Prescott advances hillside development caps and 2024 wildfire code toward May adoption votes
PRESCOTT, ARIZONA — April 21, 2026

Prescott advances hillside development caps and 2024 wildfire code toward May adoption votes

City Council study session focused on expanding hillside development standards to single-site development and adopting 2024 Wildland Urban Interface Code citywide to address community concerns about hillside scarring and reduce wildfire insurance non-renewals.

Prescott Council Moves Forward on Hillside Protection and Comprehensive 2024 Wildfire Code to Address Community Scarring and Insurance Crisis

Prescott's City Council held a special study session on April 21, 2026, to examine two landmark initiatives designed to curb hillside destruction, reduce wildfire risk, and stem a wave of insurance non-renewals that has left residents scrambling for coverage. The council heard extensive presentations from Planning Manager Alex Braramlet on expanding hillside development standards to single-site projects, and from Wildfire Risk Manager Conrad Jackson and Fire Marshal Anthony Valdez on adopting the 2024 International Wildland Urban Interface Code citywide. Both measures will return to Council for final adoption votes following Planning & Zoning Commission review, likely in May 2026.

The meeting underscored deep community frustration with mass grading, native vegetation stripping, and the visual scarring of Prescott's iconic ridgelines—complaints that councilmembers described as arriving not just at public meetings but via email, phone, and chance encounters at local businesses. The council also confronted the harsh insurance market reality: only about 30 companies still insure properties in Arizona's Wildland Urban Interface areas, and three Prescott homeowners lost coverage last year due to open eaves alone.

Hillside Development Standards: Closing the Single-Site Loophole

Braramlet presented a proposal to expand the city's existing hillside development standards—currently applicable only to subdivisions and planned area developments—to also cover single-site development on parcels exceeding 2 acres. The expansion aims to close a regulatory gap that has allowed large single-parcel projects, particularly multifamily and commercial developments, to proceed with minimal slope protection.

The existing code enforces maximum disturbable-area percentages keyed to slope categories: 30% for slopes of 20–30%, 15% for slopes of 30–40%, and 10% for slopes exceeding 40%. Single-site projects over 2 acres would now be subject to the same thresholds, with minimum lot-area requirements determined by the slope category that dominates the parcel.

Braramlet walked through three hypothetical 21-acre scenarios to illustrate application. In a standard subdivision with single-family zoning, the code would limit individual lot sizes based on slope dominance—a lot with 0.9 acres in the steepest category (>40%) would require a 3-acre minimum. In a planned area development, the code incentivizes density transfer via bonuses: developers who cluster units on flatter terrain and preserve steeper slopes gain additional dwelling units. A hypothetical 21-acre PAD could rise from 46 base units to 56 units through that mechanism.

The 2-Acre Threshold Controversy

Councilman Jim Garing challenged the 2-acre floor, arguing that it creates perverse incentives. He noted that homes on stilts along Rosa Road exceed 2 acres and sit on slopes steeper than 30%, yet multifamily development on identical slopes would be restricted if the parcel is larger than 2 acres.

"I don't see uniformity in this [approach]." — Councilman Jim Garing

Braramlet explained that staff imposed the 2-acre threshold to avoid rendering small slope-heavy single-family lots unbuildable. Arizona Prop 207, noted City Attorney Young, exposes the city to "partial takings" liability if zoning amendments reduce property values. The combination of steep slopes and restrictive regulations on small commercial parcels could render them unbuildable, triggering compensation claims.

Ted Gambogi pressed the same point: if the goal is to preserve Prescott's visual character, why exempt single-family homes from standards that apply to multifamily? Braramlet suggested the code already constrains single-family lot coverage through standard zoning requirements—effectively achieving similar protection.

Mayor Cathey Rusing asked staff to analyze GIS data on remaining undeveloped single-family lots and explore alternatives that allow building while protecting slopes. No final decision on the threshold was made.

Prescott Lakes and HOA Approval Gaps

Councilman Jim Garing referenced the Prescott Lakes development, where the HOA was not consulted during administrative approvals despite a contractual requirement. The result was massive grading and dirt displacement onto adjacent hillsides. City Attorney Young noted that the city cannot enforce Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions (private contracts between property owners) and that the Prescott Lakes issue predates the current discussion (the project was approved in 2005).

Staff did clarify that a recently updated administrative approval resolution now requires applicants to confirm in writing that they have obtained all CCNR and HOA approvals before final plat recordation. However, Councilwoman Lois Fruhwirth expressed concern that the city is delegating verification to the developer rather than independently confirming HOA sign-off. Young reiterated that city involvement in private contracts creates legal exposure.

Vegetation Management and the Comprehensive Land Development Code Refresh

Councilwoman Lois Fruhwirth highlighted a gap that Braramlet had surfaced: the hillside ordinance addresses only grading and disturbance, not vegetation removal, mass tree cutting, or native plant preservation. Those controls lie in the Land Development Code—which has not been comprehensively revised in over 20 years.

Staff announced plans to hire a consultant in the coming fiscal year to undertake a 20-year overdue overhaul of the code. That effort will address vegetation management, mass grading rules, tree removal permits, and native vegetation preservation. Lois Fruhwirth emphasized that hillside standard expansion alone will not satisfy community concerns about denudation and erosion; the broader code refresh is essential.

2024 Wildland Urban Interface Code: Citywide Adoption, Risk-Based Tiers, and Practical Flexibility

The Insurance Crisis and Why Now

Conrad Jackson, the city's Wildfire Risk Manager (hired 2.5 years ago), framed the urgency with stark data. Arizona's insurance market for wildfire-risk areas has shrunk to approximately 30 companies. Three Prescott homeowners lost coverage last year due to open eaves—a structural feature that creates ember vulnerabilities. Insurance firms are non-renewing policies based on historical fire activity, fuels, topography, and community preparedness. Jackson showed maps of fires over the past 30 years that local agencies successfully suppressed, but also the much larger fires they did not catch—the latter shaping how insurers assess Prescott's risk profile.

Open eaves, which allow radiant heat and embers to accumulate in cupping spaces and migrate into attics, are a primary trigger. Class A roofs (standard asphalt shingles, not exotic materials), enclosed eaves with attic screens, and a 5-foot defensible space with no combustibles are the "three pillars" of home hardening. Testing by the Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety showed that homes with these features improved survivability from 36% to 50% even under ember bombardment.

Jackson also distinguished between wildfires (in forests and grasslands) and urban conflagrations (once fire spreads to neighborhoods and consumes three or more homes). In the latter scenario, houses become the fuel, not vegetation. He cited Lahaina as an example: one house survived because it had undergone prefire mitigation, while the community around it became ash—a pyrrhic victory.

Current Code and Why It Falls Short

Fire Marshal Anthony Valdez, who joined the department in late 2024, found the city enforcing the 2012 IWUI Code—14 years obsolete. The current code applies only to the 80% of the city originally designated as Wildland Urban Interface in 2002, leaving a patchwork. Valdez could find no scientific or data-driven basis for the 80% boundary; it appears arbitrary. Moreover, the current code is inconsistently enforced and relies on outdated vegetation-management language that even Conrad Jackson found difficult to explain to homeowners.

Valdez proposed to adopt the 2024 IWUI Code and simultaneously redesignate the entire city as WUI. This approach better reflects reality: grassland, brush, and timber all burn, and insurance companies treat Prescott's entire footprint as fire-adapted.

Three-Tier Risk Mapping and Reduced Compliance Burden

Rather than apply the most restrictive ignition-resistant construction standard (IR1) everywhere, the 2024 code allows for three tiers: extreme, high, and moderate risk. Valdez is procuring risk-mapping software to overlay fuels, topography, historical fire patterns, and structural hardening to create a community-specific risk map. This allows tailored building requirements: extreme-risk zones demand IR1 (most stringent); high-risk zones may permit IR2; moderate-risk zones may allow IR3 (least restrictive).

Critically, Valdez proposed exempting existing structures that predate IWUI adoption from code compliance for minor alterations and additions. A homeowner replacing a rotting 1980 deck or patching sun-damaged siding would not need to retrofit the entire house to IWUI standards. This prevents the illogical outcome of a new deck meeting strict fire ratings while the rest of the structure does not.

However, a 25% threshold mechanism applies: if an alteration or addition affects 25% or less of wall surface or roof area, the exempt provision holds. Exceeding 25% triggers full compliance.

Public Outreach and Unanimous Fire Board Support

Valdez and Jackson conducted extensive public engagement from December 2025 through March 2026. They hosted two formal public meetings (February 12 and February 20), a farmers market outreach day, radio interviews, contractor and designer focus groups, and presentations to the Prescott Area Association of Realtors and Yavapai County Building Officials. A YCCA mailer reached over 700 residents.

Across all venues, they received zero negative public comments. The Fire Board of Appeals supported the initiatives unanimously. A QR survey and comment cards solicited input; the only actionable complaint came from a contractor asking the city to eliminate the existing requirement for hose bibs on all four sides of residential structures. Valdez evaluated that feedback and agreed to remove it, determining it unnecessary for fire safety.

Key Amendments and Practical Adjustments

Vegetation Management: The 2024 code replaces confusing local amendments with science-backed standards, updated in light of research from recent major wildfires in California and elsewhere. Jackson illustrated the problem with a photo of a property owner who cut a 5-foot "moat" around their perimeter and called it firewise; Jackson explained the ineffectiveness of that approach. A later photo showed a homeowner who strategically topped trees (leaving shrubs for wildlife), kept grounds clear, and created a defensible space. The message: vegetation management is nuanced and requires guidance, not just rules.

Base Standard Construction: Even under IR3 (least restrictive), all buildings must minimally have Class A roofs, enclosed eaves, and attic screens. This ensures non-negotiable baseline ember resistance.

Automatic Sprinklers: A question arose about whether all new homes in subdivisions should be sprinklered, regardless of size. Valdez explained that Arizona Revised Statute (2009) prohibits municipalities from enforcing residential fire sprinklers unless they adopted an ordinance before December 31, 2009. Prescott did; thus, the city may continue enforcing sprinklers under the original ordinance scope. However, any amendment to that ordinance could render it void and trigger the state prohibition. Consequently, the 2024 code amendments defer to the city's existing fire code thresholds (5,000 square feet and other criteria), rather than mandating sprinklers on all homes. Valdez noted that insurance companies prefer sprinklers and offer discounts, but the state statute constrains local latitude.

Historic Structures: The 2024 code includes an exemption for historic structures (those in historic districts or on historic registers), addressing Council concern about preservation requirements conflicting with architectural integrity.

Roof and Siding Replacement Costs: Lois Fruhwirth asked about the cost impact of requiring Class A roofs when hail or weather damage forces replacement. A contractor cited $90,000 for a Class A upgrade on a typical roof. Valdez contacted three local roofing contractors and found more modest figures: Class A material costs approximately $0.50–$0.80 per square foot above standard asphalt, translating to roughly $500–$1,600 for a typical re-roof on a 2,500-square-foot home. Valdez noted that most roofing contractors already use Class A asphalt shingles as a base standard and warranty requirement. The high-end quote ($23,000) involved premium substrates and underlayment chosen by the homeowner, not mandated by code.

Key Speeches

"I'm your incentivized guy. I struggle to live in a community where everybody's being nasty to each other." — Conrad Jackson, Wildfire Risk Manager, on balancing mitigation with community acceptance

"If you're asking my opinion, I think all homes should be sprinklered, but I don't want to go into that debate at this point." — Fire Marshal Anthony Valdez, acknowledging Arizona state law constraints on residential sprinkler ordinances

"We live in a tinder box. We've got a 30-year drought and we've seen what's happened to other communities that haven't been prepared. So we need to keep Prescott strong." — Mayor Cathey Rusing, closing remarks

Timeline

Hillside Development Standards:

2024 Wildland Urban Interface Code:

Opposition

Support

Project Details

Hillside Development Standards Expansion

2024 Wildland Urban Interface Code Adoption

Vote Breakdown

Outcome & Next Steps

Hillside Standards: Staff will conduct GIS analysis of remaining undeveloped single-family lots and explore alternatives that allow building while protecting slopes. The 2-acre threshold will be reconsidered. Item will advance to Planning & Zoning Commission for review and recommendation, then return to Council for final vote. Once approved, ordinance takes effect 30 days after Council adoption. Applies to any applications submitted after the effective date.

2024 IWUI Code: Amendment drafts are completed and under stakeholder review. Risk-mapping software procurement is in final stages (two vendors remain under consideration); Valdez promised to present the selected product at May Council voting session. Fire Board of Appeals endorsed unanimously with no requested changes. Public outreach (Feb–Mar 2026) yielded zero negative comments and one actionable contractor recommendation (hose-bib removal), which was accepted. Expected Council vote May 2026. Upon adoption, code takes effect 30 days later.

Both measures are designed to take effect prospectively, applying only to applications/projects submitted after the effective date.

Controversies & Context

Hillside Scarring and Community Frustration

Prescott residents have voiced mounting concerns about mass grading, native vegetation removal, rock-wall proliferation, and visual scarring of hillsides and ridgelines. Lois Fruhwirth reported receiving numerous complaints from citizens, particularly about the appearance of "nothing but rocks and nothing but dirt." Jim Garing noted emails, phone calls, texts, and chance encounters at Fries (local coffee shop) voicing these concerns.

The Prescott Lakes development emerged as a flashpoint. In 2005, the project received administrative approvals that enabled massive grading and dirt displacement onto adjacent hillsides. The HOA was not consulted despite a contractual requirement. The resulting visual impact prompted Jim Garing to state: "This could have been the scenario on the slag pile that they got going on there... Unfortunately, for some reason, the HOA wasn't consulted, which is required in their development agreement."

Single-Site Development Loophole

Under the current hillside ordinance, which applies only to subdivisions and planned area developments, single-site development has been treated as exempt. This created an unintended incentive: large single-parcel projects (multifamily, commercial) could proceed with minimal slope protection, while subdivisions faced strict disturbable-area limits. A variance or appeal process allowed some projects to be administratively approved without City Council review, reducing transparency.

Jim Garing pointed out: "Originally under the current hillside ordinance... it allowed it to be administratively approved. And we really didn't have any idea what we were approving. We didn't know that had been waved administratively."

Arizona Prop 207 and Takings Liability

City Attorney Young introduced a significant legal constraint. Arizona Prop 207 (approved 2006) holds municipalities liable for any reduction in property value caused by regulation changes. If hillside standards are applied to small commercial parcels and render them unbuildable, the city faces potential partial-takings claims. This tension between environmental protection and property-rights exposure shaped the staff's decision to impose a 2-acre threshold—balancing slope preservation against liability exposure.

Historic Fire Suppression vs. Insurance Market Perception

Conrad Jackson highlighted a paradox: local fire agencies have successfully suppressed the vast majority of fires over 30 years, as shown on risk maps. Yet insurance companies base non-renewals on the fires that weren't caught—the large, visible, historical blazes. This creates a perception gap: Prescott has strong suppression capacity, but insurers view it through the lens of occasional major incidents (e.g., Viewpoint Fire, 5,000 acres in two hours). Only about 30 companies still insure WUI areas in Arizona; the market has dramatically contracted.

HOA Authority and Private Contracts

The Prescott Lakes dispute revealed tensions between city authority and private contractual obligations. The development agreement required HOA approval, but the city cannot enforce Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions because they are private contracts between property owners. City Attorney Young was adamant: "If we are enforcing CCNRs, it becomes problematic... Jumping into contracts between third parties isn't really the role of city government or necessarily any government."

The city updated its administrative approval resolution to require applicants to certify (in writing) that they have obtained HOA approvals before final plat recordation. Lois Fruhwirth wanted the city to independently verify, not rely on the developer's affirmation. The tension remains unresolved.

Vegetation Management vs. Hillside Ordinance

Councilwoman Lois Fruhwirth raised an important revelation: the public concern about denuturation and vegetation removal is not addressed by the hillside ordinance. Those controls reside in the Land Development Code, which has not been comprehensively revised in over 20 years. The hillside code addresses only grading and disturbance limits; it does not regulate tree removal, native plant preservation, or mass vegetation management.

This realization prompted staff to fast-track a Land Development Code comprehensive review, to begin in the next few months via consultant procurement. Lois Fruhwirth emphasized: "This only solves a portion of the public concerns about mass grading and denuting of our hillsides and I think the work that we do over the next year will help some of those other public concerns."

State Preemption on Residential Fire Sprinklers

Arizona Revised Statute (2009) prohibits municipalities and counties from enforcing residential fire sprinkler installation unless they had an ordinance in place before December 31, 2009. Critically, any amendment to that ordinance after the deadline voids the ordinance, triggering state preemption.

Prescott adopted a sprinkler ordinance before the deadline, so it may continue enforcing existing thresholds. However, if Council wishes to expand sprinkler requirements (e.g., mandate all new homes), it cannot do so without risking the entire ordinance's validity. This state constraint is binding and frustrating to Valdez and others who view universal sprinklers as optimal.

Insurance Non-Renewals and Fixed-Income Vulnerability

Three Prescott homeowners lost insurance in the past year due to open eaves. With only ~30 companies serving WUI areas, renewals are scarce and expensive. Lois Fruhwirth shared a personal anecdote: she evacuated in 2002 for the Indian Fire and was harrowed by flames cresting the ridge at her house. She expressed frustration that even homeowners who comply with all IWUI standards (Class A roofs, enclosed eaves, concrete siding, hardscaping) sometimes lose coverage anyway because insurers spread risk across zip codes and entire regions affected by major fires in California.

The council hopes that adoption of the 2024 code will signal community commitment to mitigation, potentially improving insurer confidence and reducing non-renewals or rate hikes. However, Valdez acknowledged that he has no hard data linking code adoption to measurable insurance outcomes; the mechanism remains empirical rather than guaranteed.

Duration

Other Notable Items

Fire Code Access/Egress Amendment (Already Approved): In November 2025, Council approved an amendment requiring two means of egress and two means of access in all new developments, effective January 1, 2026. This was in response to single-entry/exit neighborhoods like Cathedral Pines, where evacuations during the 2002 Indian Fire were hampered by insufficient routes. Chief Valdez confirmed the amendment is now in effect and applies to all applications after Jan. 1, 2026.

Land Development Code Comprehensive Overhaul (Timeline Announced): Staff announced that the city will hire a consultant in the next fiscal year to undertake the first comprehensive revision of the Land Development Code in over 20 years. The effort will address vegetation management, mass grading rules, tree removal permitting, and native vegetation preservation. Work expected to begin in coming months, with completion spanning several years.