The Brief

For years, Bob Hughes had been eyeing a corner lot just down the street from his San José office, where he runs a building firm.

The single-family property at Lantz and Foxworthy avenues — shrouded by trees and sitting on just under 12,000 square feet in a quiet residential neighborhood near Cambrian Park — seemed ripe for development. So when he got the opportunity to purchase it, Hughes immediately began thinking about how to split the lot.

“The original house here was just covered with foliage all across the front — large trees and plants,” he said. “You couldn’t even see the house.”

Now, nearly three years later, Hughes is a few weeks away from becoming the second developer in the state to successfully take advantage of a new law that allows homeowners to sell ADUs as condos.

The first, on Josefa Street near San José’s downtown by developer AlphaX RE Capital, got its official certification from the city in a public ceremony on Thursday. Standing in front of a white backyard cottage with a sloping roof, Mayor Matt Mahan said the home represented “history in the making.”

“ADUs are affordable by design and growing in popularity across the state. And now, they can offer the most accessible form of homeownership, as well,” he said. “We are offering a proof of concept for California and hope that other cities follow San José’s lead.”

The law, AB 1033 by former San Francisco Assemblymember Phil Ting, went into effect in 2024 and allows cities to opt into the new rules. San José became the first city last year to adopt them. Since then, at least a handful of other cities have followed, including Santa Monica, Santa Cruz, San Francisco and San Diego. Berkeley planning officials expect to put forward an ordinance in September to allow condo sales.

Robert Hughes, a long-time developer from the South Bay, stands outside of a condominium for sale in San José on Aug. 13, 2025.

(

Tâm Vũ

/

KQED

)

The goal, supporters say, is to encourage more affordable ownership opportunities in a state where just 15% of households could reasonably afford to purchase the median-priced single-family home, according to the California Association of Realtors.

Rafael Perez, board chair of the Casita Coalition, which championed the law, lauded California for making significant strides in permitting new ADUs — with over 30,000 permitted last year, representing a quarter of California’s projected housing stock.

But early iterations of the law had prohibited selling them as condos, with some exceptions. Two surveys, from UC Berkeley’s Terner Center for Housing Innovation and the South Bay Cities Council of Government, found that about 65% of ADUs are offered as long-term rentals, either on the private market or to family and friends for free.

“ADUs weren’t moving the needle on homeownership as much as we would like,” Perez said. “ADU condos open up that door of possibility.”

But so far, city officials in Santa Monica and Santa Cruz, which adopted their versions of the law in October and January, respectively, said they had not yet received any applications. In San José, just two developers have filed applications to convert ADUs to condos — though, on Thursday, AlphaX committed to completing dozens more.

The paucity of enthusiasm — either from other cities looking to implement it or other property owners hoping to take advantage of it — isn’t entirely surprising, several observers said.

For owners with mortgages, the conversion not only requires securing lenders’ approval but also potentially devaluing the existing home, since condos are typically valued less, said Martina Davis, a planning division manager for the city of San José.

“If you have a big mortgage, your bank might not be OK with that,” Davis said. “Or you may look at it and say, ‘Wait, hold on, I need to retain the full value of the house.’”

Anecdotally, Davis said most of the interest in converting ADUs to condos in San José has come from developers for whom those obstacles may not apply. Though Hughes said the newness of the law, along with some of its provisions, has presented its own challenges.

The kitchen at 2985 Lantz Ave. in San José on Aug. 13, 2025.

(

Tâm Vũ

/

KQED

)

Unlike traditional condos, the law requires the ADU to receive a certificate of occupancy before undergoing condominium mapping — a process that’s taken Hughes about six months of precious time sitting on two vacant homes. And after San José officials certify the units as condos, they’ll need approval from the county, as well.

“I’ve got a lot of money tied up here,” he said. “I want to hurry this along.”

For AlphaX, the decision to use the law was more of an experiment to test whether it could work. The company had already purchased the lot and had renters living in both the main home and ADU.

“We are not afraid to be the pioneer,” said Jia Li, the company’s chief asset manager. “If you solve this problem, or we explore the options, then there’s all these other opportunities that could come.”

But Jane Lin, chief investment officer for AlphaX, said it’s a model they think has promise. “At the end of the day, it’s just providing more housing. It’s one possible solution to help create more housing.”

Her company on Thursday said it hoped to complete another 85 ADU condos over the next year, which could be built for existing homeowners on lots they already own, or on lots the company purchases. Once it secures the land, Lin said, “ADUs go up fast.”

In Seattle, about 60% of all ADUs were sold as condos in 2024, according to a city dashboard. Nick Welch, a senior planner at Seattle’s Office of Planning and Community Development, said those figures may be even higher this year because the share of ADU condos has been rising, indicating strong demand for more affordable homeownership options.

According to a city report analyzing data from 2023, the median ADU sold at about 60% of the price of the associated main home and about half as much as a new, detached home.

“Plenty of people want to buy homes and are priced out of the market,” Welch said. “ADUs — just by virtue of being smaller and having a smaller lot area — are obviously sold for less than a new 4,000 square-foot single-family home. And so there’s plenty of demand for that type of ownership housing.”

However, Perez sees scenarios where existing homeowners could also benefit from converting their home and backyard cottage into condominiums. The law makes it possible to access their home’s equity, without taking on additional debt, he said. “They can sell off the ADU and with the proceeds, pay off what was left of that mortgage and be mortgage-free, right?”

The main home property associated with the condominium for sale at 2985 Lantz Ave., in San José, on Aug. 13, 2025.

(

Tâm Vũ

/

KQED

)

Or, they can sell to a family member. “For families that are seeing displacement, the ability to create an entry point in the backyard that’s more affordable than the homes they can’t afford is also a way that people are able to stay in the state.”

Hughes said he already has a buyer for the ADU he built in San José. The three-bedroom, two-bath, nearly 1,200 square-foot home will go for just under $1.6 million, as soon as the condominium map is approved.

The primary home, with five bedrooms, three bathrooms and nearly 2,900 square feet, is listed for more than $3 million.

While certainly not cheap, Hughes said, “No place in San José is, though. I mean, realistically, they are not.”

Hughes had the advantage of starting with a relatively big lot, which allowed him to build two units with separate entrances and utilities, making them more akin to single-family homes than condos.

“It’s unique because it’s on the corner, and the lot was big enough that I could build a 1,200 square-foot ADU,” Hughes said, noting that most lots will be smaller and have shared utilities. “It’s going to be down in a lower price range just by the size. So, therefore, it is creating that affordable home for somebody to go in there.”

More typical is the lot on Josefa Street, where AlphaX is recording the city’s first ADU-condominium-conversion map. The main home takes over most of the lot, with the ADU at the rear of the property. The two homes share a long driveway.

Lin said she wasn’t sure whether the company would ultimately sell the units as condos or continue to rent them out.

“It’s just the beginning,” she said. “So that’s why we’re all very happy and very excited to try.”

In the days immediately after last January’s Los Angeles firestorm, state lawmakers and civic leaders promised to turbocharge the rebuilding effort. For California, where the permitting and construction of homes is infamously slow and costly, the scale of destruction stood as a singular challenge.

A year later, the charred homes, the melted appliances and the toxic ash have mostly been removed, the dirt beneath scraped and then carted away. Many of the residents whose houses were spared have returned. Permits for reconstruction have been filed, architects and contractors hired. Battles with insurance companies, utilities and banks persist, vacant lots and blackened trees abound, but look around and — here and there — you’ll find new construction.

As of this week, more than 2,600 residential permits have been issued between the Palisades and Altadena — roughly one for every five of the nearly 13,000 homes lost. Another 3,340 are under review.

For many displaced and traumatized homeowners, that represents an intolerably slow return to what was. But by historic standards, the Los Angeles recovery has been on the speedy side so far.

In a press release commemorating the first anniversary of the disaster, Gov. Gavin Newsom lauded the permitting figures as “historic.”

Last year local governments — the City and County of Los Angeles, as well as Malibu and Pasadena — issued permits for single-family homes and accessory dwelling units “three times faster” than they were in the five years leading up to the fire, the administration noted.

Rebuilding after disaster is almost always a grueling, slow process. Of the more than 22,500 homes destroyed in five of California’s most destructive fires between 2017 and 2020, fewer than four-in-ten had been rebuilt by 2025, a Los Angeles Times analysis from late last summer found.

A year after major fires ripped through Maui, Paradise, Redding and the outskirts of Boulder, Colo., 2%, 3%, 15% and 30% of the destroyed homes, respectively, had been permitted for reconstruction, according to a separate Urban Institute analysis.

Based on the pace of permitting, Los Angeles’ reconstruction is on a relatively fast track. But freshly-pulled permits aren’t completed homes.

“People can pull permits, but you know, if they don't have their costs sorted out — we've had folks abandon their plans,” said Devang Shah with Genesis Builders, which is selling pre-approved, fixed-priced rebuilds in Altadena. Using permits as a metric of progress may be premature, he said.

Some of the speedy progress that Los Angeles has seen may be due to regulatory changes imposed by fiat in the aftermath of the fire. In early 2025, both Newsom and Mayor Karen Bass mandated speedier permitting of like-for-like rebuilds — construction that stuck to the rough dimensions and design specification of the home that was there before. Los Angeles county rolled out a self-certification building plan approval pilot program for certain simple projects. Newsom waived building code requirements intended to ease the cost of reconstruction.

“We’ve got planning approvals in three days that would have normally taken three months,” said Tim Vordtriede, an architect who also lost his home in Altadena. The county has “done a remarkable job at making things as efficient and streamlined as a bureaucratic entity can.”

In the weeks after the fire, Vordtriede co-founded the Altadena Collective, a network of designers and architects that provides discounted design services, permitting advice and contractor recommendations to local survivors. He and his co-founders Chris Driscoll and Chris Corbett have also launched a nonprofit called Collective OR that is meant to represent inexperienced and anxious homeowners in negotiations with builders and architects.

The pace of reconstruction may simply benefit from the fact that it’s taking place in Los Angeles County: A mammoth economic hub flush with financial resources and political connections.

“We have access to a really good supply chain, there’s a lot of capital, there’s a lot of infrastructure,“ said Ben Stapleton, director of U.S. Green Building Council California.

That’s in contrast to a town like Paradise.

Since the majority of homes were destroyed in the 2018 Camp Fire, fewer than one-in-five have since been rebuilt, said Colette Curtis, the Butte County town’s recovery and economic development director.

She cautioned against comparing the pace of rebuilding efforts across communities struck by disaster.

“It's impossible to say, ‘they were here by this date so we should also be there,’” she said. “The data set is just too variable.”

Paradise, a remote town with relatively low income, lacked the local services and philanthropic draw of places like Lahaina and the Palisades, she said. But lower land values and the fact that displaced homeowners haven’t had to compete with investors setting aside new units for tourist rentals was a net positive.

Another thing that may give Los Angeles a leg up: It’s a region that’s also heavy on expertise.

At around the same time that Vordtriede was setting up the Altadena Collective, nearby architect couple Cynthia Sigler and Alex Athenson launched the Foothill Catalog, a packet of ready-made architectural and structural plans that have been pre-approved by L.A. County.

With roughly 15 projects either under construction or gearing up to break ground, Athenson said the pre-approval process can shave at least 10% off the total development cost of a custom single-family home.

That’s in part by trimming the approval process. But that's also because prior to the fire, a "custom single-family home" in ALtadena was a luxury product.

The local industry is “set up to serve that client who is building their dream home from scratch, with a very large if not unlimited budget,” said Athenson. Long-time homeowners displaced by fire, many of them on fixed incomes, represent a very different kind of buyer.

As builders, designers and policymakers scramble to rebuild in faster, cheaper and more fire-resilient ways, they may stumble upon a solution that could be of use long after the last home is rebuilt in Altadena, he added.

“Ultimately, we're providing a system for more efficient, affordable housing development,” said Athenson. “I'm excited about proving it in Altadena, and then seeing where it goes beyond.”

So far the county has approved more than two dozen of the catalog’s plans. Athenson said they are now discussing rolling out a similar batch for the Palisades with the City of Los Angeles.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

A high-profile defense attorney for Nick Reiner, who is accused of killing his famous parents in their Brentwood home, has stepped down from the case and arraignment has been pushed to next month.

Reiner, 32, was expected to be arraigned Wednesday morning in Los Angeles County Superior Court in connection with the deaths of his parents, Hollywood legend Rob Reiner and Michele Singer Reiner, last month.

Instead, Nick Reiner’s lawyer, Alan Jackson, revealed to Judge Theresa McGonigle that he was withdrawing from the case.

"Circumstances beyond our control, but more importantly, circumstances beyond Nick’s control have dictated that sadly it's made it impossible for us to continue our representation of Nick,” Jackson told reporters after Reiner's brief court appearance.

The attorney said he is "legally and ethically" prohibited from explaining why he would no longer represent Reiner.

“We know the legal process will reveal the true facts of the circumstances surrounding this case,” Jackson continued. "We’ve investigated this matter top to bottom and front to back.“

He also said, "pursuant to the law in California, Nick Reiner is not guilty of murder,” and, “We wish him the very best.”

The L.A. County Public Defender’s Office will to take over Reiner’s defense.

“This is a challenging time for the entire legal process,” said L.A. County Public Defender Ricardo Garcia. “We ask for your patience, your understanding as we navigate this process through the legal system”

Nick Reiner has admitted in the past to struggles with drug addiction and mental illness. It remains unclear how much of that will factor into the case.

Deputy Public Defender Kimberly Greene, who will represent Reiner in court, said she had only spoken to her client briefly Wednesday morning.

“We’ve had no contact with the family," she said outside court. "I don’t think they were aware this was going on until this morning.”

Reiner, the youngest of the famous couple’s four children, two counts of murder and special-circumstance allegations — multiple murders and use of a deadly weapon — that would make him eligible for the death penalty if convicted.

District Attorney Nathan Hochman has said his office has not yet determined whether it would seek death or life without the possibility of parole. Such decisions are usually made after a preliminary hearing where a judge hears evidence from prosecutors.

Hochman has said he would consider the family’s wishes when making his decision.

On Wednesday, he told reporters the charges would lead to conviction.

“We are fully confident that a jury will convict Nick Reiner beyond a reasonable doubt of the brutal murders of his parents,” he said.

Rob Reiner, 78, and Michele Singer Reiner, 68, were found dead Dec. 14 after police were called to their home on South Chadbourne Avenue.

Detectives with the Police Department’s elite Robbery Homicide Division, Homicide Special Section began an investigation and identified Reiner as the suspect, according to police.

The younger Reiner was located and arrested near Exposition Park close to USC at approximately 9:15 p.m., according to police. He remains in jail on a no-bail status.

His arraignment in now set for Feb. 23.

A year after the deadly Los Angeles County fires, California’s property insurance market remains problematic; survivors are suing insurers over delayed or denied claims; and most of the state’s policyholders are likely to see their premiums rise.

Seven in 10 L.A. fire survivors have yet to return home, some in part because of insurance claim delays, according to a new survey released this week by Department of Angels, a nonprofit group that was formed after the fires.

The survey also found that 4 in 10 insurance policyholders have experienced insurability issues, such as huge premium increases and dropped coverage, although state law mandates a one-year moratorium on insurers canceling or not renewing customers’ policies after the governor declares a state of emergency. Those with homes that did not burn down but are still standing are especially likely to have seen big increases in their premiums, according to the survey of 2,443 adults from Nov. 18 to Dec. 2, 2025.

Insurance premiums for everyone, not just fire survivors, were already expected to rise under new rules by Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara. The commissioner, under pressure to improve availability of insurance in the state, last January implemented a plan that aims for quicker rate reviews and allows insurers to use catastrophe modeling and reinsurance costs in setting their rates. The plan took effect just days before the L.A. fires.

Now the response to the fires could also lead to even higher insurance premiums across the board, said Amy Bach, executive director of consumer advocacy group United Policyholders.

“I advocate for disaster survivors, but also for the entire community of policyholders,” Bach said. “For every ‘Eliminate the List’ bill, for every improvement we make to prevent post-disaster trauma around under-insurance, there’s a cost.” She said such actions will have ramifications for both insurance affordability and availability.

“Eliminate the List,” which Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law last year, requires insurance companies to pay 60% of personal property coverage limits, up to $350,000, to policyholders who experience a total loss without requiring them to submit a detailed inventory for at least 100 days.

Still, Bach knows that such mandates are necessary to improve survivors’ experiences after a fire, and lawmakers are introducing new bills to address their concerns. Her own group released a survey in November, reporting policyholder complaints that included insurer communication delays, claims payment delays and being assigned multiple claims adjusters.

The Department of Angels survey found that customers of State Farm and the last-resort FAIR Plan — the two largest insurers in California — were the most dissatisfied with their insurers’ response. California’s insurance department is investigating State Farm’s response to the fires, and has taken legal action against the FAIR Plan over its response as well, especially to smoke-damage claims. Those insurers, along with other companies, are also facing policyholder lawsuits.

“Our customer feedback reflects a different experience than what is being reported,” said Tom Hartmann, a State Farm spokesperson, in an email. “We’re supporting more than 13,500 customers affected by the wildfires, more than any other carrier, and have already paid over $5 billion to help them recover.”

Sam Strgacich, left, and his wife Rossana Valverde, right, examine soot damage at their home in Pasadena on April 26, 2025.

(

Joel Angel Juarez

/

CalMatters

)

“We’ve paid almost $200,000 out of pocket to repair our home because of the FAIR Plan’s blanket denials of our remediation,” said Angela Giacchetti, a spokesperson for the Department of Angels who worked on the survey. She’s also a fire survivor whose Altadena home did not burn down but was badly damaged.

“While we are unable to comment on individual policyholders' claims, the California FAIR Plan does not direct where policyholders reside,” said Hilary McLean, a spokesperson for the plan. “The FAIR Plan evaluates every claim on its own merits and pays all covered claims up to the individual policy limits.”

The FAIR Plan said in a press release this week that it has handled about 5,400 claims and paid almost $3.5 billion to policyholders. It also said it “has taken steps to enhance its ability to serve policyholders” by securing a line of credit and reinsurance, helped by a $750 million catastrophe bond made possible by a new law allowing the FAIR Plan to get bond financing through the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank.

The American Property Casualty Insurance Association says insurance companies have paid $22.4 billion of the expected $40 billion in total claims from the L.A. fires.

The Department of Angels survey also found 79% of survivors are facing financial hardships, with more Black, Asian and Latino survivors falling behind on their rent or mortgage payments. In addition, 40% of those surveyed said they were very dissatisfied with the local, state and federal response to their needs.

Newsom said Tuesday that he is working with state lawmakers, the banking industry and others on new loans for rebuilding, and that the state will expand eligibility for the CalAssist Mortgage Fund. The governor’s office did not respond to CalMatters’ questions about whether he plans to propose any aid for renters who survived the fires, and about what else he is doing to continue to press the federal government for long-term disaster funding.

“This report says exactly what we’ve been hearing,” said Michael Soller, spokesperson for the insurance department. “Wildfire survivors want action and they want results.” He said the issues in the survey are top priorities for the department, and among other things pointed to a task force on smoke damage that the department has convened.

A bill sponsored by Lara and introduced by newly appointed Senate Insurance Committee Chair Steve Padilla, the Democrat from San Diego, late Tuesday would require insurance companies to submit to the state their disaster-recovery plans related to handling claims; double penalties for violations of fair claims practices during an emergency; expand upfront claims payments; give policyholders status updates within five days whenever their adjuster is replaced; and more.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.