Why is everyone ignoring the effect of suburban sprawl on the LA wildefires

First off the fire is awful and losing your home and all our belongings like that is tragic. No one deserves that.

BUT

In all the coverage I've read and seen, the idea that houses had to be built in the wildland-urban interface is treated as a forgone conclusion. This fire is the inevitable consequence of that mode of thought.

The NYT this morning basically said "Increasing fire standards will make it so we have spread houses out even more, meaning fewer homes, which would make the housing crisis worse". They mentioned that climate change is having an effect but that's it

No discussion of just not building there anymore, or building denser father from the wildlands. The American mind (and I suppose the southern californian mind even more so) can only envision endless sprawl. At this rate. we're doomed to an even worse fire in 5 to 10 years.

Perhaps it's that this whole thing is devastating and fresh, so there is no appetite for hearing that you'll never rebuild there again. Maybe in a few months we can more soberly evaluate if rebuilding SFH sprawl in fire prone areas is good idea. Maybe. But I'm not holding my breath