5 miles from structure
• Internal sprinklers: For new build properties only
• Utilities are both aboveground
6.2 p. 289 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | C-24
Fires Within Polygon Based on Recent Fire History
• Austrian Gulch Fire, 1961
o Extends into Almaden Valley, Lexington Hills, and south beyond the planning area • Uvas Fire, 1988
• Dahlberg Fire, 1989
• Dunne Fire, 1985
• Hayes Fire, 1985
• Henry W. Coe State Park Fire, 1989
• Redwood Retreat Fire, 1997
• Croy Fire, 2002
• White Hurst Fire, 2008
o Extends into West Gilroy
• Hummingbird Fire, 2008
• Summit Fire, 2008
o Extends south outside of the planning area
• Loma Fire, 2016
o Extends into Lexington Hills and Almaden Valley
6.2 p. 290 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | C-25
WEST GILROY
WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE COMMUNITIES
WEST GILROY POLYGON SUMMARY STATISTICS
Community Polygon Background
Community Polygon Name: West Gilroy Total 2016 Score: 88 Rating: High Building Density (Building Units per square mile): 81.95 Percentage of Wildfire Hazard: (lowest relative hazard (1) to highest relative hazard (6)) (based on 2023 desktop wildfire hazard assessment data):
1: 1.38%; 2: 2.92%; 3: 13.94%; 4: 24.26%; 5: 25.90%; 6: 31.60% Dominant Fuel Type
Grass Grass/Shrub Shrub Timber Understory Timber Litter GR2
Percent of Community by Modeled/Calculated Wildfire Risk Inputs Drive Time from Fire Station
0-5 mins: 5.80%
5-10 mins: 9.66%
10-15 mins: 1.94%
>15 mins: 82.60%
1144 Survey Summary Highlights
Positive Attributes (Low Scores)
• Good separation of adjacent structures
Negative Attributes (High Scores)
• One road in and out
• Narrow road width
• Poor fire access, dead-end spurs, lack
turnaround
• Street signs are present, some are nonreflective
• Adjacent fuels: Moderate with high flammability
• Defensible space: >30 feet and <70 feet around
structure
• High concern topography surrounding
structures
• Moderate history of severe weather and fire
• Non-combustible siding, combustible deck
• Water unavailable
• Response: Station >5 miles from structure
• Internal sprinklers: Only for new build properties
• Utilities both aboveground
6.2 p. 291 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | C-26
Fires Within Polygon Based on Recent Fire History
• Rocha VMP Escape #2 Fire, 1984
o Extends south outside of the planning area
• White Hurst Fire, 2008
o Extends into Uvas Casa Loma
• Castro Valley Fire, 2017
• Bally Fire, 2017
6.2 p. 292 of 557
APPENDIX D:
Tukman Geospatial Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, and
San Mateo County Wildfire Risk to Structures and
Classified Wildfire Hazard Maps for Fire Prevention Planning
6.2 p. 293 of 557
This page intentionally left blank.
6.2 p. 294 of 557
Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, and San Mateo County
Wildfire Risk to Structures and
Classified Wildfire Hazard Maps for
Fire Prevention Planning
Final Report
Prepared by Tukman Geospatial, Digital Mapping Solutions, Wildland Res Mgt & the Santa Cruz Mountains Stewardship Network
Suggested citation: 2020 Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, San Mateo County Wildfire Risk to Structures and Classified Wildfire Hazard Maps for Fire Prevention Planning, Santa Cruz Mountains Stewardship Network, et al.
November 7, 2022
6.2 p. 295 of 557
2 | Page
Contents
1. Introduction............................................................................................................................. 6
2. Definitions – Hazard versus Risk.............................................................................................. 6
3. Wildfire Risk and Hazard Data – Intended Uses...................................................................... 9
4. Data Limitations..................................................................................................................... 10
4.1. Time/date limitations of foundational data................................................................... 10
4.2. Example misapplications................................................................................................ 10
4.3. Value of field verification/validation.............................................................................. 10
4.4. Limits of fire behavior modeling .................................................................................... 11
4.5. Building footprint errors of omission and commission.................................................. 12
4.6. Houses versus warehouses and the inability to assess structure type.......................... 12
4.7. Areas that burned in the 2020 CZU and SCU lightning complex fires ........................... 12
4.8. Accuracy Assessment..................................................................................................... 13
5. Mapping Methods................................................................................................................. 14
5.1. Methods development and community engagement................................................... 14
5.2. Overview ........................................................................................................................ 16
5.3. Hazard mapping methods.............................................................................................. 16
5.4. Hazard mapping geospatial dataset details................................................................... 22 Flame length ........................................................................................................... 22 Flame length – processing steps............................................................................. 22 Extreme fire weather potential .............................................................................. 26 Extreme fire weather potential – processing steps................................................ 26 Ember load index .................................................................................................... 28 Ember load index – processing steps...................................................................... 28 Suppression difficulty index.................................................................................... 30 Suppression difficulty index – processing steps..................................................... 30 Dense urban without wildland vegetation ............................................................. 32 Dense urban without wildland vegetation – processing steps........................... 32 Human development proximity .......................................................................... 35
6.2 p. 296 of 557
3 | Page
Human development proximity – processing steps ........................................... 35 Transmission line proximity ................................................................................ 37 Transmission line proximity – processing steps.................................................. 37 Distribution line proximity .................................................................................. 39 Distribution line proximity – processing steps.................................................... 39 Historic ignitions.................................................................................................. 41 Historic ignitions – processing steps................................................................... 41
5.5. Combining wildfire hazard with structure density to create the Wildfire Risk to Structures map.......................................................................................................................... 43 Structure data ......................................................................................................... 43 Combining structures and hazard into hexagons................................................... 43
5.6. Spatial data attributes – risk and hazard datasets......................................................... 48
6. Results and Key Findings ....................................................................................................... 51
7. Conclusions and Next Steps................................................................................................... 51
8. Comparison to Other Assessments....................................................................................... 52
9. Case Study: City of Santa Cruz Watershed Lands Example Risk Assessment........................ 59
10. Acknowledgements............................................................................................................... 62
11. References............................................................................................................................. 63
12. Disclaimer.............................................................................................................................. 65
LIST OF TABLES
Stakeholder workshops to support three-county risk mapping............................................15 Classification ranges for the final classified hazard raster (hazard version 10) ....................20 Classes for flame length ........................................................................................................23 Links to datasheets for impervious surface maps of the three-county area ........................35 Classification of raw distance to impervious features to classified human development proximity ...............................................................................................................................35 Classification of raw distance to transmission lines to classified transmission line proximity ..............................................................................................................................................37
6.2 p. 297 of 557
4 | Page
Classification of raw distance to impervious features to classified distribution line proximity ..............................................................................................................................................39 Structure density breaks assigned to each hexagon to characterize structure density within the hexagon and structure density in the hexagon’s 1-mile buffer......................................45 Wildfire Risk to Structures attributes....................................................................................49 Classified Wildfire Hazard raster attributes..........................................................................50 Hazard within 500 feet of water pipelines............................................................................61 Hazard within source watersheds.........................................................................................61 Mean Classified Wildfire Hazard for 1,000-foot buffers of facility centroids........................61
LIST OF FIGURES
Santa Cruz – Santa Clara – San Mateo Wildfire Risk to Structures .........................................8 2020 CZU and SCU lightning complex fires ...........................................................................14 Three county wildfire classified wildfire hazard and Wildfire Risk to Structures logic model ..............................................................................................................................................17 Theoretical maximum pixel value for the wildfire hazard index...........................................18 Geographic areas (roughly following pyromes and ecoregion boundaries) used for assigning relative hazard class..............................................................................................................19 Classified Wildfire Hazard for the three-county area (version 11 Hazard) ...........................21 Parameters for FLAMMAP flame length predictions ............................................................24 Modeled flame length for the three-county area .................................................................25 Workflow for creating extreme fire weather potential raster..............................................26 Classified extreme fire weather potential.............................................................................27 Ember load index for the-three county area.........................................................................29 Suppression Difficulty for the-three county area..................................................................31 Dense urban without wildland vegetation for the three-county area..................................33
6.2 p. 298 of 557
5 | Page
Workflow for creating dense urban without wildland vegetation for the three-county area ..............................................................................................................................................34 Human development proximity for the three-county area ..................................................36 Transmission line proximity for the three-county area ........................................................38 Distribution line proximity for the three-county area ..........................................................40 Classified historic ignitions > 5 acres density map for the three-county area ......................42 Conceptual process of combining wildfire hazard with structure density for the threecounty area to create the Wildfire Risk to Structures map...................................................44 Example hexagon, the 1-mile hexagon buffer, and attributes of the wildfire risk to structure map .......................................................................................................................................47 CWH (left) v. SC CWPP (right) in the Lexington Hills Community south of Los Gatos along Highway 17. Green represents low hazard/risk and red represents the highest hazard/risk. ..............................................................................................................................................53 CWH (left) v. SC CWPP (right) in the area east of Gilroy. Green represents low hazard/risk and red represents the highest hazard/risk..........................................................................54 CWH (left) v. SC CWPP (right) in the area in the Saratoga Hills. Green represents low hazard/risk and red represents the highest hazard/risk.......................................................54 CWH (left) v. SC CWPP (right) in the area in the Monte Sereno and Los Gatos area. Green represents low hazard/risk and red represents the highest hazard/risk..............................55 CWH (left) v. SC CWPP (right) in the area in the Milpitas and Arroyo De Los Coches area.
Green represents low hazard/risk and red represents the highest hazard/risk...................56 CWH (left) v. SC CWPP (right) in the area in the Aldercroft Creek area. Green represents low hazard/risk and red represents the highest hazard/risk................................................57 CWH (left) v. SC CWPP (right) in the area in the Anderson Lake area. Green represents low hazard/risk and red represents the highest hazard/risk.......................................................58 City of Santa Cruz water supply infrastructure in four panes. See text for more details the contents of the panes and refer to the legend at bottom of the map. ................................60
6.2 p. 299 of 557
6 | Page
1. Introduction
Santa Cruz, Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties are home to a wide variety of land cover, ranging from moist coastal headlands to very dense urban areas, to dry, interior forest and shrublands, to intensive agriculture, to the redwood forest of the Santa Cruz Mountains. The pattern of human development in these counties has been both concentrated in urban areas and dispersed across the landscape, with rural communities and homes surrounded by wildlands. This pattern of development results in the three-county area facing significant challenges to wildfire response and fire prevention planning. The potential for wildfire requires land managers, public officials, and Fire Safe Councils to seek decision-support tools for managing landscapes, prioritizing fuel treatments, and planning evacuation routes. Because it is neither economically nor ecologically viable to treat hazardous fuels across the entire landscape, the purpose of this project was to reduce negative impacts from wildfires by providing a suite of fine-scale wildfire hazard and risk spatial data layers to support efficient and effective wildfire risk planning throughout each county.
The primary deliverable and subject of this document is the Wildfire Risk to Structures map for the three-county area (see Figure 1, or here for larger format PDF maps). The Wildfire Risk to Structures map provides a spatially explicit ranking for 10-acre hexagons, assigning each hexagon with a ranking for wildfire hazard and a ranking for housing density. From a risk to structures perspective hexagons with high housing density and high wildfire hazard are of greatest concern. The map displayed in Figure 1 shows only hexagons that have greater than or equal to ‘Moderate’ hazard and at least one structure. These areas represent approximately 17% of the three-county area. The rationale for including moderate hazard and above is to focus on structures with the most risk and is explained further in section 6. Note that the GIS deliverables for the Wildfire Risk to Structures can be symbolized to show all levels of hazard (including low hazard), even though Figure 1 only shows moderate hazard and above.
In addition to the Wildfire Risk to Structures polygon map, a second project deliverable is the 6- class, 20-meter Classified Wildfire Hazard raster. Methods for development of both the Wildfire Risk to Structures polygons map and the Classified Wildfire Hazard raster are the main subject of this report.
For links to download the Classified Wildfire Hazard and Wildfire Risk to Structures data, open this product datasheet or go to pacificvegmap.org.
2. Definitions – Hazard versus Risk
The term “hazard” in the context of this work is the potential for hazardous wildfire. Wildfire hazard can be described qualitatively as the fire environment – fuel, weather, topography, and ignitions – and quantitatively by two characteristics (Scott et al, 2013):
6.2 p. 300 of 557
7 | Page
1. the probability of a fire occurring at a specific point during a specified time period
2. the expected distribution of intensity
Hazard combines fuel characteristics such as the volume, arrangement, moisture, and sizes of the fuels, all of which contribute to how the fire will burn. Information about the fuels is combined with physical landscape characteristics such as weather, topography, and the distribution of ignitions across the landscape. The logic model for wildfire hazard as implemented for this project is shown in Figure 3.
Wildfire hazard can be very high, but if no resources or assets are exposed to the hazard, there is no risk. Wildfire risk is the potential for realization of adverse consequences to valued resources or assets. Wildfire risk considers not only the potential for hazardous wildfire, but the values exposed to the hazard. Some risk assessments consider all relevant all types of values, including socio-economic, along with ecological elements. For the purposes of this project, the “risk” aspect of the model applied to one value: structures. As such, the risk assessment portion of this work is only relevant for wildfire risk to structures, not wildfire risk to other resources and assets. It is important to point out that the structure data used for this work is the best available, but it does have errors and limitations. More details about the structure data are provided in sections 4.5-4.7.
6.2 p. 301 of 557
8 | Page
Santa Cruz – Santa Clara – San Mateo Wildfire Risk to Structures
6.2 p. 302 of 557
9 | Page
This report is organized into the following sections:
• Section 3. Wildfire Risk and Hazard Data Intended Uses • Section 4. Data Limitations
• Section 5. Mapping Methods
• Section 6. Results and Key Findings
• Section 7. Conclusions and Next Steps
• Section 8. Comparison to Other Assessments
• Section 9. Case Study – Santa Cruz Water Risk Assessment • Section 10. Acknowledgements
• Section 11. References
• Section 12. Disclaimer
3. Wildfire Risk and Hazard Data – Intended Uses
The Wildfire Risk to Structures and Classified Wildfire Hazard data products are designed for land managers and fire responders who are interested in relative rankings of wildfire risk and wildfire hazard. The risk and hazard map products are modeled outputs based on the best available data. As such, they provide an interpretation of risk and hazard that is based on a set of input variables and decision rules (see Methods Section 5 below). Though we are using the best available input data there are many approaches to modeling wildfire risk and hazard, all of which are both complex and imperfect, and these data should be used with this in mind.
These data are meant to be used as reference datasets for fire prevention planning purposes.
Appropriate uses for Wildfire Risk to Structures dataset is to help to identify areas that have structures at risk from wildfire. This information can be used for prioritizing fuel reduction projects, for planning suppression activities, and for targeting areas for activities to increase ignition resistance of structures. While outside the scope of work for this project, the Classified Wildfire Hazard raster can also be used to assess the risk to other values (such as evacuation routes, sensitive natural or cultural resources, and water storage/delivery infrastructure). See Section 9 for an example of such an application.
These maps and GIS products are screening level products created from remotely sensed data and modeling. On the ground knowledge and local expertise (where available) should take precedence over these data products for the detailed work of site-specific planning and implementation of fuel reduction projects in the three-county area.
6.2 p. 303 of 557
10 | Page
4. Data Limitations
4.1. Time/date limitations of foundational data
The Wildfire Risk to Structures and Classified Wildfire Hazard data products represent the state of the landscape when the foundational input datasets were created (see section 5.4 for a discussion of these datasets). These input datasets generally represent the state of the landscape in mid-2020. With this in mind, it is important to note several temporal constraints and limitations of the data. These are:
• When using the Wildfire Risk to Structures map in the future, it is important to note that changes to the landscape post summer-2020 will not be reflected in the risk maps.
Hence, subsequent changes to wildfire risk resulting from wildfire, forest thinning, prescribed burning, construction, property improvements, land cover change, or other events will not be reflected in this data product.
• Building footprints and housing density represent the state of the landscape just before the CZU and SCU Lightning Complex Fires burned in 2020. As such, structures within these footprints that exist in the datasets used for the risk map may no longer exist.
4.2. Example misapplications
The three-county Wildfire Risk to Structures map and the Classified Wildfire Hazard data products are models meant to approximate real-world conditions. Users should keep in mind the adage ‘All models are wrong, but some models are useful.’ In the relative risk and hazard maps presented here, there are almost surely structures that are mapped as very high risk and high hazard that will not burn during the next 100 years. Likewise, there are structures mapped as low risk that will burn in the next 10 years. With that in mind, an inappropriate use of the risk maps would be to try and identify with 100% certainty structures or areas that will or will not burn.
4.3. Value of field verification/validation
A number of input datasets were used to create the Wildfire Risk to Structures and Classified Wildfire Hazard data products (these are discussed in section 5.4). These input datasets are the best available datasets for the things that they represent. Despite this, the input datasets are spatial approximations of the things that they represent and have errors, inaccuracies, and varying levels of resolution and precision. In addition, there are variables and datasets that could be useful but were excluded from the logic model and from the hazard mapping because spatial data for them did not exist. For example, at the time of this work no spatial dataset representing home ignition resistance existed. Consequently, this variable, which is an important variable for Wildfire Risk to Structures mapping, was not included in the threecounty Wildfire Risk to Structures map.
6.2 p. 304 of 557
11 | Page
Because the input datasets used to create the Wildfire Risk to Structures and Classified Wildfire Hazard data products aren’t perfectly accurate, always highly resolute, or totally comprehensive, there will always be a need to assess risk on the ground at a much finer scale than is reasonable or possible in a three-county (or even single-county) mapping exercise.
4.4. Limits of fire behavior modeling
One of the most important inputs to the three-county Wildfire Risk to Structures map was modeled flame length. Modeled (predicted) flame length is proxy for fire severity – the longer/taller the modeled flame length the more severe the wildfire in a given area. Flame length was predicted using fire behavior modeling software called FLAMMAP. For FLAMMAP to provide spatial predictions of flame length (and other indices such as rate of spread, heat per unit area, fireline intensity, etc.), it requires a landscape file which is composed of a fuelscape (a map of surface fuels) along with elevation, slope, aspect, canopy height, canopy density, canopy base height, and canopy bulk density. Other required inputs include information about dead and live fuel moisture, and an initial wind speed and direction for the simulation.
FLAMMAP calculates potential fire behavior based on the inputs listed above. The FLAMMAP software uses the same surface fire spread and crown fire initiation/spread equations (or models) as all the standard fire behavior software packages available today (Rothermel 1972, Van Wagner 1977, Albini 1979, and others). FLAMMAP applies these fire behavior prediction models to each pixel independently, regardless of potential activity in adjacent pixels. This allows for a comparison across a landscape in which the environmental conditions are constant, and the only difference is the fuel and surface characteristics.
Though this type of analysis can provide valuable information for planning, FLAMMAP has limitations. Primary is the limiting factor of fuel models and the equations themselves. Not all fuel on the landscape is represented in the surface fuel models nor is all that fuel available to burn in any given scenario. For example, if the predicted flame length for any given pixel is below the canopy base height assigned to that pixel, then the crown fire initiation model is not applied. Likewise, if the heat per unit area for a given pixel does not reach the crown fire spread threshold, the crown fire spread model will not be initiated. While in the model, the conditions may be true that a fire doesn’t get “hot” enough to predict crown fire conditions, we know from experience that in reality, these conditions have been met and may do so again in the future.
Second among limitations is the use of fuel models, which themselves are stylized representation of biomass. There is a finite set of models to choose from, and there are conditions not represented by the model.
6.2 p. 305 of 557
12 | Page
4.5. Building footprint errors of omission and commission Of all the inputs to the three-county Wildfire Risk to Structures map, the building footprints input is perhaps the most important since it identifies the location of structures and structures are overlaid with the Classified Wildfire Hazard data to assess their risk. Though the building footprints are the best available data representing structure locations and they are derived from high density lidar data, they still have limitations. These limitations are as follows:
• Structures occluded by overhanging vegetation are sometime omitted. Buildings with trees, branches, or other vegetation that partially or totally obscure their view from above are sometime missed from the algorithms that were used to extract building features from the lidar point cloud. These homes exist on the ground, but do not exist in the risk mapping. Errors of building omissions are less common in Santa Clara County, where the County paid extra for human interpreters to manually improve the County’s lidar derived building footprints layer.
• Features that aren’t habitable can be mapped as structures. Features such as water towers, silos, tree houses, and other objects that aren’t habitable are mapped as structures. Users of the map should bear in mind that these types of features aren’t discriminated from their habitable counterparts in the risk assessment, which treats habitable and uninhabitable structures equally. It is important to note that nonhabitable structures are not houses, but many are both ignition risks and valued assets.
4.6. Houses versus warehouses and the inability to assess structure type
In our risk maps, structures are defined as any single structure. As a result, an outbuilding counts the same as a small house, which counts the same as a large house, or a ½ acre commercial building. This was done by design, so that bias in the risk assessment and risk mapping wasn’t given to larger structures versus smaller structures. Instead, risk is assessed based on density of structures irrespective of their size.
4.7. Areas that burned in the 2020 CZU and SCU lightning complex fires
In areas that burned in the 2020 CZU and SCU fires (these areas are shown in Figure 2), fire hazard and risk was especially difficult to map because the imagery and lidar data critical to fuels mapping predated these wildfires. The fuelscape, a critical input to the fire behavior model, was updated to reflect reduced fuels in the burned areas, but updates to the fuel model were based on expert analysis instead of measurable attributes. The quantitative forest structure components of the fuelscape (canopy density, canopy cover, canopy base height, and canopy bulk density) were not updated at all since lidar would need to have been collected post-fire to derive these forest structure metrics. Instead, the Scott and Burgan fuel model was
6.2 p. 306 of 557
13 | Page
changed by incorporating estimated changes to canopy and resulting vegetation height, volume, and arrangement based on available burn severity data.
4.8. Accuracy Assessment
It is important to note that thought we believe that the data presented here are the ‘best available’ countywide datasets of their type, these data and maps depict large areas and are produced using models and semi-automated methods. They are not based on detailed ground surveys. Also, accuracy assessments have not been completed to date for the Classified Wildfire Hazard, the Wildfire Risk to Structures, or their inputs (those created by this team, Pyrologix, or others). However, in June 2023, an accuracy assessment will be published for the enhanced lifeform map, which is a critical input to the 5-meter fuel model, the Classified Wildfire Hazard, and the Wildfire Risk to Structures.
6.2 p. 307 of 557
14 | Page
2020 CZU and SCU lightning complex fires
5. Mapping Methods
5.1. Methods development and community engagement
The three-county Wildfire Risk to Structures polygon map and the Classified Wildfire Hazard 20- meter raster were developed in collaborative partnership. Tukman Geospatial served as the technical lead and was responsible for implementing the model design, python coding, and geospatial data analysis. Tukman Geospatial partners Digital Mapping Solutions (Esther Mandeno) and Wildland Res Mgt (Carol Rice) provided guidance on the risk model design, its data inputs, and the weights used for the inputs. Drafts of the risk map were reviewed by all team members, who balanced internal team input with inputs from stakeholders. The final Wildfire Risk to Structures map is version 11 and represents 11 rounds of iterative improvements to the logic model, model inputs, model weights, and the python code that produces the model. The Classified Wildfire Hazard raster is also version 11.
Stakeholder input and community engagement was critical to the production of the threecounty risk map. Five workshops were held throughout the course of the project to solicit input
6.2 p. 308 of 557
15 | Page
from land managers and the fire community. Table 1 below lists the workshops and provides links to the slide deck and video (if applicable) for each meeting. In addition to the workshops, the internal project team had numerous meetings with personnel from the CAL FIRE Santa Clara Unit (SCU) and San Mateo - Santa Cruz Unit (CZU), staff from CAL FIRE Fire and Resource Assessment Program (FRAP), land managers, and community-based wildfire groups in Santa Cruz and Santa Clara County to solicit focused input on specific geographies. Workshops and smaller meetings were catalysts for numerous improvements the wildfire risk map over the course of its-ten version evolution.
Stakeholder workshops to support three-county risk mapping Workshop Link to Slides Link to Video (if available)
CZU Workshop
#1 (3-4-21)
https://fuelsmapping.com/czu_workshop1_slides https://fuelsmapping.com/czu_workshop1_video CZU Workshop
#2 (9-9-21)
https://fuelsmapping.com/czu_workshop2_slides https://fuelsmapping.com/czu_workshop2_video CZU Workshop
#3 (1-18-22)
https://fuelsmapping.com/czu_workshop3_slides https://fuelsmapping.com/czu_workshop3_video CZU Workshop
#4 (3-10-22)
https://fuelsmapping.com/czu_workshop4_slides https://fuelsmapping.com/czu_workshop4_video CZU Workshop
#5
https://fuelsmapping.com/czu_workshop5_slides https://fuelsmapping.com/czu_workshop5_video SCU Workshop
#1
(9-15-21)
https://fuelsmapping.com/scu_workshop1_slides https://fuelsmapping.com/scu_workshop1_video SCU Workshop
#2
(2-25-22)
https://fuelsmapping.com/scu_workshop2_slides https://fuelsmapping.com/scu_workshop2_video SCU Workshop
#3
(1-18-22)
https://fuelsmapping.com/scu_workshop3_slides https://fuelsmapping.com/scu_workshop3_video SCU Workshop
#4
(3-8-22)
https://fuelsmapping.com/scu_workshop4_slides https://fuelsmapping.com/scu_workshop4_video SCU Workshop
#5
https://fuelsmapping.com/scu_workshop5_slides https://fuelsmapping.com/scu_workshop5_video
6.2 p. 309 of 557
16 | Page
5.2. Overview
The logic model for the Santa Cruz – Santa Clara – San Mateo Wildfire Risk to Structures map and the classified wildfire hazard map is shown in Figure 3. The risk mapping process synthesizes wildfire hazard together with structure density to produce the final Wildfire Risk to Structures map. We will first discuss the methods for creating Classified Wildfire Hazard (section 5.3), then provide details on each of the 9 geospatial datasets that represent wildfire hazard (section 5.4), and finally illustrate how Classified Wildfire Hazard (a 20-meter raster product) is combined with structure density using 10-acre hexagons as mapping units to produce the final Wildfire Risk to Structures map. Note that the two final deliverables (Wildfire Risk to Structures and Classified Wildfire Hazard) are shown as green blobs in the logic model.
5.3. Hazard mapping methods
In the logic model, input geospatial datasets are shown with white type. In this section we will discuss the hazard portion of the logic model, which is represented by the input spatial datasets to the right of the blob labelled ‘Classified Wildfire Hazard’. The logic model includes 5 input spatial datasets that characterize wildfire potential and 3 input spatial datasets that are related to wildfire probability. Collectively, these 9 input spatial datasets are synthesized into a raw hazard score in a 20-meter raster environment.
6.2 p. 310 of 557
17 | Page
Three county wildfire classified wildfire hazard and Wildfire Risk to Structures logic model
6.2 p. 311 of 557
18 | Page
Each of the 9 input spatial datasets related to hazard is scaled from 0-4 (for example, very short flame lengths would get a 0 for flame length and very tall flame lengths would get a 4).
Classified relative wildfire hazard was calculated by weighting the inputs and adding up the weighted inputs. Flame length was assigned a weight of 4, extreme fire weather potential and ember load index were assigned weights of 2, suppression difficulty was assigned a weight of 3, wildland vegetation was assigned a weight of 2, human development proximity was assigned a weight of 1, transmission proximity a weight of 1.5, distribution proximity a weight of 2, and historic ignitions 0.5. To synthesize these 9 hazard spatial datasets together, first the variable’s class (0-4) for a given pixel is multiplied by that variable’s weight to produce a raw score for each variable. The highest possible index value was 72. Figure 4 shows how a theoretical pixel value of 64 would be assigned if all inputs had a value of 'Very High (4)'.
Theoretical maximum pixel value for the wildfire hazard index After computing raw hazard, with possible pixel values from 0 to 64 for each pixel, pixels were ‘binned’ into 6 hazard classes, 1 through 6, with 1 representing the areas of lowest relative hazard and 6 representing the areas of highest relative hazard. This classification was done using the following steps:
1. Class 1 was automatically assigned to pixels that were mapped as water or salt marsh in the enhanced lifeform map or had a non-burnable (NB) fuel model in the 2020 Scott and Burgan Surface Fuel Model.
2. The classification was adjusted to account for distinct differences in fire weather, topography, vegetation, and land use observed by experts when comparing results for the Santa Cruz Mountains ecoregion (west of Hwy. 101) versus the Mt. Hamilton/Diablo Range ecoregion (east of Hwy. 101). Figure 5 shows these two areas. For each of these two areas, the mapping team used the slice command to slice the pixels into quintiles using the raw hazard value. 2 was assigned to the lowest quintile, 3 to the second, 4 to the third, 5 to the fourth, and 6 to the highest quintile. Classes 2-6 have a roughly equal number of pixels within each of the two areas shown in figure 5.
Table 2 shows the class breaks used for the reclassification of raw hazard to classified hazard.
Note that areas mapped as ‘Water’ or ‘Tidal Marsh’ in the enhanced lifeform map, or areas that are ‘Non Burnable’ in the surface fuel model, were automatically assigned a hazard class of ‘1’ (the lowest hazard class).
6.2 p. 312 of 557
19 | Page
Geographic areas (roughly following pyromes and ecoregion boundaries) used for assigning relative hazard class.
6.2 p. 313 of 557
20 | Page
Classification ranges for the final classified hazard raster (hazard version 10)
West of 101 East of 101
Raw Range Hazard Index
Value Raw Range Hazard Index Value
Non-burnable, Water or
Tidal Marsh 1 Non-burnable, Water or Tidal Marsh 1
0-22.5 2 0-26 2
23-30 3 26.5-33 3
30.5-36 4 33.5-37 4
36.5-43.5 5 37.5-43 5
44-72 6 43.5-72 6
The classified wildfire hazard dataset, a 20-meter resolution raster dataset with pixel values ranging from 1 (lowest relative wildfire hazard) to 6 (highest relative wildfire hazard). Is shown in Figure 6.
6.2 p. 314 of 557
21 | Page
Classified Wildfire Hazard for the three-county area (version 11 Hazard)
6.2 p. 315 of 557
22 | Page
5.4. Hazard mapping geospatial dataset details
Flame length
Flame length is an important variable for characterizing wildfire potential and has the highest weight (x4) of the 9 hazard input spatial datasets. FLAMMAP was used to model flame length using the 2020 5-meter resolution fuelscape produced by Tukman Geospatial. The fuelscape includes a Scott and Burgan Fuel Surface Fuel Model, as well as the other components of the fuelscape (derived from 2020 lidar for Santa Cruz and Santa Clara, and 2017 lidar for San Mateo): slope, aspect, elevation, canopy base height, canopy bulk density, canopy height, and canopy density. The San Mateo and Santa Cruz/Santa Clara County Fuel Models are 5-meter spatial resolution fuel models that adhere to Scott and Burgan’s classification (Scott and Burgan, 2005). The fuel model provides a fine scale map of fuel conditions on the landscape and is a required input for fire behavior and fire spread models. The fuel model provides a higher spatial resolution than the existing, publicly available fuel models, which are based on the LANDFIRE data derived from 30-meter Landsat data. The fuel model was updated to post CZU and SCU fire conditions using Sentinel-derived burn severity data. For a more in-depth technical report on the methods used to create the fuel models, and to download the fuel models, visit these links:
Santa Cruz/Santa Clara County Fuel Model
Full Report: https://fuelsmapping.com/santa_cruz_clara_fuels_full_report Datasheet: https://vegmap.press/scc_scz_5_meter_fuel_model_datasheet San Mateo County Fuel Model
Full Report: https://fuelsmapping.com/san_mateo_fuels_full_report Datasheet: https://fuelsmapping.com/san_mateo_fuels_datasheet Flame length – processing steps
Modeled flame length was created as a 5-meter raster and resampled to 20 meters for the relative hazard mapping effort. The parameters used in FLAMMAP to predict flame length are shown in Figure 8. The output flame length raster from FLAMMAP was classified into 5 classes (0-4) using the hauling charts (Andrews and Rothermel, 1982). The classification is shown in Table 4. Modeled flame length for the three-county area is shown in Figure 9.
6.2 p. 316 of 557
23 | Page
Classes for flame length
Raw Modelled Flame Length Classified Flame Length
0 Feet 0
>0 Feet and <=4 Feet 1
>4 Feet and <= 8 Feet 2
>8 Feet and <=11 Feet 3
>11 Feet 4
The parameters used for the FLAMMAP runs were chosen based on consultations with local CAL FIRE units and Tadashi Moody and Dave Sapsis at CAL FIRE’s Fire and Resource Assessment Program (FRAP).
6.2 p. 317 of 557
24 | Page
Parameters for FLAMMAP flame length predictions
6.2 p. 318 of 557
25 | Page
Modeled flame length for the three-county area
6.2 p. 319 of 557
26 | Page
Extreme fire weather potential
Extreme fire weather potential was created by Alan Fox (Fox Weather LLC) and Tukman Geospatial. Extreme fire weather potential represents the relative potential across the county for very windy, very dry weather.
Extreme fire weather potential – processing steps
Figure 10 shows a conceptual diagram of the workflow to create the extreme fire weather potential dataset. The extreme fire weather potential dataset uses a fire spread index that was calculated from relative humidity and wind speed (adapted from Nelson, 1964). Maximum daily fire spread index values were calculated for each pixel in a 1.5-kilometer countywide raster for each day of September and October 2017, 2019, and 2020. For each pixel, the 97th percentile index value was found for these 180 days. The resulting 97th percentile value for all pixels was in the three-county area was then classified into quantiles; the lowest quantile was assigned class of Very Low (0), the second quantile a class of Low (1), the third a class of Moderate (2), the fourth a class of High (3), and the top quantile a class of Very High (4). Figure 10 shows classified extreme fire weather potential for the three-county area.
Workflow for creating extreme fire weather potential raster The raw data for this analysis is from NOAA's North American Regional Reanalyis (NARR). Fox Weather processed the NARR data (32 km resolution) using the Weather Research and Forecasting Model (WRF) to downscale it to 4 km resolution. The 4 km data from WRF was then downscaled to 1.5 km using Fox Weather's proprietary MtnRT software.
6.2 p. 320 of 557
27 | Page
Classified extreme fire weather potential
6.2 p. 321 of 557
28 | Page
Ember load index
The ember load index was obtained from Pyrologix’s Contemporary Wildfire Hazard Across California analysis and geospatial datasets, which were updated to reflect the post-2020 fire season fuelscape. The Pyrologix/USDA Forest Service ember load index raster can be found here. The ember load index provides information about the relative amount of embers that would be deposited at any location in the three-county landscape in the event of a wildfire.
From Pyrologix’s documentation:
The ember load indices represent relative ember load at a pixel. Similar to ember production, ember load is also based on surface and canopy fuel characteristics, climate, and topography at the pixel. Ember load incorporates downwind ember travel.
Ember load index – processing steps
For our modeling, we chose to use conditional ember load (cELI), which does not account for burn probability. Ember load index was resampled from its native resolution of 30-meters to 20-meters for use in our model. It was then classified across the three-county area into quantiles; the lowest quantile was assigned class of Very Low (0), the second quantile a class of Low (1), the third a class of Moderate (2), the fourth a class of High (3), and the top quantile a class of Very High (4).
Classified ember load index for the three-county area is shown in Figure 12.
6.2 p. 322 of 557
29 | Page
Ember load index for the-three county area
6.2 p. 323 of 557
30 | Page
Suppression difficulty index
Suppression Difficulty and Ember Load Index come from Pyrologix and the USDA Forest service’s Contemporary Wildfire Hazard Across California. The Pyrologix/USDA Forest Service suppression difficulty index raster can be found here.
Suppression Difficulty factors in topography, fuels, expected fire behavior under severe fire weather conditions, firefighter line production rates in various fuel types, and accessibility (distance from roads/trails) to assess relative suppression effort (Rodriguez et al., Vogler et al.).
The raw suppression difficulty index delivered from Pyrologix has a continuous value distribution from 1-10.
Suppression difficulty index – processing steps
Suppression difficulty index was resampled from its native resolution of 30-meters to 20-meters for use in our model. It was then classified across the three-county area into quantiles; the lowest quantile was assigned class of Very Low (0), the second quantile a class of Low (1), the third a class of Moderate (2), the fourth a class of High (3), and the top quantile a class of Very High (4).
Figure 13 shows the suppression difficulty index for the three-county area.
6.2 p. 324 of 557
31 | Page
Suppression Difficulty for the-three county area
6.2 p. 325 of 557
32 | Page
Dense urban without wildland vegetation
The ‘Dense urban without wildland vegetation’ geospatial dataset for the three-county area depicts areas with high structure density that aren’t close to contiguous areas of vegetation with a value of Very Low (0). This reflects the situation in urban areas where wildfires are rare due to a lack of vegetative fuel. All other areas, which include areas of contiguous woody or non-woody vegetation, are assigned a Very High (4). In addition, dense areas of urban land cover near contiguous areas of vegetation are also assigned a value of 4.
Vegetation fire potential was the last input spatial dataset to be included in the model. It was developed based on suggested input from CAL FIRE analysts from the CZU unit, who observed that hazard predictions were unexpectedly high for some urban areas with dense housing. This input from CAL FIRE prompted the mapping team to develop a geospatial dataset that differentiates dense urban areas without nearby wildland vegetation from other areas.
Dense urban without wildland vegetation – processing steps The output dataset representing dense urban areas without wildland vegetation v. other areas is shown in Figure 14. The workflow diagram for producing this geospatial dataset is shown in Figure 15. As shown in the workflow diagram, the dataset was created by combining two intermediate datasets in a 20-meter resolution raster environment: a three-county ‘urban mask’ raster and a ‘wildland vegetation’ raster. The urban mask depicts areas representing impervious land cover greater than 50% and was developed from the San Mateo (2018), Santa Cruz (2020, pre-CZU fire) and Santa Clara County (2020, pre-CZU/SCU fires) impervious surface maps. The wildland vegetation raster was created by selecting vegetated land covers from the San Mateo, Santa Cruz, and Santa Clara enhanced lifeform maps (same ground condition dates as shown above for the impervious surface maps). Wildland vegetation areas were defined as areas greater than 300 acres and include both woody and non-woody vegetation. The result of combining the urban mask and the wildland vegetation rasters is shown in Figure 14: dense urban areas that are not within 500 feet of wildland vegetation are shown in blue; other areas are shown in red.
6.2 p. 326 of 557
33 | Page
Dense urban without wildland vegetation for the three-county area
6.2 p. 327 of 557
34 | Page
Workflow for creating dense urban without wildland vegetation for the three-county area
6.2 p. 328 of 557
35 | Page
Human development proximity
Proximity to human development, such as roads, structures, and other infrastructure increases the chance a fire will occur since many wildfires are sparked in and around these areas. Human development proximity was derived from the San Mateo (2018), Santa Cruz (2020, pre-CZU fire) and Santa Clara (2020, pre CZU/SCU fire) impervious surface maps. These maps are fine scale vector polygon map of buildings, paved and dirt/gravel roads, other paved areas (like parking lots), and other dirt impervious areas. Table 5 provides links to the datasheets for the impervious surface maps across the three counties.
Links to datasheets for impervious surface maps of the three-county area County Link to Datasheet/Download Info for Impervious Map San Mateo https://vegmap.press/san_mateo_impervious_datasheet Santa Cruz https://vegmap.press/Santa_Cruz_Impervious_Datasheet Santa Clara https://vegmap.press/Santa_Clara_Impervious_Datasheet Human development proximity – processing steps
To create the human development proximity 20-meter raster that was used as one of the geospatial input datasets for hazard classification, Tukman Geospatial combined the vector impervious surface maps for the three counties, and then created a Euclidian distance raster at 20-meter raster resolution. The Euclidian distance raster’s pixel values represent that pixel’s distance in feet to the nearest impervious feature. Raster values representing these distances were reclassified into 4 values (from Very Low (0) to Very High (4) impervious proximity). Table Table 6 shows the details of how raw values were binned to create the classified human development proximity geospatial dataset used for hazard and risk mapping. Figure 16 shows a map of classified human development proximity for the three-county area.
Classification of raw distance to impervious features to classified human development proximity
Proximity to Impervious Feature Classified Value
0-25 Feet Very High (4)
25-50 Feet High (3)
50-100 Feet Moderate (2)
100-200 Feet Low (1)
Greater than 200 Feet from Impervious Feature Very Low (0)
6.2 p. 329 of 557
36 | Page
Human development proximity for the three-county area
6.2 p. 330 of 557
37 | Page
Transmission line proximity
Proximity to transmission lines increases fire probability since some wildfires are sparked by transmission lines, especially during wind events. As power safety shutoffs continue, transmission will likely play a lesser role in sparking wildfires, but we have still included proximity to transmission lines as an input to the Classified Wildfire Hazard dataset. However, we did not include transmission lines that traversed urbanized areas without wildland vegetation – these lines were masked out of our dataset since they generally aren’t ignition sources for wildland vegetation fires.
Transmission line proximity – processing steps
Transmission line data was acquired by the California Public Utilities Commission (2021, link here). Proximity to transmission lines was created (using the Euclidian distance function) and classified in the same manner as for human development proximity (see Table 7 for class breaks). As noted above, transmission lines traversing dense urban areas without contiguous wildland vegetation were not included in this analysis. See section 5.4.10 for a discussion of how these dense urban areas were mapped for this project.
To create the transmission line proximity 20-meter raster that was used as one of the geospatial input datasets for hazard classification, Tukman Geospatial rasterized the CPUC vector transmission line dataset for the three-county area and then created a Euclidian distance raster at 20-meter raster resolution. The Euclidian distance raster’s pixel values represent that pixel’s distance in feet to the nearest transmission line feature. Raster values representing these distances were reclassified into 4 values (from Very Low (0) to Very High (4) impervious proximity). Table 7 shows the details of how raw values were binned to create the classified transmission line proximity geospatial dataset used for hazard and risk mapping.
Classification of raw distance to transmission lines to classified transmission line proximity
Proximity to Transmission Line Feature Classified Value 0-25 Feet Very High (4)
25-50 Feet High (3)
50-100 Feet Moderate (2)
100-200 Feet Low (1)
Greater than 200 Feet from Impervious Feature Very Low (0) Figure 17 shows classified transmission line proximity for the three-county area.
6.2 p. 331 of 557
38 | Page
Transmission line proximity for the three-county area
6.2 p. 332 of 557
39 | Page
Distribution line proximity
Proximity to distribution lines increases fire probability since some wildfires are sparked by distribution lines, especially during wind events. As power safety shutoffs continue, distribution lines will likely play a lesser role in sparking wildfires, but we have still included proximity to distribution lines as an input to the Classified Wildfire Hazard dataset. However, we did not include distribution lines that traversed urbanized areas without wildland vegetation – these lines were masked out of our dataset since they generally aren’t ignition sources for wildland vegetation fires. Because distribution lines are a much more common cause of ignitions then their higher voltage counterparts, transmission lines, distribution line proximity was given a higher weight in the model than transmission line proximity (see Figure 3).
Distribution line proximity – processing steps
Distribution line data was acquired by PG&E’s Integration Capacity Analysis webmap as a vector line feature class (link here). Proximity to distribution lines was created (using the Euclidian distance function) and then classified (see Table 8 for class breaks). As noted above, distribution lines traversing dense urban areas without contiguous wildland vegetation were not included in this analysis. See section 5.4.10 for a discussion of how these dense urban areas were mapped for this project. Figure 18 shows classified distribution line proximity .
To create the distribution line proximity 20-meter raster that was used as one of the geospatial input datasets for hazard classification, Tukman Geospatial rasterized the PG&E vector distribution line dataset for the three-county area and then created a Euclidian distance raster at 20-meter raster resolution. The Euclidian distance raster’s pixel values represent that pixel’s distance in feet to the nearest transmission line feature. For distribution lines, Raster values representing these distances were reclassified into 4 values (from Very Low (0) to Very High (4) impervious proximity). Table Table 8 shows the details of how raw values were binned to create the classified transmission line proximity geospatial dataset used for hazard and risk mapping. Areas within 66 feet of a transmission line were assigned a Very High (4); areas further from the line were assigned Very Low (0). This ‘binary’ assignment was chosen to reflect the fact that increased ignition hazard from distribution lines, and the efficacy of reducing ignition hazard by clearing vegetation along distribution lines, is limited to a relatively narrow strip of land adjacent to the line.
Classification of raw distance to impervious features to classified distribution line proximity
Proximity to Transmission Line Feature Classified Value 0-66 Feet Very High (4)
Greater than 66 Feet from Impervious Feature Very Low (0)
6.2 p. 333 of 557
40 | Page
Distribution line proximity for the three-county area
6.2 p. 334 of 557
41 | Page
Historic ignitions
Historic ignitions were the final geospatial input dataset used to map wildfire hazard. Historic ignitions provide insight into where ignitions occurred in the past. Historic ignition data was used where the wildfire resulting from an ignition was greater than 5 acres in size. The input dataset used for historic ignitions was acquired from the CAL FIRE Fire and Resource Assessment Program and includes historic ignition point locations through the middle of the 2019 fire season.
Historic ignitions – processing steps
The historic ignitions data acquired from FRAP depicts ignition locations across the state of California between 2004 and 2019. The FRAP points were clipped to the three-county area.
From the clipped layer, analysts selected out the ignition locations that resulted in wildfires greater than 5 acres. From the resulting point layer, the kernel density function was used to create a density map of ignition points over 5 acres. The historic ignitions density map was then classified across the three-county area into quantiles; the lowest quantile was assigned class of Very Low (0), the second quantile a class of Low (1), the third a class of Moderate (2), the fourth a class of High (3), and the top quantile a class of Very High (4).
Figure 19 shows the historic ignitions classified density map.
6.2 p. 335 of 557
42 | Page
Classified historic ignitions > 5 acres density map for the three-county area
6.2 p. 336 of 557
43 | Page
5.5. Combining wildfire hazard with structure density to create the Wildfire Risk to Structures map
Structure data
Structures were derived from the San Mateo (2018), Santa Cruz (2020, pre CZU fire) and Santa Clara (2020, pre-CZU/SCU fire) impervious surface maps. The structures in the three impervious surfaces map were derived from the ‘best available’ lidar data for the three counties. In addition, structure footprint data provided by Sanborn also derived from the best available lidar data was integrated into the impervious surface map for Santa Clara County.
Though the structures used for this analysis are the ‘best available’ data to spatially represent structure on the landscape, they still contain false positives and false negatives (especially when structures are visibly obscured by tree canopy from an aerial perspective). In addition, the structure footprints were derived from data collected before the 2020 lightning fires in the three-county area. As a result, they depict structures that have since burned down. The lidar derived structures used in this analysis were qualitatively compared to Microsoft Building Footprints (derived from optical data) and were deemed superior in their accuracy, with less false positives and false negatives.
From the impervious surface maps, structures polygons were selected and combined, and structure centroids (points) were created.
Combining structures and hazard into hexagons
The Classified Wildfire Hazard map, which is described above in Sections 5.3 and 5.4, was combined with the structure data to create the final deliverable for this project: a Wildfire Risk to Structures map. Figure 20 is a high-level conceptual diagram of this process.
6.2 p. 337 of 557
44 | Page
Conceptual process of combining wildfire hazard with structure density for the three-county area to create the Wildfire Risk to Structures map The Wildfire Risk to Structures map uses 10-acre hexagons as its map units. There were 144,626 10-acre hexagons across the three-county area. Each hexagon was assigned both a count of structure centroids that fall inside of it, as well as a structure density class for structures that fall inside of it. Structure density class breaks were determined by adapting recommendations from the current literature (Maranghides et al.), along with recommendations from the project team and CAL FIRE. Table 9 shows the structure density breaks used to assign classified structure density. Each hexagon was also assigned (using zonal statistics) the mean Classified Wildfire Hazard of the pixels that the hexagon overlapped and the mean Classified Wildfire Hazard of the pixels that the hexagon’s 1-mile outside only buffer overlapped.
Then, each hexagon was assigned a hazard value the following way:
(Mean Hazard Value of Pixels Inside the Hexagon + Mean Hazard Value of Pixels in the 1-Mile Hexagon Buffer)/2
6.2 p. 338 of 557
45 | Page
Figure 20 shows an example hexagon with its 1 mile outside only buffer, the structure locations, and the attributes assigned for structures within the hexagon, structure density within the hexagon, and hazard as calculated in the formula above and rounded to the nearest integer.
Structure density breaks assigned to each hexagon to characterize structure density within the hexagon and structure density in the hexagon’s 1- mile buffer
Structure Density (Structures/Acre) Structure Density Class <.1 1
0.1-.4 2
.5-.9 3
1-1.9 4
2-2.9 5
>=3 6
Figure 21 helps clarify the process of assigning the final ‘Hazard to Structures’ classification, which is the result of the Wildfire Risk to Structures map. In Figure 21, the single example hexagon shown in the center of the map received a ‘Hazard to Structures’ classification of ‘High Hazard, .5-.9 Structures per Acre.’ Reading left to right along the table at the top of Figure 21, the attributes are as follow:
Mean Hazard Within: This is the mean wildfire hazard (1-6) of the pixels within the hexagon (the hexagon is shown in the center of the map). The value for this is 3.49.
Mean Hazard 1 Mile: This is the mean wildfire hazard (1-6) of the pixels within the 1-mile buffer around the example hexagon. The 1-mile buffer is shown as the large purple circle in the map.
The value for this is 4.31, which reflects the higher hazard in the buffer relative to within the hexagon itself.
Neighborhood Hazard Class: This is calculated by rounding the result of the following to the nearest integer (as shown on the previous page):
(Mean Hazard Value of Pixels Inside the Hexagon + Mean Hazard Value of Pixels in the 1-Mile Hexagon Buffer)/2
The value for this is 4 (High).
Structures Within: The count of structures within the example 10-acre hexagon. The value is 6.
Structures per Acre: Structure density (structures per acre) within the example 10-acre hexagon. The value is .6.
6.2 p. 339 of 557
46 | Page
Structures within Description: Structure density, binned into classes for the example 10-acre hexagon. The value is ‘.5-.9 Structures per Acre’.
Hazard to Structures: A combination of ‘Hazard Class’, which is ‘4 (High Hazard)’ and ‘Structures within Description’, which is ‘.5-.9 Structures per Acre’.
6.2 p. 340 of 557
47 | Page
Example hexagon, the 1-mile hexagon buffer, and attributes of the wildfire risk to structure map
6.2 p. 341 of 557
48 | Page
5.6. Spatial data attributes – risk and hazard datasets Tables 10 and 11 below show the attributes of the Classified Wildfire Hazard raster and the Wildfire Risk to Structures vector dataset. When using this wildfire risk to structures dataset, we recommend symbolizing using the ‘symbology’ attribute, which combines classified hazard and classified structure density into a single attribute. This symbology is included in an ArcGIS Pro map package that is distributed with the project geodata. See the project datasheet for details and download information.
6.2 p. 342 of 557
49 | Page
Wildfire Risk to Structures attributes
Attribute Name Attribute Alias Description
HAZARD_WITHIN_CLASS Mean Hazard Within Mean wildfire hazard within hexagon, calculated by overlaying wildfire hazard raster with hexagon vector polygons.
HAZARD_WITHIN_1MILE_CLASS Mean Hazard 1 Mile Mean wildfire hazard for the one-mile buffer outside of the hexagon, calculated by overlaying wildfire hazard with hexagon vector polygons.
STRUCTURES_WITHIN Structures Within Count of structures within the hexagon.
STRUCTURES_PER_ACRE Structures per Acre Structures per acre within the hexagon.
STRUCTURES_WITHIN_1MILE Structures in 1
Mile Buffer
Count of structures for the one-mile buffer outside of the hexagon.
STRUCTURES_WITHIN_1MILE_CLASS Structures w/in 1
Mile Classified
Classified structure density (1-6) for the one-mile buffer outside of the hexagon. See Table 9 for structure density class breaks.
STRUCTURES_WITHIN_CLASS Structures Within
Classified
Classified structure density (1-6) inside of the hexagon. See Table 9 for structure density class breaks.
STRUCTURES_WITHIN_DESC Structures Within
Description
Classified structure density description (e.g., .5-.9 structure per acre) inside of the hexagon. See Table 9 for structure density class breaks.
STRUCTURES_WITHIN_1MILE_DESC Structures w/in 1
Mile Description
Classified structure density description (e.g., .5-.9 structure per acre) for the one-mile buffer outside of the hexagon. See Table 9 for structure density class breaks.
NEIGHBORHOOD_HAZARD_CLASS Neighborhood Hazard
Class
This is calculated by rounding the result of the following expression to the nearest integer:
(Mean Hazard Value of Pixels Inside the Hexagon + Mean Hazard Value of Pixels in the 1-Mile Hexagon Buffer)/2
TOTAL_SCORE Total Score The sum of ‘Structures Within Classified’ + ‘Neighborhood Hazard Class’ SYMBOLOGY Symbology Attribute that combines ‘Neighborhood Hazard Class’ and ‘Structures within Description’
6.2 p. 343 of 557
50 | Page
Classified Wildfire Hazard raster attributes
Attribute Name Description
HAZ_CLASS Hazard class (1-6) for each 20-meter pixel.
HAZARD Classified values for hazard input variables, providing the details behind the hazard class ranking.
6.2 p. 344 of 557
51 | Page
6. Results and Key Findings
The Wildfire Risk to Structures map shown in Figure 1 (and here as countywide PDFs), symbolizes the Wildfire Risk to Structures map in a way that displays only the hexagons with Moderate, High, Very High, and Highest Hazard (classes 3, 4, 5, and 6) that also have structures within their boundaries. By looking at this subset of hexagons, only areas that have moderate or greater hazard AND at least one structure per 10 acres are shown. By limiting the data shown in this way, only 24,880 hexagons, or 17.2% of the three-county area, is shown. This subset focuses the user on the areas of the landscape of greatest concern in the context of structures at risk to wildfire. To further focus on the highest risk areas, by removing the ‘Moderate’ hazard class and focusing on the High, Very High, and Highest Hazard classes where hexagons have at least one structure within their 10-acre boundary, we limit our selection of hexagons to 12,217 hexagons, or 8.4% of the three-county area. Note that these are the hexagons that actually contain the structures, and that management opportunities that provide benefits to these areas in terms of hazard mitigation will extend to hexagons nearby that aren’t shown because they do not have structures (or have low hazard).
7. Conclusions and Next Steps
The first step any land manager should take is to review the data and results carefully. Where the input layers accurately represent on-the-ground conditions, confidence in the results is high. While all locations should be considered at risk of fire, those identified as moderate or above should be considered for mitigation projects (i.e., home hardening, defensible space, shaded fuel break construction, forest thinning/management, etc.).
It is also important to remember that treatments designed to protect structures should not be limited to hexagons with a structure; reducing hazard with treatments in hexagons with no structures can also reduce risk to nearby hexagons with structures.
A user can use this Wildfire Risk to Structures map to either sequence activities to reduce hazard or determine locations for which funding for such activities should be sought. In almost all cases, activities would be aimed at reducing hazard, as it is improbable to reduce the number of structures or other inputs that influence risk (weather, distribution powerlines, or impervious surfaces).
Natural resource managers may choose to use the Classified Wildfire Hazard map to guide treatments across the larger landscape as a way to mitigate the effect of the 'halo' of high hazard. Additionally, the Classified Wildfire Hazard map can be used to evaluate risk to other resources and assets besides structures, such as wildlife habitat, watershed function, and more.
See Section 9 for a case study that illustrates this way of using the hazard data.
6.2 p. 345 of 557
52 | Page
Further, users of the Wildfire Risk to Structures dataset can observe and compare the aggregate level of risk in certain locations. For example, the communities east of the Junipero Serra Freeway are uniformly included in the mapped areas of risk (albeit lower levels of risk), as compared to smaller pockets of the highest levels of risk along Skyline Blvd. This information can be used to inform local hazard mitigation plans or justify applications for large-scale treatments.
8. Comparison to Other Assessments
During stakeholder review, input was provided to the mapping team about places where members of the Santa Cruz/Santa Clara County fire and/or land management community observed differences between the Wildfire Risk to Structures/Classified Wildfire Hazard data products and other existing hazard and/or risk assessments. This Section provides a discussion of some of these areas, comparing the existing assessments with the wildfire and hazard maps created in this project, and addressing the differences.
One main area of questions was with regards to differences between the Classified Wildfire Hazard dataset presented here and the maps provided as part of the 2016 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan (SC CWPP), produced by SWCA Environmental Consultants.
When the Classified Wildfire Hazard (CWH for the remainder of this discussion) dataset presented here is compared directly with the SC CWPP risk model (filename ‘RAwo_final.tif’), the results are quite similar (though the CWH is more refined). The SC CWPP model is heavily weighted on hazard, with only 5% of the rating based on fire occurrence, or risk. As such, the SC CWPP is directly comparable to the CWH presented here.
Initial reviewers of the CWH noted that the SC CWPP risk assessment model typically classified areas at higher risk.
The inputs of the CWH include datasets that the SC CWPP risk model does not, which may explain why the two data products differ in some locations. The CWH includes extreme fire weather potential, and ember load index for example, which are lacking in the SC CWPP risk model. The extreme fire weather potential results in heightened hazard in the northern portion of the Santa Clara Valley, and on the coast by Half Moon Bay (see section 5.4 for details on model inputs).
In general, on a landscape scale, there is not a large difference between the two models in terms of overall risk/hazard. However, at the fine-scale, differences become apparent, which is to be expected given the different resolution of the data (30 meters for the SC CWPP risk versus 20 meters for the CWH) and the evolution of the modeling since 2016, when the SC CWPP dataset was created. It should also be noted that the SC CWPP model used LANDFIRE fuelscape
6.2 p. 346 of 557
53 | Page
and the CWH uses a fuelscape derived from lidar and fine scale vegetation mapping. Even so, the overall distribution of hazard is generally similar.
Below we compare the portion of the CWH presented here with the SC CWPP hazard/risk model from 2016.
CWH (left) v. SC CWPP (right) in the Lexington Hills Community south of Los Gatos along Highway 17. Green represents low hazard/risk and red represents the highest hazard/risk.
Both models show lower hazard/risk within the community at the very center of the map extents above. The surrounding hills are predicted at moderate to high in the CWH and mostly high in the SC CWPP model. There is more nuance in the CWH, but overall, the resulting pattern of hazard/risk is similar.
6.2 p. 347 of 557
54 | Page
CWH (left) v. SC CWPP (right) in the area east of Gilroy. Green represents low hazard/risk and red represents the highest hazard/risk.
Both models show elevated hazard/risk in the hills east of Gilroy in a patchwork pattern, likely due to the distribution of shrub and forested lands in that area. Notably, the SC CWPP gave the grazed grasslands in that area a higher risk rating than the CWH. In the CWH, the team compensated for the heavily grazed grassland in the south-eastern portion of Santa Clara County by assigning those areas a grass fuel model with the lowest fuel loading.
CWH (left) v. SC CWPP (right) in the area in the Saratoga Hills. Green represents low hazard/risk and red represents the highest hazard/risk.
6.2 p. 348 of 557
55 | Page
In the Saratoga Hills (west of Saratoga Sunnyvale Road), the SC CWPP model shows a scattering of high risk in the neighborhood whereas the CWH indicates mostly moderate hazard, with patches of high hazard. However, in the CWH, more of the area is assigned moderate and above hazard, whereas the SC CWPP model has much of the area mapped as low risk/hazard. In the hills in the south and southeast of the map, the pattern of hazard/risk between the two data products is similar.
CWH (left) v. SC CWPP (right) in the area in the Monte Sereno and Los Gatos area. Green represents low hazard/risk and red represents the highest hazard/risk.
In the Monte Sereno/Los Gatos area, the CWH shows low to moderate hazard within the suburban community in the center-left of the map images (between Quito Rd. and Winchester Blvd.) in contrast with the SC CWPP risk/hazard, which shows the area at the lowest risk/hazard rating (dark green). This likely because the CWH takes into consideration burnable vegetation along riparian corridors and within the neighborhood itself, whereas the LANDFIRE based fuelscape that underpins SC CWPP often doesn’t represent small pockets of burnable vegetation within the urban mosaic.
6.2 p. 349 of 557
56 | Page
CWH (left) v. SC CWPP (right) in the area in the Milpitas and Arroyo De Los Coches area. Green represents low hazard/risk and red represents the highest hazard/risk.
For the Milpitas area, the results are quite similar between the two models with much of the urban portion of the area in the lowest hazard rating in the CWH and in the SC CWPP model.
Along Calaveras Rd. in the Arroyo De Los Coches area, both models indicate areas of high hazard/risk. Along the edges of the valley, both show moderate hazard/risk. In the hills, there is more nuance in the CWH, most likely because of the finer scale vegetation and fuel model mapping that serves as the foundation of the CWH.
6.2 p. 350 of 557
57 | Page
CWH (left) v. SC CWPP (right) in the area in the Aldercroft Creek area. Green represents low hazard/risk and red represents the highest hazard/risk.
At Aldercroft Creek along Highway 17, the two models show significant differences. The SC CWPP hazard/risk classifies much of the area in the highest risk/hazard class. The CWH, on the other hand, scores the area between moderate and high. However, the SC CWPP's risk also shows some areas of low (in the flatter valleys) where the CWH does not.
6.2 p. 351 of 557
58 | Page
CWH (left) v. SC CWPP (right) in the area in the Anderson Lake area. Green represents low hazard/risk and red represents the highest hazard/risk.
Near Anderson Lake, along Manzanita Dr. in Santa Clara County, the CWH mostly indicates moderate hazard whereas the SC CWPP risk/hazard rating is low.
In summary, the Classified Wildfire Hazard (CWH) presented here and the SC CWPP hazard/risk models are broadly similar in most areas of Santa Clara County. Since the CWH is based on fine scale vegetation and lidar, it has more nuance and tends to capture pockets of hazard that the SC CWPP misses, especially in and around urban areas.
It is important to remember that these are both models, and that differences in models are to be expected. Paul Hansen, The Board Chair of the Santa Clara County FireSafe Council opined on the emergence of many risk models, with this comment:
I am very comfortable using the new models, even when there are slight discrepancies from prior predictive algorithms. Just like the "best" hurricane path models, no single model is perfect. Mother Nature simply won't allow for that. But the CWH information is our latest, most refined, and most comprehensive analysis available, and that will allow us to identify and subsequently focus on specific neighborhoods / communities / associations of highest risks. There we can follow up with a "ground-level" dialogue - or better, a community assessment - to quantify their specific risks in more detail. At that time, we will discuss any discrepancies or irregularities we find in a positive way, and use any learnings to improve the modeling results to better characterize specific locational differences. Importantly, this multi-dimensional risk assessment and graphical hazard mapping allows our organization to effectively educate participants on their various elements of wildfire hazards and risks so that we can follow up with a prioritize selection of mitigation efforts to address those highest risk points; offering advice for the DIYers, or products and paid services for those who want it done professionally.
6.2 p. 352 of 557
59 | Page
The Santa Clara County FireSafe Council will leverage the all new CWH model as the basis for our Risk Assessment in our forthcoming update to the Santa Clara County CWPP, replacing 2016 CWPP version, planned for publishing in 2023. Using the fine scale mapping and interactive tools, our communications to residents will amplify the importance of multi-home participation, and ask communities to take a collaborative and holistic approach to mitigating local wildfire risks. The CWH modeling will help individuals explore and understand the broader risks they face, and that will hopefully lead to better results than a one-home-at-a-time defensible zone campaign. Our objective is to have our prioritized wildfire mitigation recommendations based on both highly-scientific top-down modeling, validated with bottoms-up refinements at the local community level, leading to the most accurate risk assessments available anywhere. We believe this will offer compelling motivation for community action, leading to significant long-term benefits for all Santa Clara County residents.
9. Case Study: City of Santa Cruz Watershed Lands Example Risk Assessment The Wildfire Risk to Structures dataset described in this report is a risk assessment that analyzes only structures as values at risk. This section provides an example of using the Classified Wildfire Hazard dataset to assess risk to other values: in this case the infrastructure of the City of Santa Cruz Water Department. This is not a comprehensive exercise and is meant to demonstrate how the Classified Wildfire Hazard raster can be used to model risk to values other than structures.
The City of Santa Cruz Water department manages land and infrastructure to deliver drinking water to Santa Cruz residents. About half of the city’s water comes from the San Lorenzo River and 32% of it from local creeks that include Majors Creek, Laguna Creek, and Liddell Creek.
Water infrastructure includes Loch Lomond Reservoir, an impoundment on a tributary of the San Lorenzo River, and numerous other assets. Facilities include 4 wells, 2 water treatment plants, pump stations, a dam on Loch Lomond Reservoir, intakes to draw water from local streams, and a series of pipelines to transport water from the water sources to treatment plants and the end users.
For this exercise, we overlaid the Classified Wildfire Hazard raster with the City of Santa Cruz’s water infrastructure to generally assess which components of the infrastructure are exposed to high wildfire hazard. Figure 1 on the next page shows a 4-pane map (with all panes showing the water supply infrastructure). The upper left pane includes roads and public lands with lidar derived building footprints and their 100-foot buffers. The upper right pane shows Classified Wildfire Hazard, the watershed that supplies the city’s water, and the footprint of the 2020 CZU lightning complex fire. The lower left pane displays a hillshade, and the lower right pane shows aerial imagery.
6.2 p. 353 of 557
60 | Page
City of Santa Cruz water supply infrastructure in four panes. See text for more details the contents of the panes and refer to the legend at bottom of the map.
6.2 p. 354 of 557
61 | Page
Tables 12 and 13 show the distribution of hazard from the Classified Wildfire Hazard layer for the pipelines and the entire source watershed (shown in blue in Figure 29). 11% of the area within 500 feet of the water pipelines is very high (class 5), or highest (class 6) hazard, with 25% of it in the high (class 4 hazard class). For the entire watershed, hazard is higher, with 36% of the source watershed area in the two highest hazard classes and 61% of the area in the three highest hazard classes. This is explained by the fact that the upper northern and eastern parts of the watershed (up-catchment of the infrastructure) have very high wildfire hazard.
Hazard within 500 feet of water pipelines
Hazard Class Acres
Percent of
Area
1 - Lowest 128 4%
2 1081 30%
3 1050 29%
4 905 25%
5 334 9%
6 - Highest 69 2%
Hazard within source watersheds
Hazard Class Acres
Percent of
Area
1 - Lowest 62 1%
2 945 12%
3 2172 26%
4 2029 25%
5 1679 20%
6 - Highest 1320 16%
Table 14 shows a list of facilities, with the mean hazard for a 1500-foot buffer of the facility’s centroid. The table is ranked in descending order of mean hazard, showing facilities with the highest mean Classified Wildfire Hazard at the top of the list.
Mean Classified Wildfire Hazard for 1,000-foot buffers of facility centroids Water Facilities
Mean Classified
Wildfire Hazard
Liddell Spring Intake 4.7
Reggiardo Creek Intake 4.3
Laguna Creek Intake 3.9
Graham Hill Water Treatment Plant 3.6
Loch Lomond Dam 3.6
Lagun Recirc 3.4
6.2 p. 355 of 557
62 | Page
Water Facilities
Mean Classified
Wildfire Hazard
Majors Creek Intake 3.4
Felton Diversion 2.9
Tait 1 Well Site 2.9
San Lorenzo River Intake 2.8
Tait 4 Well Site 2.8
Felton Booster Pump Station 2.7
Beltz 10 Well Site 2.2
Beltz 12 Well Site 2.1
Beltz 9 Well Site 2.1
Beltz 8 Well Site 2.0
Beltz Groundwater Treatment Plant 2.0
The information presented in this section shows how this data can be used to prioritize fuel reduction projects in a way that addresses infrastructure most at risk from wildfire. This type of prioritization would also be informed by local knowledge and field reconnaissance, in addition to other data such as the feasibility of treating the landscape (also known as ‘Treatment Feasibility’), slope, aspect, vegetation type, and forest structure datasets. In addition, fire behavior modeling can be used to simulate fires on the landscape at selected ignition points and the information gleaned from fire behavior modeling can aid in prioritizing treatments.
10. Acknowledgements
The project team would like to thank the Santa Cruz Mountains Stewardship Network, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) Wildfire Prevention Grants Program, and California Climate Investments for supporting this work.
Thank you to all the individual stakeholders and workshop attendees for providing thoughtful review and feedback throughout the process.
Special thanks to strategic consultant Kass Green of Kass Green & Associates for her exceptional vision and unyielding commitment to excellence.
Thanks to the broad group of funders, stakeholders, and leaders supporting development of the Santa Clara-Santa Cruz Countywide Fine Scale Vegetation Map and Landscape Database Project, of which this wildfire hazard and risk mapping effort has been a significant component. This includes:
• Big Creek Lumber
• California Department of Fish and Wildlife
• California Department of Parks and Recreation
6.2 p. 356 of 557
63 | Page
• California Native Plant Society
• California State Coastal Conservancy
• County of Santa Clara
• County of Santa Cruz
• Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy
• Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation
• Jasper Ridge Biological Preserve
• Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
• NOAA Office for Coastal Management
• Peninsula Open Space Trust
• Quantum Spatial/NV5
• Resources Legacy Fund
• San Mateo FireSafe Council
• San Mateo RCD
• San Francisco Bay Area Network of National Parks
• San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
• Santa Clara County Open Space Authority
• Santa Clara County FireSafe Council
• Santa Clara Valley Water District
• Save the Redwoods League
• UC Santa Cruz
• US Geological Survey
11. References
Andrews, P.L. and Rothermal, R. 1982. Charts for Interpreting Wildfire Fire Behavior Characteristics. General Technical Report INT-131. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden, Utah Maranghides, A., Link E.D., et al. 2022. WUI/Structure/Parcel/Community Fire Hazard Mitigation Methodology. NIST Technical Note 2205. National Institute of Standards and Technology, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C.
Nelson, R.M., 1964. The National Fire Danger Rating System: Derivation of Spread Index for Eastern and Southern States, U.S. Forest Service Research Paper SE-13. September 1964, pp. 1-
37. Rodríguez y Silva, F., J. R. M. Martínez, et al. 2014. "A methodology for determining operational priorities for prevention and suppression of wildland fires." International Journal of Wildland Fire 23(4): 544-55.
Scott, J.H., Thompson, M.P., and Calkin, D.E. 2013. A Wildfire Risk Assessment Framework for Land and Resource Management. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-315. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, Colorado
6.2 p. 357 of 557
64 | Page
Vogler, K. C., Brough, A., et al. (2021, June 30). Contemporary Wildfire Hazard Across California.
Retrieved February 28, 2022, from http://pyrologix.com/reports/Contemporary-WildfireHazard-Across-California.pdf
6.2 p. 358 of 557
65 | Page
12. Disclaimer
Tukman Geospatial makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy, timeliness, or completeness of these data. Tukman Geospatial makes no warranty of merchantability or warranty for fitness of use for a particular purpose, expressed or implied, with respect to these products or the underlying data. Any user of this data, accepts same as is, with all faults, and assumes all responsibility for the use thereof, and further covenants and agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold Tukman Geospatial harmless from and against all damage, loss or liability arising from any use of these data products, in consideration of Tukman Geospatial and its partners having made this information available. Independent verification of all data contained herein should be obtained by any user of these products, or the underlying data. Tukman Geospatial disclaims, and shall not be held liable for, any and all damage, loss, or liability, whether direct, indirect, or consequential, which arises or may arise from these products or the use thereof by any person or entity.
6.2 p. 359 of 557
This page intentionally left blank.
6.2 p. 360 of 557
APPENDIX E:
Project Recommendations
6.2 p. 361 of 557
This page intentionally left blank.
6.2 p. 362 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | E-1
Table E.1. Recommendations to Create Resilient Landscapes (Fuel Treatments) Project
ID Status Priority (H,M,L)
Timeline
for Action Project Description Location Land Ownership/ Lead Agency Methodology/Approach Serves To: Monitoring/Maintenance Requirements Funding Sources RL1 M 2023-2033 Continue to align the CWPP,
MJHMP, and General Plan
Safety Element updates and
revisions to build consistency
and leverage funding
opportunities for hazardous fuel
treatments.
Countywide Santa Clara County
OES
Build and retain partnerships between agencies and decisionmaking bodies across the county to develop solutions that mitigate the risks of common hazards faced by the entire County
• Assess values at risk
• Build upon existing hazard mitigation planning from
other agencies
• Use story map and project tracking tool to increase
accessibility and public awareness
• Utilize the established CWPP Management Team
to foster collaboration
Protect life by identifying hazards
and reducing associated risks
Protect public and first responder
life and safety
Updates to materials as needed
Convene Management Team on
an annual basis
Update the CWPP project tracking
tool with progress
• FEMA BRIC Grants
• EMPG
• RCP
• Firewise grants National
Urban and Community Forest
Program
• FP&S (FEMA)
• California Fire Safe Council
Grants
• NFPA Firewise Grants
RL2 H Ongoing Install strategic fuel breaks and
fuel reduction areas throughout
the county based on findings of
the Risk-Hazard Assessment.
Open Space
Authority, Midpen,
State Parks, County
Parks, Palo Alto
Parks, San Jose
Parks, and other
public lands that
bound up to the WUI.
Consider Assembly
Bill 2911
Prioritize treatment in
areas of concern
(Figure ES.1, Figure
4.2), and specifically
adjacent to areas
classified as ‘extreme
risk to structures’ in
the Risk-Hazard
Assessment
County, private
landowners (private
roads), state and
federal agencies
Install fuel breaks in high-risk areas and prioritize
underserved and rural areas. Potential fuel break locations include:
• Buffer roads, natural fuel breaks (rivers, creeks,
and ridgelines), and designated rights-of-way to
increase fuel break effectiveness. Areas that
support the protection of the WUI
• Valley floors, where grasslands meet or intermingle
with communities
• Around communities surrounded with rolling hills
and grasslands
• Communities surrounded by steep topography and
heavy fuel loading
• Around critical facilities and infrastructure
(e.g., communications)
• Aim for 300-foot shaded fuel breaks around
communities
• Implement and maintain shaded fuel breaks and
reduce ladder fuels and greenbelts
• Perform roadside fuels treatments to maximize
effectiveness of roadways as fuel breaks and
reduce wildfire behavior along major ingress and
egress routes.
• Fuel breaks should be designed according to sitespecific conditions • Potential methods include prescribed burning,
grazing, and mechanical
Implement a maintenance program for the Highway 17
shaded fuel break.
Protect life and property by
reducing the spread of high
severity wildfire and improving
access for emergency vehicles.
Regular maintenance schedule
should be implemented to ensure
clearance levels are maintained
and remain effective.
Update the CWPP project tracking
tool with progress and relevant
statistics.
• USFS CWDG Grants
• CAL FIRE Grant Programs
• FEMA BRIC Grants
• California Fire Safe Council
Grants
• NFPA Firewise Grants
6.2 p. 363 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | E-2
Project
ID Status Priority (H,M,L)
Timeline
for Action Project Description Location Land Ownership/ Lead Agency Methodology/Approach Serves To: Monitoring/Maintenance Requirements Funding Sources RL3 H Ongoing Evaluate existing native surface
(unpaved) fire roads for use as
fuel breaks/fuel reduction areas
as appropriate
Open Space
Authority, Midpen,
State Parks, County
Parks, Palo Alto
Parks, San Jose
Parks, and other
municipal parks that
bound up to the WUI.
Consider Assembly
Bill 2911
Depends on
jurisdiction/
easement
Identify existing gaps in fuel breaks or large-scale treatments meant for connectivity and implement and determine most effective treatment methods
• Consider road type and ownership
• Fire dept with jurisdiction/easement access would
evaluate road condition and suitability
• Maintenance would be assigned based on
jurisdiction.
• Implement maintenance - road/trail width for fire
and park patrol vehicles where possible
• Refer to RL1 for other fuel break considerations.
• Consider bridge access, ratings and maintenance
Protect life and property by
improving access for emergency
vehicles to open space areas and
WUI areas adjacent to open
space.
Regular maintenance schedule
should be implemented to ensure
clearance levels are maintained
and remain effective.
Update the CWPP project tracking
tool with progress and relevant
statistics.
• USFS CWDG Grants
• CAL FIRE Grant Programs
• FEMA BRIC Grants
• California Fire Safe Council
Grants
• NFPA Firewise Grants
6.2 p. 364 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | E-3
Project
ID Status Priority (H,M,L)
Timeline
for Action Project Description Location Land Ownership/ Lead Agency Methodology/Approach Serves To: Monitoring/Maintenance Requirements Funding Sources RL4 M Ongoing Identify continued prescribed
herbivory in open spaces,
targeting grasses and light fuels
throughout the Unit.
County-wide
Following assessment
of feasibility, prioritize
treatment in areas of
concern (Figure
ES.1), and specifically
adjacent to areas
classified as ‘high and
extreme risk to
structures’ in the riskhazard assessment
County Parks,
Miidpen, Open
Space Authority,
State Parks, water
company/district
properties,
Cattleman’s
association,
ranching
community, private
landowners
Utilize prescribed herbivory as fuel reduction and
maintenance technique, especially adjacent to WUI areas. • Work with Santa Clara Cattleman’s Association to
develop a regional grazing plan.
• Implement grazing plans to eliminate dry grass and
remove weeds and/or establish irrigation to regreen
the parcel.
• Employ grazing as a solution for treating areas of
high concern topography that would be unsafe for
hand treatment
• Work with RCDs to investigate locations where
grazing would be most effective
Collaborate with California Department of Fish and Wildlife for beaver conservation and population/habitat restoration efforts that could provide benefits for forest health/hazardous fuels reduction
• Conduct a comprehensive assessment of existing
beaver populations and study benefit to forest
resilience
• Secure funding and resources through
partnerships, grants, and fundraising initiatives to
support beaver conservation and habitat restoration
projects
• Develop and implement a monitoring program to
track the population dynamics, behavior, and
habitat conditions
Establish communication and collaboration with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) or CalTrans to
initiate discussions on the potential for expanding the elk population in targeted regions with a view to provided benefit for forest and grassland resilience.
• Conduct an assessment of suitable habitat areas
• Collaborate with CDFW to develop a
comprehensive elk management plan
• Coordinate with CalTrans to identify potential areas
for wildlife crossings through transportation
corridors
• Assess need for habitat restoration and long-term
monitoring program
Reduce fuel loading of fine fuels
that could increase wildfire spread
to WUI areas.
Regular monitoring needed to
ensure against environmental
damage and invasive species
Update the CWPP project tracking
tool with progress and relevant
statistics.
• SRA
• CA Fire Safe Council
• CFIP
• NRCS
• FEMA
• GHGRF
6.2 p. 365 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | E-4
Project
ID Status Priority (H,M,L)
Timeline
for Action Project Description Location Land Ownership/ Lead Agency Methodology/Approach Serves To: Monitoring/Maintenance Requirements Funding Sources RL5 H Ongoing Encourage use of intentional fire
(i.e. – broadcast burning, pile
burning, cultural burning,
biochar and carbonator) where
ecologically sound and feasible
County-wide
Following an
assessment of
feasibility, prioritize
treatments in areas of
concern (Figure
ES.1), and specifically
in locations where
treatment would
alleviate ‘high and
extreme risk to
structures’ in the riskhazard assessment,
and would provide
positive impacts to
watershed and
ecological health
All jurisdictions
where appropriate
Tribes
Federal agencies,
CAL FIRE
Utilize prescribed burn planning that follows agency and regulator protocols.
• Engage with tribal entities to promote the use of
cultural burning when appropriate and feasible.
• Train personnel to be NWCG-certified burn bosses
(RXB2).
• Reach out to surrounding fire agencies to
collaborate on prescribed burns. This will improve
the capacity to accomplish many/large acreage
burns.
Assess opportunities to use prescribed fire for restoration (e.g., oak woodlands) to increase wildfire resiliency.
Reduce fuel loading of fine fuels
and understory species to mitigate
potential for intense fire behavior in
the event of an unplanned ignition.
Increase capacity and training for
fire departments.
Promote healthy successional
vegetation
Provide habitat for fire-adapted
species.
Regular monitoring needed to
ensure against environmental
damage and invasive species into
burned areas.
Establish annual goals and
objectives for prescribed burning
operations.
Update the CWPP project tracking
tool with progress and relevant
statistics.
• CAL FIRE VMP program
• SRA
• CA Fire Safe Council
• CFIP
• NRCS
• GSA Federal Excess
Personal Property (FEPP)
• Firewise Grants
• BRIC
• RCP
• Fire Prevention and Safety
(FP&S) Grants (FEMA)
• Community Wildfire Defense
Grants (CWDG)
• National Urban and
Community Forestry
Challenge Cost Share Grant
Program
• U.S. Endowment for Forestry
and Communities
RL6 H Develop roadside fuel treatment
program (paved public roads),
including suite of methods
available and sustainability
mechanism.
County Wide
Prioritize treatment in
areas of concern
(Figure ES.1), and
specifically adjacent
to areas classified as
‘extreme risk to
structures’ in the riskhazard assessment
Caltrans, County
and city road
agencies; private
road associations,
PG&E, cable and
phone companies
Highest risk roadways as identified in the risk assessment Determine suite of treatment methods allowed and restriction for roadside hazard reduction including mowing, mastication, chemical, plantings, mulching, etc.
Develop treatment plan and rotation schedule for roadside treatments, focusing on primary evacuation or access/egress corridors.
• Annual spring maintenance of right-of-way
• Treat surface fuels for a minimum 10-foot buffer
and up to 30 feet where possible
• Trim fuels (limbing-up timber) to allow safe
passage of emergency vehicles
• Control for invasive species that may contribute to
rapid fire spread (i.e., weeds and grasses).
• Utilize CalVTP to expedite treatments
• Develop map that highlights critical routes.
• Align with evacuation modeling and planning
Collaborate with Santa Clara County Roads Dept. to identify areas of elevated fire risk and implement necessary treatment (e.g., Old Santa Cruz Highway, Idylwild Road)
Reduce fuel loading around roads
and highways to ensure safe
passage of vehicles in event of
evacuation and reduce unplanned
ignitions from vehicles and
highway users.
Regular maintenance schedule
should be implemented to ensure
clearance levels are maintained.
Develop standards for road crews,
including removal of slash.
Update the CWPP project tracking
tool with progress and relevant
statistics.
• SRA
• CA Fire Safe Council
• CFIP
• NRCS
• FEMA
• GHGRF
6.2 p. 366 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | E-5
Project
ID Status Priority (H,M,L)
Timeline
for Action Project Description Location Land Ownership/ Lead Agency Methodology/Approach Serves To: Monitoring/Maintenance Requirements Funding Sources RL7 M Within
18 months
and ongoing
Mobilize private landowners to
reduce fuels around homes and
communities
Private lands across
all communities
FireSafe Council
County and private
lands.
• Planning Team entities should collaborate on
development of a property owner “play book” to
encourage and support property owner actions.
Playbook would include technical information on
best management practices for mechanical thinning
and manual clearing.
• Access to a database of contractors
• Project costs within county- knowledge of common
fuel treatment methodologies and their associated
costs
Empower property owners through other mechanisms:
• Develop an enforcement program providing the
County with cause to clean up derelict or
abandoned lots.
• Develop an incentive program for property owners.
• Identify treatment burdens and address with
outreach
• Establish a community bulletin for property owners
to post information on abandoned structures and
vegetation buildup on privately owned yards.
• Consider working with local volunteer groups to
increase capacity.
Provide residents with information
that helps them prioritize
treatments and plan their
defensible space projects.
Monitor effectiveness of different
treatment approaches and
implement adaptive approach for
updating the list depending on
uptake of various methods.
Update the CWPP project tracking
tool with progress and relevant
statistics.
• NPS
• U.S. Forest Service
• CAL FIRE
• PG&E
RL8 L Ongoing Continue established agency
partnerships that retain hand
crews for fire hazard reduction
Countywide County Fire, CAL
FIRE, County
Sheriff (Weekend
Work Program),
CCC
Fuels management crews can be utilized as a countywide
resource to provide support during incident response, and they can achieve significant progress in fuels reduction projects.
Continue crew work in fire defense improvement work
throughout the county.
• Develop equipment needs to accomplish work
(including maintenance) and seek funding for
purchase.
• Create an educational tool for land/property owners
re: various methods, techniques, and cost for
various fuel treatments.
• Cultivate and support partnerships with NGOs and
volunteer groups to support implementation of
projects.
Create resilient landscapes and
address potential for extreme
wildfire behavior in and around the
WUI.
Create and maintain accountability
with local landowners/
managers.
Monitor cost effectiveness through
benefit cost ratio approach
Update the CWPP project tracking
tool with progress and relevant
statistics.
• CAL FIRE Grant Programs
• SRA
• CA Fire Safe Council
• CFIP
• NRCS
• FEMA
• GHGRF
RL9 M Within 5
years
Feasibility study for biomass
reduction and utilization
Countywide Public-Private
Partnerships
Convene public and private industry partners to explore potential methods for biomass reduction and utilization. • Conduct benefit analysis to ensure that the energy
production potential outweighs transportation costs
• Work with local biomass utilization centers for
future partnerships with fuel managers and fire
agencies
Address a need for removal of
hazardous fuels resulting from
treatments
Increase opportunities for
treatment funding by creating a
carbon benefit
Create resilient landscapes
through increased fuel treatments.
Bi-monthly or quarterly review of
progress
Monitor cost and carbon benefit
and develop standards for biomass
utilization from fuel treatments.
Update the CWPP project tracking
tool with progress
• CAL FIRE Grant Programs
• SRA
• CA Fire Safe Council
• CFIP
• NRCS
• FEMA
• GHGRF
6.2 p. 367 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | E-6
Project
ID Status Priority (H,M,L)
Timeline
for Action Project Description Location Land Ownership/ Lead Agency Methodology/Approach Serves To: Monitoring/Maintenance Requirements Funding Sources RL10 H Ongoing Create a full-time permanent
funded Countywide Wildfire
Coordinator Position
Countywide Santa Clara
County, FireSafe
Council
Establish funding for a full-time Santa Clara County Wildfire Coordinator to increase wildfire planning efforts, implement trainings for residents and county agencies, and coordinate mitigation efforts with greater effectiveness.
• Must receive budget approval from Board of
Supervisors
• FSC would provide list of responsibilities of position Increase local and county level
planning
Build resilient landscape by scaling
up wildfire planning, coordination,
and training on a county level
Update the CWPP project tracking
tool with progress.
• Internal County funds
• CAL FIRE Grant Programs
• SRA
• CA Fire Safe Council
• CFIP
• NRCS
• FEMA
• GHGRF
RL 11 H Within
5 years
Survey for dead and dying trees
and conduct removal projects
throughout
County Wide
Lexington Hills area
Santa Clara County Conduct a thorough visual survey of the designated area to identify dead and dying tree, recording coordinates, tree characteristics, and overall density.
• Prioritize removal projects based on immediate
threats to infrastructure, public safety, or high-value areas
• Develop a detailed plan for the safe and efficient
removal of dead and dying trees
Coordinate with trained personnel and monitor progress
Build resilient landscape by
reducing dry fuel loads throughout
County
Update the CWPP project tracking
tool with progress and relevant
statistics.
• SRA
• CA Fire Safe Council
• CFIP
• NRCS
• FEMA
• GHGRF
Table E.2. Recommendations for Creating Fire-Adapted Communities (Public Education and Reducing Structural Ignitability) Project
ID Status Priority (H,M,L)
Timeline
for Action Project Description Location Land Ownership/ Lead Agency Methodology/Approach Serves To: Monitoring/Maintenance Requirements Funding Sources FAC 1 H Ongoing Decrease ignitions from
unhoused populations.
WUI areas with
significant unhoused
populations including
parks and open space
areas countywide.
Santa Clara
County, private and
state lands.
Create a task force or team of PIOs and County
officials including members of the community to
create and disseminate outreach materials.
• Unify coordination.
• Create consistent messaging.
• Create goals and objectives.
• Evaluate areas of concern
• Provide information and resources guiding
individuals in the safe use of heating and
cooking materials.
• Provide unhoused populations with more
opportunities to make use of fuel sources
that reduce the risk of wildland ignitions.
• Consider implementing a fuel canister
recycling program for the purpose of
reducing the use of open flames and
canister waste.
• Apply for Community Resilience Centers
Program
Reduce wildland ignitions resulting
from unhoused populations.
PIOs meet once a quarter or once a
month.
Evaluate goals and objectives.
Update the CWPP project tracking
tool with progress and relevant
statistics.
• Firewise grants
• FP&S (FEMA)
• EPA Environmental Education
Grants
• CWDG
FAC2 L Ongoing Create collaborative
relationships with local
agricultural and ranching
communities.
Countywide County, state, and
private lands.
County planning collaborative community practice –
they have a heat and air quality group; this could be a starting point for a steering committee.
Collect a list of organizations that work with
communities and identify ways to collaborate.
Analyze and address trends in shifting livestock types
to offset hurdles associated with climate change and
wildfire.
The Firesafe Council can facilitate meetings between
the CWPP Advisory Team and ranchers after the
CWPP is developed.
Raise awareness of wildfire risks and
hazards in rural areas throughout the
County.
Establish regular steering committee
meetings.
Update the CWPP project tracking
tool with progress
• Firewise grants
• FP&S (FEMA)
• EPA Environmental Education
Grants
• CWDG
6.2 p. 368 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | E-7
Project
ID Status Priority (H,M,L)
Timeline
for Action Project Description Location Land Ownership/ Lead Agency Methodology/Approach Serves To: Monitoring/Maintenance Requirements Funding Sources FAC3 M Ongoing Provide wildland fire overview
classes to local reporters and
news press employees to
ensure the information that is
being disseminated is correct
and not misleading.
Countywide Local news
stations, reporters,
newspapers, and
public bulletins.
Create a curriculum in collaboration with County PIOs
and FPD officials.
• Provide training on proper language
regarding wildland fire.
• Provide an overview of the incident
command system and decision-making
process.
• Provide example press releases and
methods for disseminating information to
the public.
• Reduce the use of dramatic language and
provide context and clarity in a way that
reduces fear and panic in the community.
Create more trust between the
community and fire agencies.
Increase the likelihood of residents to
follow evacuation orders.
Provide Annual refreshers or classes
to reporters, editors, PIOs, and other
press-related employees.
Update the CWPP project tracking
tool with progress
• Firewise grants
• FP&S (FEMA)
• EPA Environmental Education
Grants
• CWDG
FAC4 H Ongoing Work with local fire departments
and communities to attain and
maintain Firewise USA
recognition.
Santa Clara County
fire departments and
communities. Santa
Clara County FireSafe
Council
County and private. SCCFSC working directly with CALFIRE and NFPA as a Regional Coordinator
SCCFSC in conjunction with FPDs will work with local
community leaders and HOAs for attaining and
maintaining Firewise certifications.
Reduce the risk and hazards of
wildfire to the WUI. Empower
residents to work with their neighbors
to build greater wildfire resiliency on
the community level.
Work with communities to establish
new Firewise USA recognition and
assist community Firewise
committees to evaluate progress
towards annual Firewise USA
recognition.
Update the CWPP project tracking
tool with progress and relevant
statistics.
• Coastal Conservancy
• CWDG
• California Firesafe Council
• CAL FIRE
FAC5 Ongoing H Ongoing Form a task force to do parcellevel inspection work to enhance risk modeling and be an
educational resource; utilize
portable data collection and
ArcGIS as analysis tools.
Countywide Private homes and
businesses.
Must have an agency champion to be accepted by the
public.
Agency responsibility would fall to the County Fire
Department and would expand to SCCFSC and other
entities to increase capacity.
Carry out parcel-level assessments to enhance risk
assessment model components at a finer scale.
Add data to the risk-hazard model and re-run as
necessary.
Create a comprehensive database of
parcel-level inspection data.
Inform decision-makers on risks to
structures throughout the county.
Set a target number of parcels to be
assessed each year.
Review the number of parcels
assessed each year at the annual
CWPP meeting.
Update the CWPP project tracking
tool with progress
• Firewise grants
• FP&S (FEMA)
• EPA Environmental Education
Grants
• CWDG
• SRA
• GHGR
6.2 p. 369 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | E-8
Project
ID Status Priority (H,M,L)
Timeline
for Action Project Description Location Land Ownership/ Lead Agency Methodology/Approach Serves To: Monitoring/Maintenance Requirements Funding Sources FAC6 Ongoing H Ongoing Establish and enforce defensible space standards.
County-wide, but
prioritize high and risk
areas as delineated
by the risk-hazard
assessment and
specifically, 'risk to
structures’ layer.
Local fire protection
districts, HOAs,
Private landowners
Promote defensible spaces:
• Make sure new homes/structures are made
with non-combustible materials
(i.e., encourage structural hardening)
• Enforce a minimum of 100 feet of
defensible space around structures.
• Clean and maintain ingress/egress routes.
• Ensure there are two ways out of a
community.
• Consider landscaping methods across
multiple properties that reduce fire potential
(e.g., connect fuel treatments across
different properties)
• Create a defensible space program. Include
pre-determined inspection frequency and
education/outreach efforts.
• Develop a staffing plan to support
enforcement and seek funding to implement
the plan.
• Educate property owners on real actions
that could mitigate their wildfire hazard and
risk.
• Provide tax incentives for defensible space
actions.
• Work with insurance companies to
determine the potential to provide
incentives for defensible space associated
with reduced insurance premiums.
• Consider green waste pickup/disposal
options.
• Promote and educate residents on home
hardening using NFPA, IBHS, or NIST
standards
Reduce loss of life and structures
through defensible space.
Annual program evaluation and
updates as necessary.
Consider updates to the building
code, where needed
Update the CWPP project tracking
tool with progress
• Firewise grants
• FP&S (FEMA)
• EPA Environmental Education
Grants
• CWDG
• BRIC
• SRA
• GHGR
FAC7 Ongoing L Ongoing Add hyperspectral and LiDAR
imaging to periodic aerial
photography flights.
Countywide and
surrounding
jurisdictions.
Private, county,
and state lands.
Work in conjunction with the County Assessor or other
agency that acquires aerial photography of the county
and add additional sensing cameras to flights to
acquire specialized vegetation data.
Hyperspectral and LiDAR can
provide in-depth identification and
analysis of hazards and risks
associated with fuels and
topography.
These methods may work well to
evaluate the efficacy of fuel
treatments and fuel breaks.
Periodic new flights to update data
sets.
Update the CWPP project tracking
tool with progress
• Firewise grants
• FP&S (FEMA)
• EPA Environmental Education
Grants
• CWDG
• BRIC
• SRA
• GHGR
6.2 p. 370 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | E-9
Project
ID Status Priority (H,M,L)
Timeline
for Action Project Description Location Land Ownership/ Lead Agency Methodology/Approach Serves To: Monitoring/Maintenance Requirements Funding Sources FAC8 Ongoing H Ongoing Educate citizens on how to
achieve contemporary WUI
code compliance in
retrofits/cost: benefit ratio.
Provide workshops and/or
demonstration site.
Countywide Fire Safe Councils,
County Fire, CAL
FIRE
Estimate costs for workshops and/or webinars.
Provide opportunities for the public to learn about WUI code and strategies for implementing home hardening
upgrades. See Chapter 4: Reducing Structural
Ignitability and Appendix G, Property Owner
Resources.
Refer to reports by Headwaters Economics on recent
home hardening upgrade options and costs for CA
Strategize on ways to coordinate this project with
parcel level inspection work.
Strategize avenues for engaging the public.
Be opportunistic- engage residents following a local
wildfire or at existing well-attended events, i.e., annual BBQ, Pancake Breakfasts, and open days offered by
Fire Departments.
Acquire resources through the Community Resilience
Centers Program to establish neighborhood-level
resilience centers.
Increase compliance with County
code.
Reduce fire risk levels for individual
parcels and the community.
Update the CWPP project tracking
tool with progress and relevant
statistics.
• Firewise grants
• FP&S (FEMA)
• EPA Environmental Education
Grants
• CWDG
• BRIC
• SRA
• California Fire Safe Council
FAC9 H Ongoing Track Firewise USA recognized
communities, home inspections,
outreach events, fuel mitigation
work, Firesafe Council activities,
and CWPP action Items in the
CWPP project tracking tool.
N/A Santa Clara County
SCCFSC
Establish dedicated county personnel to evaluate
project progress, collect information from PIOs and
fire departments on outreach and education, and
compile data on home inspections and Firewise USA
community.
Regularly update the CWPP project tracking tool with
relevant statistics to be reviewed by the public and
monitored by county officials.
Align actions and updates across the county hub site,
story map, and CWPP project tracking tool.
Collaborate with groups countywide to incorporate
regular updates to the CWPP hub site and story map.
Coordinate regular meetings to discuss projects and
CWPP updates.
Develop and maintain countywide FAC practitioner
database
Track the progress of different
projects, programs, and initiatives.
Provide a centralized database of
certifications, inspections, and
mitigation activities that can help with
future grant work and funding goals.
Utilize the CWPP project tracking tool
at annual CWPP meetings, Firesafe
Council meetings, and Emergency
Management Planning meetings.
Reach out to SWCA Environmental
Consultants for guidance and training
on using the tracking tool.
• Firewise grants
• FP&S (FEMA)
• EPA Environmental Education
Grants
• CWDG
• BRIC
• SRA
• California Fire Safe Council
FAC10 M Ongoing Increase and encourage
attendance of the Ag pass
program
Rural Santa Clara
County
Santa Clara
County, commercial
agriculture
producers
The existing Ag pass program is effective in
addressing post-fire concerns for ranchers and
farmers in the area.
Conduct outreach and marketing for the Ag Pass
program in relevant areas throughout the county.
The program allows eligible Santa Clara County cattle
producers access to their livestock in the event of a
wildfire.
Inform commercial ranchers and
farmers of opportunities to access
livestock in the event of a wildfire.
Evaluate attendance of outreach
events and fire safety trainings
associated with the Ag pass program.
• Firewise grants
• FP&S (FEMA)
• EPA Environmental Education
Grants
• CWDG
• BRIC
• SRA
• California Fire Safe Council
FAC11 M Ongoing Incorporate local Resource
Conservation Districts (RCDs) in
the planning and outreach
process for CWPP updates and
implementation.
Countywide and
surrounding RCDs.
Santa Clara County Ensure RCDs are given a place at the table.
RCDs can provide connections and referrals and
often have good information on communities that can
help inform land managers during decision-making
processes.
The Guadalupe-Coyote RCD has a new staff member
who can support outreach. They are looking to fill
gaps, not provide redundant resources.
Provide the county with more support
and information regarding local
communities.
Support outreach regarding wildfire
risk.
Establish an RCD representative on
the Advisory Team. • Firewise grants
• FP&S (FEMA)
• EPA Environmental Education
Grants
• CWDG
• BRIC
• SRA
• California Fire Safe Council
6.2 p. 371 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | E-10
Project
ID Status Priority (H,M,L)
Timeline
for Action Project Description Location Land Ownership/ Lead Agency Methodology/Approach Serves To: Monitoring/Maintenance Requirements Funding Sources FAC12 H Ongoing Utilize NextDoor as an outreach
tool
Countywide NextDoor now has a public agency platform that can link citizens to their neighborhoods and view agency
messaging.
Guadalupe-Coyote RCD has 1/3 of its population
viewing messages and has seen an increased trend
in people signing up for alerts and newsletters.
Collaborate with RCDs and PIOs on using NextDoor.
Provide county residents with a
reliable and centralized outreach
system.
Conduct quarterly meetings to
coordinate outreach efforts through
the program.
• Firewise grants
• FP&S (FEMA)
• EPA Environmental Education
Grants
• CWDG
• BRIC
• SRA
• California Fire Safe Council
FAC 13 H Ongoing Create smoke-ready
communities through facilitating
smoke education and providing
resources.
Countywide, focus on
smoke prone areas
and disadvantaged
communities
County Fire
Departments and
Fire Safe Councils
Identify smoke-prone regions and socioeconomically
disadvantaged communities that are most vulnerable
to impacts of smoke.
Work with FDs and Fire Safe Councils to develop
education materials
Work with County Air Quality and Extreme Heat
Working Group to develop materials
Provide resources (e.g. air cleaners) to vulnerable
and at-risk communities
Disseminate information through various channels,
including:
• Social Media
• Public Events
• In-Person Training and Workshops
• School Curriculum integration
Provide the community with
knowledge and strategies to reduce
the health impacts associated with
smoke form wildfires
Annual program evaluation and
updates as necessary. • CWDG
• Coastal Conservancy
• CAL FIRE
• California Firesafe Council
FAC 14 M Ongoing Research the need for a
Prescribed Burn Association
(PBA) or a Prescribed Burn
Council (PBC), and work with
partners to implement a
program.
Countywide SCCFSC, RCDs,
CAL FIRE, county
fire departments,
landowners, etc.
Evaluate existing legal and regulatory framework
surrounding prescribed burns in Santa Clara
Research the approach used by other existing
PBAs/PBCs in California organize their efforts
mitigate wildfire risk
Garner public involvement and interest, disseminate
educative materials to spread awareness of the
benefits of prescribes fires
Determine resource availability and additional needs
to establish and operate of PBA/PBC:
• Trained personnel
• Equipment
• Funding
• Partnership
Educate communities about the use
of prescribed fire
Reduce loss of life and structures
through decrease fuel loads
Annual program evaluation and
updates as necessary. • Coastal Conservancy
• CAL FIRE
• California Firesafe Council
FAC 15 H Ongoing Continued FAC education for
people residing, working, and
recreating in Santa Clara
County.
County Wide County Fire
Departments and
Fire Safe Councils
Educating members of the community on wildfire
science, fuels reduction, home hardening through:
• Training programs and workshops
• Community guidelines
• Train-the-trainer programs
• Forest health education programs
Promoting knowledge about smoke and its impact
with:
• Local alerts
• Public service announcements
• Guidance for indoor air quality measure
(e.g. air purifiers, closing windows)
Collaborate with FDs to develop plans and
communicate strategies that will help maximize
evacuation readiness
Provide those living, working, and
taking part in recreation within the
County with proper wildfire education
Increase community resilience to
wildfire impacts
Annual program evaluation and
updates as necessary. • CWDG
• CAL FIRE
• California Firesafe Council
6.2 p. 372 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | E-11
Table E.3. Recommendations for Safe and Effective Wildfire Response Project
ID Status Priority (H,M,L)
Timeline for
Action Project Description Location Land Ownership/ Lead Agency Methodology/Approach Serves To: Monitoring/Maintenance Requirements Funding Sources FR1 M Ongoing Reestablish protocols for
preplanned water
sources for fire
suppression operations
during times of drought.
Countywide Fire Safe Councils
or Fire Wise
Communities,
consultation with
SJW, Valley Water
and other water
providers
Ensure adequate water resources are placed and
identified in strategic locations around the county
during peak wildfire season. Locations of water
resources should be cataloged in an online mapping
program. Water infrastructure should be considered
during permitting processes and implemented into
pre-attack plans.
• Implement temporary water storage
solutions on private lands (dip tanks,
pumpkins, cisterns).
• Conduct portable dip tank training with fire
personnel.
• Create a countywide GIS and map of
temporary water resources.
• Improve existing fire flows in remote areas
to meet fire flow requirements
• Make sure fire flows in new developments
meet fire flow requirements
• Install water tanks where feasible.
In locations water tanks cannot be installed,
have tanks filled and pre-loaded to be
transported to areas of need in the event of
a fire
• Install additional tanks and standpipes
• Install helicopter dip tanks where
appropriate
• Initiate a detailed study of feasible locations
for water development improvements
• Install hand pumps or other methods
independent of the grid for accessing
private well water
• Ensure suppression crews have the
appropriate “keys” for hydrants or
standardized water fittings
• Consult with SJW, Valley Water and other
water providers
Improve fire-fighting response
Alleviate public and agency concerns
for limited water supply in certain
areas during times of drought
Aligns with the following plans:
• Santa Clara County
Operational Area Hazard
Mitigation Plan (2017)
Update the CWPP project tracking
tool with progress and relevant
statistics.
• CAL FIRE – Grant Portal
• AFG
• HMGP
• EMPG
• FMAG
• RCP
• SAFER
• BRIC
FR2 L Ongoing Determine the feasibility
of implementing a drone
program for the purpose
of monitoring wildfire
ignitions and Initial Attack
operations.
Countywide Local and state fire
agencies
Conduct a cost benefit analysis determining the
economic viability of a UAS program.
Identify and/or establish appropriate training protocols and certifications.
Create or identify a UAS job hazard analysis (JHA).
Emphasize to public that unauthorized UASs in active
fire areas interfere with Initial Attack operations
Improve fire reporting of small and
remote fires.
Notify fire suppression agencies of
wildfire ignitions and spread.
Certified UAS pilots are required.
Notify local civilian and fire related
aviation authorities of flight
operations.
• CAL FIRE – Grant Portal
• AFG
• HMGP
• EMPG
• FMAG
• RCP
• SAFER
• BRIC
FR3 L Ongoing Install a Countywide fire
detection camera system.
Countywide Santa Clara County
Office of
Emergency
Management
Determine costs, upkeep, and operational capacity of
a fire detection camera system.
Consider using a combination of UAS, Landscape
cameras, and satellite data.
Improve early detection of new
wildfire ignitions in Santa Clara
County.
Yearly testing and maintenance
before peak wildfire season.
• CAL FIRE – Grant Portal
• AFG
• HMGP
• EMPG
• FMAG
• RCP
• SAFER
6.2 p. 373 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | E-12
Project
ID Status Priority (H,M,L)
Timeline for
Action Project Description Location Land Ownership/ Lead Agency Methodology/Approach Serves To: Monitoring/Maintenance Requirements Funding Sources FR4 H Within 1 year Develop WUI Pre-Plans
for public safety agencies
to utilize in fire response
Countywide County Fire
Agencies
Utilize Zonehaven software.
Ground truth Zonehaven information by entity.
Facilitate safe and effective wildfire
response
Yearly testing and maintenance
before peak wildfire season.
• CAL FIRE – Grant Portal
• AFG
• HMGP
• EMPG
• FMAG
• RCP
• SAFER
FR5 H Within 1 year Develop a Countywide
evacuation plan
Countywide County Fire
Agencies
Utilize Zonehaven software
Ground truth Zonehaven by entity.
Use Assembly Bill 2911 subdivision review for
ingress/egress.
Notify citizens of evacuation plans
expeditiously.
Aligns with the following plans:
• Santa Clara County
Operational Area Hazard
Mitigation Plan (2017)
Yearly testing and maintenance
before peak wildfire season.
• CAL FIRE – Grant Portal
• AFG
• HMGP
• EMPG
• FMAG
• RCP
• SAFER
FR6 Ongoing M Ongoing Identify populations with
disabilities or access
needs during
evacuations.
Countywide Santa Clara County
Office of
Emergency
Management
Integrate consideration and approaches for
evacuation of vulnerable populations into the design
of education and outreach programs as well as
preplanning processes.
Assist in the safe evacuation of
vulnerable populations
Aligns with the following plans:
• Santa Clara County
Operational Area Hazard
Mitigation Plan (2017)
• Strategic Visioning Plan
(EOP) (2022)
Yearly assessment of data quality. • CAL FIRE – Grant Portal • AFG
• HMGP
• EMPG
• FMAG
• RCP
• SAFER
FR7 H Within 1 year Identify communities that
have poor ingress and
egress routes or oneway-out communities and
determine potential
solutions
Countywide Local Fire
Protection Districts
Develop a working group- outreaching to annex
holders- to address community concerns
Address specific ingress concerns in appropriate
annexes
Utilize existing CAL FIRE maps
Explore and implement a permitting process
Align with the Safety Element and HMP
Incorporate findings into/from jurisdictional annexes
and other evacuation related studies or assessments
Improve the evacuation of remote
communities and people with poor
ingress and egress options.
Aligns with the following plans:
• Santa Clara County
Operational Area Hazard
Mitigation Plan (2017)
• Strategic Visioning Plan
(EOP) (2022)
• Santa Clara County
General Plan Safety
Element (2023)
Yearly meeting of annex holders to
evaluate egress and ingress needs.
• CAL FIRE – Grant Portal
• AFG
• HMGP
• EMPG
• FMAG
• RCP
• SAFER
FR8 H Within 1 year Repaint or establish new
evacuation arrow
markers in
neighborhoods.
Countywide Santa Clara County
Office of
Emergency
Management
Paint arrows red or yellow.
Align markers with evacuation planning and identify
temporary refuge areas.
Improve the efficiency and safety of
evacuations.
Aligns with the following plans:
• Santa Clara County
Operational Area Hazard
Mitigation Plan (2017)
• Strategic Visioning Plan
(EOP) (2022)
Repaint arrows every 10 years • CAL FIRE – Grant Portal • AFG
• HMGP
• EMPG
• FMAG
• RCP
• SAFER
6.2 p. 374 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | E-13
Project
ID Status Priority (H,M,L)
Timeline for
Action Project Description Location Land Ownership/ Lead Agency Methodology/Approach Serves To: Monitoring/Maintenance Requirements Funding Sources FR9 M Ongoing Improve and provide
wildland fire specific
training opportunities to
local firefighters.
Santa Clara County Fire Protection
Districts, Fire
Stations, Rural
Volunteer Fire
Departments.
Expand certifications and qualifications for fire
department personnel. Ensure that all firefighters are
trained in basic wildfire behavior, basic fire weather, and that all company officers and chief level officers
are trained in the wildland command and strike team
leader level.
Develop agreements between agencies to provide
training opportunities for fire staff.
Ensure fire departments require all firefighters to be
red carded. A red card is required for firefighters to
work on an active federal fire incident.
Increase funds for volunteer Fire Department training
for response to fires in the WUI.
Reach out to the National Wildfire Coordination Group
(NWCG) for training materials, online courses, and
instructor needs.
Provide training opportunities for firefighter trainees to meet NWCG standards.
Expand chainsaw operation training programs.
Improve local fire department
wildland fire response and
suppression capabilities.
Reduce the damage caused by
wildfires.
Reduce the likelihood of firefighter
injuries and fatalities.
Aligns with the following plans:
• Santa Clara County
Operational Area Hazard
Mitigation Plan (2017)
• Strategic Visioning Plan
(EOP) (2022)
Provide annual red card
training/refresher/pack test events
before the start of fire season.
Provide online wildfire training
classes/refresher courses.
Establish Inter-agency training
cooperation.
• CAL FIRE – Grant Portal
• AFG
• HMGP
• EMPG
• FMAG
• RCP
• SAFER
FR10 New L Ongoing Create partnerships with
local ranchers. Increase
cooperation between
CAL FIRE, Incident
Management Teams, and
local landowners.
Santa Clara County
FSC
Rural areas,
ranchlands,
agricultural lands,
privately owned
open spaces.
Many local ranchers have private access roads,
gates, and bridges that can aid Incident Management
Teams with fire suppression operations and expedite
Initial Attack resource response. Private access roads
are not publicly mapped, and local landowners would
like it to stay that way. Consider implementing an
NDA to acquire private access information without
making it publicly available.
Ag Pass Contacts:
Stephanie Moreno
Sheila Barry
Improve Initial attack response
capabilities.
Improve fire agencies data on ingress
and egress routes.
Conduct pre-fire season meetings
with local ranch and agricultural
leaders.
• CAL FIRE – Grant Portal
• AFG
• HMGP
• EMPG
• FMAG
• RCP
• SAFER
6.2 p. 375 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | E-14
This page intentionally left blank.
6.2 p. 376 of 557
APPENDIX F:
Fuel Treatment Types and Methods
6.2 p. 377 of 557
This page intentionally left blank.
6.2 p. 378 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | F-1
FUELS TREATMENT TYPES
DEFENSIBLE SPACE
Defensible space is perhaps the fastest, most cost-effective, and most efficacious means of reducing the risk of loss of life and property. Although fire agencies can be valuable in providing guidance and assistance, creating defensible space is the responsibility of the individual property owner (Figure F.1).
The Casualty Actuarial Society (CAS) compared the impact of individual and community-level mitigation on individual property owner risks. They found that “the model indicates that all mitigation measures reduce the individual risk, but individual home mitigation – which individual property owner control – can have a bigger impact than any community mitigation alone” (CAS 2023).
Figure F.1. Defensible space zones providing clearance between a structure and adjacent woodland or forest fuels. This figure does not depict Zone 0.
Source: CAL FIRE 2022i
Effective defensible space consists of creating an essentially fire-free zone adjacent to the home (Zone 0), a treated secondary zone that is thinned and cleaned of surface fuels (Zone 1), and (if the parcel is large enough) a transitional third zone that is basically a managed forest area (Zone 2). These components work together in a proven and predictable manner. Zone 0 keeps fire from burning directly to the home; Zone 1 reduces the adjacent fire intensity and the likelihood of torching, crown fire, and ember production; and Zone 2 provides the same at a broader scale, keeping the fire intensity lower by maintaining a more natural, historic condition (see Figure F.1).
6.2 p. 379 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | F-2
It should be emphasized that defensible space is just that—an area that allows firefighters to work effectively and with some degree of safety to defend structures. While defensible space may increase a home’s chance of surviving a fire on its own, a structure’s survival is not guaranteed, with or without firefighter protection. Nevertheless, when these principles are consistently applied across a neighborhood, everybody benefits.
The definition of defensible space via state and local codes, its maintenance by property owners, and enforcement by fire agencies as needed is a common part of wildfire risk mitigation. The California State Board of Forestry issued General Guidelines for Creating Defensible Space in 2008, following a change in Public Resources Code 4291 that expanded defensible space clearance requirements from 30 to 100 feet around buildings and structures within SRAs or very high fire hazard severity zones within LRAs.
The guidelines were updated again in January 2021 to require an ember-resistant zone within 5 feet of the home. Some aspects about WUI defensible space that are often overlooked include:
• Greater defensible space may be needed due to local conditions, such as slope, fuel density, building materials, or location.
• Fuel reduction has more to do with disrupting fuel continuity so that the spread of fire is impeded, rather than creating a denuded zone around a home. For example, pruning the lower limbs of trees creates a break between ground fuels and tree canopies, reducing the chances that a fire will move from a ground fire to a crown fire.
• Communities may wish to develop defensible space areas that are greater than 100 feet for even better protection; the code sets only a minimum distance. However, expanding treatments beyond property lines can only be done if allowed by state law, local ordinance, rule, or regulation.
• Defensible space also provides a safer environment within which firefighters can work. This environment is more than vegetation clearance; defensible space also involves emergency vehicle access, water supply, and clear street signs and addresses. All these factors, and many more as identified by previous community-level CWPPs, affect the usefulness of defensible space in structure protection.
• Vegetation fuel reduction projects require compliance with all federal, state, or local environmental protection laws.
Additionally, the Public Resources Code was amended in January 2021 to require an ember-resistant zone within 5 feet of the home/structure on or before January 1, 2023. This translates to having a clearance of 5 feet between the home/structure and any materials that would likely be ignited by embers CA Public Resources Code Section 4291 (California Public Law 2023).
The three zones for defensible space actions are described below (CAL FIRE 2022)i:
Zone 0 Immediate Zone–Ember Resistant: As of January 1, 2023, Assembly Bill 3074 requires the Board of Forestry and Fire Protection to develop the regulation for Zone 0. This zone has been proven to be the most important defensible space zone for protecting your home against wildfire. This zone consists of the immediate area around a home and is defined as 0 to 5 feet from the property structure, including areas under and around all structure attachments, such as sheds or decks. Zone 0 requires the most stringent wildfire fuel reduction methods as actions taken within this zone can directly influence whether a property ignites. See Ember Ignition Hazards in Chapter 2. Recommendations for treating Zone 0 include (CAL FIRE 2022i):
• Use non-combustible landscaping materials, such as gravel, in place of mulch.
6.2 p. 380 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | F-3
• Clear all dead and dying debris from around a structure, including branches, dead leaves, pinecones, pine needles, grasses, and shrubs. Remember to check areas where the debris can accumulate, such as gutters, stairways, porches, and roofs. • Clear all branches or vegetation within 10 feet of any chimney or stovepipe outlet. • To keep vegetation within the 5-foot buffer around all structures, make sure plants are thoroughly watered, and keep non-woody, low-growing plant species if possible. • Limit the use of combustible materials, such as outdoor furniture, on decks or patios. • Relocate firewood or lumber to Zone 2.
• Replace structures attached to a home, such as fencing or gates, with non-combustible materials. • If possible, keep garbage receptacles outside of Zone 0. • If possible, keep all vehicles, boats, ATVs, and any other machines outside of Zone 0.
Zone 1 Intermediate Zone–Clean and Green: Zone 1 consists of the first 30 feet from structures, including the home, decks, garages, etc. If a property line extends less than 30 feet, Zone 1 would be the distance from structures to property line. This zone features fuel reduction efforts and serves as a transitional area between Zones 0 and 2. Recommendations for treating Zone 1 include (CAL FIRE 2022i):
• Remove all dead and dying vegetation, including vegetation debris such as leaf litter. Be sure to check roof and gutters as well.
• Maintain a minimum buffer of 10 feet between a chimney and any vegetation, including dead or overhanging branches. Be sure to remove all branches that hang over the roof. • Maintain trees by trimming them regularly and keep a minimum 10-foot buffer between tree canopies.
• Relocate fire or lumber to Zone 2.
• Trim or remove any flammable vegetation near windows. • Remove any items or vegetation that could catch fire and ignite other property structures, such as vegetation under decks or stairs.
• Separate any items that could ignite, such as trees, shrubs, swing sets, patio furniture, etc.
Zone 2 Extended Zone–Reduced Fuel: This zone encompasses an area 30 feet from a structure out to 100 feet, or the property line, whichever is closer. This zone addresses fuel reduction to prevent wildfires from spreading. Recommendations for treating Zone 2 include (CAL FIRE 2022i):
• Maintain all grasses to reach a maximum height of 4 inches. • For shrubs or trees, maintain horizontal space between plants of at least two times a plant’s size (Figure F.3). Additional space between vegetation is needed for properties on slopes. o Flat to mild slope (less than 20%): Minimum distance of 10 feet between trees and two times the size of other plants. Example: For shrubs 2 feet in diameter, at least 4 feet are needed between shrubs.
o Mild to moderate slope (20%–40%): Minimum distance of 20 feet between trees and four times the size of other plants. Example: For shrubs 2 feet in diameter, at least 8 feet are needed between shrubs.
6.2 p. 381 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | F-4
o Moderate to steep slope (greater than 40%): Minimum distance of 30 feet between trees and six times the size of other plants. Example: For shrubs 2 feet in diameter, at least 12 feet are needed between shrubs.
• Create vertical space between vegetation by clearing all branches at least 6 feet from the ground for isolated trees, or for trees with nearby shrubs, clear at least 3 times the shrub height (Figure F.4).
o Example: A 4-foot shrub is growing near a tree. A clearance of 12 feet (3 × 4) is needed between the top of the shrub and the lowest tree branch. • Vegetation debris such as dead leaves, branches, twigs, pinecones, etc., may be allowed up to 3 inches in depth. However, it is best to remove vegetation debris. • All wood or lumber piles must have a 10-foot buffer of bare mineral soil in all directions; no vegetation is allowed.
In addition to the recommendations listed above, CAL FIRE suggests maintaining a clearance zone of 10 feet around any outbuildings or liquid propane gas storage tanks, and an additional 10-foot clearance zone with no flammable vegetation (CAL FIRE 2022i).
A defensible space of 100 feet is required by California State law. Figure F.2 provides a brief synopsis of the 100-foot defensible space requirement for California residents living in the WUI.
Property owners are encouraged to take advantage of local resources for fire prevention and mitigation.
Property owner actions have been found to also motivate neighbors to act, increasing the scope of the wildfire mitigation across a community (Evans et al. 2015). Adopting a phased approach can make the process more manageable and encourage maintenance.
The Santa Clara County Fire Department and CAL FIRE provide defensible space recommendations on their websites at:
• https://sccfiresafe.org/prepare/creating-defensible-space/ • https://www.fire.ca.gov/dspace
The Santa Clara Fire Council has created a defensible space presentation to assist educating county residents: https://sccfiresafe.org/learn/defensible-space-presentation/
6.2 p. 382 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | F-5
Figure F.2. Defensible space.
Source: CAL FIRE 2022i
Specific recommendations should be based on the particular hazards adjacent to a structure such as slope steepness and fuel type. Local fire authorities or CAL FIRE should be contacted if a professional assessment seems warranted. Firewise guidelines are an excellent resource, but creating defensible
6.2 p. 383 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | F-6
space does not have to be an overwhelming process. Assisting neighbors may be essential in many cases. Property owners should consider assisting the elderly, sharing ladders for gutter cleaning, and assisting neighbors with large thinning needs. Adopting a phased approach can make the process more manageable and encourage maintenance (Table F.1).
Table F.1. Example of a Phased Approach to Defensible Space Year Project Actions
1 Basic yard cleanup (annual)
Dispose of clutter in the yard and under porches.
Remove dead branches from yard.
Mow and rake.
Clean roofs and gutters.
Remove combustible vegetation near structures.
Coordinate disposal as a neighborhood or community.
Post 4-inch reflective address numbers visible from road. 2 Understory thinning near
structures
Repeat basic yard cleanup.
Limb trees up to 6–10 feet.
Trim branches back 15 feet from chimneys.
Trim or cut down brush.
Remove young trees that can carry fire into forest canopy.
Coordinate disposal as a neighborhood or community.
3 Understory thinning on private
property along roads and
drainages
Limb trees up to 6–10 feet.
Trim or cut down brush.
Remove young trees that can carry fire into forest canopy.
Coordinate disposal as a neighborhood or community.
4 Overstory treatments on
private property
Evaluate the need to thin mature or diseased trees.
Prioritize and coordinate tree removal within neighborhoods to increase cost effectiveness.
5 Restart defensible space
treatment cycle
Continue the annual basic yard cleanup.
Evaluate need to revisit past efforts or catch those that were bypassed.
6.2 p. 384 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | F-7
Figure F.3. Minimum horizontal clearance.
Source: CAL FIRE 2022i
Figure F.4. Minimum vertical clearance.
Source: CAL FIRE 2022i
Specific recommendations should be based on the hazards adjacent to a structure such as slope steepness and fuel type. Firewise guidelines and the Property Owner Resources Appendix (see Appendix G) are excellent resources but creating defensible space does not have to be an overwhelming process.
The NFPA offers a free Community Wildfire Risk Assessment Tutorial and an online learning module:
6.2 p. 385 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | F-8
Understanding the Wildfire Threat to Homes. Both tools are great resources for learning about and implementing defensible space.
Adopting a phased approach can make the process more manageable and encourage maintenance (Table F.2).
Table F.2. Example of a Phased Approach to Mitigating Home Ignitability Year Project Actions
1 Basic yard cleanup (annual) Dispose of clutter in the yard and under porches.
Remove dead branches from yard.
Mow and rake.
Clean roofs and gutters.
Remove combustible vegetation near structures.
Coordinate disposal as a neighborhood or community.
Post 6-inch reflective address numbers visible from road. 2 Understory thinning near
structures
Repeat basic yard cleanup.
Limb trees up to 6–10 feet.
Trim branches back 15 feet from chimneys.
Trim or cut down brush.
Remove young trees that can carry fire into forest canopy.
Coordinate disposal as a neighborhood or community.
3 Understory thinning on private
property along roads and
drainages
Limb trees up to 6–10 feet.
Trim or cut down brush.
Remove young trees that can carry fire into forest canopy.
Coordinate disposal as a neighborhood or community.
4 Overstory treatments on private
property
Evaluate the need to thin mature or diseased trees.
Prioritize and coordinate tree removal within neighborhoods to increase cost effectiveness.
5 Restart defensible space
treatment cycle
Continue the annual basic yard cleanup.
Evaluate need to revisit past efforts or catch those that were bypassed.
Current Structural Ignitability Reduction Programs
Defensible Space Enforcement
The Santa Clara County Fire Department carries out defensible space assessments of homes within their jurisdiction that fall within the designated WUI of the communities they serve. The assessments are carried out on a rotating basis. The department sends mailings to each identified residence prior to fire season, announcing the measures that the resident should take in implementing defensible space practices. State law requires a defensible space of 100 feet around homes and all accessory structures in the very high FHSZ and on all identified properties in the SRA. The Santa Clara County Fire Chiefs Association has developed the following list of required and recommended preventative measures that are included in the mailing.
6.2 p. 386 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | F-9
Enforced Safety Measures:
A. Create 100 feet of defensible space around home. To accomplish this, create a Green Zone by clearing flammable vegetation 30 feet around structures. Additionally create a Reduced Fuel Zone for remaining 70 feet or to your property line.
B. Clear ornamental shrubs and trees of dead leaves and branches.
C. Remove all pine needles and leaves from roofs, eaves, and rain gutters.
D. Trim tree limbs 10 feet from chimneys or stovepipes and remove dead limbs that hang over rooftops.
E. Cover chimney outlets or flues with a ½-inch mesh spark arrestor.
F. Post a clearly visible house address, using at least 6-inch-high numbers, for easy identification.
Additional Recommended Measures:
A. Trees 18 feet or taller should be limbed up 6 feet from the ground.
B. Stack woodpiles a minimum of 30 feet from buildings, fences, and combustible materials.
C. Clear vegetation and other flammable materials from underneath decks. Enclose elevated desks with fire-resistive materials.
D. If you have any trees near power lines, please contact PG&E at 1-800-PGE-5000 for a free inspection. State law requires vegetation clearance from electrical lines. For more information, visit http://www.PGE.com. In most cases, PG&E will remove the tree at no cost to you.
E. The Santa Clara County Fire Safe Council offers defensible space chipping programs to assist property owners, including special programs for qualified low-income seniors and disabled property owners. For more information, visit http://www.sccfiresafe.org.
Santa Clara County fire personnel carry out the inspections beginning in the spring each year. For those properties that are non-compliant, the department will advise the property owner that work is necessary to be in compliance with the applicable regulations. Residents who are unable to complete the measures due to physical disabilities, etc., are asked to contact the department. The resident is welcome to complete the necessary work on their own or they can use a contractor. Follow-up inspections are completed in early summer for properties that did not meet the Enforced Safety Measures (see above) during the first inspection. If residents do not comply with items A through F of the Enforced Safety Measures, the compliance work is completed by an authorized contractor of the relevant municipality, and the charges for the service are applied to the next property tax bill for the property.
Home Ignition Zone Assessments
The Santa Clara County Fire Safe Council offers on-site assessments of structural ignitability and home ignition zone vulnerabilities to residents in its service area. This program brings consultants to see the home and yard in person and to review checklists and recommendations to reduce the risk of the structure being ignited from flying embers, as well as flames in the yard and neighboring structures.
The assessment is based on NFPA’s 1144 Standard for Reducing Structure Ignition Hazards from Wildland Fire.
6.2 p. 387 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | F-10
HAZARDOUS FUEL
Fuels should be modified with a strategic approach across the planning area to reduce the threat that high intensity wildfires pose to lives, property, and other values. Pursuant to these objectives, the CWPP contains recommendations developed in the context of existing and planned fuels management projects.
These recommendations initially focus on areas adjacent to structures (defensible space), then near community boundaries (fuel breaks, cleanup of adjacent open spaces), and finally in the wildlands beyond community boundaries (larger-scale forest health and restoration treatments). A common focus of fuels treatment is to reduce brush, diseased trees, dead fuels, and immature trees in favor of healthy, more mature trees and shrubs.
While not necessarily at odds with one another, the emphasis of each of these treatment types is different. Proximate to structures, the recommendations focus on reducing fire intensity consistent with County and code standards. Further into open space areas, treatments will tend to emphasize the restoration of historic conditions and general forest health. Cooperators in fuels management should include federal, state, and local agencies, as well as interested members of the public.
Fire management cannot be a one-size-fits-all endeavor; this plan is designed to be flexible. Treatment approaches and methods will be site-specific and should be adapted to best meet the needs of the landowner and the resources available. Moreover, each treatment recommendation should address protection of CVARs, protection of people, critical infrastructure, cultural icons, economic engines, and threatened and endangered species. It is the intent of this plan to be an evolving document that will incorporate additional areas of the CWPP planning area as they change in risk category over time.
Current Hazardous Fuel Mitigation Programs
Vegetation Management Program
CAL FIRE’s Vegetation Management Program (VMP) is a formal cost-sharing program that applies prescribed fire and various mechanical treatment methods to reduce wildland hazardous fuels and to achieve other natural resource management goals within SRAs (CAL FIRE 2023c). The Santa Clara Unit has a long history of partnering under such agreements with local landowners to reduce hazardous fuels, improve range and wildlife habitat, and maintain natural ecosystems dependent upon periodic fires.
Vegetation management focuses on the volume, structure, and distribution of vegetation on a landscape.
Fuel treatments mainly focus on only the surface and ladder fuels.
The CAL FIRE Santa Clara Unit Fire Plan identifies the following priority areas for VMP projects:
• VMP projects where property owners meet the criteria for a cost share agreement and have a signed agreement with CAL FIRE;
• areas with high hazardous fuel loading near WUI zones; • areas with no recent fire history;
• areas with protected species requiring burning for habitat improvement; and • areas needing improvement to range capacity or hydrologic production.
6.2 p. 388 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | F-11
OPEN SPACE CLEANUP
The next location priority for fuels treatments should be where the community meets wildland. This may be the outer margins of a town or an area adjacent to occluded open spaces such as a park. Fuel breaks (also known as shaded fuel breaks) are strips of land where fuel (for example, living trees and brush, dead branches, leaves, or downed logs) has been modified or reduced to limit the fire’s ability to spread rapidly. Fuel breaks should not be confused with firebreaks, which are areas where vegetation and organic matter are removed down to mineral soil. Shaded fuel breaks may be created to provide options for suppression resources or to provide opportunities to introduce prescribed fire. In many cases, shaded fuel breaks may be created by thinning along roads. This provides access for mitigation resources and firefighters, as well as enhancing the safety of evacuation routes.
Fuel Breaks and Roadside Treatments
After defensible space, the next location priority for fuels treatments is where the community meets the wildland. This may be the outer margins of a town or an area adjacent to open spaces such as a park.
Fuel breaks are strips of land where natural vegetation fuels have been modified or reduced to limit the fire’s ability to spread rapidly and generate large amounts of embers.
Fuel modifications can include removing dead trees, branches, and downed logs; reducing the amount of deep duff such as needles, leaves, and twigs; mowing or plowing grasses; and pruning or thinning living trees and shrubs. Fuel breaks can be underneath trees where they are called shaded fuel breaks, or out in the sunlight, such as through chaparral, shrublands, or grasslands.
Fuel breaks are typically at least 75 feet wide and can be as much as 200 feet wide, however they retain some vegetation within the fuel break and its habitat values. They should not be confused with fire breaks, which are areas where vegetation and organic matter are removed down to mineral soil.
Fuel breaks may be created to provide options for suppression resources, opportunities to introduce prescribed fire, or to create a zone where crown fire will be forced to the ground where it is more easily contained.
In some cases, fuel breaks may be created by treating vegetation along roadsides where the road is located on a ridge or other geographic feature that helps interrupt wildfire growth. The road surface is included in the width of the fuel break, which can be on one or both sides of the road.
Another type of roadside treatment is evacuation route clearance and thinning. This treatment generally is more modest than a fuel break and is used in locations where fire may easily cross the road, such as where the road traverses a slope, or where homes, fencing, and other features prevent full-width fuel break clearing.
Evacuation route treatments include removing weak trees that lean into or over the road, pruning branches high and wide enough to ensure fire engine and truck passage, and then mowing grasses, removing or thinning shrubs and small trees, removing dead branches, trees and logs, and removing low branches on larger living trees to clear ladder fuels next to the road. Where roads are narrow, bulges and turnouts are cleared to help provide places to pass. Generally, evacuation route treatments extend 6 to 30 feet from both road edges.
6.2 p. 389 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | F-12
Evacuation route treatments make the road safer to use during a wildfire, even when it is burning next to the road, by keeping flame lengths low and the fire on the ground instead of in the crown of the trees, which reduces heat, and by reducing the likelihood of burning trees and utility poles falling into and blocking the roadway. They also help responding fire apparatuses pass evacuating residents.
Evacuation routes that have been treated are also less likely to be sites of fire starts from vehicle fires, sparking trailer chains, burning cigarettes, or similar causes.
The Fire Safe Council has a robust fuel break and evacuation route vegetation treatment program that it coordinates with private landowners, parks and open space managers, and roads departments. Funding for these treatments comes from federal, state, county, and local sources, as well as road associations, utilities, and other corporate or private grants. CAL FIRE also provides in-kind support through the use of conservation/fire crews to provide manual treatments at low cost, which extends grant funds to treat more ground.
LARGER-SCALE TREATMENTS
Farther away from WUI communities, the emphasis of treatments often becomes broader. While reducing the buildup of hazardous fuels remains important, other objectives are often included, such as forest health and resiliency to catastrophic wildfire and climate change considerations. Wildfires frequently burn across jurisdictional boundaries, sometimes on landscape scales. As such, these larger treatments need to be coordinated on a strategic level. This requires coordination between projects and jurisdictions, as is currently occurring.
ACTION ITEMS FOR PROPERTY OWNERS TO
REDUCE STRUCTURAL IGNITABILITY
Limited Investment (<$250)
• Regularly check fire extinguishers and have a 100-foot hose available to wet perimeter of home. • Maintain defensible space within 30 feet around home. Collaborate with neighbors to provide adequate fuels mitigation in the event of overlapping property boundaries. • Ensure that house numbers are easily readable from the street. • Keep wooden fence perimeters free of combustible materials. If possible, non-combustible material should link the house and fence.
• Store combustible materials (propane, grills, firewood) away from the house. • Remove flammable material from around propane tanks.
• Clear out materials from under decks and near structures. Stack firewood at least 30 feet away from the house.
• Reduce your workload by considering local weather conditions. First, consider mitigating hazards on the side of your property that faces the prevailing wind direction. Then work around to cover the whole property.
6.2 p. 390 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | F-13
• Keep gutters free of combustible material. Gutters can act as collection points for embers. Gutter cleaning costs: $0.50 to $1.50 per square foot; $110 to $185 for a one-story home; $125 to $250 for a two-story home (national average).
• Maintain roofs by installing flashing, fixing holes, replacing shingles, and closing gaps: $150 to $400 for minor repairs (national average).
• Purchase or use a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration weather alert radio to hear fire weather announcements: $25 to $100.
Moderate Investment (<$1,500)
• When landscaping in the home ignition zone (HIZ) (approximately 30 feet around the property), select non-combustible plants, lawn furniture, and landscaping material. Combustible plant material like junipers and ornamental conifers should be pruned and kept away from siding. If possible, trees should be planted in groups and no closer than 10 feet to the house. Tree crowns should have a spacing of at least 18 feet when within the HIZ. Vegetation at the greatest distance from the structure and closest to wildland fuels should be carefully trimmed and pruned to reduce ladder fuels, and density should be reduced with approximately 6-foot spacing between trees and crowns.
• Work on mitigating hazards on adjoining structures (sheds, garages, barns, etc.). These can act as ignition points to your home.
• Clear and thin vegetation along driveways and access roads so they can act as a safe evacuation route and allow emergency responders access to the home.
• Construct a gravel turnaround in your driveway to improve access and mobilization of fire responders.
Single-car turnaround: $400 to $600. Two-car turnaround: $800 to $1200. • Install a roof irrigation system: $230 to $1500.
High Investment ($1,500+)
• Install an environmentally friendly and fire-resistant xeriscape yard: $5 to $20 per square foot. • Install screen vents with non-combustible meshing. Mesh openings should not exceed nominal ⅛ - 1/16‑inch size: $2.50 per square foot. Average cost per home: approximately $5,000. • Enclose open space underneath permanently located manufactured homes using non-combustible skirting: $300 to $3,000 with an average of $1,700. Added features include home egress: $50 to $85; skirting vents: $7 to $25 each.
• Construct a non-combustible wall or barrier between your property and wildland fuels. This could be particularly effective at mitigating the effect of radiant heat and fire spread where 30 feet of defensible space is not available around the structure.
• Install fire resistant soffits and under eave vents to protect your home from heat and embers that can be trapped beneath roof overhangs. Soffit and fascia: $7,000. Vents: $1,500. • Replace exterior windows and skylights with tempered glass or multilayered glazed panels: Average cost per home: $11,500.
• Update your roof to a non-combustible construction. Look for materials that have been treated and given a fire-resistant roof classification of Class A: $10,000 to 15,000+. • Upgrade exterior walls with fire resistant materials. Siding: $12,000+. Sheathing: $4,000+. • Relocate propane tanks underground: $1,500 to $ 8,150.
6.2 p. 391 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | F-14
Additional resources regarding home hardening can be found in Appendix G.
FUEL TREATMENT METHODS
Several treatment methods are commonly used for hazardous fuels reduction, including manual treatments, mechanized treatments, prescribed fire, and grazing (Table F.3). This brief synopsis of treatment options is provided for general knowledge; specific projects will require further planning.
The appropriate treatment method and cost will vary depending on factors such as the following:
• Diameter of materials
• Proximity to structures
• Acreage of project
• Fuel costs
• Steepness of slope
• Area accessibility
• Density of fuels
• Project objectives
It is imperative that long-term monitoring and maintenance of all treatments are implemented. Posttreatment rehabilitation, such as seeding with native plants and erosion control, may be necessary.
In addition, post-treatment fuel clean-up is a must as neglected piles of vegetation may result in increased fire risk.
Table F.3. Summary of Fuels Treatment Methods
Treatment Comments
Machine mowing Appropriate for large, flat, grassy areas on relatively flat terrain.
Manual treatment with
chipping or pile burning
Requires chipping, hauling, and pile burning of slash in cases where lop and scatter is inappropriate.
Pile burning must comply with smoke management policy.
Brush mastication Brush species tend to re-sprout vigorously after mechanical treatment.
Frequent maintenance of treatments is typically necessary.
Mastication (ground-up timber) tends to be less expensive than manual (chainsaw) treatment and eliminates disposal issues.
Timber mastication Materials up to 10 inches in diameter and slopes up to 30% can be treated.
Eliminates disposal issues.
Environmental impact of residue being left on-site is still being studied.
Prescribed fire Can be very cost effective for public land but not close to the city.
Ecologically beneficial.
Can be used as training opportunities for firefighters.
May require manual or mechanical pretreatment.
Carries risk of escape.
Unreliable scheduling due to weather and smoke management constraints.
6.2 p. 392 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | F-15
Treatment Comments
Feller buncher Mechanical treatment on slopes more than 30% or of materials more than 10 inches in diameter may require a feller buncher rather than a masticator.
Costs tend to be considerably higher than masticator.
Grazing (goats) Can be cost effective.
Ecologically beneficial.
Can be applied on steep slopes and shrubby and flashy fuels.
Requires close management.
MANUAL TREATMENT
Manual treatment refers to crew-implemented cutting with chainsaws. Although it can be more expensive than mechanized treatment, crews can access many areas that are too steep or otherwise inaccessible with machines. Treatments can often be implemented with more precision than prescribed fire or mechanized methods allow. Merchantable materials and firewood can be removed while nonmerchantable materials are often lopped and scattered, chipped, or piled and burned on-site. Care should be exercised to not increase the fire hazard by failing to remove or treat discarded material in a siteappropriate manner.
Strategic timing and placement of fuel treatments are critical for effective fuel management practices and should be prescribed based on the conditions of each treatment area. Some examples of this would be to place fuel breaks in areas where the fuels are heavier and in the path of prevailing winds and to mow grasses just before they cure and become flammable. Also, fuel reductions on slopes/ridgelines extending from the WUI are important to enhance community protection. In areas where the vegetation is sparse and not continuous, fuel treatments may not be necessary to create a defensible area where firefighters can work. In this situation, where the amount of fuel to carry a fire is minimal, it is best to leave the site in its current condition to avoid the introduction of exotic species.
MECHANIZED TREATMENTS
Mechanized treatments include mowing, mastication, and whole tree felling. These treatments allow for more precision than prescribed fire and are often more cost-effective than manual treatment.
Mowing, including ATV and tractor-pulled mower decks, can effectively reduce grass fuels adjacent to structures and along highway rights-of-way and fence lines. For heavier fuels, several different masticating machines can be used, including drum or blade-type masticating heads mounted on machines and ranging in size from a small skid-steer to large front-end loaders. Some masticators can grind standing timber up to 10 inches in diameter. Other masticators are more effective for use in brush or surface fuels. Mowing and mastication do not actually reduce the amount of on-site biomass but alter the fuel arrangement to a less combustible profile.
In existing fuel break areas maintenance is crucial, especially in areas of encroaching shrubs or trees.
In extreme risk areas more intensive fuels treatments may be necessary to keep the fire on the ground surface and reduce flame lengths. Within the fuel break, shrubs should be removed, and the branches of trees should be pruned from the ground surface to a height of 4 to 8 feet, depending on the height of the fuel below the canopy, and thinned with a spacing of at least two to three times the height of the trees to avoid movement of an active fire into the canopy.
6.2 p. 393 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | F-16
Mechanical shears mounted on feller bunchers are used for whole tree removal. The stems are typically hauled off-site for utilization while the limbs are discarded. The discarded material may be masticated, chipped, or burned to reduce the wildfire hazard and to speed the recycling of nutrients.
GRAZING
Fuel modifications targeted toward decreasing both vertical and horizontal continuity in fuels is critical as a prevention method against fire proliferation. The primary objectives for these modifications are treating surface fuels and producing low-density and vertically disconnected stands. Goat grazing is an effective, nontoxic, nonpolluting, and practically carbon-neutral vegetation treatment method. A goat grazing system typically consists of a high density of goats enclosed by a metallic or electrified fence guided by herders. Goats feed on a variety of foliage and twigs from herbaceous vegetation and woody plants (Lovreglio et al. 2014).
FUEL BREAKS
Fuel breaks, or shaded fuel breaks, are strips of land where fuel (for example, living trees and brush, dead branches, leaves, or downed logs) has been modified or reduced to limit the fire’s ability to spread rapidly. Because fuel breaks may not stop a fire under extreme fire behavior or strong winds, they should be considered a mitigating measure rather than a fail-safe method for fire containment. Furthermore, fuel break utility is contingent upon regular maintenance, as regrowth in a fuel break can quickly reduce its effectiveness and vegetation in this ecosystem is known to quickly re-sprout and reestablish.
Maintenance of existing breaks could be more cost efficient than installation of new features.
It is not possible to provide a standard treatment prescription for the entire landscape because fuel break dimensions should be based on the local fuel conditions and prevailing weather patterns. For example, in some areas, clearing an area too wide could open the landscape to strong winds that could generate more intense fire behavior and/or create wind throw.
Strategic placement of fuel breaks is critical to prevent fire from moving from wildland fuels into adjacent neighborhoods. For effective management of most fuels, fuel breaks should be prescribed based on the conditions in each treatment area. Some examples of this would be to place fuel breaks in areas where fuels are heavier or in areas with easy access for fire crews. In areas where the vegetation is discontinuous, fuel treatments may not be necessary. In these situations, it is best to leave sites in their current conditions to avoid the introduction of more flammable, exotic species that may respond readily following disturbance.
Well-managed fuels reduction projects often result in ecological benefits to wildlife and watershed health.
Simultaneously, planning and resource management efforts should occur when possible while reducing fuels to ensure that the land remains viable for multiple uses in the long term. The effectiveness of any fuels reduction treatment will increase over time with a maintenance and monitoring plan. Monitoring will also ensure that objectives are being met in a cost-effective manner.
One example of a large fuel break in Santa Clara County is the State Route 17 Shaded Fuel break, which was completed in May of 2019. The project represented the largest vegetative fuel reduction pursuit among Governor Newsom’s priority wildfire protection projects for the year, amassing a cost of $9 million.
With the treatment of over 400 acres, the fuel break aimed to improve wildfire resiliency for the neighborhoods along the Highway 17 corridor. This project was a collaborative effort between a collection of public agencies as part of the California Climate Investments statewide initiative, funneling billions of
6.2 p. 394 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | F-17
Cap-and-Trade dollars toward projects that help facilitate meaningful climate benefits such as the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and improving the health the environment (Santa Clara County Fire Safe Council 2019).
PRESCRIBED BURNING
Prescribed burning (Figure 4.5) is also a useful tool to reduce the threat of extreme fire behavior by removing excessive standing plant material, litter, and woody debris while limiting the encroachment of shrubby vegetation. Where possible, prescribed fire could occur on public land since fire is ecologically beneficial to this fire-adapted vegetation community and wildlife habitat. However, there is minimal opportunity to apply prescribed fire within or close to city limits. Prescribed burning requires detailed planning and coordination. In 2019, the CAL FIRE Prescribed Fire Working Group developed the CAL FIRE Prescribed Fire Guidebook with the intent of educating CAL FIRE employees on how the department utilizes prescribed fire to reduce fuels at a landscape scale while improving ecosystem health in California (CAL FIRE 2019c).
Although the focus of wildfire risk mitigation is often on the reduction and removal of vegetation, and the prevention and suppression of wildfire, fire under the right circumstances can be not only a useful tool to reduce hazardous amounts of fuel but also an important factor in wildland ecosystems. Many fire and resource management agencies at the local, state, and federal levels include the use of fire in their programs.
The use of prescribed fire has several requirements to be successful, including:
• Planning documents include approval authority, burn objectives, preparation requirements, weather and fuel conditions under which the burn will be performed, operational responsibilities, contingency planning in the event of an escape, and post-burn monitoring to document the attainment of burn objectives and other potential fire effects, such as the occurrence of invasive species.
• Specific attention must be given to smoke management and weather forecasts concerning smoke direction and atmospheric mixing patterns. Review of prescribed burn plans and smoke management techniques need to be performed by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District.
Consultation between the agencies involved with the burn and the air district needs to occur early in the planning cycle, especially regarding identification of suitable weather periods for the burn to be conducted. Conditions suitable for the fire agency may not be suitable from the perspective of the air district.
• Public education and outreach are vital given the frequent concern by the public over smoke, risk of escape, and post-fire appearance of the burn unit. It is unlikely that all the public will support the prescribed fire program, but outreach conducted through social media and on-site visits to the post-burn areas as they recover can develop a broad base of support, especially if the fire has stimulated the occurrence of desirable species considered to be rare.
6.2 p. 395 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | F-18
Figure F.5. Prescribed fire being used to reduce grass loads on public open space land in Santa Clara County.
More typically, hazardous fuels are managed with a variety of tools, including goats, disking, hand cutting and piling, herbicides, mowing, and weed whips. As is the case with prescribed fire, the need remains to define the objectives of the treatment, measurement to document that the objectives were met, and follow-up monitoring to discover any unexpected deleterious effects on natural resources.
Cultural Burning
Within the Pacific West, fire has historically been a means of forest management and restoration by Indigenous communities (Long et al. 2021). Cultural burning has been defined as the “purposeful use of fire by a cultural group (e.g., family unit, Tribe, clan/moiety, society) for a variety of purposes and outcomes,” and is included under the terms Indigenous fire management, Indigenous burning, and Indigenous stewardship (Long et al. 2021).
Rather than focusing solely on fuel reduction, or as a means of wildfire mitigation, cultural burning is done with a more holistic view, under the philosophy of “reciprocal restoration,” meaning, as stewardship responsibilities to the land are fulfilled, those actions will in turn benefit the peoples who depend on those ecosystems (Long et al. 2021). Cultural burning is typically performed with a variety of objectives, such as landscape management, ecosystem and species biodiversity and health, transmission of environmental and cultural knowledge, ceremonies and spiritual wellbeing, a sense of place, and material services (i.e., food, medicine, plan materials). Extensive site preparation is typically done before a burn, and postburn monitoring and additional cultural practices are a common factor of the land stewardship tradition (Long et al. 2021).
6.2 p. 396 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | F-19
Figure F.6. Photograph showing a prescribed burn carried out by San Jose Fire Department.
Thinning and Prescribed Fire Combined
Combining thinning and prescribed fire can be the most effective treatment (Graham et al. 2004).
In forests where fire exclusion or disease has created a buildup of hazardous fuels, prescribed fire cannot be safely applied, and pre-burn thinning is required. The subsequent use of fire can further reduce residual fuels and reintroduce this ecologically imperative process.
IMPACTS OF PRESCRIBED FIRE AND WILDFIRE SMOKE
ON COMMUNITIES
Prescribed burning produces smoke that is composed of toxic particulate and gaseous pollutants.
Inappropriate management of prescribed fires can be bothersome to residents, and it can negatively affect community health. Smoke from burning vegetation produces air pollutants that are regulated by both the U.S Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the State of California (EPA 2019).
Additionally, smoke can increase ambient air pollution levels to a point where it exceeds air quality standards (California Air Resources Board [CARB] 2003). Therefore, effective smoke management is a vital component of planning and conducting prescribed fires. In Santa Clara County, a Miscellaneous Fire Marshal Review Application must be obtained to carry out a burn (Santa Clara County 2023f).
All prescribed fire operations will be conducted in accordance with federal and state laws and regulations.
Public safety would be the primary consideration in the design of any prescribed burn plan so as to not negatively impact the WUI. Agency use of prescribed fire on public land would be carried out within the confines of the agency’s fire management planning documents and would require individual prescribed burn plans that are developed for specific burn units and consider smoke management concerns and sensitive receptors within the WUI. Smoke monitors could be placed in areas where smoke concerns have been raised in the past.
6.2 p. 397 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | F-20
In addition, the NWCG released the NWCG Smoke Management Guide for Prescribed Fire in 2020 (NWCG 2020). This plan is designed to act as a guide to all those who use prescribed fire. Smoke management techniques, air quality regulations, public perception of prescribed fire, foundational science behind prescribed fire, modeling, smoke tools, air quality impacts, and more are all discussed in this plan.
The document is meant to pair with NWCG’s Interagency Prescribed Fire Planning and Implementation Procedures Guide for planning and addressing smoke when prescribed fire is used (NWCG 2020).
To view the plan, please visit: https://www.nwcg.gov/sites/default/files/publications/pms420-3.pdf.
Following any type of fuels reduction treatment, post-treatment monitoring should continue to ensure that management actions continue to be effective throughout the fire season. The vegetation within this ecosystem can change rapidly in response to drought or moisture from year to year and during the course of the season, so fuels treatments should be adjusted accordingly. To learn more about firing techniques, visit the EFIRE Fire Techniques webpage: https://efire.cnr.ncsu.edu/efire/fire-techniques/.
Several burns may be needed to meet full resource management objectives, so a solid maintenance plan is needed to ensure success.
The CDC recommends taking personal steps to limit risk and exposure to wildfire smoke (CDC 2023).
These include buying an air filter cleaner to be used in sleeping areas, limiting outdoor activities, seeking out clean air spaces if they are not available at home, and wearing a fit-tested, NIOSH-approved N95 or P100 respirator. It is important to stay current on air quality in your area and plan appropriately for outdoor activities. See Appendix G for links to property owner resources regarding smoke safety and risk mitigation.
Santa Clara County current air quality conditions: http://baaqmdmapsprod.azurewebsites.net/map-airquality.html?baaqmdZoom=11&baaqmdLat=37.189396&baaqmdLng=-121.705327.
MANAGEMENT OF NON-NATIVE PLANTS
California Invasive Plant Council
California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC) is a nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting California's natural ecosystems from the harmful impacts of invasive plants. They actively prevents the introduction and spread of invasive plants through research, education, and collaboration with government agencies, land managers, and the public. Cal-IPC provides resources, information, and training programs to raise awareness and knowledge about invasive plants. The organization promotes science-based management practices to control invasive plants, restore native habitats, and preserve California's biodiversity (CAL IPC 2023).
USDA Noxious Weed Program
The USDA maintains a list of introduced, invasive, and noxious plants by state (USDA 2022). Fuel treatment approaches should always consider the potential for introduction or proliferation of invasive non-native species as a result of management actions.
The California Department of Food and Agriculture maintains a list of noxious weeds rated from A to C based on the current degree of infestation of the species and the potential for eradication (California Department of Food and Agriculture 2021).
6.2 p. 398 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | F-21
Fuel Management
Fuel treatment approaches should always consider the potential for introduction or proliferation of invasive non-native species because of management actions. Several non-native plants present significant fire hazards and will spread in fuel reduction areas when other vegetation is removed. When feasible, fuel reduction projects should attempt to permanently remove scotch and French broom species, eucalyptus trees, and acacia trees. Eradication can be achieved by manual pulling and/or herbicide use followed up with long-term monitoring of the seed bank and re-sprouts.
SUSTAINABILITY CHALLENGE
Well-managed fuel reduction projects often result in ecological benefits to wildlife and watershed health.
Simultaneously, planning and resource management efforts should occur when possible while reducing fuels to ensure that the land remains viable for multiple uses in the long term.
Fuel break and fuel treatment utility is contingent upon regular maintenance, as regrowth in a treated area can quickly reduce its effectiveness. Input provided during public outreach activities identified a need for maintenance of existing fuel breaks that have become overgrown. Maintenance of existing breaks could be more cost efficient than installation of new features.
The effectiveness of any fuel reduction treatment will increase over time with a maintenance and monitoring plan. Monitoring will also ensure that objectives are being met in a cost-effective manner.
For information on monitoring and sustainability for CWPP projects, see Chapter 5.
6.2 p. 399 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | F-22
This page intentionally left blank.
6.2 p. 400 of 557
APPENDIX G:
Property Owner Resources
6.2 p. 401 of 557
This page intentionally left blank.
6.2 p. 402 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | G-1
SANTA CLARA COUNTY
SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRESAFE COUNCIL
• Is Your Home in a WUI Area of Concern? https://sccfiresafe.org/resources/do-you-reside-insanta-clara-countys-wildland-urban-interface-wui/ • General Resource Guide for Wildfire Safety: https://sccfiresafe.org/resources/ • Wildfire Evacuation Workshop: https://sccfiresafe.org/learn/wildfire-evacuation-workshop/ • How to Create Defensible Space: https://www.fire.ca.gov/programs/communications/defensiblespace-prc-4291/ • Community Chipping Program: https://sccfiresafe.org/prepare/community-chipping-program/ • Hazardous Tree Removal Application: https://sccfiresafe.org/prepare/saratoga-tree-removal-app/ • Home Hardening Guide: https://sccfiresafe.org/prepare/home-hardening/ • Hazardous Fuels Reduction Guide: https://sccfiresafe.org/prepare/defensible-space-andhazardous-fuel-reduction-hfr/
SAN JOSE FIRE DEPARTMENT
• Create a Defensible Space:https://www.sanjoseca.gov/your-government/departments-offices/firedepartment/public-education/wildfire-preparedness/defensible-space • Harden Your Home: https://www.sanjoseca.gov/your-government/departments-offices/firedepartment/public-education/wildfire-preparedness/hardening-your-home • Install a Fire-Resistant Landscape: https://www.sanjoseca.gov/your-government/departmentsoffices/fire-department/public-education/wildfire-preparedness/fire-resistant-landscaping • Check if You Live in a WUI: https://www.sanjoseca.gov/your-government/departments-offices/firedepartment/public-education/wildfire-preparedness/wildland-urban-interface • Draw up a Wildfire Action Plan: https://www.sanjoseca.gov/your-government/departmentsoffices/fire-department/public-education/wildfire-preparedness/wildfire-action-plan • Assemble an Emergency Supply Kit: https://www.sanjoseca.gov/your-government/departmentsoffices/fire-department/public-education/wildfire-preparedness/emergency-supply-kit • Prepare Your Insurance: https://www.sanjoseca.gov/your-government/departments-offices/firedepartment/public-education/wildfire-preparedness/insurance-preparedness • Create a Pre-Evacuation List: https://www.sanjoseca.gov/your-government/departmentsoffices/fire-department/public-education/wildfire-preparedness/pre-evacuation • Review Evacuation Steps: https://www.sanjoseca.gov/your-government/departments-offices/firedepartment/public-education/wildfire-preparedness/wildfire-evacuation
6.2 p. 403 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | G-2
GILROY FIRE DEPARTMENT
• Wildfire Preparedness and Local High Fire Risk Notices: https://www.cityofgilroy.org/911/WildfirePreparedness-Local-High-Fire-Ri • Fireworks Information: https://www.cityofgilroy.org/910/Fireworks-Information o Fireworks Prohibited Locations:
https://www.cityofgilroy.org/DocumentCenter/View/6655/Fireworks-ProhibitedLocations?bidId=
MORGAN HILL DEPARTMENT
• Wildfire Preparedness: https://www.morganhill.ca.gov/1396/Wildfire-Preparedness • Be Ember Aware: https://www.morganhill.ca.gov/1596/Be-Ember-Aware • Ready, Set, Go!: https://www.morganhill.ca.gov/1799/Ready-Set-Go • PG&E Public Safety Power Shutoff: https://www.morganhill.ca.gov/1848/Public-Safety-PowerShutoff OTHER
• Wildfire Preparedness Resources: https://www.sccfd.org/education-and-preparednessoverview/safety-information-referral-assistance/wildfire-preparedness/ • Santa Clara Fire Department Resources and Learning: https://www.santaclaraca.gov/ourcity/departments-a-f/fire-department/community-resources • Wildfire Disaster Debris Removal: https://ehinfo.sccgov.org/wildfire-disaster-debris-removal • Animal Evacuation Team: www.scclaet.org/default.aspx
• Sign Up for Emergency Notifications: https://emergencymanagement.sccgov.org/AlertSCC • Resources for Wildfire Smoke Exposure: https://publichealth.sccgov.org/healthinformation/emergency-preparedness/avoid-breathing-wildfire-smoke
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE
PROTECTION (CAL FIRE)
Home and Fuels Management
Homeowners Checklist; How to Make Your Home Fire Safe:
https://www.lakeshastina.com/Docs_PDFs/Checklist.pdf
• Hardening Your Home: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/prepare-for-wildfire/get-ready/hardeningyour-home/
6.2 p. 404 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | G-3
• Home Hardening Toolkit: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/campaign-toolkits/home-hardeningtoolkit/ • Defensible Space: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/prepare-for-wildfire/get-ready/defensiblespace/ • Defensible Space Toolkit: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/campaign-toolkits/defensible-spacetoolkit/ • Defensible Space Self-Assessment Survey:
https://survey123.arcgis.com/share/77d52e2c982e480990320eb5bd53f5fc?portalUrl=https://CAL FIRE-Forestry.maps.arcgis.com
• Fire-Resistant Landscaping: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/prepare-for-wildfire/get-ready/fireresistant-landscaping/ • What Property Owners Need to Know to Reduce Wildfire Risk Each Season:
https://www.readyforwildfire.org/forest-health/seasonal-actions/ • Prescribed Fire Toolkit: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/campaign-toolkits/prescribed-fires-toolkit/ Preparing for Wildfire
• Wildfire Action Plan: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/prepare-for-wildfire/get-set/wildfire-actionplan/ • How to Prepare to Evacuate from a Wildfire: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/prepare-forwildfire/get-set/prepare-your-family/ • Pre-Evacuation Preparation Steps: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/prepare-for-wildfire/goevacuation-guide/pre-evacuation-preparation-steps/ • Evacuation Steps: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/prepare-for-wildfire/go-evacuationguide/evacuation-steps/ • Animal Evacuation: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/prepare-for-wildfire/go-evacuationguide/animal-evacuation/ • GO! Evacuation Guide: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/prepare-for-wildfire/go-evacuation-guide/ • GO! Evacuation Toolkit: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/campaign-toolkits/go-evacuation-toolkit/ • Emergency Supply Kit: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/prepare-for-wildfire/get-set/emergencysupply-kit/ • Insurance Preparedness: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/prepare-for-wildfire/get-set/insurancepreparedness/ • Power Outage Information: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/prepare-for-wildfire/go-evacuationguide/power-outage-information/ • What To Do If Trapped: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/prepare-for-wildfire/go-evacuationguide/what-to-do-if-trapped/ Preventing Wildfire
• Equipment Use: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/prevent-wildfire/equipment-use/
6.2 p. 405 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | G-4
• Debris Burning: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/prevent-wildfire/debris-burning/ • Vehicle Use: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/prevent-wildfire/vehicle-use/ • Campfire Safety: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/prevent-wildfire/campfire-safety/ • Target Shooting Safety: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/prevent-wildfire/target-shooting-safety/ • One Less Spark, One Less Wildfire Toolkit: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/prevent-wildfire/oneless-spark-campaign/ • Forest Health: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/forest-health/ • Forest Health Toolkit: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/campaign-toolkits/forest-health-toolkit/ After the Fire
• Returning Home After a Wildfire: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/post-wildfire/ • What to Expect After a Wildfire: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/post-wildfire/after-a-wildfire/ • Immediate Safety: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/post-wildfire/returning-home/ • Rebuilding, Mobilizing Your Community: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/post-wildfire/rebuilding/ • Who Can Help? https://www.readyforwildfire.org/post-wildfire/who-can-help/ Miscellaneous
• Non-Renewals for California Homeowners: https://strongerca.com/wpcontent/uploads/2021/06/Non-renewals-for-CA-Homeowners.pdf • Safer from Wildfires Insurance Partnership: https://www.insurance.ca.gov/01-consumers/200- wrr/saferfromwildfires.cfm
• Mass Tree Mortality, Fuels, and Fire: A Guide for Sierra Nevada Forest Landowners:
https://anrcatalog.ucanr.edu/pdf/8683.pdf
• State Fire Marshal Listed Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) Products Handbook:
https://www.fire.ca.gov/media/5e4drz1r/2021-sfm-wui-listed-products-handbook-12-14-2021.pdf • Community Alliance with Family Farms (CAFF): www.caff.org • Wildfire resilience program: https://caff.org/wildfire-resilience-program/ • Farm Resilience Resources: https://caff.org/resilience-resources/ • Stronger California Tax Fact sheet: https://strongerca.com/non-renewal/ o While property insurance frequently acts as the largest financial safety net in the event of an emergency, many California homeowners are being denied home insurance renewal options in areas deemed high risk, where they would need a financial safety net the most. Finding home insurance with adequate coverage at an affordable price can be challenging.
An insurance trade coalition in California, Stronger California, produced a fact sheet to help homeowners understand their coverages under California law and connect homeowners with resources to find new insurance.
6.2 p. 406 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | G-5
NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION (NFPA)
Protecting Your Home
• Understanding the Wildfire Threat to Homes: https://www.nfpa.org/News-andResearch/Publications-and-media/Blogs-Landing-Page/Fire-Break/BlogPosts/2020/12/08/Interactive-online-resource-helps-build-understanding-of-wildfire-risks • Preparing Homes for Wildfire: https://www.nfpa.org/Public-Education/Fire-causes-andrisks/Wildfire/Preparing-homes-for-wildfire • If your Home Doesn’t Ignite, It Can’t Burn: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqKFDDBGd5o • How do Homes Burn in a Wildfire? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QthynXympI • Wildfire Community Preparedness Day Toolkit: https://go.nfpa.org/l/14662/2022-01-11/8j6nqh • 5 Key Areas Around the Home You Must Examine When Assessing Wildfire Risk:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIUQVL3BvVg
• Your Home and Wildfire, Choices That Make a Difference:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfbEcMeYFFA
• Home Hardening Fact Sheets: https://www.nfpa.org/Public-Education/Fire-causes-andrisks/Wildfire/Firewise-USA/Firewise-USA-Resources/Research-Fact-Sheet-Series Preparation and Evacuation
• Wildfire Preparedness Tips: https://www.nfpa.org/Public-Education/Fire-causes-andrisks/Wildfire/Wildfire-safety-tips • Wildfire Preparedness for Household Pets: https://www.nfpa.org//-/media/Files/PublicEducation/Campaigns/TakeAction/TakeActionPetsChecklist.pdf • Wildfire Preparedness for Horses and Livestock: https://www.nfpa.org/-/media/Files/PublicEducation/Campaigns/TakeAction/TakeActionHorseChecklist.ashx • Backpack Emergency GO! Kit: https://www.nfpa.org/-/media/Files/PublicEducation/Campaigns/TakeAction/TakeActionBackPackGoKit.ashx • Outthink a Wildfire; Wildfire Action Policies: https://www.nfpa.org/wildfirepolicy • National Fire Protection Association (NFPA):
WILDFIRE SMOKE
• Smoke Ready Toolbox for Wildfires EPA: https://www.epa.gov/smoke-ready-toolbox-wildfires • AirNow: https://www.airnow.gov/
• AirNow Fire and Smoke Map: https://fire.airnow.gov/
• Smoke Advisories: https://www.airnow.gov/air-quality-and-health/fires/smoke-advisories/ • Fires and Your Health: https://www.epa.gov/pm-pollution/fires-and-your-health
6.2 p. 407 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | G-6
• Wildfires and Indoor Air Quality: https://www.epa.gov/indoor-air-quality-iaq/wildfires-and-indoorair-quality-iaq • Frequent Questions About Wildfire Smoke:
https://usepa.servicenowservices.com/airnow?id=kb_search&kb_knowledge_base=798f5d172fa0 50102be2d2172799b6d8&spa=1&kb_category=23bbbd9f1b681c104614ddb6bc4bcb70 • Smoke Sense App: https://www.epa.gov/air-research/smoke-sense-study-citizen-science-projectusing-mobile-app • Wildfire Smoke and COVID-19: https://www.cdc.gov/disasters/covid-19/wildfire_smoke_covid19.html • Air Monitoring in Santa Clara County: http://baaqmdmapsprod.azurewebsites.net/map-airmonitoring.html?baaqmdZoom=11&baaqmdLat=37.189396&baaqmdLng=-121.705327 • Bay Area Air Quality Management District: https://www.baaqmd.gov/about-the-air-district/in-yourcommunity/santa-clara-county Figure G.1. Santa Clara Public health flyer: Air Quality and Health.
6.2 p. 408 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | G-7
Figure G.2. Santa Clara Public Health flyer: Make a filter in 10 mins.
FEMA
• Protective Actions for Wildfires FEMA:
https://community.fema.gov/ProtectiveActions/s/article/Wildfire • Flood Insurance Information: https://www.fema.gov/flood-insurance • Explore FEMA’s National Risk Index by County for risk, expected annual loss, social vulnerability, and community resilience: https://hazards.fema.gov/nri/map
RED CROSS
• Red Cross – How to Prepare For Emergencies: https://www.redcross.org/get-help/how-toprepare-for-emergencies.html • Red Cross – Colorado Wildfire Handbook:
https://sheriff.mesacounty.us/globalassets/divisions/emergency-services/arc-brochure.pdf
6.2 p. 409 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | G-8
• Red Cross – Wildfire Checklist (English):
https://sheriff.mesacounty.us/globalassets/divisions/emergency-services/arc-wildfire.pdf • Red Cross – Wildfire Checklist (Spanish):
https://sheriff.mesacounty.us/globalassets/divisions/emergency-services/arc-wildfire_spn.pdf • Red Cross – Preparing for Disaster for People with Disabilities and Other Special Needs:
https://sheriff.mesacounty.us/globalassets/divisions/emergency-services/arc-special-needs.pdf
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
• Prepare For Natural Disasters and Recovery: https://www.epa.gov/natural-disasters READY.GOV
• Wildfires Ready.gov: https://www.ready.gov/wildfires
• Family Disaster Readiness: https://www.ready.gov/kids • Kids: https://www.ready.gov/kids/be-ready-kids
• Teens: https://www.ready.gov/kids/teens
• Families: https://www.ready.gov/kids/prepare-your-family • Educators and Organizations: https://www.ready.gov/kids/educators-organizations • Wildfire Information Sheet: https://www.ready.gov/sites/default/files/2021-12/ready_wildfire_infosheet.pdf
MISCELLANEOUS
• Non-Renewals for California Homeowners: https://strongerca.com/wpcontent/uploads/2021/06/Non-renewals-for-CA-Homeowners.pdf • Mass Tree Mortality, Fuels, and Fire: A Guide for Sierra Nevada Forest Landowners:
https://anrcatalog.ucanr.edu/pdf/8683.pdf
• Instructor Guide: The ability to identifying, analyzing, and using relevant situational information about topographic features can help predict wildland fire behavior is the responsibility of everyone on the fireline: https://www.nwcg.gov/sites/default/files/training/docs/s-190-ig04.pdf • WiRē – Wildfire Research, an interdisciplinary collaboration on community adaptability to wildland fire: https://wildfireresearchcenter.org/
• Wildfire Ready App:
o App Store: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/wildfire-readyvirtual/id1540773278?msclkid=4eac0069a71411ecb26fa03c0b08eba2 o Google Play:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.BaltiVirtual.Wildfire&gl=US&msclkid=4eab c8f6a71411ecbfe27aa64cd6d835
6.2 p. 410 of 557
APPENDIX H:
Post-Fire Recovery and Restoration
6.2 p. 411 of 557
This page intentionally left blank.
6.2 p. 412 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | H-1
POST-FIRE RESPONSE AND REHABILITATION
The recent increase in severe fires has highlighted the numerous complexities of post-fire response.
Research indicates that high-severity burn areas may produce erosion and runoff rates 5 to 10 times higher than the rates produced by moderate-severity burn areas (Sierra Nevada Conservancy 2021).
Following a fire, heavy rains may result in widespread floods carrying trees, boulders, and soil through canyons, ultimately damaging communities and critical infrastructure. In Santa Clara, the areas that are susceptible to debris flows and mudslides include the mountain and foothill areas, e.g., the Santa Cruz Mountains and Diablo Range (SCC OES 2017).
The SCU Lightning Complex occurred from August to October 2020 and burned approximately 396,624 acres across Alameda, Contra Costa, Santa Clara, San Joaquín, Stanislaus, and Merced Counties. Of those acres burned, 165,205 acres were burned within Santa Clara County, with a total of 222 structures destroyed and 26 structures experiencing damages from the fire complex’s impacts.
According to a Santa Clara Resource Conservation District (RCD) Watershed Emergency Response Team evaluation, the SCU Lightning Complex resulted in 70.6% of the burned area sustaining low burn severity and 7.3% moderate burn severity (Santa Clara RCD 2020). In general, the soil burn severity from this incident was limited by the type of fuels present in the region. Because the burned area largely displayed mostly low density fuels, the rate of spread was greater, resulting in a lower burn severity.
Despite this, there was still occurrences of moderate soil burn severity (SBS), which can dramatically reduce soil cover, leading to increased water repellency and runoff. By contrast, soil cover is nearly nonexistent in areas experiencing high SBS and the surface mineral soil has been burned to fine powder.
Exposed, granular mineral soil is readily transported during rain events resulting in elevated soil erosion and sediment loading in streams, creeks, and rivers (Burned Area Emergency Response [BAER] 2021).
Areas affected by the SCU Lightning Complex experience post-fire hazards such as debris flows, flooding, and sediment loading that may pose a threat to infrastructure and general public safety. Despite being located outside of the burned area, sections of San Benito County were still identified as having post-fire flooding impacts.
6.2 p. 413 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | H-2
Figure H.1. Burn scar from the SCU Lightning Complex.
Figure H.2. Burn scar from the SCU Lightning Complex.
There are many facets to post-fire recovery, including but not limited to:
• Ensuring public health and safety—prompt removal of downed and hazard trees, addressing watershed damage, and mitigating potential flooding.
6.2 p. 414 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | H-3
• Rebuilding communities and assessing economic needs—securing the financial resources necessary for communities to rebuild homes, business, and infrastructure. • Restoring the damaged landscape—restoration of watersheds, soil stabilization, and tree planting.
• Reducing fire risk in the future—identifying hazard areas and implementing mitigation. • Prioritizing the needs of vulnerable and disadvantaged communities during response and disaster recovery efforts.
• Reducing post-fire recovery time by replanting native species. • Ensuring fire protection measures enhance sustainability of restoration projects e.g., introducing prescribed fire to a fire-dependent ecosystem where fire had previously been excluded. • Retaining downed logs for erosion control and habitat maintenance. • Evaluating and updating disaster recovery plans every 5 years to respond to changing needs and characteristics of the community.
• Coordinating with planning, housing, health, and human services, and other local, regional, or state agencies to develop contingency plans for meeting short-term, temporary housing needs of those displaced during a catastrophic wildfire event.
• Incorporating forecasted impacts from climate change intro trends and projections of future risk and consideration of policies to address identified risk. • Updating codes and ordinances to specify procedures and standards for planning and permitting the reconstruction of buildings destroyed by wildfire.
The USFS provides a science-based framework to guide post-fire restoration efforts in National Forest lands in California. The framework is based on a five-step process that leads to the development of a restoration portfolio that can inform project planning and monitoring (USFS 2021d). The framework is available at: https://www.fs.usda.gov/psw/publications/documents/psw_gtr270/psw_gtr270.pdf
COMMUNITY RESPONSE AND RECOVERY
Recovery of the vegetated landscape is often more straightforward than recovery of the human environment. Assessments of the burned landscape are often well-coordinated through the use of interagency crews who are mobilized immediately after a fire to assess the post-fire environment and make recommendations for rehabilitation efforts.
For the community impacted by fire, however, there is often very little planning at the local level to guide their return after the fire. Residents impacted by the fire need assistance making insurance claims; finding temporary accommodation for themselves, pets, and livestock; rebuilding or repairing damaged property; removing debris and burned trees; stabilizing the land for construction; mitigating potential flood damage; repairing infrastructure; reconnecting to utilities; and mitigating impacts to health. Oftentimes, physical impacts can be mitigated over time, but emotional impacts of the loss and change to surroundings are long-lasting and require support and compassion from the community.
6.2 p. 415 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | H-4
After the Fire
Rebuilding and recovery from wildfire can vary greatly across income levels and demographics.
Rural areas, low-income neighborhoods, and immigrant communities generally do not have the necessary resources to cover insurance and rebuilding expenses that occur after a fire. Due to this, many of these areas take more time to recover than those with greater access to resources. In addition, the occurrence of wildfire can worsen existing mental health conditions and lead to post-traumatic stress (PTS), low self-esteem, and depression for at-risk populations (CA GOPR 2020).
Emergency Assistance: Before, During, and After a Fire
Team Rubicon is a veteran-led humanitarian organization that serves communities around the world before, during, and after disasters such as earthquakes, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, and wildfire. Team Rubicon focuses on serving vulnerable and at-risk populations affected by disasters, and all services are provided free of charge. Services include incident management, debris management, hazard mitigation, volunteer management, home repair, and emergency medicine. With respect to fire-related assistance, Team Rubicon assists with any action that would limit the impact of a wildfire, such as helping property owners to make their home fire safe, providing staff to assist with mitigation projects (e.g., fuels reduction), and removing debris and hazardous trees (Team Rubicon 2022).
To find out more about Team Rubicon, please visit https://teamrubiconusa.org/capabilities-services/.
Returning Home
First and foremost, follow the advice and recommendations of emergency management agencies, fire departments, utility companies, and local aid organizations regarding activities following the wildfire.
Do not attempt to return to your home until fire personnel have deemed it safe to do so.
When driving, watch for trees, brush, and rock which may have been weakened or loosened by the fire.
Be aware of any damage or debris on roads and driveways. Traffic may be delayed, or lanes closed due to firefighter operations. Use extreme caution around trees, power poles, and any other tall objects that may have been weakened by the fire (CAL FIRE 2020d).
Even if the fire did not damage your house, do not expect to return to normal routines immediately.
Expect that utility infrastructure may have been damaged and repairs may be necessary. When you return to your home, check for hazards, such as gas or water leaks and electrical shorts. Turn off damaged utilities if you did not do so previously. Request that the fire department or utility companies turn the utilities back on once the area is secured. Similarly, water supply systems may have been damaged; do not drink from the tap until you have been advised that it is safe to do so. Finally, keep a “fire watch”; look for smoke or sparks in houses and other buildings. Once at home, check for the following (CAL FIRE 2019d):
• Check the roof and exterior areas for sparks or embers • Check grounds for hot spots, smoldering stumps, and vegetation • Check for fire damage to your home, turn off all appliances and make sure the meter is not damaged before turning on the main circuit breaker
• Check the attic and throughout your house for any hidden burning sparks or embers
6.2 p. 416 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | H-5
• Do not drink water from the faucet until emergency officials say it is okay, water supply systems can be damaged and become polluted during wildfires
• Discard any food that has been exposed to heat, smoke, flood water, or soot • If you have a propane tank or natural gas, leave valves closed until the supplier or utilities can inspect your system
• If you have a solar electrical system, this system should be inspected by a licensed technician to verify that the solar panels and electrical wiring are safe for continued operation • Consult local experts on the best way to restore and plant your land with fire-safe landscaping • Contact 911 if any danger is perceived
• Ash contains toxic substances and may be irritating to the eyes, nose, throat, and skin. Ash is harmful to breathe and may trigger asthma attacks. Follow these tips to reduce your exposure to ash (California Department of Public Health 2017):
• Do not allow children to play in ash and wash off children’s toys before children play with them. • Immediately was any part of your body that touches ash to avoid irritation. • Wash fruits and vegetables from your garden thoroughly before eating them. • Keep pets out of ash areas.
• Frequently clean indoor surfaces by wet mopping.
• Wear protective clothing and a respirator when working outside.
Insurance Claims
Your insurance agent is the best source of information for submitting a claim. It is recommended you take photos of your home, of both the inside and outside, in preparation of an emergency. Keep the photos in a safe place as this will make the insurance claim process easier. Most expenses incurred during the time you are forced to live elsewhere may be reimbursed, so be sure to keep all receipts. Additional items that may be covered are extra transportation costs to and from work or school, telephone installation, furniture rental, extra food costs, and water damage. Do not start any repairs without the approval of your claims adjuster (California Department of Insurance 2021).
Natural disasters aren’t always predictable, but there are steps property owners can make to better prepare for an emergency.
• Review your insurance policy annually to see if your home is adequately insured • Know your “loss of use” section – this covers living expenses should your home become unlivable due to fire, smoke, or otherwise
You can view a guide on creating a home inventory here: https://www.iii.org/article/how-create-homeinventory Community Safety: Post-Fire Floods and Debris Flows
There are numerous natural hazards after a wildfire. Perhaps most dangerous are potential flash floods and landslides following rainfall in a burned area upstream of a community. Wildfires increase risk of
6.2 p. 417 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | H-6
flooding because burned soil is unable to absorb rainfall and it becomes hydrophobic. Factors that contribute to flooding and debris flows are steep slopes, heavy rainfall, weak or loose rock and soil, and improper construction and grading. Even small rainfall can cause a flash flood, transporting debris and damaging homes and other structures. Listen and look for emergency updates, weather reports, and flash flood warnings (California Department of Conservation 2019). Develop an evacuation plan with your family and stay away from waterways, storm channels, and arroyos. Be aware of your risk, pay attention to weather forecasts, listen to local authorities, and have a household inventory with copies of critical documents (California Department of Water Resources 2021).
Mobilizing Your Community
Wildfires that produce extensive damage require a community-scale response for recovery efforts.
The local Emergency Manager will collaborate with state and federal partners to manage disaster response and urgent needs. Still, mobilizing a response and recovery team or a group of teams in a community can function as a vital part of the recovery procedure. Coordinated and informed direction throughout community-level volunteers and all levels of government are necessary for successful recovery (California Silver Jackets Team [California SJT] 2019).
As opposed to wildfire response, post-fire response is not typically managed by a unified state or federal team. Rather, each organization and each tier of government acts on its own authority. This produces a greater demand for coordination at the local level and the sharing of information between organizations to coordinate recovery efforts (California SJT 2019).
Residents throughout California are encouraged to join forces to create local Fire Safe Councils to minimize and prevent wildfire losses. Fire Safe Councils are community-based organizations that mobilize residents to protect their properties, communities, and environments from disastrous wildfires. Fire Safe Councils educate property owners about community wildfire preparedness activities while collaborating with local fire officials to plan and implement projects that increase the wildfire resilience of their communities (California Fire Safe Council 2021).
In addition, each community is encouraged to create its own type of a Post-Fire Coordination Group (PFCG) to direct the response to any ensuing post-wildfire natural hazards and aid in determining postfire mitigation actions. The PFCG should work directly with local, state, or federal agencies, emergency response officials, and others to aid in a coordinated response. Primary duties of the PFCG include coordinating the exchange of information among agencies and the risk assessment, assembling and exchanging geospatial data, assisting public communications, and coordinating with elected officials (California SJT 2019).
Communities are also encouraged to establish a post-fire coordinator. The post-fire coordinator is appointed by the community to assist a coordinated response to a wildfire and to aid the community’s post-fire recovery efforts. The post-fire coordinator is likely to collaborate with local, state, and federal organizations that participate in emergency response and post-fire recovery efforts. It is important that the post-fire coordinator have demonstrated management, internet, and social media skills, community knowledge, and experience with government agencies and programs (California SJT 2019).
The recovery coordinator should become familiar with representatives from local, state, and government agencies that will be helping with coordination or funding of post-fire recovery. The following resources may be helpful for the post-fire and volunteer coordinators (California SJT 2019):
1. Housing
a. FEMA
6.2 p. 418 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | H-7
b. Federal Housing Administration
c. California Department of Housing and Community Development d. The Salvation Army
2. Debris Removal
a. California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery b. USACE
3. Debris Modeling
a. USGS
4. Hazardous Waste and Pollution
a. California Environmental Protection Agency
5. Pets and Livestock
a. American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals b. CDFA
6. Food
a. USDA Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
b. California Department of Social Services, Disaster CalFresh
7. Social Services
a. California Employment Development Department
b. FEMA Disaster Unemployment Assistance
c. U.S. Administration for Children and Families
d. Office of Access and Functional Needs
e. California Foundation for Independent Living Centers
8. Farm Rehabilitation
a. Farm Service Agency
b. USDA Rural Development Disaster Assistance
c. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) General Environmental Quality Incentives Program Financial Assistance
9. General
a. The American Red Cross
b. CA OES
c. USFS
d. NPS
e. CAL FIRE
6.2 p. 419 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | H-8
Any large wildfire will also involve an Incident Command System (ICS), an appropriately sized team assigned to aid in post-fire recovery. Learn more are https://www.nps.gov/articles/wildland-fire-incidentcommand-system-levels.htm.
Communication
After a team is assembled and immediate tasks are identified, find the best way to spread information in your community. You may distribute flyers, set up a voicemail box, work to find pets or livestock that have been displaced, develop a mailing list for property owners, hold regular public meetings, etc. It is important that a long-term communications plan is developed (California SJT 2019). Applying the following steps can aid in successful communication (California SJT 2019):
• Convey post-wildfire hazards to the public.
• Develop and maintain emergency notification systems that allow authorized official to alert residents of emergency situations.
• Hold public meetings to inform the public about programs and services available in the community.
• Determine the best way to relay information, e.g., phone calls, radio, TV, or social media. • Find out how emergency response teams, local officials, and volunteers will communicate with the community.
Post-Fire Rehabilitation and Resources for Landowners
Wildfires that cause extensive damage necessitate dedicated efforts to avert issues afterwards.
As aforementioned, loss of vegetation increases soil susceptibility to erosion; water runoff may increase and lead to flooding; sediments and debris may be transported downstream and damage properties or saturate reservoirs putting endangered species and water reserves at risk (USFS 2021a). Following a fire, the primary priority is emergency stabilization to prevent additional damage to life, property, or natural resources. The soil stabilization work starts immediately and may proceed for up to a year.
The rehabilitation effort to restore damage caused by the fire starts after the fire is out and may persist for various years. For the most part, rehabilitation efforts focus on the lands not likely to recover naturally from wildfire damage (USFS 2021a).
The USFS’s post-fire emergency stabilization program is called the Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) program. The goal of the BAER program is to discover post-wildfire threats to human life and safety, property, and critical natural or cultural resources on USFS lands and take appropriate actions to mitigate unacceptable risks (NIFC 2022). BAER teams are composed of trained professionals in different fields: soil scientists, engineers, hydrologists, biologists, botanists, archaeologists, and others who quickly assess the burned area and advise emergency stabilization treatments (NIFC 2022.
The NRCS Emergency Watershed Protection (EWP) program provides technical and financial services for watershed repair on public (state and local) and private land. The goal is reduced flood risk via funding and expert advice for land treatments. The EWP program can provide up to 75% of funds; remaining funds can be paid with in-kind volunteer labor (Coalition for the Upper South Platte [CUSP] 2016). This funding is used by the State Emergency Rehabilitation Team (a multi-agency group assembled by the NRCS) to develop specific recovery and treatment plans.
6.2 p. 420 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | H-9
Examples of potential treatments include (USFS 2021b):
• Hillside stabilization (for example, placing bundles of straw parallel to the slope to slow erosion) • Hazard tree cutting
• Felling trees perpendicular to the slope contour to reduce runoff • Mulching areas seeded with native vegetation
• Stream enhancements and construction of catchments to control erosion, runoff, and debris flows • Planting or seeding native species to limit spread of invasive species The USFS provides a science-based framework to guide post-fire restoration efforts in National Forest lands in California. The framework is based on a five-step process that leads to the development of a restoration portfolio that can inform project planning and monitoring (USFS 2021a). The framework is available at: https://www.fs.fed.us/psw/publications/documents/psw_gtr270/psw_gtr270.pdf A comparison of potential hillside, channel, and road treatments is available at:
https://www.afterwildfirenm.org/post-fire-treatments/which-treatment-do-i-use The California state Watershed Emergency Response Teams (WERTs) play a crucial role in post-fire assessments. Their duties involve identifying threats caused by debris flows, flooding, rockfall, and surface erosion, which are exacerbated by wildfires. WERT members analyze the types and locations of these threats to life, safety, and property, collectively known as "Values-at-Risk" (VARs), and propose initial emergency protection measures for the affected areas. They then communicate their findings to the relevant local emergency management agencies, ensuring effective coordination and response.
More information on post-wildfire recovery and what to expect after a wildfire can be found at:
https://www.readyforwildfire.org/post-wildfire/after-a-wildfire/ Specific Treatment Details
While the following is a description of treatment activity types, many of the areas for which one would do these are under the jurisdiction of public agencies. In addition, these areas may also require additional local, state and federal permits to perform such work.
Hillslope Treatments
Cover Applications:
Dry mulch: provides immediate ground cover with mulch to reduce erosion and downstream flow.
Wet mulch (hydromulch): provides immediate cover to hold moisture and seeds on slopes using a combination of organic fibers, glue, suspension agents, and seeds (most effective on inaccessible slopes).
Slash spreading: provides ground cover to reduce erosion by felling trees in burned areas.
Seeding: reduces soil erosion over time with an application of native seed mixtures (most successful in combination with mulching). Breaking up and loosening topsoil to break down the hydrophobic layer on top of the soil is also effective.
6.2 p. 421 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | H-10
Erosion Barrier Applications:
Erosion control mat: organic mats staked on the soil surface to provide stability for vegetation establishment.
Log erosion barrier: trees felled perpendicular to the hillslope to slow runoff.
Fiber rolls (wattles): rolls placed perpendicular to the hillslope to reduce surface flows and reduce erosion.
Silt fencing: permeable fabric fencing installed parallel to the slope contour to trap sediment as water flows down the hillslope.
Channel Treatments
Check dam: small dams built to trap and store sediment in stream channels.
In-channel tree felling: felling trees in a staggered pattern in a channel to trap debris and sediment.
Grade stabilizer: structures made of natural materials placed in ephemeral channels for stabilization.
Stream bank armoring: reinforcing streambanks with natural materials to reduce bank cutting during stream flow.
Channel deflector: an engineered structure to direct flow away from unstable banks or nearby roads.
Debris basin: constructed to store large amounts of sediment moving in a stream channel.
Road and Trail Treatments
Outsloping and rolling dips (water bars): alter the road shape or template to disperse water and reduce erosion.
Overflow structures: protect the road by controlling runoff and diverting stream flow to constructed channels.
Low water stream crossing: culverts replaced by natural fords to prevent stream diversion and keep water in the natural channel.
Culvert modification: upgrading culvert size to prevent road damage.
Debris rack and deflectors: structure placed in a stream channel to collect debris before reaching a culvert.
Riser pipes: filter out debris and allow the passage of water in stream channels.
Catchment-basin cleanout: using machinery to clean debris and sediment out of stream channels and catchment basins.
Trail stabilization: constructing water bars and spillways to provide drainage away from the trail surface.
These treatments and descriptions are further detailed at: https://afterwildfirenm.org/post-firetreatments/treatment-descriptions
6.2 p. 422 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | H-11
For more information about how to install and build treatments, see the Wildfire Restoration Handbook at:
https://www.rmfi.org/sites/default/files/hero-content-files/Fire-RestorationHandbookDraft_2015_2.compressed_0.pdf Timber Salvage
Many private landowners may decide to harvest trees killed in the fire, a decision that can be highly controversial. Trees remaining post-fire can be instrumental for soil and wildlife habitat recovery, but dead standing trees may also pose safety concerns and fuel loadings may still be conducive to future high intensity wildfires. Burned soils are especially susceptible to soil compaction and erosion so it is recommended to have professionals perform the timber salvage. Several programs assist landowners with timber salvage, including the NRCS Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) (CUSP 2016).
Invasive Species Management and Native Revegetation
Wildfire provides opportunity for many invasive species to dominate the landscape because many of these species thrive on recently burned landscapes. It is imperative that landowners prevent invasive establishment by eradicating weeds early, planting native species, and limiting invasive seed dispersal (CUSP 2016).
Planting native seeds is an economical way to restore a disturbed landscape. Vegetation provides protection against erosion and stabilizes exposed soils. In order to be successful, seeds must be planted during the proper time of year and using correct techniques. Use a native seed mixture with a diversity of species and consider the species’ ability to compete with invasive species. Before planting, the seedbed must be prepared with topsoil and by raking to break up the hydrophobic soil layer. If you choose to transplant or plant native species, consider whether the landscape has made a sufficient recovery to ensure the safety of the individuals (CUSP 2016).
Long-Term Community Recovery
On non-federal land, recovery efforts are the responsibility of local governments and private landowners.
Challenges associated with long-term recovery include homes that were severely damaged or were saved but are located in high-severity burn areas. Furthermore, homes saved but located on unstable slopes or in areas in danger of flooding or landslides present a more complicated challenge.
Economically, essential businesses that were burned or were otherwise forced to close pose a challenge to communities of all sizes. Given these complications, rebuilding and recovery efforts can last for years, with invasive species control and ecosystem restoration lasting even longer (CUSP 2016). It is critical that a long-term plan is in place and there is sufficient funding and support for all necessary ecosystem and community recovery. To learn about more post-fire recovery resources, visit the Ready for Wildfire website here: https://www.readyforwildfire.org/post-wildfire/after-a-wildfire/.
Additional resources regarding post-fire return and recovery can be found in Appendix G.
6.2 p. 423 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | H-12
This page intentionally left blank.
6.2 p. 424 of 557
APPENDIX I:
Project Outreach
6.2 p. 425 of 557
This page intentionally left blank.
6.2 p. 426 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | I-1
COMMUNITY OUTREACH
Table I.1 presents examples of the public outreach completed as part of the CWPP development prior to the public review period – June 19th-July 2nd, 2023. Online resources were used to provide information to the public and solicit feedback. Figures I.1 through I.10 show examples of outreach materials and online posts.
Feedback, comments, and suggestions received from community members during community events (e.g., meetings and walkthroughs), the community survey, and project recommendations review were synthesized and utilized to craft project recommendations for the Santa Clara County CWPP. Therefore, the project recommendations (see Chapter 4 or Appendix E) are specifically tailored to address the concerns and priorities of Santa Clara County.
6.2 p. 427 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | I-2
Table I.1. Public Outreach Resources
Resource Description Location URL Date
Meetings
Community Outreach Public Meeting Saratoga https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27eu79RkYlo&feature=youtu.be 12/1/2022 Community Outreach Public Meeting Campbell https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SMU0ehnxOc 12/6/2022 Community Outreach Public Meeting Downtown San Jose https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKytyYWlIxs&feature=youtu.be 12/7/2022 Community Outreach Public Meeting Milpitas https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQWu5ToGKjU 12/13/2022 Community Outreach Public Meeting Morgan Hill https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFCC3Hw-66Y&feature=youtu.be 12/15/2022 Community Wildfire Meeting Redwood Estates Pavilion,
Lexington Basin
2/22/2023
Facebook Posts
CWPP Town Hall Meetings FB post Facebook https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=505925448241271&set=a.215 499980617154
11/10/2022
CWPP Saratoga
Town Hall Meeting FB post
Facebook https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=522225716611244&set=a.2154 99980617154
11/30/2022
CWPP Campbell
Town Hall Meeting FB post
Facebook https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=526585952841887&set=a.2154 99980617154
12/05/2022
CWPP Downtown San Jose
Town Hall Meeting FB post
Facebook https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=527381356095680&set=a.2154 99980617154
12/06/2022
CWPP Milpitas
Town Hall Meeting FB post
Facebook https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=532525728914576&set=a.2154 99980617154
12/12/2022
CWPP Morgan Hill
Town Hall Meeting FB post
Facebook https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=534375715396244&set=a.2154 99980617154
12/14/2022
Lexington Basin Community Wildfire
Meeting FB post
Facebook https://www.facebook.com/events/573356257745399/?ref=newsfeed 2/3/2023 Outreach Materials
CWPP Public Meeting Presentation Multiple; public meetings https://sccfiresafe.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/CWPP-publicmeeting_web.pdf Santa Clara County CWPP FAQ FireSafe Council website and hub
https://sccfiresafe.org/cwpp/faqs/
6.2 p. 428 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | I-3
Resource Description Location URL Date
CWPP FAQ Flyer FireSafe Council website and
hub
https://sccfiresafe.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/CWPP_FAQ791x1024.jpg CWPP Town Hall Meeting Flyer FireSafe Council website and hub
https://sccfiresafe.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/CWPPTownHallMtgsFlier-791x1024.png CWPP Press Release FireSafe Council website and
hub
https://sccfiresafe.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/CWPP-PressRelease-Final-11-10-22.pdf 11/10/2022
CWPP Update Newsletter FireSafe Council website and
hub
https://myemail.constantcontact.com/CWPP-UpdateNewsletter.html?soid=1101807391718&aid=Xz1lmHkHSj8 CWPP Advisory Team https://sccfiresafe.org/cwpp/advisory-team/ CWPP Survey Multiple; public meetings and
FireSafe Council website
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfeTqYvfvH4Ex1Liik5HCk bxHP264BSCdl59etGbUNmQL3a2A/viewform
CWPP Story Map Online https://sccfiresafe.org/cwpp/cwpp-story-map/
6.2 p. 429 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | I-4
Figure I.1. CWPP press release.
6.2 p. 430 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | I-5
Figure I.2. CWPP update newsletter.
6.2 p. 431 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | I-6
Figure I.3. Town hall meeting flyer.
6.2 p. 432 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | I-7
Figure I.4. Frequently asked questions flyer.
6.2 p. 433 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | I-8
Figure I.5. CWPP online web survey.
6.2 p. 434 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | I-9
Figure I.6. Santa Clara County FireSafe Council CWPP community meetings Facebook posts.
Figure I.7. Santa Clara County Fire Department Lexington Hills community meeting Facebook post.
6.2 p. 435 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | I-10
Figure I.8. 2023 Santa Clara County CWPP Advisory Team meeting.
Figure I.9. San Jose FireSafe Council community outreach meeting.
6.2 p. 436 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | I-11
Figure I.10. Saratoga FireSafe Council community outreach meeting.
COMMUNITY MEETING SURVEY RESULTS
Survey Results (in percentage of respondents, 16 total respondents) from the Morgan Hill and Saratoga Community Meetings - December 2022
How familiar are you with CWPPs?
Very Familiar 44%
Somewhat Familiar 44%
Not Familiar 12%
What is a CWPP? 0
Have you seen the current 2016 CWPP?
yes 69%
no 31%
Did you participate in the 2016 CWPP?
Yes, as a resident 0
Yes, as a Government, Special District, Non-profit, or
Company Rep
10%
No 90%
6.2 p. 437 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | I-12
How great of a risk do you think wildfire poses to your community? Extreme Risk 75%
Moderate Risk 25%
Low Risk
No Risk
How great of a risk do you think wildfire poses to your residence? Extreme Risk 70%
Moderate Risk 12.5%
Low Risk 12.5%
No Risk
How do you feel that your residence is prepared for wildfire? Not Prepared
Somewhat Prepared 80%
Hardened & Prepared 20%
What kind of wildfire support do you need?
Home ignition zone inspection 55%
Chipping 55%
Community Engagement 50%
Education 60%
None 10%
Other Evacuation planning 20%, Grant writing and funding help 40%.
STORY MAP
Santa Clara County developed the CWPP story map (online content, link in Table I.1) to accommodate engagement with the public. The story map provides opportunities for both information sharing and gathering between the public and the Advisory Team. The story map has several tabs, each demonstrating information from various chapters in the CWPP document. The introductory tab presents the purpose of the story map, project history, instructions for navigating the content, and the National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management Strategy framework (Figure I.11). Next, the public involvement tab invites viewers to view past and future event announcements and recordings, funding information, and links to additional communication tools. The fire environment, values at risk, WUI hazard and Risk-Hazard Assessment, mitigation strategies, and monitoring and evaluation strategies tabs present the bulk of the CWPP content. These tabs introduce the WUI concept, fire regimes and fire history in the county, information regarding county fire planning and response, county values at risk from wildfire, areas with high versus low risk, wildfire mitigation actions, and monitoring strategies for applied treatments.
6.2 p. 438 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | I-13
The story map also links the viewer to the CWPP document and contact information for the Santa Clara County Advisory Team. Each map is interactive, with several clickable layers providing information on numerous aspects of wildfire, including but not limited to communities in high-risk areas, vegetation and fuels, current mitigation projects, and fire behavior.
Figure I.11. CWPP story map introduction tab sample.
STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH
Attempts to engage stakeholders and agencies in outreach were made through an email invitation process, inviting stakeholders to participate as an Advisory Team member. If stakeholders accepted the invitation, they were added to the Advisory Team list and included on all Advisory Team meetings and communication. Advisory Team members served the role as local SME/Advisor to ensure local knowledge and concerns for each community within Santa Clara County were represented. Advisory Team members were given opportunities throughout the project to discuss/inform the planning approach, data needs, the Risk-Hazard Assessment, mapping, and document narrative. As additional stakeholders were identified, they were offered to be an Advisory Team member at any point in the planning process.
In addition, one-on-one calls were held to gather stakeholder perspectives throughout the planning process.
6.2 p. 439 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | I-14
This page intentionally left blank.
6.2 p. 440 of 557
APPENDIX J:
Additional Mapping
6.2 p. 441 of 557
This page intentionally left blank.
6.2 p. 442 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | J-1
Map 1. Risk-Hazard Assessment inputs obtained from fire behavior analysis: flame length.
6.2 p. 443 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | J-2
Map 2. Risk-Hazard Assessment inputs obtained from fire behavior analysis: fireline intensity.
6.2 p. 444 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | J-3
Map 3. Risk-Hazard Assessment inputs obtained from fire behavior analysis: rate of spread.
6.2 p. 445 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | J-4
Map 4. Risk-Hazard Assessment inputs obtained from fire behavior analysis: crown fire activity.
6.2 p. 446 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | J-5
Map 5. Risk-Hazard Assessment inputs obtained from fire behavior analysis: ember load index.
6.2 p. 447 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | J-6
Map 6. Critical infrastructure.
6.2 p. 448 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | J-7
Map 7. CPUC fire threat districts.
6.2 p. 449 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | J-8
Map 8. Climate predicted wildfire hazard – mid-century.
6.2 p. 450 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | J-9
Map 9. Climate predicted wildfire hazard – late century.
6.2 p. 451 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | J-10
Map 10. Social vulnerability within Santa Clara County.
6.2 p. 452 of 557
APPENDIX K:
Forms
6.2 p. 453 of 557
This page intentionally left blank.
6.2 p. 454 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | K-1
1144 NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION
ASSESSMENT FORM
The NFPA 1144 Assessment was used in the 2016 CWPP to evaluate each community and assign a corresponding risk score of low, moderate, high, or extreme.
SWCA – 1144 Assessment
Community Notes:
Surveyor
Survey Date/Time
Means of Access
Ingress and Egress
2 or more roads in and out score | 0
1 road in and out | 7
Road Width
> 24 ft | 0
> 20 ft < 24 ft | 2
< 20 ft | 4
Road Conditions
Surfaced road, grade < 5% | 0
Surfaced road, grade > 5% | 2
Non-surfaced road, grade < 5% | 2
Non-surfaced road, grade > 5% | 5
Other than all season | 7
Fire Access
< 300 ft with turnaround | 0
> 300 ft with turnaround | 2
< 300 ft with no turnaround | 4
> 300 ft with no turnaround | 5
Street Signs
Present – reflective | 0
Present – non-reflective | 2
Not present | 5
Notes:
6.2 p. 455 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | K-2
Vegetation (Fuel Models)
Predominant Vegetation
Primary Predominant Vegetation
Non-Burnable (NB) Score | 2
Grass (GR) Score | 5
Grass-Shrub (GS) Score | 10
Shrub (SH) Score | 15
Timber-Understory (TU) Score | 20
Timber-Litter (TL) Score | 25
Slash-Blow (TU) Score | 30
Notes:
Defensible Space
> 100 ft around structure | 1
> 70 ft < 100 ft around structure | 3
> 30 ft < 70 ft around structure | 10
< 30 ft around structure | 25
Topography Within 300 ft of Structures
Slope
< 9% | 1
10% to 20% | 4
21% to 30% | 7
31% to 40% | 8
>41% | 10
Additional Rating Factors (rate all that apply)
Topographic features | 1-5
History of high fire occurrence | 1-5
Severe fire weather potential | 1-5
Separation of adjacent structures | 1-5
Notes:
Roofing Assembly
Roofing
Class A - metal roof, clay/concrete tiles, slate, asphalt shingles | 0 Class B - pressure treated composite shakes and shingles | 3 Class C - untreated wood shingle, plywood, particle board | 15 Unrated - Extremely poor roofing conditions | 25
6.2 p. 456 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | K-3
Notes:
Building Construction
Siding Materials (predominant)
Non-combustible (brick/concrete) | 5
Fire Resistive (stucco/adobe) | 10
Combustible (wood or vinyl) | 12
Deck and fencing (predominant)
No deck or fence/non-combustible | 0
Combustible deck and fence | 5
Building Set-Back
> 30 ft to slope | 1
< 30 ft to slope | 5
Notes:
Available Fire Protection
Water Sources
Water Source? | yes/no
Water Source Type | hydrant, water tank, other
Other Water Source
Water Source Score | Hydrant = 1 Water Tank = 3
Organized Response
Station < 5 mi from community | 1
Station > 5 mi from community | 3
Notes:
Placement of Gas and Electric Utilities
Both underground | 0
One above, one below | 3
Both above ground | 5
Values at Risk Observations
Forest Health Observations
Land Use Observations
6.2 p. 457 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | K-4
Misc Observations
Total
Hazard Rating Scale <40 Low >40 Moderate >70 High >112 Extreme
6.2 p. 458 of 557
APPENDIX L:
Funding Sources
6.2 p. 459 of 557
This page intentionally left blank.
6.2 p. 460 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | L-1
FUNDING SOURCES
The following section provides information on federal, state, and private funding opportunities for conducting wildfire mitigation projects.
FEDERAL FUNDING INFORMATION
Source: 2022 Infrastructure Investments and Jobs Act
Agency: Multiple
Website: https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3684 Description: The Infrastructure Investments and Jobs act allocated funding through various departments for infrastructure projects including, but not limited to roads, bridges, and major projects; passenger and freight rail; highway and pedestrian safety; public transit; broadband; ports and waterways; airports; water infrastructure; power and grid reliability and resiliency; resiliency, including funding for coastal resiliency, ecosystem restoration, and weatherization; clean school buses and ferries; electric vehicle charging; addressing legacy pollution by cleaning up Brownfield and Superfund sites and reclaiming abandoned mines; and Western Water Infrastructure.
Specifically, the Community Wildfire Defense Grant Program is a $1 billion program where the Department of Agriculture will provide grants to communities at risk from wildfire to develop or revise their community wildfire protection plans and carry out projects described within those plans. It will include a mix of formula and competitive funds. Applications are expected to open early in 2023.
Section 40803 addresses wildfire risk reduction, section 40804 deals with ecosystem restoration, section 40806 handles the establishment of fuel breaks in forests and other wildland vegetation, and section 70302 addresses reforestation. To learn more about the Act, please see guidebook located here https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/BUILDING-A-BETTERAMERICA_FINAL.pdf?msclkid=48f8f465b51911ec85e010228d808d4d.
Source: Access to Ancestral Lands Grant Opportunity (AALG) Agency: First Nations Development Institute
Website: https://www.firstnations.org/
Description: For more than 41 years, First Nations Development Institute (First Nations), a Nativeled 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, has worked to strengthen American Indian economies to support healthy Native communities by investing in and creating innovative institutions and models that strengthen asset control and support economic development for American Indian people and their communities. First Nations began its national grantmaking program in 1993. Through mid-year 2021, First Nations has successfully managed 2,276 grants totaling more than $46 million to tribal and community institutions across Indian Country. The California Tribal Fund was created to support California-based, California-Native-led nonprofits and tribal programs in controlling and protecting their food systems, water, languages, traditional ecological knowledge, and land. Currently, the fund is operated as a project of First Nations Development Institute. You can find more information on the AALG here: https://www.firstnations.org/rfps/california-tribal-fund-access-to-ancestral-lands-grantopportunity/
6.2 p. 461 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | L-2
Source: Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) Grant Program Agency: Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
Website: https://www.fema.gov/grants/mitigation/building-resilient-infrastructure-communities Description: BRIC will supports states, local communities, tribes, and territories as they undertake hazard mitigation projects, reducing the risks they face from disasters and natural hazards. The BRIC program guiding principles are supporting communities through capability- and capacity-building; encouraging and enabling innovation; promoting partnerships; enabling large projects; maintaining flexibility; and providing consistency. You can find more information on the BRIC program here:
https://www.fema.gov/grants/mitigation/building-resilient-infrastructure-communities Source: Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP)
Agency: FEMA
Website: https://www.fema.gov/grants/mitigation/hazard-mitigation Description: The HMGP provides funding to state, local, tribal, or territorial governments (and individuals or businesses if the community applies on their behalf) to rebuild with the intentions to mitigate future losses due to potential disasters. This grant program is available after a presidentially declared disaster.
Source: Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) – Post Fire Agency: FEMA
Website: https://www.fema.gov/grants/mitigation/post-fire Description: The HMGP Post Fire grant program provides assistance to communities for the purpose of implementing hazard mitigation measures following a wildfire. Mitigation measures may include:
• Soil stabilization
• Flood diversion
• Reforestation
Source: Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) Grant
Agency: FEMA
Website: https://www.fema.gov/grants/mitigation/floods
Description: The Flood Mitigation Assistance Program is a competitive grant program that provides funding to states, local communities, federally recognized tribes, and territories. Funds can be used for projects that reduce or eliminate the risk of repetitive flood damage to buildings insured by the National Flood Insurance Program. FEMA chooses recipients based on the applicant’s ranking of the project and the eligibility and cost-effectiveness of the project.
Source: Emergency Management Performance Grant (EMPG)
Agency: FEMA
Website: https://www.fema.gov/grants/preparedness/emergency-management-performance
6.2 p. 462 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | L-3
Description: The EMPG program provides funding to state, local, tribal, and territorial emergency management agencies with the overall goal of creating a safe and resilient nation. The two main objectives of the program are 1) closing capability gaps that are identified in the state or territory’s most recent Stakeholder Preparedness Review (SPR); and 2) building or sustaining those capabilities that are identified as high priority through the Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA)/SPR process and other relevant information sources. The grant recipient and Regional Administrator must come to an agreement on program priorities, which are crafted based on National, State, and regional priorities.
Source: Fire Management Assistance Grant (FMAG)
Agency: FEMA
Website: https://www.fema.gov/assistance/public/fire-management-assistance Description: Fire Management Assistance is available to state, local, and tribal governments for the mitigation, management, and control of fires on publicly or privately owned forests or grasslands, which threaten such destruction as would constitute a major disaster. The Fire Management Assistance declaration process is initiated when a state submits a request for assistance to the FEMA Regional Director at the time a "threat of major disaster" exists. The entire process is accomplished on an expedited basis and a FEMA decision is rendered in a matter of hours. Before a grant can be awarded, a state must demonstrate that total eligible costs for the declared fire meet or exceed either the individual fire cost threshold, which applies to single fires, or the cumulative fire cost threshold, which recognizes numerous smaller fires burning throughout a state.
Source: Regional Catastrophic Preparedness (RCP) Grants Agency: FEMA
Website: https://www.fema.gov/grants/preparedness/regional-catastrophic Description: The Regional Catastrophic Preparedness Grant program provides funding to increase collaboration and capacity in regard to catastrophic incident response and preparation.
Source: Emergency Forest Restoration Program (EFRP)
Agency: USDA Farm Service Agency (FSA)
Website: https://www.fsa.usda.gov/programs-and-services/disaster-assistanceprogram/emergency-forest-restoration/index Description: The Emergency Forest Restoration Program (EFRP) helps the owners of non-industrial private forests restore forest health damaged by natural disasters. The EFRP does this by authorizing payments to owners of private forests to restore disaster damaged forests. The local FSA County Committee implements EFRP for all disasters with the exceptions of drought and insect infestations.
Eligible practices may include debris removal, such as down or damaged trees; site preparation, planting materials, and labor to replant forest stand; restoration of forestland roads, fire lanes, fuel breaks, or erosion-control structures; fencing, tree shelters; wildlife enhancement.
To be eligible for EFRP, the land must have existing tree cover; and be owned by any nonindustrial private individual, group, association, corporation, or other private legal entity.
6.2 p. 463 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | L-4
Source: Emergency Conservation Program (ECP)
Agency: USDA Farm Service Agency (FSA)
Website: https://www.fsa.usda.gov/programs-and-services/conservation-programs/emergencyconservation/index Description: The Emergency Conservation Program (ECP) helps farmers and ranchers to repair damage to farmlands caused by natural disasters and to help put in place methods for water conservation during severe drought. The ECP does this by giving ranchers and farmers funding and assistance to repair the damaged farmland or to install methods for water conservation. The grant could be used for restoring conservation structures (waterways, diversion ditches, buried irrigation mainlines, and permanently installed ditching system).
Source: Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) Agency: National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS)
Website: https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/co/programs/financial/eqip/ Description: The Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) is a voluntary program authorized under the Agricultural Act of 2014 (2014 Farm Bill) that helps farmers, ranchers and forest landowners who own or rent agricultural land to implement practices and/or install measures to protect soil, water, plant, wildlife, and other natural resources while ensuring sustainable production on their farms, ranches, and working forest lands. California EQUIP ranking pools include Catastrophic Fire Recovery and Forest Tree Mortality.
Source: Emergency Watershed Protection (EWP) Program
Agency: National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS)
Website: https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/national/programs/landscape/ewpp/ Description: The program offers technical and financial assistance to help local communities relieve imminent threats to life and property caused by floods, fires, windstorms, and other natural disasters that impair a watershed.
Eligible sponsors include cities, counties, towns, conservation districts, or any federally recognized Native American tribe or tribal organization. Interested public and private landowners can apply for EWP Program recovery assistance through one of those sponsors.
EWP Program covers the following activities.
• Debris removal from stream channels, road culverts, and bridges • Reshape and protect eroded streambanks
• Correct damaged drainage facilities
• Establish vegetative cover on critically eroded lands • Repair levees and structures
• Repair conservation practices
6.2 p. 464 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | L-5
Source: Funding for Fire Departments and First Responders Agency: DHS, U.S. Fire Administration
Website: https://www.usfa.fema.gov/grants/
Description: Includes grants and general information on financial assistance for fire departments and first responders. Programs include the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program, Reimbursement for Firefighting on Federal Property, State Fire Training Systems Grants, and National Fire Academy Training Assistance.
Source: Tribal Environmental General Assistance Program (GAP) Agency: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Website: https://www.epa.gov/tribal-pacific-sw/epa-region-9-tribal-environmental-gap-funding Description: Funding under this program is used to aid Native American tribes in establishing and implementing their own reservation-specific environmental protection programs. To find out more about this funding opportunity please contact Tribal Branch Manager, Jeremy Bauer, at [email protected].
Source: Specific EPA Grant Programs
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Website: https://www.epa.gov/tribal-pacific-sw/epa-region-9-tribal-environmental-gap-funding Description: Various grant programs are listed under this site. Listed below are examples of grants offered:
• Multipurpose Grants to States and Tribes: https://www.epa.gov/grants/multipurposegrants-states-and-tribes • Environmental Education Grants: https://www.epa.gov/education/grants • Environmental Justice Grants: https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/environmentaljustice-grants-funding-and-technical-assistance Source: Conservation Innovation Grants (CIG)
Agency: National Resource Conservation Service
Website: Conservation Innovation Grant (CIG) | NRCS California (usda.gov) Description: CIG State Component. CIG is a voluntary program intended to stimulate the development and adoption of innovative conservation approaches and technologies while leveraging federal investment in environmental enhancement and protection, in conjunction with agricultural production. Under CIG, Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) funds are used to award competitive grants to non-federal governmental or nongovernmental organizations, tribes, or individuals. CIG enables the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) to work with other public and private entities to accelerate technology transfer and adoption of promising technologies and approaches to address some of the nation's most pressing natural resource concerns. CIG will benefit agricultural producers by providing more options for environmental enhancement and compliance with federal, state, and local regulations. The NRCS administers the CIG program.
The CIG requires a 50/50 match between the agency and the applicant. The CIG has two funding
6.2 p. 465 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | L-6
components: national and state. Funding sources are available for water resources, soil resources, atmospheric resources, and grazing land and forest health.
Source: Urban and Community Forestry Program, National Urban and Community Forestry Challenge Cost Share Grant Program
Agency: U.S. Forest Service
Website: https://www.fs.usda.gov/managing-land/urban-forests/ucf Description: U.S. Forest Service funding will provide for Urban and Community Forestry Programs that work with local communities to establish climate-resilient tree species to promote long-term forest health. The other initiative behind this program is to promote and carry out disaster risk mitigation activities, with priority given to environmental justice communities. For more information, contact a Forest Service Regional Program Manager.
Source: Catalog of Federal Funding Sources; Land Resources Agency: Multiple
Website: https://ordspub.epa.gov/ords/wfc/f?p=165:512:10535656593775:::512::
Description: The Land Finance Clearing House is a catalogue of Federal funding sources for all things land related.
Examples of the types of grants found at this site are:
• Forest and Woodlands Resource Management Grant:
https://sam.gov/fal/a798ad78cac749639b48270db3e86fdc/view?index=cfda&page=2&org anization_id=100011100
• Environmental Education Grant: https://www.epa.gov/education/grants • Public Assistance Grant Program: https://www.fema.gov/assistance/public • Hazard Mitigation Grant: https://www.fema.gov/grants/mitigation/hazard-mitigation Source: Catalog of Federal Funding Sources; Water Resources Agency: Multiple
Website: https://ofmpub.epa.gov/apex/wfc/f?p=165:12:6483383318137:::12::
Description: The Water Finance Clearing House is a catalogue of Federal funding sources for all things water related.
Examples of the types of grants found at this site are:
• Water Conservation Field Services Program: https://www.usbr.gov/waterconservation/ • California Community Development Block Grant:
https://www.grants.ca.gov/grants/community-development-block-grant-cdbg/ • California Clean Water State Revolving Fund Program (CWSRF):
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/grants_loans/srf/index.html
6.2 p. 466 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | L-7
Source: Firewise Communities
Agency: Multiple
Website: http://www.firewise.org
Description: Many different Firewise Communities activities are available to help homes and whole neighborhoods become safer from wildfire without significant expense. Community cleanup days, awareness events, and other cooperative activities can often be successfully accomplished through partnerships among neighbors, local businesses, and local fire departments at little or no cost.
The kind of help you need will depend on who you are, where you are, and what you want to do.
Among the different activities that individuals and neighborhoods can undertake, the following often benefit from seed funding or additional assistance from an outside source:
• Thinning/pruning/tree removal/clearing on private property—particularly on very large, densely wooded properties
• Retrofit of home roofing or siding to non-combustible materials • Managing private forest
• Community slash pickup or chipping
• Creation or improvement of access/egress roads
• Improvement of water supply for firefighting
• Public education activities throughout the community or region Source: The National Fire Plan (NFP)
Agency: DOI & USDA
Website: http://www.forestsandrangelands.gov/
Description: Many states are using funds from the NFP to provide funds through a cost-share with residents to help them reduce the wildfire risk to their private property. These actions are usually in the form of thinning or pruning trees, shrubs, and other vegetation and/or clearing the slash and debris from this kind of work. Opportunities are available for rural, state, and volunteer fire assistance.
Source: Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) Agency: FEMA
Website: https://www.fema.gov/grants/preparedness/firefighters/safer Description: The purpose of SAFER grants is to help fire departments increase the number of frontline firefighters. The goal is for fire departments to increase their staffing and deployment capabilities and ultimately attain 24-hour staffing, thus ensuring that their communities have adequate protection from fire and fire-related hazards. The SAFER grants support two specific activities:
(1) hiring of firefighters and (2) recruitment and retention of volunteer firefighters. The hiring of firefighters activity provides grants to pay for part of the salaries of newly hired firefighters over the five-year program.
6.2 p. 467 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | L-8
Source: The Fire Prevention and Safety Grants (FP&S)
Agency: FEMA
Website: https://www.fema.gov/grants/preparedness/firefighters/safety-awards Description: FP&S offers support to projects that enhance the safety of the public and firefighters who may be exposed to fire and related hazards. The primary goal is to target high risk populations and mitigate high incidences of death and injury. Examples of the types of projects supported by FP&S include fire-prevention and public-safety education campaigns, juvenile fire-setter interventions, media campaigns, and arson prevention and awareness programs. In fiscal year 2005, Congress reauthorized funding for FP&S and expanded the eligible uses of funds to include firefighter safety research and development.
Source: Federal Excess Personal Property
Agency: USFS
Website: https://gsaxcess.gov/
Description: The Federal Excess Personal Property (FEPP) program refers to Forest Service-owned property that is on loan to State Foresters for the purpose of wildland and rural firefighting. Most of the property originally belonged to the Department of Defense (DoD). Once acquired by the Forest Service, it is loaned to State Cooperators for firefighting purposes. The property is then loaned to the State Forester, who may then place it with local departments to improve local fire programs. State Foresters and the USDA Forest Service have mutually participated in the FEPP program since 1956.
Source: Assistance to Firefighters Grants (AFG)
Agency: FEMA
Website: https://www.fema.gov/grants/preparedness/firefighters.
Description: The AFG program provides resources to assist fire departments in attaining critical resources such as training and equipment.
Source: Community Wildfire Defense Grant
Agency: USDA Forest Service
Website: https://www.fs.usda.gov/managing-land/fire/grants Description: The community Wildfire Defense Grant is a program aimed at assisting local communities and Tribes within the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) in their planning efforts to reduce wildfire risk. The Forest Service intends to do this through the implementation of three goals from the National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management Strategy (Cohesive Strategy). Included in these three goals is restoring and maintaining landscapes, creating fire adapted communities, and improving wildfire response within the specific at-risk community. Grant funding of no more than $250k will be awarded for the development and revision of Community Wildfire Protection Plans (CWPPs) and no more than $10 million will be awarded for the implementation of projects outline in CWPPs that are less than ten years old. Communities, Tribes, states, non-profits, and Alaska Native Corporations are all considered eligible for this grant.
6.2 p. 468 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | L-9
Source: Property Owners and the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program Agency: FEMA
Website: https://www.fema.gov/grants/mitigation/hazard-mitigation/property-owners Description: The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) provides funding to homeowners whose properties are located in states that have received a Presidential Disaster Declaration. Eligibility requires an approved hazard mitigation plan, compliance with relevant regulations, and a costeffective and technically feasible rebuilding project. Homeowners work with their local community to develop an HMGP grant proposal, and if approved, FEMA reimburses up to 75% of mitigation costs.
The benefits of mitigation include reducing future losses, strengthening homes against natural hazards, lowering insurance premiums, increasing property value, and reducing personal expenses.
The application review process involves FEMA assessing cost-effectiveness and compliance, and approved projects are implemented by the local community. Reimbursement is granted upon completion of approved work. The process for businesses to be included in HMGP grant applications is the same as for homeowners.
STATE FUNDING INFORMATION
Source: CAL FIRE Grant Programs
Agency: CAL FIRE
Website: https://www.fire.ca.gov/grants/
Description: The CAL FIRE Grant Program offers a range of forest-related grants with differing scopes and funding details. Some of the Grants include:
1. Forest Health Grants: https://www.fire.ca.gov/grants/forest-health-grants/
2. California Forest Improvement Program: https://www.fire.ca.gov/grants/california-forestimprovement-program-cfip/
3. Fire Prevention Grants Program: https://www.fire.ca.gov/grants/fire-prevention-grants/
4. Urban & Community Forestry Grant Programs:
https://wwwresponse.fire.ca.gov/grants/urban-and-community-forestry-grant-programs/
5. Wildfire Resilience and Forestry Assistance Grant- Prop 68:
https://www.fire.ca.gov/programs/resource-management/resource-protectionimprovement/landowner-assistance/forest-stewardship/ Source: California Fire Safe Council Grant Programs
Agency: California Fire Safe Council
Website: https://cafiresafecouncil.org/grants-and-funding/apply-for-a-grant/ Description: The California Fire Safe Council provides a range of Federal, State, and Private funding sources in addition to administering the USFS State Fire Assistance (SFA) Grant Programs.
Source: California Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Loans and Grants Agency: Multiple
Website: https://calepa.ca.gov/loansgrants/
6.2 p. 469 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | L-10
Description: The California EPA Loans and Grants hosts a wide variety of EPA grants specifically for California. While these funding sources may not tie directly to fuel management or fire recovery, there is a wide array of funding opportunities for water and air resources which are directly impacted by wildfire.
Source: Northern California Forests and Watersheds Program Agency: Multiple
Website: https://www.nfwf.org/programs/northern-california-forests-and-watersheds Description: The National Fish and Wildlife Foundations and the U.S. Forest Service have partnered to restore and enhance National Forests and watersheds affected by wildfires in northern California.
This program will administer an initial $6 million in grants to projects that increase wildfire resiliency for northern California National Forests and watersheds.
Source: Adaptation Clearinghouse
Agency: Multiple
Website: https://resilientca.org/
Description: This resource has numerous wildfire-related resources such as funding opportunities, assessments, case studies, educational materials, data and tools, example plans and strategies, and additional policy guidance.
Source: State of California’s Grants Portal
Agency: Multiple
Website: https://www.grants.ca.gov/
Description: The California Grants Portal helps users identify the latest grants that could support fire hazard planning or related implementation efforts that support wildfire risk mitigation, fuels management, and other related projects.
Source: California Air Resources Board Funding Wizard
Agency: Multiple
Website: https://fundingwizard.arb.ca.gov/web/
Description: The Funding Wizard aggregates current federal, state, regional, private, and other funding opportunities for environmental and sustainability projects.
Source: California Grant Programs
Agency: California Fire Foundation
Website: https://www.cafirefoundation.org/programs/fireprevention/ Description: The California Fire Foundation (CFF) offers grant opportunities to fire departments, firefighter associations, and community-based organizations whose projects help address wildfire and disaster prevention, preparedness, relief, and recovery needs within the state of California. The CFF directly supports high fire threat and/or under-resourced communities.
6.2 p. 470 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | L-11
Source: Wildfire Recovery Fund
Agency: California Community Foundation
Website: https://www.calfund.org/wildfirerecoveryfund/
Description: The Wildfire Recovery Fund supports intermediate and long-term recovery efforts for major California wildfires. The Fund also supports wildfire prevention and preparedness efforts. Since 2003, the fund has granted more than $32 million to support relief and recovery efforts in the aftermath of destructive wildfires.
Source: Wildfire Recovery Fund
Agency: California Community Foundation
Website: https://www.calfund.org/wildfirerecoveryfund/
Description: The Wildfire Recovery Fund supports intermediate and long-term recovery efforts for major California wildfires. The Fund also supports wildfire prevention and preparedness efforts. Since 2003, the fund has granted more than $32 million to support relief and recovery efforts in the aftermath of destructive wildfires.
Source: Regional Forest and Fire Capacity Grant Program Agency: California Department of Conservation
Website: https://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/grant-programs/Pages/Regional-Forest-and-FireCapacity-Program.aspx Description: The Department of Conservation has announced the release of the 2022 Regional Forest and Fire Capacity (RFFC) Program Final Grant Guidelines. The RFFC Program is made possible through the Public Resources Code section 4208.1 (California Department of Conservation 2023). The Department provides block grants to regional entities and eligible coordinating organizations to support large and small scale project implementation. The Program aims to achieve community wildfire resilience that is consistent with the California Wildfire and Forest Resilience Action Plan, California Forest Carbon Plan, and Executive Order B-52-18. The State Coastal Conservancy (SCC) is the current grantee for the Central Region.
Source: Wildfire Resilience Program
Agency: State Coastal Conservancy
Website: https://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/grant-programs/Pages/Regional-Forest-and-FireCapacity-Program.aspx Description: This program supports local partners for the purpose of implementing projects that will improve forest health and reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfire from occurring in developed areas.
The Conservancy has provided over $17 million to support forest management projects that reduce wildfire risk (Coastal Conservancy 2023). The goal of the Wildfire Resilience Program is to “build organizational capacity at the local and regional level to implement forest health and fire risk reduction projects” (Coastal Conservancy 2023). The Coastal Conservancy funds these projects from a block grant through the Department of Conservation’s Regional Fire and Forest Health Capacity
6.2 p. 471 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | L-12
Program, the California Climate Initiative Program, Proposition 68, and Proposition 84. Priorities for the grant program include projects that:
• are in high wildfire risk areas, such as those identified in the CalFire Fire Hazard Severity Zones or the FRAP Priority Landscape Maps
• implement the California Wildfire and Forest Resilience Action Plan • provide significant public benefit
Source: ReCoverCA
Agency: California Department of Housing and Community Development Website: https://www.hcd.ca.gov/grants-and-funding/recoverca Description: The ReCoverCA program offers financial assistance and construction management services to assist homeowners in rebuilding single-family homes and manufactured housing units.
It focuses on community development beyond new construction, aiding communities in recovering from various disasters like droughts, fires, and floods. By administering federal funds for recovery and mitigation, the program collaborates with local governments and organizations to support long-term recovery initiatives for housing, infrastructure, economic revitalization, and disaster risk reduction.
PRIVATE FUNDING INFORMATION
Source: State Farm Good Neighbor Citizenship (GNC) Grants Agency: State Farm
Website: https://www.statefarm.com/about-us/corporate-responsibility/community-grants/goodneighbor-citizenship-grants Description: State Farm funding is directed at:
• Auto and roadway safety
• Teen Driver Education
• Home safety and fire prevention
• Disaster preparedness
• Disaster recovery
Source: The Urban Land Institute (ULI)
Website: http://www.uli.org
Description: ULI is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit research and education organization supported by its members. The institute has more than 22,000 members worldwide, representing the entire spectrum of land use and real estate development disciplines, working in private enterprise and public service.
The mission of the ULI is to provide responsible leadership in the use of land to enhance the total environment. ULI and the ULI Foundation have instituted Community Action Grants that could be used for Firewise Communities activities. Applicants must be ULI members or part of a ULI District Council. Contact [email protected] or review the web page to find your District Council and the application information.
6.2 p. 472 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | L-13
Source: Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI) Website: http://www.esri.com/grants
Description: ESRI is a privately held firm and the world's largest research and development organization dedicated to geographic information systems. ESRI provides free software, hardware, and training bundles under ESRI-sponsored Grants that include such activities as conservation, education, and sustainable development, and posts related non-ESRI grant opportunities under such categories as agriculture, education, environment, fire, public safety, and more. You can register on the website to receive updates on grant opportunities.
Source: Matching Awards Program
Agency: National Forest Foundation (NFF)
Website: https://www.nationalforests.org/grant-programs/map Description: The NFF is soliciting proposals for its Matching Awards Program (MAP) to provide funds for direct on-the-ground projects benefitting America’s National Forests and Grasslands.
By pairing federal funds provided through a cooperative agreement with the U.S. Forest Service with non-federal dollars raised by award recipients, MAP measurably multiplies the resources available to implement stewardship projects that benefit the National Forest System.
Source: Patagonia Environmental Grants and Support
Agency: Patagonia
Website: https://www.patagonia.com/how-we-fund/
Description: Patagonia supports innovative work that addresses the root causes of the environmental crisis and seeks to protect both the environment and affected communities. Patagonia focuses on places where they have built connections through outdoor recreation and through their network of retail stores, nationally and internationally.
Source: Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation Grants
Agency: Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation
Website: https://www.rewild.org/
Description: The foundation supports projects around the world that build climate resiliency, protect vulnerable wildlife, and restore balance to threatened ecosystems and communities.
Source: U.S. Endowment for Forestry and Communities
Agency: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Economic Development Agency
Website: https://www.usendowment.org/
Description: As the nation’s largest public charity dedicated to keeping our working forests working and ensuring their bounty for current and future generations, the Endowment deploys the creativity and power of markets to advance their mission: The Endowment works collaboratively with partners in the public and private sectors to advance systemic, transformative and sustainable change for the health and vitality of the nation’s working forests and forest-reliant communities.
6.2 p. 473 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | L-14
OTHER FUNDING INFORMATION
The following resources may also provide helpful information for funding opportunities:
• Western Forestry Leadership Coalition: https://www.thewflc.org/ • USDA Information Center: https://www.nal.usda.gov/main/information-centers • Forest Service Fire Management website: https://www.fs.usda.gov/managing-land/fire • Insurance Services Office Mitigation Online (town fire ratings): http://www.isomitigation.com/ • National Fire Protection Association: http://www.nfpa.org • Wildland Fire Prevention/Education: https://www.nifc.gov/fire-information/fire-preventioneducation-mitigation • Department of Homeland Security U.S. Fire Administration: https://www.usfa.fema.gov/index.html
6.2 p. 474 of 557
APPENDIX M:
List of Preparers
6.2 p. 475 of 557
This page intentionally left blank.
6.2 p. 476 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan Page | M-1
LIST OF PREPARERS
Name Organization
Victoria Amato SWCA Environmental Consultants
Breanna Plucinski SWCA Environmental Consultants
Ryan Saggese SWCA Environmental Consultants
Montiel Ayala SWCA Environmental Consultants
Sam Lashley SWCA Environmental Consultants
Liz Hitzfelder SWCA Environmental Consultants
Peggy Ford SWCA Environmental Consultants
Kimberly Proa SWCA Environmental Consultants
Esther Mandeno Digital Mapping Solutions
Carol Rice Wildland Resource Management
For additional information on this project, please contact Project Manager Victoria Amato at [email protected].
6.2 p. 477 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan: Annex 12 City of Gilroy Page | 1
ANNEX 12: CITY OF GILROY
Organization and Jurisdiction
The City of Gilroy is a charter city governed by a publicly elected city council and has authority for General Plan land use planning, code adoption, and permit processing. The City of Gilroy operates a municipal fire department that provides fire suppression, emergency medical services, and rescue response to incorporated areas and unincorporated areas through automatic and mutual aid agreements. The Gilroy Fire Department works with the City’s Community Development Department to provide hazardous material and fire inspection and investigation, fire prevention, and building safety assessments. The Gilroy Fire Department works with the City’s Office of Emergency Management to provide public outreach, education, and wildfire resiliency.
Lying within the southernmost extension of Santa Clara County’s Santa Clara Valley at about 200 feet above sea level and bounded by the Santa Cruz Mountains to the west and the Diablo Mountains to the east, the City of Gilroy covers 16.54 square miles. At the time of the 2020 US Census, the City had a population of 59,520.
The Gilroy Planning Area, like other Planning Areas defined in the base CWPP, is not confined to a single jurisdiction's boundary to encourage cooperation, communication, coordination, and collaboration with other agencies and community stakeholders involved with wildfire mitigation activities. The California Resources Code defines State Responsibility Areas (SRAs) and Local Responsibility Areas (LRAs). Gilroy Fire Department provides fire protection to incorporated Gilroy, and the South Santa Clara Fire Protection District, under contract with CAL FIRE, provides fire protection to unincorporated areas surrounding Gilroy within the LRA, while CAL FIRE is responsible for fire protection in the SRA directly west of Gilroy's jurisdiction boundaries. All departments provide automatic and mutual aid within the Gilroy Planning Area, as shown in Figure 12.1. The City of Gilroy and parts of unincorporated Santa Clara County are within the Gilroy Planning Area and designated LRA.
Planning Team Participation
The City of Gilroy has contributed to the development of the Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) through collaboration with various stakeholders across the County of Santa Clara, including the Santa Clara County FireSafe Council, CWPP Management and Advisory Team, and other stakeholders from local government jurisdictions, nongovernmental organizations, and the private sector. The City of Gilroy engaged adjoining jurisdictions and the community in developing Annex 12. To update the annex, the City of Gilroy utilized a risk and hazard assessment completed during the initial planning process to identify wildfire hazard and risk potential and support wildfire prevention planning and mitigation priorities. A community information meeting was held in South County with representatives from the Santa Clara County Fire/Safe Council, CAL FIRE, South Santa Clara County Fire District, County of Santa Clara Office of Emergency Management, City of Morgan Hill Office of Emergency Services, and the City of Gilroy Office of Emergency Management at the City on December 15, 2022. This meeting allowed community members to receive information, review CWPP planning progress and maps, provide input on areas of concern, and have their questions answered.
Risk-Hazard Summary
The City of Gilroy is identified as an at-risk community by the California Office of the State Fire Marshal. The Planning Area has a complex wildfire environment, especially along the western wildland-urban interface, that presents a significant risk to public safety and the built environment. The Planning Area experiences a Mediterranean climate characterized by warm, dry summers and mild, wet winters. This climate is conducive to
6.2 p. 478 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan: Annex 12 City of Gilroy Page | 2
wildfire as vegetation is often driest during the warmer summer and fall months. Extreme fire weather is also possible, notably during wind events, which bring warm, dry air and high wind speeds along the hills, mountains, and valley. Vegetation within the Planning Area includes woodlands, shrublands, grasslands, and non-native urban vegetation associated with residential development that can facilitate wildfire spread.
The Planning Area and adjacent lands feature relatively flat and hilly terrain contributing to fire hazard. Fires can spread more rapidly uphill, and steep terrain and valleys can channel and intensify winds, further exacerbating wildfire risk. Steep slopes and limited accessibility can also make firefighting efforts more challenging. The Planning Area also includes an extensive wildland urban interface (WUI). The development along the WUI results in homes, roads, and other assets interspersed with vegetation with varying degrees of fuel loading increasing hazard vulnerability in those areas. Large adjacent open space areas (primarily along the west edge of the Planning Area) expose the community to wildfires originating outside the Planning Area and burning toward it. If not quickly suppressed, these ignitions could move into the Planning Area and cause significant wildfire impacts to the community.
Most of the homes in the Planning Area are not located within the WUI area. Homes along the WUI typically maintain a defensible space of at least 30 feet, though many still need to achieve and maintain defensible space treatment out to 100 feet from structures. Limited defensible space and combustible building materials increase wildfire susceptibility and risk. Roads and narrow driveways are present within the Planning Area. Some properties are accessed via dead-end public roads and private roads that rely solely on one route for emergency evacuation, and some lots have limited space for turning around, posing a potential risk of entrapment for community members and emergency responders.
The City of Gilroy is actively addressing wildfire risk reduction in the Planning Area through various methods.
This CWPP Annex also identifies recommended actions that can be implemented to reduce wildfire risk to the community. These plans, programs, and actions are summarized below:
• Resident Programs: Includes debris removal and chipping when the Fire Safe Council makes this opportunity available in South County.
• Community Education: Includes wildfire safety and personal preparedness education through workshops and tabling events.
• Community Emergency Preparedness: Includes support of Community Emergency Response Teams (CERT) and Amateur Radio Emergency Services (ARES), maintaining disaster tools and emergency supplies, and utilizing AlertSCC for delivering critical emergency and evacuation information. • Funding and Staffing: Includes vegetation assessment and abatement within City-owned parcels and evaluating grant funding opportunities surrounding wildfire reduction projects and staff augmentation to support community resilience efforts.
WUI Area Description
The wildland-urban interface (WUI) is an area where wildfire risk mitigation projects may be conducted to reduce wildland fire threats to at-risk communities. The development pattern and land use within the Planning Area create conditions that can be described as either a wildland-urban interface or a wildland-urban intermix. Urban areas are predominantly built-up environments with little or no exposure to natural vegetative fuels. The area where urban development abuts vegetative fuels would be characterized as a wildland-urban interface. This condition exists where structures abut City parks, privately owned land, and open space. Areas where the density of housing units and structures is lower and the space between structures consists of vegetative fuels
6.2 p. 479 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan: Annex 12 City of Gilroy Page | 3
capable of propagating fire are more typically characterized as a wildland-urban intermix. The wildland fire risk associated with Interface and Intermix areas include:
• Fire propagation via structure-to-structure fire spread. • Landscaping-to-structure fire spread.
• Ember intrusion.
Most of the Planning Area is away from the WUI but shares borders with the surrounding WUI and intermix.
WUI Area Defined
Much of the City of Gilroy is considered non-WUI. However, portions of the Planning Area are designated as WUI and are assigned a low-risk rating. State wildland fire and defensible space laws apply outside City limits but not within the City. The City of Gilroy has the authority to adopt wildland fire and defensible space regulations throughout the City. The Countywide CWPP provides maps of WUI areas within the County, including the Planning Area. The extent of these WUI areas is presented in Figure 2.1 in the base Santa Clara County CWPP document (SWCA 2023). Figure 12.1 shows the Planning Area for the City of Gilroy.
Fire History
Fire history is an essential component of fire planning. It can provide an understanding of various fire-related factors, including frequency, type, and behavior, as well as the most vulnerable community areas and significant ignition sources. One important use for this information is as a tool for pre-planning. It is advantageous to know which areas may have burned recently and, therefore, may provide a tactical defense position, what type of fire burned in the area, and how fires may spread. Gilroy’s Planning Area has no history of notable wildfires.
However, several notable wildfires have occurred in the west Gilroy and east Gilroy Planning Areas that border the Gilroy Planning Area. Additional fire history information is shown in Figure 2.9 in the base CWPP document.
Hazardous Fuel Characteristics
The City of Gilroy is classified primarily as an urban fuel model with pockets of grass and timber interspersed throughout the city boundary. The hillside areas are mainly grass and shrub fuels intermixed with agricultural and grazed lands. The dominant vegetation in the hillside areas includes annual grassland, coastal live oak woodland, and coastal scrub. The scrub fuel types burn with high intensity in the event of ignition, particularly during periods of drought that follow a wet spring, where grass fuel loads provide the fine fuel layer capable of carrying wildfire. According to the Tuckman Risk Assessment, most of the Planning Area is rated as being in a moderate to high hazard area. The assessment indicates that most of the City is not within a hazard zone.
Appendix D of the base CWPP document provides additional details on the Tuckman Risk Assessment and Wildfire Hazard.
6.2 p. 480 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan: Annex 12 City of Gilroy Page | 4
Figure. 12.1 Gilroy Planning Area.
6.2 p. 481 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan: Annex 12 City of Gilroy Page | 5 Table of Contents
Neighborhood and Structural Characteristics
Gilroy is a diverse community composed of retail/commercial core, medium to high-density residential areas with small lots, and larger single-family homes. The areas of greatest concern are where structures in proximity to open space preserves, certain parks, and open parcels with heavy vegetation have the greatest risk to wildfire.
Water Supply: Gilroy has a good water supply through a hydrant system linked to the City’s supply system.
Some newer development areas have community water systems with fire hydrants. However, by and large there are little to no fire hydrants in the less densely development areas. Water supplies are very limited except for the reservoirs in the area. However, many property owners recognize this danger and have private water tanks with fittings for use by fire engines. CAL FIRE helicopters use the reservoirs as a source of water to fight fires in this area.
Roads and Access: Access is generally good throughout the community with well-maintained roads.
However, there are communities within the Planning Area that are accessed via one artery. In the event this road becomes unpassable, safe evacuation and emergency access will be compromised.
Defensible Space Characteristics: Most homes in WUI areas throughout the Planning Area have well maintained and irrigated yards with adequate defensible space. Parcel owners who fail to adequately maintain vegetation are assessed and notified annually to act. Notable in the neighborhoods at the base of the west hills are homes with minimal setbacks from the slope and adjacency to open space property with long grass, chaparral, and oak trees. Most homes in these areas are newer and subject to ordinances that specify building construction in the WUI.
Figure. 12.2. The images below depict the physical environments along the WUI in and around the Planning Area.
Figure 12.2.1. Gilroy and the WUI surrounding. Figure 12.2.2. Recreation trail and housing development along the WUI.
6.2 p. 482 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan: Annex 12 City of Gilroy Page | 6 Table of Contents
Figure 12.2.3. View near Christmas Hill Park and
Uvas Park Preserve with grass and oak trees.
Figure 12.2.4 Development along the WUI
looking towards West Hills.
Emergency Response Capacity
Fire Suppression Resources
Fire response for the incorporated City of Gilroy is provided by the Gilroy Fire Department and operates out of three full-time fire stations and one part-time fire station. The following resources are available at each station staffed with one crew:
• Chestnut Station, 7070 Chestnut Street, Gilroy.
o Type 1 Engine.
o Type 1 Truck.
o Type 6 Engine (OES).
• Las Animas Station, 8383 Wren Avenue, Gilroy.
o Type 1 Engine.
o Type 3 Engine.
o Type 1 Engine (Reserve).
• Sunrise Station, 880 Sunrise Drive, Gilroy.
o Type 1 Engine.
o Type 1 Engine (Reserve).
• Santa Teresa Station, 7049 Miller Ave, Gilroy.*
o Type 1 Engine.
o Type 6 Engine.
* The Santa Teresa Station operates on a part-time basis year-round, with staffing during periods of heightened public safety concerns, such as:
• Local emergency declarations.
• Red flag warnings.
• 4th of July and surrounding weekend.
6.2 p. 483 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan: Annex 12 City of Gilroy Page | 7 Table of Contents
• Potential flood or other disaster.
• Public events or gatherings in which there is a significant public safety concern.
The South Santa Clara County Fire District handles both automatic and mutual aid, as well as primary response duties within the Planning Area. It operates from the Masten Fire Station, Treehaven Fire Station, and Morgan Hill CAL FIRE Headquarters. Additionally, the CAL FIRE Santa Clara Unit, based at the Morgan Hill Headquarters, is responsible for unincorporated areas not covered by the district and can provide resources through mutual aid. CAL FIRE can provide additional resources by type to meet specific wildfire response needs through mutual aid.
Water Availability
The City’s water supply and fire department connection system is complex and built with many redundancies to support firefighting efforts. The South Santa Clara County Fire District also has water tenders available through mutual aid in any areas where hydrant access may be limited.
Fire Response
Federal Responsibility Area (FRA): A term designating areas where the federal government is responsible for fire response efforts. These areas include land under federal ownership (CA GOPR 2020).
Local Responsibility Area (LRA): A term designating areas where the local government is responsible for wildfire protection. The LRA includes incorporated cities, cultivated agricultural land, and portions of the desert. LRA fire protection is typically provided by city fire departments, fire protection districts, counties, and by CAL FIRE under contract to local government (CA GOPR 2020).
State Responsibility Area (SRA): A term designating areas where the state has financial responsibility for wildland fire protection. Incorporated cities and land under federal ownership are not included in the SRA. Land under federal ownership is in the federal responsibility area (CA GOPR 2020).
Source for more information- California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (CA GOPR). 2020.
Fire Hazard Planning Technical Advisory. Available at: https://www.opr.ca.gov/docs/20201109- Draft_Wildfire_TA.pdf [Accessed August 2021].
Agricultural Pass Program
The County of Santa Clara has established a Livestock Pass program to enable commercial livestock producers in the City of Gilroy and unincorporated areas to access their livestock during wildfire emergencies. The Livestock Pass program provides a standardized identification system for commercial livestock producers, enabling firefighting personnel, law enforcement officers, and emergency responders to facilitate access during a wildfire or similar disaster. With a Livestock Pass, ranchers may have limited emergency access to restricted areas for feeding, watering, caring for livestock that is sheltering in place, or evacuation. To qualify for the Livestock Pass program, eligible livestock owners must complete a 4- hour fire safety training workshop. To find more information about the Livestock pass program visit:
https://ag.santaclaracounty.gov/apply-ranchers-livestock-pass Public Education and Outreach Programs
The City of Gilroy recognizes and supports the Ready Set, Go! program and is actively involved with the Santa Clara County FireSafe Council (http://www.SCCFireSafe.org). This organization provides
6.2 p. 484 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan: Annex 12 City of Gilroy Page | 8 Table of Contents
information regarding chipping programs, defensible space mitigation, forest health issues, and much more. They also offer public meetings and forums to support wildfire awareness.
The Gilroy Fire Department provides comprehensive wildfire preparedness information on the City Website: https://www.cityofgilroy.org/165/Fire-Department.
The City of Gilroy’s Fire Prevention Division, under the Community Development Department provides comprehensive information regarding fire codes and regulations, wildfire hazard awareness and preparedness on the City’s website: https://www.cityofgilroy.org/166/Fire-Prevention.
The City of Gilroy’s Emergency Services Division, under the Administration Department, provides comprehensive emergency preparedness information on the City website:
http://www.cityofgilroy.org/174/Emergency-Preparedness.
Social Vulnerabilities
Key Issues
There are multiple census tracts identified as being exposed to multiple hazards and having increased social vulnerability that are indicated on Cal OES’ Hazard Exposure and Vulnerability Map:
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/3c78aea361be4ea8a21b22b30e613d6e. Disadvantaged communities often face heightened risks and long-term impacts from wildfire and smoke due to a combination of socioeconomic and systemic factors.
Below is a brief overview of increased community risk during wildfires:
• Economic Vulnerabilities – Substandard housing is increasingly susceptible and potential barriers to resource access to transportation and emergency information that can hinder awareness, preparedness, and response may exist.
• Health and Mobility Issues – Those with pre-existing health conditions may be impacted by smoke and those with physical limitations may require additional assistance.
Below is a brief overview of the long-term impacts post-wildfire:
• Economic Recovery – Wildfires can destroy residences, businesses, and critical infrastructure resulting in a phased recovery with prolonged hardship. • Health and Well-being – Mental health may be adversely impacted, and smoke inhalation may exacerbate respiratory conditions or other health issues. • Community and Social Dynamics – Social networks and community cohesion can be disrupted and barriers to accessing recovery services and support is possible.
Addressing these challenges requires targeted interventions that consider the unique needs of disadvantaged communities, including equitable risk reduction strategies, community engagement, and policy changes to support long-term recovery and resilience.
Response and Recovery Priorities
Essential services support the health, safety, and economic security of a community. The absence of these essential services can have adverse impacts during and post-wildfire. These elements have been
6.2 p. 485 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan: Annex 12 City of Gilroy Page | 9 Table of Contents
identified under FEMA’s Community Lifelines and should be considered when prioritizing and focusing efforts during response and recovery.
FEMA’s Community Lifelines address the following key impacts:
• Safety and Security
• Food, Hydration, and Shelter
• Health and Medical
• Energy
• Communications
• Transportation
• Hazardous Materials
• Water Systems
Additional information on Community Lifelines can be found at https://www.fema.gov/emergencymanagers/practitioners/lifelines.
Policies, Regulations, Ordinances, and Codes
City of Gilroy General Plan
Hilly areas in the northern and western portions of the city, as well as the adjacent areas outside of the city limits, are prone to wildfires. Gilroy is susceptible to wildfires in the “wildland-urban interface” areas of Gilroy. In addition, wildfires locally and regionally could lead to heavy smoke conditions in Gilroy that would require emergency management. Policies in this section are designed to minimize urban wildfire risks through public education, fire prevention codes, and hillside management practices that reduce the potential for wildfires.
The City of Gilroy’s General Plan identifies the following goals within the Potential Hazards element under wildfire hazards:
• Goal PH 4 – Protect life and minimize property damage from wildfires in the wildland/urban interface area and hazardous fire areas.
o PH 4.1 – Fire Hazard Severity Zones – Ensure the development in the Gilroy Wildland/Urban Interface area conforms to the most current standards for wildfire protection.
o PH 4.2 – Development Review – Provide plan checks for new construction, remodels, tenant improvements, and demolitions to ensure compliance with applicable life safety and fire protection system requirements, including special requirements for fire safety in areas with wildfire risk.
o PH 4.3 – Roofing Requirements – Require “Class A” fire-rated roofs on all new construction or re-roofing in the following areas:
West of Santa Teresa Boulevard, and south of Mantelli Drive.
6.2 p. 486 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan: Annex 12 City of Gilroy Page | 10 Table of Contents
West of Rancho Hills Drive.
In all other areas, “Class C” or better fire rated roofs shall be required for new construction and re-roofing.
o PH 4.4 – Hillside Areas – Require development in hillside areas to comply with the fire hazard policies and codes adopted into the Gilroy Fire Code for wildland/urban interface areas.
o PH 4.5 – Fire Safety Education and Training – Provide information on wildfire safety and prevention to raise public awareness on fire hazard issues and encourage preventive measures.
City of Gilroy Municipal Code
The City of Gilroy uses the updated California Fire Code, published by the International Code Council, Inc. and the California Building Standards Commission in Part 9 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, was adopted by resolution in 2022 and incorporated into Chapter 10, Section 10 of the Gilroy City Code (https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Gilroy/#!/Gilroy10.html#10.10).
The City of Gilroy Fire Prevention Program enforces the City’s Fire Codes. This consists of providing development review services for new streets and subdivisions, providing plan check and inspection services for new and modified construction, managing the fireworks and the weed abatement programs, conducting regulatory inspections of new businesses and existing businesses that are required by the code to have a regulatory permit, complaint investigation and code enforcement and providing training, consultation, and technical assistance to the Fire Department.
Extracts from this code relating to WUI are provided below:
103.2.1 General. The Fire Marshal Carries out the functions of the fire code official on behalf of and under the direction of the Fire Chief and implements, administers and enforces the provisions of this code. The Fire Marshal’s Office is established within the City of Gilroy as the Office of Fire Prevention. The Fire Marshal carries out the functions of the fire code official on behalf of and under the direction of the Fire Chief and implements, administers and enforces the provisions of this code.
The Residential Hillside Zoning areas are designated as the “City of Gilroy Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area” and subject to the construction methods of Section 4905.2 of the Gilroy City Code.
The establishment of limits for the Wildland-Urban Interface Area’s required construction methods shall be designated pursuant to the California Public Resources Code for SRAs, and in the City of Gilroy the areas designated as Residential Hillside (RH) zoning are designated based on their topography, vegetation, climatic and proximity to SRAs which make these methods necessary for effective fire protection within this area.
4906.2.1 Application. Buildings and structures located in the following areas shall maintain the required hazardous vegetation and fuel management:
1. All unincorporated lands designated by the State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection as State Responsibility Areas (SRA) including:
o 1.1. Moderate Fire Hazard Severity Zones
o 1.2. High Fire Hazard Severity Zones
6.2 p. 487 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan: Annex 12 City of Gilroy Page | 11 Table of Contents
o 1.3. Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones
o 1.4. Land designated as a Very-High Fire Hazard Severity Zone or designated “City of Gilroy Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area” as established in Section 4905.3.
2. Areas designated as High Fire Hazard Severity Zones and adjacent to “City of Gilroy WildlandUrban Interface Fire Area” may be subject to all or part of the hazardous vegetation and fuel management requirements when determined necessary by the Fire Chief.
In addition to the Fire Code there are several policies and guidance documents:
• Fire Code Policies
• Allowable Grade
• Electric Security Gates (Width and KNOX requirement)
• Fire Service Access Roads (road length and turn around requirements) • Fire Works Booths
• Key Box / KNOX Box Requirement
• Private Fire Underground Main
• Spark Arrestors for Chimneys
• Tents, Canopies and Membrane structures
• Fire Hydrant Distance to buildings and intervals on public street • Fuel Transition Zone for Hillside Development
• Large Family Day Care Facilities
• Residential Hillside Development and Construction
Additional information and resources can be found on the City of Gilroy’s Fire Prevention Program webpage at https://www.cityofgilroy.org/166/Fire-Prevention-Division.
Risk-Hazard Assessment
A regionally specific wildfire hazard and risk assessment was conducted for the Planning Area to supplement the existing countywide risk assessment (Tukman 2022). This assessment incorporated additional inputs that are believed to represent wildfire hazards specifically for the Planning Area.
The Tukman Risk Assessment is a third-party risk assessment based on fire behavior modeling derived from fuel mapping classified at a 5m resolution, as well as historic weather, topographic conditions, and ignition history. The risk assessment has been developed as part of a collaborative effort with multijurisdictional participation. The County CWPP presents data on the Wildfire Hazard and Wildfire Risk to Structure layers.
Additional information about this assessment can be found in Appendix D of the base CWPP document.
6.2 p. 488 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan: Annex 12 City of Gilroy Page | 12 Table of Contents
County Risk Assessment
Figure 12.3. Composite Risk/Hazard Assessment for the Gilroy Planning Area.
Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSV)
The CAL FIRE FHSZ system is a science-based system where severity zones are defined based on vegetation, topography, and weather (temperature, humidity, and wind) and represent the likelihood of an area burning over a 30- to 50-year period without considering modifications such as fuel reduction efforts.
The CAL FIRE FHSZ maps present wildfire hazard and not wildfire risk. In California, CAL FIRE maintains FSHZ data within the SRA. There are three classes of fire hazard severity ratings within FHSZs:
Moderate, High, and Very High (CA GOPR 2020). The CAL FIRE FSHZ is shown in Figure 12.1. The City’s FSHZ, also shown in Figure 12.1., highlights the areas where local authorities manage and enforce regulations to improve fire safety and building standards in the identified wildfire hazard areas.
Gilroy Community Level Risk Assessment
Community hazard assessments include ratings of community conditions compared to best practices for WUI fire mitigation. These ratings consider applicable state codes, local ordinances, and recognized best practices guidelines.
The National Fire Protection Association Standard 144 (NFPA 144) defines WUI hazards and risks at community and parcel levels. This plan utilized components of NFPA 11444, California laws, and local
6.2 p. 489 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan: Annex 12 City of Gilroy Page | 13 Table of Contents
ordinances to evaluate neighborhood WUI hazards and risks. California PRC 4290 and 4291 sections address WUI community design and defensible space standards.
The community risk assessment conducted in 2016 reflects the average risk to communities in the Planning Area. The NFPA 144 community risk assessment for the Gilroy Community assigned the WUI community a risk rating of Moderate with a score of 48 (<40 = low, >40 = moderate, >70 = High, >112 = Extreme). Averages are recorded across the community for each of these parameters. There were no changes to this assessment upon review in 2023. Factors that contributed to the risk are illustrated below in Figure 12.4.
Parameter Condition Rating
Access Two roads in and out +
Narrow road width +
Surfaced road with greater than 5% grade +
Poor fire access, dead end spurs, lack turnaround +\-
Street signs are present, some are non-reflective
Vegetation Adjacent fuels: Medium +
Defensible space: >30 feet, <70 feet around structure +\- Topography within 300 feet of
structure
21%–30 % +\-
Topographic features Moderate to high concern +
History of high fire occurrence Moderate +
Severe fire weather potential Low +
Separation of adjacent structures Good separation +
Roofing assembly* Class C +\-
Building construction Combustible siding and deck +\-
Building set back <30 feet to slope +
Available fire protection* Water: hydrants present with variable pressure +\- Response: Station <5 miles from structure +
Internal sprinklers: none +\-
Utilities One above and one below ground +\-
Risk Rating- Moderate (48)
Figure 12.4. Gilroy Community Risk Assessment.
*Since the early 2000s, all new construction within the City of Gilroy’s WUI is required to have Class A roofing, and internal fire protection sprinkler systems.
6.2 p. 490 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan: Annex 12 City of Gilroy Page | 14 Table of Contents
Critical Infrastructure and Community Values at Risk
The critical utility infrastructure in Gilroy, including electric generation facilities, substations, power distribution and supply lines, natural gas lines, water supply systems, and communications lines, plays a vital role in supplying essential services to the community. These services, which are often critical to health and life safety, are at risk from the significant threat of wildfire to the electric utility supply.
The project area has several watersheds that are community values at risk. Watersheds must be protected and maintained from catastrophic wildfire damage to prevent mass movement, erosion, sedimentation, and water contamination. Several open space preserves and parks within and adjacent to the Planning Area exist. Several transportation routes serve as potential ingress for fire response resources and evacuation routes, and the roadways require maintenance to ensure adequate vegetation clearance. Critical firefighting infrastructure includes access and egress routes, fire hydrants, water storage tanks and lakes, ponds, and swimming pools that can be used as water sources to fight wildfire. Other crucial public welfare and emergency facilities, such as radio repeaters, also occur in this area. Other community values at risk include places of worship, life safety, homes and property, infrastructure, recreation facilities, wildlife habitat, watershed protection, and environmental resources.
Commercial operations proximal to or within WUI areas, including several farms, ranches, and vineyards, are at risk. Loss of services from infrastructure sites can also be far-reaching and affect people and operations at a considerable distance from the fire itself. Potential losses include but are not limited to human and animal casualties, crop loss, facility loss, and associated economic losses.
6.2 p. 491 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan: Annex 12 City of Gilroy Page | 15 Table of Contents
Mitigation Projects and Prioritizations
The following project matrices have been developed by the community and Core Team to direct specific project implementation for the City of Gilroy (Table 12-1.1–Table 12-1.3). The matrices below are tiered to the strategic goals presented in the body of the CWPP through project IDs in the first column of each matrix. The matrices are broken down into projects for addressing public education and outreach, reducing structural ignitability, improving fire response capability, and reducing hazardous fuels.
Table 12-1.1. Recommended Projects for Creating Resilient Landscapes (Fuel Reduction Projects) in the Gilroy Planning Area.
Project
ID Status Priority (H,M,L)
Timeline
for Action Project Description Location Land Ownership/ Lead Agency Methodology/Approach Serves To: Monitoring/Maintenance Requirements Funding Sources GIL RL1 Ongoing M Ongoing Continue to align the CWPP,
MJHMP, General Plan, and
other relevant plans to maintain
consistency across all plans and
leverage funding opportunities
for hazardous fuel treatments.
Citywide and
Countywide.
City, County,
State
Build and retain partnerships between agencies and
decision-making bodies at the City and County government level to develop solutions that mitigate the risks of common hazards:
• Assess values at risk.
• Build upon existing hazard mitigation planning
from other agencies.
• Use CWPP story map and projected tracking tools
to increase accessibility and public awareness.
• Utilize the established CWPP Management Team
to foster collaboration.
Protect life and property by
identifying hazards and
reducing associated risks.
Protect public and first
responder safety.
Review and updated plans as
indicated.
Update the CWPP project tracking
tool.
General fund, Grants
GIL RL2 Upcoming M Ongoing Identify and evaluate areas
where herbivory prescribed fuel
treatments should occur.
Prioritize highest
risk areas.
City, County,
State, Federal,
Private
landowners
Utilize prescribed herbivory as fuel reduction and
maintenance technique, especially adjacent to WUI areas:
• Collaborate with organizations to develop fuel
reduction projects.
• Employ grazing as a solution to where topography
may not allow for safe treatment utilizing
alternative methods.
• Identify and evaluate fuel reduction projects that
eliminate invasive plant species and restore areas
back to their natural environment.
Protect life and property by
mitigating fuels, providing
defensible space for
firefighters protecting
structures.
Create a fuel arrangement
to reduce wildfire spread.
Ensure the protection of
vulnerable ecosystems and
values at risk.
Regular monitoring is needed to
mitigate environmental damage and
invasive species.
Continued management of fire
breaks maintained by grazing, brush
breaking, controlled burns.
Update the CWPP project tracking
tool.
Grants
GIL RL3 Upcoming M Ongoing Encourage the use of intentional fire where ecologically sound
and feasible.
Prioritize highest
risk areas.
City, County,
State, Private
Landowners
Utilize prescribed burn planning that follows agency and regulatory protocols.
• Reach out to other surrounding fire agencies to
collaborate on prescribed burns. This will improve
the capacity to accomplish larger acreage burns.
• Assess opportunities to use prescribed fire for
habitat restoration to increase wildfire resilience.
Reduce fuel load of fine
fuels and understory
species to mitigate potential
for intense fire behavior in
the event of an unplanned
ignition.
Increase capacity and
training for fire departments.
Promote healthy
successional vegetation.
Provide habitat for fireadapted species.
Regular monitoring is needed to
mitigate environmental damage and
invasive species in burned areas.
Establish annual goals and
objectives for prescribed burning
operations
Update the CWPP project tracking
tool.
Grants
GIL RL4 Upcoming M Ongoing Encourage landowners to
reduce fuel around homes and
communities.
Prioritize highest
risk areas.
City, County,
State, FireSafe
Council, Local
Landowners
Work with the FireSafe Council to empower property owners to conduce mitigation:
Assist with assessment and identify best mitigation
practices.
Consider working with community-based organizations and volunteers to provide support and increase capacity.
Provide residents with
information that helps them
prioritize and plan their
defensible space projects.
Evaluate and monitor cost
effectiveness through a cost-benefit
analysis.
Assess completed work post
assessment.
Update CWPP project tracking tool.
General Fund, Grants
6.2 p. 492 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan: Annex 12 City of Gilroy Page | 16 Table of Contents
Table 12-1.2. Recommended Projects for Creating Fire Adapted Communities (Public Education and Outreach and Structural Ignitability Projects) in the Gilroy Planning Area Project
ID Status Priority (H,M,L)
Timeline
for Action Project Description Location Land Ownership/ Lead Agency Methodology/Approach Serves To: Monitoring/Maintenance Requirements Funding Sources GIL
FAC1
Ongoing H Ongoing Identify vulnerable
populations located in the WUI
Prioritize high
risk areas.
Santa Clara
County OEM, Fire
Department,
Community
Development,
Administration
Department
The City and County needs to identify vulnerable
populations (elderly, disabled, low income) who may need additional help to mitigate home hazards and to evacuate during a wildfire.
Seek grant opportunities to support assistance for
vulnerable populations.
Protect life and property of
the most vulnerable
members of the community.
Annual review of the number of
actions taken to address vulnerable
populations.
General Fund, Grants
GIL
FAC2
Upcoming M Ongoing Identify priority ignition
concerns.
Prioritize high
risk areas.
Fire Department,
Community
Development,
Public Works
Department,
Utilities
Department
Administration
Department
Utilize fire history data to identify areas with frequent fire starts and develop a strategy to reduce incidence of
ignitions. Convene a working group to develop strategies to reduce human ignitions:
• Education campaign
• Signage
• Fire response plans
Reduce unnecessary
ignition through unlawful or
irresponsible behavior.
Annual evaluation of priority ignition
concerns.
5-year re-run of risk assessment to
determine success in mitigating
hazards.
Review fire history data on a 2-year
frequency to monitor trends.
General Fund, Grants
GIL
FAC3
Ongoing H Ongoing Improve wildfire awareness and
preparedness.
All Planning Area
with focus along
WUI.
Fire Department,
Community
Development
Department,
Administration
Department, Local
Partners
Continue and expand awareness and education to residents in the following areas:
• Social media
• Newsletter
• Webpage
• Tabling Events
• Workshops
Prepare and educate
community and promotes
safety and resilience.
Annually evaluate the effectiveness
of outreach efforts on an annual
basis.
General Fund, Grants
GIL
FAC4
Ongoing M Ongoing Provide support to assess and
educate property owners on
wildfire prevention compliance
including defensible space and
home hardening.
Prioritize high
risk areas.
Fire Department,
Community
Development,
Utilities
Department,
Public Works
Department,
Administration
Department, Local
Partners
Promote defensible space and home hardening standards:
• Encourage new structures follow applicable codes
outlined in City ordinance and ensure older
structure owners are aware of emerging wildfire
mitigation standards.
• Educate and encourage compliance with 30-100
feet of defensible space around structures.
• Clean and maintain ingress/egress routes and
ensure alternate routes when possible.
• Continue educating property owners on tangible
actions to mitigate their risk to wildfire hazards.
Reduce loss of life and
structures through
defensible space and
property hygiene and
maintenance education and
outreach programs.
Annual program review and
consider updates to City code as
required.
General Fund, Grants
GIL FAC
5 Ongoing H Ongoing Improved air quality and smoke
awareness and education.
All Planning Area
with a focus on
vulnerable
populations.
Fire Department,
Community
Development,
Administration
Department, Local
Partners
Identify individuals and portions of the community most vulnerable to the impacts of smoke.
Work with Fire Departments and FireSafe Council to
develop materials and provide resources to at-risk
communities.
Disseminate information through various platforms:
• Social media
• Newsletter
• Outreach and training events
Empower the community
with knowledge to mitigate
health-related impacts from
smoke.
Annually evaluate and update
program as indicated.
General Fund, Grants
6.2 p. 493 of 557
2023 Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan: Annex 12 City of Gilroy Page | 17 Table of Contents
Table 12-1.3. Recommended Projects for Safe and Effective Wildfire Response (Fire Fighting Capability Projects) in the Gilroy Planning Area.
Project
ID Status Priority (H,M,L)
Timeline
for Action Project Description Location Land Ownership/ Lead Agency Methodology/Approach Serves To: Monitoring/Maintenance Requirements Funding Sources
GIL FR1 Upcoming M Ongoing Develop a coordinated approach between the fire department and
water district to identify needed
improvements to the water
distribution system, initially
focusing on areas of highest
wildfire hazard as determined in
the risk assessment and areas
with limited water pressure or no
existing water supply.
Prioritize high
risk areas.
Santa Clara
County, City of
Gilroy, Valley
Water, Private
landowners
Initiate a detailed study of feasible locations for water development improvements including but not limited to
additional distribution and supply lines with hydrants in difficult to access locations.
Install hand pumps or other methods independent of the grid for accessing private well water.
Evaluate and consider heli hydrants and mapping out
potential drafting locations.
Improve fire-fighting
response if water is more
readily available or closest
locations could be identified
on a GIS map on a
tablet/computer.
Alleviates public and agency
concern for limited water
supply in some WUI areas
Convene annually
Document number of meetings held
Document number of actions taken
General Fund, Grants
GIL FR2 Upcoming H Ongoing Develop strategies to enhance safe wildfire response in areas
with poor ingress and egress.
Prioritize high
risk areas.
City, County,
State, SSCCFD,
CAL FIRE
Address narrow access concerns for wildfire apparatus
through road improvements, new egress points, or
development of response plans.
Identify alternative apparatus for access into narrow areas.
Identify potential areas that threaten entrapment of response crews and develop response plans and/or safety zones.
Map all alternative ingress/egress.
Identify areas with limited all-weather access and develop response plans.
Work with HOAs and Community Associations to address
locked gates and access concerns
Improve fire-fighting
response if smaller more
agile vehicles are available
to navigate narrow
unimproved roads
Annually evaluate areas of concern
and address ads required.
General fund, Grants
GIL FR3 Upcoming M Ongoing Participate with County, CAL FIRE, and SSCCFD to support a
countywide early warning fire
detection system.
Prioritize high
risk areas.
City, County,
SSCCFD, CAL
FIRE
Determine costs, upkeep, and operational capacity of an early warning fire detection system.
Consider feasibility of early waring fire detection
technologies for use in the West Gilroy Hills.
Improve early detection of
new wildfire ignitions.
Yearly testing and maintenance. Grants
GIL FR4 Upcoming L Ongoing Determine the feasibility of implementing a drone program
for the purpose of monitoring
wildfire ignitions, reignitions, and
initial attack operations.
City WUI areas
that are not
easily or safely
accessible.
City OEM, County
OEM, GFD
Conduct a cost-benefit analysis determining the economic viability of a UAS program.
Identify and establish training protocols and required
licensure.
Emphasize to the public that unauthorized UASs in active fire area could interfere with firefighting operations.
Improve fire reporting of
difficult to access fires.
Notify fire suppression
agencies of wildfire ignition
and spread.
Pilots will be required to maintain
licensure and operate consistent
with FAA Part 107 rules.
Notify local civilian and fire-related
aviation authorities of the program
and during flight operations.
Grants
GIL FR5 Upcoming H Ongoing Collaborate to implement an
evacuation platform.
All areas within
Planning Area
City OEM, County
OEM
Implement evacuation software and create evacuation maps based on a zone configuration.
Notify community members
of evacuation status and
provide links to additional
information
Requires annual community
outreach and testing.
Grants
GIL FR6 Upcoming M Ongoing Improve and provide wildland fire-specific training
opportunities to firefighters
Countywide City, County,
State
Expand certification and qualifications for fire department personnel. Ensure that all firefighters are training in basic wildfire behavior, basic fire weather, and that all company, officers and chief level officers are trained in the wildland command and strike team leader level.
Develop agreements between agencies to provide training opportunities to fire staff.
Ensure fire departments require all firefighters to be red card. A red card is a requirement to work on an active
federal fire incident.
Reach out to the National Wildfire Coordination Group
(NCWG) for training materials, online courses, and instructor needs.
Provide training opportunities for firefighter trainees to meet NCWG standards,
Improve department and
wildland fire response and
suppression capabilities.
Reduce damage caused by
wildfires.
Reduce the likelihood of
firefighter casualties.
Provide annual red card
training/refresher/pack test events
before the start of fire season.
Provide online wildfire training
courses/refresher courses.
Establish inter-agency training.
Grants
6.2 p. 494 of 557
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY ADOPTING THE SANTA CLARA COUNTY
COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN AND THE GILROY ANNEX WHEREAS, wildfires pose a significant threat to the safety, property, and environment of communities within Santa Clara County, particularly in the wildland-urban interface (WUI); and WHEREAS, the development of a comprehensive wildfire protection plan is critical to reducing the risk of wildfires and enhancing community preparedness, resilience, and recovery; and WHEREAS, the Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) was updated in 2023, through the collaboration of the Santa Clara County FireSafe Council, CAL FIRE, the County of Santa Clara Office of Emergency Management, local stakeholders, and community input; and WHEREAS, the 2023 CWPP update builds upon the previous 2016 plan, incorporating enhanced mitigation strategies, priority areas for wildfire risk reduction, community collaboration, and public education initiatives to address the increasing wildfire threat; and WHEREAS, a supporting annex was developed specifically for the Gilroy Planning Area (the “Gilroy Annex”), outlining tailored mitigation measures and priorities to protect the lives, property, and critical infrastructure within the City of Gilroy; and
WHEREAS, the CWPP and Gilroy Annex were developed through a robust public engagement process that included multiple community outreach events, public feedback opportunities, and the participation of various stakeholders to ensure that the plan reflects local needs and priorities; and WHEREAS, the City of Gilroy has reviewed the Santa Clara County CWPP and the Gilroy Annex, both of which provide essential strategies and resources for wildfire prevention and preparedness within the city; and
WHEREAS, the adoption of the CWPP and Gilroy Annex will help the City of Gilroy align with regional wildfire prevention efforts, secure potential funding for mitigation projects, and enhance coordination with state and local agencies during wildfire emergencies.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Gilroy hereby adopts the Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) and the Gilroy Annex, and directs city staff to incorporate the provisions of these plans into the City’s hazard mitigation strategies, land-use planning, and emergency preparedness efforts.
6.2 p. 495 of 557
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of November 2024 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
APPROVED:
Marie Blankley, Mayor
ATTEST:
Beth Minor, Interim City Clerk
6.2 p. 496 of 557