Planning director reports rising fire‑rebuild activity; city opens rebuild center and warns of scam emails

Planning staff told the Malibu Planning Commission on May 19 that fire‑rebuild activity in the Palisades and Woolsey‑affected areas has increased, with 26 planning submittals now in process (an increase of eight since the last report) and 14 approvals finalized.

Planning staff gave commissioners a short slide update describing current volumes and timelines: average time to initial plan‑review response is about nine days and average time to approval about 24 days for the verifications reviewed. Staff said 14 of the rebuilds used the “like‑for‑like” rebuild approach and 14 applicants took advantage of the additional 10% allowance in floor area. The department reported issuance of 87 debris removal permits and that 106 homes are currently under construction in the Woolsey rebuild area.

The planning director said the city’s rebuild center is open for walk‑ins and that contract planner support remains available for overflow capacity. “We’ve had 234 properties [meetings] at our rebuild center… that’s about 28 people in the last 2 weeks,” staff said, and the city has also recorded 48 follow‑up visits indicating applicants are moving toward final verification and plan check submittals.

Staff noted the council will consider a range of fire recovery items at an adjourned meeting: authorization to move forward on a fire‑rebuilding ambassador position; potential suspensions of temporary use permit (TUP) fees to aid local business recovery; and a council letter in support of AB 1253 (home rebuild fair notes and property‑tax relief). The planning director also reminded residents that the city is investigating a scam in which false emails purport to be from planning staff and request wire transfers; staff urged residents to call the city and the sheriff if they receive suspicious requests.

Public comment included a number of residents describing project‑specific permitting delays for private rebuilds; one speaker asked the commission to note how the hybrid meeting experience and prior technical problems had interfered with public notice and considered Brown Act issues. Staff said the city is planning further outreach (including wildfire support group sessions) and will continue to allow remote participation when technically possible, but that upcoming agendas will strongly recommend in‑person attendance to ensure ability to participate if remote connections fail.

Staff characterized the implementation risk for rebuild work as primarily administrative and logistical — plan check bottlenecks and contractor capacity — and encouraged residents to visit the open rebuild center and to report scams or suspicious email requests for funds.

Outcome: informational staff report; no formal action taken.