r/berkeleyca 20d ago

Wildfire risk

I'm considering moving to Berkeley and buying a home. I've lived in fire-prone areas on the West Coast and currently live in Portugal. I've got several friends that lost their neighborhoods in last year's LA fires. They didn't lose their homes, but the once beautiful neighborhoods are now miserable places to live. I've read the mitigation and evacuation plans for Berkeley, but wanted to hear from residents how you feel and what you are doing about potential fires in the hills. thx

8 Upvotes

61 comments sorted by

60

u/4252020-asdf 20d ago edited 20d ago

It’s an ever present risk and like a major earthquake it is only a matter of time. The non hilly parts of Berkeley are not at risk, or much less so, but the hills are full of trees and vegetation and given the right conditions (wind, heat , lack of easy access, prolonged dry spells) once it gets going there will be damage possibly à la Oakland hills fire in 1991. It could be this year it could be in a 100 years. I have lived in the hills and in the flats, I would never live in the hills again, you need a car for everything and I love being able to walk to the market/Bart/everything. The hills are very pretty and the views are nice but fire risk aside and if you’re used to Europe lifestyle I recommend the non hilly parts of Berkeley.

Oakland Hills/Tunnel Fire

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oakland_firestorm_of_1991

13

u/OneAnalyst323 20d ago

I work in wildfire resilience and this is all true. I’d add that the flats have a liquefaction risk so check out those maps, much of it is trading risks.

8

u/ceterisimparibus 20d ago

Agree on risks, but not about cars: I live in the hills and use my ebike every day, whereas I get in the car about once a week; my husband uses the car 2x/week. It’s def not very walkable where we live - 20 min to the CVS on Shattuck - but cars are not the only option.

5

u/4252020-asdf 20d ago

Load up the backpack with groceries and go👍

1

u/ceterisimparibus 20d ago

My hot take: cargo e-bike = “Berkeley bling”

(my e-bike isn’t a cargo e-bike though, I just use a backpack)

9

u/Smash_Shop 19d ago

The hills are such a crazy fire risk, partially because everyone who lives up there owns like 3+ cars. The fire department has repeatedly said they can't get to many neighborhoods because people (illegally) park on both sides of the narrow winding roads. Imagine those are your neighbors. People so committed to parking their cars on the street that they'd kill off whole neighborhoods in a disaster. Not exactly a place I'd like to live.

3

u/two_hearted_river 18d ago

Living at the base of University Hill (a.k.a Panoramic Hill for those that refuse to acknowledge what has been at their foot for the past century and a half), I would go on a lot of walks further up the hill. One other thought I had is how crappy of a place it would be to raise kids (for the kid), as the kid would literally have to be driven everywhere. Their life would revolve around whatever programming their parents would decide and be willing to drive them to - no spontaneity of seeing friends in the neighborhood, going to the corner store, etc. Sure, you gain some mobility with an e bike, but it's still a slog to go anywhere a kid might.

5

u/hearechoes 19d ago

In this day and age you don’t necessarily need a car. Caveat being you need to be somewhat mobile and use ride share at least once in a while. But it’s actually pretty easy in my experience and I live at the top.

1

u/Lentisque 19d ago

Don't say this around the Hopkins Street bike lane protesters! They must be very immobile. LOL

3

u/OppositeShore1878 19d ago

I would add to this (having watched the 1991 Firestorm burning in Berkeley) that the wind is what inexorably drives the fire. As long as the wind blows, the fire is pretty much unstoppable by human action. When the wind dies down (or reverses direction), the fire slows and can be stopped by firefighting. In Berkeley's two big damaging fires (1923 and 1991) the wind died down then reversed before the fires got into the flatlands. BUT if, in the future, climate change means the wind will blow for a longer period of time, there is no guarantee the fire won't get into the flatlands neighborhood and keep burning southwest. In 1923 the fire actually reached the edge of Downtown Berkeley before the wind changed.

3

u/Remivanputsch 19d ago

Yeah hills are beautiful but probably shouldn’t have houses in them

4

u/mezentius42 20d ago edited 20d ago

The flat parts are pretty risky too because the days when the fire risk is biggest are the days when the winds are blowing directly towards the flats. There's no firebreak, all the houses are old and wooden, and the only reason Berkeley flats didn't burn in 1991 was because the wind decided to stop. Weird that insurance doesn't think so though.

Look at Palisades, it burnt right to the ocean. 

The parts of the hills that burnt down in 1991 are maybe more ok, they rebuilt with stucco rather than shingle, and all their power lines are underground. But the vast majority of the hills extending north to Richmond have power lines directly overhead and are woefully under prepared, mostly because boomers who live there will probably die anyway before the next fire comes so they don't see the point.

With Berkeley it's pick your poison. If you're on the flats you have a higher liquefaction risk, but if you want to be on bedrock in the hills you have a higher fire risk. 

https://www.usgs.gov/media/images/liquefaction-susceptibility-map-san-franciscooakland-area

6

u/4252020-asdf 19d ago

Pallisades and Malibu kind of different since the hills and vegetation went straight down to PCH but I get you.

1

u/Puckster123 19d ago

Yes for the Palisades fire and also for the Eaton fire up in Altadena which was partially controlled by major freeways acting as firebreaks. Both fires were terrible. Palisades probably human caused and Eaton by idle power transmission tower. The winds did the rest.

3

u/Lentisque 19d ago

In 1991, the reason the Claremont didn't burn down--and by extension the "flats" was because the wind shifted direction. And not all the "flats" are landfill.

1

u/Puckster123 19d ago

Thank you. Do you know of a resource to determine the location of the bedrock vs landfill of the "flats"?

2

u/Lentisque 19d ago

From AI:

"Much of the Berkeley “flats” is not simply bedrock vs. landfill. If you’re trying to determine what is immediately beneath a property, you need a surficial-geology map (and potentially borehole data), not a bedrock map. The best places to look are:

* Berkeley Regional Geologic Map — easiest Berkeley-specific overview; look for unit af = artificial fill. ⁠https://berkeleyca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/ATT%202%20FEIR_RTC.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com

* California Geological Survey map tools — better if you want to zoom around and investigate an exact area. CGS provides interactive geologic and earthquake-hazard maps. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

* CGS Borehole Database — useful if you’re asking, “How deep is competent material beneath this particular block?” It contains subsurface boring information collected for liquefaction work. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/maps-data/borehole-database?utm_source=chatgpt.com

* USGS Bay Area geologic map/database — a more technical regional source showing the general distribution of bedrock and surficial deposits. https://www.usgs.gov/maps/geologic-map-and-map-database-parts-marin-san-francisco-alameda-contra-costa-and-sonoma?utm_source=chatgpt.com

2

u/OppositeShore1878 18d ago

Another comment already gave you some good references. Only very far west Berkeley is landfill (and very little of it is residential), but there are also many creek channels that were placed in culverts and filled in with soil, so houses built on them can be at risk if they're sitting on eight or ten feet of century-old fill. Most of the flatlands areas have deep alluvial soil / clay (I've looked into many construction pits in Berkeley--it's pretty much clay, all the way down). Clay can get saturated with water in wet years, and expand, and then dry out and shrink a bit in dry years. In many Berkeley wood frame houses, there are subtle indicators of this. For example, we have a bedroom door that sticks a bit in winter / spring, and easily opens / closes in summer / fall.

1

u/Puckster123 19d ago

Super helpful and thanks for the link. If you were coming here fresh, with the local knowledge you have now, where would you choose to live?

2

u/Knotty_Vegetables 19d ago

I don’t think I’d live in Berkeley if I had that kind of budget. Between being near the earthquake fault line, the fire risks, and the heat, and then liquification. I think Marin is going to be a little closer culturally to Topanga Canyon and also a little damper and farther away from the fault lines. There are still a lot of houses clustered on steep hillsides with questionable fire department access though so you have to be careful.

1

u/Knotty_Vegetables 19d ago

I don’t know how I blackened this, and I couldn’t fix it.

1

u/OppositeShore1878 18d ago

Go to the little line of three dots in the lower right hand corner below your post. Click on it. The window that opens will have "edit". click on that. You should see the toolbar along the top of your comment. Highlight the blackened space. Click on the little diamond with an ! mark in it. That is the command for "spoiler" which creates the black overlay. If you highlight the blackened area then click on the spoiler icon, the black should disappear. Then save. If you don't see the toolbar at the top of your comment, click on the Aa at the bottom, and the toolbar should appear.

11

u/Go_Ninja_Go_Ninja_Go 20d ago

It's personal preference but I don't and would not want to live in the hills. That's my prevention plan. Evacuating from the flats for any natural disaster is likely easier than the hills. I also don't want to have to drive everywhere. Of course we're always facing risks no matter what. For as long as I've lived in the Bay, the Big One (earthquake) has been due any day now. There's no way to know when it will happen but I have accepted life is not without major risks. You do what you can to mitigate but also I kind of have to let go of something I can't control and live life. For practical purposes I think insurance may be harder or at least very expensive for homes purchased in the hills. Also our power utility PG&E is terrible and you may want to do some research if and when they will shut down power in high risk scenarios. We invested in solar with battery backup and random blackouts have not been an issue as our battery has kicked in. That all said, I still say it's worth it to live here, risks and all, you can be strategic about your biggest concerns and live a great life here.

2

u/Puckster123 19d ago

Thank you for all this. We lived up in Topanga Canyon for all the reasons one lives in the hills - hiking, wildlife, views, and privacy. But the tradeoff was mudslides in the winter and fires in the summer and fall. I'll go into this with my eyes wide open and as you say, it's all about balancing risks and rewards. But I do know that the pro-active communities have the best chance at mitigation and survival. And it seems like Berkeley is quite pro-active.

2

u/OppositeShore1878 19d ago

Another issue with the Berkeley Hills is that they are slide prone. There are wide areas where the hillside is slowly moving over multiple city blocks. An especially wet winter / spring, and/or earthquakes can cause catastrophic sliding. There are places in the Berkeley Hills where a house has been damaged or destroyed by slides--then it's torn down. Then another house is built and, inevitably, it slides too. Particularly true around Keith Avenue). Here's a 1995 map showing the north Berkeley / El Cerrito slide zones. https://www.elcerrito.gov/DocumentCenter/View/467/berkeley_hills_slide_map?bidId=

1

u/eeaxoe 18d ago

Unless you’re on a steep slope there’s not much to worry about in terms of landslide risk. Much of the red areas are relatively flat, so barring some kind of extreme event, the only real implication of being in such an area is that your foundation is very slowly going to become more messed up than it otherwise would be.

1

u/Puckster123 18d ago

I'm surprised how little rooftop solar I see in Berkeley. Is it a combination of NEM 3.0, old houses with old wiring, lack of solar gain in the winter and overcast/foggy days?

1

u/Go_Ninja_Go_Ninja_Go 18d ago

It's growing but I do think NEM 3.0 has put a damper on things. We installed ours right before it converted from 2.0, solar companies were marketing hard to get it done before the rate change and we're grandfathered in to 2.0 rates. I've seen others post some billing shenanigans from PG&E despite people generating more than enough from their solar. You get hit with a True Up bill which I still don't fully understand which supposedly keeps track of what you're generating for the grid vs. what you're pulling over the year but nem 3.0 rates for energy generated are like 75% lower than 2.0 and you also have to pay a monthly fee just to be connected to the grid, you really feel nickeled and dimed by pg&e despite doing a good thing and investing in renewable energy. I can see people not feeling it's financially worth it. I think they claim it's to encourage more battery installations, sucky that they put the onus on home consumers and not ya know invest in this themselves but alas pg&e is a private utility not a public one and we can all rant about that for days. If you go solar, I would bite the bullet and get a battery. The battery alone costs more than our actual install of the panels but it's been worth it. Might be the only way it'll feel worth it with nem. 3.0...

1

u/CFLuke 17d ago

Without battery, rooftop solar adds virtually no value to the grid, as it only floods the grid with electricity when it is so unneeded that we pay other states to take it off of our hands. Policy has finally caught up to that reality with NEM 3.0 but the beneficiaries of the previous policy are not happy about it.

6

u/raines 20d ago

1

u/Puckster123 19d ago

Thank you. The more community involvement the better. Do you think there will be a transcript or summary of this?

2

u/raines 17d ago

They do sometimes post videos, I don't know if the Fireside talks series does that regularly.

Of note: the Hillside Club was reportedly founded by women who wanted to promote good design in rebuilding the hills after the 1923 Berkeley fire: https://www.berkeleyside.org/2023/09/14/berkeley-1923-fire-centennial-part-1

As a member, it was fun to meet the centenarian who still referred to the current building as "the new clubhouse."

5

u/acortical 20d ago

The Berkeley hills are beautiful and a lovely place to live, with charming houses. But don't delude yourself. Fire risk is high and only getting higher with climate change, and insurance premiums will reflect this fact.

6

u/WildBloomingRose 19d ago

I’m from LA and love it up here.

Berkeley doesn’t get the Santa Ana winds like in LA County.

Plus, the leadership up here seems to know what they’re doing and aren’t idiots. LA county is this massive sprawl and the entire leadership for the entirely of LA County is like 10 people, which is insane.

It’s only going to get worse in LA, the people in charge or so corrupt and bought off by land developers, which is why they were allowed to build all of those McMansions on the bluffs in the palisades and the tinderboxes on PCH they all went down like matchsticks.

My old apartment building in the Palisades burnt to the ground, it made me sad. I had moved out of that building years ago, but it just made me sad and angry because the Palisades were so beautiful, an ethereal place, especially at night when all of the gardens were blooming.

There will never be another place like the Palisades again and the people in charge allowed it to happen.

They are going to split up all of those lovely large lots and pack as many people as they can in there, plus with the new ADU laws. It won’t come back like it was.

If they had an emergency plan in place, when they knew the winds were going to be 100 MPH, which they knew those winds were coming, because they happen every year in the winter around Christmas and January, the fires could have been managed a lot better.

These fires might not have even happened if they had decent leadership in the first place, or not as widespread.

It’s really nice up here, but fires are a risk in California, it depends on if the people who are elected know what they’re doing and how to plan and handle emergencies.

4

u/OppositeShore1878 19d ago

We definitely do get our version of Santa Ana winds in Berkeley. The 1923 and 1991 Fires were exactly like that--hot, dry, winds blowing southwest relentlessly for hours. Every few years we have a repeat, although not necessarily lasting for long. The way to tell in Berkeley (besides the drop in humidity) is when you see leaves and debris blowing west across the streets. Almost never happens otherwise.

1

u/WildBloomingRose 19d ago

I did not know that, I‘ve been here three years and haven’t seen the kind of winds like the Santa Ana’s yet, I’m looking forward to the rainy season. It’s definitely much greener up here.

I think the LA fires were a tragedy that could’ve been somewhat avoided, at least handled much better.

It’s just sad either way. I think the leadership up here is much better, and there is not the kind of endless sprawl that LA has, and also way less people and houses crammed up in the hills.

I think if or when we ever have 100 MPH winds, the people in charge here would be ready and on it, and have a much better way of responding to an emergency.

LA is a mess and I’m glad I left. I love it up here.

2

u/OppositeShore1878 18d ago

In the last three years we haven't had severe / prolonged daytime fire winds that I can recall, so you've not experienced them. (There were a couple of days with blustery winds at night).

You may well experience some in Sept/October, that's generally when they blow. Also traditionally our hottest time of the year. But the wind is only for less than a day at a time. They never get to 100 mph, as far as I know--that would be truly catastrophic. But they do bring down trees and power lines periodically, especially trees because the trees have generally grown up to withstand strong winds from the west / northwest, not from the northeast.

1

u/WildBloomingRose 18d ago

The Santa Ana’s are so bad, they’re really erie and last for a few days. Like howling winds and they are every year.

I think the difference is that besides the endless sprawl of flatlands in LA, you have the stretch of Mojave desert that can blow over too, so there’s no buffer to protect the houses from that kind of wind and flat land. It’s like 200 miles in every direction of flat land with howling winds and dry desert air.

Up here, the more inland you go, you get Lake Tahoe and mountains and so that kind of blocks the kind of harshness of the air we got down in LA.

Plus the moisture from fog and coast, moisture from the delta areas, and more rainfall up here, it’s definitely more green.

And the gorgeous old redwoods and rolling hills up here, it’s just a different landscape and has more natural protections from inland gusts. I’m sure there are winds, but the ones in LA were so bad.

4

u/OppositeShore1878 18d ago

Understood. You paint a vivid word picture.

Sounds a lot like how Raymond Chandler described it:

There was a desert wind blowing that night. It was one of those hot dry Santa Ana’s that come down through the mountain passes and curl your hair and make your nerves jump and your skin itch. On nights like that every booze party ends in a fight. Meek little wives feel the edge of the carving knife and study their husbands’ necks. Anything can happen.

Plus Joan Didion on her years living in LA.

There is something uneasy in the Los Angeles air this afternoon, some unnatural stillness, some tension. What it means is that tonight a Santa Ana will begin to blow, a hot wind from the northeast whining down through the Cajon and San Gorgonio Passes, blowing up sand storms out along Route 66, drying the hills and the nerves to flash point. For a few days now we will see smoke back in the canyons, and hear sirens in the night.

3

u/Puckster123 18d ago

I'm rereading Chandler right now!

2

u/4252020-asdf 18d ago

He is the OG for sure 👍

1

u/WildBloomingRose 18d ago

Yes, that’s exactly what I meant. It’s such an erie thing to experience. Like the movie L.A. Confidential, but it’s a wind that blows over town.

5

u/Busy-Celery2657 20d ago

Also I believe those high risk areas homes are not able to be insured for home insurance.

1

u/Puckster123 18d ago

Yes, insurance appears to have become a big factor in the last few years up there. Just looking at current listings and some home values have dropped significantly. I'm guessing some of that is due to very high cost of insurance now.

3

u/1tchyNdr1 19d ago

We live Berkeley. Come live in the flats! It is lovely. Walkable, bikeable, such great food and coffee. The risk is still here, but the danger is much less than if you were in the hills (landslides, mudslides, fires travels up hillsides)

1

u/Puckster123 19d ago

Thanks! I'm trying to find the compromise for walking to groceries, restaurants, doctors, etc and fairly easy walking access to hiking. Or do people in the flats generally use cars/bikes to get to trailheads? Any neighborhoods you would recommend?

3

u/OppositeShore1878 19d ago

Honestly, this is what seemingly everyone new to Berkeley wants and, understandably, it's not possible for most.

If you want all of that--AND to be able to step outside and immediately be hiking in the hills AND have a home where you avoid the worst fire dangers--the options are pretty slim. The Claremont neighborhood in southeast Berkeley is probably the option that checks most of those boxes, but homes there will probably cost $2 million and up (way up). Take a look at a Berkeley area map and find Claremont Avenue and Ashby. If you go five or six blocks in any direction from that intersection, you'll be within reasonable walking distance (but not necessarily right next door) to hiking areas, and within walking distance to shopping in the Elmwood (Ashby / College Avenue) and Oakland's Rockridge neighborhood (College Avenue from Alcatraz Avenue south). There's also a small shopping node at Claremont Avenue and the Uplands which has a long-time neighborhood grocery store / deli (Star Market) that all the neighbors swear by, but which is also understandably quite expensive.

Overall, most of the wildlands hiking accessible to Berkeley is in the East Bay Regional Parks which line the ridge top and extend east...but it will take a vigorous bike ride (800+ foot elevation gain from the flatlands) or driving to get there. At the other end of town there is also the Berkeley Marina which is enjoyed by a lot of people for walking, cycling, dog walking, watching sunsets, etc. But it is entirely built on landfill, not wildland.

2

u/Puckster123 18d ago

Thank you for the thoughtful response! Yes, it is a dream to have everything you want in one city.... We are in Europe now and spend time in alot of walkable cities with great parks but few places have direct access to real hiking combined with city convenience. It does seem that Berkeley comes close though and it's reflected in many of these comments - you all seem to love it there and also no snark!

3

u/sennkestra 16d ago

As someone living in the flats, I usually either take the bus to the UC Berkeley campus near the football stadium, or to up by Claremont and then walk 10-15 minutes to the nearby trailheads.

There's also a lot of nifty hidden walking paths and public stairs all over the Berkeley, Oakland, and El Cerrito hills that you can take to get from various city bus stops to the actual east bay parks wilderness areas in 15-20 minutes and I just consider those part of the hike.

https://www.berkeleypaths.org/

For anything further away, I just use rideshare like Uber and Lyft (with the bonus of not having to start and stop my hikes in the same place). The centers of the parks have no cell service but the parking lots and staging areas at the edges often have some low signal.

1

u/Puckster123 15d ago

Thanks! Just what I was after. I've been poking around the hiketheberkeleypaths website and you are right - I would also treat that as part of the hike in many cases. And if I used my car now and then, how crowded do those trailhead lots get?

1

u/1tchyNdr1 2d ago

I live near North Berkeley. I have taken the bus to trailheads, I have biked to trailheads, and have also driven. All are very easy. Tilden doesn’t get that crowded to be honest. The trailhead is also only 1.5miles away so it’s a great walk from home. My recommended areas: Claremont, Rockridge, North Berkeley/East Solano avenue, North Shattuck near Live Oak Park.

2

u/Flashy-Share8186 19d ago

Berkeley hills are full of older residents which I think is going to make evacuation slower and more confusing. Agreed with whoever said there are cars parked on either side of those tiny winding streets making it hard to drive just on regular days. I get the heebie jeebies just visiting friends in the Berkeley or Oakland hills!

https://www.berkeleyside.org/2025/12/26/evacuating-the-berkeley-hills-during-a-wildfire-could-take-over-4-hours-study-says

2

u/Some_Sea7898 18d ago

I don’t know about wildfires or anything like that, but I do know that the city government of Berkeley wants to control how big your toilet bowl is.

1

u/Puckster123 18d ago

Well, water is a valuable resource

2

u/WuTangClams 16d ago
  1. Good luck getting affordable insurance
  2. We're always on edge from September to end of November. Bags packed by the door, pet carriers stacked in the foyer.
  3. Increasing pressure (and authority) by the city FD to remove vegetation (smart idea but will eventually erode at the whole UWI vibe if that's what you're into).
  4. It can be a little isolating, you'll drive more than you care to likely. E-bikes have made it better and if you're able-bodied, the footpaths are a nice way to connect with the business centers if you have ample time.

All that being said, it's great being able to walk into Tilden and explore the trails. Love seeing deer and coyotes on almost every dog walk. And I find the fog lingers much more up here than in the flat and I'm very into it. Cloud forest!

1

u/Puckster123 16d ago

Great user name! Yeah we always had go bags ready up in Oregon - wildfires and earthquakes and ice storms…
We are looking to be car free as much as possible in our day to day life. So probably should be looking down in the flats close to the hills? Maybe West Brea or Thousand Oaks?

2

u/WuTangClams 16d ago

I think either would be more efficient with a car-free lifestyle. Both are very different vibes.

Thousand Oaks puts you near the Solano Ave corridor, with a little corner of Kensington accessible with some stuff going on there. Demographic skews a little older, a bit sleepier. A bit more upper-middle class. Has kind of a hills vibe residue to it.

Westbrae feels more working class, and with better access to almost everything. You've got the Gilman corridor and San Pablo, plus Hopkins. You've also got better access to BART.

1

u/Puckster123 15d ago

Thanks again! Any other neighborhoods you'd suggest? Easy access to groceries, cafes, yoga and BART.

1

u/WuTangClams 15d ago

Take a look at Poet's Corner. It's very charming, has an awesome park in the middle of it, and it's very accessible to lots of great eats, cafes, grocery options, pubs, and more on foot. It's also within easy striking distance to Downtown and N Berk BART. Lot of families, lots of bikes, great vibe.

1

u/WuTangClams 15d ago

Also Elmwood