The City is holding a special meeting today (March 1) in which the City Council will vote on the changes to the Baseline Hillside Ordinance (BHO), Baseline Mansionization Ordinance (BMO), new R1 Variations Ordinance, and the specific R1 variation zone changes that have been proposed for 15 communities (primarily in the Westside).
 
Because the City Council is calling this a Special Meeting, it only needed to provide 24-hour notice of the hearing. If 12 or more council members vote unanimously in support of the motions today, the items can skip the required 2nd reading and go straight to the Mayor’s office. Mayor Garcetti has 10 days to sign it; once he does, it goes back to the City Clerk for publishing. As soon as the City Clerk publishes the approved and signed ordinances, they take effect because each of these ordinances have an urgency clause attached to them.
 
Bottom line: The new BHO, BMO, R1 ordinances could take effect as early as Monday, March 6, and will likely take effect no later than early in the week of March 13, assuming the council has at least 12 members present today and they all vote in favor of each of these ordinances. If the council has fewer than 12 members and/or one or more members opposes the ordinances, the ordinances will return to the City Council on March 8 for a second reading and vote which would mean they take effect later this month. This is unlikely, but it is possible.
 
The meeting is scheduled to begin at 10:15 a.m. in the John Ferraro Council Chamber (Room 340) of Los Angeles City Hall, 200 N Spring St, Los Angeles, CA 90012.
 
The agenda for today’s hearing is here: 
https://www.lacity.org/city-government/calendar 

The Council Files for these items can be found on the City Clerk’s website.

Baseline Mansionization/Baseline Hillside Code Amendment:
https://cityclerk.lacity.org/lacityclerkconnect/index.cfm?fa=ccfi.viewrecord&cfnumber=14-0656

R1 Variation Zones Code Amendment: 
https://cityclerk.lacity.org/lacityclerkconnect/index.cfm?fa=ccfi.viewrecord&cfnumber=16-1460

Neighborhood Conservation Zone Changes:
https://cityclerk.lacity.org/lacityclerkconnect/index.cfm?fa=ccfi.viewrecord&cfnumber=16-1470

As expected, the City Council’s Plum Committee at a special meeting Wednesday unanimously approved without changes three controversial ordinances that will effect development in more than 40% of the city's residentially zoned neighborhoods: R1 Variations, Bel-Air Hillside Construction Development limitations, and the BHO/BMO revisions.
 
The first two ordinances (R1 Variations and Bel-Air development) will go to the City Attorney’s Office to be converted into final, draft ordinances. They will return to the PLUM committee later this spring.
 
The third ordinance (BHO/BMO updates) was passed and can go to the City Council for a final vote. But it looks like – as predicted here – the council is going to sit on the BHO/BMO updates until the R1 Variations and Bel-Air development ordinances come back from the City Attorney’s Office for PLUM vote. That's because PLUM chairman Jose Huizar asked - as the committee was voting on the BHO/BMO proposal - when the ordinance would be with the full council, and staff said that “they” have asked that the BHO/BMO update not be voted on by the council until the other ordinances “can be packaged” with it (no explanation of who “they” is: City Attorney’s office? Fellow council members?). Huizar said that was fine by him, asked if any of the committee members objected, and when no one did, the voted unanimously to recommend approval.
 
So that means the City Attorney’s Office needs to produce the R1 Variations and Bel-Air development ordinances quickly and it is highly likely that the whole package will be approved and enacted right before the March 25 deadline.

Why is March 25 so important? Because that's when 15 Interim Control Ordinances (ICOs) around the city expire, and if these new rules aren't in place before the ICOs expire, the rules in those 15 areas revert back to 'standard' zoning which could mean an outbreak of so-called McMansions.

Those weren't the only controversial items addressed during the 3+ hour-long meeting Wednesday.
 
The committee voted to approve Rick Caruso’s controversial project at 333 La Cienega after Councilman Paul Koretz arrived to announce that they struck a deal to reduce its height from 240 feet to 185 feet and increase the amount of money Caruso is giving to community groups and increase the amount of affordable housing units in the now-16-story mixed-use project. The full council is expected to vote on the project next week.

The committee voted to approve the Sunset Square Historic Preservation Overlay Zone, despite numerous protests against the inclusion of several blocks west of Fairfax and south of Hollywood Blvd. The motion goes to the City Attorney’s Office for it to write the final draft ordinance.

The City Council's land-use committee is going to consider a proposal from City Planning on Wednesday that would create more than a dozen new "variations" of the city's traditional R1 zone, and identify areas around the city where these new zones could be the new rule of law for homeowners in as little as 2 months.

The council's Planning & Land Use Management (PLUM) committee is expected to review and then pass along to the City Attorney's Office the draft R1 Variations ordinance that was approved by the City Planning Commission last month. PLUM members have a big night ahead of them: Wednesday's agenda also includes the updated draft ordinance for the Baseline Hillside Ordinance and Baseline Mansionization Ordinance (story here) and an appeal of the City Planning Commission's approval of a Frank Caruso's mixed-use project in Beverly Grove.

The R1 Variations ordinance would create 16 new flavors of the R1 zone that would maintain the same standard R1 Zone lot size and setback requirements, but include different maximum Residential Floor Area ratios and also regulate height, form, and lot coverage to provide a range of new zones that vary from larger to smaller in scale.

The R1 zone currently covers 38% of the city, according to the City Planning Department. That makes this one of the largest, most far-reaching changes in City Planning history. Having said that, the proposed ordinance that PLUM will review tomorrow only includes specific zone changes for a few neighborhoods in Los Angeles, primarily in West LA and a few Hillside areas south of Mulholland Drive.

Eventually, all of the R1 neighborhoods in Los Angeles could be rezoned to one of the R1 variations, assuming the City Council approves the ordinance once the City Attorney's office has feted it. But for now, city officials are rushing to get the overall R1 Variations ordinance and spot zoning for the first 15 neighborhoods approved by March 25, when current Interim Control Ordinances (ICOs) expire. Those ICOs are currently preventing development that once was allowed by-right in those neighborhoods; city officials want the new R1 Variations and updated BHO/BMO to establish the new "by-right" levels.

The City Council PLUM meeting Wednesday starts at 3:30 p.m. The agenda is here.

Late Friday, the City Attorney’s office released its proposed draft ordinance for the changes to the Baseline Hillside Ordinance and Baseline Mansionization Ordinance, the highly controversial update to the rules that have governed hillside development and 'mansionization' in Los Angeles for more than a decade.
 
The City Council’s Planning & Land Use Management committee has already put the item on its agenda for this Wednesday’s meeting, which starts at 3:30 p.m. in City Hall (Room 340). Here's the draft ordinance: http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/2014/14-0656_misc_01-13-2017.pdf
 
The cover letter from the City Attorney’s Office (here) includes discussion about passing the BHO/BMO update simultaneously with City Planning’s ordinance establishing variations of the R1 Zone because “the simultaneous effective dates of these two ordinances is important because this draft ordinance amending the BMO and BHO and the R1 zone variation ordinance together repeal and replace” the 15 Interim Control Ordinances (ICOs) that were enacted on March 25, 2015. Those ICOs expire this March 25.

But the draft ordinance for the R1 Zone Variations (here) hasn’t been sent to the City Attorney’s office yet. It’s on this Wednesday’s PLUM agenda too so PLUM can review and (presumably) vote to send it to the City Attorney’s office for the final draft ordinance. If the City Council wants to pass and enact both simultaneously, the BHO/BMO update is going to have to be set aside for the R1 Zone Variations ordinance to catch up.
 
The City Attorney’s office thinks it’s so important for both ordinances to be enacted simultaneously, they’ve included an “urgency clause” in the BHO/BMO update so that the changes take effect as soon as the City Clerk posts the approved ordinance (approved by City Council; approved and signed by Mayor Garcetti).
 
So assuming that the City Council agrees with the City Attorney’s recommendation, the BHO/BMO changes will be take effect close to March 25 (along with the R1 Zone Variations). If 3/4s of  the City Council disagrees and wants to enact the changes to the BHO/BMO sooner (and the mayor agrees), it could be done within a couple of weeks thanks to the urgency clause.
 
So what does the draft ordinance change? The City Attorney’s summarized the significant changes to the BHO/BMO as:

• Reduces the maximum residential floor area ratio allowed in the R1 zone
  
• Modifies the areas that count toward the calculation of residential floor area by limiting the FAR exemptions in all SFD zones
  
• Eliminates all floor area bonus options in the R1 zone
• Eliminates all floor area bonuses for Green Building in all SFD zones
• Establishes an encroachment plane and side-wall offset for building envelopes in the R1 zone
• Requires occupied rooftop decks in the R1 zone to be 3+ feet from the side yard setback
• Limits driveway widths in the R1 zone in non-Hillside areas
• Requires a public hearing for property owners who want a 10% increase in RFA beyond the allowed by-right in non-Hillside areas
• Removes most “exempt” grading areas
• Increases the amount of by-right grading allowed in all zones except R1 to compensate for formerly exempt grading
• Limits the hours of import and export allowed
• Limits the amount of export/import allowed

  
If you would like to contact the PLUM members and weigh in on the proposed changes and/or the timeline for approval, the council members on PLUM are:

José Huizar (Committee chair) – 213-473-7014 or councilmember.huizar@lacity.org
Gil Cedillo – 213-473-7001 or councilmember.cedillo@lacity.org
Mitchell Englander – 213-473-7012 or councilmember.englander@lacity.org
Marqueece Harris-Dawson – 213-473-7008 or councilmember.harris-dawson@lacity.org
Curren Price – 213-473-7009 or councilmember.price@lacity.org

City officials hope to have most construction projects in Hollywood back on track in about a month although the largest and most high profile projects will probably have to wait longer or modify their proposal,  according to officials who spoke with LandUseLA.com

As previously reported by LandUseLA.com and Curbed LA, projects in the Hollywood Community Plan area were temporarily frozen earlier this month when a Los Angeles Superior Court judge issued a ruling that said the update of that community plan was "fundamentally flawed" and no more permits could be issued that relied upon the community plan for its justification. After several days in which all Hollywood-area projects were stopped, the Planning Department issued a new policy that provided a pathway for most construction projects to move forward.

Still, at least 30 projects remained in limbo because their entitlements relied upon the community plan, according to a review of online records by LandUseLA.com.

Last week, the City Council instructed the Planning Department to return within a month with a timeline and expected cost for fixing the Hollywood Community Plan Update. The council also expects the department to return with an ordinance that will revive the old Hollywood Community Plan while the update is being repaired.

If the City Council revives the old community plan, many of the 30-plus entitlement cases currently in limbo could restart. However, any projects that rely upon the updated community plan would have to either redesign the project  to meet the old community plan, recast the legal justifications based upon the old community plan, or wait for the update to be repaired and enacted and then determine whether the project still meshes with the community plan.

ALSO: LandUseLA.com on the radio
LandUseLA.com publisher Chris Parker was on WhichWayLA? yesterday, discussing the Hollywood injunction. You can listen to the interview here: WhichWayLA?

Scores and scores of projects in the Hollywood Community Plan area will require an extra level of review and more than two dozen Hollywood projects are on hold indefinitely thanks to a policy enacted this morning by the Los Angeles Planning Department.

The department's new policy - dubbed the Hollywood Community Plan Update Injunction Clearance - is in response to a Feb. 11 ruling issued by the Los Angeles County Superior Court. The court determined that the department's Hollywood Community Plan Update was "fundamentally flawed" when it was approved in June 2012. Because the Hollywood growth plan is void, the city is prohibited from granting any "authority, permits or entitlements which derive from the HCPU or its EIR (Environmental Impact Report)," the court said.

A temporary - and unannounced - hold was placed last week on all projects in the Hollywood area by the Planning and Building & Safety departments until the Planning Department could issue a response to the court ruling. The response was issued this morning as Zoning Information File No. 2433, a 4-page memo with instructions on what projects could still move forward and which type of projects would be put on hold indefinitely.

The good news for property owners in Hollywood is that many projects will be able to move forward, albeit with an extra level of review.

But according to ZI-2433, any project that has an entitlement request which rely on the HCPU or its EIR are now on hold until the City Council passes legislation that addresses the court's concerns. The council voted Tuesday to instruct the Planning Department to return within 30 days with a timeline and cost.

In the meantime, dozens of projects that were filed with the Planning Department are on hold. That's because those projects include entitlement requests such as Zone Changes, Zone Variances or other deviations from the Zone Code that can no longer be decided by the department because the community plan for the Hollywood area is void.

A LandUseLA.com review of the department's online records has found 28 cases that are now on hold which were filed with the Planning Department's Office of Zoning Administration between Aug. 11, 2013 and Feb. 8, 2014. The projects include everything from minor entitlement requests such as yard deviations to major projects such as hotels and mixed-use projects. It is safe to assume there are additional projects filed prior to August 2013 that didn't receive entitlement relief by Tuesday and are now on hold. 

One of the more interesting entitlement cases that is now ensnared in this injunction hold is a request from the Hollywood Forever Cemetery to add 7 new mausoleums and/or wall crypt structures. In October, the cemetery submitted a request for a Zone Variance and Zoning Administrator's Adjustment, among other entitlements, to be able to build the new mausoleums.

As mentioned previously, the majority of projects in Hollywood will be able to move forward once they receive approval from city planners assigned to the HCPU Injunction Clearance process. According to ZI-2433, building permit requests in the Hollywood area will be reviewed and approved if they: don't require a Planning entitlement (i.e. - "by right"); only need ministerial clearances tied to previously issued building permits; or require discretionary approvals under one of the special districts in the Hollywood area as long as those approvals don't require an amendment and/or exception.

All of this stems from appeals filed by Hollywood-area homeowners groups against the city's June 2012 approval of the Hollywood Community Plan Update. The groups objected to the plan, saying it was based upon false growth assumptions and didn't adequately address infrastructure issues for the population growth that the community plan allowed.

A tentative ruling was issued in December but it wasn't until last week that the written Superior Court determination was issued, requiring the city to stop issuing permits based upon the updated Hollywood plan.

How long will this injunction last? It's unknown. But the City Council instructed the Planning Department to return in a month with a plan and cost for fixing the Hollywood Community Plan, not to return with the actual fix itself. Once the department gets council approval on the timeline and cost, it would presumably take several months of department work and then public hearings until the City Council can vote on the updated Hollywood Community Plan Update.

In the meantime, dozens of projects currently in the pipeline plus countless more that will be filed this year, will be on hold.

ZI No. 2433: Hollywood Community Plan Update Injunction Clearance Instructions
http://zimas.lacity.org/documents/zoneinfo/ZI2433.pdf

Curbed LA: NIMBYs Put Indefinite Stop to All Building Permits in Hollywood
http://la.curbed.com/archives/2014/02/nimbys_put_indefinite_stop_to_all_building_permits_in_hollywood.php

City Council motion: Instructions to Planning Department re Hollywood Community Plan Update
http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/2012/12-0303-S3_CA_02-18-14.pdf

Hollywood Forever Cemetery Request for 7 New Mausoleums:
http://planning.lacity.org/cts_internet/index.cfm?urlCaseId=193758&caseNumber=CPC-2013-3262-PUB-ZV-ZAA-SPR&fuseaction=case.summary

LA Times: Judge Deals Major Blow to Hollywood Growth Plan
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-judge-hollywood-growth-plan-20131211,0,7703380.story#axzz2tnkOGC7X

The City Council rescheduled today's vote on the anti-McMansion ordinance for the Beverly Grove area to Friday's council meeting.

The item was originally scheduled to be voted on today. But the council agreed unanimously without discussion to delay the vote three days.

If approved, the ordinance would put a Residential Floor Area (RFA) District over approximately 700 homes in a 5-street Mid City neighborhood between San Vicente Boulevard and Fairfax Avenue north of Wilshire Boulevard. This would be the second RFA District approved in the city following the February 2012 approval of a RFA District in Studio City.

The ordinance was fast-tracked last week by the council's Planning and Land Use Management Committee, which voted to recommend the new regulations with an urgency clause at the request of Councilman Paul Koretz, whose 5th District includes Beverly Grove. If the City Council votes Friday to approve the ordinance, it could take affect in about 5-8 weeks later depending upon how quickly Mayor Eric Garcetti signs it.

LandUseLA.com: 'McMansion' limits for another neighborhood
http://www.landusela.com/1/post/2013/10/mcmansion-limits-for-another-neighborhood.html

UPDATE (8:26 p.m.): Garcetti vows to stop Planning, LADBS merger
http://www.landusela.com/1/post/2013/10/update-garcetti-vows-to-stop-planning-ladbs-merger.html

------

(Original Post 6:27 a.m.)

The controversial, proposed merger between the city's departments of Planning and Building & Safety will not occur on Jan. 1 as originally proposed, a city consultant told a key City Council committee recently, and may not occur at all if alternative methods are adopted to streamline the city's construction bureaucracies.

Gary Goelitz of Matrix Consulting Group told members of the City Council's Planning & Land Use Management Committee last week that it was too late to implement the merger in 2013.

"No, it's not possible," he said when asked by PLUM chairman Jose Huizar if the merger could still be completed this calendar year. "I'm not suggesting that you don't start the process, but I am suggesting that to expect the end of the process to be Jan. 1 is beyond reasonable now."

Goelitz spoke a few minutes before committee members voted to recommend postponing the merger until July 2014, if at all. The PLUM Committee recommended that the Council instruct its consultants to study "options other than consolidation that would improve the City's development process."

About 30 people spoke to the requested delay at the PLUM Committee hearing, with the vast majority of the speakers in favor of the delay.

The overwhelming support of a delay was in stark contrast to a month ago, when council members Curren Price Jr. and Tom LaBonge first proposed a motion on the Council floor for a postponement. Quick-acting and vocal community members forced the council to steer the motion to committee, where they said the pros and cons of stalling the merger needed to be discussed in public.

Proponents of the merger say that consolidation will result in lower costs and quicker processing times. They point out that managers of both departments publicly support the merger. They also say that the city has spent $850,000 to study and prepare for this merger and doesn't need to spend more money to study it further until July.

Opponents of the merger say there is no proof of either lower costs or quicker processing times, and they question whether a merger of two departments with different and sometimes conflicting roles should be under one banner. Building & Safety is a policing agency that guarantees residents' safety, they say. Planning is a development agency that is judged by the amount and types of projects that get built. They also say that most employees of the two departments are quietly opposed to the merger.

The merger was first proposed under then-Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and was endorsed by then-councilman Eric Garcetti. Now that Garcetti is mayor, he has not indicated whether he wants to go through with it.

“The priority for Mayor Garcetti is less red tape and faster customer service, and he is analyzing consolidation options that would best help businesses open and create jobs here in L.A.,” spokesman Yusef Robb told Rick Orlov of the Los Angeles Daily News in mid-September.

The item is now with the council's Budget and Finance Committee but is not currently scheduled for a hearing date.


PLUM Committee hearing Oct. 8 audio
http://lacity.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=103&clip_id=12222

Councilman Price's motion to delay merger
http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/2013/13-0046_MOT_09-13-13.pdf

Letter of support for merger delay
http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/2013/13-0046_PC_09-17-13.pdf

LA Daily News: Hearing set on merger of L.A. building, planning departments
http://www.dailynews.com/government-and-politics/20130917/hearing-set-on-merger-of-la-building-planning-departments

City Watch LA: City Council Trying to Bypass the Public and Hijack LA’s Department Consolidation Process
http://www.citywatchla.com/recent-posts-hidden/337-recent-posts-8box-left/5712-city-council-trying-to-bypass-the-public-and-hijack-la-s-department-consolidation-process

The City of Los Angeles is poised to approve its second neighborhood-specific set of restrictions on the size of single-family homes, this time to limit "McMansions" in the Beverly Grove area.

The City Council will vote Tuesday on an ordinance that would put a Residential Floor Area (RFA) District over approximately 700 homes in a 5-street Mid City neighborhood between San Vicente Boulevard and Fairfax Avenue north of Wilshire Boulevard. This would be the second RFA District approved in the city following the February 2012 approval of a RFA District in Studio City.

If enacted, the Beverly Grove RFA would limit the maximum residential floor area ratio (FAR) contained in all
buildings and accessory buildings to 42 percent, with various bonuses that could bring the FAR up to 50%. For example, a home on a 6,000-square-foot lot would be limited to 3,000 square feet, with bonuses. The Beverly Grove RFA sets both a lower base FAR and a lower maximum allowable FAR than is currently allowed citywide.

Several local homeowner groups have pushed for the RFA District, saying that recently built homes are out of character with the 90-year-old neighborhood. "These Beverly Grove McMansions are out-of-character, out-of-scale, and deprive neighboring houses of privacy, air and sunlight," wrote the Beverly Wilshire Homes Association in its support letter for the ordinance.

But not everyone in Beverly Grove supports the RFA District. At the City Council's Planning & Land Use (PLUM) Committee last month, opponents submitted petitions signed by 359 people identified as property owners in the neighborhood who oppose the RFA. Despite the opposition, the PLUM committee voted unanimously to recommend approval of the RFA District to the full City Council.

Councilman Paul Koretz, who represents the area, requested that the PLUM Committee recommend an urgency clause for the Beverly Grove RFA, which the committee did citing an urgent need for the new regulations. That urgency clause has pushed the Beverly Grove RFA District on a fast tract toward approval. If the City Council votes Tuesday to approve the ordinance, it could take affect in about 5-8 weeks later depending upon how quickly Mayor Eric Garcetti signs it.

By contrast, the Baseline Hillside Ordinance (which set development limits on the city's Hillside neighborhoods) was approved by the PLUM Committee in August 2010 without an urgency clause. It wasn't enacted for 8 months.

The City Council is scheduled to vote on the Beverly Grove RFA on Tuesday during its regularly scheduled meeting, which starts at 10 a.m. at City Hall.

City Council file
http://cityclerk.lacity.org/lacityclerkconnect/index.cfm?fa=ccfi.viewrecord&cfnumber=11-1438

PLUM Report
http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/2011/11-1438_rpt_plum_9-17-13.PDF

359 petitions submitted opposing the RFA District
http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/2011/11-1438_pc_09-17-2013.pdf

Beverly-Wilshire Homes Association support
http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/2011/11-1438_pc_9-17-13.pdf

Beverly Grove Alliance support
http://clkrep.lacity.org/onlinedocs/2011/11-1438_pc_9-12-13.pdf

Studio City Residential Floor Area District Ordinance
http://planning.lacity.org/Code_Studies/Misc/ResidentialFloorPlan.pdf

Three prominent South Valley homeowners groups filed appeals last week against the City Planning Commission's approval of a 325-unit condominium project near the 405-101 interchange.

The Coalition to Stop Il Villaggio Toscano opposes the project because of "massive traffic" and other environmental impacts it will have on the surrounding community.

The coalition was created by the Encino Property Owners Assn. (EPOA), Homeowners of Encino (HOME) and Sherman Oaks Homeowners Assn. (SOHA), three well-known and active homeowners groups in the South Valley. The coalition says it's not trying to kill the project, just to "actively reduce the size and scope of the project."

The project was originally proposed in 2004 to include 500 units, but the developer asked for and received approval for just 325 units at the CPC hearing last month.  The 8-story project will also include 55,000 square feet of commercial space, an outdoor plaza and approximately 1,200 parking spaces.

The project's Final EIR was published in January 2013.  The developer requested numerous entitlements, which were granted by the CPC, including a Zone Change, new Height District, and several exceptions to the Ventura/Cahuenga Boulevard Corridor Specific Plan. The project also has a Vesting Tentative Tract that was approved earlier this year by the city Planning Department.

Not every prominent group in the area opposed Il Villaggio Toscano. The Sherman Oaks Neighborhood Council voted in May 2012 to support the project, the Daily News reported.

The project will ultimately require City Council approval.

Appeal of CPC-2010-3152-ZC-HD-SPE-SPR-SPP-CUB-1A
http://planning.lacity.org/cts_internet/index.cfm?urlCaseId=192227&caseNumber=CPC-2010-3152-ZC-HD-SPE-SPR-SPP-CUB-1A&fuseaction=case.summary

Final Environmental Impact Report:
http://planning.lacity.org/eir/VillaggioToscano/FEIR/index.html

Coalition to Stop Il Villaggio Toscano
http://stopilvillagiotoscano.wordpress.com/

LADN: Sherman Oaks Neighborhood Council approves 399-unit apartment development
http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_20628452/sherman-oaks-neighborhood-council-approves-399-unit-apartment