For the past 70 years, Fox's has been serving pies, ham and catfish to the residents of Altadena in Los Angeles County. That was until last week's devastating wildfires reduced it to charred rubble, with only the roadside restaurant sign remaining.
Fox owner Paul Rosenblau now wonders whether there's any point in staying put to rebuild. “You can only live in a disaster zone for so long,” he says. “At some point you say, 'I don't want to deal with this crap anymore.'”
Tens of thousands of others across Los Angeles face the same dilemma — whether to stay in areas turned into smoldering piles by one of the costliest natural disasters in U.S. history, or move somewhere less vulnerable to disasters linked to climate change.
The wildfires, fanned by powerful monsoon winds known as Santa Anas, began in the affluent coastal neighborhood of Pacific Palisades on the morning of January 7. Other fires soon broke out throughout the city and its suburbs, killing and devastating at least 27 people. More than 12,000 buildings were damaged and nearly 180,000 people were forced to evacuate their homes.
The potential economic losses were estimated at between $135 billion and $150 billion, far higher than the record $16.5 billion set by the 2018 Camp Fire in Northern California, which was the deadliest and most destructive wildfire in the state's history.
The two worst fires, the Palisades fire and the Eaton fire in Altadena, continue to burn through Friday. But Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and California Governor Gavin Newsom have already issued urgent executive orders this week to begin the rebuilding process. They pledged to cut through red tape to speed things up, including by streamlining planning reviews and waiving environmental requirements.
“People have lost their homes, but they are also ready to go back to work,” Bass, who has faced intense criticism for her handling of the crisis, said this week. “If your property burns down and you want to rebuild it exactly as it was before, you don't have to go through a complicated and time-consuming permit process.”
However, there are some difficult questions looming behind the push to rebuild: Can the city afford to rebuild areas that have become uninsurable? Are the most affected areas safe for human habitation? And does Los Angeles as it is today, with homes largely clustered on hillsides and adjacent forests, still make sense in a warming world?
The fires raised “important questions about the long-term sustainability of a city based primarily on urban sprawl and single-family development,” says Michael Maltzan, the Los Angeles-based architect who designed the Sixth Street Viaduct downtown and is a supporter. Sustainable high-density housing in the city.
“Is this the moment when we must, in a radical way, rethink the way we live in the city?” He says. “Fires happen every two years at different levels. As much as we wish this was a one-time anomaly, it's not. It's part of a regular life cycle in Southern California.”
It was the beautiful natural environment of Altadena, in the foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains, that attracted people to want to live there. The city became a haven for middle-class black families who were being pushed out of white-dominated neighborhoods elsewhere.
But the terrain is dry, with little rainfall, and is therefore an ideal environment for wildfires. Conditions become perilous with Santa Anse, the so-called “devil wind,” blowing in from the desert and drying out the plants.
Shauna Dawson Beer, a marketing consultant whose Altadena home burned down in the Eaton fire, has become convinced that the danger of living in Southern California is on the rise. “The fires have underscored the fact that none of these communities are safe anymore,” she says. “The high-risk area has tripled in size.”
The state of California has attempted to “fireproof” such neighborhoods through an exemplary building code that stipulates rules for building homes in fire-prone areas. Residents must create a 100-foot defensible space around their homes and remove flammable materials to provide a safe perimeter for firefighters.
But that didn't help much in the recent fires. “The winds were so strong there was nothing the firefighters could do,” says Moira Conlon, founder of public relations firm Financial Profiles, who lost her home in Pacific Palisades, an upscale neighborhood home to many Hollywood stars and studio executives.
Conlon isn't sure about rebuilding. “The place is a toxic waste zone with no infrastructure,” she says.
She adds that the costs of reconstruction at a time when thousands more are rebuilding may end up being prohibitive. “Can you imagine the material and labor shortages we will experience? Do I want to spend the next five years of my life fighting for builders?
Then there is the threat of more wildfires. These are no longer just seasonal risks, but an ever-present risk at a time when a changing climate leads to higher temperatures and prolonged droughts. “It's terrifying, and God knows it could happen again,” Conlon says.
The risk of natural disasters has always been seen as a fair price for the privilege of living in Los Angeles, with its dramatic coastline and Mediterranean climate.
Floods occurred in 1938 that killed 115 people and destroyed more than 5,000 homes. In 1994, the Northridge earthquake destroyed buildings and caused $40 billion in damage. Forest fires have always been a concern, especially in the dry period between August and October.
In his book The Ecology of Fear: Los Angeles and the Disaster ImaginationLos Angeles-based writer Mike Davis charted the history of fires in the coastal paradise of Malibu, which he declared “the wildfire capital of North America, and perhaps the world.” He questioned the rebuilding cycle after every fire, which he said had been possible for decades thanks to cheap fire insurance. The result was a larger “Belt of Fire” suburb than ever before.
This cycle may be broken now. Many homes destroyed in fires this month are uninsured. Companies like Allstate and State Farm recently stopped selling new home insurance policies in California, blaming regulatory caps for rising rates, which has made covering losses increasingly difficult.
State Farm also announced last year that it would not renew the policies of 72,000 California homes and apartments, including 69 percent of plans in Pacific Palisades — though it partially reversed that move after this month's fires. Many homeowners abandoned by State Farm have instead turned to California's state-backed Fair Plan, which provides coverage of up to $3 million for a residential property — without taking into account the value of real estate in these parts.
An incomplete insurance picture may mean that, whatever the political rhetoric, it will be difficult to build back better. “Many people will have no insurance, and many others will be underinsured, which means people will be pressured to cut as many things as possible in the rebuilding process,” Maltzan says. “This means that the homes will be built less well than they were originally.”
Dawson Bear's home is insured, but she fears her insurance policy won't extend to the enormous costs of rebuilding a new home in Altadena. “Costs will go up dramatically, just based on supply and demand,” she says. “I heard it would cost $700 to $900 per square foot to rebuild, and no insurance company would cover that.”
Then, after housing is rebuilt, new insurance premiums may end up being too high for most homeowners, as more companies change their policies to reflect higher fire risks. “When we go back and rebuild, isn't there a risk that our community will become uninsurable?” She says.
The devastation comes as California is already in the grip of a cost-of-living crisis. The sudden appearance of thousands of homeless residents looking for a roof over their heads will only exacerbate the city's chronic housing shortage. The median home price in Los Angeles is already more than $1 million, after rising 30 percent between 2018 and 2023.
“The big question is housing affordability,” says Manfred Kiel, chief economist at the Inland Empire Economic Partnership, a nonprofit development organization. “Housing costs will go up after (the fires), people won't be able to afford it, and then they'll start leaving.”
There is precedent for this: Six years after the Camp Fire destroyed Paradise, California, the city's population is about 9,300, compared to 26,500 before the fire.
Despite Bass and Newsom's pledges, red tape will also slow the reconstruction process, says Edward Ring of the California Policy Center, an educational organization. “If you look at the time it takes to get a building permit in California, you can only expect to start building within three years,” he says. “You'll be spending $100,000 on permits and fees. Imagine what that means when you're trying to rebuild.”
Meanwhile, it is not clear who will actually foot the bill for rebuilding not only the homes but also the infrastructure destroyed by the fires.
“We want to rebuild, but how long will it take (the authorities) to restore the facilities?” he said. How do you attach a chainsaw?” says Rosenbluh, the restaurant owner. “Fatigue and prolonged time will take its toll. “Maybe people will take out the deposit and move to Virginia.”
All of this adds to the already big problems facing Los Angeles, where Hollywood is located Struggling There remains a stubborn displacement crisis. City leaders will have to oversee the fire recovery process while also preparing to host eight FIFA World Cup matches next year and the Olympic Games in 2028.
But the city went through “very painful periods,” notes Ian Campbell, a longtime Los Angeles businessman who held a key role at the California Department of Commerce and was later vice president of the public relations firm Abernathy MacGregor. He points out that along with floods, earthquakes and fires, Los Angeles also weathered the shrinkage of the aviation industry — a major employer — after the end of the Cold War.
“Los Angeles has a long history of these amazing moments, partly because we live on such fragile terrain,” he says. “This could be another time of reckoning for Los Angeles. Will the city continue to allow people to live in risky areas, and should the entire community support that? These are the issues that must be confronted.”
