Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the 550 Chateau Place topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
PLUM denies SAFER appeal; approves 8‑story, 318-unit Chateau Place housing and commercial project
Summary
The committee denied an appeal by Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility and sustained the City Planning Commission approval for a density-bonus mixed-use project at 550 Chateau Place: an eight‑story building with 318 units (35 reserved for very-low-income households) and ~21,482 sq ft of commercial space.
The Planning and Land Use Management Committee denied an appeal by the Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility (SAFER) and sustained the City Planning Commission’s approval of a density-bonus project at 550 Chateau Place in Koreatown (Council District 10). Planning staff and the project applicant told the committee the housing project is within the scope of the Housing Element program EIR; the appellant argued the project is out of scope and raises unexamined air quality and formaldehyde exposure risks.
Michelle Carter, LA City Planning, told the committee the City Planning Commission approved the density bonus and project review on March 13, 2025, for an eight‑story building with 318 dwelling units (including 35 units reserved for very‑low‑income households) and roughly 21,482 square feet of commercial space. Carter said staff’s revised appeal response (06/20/2025) concluded the project complies with the Los Angeles Municipal Code and CEQA and that there is no substantial evidence showing impacts outside the housing‑element EIR scope; staff recommended denying the appeal and sustaining the Commission’s determination.
Trace Marciano, counsel for SAFER, argued for a project‑level EIR. Marciano said the project is not consistent with density and setback assumptions in the program EIR and identified two impacts he said were not examined in the housing element EIR: diesel particulate matter from construction and indoor formaldehyde emissions from building materials. He urged the committee to grant the appeal and require a project‑level EIR.
Applicant representative Ryan Lederman said the project is within the scope of the Housing Element EIR, that previous versions of the project and related site parcels were considered, and that SAFER’s analyses do not create substantial evidence requiring additional CEQA review. Lederman said the project will preserve an existing church building, convert it for reuse, and add housing and commercial space.
A range of labor and community groups spoke in support during public comment, highlighting job creation, union wages and the inclusion of very‑low‑income units. After discussion, Councilmember Hutt moved to deny the appeal and approve the Planning Commission recommendation. The committee recorded a vote sustaining the Commission and denying SAFER’s appeal: Blumenfield: aye; Hutt: yes; Nasserian: absent; Lee: aye; Raman: yes. The action carried 4–0 with one absence.
