BILL ANALYSIS AB 2447 Page 1 Date of Hearing: April 30, 2008 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT Anna Marie Caballero, Chair AB 2447 (Jones) - As Amended: April 17, 2008 SUBJECT : Subdivision map act: disapproval. SUMMARY : Requires a county to deny approval of a tentative map or parcel map if the proposed map will cause increased development in a state responsibility area or a very high fire hazard severity zone as designated by the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, with specified exceptions. Specifically, this bill : 1)Requires a county to deny approval of a tentative map or parcel map if the proposed map is in a state responsibility area (SRA) or a very high fire hazard severity zone as designated by the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (Cal Fire). 2)Permits a county to approve the tentative or parcel map if the county does all of the following: a) Makes a finding, based on substantial evidence, that the design and location of the subdivision will not increase the risk of wildfire and that structures can be built on the parcels that would be created consistent with any regulations promulgated by Cal Fire that govern construction in fire-prone areas reimbursed fully by the county for the area in which the proposed subdivision is located; b) Makes a finding, based on substantial evidence, that sufficient fire protection and suppression services will be available for the subdivision through one of the following methods: i) Creating a community facilities district for fire protection for the affected area pursuant to Section 53313 of the Government Code; ii) Requiring the annexation of the affected land to a city or special district that provides structural fire protection; AB 2447 Page 2 iii) Contracting with Cal Fire to provide fire protection services until, or unless, the county provides fire protection pursuant to the above subparagraphs and verifies there is, or will be, sufficient fiscal resources, equipment, and water supply and pressure to suppress fire; and c) Makes a finding that there is adequate ingress and egress for the subdivision, including a minimum of two access ways into and out of the subdivision for emergency equipment and evacuations. EXISTING LAW : 1)Requires, pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, the legislative body of a city or county to deny approval of a tentative map, or a parcel map for which a tentative map was not required, if it makes certain findings. 2)Requires the director of Cal Fire to identify areas in the state as very high fire hazard severity zones based on consistent statewide criteria and the severity of fire hazard that is expected to prevail in those areas as determined by fuel loading, slope, fire weather, and other relevant factors. 3)Defines SRAs as areas of the state in which the financial responsibility of preventing and suppressing fires has been determined by the Board of Forestry to be primarily the responsibility of the state. FISCAL EFFECT : None COMMENTS : 1)AB 2447 attempts to put into place what seems like a very common-sense proposal: don't build houses in places where they're highly likely to burn down in wildfires. According to the author, over the last few decades counties have approved new subdivisions in rural areas that are subject to a high risk of fire danger at a rapid pace due to California's population growth and growing demand for homes away from urban AB 2447 Page 3 areas. According to a USA Today analysis, building in fire prone areas in California has been running at twice the state average. At the same time, Cal Fire keeps expanding the area it considers dangerously fire-prone. From 2000-2005, land designated as SRAs increased by 284,812 acres due to more accurate assessments by Cal Fire and the Board of Forestry. Accelerated climate change is exacerbating the problem. There is near consensus among fire scientists and climatologists that fires will be more intense and more frequent due to global warming. 2)When fire does occur, the costs of fire suppression are paid mainly from the state's General Fund. Cal Fire fights all fires in SRAs regardless of the cause of the fire or whether there are any structures at risk. According to the author, this means that all Californians are paying not only for the choices of individuals to build homes in areas of high fire risk but also for the decisions of some local governments to approve new development in those areas. 3)While the author believes that significant progress has been made in the areas of stricter building standards and requirements for defensible space for homes already approved for fire-prone areas, he also believes that more emphasis should be put on whether the homes should be approved in the first place, and what a county that wishes to approve such a development should have to demonstrate in order to proceed. 4)AB 2447 takes an approach to approving development pursuant to the Map Act in areas of high fire risk somewhat similar to that taken by SB 221 (Kuehl), Chapter 642, Statutes of 2001, which requires proof of adequate water supply prior to map approval, and by SB 5 (Machado), Chapter 364, Statutes of 2007, which prohibits map approval for specified flood-prone areas unless the city or county makes findings concerning the adequacy of flood protection for the area. AB 2447 prohibits a county from approving a tentative map or parcel map if the proposed map is in an SRA or a very high fire hazard severity zone as designated by Cal Fire unless the county can make findings that the proposed development is located and designed in a way that does not increase the risk of wildfire, that sufficient fire protection and suppression services will be both available and adequately supplied and funded on an ongoing basis, and that residents and firefighters will be able to get in and out from more than one direction in the AB 2447 Page 4 event of a fire. 5)In its current form, AB 2447 requires that, in order to approve a development in an SRA or very high fire hazard severity zone, a county must make substantial findings that the design and location of the subdivision will not increase the risk of wildfire and that structures can be built on the parcels that would be created consistent with any regulations promulgated by Cal Fire that govern construction in fire-prone areas. This requirement is somewhat vague, and places the onus on the county to determine that the design and location of the subdivision will not increase the risk of wildfire. A substantial body of fire protection regulations already exists. The burden on counties created by AB 2447 could be lessened by requiring that the county certify that the design and location of each parcel, and the map as a whole, is or can be made consistent with applicable existing state fire protection regulations. This would make AB 2447 more consistent with the model created by SB 221 and SB 5 by having the governing body make its determination based on an outside source rather than its own expertise or lack thereof. 6)PROPOSED AUTHOR'S AMENDMENTS . The author proposes to amend AB 2447 as follows: a) On page 2, delete lines 12 through 17, inclusive, and insert: Makes a finding supported by substantial evidence that the design and location of each parcel and the map as a whole would allow improvements, such as roads, turnarounds, defensible space, and emergency water systems, to be made consistent with the regulations promulgated by the Board of Forestry pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 4290 and 4291 at CCR Title 14, Division 1.5, Chapter 7, Subchapters 2 and 3; b) On page 2, delete line 27 after the word "services" and lines 28 through 31, inclusive, and insert: (D) Demonstrating, for subparagraphs (A) and (B) above, that there is or will be at the time occupancy permits are issued for any structures sufficient fiscal resources, personnel, equipment, and emergency water systems to protect against and suppress fire on the parcels proposed AB 2447 Page 5 by the map on an ongoing basis. 7)PROPOSED COMMITTEE AMENDMENT . Under exiting law all fire suppression service providers are required to respond to fires in their areas under the State Mutual Aid Agreement. For example, if there is a fire within a city fire station's jurisdiction but there is a special district fire station that is located closer to the fire, the special district is required to respond to the fire first. Furthermore, fire departments across the state are required to respond to large fires all over California. In most cases across the state fire suppression service is provided by a city, special district, or Cal Fire. Only in a few cases are there county-run fire departments. Since counties neither provide nor fund fire protection in most cases, it seems that they should not be held financially responsible for ensuring that there is adequate fire protection for a new development, since the resources lie outside of their jurisdictions. The SB 221/SB 5 model would indicate that obtaining certification from the agency or agencies that are responsible for providing and funding fire protection should be adequate. If this certification cannot be obtained, then the county would be required to disapprove the map. The Committee may wish to request that the author amend the bill to delete subsection (b)(2) and replace it with language requiring the county to obtain certification for the appropriate agencies that fire protection can be provided and funded for the new development. REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION : Support CDF Firefighters Endangered Habitats League Planning and Conservation League Serene Lakes Property Owners Association Sierra Club CA Opposition CA Building Industry Association CA State Association of Counties (unless amended) Regional Council of Rural Counties (unless amended) AB 2447 Page 6 Analysis Prepared by : J. Stacey Sullivan / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958