Insights
Publications

Changing Climate, Changing Laws: Addressing CEQA’s New Wildfire Risk Requirements in Project Development

September 12, 2019 Articles

Wildfires pose an increasingly serious threat to the public and environment in California. So it should be no surprise that the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) amended Appendix G of California Environmental Quality Act’s (CEQA) regulations (or “Guidelines”) to help public agencies identify and evaluate such risks. http://opr.ca.gov/ceqa/updates/guidelines/. These amendments along with a host of other updates to the Guidelines became effective December 28, 2018.

What does this mean for project developers engaged in large-scale projects such as renewable energy, transportation, housing and infrastructure projects in California? Assuming the project is not exempt from CEQA, before the lead agency can issue a permit for the project, it must evaluate the project’s impacts on the environment. These impacts may include “any potentially significant direct, indirect, or cumulative environmental impacts of locating development in areas susceptible to hazardous conditions (e.g., floodplains, coastlines, wildfire risk areas) . . . .” See CEQA Guidelines, § 15126.2(a) (explaining the types of significant impacts that should be discussed in an Environmental Impact Report).

The new amendments now guide agencies in how to evaluate wildfire risks as they begin preparing environmental review documents. This is a significant change from how agencies dealt with this issue before. Prior to these amendments, there were no specific wildfire-related questions that prompted agencies to think about how new projects will create or exacerbate wildfire risks. Now the Environmental Checklist Form, found in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, includes new questions asking whether the relevant project is “located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones.” (State responsibility areas are areas where the state has a financial responsibility to prevent and suppress fires.) 

A map of these areas can be found at: https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/divisions/wildfire-prevention-planning-engineering/wildland-hazards-building-codes/fire-hazard-severity-zones-maps/. Although the map is helpful in assessing whether a project is located within these areas, it is not always clear when a project is located “near” one. For those decisions, OPR stated in its Final Statement of Reasons that public agencies “will be best placed to determine precisely where such analysis is needed outside of the specified zone.” http://resources.ca.gov/ceqa/docs/2018_CEQA_Final_Statement_of%20Reasons_111218.pdf. In other words, when it is not obvious, the agency will use its judgment to decide if the project is “near” these areas.

What if the project is located in or “near” these areas? In that situation, the agency may rely on the checklist’s wildfire-related questions to assess whether, among other things, the project will impair an emergency evacuation plan, exacerbate wildfire risks, require the installation of power lines that may exacerbate fire risk or expose people or structures to significant risks from post-fire landslides.

In other words, if a project developer is building a renewable energy project in or near a high wildfire-risk area, these new questions will prompt the agency to ask whether the project will exacerbate wildfire conditions. For example, will the project have transmission lines that can spark in high winds? If yes, then the project could make existing conditions worse and the agency will need to thoroughly analyze this issue. What about the project’s location? Can it be built in a way to avoid a steep slope or prevailing wind patterns, which can exacerbate wildfire impacts? If it will make conditions worse, are there mitigation measures that can be adopted to maintain or improve roads, fuel breaks, and emergency water sources? These could reduce how much the project contributes to wildfire risk. Finally, if the goal is to avoid a high risk area altogether, the developer should check with the relevant public agency to make sure the agency will not consider the project to be sufficiently “near” one.

The new wildfire amendments will impact California’s future renewable energy, transportation, housing and infrastructure projects. A project developer should check the high fire hazard map first, and then reach out to counsel or consultants to navigate these new CEQA amendments in these ever changing environmental and legal landscapes.

Firm Highlights

News

Plans for SF’s 4th-tallest building win key OK as developer resolves opposition

C.J. Higley was mentioned in the article, "Plans for SF’s 4th-tallest building win key OK as developer resolves opposition."  According to the article, the Transbay district Parcel F tower would include 165 condos, 189...

Read More
Publication

Force Majeure and Contractual Non-Performance During the Coronavirus Pandemic

Never in the experience of most of us has an event so thoroughly interrupted business as usual as the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. Everywhere, contract parties facing severe stress in their businesses are reassessing their contractual...

Read More
Publication

Perfluorinated Compounds: No Longer an Emerging Contaminant

Lawsuits present major liability risks to PFAS manufacturers and industries that historically used PFAS in their operations. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl chemicals (PFAS) are synthetic, human-made compounds that were manufactured in the United States beginning...

Read More
News

Farella Assists San Francisco Flower Mart With Development Project

Farella Braun + Martel represented the master tenant of the San Francisco Flower Mart in renegotiating its agreements with Kilroy Realty Corp., including a long-term master lease to permanently relocate the Flower Mart to...

Read More
Publication

Business Interruption Coverage for the Coronavirus (COVID-19)

The coronavirus (COVID-19) has already caused severe disruption to the economy. In the U.S., governmental entities as well as the private sector are implementing more and more drastic measures to respond to the coronavirus...

Read More
Publication

San Francisco Bay Area Counties Issue Stricter Limits on Commercial Activities in Updated COVID-19 Shelter-In-Place Orders

To combat the growing number of coronavirus cases in the Bay Area, six local counties (Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara) have issued updated Shelter-In-Place orders that extend the...

Read More
Publication

California's Bold Step Forward Into the Contentious World of Wetlands Regulation

Read More
Publication

Changing Climate, Changing Laws: Addressing New Wildfire Risk Requirements in Project Development

In this op-ed for pv magazine, David Lazerwitz and Linda Sobczynski of Farella Braun + Martel examine the levels of precaution necessary to ensure fire risk mitigation in project development. The increasingly common occurrence...

Read More
Publication

Is Your Business an “Essential Business”? Navigating California State and County COVID-19 Shelter-In-Place Orders

In light of the recent “Shelter-In-Place” orders issued by all nine Bay Area counties (Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Sonoma, Solano, and Napa) and the subsequent “Stay-At-Home” order issued...

Read More
News

Farella Braun + Martel Announces 2020 Partner Elevations

SAN FRANCISCO/ST. HELENA, Calif., January 21, 2020: Northern California legal powerhouse Farella Braun + Martel is pleased to announce the election of senior associates Evan Abrams, Lauren Galbraith, and Alex Reese to the partnership...

Read More