Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the West Adams Writ topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

PLUM complies with court writ, vacates 2020 CEQA exemption and reaffirms 2022 decision on West Adams project

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The committee complied with a Los Angeles Superior Court writ to vacate the city council’s 2020 CEQA Class 32 exemption for a West Adams residential project, and separately reaffirmed the council’s 2022 determination that the project is consistent with the Exposition/University Park redevelopment plan.

The Planning and Land Use Management Committee moved to comply with a Los Angeles Superior Court writ and judgment in litigation brought by the West Adams Heritage Association and Adams Severance Coalition. The action set aside the City Council’s February 4, 2020 determination that a multifamily residential project at 806 W. Adams Boulevard was categorically exempt under CEQA (Class 32) and reaffirmed the council’s April 19, 2022 decision that the project was consistent with the Exposition/University Park Redevelopment Plan and adopted the Class 32 categorical exemption.

Cathy Phelan of the City Attorney’s Office summarized the court’s holdings: while the city prevailed on several matters in long litigation, the court ordered that the 2020 exemption determination be vacated because the Council had not made a written consistency determination with the redevelopment plan. Phelan recommended the council comply with the writ by setting aside the 2020 action and then reaffirming the 2022 action that included findings of consistency with the redevelopment plan.

An attorney for the applicant said the applicant had fully litigated the case through various appellate levels and was available to answer questions. The committee voted to comply with the writ and adopt the city attorney’s recommendations. The roll call recorded Blumenfield: aye; Hutt: no; Nasserian: aye; Lee: aye; Raman: yes — resulting in a final tally of four ayes and one no.