State Parks Superintendent Discusses Brush Clearance at Pacific Palisades Community Council Meeting

By SARAH SHMERLING | Editor-in-Chief

California State Parks District Superintendent Richard Fink answered questions posed by Pacific Palisades Community Council regarding brush clearance at its most recent meeting, August 24.

The question “who is responsible for clearing state land when an adjacent home is not able to achieve the recommended defensible space?” was the focus of the conversation.

“There are at least three vast areas of land in Pacific Palisades that turned out to be owned by the state and brush is not cleared on them,” PPCC Chair Maryam Zar explained at the start of the conversation. “So we went and asked … how to get that brush cleared.”

Homeowners in the city of Los Angeles are required to clear 200 feet from structures (including neighboring homes), or up to their property line. In the Palisades, that brush clearance law supersedes the state law—which is 100 feet from structures or up to the property line.

PPCC approached the office of Assemblymember Jacqui Irwin, which reported to Zar that when homeowners have a property that abuts state-owned property, the homeowner must obtain a permit to go onto state land and clear it if they want to achieve 200 feet of cleared space.

The process includes multiple steps, including an initial inspection alongside a representative from State Parks. After an assessment of potential hazards, as well as what can be removed and what should be protected, a permit is issued and the actual clearing can then be done by a contractor, gardener, etc.

“The state is happy to give them the right of entry for them to go in and clean it on their own, which is wonderful of the state to do, but it’s not likely to clear acres and acres and acres of brush,” Zar explained. “So our response was, given the fact that the state is spending so much time and energy and money and brain bandwidth to come up with ways to mitigate the fire threat across California, how about if they just clear their land?”

Fink explained that State Parks has a “flammable vegetation and fuel modification policy,” which “prohibits the construction and prohibits the maintenance of fire breaks and other fuel modification zones on department land.” Fink said this is due to the department’s mission and mandate, which is to “preserve the state’s natural resources.”

One of the areas Zar referenced, and the parcel that started this conversation, was a stretch of Via Floresta in Marquez Knolls, which abuts Topanga State Park. The particular parcel in question has a city of LA easement, primarily for drainage and erosion control.

“Typically, what you see is some sort of agreement in the easement about the maintenance, who’s going to maintain the easement? Is it State Parks, or is it the city?” Fink explained. “Like many of our old agreements, this one in particular, is not very clear on who maintains this easement. In fact, it does not specify any maintenance obligations.”

For this parcel, State Parks coordinated with the city, which agreed to conduct brush clearance and fuel modification, primarily from the sidewalk.

“As far as clearing out a vast acreage of brush or trees or things like that, that is not something we will do,” Fink said. “That’s not part of our mission. We’re really here to protect the natural habitat, provide a habitat for everything that’s in the beautiful neighborhood of the Palisades. And that’s going to continue to be our mission, but we’re happy to collaborate and work with you and find ways to take care of some of these safety concerns.”

Zar thanked Fink for the news that the city would be clearing part of the parcel—but pointed to this not being a “long-term solution for every parcel.”

“I think it’s wonderful that the state is not in the business of clearing brush, because you want to preserve natural habitat,” she said. “But at the same time, we know that things can go up in smoke and houses are nearby. It can be perilous for life and property, at least human life and property.”

Zar concluded the conversation by asking Fink to keep PPCC updated “if anything else comes to light” in relation to brush clearance, as this parcel “is not the only place” owned by State Parks with brush.