Council Deals Blow to Proposed Fee Hikes for Planning Appeals

In a victory for homeowner groups and a setback to Mayor Richard Riordan, the Los Angeles City Council balked Tuesday at a plan that would have charged residents up to $5,000 if they appealed planning decisions on projects more than 500 feet from their homes.

The proposal, recommended by a panel formed by the mayor, was intended to discourage frivolous appeals and make the city more friendly to businesses and developers.

But nearly every council member criticized the plan, saying the proposed fees are too high and would have a chilling effect on the public’s ability to participate in planning issues.

Instead, they voted unanimously to send the matter to the council’s planning committee for revisions.

“We don’t want to trample on the public’s participatory rights,” said Councilman Marvin Braude.

Under the city’s current fee structure, a resident who opposes a decision by a city zoning or planning panel must pay $64 to appeal to a higher decision-making body, regardless of where the resident lives.

Under the new proposal, residents would have paid a maximum of $150 for an appeal, but up to $5,000 if they lived more than 500 feet from the project they opposed.

The fee could be less, depending on the city’s cost of holding new hearings and issuing notices to interested parties, among other factors.

The fee package was developed by Riordan’s Development Reform Committee, a panel whose membership includes real estate lawyers and other representatives of the development industry. Homeowner groups criticized the panel, saying it has a pro-business slant and does not include enough community representatives.

Councilman Hal Bernson, who was the only voice of support for the plan, suggested modifying it by doing away with the 500-foot standard and charging the higher fee to residents who appeal projects outside of their ZIP Code.

He said the higher fees would ensure that frivolous appeals do not discourage business from settling in Los Angeles.

“Unfortunately, there are some people who appeal everything,” Bernson said. “This impacts the cost of doing business in the city.”

But several council members rejected the ZIP Code proposal, noting that many communities are split up into several ZIP Codes. They said a resident might oppose a project that is across the street but in a different ZIP Code.

Councilman Joel Wachs, whose district stretches from Studio City to Sunland, objected to both the 500-foot standard and the ZIP Code proposal, saying the appeals process is the only way residents can influence what is built in their neighborhoods.

“People shouldn’t have to pay so much for that right,” he said.

Several homeowner group leaders objected to the new fees and rejected the charges that they file many frivolous appeals.

“We keep talking about making the city business friendly. Let’s make it citizen friendly,” said Joseph Gardner, president of Baldwin Hills Estate Homeowners Assn.