PLUM sustains EIR and statement of overriding considerations for the Berry Building; appeals denied

The Planning and Land Use Management Committee voted to deny appeals seeking to rescind the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and block demolition of the Berry Building (Historic Cultural Monument No. 887) on Feb. 19, sustaining the Board of Building and Safety Commissioners' prior certification and the City's statement of overriding considerations.

Department staff and LADBS told the committee the demolition request followed LADBS's determination that mandatory seismic soft‑story retrofits made preserving the structure financially infeasible. Staff said an EIR, mitigation monitoring program and SOC had been prepared and adopted by LADBS after review, and the Department of City Planning recommended the City Council sustain those determinations and adopt the necessary CEQA findings so a demolition permit could issue.

Appellants, represented by Jamie Hall of Channel Law Group on behalf of Angelenos for Historic Preservation, urged the committee to withhold approval. Hall argued the staff's reliance on very large cost figures conflated voluntary full rehabilitation work and mandatory retrofit costs, and presented a lower retrofit estimate (about $379,000) from an independent structural reviewer. He also alleged procedural irregularities, including that a council district office shared a draft Statement of Overriding Considerations with LADBS and raised concerns about inadequate AB 52 tribal consultation.

Applicant representatives and their counsel (including Ed Casey Lang) said the EIR process spanned years, involved more than 20 technical reports, examined multiple preservation alternatives and concluded that retrofit or preservation would result in negative economic value. Applicant counsel said the administrative record contains substantial evidence supporting the certification and the adopted SOC and mitigation measures.

Committee action and legal context

Chair Blumenfield moved to deny the appeal and sustain the Board of Building and Safety Commissioners' certification of the EIR and the SOC; the committee recorded two ayes and one no among the members present and moved the chair's recommendation to the City Council record. The action directs LADBS, in consultation with City Planning, to file a Notice of Determination consistent with CEQA.

What appellants said

Jamie Hall (appellant counsel) accused the owner of allowing the building to deteriorate and argued the record lacked substantial evidence that preservation was infeasible. Hall said: "Do not reward demolition by neglect," and urged the committee to rescind the EIR certification and deny the demolition permit.

What the applicant said

Applicant counsel responded that the EIR considered multiple preservation alternatives and economic analyses and that LADBS and City Planning's independent judgments were supported by the record: "The EIR process took over 5 years...the economic expert opinion is overwhelming," counsel told the committee.

Next steps

LADBS will file a Notice of Determination as instructed and the council file will reflect the committee's action. The decision may still be subject to legal challenge; appellants cited AB 52 tribal consultation concerns and CEQA adequacy as grounds for further review.

Key details

- Property: Berry Building (HCM No. 887), 11973–11975 W. San Vicente Blvd. - Committee action: Appeal denied; EIR certified and SOC sustained by committee vote to forward chair's recommendation. - Noted records: Final EIR dated September 2023 referenced in staff presentation.

Representative quote: "This calculated procedural bypass allowed the applicant to subvert independent staff review," appellant counsel Jamie Hall said, alleging that council office emails showed improper sharing of a draft SOC.