City Planning Chief Favors More Controls

Many people dislike mini-malls. They are often characterized by slap-dash stucco construction and punctuated by glaring neon. They frequently have insufficient parking, narrow driveways, and entrances and exits located too close to intersections.

About one year ago, the Los Angeles City Council took initial steps to regulate mini-mall development on corner lots. This original proposal was quickly approved by the Planning Commission and council and is now in effect.

Interim Moratorium

Late last year, the council issued a flurry of legislative proposals concerning mini-mall regulations. These proposals, although well-intentioned, were ad hoc , internally inconsistent, and generally confusing. No comprehensive citywide approach to the problem was articulated.

Early this year, after studying the City Council motions, the Planning Commission attempted to synthesize all these recommendations. This study resulted in an interim moratorium and an ordinance that the commission has recently revised and sent to the City Council.

The commission proposal precludes the issuance of building permits for mini-malls until they go through a public hearing process before a zoning administrator. The zoning administrator will be required to ensure that future mini-malls have adequate parking, landscaping, driveway plans and site plans.

These reforms are necessary to enhance the design, function and overall appearance of mini-malls. The proposals are better than merely raising parking requirements--or making some other arbitrary code change--because parking is not the only problem associated with these projects, and because good design requires some flexibility.

It may be argued that mini-malls are being singled out for some special restrictions, but it should be pointed out that no other uses in the city pack such traffic-generating activities on such small lots. Fewer projects change the image of a street, for better or worse, than two or three new mini-malls.

Some mini-malls are attractive and well-planned, but too many are not. The Planning Commission proposals will clearly subject many developers to a new and unfamiliar process, but this step is necessary to protect the public interest. If nothing is done now, future legislative proposals would be even more severe.

Improve Appearance

Although developers will not like these regulations, the proposals are reasonable, will not halt construction altogether and will certainly improve the appearance and design of mini-malls and thus positively influence public reaction toward such projects.

The path ahead for this citywide ordinance is unclear. The commission had proposed that only minimalls under 45,000 square feet in size be subject to the review process; the City Council has raised the limit to 65,000 square feet. The council will also allow hardship exemptions, and appeals from the zoning administrator will go directly to the City Council rather than to the board of zoning appeals. Although these changes are all inadvisable, the ordinance still achieves its basic purposes.

Future Design Criteria

Finally, it is foreseeable that in addition to this blanket citywide ordinance, future regulations will allow for new and specific design criteria to be imposed on mini-mall construction in areas which possess an identifiable architectural character worthy of preserving.

We are generally very reluctant to impose the subjective judgment of those who do not have an economic investment in a project over those who do. But such a process, if done properly, will enhance the identity and character of some neighborhoods and thereby benefit residents and developers alike.