By Bruce Silverstein, Guest Columnist 

In the wake of the Palisades, Franklin, and Broad wildfires, the City of Malibu’s creation of the Rebuild Center was a step in the direction of facilitating the efficient, expeditious and economical rebuilding of residents’ homes lost to the wildfires. Now that the Rebuild Center has been operating for a while, it is time to consider modifications to improve upon Malibu’s provision of wildfire rebuild services. This is my attempt to identify changes I believe worthy of consideration — many of which have been discussed with, and some of which have been suggested to me, by others, including the rebuild ambassador (Abe Roy) and various residents seeking to rebuild their homes destroyed by the Palisades Fire.

To begin, as an organizational matter, the city should formally create a new and self-contained segment of the Community Development Department responsible for providing dedicated soup-to-nuts planning and building review and approval of wildfire rebuilds being pursued on the basis of like-for-like, plus of up to 10% (an “L4L+10% Rebuild”). These are the wildfire rebuilds that qualify for both (i) a blanket exclusion from the permitting requirements of the Coastal Act pursuant to the Governor’s Executive Orders, and (ii) plan-check planning approval pursuant to the MMC (and the terms of the LIP where the permitting requirements of the Coastal Act have not been entirely eliminated). This new segment of the Community Development Department designated to deal with L4L+10% Rebuilds can be denominated the “Wildfire Rebuild Unit.”

Subject only to narrow specified exceptions, (i) the staff of the Wildfire Rebuild Unit (both in-house and outside consultants) should work exclusively in the Rebuild Center and have no involvement with any development that does not qualify as an L4L+10% Rebuild, and (ii) the balance of the staff of the Community Development Department (other than the department’s Director) should work entirely outside of the Rebuild Center and have no involvement with the L4L+10% Rebuilds. With this division in place, (i) all projects that qualify as an L4L+10% Rebuild would be handled exclusively in the Rebuild Center by the staff of the Wildfire Rebuild Unit, and (ii) any project that does not qualify as a L4L+10% Rebuild would be pursued through the city’s normal processes, and outside the Rebuild Center — even if it may start out as a L4L+10% Rebuild. I have been advocating for this division of labor since the Rebuild Center was organized.  As I have explained in the past, it is imperative that the staff of the Rebuild Center need to be focused on finding ways to facilitate the efficient, expeditious and economical rebuilding of residents’ homes lost to the wildfires, while the balance of the staff of the Community Development Department needs to remain focused on pursuing Malibu’s vision and mission of constraining development to preserve Malibu’s fragile rural nature.  In my experience, it requires a rare intellect to pursue steadfastly and concurrently both of these facially contrary and conflicting objectives, and the best course is to task different staff to accomplish these conflicting tasks – all the while headed by the Director of the Community Development Department (the “Community Development Director”) who does possess that rare ability,

The Wildfire Rebuild Unit should be managed by a full-time employee designated as the Deputy Wildfire Rebuild Unit Building Official (the “Wildfire Rebuild Unit Deputy”), who should have an office in the Rebuild Center, and who should report directly to the Community Development Director.” The Wildfire Rebuild Unit Deputy should have authority to approve plan check and building permit applications for all L4L+10% Rebuilds, subject to some level of prescribed oversight by the Community Development Director, whose authority should include the ability to override the decisions of the Wildfire Rebuild Unit Deputy. In addition to the current staff of the Rebuild Center, the Wildfire Rebuild Unit also should include, among other things, (i) a Wildfire Rebuild Unit Plan-Check Manager, and (ii) an in-house Wildfire Rebuild Unit Geotechnical Engineer.

If it is not already the case, each L4L+10% Rebuild should be assigned to specific members of the Wildfire Rebuild Unit staff who will be responsible for handling all aspects of the L4L+10% Rebuild assigned to them that is within their area of expertise. Because L4L+10% Rebuilds in different areas of Malibu will present different challenges, consideration should be given to dividing up the work among members of the Wildfire Rebuild Unit staff by the area in which the L4L+10% Rebuilds are being pursued — i.e., on the beachfront, on a landslide area, on a stable hillside, on relatively flat property along the landside of PCH. It also would be helpful for the city to employ or contract for the services of “case managers,” who can be tasked with the assignment of following all L4L+10% Rebuilds from the time of initial submission to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, and whose responsibilities will include interfacing with the member(s) of the Wildfire Rebuild Unit staff working on the projects being followed by the case managers.

There needs to be a comprehensive checklist of items that staff of the Wildfire Rebuild Unit is required to consider and address in the first pass of a completed plan-check or building permit application — such that an applicant will not be met with successive requests or qualifications(other than those created by changes made by the applicant following a review that does not result in an approval). There also needs to be a measurable time period between submission of a completed plan-check or building permit application and approval or denial thereof, and any denial should be accompanied by a written explanation of all reasons for the denial.

Applicants for an L4L+10% Rebuild should be permitted to obtain plan-check planning approval for the structures on their property separate from and prior to the submission and approval of a landscaping plan, geotechnical studies, drainage plan, and/or erosion control plan. They also should be able to obtain a building permit (but not a certificate of occupancy) separate from and prior to landscaping, Dark Skies, and other matters that do not impact the plan and construction of the main residence and other structures that predated the wildfires. For properties on the beach, applicants for a L4L+10% Rebuild should be permitted to obtain a plan-check planning approval and a building permit (but not a certificate of occupancy) without accounting for whether the rebuild will utilize an OWTS or a sewer connection, so long as the addition of either will not alter the plan and can be accomplished after the rebuild is otherwise completed.

In the ordinary course of development applications in the city, an applicant is able to obtain planning approval before seeking to obtain a building permit. It is my understanding that these two stages of the permitting process have been combined for purposes of the approval of L4L+10% Rebuilds. There are pros and cons of both approaches, and I believe that applicants for L4L+10% Rebuilds should have the option of seeking to secure plan-check planning approval before or concurrently with seeking to secure a building permit.  I understand that option to be available with the consent of the building official, but I believe the option should be available upon the request of any applicant pursuing an L4L+10% Rebuild.

If there should be insufficient L4L+10% Rebuild work to occupy the full time and attention of the Wildfire Rebuild Unit staff, the Community Development Director may exercise her discretion to assign specific staff members, on a case-by-case basis, to assist with other matters within the Community Development Department that fall within their expertise, but with the understanding that any increase in the L4L+10% Rebuild workload of the Wildfire Rebuild Unit staff will cause such staff members to abandon such other work they may be assigned to address so that they are able to provide the time and attention needed to address all L4L+10% Rebuild work within the Wildfire Rebuild Unit.  In the event that Community Development Director should exercise her discretion to make a specific assignment of a Wildfire Rebuild Unit staff member to a project that is not an L4L+10% Rebuild, care must be taken to ensure that the Wildfire Rebuild Unit staff member understands and appreciates the contrasting approach to the consideration of development in Malibu that does not qualify as an L4L+10% Rebuild.

All applicant complaints respecting the work of the Wildfire Rebuild Unit shall be referred, in the first instance, to the Rebuild Ambassador, who shall seek to determine the validity of the complaint. If the Rebuild Ambassador should determine that a complaint respecting the Wildfire Rebuild Unit is valid, the Rebuild Ambassador should raise the issue with the Wildfire Rebuild Unit Deputy. If the complaint is not resolved by the Rebuild Ambassador and Wildfire Rebuild Unit Deputy, the complaint should be elevated to the Community Development Director. If the complaint is an isolated matter, resolution of the complaint shall end with the Community Development Director — subject only to whatever appellate or legal recourse the applicant may have. If the complaint is of the type that widely impacts all applicants and/or a material subset thereof, the City Council shall be advised of the issue if the Rebuild Ambassador and Community Development Director are unable to agree upon a solution.

Given the number of crucial decisions that need to be made corresponding to L4L+10% Rebuilds, the Wildfire Rebuild Unit Deputy should provide a progress report to the City Council at each regular meeting of the City Council and identify all outstanding issues of significance until they are resolved to the satisfaction of the City Council. The Wildfire Rebuild Unit Deputy should establish targets, goals, and metrics for reviews that are published and tracked to identify areas of continuous improvement.

I am confident that other councilmembers, city staff, the rebuild ambassador, area captains, residents and building professionals can identify other ways in which the Malibu Rebuild Center can better serve residents seeking to accomplish an L4L+10% Rebuild, and I suspect that some of my suggestions may be counterproductive for reasons I lack the experience to appreciate. The purpose of this column is to spark a conversation about how the process can be further improved upon so that we might help our friends, neighbors and community members rebuild their homes more efficiently, expeditiously, and economically than otherwise.