Will the California Coastal Commission let people rebuild?

[Tooms22]

Based on their history... no.

Word from big law land use attorneys is that the California Coastal Commission has a history of making coastal land worthless after coastal buildings are lost in fires, earthquakes, or landslides by refusing to approve permits to rebuild.

The great courts of California have given their blessing in the past, which gives the CCC authority to continue this approach.

Here is the CCC saying "Nuh uh, we definitely won't do that. Misinformation and conspiracy theories."

California Coastal Commission counters misinformation amid LA wildfires

As the deadly and destructive wildfires continue to burn in Southern California, there is new concern about what the cleanup and rebuilding process might look like once the smoke clears.

www.ksbw.com

If this is true, we still have a problem. The enviro-nazis can sue based on the authority the courts have created in the past.

There are few things that might make this situation different: This should be considered a taking by the government (Land you can build on = $$$$, Can't build on it anymore = $0). There are going to be a good number of people affected who can likely pool their resources to fight back. The people affected by the Palisades fire likely have some money for the fight. And the CCC, Newsom, and Bass don't want to end up on national news doing this to people after a wildfire.

Moral of the story: You might lose tens of millions of dollars because of a government taking, but you can still surf in front of your worthless piece of property in January because it's sunny and 65

 

[wallnutz]

It will all be good, your fine Governor says he will build a smart city in the burned areas.

 

[Gramps]

It will all be good, your fine Governor says he will build a smart city in the burned areas.

and if Kamala gets elected the "smart city" will have a dumb governor

 

[cofooter]

It will be years, if ever, before they get to re-build with all that drama.........

 

[lbhsbz]

Based on their history... no.

Word from big law land use attorneys is that the California Coastal Commission has a history of making coastal land worthless after coastal buildings are lost in fires, earthquakes, or landslides by refusing to approve permits to rebuild.

The great courts of California have given their blessing in the past, which gives the CCC authority to continue this approach.

Here is the CCC saying "Nuh uh, we definitely won't do that. Misinformation and conspiracy theories."

California Coastal Commission counters misinformation amid LA wildfires

As the deadly and destructive wildfires continue to burn in Southern California, there is new concern about what the cleanup and rebuilding process might look like once the smoke clears.

www.ksbw.com

If this is true, we still have a problem. The enviro-nazis can sue based on the authority the courts have created in the past.

There are few things that might make this situation different: This should be considered a taking by the government (Land you can build on = $$$$, Can't build on it anymore = $0). There are going to be a good number of people affected who can likely pool their resources to fight back. The people affected by the Palisades fire likely have some money for the fight. And the CCC, Newsom, and Bass don't want to end up on national news doing this to people after a wildfire.

Moral of the story: You might lose tens of millions of dollars because of a government taking, but you can still surf in front of your worthless piece of property in January because it's sunny and 65

On the homepage of the CA Coastal commission website.....and it's been there for over a week....

​

"

Emergency Notice Regarding the Southern California Fires​

For property owners impacted by the fires in Southern California, please be advised that the Coastal Act provides that reconstruction of homes, businesses and most other structures destroyed by a disaster are exempt from Coastal Development Permit (CDP) requirements. For more information, see Public Resources Code Section 30610(g) and this FAQ document on rebuilding after the Palisades fire. Property owners wishing to build a larger or different structure on their property than previously existed should contact their local permitting agency or the Coastal Commission for specific guidance. For more information about particular fires and evacuation orders, visit Cal Fire's website.​

I understand the ambulance chasers have ignored this, or simply made up facts and refused to google it....but there it is, in print. Seems they'll be fairly not shitty to deal with as far as reconstruction goes.

This was on the website long before King Newsom made his announcement

 

[shintoooo]

I read that if you build your house the same size or up to 10% larger then the coastal commission doesn’t get involved.

 

[lbhsbz]

and if Kamala gets elected the "smart city" will have a dumb governor

I'll put my mark down right now on this one....she ain't gonna be governor of shit. Anyone wanna put some money on this?

 

[Ziggy]

I read that if you build your house the same size or up to 10% larger then the coastal commission doesn’t get involved.

But at 11% bend over and buy lots of lube

 

[samsah33]

I guess it will depend on the other permitting agencies and their rules and regs... The CCC ain't the only bureaucracy that has any say in the matter...

 

[DarkHorseRacing]

This isn't San Bernardino. Those homes are hundreds of millions of dollars in value. These property owners would ream CA a new asshole if they weren't allowed to rebuild.

And to be honest, most of the lost homes were already monstrosities on the parcels already. They couldn't really build bigger unless they went up more stories which the CCC would probably still block.

 

[Ziggy]

I'll put my mark down right now on this one....she ain't gonna be governor of shit. Anyone wanna put some money on this?

I hope so but Ca voters did pick her for Prez.

 

[lbhsbz]

But at 11% bend over and buy lots of lube

I've suggested for years that bootleg tape measures need to exist....this is a perfect application of the theory....

Donuts and a new tape for the inspector.....lol

 

[Ziggy]

This isn't San Bernardino. Those homes are hundreds of millions of dollars in value. These property owners would ream CA a new asshole if they weren't allowed to rebuild.

And to be honest, most of the lost homes were already monstrosities on the parcels already. They couldn't really build bigger unless they went up more stories which the CCC would probably still block.

I would not doubt for a second that some of the older mansions had some undocumented,(cough,cough) additions.

 

[DarkHorseRacing]

I would not doubt for a second that some of the older mansions had some undocumented,(cough,cough) additions.

Considering there is supposed to be public beach access, the one thing I think the CCC might step in with is better setbacks and dedicated beach access pathways for the public to use. I'm sure that will piss off the homeowners, but those aren't private beaches.

There might have been three feet separating those home previously. (or it seemed like it)

 

[Dog]

But at 11% bend over and buy lots of lube

Diddy did it, need 1000 bottles of lube...

 

[Bucs 0340]

I'll put my mark down right now on this one....she ain't gonna be governor of shit. Anyone wanna put some money on this?

How did the bet work out for you last time you asked to put some money on it.

 

[BingerFang]

I read that if you build your house the same size or up to 10% larger then the coastal commission doesn’t get involved.

I heard the same from a large client that builds and will rebuild those homes.

 

[redone76]

I've suggested for years that bootleg tape measures need to exist....this is a perfect application of the theory....

Donuts and a new tape for the inspector.....lol

You're a damn genius

 

[FROGMAN524]

Didn’t they do the same thing just recently in Australia? Lots of big time homes burnt down and they’re rebuilding with “smart cities”

 

[Tooms22]

On the homepage of the CA Coastal commission website.....and it's been there for over a week....

​

"

Emergency Notice Regarding the Southern California Fires​

For property owners impacted by the fires in Southern California, please be advised that the Coastal Act provides that reconstruction of homes, businesses and most other structures destroyed by a disaster are exempt from Coastal Development Permit (CDP) requirements. For more information, see Public Resources Code Section 30610(g) and this FAQ document on rebuilding after the Palisades fire. Property owners wishing to build a larger or different structure on their property than previously existed should contact their local permitting agency or the Coastal Commission for specific guidance. For more information about particular fires and evacuation orders, visit Cal Fire's website.​

I understand the ambulance chasers have ignored this, or simply made up facts and refused to google it....but there it is, in print. Seems they'll be fairly not shitty to deal with as far as reconstruction goes.

This was on the website long before King Newsom made his announcement

I read that if you build your house the same size or up to 10% larger then the coastal commission doesn’t get involved.

This is the saaaammmmeee thing that I said back to the land use attorney that I talked to.

They said yep, CCC is saying that. Their past actions and the case law tend to disagree. They think it will be an issue.

A little clarity, the CCC has authority 5 miles in from the coastline. They probably won't mess with 4.9 miles of that 5 miles. But anything on the beach or across PCH is considered "critical infrastructure." So they will claim the beach homes cannot be built back safely due to erosion, storms, etc. I'll say it again, they've done it before.

Based on my zero experience with land use law, I have no reason to disagree.

@lbhsbz I'm sure $1,000/hr attorneys simply made up facts and refused to google it. Pretty sure having some of the biggest real estate clients in the state isn't a "make up facts and google it" situation. Also, land use attorneys aren't ambulance chasers. They literally try to work with or around the government to get land developed

A completely unrelated note: The CCC tried to restrict SpaceX launches in CA once Elon started supporting Trump. So the CCC is obviously a efficient, well-intentioned, and respected state department.

 

[Rbcconst]

With the current situation they will relax on rebuilds that fit in there guidelines of not exceeding 10% in additional footage or adding additional structures. If you were talking about 1 single home fire rebuild or a new build they would be up your ass with a scope. LA county should expedite there permitting process considering the event, if this was a 1 home fire rebuild they would be in plan check over a year.

 

[NIKAL]

My guess is Newscum gets involved and removes a lot of the red tape, BS fees, permits, puts a freeze on the CCC and expedites the processes to rebuild.

Why? Because a lot of the people who lost their homes were primarily democrat voters. To save his ass and the party, they will take care of them.

Meanwhile the average person who lost their homes will probably have to sell their land as they can’t afford the continued mortgage, a second place to live, permits, and all the while fighting the insurance companies as the cost to rebuild will be 20-40% more then the insurance pays out. If they can find a contractor!

Also imagine the increased property taxes a new home is going to cost these owners.

 

[thedan]

The Adam Carolla Show on Instagram: "After evacuating his home during the LA wildfires, @adamcarolla delivers a passionate hotel rant, predicting Hollywood’s frustration with rebuilding could shake their Democratic loyalties."

54K likes, 1,828 comments - theadamcarollashow on January 9, 2025: "After evacuating his home during the LA wildfires, @adamcarolla delivers a passionate hotel rant, predicting Hollywood’s frustration with rebuilding could shake their Democratic loyalties.".

www.instagram.com

 

[zhandfull]

All this talk about removing barriers. I can already see there is going to be a huge issue with just the clean up. You can hear it in the press conferences. Not safe, hazardous materials, heavy metals, off gassing. Then getting residents PPE before allowing them back to THEIR property. Wait till the rain comes and washed all that crap in the ocean. Who’s getting fined for violating the clean water act, the property owners?

The fire was a shit show. The response has been a shit show. Clean up will be a shit show. Those that choose to rebuild, I wish them the best.

 

[Pattle]

This guy gives some insight on the leftys desire for how to do the rebuild.

 

[Rajobigguy]

I doubt that those beach side homes on the Malibu strip will ever be rebuilt. I don’t know what agency or activist organizations will throw up the road block but someone will and in this particular instance I’m not sure that it’s a bad thing. Most of those homes were overbuilt, aesthetically horrible and restricted beach access to the general public. I do believe that the owners of those homes should be fairly compensated for their lose but that area should be public land not quasi private beaches.

 

[Eliminator21vdrive]

Based on their history... no.

Word from big law land use attorneys is that the California Coastal Commission has a history of making coastal land worthless after coastal buildings are lost in fires, earthquakes, or landslides by refusing to approve permits to rebuild.

The great courts of California have given their blessing in the past, which gives the CCC authority to continue this approach.

Here is the CCC saying "Nuh uh, we definitely won't do that. Misinformation and conspiracy theories."

California Coastal Commission counters misinformation amid LA wildfires

As the deadly and destructive wildfires continue to burn in Southern California, there is new concern about what the cleanup and rebuilding process might look like once the smoke clears.

www.ksbw.com

If this is true, we still have a problem. The enviro-nazis can sue based on the authority the courts have created in the past.

There are few things that might make this situation different: This should be considered a taking by the government (Land you can build on = $$$$, Can't build on it anymore = $0). There are going to be a good number of people affected who can likely pool their resources to fight back. The people affected by the Palisades fire likely have some money for the fight. And the CCC, Newsom, and Bass don't want to end up on national news doing this to people after a wildfire.

Moral of the story: You might lose tens of millions of dollars because of a government taking, but you can still surf in front of your worthless piece of property in January because it's sunny and 65

Yep my prediction is that the tree hugers will not let them build from the highway to the pacific at a minimum.

Fuck the sierra club they keep shutting down every cool coastal venue.

 

[regor]

18 months after wildfires destroyed some 2,000 homes on Maui, only 3 have been rebuilt

As California looks to rebuild from the wildfires that ripped through the Los Angeles area, California Gov. Gavin Newsom has reportedly been in

reason.com

 

[COCA COLA COWBOY]

This guy gives some insight on the leftys desire for how to do the rebuild.

I said this the day it was happening!

 

[mbrown2]

Based on their history... no.

Word from big law land use attorneys is that the California Coastal Commission has a history of making coastal land worthless after coastal buildings are lost in fires, earthquakes, or landslides by refusing to approve permits to rebuild.

The great courts of California have given their blessing in the past, which gives the CCC authority to continue this approach.

Here is the CCC saying "Nuh uh, we definitely won't do that. Misinformation and conspiracy theories."

California Coastal Commission counters misinformation amid LA wildfires

As the deadly and destructive wildfires continue to burn in Southern California, there is new concern about what the cleanup and rebuilding process might look like once the smoke clears.

www.ksbw.com

If this is true, we still have a problem. The enviro-nazis can sue based on the authority the courts have created in the past.

There are few things that might make this situation different: This should be considered a taking by the government (Land you can build on = $$$$, Can't build on it anymore = $0). There are going to be a good number of people affected who can likely pool their resources to fight back. The people affected by the Palisades fire likely have some money for the fight. And the CCC, Newsom, and Bass don't want to end up on national news doing this to people after a wildfire.

Moral of the story: You might lose tens of millions of dollars because of a government taking, but you can still surf in front of your worthless piece of property in January because it's sunny and 65

I think the Palisades fire will be the turning point for the Coastal Commissions reach. The folks who want to rebuild have the resources to legally fight and Newsom/Bass are on the hotseat. Throw in Fed Gov at odds with Cali politics and likely putting conditions on funds I am hopeful this is the energy that gets the pendalum moving in the other direction...

 

[500bbc]

I hope so but Ca voters did pick her for Prez.

The Ho got 1% in the primary...

 

[coolchange]

The Ho got 1% in the primary...

And her vote was not a “ for” vote, but an “against” vote.

 

[RiverDave]

I guess a common sense question is if the regulations are so bad that they have to step into bypass them.. why are they that way to begin with?

RD

 

[SodarSki73]

Having gone through the Coastal Commission process during late COVID (2021-2022), I can't explain what a nightmare it was. The overreach of these unelected officials is staggering. It was a process of endless reports, studies, meetings, arbitrary staff recommendations, and mandated terms recorded against my deed which delayed the process for nearly two years and cost us 10s of thousands of dollars to go through. The CCC required reports included hazardous assessments, sea level studies, stormwater plans, native landscaping plans, and even waterproofing concrete foundations to prevent "abrasive sand scarring"—despite the original foundation lasting 85 years without issue.

For context, this was a rebuild of an 800 sq. ft. beach bungalow into a 2,500 sq. ft. single-family residence on a 25'x100' lot. We are in the middle of the city and every lot is of similar size, elevation and building type. We kept the same footprint as our old house but tore the walls and floor off, reinforced the foundation, and then added a second floor and roof deck. Despite being 700' from the bay and 1,900' from the beach, the CCC still had jurisdiction.

One of my favorite terms of the permit states the following:

"By acceptance of this Permit, the permittees further agree, on behalf of themselves and all successors and assigns, that they are required to remove all or a portion of the development authorized by the permit, including, but not limited to, the residence, garage, balcony, patio, deck, and any other future improvements, and restore the site, if: (1) the City or any other government agency with legal jurisdiction has issued a final order, not overturned through any appeal or writ proceedings, determining that the structures are currently and permanently unsafe for occupancy or use due to damage or destruction from waves, flooding, erosion or other hazards related to coastal processes, and that there are no feasible measures that could make the structures suitable for habitation or use without the use of shoreline protective devices; (2) essential services to the site (e.g., utilities, roads) can no longer feasibly be maintained due to the coastal hazards listed above; (3) removal is required pursuant to LCP policies for sea level rise adaptation planning; or (4) the development requires new and/or augmented shoreline protective devices that conflict with relevant LCP or Coastal Act policies."

In short, I’m obligated to demolish my home and walk away if the government deems it unsafe and it prohibits me from constructing any protective measures to save it. Thanks, CCC!

 

[BabyRay]

Having gone through the Coastal Commission process during late COVID (2021-2022), I can't explain what a nightmare it was. The overreach of these unelected officials is staggering. It was a process of endless reports, studies, meetings, arbitrary staff recommendations, and mandated terms recorded against my deed which delayed the process for nearly two years and cost us 10s of thousands of dollars to go through. The CCC required reports included hazardous assessments, sea level studies, stormwater plans, native landscaping plans, and even waterproofing concrete foundations to prevent "abrasive sand scarring"—despite the original foundation lasting 85 years without issue.

For context, this was a rebuild of an 800 sq. ft. beach bungalow into a 2,500 sq. ft. single-family residence on a 25'x100' lot. We are in the middle of the city and every lot is of similar size, elevation and building type. We kept the same footprint as our old house but tore the walls and floor off, reinforced the foundation, and then added a second floor and roof deck. Despite being 700' from the bay and 1,900' from the beach, the CCC still had jurisdiction.

One of my favorite terms of the permit states the following:

"By acceptance of this Permit, the permittees further agree, on behalf of themselves and all successors and assigns, that they are required to remove all or a portion of the development authorized by the permit, including, but not limited to, the residence, garage, balcony, patio, deck, and any other future improvements, and restore the site, if: (1) the City or any other government agency with legal jurisdiction has issued a final order, not overturned through any appeal or writ proceedings, determining that the structures are currently and permanently unsafe for occupancy or use due to damage or destruction from waves, flooding, erosion or other hazards related to coastal processes, and that there are no feasible measures that could make the structures suitable for habitation or use without the use of shoreline protective devices; (2) essential services to the site (e.g., utilities, roads) can no longer feasibly be maintained due to the coastal hazards listed above; (3) removal is required pursuant to LCP policies for sea level rise adaptation planning; or (4) the development requires new and/or augmented shoreline protective devices that conflict with relevant LCP or Coastal Act policies."

In short, I’m obligated to demolish my home and walk away if the government deems it unsafe and it prohibits me from constructing any protective measures to save it. Thanks, CCC!

I’m guessing you were quite a ways into the process before they threw that one at you.

 

[500bbc]

Having gone through the Coastal Commission process during late COVID (2021-2022), I can't explain what a nightmare it was. The overreach of these unelected officials is staggering. It was a process of endless reports, studies, meetings, arbitrary staff recommendations, and mandated terms recorded against my deed which delayed the process for nearly two years and cost us 10s of thousands of dollars to go through. The CCC required reports included hazardous assessments, sea level studies, stormwater plans, native landscaping plans, and even waterproofing concrete foundations to prevent "abrasive sand scarring"—despite the original foundation lasting 85 years without issue.

For context, this was a rebuild of an 800 sq. ft. beach bungalow into a 2,500 sq. ft. single-family residence on a 25'x100' lot. We are in the middle of the city and every lot is of similar size, elevation and building type. We kept the same footprint as our old house but tore the walls and floor off, reinforced the foundation, and then added a second floor and roof deck. Despite being 700' from the bay and 1,900' from the beach, the CCC still had jurisdiction.

One of my favorite terms of the permit states the following:

"By acceptance of this Permit, the permittees further agree, on behalf of themselves and all successors and assigns, that they are required to remove all or a portion of the development authorized by the permit, including, but not limited to, the residence, garage, balcony, patio, deck, and any other future improvements, and restore the site, if: (1) the City or any other government agency with legal jurisdiction has issued a final order, not overturned through any appeal or writ proceedings, determining that the structures are currently and permanently unsafe for occupancy or use due to damage or destruction from waves, flooding, erosion or other hazards related to coastal processes, and that there are no feasible measures that could make the structures suitable for habitation or use without the use of shoreline protective devices; (2) essential services to the site (e.g., utilities, roads) can no longer feasibly be maintained due to the coastal hazards listed above; (3) removal is required pursuant to LCP policies for sea level rise adaptation planning; or (4) the development requires new and/or augmented shoreline protective devices that conflict with relevant LCP or Coastal Act policies."

In short, I’m obligated to demolish my home and walk away if the government deems it unsafe and it prohibits me from constructing any protective measures to save it. Thanks, CCC!

It's a not so subtle attempt to keep anything near the coast for the elite (AKA political doners)...

 

[Mandelon]

I think the Commission could hold up a home or two at a time, but not when so many rich folks all have their homes needing to rebuilt at once. There's safety in numbers and residents area already on edge. They will lawyer up and sue the State.

 

[MeCasa16]

You guys are forgetting, that the politicians who would normally make this process difficult for normal people are now dealing with the people who host the high end fundraiser dinners in the exact homes that burnt down. You’re talking about the dinner tables that financed the politicians careers. They won’t have any trouble getting through the tape.

 

[Tank]

Coastal commission can eat a bag of dicks. They get involved in ANY construction done along the coast. Long history of being absolute nightmare to get anything done on the ocean front. You want to remodel and add square footage, they’re involved. And they take years to pass permits. Mark
My word, they will 100% be Involved and they will be a nightmare. Remember, this is the group that wanted to stop space x launches in ca because Elon supported trump. And in their ultimate stupidity they publicly stated as much. They don’t want anyone to build ir have any structures on the beach. Total Nazis.

 

[Tooms22]

Having gone through the Coastal Commission process during late COVID (2021-2022), I can't explain what a nightmare it was. The overreach of these unelected officials is staggering. It was a process of endless reports, studies, meetings, arbitrary staff recommendations, and mandated terms recorded against my deed which delayed the process for nearly two years and cost us 10s of thousands of dollars to go through. The CCC required reports included hazardous assessments, sea level studies, stormwater plans, native landscaping plans, and even waterproofing concrete foundations to prevent "abrasive sand scarring"—despite the original foundation lasting 85 years without issue.

For context, this was a rebuild of an 800 sq. ft. beach bungalow into a 2,500 sq. ft. single-family residence on a 25'x100' lot. We are in the middle of the city and every lot is of similar size, elevation and building type. We kept the same footprint as our old house but tore the walls and floor off, reinforced the foundation, and then added a second floor and roof deck. Despite being 700' from the bay and 1,900' from the beach, the CCC still had jurisdiction.

One of my favorite terms of the permit states the following:

"By acceptance of this Permit, the permittees further agree, on behalf of themselves and all successors and assigns, that they are required to remove all or a portion of the development authorized by the permit, including, but not limited to, the residence, garage, balcony, patio, deck, and any other future improvements, and restore the site, if: (1) the City or any other government agency with legal jurisdiction has issued a final order, not overturned through any appeal or writ proceedings, determining that the structures are currently and permanently unsafe for occupancy or use due to damage or destruction from waves, flooding, erosion or other hazards related to coastal processes, and that there are no feasible measures that could make the structures suitable for habitation or use without the use of shoreline protective devices; (2) essential services to the site (e.g., utilities, roads) can no longer feasibly be maintained due to the coastal hazards listed above; (3) removal is required pursuant to LCP policies for sea level rise adaptation planning; or (4) the development requires new and/or augmented shoreline protective devices that conflict with relevant LCP or Coastal Act policies."

In short, I’m obligated to demolish my home and walk away if the government deems it unsafe and it prohibits me from constructing any protective measures to save it. Thanks, CCC!

Hopefully this helps some of you understand how bad it is dealing with them.

Now imagine a full rebuild on the beach.

But again, the hope is that the CCC doesn't want to get completely rocked and killed off. With this many houses and it being all over the news, they might actually play ball or be told to stand down before they commit political suicide. Screwing over one homeowner at a time, easier to do. 100s of homeowners... it will be all over the news.

But the enviro groups...

What do you guys know about CEQA?

 

[SodarSki73]

I’m guessing you were quite a ways into the process before they threw that one at you.

Yes, at this point, I was very pregnant with it. I did speak to a real estate attorney prior to preceeding with it though. His comment/recommendation was to record it and build the house. Fight it if something happens later and if it does, I would have a strength in numbers, as everyone that has built in the last decade in our neighborhood has had to agree to the same terms.

His advice was right in line with several comments above stating that the Palisades and Malibu property owners have the benefit of a large group vs. a single homeowner trying to build.

 

[Waterjunky]

I'm actually hoping that CCC makes its usual mess out of this!

The result will be they will legally and officially get their nuts cut off. They really could use the clipping.

 

[Taboma]

18 months after wildfires destroyed some 2,000 homes on Maui, only 3 have been rebuilt

As California looks to rebuild from the wildfires that ripped through the Los Angeles area, California Gov. Gavin Newsom has reportedly been in

reason.com

View attachment 1472021

FYI, following the '07 fire that took us out, not a single home out of the 23 of ours and our neighbors homes that had burned had been rebuilt. After 2 years maybe five had been finished, and we finally moved into ours almost exactly three years from the date it had burned.
There's a lot of steps involved, this isn't like getting your car repaired after an accident. You have to prove your claims with documentation, much of which you just lost in the fire.
Then you have to get a contractor to provide a proposal for rebuilding the exact home you lost. What if you don't have drawings for it ?
This all takes time. Then the contractor has to provide separate documentation for all the additional available insurance monies, for fire code upgrades, general code upgrades, and updated efficiency code requirements.
These various code required upgrades come out of a different pot than your base structure policy.
But all this must be documented and submitted, then approved, then negotiated before you can even know how much funding you'll have to work with.

 

[Boat 405]

They say they will be able to bypass Costal, but I highly doubt it. Many places were complete piles of shit in Malibu. The idea of rebuilding within 110% is bizarre. I guarantee it will be a shit show. I have a customer in La Jolla that has been dealing with them for 6 years. He wants to do an interior remodel. No change of footprint or outside structures. Everything interior. 6 fucking years.

 

[BabyRay]

They say they will be able to bypass Costal, but I highly doubt it. Many places were complete piles of shit in Malibu. The idea of rebuilding within 110% is bizarre. I guarantee it will be a shit show. I have a customer in La Jolla that has been dealing with them for 6 years. He wants to do an interior remodel. No change of footprint or outside structures. Everything interior. 6 fucking years.

Well, the first problem is they went for permits. Sometimes it’s better to ask for forgiveness.

Yeah, maybe not that simple if it was a big project, but could they have gotten away with multiple small projects over a 5 or 6 year period? I’ll bet they wish they’d tried that in hindsight.

 

[Cole 392]

 

[BajaMike]

I think the Palisades fire will be the turning point for the Coastal Commissions reach. The folks who want to rebuild have the resources to legally fight and Newsom/Bass are on the hotseat. Throw in Fed Gov at odds with Cali politics and likely putting conditions on funds I am hopeful this is the energy that gets the pendalum moving in the other direction...

The California Coastal Commission should be abolished. It started out as a good small “protect the public access to the beaches” agency. Its turned into a huge buerocracy, run by a bunch of tree hugging Nazis.

Most of their huge budgets comes from the federal government, so Trump can cut that off.

 

[boatpi]

I can tell you this haven’t dealt with them and had meetings with them a few years back the coastal commission answers to just one person and that’s the governor no one else.

 

[77charger]

I bet a majority of those homeowners on the beach are the type who are against any new builds on another beach and prefer the natural coastline.

But since they had theirs it was fine to them. So maybe they get what they wished for.

 

[boatpi]

One thing that mentioned here that the palisades is a generational area for many houses usually hard-core left Jewish families have been around for many many years in the West End of Los Angeles. And if you don’t think by connections or money or otherwise, they aren’t connected politically trust me they are they could pick up a phone and vaporize Newsom if they wanted to.
At least for the Palisades, they’re going get some things done and expedited, or a lot of people gonna be put into their own political graves. Most of them are very reasonable, good people, and they are not going put up with a bunch of government blockade nonsense.