Don't think of it as recovery. These fires are good not just for forests, but for many types of wildlife ranging from deer to birds to butterflies. The specific type of succession is going to depend on where the fire was and how intense it was, but if you check out an area a couple years, to 5 to 10 years and on, you see a neat cycle. Including sometimes just incredible wildflower seasons early on. (Assuming we are talking ski country and similar type ecosystems; there are some areas that take a bit longer, just because things like Joshua trees grow real slowly...but there are plenty of Joshua trees to be seen anyway.) Look to places like Yellowstone, now, or Yosemite, for that matter, and see what areas with big burns say 25 years ago have experienced.
Even for real-hot fires, there's a lot more in the way of unburned stands of trees and such here and there than most people realize. It's just a process, just like high tide and low tide at the beach.
Here's some pictures from local to me - I won't editorialize this, other than to say that in microclimate zones I suspect outcomes and timelines are harder to predict, and I also suspect that many WUI zones have appealing micro climates.
This is Mount Herman, which is part of the Rampart Range and about 10 miles from the Black Forest Fire just for reference. A 900 acre fire burned to the summit in 1989.
The burn zone is obvious today:
A post fire picture I found...not particularly intense by large fire standards:
The dominance of gamble oak as seen from inside the burn zone:
And blog commentary from a small org working to restore the forest:
The Front Range of Colorado is really a continental climate transition zone. The extent to which nature can regrow conifer forests in large burn zones is an open question here. The Mt. Herman burn zone is a single example, and it is starkly beautiful in some ways, but a naturally regrowing forest within human generational timelines it is not.