I addressed Los Angeles County's adoption of "defensible space clearance" requirements in a post on March 28th. The requirements were applicable to all homeowners in areas facing significant fire risk. We received a notice from the Los Angeles Fire Department outlining its guidelines and notifying us of inspections to be conducted by department personnel in or around June. Among other things, the notice specified the following:
"It is required that all trees and shrubs shall be maintained free of deadwood and litter. Native and ornamental vegetation known to be flammable, including, but not limited to: Acacia, Cedar, Cypress, Eucalyptus, Juniper, Pine, and Pampas Grass shall be removed within 30 feet of any structure..."
The fire hazard maps available online for our area at that time showed the majority of our peninsula was classified as facing severe fire risk. Although we weren't specifically required to take any action prior to the inspections, the notice stipulated that homeowners would have just thirty days to resolve any issues that inspectors found and the preliminary guidance we received suggested that time frame could be difficult if extensive changes were required. We decided to get ahead of the problem by taking a range of actions that made some sense to us. We ended up removing a large number of shrubs, which I addressed in a post published on May 7th.
In July we received notice of our compliance with current guidelines. We never saw an inspector nor received any specific input concerning future challenges, specifically the "zone zero" guidelines under development at the California State level. As it became more and more apparent that "zone zero" guidelines will be implemented by year's end, I began formulating strategies to remove materials that might be considered "flammable" sitting within five feet of our house (i.e., within "zone zero").
One of my most recent actions involved pulling out two woody Coleonema album (breath of heaven) shrubs near the front door. I subsequently filled in the empty area with a Lomandra, which is generally considered to be fire resistant.
After I expressed my concerns about the pending "zone zero" guidelines, my husband did an internet search and discovered - drum roll! - that the local authorities responsible for our peninsula are in the process of adopting dramatic changes to our fire hazard severity zones. These zone classifications are important because they determine where California's defensible space standards apply, including those relating to "zone zero." I wasn't able to dig up a "before" map but the extent of the changes are remarkable as shown here:
| The update was published by our city in mid-June but I don't follow the city's website, which was clearly a mistake in this case Map Source: rpvca.gov |
Moreover, when I checked the rating of our property and the properties within our immediate neighborhood, which consists of fifty-six homes and one large empty lot, I was even more surprised.
| That black dot indicates our location within the green (no designated risk) area |
- An area's "fire history"
- "Existing and potential fuel" (vegetation)
- "Flame length" (which according to Google AI refers to wildfire intensity and potential for damage)
- "Blowing embers terrain" (which refers to how wind-blown embers spread during a wildfire) and
- "Typical fire weather"
Officially at least, it appears that I no longer have to worry about the following areas of my garden:
| I'm under no obligation to remove the lovely Camellia 'Taylor's Perfection' or Acer palmatum 'Sango Kaku' I planted next to the garage soon after we moved in over 14 years ago |
| I needn't worry that my beloved ever-blooming Grevillea 'Superb' is partially intruding in the 5-foot space between it and the house, despite a serious pruning this spring |
| No immediate action is required with respect to the Coleonema and Pittosporum shrubs that make up the hedge here on the north end of the house |
| or the Camellia sasanqua and Pittosporum shrubs around the corner that we also inherited with the garden |
Moving on to other less ambiguous matters, we did receive "significant" rain from the storm that passed through Southern California earlier this week. It's been called a "Goldilocks" atmospheric river event as it put a temporary stay on the start of our fire season while avoiding mudslides in the areas affected by the fires last January. Our net rain tally was 0.74/inch. My 50- and 160-gallon collection tanks are full. The 265-gallon tank didn't accumulate much. After-the-fact, we discovered that one of the filters was blocked by an inch of mud, preventing rainwater from flowing into the tank during the storm. That, and the fact that tank collects rain off the smallest roof surface (i.e., only the back half of the garage roof), accounted for the fact the tank was nearly dry. The tank's placement can't be helped as it's too ugly to set up in front of the house.
The best news is that the garden is currently fully saturated. I should be able to leave our irrigation system off for more than a week without touching any of the collected rainwater. The only negative is that my work in the cutting garden remains on hold until the soil in the raised planters dries out and can be worked again.
Meeko and I may be getting some time off this weekend.
| As soon as our daytime temperatures dropped into the 60sF, I turned on the heating pad below Meeko's pink afghan and she's been calmer ever since |
Enjoy a great weekend and thumbs up if you're joining a "No Kings" march on Saturday!
All material © 2012-2025 by Kris Peterson for Late to the Garden Party