San Francisco has much different urban fire risks than Los Angeles — but some areas in SF pose “moderate” and even “high-risk” of burning amid a wildfire.
The Palisades and Eaton fires have destroyed over 12,000 homes after starting on January 7th. The fires represented the perfect nexus of situational cataclysm and climate crisis outcomes produced what will inevitably become one of the Calfironia’s costliest and most deadly wildfire outbreaks in history.
LA’s hillsides are the backdrops of cinematic lore and lust; they exist as a proxy of social status and ostensible wealth — the closer one resides to them, the more likely they are to be aspirational bipeds (or so society denotes). Alas, they held dry groundcover and conditions rife for wildfires. Altadena, a historically Black neighborhood in Los Angeles County that exists as an outlier amid an otherwise gentrified city, has effectively burned down; its proximity to Echo Mountain and its surrounding forest allowed the fire to spread down from the hillsides and into the neighborhoods.
None of these two major fires are even 40% contained — Wednesday’s winds haven’t helped, either. Amid the burning, speculation of whether the same could happen in San Francisco has swirled.
The simple answer? Far less likely. The more complex answer? Yes, if the climate crisis worsens and entirely alters SF’s microclimates.
San Francisco’s high-risk fire map by CalFire is woefully out of date. It was last updated when Barack Obama was elected into office … the first time. Since then, San Francisco has averaged a couple of degrees warmer on any given day, seen its personified maritime layer, Karl The Fog, shrink, orange skies wrap the city, and sea levels rise, albeit minimally. Mind you, all of these happenings are expected to continue on and increase in intensity.
Color-organized “Fire Hazard Severity Zones” designated by CalFire in the 2008 map show predictable areas in “moderate” risk areas. (The map is organized from “unzoned” to “very high” concerning an area’s chance of wildfire risk; for context, all the areas currently burning in Los Angeles County are in red — “very high” risk assessments.) Neighborhoods and urban greenery around Twin Peaks, the Presdiion, and Lake Merced are among those yellowed locations. But an eagle-eyed watcher of this antiqued, pixelated map notices a small sliver of orange toward the bottom-right boundary.
The “high-risk” area highlights the risk SF’s Crocker-Amazon neighborhood has in going up in flames, not unlike Altadena.
The neighborhood history registers warmer temperatures than other areas in San Francisco; the area was among the warmest recorded during San Francisco’s record-breaking heat last year. The neighborhood, too, sits close proximity to San Bruno Mountain State Park — a greenspace considered a wildfire first by CalFire — and, unlike areas downtown, consists of primarily single-family homes, townhouses, and condos, which boast more flammable construction materials than structures in areas like Nob Hill and SoMa.
Those overhead, unburied powerlines installed and maintained by PG&E that have a particular proclivity to sparking during windstorms? Corcker-Amazon has among the highest concentrations of them anywhere in San Francisco. Because of San Francisco’s topography and ground makeup, PG&E has stated it’s impractical and improbable to bury these lines.
If there were any area where we’re likely to see a wildfire flamed by the climate crisis to break out in SF, it’ll likely happen in one of the city’s smallest neighborhoods at just a half-square-mile in size. And while it’s true vegetation fires spread quicker among leafage, San Francisco is no stranger to devastating fires that level it and claim thousands of lives.
Feature image: Crocker-Amazon neighborhood in SF (featuring overhead powerlines), courtesy of Trulia.
