A city’s General Plan lays out the broad guidelines for all new developments that are then refined through community plans that provide detailed rules block by block so that residents and developers know exactly what is allowed and what isn’t.
That’s the theory anyway and in practice it works that way in many towns.
In LA, however, the General Plan is a meaningless hodgepodge that is vague and contradictory much to the delight of planners, developers and politicians because they can do whatever they want wherever they want.
Even in those rare cases when the community outcry is great enough, the City Council has its own practice of going along with whatever a member wants in his district even if they know it will be hard on the community. To challenge this practice would cause the other 14 members to gang up on the troublemaker and block everything in his or her district.
These are the reasons the neighborhoods in much of the city are deteriorating and community resistance is growing. NIMBYism, after all, is a sane response to powerlessness.
One of the few tools the public has for upsetting this destructive system is the requirement in many cases for environmental impact reports. But now, in the first test of new Planning Director Michael LoGrande’s leadership, even that requirement is under threat.
Barely a week ago, activist Joyce Dillard sounded the alarm when she discovered the Planning Department was proposing a sweeping change to the General Plan that could eliminate the need for any EIR in the future.
The proposal is for a “negative declaration” on the need for an EIRl for the “adoption of Citywide Urban Design Guidelines (“Design Guidelines”) as an Appendix to the General Plan Framework Element for Multifamily Residential, Mixed-Use, Commercial and Industrial land uses.”
urbanguidenegdec.pdf designrchecklist.pdf
“The purpose of the Design Guidelines is twofold: to implement the design values in the 10 Urban Design Principles, a part of the Framework Element, on individual projects; and to consolidate basic Design Guidelines common throughout most Community Plans in one document, allowing
individual New Community Plans to provide tailored, neighborhood-specific Design guidelines. The Design Guidelines will establish design expectations for new development based on Citywide goals, policies and objectives. The Design Guidelines will illustrate ways for individual projects to promote walkability, maintain neighborhood form and character, and promote creative infill development solutions. The Design Guidelines will apply to all new developments and substantial building alterations that require discretionary approvals…”
Just like LoGrande’s glib banter about smart growth, the guidelines sound like a progressive step but residents who have taken a keen interest in planning suspect it’s just another way of trampling on their interests and concerns.
The process has a lot to do with that. Little notice was given of such a radical change and the public has been given only four weeks to respond to the proposal with the deadline for input Aug. 25.
What’s even more amazing is that there isn’t a proposal at all. The public is supposed to respond to something that doesn’t exist, that will only be written after public comment is closed.
Lucille Saunders of the La Brea Coalition and Cindy Cleghorn of PlanCheckNC and the Sunland-Tujunga Neighborhood Council met Thursday with Michelle Sorkin, the planner in charge of this project, to find out first-hand what is going on. You can set up a meeting too by calling Sorkin at (213) 978-1199 or you can fax your comment to her at (213) 978-1226.
Saunders’ report on the meeting was sent out under the headline:
Report on Urban Guidelines Neg Dec Meeting: A FLAWED PLANNING PROCESS
Trust Me…the Planning Department
She described the process as a “travesty,” like asking someone: “How was the dinner you’ll eat tomorrow night?”
“Trust in the Department of City Planning (DCP) means the department will tell you — make the decision — before you have the opportunity to know the facts yourself ... We
cannot trust the process which is fundamentally fatally flawed. It is
this process which must be changed. It simply is not planning.“
Sorkin was told the process is “backwards,” asking people to comment before the proposal is written. Her answer: “We always do it
this way.”
“Trust
us, they imply … But
experiences have taught us once the Staff Report has been written–and
that process unanimously recommends the Commission accept the decision
(Just trust us!), terms are rarely changed.”
The Planninig Department is in a great rush to push this through by holding three informational public meetings on Aug. 30 and 31 and then the guidelines will go to the Planning Commission and the City Council to be rubber-stamped.
This is exactly what so many planning experts feared when LoGrande was appointed to succeed Gail Goldberg because he lacked real qualifications for the job beyond an obedient nature to carry out orders methodically and expeditiously.
Planning is too important to be done this way. The state of the city too fragile. City Hall’s credibility is too low to act in such an imperious way.
We are truly living in an Alice in LaLaWonderland world where up is down, in is out and everything is the bassackwards reflection of a looking glass.
Even if a few manage to make the mad dash to a planning meeting. we might as well be late for that very important date, because when or if we get there because there’s so much traffic, nobody will listen to what we have to say.
W might as well kill time at the beach, because stopping the Mad Hatter Mayor and Council is like trying to stop a tsunami.
Lawsuits are the only remedy left for citizens. The city knows that most people can’t afford to file one, and absent that, life goes on merrily in City Hall.
Lawsuits are NOT the only remedy.
WE — you and I — have the power to REPLACE half the City Council on March 8, 2011.
Join the angry mob of progressives, moderates and conservatives who, despite their disagreements about national and foreign policy, all agree we need to clean up City Hall: http://LACleanSweep.com.
I feel that many of the appointed managers and commissioners are thrust into their jobs without knowing what their duties and responsabilities are to be. To be a department head the individual being considered for the job should have an MBA degree from a well known business school. So the problem is Hizoner appoints his brether in law or a golf partner to head up Airports. The poor gy does’nt know what to do so he is led down whatever path staff wants. To be head of airports, harbor or DWP, the manager needs an MBA. This ia why DWP is being run by IBEW, not the management team. That’s another thing. The manager needs to have a strong and informed staff.
“General Plan is a meaningless hodgepodge that is vague and contradictory much to the delight of planners, developers and politicians because they can do whatever they want wherever they want”.
The above statement first needs to be qualified as to its meaning, which is loosely thrown around. So when we talk about a General Plan, in LA it is about the 35 Community Plans, and the real issue is about densities shown on the Community Plan Map. As such, they are not a hodgepodge. Each and every parcel in the city has a Plan designation and a zone attached to it. No confusion here. The problem arises, always, when the developer wants more than is designated on the Plan and the densities allowed by the zone. And therefore, the need for a Plan Amendment and a Zone Change for something different, which is the maximum allowable in a Plan and a zone. For eg. a property maybe designated on the Community Plan for Low Medium Density Residential with a zone of RD3 ie. 3,000 sq.ft per dwelling unit per lot area. The reason it so planned and zoned is that it is located next to single family dwellings in the R1-1 zone.
But the developer wants to change the Community Plan to High Density Residential with a zone change to R4 ie. 400 sq.ft. per dwelling unit per lot area. This is where all the problems start. The Planning Department can say “NO” and make findings in denial because it is against a Community Plan and the Community’s vision of what they thought was right for the area. This rarely happens. The Mayor and Council offices have accepted money from the developer, and the project will be approved regardless of community opposition.
Therefore, when communities keep insisting they need new Community Plans, they have no idea what they are demanding. The only way to put an end to discretionary actions is to upzone properties to the maximum, so there is no need for such action, cause now the developer can put his 400 sq.ft units by-right. This is what “business friendly” community plans are all about. This is the reason why you have a developer doormat Logrande in place. There will be noone in the Planning Department to object to such gross planning that will densify every neighborhood beyond what should be allowed or acceptable based on the infrastructure.
And yes, it will be too late, by the time communities understand what is going on. Lawsuits will be the only answer, which may result or not in marginal satisfaction. Who is going to fight the mammoth machinery of City Hall and has the money to keep doing it. Therefore, please do not keep repeating, unless you are crystal clear on the issues, that we need new community plans. Instead, demand that the City produce a comprehensive Infrastucture and Growth Plan that clearly states how much growth can be supported and where. Is it not interesting that you never hear anyone talk about it at all those wonderful APA and architect panels or conferences. Why? Because, the politicians, architects, planners, unions and other vested interests make a living from growth. Only a handful of LA residents understand and are demanding for the right plan and not foolishly repeating the BS from City Hall so they can pretend that they understand the buzz words.
@5.22 pm. It is unfortunate such a person with so much knowledge and concern for our city and the planning system must sign in anonymously.
Please contact Lucille Saunders at labreacoalition@gmail.com. Confidential.
Lucille Saunders
The following comment was posted on an earlier article on “Ron Kaye’ and is worth repeating.
—-”Now is the time to position a Director who will protect the future of Angelenos by developing a shared vision, by updating the General Plan and the Community Plans, and by partnering with the community to protect the quality of life in the neighborhood”, in an article by Stephen Box in Citywatch.
Sorry to be the second person to pick on you, but we want you to win, and hopefully through you well written articles, we can educate the rest of the community. So the first question is what is wrong with the existing Community Plans? They include the community’s vision for their communities, and if that vision has changed, it needs to be articulated. I think we are all suffering the aftermath of Gail Goldberg’s BS who broadcast to the whole city that the community plans were not predictable and were confusing to the developer and that her new community plans would put an end to discretionary actions.
The communities were thrilled. To them, it meant that the Planning department would start saying “no” to discretionary actions. Nothing could be further from the truth. The intent then, and now clarified by the Mayor and Ed Reyes for “Business Friendly” Community Plans is to upzone properties to the maximum, so there is no need for discretionary action and no opportunity for communities to provide their input at the hearings. The projects will be by-right.
To give a good example of the reality, get a copy of the staff report ZA 2009-0534 ZV-SPR, for a property located at 2600 Riverside Drive in CD4 (your area). Space does not permit an in-depth analysis other than the highlights. This site was restricted by the Silver Lake-Echo Park-Elysian Valley Community Plan, adopted as recently as 2004, to a total of 210 dwelling units. There is nothing unpredicatable or confusing here, other than that the developer wants more units than allowed. Typical scenario in LA. The only way this can be done is to get a Plan Amendment and a concurrent Zone Change. This legislative process, however, is costly and time consuming.
It instead is accomplished through a Zoning Administrator Variance, a quasi-judicial action, an illegal tool to amend a Community Plan, and the developer gets the requested 277 units or 67 units more than allowed. Meanwhile, the horse trails depicted on the Community Plan that should have been required in a discretionary action, were ignored. La Bonge is on record, as quoted in LA Times, that a “Community Plan” is not an ordinance, and as such they were not required. It should be easy to beat this fool, who does not understand the ABCs of planning. To cut a long story short, the way the variance was done was illegal, and if the Santa Monica Conservancy that appealed it on non-provision of the trails and lost, or the Silver Lake Neighborhood Council that opposed the project were to take legal action, this entitlement would be tossed out.
The public who keep wasting their time and energy fighting such cases usually lose, cause they never seem to understand the intricacies. The developer hires the best land use consultants and the communities have none. Guess on whose side the Councilperson is.
Anyway, the purpose of this story was that please don’t keep repeating the shit from City Hall. The communities need to be aware of the Community Plan updates, and what they entail. More so now, with the developer’s man at the helm. By the time that 2-story building turns into a 10-story, it will be too late.
What the communities should be demanding is an Infrastructure Plan that would justify the densities based on it. We do it backwards. Increase the densities and hope the infrastructure supports it.
To both Anon 5:22 PM & 6:55 PM:
I agree with Lucille Saunders: please contact her. Your knowledge, information and opinions are greatly needed. Lucille has been waging a battle for years for the release of the Infrastructure Status Report (not the correct title) that was deemed by the City Charter. The Update Report has NEVER been released because it’s in “Draft Form”, therefore unreleaseable. This is all BS.
Mr. Kaye’s Group SLAP as well as the movement called “Clean Sweep” need your input and the education you can provide to possible candidates.
Candidates running against the establishment can’t just scream foul and anger, they must offer logical and reasonable solutions to problems. You can help greatly with your knowledge and assistance.
Please consider contacting Lucille and Clean Sweep.
Thank you.
Anonymous @5:22;
Keep educating us. What you have to say is informative and has an impact on the rest of us, who aren’t aware of what is really going on. Thanks.
Me thinks me hears the words of David Abel…
C’mon Ron, how about full disclosure?
You humped for your buddy Dave to get the gig and he didn’t, so no one will be good enough for you.
That’s the trouble with journalists getting into the fray; they lose their neutrality and their ability to look at any situation clearly.
At least give Michael a chance before you conduct his funeral services.
I didn’t get a chance to comment yesterday after reading Ron’s comments. Today, I was hoping I would find outrage about the possibility of the elimination of Environmental Impact Reports. Notwithstanding the good points raised by others, I believe many of you have missed what I consider to be the final nail in the coffin for our communities. If EIRs are eliminated, then the basis for many a lawsuit against the city, challenging lack of compliance with CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) will just about hand every single developer of large scale projects complete permission to override the existing zoning and planning laws affecting neighborhoods, business communities – not to mention the environment. True, EIRs aren’t perfect, since the city has magical ways of letting developers “override” the requirements…but, for the most part, an EIR forces a developer to come clean about the scope and impacts of their project – like traffic, gridlock, congestion, cumulative impacts – minor things like that! A Mitigation Negative Declaration is just icing on the cake by comparison.
Let me put in another way – it costs thousands of dollars to prepare a EIR (hiring experts, fees, etc.) It takes lots of man hours for the city to review and process this document. Lastly, an EIR requires lots of public input and responses prepared by the developer and the city accordingly. An MND has a very short “shelf” life compared to the months it takes to do an EIR.
Bottom line – it’s another attempt to save developers money, shortchange the public’s right to have their say, and prove, once again, the city’s lack of vision when it comes to safeguarding our Environment (upper case for emphasis).
Meanwhile, here is an excerpt from LA Weekly:
“So when LoGrande went up to the monthly meeting of the Valley Alliance, count us among those who expected him to get a chilly and skeptical reception. For now, though, he’s got a bit of a honeymoon going on.
We talked this morning to Jill Banks Barad, chair of the Valley Alliance of Neighborhood Councils, and she gushed about LoGrande’s appearance and called the reception warm.
“Everyone was very very impressed,” she said. Barad noted that LoGrande doesn’t come from a traditional planning background, but said that could be a good thing.
LoGrande majored in political science. Given the highly politicized nature of the job, maybe that’s what’s needed. He gave out his number and told the Valley denizens to call. He said he has instructed his staff to get out into the community rather than holing up downtown. He said he wants to do actual planning rather than project by project piecemeal decision-making, which is what leads to the kind of incoherence seen all over the city. He told them he wants to preserve the character of neighborhoods.
So, pretty much, he told them exactly what they wanted to hear. Remains to be seen whether he’ll follow through, but it seems he got off on the right foot Thursday”.
LA residents are idiots and deserve this man and the slow and steady destruction of their neighborhoods.
I also don’t understand why an Infrastructure and Growth report that is legally required to be produced on an annual basis is not. Why is this Lucille Saunder’s lone battle on an issue, which affects the whole city. Where are the Neighborhood Councils. Why are they not demanding it? Oh wait, they are busy welcoming Logrande and gushing about him as the best thing that could happen to them. God help LA.
Yeah, let’s continue to make it even harder for anyone to develop, piling on the EIR’s just to drag out the process by years and tens of thousands of dollars or much more. WHILE neighbor cities like West Hollywood build and build and build. That idiot Lucille Saunders pipes in here, as usual with her selfish perspective based on one property that is in sore need of renovation, and pits her cheap apartment against the much-needed revenue of an extremely well-planned replacement.
WHILE literally directly across the street sits the giant Target/ Best Buy etc. mall, AND while on that very same intersection, West Hollywood has announced plans to aggressively develop way more density than is there now “because it’s an area that can handle a great deal more density, since it’s on a highly traveled MTA corridor…”
West Hollywood has also over-developed Sunset Blvd./ The Sunset Strip to beyond gridlock day and night, but plans massive projects there too, over the strenuous objections of its residents and of those who live in the hills of L A, which city line starts a mere few feet above the Strip.
(SO close in fact, that when Paris Hilton’s house was besieged by paps to the great annoynace of neighbords, the moronic WLA/ CD5 anti-ALL development groups like the Mike Eveloff crowd, blasted the CD5 Council office for “meddling in West Hollywood to help Paris Hilton.” THESE MORONS in WLA, like Lucilla Saunders, have been the only ones with the time/ energy enough to name themselves the “voice of the residents.” WHILE literally turning a blind eye to the doings of WeHo, which doesn’t give a damn at all, and openly says so. AND which openly flauted CEQA even 2 decades ago, and was BEGGING to be sued, as one of their “planning commissioners” told me off the record, and now, is WAY beyond the clean air CEQA requirements.)
Ditto even with Santa Monica, the other “progressive city,” that Rosendahl always rails about. Culver City’s gotten in on development, streamlining and improving its run-down areas and revenue and hence services to residents, as well as of course, Burbank and Glendale…
Problem is you people are so myopic and clueless there’s NO way Clean Sweep can ever push anyone who’s remotely capable of balancing the need for reasonable, responsible development with the demand for MORE services like cops, you demand.
Mary Cummins for Mayor. She is an expert on everything from dogs to planning.
This is completely false. To convey the idea that the City of LA and the Planning Department is able to circumvent the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) is nothing short of a “Red Herring.” I encourage all those reading posts on this site do some homework on planning laws and environmental law. You should also go online and read the CEQA Guidelines,the Zoning Code and the Commuunity Plan for the area you live in.
To 5:06 p.m. we work in the Planning Department and are sick and tired of ripping off the communities, which if we don’t, our careers are screwed. Don’t bother to tell us that you know more, cause you don’t. We know the calibre of the idiots who work there. I don’t think you want us to air all the dirty laundry and names, so back off.
@ anonymous 1.05 pm
Lucille Saunders has nothing to hide. I am stand up, speak up, and am proud to give my name and will disclose my proven facts to all. People know me. They trust me, even if they do not agree with or I with them.
But can we believe one who does not believe in their points or is so fearful of revealing their position, yet who hides but spews lies and libel through untrue misinformation??
Clearly something is widely amiss with such a person who needs such deceit…
Proud to claim: I am Lucille Saunders
Lucille, the time is actually 1:08. Don’t bother responding to this idiot. Her name is Mary Cummins, who used to work in LA Animal Shelter, sued the city, made tons of money, and is the scourge of every blog. She has too much free time on her hands and espouses nonsense all the time. If you read the blogs, this story of hers in addition to beating up on Trutanich is old and tired.
We respect you what you are doing, and only wish there were enough committed citizens who would join you in demanding a legally required Growth and Infrastructure report that affects each and every neighborhood. To say the least, I’m disappointed in the whole Neighborhood Council system, who collect their moneys from the city, and waste it on frivolous items like baseball uniforms for kids or dinners, and think they are now a part of the establishment.
The Neighborhood Councils, as presently operated are a disgrace.
For those who missed this comment, based on reality, here is a repeat, so you are aware of how futile it is when you go to the Planning Commission for your two minutes. The Mayor, the Planning Commission and the Planning Department are all closely aligned. The Planning Commissioners designed to be the Citizen Watchdogs are anything but that. Just want you to understand the monolithic walls you have to put up with.
By Anonymous on July 24, 2010 5:27 PM
The following is a copy of the City Planning Commision letter to the Planning Department. It is followed by an analysis of this letter.
July 15, 2010
To: All Planning Department Staff
Re: The Resignation of S. Gail Goldberg, Director of Planning
Your City Planning Commission wants to reach out to all of you to offer our continued support in this time of transition and commit to our continued confidence in the Planning Department.
For many of us, our tenure on the Commission has provided the rewarding opportunity to appreciate your work and we would like to applaud the Department’s past successes and encourage your continued focus and determination. It is to the credit of the entire Planning Department that an evolving “culture of planning” for the City of Los Angeles has made its mark through so many of your efforts. The following list represents a few highlights: beginning with a growing excellence in Administrative and Clerical staff
including the Executive Office, the Commission Office and other offices that keep us all operating smoothly; the exciting upgrades in “ZIMAS” and “PCTS” by the Systems and GIS staff; Citywide Planning’s extensive policy planning such as the Housing Element update, multiple housing ordinances,“Green” building, LA River Improvement Overlay (LA-RIO), the Citywide Draft Bicycle Plan and numerous transit oriented design plans; the Community Planning staff’s Update program with its vitalpublic outreach, its specific plans, CDOs and Citywide Mansionization Ordinance; the creation of the
Urban Design Studio and your leadership on community and urban design guidelines and principles; the Office of Historic Resources and your leadership on Historic Preservation Zones (HPOZ’s) and “Survey LA”; the Office of Zoning Administration including the Expediting Unit and Environmental Review’s evident excellence; Code Studies including your important code review work and streamlining efforts and specialized zoning research, including the Citywide Sign Ordinance rewrite; and finally Subdivision’s
fine work on Tract and Parcel Map projects. Please know how greatly each of our Commissioners
appreciates all of your work and efforts.
All of these successes aligned with and helped to implement the “Do Real Planning” principles defined by our Commission four years ago. We thank you for this vital support. These and other department accomplishments are significant and their value needs to be recognized and championed during this transition to both ensure continuity and to further empower City Planning staff.
Your path has been challenged with disappearing budgets and early retirements that have limited the Department’s capacities. But there is much to celebrate in the Planning Department’s accomplishments during Gail Goldberg’s tenure. This Commission has every confidence in the continuity of leadership of interim Director of Planning, Vince Bertoni, Deputy Director, Eva Yuan-McDaniel, and Chief Zoning Administrator, Michael LoGrande to follow through on the Department’s promise and deliver continued
pride in our Los Angeles City Planning Department.
In the next 6 to 12 months our combined commitments, including both the Planning Department and the Planning Commission, are substantial with issues of critical importance to the City of Los Angeles. Together we are poised to complete the Department’s reorganization, streamlining of the permitting
process, code reviews, citywide urban design guidelines, and multiple community plan updates. In this transition time the Commission has reached out to Mayor Villaraigosa for his continued support, for it is the Mayor’s vision that has initiated this “new era of planning culture” in Los Angeles. We thank him,
we thank Gail Goldberg, and we thank all of you.
Sincerely on behalf of the City Planning Commission with excitement for the future of planning in Los Angeles,
William Roschen, FAIA, LEED AP Regina Freer
President, L.A. City Planning Commission Vice President, L. A. City Planning Commission
CC: The Honorable Antonio Villaraigosa, Mayor
THE FOLLOWING IS AN ATTEMPT TO MAKE SENSE OF THIS LETTER:
“Your City Planning Commission wants to reach out to all of you to offer our continued support in this time of transition and commit to our continued confidence in the Planning Department”.
The Planning Commission reaches out to staff through a parody of a letter, which only shows the Commission’s ignorance of the Department and uncalled for closeness. How is it helpful?
“For many of us, our tenure on the Commission has provided the rewarding opportunity to appreciate your work and we would like to applaud the Department’s past successes and encourage your continued focus and determination. It is to the credit of the entire Planning Department that an evolving “culture of
planning” for the City of Los Angeles has made its mark through so many of your efforts”.
“continued focus and determination”
On what?
Please explain “culture of planning”.
The following list represents a few highlights: beginning with a growing excellence in Administrative and Clerical staff including the Executive Office, the Commission Office and other offices that keep us all operating smoothly;
Does the Commission realize that most of the Planning Commission reports are never attached to the Planning agenda, and the community has to jump through hoops to get a copy of the staff report? It does not appear as an attempt at transparency or to promote public participation.
“the exciting upgrades in “ZIMAS” and “PCTS” by the Systems and GIS staff;”
Nothing new. They were there before this Commission came on board.
“multiple housing ordinances, “Green” building, LA River Improvement Overlay (LA-RIO), the Citywide Draft Bicycle Plan and numerous transit oriented design plans; the Community Planning staff’s Update program with its vital public outreach, its specific plans, CDOs and Citywide Mansionization Ordinance;”
One of those multiple housing ordinances must include the disgraced SB1818 ordinance, which gave away far more than was necessary and that continues to create a mess in the department. Just how many years does it take to write a simple LA-RIO or that 4-1/2 years later not a single Community Plan has been produced. The bicycle Plan after several years with huge monies spent on consultants is still a draft. Yet to see a TOD Plan. The Citywide Mansionization Ordinance would never have been accomplished if not for the efforts of the past President, Jane Usher.
“the creation of the Urban Design Studio and your leadership on community and urban design guidelines and principles;
The reality is that there was never any serious commitment. It was no more than a PR stunt. An urban design studio for city of LA composed of two people, one of whom retired.
“the Office of Historic Resources and your leadership on Historic Preservation Zones (HPOZ’s) and “Survey LA”;
The Office was already there. What is the point here?
“the Office of Zoning Administration including the Expediting Unit”
Is the Commission aware that the Zoning office backlog of cases is several years, and the quality of reports deteriorate by the year.
As for the expediting unit, it is well known that for a few extra bucks, it rubberstamps everything that comes its way. It has to be the greatest return on the money for a developer.
and Environmental Review’s evident excellence;”
No idea what this is about. Huge case backlog.
“Code Studies including your important code review work and streamlining efforts and
specialized zoning research,”
Are we talking about the Code streamlining efforts that would make it easier for developers to sail through with little community input now or later on projects that impact their quality of life?
“and finally Subdivision’s fine work on Tract and Parcel Map projects”.
Is the Commission aware that the last Advisory Agency quit abruptly and left the city for no lack of support from management besides being kicked out of management meetings? Huge backlog.
“All of these successes aligned with and helped to implement the “Do Real Planning” principles defined by our Commission four years ago. We thank you for this vital support. These and other department accomplishments are significant and their value needs to be recognized and championed during this transition to both ensure continuity and to further empower City Planning staff”.
Surely, the Commission reads the same staff reports we do. Their mediocrity is a complete departure from “Real Planning”. It seems the primary purpose of this commission is to approve more density, regardless of community opposition and its impact on their quality of life.
“and championed during this transition to both ensure continuity and to further empower City Planning staff”.
Continuity of what and empowerment of whom and to what end? The morale in the department has never been lower.
“Your path has been challenged with disappearing budgets and early retirements that have limited the Department’s capacities. But there is much to celebrate in the Planning Department’s accomplishments during Gail Goldberg’s tenure”.
Surely the Commission jests. Until April this year, the Planning Department had almost 300 staff. The ERIPs started only in January. If 300 employees were inadequate, than just how many are needed. 400, 500 or 600? It is a sad testimony that an intelligent Planning Commission bought into Gail Goldberg’s BS to the extent that they must repeat it as an excuse for producing so little in 4 and a half years.
“This Commission has every confidence in the continuity of leadership of interim Director of Planning, Vince Bertoni, Deputy Director, Eva Yuan-McDaniel, and Chief Zoning Administrator, Michael LoGrande to follow through on the Department’s promise and deliver continued pride in our Los Angeles City Planning Department.”
This is the part where it truly gets frightening. Why is the Commission involved in personnel issues when the City Charter gives them no such power.
“In the next 6 to 12 months our combined commitments, including both the Planning Department and the Planning Commission, are substantial with issues of critical importance to the City of Los Angeles. Together we are poised to complete the Department’s reorganization, streamlining of the permitting
process, code reviews, citywide urban design guidelines, and multiple community plan updates. In this transition time the Commission has reached out to Mayor Villaraigosa for his continued support, for it is the Mayor’s vision that has initiated this “new era of planning culture” in Los Angeles. We thank him,
we thank Gail Goldberg, and we thank all of you”.
Once again, the Commission is getting involved with the department’s internal reorganization, a personnel issue. Interestingly, the community has not heard anything about this re-organization. Ditto on the code streamlining. No explanation provided as to why it would be beneficial to the communities.
“for it is the Mayor’s vision that has initiated this “new era of planning culture” in Los Angeles”.
The Commission talks about a vision, which has not been shared with the community that affects their quality of lives. Should not the Planning Commission entrusted with this job make an effort in sharing this vision.
“CC: The Honorable Antonio Villaraigosa, Mayor”
Now Planning Commission, you have really hurt the communities’ feelings. No cc to the APCs, Neighborhood Councils or the communities? If anything, the Mayor, Commission and the Planning Department alignment shows how entwined the three are and how the Commission has lost all semblance of even pretending to be independent citizen watchdogs.
@ 5:06 and The Subject at Hand. Two big flaws with the Negative Declaration: 1) could not find a link to “citywide design guidelines.” Anyone who wants to make an intelligent CEQA-related comment is SOL unless the document is transparently disclosed. Comments are due August 25; and 2) What do the planners mean when they write that these guidelines will amend the Appendix of the General Plan Framework? What Appendix? There isn’t an appendix listed in the Framework Table of Contents.
There are actually two Growth and Infrastructure lawsuits. Lucille’s and one filed by Fix The City, a group of concerned citizens that believe (as does Lucille)that the City should follow the Charter and General plan. Wow what a concept! What anyone thinks of us doesn’t matter, these suits will have their day in court and the City will lose.
Thanks for update on lawsuits. The planning process over the last 5 years has atomized into alphabet soup: cdo, pod, tod (hpoz’s are effective) which are either useless for shaping development or remain an aicp-apa planners dream learned at the latest conference. In the meantime some good projects have come in only because the developers and the designers were responsive to the site and community. @1:08- You think LA is losing out and use as your example—gridlock in WeHo? Logic alert.
To 10:30: “logic alert” indeed. If Saunders and her bunch (as well as the likes of CC Verone of the Save Our Strip or whatever she’s calling it now, haven’t heard her active in years in fighting the over-development of Sunset Strip/ member of the Bel Air- Beverly Crest Assn.) were truly interested in fighting gridlock they would organize to call attention to what West Hollywood is doing to the quality of life to Los Angeles’ residents. Just as residents of other cities do when their quality of life is ruined by adjacent towns. NO one said to use WeHo and over-developing cities as MODELS, dum-dum, but to realize that Lucille and and “Fix Our City Coalition” are in fact doing exactly opposite.
As the L A Weekly has pointed out, WeHo gets a total pass for far, far more egregious and virtually unchecked over-development, while these residents want Zero-development for L A. Even though it means THEY will get reduced services due to the lack of new tax money, while WeHo, Santa Monica and other cities are thriving and giving residents services L A can only envy. AND if these geniuses have their way, will have even MORE curtailed services.
What they are doing is driving companies which would provide the infrastructure and services they simultaneously DEMAND, out of the city, with their cutting off their nose to spite their face, philosophy. Actually, cutting off OUR noses as other L A residents having to pay for their lawsuits, instead of seeing that money go toward services. We all want to make City Hall accountable, and should push for city-wide open discussions on WHAT kind of vision we want to have as a city, so that each project doesn’t become bogged down in their NIMBY wars. (The Daily News had a surprisingly wise editorial on that a month or so ago.) City Hall, whether the Mayor’s office or individual council offices, has tended to avoid such NIMBY confrontations or conduct such planning only with “invited” guests, rather than doing this publicly and openly, come what may.
Fix Our City Coalition’s website doesn’t list ANY of the brave “volunteers” behind it and its lawsuit, curiously, other than James O’Sullivan who writes the overview. But it’s “About us” page has this written by Scott McNeely, 4/21/08:
“Many believe unchecked growth has outstripped our infrastructure and compromises our quality of life. Our streets are filled to capacity. The sewers are 100 years old. Blackouts threaten our neighborhoods on calm, cool, clear days. Our public education system lacks supports and and basic upkeep, causing our children to perform below national standards. Street services has a 20-year backlog of fixing sidewalks. Hospitals and emergency rooms have closed in the double digits in the last 5 years.”
I’ll grant that although amateurishly incoherent and unable to distinguish between COUNTY services like Hospitals/ ER’s, LAUSD/STATE funding issues like the schools, DWP issues – and those offered by the city – we all agree that these things are “broken.” But by having as their main agenda, simply saying no to all development – the very source of new revenue to fix the infrastructure absent the higher parcel taxes we don’t want – they are ensuring that streets, numbers of cops and all services they demand are reduced. While Santa Monica and WeHo and even Culver City and Long Beach now, grow and thrive at our expense.
While this group won’t list names, it’s been openly linked with Tract 7260 (Mike Eveloff’s group), and Jay Handel, and their issues listed as prime are: Opposing Medical Marijuana dispensaries, billboards, Pico-Olympic, linking to stories on THIS Kaye blog about city worker wages and pensions, DWP and CRA and progapanda praising Nuch. Who they actively campaigned for so we get the idea. O’Sullivan emailed around in ’08 his support for Jane Usher’s famous memo and she is sort of their patron saint.
ADD to these issues, the opposition to the Expo Line Phase II unless it adopts the most expensive below-grade (ground) version (joining even with Damion Goodman and his radical “Environmental Racism” group), the opposition of many like their most-featured columnist Kaye our blog host to ALL “subway to the sea”/ Red Line west extensions in favor or just surface “solutions” to gridlock (an oxymoron) even as they bitterly fight Pico-Olympic’s short-term plan to do just that…we get the idea. Unfortunately.
I could understand a lot of people being satisfied with the status quo — and acquiring a NIMBY mentality — if most of Los Angeles were like a giant version of Beverly Hills, Brentwood or Pacific Palisades. Or Paris, France. Or London, England. Or Geneva, Switzerland. But it’s not.
Instead much of older LA is a series of largely worn-out, outdated, frowsy environments. Most of them are a reflection of the unsophisticated, lower-middle-class (or barely middle-class) late 1930s, 1950s and early 1960s. The period when southern California was attracting the type of Midwestern and Dust-Bowl people who’d help LA earn the dubious reputation of “overgrown hick town.” That applies even more so to the way that large portions of the San Fernando Valley developed and evolved over 40 to 50 years ago.
In many cases, such areas seem more dowdy and unappealing today than ever before. Not to mention that they and older communities in general are always vulnerable to decades of natural wear and tear. Therefore, the areas of LA that were second-rate to begin with are even more at risk of becoming straight-out slums. And even when well maintained or semi-well maintained, such communities tend to turn off, if not repel, a lot of well-educated, skill-oriented, upwardly mobile people.
Therefore, it’s not surprising that Los Angeles now is attracting — or getting trapped with — a high percentage of hand-to-mouth, semi-illiterate, low-income residents.
Thanks for your update on the “infrastructure” suit, Jim.
These “conspiracy wackos” have lost ALL CREDIBILITY with their wild, wide of the point accusations (and associations).
Perhaps if they actually READ the suits, cited below, they would–if they wanted to–become more informed.
Saunders et al v. City of Los Angeles BS115435 (“Infrastructure” Case)
Saunders et al v La Brea Gateway and City BS121492 (Consolidated with BS121581)
The “Infrastructure Case” is based on the General Plan mandate for the City to measure, monitor and report the infrastructure annually as the bases for the City, citizens and developers to approve developments–or not. The report has not been conducted since 1998. What state is the infrastructure is a truly burning question we all need to know the answers. Now.
Our La Brea Gateway project was NOT NIMBY, BUT TO BE CONSISTENT WITH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD–NOT THE BEHEMOTH THEY THRUST ON US. Yes, we sued because we believe each of us has the right to live where and how we want.
We chose this neighborhood, certainly not a slum. Not WeHo. (Where do all of you live, by the way?? We gladly compare our educations, skills, and mobility with the lot of you! And you are clearly outclassed–except as comedians.)
Lucille Saunders
We gladly compare our educations, skills, and mobility with the lot of you!
Then how do you explain the type of people you describe — the ones with school-aged children — often choosing to send their sons and daughters NOT to public schools in the mid-Wilshire area, but to private ones?
Los Angeles High School was once considered a prestigious part of the LAUSD. Is it today?
The effects of decades of “limousine liberalism” are a glorious sight to behold!
To 1:56….How quaint…What happen to Europe during, and after WWII..After WWII, “THE MARSHALL PLAN” happened! I once heard, not too long ago from a Parsons Brinckerhoff representative (paraphrasing) Los Angeles chose to build “Boxed”homes…Of course you have an “artsy enclave” like the Brewery, that when they first moved in, the occupiers didn’t want anything to do with Ed Reyes’ district…As Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa would say “Put your money where your mouth is…” and buy one of those 100 year homes to renovate…Oh I forgot you wouldn’t live near working class folk…that’s why the big developers build all these new dwellings but never for mixed income usage….Do you remember Chavez Ravine…well I do, and so do my relatives…If I were a rich developer who used imminent domain in order to build posh apartments; I would allow the evicted to live in these quaint humble abodes rent free….Why?…Because it is the right thing to do!….Oh, but we can’t have that, that’s not “fair”…that’s not the capitalistic way of life, We can’t have that NOW!… Can WE?
Recently a friend of mine and I have been immersed in old LA City traffic studies going back to 1915. What do they tell us about today and the Neg Decl which Lucille has brought to our attention?
Residential neighborhoods were once heralded as the crowning achievement of LA and a major reason we stood head and shoulders above other metropolitan centers. No more! The City has turned against it residents and our homes. Behind closed doors these greedy goniffs have adopted a plan to destroy LA in 10 years rather than the 30 which they envisioned a few years ago. The 10/30 Plan to make LA the leader in fixed rail mass transit is a scam. Fixed rail mass transit means mega-density. Think of Sylvester Stallone’s cubbyhole apartment in Judge Dredd.
The Neg Decl is really a Declaration of War on our homes. Lucille is our modern day Paul Revere -
@3.52 As with much diversive and bombastic rhetoric, you missed the mark of my comment. But since you did include a quote from it, I say:
I have no idea to whom you are asking these questions and making such points– since they are indicators of the public school system and not of any position I have supported. And since we do not live near Los Angeles HS or Wilshire.
BTW, my children went to Melrose Avenue ES, Bancroft MS, and Fairfax HS–all public and all within walking distance of our home.
And why are all these people throwing jello of unsound and unfounded stuff that smacks of such desperation called “anonymous??”
Except those of you who clearly work for the city and have a conscience.
Lucille Saunders
I’m not going to waste my time arguing with a wacko, who knows a little about everything thru her research on-line. Mary, you do need psychiatric help, and looks like you forgot your dosage for the day.
Lucille, once again, let me remind you, that 1:08 p.m.; 11:56 a.m.; 1:44 p.m.; 1:56 p.m; and 3:52 p.m. is one and the same person: Mary Cummins. Just ignore her. She will out write you and noone with any intelligence can argue with this woman whose last job was working with cats and dogs, whom by the way I love. This woman has no life other than to attack people on-line.
4:50…Once the LA urban planners have their way..All those residents by the LA River will be tossed down the river…La Llorona style…¡Vaya con Dìos!
I haven’t had this much fun in years. As I said earlier those of us that are trying to make a difference in our neighborhoods have been called every name in the book and we don’t care. No one I know gets up in the morning and says “I think I’ll take on City Hall today!” It happens because the City is always pushing the envelope. Pico/Olympic was a perfect example of the community (both business and residents) coming together to address a bad idea. I know some in the Anonymous family will think I mean the plan itself but the lawsuit actually dealt with the fact that the Mayor was trying to circumvent CEQA, something no one should approve of. A group of us went to the Mayor and tried to get him to comply with CEQA but he thought he was right or maybe he just didn’t care. Fortunately the court agreed with us. The City’s implementation of SB1818 was another bad move so again some of us banded together and sued the City. As for not wanting development in Los Angeles I plead not guilty. The Miracle Mile has seen well over 1200 new residential units approved in the last 5 or 6 years and the Residential Association interacted with those developers to get the best projects for them and for the neighborhood. I have no problem when someone puts their money down and wants to develop a property. What I do have a problem with is when the developer is given a variance they should not qualify for. A variance allows a property owner to use his or her property in a manner that is basically consistent with zoning regulations with minor variations so that he or she has“an equity with other owners in the same zone”. Equity is rarely proven but Planning issues a variance anyway. When you buy a property that has a footprint resembling a circle you should not get a variance to build a larger project with the footprint of a rectangle. In theory the Planning department is supposed to respect zoning but they don’t. The Community plans are and always have been under attack. When the Wilshire Plan was last updated business, residents and the City came together and upgraded some parcels, downgraded others and completely did away with certain zones. There was a lot of give and take in the process and we thought we had a deal. It wasn’t to long after that that the City came up with RAS zones that blew the plan all to hell. No one but the planning department, certain developers and City officials knew anything about them until they were approved. Soon after that we got mixed use zones which really made life interesting along transportation corridors.
The point is we all live,(hopefully)work and play here. In order for the City to work everyone needs to play by the rules. That includes the City. I did not start out to file a suit against the City to get them to comply with the General Plan, I was just trying to get information about infrastructure in the Miracle Mile. I read the 1998 report and it mentioned some problems in the Wilshire plan area. I searched for the 1999 report (to see if the issues had been resolved) and when I couldn’t find it, filed a public records request with the Planning Department. In an interesting meeting with Gail Goldberg and her entire staff she told me the City just stopped doing the plans. She didn’t know why and frankly I think it was her first hint that things were not going to work out for her the way she had planned. I believed her and still do that she didn’t know about the missing reports.
So while this has been fun I’m off to read some more data on water issues. Water is where the you know what will really hit the fan in LA. That is unless you are NBC Universal.
Elegant density, Smart Growth, high density, transit oriented development, in-fill development. What does it all really mean?
In Los Angeles, with a dwindling water supply, it is inappropriate to have this endless growth.
Who does it really benefit? The out-of-town developers that have no downside and all the upside.
Just look at some recent developers – Sunset Gordon is being foreclosed on and walking away from their project. But wait, they are heading to Venice on another project. Who cares, its OPM (Other People’s Money).
Now look at 1601 LLC, (Vine Street and Selma). Here is a developer who has at least 3 major problems in the past including most recently a bankruptcy oweing more than $105 million dollars on a $95 million dollar project.
And what about the Midtown Crossing project and CIM? A $20 million gift to CIM Group. And the taxpayer pays back this loan?
And no matter how wrong, how risky, how costly for the taxpayers, everything is a done deal, a rubber stamp.
To those who complain about any holdups in development, you are very lucky that there are those UNSELFISH people who sacrifice time and resources not for their own personal enrichment, but for the GREATER GOOD of the community and city as a whole.
Thank you Lucille on behalf of all the “locals” who really care.
Bob.
BTW, my children went to Melrose Avenue ES, Bancroft MS, and Fairfax HS–all public and all within walking distance of our home.
Well, good for you. But statistically you’re the exception to the rule. That is, if most of your neighbors are that vanishing breed of urban LA resident who is somewhat well-off and well-educated, and still young enough to have school-aged children — and therefore are not in the category of hipster single (straight or gay) — odds are they’ll be doing back flips to get their kids into either private schools (including parochial schools) or certain public schools located far away from the typical old-urban-LA setting.
The people who can’t swing that, or don’t want to deal with the hassle of that, in many cases choose to pull up stakes and relocate to various suburbs — such as around southern Orange County or Westlake-Thousand Oaks — or even other cities like Portland, Oregon. If they have enough money, they’ll perhaps try to move farther west, towards neighborhoods like Brentwood.
In Los Angeles, with a dwindling water supply, it is inappropriate to have this endless growth.
A lack of plentiful water supplies and a suitable infrastructure hasn’t prevented cities in northern Mexico, if not Mexico in general, from growing exponentially. No reason to believe Los Angeles will be any different…
To August 15, 2010 7:38 PM,
So you are telling us that the City Council is lying to us? We don’t have to cut back on our water usage? Thank You!
By adding many, many more water fixture units per square foot of land will result in a net increase in water usage. Even with LEED building standards and reduced water usage. And many proponents to High Density Development don’t want any height and density (ratio of floor to height – FAR) limits.
Just like the DWP rate increase that was “fought out” in March and April of 2010 and Al Gore appearing with the Mayor saying that the rate increase was “for the Environment.” Of course it had nothing to do with Green power, because DWP is going to need a whole lot more money before the decade is out.
Your logic and example on growth doesn’t add up. In Hollywood, the rate of population growth from the 1980s and used by the planning department as an excuse for planning was far greater than the actual.
As another posters have said, the beneficiary of the projects are the Billionaires who take from the working class. But existing and small businesses just get run over and driven out.
What we have here is a financial bailout for the rich.
In Hollywood, the rate of population growth from the 1980s and used by the planning department as an excuse for planning was far greater than the actual.
Some of the highest rates of population density, not just in LA city but in LA County too, have occurred in neighborhoods that have witnessed very little to almost no development over the past 25 (or even 50-plus) years. Areas like the MacArthur Park section of the city, or even various old, lower-class single-family neighborhoods like around South-Central or southeast LA County. That’s where garages of tract housing have been converted into apartments or where more than one family will crowd into one house.
To August 15, 2010 8:17 PM,
So what is your point? You are saying that have existing high density. So should we increase it even more with high rise developments which by the way, don’t help the poor.
Again, the problems with the infrastructure and water supply will even be harder to deal with.
You (8:17 PM) are pointing out that there will be growth – illegal units etc.
But those who want endless growth (aka High Density) you are adding to the problem by making the City even more crowded.
That will lead to a downfall and is unsustainable.
Lucille Sanders is a heroine. She is one of the few of us who actually is doing something about the political/development dictatorship that has taken over our city. She cares about the lack of infrastructure – imagine that!
Lawsuits do cost money and lots of time and effort, but the city does almost always lose.
Before we can ever solve this addiction to overdevelopment and Smart Growth (what an oxymoron that is) served up to us through City Planning by these politicians/developers, we must change the system. Lawsuits are one way – an expensive way.
Another way is to elect Councilmembers who represent the people. We have one of them now – one! And that is Paul Krekorian. Clean Sweep may actually give us two more.
Another way is to change the Charter, and the first change has to be that City Commissioners in Area Planning and City Planning must be elected instead of appointed by our pro-development Mayors.
Elaine Brown
If Commissioners are going to be elected, it”ll be the same problem as the politicians. It takes money to get elected. The Mayor should not make all the appointments. In Pasadena, each Councilmember gets a choice and the Mayor two for a total of nine commissioners that ensures diversity of opinion, background and relative independence from group thinking. In LA, the Commissions and General Mangers are appointed by the Mayor, and all three are in tandem. If some were appointed by the Councilmembers, we may see some change. Also, at least two should be from Neighborhood Councils.
ALL TOGETHER NOW: Let’s focus on the topics at hand–the backwards process and “trust me” planning models –illustrated in the report on meeting held August 12, 2010, referenced in Ron’s introductory article.
Report on Urban Guidelines Neg Dec Meeting: A FLAWED PLANNING
PROCESS Trust Me…the Planning Department
Lucille Saunders
La Brea Willoughby Coalition
How was the dinner you’ll eat tomorrow night? Trust in the Department of City Planning (DCP) means the department will tell you–make the decision–before you have the opportunity to know the facts yourself.
The present “planning process” follows that route: to determine the outcomes before the facts are in. And DCP wants the public to do the same. They have now released the Negative Declaration (Neg Dec) on Urban Design Guidelines which have not been written.
It is their decision these Guidelines have NO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS– ON FACTS NOT YET GIVEN. To compound this travesty, the planning department is insisting on public comment on the Neg Dec (due by August 25, 2010) before the Guidelines are completed.
Questions to the project planner about how backward the cycle is, and how could citizens change the process brought protestations of, “We always do it this way…”
Yes, we know. This is the way the Housing Element Framework was passed, with the final report written– before the very limited community meetings were held and with no citizen input.
Yes, the Hollywood Community Plan-Update’s hundreds of pages of policies which change our neighborhoods forever have been released. But the Draft EIR on which those policies are based have not been published. When the DEIR is released, public comment will now be limited to 45-days.
Yes, we asked at the meeting, but how can citizens have adequate information and give relevant comments on something not yet in existence?
Trust us, they imply. The answer was public comments can be made and the Neg Dec can be changed until the Planning Commission decision is made.
But experiences have taught us once the Staff Report has been written–and that process unanimously recommends the Commission accept the decision (Just trust us!), terms are rarely changed.
When we stressed how much better for the citizens and the process to be involved and give input throughout the process rather then to comment and attempt to fix a project at a hearing or to appeal after one. DCP answer: There will be 3-meeting for public information and input [for the whole city] on August 30 and 31st (in about 20-days). We will get the notices out “soon…”
At the meeting, we were given drafts of the Guidelines and were told the drafts would be released “in a few days” to the public. That is a step in the right direction. But this writer continues to insist the Neg Dec cannot be determined and therefore public comments on the environmental aspects on the citywide Guidelines cannot be addressed until adequate citizen input into the Guidelines. And then, the basic planning process to judge
environmental impacts on those Guidelines would follow.
We cannot trust the process which is fundamentally fatally flawed. It is this process which must be changed. It simply is not planning.
But those who want endless growth (aka High Density) you are adding to the problem by making the City even more crowded.
There won’t be endless growth because the type of people who support most new development either don’t live in or aren’t moving to LA. The city is attracting mainly low-income people, as it has for the past few decades. Of course, there are some pockets of gentrification, and the type of people who go with that. But those areas are limited in scope and scale.
The era of larger amounts of development in LA over the past 10 years is pretty much over. We’ve entered what some are calling the Great Recession. Or a situation that perhaps will be similar to Japan’s “Lost Decade” or, worse, Detroit/Michigan with palms and sunshine. So be relieved and happy.
Now we’re returning to what actually is normalcy for Los Angeles—certainly most of the older parts of the city. That’s where properties will sit vacant or stagnant for years, if not decades, on end. For example, land such as where the old Broadway store in the Miracle Mile used to stand. Or raw land once suitable for major new development having been tapped out decades ago and no longer existing. Sort of like an old, washed-up oil field.
But if for any number of reasons too much development still happens to occur near you in the upcoming few years, I recommend you move to communities like MacArthur Park, east Hollywood, Crenshaw/Baldwin Hills or any variety of neighborhoods throughout older Los Angeles. There are quite a few areas in the city that have seen little to no development in over 50 years.
“We always do it this way…” No that is not the way we did things, till Gail Goldberg came on board. She was a fish out of water having been a Director of about 20 people in San Diego. Here was a staff of 300 with 35 Community Plans and a complex zoning code, which is purposely that way as a protection for the communities, so that most development can be controlled in the city. There are sections that can be revised, but the current streamlining is only for the benefit of developers.
In her very first week here, instead of rolling up her sleeves to understand the Department, Gail prompltly flew away to attend an APA conference, and she never stopped. She was attending at least a dozen conferences a year promoting herself. Meanwhile, there was no one in control, and new staff did whatever they fancied. Gail could not stand the knowledgeable and experienced staff and over 50 left. Her confidante was Michael LoGrande whom she elevated to Chief Zoning Administrator, a travesty, cause knowing little zoning, he spent most of his time schoomzing with developers.
She then turned to Jane Blumenfeld, and that’s where most of the problems emanated. Jane was the author of the RAS zones, which circumvent Prop U that had halved the FARs to 1.5 from 3:0, and as you have seen this zone has been used to the max. She then screwed the SB1818 ordinance, which continues to cause problems in the department. You have already mentioned the Housing Element. The small lot subdivision, also a Jane invention is another problem. Finally, Gail made her Deputy Director for Community Planning, and so here we are, where the EIR instead of justifying the densities based on infrastructure is an afterthought. We have the Hollywood Community Plan, 200 pages of drivel, cause Gail wanted them to be 250 pages long. Who has time to read this. No Plan should be more than 50 pages.
Gail was good at destroying, and broke down all the structures, policies and procedures, but had no idea how to rebuild. She leaves the place a mess, and I don’t think the new Director has the capabilities to fix it. My advice is that the communities have to be even more vigilant, and on top of things. And no, this is not how we did things, putting the cart before the horse.
As for the Growth and Infrastructure report, don’t hold your breath for it.
Again, the problems with the infrastructure and water supply will even be harder to deal with.
It’s interesting because some of the people most worried about that and the gradual deterioration or stagnation of the city are moving out of Los Angeles. Or they’re moving out of Southern California or out of California altogether. They’re moving to places like Seattle or Portland, which at least is closer to sources of water. Or they’re moving to the East Coast, which never has the problem of being as parched as the southwest is.
I bet some of the people I describe are in your own family, either immediate or extended. Or they’re friends, co-workers, neighbors or acquaintances of yours. Or if they’re not in that category now, they’ll probably be there in upcoming months and years. Certainly as the shambles of California’s economy — particularly LA’s economy — takes a greater toll.
“The era of larger amounts of development in LA over the past 10 years is pretty much over. We’ve entered what some are calling the Great Recession.”
Of course what you said makes total sense. The problem is that City Council, CRA (for areas within a CRA Project Area), and the Mayor don’t seem to get it. The City Council once again voted unanimously for the CBS Columbia square project.
As you accurately pointed out, we are indeed in the Great Recession which may very well be similar to what Japan experienced in 1990.
But our clueless leaders still are living in another era when they approve such projects.
The Developers aren’t dumb when it comes to these large scale projects. There are two things that they seek when they approach the City with large-scale projects:
1. Governmental Subsidies: Through State bonds, CRA funds, and even HUD Section 108 loan guarantees in the case of the Midtown Crossing (CIM Group) project in Wesson’s district.
2. Flipping: Developers who purchased land before the start of the Great Recession in 3rd quarter of 2008 rely on either corrupt or incompetent elected officials granting them zoning variances and Plan Amendments which dramatically increases the value of the land.
Angelenos it’s time to change LA and provide a fresh start by electing ordinary people for the common good instead of reelecting these career politicians who have NOT balanced anything other than raise DWP water and power fees, parking tickets, parking meter fees, trash fees, etc. These politicians reward gang members with $24 million for furthering their criminal activities as mentioned by Sgt. Valdemar, retired from Los Angeles County Sheriff’s and a gang specialist, while closing libraries for the law abiding kids while continuing to lower the standards here in LA with basic essential needs.
Mayor Sam’s Blog
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_GmAG-JlHT4M/TGY0XhCnVsI/AAAAAAAAA20/WG7Gu8mIhoY/s640/LeastWanted.jpg
Angelenos it’s time to change LA and provide a fresh start by electing ordinary people for the common good instead of reelecting these career politicians who have NOT balanced anything other than raise DWP water and power fees, parking tickets, parking meter fees, trash fees, etc. These politicians reward gang members with $24 million for furthering their criminal activities as mentioned by Sgt. Valdemar, retired from Los Angeles County Sheriff’s and a gang specialist, while closing libraries for the law abiding kids and continue to lower the standards here in LA with basic essential needs.
Note Full Disclosure NO Longer on City Channel
http://blog.fulldisclosure.net/2009/02/24-million-l-gang-program-to-bring.html
5:22 — the person WAY up there — for City Council!
That was a very informative explanation of the General Plan, etc. THANK YOU!
It’s true – our “leaders” live in a time warp while the rest of us deal with the consequences. For some bizarre reasons, the gang in City Hall hasn’t realized that Los Angeles is dying like the rest of this country, so long as it’s business as usual. Change has to occur – and we have the power to do so. We keep looking to our “leaders” to show us. No, it is the other way around.
Nevertheless, there has to be a balance – between the interests of a property owner (in this instance, a “developer”) and the community. But in Los Angeles, it is completely one sided. Each community hopes that any new re-writings of their land use laws will provide that balance. They discuss in good faith. All while the city is putting in provisions granting “exceptions, “variances” and the like. Again, no balance. And, a huge waste of time and money.
Instead of requiring developers to pay a proportional share for increasing the burden on over and under ground utilities, Los Angeles is destined to come out losing when the water wars erupt no matter how great any law is.
I strongly recommend that everyone go get hold of an excellent documentary called “Fuel” (try Netflix) and then you will really see how backwards Los Angeles (and the rest of the country is).
I think we all agree that we have a development problem in LA. With not much development happening other than thru CRA subsidies, this is the time to collect a Blue Ribbon Committee or a similar body with all involved stakeholders to chart out the future of our city. We need a Growth and Infrastructure Plan that informs us where we are and based on it, where we need to go. As things stand currently, we have only the Mayor’s aka Beutner’s vision for the city. We can’t allow that.
To Aug 14-12:28 p.m., here is a follow up on Jill Barard who gushed over Michael Logrande, as reported in LA Weekly, which clearly shows why most Neighborhood Councils are a failure, having been taken over by narrow, vested interests.
“Jill Barad & Associates is a political consulting, fundraising and public relations firm and has produced winning campaigns for federal, state, local and judicial offices and for statewide and local ballot propositions for over twenty five years. The firm also does government and community affairs, media relations, fundraising and event coordination for corporate and community-based clients.
Jill is Treasurer and Board Member of the Sherman Oaks Chamber of Commerce. Jill is founder of the Sherman Oaks Neighborhood Council and served as its interim chair guiding the Council through the certification and election process. Jill is the founder and Chair of the Valley Alliance of Neighborhood Councils, a coalition of members of the neighborhood councils in the San Fernando Valley. Jill is on the Board of VICA and is past Chair of the State Issues Committee”.
These were the kind of people who came to support him at PLUM. When will these dumb Chambers of Commerce and the like understand that they cannot make money off an unhealthy city. A healthy city that supports a healthy business environment are not on opposing sides, but such are the dumb business leaders in LA that their narrow and uneducated background only dooms them.
5:45 Please opine on your intimate knowledge of the Department-wouldn’t that back up your claims?
It’s one thing to talk smack – but its another thing to actually back up your statements! I’ll back off when you can actually provide something factual!!!
5:45 Please opine on your intimate knowledge of the Department-wouldn’t that back up your claims?
It’s one thing to talk smack – but its another thing to actually back up your statements! I’ll back off when you can actually provide something factual!!!
For some bizarre reasons, the gang in City Hall hasn’t realized that Los Angeles is dying like the rest of this country, so long as it’s business as usual.
There’s dying and there’s DYING. I know back in the 1990s, after the riots and recession proceeding the fall of the Berlin Wall — which made LA’s defense industry quite irrelevant — huge swaths of the city started competing with cities like Cleveland and Detroit (if not also Calexico and Tijuana) for title of “most screwed up” and “most washed up.”
The flatlands of Hollywood were a joke, downtown LA was a flop, mid-town LA was a pit (symbolized by the shutdown of Bullock’s Wilshire), Culver City was a zero, areas around Silver Lake and Hancock Park were fraying at the edges, Van Nuys was, well, Van Nuys, Compton was, well, Compton. Palms was, well, Palms. Westchester was has-been land. North Hollywood was flopping around. And so on and so forth.
As for parts of America that aren’t dying? Washington DC is making out pretty good right now. That can be traced to the nation’s capital snagging a lot of government-generated wealth, and all the workers that go with that. Some of that also is an off-shoot of the aerospace industry now favoring DC to LA, where it once was located. Even in this age of modern transportation and cell-phone communication, close physical proximity to federal agencies like the Defense Department is hard to beat. So LA ends up as sort of the hinterlands even decades after the railroads first reached the West Coast.