Texas A&M and Cal Poly Use Data to Help Communities Prevent Wildfire Risk

Researchers at Texas A&M University’s College of Architecture and Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo have released a new tool that helps local governments find and fix contradictions in their planning documents that can inadvertently increase wildfire risk.

Developed over a two-year collaboration, the guidebook adapts Texas A&M’s Plan Integration for Resilience Scorecard (PIRS™) for wildfire resilience. The scorecard originally began as a tool for flood resilience. It helped communities on coasts and rivers check whether zoning, transportation and economic development policies were working for all purposes. The Texas A&M and Cal Poly team used the same approach for wildfire, where risk also changes from one location to another. It also provides planners and fire officials with a step-by-step approach to compare policies across key local plans and identify conflicts in fire-prone areas. 

Dr. Matthew Malecha, an assistant professor in the Department of Landscape Architecture and Urban Planning and a researcher with the Hazard Reduction and Recovery Center, led the effort.

“Previously, the work was focused on flooding,” Malecha said. “We have been moving it into the realm of wildfire because wildfires are also sufficiently spatial to enable a PIRS evaluation. Some places are more and less prone to wildfire.”

Pilot Testing in California Communities

Backed by nearly $300,000 from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, the researchers piloted the scorecard in California with partners in Temecula, Atascadero, Santa Barbara County, Napa County and Placer County.

Many communities want new housing, new roads and economic growth. Malecha explained that the scorecard helps them determine whether those goals align with wildfire safety.

For example, a land-use plan may encourage denser housing in a high-risk wildland-urban interface area, where homes are close to flammable vegetation. The scorecard helps communities flag mismatches and revise policies so development avoids the most hazardous areas or includes stronger mitigation requirements.

“If a policy applies in a wildfire-prone area, you can get a sense of whether a policy is helping things or is actually hurting the cause of resilience,” Malecha said. “Increasing development intensity in an area that is in the wildland-urban interface? Maybe not a great idea.”

In Placer County, which stretches from the Sierra Nevada to the Sacramento suburbs, local officials used the pilot version of the scorecard to adjust policy language so new growth does not inadvertently increase the county’s risk profile.

“Wildfire is a unique hazard, needing natural and built environment fuels plus wind, a climate component, to spread after ignition,” said Dr. William Siembieda, professor of city and regional planning, California Polytechnic State University.

“[Lowering] wildfire risk requires interdisciplinary knowledge about fuel behavior, ignition and land-use planning. The PIRS™ for Wildfire approach introduces an innovative method of addressing wildfire mitigation,” Siembieda added.

A Model for Local Governments

The project represents a joint effort between the PIRS™ Lab within Texas A&M’s HRRC and the new Wildland Urban Interface Fire Institute at Cal Poly. Researchers worked with city planning staff, emergency managers and fire marshals during testing to ensure the tool fits local government workflows.

Malecha said communities need both planners and fire safety officials to collaborate for long-term resilience. While planners shape where growth happens, fire officials understand how roads, vegetation, topography and wind can affect evacuation and response in emergencies.

“You want a champion, and you also want the kind of people who are going to be able to manage the project from the city side,” Malecha said.

The team wrote, refined and tested the guidebook so local staff can use it without starting from scratch each time they update a plan.

Access the Guidebook

The scorecard offers a way to catch policy conflicts early as more communities expand into fire-prone landscapes.

Researchers are encouraging wider use by communities that want to align development decisions with wildfire mitigation.