However, the planners and residents working to rebuild Los Angeles are not starting from a blank slate. Roads, infrastructure and existing land all shape how the city is regenerated. Some residents may want to rebuild immediately on the same lot, while some may want to sell their land to create a buffer zone.
On January 13, Mayor Bass issued an executive order expediting “like-for-like” redevelopment permits and exempting them from reviews that slow down the redevelopment process. Governor Newsom has also relaxed permitting rules under the California Environmental Quality Act to expedite restoration.
Exactly how Los Angeles chooses to rebuild is “a matter of social values,” Moritz says. “This is no longer a scientific question. Shouldn’t we as a society be able to weigh in on where and how people build or rebuild, so it’s safer and less impactful from a public budget perspective in the future? Because many of these events will be repeated.”
California wildfires have gotten bigger and more destructive in recent years. About 7.08 million acres burned in California between 2009 and 2018 — more than double the area burned between 1979 and 1988. The number of fires in urban areas has also increased. In the 10 years between 1979 and 1988, about 22,000 acres of land burned were located in the so-called wildland/urban interface—areas where housing is close to fire-prone nature. It increased to 32,000 hectares from 2009 to 2018.
One result of all this is that California officials have good maps of high-risk areas. Many of the areas affected by the Palisades and Eaton fires were classified as very high fire danger areas, meaning new developments in these areas must take measures to minimize the risk of fire spreading from wild vegetation to houses, including planting fire-resistant vegetation. And keep other trees and shrubs short and away from houses.
But the demand for housing in cities like Los Angeles is so high that developers often build in areas with a very high fire risk. After a wildfire, developers tend to slow down construction in high-risk areas for a while, but after a few years, said Nicholas Irwin, who studies real estate economics at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. years return to the speed of previous development. .
Irwin says cities and local officials should think about ways to prevent development in high-risk areas. One way is to raise development taxes in fire-prone areas, but another is to encourage developers to supplement — building more homes and apartments in underutilized urban areas.
We need more dense development, especially in places like Los Angeles. The property market there is out of control and will get worse. “We need to think about ways to rebuild that allow more units to be built to help affordably, but also ways that are more resilient to the risks of future wildfires.”
Burying power lines may also help defend homes against fire hazards. The fire that destroyed Paradise was sparked by a faulty power line and at least seven other devastating fires in California. Burying power lines isn’t cheap, and those costs are passed on to utility customers, many of whom don’t live in fire-prone areas.
“It’s the little things that make a difference in the long run,” says Irwin. Burying power lines, encouraging denser development, and creating more defensible communities. But these long-term investments require changing the way people think about living in fire-risk areas and accepting that more resilient communities come at a cost. “I just don’t know if we’re going to learn anything,” Irwin says.
