Letters to the Editor: Lots of ADUs, hardened homes: What rebuilt neighborhoods will look like

To the editor: As I read about the debates and conflicts that inevitably follow the complexity of rebuilding the homes lost in the Los Angeles fires, I offer this modest suggestion: When single-family homes are allowed to rebuild, the city should permit and facilitate the addition of accessory dwelling units, or ADUs. (“Fires aggravated L.A.’s housing crisis. We need to build homes much faster,” editorial, Jan. 26)

Financial incentives should be offered to homeowners in the form of rebates, speedy permits, interest-free or very low-interest loans and other benefits. Building an ADU along with rebuilding the primary residence saves time (cutting lumber for two units at a time instead of twice) and allows easy linkage of utilities to the main residence.

Because of the desperate need for rentals for so many displaced people, homeowners who agree to rent their ADU would be providing not only a financial benefit to themselves but a community benefit as well.

Carol Tavris, Los Angeles

..

To the editor: Not that many years ago, a local wildfire spread onto our property. Our gratitude to the firefighters who saved our home is as immeasurable as our grief for those who have lost their homes and lives in Altadena and Pacific Palisades.

About a dozen homes in our community were lost, a small fraction of the thousands of homes lost in the recent fires. Even then, it took between three and four years to rebuild.

To expediently get people back into their homes — homes that need to be earthquake- and fire-code-complaint — is it better to employ thousands of contractors of variable quality who are competing for the same labor and construction resources, or to coordinate with a few community home builders with experience in building entire neighborhoods?

Yes, the architectural charm imbued into these neighborhoods may be lost, but after the destruction wrought by the wildfires, that might never be brought back.

Michael Nelson, Porter Ranch

..

To the editor: Long before the L.A. wildfires, expedited housing development has been an imperative — one this city has failed to address.

Outdated planning codes and byzantine community plans mean developers must seek waivers and regulatory changes to build financially feasible projects. This regulatory amendment process, known as “discretionary review,” requires the L.A. City Council to vote on individual project approvals.

At worst, the process is prone to corruption. At best — and at the root of our housing crisis — it’s painstakingly slow. We need to responsibly depoliticize the process of land-use decision-making to build faster.

The governance reform report by my organization, Central City Assn. of Los Angeles, details ways other cities have done so, among them: setting hard time limits by which the Council must act, deeming projects automatically approved, and other structural and staff enhancements to the City Planning Commission and the Planning and Land Use Committee.

Nella McOsker, Los Angeles

The writer is president and chief executive of Central City Assn. of Los Angeles.

..

To the editor: Until we know if the major insurance companies will write new policies in the burn areas, little or no new construction will occur, lenders will not make new mortgages and real estate sales will drop. New plans for the burn area will be stymied.

What are our elected officials and new “fire czar” doing about this basic problem?

Steven Strauss, Corona del Mar