Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Fire Maps topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City staff say Cal Fire severity-map methodology needs review; council letter coming
Summary
Ukiah staff told the Planning Commission they have drafted a city council letter questioning parts of Cal Fire and Office of State Fire Marshal mapping methodology, particularly how prevailing wind speed was aggregated, and will transmit the letter after council review.
Director Schlatter told the Planning Commission on April 9 that staff and a city-council ad hoc had completed a draft letter to the city council that questions aspects of the newly published California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (Cal Fire) and Office of the State Fire Marshal (OSFM) fire hazard severity maps.
"We did a pretty deep dive on all the methodology that CAL FIRE and the Office of the State Fire Marshal put out there," Schlatter said. "We found some, what I would call inconsistencies. What it appears ... is just that they didn't go far enough to make it hyperlocal." He described one specific concern as an aggregated treatment of prevailing wind speed for the Ukiah Valley and contrasted that with more localized NOAA data.
Nut graf: Schlatter said staff’s draft letter — prepared with a council ad hoc and posted in the CivicClerk agenda system — will be reviewed by the full City Council, after which staff intends to transmit the letter to Cal Fire. He said staff expect to present a report back to the Planning Commission at a future meeting.
Schlatter said staff had run an analysis comparing the Cal Fire/OSFM approach with National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) prevailing-wind data and identified notable differences. "We found... pretty stark difference in how it looked like Cal Fire and OSFM were reviewing prevailing wind speed and what is actually available factually from the NOAA," Schlatter said.
Schlatter told commissioners the council ad hoc approved the draft and the council will consider it at its next meeting; if the council concurs, Schlatter said the transmission to the state was planned for Thursday, April 17. He offered to provide the commission a copy of the letter after the council meeting and to return with a report at the next Planning Commission meeting.
Ending: Commissioners asked for a follow-up report; Schlatter said he would provide that at a future meeting and that the CivicClerk packet would include the draft letter when it goes before council.
