[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6102487,"mediaKeyId","2804205-e5c9fe0f439661e84a46e192cd40a8e4","parentId",2804205,"title","Council and engineers debate self‑certification and geotechnical requirements for coastal rebuilds","audioSeconds",9911,"startMs",485000,"endMs",10396000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2804205-e5c9fe0f439661e84a46e192cd40a8e4&start=485&end=10396","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2804205-e5c9fe0f439661e84a46e192cd40a8e4/thumbnail_485000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6102487/Malibu-City/Los-Angeles-County/California/Council-and-engineers-debate-selfcertification-and-geotechnical-requirements-for-coastal-rebuilds","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6102487-43f3a12cf7999b722001eeffe369acfb/orig.mp4?Expires=1771183108&Signature=U8q30DNS1uSVQIxdT5jQ2otWw0T5Dd9rn7Zf~udjpR3c1dBPWGCFiKEITkKn9VUMT~GO0Y-sdlOM6hEfRFqj-Rgif7EQanYhtxKkqc18xBVheAzNxlApkUfxOu624jC~9LGEwGOuCcrsHU6GOEzRM~FDBklj7FmFfW1jaNApCHHQC6awdeNgh0cbXGuKFO8xpXI10dMD-zuZjcDVf3FlNMFAxjP1WDFi-T6U402TkTEWqo5iYHc4dVX89ec~M60t8czr~xbuQAN~EOiCF9gQ8jijknlW3J4srv-CgiFzdYjuggLvhLQR4liEtSoXIikH9nJqSKOWL424llJkVE5HaQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City of Malibu, CA","date","2025-03-28T05:22:34.857Z","article","City staff, council members and technical commenters discussed the pros and cons of self‑certification for some rebuild elements and the specific geotechnical and coastal engineering documentation the city should require for hazard‑prone sites.

Structural engineer Reg Brown urged the council to require second‑party review on projects within Malibu’s challenging coastal and slope conditions, saying \"we need a second set of eyes beyond the design team to certify these projects.\" Several residents and technical professionals urged clarity about when a limited geotechnical report is acceptable and when a full geotechnical / soils engineering report must be required. Planning staff said they are developing a rubric that will distinguish “limited” versus “comprehensive” geotechnical scopes depending on onsite hazards.

Council members asked staff to survey other jurisdictions that use self‑certification (Bellflower, San Diego and others), evaluate legal and liability implications, and identify audit and enforcement mechanisms that would let the city accept certified work while preserving safety: sample audits, decertification for repeated noncompliance and required professional indemnity. Several council members said they want more information before deciding whether to permit self‑certification in any form; others said the approach merited study if it included strong audit controls.

Staff said they will publish specific guidance and checklists for geotechnical and coastal documents and work to incorporate those lists into the rebuild center’s intake process so applicants know whether a limited report will suffice. No code changes or self‑certification policy was adopted at the session.

Ending: Staff agreed to return with a proposed checklist, examples from other cities, and a risk‑mitigation plan for any self‑certification approach that could include audit triggers and decertification procedures.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Malibu City Council Work Session March 19, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Engineers and council members discussed whether limited self‑certification can safely speed rebuilds in geologically sensitive Malibu neighborhoods and what geotechnical/coastal documentation the city will require.","taxTitle","Malibu City, Los Angeles County, California","taxId",70912,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6102492,"Council presses staff for a rebuild dashboard and clearer permit timelines",4293,1484000,5777000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2804205-e5c9fe0f439661e84a46e192cd40a8e4&start=1484&end=5777","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2804205-e5c9fe0f439661e84a46e192cd40a8e4/thumbnail_1484000.jpg","/articles/6102492/Malibu-City/Los-Angeles-County/California/Council-presses-staff-for-a-rebuild-dashboard-and-clearer-permit-timelines","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6102492-5b756b5800bced67881024a7575fed93/orig.mp4?Expires=1771183108&Signature=W3unAZOqzu-6c8EMNHlQ-iru1Uzb8ZtUMDd-onuwMfMA7oGfYqpY8FWWFOzexIUvldGDMfn7~kIWhkSYzXnt06vZHm2VPd8ZhgK13YCJhKupph5QM9JBsOr~ZmFV4p3EnEvBZb59wrMtmVg8nUTIok5bHf~-2kew7i~zwczsp75PBX8wRzI5BaPZYfrkoTDnlFGtcWkfveiYfj9lTTjRIQzZPbiT5Ur8gwMY973vF7Os-gz62jJVEH4B~k-4IKQ-Y-lEXuTTl6P58IuOcMRluKISCRi3Af3eD8kSZwFJct3ULR9QBQXnlkHGXnpRQqs3Ua-73GsV4WNYle19d3oYrA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Council members and public commenters called on staff to publish clearer, property‑specific permit status information and weekly metrics that show how long each step in the rebuild process takes.

Public speakers repeatedly asked the council to give fire survivors access to a single, easy‑to‑use dashboard or rebuild website where they can see status updates per property, expected turnaround times for plan reviews and inspection schedules. Several residents asked for a dedicated rebuild liaison or “czar” who would coordinate across planning, building and fire departments and hold a single point of contact for each family. Abe, a resident organizer, said a resident‑facing site went live and that integrating it with the city’s OnBase system would be a high priority.

City Manager David said the city is building a rebuild center that already provides concurrent interdepartmental review and that staff will publish statistics showing each phase of the process. He told the council staff will return with a list of the metrics the city is already capturing and recommended a short public session to refine what residents want to see. Planning staff and other presenters described an online application portal that shows applicants their individual application status, and staff said they will present a dashboard prototype to council and the public soon.

Ending: Staff pledged to provide the council and the public a clearer list of dashboard metrics and to continue outreach at the rebuild center; interested homeowners were encouraged to use the rebuild center and posted resources to get property‑specific guidance.","Council and residents pushed staff to publish permit‑tracking data and operate a rebuild center with weekly metrics so homeowners know where their applications stand and can see average turnaround times.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6102497,"Malibu council debates scope of “like‑for‑like” rebuilds under governor’s order",9514,2019000,11533000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2804205-e5c9fe0f439661e84a46e192cd40a8e4&start=2019&end=11533","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2804205-e5c9fe0f439661e84a46e192cd40a8e4/thumbnail_2019000.jpg","/articles/6102497/Malibu-City/Los-Angeles-County/California/Malibu-council-debates-scope-of-likeforlike-rebuilds-under-governors-order","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6102497-2073b13058f7b15be5a264007ec7b077/orig.mp4?Expires=1771183108&Signature=jcnISiUVsOvaAzDnILxKbqcxydNJicQGlnKG~gjGMPDhnWASh~SCHikJOSIEFNJ6JiA4YzLTaPHCZjqgXaZxTetb2kQdNdGR46bdvGEOOwdoPMH2MigTB1RuMABRWPfoxxELbTcmH0brqqepjwjfHBSPmvA2Q~w9~yLKjPRuSYK0tT3dkFzB2NJ6hERgTcOBsvAh69VSdDIXC8kNvagr6wlgKmsspuiYdLPZW~sLxh8HN42btTtWBETZbzEPdEujiIi1NRKTtmNkelNkAoA4FnIJ~btzSJ5K1jNarY~cIVN74H2JAHFp8eP8nl-yBFHUAdL2wEyJb5DX57v1B3peQg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Malibu City Council members and staff spent much of a special March 19 meeting hashing out how to interpret the governor’s disaster rebuild policy that lets homeowners replace damaged homes “in substantially the same location” with an allowance of up to 10% additional size.

The council and planning staff discussed how to define “substantially the same location,” whether changes in orientation or roof type count as a new build and how to treat nonconforming or previously unpermitted structures. Council members emphasized speeding reconstruction for homeowners who want to restore what they had before the Palisades and other fires, while also preserving neighborhood scale and safety.

The debate centered on three practical questions: how to measure the 10% allowance (height, footprint or aggregate), who interprets the standard in unclear cases, and which changes should be treated as necessary safety upgrades rather than discretionary design changes. Planning Director Joe and City Manager David described current practice and staff plans: the city has typically compared an applicant’s previous three‑dimensional “box” (footprint and height) with proposed plans, and where code or view protections apply, staff routes the application to the appropriate discretionary review. “Like for like historically as it’s been applied, is you get your house back in the same location, same approximate location, plus 10%,” Planning staff explained during the discussion.

Council members proposed a mix of policy clarifications. Some members pressed for a narrow, rules‑based definition — for example limiting allowed changes to those that do not increase nonconformity or block neighbors’ protected views — so that quick, straightforward rebuilds are not delayed. Others urged more flexibility to allow both modern safety upgrades and modest design changes that make homes more fire resilient, arguing that many homeowners will not rebuild if the process is too rigid or slow.

City Manager David told the meeting that staff are preparing a policy document and a checklist staff will use to evaluate rebuild applications. Staff also said they will bring a draft policy back to council for direction and noted the city’s existing Coastal Commission and municipal code constraints that shape any interpretation. David also said the city is working to identify specific timelines residents can expect: first plan review target of about 10 business days and a second review target of 5–7 days, though staff warned those targets may change when reviews are done concurrently during the rebuild process.

Public commenters, including homeowner advocates and technical professionals, urged both clarity and speed. Structural and coastal engineer Reg Brown told council he supports additional technical review for unique Malibu conditions and expressed caution about broad self‑certification models. Resident Salo Waha described the emotional and economic pressure on fire survivors and urged council to prioritize displaced homeowners in the rebuild queue.

Council members directed staff to draft a policy that: (1) defines what “substantially the same location” means in measurable terms; (2) clarifies whether changes in orientation or roofline constitute a new location; (3) lists the evidence types the city will accept to reconstruct prior conditions (assessor records, aerial photos, past permits, photographs); and (4) recommends which safety or infrastructure improvements (for example, external fire‑hardening measures) are exempt from the 10% calculation. Staff said they will return with proposed language for council consideration and with examples from prior events (Woolsey) and other jurisdictions.

The council did not adopt a final rule at the meeting. The discussion produced initial consensus points — notably, that proposals which would increase an existing nonconformity should not be fast‑tracked as a simple like‑for‑like rebuild — but left many details for staff to return with as a draft policy.

Ending: Council members stressed the need for clear, written rules so residents know what they can rebuild quickly and what will require discretionary review. Staff said they will present a draft policy and recommended procedures in a future meeting and continue refining the rebuild center’s checklists so applicants and reviewers share the same expectations.","Council members, staff and residents spent hours discussing how to interpret the governor’s ‘like‑for‑like plus 10%’ rule for fire‑damaged homes, debating who decides what counts as the same location and which safety upgrades should be exempt from size limits.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Council and engineers debate self‑certification and geotechnical requirements for coastal rebuilds

Council presses staff for a rebuild dashboard and clearer permit timelines

Malibu council debates scope of “like‑for‑like” rebuilds under governor’s order