Council approves planning reorganization, sends Mulholland item back to committee

The Los Angeles City Council voted to adopt most of the Department of City Planningimplementation package called for under the new city charter, approving a structure of seven area planning commissions, changes in which approvals will be decided locally versus citywide, and a new public-benefit permit process. The measure passed after several amendments and an 18-month monitoring pledge; the final vote was unanimous.

City Planning Director Khan Howe told council members that the revisions are driven by the voter-approved charter changes that take effect July 1, and that the department reduced more than 50 separate permit processes to a smaller set of clearer procedures. "We have made every effort to try to make them as clear as possible," Howe said.

The council and staff said the new structure shifts many quasi-judicial decisions to area planning commissions (APCs) while retaining legislative matters at the City Planning Commission and City Council level. The planning commission created a new "public benefit" category for certain uses; the PLUM committee and the charter implementation ad hoc committee differed on which uses should be heard at the APC level and which should be treated as citywide matters.

Councilmember Bernsen, chair of the PLUM committee, moved the PLUM committee report with minor changes, including moving schools and hospitals out of APC jurisdiction and into the City Planning Commission for initial review. Councilmember Goldberg successfully proposed one further amendment: to send the proposal to place the Mulholland Scenic Parkway specific plan entirely in the South Valley APC back to the PLUM committee for additional review. That amendment passed 9-4. Another amendment by Councilmember Hernandez to classify additional facilities (including alcohol and drug treatment centers and other social service uses) as "public benefit" and therefore subject to citywide review passed 12-1.

The council heard substantial public comment from hillside and mountain-area advocates, including Joan Lux of the Federation of Hillside and Canyon Associations and Susan Nelson of Friends of the Santa Monica Mountain Parks, who urged protections for steep-slope areas and asked either for an overlay or a separate mountain APC for the Santa Monica Mountains. Lux urged protections based on a slope-density formula and asked that appeals from hillside projects be heard by the City Planning Commission; Nelson urged a separate mountain district to preserve the corridor and its public lands.

Planning staff and several business groups urged prompt implementation so that ordinances can be drafted and the new commissions appointed and trained before the July 1 deadline. Frank Eberhard, deputy director at the Planning Department, summarized the remaining issues as: number and boundary of APCs, decision-making authority, simplification of procedures and how to handle Mulholland and other hillside-specific plans.

Council members stressed that the changes would be monitored and that the ordinance package will be reviewed 18 months after implementation, including use of new census data where appropriate. The council unanimously approved the amended implementation report and directed staff to begin ordinance drafting and to monitor the operation of the new planning system.

The council recorded the final adoption vote after several roll-call amendments; the overall package was approved unanimously.

For now the council left open the Mulholland placement question and ordered a prompt PLUM review of that single item; all other items in the package proceed to ordinance drafting and implementation with an 18-month review scheduled.