PLANNING WATCH / PLAN-IT LOS ANGELES

December 10, 2009 REGARDING THE PROPOSED COLUMBIA SQUARE PROJECT CPC-2007-9911-GPA-VZC-HD-CUB-CUX-VCU-SPR-DA A MIXED-USE PROJECT IN THE HOLLYWOOD COMMUNITY PLAN AREA I am Richard Platkin, a city planning consultant, presenting today on behalf of the La Mirada Avenue Neighborhood Association of Hollywood. I am offering testimony in support of their opposition to seven entitlements for the proposed Columbia Square project, including a plan amendment, zone change, and height district change Prior to becoming a planning consultant, I earned graduate degrees in city planning and sociology, worked for the City of Seattle, worked for non-profits and private firms in Los Angeles, and was a Los Angeles City planner from 1987 to 2007. During my 20 years in LA’s Department of City Planning most of my professional assignments dealt with long range planning, and I was, in fact, part of the team which prepared the General Plan Framework. I therefore think I can speak with some expertise on whet

SIX FAILINGS AND SEVERAL REMEDIES FOR THE PLANNING PROCESS IN LOS ANGELES Los Angeles residents who follow local land use issues have a gut feeling that their city is poorly governed and poorly planned. Here is one effort to explain why these feelings are sound and to also offer potential solutions based on years of city planning experience in and out of City Hall. In a nutshell, the Los Angeles planning process, from the allocation of public resources to project level decisions, has stumbled badly. Its Achilles heal is its reluctance to carefully consider the capacity of local public services and infrastructure to meet the existing and future needs of the city’s residents, institutions, and businesses. Once this glaring defect can be remedied, then the city can begin fixing much of what is broken. More specifically, a careful examination of City Hall’s minimal efforts to address LA’s needs for infrastructure and public services reveals six related shortcomings. Furthermore, the on

Enforcement of Conditions on City Planning Cases San Fernando Valley Regional Congress Panorama City High School -- May 29, 2009 Please send comments and corrections to : Dick Platkin E-mail: rhplatkin@yahoo.com 213-308-6354 cell, 323-938-7027 FAX Blog: www.plan-itlosangeles.blogspot.com Senior Planner and Policy Analyst, Tierra Concepts I have five major points to make today about the enforcement of conditions on approved City Planning discretionary actions: 1) The historic weakness of the overall planning process in Los Angeles has encouraged the proliferation of discretionary actions to side-step the city’s legally adopted zones and plan designations. 2) Few applications for discretionary actions are ever denied, and few are ever approved out-right. The Planning Department’s general approach to these applications for discretionary actions could be summarized as “Approve with conditions.” 3) The weakness of the Departments of B

At L.A.'s City Hall, despite intense disagreements over the best way to make budget cutbacks, there is an implicit "we have no money" consensus among the Mayor, his supporters on the City Council, and his Council critics. As a result, they all sadly restrict their budget debate to the best way to reach bottom: Should we exempt or not exempt the LAPD from across-the-board staff reductions, even if results in 1,200 additional layoffs of civilians employees and up to 40 furlough days for the remaining civil servants. But, both sides in this debate are wrong. There clearly is money, as demonstrated by this recent article from the Huffington Post. In addition to the $95 billion supplemental budget allocation for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars requested by the Obama Administration and just approved by a Democratic-controlled Congress (Sound familiar?), there is another $108 billion being shunted to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in this same legislation. So -- let us

Jane Usher Slams Gail Goldberg A former commission president slams L.A.'s planning director as a developer sellout By Steven Leigh Morris published: April 30, 2009 * Kevin Scanlon Planning director Gail Goldberg Planning director Gail Goldberg It’s been a bad season for L.A.’s City Planning department. Recently, big sections of a city law to encourage density and affordable housing were struck down by Superior Court Judge Thomas McKnew. And now a leading civic figure is alleging that City Planning Director Gail Goldberg, who pushed the pro-developer law, is little more than a handmaiden to developers. The judge tossed out provisions of a controversial “bonus density” rule that lets developers build far bigger and taller projects than allowed by zoning if they agree to include a small number of cheap rental units. That ordinance “masquerades as an affordable-housing act, when it’s really a densification act that facilitates sprawl,” says departed City Hall insi

When was the last time, you heard public officials even mention this aspect of public health -- the worse air of any urban area in the entire United States -- in any landuse decision. Even now, when there is the possibility of use Recovery Act money for less polluting infrastructure, their reflexive response is public investment for roads, highways, and bridges. What a lost opportunity to not just improve alternative transportation modes, but also address high levels of ozone pollution and particulate matter. America's Most Polluted Cities Rebecca Ruiz, Forbes Magazine, 04.29.09, 3:01 AM ET This time of year, many Americans are concerned with sunburns. In some areas, they should pay more attention to smog. The reason? Though it's often invisible, air pollution is a threat to 186 million Americans, according to a new report released by the American Lung Association. The annual report--State of the Air 2009--found that six in 10 Americans live in counties where ozone o

Los Angeles residents who follow local land use issues have a gut feeling that something is truly wrong in how their city is governed. But, since they have difficulty determining exactly what has failed so badly in their local government, here is one effort to explain the underlying problems.    In a nutshell, the Los Angeles planning process has stumbled badly in considering the capacity of local public services and infrastructure to meet the existing and future needs of the city’s residents.  More specifically, a careful examination of the city’s efforts to address its infrastructure needs reveals six related lapses.   Furthermore, the only current   remedy for these failures, the gradual updating of the city’s 35 local community plans, is not just too little and too late, it will make the situation worse, not better.   This is because the real impact of these plan updates will be to reduce the administrative barriers faced by developers and speculators intent on building larg