City Council Approves Hollywood Community Plan Update

The City Council voted unanimously to approve the document that serves as a blueprint for development in Hollywood.

The Los Angeles City Council Tuesday approved a zoning plan for the Hollywood area that's intended to concentrate development and population growth around transit stops, while placing limitations on growth in other areas.

The Hollywood Community Plan, approved on a 13-0 vote, changes some floor-area-ratios that will allow for taller buildings, mainly on Sunset and Hollywood boulevards near Red Line subway stops, angering opponents who predict skyscrapers will soon dominate the area.

Planning Department officials countered that individual projects over 50 units or 50,000 square feet will require special public hearings and city approval, which is not the case for smaller developments.     

"This plan definitely does not accelerate growth," City Planning Director Michael LoGrande said. "What it does is it plans for growth."

The plan, which had not been updated since 1988, restricts growth in residential areas and the Hollywood Hills and extends a historical preservation zone to cover more of the 25-square-mile plan area. It also includes provisions to allow for more parks.

"If we were to freeze-frame one year in Hollywood's history, 1988 would not be our most august year," said City Councilman Eric Garcetti, who helped shepherd the plan through city committees.

"Planning for if growth comes, how to deal with it, does not mean that growth has to come. People are free in this city ... to move out of Hollywood if it's overly dense in certain parts. Those things will occur. It's whether we plan for the occasion when people come in."

Critics of the plan, who vowed to sue, argued it will accelerate growth and worsen traffic in the already congested residential neighborhoods adjacent to Hollywood and Sunset boulevards and the Hollywood (101) Freeway.

Several dozen opponents testified that the plan relied on a population increase projected by 2030, when the plan area's population has gone down in recent years.

Opponents also argued the plan allows for taller buildings blocking the Hollywood sign and the historic Capital Records building.

George Abrahams, who sits on the Beachwood Canyon Neighborhood Association board, told council members that by passing the plan, "you'll just be  blowing a lot of money on a time-wasting legal battle."



resident90068 June 20, 2012 at 04:47 AM
When "termed out Tommy" is long gone from office and the Developers start to build does he still get his money from them? I hope he gets stuck in traffic on the way to the bank to cash the checks.
Philip Mershon June 20, 2012 at 05:01 AM
@Mary, couldn't agree with you more! Our little Patch here is an oasis in a desert of coverage. And really, if a reporter would read some of these comments that have appeared on these stories which contain astounding allegations against the City Council that include faked reports, misuse of public funds and getting paid off by commercial developers, you would thing they'd be salivating to do some research and break a scoop on the City Government. Unless the larger media outlets are in on the gravy train too.
Scott Zwartz June 20, 2012 at 03:40 PM
Dear Philip Mershon: These matters have been published. There has been extensive coverage of the $1.4 M appraisal fraud at 1601 N. Vine involving Garcetti, Ullman, and Katersky followed up by the corrupt sale of the $4 M property to Katersky for only $825,000. The near $1/2 Billion loss at Hollywood-Higland has been discussed for years. The $12.5 M fraud involving the Hollywood Sign has been publicized. The $11.3 M that CRA gave CIM Group for causing blight at Hollywood-Western has been published. The $52 M to developer Eli Broad for his parking garage at his art museum was even cited as one of the reasons the State abolished the CRA. The severe population loss near the subways and the CRA projects has been publicized. I suggest that you should draw a distinction between the stories which have been published and the ones which you have read.
Philip Mershon June 20, 2012 at 05:01 PM
Calm down there Scott, we're on the same side here. At least I think so. Unfortunately "extensive coverage", "followed up", "been publicized" and "been published" doesn't amount to much when the LA Times article last Sunday (http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jun/17/local/la-me-hollywood-plan-20120617) ridiculously and erroneously reduced the entire affair to a fight between two invented camps: 'flat-landers for development' and 'hill-dwellers against development'. The average citizen (who isn't an avid troller of news sources and blogs on this topic like a lot of us are) isn't having all the dots connected for them to get the story of the shenanigans BEHIND the idea of building a bunch of new buildings. The point I was trying to make (which perhaps I wasn't clear about and will be now) is this: I am casting a suspicious eye on all of the print/TV news media for not investigating this with the verve and tenacity that they typically show for any Hollywood scandal. If there is a suggestion of wrong doing in the past on various different development projects (and there is), and there is verifiable documentation to support that (which there certainly seems to be) I'm asking for coverage that ties all of this together and keeps the finger pointed squarely at City Hall and not deflecting the attention onto the citizens. Only then can we understand what's really going down and begin to clean house if necessary.
ruth June 20, 2012 at 11:44 PM
They could have recirculated it. Instead they followed Garcetti, Villaraigosa, The Hollywood Chanber of Commerce, all funded by Millennium, into the firey Hell of Millennium's developer corrupting money.. They voted for a very flawed, ILLEGAL Plan. With nothing in it to protect the PEOPLE, who travel through Hollywood, visit Hollywood and live and work in Hollywood. People/Children/Families, Elders..PEOPLE. There is NO COMMUNITY in The Hollywood Community Plan. Garcetti actually said yesterday that we can move to Rosendahl's district if we don't like high density. I guess we pack up our families, pull our kids out of their schools, away from their friends and just leave? He is not only a lieing, corrupt coward, but he is inhumane too. Their will be law suits. Sadly, at the taxpayers expense. The only good thing to come out of it.. city council members have been accomplices in Garcetti's POLITICAL SUICIDE.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »