Lexington Hills, California Community Wildfire

Home , Lexington Reservoir

LEXINGTON HILLS, CALIFORNIA

COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN

Prepared for: Lexington Hills Santa Clara County, CA

Submitted by: Anchor Point Group, LLC Boulder, CO

June 19, 2009

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

This page left intentionally blank Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

PURPOSE

1. This document provides a comprehensive, scientifically based analysis of wildfire related hazards and risks in the Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) areas of Lexington Hills, CA. The analysis is delivered in the form of a Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP), and follows the standards for CWPPs that have been established by the Healthy Forest Restoration Act.

2. Using the results of the analysis, recommendations have been generated that aid stakeholders in preventing and/or reducing the threat of wildfire to values in the study area. These recommendations are included throughout the report, wherever appropriate.

3. This report complements local agreements and existing plans for wildfire protection to aid in implementing a seamless, coordinated effort in determining appropriate fire management actions in the study area.

The Lexington Hills Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) is a multi-year guiding document that will facilitate the implementation of future mitigation efforts.

This CWPP meets the requirements of HFRA by: 1. Identifying and prioritizing fuels reduction opportunities across the landscape See Appendix B of this document. 2. Addressing structural ignitability See Structural Ignitability/Defensible Space section. 3. Collaborating with stakeholders See page three and Appendix C of the main CWPP report.

The Lexington Hills CWPP is the result of a area-wide fire protection planning effort that includes extensive field data, a compilation of existing documents, scientific analysis of the fire behavior potential of the study area (based on fuels, topography, and historical weather conditions), and collaboration with homeowners and officials from several agencies including CAL FIRE, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, San Jose Water Company, Santa Clara County Fire Department, Santa Clara Valley Water District, Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation, and the Santa Clara County FireSafe Council.

This CWPP provides a comprehensive assessment of the wildfire hazards and risks in the study area. Its goal is to reduce hazards through increased education about wildfires, hazardous fuels reduction, and other recommendations that will facilitate fire suppression efforts. Detailed recommendations for specific actions are included herein. It is important to note that the Lexington Hills CWPP is a working document, and, as such, will need to be updated annually, and/or after a major “event” such as wildfire, flood, insect infestation or even significant new home development.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

CONCLUSIONS The CWPP provides an overview of the Values at Risk on which a significant wildfire would have an impact. These include: Life Safety, Homes and Property Values, Infrastructure, Recreation and Lifestyle, Wildlife Habitat, Watershed Protection, and Environmental Resources.

The report’s main recommendations are organized to address five broad categories of fire mitigation: public education, structural ignitability/defensible space, water supply, access/evacuation, and street and home addressing. There are three landscape fuel breaks, ten major roadside thinning projects, and five evacuation route roadside thinning projects recommended for the Lexington Hills study area. Specific recommendations and their priority level are included in Appendix B. The report also contains an “Areas of Special Interest” section, which are areas that do not qualify as communities, but should still be considered in wildfire planning. This section analyzes and makes mitigation and public education recommendations for Loma Prieta Road, the Lupin Lodge, the Presentation Center, and the Mount Bache area.

Because much of the information contained in the report is extensive and/or technical in nature, detailed discussions of certain elements are contained in appendices:

Appendix A: Fire Behavior Potential Analysis Methodology Appendix A describes the methodology used to evaluate the threat represented by physical hazards such as fuels, weather, and topography to Values at Risk in the study area, by modeling their effects on fire behavior potential. A detailed description of each standardized, nationally recognized fuel model found in the study area is included. Appendix B: Action Plan and Project Priorities This appendix provides guidelines on how to implement the recommendations made in the CWPP. As a requirement for HFRA, projects are prioritized for completion. This section includes all the recommended fuels reduction projects within the study area, as well as their priority listing, one being the highest, four being the lowest. Other fire management recommendations such as addressing and water supply are not prioritized, however a methodology for local prioritization is provided in this appendix. Appendix C: Project Collaboration One of the main requirements of HFRA is to assure community participation. A summary of the collaborative process undertaken for this project are found here.

DISCLAIMER Recommendations in this document are not prescriptive, but are intended to provide identification of possible solutions or mitigation actions to reduce the impact of wildfire on values at risk. The views and conclusions in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the opinions or policies of the California Fire Safe Council, the Santa Clara County FireSafe Council, any government entity or fire agency, signatory companies, or the U.S. Government. Mention of companies, trade names or commercial products does not constitute an endorsement by the California Fire Safe Council, the Santa Clara County FireSafe Council or the U.S. Government.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... I INTRODUCTION ...... 1 THE NATIONAL FIRE PLAN AND THE HEALTHY FOREST RESTORATION ACT ...... 1 COLLABORATION: COMMUNITY/AGENCIES/STAKEHOLDERS ...... 3 STUDY AREA OVERVIEW ...... 3 VALUES ...... 6 Critical Infrastructure ...... 6 Growth and Development ...... 6 Water Supply ...... 6 Watersheds ...... 6 Open Space ...... 7 Current Risk Situation ...... 8 FIRE REGIME AND CONDITION CLASS ...... 10

CONDITION CLASS ...... 12 CONDITION CLASS DESCRIPTION ...... 12 SOLUTIONS AND MITIGATION ...... 13 Public Education ...... 13 Structural ignitability/Defensible Space ...... 14 Water Supply: Individual Home Cisterns ...... 17 Access/Evacuation Routes ...... 18 Addressing ...... 19 RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 1 9 Pacific Gas and Electric ...... 20 Hydrant Signage and Testing ...... 20 Roadside Thinning ...... 21 Access/Evacuation Routes ...... 21 Good Neighbor Policy ...... 21 CURRENT LANDSCAPE-LEVEL FUEL TREATMENTS ...... 21 Open Space Projects ...... 23 Santa Clara County Parks ...... 24 Water Utility Projects ...... 24 Other Recommendations ...... 25 Local Preparedness/Firefighting ...... 26 Fire Station Proximity in the Study Area ...... 27 STRUCTURAL IGNITABILITY ...... 29

COMMUNITY DESCRIPTIONS ...... 29 Community Assessment Methodology ...... 30 Aldercroft Heights ...... 31 Recommendations ...... 32 Soda Springs ...... 34 Recommendations ...... 35 Upper Montevina ...... 37 Recommendations ...... 38 Chemeketa Park ...... 40 Recommendations ...... 41

iii

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Lower Montevina ...... 43 Recommendations ...... 44 Redwood Estates ...... 46 Recommendations ...... 47 Summit Road ...... 48 Recommendations ...... 49 Recommendations ...... 51 Skyline/Black Road ...... 52 Recommendations ...... 53 Lake Canyon ...... 55 Recommendations ...... 56 Hebard ...... 57 Recommendations ...... 58 Upper Redwood Estates ...... 59 Recommendations ...... 60 Call of the Wild ...... 61 Recommendations ...... 62 Mountain Charlie/Melody Lane ...... 64 Recommendations ...... 65 Lower Loma Prieta ...... 66 Recommendations ...... 67 Bear Creek ...... 68 Recommendations ...... 69 Idylwild ...... 70 Recommendations ...... 71 AREAS OF SPECIAL INTEREST ...... 72 Loma Prieta Road ...... 72 Lupin Lodge ...... 72 Presentation Center ...... 72 Mount Bache ...... 72 CONCLUSION ...... 74

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Lexington Hills Community Hazard Rating Map ...... 5 Figure 2. Midpeninsula and County Park Open Space Ownership ...... 8 Figure 3. Historic Fire Perimeters ...... 9 Figure 4. Fire Regime and Condition Class ...... 10 Figure 5. Area identified as Wildland Urban Interface for Santa Clara County ...... 14 Figure 6. Cisterns with Obstructed Access ...... 17 Figure 7. Narrow Roads, Confusing Signage ...... 18 Figure 8. Group Addressing on Mailboxes ...... 19 Figure 9. Fire Hydrants With and Without Appropriate Marking ...... 20 Figure 10. Morrill Road Project ...... 23 Figure 11. Lexington Hills Proximity Map ...... 28 Figure 12. Community Hazard Rating Map ...... 29 Figure 13. Aldercroft Heights Fuels Reduction Projects ...... 33 Figure 14. Soda Springs Roadside Thinning ...... 36 Figure 15. Upper Montevina Fuels Reduction Projects ...... 39 Figure 16. Chemeketa Park Fuels Reduction Projects ...... 42 Figure 17. Lower Montevina Fuels Reduction Projects ...... 45 Figure 18. Upper Loma Prieta Fuels Reduction Projects ...... 51 Figure 19. Skyline/Black Road Fuels Reduction Projects ...... 54 Figure 20. Call of the Wild Fuels Reduction Projects ...... 63 Figure 21. Mountain Charlie/Melody Lane Fuels Reduction Projects ...... 65 Figure 22. Lower Loma Prieta Fuels Reduction Projects ...... 67 Figure 23. Bear Creek Fuels Reduction Projects ...... 69

LIST OF TABLES Table 1. CWPP Core Development Team ...... 3 Table 2. Community Hazard Ratings ...... 5 Table 3. Fire Regime and Condition Class ...... 12

LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A: Fire Behavior Potential Analysis Methodology.…………………………………………………A-1 Appendix B: Action Plan and Project Priorities….…...………………………………………………………...B-1 Appendix C: Project Collaboration.…………………………...………...………………………………………C-1

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

This page left intentionally blank Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

INTRODUCTION

The Lexington Hills Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) is the result of a community- wide effort that included extensive field data gathering, compilation of existing documents and GIS data, and extensive fire behavior analyses. This document also incorporates existing information relating to wildfire which will be valuable to citizens, policy makers, and public agencies in the Lexington Hills study area. Together, these inputs allow recommendations to be made about what specific actions can be taken to reduce the threat of wildfire related damages to “values at risk” (see below). This document meets the requirements of the federal Healthy Forest Restoration Act of 2003 for community fire planning.

THE NATIONAL FIRE PLAN AND THE HEALTHY FOREST RESTORATION ACT

In the year 2000, more than eight million acres burned across the United States, marking one of the most devastating wildfire seasons in American history. One high-profile incident, the Cerro Grande fire at Los Alamos, NM, destroyed more than 235 structures and threatened the Department of Energy’s nuclear research facility.

Two reports addressing federal wildland fire management were initiated after the 2000 fire season. The first report, prepared by a federal interagency group, was titled “Review and Update of the 1995 Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy” (2001). This report concluded, among other points, that the condition of America’s forests had continued to deteriorate.

The second report, titled “Managing the Impacts of Wildfire on Communities and the Environment: A Report to the President in Response to the Wildfires of 2000,” was issued by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service (USFS). It became known as the National Fire Plan (NFP). This report, and the ensuing congressional appropriations, ultimately required actions to:

x Respond to severe fires x Reduce the impacts of fire on rural communities and the environment x Ensure sufficient firefighting resources

Congress increased its specific appropriations to accomplish these goals. 2002 was another severe season: more than 1,200 homes were destroyed and over seven million acres burned. In response to public pressure, congress and the Bush administration continued to designate funds specifically for actionable items such as preparedness and suppression. That same year, the Bush administration announced the Healthy Forest Restoration Act (HFRA) initiative, which enhanced measures to restore forest and rangeland health and reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfires. In 2003, that act was signed into law.

Through these watershed pieces of legislation, Congress continues to appropriate specific funding to address five main sub-categories: preparedness, suppression, reduction of hazardous fuels, burned-area rehabilitation, and state and local assistance to firefighters. The general concepts of the NFP blended well with the established need for community wildfire protection in the study area. The spirit of the NFP is reflected in the Lexington Hills CWPP.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

This CWPP meets the requirements of HFRA by: 1. Identifying and prioritizing fuels reduction opportunities across the landscape 2. Making recommendations to reduce structural ignitibility 3. Assessing community fire suppression capabilities 4. Collaborating with stakeholders

Participants in this project include CAL FIRE, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, San Jose Water Company, Santa Clara County Fire Department, Santa Clara Valley Water District and Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation, and the Santa Clara County FireSafe Council, homeowners, adjacent state and county land managers, and other stakeholders. A more in depth listing is included in Appendix C, Lexington Hills Collaborative Effort.

The assessment portion of this document analyzes the hazards and risks associated with wildland fire in proximity to WUI areas. This information, in conjunction with identification of the values at risk, defines “areas of concern” and allows for prioritization of mitigation efforts. From the analysis of this data, solutions and mitigation recommendations are offered that will aid homeowners, land managers, and other interested parties in developing short-term and long- term fuels and fire management plans.

The Wildfire Hazard and Risk Assessment is developed using a Community Wildfire Hazard/Risk Rating system (WHR) and combining it with Fire Behavior Potential modeling and analysis. Because this data is technical in nature, detailed findings and technical analyses are included in Appendix A. This approach is designed to make the plan more readable, while establishing a reference source for those interested in the technical elements of wildfire hazard and risk assessment. For the convenience of residents in the study area, however, each community’s detailed analysis and recommendations can be found in the main report.

It should be noted that this CWPP is a “living document” that is useful only to the extent that it is current. Therefore, this document should be updated annually. It could be made an on-line document and updated annually to reflect current best practices and any new relevant information, as well as, list of projects completed or planned. A review of the CWPP should be conducted more frequently if significant changes occur in the study area. As an example, if a large contiguous area becomes highly affected by Sudden Oak Death (SOD), it may have an impact on the fuels that would carry fire. Changes to the fuel models used to predict fire behavior may be significant and warrant additional action. Additional information on fire modeling and SOD should be evaluated as this disease progresses. Detailed information is available at www.suddenoakdeath.org.

The Santa Clara County FireSafe Council will be primarily responsible for compiling and printing updates to the master copy, with the data being supplied by the responsible parties of the affected areas.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

COLLABORATION: COMMUNITY/AGENCIES/STAKEHOLDERS

Organizations involved in the development of the Lexington Hills CWPP are included in Table 1. For more information on the collaborative process that led to the development of this CWPP, see Appendix C: Lexington Hills CWPP Collaborative Effort.

Table 1. CWPP Core Development Team Organization

Santa Clara County FireSafe Council Santa Clara County Fire Department CAL FIRE Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Santa Clara Valley Water District Santa Clara County Parks San Jose Water Company

Anchor Point Group LLC Consultants

STUDY AREA OVERVIEW

Lexington Hills is a Census Designated place, located in unincorporated Santa Clara County, California. The study area covers 25,148 acres (39.3 square miles), ranging in elevation from less than 300 feet to 3,700 feet in certain areas. For the purposes of the fire behavior analysis carried out as a part of this study (see Appendix A), an additional one-mile buffer in all directions was added to the study area, resulting in an area of 49,654 acres (77.6 square miles) total. The inclusion of this buffer provides the user with an analysis of potential fire behavior on adjacent lands. From both a planning and tactical perspective, it is important to evaluate exposures beyond the area of interest. However, the recommendations made in this report are limited to the study area boundary.

The population of Lexington Hills is approximately 6,000. There are approximately 2,000 homes in the study area, with varied construction types, lot sizes, and surrounding fuels. The study area has many vegetation communities depending on elevation, precipitation, and slope. Vegetation in the Lexington Hills study area ranges among chaparral, oak, mixed conifer, and redwoods. Chaparral vegetation is often found on south facing slopes, where winter precipitation is relatively high, but dry summers are common. Oak woodlands, comprised of a variety of oak species are also interspersed throughout. Knob Cone pine and Grey pine are species associated with the mixed conifer areas. Coastal coniferous forest communities such as Redwoods and Douglas-fir are located at lower elevations where precipitation is high, fog is common, and temperatures are moderate. Because of these variables, the Lexington Hills study area presents a fairly wide range of wildfire hazard ratings.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

After completing field work and conferring with local officials, stakeholders, and community members, 17 communities and three areas of special interest were delineated within the study area. Hazard and risk analyses based on community surveys and fire behavior resulted in rating of Extreme Fire Hazard for three of the 17 communities; five communities received a rating of Very High; seven were rated High; and two received a rating of Moderate. (See Figure 1 and Table 2 on the next page.)

The overall hazard ranking of these communities is determined by considering the following variables: fuels, topography, structural flammability, availability of water for fire suppression, egress and navigational difficulties, and other hazards, both natural and manmade. The methodology for this assessment uses the WHR (Wildfire Hazard Rating) community hazard rating system developed specifically to evaluate communities within the WUI for their relative wildfire hazard.1 The WHR model combines physical infrastructure such as structure density and roads, and fire behavior components like fuels and topography, with the field experience and knowledge of wildland fire experts. For more information on the WHR methodology please see the Community Hazard Analyses in the document.

1 C. White, “Community Wildfire Hazard Rating Form” Wildfire Hazard Mitigation and Response Plan, Colorado State Forest Service, Ft. Collins, CO, 1986. 4

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Figure 1. Lexington Hills Community Hazard Rating Map

Table 2. Community Hazard Ratings 1. Aldercroft Heights 10. Lake Canyon 2. Soda Springs 11. Hebard 3. Upper Montevina 12. Upper Redwood Estates 4. Chemeketa Park 13. Call of the Wild 5. Lower Montevina 14. Mountain Charlie/Melody Lane 6. Redwood Estates 15. Lower Loma Prieta 7. Summit road 16. Bear Creek 8. Upper Loma Prieta 17. Idylwild 9. Skyline/Black Road

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

VALUES

Critical Infrastructure

Critical utility infrastructure such as water treatment plants, electric power supply lines, substations, and natural gas lines are essential to supply residents and businesses with services that are in some cases critical to health and life safety. The infrastructure discussed below is considered to be the most critical to life safety that would be threatened by wildfire and is not meant to constitute a comprehensive list of all the infrastructure values existing in the study area.

In many parts of the study area, electric power is needed to power pumps for the domestic water supply, and to provide heating and lighting. Wildfire is a significant threat to the electric utility supply. There is a major transmission line that runs along the south edge of Upper Montevina. A road to access the power line has already been established, but maintaining this road and keeping it cleared is important to limit damage from wildfire.

Growth and Development

There is not a significant amount of growth in the study area at this time. According to census data, growth in the study area peaked during the 1960s. Since then, the number of people moving into the area has declined. Additionally, no major construction projects or building are going on in within the study area.

Water Supply

Like most western communities, Lexington Hills depends on stored water most of the year. The amount of water available changes from year to year depending on how much precipitation falls. Therefore, water must be stored in reservoirs during wetter years to carry over for use in dry years.

Approximately half the homes are well fed or spring fed. Many of the wells provide a year-round water supply, as they are fracture wells and do not depend on the water table for supply. Some communities get surface water from creeks and others have pressurized delivery systems.

See general water supply recommendations in the next section (“Solutions and Mitigation”). Water supply recommendations that are specific to a particular community can be found in that community’s individual analysis.

Watersheds

The project area has several reservoirs and adjacent watersheds. Among the larger stakeholders are the San Jose Water Company and Santa Clara Valley Water District. Watersheds need to be protected and maintained from catastrophic wildfire damage. A wildfire could have a very serious impact on the water quality and infrastructure of these watersheds. Immediate concerns would be erosion, sedimentation and water contamination. Long-term issues resulting from damage to watersheds would be increased run off, poor soil retention, and decreased water quality. There would be a significant long term fiscal impact as well.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Many of these areas are restricted use and/or are undeveloped. These are areas of concern due to the accumulation of brush, dead and down wood and other vegetation build up along riparian corridors. Managers of major and minor watersheds should consider developing an ecosystem management plan focused on sustaining and maintaining watershed systems.

Open Space

The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD)

The MROSD has permanently preserved over 57,000 acres of mountainous, foothill, and bayland open space, creating 26 open space preserves (24 of which are open to the public). The District covers an area of 550 square miles and includes 17 cities (Atherton, Cupertino, East Palo Alto, Half Moon Bay, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Menlo Park, Monte Sereno, Mountain View, Palo Alto, Portola Valley, Redwood City, San Carlos, Saratoga, Sunnyvale, and Woodside2). MROSD owns approximately 28,000 acres in and adjacent to the study area, which comprises all of the Bear Creek Preserve and about 30% of the Sierra Azul area.

Santa Clara County Parks

Currently, the regional parks system has expanded to 28 parks encompassing nearly 45,000 acres (Figure 2). County Parks are regional parks - The parks offer opportunities for recreation in a natural environment to all County residents. Regional parks are larger in size, usually more than 200 acres, than local neighborhood or community parks. Many of the County's regional parks also feature points of local historic interest. Lexington Reservoir County Park lies within the project area. It is a 941 acre park and reservoir minutes from the urban centers of Santa Clara County.

2 http://www.openspace.org/about_us/default.asp 7

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Figure 2. Midpeninsula and County Park Open Space Ownership

Current Risk Situation

This area has a long history of fires (Figures 3a and 3b) as well as other natural disasters such as earthquakes, floods and mudslides. The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) has mapped areas of significant fire hazards based on fuels, terrain, weather, and other relevant factors. These zones, referred to as Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ), are then used to define the application of various mitigation strategies to reduce risk associated with wildland fires. The Lexington Hills area rated Moderate, High, & Very High in the CAL FIRE assessment.

The Anchor Point analysis was a more detailed study that focused only on the Lexington Hills, rather than the entire state. Some criteria that would have been impractical to consider on a state level were used in this analysis. As a result, there may be some differences in the ratings, but overall, the Anchor Point findings correspond to the state level assessment.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Figure 3a. Historic Fire Perimeters near the Study Area

Figure 3b. Historic Fire Perimeters near Santa Clara County

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

FIRE REGIME AND CONDITION CLASS

The Fire Regime Condition Class (FRCC) is a landscape evaluation of expected fire behavior as it relates to the departure from historic norms. The data used for this study is from a national level map. The minimum mapping unit for this data is 1 square kilometer. FRCC is not to be confused with BEHAVE and FlamMap fire behavior models (detailed in the fire behavior section) which provide the fire behavior potential analysis for expected flame length, rate of spread and crown fire development.

The FRCC is an expression of the departure of the current condition from the historical fire regime. It is used as a proxy for the probability of severe fire effects (e.g., the loss of key ecosystem components - soil, vegetation structure, species, or alteration of key ecosystem processes - nutrient cycles, hydrologic regimes). Consequently, FRCC is an index of hazards to many components (e.g., water quality, fish health, wildlife habitats, etc.). Figure 4 displays graphically the return interval and condition class of the study area.

Deriving FRCC entails comparing current conditions to some estimate of the historical range that existed prior to substantial settlement by Euro-Americans. The departure of the current condition from the historical baseline serves as a proxy to likely ecosystem effects. In applying the condition class concept, it is assumed that historical fire regimes represent the conditions under which the ecosystem components within fire-adapted ecosystems evolved and have been maintained over time. Thus, if it is projected that fire intervals and/or fire severity have changed from the historical conditions, then it would be expected that fire size, intensity, and burn patterns would also be subsequently altered if a fire occurred. Furthermore, if it is assumed that these basic fire characteristics have changed, then it is likely that there would be subsequent effects to those ecosystem components that had adapted to the historical fire regimes.

As used here, the potential of ecosystem effects reflect the probability that key ecosystem components would be lost if a fire were to occur. It should be noted that a key ecosystem component can represent virtually any attribute of an ecosystem (for example, soil productivity, water quality, floral and faunal species, large-diameter trees, snags, etc.).

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Figure 4. Fire Regime and Condition Class

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

The following categories of condition class are used to qualitatively rank the potential of effects to key ecosystem components:

Table 3. Fire Regime and Condition Class

Condition Condition Class Description Class Fire regimes are within their historical range and the risk of losing key ecosystem components as a result of wildfire is low. Vegetation 1 attributes (species composition and structure) are intact and functioning within an historical range. Fire effects would be similar to those expected under historic fire regimes.

Fire regimes have been moderately altered from their historical range. The risk of losing key ecosystem components as a result of wildfire is moderate. Fire frequencies have changed by one or more fire-return intervals (either increased or decreased). Vegetation 2 attributes have been moderately altered from their historical range. Consequently, wildfires would likely be larger, more intense, more severe, and have altered burn patterns, as compared with those expected under historic fire regimes.

Fire regimes have changed substantially from their historical range. The risk of losing key ecosystem components is high. Fire frequencies have changed by two or more fire-return intervals. 3 Vegetation attributes have been significantly altered from their historical range. Consequently, wildfires would likely be larger, more intense, and have altered burn patterns, as compared with those expected under historic fire regimes.

The communities in the study area are dominantly classified under Fire Regime 35-100+, and are in Condition Class 2. By definition, historic fire regimes have been altered 34-66% from the reference conditions. Consequently, wildfires are likely to be larger, more severe, and have altered burn patterns, as compared with those expected under historic fire regimes. However, the risk of losing key ecosystem components as a result of wildfire is moderate.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

SOLUTIONS AND MITIGATION

This section gives an overview of specific areas of concern or categories related to fire mitigation in particular. This approach will help facilitate mitigation efforts among the different stakeholders involved in the Lexington Hills CWPP, who may have responsibilities in different mitigation categories (e.g., water supply vs. home safety). Unique activities and objectives are recommended for each category. Wherever possible or appropriate, community-specific recommendations in any of these categories are found in the individual community analyses below. The advantage of this approach is that it encourages residents to become involved in mitigation activities. Their local knowledge and input, motivated by a personal investment in the area, can greatly assist professionals from various fields in tailoring mitigation efforts to the specific needs of the area in question.

Public Education

The Lexington Hills study area has a highly involved fire safety council, the Santa Clara County FireSafe Council (http://www.SCCFireSafe.org). This organization provides information regarding chipping programs, defensible space mitigation, forest health issues, and much more. They also offer public meetings and forums to support wildfire awareness.

To further public awareness, the following recommendations are suggested:

- Use the Santa Clara County FireSafe Council website to promote public involvement in implementing the tasks set forth by the CWPP.

- A fire danger sign located at the riding stables.

- Fire danger signs at all community parks.

- Two electronic message signs (Caltrans) exist on Highway 17 and could be used to notify the public of very high and extreme fire danger. Coordinate with Caltrans (510-286-4444).

Yard trimming and slash pile burning is a useful tool for disposing of organic material but is a potential fire hazard. A complete list of guidelines for proper burning in Santa Clara County can be found at: http://www.sccgov.org/portal/site/fmo/agencychp?path=%2Fv7%2FFire%20Marshal%27s%20O ffice%20(DEP)%2FBurn%20Permits . The following are burn permit requirements: x Maximum pile size four feet in diameter. x Clear all flammable material and vegetation within 10-feet of the outer edge of pile. x Keep a water supply close to the burning site. x An adult should be in attendance with a shovel until the fire is out. x No burning shall be undertaken unless weather conditions (particularly wind) are such that burning can be considered safeǤ

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Structural ignitability/Defensible Space

There is a wide variety of home and structure types in the study area. Housing construction, size, and density are similar within communities, but vary greatly between them. The majority of the houses have a combination of combustible and non-combustible siding and a mix of roof coverings. In many of the communities, the density of the structures is high. Throughout the study area there are scattered larger lots that are surrounded by vineyards and other open agricultural land. Some defensible space work has been completed in some of the communities, but not for all.

Santa Clara County has adopted new building codes that relate to properties located in the wildland urban interface. Detailed information can be found by searching ‘wildland urban interface code’ at: http://www.sccgov.org/home.html

Santa Clara County FireSafe Council (SCFSC) provides excellent resources for those living in the wildland urban interface (Figure 5). A description of their services can be found in the Public Education Section found on page 13 of this CWPP.

Figure 5. Area identified as Wildland Urban Interface for Santa Clara County

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

A 20-page guide is available online at http://www.sccfiresafe.org/FireSafe/FireSafeHome.htm. This guide provides homeowners with information about what defensible space is, how to create defensible space, fire safe building materials and landscaping, and what to do if there is a fire. The Santa Clara County FireSafe Council website is an excellent resource; following the recommendations in their brochure is highly recommended.

Defensible space it the most important thing that a homeowner can do to protect their property in the event of a wildfire. A defensible space is an area in which vegetation, debris, and other types of combustible fuels have been treated, cleared, or reduced to slow the spread of a wildfire towards the building. In addition to clearing vegetation, preventing ember cast from igniting structures is also an aspect of defensible space. Installing screens over open vents and enclosing eves are easy ways to prevent home losses. Local vegetation, weather and topography are used to determine the Fire Severity of the area, which will assist in determining the necessary defensible space for a building. Creating a defensible space can often be done by the property owner and is one of the most cost-effective ways to protect a building from a wildfire. The defensible space recommendations are purely guidelines. Depending on the nature of one's home construction, fuels and topography near the home, the actions necessary for defensible space may vary. Individuals should work with professionals to discuss the options available for his or her property. As an example, defensible space guidelines often focus on clearing canopies; however, for redwoods, the focus should be on clearing and reducing surface and ladder fuels, opposed to cutting large trees. Because redwood bark is relatively fire resistant and closed canopies in redwood forests help retain fuel moisture and shade out re-growth of ladder fuels, mature redwood trees should be retained. Opening normally dense redwood crown cover may increase fire spread, fire intensity and flame length. Lower limbs may be removed to improve fire resistance.

Key Issues x Wildland vegetation such as grass, brush, and timber can be extremely combustible. The vegetation can burn with great intensity and produce firebrands and burning embers that can become wind-driven and ignite buildings. Embers can continue to be airborne for several hours after the wildfire passes. x Landscape vegetation can be as combustible as wildland vegetation. x Combustible plants have these characteristics: -Volatile resins and oils (generally aromatic when crushed) -Narrow leaves or long, thin needles such as conifer needles -Waxy or fuzzy leaves -An accumulation of dead leaves and twigs on and under the plant -Loose or papery bark x Accessory buildings and structures and other items commonly found in yards that are made of combustible materials, can also put an otherwise fire-resistant building at risk of ignition and destruction. x Combustible vegetation and materials around a building: -increases the risk of building ignition, -restricts the space necessary to provide fire fighters a relatively safe place to protect a building and -increases the chances that a building on fire will ignite adjacent wildlands.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Considerations x Consult the local or state fire agency about codes, requirements, and standards related to defensible space. Codes, requirements, and standards normally represent the minimum that should be done and consideration should be given to providing enhanced protection measures beyond what is recommended or required. x Maintaining a defensible space requires routine maintenance of vegetation, which includes pruning and removing dead branches and leaves. Characteristics of low-maintenance plants are: -Drought-resistant -Pest-resistant -Native to the area -Noninvasive -Slow-growing -Wind-resistant -Sustainable without supplemental fertilization x When conducting defensible space mitigation, consider consulting with the California Native Plant Society and wildlife biologists to create an area that is sensitive-plant and animal friendly. These practices include no heavy pesticide use, limiting soil erosion, and a focus on using native plants.

Embers landing on roofs are one of the most common ways homes burn during a wildfire. Wood shake shingle roofs are especially susceptible to burning embers and are not recommended. Removing needle cast on roofs, cleaning out gutters, and ensuring the roof is built with ignition resistant materials are recommended regardless of building codes because of this risk. Fire resistant roofing materials are one of the best ways to protect a home from wildfire.

Roofing Material Definitions3

There are three main categories of roof materials in relation to their ignitability. They are as follows:

High Resistance – Roof coverings that are effective against severe flame exposure, that afford a high degree of fire protection to the roof deck, that do not slip from position, and that do not present a flying brand hazard.

Moderate Resistance – Roof coverings that are effective against moderate flame exposure, that afford a moderate degree of fire protection to the roof deck, that do not slip from position, and that do not present a flying brand hazard.

Low Resistance – Roof coverings that are effective against light flame exposure, that afford a light degree of fire protection to the roof deck, that do not slip from position, and that do not present a flying brand hazard.

3 NFPA 1144 Standard for Reducing Structure Ignition Hazards from Wildland Fire 2008 Edition – pgs 21 – 22

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

It is important to realize that the roofs are installed in a very specific manner for testing. For this reason, the ratings should be thought of as roof covering assembly tests. In other words, in order to meet the standard at which it is rated, a roof covering material should be installed in the same manner as is described in its listing. Specific testing procedures for roofs are outlined by NFPA 256 Standard Methods of Fire Tests of Roof Coverings.

Some other useful websites:

The Natural Resources Conservation District (NRDC) in conjunction with the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) has developed a list of Fire Resistant Native Plants. The current draft and other useful fire related documents can be found on the NRDC website at: http://www.rcdsantacruz.org/Resources/fireprevention.html

Santa Clara County Planning Office also has guidelines for Integrated Landscaping: http://www.sccgov.org/portal/site/planning/ http://sccfiresafe.org/FireSafe/LivingWithFire.htm http://www.fire.ca.gov/communications/communications_firesafety_100feet.php Use these web sites for a list of public education materials, and for general homeowner education:

x http://www.fs.fed.us/fire/links/links_prevention.html x http://www.firewise.org x http://www.blm.gov/nifc/st/en/prog/fire.1.html

Water Supply: Individual Home Cisterns

Many of the homes in the study area are equipped with a private cistern that can be used by the fire department. It is recommended that the communities with cisterns work with the fire department to make sure each cistern is accessible and usable. In some cases, vegetation in the area around the cistern needs to be cleared to assure access, and there should not be any gates or fencing around the cisterns. All connections need to be compatible with fire department equipment and should be kept clean and unobstructed for fire department use.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Figure 6. Cisterns with Obstructed Access

Access/Evacuation Routes

Although the roads in the study area are paved, many of them are steep, single lane, and winding. There are limited pull-offs, multiple dead ends, private drives that look like roads, and a lack of turnarounds. Dead-end roads in particular can be extremely dangerous, especially in the event of a wildfire.

Road and housing signage is variable but often constructed of flammable and non-reflective materials. Taken together, these factors create a potentially dangerous situation in the event of a wildfire.

For a complete list of all access road and road sign regulations, please see the Property Inspection Guide, section 9, also available at: www.SCCFireSafe.org/LHCWPP/CAL_FIRE_Property_Inspection_Guide.pdf

Figure 7. Narrow Roads, Confusing Signage

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Addressing

Almost all of the communities within the study area have some missing or inadequate addressing. Home addressing varies widely in type and location, and some cannot easily be identified as address markers.

Figure 8. Group Addressing on Mailboxes

While residents may consider non-reflective wooden address signage to be decorative, it represents a serious hindrance to quick and effective response. Proper reflective signage is a critical operational need. Knowing at a glance the difference between a road and a driveway (and which houses are on the driveway) cuts down on errors and time wasted interpreting maps. This is especially true for out-of-district responders who do not have the opportunity to train on access issues specific to the response area. The value of the time saved, especially at night and in difficult conditions, cannot be overstated.

RECOMMENDATIONS

- A program of replacing worn or difficult to read street signs should be developed. Every intersection and street name change should have adequate, reflective signage.

- Multiple addressing on community driveways should be replaced with reflective markers that indicate the proper road fork, where applicable, for each address. This system should be repeated at every place where the driveway divides and an individual driveway leaves the community driveway.

- For each home, reflective markers should be placed where the driveway leaves an access road and on the house itself. These may be in addition to, or in place of, existing decorative address markers. Consistency in height and placement should be stressed.

x Size of letters, numbers, and symbols for street and road signs should be a minimum 3-inch letter height, 3/8-inch stroke, reflecting, and contrasting with the background color of the sign. (To see the complete set of guidelines, see the Property Inspection Guide, section 1274.08 and 1274.09, also available on http://www.sccfiresafe.org.)

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

- Lot markers and or address markers should be placed when a building permit is issued for new construction. These should be replaced with permanent address markers as soon as the home has a certificate of occupancy.

- Where dead-end and private road markers occur, the addresses of homes beyond the marker should be clearly posted. This can be done with a group address marker, for example “14391- 14393 Smith Road.”

Pacific Gas and Electric

Under state law PG&E is responsible for maintaining fuel clearances along power lines in the community, and they have done tree and branch cutting along the lines. Their current practice is to leave piles behind or lop and scatter after cutting. These piles and slash add to the already high surface fuel loading in many of the communities. It is therefore recommended that the piles be removed or chipped as they are generated, and not left for any significant amount of time prior to mitigation.

CAL FIRE’s forest practice rules (CCR 917.4) are more appropriate and should be considered for adaptation by PGE.

Hydrant Signage and Testing

Reflective signage or labeling should be installed for all hydrants and draft hydrants in the study area. Well marked hydrants aid firefighters in attacking any fire in the area. In addition to signage, hydrants should be tested 23 annually to ensure they are working properly. Water flow capability should also be tested. Testing will reveal any potential problems with hydrants so that they are guaranteed to function properly in the event of an emergency.

Figure 9. Hydrant Lacking Reflective Signage and Example of Hydrant with Appropriate Marking

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Roadside Thinning

Recommended roadside thinning projects should attempt to meet the California Department of Transportation Standards. Their policy is available at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/maint/manual/Ch_C2.pdf.

The policy states that vegetation should be cleared four to eight feet from the side of the road, in order to increase visibility (particularly in smoky conditions), provide space for emergency use, and preserve pavement. Roadside maintenance that follows these guidelines will not only provide for safer travel during times of wildfire, but for daily use as well. In areas where this is not practical, pullouts can be created where reasonable.

Access/Evacuation Routes

All evacuation routes and dead-end roads should be marked with highly visible, non-flammable, reflective signage. Individuals should be made aware of the evacuation routes before an emergency occurs, but additional signage should be installed to help people get out safely. The importance of good signage should not be underestimated: the enormous stress and fear associated with an oncoming wildfire, not to mention the reduced visibility, can hinder residents’ ability to escape in a timely manner. Early evacuation is critical because of the complexity and narrow nature of nature of many of the roads. While some road have been recommended for improvement to be used as evacuation routes, it is recommended that the county and/or fire departments plan these routes officially. Communities should be in contact with these entities to resolve any confusion as to where their evacuation routes exist.

Specific access route improvement recommendations can be found below, and in the individual community analyses.

Good Neighbor Policy

High fuel loading on public parks, open space and water company properties adjacent to private, residential lands occurs throughout the study area and poses a significant fire threat to the residential communities. Residential landowners should attempt to work with public and private agencies to allow treatment on these borders. Additionally, it is recommended that all stakeholders, such as SJWC, SCVWD, MROSD and County Parks work with local fire officials, CAL FIRE and the SCFSC to create and expand policies and plans that work with homeowners who have structures located within 100-300 feet of their land, depending on the slope. Several public agencies already have policies in place. Both SCVWD and MROSD have acknowledged the need to work collaboratively with residents in creating defensible space that is amenable to all involved. These agreements are the first steps in fostering a long-term partnership that will benefit homeowners and other landowners in the area.

Current Landscape-Level Fuel Treatments

PL566

This project originally resulted from a Federal request to protect the Llagas watershed in the 1960s from the effects of wildfire where it might result in increased sediment loads in the creeks and reservoirs and a decrease in water quality. The Gavilan Water District, which initiated this

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

project, merged with Santa Clara Valley Water District in 1986 and the PL566 continues as a flood control project that maintains hazardous fuel breaks around the watershed.

Recent fire behavior modeling for the Upper Los Gatos Creek as part of the Lexington Hills Community Wildfire Protection plan and the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District’s Fire Management Plan provide new information that will impact the PL566. It is suggested that the fire behavior maps, locations of likely ignition, and predicted fire behavior be reviewed and updated as appropriate to see how the PL566 can be better implemented and or expanded to serve its original purpose, protecting water quality in the Llagas watershed owned by SCVWD and possibility designing the program to provide additional protection to adjacent watershed owned and/or operated by SCVWD and perhaps SJWC

Loma Prieta

CAL FIRE completed a fuels treatment project near the southern border of the Lexington Hills CWPP. It consisted of a 150-200’ fuel break constructed around the perimeter of the telecommunication equipment. This was done cooperatively with American Tower Communications to secure radio, fiber optic, microwave repeaters and local television assets for public and private agencies from the threat of wildfire. Due to fire history and conditions of fuels this project was a high priority. Fuel treatment will continue to include adjacent Crystal Peak and Mt. Chual telecommunications facilities.

Morrill Road Shaded Fuelbreak

A press release from the Santa Clara County FireSafe Council (SCFSC) announced that the Morrill Road shaded fuelbreak has been completed as of February 10, 2009. This collaborative effort coordinated by the Santa Clara County FireSafe Council, created a shaded fuel break on Morrill Road adjacent to Summit Road on the Lexington Reservoir side of the Summit Road. The 5.5 acre fuel break, located on a property owned by San Jose Water Company and Santa Clara County Parks, is expected to help protect approximately 20 adjacent homes and another 200+ homes by helping to prevent future wildfires from spreading onto Summit Road, which is a potential evacuation route for residents in the area.

This project also serves as a demonstration site for homeowners as to what a shaded fuelbreak looks like in a heavily forested area. In this project, all healthy, large diameter trees were preserved and de-limbed to a height of 12'. Low lying brush was thinned, and cut back reducing the amount of ladder fuel that might carry a ground fire into the canopy. Dead and dying trees were removed (Most of the dead trees were a result of sudden oak death, or the 1985 Lexington Hills fire). In the past, residents were required to create a defensible space 30' around their homes. That space has been extended to 100'. The Morrill Road project provides just one example of what home owners might consider when extending their defensible space from 30' to 100'.

The project’s success is attributed to cooperation among several agencies and companies: CAL FIRE, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Jose Water Company, Santa Clara County Parks, Santa Clara County Fire and SCFSC, which oversaw the coordination of the project. The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Ben Lomond Conservation Camp provided the manpower to clear the fuel break and operate the chipper. Selection of brush, snags and ladder fuels to be removed and chipped was done by staff from Santa Clara County Parks. Pacific Gas and Electric Company worked onsite to remove two dead Tan Oak trees close to their power lines. 22

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Figure 10. Morrill Road Project

Open Space Projects

The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District has recently completed a draft Fire Management plan that will help guide fire mitigation efforts and balance it with sound ecological principles. This plan will detail ongoing and planned efforts in the project area.

Currently, the District is undertaking the following fire mitigation efforts in all four District Preserves (Sierra Azul, Bear Creek Redwoods, El Sereno & Saint Joseph’s Hill) that fall within the Lexington Hills CWPP:

x Brushing single track trails annually by hand. x Brushing roads with an articulating tractor brushing arm on an approximately three-year rotation. x Grading roadways to ensure vehicle access x Working with CAL FIRE to maintain the firebreak from Loma Prieta Ridge to Twin Creeks (PL566). x Annual fire disking in Sierra Azul & Bear Creek Redwoods x Gating and securing all boundaries with fences and gates, posting all areas hazardous fire areas during fire season. x Enforcing District regulations for no smoking/open fires x District Ranger staff patrols preserves with patrol trucks equipped with slide-on pumper units during fire season. x Working in conjunction with all local & state fire departments on area orientation of District Lands.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

x Working to implement a District wide Defensible Space Permit policy to allow neighboring landowners to remove vegetation from District property within 100 feet of homes. Coordination with neighboring fire agencies is underway and the District expects to announce the Program in 2009.

Santa Clara County Parks

Santa Clara County Parks completes a variety of clearing projects, including: x Clearing of single-track trails by hand. x Brushing roads as needed with a slope mower (deck brush mower or articulating arm mower as needed). x Maintenance of fire roads for vehicular access. x Defensible space around park structures and other county buildings. x Secure park boundaries and work with adjacent agencies and fire agencies. x Park Ranger staff enforces all park rules and regulations and ordinances (including open fires and smoking regulations). x Park Ranger staff patrol parks with slide-on pumper trucks for initial attack. x Park Maintenance follow procedures developed with CAL FIRE for vegetation management (and other high risk activities) during fire season.

Water Utility Projects

San Jose Water Company

Annual maintenance activities typically consist of: x Brush control along watershed roads, typically 10 feet to either side when practical. x Limbing of trees up to approximately 6 feet in these corridors. Roads maintained are Call of the Wild, Hooker Bypass, Elsman Driveway, Williams Road and McKenzie Access road (Black road side). x Brush control on the face of Austrian Dam, Kittredge Dam and Cozzens Dam. This is typically done with hand crews, lopping and scattering or chipping material. x Brush cutting/removal as needed around intake facilities, pipelines and other infrastructure.

SJWC manages watershed land using an existing SJWC 3-person crew plus a “summer hire” crew to clean and maintain culverts, complete simple road maintenance tasks, and for brush clearing. Control of invasives such as French broom have historically been primarily through herbicide application, however herbicide application is now severely restricted by recently adopted regulations, and most brush clearing is now done by hand. Brush clearing is performed annually to maintain raw water pipeline right of ways, maintain vehicle clearance along company roads, and to remove vegetation from dam faces as required by the California Division of Dam Safety.

SJWC is currently seeking funding sources necessary to implement the vegetation management recommendations provided by the TSS Consulting study, which was completed in 2006.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Santa Clara Valley Water District

The Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) serves as a steward for the County’s 800 miles of streams and creeks, its groundwater basins, and District-owned reservoirs. The District uses best management practices, and collaborations or partnerships with others to be environmentally sensitive in how it plans and conducts its work. It also strives to be a “Good Neighbor” by minimizing the unavoidable disruption to neighborhoods and residents caused by District work, and integrate habitat protection into its capital and maintenance projects. Also, the District maintains its facilities in compliance with local fire codes and regulations to reduce the fire threat to the public. In addition, the District works with local jurisdictions to make available reservoirs, trails, and open space for public use and recreation. Work in Oakmont neighborhood around Lexington Lake can be summarized by: removal of vegetation (mainly broom and weed) from a 60 foot strip along Oakmont neighborhood adjacent to Lexington Reservoir. Plants that are removed would then be gathered and piled for chipping at a later date.

Santa Clara Valley Water District owns and manages the Lexington Lake to provide drinking water and resupply of the ground water. The Upper Los Gatos Creek that runs from Lake Elsman (owned and operated by San Jose Water Company) to Lexington Lake provide run off from winter rains into the Lexington Lake. Protecting the Upper Los Gatos Creek from catastrophic fire will help reduce excess sediment from entering the Lexington Lake. It is suggested that SJWC and SCVWD explore the feasibility of creating a shaded fuelbreak along the Upper Los Gatos Creek to prevent or reduce the risk of wildfire from damages to this critical riparian zone.

SCVWD has a friendly neighbor policy of clearing brush within the defensible space of homes when the brush is on their property. In 2008, the Santa Clara Fire Safe Council and SCVWD collaborated on three acre project to remove brush along the Lexington Reservoir in the Oakmont neighborhood. SCVWD is also involved with the PL566 project. The County Parks’ annual work list could be useful in helping decide where other projects should be implemented.

Other Recommendations

The following general fire safety and mitigation recommendations are taken from “Taming Natural Disasters,” produced by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG).4

This should be used as a guiding document, in some instances, certain recommendations are not feasible and alternatives would need to be used.

1) Ensure a reliable source of water for fire suppression (meeting acceptable standards for minimum volume and duration of flow) for existing and new development.

2) Develop a coordinated approach between fire jurisdictions and water supply agencies to identify needed improvements to the water distribution system, initially focusing on areas of highest wildfire hazard.

3) Develop a defensible space vegetation program that includes the clearing or thinning of (a) non-fire resistive vegetation within 30 feet of access and evacuation roads and routes to critical facilities, or (b) all non-native species (such as eucalyptus and pine, but not necessarily oaks) within 30 feet of access and evacuation roads and routes to critical facilities.

4 http://www.sccfiresafe.org/CWPP/ABAG_Report.pdf 25

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

4) Ensure all dead-end segments of public roads in high hazard areas have at least a “T” intersection turn-around sufficient for typical wildland fire equipment.

5) Enforce minimum road width of 20 feet with an additional 10-foot clearance on each shoulder on all driveways and road segments greater than 50 feet in length in wildfire hazard areas.

6) Require new developments in high fire hazard areas to provide adequate access roads (with width and vertical clearance that meet the minimum standards of the Fire Code or relevant local ordinance), onsite fire protection systems, evacuation signage, and fire breaks.

7) Ensure adequate fire equipment road or fire road access to developed and open space areas.

8) Maintain fire roads and/or public right-of-way roads and keep them passable at all times.

Adhering to every aspect of the ABAG recommendations may not be possible for all areas, especially when existing infrastructure is limiting. These recommendations should be followed when possible, and should at least be considered when carrying-out projects.

Santa Clara County and Santa Clara Valley Water District also have FEMA approved annexes. These are mitigation strategies for all hazards and are part of a larger Bay Area Master Plan. See http://quake.abag.ca.gov/mitigation/plan.html for more information.

Local Preparedness/Firefighting

Fire suppression services for the study area are provided by the following agencies:

CAL FIRE

The Lexington Hills CWPP lies solely within the Battalion 3 of the Santa Clara Unit in the unincorporated area of western Santa Clara County. This includes all the State Responsibility Area (SRA) lands north of Highway 152; west of the Almaden Valley; east of the Santa Cruz County line; and south from the San Mateo County Line. This area has been rated as a severe fire hazard severity zone due to most current CAL FIRE study. The area includes multiple thriving watersheds that service the numerous communities within Santa Clara County. The watersheds are managed by various water districts including the Santa Clara Valley Water District and the San Jose Water Company. The unit also includes many stands of Coastal Redwoods in the upper elevation drainages. These stands and other riparian habitats are protected from development by open space districts and County parks. The Battalion also contains a number of small rural communities that have little or no governmental services.

Stations: Alma Fire Station, Alma Helitack Base, Stevens Creek Fire Station 1 Battalion Chief; 6 permanent and 3 seasonal Fire Captains; 2 Fire Pilots and 2 seasonal Fire Apparatus Engineers; and 29 seasonal firefighters and 1 seasonal PRC4291 compliance inspector. Assigned apparatus includes 1 ICS Type II helicopter and 2 ICS Type III fire engines.

Loma Prieta Volunteer Fire and Rescue – 17445 Old Summit Road, Los Gatos

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

This station serves in support of CAL FIRE to protect the forest, farms, homes and above all the families along the Santa Cruz-Santa Clara County line in the Summit area south of Los Gatos.

Burrell Forest Fire Station - 25050 Highland Way, Los Gatos The station doubles as a Santa Cruz County Fire Station and responds auto aid to both Santa Clara County Fire District and the CAL FIRE Santa Clara Unit.

In the event of a large wildfire CAL FIRE has the capability of requesting Incident Command Teams and a multitude of agency hand crews and fire engines. Thru the California Fire Assistance Agreement and or local Assistance for Hire agreements additional fire engines and government personnel can be requested.

Santa Clara County Fire Department

Established in 1947, the Santa Clara County Fire Department provides ISO Class 2/8 services for Santa Clara County and the communities of Campbell, Cupertino, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, and Saratoga, in California. The department also provides protection for the unincorporated areas adjacent to those cities.

Wrapping in a 40 mile arc around the southern end of “Silicon Valley”, the Santa Clara County Fire Department has grown to include 16 fire stations, an administrative headquarters, a maintenance facility, five other support facilities, and more than 100 vehicles, to cover approximately 100 square miles and a population of over 210,000. The department employs over 265 fire prevention, suppression, investigation, administration, and maintenance personnel. The department’s suppression force is also augmented by 40 volunteer firefighters.5

Stations: Redwood station #4 – 21452 Madrone Drive, Redwood Estates Los Gatos station #3 – 306 University Avenue, Los Gatos Shannon station #6 – 16565 Shannon Road, Los Gatos Quito station #8 – 18870 Saratoga/Los Gatos Road, Los Gatos

Fire Station Proximity in the Study Area

Distances to the nearest fire stations were calculated in ArcGIS and take into account the road distance to a given area, rather than merely the “flight distance.” Figure 11 on the next page shows the road distances from the communities to the nearest fire station. Several communities are greater than five miles from a fire station. However, for the purposes of this report, this is not an Insurance Services Office (ISO) issue, but one of defining response distance to potential fire ignitions. The distance analysis calculates drivable distance, not drive time. However, the distance is an important factor in rating community hazards. Response times will vary greatly over the same distance due to road conditions, steepness, curvature of roads, and evacuation traffic.

Most fire service leaders agree that response time is composed of a number of distinct elements: call processing time (the time it takes for dispatchers to ascertain the location and nature of the emergency and initiate the appropriate response); turnout or staffing time (the time

5http://www.sccgov.org/portal/site/scc/chlevel3?path=%2Fv7%2FSCC%20Public%20Portal%2FHandling %20Emergencies%2FGetting%20Immediate%20Help%2FLocal%20Fire%20Departments 27

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

it takes for personnel to respond to the dispatch, board apparatus, and begin traveling to the scene); and travel time (the actual time it takes to travel from the station to the scene).

The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) has established time objectives for volunteer organization fire response. NFPA 1720 requires: Ten minutes or less for the arrival of the first arriving engine company at a fire suppression incident. If a turnout time of two minutes is observed and the average driving speed is 30 MPH, then the engine company will be able to drive four miles in the ten minutes established by NFPA 1720. Therefore, communities with mean distances greater than four miles from a fire station were given a weighted increase in their hazard rating.

Figure 11. Lexington Hills Proximity Map

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Structural Ignitability

Community Descriptions

The purpose of this section is to examine in greater detail the communities in the study area. Of the 17 WUI communities in the Lexington Hills study area, three were found to represent an Extreme Hazard, five were Very High Hazard; seven were rated as High Hazard; and two as Moderate Hazard. While adhering to a proven rating methodology, Anchor Point strives to approach each community as a unique entity with its own unique characteristics, so that we can provide the most accurate, and useful assessments possible. For easy reference, the map of communities and areas of special interest presented at the beginning of the report has been reproduced here as Figure 12.

Figure 12. Community Hazard Rating Map

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Community Assessment Methodology

The community level methodology for this assessment uses a Wildfire Hazard Rating (WHR) that was developed specifically to evaluate communities within the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) for their relative wildfire hazard.6 The WHR model combines physical infrastructure such as structure density and roads, and fire behavior components like fuels and topography, with the field experience and knowledge of wildland fire experts. It has been proven and refined by use in rating thousands of neighborhoods throughout the United States. Much of NFPA 1144 has been integrated into this methodology to ensure compatibility with National standards.

Many knowledgeable and experienced fire management professionals were queried about specific environmental and infrastructure factors, and wildfire behavior and hazards. Weightings within the model were established through these queries. The model was designed to be applicable throughout the western United States.

The model was developed from the perspective of performing structural triage on a threatened community in the path of an advancing wildfire with moderate fire behavior. The WHR survey and fuel model groundtruthing are accomplished by field surveyors with WUI fire experience.

The rating system assigns a hazard rating based on five categories: topographic position, fuels and fire behavior, construction and infrastructure, suppression factors, and other factors, including frequent lightning, railroads, campfires, etc.

It is important to note that every hazard rating does not necessarily occur in every geographic region. There are some areas with no low hazard communities, just as there are some areas with no extreme communities. The rankings are also related to what is customary for the area. For example, a high hazard area on the plains of Kansas may not look like a high hazard area in the Sierra Nevada. The system creates a relative ranking of community hazards in relation to the other communities in the study area. It is designed to be used by experienced wildland firefighters who have a familiarity with structural triage operations and fire behavior in the interface.

6 C. White, “Community Wildfire Hazard Rating Form” Wildfire Hazard Mitigation and Response Plan, Colorado State Forest Service, Ft. Collins, CO, 1986. 30

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Aldercroft Heights

Hazard Rating: Extreme

Description

This community is comprised of densely packed homes on fairly small lots. Building construction is generally wood with wood decks and moderately fire resistant roofs. Multiple outbuildings exist in the area. The roads throughout the community are steep and extremely narrow with parked vehicles on the sides, making for very limited access by fire apparatus. Further, there are several dead-end roads that need to be marked as such. Aldercroft Heights is currently single ingress/egress, but access to the road that connects Old Mine Road to Panorama Drive, which is owned by the San Jose Water Company, would provide for a second route. All feeder roads are dead ends.

Street signage is inconsistent throughout the community. Above-ground utility lines are prevalent. This community has approximately 350,000 gallons of water stored for use. There are hydrants located throughout the community that are gravity fed, therefore flow rate depends on the topographical position of the hydrant.

The fuels in this community are comprised of mixed conifer, such as Douglas-fir and knobcone pine, overstory with abundant understory vegetation. There is a large amount of leaf litter on the forest floor, combined with dense understory vegetation. Under moderate weather conditions, fire behavior within the community will be low. The threat to the community stems from the chaparral hillsides above under extreme weather scenarios. Wind-driven (Diablo wind) fires will push intense heat and smoke into the community. As a result, spotting and ember cast is likely. The mixed conifer stands within the community would be preheated, and thus more susceptible to torching and group torching.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Recommendations

-An additional evacuation route is recommended for Aldercroft Heights (Figure 13). Aldercroft Heights Road should be brushed out, limbed, and mowed inside and outside of the community boundary. There are currently two locked gates in Aldercroft Heights at the south end of the community, making the section of road extending from Aldercroft Heights to the intersection of Aldercroft Heights and Wright Station Road unavailable. Locked gates are required per San Jose Water Company's federally mandated Water System Security Vulnerability Assessment. Emergency access has been granted to CAL FIRE and County Fire Department, and the San Jose Water Company has operators on staff 24 hours per day, with instructions to provide access via these gates during emergencies. Any changes in gate procedures need to be relayed to the fire departments.

-Roadside brushing, mowing and trimming along the entire length of Aldercroft Heights Road.

-All dead-end roads need to be marked as such.

-Due to the narrow roads within the community, the feasibility of creating pull-offs should be investigated. This would provide safer traveling during times of emergency, especially when fire vehicles are involved.

-Consider a covenant to prohibit vehicles from being parked along the side of the roads during times of high fire danger.

-Explore other ways of unlocking the gates quickly during an emergency, i.e. electronic activation.

-Fire hydrants should be tested annually to ensure that they are working properly, including flow capacity.

-An early warning and early evacuation system is recommended for this community. Because evacuation routes are long and located on narrow, winding roads, with potential for high fire exposure, it is imperative to allow as much time as possible for evacuation.

In addition to the recommendations mentioned above, the HOA has supplied the following recommendations:

-The only fire road which connects the south end of Aldercroft Heights to the north end of the community has a wooden bridge spanning a gulch. This bridge should be improved, enabling residents to exit Aldercroft Heights if other areas become blocked.

-Clearing is necessary on the Adair/Old Mine property that borders homes along Old Mine Road and the south end of Aldercroft Heights. This property was burned heavily in the 1985 fire, but has had no attention in the years since. This is a major fire concern because the brush is at least 10 feet high, very dense, and borders at least 10 homes. There was a small fire last spring on this property.

-The bridge located at 20610 Aldercroft Heights Road should be improved. The last two small fires came from the direction of this property but the fire department was unable to get equipment across the bridge.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

-Earthquake-proof LPG tank switches are recommended to prevent fires after an earthquake, should firefighters have difficulty reaching the community. A prime example of the need for the switches is the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, when a house on Old Mine Road caught fire after the earthquake, but Aldercroft Heights Road was blocked by a landslide.

-Defensible space should be implemented for all homes in this community. Following the guidelines established by the Santa Clara County FireSafe Council is recommended as a first step; however individuals should work with professionals to discuss the options available for his or her property. Defensible space guidelines often focus on clearing canopies, but for redwoods, the focus should be on clearing and reducing surface and ladder fuels, opposed to cutting large trees. See page 14 of the main CWPP report for details.

Figure 13. Aldercroft Heights Fuels Reduction Projects

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Soda Springs

Hazard Rating: Extreme

Description

Most of the homes in this community are built along the canyon rim. Many of the decks overhang ravines. The lots are large, and the home density is low. The construction materials are in many cases combustible, and many homes have moderate or low fire resistant roofs. No defensible space work has been done, and there is often vegetation growing right up to the houses. The roads in Soda Springs are often steep and winding as they progress up the canyon, and in many places side roads are not labeled. There is limited water supply in this community. Storage tanks and wells are inadequate and/or intermittent.

Fuels in the western part of the community are primarily large shrubs and oak. There is also a large concentration of chaparral just outside the community on the south side. The north-facing aspect is primarily mixed conifer. As a result, under moderate weather conditions, expected fire behavior in the mixed conifer would be low due to a cooler, moister environment on north-facing slopes. The chaparral would burn more actively because of increased wind exposure and overall drier conditions. Extreme weather would supply the conditions necessary for active crown fire in the mixed conifer stands and preheating of fuels further upslope. Intense uphill rates of spread and long flame lengths would be seen throughout the mixed conifer stands as the fire transitions and continues to burn in the chaparral on the ridge tops and south facing slopes.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Recommendations

-A roadside fuels treatment is recommended for Soda Springs Road (Figure 14). Brushing out, limbing, mowing, and thinning are important mitigation activities, because they reduce the continuity of the fuels and allow for safer travel along this major evacuation route.

-Due to the size of the project that would be required to effectively mitigate wildfire, a landscape thinning treatment would not be feasible economically nor operationally, and is therefore not recommended here.

-Investigate using the vineyards as potential safety zones. The open nature of these areas may provide an additional area for people to congregate in case of a wildfire.

-Maintain pullouts and clearance. Make sure no vehicles, trailers, equipment, etc. are left on the side of the road.

-Reflective 4-inch road signage is recommended for all the roads in the community.

-Due to the nature of the topography, defensible space is the key to home survival and is therefore strongly recommended. Defensible space should be implemented for all homes in this community. All materials should be cleared out from under decks, since they overhang ravines. Embers can easily being burning in debris under decks and quickly spread to the house. Please follow the guidelines established by the Santa Clara County FireSafe Council. See page 14 of the main CWPP report for details.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Figure 14. Soda Springs Roadside Thinning

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Upper Montevina

Hazard Rating: Extreme

Description

This community is located at the top of the hill, above Lower Montevina. The topography of the community is distinct because of the extremely steep slopes, chimneys, and homes located in saddles and ridge tops. The homes are widely spaced and many have tile roofs and stucco siding. Defensible space has been created around some of the houses, but many still require it. Homes that have sprinkler systems need to be labeled as such. The electric lines are located above ground, as are the high-tension power poles and transmission line located in the community. There are access roads to this power line and there has been extensive cutting done along this line. While the signage for the roads is good, not all are reflective. Roads within the community are approximately 20 feet wide and good turnarounds are provided. There are multiple routes in and out of the community. The vegetation along the road is dense, but is necessary to prevent erosion. Individual houses have cisterns for water supply with fire department connections that need to be maintained.

This community sits on the top of a slope, with a primarily south aspect. Much of the vegetation in the community is tall chaparral and has a significant grass and oak component. There are also mixed conifer stands. The hazard rating for this community is extreme due to the continuous fuels, high surface loading, and steep drainages on either side. There are several topographic features, including steep slopes and chimneys, which are known to cause extreme fire behavior. The cutting project for the access road to the transmission line acts as a limited fuel break. With moderate weather conditions, fire is likely to move uphill from either the north or south slopes. Intense heat and long flame lengths will easily preheat the fuels uphill, allowing for accelerated rates of spread. This situation will be further exaggerated under extreme weather conditions. There is a high probability that access to the main evacuation route will be cut off in both moderate and extreme weather scenarios. Ember-cast and spotting is likely. 37

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Recommendations

-Drainages that funnel to roads are extremely dangerous. There is greater fuel loading in these drainages, which could lead to higher flame lengths and increased rates of spread. Therefore, drainages should be cleared for at least 100 feet downhill (Figure 15). This should be done in a manner that prevents soil erosion, especially on steep slopes.

-Continue to maintain and improve the current power line road.

-Evacuation is possible to the north via El Sereno Trail and Bohlman Road; however these roads are positioned above potentially dangerous topographic features that may produce extreme fire behavior along the evacuation routes.

-An early warning and early evacuation system is recommended for this community. Because evacuation routes are long and located on narrow, winding roads, with potential for extreme fire behavior, it is imperative to allow as much time as possible for evacuation.

-A post-fire erosion control plan should be created.

-All homes with sprinkler systems and fire alarms should have appropriate signage denoting the presence of the sprinkler system, visible from the outside of the house.

-Defensible space should be implemented for all homes in this community. Please follow the guidelines established by the Santa Clara County FireSafe Council. See page 14 of the main CWPP report for details.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Figure 15. Upper Montevina Fuels Reduction Projects

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Chemeketa Park

Hazard Rating: Very High

Description

This community contains a dense network of homes with no defensible space between them. Lot sizes are less than one acre, with 20-30 feet between houses. The close proximity of homes makes it a challenge to create defensible space for individual homes. See recommendations below for dealing with this issue. Construction is varied but typically with moderately fire resistant roofing. Home to home ignition is a big risk factor. The roads are paved, but narrow (approximately 10 to 12 feet wide) with no turnarounds. There are three exit routes out the Park. The wooden street signs were replaced with reflective metal signs this year (2009), which greatly increased visibility. All utilities are located above ground. Water supply consists of a community water system with hydrants, as well as three steel tanks at the upper end of Ogallala Warpath containing 160,000 gallons, with hydrant access, plus a 5,000 gallon redwood tank and an additional 150 gallon tank. Some plastic pipe runs above ground. A small community park (the playground) could potentially be used as a staging area if a fuel break is created.

The elevation in this community varies greatly. Structures are located l along the hillside at varying elevations. The fuels in this community are primarily redwood forest mixed with firs, oaks, bays, and maples. Tanoaks and other oaks, which are interspersed through all stands, are dying out due to SOD. The mixed redwood stands are typically very wet, especially in the low-lying valley along the east side of the community. Surface fuel loading is high: there are large amounts of leaf litter and dense understory vegetation, thus increasing the chance of a 40

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

surface fire. The damp nature of most areas reduces the chance of active fire behavior under moderate and extreme weather conditions. However, if fire were to start further up the hill, the hardwood vegetation type could experience some increased fire behavior, including torching, long flame lengths, and higher rates of spread. Chemeketa Park’s northern boundary is shared with San Jose Water Company, whose downhill lands are heavily forested with redwoods, oaks, bay, maple and fir and covered with dense understory vegetation, creating a fire risk for Chemeketa Park.

Recommendations

-A fuel break around the playground is recommended (Figure 16). Removing intermediate level fuels and dead standing trees, as well as clearing out ground cover, could make the park a good staging area for community members or fire apparatus.

-Widening the gate to the playground will allow fire apparatus to access the area.

-Due to the dense nature of the homes, linked defensible space around multiple “pods” of homes should be implemented. Linking defensible space can act as a partial landscape-level fuel treatment.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Figure 16. Chemeketa Park Fuels Reduction Projects

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Lower Montevina

Hazard Rating: Very High

Description

This community is located on a fairly steep slope with a south-facing aspect. The homes are of older construction with little spacing between them. The vegetation is fairly dense, with scattered clearings. The siding and deck materials are combustible, but the roofs are highly resistant to ignition, and therefore resistant to ember cast or debris that may land on the roofs. There are, however, a few cedar shake roofs in this community. Partial defensible space has been implemented for some of the homes in the community. The presence of overhead utility lines should be noted. The streets are well marked and fairly wide, but there are no turnarounds at dead ends and cul-de-sacs. There is only one ingress/egress route. There is no water supply for the community, but it is in close proximity to the reservoir, which can be used for fire operations.

The fuels surrounding this community range from hardwoods to open pine to tall chaparral. The south-facing slope is primarily hardwoods such as oak and redwoods. However, the fuel type transitions into tall chaparral with a grass understory component as you move up the hill. Like many places in the study area, fire starting below the community is the biggest concern. A fire in either the mixed conifer or hardwood would likely be a surface fire with patches of active behavior and fairly low rates of spread. However, active fire behavior is possible in this vegetation type under extreme weather conditions, especially where there is high surface loading. The chaparral will have long flame lengths under either moderate or extreme weather scenarios. The nature of these fuels is to burn quickly and intensely. Fire starting below these fuels would only serve to increase their likelihood for active fire behavior.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Recommendations

-Clearing Montevina Road between Upper and Lower Montevina is recommended, since this is the primary ingress/egress route (Figure 17). Horizontal and vertical clearance is important in controlling fuel continuity. Drainages that funnel to the road should be cleared 100 feet downhill.

-Remove debris and flammable materials from yards and from under decks.

-There are hills covered in thick brush throughout the community. Treat and remove the brush on the hillsides. The hill to the south of Vista Grande Way is an example of such an area.

-The reservoir below the community is dry, and as a result, noxious weeds have grown in the area. These make for a light flashy fuel load. Until the water is put back into the reservoir, the area should be maintained by weed whacking and/or mowing.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Figure 17. Lower Montevina Fuels Reduction Projects

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Redwood Estates

Hazard Rating: Very High

Description

Redwood Estates is a community of older homes, many of which have been remodeled to have non-combustible siding and moderately fire resistant roofs. The homes are fairly close together and no defensible space has been implemented for the homes in the community. Many homes have open vents, and residents are in many cases using open spaces underneath structures to store belongings. There is a lot of wood storage and other debris around the homes. Another risk factor that merits attention in this community is wood stove usage inside structures. Generally there is little addressing and lack of dead end road signage. The roads are steep and narrow, and lack adequate turnarounds. Nonetheless, there are multiple ingress/egress routes. The community runs on a municipal water system, and there are some hydrants within the community.

The fuels in Redwood Estates include, as the name implies, a fair amount of redwoods, as well as a variety of oak species, Douglas-fir and a small component of eucalyptus trees. Tall chaparral vegetation is found in patches, especially at the higher elevations. There are a lot of continuous surface fuels in the area with moderate surface loading. The lower areas of the community are typically moist, so fire spread is generally limited. However, given the right combination of weather conditions, surface fire can be expected to burn uphill. High winds 46

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

experienced during extreme conditions can cause rapid spread rates and spotting due to leaf litter accumulation. Areas with increased fuel loading from dead and down materials may experience crowning under the right conditions. The patches of chaparral are likely to burn under moderate or extreme conditions, and in the process produce intense heat, active fire behavior, and long flame lengths.

Recommendations

-All dead-end roads need to be marked as such.

-There are a lot of open areas under the homes. Debris and flammable materials need to be removed from the under the houses.

-Home addressing can be improved by adding reflective, non-flammable markers.

-Many of the homes have wood-burning fireplaces, but do not have screens in the chimneys. Fireplace maintenance should occur regularly, and screens should be added to any chimneys that do not have them currently.

-Some of the construction in the area is not up to code. Any further construction should meet NWUI codes.

-The annual community brush chipping project is an excellent opportunity to remove brush and should be continued.

-The roadside brush clearing project that has been going on for the last three years should be continued.

-Fire safety and brush abatement education for the homeowners should be continued at the Annual Members Meeting.

-The monthly mailings before and during peak fire season should be continued. These mailings are an excellent way to educate homeowners about vegetation/leaf build-up on their roofs and gutters, and about the importance of Firewise practices.

-It is recommended that the Green Waste Disposal Company maintain their weekly curbside pickup for yard waste. This is a valuable program because it allows Firewise practices to be maintained more easily.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Summit Road

Hazard Rating: Very High

Description

This residential community is made up mostly of homes on larger lots, but also contains Loma Prieta School, and a small events center, Maison de Luc. Maison de Luc is used for large gatherings, and can hold up to 500 people. Wood construction, moderately fire resistant roofs and poor signage are prevalent in the community. The roads are very narrow and there is only one ingress/egress route. There are multiple spurs that have neither signage indicating that they are dead ends, nor the number of homes at the end. The available turnarounds are tight on older homes but the newer homes provide a 50' diameter turnaround for emergency vehicles. Most homes in this community have at least a 5,000 gallon storage tank and some have 10,000 gallons or more.

The fuels in this community are primarily redwood forest. Some old fire scars can be seen, and there was a major fire that occurred in 1985. There is also a Douglas fir component. Surface fire is the biggest concern, with a few areas of active crown fire under extreme conditions. Long flame lengths are expected under extreme conditions, as are elevated rates of spread.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Recommendations

-The Morrill Road thinning project was recently completed. This 5.5-acre project protects approximately 200 homes in the area. Maintaining this project is beneficial for this community and those around it by preventing fire from limiting evacuation access on Summit Road. The community should continue to take an active approach to fuels reduction projects.

-Consider extending the Morrill Road shaded fuel break to Summit Road on both ends.

-With a few improvements, the Loma Prieta School could potentially be used as an evacuation center for those in the area. In this case, more focused defensible space, including installation of screens on eaves and construction improvement, is necessary.

-Contact the tree farm that surrounds the school to examine the possibility of using their irrigation water during a fire event.

-The Montevina pipeline that is now owned by SJWC runs down Summit Road almost to Morrill Road. During a wildfire, this could provide a much needed supply water. Hydrants to this pipeline exist and the Santa Cruz side of Summit Road in the neighborhood of Villa De Monte which runs their water system off of the pipeline. Coordinate with SJWC to develop access.

-There are multiple dead ends which need to be labeled as such. These road signs should also indicate the number of homes on the dead-end road.

-The Aldercroft/Wright Station evacuation road improvement (Figure 20) will benefit this community as well.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Upper Loma Prieta

Hazard Rating: Very High

Description

This community sits above Loma Prieta - Lower. Average lot size is about five acres. There are extremely steep slopes, chimneys and houses that sit in saddles. The houses have roofs that are highly resistant to fire with combustible siding. Home addressing should be improved. Defensible space has been completed for some of the houses in the community. The roads are narrow and unpaved, but they are well maintained. There are no adequate turnaround areas on the road. There are multiple ingress/egress routes, but they are all accessed via a single midslope access road that goes through chaparral; this is also true for the second egress to Mt. Bache Road. A water supply is available through individual home cisterns.

The fuels in the community are primarily brush and chaparral, which provide continuous but light surface fuel loading. Shrubs are fairly short and almost totally cover the area. Because of the light surface loading, surface fires would typically not be very intense under moderate weather scenarios. There are large areas of mixed conifer with high surface fuel loading below the community, which are likely to preheat the brush, and thus lead to increased uphill rates of spread and longer flame lengths. Drainages will act as funnels for fire, creating areas where active fire behavior, fast uphill runs, and long flame lengths are likely. Once the fire reaches the 50

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

ridge, it will be much more exposed to the wind, which will cause the fire to spread rapidly when conditions are extreme.

Recommendations

-A potential evacuation exists from Loma Prieta Way to Loma Prieta Road (Figure 18). The road should be treated along the entire route, including limbing, thinning, and brushing out where necessary.

-Roadside treatment along Loma Prieta Avenue is recommended. Extend the treatments where brush exists.

-Maintain an emergency water supply.

Figure 18. Upper Loma Prieta Fuels Reduction Projects

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Skyline/Black Road

Hazard Rating: High

Description

This community has many older homes and large vineyards. Parcels tend to be large. The retreat center located within Skyline/Black Road is listed as an Area of Special Interest (ASI) in this report. (See the ASI section for details.) In the event of a fire, the retreat center and the vineyards have open areas that would be appropriate for use as staging areas, incident command posts, or to fulfill other needs. These large areas also help provide fuel breaks for other structures in the community. Construction is a mixture of combustible and non- combustible materials with high fire resistant roofing. The area encompassing Skyline Road is very narrow and decreases to a one-lane road at the top, making for difficult ingress/egress. Travel speeds on these roads are slow, creating long access times for suppression vehicles. The high level of recreational use in this community further complicates the road situation. There is no municipal water supply or cisterns, but there are two ponds located in the community that may be a potential water supply in case of a wildland fire.

The topography within this community is complex, featuring steep terrain and a variety of vegetation types. While the community is primarily at the top of a large hill, the fuels below are highly influential on the fire behavior within the community. Much of the vegetation along the lower elevations are redwoods, oak, and mixed conifers. Fuel continuity is high and has a moderate level of surface fuel loading, which allows for surface fire spread. While surface fire is expected under moderate weather conditions, some torching may be seen in conjunction with longer flame lengths. Vegetation in the northern part of the community is also mixed conifer, but it has a higher component of dead and down material. As a result, under extreme conditions, active crown fire and faster rates of spread are likely. This is especially true if fire from below were to preheat and dry out these fuels. 52

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Recommendations

-Roadside thinning should be performed from the intersection of Briggs and Black Road and continue on Black Road to Skyline Boulevard (Figure 19). The project should also focus on breaking up horizontal and vertical fuel continuity.

-This is also an area that is very affected by sudden oak death (SOD). Removing the dead and dying trees around homes and roadways is also beneficial.

-Skyline Boulevard has been identified as a main road for evacuation in the case of a wildfire. Therefore, brush should be removed, trees should be limbed and trimmed, and mowing should be performed in grassy areas.

-Roadside treatments within the community should be carried out along Black Road (Fig. 17). Vertical and horizontal fuel continuity should be broken up to hinder the spread of fire. Create pullouts along this road where possible.

-A fire awareness sign should be placed at the bottom of Bear Road and Black Road.

-The Alma College Road/Bear Creek Road fuel break (Figure 21) within the Bear Creek community will also benefit this community.

-Defensible space should be implemented for all homes in this community. Please follow the guidelines established by the Santa Clara County FireSafe Council. See page 14 for details.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Figure 19. Skyline/Black Road Fuels Reduction Projects

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Lake Canyon

Hazard Rating: High

Description

The Lake Canyon community is located in the base of the canyon and is surrounded by very steep slopes. The creek bottom is very wet, and as a result there is a lower fire risk in the area. Nonetheless, embers from a fire above could lead to home ignition. Further, the lack of defensible space and close spacing between homes increases the risk of home ignition. The community is characterized by mixed construction with roofs primarily low to fire ignition. There is a fair amount of debris and litter surrounding the houses and collected on the roofs, which can easily be removed. The roads are very narrow, and often not labeled. Currently there is only one ingress/egress route in Lake Canyon. There are multiple narrow bridges that are not marked with weight limits. There is no hydrant supply in the community.

The primary overstory fuels in the area are redwoods, maple and Douglas-fir. Because of the moist environment, these trees are not at a high risk for ignition. The north-facing aspect of the canyon is mostly hardwoods but also includes short needle conifers, Douglas-fir, and Western larch. The steeper, south-facing slope also has these same fuel types, but with a larger component of dead and down fuels, resulting in potentially more intense burning. Slow spreading surface fires are most likely under moderate weather conditions, but some torching and spotting are possible, especially if weather conditions were to become extreme. Extreme weather conditions would also lead to longer flame lengths and increased rates of spread, especially for fire running uphill.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Recommendations

-Because of the potential for home to home ignition in this community, defensible space is the number one recommendation. Following the guidelines established by the Santa Clara County FireSafe Council is recommended as a first step; however individuals should work with professionals to discuss the options available for his or her property. Defensible space guidelines often focus on clearing canopies, but for redwoods, the focus should be on clearing and reducing surface and ladder fuels, opposed to cutting large trees. See page 14 of the main CWPP report for details.

-Vegetation and needle buildup on roofs is one of the most common catalysts for home ignition, so roofs should be cleared regularly. Embers lofting into the community can land on a roof and smolder in the debris until the house eventually catches fire.

-Adequate road clearance and access is needed in this community. Abandoned vehicles, equipment, and other debris should be removed immediately to allow for egress if necessary.

-Explore the possibility of using water from water treatment facility.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Hebard

Hazard Rating: High

Description

The homes in the Hebard community are fairly close together due to smaller lot sizes. Group addressing on mailboxes is standard. Topography is quite steep. The home siding and decking materials are combustible and generally have moderately ignition resistant roofs. All of the homes need defensible space. Wood burning in homes, common in this community, increases the risk of ignitions. The roads are paved but are also steep and exceedingly narrow. Some of the utilities are above ground, which also make access for fire apparatus difficult. Each house has an individual cistern for water supply, but these need reflective signage.

There are many different fuel types within this community. Much of the area is either mixed conifer or hardwoods, but there are also patchy areas of tall chaparral. The lowest lying areas are primarily mixed conifer, while hardwoods and brush prevail near tops of slopes. The majority of the structures are either located on the top of the hill or mid-slope on the east-facing aspect. Fire starting below the community is the biggest concern. Given moderate conditions, flame lengths longer than 12 feet can be expected within areas of the mixed conifer stand. Preheating of uphill fuels could lead to moderate rates of spread. Under extreme conditions, longer flame lengths and more active fire behavior is likely, especially in areas further up slope.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Recommendations

-Remove vegetation along roads, focusing on vertical and horizontal clearance.

-Flagged addressing, rather than the grouped addressing currently used, is recommended along the roads.

-Reflective signage is recommended for all hydrants and draft hydrants in the community.

-Fire hydrants should be tested annually for flow capacity and proper general functioning.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Upper Redwood Estates

Hazard Rating: High

Description

This community sits above Redwood Estates. The homes in this area are newer construction with highly fire resistant roofs, but with combustible siding. There has been some defensible space done within the community. The roads are fairly wide (20-24 feet) and well marked, but they lack adequate turnarounds. There is a municipal water supply, comprised of hydrants located throughout the community. These hydrants need to be consistently well marked.

Fuels in Upper Redwood Estates have a large oak component, with some mixed conifers like Douglas-fir and short needle pines. The surface fuels are continuous, with moderate surface loading. However, a number of roads running throughout the community do break up some of the fuel continuity. The majority of the homes sit on the top of the ridge, and there are multiple slopes that may facilitate fire to spread into the community. Moderate weather is likely to produce surface fires. Rates of spread depend on the surface vegetation; for example, in the mixed conifer stands, fire is likely to travel more quickly than it is in hardwood stands. Longer flame lengths, increased rates of spread, and more active fire behavior are predicted on steeper slopes and under more extreme weather conditions, especially if fire below is preheating the vegetation further uphill. 59

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Recommendations

-The annual community brush chipping project is an excellent opportunity to remove brush and should be continued.

-A roadside brush clearing project has been going on for the last three years and should be continued to be supported.

-Continue to educate homeowners regarding fire safety and brush abatement during the Annual Members Meeting.

-Continue monthly mailings before and during peak fire season. These mailings are an excellent way to educate homeowners about vegetation/leaf build-up on their roofs, gutters, and the importance of Firewise practices.

-Green Waste Disposal Company should maintain their weekly curb-side pickup for yard waste. This is a valuable program because it allows Firewise practices to be completed easily.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Call of the Wild

Hazard Rating: High

Description

This community is a mixture of construction types. Dominant roof type is moderately resistant to ignition, and siding is a mix of combustible and non-combustible. Little defensible space has been implemented in this community. The roads are steep and have copious amounts of vegetation along the sides where clearing needs to be maintained. Some areas have adequate turnarounds for fire vehicles, while others are inadequate. Street labeling is inconsistent. There is only one ingress/egress route. Water supply is available from individual home cisterns equipped with fire department connections. In some cases, physical barriers and lack of maintenance make access to these cisterns difficult.

The vegetation in the community is largely hardwood forests, consisting of redwoods and oaks, especially along the ridge tops and higher areas. The hill slopes are more dominated by mixed conifer stands, which include Douglas-fir that extend into the valleys below the community. The threat of fire in this community stems from the fuels below. If fire were to start in the mixed conifer stands below, under moderate weather, a surface fire would be most likely. Fire would run up hill and build in intensity as it moves. Flame lengths could get to the point where fire would extend into the trees, causing individual torching and more active fire behavior. Under an 61

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

extreme weather scenario, more rapid rates of spread and intense, active fire behavior can be expected, especially along the ridge on the south side that has small patches of chaparral and other brush.

Recommendations

-Fuels reduction work should focus on reducing surface fuels in the understory. These areas should be cleared of dead material and potential ladder fuels.

-Investigate roadside thinning to increase vertical and horizontal clearance.

-A secondary egress for this community is recommended (Figure 20). Mineral Springs Way is a dirt road that with some clearing and maintenance could be an effective evacuation route. The road will be useful for those in the Call of the Wild community, as well as others living in Aldercroft Heights. Preventing fires in this area will serve to reduce the amount of sedimentation in the lakes and waterways, thus improving water quality.

Call of the Wild Estates This enclave of five homes is different enough from the rest of the community to be called out as a sub-community. The rating for this area is moderate due to several factors: ignition-resistant construction with high ignition resistant roofing materials and interior sprinklers; larger lots on a flat knoll; a large turnaround on Gillette Drive; and roads are of adequate width. Further, utilities are underground and there are dedicated water storage tanks for fire. The vegetation is primarily Redwood forest that would not pose a great threat from fire. However, the understory could support a fire and the steep slopes below would likely increase the rate of spread towards the homes.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Recommendations

-Linked defensible spaces that concentrate on the downhill side to the north and east would help protect the homes in this neighborhood.

-Understory vegetation treatments are recommended down the slopes to the north and east.

-Water tanks in the community should be tested annually to ensure they are working properly.

-The drinking water tank should be fitted with the proper connections to make it available for use by firefighters.

Figure 20. Call of the Wild Fuels Reduction Projects

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Mountain Charlie/Melody Lane

Hazard Rating: High

Description

This community is a mixture of construction types, including both combustible and non- combustible materials, with roofs primarily moderately resistant to fire. There is little defensible space for individual homes. The roads are fairly wide but very steep and have large amounts of vegetation along the sides that requires clearing. Some areas have adequate turnarounds for fire vehicles, while others are inadequate. There is inconsistent labeling of streets in the area. There are multiple ingress/egress routes. Water supply is available from individual home cisterns outfitted with fire department connections. However, these cisterns are not always accessible, either due to lack of maintenance or physical barriers, such as fences.

The vegetation in the area is an overstory of redwoods, with continuous understory vegetation. Surface fuel loading is moderate, but there is a high level of slash loading from cutting projects and downed fuels. Douglas-fir, oak, and other short needle pines are the dominant vegetation type. Small patches of chaparral within and directly surrounding the community are also present. Surface fire spread is expected, carried by the surface fuels. Individual torching and some long flame lengths are possible with moderate weather. Some of the area around the structures has been cleared, and is therefore unlikely to burn, but trees directly impinging upon the homes could potentially pose a threat. Increased flame lengths and faster rates of spread will occur with more extreme conditions. 64

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Recommendations

-Roadside thinning is recommended in this community (Figure 21). This work should aim to break up the horizontal and vertical continuity of the fuels. The fuels reductions should be focused on the main roads within the community, especially Mountain Charlie Road.

-The Aldercroft/Wright Station roadside thinning (Figure 20) will benefit this community as well.

Figure 21. Mountain Charlie/Melody Lane Fuels Reduction Projects

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Lower Loma Prieta

Hazard Rating: High

Description

This community is characterized by larger lots and homes with mixed construction. There is a lot of agriculture in the area, including some fruit tree farms and vineyards. Some defensible space has already been implemented in the community. The roads are steep, and they do not provide adequate turnarounds. Above-ground utility lines are also present. Water is available through individual home cisterns.

The majority of the structures in this community sit on top of the hill where the fuels are primarily grass and other light, flashy fuels. However, on the south-facing slope below the structures, the vegetation consists of mixed conifers with higher levels of dead and down fuels. The fuels below on the north-facing slope are shrubs, grasses or forbs. Fire behavior in the mixed conifer stands is likely to have increased intensity due to the higher quantities of surface loading, but rates of spread will be fairly low. Some crowning, spotting and torching are likely. Less intensity is common with the brush on the north-facing slope, but given extreme weather, high uphill rates of spread and long flame lengths can be expected. The large open areas surrounding the structures are unlikely to burn.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Recommendations

-A landscape scale fuel break is recommended on the south side of the community, extending from the intersection of Morrill Road and Summit Road, continuing along Summit Road to the east (Figure 22). Special attention should be given to the downhill side of the road because of the risk of fire from below.

Figure 22. Lower Loma Prieta Fuels Reduction Projects

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Bear Creek

Hazard Rating: Moderate

Description

The Bear Creek community is comprised mostly of large lots, but has some higher density residences. The large lots are on relatively open vineyards or agricultural areas that are scattered throughout the community. Many of the more dense areas and apartment buildings are located near the highway. Defensible space has not been completed for all of the homes. The construction is a combination of combustible and non-combustible materials, but the roofs are primarily highly resistant to ignition. The roads are well maintained and provide multiple ingress/egress routes. Not all of the roads are marked with 4-inch reflective signage.

Of the natural vegetation in the community, various oak species and other hardwoods predominate. The large open areas do not provide significant fuels for fire in the area. There are some steeper areas with drainages that have higher fuel loading. Fire behavior within this community is not very extreme. While fire could travel quickly through the forested areas as a surface or crown fire, the large, open areas, highway, and reservoir greatly diminish the impact fire would have on the community.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Recommendations

-A fuel break along Bear Creek Road from Highway 17 to the northern Preserve Boundary would be recommended. Brushing along Highway 17 would also provide an added measure of safety for homes north of the Preserve, as well as the Preserve itself (Figure 23).

-Carry out defensible space for homes not in the large agricultural areas, following the Santa Clara County FireSafe Council recommendations. This will provide for an appropriate level of protection for infrastructure, while limiting landscape level impacts within the Preserve. See page 14 of the main CWPP report for details.

Figure 23. Bear Creek Fuels Reduction Projects

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Idylwild

Hazard Rating: Moderate

Description

This community is located at the top of a hill, which has fairly steep slopes around it. Houses in this community tend to be newer construction, and typically have highly ignition resistant roofs and mixed siding. Defensible space has been partially completed by individual homeowners, but is not consistent throughout the entire community. In general, home addresses are well labeled but not reflective. The roads are over 20 feet wide, allowing for fire apparatus to access the community. There is a mixture of adequate and inadequate turnarounds throughout the area. This community is located on the east side of Santa Cruz Highway (HW 17), and allows for multiple routes for ingress/egress. The presence of overhead utility lines should be noted. Water is available from individual home cisterns.

The fuels in the community are varied. Drainages and hilltops are a combination of closed canopy hardwoods and short needle conifers. The north end of the community has a higher component of chaparral along the top of the ridge. Fire from below is of greatest concern to the community. While slow-burning ground fires with low flame lengths are typical with moderate conditions, heavy fuel concentrations may allow fire to flare up and spread more readily through the mixed conifer stands. Extreme weather conditions that produce high winds are likely to cause increased rates of spread, spotting, and overall increased fire behavior. Fire behavior in the chaparral is expected to be of high intensity and exhibit long flame lengths. 70

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Recommendations

-Although the roads are well maintained within the community, they need to have 4-inch reflective signage.

-Mark evacuation routes so residents know the appropriate way to leave the area if necessary.

-Maintain general roadside clearing throughout the community. This is already being done for some roads and should be continued and expanded.

- Fire hydrants should be tested annually to ensure they are working properly and for their flow capacity.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

Areas of Special Interest

Loma Prieta Road

The area along Loma Prieta Road is designated an area of special interest and not a community because of the low housing density. However, because of the risk and the scattered homes, it’s an area that should still be addressed, and is given a very high hazard and risk rating. Because of the low population density, a large fuelbreak is not economically feasible. To mitigate the fire risk for those in the area, the following recommendations are suggested: -Maintain Twin Creek’s Spur Firebreak. -Continue with CAL FIRE’s planned fuelbreak, PL566. This fuelbreak will offer additional protection by decreasing the risk of fire coming from the east.

Lupin Lodge

The Lupin Lodge is an area of special interest due to its size and capacity to house so many guests. The Lodge is a 110 acre private club that has a year-round population. The Lodge offers a variety of activities for its guests, and as a result has many small cabins and yurts in addition to the main lodge. Recommendations for the area of special interest include: -Defensible space for all the outbuildings. -Ensure a safe evacuation route for all guests and staff. -Further investigate the area as a safety zone or an area where people can shelter in place. - Provide brochures on fire safety for guests, especially during times of high fire danger.

Presentation Center

The Presentation Center is a 67-acre retreat center located along Bear Creek Road. There is a main lodge which can hold 77 people and several small cabins, increasing the guest capacity to 137. The presentation center is used year-round for conferences, meetings, retreats, and other business services. The main building has recently been remodeled and is adobe construction. Overall, the recommendations include: -Defensible space for the main building and outbuildings. -Ensure a safe evacuation route for all guests and staff. - Provide brochures on fire safety for guests, especially during times of high fire danger.

Mount Bache

Mount Bache is outside of the current study area. Mount Bache Road connects with Upper Loma Prieta Avenue and includes approximately 80 homes in Santa Cruz County. Average lot size is about two acres. There are extremely steep slopes, chimneys and houses that sit in saddles. The houses have roofs that are highly resistant to fire with combustible siding. Home addressing should be improved. Defensible space has been completed for some of the houses in the community. The road is narrow, paved, but single lane in some sections. There are no adequate turnaround areas on the road. There are multiple ingress/egress routes, but they are all accessed via a single midslope access road that runs through chaparral; this is also true for

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

the second egress to Loma Prieta Avenue. A water supply is available through individual home cisterns.

This area has not experienced a fire for many years, and as a result the fuels have become dense. The vegetation in the community is primarily brush and chaparral mixed with pockets of dense knobcone pines. The chaparral is quite mature in some areas, growing up against the sides of homes and under decks. Because of the high surface loading, surface fire would produce long flame lengths and could spread quickly. There are large areas of mixed conifer with high surface fuel loading throughout the community, which are likely to preheat the brush, and thus lead to increased uphill rates of spread and longer flame lengths. Drainages will act as funnels for fire, creating areas where active fire behavior, fast uphill runs, and long flame lengths are likely. Once the fire reaches the ridge, it will be much more exposed to the wind, which will cause the fire to spread rapidly when conditions are extreme.

Recommendations for this area include: -Become involved with the group developing a CWPP for Santa Cruz County -Look for potential evacuation routes and develop a plan for early evacuation in the case of an extreme fire event. -Roadside treatment along Mount Bache Rd is recommended. Extend the treatments where heavy brush exists. -Maintain an emergency water supply. -Defensible space should be implemented for all homes in this community. Please follow the guidelines established by the Santa Clara County FireSafe Council. See page 14 of the main CWPP for details.

Lexington Hills CWPP – June 2009

CONCLUSION

The Lexington Hills Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) is a comprehensive, scientifically based analysis of wildfire related hazards and risks in the Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) areas of Lexington Hills, CA. This document follows the standards for CWPPs that have been established by the Healthy Forest Restoration Act, which was established in 2003.

The results of the analysis were used to determine a variety of fuel reduction projects throughout the study area. While these are recommendations made by Anchor Point Group, LLC., the stakeholders can also use these results to guide in decision making for additional fuel reduction projects. Recommendations focus on reducing the threat of wildfire to values within the study area. Additional recommendations are presented throughout the document, and include public education, home and street addressing, as well as water source availability.

Local agreements and existing plans were examined, in order to create a coordinated fire management effort between all parties involved. Public land management, private landowners and resident concerns and comments were used to generate this document. The Lexington Hills Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) is a multi-year guiding document that will facilitate the implementation of future mitigation efforts. The CWPP is a living document, meaning it changes and evolves through time. Consequently, it should be revisited at least annually to assess the relevance and progress on the given recommendations.

Since much of the report is technical, detailed discussions of certain elements are contained in appendices, which are included after the main CWPP document. Descriptions of these appendices are as follows: