Project Recovery: Rebuilding Los Angeles after the January 2025 Wildfires

Urban Land Institute Los Angeles

The Urban Land Institute is a global, member-driven organization comprising more than 48,000 land use and real estate professionals dedicated to advancing the Institute’s mission of shaping the future of the built environment for transformative impact in communities worldwide.

ULI Los Angeles, a district council of the Urban Land Institute, carries forth that mission as the preeminent regional real estate organization providing inclusive and trusted leadership influencing public policy and practice.

About

© 2025 by the Urban Land Institute2001 L Street, NW | Suite 200 | Washington, DC 20036-4948

All rights reserved. Reproduction or use of the whole or any part of the contents without written permission of the copyright holder is prohibited.

University of Southern California Lusk Center for Real Estate

The USC Lusk Center for Real Estate seeks to advance real estate knowledge, inform business practice, and address timely issues that affect the real estate industry, the urban economy, and public policy.

The Lusk Center produces relevant real estate research, supports educational programs, and convenes professional forums that bring together academics, students, business executives, and community leaders.

University of California Los Angeles Ziman Center for Real Estate

The UCLA Ziman Center for Real Estate advances thought leadership in the field of real estate by generating world-class research, cutting-edge academic programs for the next generation of leaders in real estate, industry best practices, and social entrepreneurship initiatives to improve our communities.

The Ziman Center network is an ever-widening circle of thought leaders, uniquely positioning it to facilitate meaningful connectivity between industry, academia, and policy. The strength of the Ziman Center lies in its relationships with partners on and off campus.

The content of this publication is provided for personal educational purposes only by the Urban Land Institute in furtherance of its tax-exempt mission, but it should not be relied upon as business or legal advice. The content is provided on an “AS IS” basis without any warranties, express or implied. Additionally, the listing of contacts throughout this publication is for informational purposes only and does not constitute or imply any endorsement of any company or individual by ULI.

Project Recovery is a living document that will be updated regularly to address new developments and issues and share the most current information about this fast-changing process.

Version 1.0 | March 16, 2025

Organizing and Governance Committee

Lew Horne (Chair), CBREClare De Briere, Catalyst Property CompanyLew Feldman, Heritage CRETech VenturesStuart Gabriel, UCLA Ziman CenterRichard Green, USC Lusk CenterGadi Kaufmann, RCLCOTim Kawahara, UCLA Ziman CenterKellie Kao Miles, Urban Land Institute Los AngelesDavid Waite, Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLPKev Zoryan, Arselle Investments

Project Team

Team Leaders

Preston Brooks, Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLPMarty Caverly, LoweDarcy L. Coleman, Alagem Capital GroupClare De Briere, Catalyst Property CompanyAdrian Foley, BrookfieldStuart Gabriel, UCLA Ziman CenterRichard Green, USC Lusk CenterRob Jernigan, ClayCoGadi Kaufmann, RCLCOJacob Lipa, Lipa Consulting GroupTaylor Mammen, RCLCOSteve Matt, Matt ConstructionMitch Menzer, Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLP

Project Staff

Mary Beth Corrigan, Urban Land InstituteKellie Kao Miles, Urban Land Institute Los AngelesKelsey Penn, CBREKelsey Steffen, Urban Land InstituteGayle Berens, Urban Land InstituteLibby Riker, Urban Land InstituteKelly Annis, Urban Land InstituteJules Radcliff, Radcliff Fairman LLPCarl Svensson, CBREJoss Tillard-Gates, Clark ConstructionDavid Waite, Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLPKev Zoryan, Arselle Investments

Contents

IntroductionKey Takeaways for Greater Los Angeles from the ULI Advisory Services ProgramHazardous Materials and Debris Management, Removal, and Disposal, and Process for Property Owners’ Safe ReturnImplementing a Building Permit Self-Certification ProgramLabor and Supply Chain ChallengesStrategies to Stabilize California’s Insurance Market and Rebuild Resilient CommunitiesVertical Rebuilding after the WildfiresFinancial Strategies for Rebuilding Infrastructure, Homes, and CommunitiesRebuilding Infrastructure for the Pacific Palisades and AltadenaAppendices A–J

Introduction

January 7, 2025, is a day Angelenos will not soon forget. Wildfires erupted in the Pacific Palisades and in Eaton Canyon in Los Angeles County. Coupled with ferocious Santa Ana winds and very dry weather conditions, the fires burned out of control, destroying approximately 16,000 structures totaling some 24 million square feet and 40,000 acres of land, resulting in 29 deaths. In the wake of this horrific event, Angelenos, whether neighbors or strangers, sprang into action.

The business and real estate communities also mobilized quickly. Within a week, the Urban Land Institute Los Angeles District Council members came together to see how they could help. A week later, they teamed up with the UCLA Ziman Center for Real Estate and the USC Lusk Center for Real Estate to create a response plan of action. They quickly assembled nine teams of experts to both identify roadblocks to recovery and propose realistic expedited solutions for each roadblock.

These volunteers immediately set to work, drawing in additional experts from all over the region, state, and country. Working with purpose and diligence, each group proposed a series of recommendations and ways in which they could be implemented. This collaboration reflects a shared commitment to restore what was lost and, where possible, to seize this moment as an opportunity to build back better.

The magnitude of this crisis requires novel solutions and mobilization of resources from a broad range of stakeholders in unprecedented ways. A key pillar of the rebuilding effort is the partnership between various community stakeholders, including the private and public sectors, nonprofits, community organizations, and more.

To that end, the teams produced this report covering eight aspects of the rebuilding effort, presenting recommendations that aim to foster local community and government collaboration and support that would result in building back better, faster, and cost effectively. Each report makes a series of actionable recommendations for the City and County of Los Angeles. Below is a summary of some of the most significant recommendations to be considered.

Key Takeaways for Greater Los Angeles from the ULI Advisory Services Program

1. Prioritize restoration of critical infrastructure

• Assess and restore water delivery systems, power grids, and emergency communications as top priorities.

• Implement temporary water and power solutions, such as mobile generators and water tanks, for areas awaiting complete restoration.

2. Develop and enforce emergency fire-safe rebuilding standards

• Implement defensible space regulations requiring fire-resistant landscaping, ember-resistant vents, and noncombustible roofing materials.

• Adopt fire-resilient building codes for rebuilding, including retrofitting undamaged structures to improve fire resistance.

• Explore partnerships with experts in the nonprofit and/or private sector to assist in the development of fire-resilient building codes.

3. Community Engagement and Equity

• Inclusive community engagement: Ensure that all residents, including displaced persons, renters, and marginalized groups, have representation in decision-making processes.

• Grassroots and social capital networks: Leverage existing community networks and digital communication platforms such as Neighborhood Liaisons and Nextdoor.

• Equity-centered approaches: Recovery efforts should address historic disinvestment and ensure equitable access to recovery resources.

Hazardous Materials and Debris Management, Removal, and Disposal, and Process for Property Owners’ Safe Return

1. Confirmation sampling

After debris removal, whether performed by the Army Corps of Engineers or private contractors, soil samples should be collected to confirm that hazardous materials have been fully removed from the affected sites. The samples should be submitted to an independent laboratory for analysis. If hazardous materials remain in the soil, additional soil should be removed from the site until the soil is established to be free of hazardous materials resulting from the fire.

2. Consistency in standards

Consultants and contractors, whether engaged by the Army Corps of Engineers or by private parties, should follow the same protocols for debris removal. For example, waivers of certain requirements of AQMD Rule 1403 relating to asbestos removal provided to Army Corps contractors should also be extended to privately engaged contractors.

3. Certificate of completion

Soil sampling results should be reviewed for each property to ensure they meet accepted standards. A certificate of completion should be issued by a state or local environmental agency and connected to the building permit file for each property as a permanent record.

Implementing a Building Permit Self-Certification Program

1. Building permit self-certificationDevelop a self-certification program for eligible projects, including single-family residences, accessory dwelling units, multifamily, mixed-use, and small commercial projects. Licensed architects, engineers, and design professionals would self-certify compliance with objective building code requirements and standards, including zoning, grading, fire, green building, Americans with Disabilities Act, structural, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing clearances, supported by a dedicated inspection unit.

2. Facilitate 30-day expedited departmental approvals and clearancesEliminate sequential departmental reviews by consolidating all reviews under a single project permit coordinator responsible for coordinating all departmental permit reviews, clearances, and signoffs to ensure permit issuance within 30 days of application submittal.

3. Implement digital and emerging artificial intelligence technologiesAdopt state-of-the-art digital technologies and artificial intelligence to create a single, uniform digital application for all self-certification permit submittals. These tools should support permit coordination, on-site permitting centers, mobile inspections, and inspection unit operations.

Labor and Supply Chain Challenges

1. Create onsite rebuilding logistics centers for each wildfire area capable of:

   • Processing 250 to 350 permits per month within 30 days of application

   • Managing peak concurrent construction of 1,000 to 2,000 residences per area and 30,000 to 40,000 workers, including parking, housing, services, deliveries, haul routes, staging, and work hours

   • Providing inspector offices and inspection scheduling services

   • Coordinating utility services and infrastructure with residential construction

2. Use existing infrastructure for construction logistical needsSecure and manage existing facilities, infrastructure, vacant lots, and parking facilities for temporary worker housing, construction parking, and material staging hubs.

3. Resolve the infrastructure scope as soon as possibleInfrastructure coordination is critical to residential rebuilding logistics and should not delay expeditious rebuilding of homes.

Strategies to Stabilize California’s Property Insurance Market and Rebuild Resilient Communities

1. Legislation for insurer underwriting models and consistent fire-hardening requirements

a. Mandate risk-based insurer underwriting modelsThe state must require insurers to factor home hardening, defensible space, and community-wide mitigation efforts into underwriting models. Premium discounts should be standardized and consistently applied. Insurers should disclose how mitigation efforts influence rates and reassess premiums during policy renewals based on verified upgrades.

b. Bridge the gap in fire-hardening building codesNew builds must comply with Chapter 7A fire-resistant standards, while existing buildings currently face no retrofit mandates. This gap increases wildfire risk and insurance instability. The state should enforce fire-hardening for existing buildings, strengthen defensible space regulations, and expand financial assistance programs to make retrofitting more accessible.

2. Expand insurance market competition and support the uninsured and underinsured

Establish a public and private reinsurance program to encourage insurers to re-enter high-risk areas. This program should include global reinsurers, tax incentives, premium subsidies, sliding-scale premiums for lower-income homeowners, and mandatory replacement cost disclosures. Compared to this approach, the FAIR Plan offers limited coverage, minimal mitigation incentives, and faces solvency challenges.

3. Forest management and wildfire mitigation

Expand forest management programs through sustained funding, staffing increases, regulatory streamlining, and broader Forest Resilience Bond implementation. Permanent reforms are needed, including CEQA reforms and public and private partnerships, to support long-term wildfire risk reduction and insurance market stability.