CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION, COMMUNICATION FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY and ORDINANCE FIRST CONSIDERATION relative to amending the Los Angeles Administrative Code (LAAC) to add Council District 15, to the list of Council Districts where a mural may be placed on a lot that is developed with only one single-family residential structure and accessory structures.
Recommendations for Council action, SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE MAYOR:
FIND that this project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), based upon the CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, (Class 1 – Existing Facilities). As described in Section 15301: Class 1 consists of the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of the lead agency’s determination. …The key consideration is whether the project involves negligible or no expansion of an existing use.
PRESENT and ADOPT the accompanying ORDINANCE dated June 21, 2017, attached to the Council file, amending Section 22.119 of the LAAC to add Council District 15, as defined by Los Angeles Ordinance No. 182168, to the list of Council Districts where a mural may be placed on a lot that is developed with only one single-family residential structure and accessory structures.
Fiscal Impact Statement: None submitted by City Attorney. Neither the City Administrative Officer nor the Chief Legislative Analyst has completed a financial analysis of this report.
Community Impact Statement: None submitted.
(Arts, Parks, and River Committee waived consideration of the above matter)
Los Angeles city planners are taking the first step toward freshening up dozens of outdated community development plans throughout the city in the next six years, and they are starting in the San Fernando Valley.
These community plans can dictate whether apartments, single family homes or a mix of the two can be built in a particular neighborhood. The plans also are meant to reflect neighborhood character and vision that each respective community wants to see in their area.
The Los Angeles Planning Department has picked three community plans that affect the southwest portion of the Valley, and hope to have the updates to those plans adopted by 2020.
The “Canoga Park-Winnetka-Woodland Hills-West Hills,” “Encino-Tarzana” and “Reseda-West Van Nuys” plans are the three blueprints that are up first to be revised. These plans have not been updated since the late 1990s.
The neighborhood blueprints are being updated as a recently approved plan for the Warner Center area is expected to bring more density to parts of the southwest Valley, which has been known more for low-density, single-family homes. Other factors that may come into play during the update include plans to build up the public transit corridors in the area, such as the Orange Line.
Residents and other members of the public in the southwest Valley will have opportunities this week to begin learning about the city’s accelerated process for updating all 35 of the blueprints throughout the city.
On Wednesday evening, the Woodland Hills-Warner Center Neighborhood Council will host a presentation by the Planning Department during its regular meeting starting at 6:30 p.m. at the American Legion Hall, 5320 Fallbrook Ave.
A “Planning 101” event has also been scheduled for Saturday, from 9 a.m. to noon, at the Rose Goldwater Community Center at Westfield Topanga, on the corner of Vanowen Street and Owensmouth Avenue. The aim of the event is to provide information on how the city’s planning process works, as residents and stakeholders get ready to give input on the update of the southwest Valley plans, city officials said.
Mayor Eric Garcetti set the six-year community plan schedule into motion as a response to Measure S, a ballot initiative that was ultimately defeated, but tapped into some residents’ complaints that the city was ignoring community plans when approving development projects. With many of the community plans collecting dust for as long as 25 years, they are often not seen by developers, community members and the city as an accurate reflection of the needs of various neighborhoods.
Los Angeles city planners began making the rounds in May at local neighborhood council groups in the southwest Valley, and have set a schedule for additional community meetings taking place this summer, starting in July. The meetings are set for:
– July 12, in Encino, at 6:30 p.m.;
– July 13, in Canoga Park, at 6 p.m.;
– July 18, in West Hills, at 6 p.m.;
– July 19, in Reseda;
– July 25, in Lake Balboa;
– July 27, in Tarzana, at 6 p.m.; and
– Aug. 1, in Woodland Hills, at 6 p.m.
The city planning department’s website for the southwest San Fernando Valley plan update process can be found here.
LOS ANGELES- Today, the Department of City Planning (DCP) unveiled the updated version of the draft Hollywood Community Plan, which will shape the future of Hollywood by directing jobs and housing near major transit corridors. In particular, the Plan focuses most of the housing anticipated through the year 2040 in central Hollywood, in areas served by the Metro Red Line.
A key feature of the Plan includes a new interactive online map that allows users to search by address to view the proposed changes to zoning. The proposal and the interactive map are available on HCPU2.org.
As of May 17, 2017, unpermitted units may be eligible to be legalized through the Unpermitted Dwelling Unit (UDU) ordinance (Ord. No. 184,907). The ordinance established a voluntary program that allows property owners to legalize qualifying unpermitted units, assuming all life-safety conditions are met. These existing units may legally join the housing market should the owner follow the stipulated process, including providing at least one low or moderate income affordable housing unit for each legalized unit.Once legalized, these units add much-needed affordable housing to the City of Los Angeles.
For more information and to apply, please visit the Department of City Planning’s Development Services Center at 201 N. Figueroa, 4th Floor, or email dcpphp@lacity.org.
UDU LEGALIZATION PROCESSApplicants who have been cited for an unpermitted unit as a result of a building inspection, or wish to legalize a previously-created unit, may be eligible to legalize units through a streamlined application process. To legalize qualifying unpermitted units, applicants must complete a six-step process with the Department of City Planning (DCP), the Department of Building and Safety (LADBS), and the Housing and Community Investment Department (HCIDLA).
CF 14-1635-S3 STATUS: 03/27/2018 Referred to Housing Committee; Planning and Land Use Management Committee.
PLANNING AND LAND USE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE REPORT relative to exploring the technology-based options that exist for implementation and enforcement of a home-sharing Ordinance.
Recommendations for Council action, pursuant to Motion (Bonin – Wesson – Huizar):
INSTRUCT the Department of City Planning (DCP) and the Office of Finance, in consultation with the City Administrative Officer’s office as necessary, to prepare and release a Request for Information (RFI) seeking information from potential candidates to provide short-term rental permitting and enforcement information technology services.
INSTRUCT the DCP to report on the results of the RFI and recommendations for potential third-party contractors or consultants at such time as the proposed home-sharing Ordinance is considered by the Council.
Fiscal Impact Statement: Neither the City Administrative Officer nor the Chief Legislative Analyst has completed a financial analysis of this report.
Community Impact Statement: None submitted.
11/29/2018 Department of City Planning document(s) referred to Budget and Finance Committee; Housing Committee; Personnel and Animal Welfare Committee; Planning and Land Use Management Committee. Report from City Planning (November 28, 2018)
11/29/2018 Document(s) submitted by Department of City Planning, as follows:
Department of City Planning report, dated November 28, 2018, relative to the report back of the proposed Home Sharing Ordinance. Report from City Planning (November 28, 2018)
03/27/2018 Department of City Planning document(s) referred to Housing Committee; Planning and Land Use Management Committee. Report from Department of City Planning (October 19, 2017)
03/22/2018 Document(s) submitted by Department of City Planning, as follows: Report from Department of City Planning (October 19, 2017)
Department of City Planning report, dated March 22, 2018, relative to a third supplemental report back on the proposed Home-Sharing Ordinance.
03/18/2018 Community Impact Statement submitted by Greater Valley Glen Neighborhood Council. Refer to CF 14-1635-S3
02/21/2018 Community Impact Statement submitted by Rampart Village Neighborhood Council. Refer to CF 14-1635-S3
10/20/2017 Department of City Planning document(s) referred to Housing Committee; Planning and Land Use Management Committee. Report from Department of City Planning (October 19, 2017)
10/20/2017 Document(s) submitted by Department of City Planning, as follows: Report from Department of City Planning (October 19, 2017)
Department of City Planning report, dated October 19, 2017, relative to the proposed home-sharing ordinance.
Los Angeles – The City of Los Angeles achieved a major milestone in finalizing Plans for
the South Los Angeles and Southeast Los Angeles communities. On Thursday, June 22nd,
the City Planning Commission (CPC) unanimously recommended approval of the
Community Plans which will guide and shape future development for years to come. In
particular, the Plans will foster thriving transit centers, promote revitalized commercial
corridors, and preserve residential neighborhoods.
To learn more about the proposed Community Plans, please visit the South LA plan
website and the Southeast LA plan website.
Case No. CPC-2017-1240-CA, CEQA No. ENV-2017-1241-CE
CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION, PLANNING AND LAND USE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE REPORT and ORDINANCE FIRST CONSIDERATION relative to the Site Plan Review Process.
Recommendations for Council action, SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE MAYOR:
FIND that this action is categorically exempt (ENV-2017-1241-CE) from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5), and CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3).
ADOPT the FINDINGS of the Los Angeles City Planning Commission, approved on May 11, 2017, as the Findings of the Council.
PRESENT and ADOPT the accompanying ORDINANCE date June 15, 2017, amending Section 16.05 of Article 6.1, Chapter 1 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code to align the Site Plan Review process with existing administrative appeal timelines and recent changes to State environmental and redevelopment law.
06/30/2017 Mayor transmitted file to City Clerk. Ordinance effective date: August 14, 2017.
06/28/2017 City Clerk transmitted file to Mayor. Last day for Mayor to act is July 10, 2017.
06/27/2017 Council adopted item, subject to reconsideration, pursuant to Council Rule 51.06/22/2017 City Clerk scheduled item for Council on June 27, 2017 . Draft Ordinance (June 15, 2017)
06/20/2017 Planning and Land Use Management Committee approved item(s) .Report from City Attorney (June 15, 2017), Draft Ordinance (June 15, 2017)
06/16/2017 Planning and Land Use Management Committee scheduled item for committee meeting on June 20, 2017. Report from City Attorney (June 15, 2017), Draft Ordinance (June 15, 2017)
06/15/2017 City Attorney document(s) referred to Planning and Land Use Management Committee. Report from City Attorney (June 15, 2017), Draft Ordinance (June 15, 2017)
06/15/2017 Document(s) submitted by City Attorney, as follows: Report from City Attorney (June 15, 2017), Draft Ordinance (June 15, 2017)
City Attorney report R17-0202, dated June 15, 2017, relative to draft ordinance amending the Los Angeles Municipal Code to align the site plan review process with existing administrative appeal timelines and recent changes to State environmental and redevelopment law.
05/30/2017 Planning and Land Use Management Committee continued item to/for a date to be determined.Staff Report (May 17, 2017), Findings (May 17, 2017), Proposed Ordinance (May 17, 2017), Report from CPC (May 17, 2017), Environmental Documents (May 17, 2017)
05/26/2017 Planning and Land Use Management Committee scheduled item for committee meeting on May 30, 2017. Staff Report (May 17, 2017), Findings (May 17, 2017), Proposed Ordinance (May 17, 2017), Report from CPC (May 17, 2017), Environmental Documents (May 17, 2017)
05/19/2017 Los Angeles City Planning Commission document(s) referred to Planning and Land Use Management Committee. Staff Report (May 17, 2017), Findings (May 17, 2017), Proposed Ordinance (May 17, 2017), Report from CPC (May 17, 2017), Environmental Documents (May 17, 2017), Interested Parties (May 17, 2017)
Los Angeles City Planning Commission report, dated May 17, 2017, relative to an ordinance amending section 16.05 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code to align provisions of the Site Plan Review Ordinance with recent changes to State law.
“SATT’s Services Come to You” is pro bono land use consultation in the comfort of a mobile office at a convenient location in San Fernando Valley.
Every Monday morning, check my website (https://satt.edublogs.org/) and see if I will be in your community that week or you can subscribe to receive a weekly notice.
As a professional planner, who is a member of the American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP), SATT subscribes to the Institute’s Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct. SATT’s “Services Come to You” furthers the principle of “Responsibility to Our Profession and Colleagues” which includes educating the public about planning issues and their relevance to our everyday lives; and contributing time and effort to groups lacking in adequate planning resources and to volunteer professional activities.
Food trucks have become increasingly popular in recent years. They are also complicated from a regulatory standpoint because they are both vehicles and food service establishments. As a result, food truck operators typically must obtain several state and local authorizations to do business in a given location. This blog post will sort through applicable food truck laws and regulations and cite examples of approaches taken by Washington municipalities that regulate food trucks in their jurisdictions.
What is a Food Truck?
You might know one if you see it, but according to the State Department of Labor and Industries (L&I) a food truck is a licensed vehicle from which food is sold at temporary sites. Workers work inside the food truck but the public stays outside. Also, a food truck is no more than 8.5 feet wide and has at least one of the following: an electrical system, a water or drain system, or a propane gas system.
From L&I’s perspective, if customers can come inside, then the establishment may be a commercial coach (if it is a vehicle) or a modular building (if it is not a vehicle). If workers serve or deliver food outside, then it may be a push cart or food delivery truck. Local jurisdictions may choose to include food trucks with other types of temporary merchants and mobile vendors for regulatory purposes.
Business License Requirements
Like other businesses, a food truck is required to have a state business license. Cities and counties typically require food trucks to obtain local business licenses as well.
Food truck operators note that it can be burdensome to obtain business licenses from the different jurisdictions in which they would like to do business. Some cities, like Wenatchee, provide temporary business licenses at reduced cost to vendors who seek to do business in the city for a limited period of time. Other jurisdictions, such as the City of Ellensburg, will not require a business license from a vendor that is an authorized participant in a permitted special event.
Health Department Requirements
In order to serve food, operators are required to obtain a permit from the local health department. Health departments require detailed plans to minimize the risk of food-borne illness. Since health departments generally have county-wide jurisdiction, food truck owners must obtain approval when they wish to operate in a new county.
Snohomish Health District recently indicated that it would not require plan review from operators who have current permits in King or Pierce counties. This step significantly streamlines the permit process and saves operators approximately $400 in fees. Snohomish Health District indicates that it is the first health district in the state to try this approach.
Local Food Truck Regulations
Cities have a broad amount of discretion with respect to issuing permits for food truck locations. Cities often require prior approval for a food truck operator to operate in a specific location. For example, the City of Lacey designates certain areas in the right-of-way for food truck use and also provides that food trucks may operate in certain zones with the prior authorization of the City.
In addition, some cities specify that food trucks may not operate within a certain distance of “brick and mortar” establishments. For example, Everett’s code provides that food trucks may not be located within 250 feet of a restaurant or café. The question of how best to regulate food trucks is mostly a question of policy. Here is a link to additional examples of regulations applicable to food trucks.
Food Trucks on Public or Private Property (Non-Right of Way)
Food trucks outside the right-of-way present a few unique issues. First, food trucks on public property, such as a park, trigger a requirement to pay leasehold excise tax pursuant to chapter 82.29A RCW. Agencies will want to factor that into account when setting food truck rates and be sure to remit the tax to the Department of Revenue.
Second, some businesses, such as brew pubs, consider food trucks to be complimentary to their operations and allow food trucks to provide service on their property. To the extent a business owner provides space for food trucks on a regular basis, the use of that space may be subject to transportation impact fees. For example, Mount Vernon provides in its zoning provisions that transportation impact fees shall be assessed for mobile food van uses.
Looking Forward: A Move towards Standardized Regulations?
In April, the Washington State Food Truck Association held a Food Truck Lobby Day in Olympia. The purpose of the event was to call the legislature’s attention to the many different local regulations applicable to food trucks. MRSC is not aware of any proposed legislation to standardize food truck regulations, but we will keep you posted!
Questions or comments? Please leave a comment below or email me at orey@mrsc.org.
About Oskar Rey
Oskar Rey has practiced municipal law since 1995 and served as Assistant City Attorney for the City of Kirkland from 2005 to 2016, where he worked on a wide range of municipal topics, including land use, public records, and public works. Oskar is a life-long resident of Washington and graduated from the University of Washington School of Law in 1992.
The California Department of Food and Agriculture recently released its CalCannabis Cultivation Licensing Draft Program Environmental Impact Report. The intent of the PEIR is to conduct environmental review of the regulations and the activities proposed by CDFA to implement the Medical Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act and the Adult Use of Marijuana Act. Agencies and interested parties may provide input on the environmental analyses, mitigation measures, and alternatives associated with statewide cannabis cultivation until July 31 at 5 p.m.
MCRSA and AUMA establish a regulatory structure for cultivation, processing, manufacturing, tracking, quality control, testing, inspection, distribution and retail sale of commercial cannabis. CDFA is required to promulgate regulations to license commercial cannabis cultivation. It must also establish a “track-and-trace” system, which involves developing a unique identifier for each plant, a reporting system and documentation of the plants’ paths from cultivation to distribution as a commercial cannabis product.
The Draft PEIR, released June 15, identifies multiple impacts from CDFA’s implementation of the proposed regulations, such as those to agricultural resources, air quality, and hydrology and water quality. However, it concludes that none of those impacts (save to cultural and tribal cultural resources) require mitigation and that none of the impacts would be significant with the implementation of mitigation.
The Draft PEIR identifies the “No High-Intensity Grow Light Alternative” as the environmentally superior alternative. That alternative would require that all cannabis cultivation operations use natural light and/or low-intensity artificial light. This would eliminate the license types of indoor cultivation and would restrict mixed-light cultivation to the use of low-intensity lighting. In addition, outdoor licenses would not be allowed to use high-intensity grow lights for propagation. The alternative would include a track-and-trace component similar to that described for the proposed program. However, the Legislature would need to amend MCRSA and AUMA to allow this alternative’s implementation.
If you would like Best Best & Krieger to assist you with the preparation of comments on the Draft PEIR or with review of any cannabis-related legislation, please contact the authors of this Legal Alert listed to the right in the firm’s Special Districts, Environmental Law & Natural Resources or Municipal Law practice groups, or your BB&K attorney.
Disclaimer: BB&K Legal Alerts are not intended as legal advice. Additional facts or future developments may affect subjects contained herein. Seek the advice of an attorney before acting or relying upon any information in this communiqué.
“SATT’s Services Come to You” is pro bono land use consultation in the comfort of a mobile office at a convenient location in San Fernando Valley.
Every Monday morning, check my website (https://satt.edublogs.org/) and see if I will be in your community that week or you can subscribe to receive a weekly notice.
As a professional planner, who is a member of the American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP), SATT subscribes to the Institute’s Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct. SATT’s “Services Come to You” furthers the principle of “Responsibility to Our Profession and Colleagues” which includes educating the public about planning issues and their relevance to our everyday lives; and contributing time and effort to groups lacking in adequate planning resources and to volunteer professional activities.
ORDINANCE SECOND CONSIDERATION amending Section 12.03 of Article 2 of Chapter 1 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code to add a definition for the Urban Agriculture Incentive Zone (UAIZ) Program and adding a new Chapter 17 to Division 19 of the Los Angeles Administrative Code implementing the Los Angeles City UAIZ Program to promote urban agriculture in exchange for reduced property tax assessments in accordance with California Government Code Sections 51040 et seq., and County of Los Angeles Planning and Zoning Code Sections 22.52.3400 et seq., commonly known as the UAIZ Act.
(Categorical Exemption, Planning and Land Use Management Committee Report adopted in Council on June 13, 2017)
—
06/13/2017 Council adopted item (vote: 10-0); Ordinance held over for second reading on June 20, 2017. PLUM report (May 30, 2017), Draft Ordinance Sec. 12.03 (May 4, 2017), Draft Ordinance Sec. 19.170 (May 5, 2017)
06/06/2017 City Clerk scheduled item for Council on June 13, 2017 . PLUM report (May 30, 2017), Draft Ordinance Sec. 12.03 (May 4, 2017), Draft Ordinance Sec. 19.170 (May 5, 2017)
05/30/2017 Planning and Land Use Management Committee approved item(s) . Form Contract (May 4, 2017), Report from City Attorney (May 4, 4017), Draft Ordinance Sec. 12.03 (May 4, 2017), Draft Ordinance Sec. 19.170 (May 5, 2017)
05/05/2017 City Attorney document(s) referred to Planning and Land Use Management Committee. Form Contract (May 4, 2017), Report from City Attorney (May 4, 4017), Draft Ordinance Sec. 12.03 (May 4, 2017), Draft Ordinance Sec. 19.170 (May 5, 2017)
05/26/2017 Planning and Land Use Management Committee scheduled item for committee meeting on May 30, 2017. Form Contract (May 4, 2017), Report from City Attorney (May 4, 4017), Draft Ordinance Sec. 12.03 (May 4, 2017), Draft Ordinance Sec. 19.170 (May 5, 2017)
05/05/2017 City Attorney document(s) referred to Planning and Land Use Management Committee. Form Contract (May 4, 2017), Report from City Attorney (May 4, 4017), Draft Ordinance Sec. 12.03 (May 4, 2017), Draft Ordinance Sec. 19.170 (May 5, 2017)
05/04/2017 Document(s) submitted by City Attorney, as follows: Form Contract (May 4, 2017), Report from City Attorney (May 4, 4017), Draft Ordinance Sec. 12.03 (May 4, 2017), Draft Ordinance Sec. 19.170 (May 5, 2017)
City Attorney report R17-0140, dated May 4, 2017, relative to a draft ordinance amending section 12.03 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code to add a definition for Urban Agriculture incentive zone and adding a new Chapter 17 to Division 19 of the Los Angeles Administrative Code to establish an Urban Agriculture Incentive Zone
Los Angeles City Planning Commission report, dated December 6, 2016, relative to an Ordinance amending Section 12.03 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code to add a definition for Urban Agricultural Incentive Zone and establish an Urban Agricultural Incentive Zone program.
Press Release (June 13, 2017) Department of City Planning Releases Proposed Hollywood Community Plan
LOS ANGELES- Today, the Department of City Planning (DCP) unveiled the updated version of the draft
Hollywood Community Plan, which will shape the future of Hollywood by directing jobs and housing near
major transit corridors. In particular, the Plan focuses most of the housing anticipated through the year 2040
in central Hollywood, in areas served by the Metro Red Line.
To Rules, Elections, Intergovernmental Relations, and Neighborhoods Committee
Motion (Wesson, Jr. – Koretz – Price, Jr. – Harris-Dawson – Huizar) – Instruct the Chief Legislative Analyst, with the assistance of the City Administrative Officer, the Department of City Planning, the City Attorney’s office, the Los Angeles Police Department, and any other department as needed, to solicit a social equity analysis of cannabis regulations aimed at promoting equitable ownership and employment opportunities in the cannabis industry.
Public Hearing CPC-2017-2260-CA SATT DOES NOT ACTIVELY MONITOR THIS TOPIC
PROPOSED PROJECT: An amendment to the Los Angeles Municipal Code concerning location restrictions and limited immunity from enforcement of specified City prohibitions relating to commercial cannabis activity consistent with Measure M adopted by Los Angeles City voters on March 7, 2017.
PLACE: Los Angeles City Hall, Room 1010
200 N Spring St, Los Angeles CA 90012
DATE: Thursday June 29, 2017
TIME: 10:00 a.m. – 12:00 noon
This notice is to inform you of a public hearing for case number CPC-2017-2260-CA, a proposed amendment to the Los Angeles Municipal Code concerning location restrictions and limited immunity from enforcement of specified City prohibitions relating to commercial cannabis activity consistent with Measure M adopted by Los Angeles City voters on March 7, 2017. All interested persons are invited to attend the public hearing, at which you may listen, speak, and submit written information relating to the proposed amendment.
Please submit comments by 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, July 12, 2017 to:
Niall Huffman niall.huffman@lacity.org, (213) 978-3405.
Case No. CPC-2015-4474-CA, CEQA No. ENV-2015-4475-CE
05/16/2017 Council Action. Vote Action: Adopted Vote Given: (12 – 0 – 3) Council Action (May 16, 2017), Communication from Mayor (May 12, 2017), Final Ordinance (May 12, 2017), Report from Housing Committee (May 10, 2017)
05/12/2017 City Clerk transmitted file to Mayor. Last day for Mayor to act is May 22, 2017.
05/12/2017 Mayor transmitted file to City Clerk. Ordinance effective date: May 17, 2017.
05/10/2017 Council adopted item, subject to reconsideration, pursuant to Council Rule 51.
05/09/2017 Council continued item to/for May 10, 2017 (Public hearing closed on May 9, 2017). Report from Housing Committee (May 10, 2017), Draft Ordinance (April 18, 2017),
04/20/05/12/2017 City Clerk transmitted file to Mayor. Last day for Mayor to act is May 22, 2017.
05/10/2017 Council adopted item, subject to reconsideration, pursuant to Council Rule 51. Vote Action: Adopted Vote Given: (12 – 0 – 3) Report from Housing Committee (May 10, 2017), Draft Ordinance (April 18, 2017),
05/09/2017 Council continued item to/for May 10, 2017 (Public hearing closed on May 9, 2017) City Clerk scheduled item for Council on May 9, 2017 . Report from Housing Committee (May 10, 2017), Draft Ordinance (April 18, 2017),
04/19/2017 City Attorney document(s) referred to Housing Committee; Planning and Land Use Management Committee. Draft Ordinance (April 18, 2017), Report from City Attorney (April 18, 2017), Report from City Attorney (April 7, 2017)
04/19/2017 City Clerk transmitted Council File to Planning and Land Use Management Committee – Draft Ordinance (April 18, 2017), Report from City Attorney (April 18, 2017), Report from City Attorney (April 7, 2017)
04/19/2017 Housing Committee approved as amended to receive and file Ordinance dated April 6, 2017, and to approve Ordinance dated April 18, 2017 and Categorical Exemption. Draft Ordinance (April 18, 2017), Report from City Attorney (April 18, 2017), Report from City Attorney (April 7, 2017)
04/18/2017 Document(s) submitted by City Attorney, as follows: Draft Ordinance (April 18, 2017), Report from City Attorney (April 18, 2017)
City Attorney report R17-0111, dated April 18, 2017, relative to a revised draft ordinance adding Subdivision 10 to Section 14.00.A of Article 4 of Chapter 1 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code to establish a process to legalize unpermitted dwelling units.
04/14/2017 Housing Committee scheduled item for committee meeting on April 19, 2017. Report from City Attorney (April 7, 2017), Revised Draft Ordinance (April 7, 2017)
04/10/2017 City Attorney document(s) referred to Housing Committee; Planning and Land Use Management Committee. Report from City Attorney (April 7, 2017), Revised Draft Ordinance (April 7, 2017)
04/07/2017 Document(s) submitted by City Attorney, as follows: Report from City Attorney (April 7, 2017), Revised Draft Ordinance (April 7, 2017)
City Attorney report R17-0104, dated April 7, 2017, relative to a second revised draft ordinance adding Subdivision 10 to Section 14.00 A Article 4 of Chapter 1 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code to establish a process to legalize unpermitted dwelling units.
04/06/2017 City Clerk transmitted Council File to Mayor in error. Council action on March 29, 2017 instructed City Attorney to prepare a revised ordinance to be considered at a later date.
03/31/2017 City Clerk transmitted file to Mayor. Last day for Mayor to act is April 10, 2017.
03/29/2017 Council adopted item as amended, subject to reconsideration, pursuant to Council Rule 51. Motion 5-A (March 29, 2017), Report from Planning and Management Committee (March 31, 2017)
03/22/2017 City Clerk scheduled item for Council on March 29, 2017 . Report from Planning and Management Committee (March 31, 2017)
03/22/2017 Housing Committee waived consideration of item . Report from City Attorney (March 17, 2017) , Revised Draft Ordinance (March 17, 2017)
03/21/2017 Planning and Land Use Management Committee approved item(s) . Report from City Attorney (March 17, 2017) , Revised Draft Ordinance (March 17, 2017)
03/17/2017 Planning and Land Use Management Committee scheduled item for committee meeting on March 21, 2017. Report from City Attorney (March 17, 2017) , Revised Draft Ordinance (March 17, 2017)
03/17/2017 City Attorney document(s) referred to Planning and Land Use Management Committee.Report from City Attorney (March 17, 2017) , Revised Draft Ordinance (March 17, 2017)
03/17/2017 Document(s) submitted by City Attorney, as follows:Report from City Attorney (March 17, 2017) , Revised Draft Ordinance (March 17, 2017)
City Attorney revised report R17-0086, dated March 17, 2017, relative to a draft ordinance adding Subdivision 10 to Section 14.00 A of Chapter 1 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code to establish a process to legalize unpermitted dwelling units.
10/05/2016 City Attorney document(s) referred to Housing Committee; Planning and Land Use Management Committee. Report from City Attorney (October 4, 2016), Draft Ordinance (October 4, 2017)
10/04/2016 Document(s) submitted by City Attorney, as follows: Report from City Attorney (October 4, 2016), Draft Ordinance (October 4, 2017)
City Attorney report R16-0318, dated October 4, 2016, relative to a draft ordinance adding Subdivision 10 to Section 14.00 A Article 4 of Chapter 1 of the Municipal Code to establish a process to legalize unpermitted dwelling units.
05/10/2016 Council adopted item, subject to reconsideration, pursuant to Council Rule 51. Report from Housing Committee (May 4, 2016)
05/04/2016 City Clerk scheduled item for Council on May 10, 2016 . Report from Housing Committee (May 4, 2016) , .Attachment to Report dated 03/04/2016 – Interested Parties (March 3, 2017), Report from Los Angeles City Planning Commission (March 4, 2016), Attachment to Report dated 03/04/2016 – Proposed Ordinance (March 4, 2016) , Attachment to Report dated 03/04/2016 – Environmental Clearance (March 4, 2016)
04/20/2016 Planning and Land Use Management Committee waived consideration of item .Attachment to Report dated 03/04/2016 – Interested Parties (March 3, 2017), Report from Los Angeles City Planning Commission (March 4, 2016), Attachment to Report dated 03/04/2016 – Proposed Ordinance (March 4, 2016) , Attachment to Report dated 03/04/2016 – Environmental Clearance (March 4, 2016)
04/07/2016 City Clerk transmitted Council File to Planning and Land Use Management Committee. Attachment to Report dated 03/04/2016 – Interested Parties (March 3, 2017), Report from Los Angeles City Planning Commission (March 4, 2016), Attachment to Report dated 03/04/2016 – Proposed Ordinance (March 4, 2016) , Attachment to Report dated 03/04/2016 – Environmental Clearance (March 4, 2016)
04/06/2016 Housing Committee approved as amended to modify draft ordinance language regarding signage and to include an urgency clause in the final ordinance. Report from Los Angeles City Planning Commission (March 4, 2016), Attachment to Report dated 03/04/2016 – Proposed Ordinance (March 4, 2016) , Attachment to Report dated 03/04/2016 – Environmental Clearance (March 4, 2016)
04/01/2016 Housing Committee scheduled item for committee meeting on April 6, 2016. Attachment to Report dated 03/04/2016 – Interested Parties (March 3, 2017), Report from Los Angeles City Planning Commission (March 4, 2016), Attachment to Report dated 03/04/2016 – Proposed Ordinance (March 4, 2016) , Attachment to Report dated 03/04/2016 – Environmental Clearance (March 4, 2016)
04/01/2016 Corrected Referral per Council President to change referral to Housing Committee. Attachment to Report dated 03/04/2016 – Interested Parties (March 3, 2017), Report from Los Angeles City Planning Commission (March 4, 2016), Attachment to Report dated 03/04/2016 – Proposed Ordinance (March 4, 2016) , Attachment to Report dated 03/04/2016 – Environmental Clearance (March 4, 2016)
03/07/2016 Los Angeles City Planning Commission document(s) referred to Planning and Land Use Management Committee. Attachment to Report dated 03/04/2016 – Interested Parties (March 3, 2017), Report from Los Angeles City Planning Commission (March 4, 2016), Attachment to Report dated 03/04/2016 – Proposed Ordinance (March 4, 2016) , Attachment to Report dated
03/04/2016 Document(s) submitted by Los Angeles City Planning Commission, as follows: Attachment to Report dated 03/04/2016 – Interested Parties (March 3, 2017) , Report from Los Angeles City Planning Commission (March 4, 2016), Attachment to Report dated 03/04/2016 – Proposed Ordinance (March 4, 2016) , Attachment to Report dated 03/04/2016 – Environmental Clearance (March 4, 2016)
Los Angeles City Planning Commission report, dated March 4, 2016, relative to a proposed unapproved dwelling unit ordinance to amend Section 14.00 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code for the purpose of creating a new process for granting legal status to unapproved dwelling units in existing multiple-family buildings when certain affordability criteria are met.
— Historical as presented to City Council May 9,2017
CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION, PLANNING AND LAND USE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE REPORT and ORDINANCE FIRST CONSIDERATION relative to unpermitted dwelling units.
Recommendations for Council action, SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE MAYOR:
DETERMINE that the project is categorically exempt pursuant to City’s California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15301, and Class 1, Categories 1, 4 and 5 of the CEQA Guidelines. Projects that qualify for this exemption include those involving repair, permitting, or minor alteration of existing private or public structures or facilities, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of the lead agency’s determination. This determination that the project is exempt from CEQA as referenced above, is based on the whole of the administrative record, the lead agency’s independent judgment and analysis, and the determination that there is no substantial evidence demonstrating that an exception to a categorical exemption pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15300.2 applies.
ADOPT the FINDINGS approved by the Los Angeles City Planning Commission on February 25, 2016, as the Findings of the Council.
PRESENT and ADOPT the accompanying ORDINANCE dated March 17, 2017, adding Subdivision 10 to Section 14.00 A of Chapter 1 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code to preserve and create affordable housing units by establishing a process for granting legal status to existing unpermitted dwelling units in multiple-family buildings when certain affordability criteria and performance standards are met, in conformance with the State Density Bonus provisions in California Government Code section 65915.
INSTRUCT the Department of City Planning (DCP) to report in one year on the impacts that this policy has had and any proposed changes recommended by the DCP and the Housing and Community Investment Department.
Fiscal Impact Statement: None submitted by the City Attorney. Neither the City Administrative Officer nor the Chief Legislative Analyst has completed a financial analysis of this report.
Community Impact Statement: None submitted.
(Housing Committee waived consideration of the above matter)
URGENCY CLAUSE – 12 VOTES REQUIRED ON SECOND READING
AMENDING MOTION (CEDILLO – HUIZAR) ADOPTED as Amended, (14)
Recommendation for Council action:
REQUEST the City Attorney to prepare and present an ordinance as stated below, in anticipation of the preparation of approximately 600 covenants from owners submitting applications under this ordinance.
Prepare a revision to the ordinance relative to unpermitted dwelling units to include an amendment to Section 19.14(a) of Chapter 1 to clarify that the affordable housing covenants described under Section 14.00 A.10(c)(2) are subject to previously approved fees for covenant preparation, enforcement and monitoring as well as an amendment to Section 19.14(e), to remove the word initial since projects subject to this ordinance will already have existing certificate of occupancies. The purpose of these fees (as approved by Council on September 27, 2016 [Council file No. 13-0413]) is for cost recovery of HCIDLA effort involved in the implementation of this new ordinance.
To Planning and Land Use Management Committee
Mayor report, dated June 1, 2017, relative to the reappointment of Dana M. Perlman to the Los Angeles City Planning Commission for the term ending June 30, 2022. Mr. Perlman’s current term expires on June 30, 2017.
To Department of City Planning
Department of City Planning report, dated May 31, 2017, relative to possible zoning code changes to strengthen enforcement of the Rent Stabilization Ordinance and Ellis Act Provisions.
To Rules, Elections, Intergovernmental Relations, and Neighborhoods Committee
Chief Legislative Analyst report 17-05-0523, dated June 1, 2017, relative to Resolution (Bonin – Harris-Dawson) to include in the 2017-18 State Legislative Program its position for AB 1505 (Bloom), which would authorize the legislative body of any city and county to adopt ordinances to establish, as a condition of development, inclusionary housing/zoning requirements.
To Planning and Land Use Management Committee
Department of City Planning report, dated June 1, 2017, relative to revisions to the proposed Ordinance to establish an Affordable Housing Linkage Fee, to be derived from development projects and deposited into the proposed Housing Impact Trust Fund.
Suzanne Paulson, Ph.D.,
Yifang Zhu, Ph.D.
University of California, Los Angeles and
Akula Venkatram, Ph.D.
University of California, Riverside
Tuesday, June 6, 2017 at 2:00 p.m., PDT (WEBCAST)
Sierra Hearing Room, 2nd Floor, CalEPA Building
1001 I Street, Sacramento, California
Traffic-related air pollutants are a significant public health concern near freeways. Previous studies have suggested that
soundwall and/or vegetation barriers (defined here as any
substantial installation of vegetation on either side of the
sound barrier, trees or tall bushes etc.) may reduce near-freeway
air pollution, but the literature is inconsistent, and data for
vegetation and other conditions common in California are very
limited. This research project combined mobile and stationary
measurement and modeling approaches to evaluate the impact of
various barrier configurations at four sites in California, and
made pair-wise comparisons of the following configurations: no
wall, sound wall only, vegetation only, and combined
soundwall-vegetation combinations (eight study locations in
total, each with a perpendicular transect). Chosen study sites
were located along major highways in Santa Monica, Encino,
Sacramento and Riverside, and if present, trees were
substantially taller than the solid barriers. Three of these
sites were chosen as test sites for daytime conditions
(Sacramento, Encino and Riverside) and one was chosen for
nighttime and early morning conditions (Santa Monica). For more
go to the announcement at: https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/seminars/paulson6/paulson6.htm
Businessman Ali Awad went to Los Angeles City Hall five years ago with a simple plan: Build 24 new homes on a vacant lot, next to the interchange of the 91 and 110 freeways.
The Planning Commission shot down that idea, worrying that nearby car and truck emissions would pose a health risk to future residents. At the time, a top advisor to Councilman Joe Buscaino said the property was “clearly not a good place” for homes.
Now, Awad is back with a more modest proposal: 15 single-family houses on the same site, located in L.A.’s Harbor Gateway neighborhood. This time around, Buscaino is entertaining the idea.
Buscaino spokesman Branimir Kvartuc said L.A. is facing a housing crisis and needs more homes to address rising prices. He argued that L.A. has already approved other residential projects near the 110 Freeway, including the Da Vinci apartments, which hugs the 110-101 interchange.
“Let’s say air quality is an issue. Let’s say that,” Kvartuc said. “How different is it than every single house in Harbor Gateway? That’s why he’s neutral at the moment. There’s good arguments on both sides.”
Kvartuc said Buscaino, who serves on the board of the South Coast Air Quality Management District, asked the developer to include features to reduce the effect of nearby vehicle emissions. Beyond that, Buscaino has not taken a position, he said.
California air quality officials have warned for more than a decade against building new homes within 500 feet of freeways, noting that residents in those areas suffer from higher rates of asthma, heart attacks, lung cancer and pre-term births. Yet a recent Times analysis found Los Angeles has experienced a spate of home building in those locations, with thousands of units going up.
Awad’s project lies about 100 feet west of the 110 and 150 feet north of the 91, according to a report prepared by the Department of City Planning. Some homes in the Awad subdivision could come within 60 feet of a swooping 110 freeway ramp, according to a map of the project submitted last year.
Foes of the development say it would generate additional traffic, making streets more dangerous. They also contend that Awad has been relying on a secret weapon to get his project through: state Assemblyman Mike Gipson, who represents their neighborhood in a district stretching from South Los Angeles to Wilmington.
Gipson spoke in favor of the development during a neighborhood meeting on the project in October. Four people who attended that meeting told The Times that during questions from the audience, Gipson said he had been working as a consultant, or paid advocate, on the project, which is located at 173rd and Hoover streets.
Harbor Gateway resident Craig Kusunoki looks from his backyard wall onto the site of a proposed 15-home subdivision planned near the interchange of the 110 and 91 Freeways. Opponents say future residents will face noise and air pollution from nearby cars and trucks. (Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times)
Ronald Robinson, who lives in Harbor Gateway and opposes the development, said he and his neighbors became angry over Gipson’s remarks. “It was — ‘You’re my representative. Shouldn’t you be representing me, and not the developer?’” Robinson said.
Harbor Gateway resident Frank Madarasz said he too heard Gipson speak at the Oct. 1 meeting, conducted by the Harbor Gateway North Neighborhood Council’s Planning and Land Use Committee. Madarasz said Gipson was confronted about whether he worked on the 15-home project — and responded by telling the audience it was legal for him to have outside income.
“He said, ‘I can have a second job,’” Madarasz said.
Gipson declined interview requests from The Times. In an email, Gipson chief of staff Mark Lomeli said Gipson has not been paid by either the developer or the developer’s consultant. Although Gipson attended three meetings on the Harbor Gateway project last year, he has no financial stake in it, Lomeli said.
“Mr. Gipson solely participated as a private citizen,” he added.
Lomeli also said that Gipson’s public statements in October were an acknowledgment that he might someday have outside work. “Again, Mr. Gipson is not involved in this project, but anticipates receiving his real estate license in the future,” he said in the email.
Neither Awad nor his land use representative, Emilio Gutierrez, responded to requests for comment about the proposed development. In paperwork filed with the city, Gutierrez said the developer has addressed neighborhood concerns about air quality.
Project opponents Charles Jerman, foreground, and Ronald Robinson, right, with other Harbor Gateway neighbors. (Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times)
Large trees and other landscaping will create a buffer between homes and the interchange, according to the project’s environmental documents. Each house will have an air conditioning system with high-performing air filters. In addition, the developer will “minimize” the number of operable windows that face the freeway, the report says.
Once those and other features are in place, “air quality at the new project will be better than the one available to most residents in the vicinity,” the developer said in the project’s paperwork.
Rosalie Preston, who serves on the Harbor Gateway North Neighborhood Council, has her doubts. Future homeowners, she said, will still want to enjoy their yards, putting themselves at risk.
“You’re still going to be exposed to a lot of the freeway pollution,” she said.
Efforts to develop the project began nearly a decade ago, when the California Department of Transportation sold the property to the developer, according to a city report.
Records state that Awad, working with the firm Mohamad Pournamdari Inc., applied for a zone change to convert the freeway-adjacent land from one that allows public facilities — a land use designation left over from Caltrans — to one that permits residential development.
The planning commission considered Awad’s application in 2012. During the meeting, the city planner assigned to the project voiced concerns that a motorist on the elevated freeway ramp could have a medical emergency, veer off the ramp and land on one of the proposed homes.
Alison Becker, a Buscaino aide at the time, testified that the development site was “clearly” a buffer zone between the neighborhood and the freeway interchange. She told commissioners they had no obligation to approve the request.
“It’s OK to say no, because the science is behind us,” she said. “It’s all right to say that residential is not OK in this particular case.”
The commission denied the application without prejudice, allowing Awad to try again. Awad’s scaled-back project went before the Harbor Area Planning Commission in January. That panel, made up of appointees of Mayor Eric Garcetti, also voted to reject the project, citing public safety and other issues.
During that meeting, commission President Esther Hatch said she had visited the site and was disturbed by the project’s location. “When I stood there I thought, ‘Oh my God, it’s right under that freeway. The noise!’” Hatch said.
Gutierrez, the developer’s representative, said the new zoning would conform to the nearby neighborhood, which consists of single-family homes. And he contested Hatch’s description, saying the project would be at least 50 feet from any portion of the freeway.
Awad appealed the commission’s decision. A council committee is scheduled to take up the project on Tuesday.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, COMMUNICATION FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY and ORDINANCE FIRST CONSIDERATION relative to enacting the NoHo West Sign District.
Recommendations for Council action, SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE MAYOR:
FIND, that the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. ENV-2015-888-EIR, was certified for the project on a prior discretionary approval for the project on September 9, 2016; FIND, pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15162, that no subsequent EIR or subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration is required for the current discretionary approval where the whole of the administrative record demonstrates that no major revisions to the EIR are necessary due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant effect resulting from changes to the project, changes to circumstances, or the existence of new information; FIND, that no Addendum is required and no changes or additions to the EIR are necessary pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164.
ADOPT the FINDINGS of the Director of Planning dated December 13, 2016, as the Findings of Council.
PRESENT and ADOPT the accompanying ORDINANCE dated May 5, 2017, approved by the Director of Planning on behalf of the Los Angeles City Planning Commission, creating a new signage supplemental use district (Sign District) for the NoHo West Project, which involves an integrated commercial, retail and residential development consisting of a mix of uses totaling approximately 1.3 million square feet, including the rehabilitation and expansion of a former Macy’s building for approximately 253,000 square feet of office and retail uses; approximately 316,000 square feet of new commercial development; 642 rental housing units; and public and private recreational amenities, with the Sign District authorizing new static and digital signage for the project, for the approximately 24.7 acre site located at the southeast corner of Laurel Canyon Boulevard and Erwin Street, generally bounded by Erwin Street to the north, Radford Avenue to the east, Laurel Canyon Boulevard and State Route 170 (Hollywood) Freeway to the west and Oxnard Street to the south.
Fiscal Impact Statement: None submitted by the City Attorney. Neither the City Administrative Officer nor the Chief Legislative Analyst has completed a financial analysis of this report.
Community Impact Statement: None submitted.
(Planning and Land Use Management Committee waived consideration of the above matter)
Adopted to Continue, Unanimous Vote (11); Absent: Englander, Huizar, Price (3)
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED – CONTINUED TO MAY 24, 2017
06/06/2017 Council Action Vote Action: Adopted, Vote Given: (10 – 0 – 5) (June 6, 2017), Communication from Mayor (June 2, 2017), Final Ordinance (June 2, 2017), Report from City Attorney (May 5, 2017)
06/02/2017 Mayor transmitted file to City Clerk. Ordinance effective date: July 16, 2017.
05/24/2017 Council adopted item, subject to reconsideration, pursuant to Council Rule 51.
05/23/2017 Council closed public hearing and continued item to May 24, 2017.
05/18/2017 City Clerk scheduled item for Council on May 23, 2017 .
05/16/2017 Planning and Land Use Management Committee waived consideration of item .
05/09/2017 City Attorney document(s) referred to Planning and Land Use Management Committee.
05/05/2017 Document(s) submitted by City Attorney, as follows:
City Attorney report R17-0141, dated May, 5, 2017 relative to enacting the NOHO West Sign District.
01/09/2017 Council Action.
01/05/2017 Mayor transmitted file to City Clerk. Ordinance effective date: February 14, 2017.
12/27/2016 City Clerk transmitted file to Mayor. Last day for Mayor to act is January 9, 2017.
12/20/2016 Council Action.
12/19/2016 Mayor transmitted file to City Clerk. Ordinance effective date: January 29, 2017.
12/14/2016 City Clerk transmitted file to Mayor. Last day for Mayor to act is December 27, 2016.
12/14/2016 Council adopted item, as amended, forthwith.
12/13/2016 Planning and Land Use Management Committee approved as amended .
12/09/2016 City Clerk scheduled item for Council on December 14, 2016 .
12/02/2016 Planning and Land Use Management Committee scheduled item for committee meeting on December 13, 2016.
11/16/2016 Los Angeles City Planning Commission document(s) referred to Planning and Land Use Management Committee.
11/15/2016 Document(s) submitted by Los Angeles City Planning Commission, as follows:
Los Angeles City Planning Commission report, dated November 15, 2016, relative to an appeal for the property at 6150 North Laurel Canyon Boulevard.
PLANNING AND LAND USE MANAGEMENT and HOUSING COMMITTEES’ REPORTS relative to the feasibility of expanding the Department of City Planning (DCP) Expedited Processing Section (EPS) to include the review of projects with new Environmental Impact Reports (EIR’s).
PLANNING AND LAND USE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE REPORT
Recommendations for Council action, as initiated by Motion (Cedillo – Wesson):
CONCUR with the recommendations in the Housing Committee Report dated February 9, 2016, attached to Council file Nos. 14-0057-S7 and 15-1251.
INSTRUCT the DCP to report on the feasibility of expanding the EPS to include the preparation and review of projects with new EIR’s; recommendations should include criteria for development projects to be eligible for expedited service, targets to reduce process time and track progress, and an appropriate fee structure, including the use of outside technical support.
Fiscal Impact Statement: Neither the City Administrative Officer (CAO) nor the Chief Legislative Analyst (CLA) has completed a financial analysis of this report.
Community Impact Statement: None submitted. HOUSING COMMITTEE REPORT
Recommendations for Council action, as initiated by Motion (Cedillo – Wesson):
INSTRUCT the Department of City Planning to:
a. Report within 30 days on the feasibility of expanding the Expedited Processing Section, to include the preparation and review of projects with new environmental impact reports; recommendations should include criteria for development projects to be eligible for expedited service, targets to reduce process time and track progress, and an appropriate fee structure, including the use of outside technical support.
b. Prepare recommendations for revising the California Environmental Quality Act and other State and/or City of Los Angeles environmental regulations to streamline the review of affordable housing developments.
c. In conjunction with the Los Angeles Housing and Community Investment Department and any other relevant departments, prioritize the recommendations of the HOUSE LA Initiative Motions by which would have the largest impact on increasing the City’s housing stock, including recommendations 7D, 7K, 7L, 7M, and 8C of the joint CAO and CLA Comprehensive Homeless Strategy joint report to the Mayor and Council dated January 7, 2016.
DIRECT the City Clerk to create one Council file for the purpose of consolidating all HOUSE LA Initiative Motions (Council file Nos. 14-0057-S1, 15-1002, 15-1003, 15-1004, 15-1005, 15-1007, and 15-1251) and all forthcoming requested reports.
Fiscal Impact Statement: Neither the CAO nor the CLA has completed a financial analysis of this report.
06/28/2017 Council adopted item forthwith. Report from PLUM (June 6, 2017) , Report from Housing Committee (February 9, 2017)
06/22/2017 City Clerk scheduled item for Council on June 28, 2017 . Report from Housing Committee (February 9, 2017)
06/06/2017 Planning and Land Use Management Committee approved item(s) . Report from Housing Committee (February 9, 2017)
06/02/2017 Planning and Land Use Management Committee scheduled item for committee meeting on June 6, 2017. Motion (October 21,2015)
03/01/2016 Planning and Land Use Management Committee continued item to/for undetermined date.
02/26/2016 Planning and Land Use Management Committee scheduled item for committee meeting on March 1, 2016.
02/12/2016 Council action of February 9, 2016, created a new file. All previous activity can be found on Council File No. 15-1251.
01/27/2016 City Clerk transmitted Council File to Planning and Land Use Management Committee .
01/20/2016 Housing Committee approved item(s) as amended to direct the Department of City Planning, in conjunction with the Los Angeles Housing and Community Investment Department and any other relevant departments, to prioritize the recommendations of the HOUSE LA Initiative Motions according to greatest impact on the production of new affordable housing.
01/15/2016 Housing Committee scheduled item for committee meeting on January 20, 2016.
08/26/2015 Council also referred item to Housing Committee.
PLANNING AND LAND USE MANAGEMENT and HOUSING COMMITTEES’ REPORTS relative to amending the Site Plan Review Ordinance to increase the production of affordable housing in the City of Los Angeles.
PLANNING AND LAND USE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE REPORT
Recommendations for Council action, as initiated by Motion (Cedillo – O’Farrell):
CONCUR with the recommendations in the Housing Committee Report dated February 9, 2016, attached to Council file Nos. 14-0057-S3 and 15-1003.
INSTRUCT the Department of City Planning to prepare and present a report with recommendations to amend the site plan review ordinance, increasing the threshold from 50 residential units and establishing an administrative zoning clearance process for projects below this threshold as a strategy to increase the City’s affordable housing production.
Fiscal Impact Statement: Neither the City Administrative Officer (CAO) nor the Chief Legislative Analyst (CLA) has completed a financial analysis of this report.
Community Impact Statement: Yes
Against: Valley Village Neighborhood Council; Greater Valley Glen Neighborhood Council
HOUSING COMMITTEE REPORT
Recommendations for Council action, as initiated by Motion (Cedillo – O’Farrell):
INSTRUCT the Department of City Planning to:
a. Report with recommendations to amend the Site Plan Review Ordinance, increasing the threshold from 50 residential units and establishing an administrative zoning clearance process for projects below this threshold as a strategy to increase the City’s affordable housing production.
b. Incorporate in its report Recommendation 7M of the joint CAO and CLA Comprehensive Homeless Strategy report to the Mayor and Council dated January 7, 2016.
c. In conjunction with the Los Angeles Housing and Community Investment Department and any other relevant departments, prioritize the recommendations of the HOUSE LA Initiative Motions by which would have the largest impact on increasing the City’s housing stock, including Recommendations 7D, 7K, 7L, 7M, and 8C of the joint CAO and CLA Comprehensive Homeless Strategy joint report.
DIRECT the City Clerk to create one Council file for the purpose of consolidating all HOUSE LA Initiative Motions (Council file Nos. 14-0057-S1, 15-1002, 15-1003, 15-1004, 15-1005, 15-1007, and 15-1251) and all forthcoming requested reports.
Fiscal Impact Statement: Neither the CAO nor the CLA has completed a financial analysis of this report.
CF 16-0767 AT PLUM 06/06/2017 CONTINUED FROM 11/8/16
Motion (Huizar – O’Farrell) relative to instructing the Department of City Planning to include a statement in its departmental reports each time a project is considered by the Planning and Land Use Management Committee which removes Rent Stabilization Ordinance (RSO) units, and which delineates how it impacts the City’s RSO inventory.
Community Impact Statement: Yes.
For: Glassell Park Neighborhood Council
—
06/02/2017 Planning and Land Use Management Committee scheduled item for committee meeting on June 6, 2017. Motion (June 6, 2016)
11/08/2016 Planning and Land Use Management Committee continued item to/for a date to be determined. Motion (June 6, 2016)
11/04/2016 Planning and Land Use Management Committee scheduled item for committee meeting on November 8, 2016. (Refer), Motion (June 6, 2016)
08/05/2016 Community Impact Statement submitted by Glassell Park Neighborhood Council. (Refer)
06/28/2016 Motion document(s) referred to Planning and Land Use Management Committee.
CF 14-0268-S8 at AT PLUM 06/06/2017 CONTINUED FROM 11/8/16
Motion (Huizar – O’Farrell – Fuentes) relative to requesting the City Attorney, with the assistance of the Housing and Community Investment Department (HCID), and the Department of City Planning (DCP), to prepare and present an ordinance that will eliminate loopholes in the Los Angeles Municipal Code that allow project applicants to file for the subdivision / conversion of Rent Stabilized Ordinance (RSO) units to condominiums, and thereafter, develop the property to an entirely different use in order to circumvent the payment of relocation assistance; and, instructing the HCID, with the assistance of the DCP, and in consultation with the City Attorney, to prepare a report on any State laws that require the City to exempt property owners of RSO housing units that will be subdivided / converted to condominiums to pay relocation assistance.
Community Impact Statement: Yes.
For: Downtown Los Angeles Neighborhood Council
—
06/02/2017 Planning and Land Use Management Committee scheduled item for committee meeting on June 6, 2017. Motion (July 1, 2016)
12/21/2016 Community Impact Statement submitted by Downtown Los Angeles Neighborhood Council. (Refer)
11/08/2016 Planning and Land Use Management Committee continued item to/for a date to be determined. Motion (July 1, 2016)
11/04/2016 Planning and Land Use Management Committee scheduled item for committee meeting on November 8, 2016. Motion (July 1, 2016)
07/01/2016 Motion document(s) referred to Planning and Land Use Management Committee. Motion (July 1, 2016)
Motion (Bonin – Harris-Dawson) relative to instructing the Housing and Community Investment Department (HCID), along with the Department of City Planning, and the Los Angeles Department of Building and Safety as necessary, to report back on the following: 1) the implementation of a system to clearly calculate and track the number of affordable units in the City, properly distinguishing between Density Bonus units and those within subsidized affordable housing developments; 2) the implementation of a system to efficiently monitor existing affordable units in order to ensure compliance with applicable affordable housing program rules and to ensure comprehensive compliance status reviews of the affordable housing stock administered by HCID, along with recommendations for enforcement options to ensure that affordable units are kept affordable and occupied by qualifying households. (Also referred to the Housing Committee.)
Community Impact Statement: None submitted.
—
06/02/2017 Planning and Land Use Management Committee scheduled item for committee meeting on June 6, 2017. Motion (January 24, 2017)
01/24/2017 Motion document(s) referred to Housing Committee; Planning and Land Use Management Committee. Motion (January 24, 2017)
