To Planning and Land Use Management Committee
City Attorney report R21-0150, dated May 5, 2021, relative to a draft Ordinance amending sections of the Los Angeles Municipal Code to create cool roof and cool surface requirements.
This month, City Planning unveiled a new online dashboard to monitor, track, and report the workload and case processing times for development projects that require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). These are some of the most diverse and large-scale projects in Los Angeles. As of August 2020, the Department is processing and reviewing 66 active EIRs. On average, each takes approximately 23 months from the initial filing to finalizing the document for City Planning Commission’s consideration.
The EIR process—the most lengthy and complex form of environmental review—entails the preparation of an Initial Study, a Draft EIR, and a Final EIR, which require public review and regular coordination between the applicant, the environmental consultant team, and the City. Generally, those documents are under review by the Department for only six to nine months (or 30 to 50 percent of the total processing time). During the majority of the process, the preparation of an EIR is in the hands of the applicant and consultant team, who work together to produce the technical reports and respond to the Department’s comments.
Categorical Exemption and related California Environmental Quality Act findings, Report from the City Attorney, and Draft Ordinance dated July 30, 2019, adding Section 11.5.13 to Article 1.5 of Chapter 1 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code to establish a procedure for appeals to Council from CEQA determinations by lower decision-making bodies.
Fiscal Impact Statement: No.
Community Impact Statement: None submitted.
Click on the BLUE HIGHLIGHT to view official documents and reports.
09/13/2019 Planning and Land Use Management Committee scheduled item for committee meeting on September 17, 2019. Draft Ordinance (August 1, 2019), Report from City Attorney (July 31, 2019)
08/05/2019 City Attorney document(s) referred to Planning and Land Use Management Committee. Draft Ordinance (August 1, 2019), Report from City Attorney (July 31, 2019)
08/01/2019 Document(s) submitted by City Attorney, as follows: Draft Ordinance (August 1, 2019), Report from City Attorney (July 31, 2019)
City Attorney report R19-0236, dated July 31, 2019, relative to a draft Ordinance amending the Los Angeles Municipal Code to establish a procedure for appeals to Council from California Environmental Quality Act determinations by lower decision-making bodies.
10/30/2018 Planning and Land Use Management Committee continued item to/for for a date to be determined to request the City Attorney to prepare the final ordinance.
09/28/2018 Department of City Planning document(s) referred to Planning and Land Use Management Committee. Report from City Planning (September 26, 2018), Proposed Ordinance (September 26, 2018)
09/27/2018 Document(s) submitted by Department of City Planning, as follows: Report from City Planning (September 26, 2018), Proposed Ordinance (September 26, 2018)
Department of City Planning report, dated September 26, 2018, relative to a proposed Ordinance adding California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) provisions to the Zoning Code.
08/30/2018 Document(s) submitted by Los Angeles City Planning Commission, as follows:
Los Angeles City Planning Commission report, dated August 30, 2018, relative to an Ordinance establishing a new Section 11.5.13 within Article 1.5 to the Los Angeles Municipal Code.
01/23/2018 Motion referred to Planning and Land Use Management Committee. Motion (January 21, 2018)
EXEMPTION, PUBLIC WORKS AND GANG REDUCTION COMMITTEE REPORT and ORDINANCE FIRST CONSIDERATION relative to establishing a procedure for appeals to the Council from environmental determinations by certain nonelected decisionmakers.
Recommendations for Council action, SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE MAYOR:
DETERMINE that the project is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c)(2) and (3) as it will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment; and, that this project is covered by CEQA’s common sense exemption, which provides that, where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA (Guideline section 15061(b)(3)).
PRESENT and ADOPT the accompanying ORDINANCE, dated May 6, 2019, adding Article 4 to Chapter XIX of the Los Angeles Municipal Code to establish a procedure pursuant to Section 21151(c) of the California Public Resources Code for appeals to the Council from environmental determinations by certain nonelected decisionmakers.
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
Click on the BLUE HIGHLIGHT to view official documents and reports.
08/12/2019 Mayor transmitted Council File to City Clerk.
07/31/2019 City Clerk transmitted Council File to Mayor. Last day for Mayor to act is 08/12/2019.07/30/2019 Council adopted item, subject to reconsideration, pursuant to Council Rule 51. Vote Given: (13 – 0 – 2) Draft Ordinance (May 6, 2019)
06/28/2019 Council adopted as amended; Ordinance held over to July 30, 2019. Amending Motion (June 28, 2019), Report from Public Works and Gang Reduction Committee (June 26, 2019), Draft Ordinance (May 6, 2019)
06/19/2019 Public Works and Gang Reduction Committee approved item(s) . Report from City Attorney (May 6, 2019), Draft Ordinance (May 6, 2019)
06/19/2019 City Clerk scheduled item for Council on June 28, 2019 . Report from Public Works and Gang Reduction Committee (June 26, 2019), Report from City Attorney (May 6, 2019), Draft Ordinance (May 6, 2019)
06/14/2019 Public Works and Gang Reduction Committee scheduled item for committee meeting on June 19, 2019. Report from City Attorney (May 6, 2019), Draft Ordinance (May 6, 2019)
5/08/2019 City Attorney document(s) referred to Public Works and Gang Reduction Committee. Report from City Attorney (May 6, 2019), Draft Ordinance (May 6, 2019)
5/07/2019 Document(s) submitted by City Attorney, as follows: Report from City Attorney (May 6, 2019), Draft Ordinance (May 6, 2019)
City Attorney report R19-0128, dated May 06, 2019, relative to a draft Ordinance amending the Los Angeles Municipal Code to establish a procedure pursuant to the California Public Resources Code for appeals to City Council from environmental determinations by certain non-elected decision makers.
02/20/2019 Council action final.
02/19/2019 Council adopted item, subject to reconsideration, pursuant to Council Rule 51. Report from Public Works and Gang Reduction Committee (February 28, 2019)
02/08/2019 City Clerk scheduled item for Council on February 19, 2019 . Report from Public Works and Gang Reduction Committee (February 28, 2019) , Motion (October 17, 2018)
02/06/2019 Public Works and Gang Reduction Committee approved item(s) . Motion (October 17, 2018)
01/18/2019 Corrected Referral per Council President to change referral to Public Works and Gang Reduction Committee. Motion (October 17, 2018)
12/10/2018 Community Impact Statement submitted by Greater Valley Glen Neighborhood Council. Refer to CF 14-0090-S1
10/17/2018 Motion document(s) referred to Planning and Land Use Management Committee. Motion (October 17, 2018)
JOIN City Planning Department to learn about the policies and regulations that guide the Department’s environmental analysis, including the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
PUBLIC HEARING – Completed November 28, 2018; November 29, 2018; December 4, 2018;
December 6, 2018
PROJECT SITE: Citywide
PROPOSED PROJECT:
An update to the Transportation Section of the Los Angeles CEQA Thresholds Guide to comply with State legislation (Senate Bill 743). State guidelines require all cities to update their transportation impact analysis metrics to vehicle miles traveled (VMT) before July 1, 2020. This approach prioritizes the safety and access of all street users. The State is also proposing a comprehensive update to the CEQA Guidelines. Accordingly, the Department of City Planning is updating its CEQA significance thresholds as part of the State’s 2019 update to CEQA.
DISCUSSION
Los Angeles City Planning Commission Adopts Recommendation to Change Los Angeles’ CEQA Traffic Significance Thresholds from LOS to VMT On March 11, 2019, the City Planning Commission adopted a recommendation that the city council update the city’s transportation significance thresholds under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Senate Bill 743. To evaluate a project’s potential transportation impacts, SB 743 and the implementing CEQA guidelines require local agencies to implement significance thresholds that no longer focus on measuring automobile delay and level of service (LOS) but instead focus on a project’s impacts on vehicle miles traveled (VMT). The VMT approach is intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, help prioritize safety and access of all street users, and promote a diversity of land uses. The city council has not yet indicated when it will formally adopt the VMT thresholds, but there will be a phase-in process for projects undergoing environmental review. Projects that have already initiated obtaining a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) from the Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) and have filed an application with the Department of City Planning (DCP) may analyze traffic impacts under the existing LOS thresholds. Projects that have not yet initiated an MOU with LADOT or filed an application with the DCP will need to prepare a VMT analysis. Because the applicable CEQA guidelines require that all local agencies apply the VMT threshold by July 1, 2020, the city will require any projects expected to complete the CEQA process after that date to include a VMT analysis.
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS:
1. Recommend that the City Council determine, based on the whole of the administrative record, that the proposed resolution is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(b)(1), CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 and is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(3) and 15308, and none of the exceptions in Section 15300.2 apply;
2. Approve and recommend that the City Council adopt the proposed Resolution pursuant to
Senate Bill 743 and CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15064.3 and 15064.7(b), updating the City’s
adopted transportation thresholds;
3. Adopt the staff report as the Commission’s report on the subject;
4. Adopt the findings; and
5. Recommend that the City Council instruct the Department of City Planning and the
Department of Transportation to report back annually for two years on status and any
additional changes needed to meet the intent of Senate Bill 743.
Applicant: City of Los Angeles
Staff: Rubina Ghazarian, City Planner rubina.ghazarian@lacity.org
(213) 978-1194
CPC-2018-6339-MSC AT CITY PLANNING COMMISSION 02/28/2019
Council Districts: All
CEQA: N/A Last Day to Act: 07-01-19
Plan Area: Citywide
PUBLIC HEARING – Completed November 28, 2018; November 29, 2018; December 4, 2018;
December 6, 2018
PROJECT SITE: Citywide
PROPOSED PROJECT:
Department adoption of the State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and Appendix G of the Guidelines as the Department of City Planning CEQA Thresholds. The Governor’s Office of Planning and Research adopted, in 2018, comprehensive updates to the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines and Appendices. The Department of City Planning’s adoption of CEQA Guidelines and Appendix G as the Department’s CEQA Thresholds of significance will ensure compliance with existing State law and any future updates to State law.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Endorse the Department of City Planning’s adoption of the State CEQA Guidelines and Appendix G of the Guidelines as the Department’s CEQA Thresholds.
Applicant: City of Los Angeles
Staff: Diana Kitching, City Planner diana.kitching@lacity.org
(213) 978-1308
Amendments to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines have been approved by the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) and filed by the Secretary of State. The OAL approved the amendments on December 28, 2018 and the Secretary of State filed the Guidelines the same day. The amendments are now effective California Regulations.
Several Updates to the CEQA Guidelines
Following a preparation process that has taken more than five years, amendments to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines are poised to take effect shortly.
In November 2018, the California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA) posted final adopted text for amendments to the CEQA Guidelines. The CNRA has passed these final amendments to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL), and the OAL has until December 28, 2018, to complete its review of the new Guidelines. Review by the OAL is the final step before the proposed Guidelines will be submitted to the Secretary of State and added to the California Code of Regulations (CCR). The amendments will go into effect immediately upon their submission by the OAL to the Secretary of State if the CNRA had good cause to request immediate effectiveness of the new Guidelines. In no event will the amendments go into effect later than 120 days after their date of submission to the Secretary of State.
There are a number of significant changes to the CEQA Guidelines that will go into effect following OAL review.
New Transportation Impacts Analysis
The amendment that has drawn the most attention is the shift from Level of Service (LOS) analysis of project transportation impacts to Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis. LOS review is focused on a project’s contribution to the amount of vehicle delay, or traffic, in its surrounding area. The new CCR § 15064.3 states that vehicle delay will no longer be considered a significant environmental impact for projects that are not roadway expansion projects. Instead, transportation analysis must study the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project. The motivation behind this change is to encourage greenhouse gas reduction and promote dense infill development.
The CNRA made an important change to the VMT amendment originally proposed by the Office of Planning and Research (OPR). The CNRA clarified that projects which decrease VMT compared to existing conditions or are located within half a mile of public transit receive a rebuttable presumption of producing a less than significant transportation impact. Ideally, this presumption will make review of infill projects in urban environments easier. Lead agencies will not be required to adopt the VMT methodology for reviewing traffic impacts until July 1, 2020, but agencies may choose to adopt the new paradigm immediately.
Renewed Focus on Energy Impacts
The new CCR § 15126.2(b) regards wasteful or inefficient energy usage as a significant environmental impact requiring mitigation. Analysis of a project’s energy use now includes energy used during the project’s construction as well as transportation-related energy consumption. While new construction is required to abide by energy efficiency standards included in the building codes, building code compliance will not necessarily be sufficient to prevent a project from being found to have significant energy impacts.
The renewed focus on a project’s energy impacts is demonstrated by the inclusion of energy impacts as a new section in the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G. Appendix G is a sample checklist form used by many lead agencies to conduct initial studies of a project’s potential significant environmental impacts. Lead agencies which use Appendix G will now consider energy impacts more explicitly during the initial study of a project.
Wildfire Impacts
Wildfire impacts have also been added as a new topic in Appendix G. It is important to note that CCR § 15126.2(a) is being amended to clarify that CEQA analysis concerns a project’s impact on the environment, not the impact of the environment on a project. While wildfire analysis will not directly focus on the risk of wildfire to the project, it will address whether a project exacerbates the risk of a natural disaster by bringing new development to vulnerable areas.
Effective Jan. 1, filing fees imposed by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife will increase for all CEQA Notices of Determination. The CDFW is required to adjust the fees annually. The fees are used to defray the agency’s costs related to, among other things, consulting with public agencies, reviewing environmental documents, making mitigation recommendations and developing monitoring programs, according to the agency’s website.
The cost increases for NOD filed on or after Jan. 1 are as follows:
DFW Fee Schedule
CEQA Document
Fees Effective Jan. 1, 2018
Fees Effective Jan. 1, 2019
Negative Declaration
$2,280.75
$2,354.75
Mitigated Negative Declaration
$2,280.75
$2,354.75
Environmental Impact Report
$3,168
$3,271
Environmental Document pursuant to a Certified Regulatory Program*
$1,077
$1,112
Notice of Exemption for a Statutory or Categorical Exempt Action
No DFW Fee
No DFW Fee
County Clerk Processing Fee**
$50
$50
*Including, but not limited to, timber harvesting plans and other state agency regulatory programs. (Public Resources Code, § 21080.5; State CEQA Guidelines, § 15251)
**Additional county fees may apply. Please check with the county clerk’s office for the current amount of the county’s processing fee. This fee is due for all filings, including a Notice of Exemption.
As was the case in 2018, no DFW fee will be assessed for the filing of Notices of Exemption in 2019. Please note, however, that a local clerk’s processing fee may be charged for the filing of any NOD or NOE, depending on local county policy.
The DFW fee may be charged only once per project. In the event that a project requires the filing of multiple NODs by lead or responsible agencies, the DFW fee is required at the time the lead agency files the first NOD. If a copy of the DFW fee receipt for the filing of the first NOD can be provided as proof of payment, subsequent NODs for the same project will not need to pay any additional DFW fees.
Notice of Open House and Public Hearing California Environmental Quality Act and Transportation Update
You are invited to an Informational Open House and a Public Hearing regarding updates by the Los Angeles Department of City Planning and Department of Transportation to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process.
The City of Los Angeles is updating the Transportation Section of the Los Angeles CEQA Thresholds Guide to comply with State legislation (Senate Bill 743). State guidelines require all cities to update their transportation impact analysis metrics to vehicle miles traveled (VMT) before July 1, 2020. This approach prioritizes the safety and access of all street users. The State is also proposing a comprehensive update to the CEQA Guidelines. Accordingly, the Department of City Planning is updating its CEQA significance thresholds as part of the State’s 2019 update to CEQA.
The Open House events are intended to allow the community to learn more about and review these updates , provide public comment, and to ask questions of Department of City Planning and Department of Transportation staff. There will be public hearings at each Open House, where oral testimony will be recorded.
Click on the green highlight to view official documents and reports.
Categorical Exemption pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15378(b) and Section 15308, Class Eight, and related CEQA findings, report from the Los Angeles City Planning Commission, proposed ordinance (updated on September 26, 2018) relative to establishing a new Section 11.5.13 within Article 1.5 to the Los Angeles Municipal Code, stating that when a decision-maker other than the City Council certifies an Environmental Impact Report, approves an Negative Declaration, Mitigated Negative Declaration, or Sustainable Communities Environmental Assessment, or determines that a project is exempt, that environmental clearance may be appealed to the City Council within 15 days of the project’s approval, and Communication from Department of City Planning dated September 26, 2018 relative to recommended changes to the proposed ordinance consisting of added provisions that address and/or enforce improper segmentation of projects, provisions for stays on project approvals when a CEQA appeal is under consideration by City Council, and technical modifications to bring the ordinance into compliance with state law.
Applicant: City of Los Angeles
Case No. CPC-2018-2657-CA
Environmental No. ENV-2018-2658-CE
Fiscal Impact Statement: No
Community Impact Statement: None submitted.
Click on the green highlight to view official documents and reports.
09/28/2018 Department of City Planning document(s) referred to Planning and Land Use Management Committee. City Planning Report (September 26, 2018), Proposed Ordinance (September 26, 2018)
09/27/2018 Document(s) submitted by Department of City Planning, as follows: City Planning Report (September 26, 2018), Proposed Ordinance (September 26, 2018)
Department of City Planning report, dated September 26, 2018, relative to a proposed Ordinance adding California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) provisions to the Zoning Code.
09/04/2018 Los Angeles City Planning Commission document(s) referred to Planning and Land Use Management Committee.
08/30/2018 Document(s) submitted by Los Angeles City Planning Commission, as follows: Findings (August 30, 2018), City Planning Commission Report (August 30, 2018), Mailing List (August 30, 2018), Proposed Ordinance (August 30, 2018), Staff Report (August 30, 2018), Environmental (August 30, 2018)
Los Angeles City Planning Commission report, dated August 30, 2018, relative to an Ordinance establishing a new Section 11.5.13 within Article 1.5 to the Los Angeles Municipal Code.
01/23/2018 Motion referred to Planning and Land Use Management Committee. Motion (January 23, 2018)
After a four-year long process, on November 27, 2017, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) announced the availability of a comprehensive package of proposed amendments to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations). Some of the significant proposed changes to the CEQA Guidelines include:
Changing the method of transportation impacts analysis from a carrying capacity approach (“level of service”) to a “vehicle miles travelled” calculation for most projects.
Promoting the use of existing regulatory standards as thresholds of significance.
Supplementing CEQA’s water supply analysis requirements.
This package also contains certain other measures that OPR purports will result in efficiency, substantive, and technical improvements to CEQA, much of which was proposed by OPR in a preliminary discussion draft released in August 2015 (please click here for our Legal Alert regarding the August 2015 discussion draft).
The Natural Resources Agency will soon begin the formal administrative rulemaking process under the Administrative Procedure Act to amend the CEQA Guidelines. The Resources Agency’s formal rulemaking process will include additional public review, which could result in further revisions to the CEQA Guidelines. The Secretary for the Natural Resources Agency will then adopt the changes, and the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) must then review and approve of the changes. Following OAL approval, the proposed CEQA Guideline changes will go into effect.
Documentation and additional information regarding the updates to the CEQA Guidelines are available on OPR’s website. The proposed CEQA Guidelines, especially the changes proposed pursuant to SB 743 and regarding the GHG impacts analysis, have the potential to cause impacts on the CEQA approval process of several land use projects. Therefore, we recommend that the development community should be actively involved in the formal rulemaking process. Interested persons can sign up for the OPR’s CEQA Guidelines List Serve to receive future notifications. Updated information about the rulemaking process will be also posted on the Natural Resources Agency website.
Proposed Efficiency Improvements
OPR proposes several efficiency improvements including:
Promoting the use of existing regulatory standards as “thresholds of significance.”
Updating the CEQA checklist in Appendix G to eliminate redundant questions and add new questions related to transportation and wildfire, pursuant to SB 743 and SB 1241.
Changing the rules for easier use of programmatic environmental review provisions, including clarifying rules of tiering and guidance on when a later project is “within the scope” of a program environmental impact report.
Enhancing several CEQA exemptions, for example, by providing clarification on establishing “baseline” under the existing facilities exemption, and expanding the exemption for specific plan implementation.
Proposing a new section in the CEQA Guidelines regarding remand and remedies in CEQA litigation.
Proposed Substantive Improvements
Some of the proposed substantive changes include:
Providing more guidance related to energy impacts analysis including requiring the energy impact analysis to include impacts from transportation, equipment use, location, and other relevant factors, and not just building design.
Adding a new subdivision (f) to section 15155 to set forth the content requirements for a water supply analysis under CEQA. These updates require a proposed project to analyze its possible water supply sources, any uncertainties in supply, possible supply alternatives over the life of the project, and the environmental impacts of supplying that water to the project.
Updating the transportation impacts analysis requirements pursuant to SB 743 to specify that vehicle miles travelled is the appropriate measure of transportation impacts for most projects. Automobile delay or the level of service method to assess transportation impacts will no longer be appropriate measures for most projects.
Updating the GHG impacts analysis to reflect the recent case law, including Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Dept. of Fish & Wildlife (2015) 62 Cal.4th 204 and Cleveland Nat’l Forest Found. v. San Diego Assn. of Gov’ts (2017) 3 Cal.5th 497.
Proposed Technical Improvements
The proposed technical improvements include: changes related to evaluation of hazards pursuant to the Supreme Court decision in Cal. Bldg. Industry Ass’n v. Bay Area Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. (2015) 62 Cal.4th 369; clarifications on when it is appropriate to use projected future conditions as the environmental baseline; when agencies may defer specific details of mitigation measures until after project approval; and a set of changes related to the duty of lead agencies to provide responses to comments on a project. Some other changes address electing the lead agency, posting notices with county clerks, clarifying the definition of “discretionary,” and technical changes to Appendices D and E to reflect recent statutory requirements.
On January 26, 2018, the California Natural Resources Agency issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking regarding proposed amendments to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations).
The proposed CEQA Guidelines amendments were informally released by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) on November 27, 2017. For a detailed discussion of significant proposed changes to the CEQA Guidelines included in the proposed amendments, please click here for the December 1, 2017 Legal Alert regarding the OPR draft.
Public comment on the proposal is due by 5 p.m. March 15, and public hearings will be held in Sacramento and Los Angeles as follows:
Sacramento
March 15, 2018 1:30 p.m.-4:30 p.m.
California Energy Commission, Rosenfield Hearing Room,
1516 9th Street, Sacramento
(This hearing will be webcast.)
Los Angeles
March 14, 2018 1:30 p.m.-4:30 p.m.
California Science Center, Annenberg Building, Muses Room,
700 Exposition Park Dr., Los Angeles
After receiving and considering comments and incorporating any revisions, the Secretary for the Natural Resources Agency will then adopt the proposed changes and submit the final CEQA Guidelines amendments to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) for review and approval. The effective date of the CEQA Guidelines amendments will be set when OAL files them with the Secretary of State. Compliance will become mandatory 120 days following the effective date for the majority of the CEQA Guidelines amendments.
PLANNING AND LAND USE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE REPORT relative to the City’s implementation process of AB 52 (Gatto), Native Americans and the California Environmental Quality Act, Chapter 532, Statutes of 2014.
Recommendations for Council action, as initiated by Motion (O’Farrell – Harris-Dawson):
INSTRUCT the Department of City Planning (DCP), in consultation with the City Attorney, to prepare a report relative to the City’s implementation process of AB 52 (Gatto), Native Americans and the California Environmental Quality Act, Chapter 532, Statutes of 2014, and to provide an overview of the intent and scope of the law, and its fiscal/communication challenges.
INSTRUCT the DCP to report in 30 days, on the cost and time needed to initiate and complete a Citywide historic context statement for Native American tribes of Los Angeles, to augment the ethnic cultural section of Survey LA.
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.
Click on the green highlight to view official documents and reports.
The CEQA Appeals Code amendment establishes a new Section 11.5.13 within Article 1.5 of Chapter 1 (the Zoning Code) of the Los Angeles Municipal Code. The Section states that when a decision- maker other that the City Council certifies an EIR , approves an ND, MND, or SCEA, or determines that a project is exempt, that environmental clearance is appealable to the City Council within 15 days of the project’s approval.
Solar panels make use of renewable energy and offer an environmentally friendly means of generating electrical power. As the use of solar energy has expanded, solar carports, also known as solar shade structures, have gained popularity. Solar carports provide numerous benefits including the efficient utilization of space by using parking lots for both parking and energy producing purposes, providing shade and protection for people and vehicles, and providing locations and energy for electric vehicle charging.
Click on the BLUE HIGHLIGHT to view official documents and reports.
07/05/2018 Council action final. Council Action (July 5, 2018)
07/03/2018 Council adopted item forthwith. Report Energy, Climate Change, and Environmental Justice Committee (June 19, 2018)
06/20/2018 City Clerk scheduled item for Council on July 3, 2018. Report Energy, Climate Change, and Environmental Justice Committee (June 19, 2018), Report from DWP (March 1, 2018)
06/19/2018 Energy, Climate Change, and Environmental Justice Committee noted and filed item(s). Report from DWP (March 1, 2018)
06/15/2018 Energy, Climate Change, and Environmental Justice Committee scheduled item for committee meeting on June 19, 2018. Report from DWP (March 1, 2018)
03/13/2018 Department of Water and Power document(s) referred to Energy, Climate Change, and Environmental Justice Committee. Report from DWP (March 1, 2018)
03/09/2018 Document(s) submitted by Department of Water and Power, as follows: Report from DWP (March 1, 2018)
Los Angeles Department of Water and Power report, dated March 1, 2018, relative to a report back on the feasibility of installing solar shade structures over parking lots at Los Angeles Police Department facilities.
11/22/2017 Council action final. Council Action (November 22, 2017), Report from Energy, Climate Change, and Environmental Justice Committee (November 17, 2017)
11/21/2017 Council adopted item forthwith. Report from Energy, Climate Change, and Environmental Justice Committee (November 17, 2017)
11/14/2017 City Clerk scheduled item for Council on November 21, 2017. Report from Energy, Climate Change, and Environmental Justice Committee (November 17, 2017) , Report from DWP (July 25, 2017), Motion (April 7, 2017)
11/07/2017 Energy, Climate Change, and Environmental Justice Committee noted and filed item(s). Report from DWP (July 25, 2017), Motion (April 7, 2017)
11/03/2017 Energy, Climate Change, and Environmental Justice Committee scheduled item for committee meeting on November 7, 2017. Report from DWP (July 25, 2017), Motion (April 7, 2017)
08/01/2017 Department of Water and Power document(s) referred to Energy, Climate Change, and Environmental Justice Committee. Report from DWP (July 25, 2017)
08/01/2017 Document(s) submitted by Department of Water and Power, as follows: Report from DWP (July 25, 2017)
Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) report, dated July 25, 2017, relative to the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) and the LADWP to report on the feasibility of installing solar shade structures over parking lots at LAPD facilities.
07/07/2017 Council rereferred item to Energy, Climate Change, and Environmental Justice Committee, pursuant to Council Action of July 1, 2017, Council File No. 17-0769.
03/07/2017 Motion document(s) referred to Energy and Environment Committee. Motion (April 7, 2017)
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.
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.
You can also find it on the Planning Department website under “Forms” or at the Development Service Center Public Counters Downtown or at Van Nuys.
The revised form will replace the old EAF as of December 30, 2016. Effective January 2, 2017, only the newly updated EAF application will be accepted by the Department.
The old EAF applications will be accepted until December 30, 2016, provided they have a notarized signature.
All the best,
YEGHIG L. KESHISHIAN
External Affairs Officer Department of City Planning
CF 15-1251 At City Council – Adopted to Refer, (15) Motion
HOUSING COMMITTEE REPORT relative to the feasibility of expanding the Department of City Planning’s Expedited Processing Section to include the review of projects with new Environmental Impact Reports (EIR).
Recommendations for Council action, as initiated by Motion (Cedillo – Wesson):
INSTRUCT the Department of City Planning:
To 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.
To 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.
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 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 City Administrative Officer and Chief Legislative Analyst 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.
Community Impact Statement: None submitted.
(Planning and Land Use Management Committee waived consideration of the above matter)
REFERRED TO PLANNING AND LAND USE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
TRANSPORTATION and PLANNING AND LAND USE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEES REPORTS relative to the impact of the State of California’s adoption of the amended California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines implementing Senate Bill (SB) 743.
TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE REPORT
Recommendation for Council action, as initiated by Motion (Bonin – Fuentes for Huizar – O’Farrell):
APPROVE the Department of City Planning (DCP) and Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) SB 743 Comment Letter dated November 6, 2014 (attached to the Council file).
PLANNING AND LAND USE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE REPORT
Recommendation for Council action, pursuant to Motion (Bonin – Fuentes for Huizar – O’Farrell):
INSTRUCT the DCP and the LADOT to begin specific tasks in anticipation of the State’s adoption of the amended CEQA Guidelines implementing SB 743, which will require changes in the way project impacts to the transportation network performance are determined, as follows:
Prepare and submit comments on behalf of the City in response to the Office of Planning and Research’s (OPR) Discussion Draft.
Prepare and present to the Transportation Committee a report on the following items:
A scope of work that the City will be required to undertake to comply with SB 743, including an implementation schedule, with specific goals and milestones, as well as a provision for monitoring and evaluation requirements that will determine if recommended mitigations are effective.
How Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) will be calculated in conducting CEQA analysis.
Clarify if levels of service will continue to be used and under what circumstances.
Map the locations within the City where new VMT metric will apply based on the provisions SB 743 and OPR’s draft guidelines.
Provide recommendations on additional outcomes that the City may have an interest in measuring in conducting CEQA analysis in two general categories:
An approach to CEQA analysis for both land use and transportation projects to disclose impacts.
A new approach to project analysis that includes safety, economic development, public health, transit travel time/reliability, and other metrics.
Report on the ways the City’s implementation of SB 743 will be in alignment with the proposed Mobility Element of the General Plan.
Identify any additional resources needed to support the effort, including but not limited to, grant funding opportunities.
Partner with other municipalities, counties and metropolitan planning organizations as necessary to provide both guidance and consistency in the effort.
Fiscal Impact Statement: None submitted by the LADOT or DCP. Neither the City Administrative Officer nor the Chief Legislative Analyst has completed a financial analysis of this report.
Proposed ordinance amending Sections 12.21 , 12.21.1 , and 12.24 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code (LAMC) to provide: (1 ) the following exceptions for structures that solely support solar energy systems: reductions in parking stall length and width; limited waivers for non-conforming parking lots; modified height exceptions; (2) a new conditional use for otherwise unallowed structures that solely support solar energy systems; and (3) other technical corrections.
On October 13, 2011 , following a public hearing, the City Planning Commission approved the proposed ordinance (attached) and recommended its adoption by the City Council. Adopted the initial Staff Report as its report on the subject. Adopted the attached Findings. Adopted Categorical Exemption No. ENV-2011-1854-CE.
Click on the BLUE HIGHLIGHT to view official documents and reports.
04/19/2012 Mayor transmitted file to City Clerk. Ordinance effective date: May 29, 2012. Final Ordinance (May 29, 2012), Communication from the Mayor (April 19, 2012)
04/13/2012 City Clerk transmitted file to Mayor. Last day for Mayor to act is April 23, 2012.
04/11/2012 Council adopted item, subject to reconsideration, pursuant to Council Rule 51. Report from PLUM (April 13, 2012)
04/03/2012 City Clerk scheduled item for Council on April 11, 2012. Report from City Attorney (February 29, 2012)
03/27/2012 Planning and Land Use Management Committee approved item(s) . Report from City Attorney (February 16, 2012) , Report from City Attorney (February 29, 2012)
03/23/2012 Planning and Land Use Management Committee scheduled item for committee meeting on March 27, 2012. Report from City Attorney (February 29, 2012)
03/01/2012 City Attorney document(s) referred to Planning and Land Use Management Committee. Report from City Attorney (February 29, 2012)
03/01/2012 Document(s) submitted by City Attorney, as follows: Report from City Attorney (February 29, 2012)
City Attorney report R12-0056, dated February 29, 2012, relative to a revised draft ordinance amending the Los Angeles Municipal Code to provide increased flexibility for structures used solely to support solar energy systems, and make other technical corrections.
02/16/2012 City Attorney document(s) referred to Planning and Land Use Management Committee. Report from City Attorney (February 16, 2012)
02/16/2012 Document(s) submitted by City Attorney, as follows: Report from City Attorney (February 16, 2012)
City Attorney report R12-0046, dated February 16, 2012, relative to an Ordinance amending the Los Angeles Municipal Code to provide increased flexibility for structures used soley to support solar energy systems, and make other technical corrections.
11/17/2011 Council action final. Report from PLUM (November 14, 2011)
11/15/2011 Council adopted item, subject to reconsideration, pursuant to Council Rule 51.
11/04/2011 City Clerk scheduled item for Council on November 15, 2011. Report from PLUM (November 14, 2011), Report from City Planning Commission (October 18, 2011)
11/01/2011 Planning and Land Use Management Committee approved item(s) . Report from City Planning Commission (October 18, 2011)
10/28/2011 Planning and Land Use Management Committee scheduled item for committee meeting on November 1, 2011. Report from City Planning Commission (October 18, 2011)
10/20/2011 Los Angeles City Planning Commission document(s) referred to Planning and Land Use Management Committee. Report from City Planning Commission (October 18, 2011)
10/20/2011 Document(s) submitted by Los Angeles City Planning Commission, as follows: Report from City Planning Commission (October 18, 2011)
Los Angeles City Planning Commission report, dated October 18, 2011, relative to a proposed ordinance amending the Los Angeles Municipal Code to provide exceptions for structures that solely support solar energy systems; etc.
Planning Department is instructed, in consultation with the City Attorney and with the assistance of the Department of Building and Safety and the Fire Department, to prepare and present a Solar Zoning Ordinance within 60 days, and streamline the permitting process for solar energy panel structures.
The California Energy Commission introduced the California solar mandate which requires rooftop solar photovoltaic systems to be equipped on all new homes built on January 1, 2020 and beyond. This progressive ruling is the first of its kind in the US and is leading the nation to a cleaner energy future. This initiative by the CEC aims to spearhead California’s milestone goal of producing 50% of the state’s energy through clean energy sources by 2030.
Click on the BLUE HIGHLIGHT to view official documents and reports.
