Home / Insights / Permitting & Land Use
Permitting & Land Use
Permitting and land use across LA County cities in this period is defined by three dominant themes: adoption of Objective Design Standards (ODS) for multi-family and mixed-use development, high-volume CEQA environmental review and appeals on individual projects, and routine alcohol/ABC license determinations at nearly every meeting. Calabasas adopted its ODS ordinance in May 2026 after months of preparation (preceded by a study session in April); Glendale introduced Title 30 amendments with new multi-family design standards the same month; and Culver City advanced a zoning code amendment to implement California SB 79 (Abundant and Affordable Housing Act) as well as a Fox Hills Specific Plan overhaul. Los Angeles generates the highest raw volume — multiple final tract and parcel map approvals, zone changes, street vacations, and CEQA appeals per meeting — reflecting its scale relative to the other jurisdictions.
The clearest trend is state-mandate-driven zoning reform, with multiple cities updating codes in parallel to comply with state housing laws. Long Beach is the most active in formalizing previously informal commercial activity: it passed three successive rounds of mobile food truck ordinances (covering private property, transitional zones, and coastal areas from March through May) and created a new regulatory framework for microenterprise home kitchens, backed by a $3 million program commitment. Cannabis permitting is being refined in both Los Angeles — social equity ownership transfers, cultivation and delivery license creation, and record-refiling amendments — and Long Beach, which capped cannabis special events at twelve permits per organizer annually. Alcohol license reviews appear as a standing agenda fixture across LA, Long Beach, Pomona, and Redondo Beach throughout the period, indicating a persistent and steady workload rather than an emerging trend.
Spending is concentrated in permitting capacity and feasibility work. Redondo Beach committed $1 million to plan check and permit technician service agreements and $35,000 for a marina parking study. Long Beach allocated $3 million for its home-based food facility permitting program and approximately $460,000 for mobile food regulation implementation. Los Angeles raised both BuildLA development services surcharge fees and City Planning application processing fees, signaling cost-recovery pressure on the permitting system. Cities diverge on historic preservation: Los Angeles actively processes Historic-Cultural Monument designations (Hollywood Center Motel, King Taco, a West Adams property), while Pomona designated a McDonald's as a historic landmark — an approach absent from other jurisdictions in this period.
(Synthesized from the 120 most recent items.)
What to watch AI-generated
Key items (8)
- [6] Adoption of Ordinance No. 2026-424 - Objective Design Standards (ODS) for Multi-Family and Mixed-Use Projects — Calabasas, 2026-05-27 · Final adoption of ODS ordinance for multi-family/mixed-use — the clearest single data point in the region-wide design standards convergence trend.
- [11a] Community Development, re: Amendments to Title 30 of the Glendale Municipal Code, 1995 (Zoning Code), to update existing development standards and provide new objective design standards for multi-family and residential mixed use development in residential and commercial zones (Zoning Code Amendment Case Nos. PZC-0007-2023 and PZC-0008-2023) — Glendale, 2026-05-12 · Glendale's parallel ODS amendment shows the trend is not Calabasas-specific; two cities codifying the same standard in the same month.
- [26-767] CC - PUBLIC HEARING: Introduction of an Ordinance Approving City-Initiated Zoning Code Amendment P2025-0066-ZCA to Amend the Culver City Municipal Code (CCMC) to Implement California State Senate Bill 79, the Abundant and Affordable Homes Near Transit Act. — Culver City, 2026-05-11 · SB 79 zoning code compliance — illustrates cities acting under state housing mandates, the most structurally significant driver of zoning reform in this period.
- [26-889] CC - PUBLIC HEARING: (1) Discussion of Fox Hills Specific Plan, Zoning Code Text and Map Amendments; (2) Adoption of an Addendum to the Culver City General Plan 2045 Environmental Impact Report; and (2) Introduction of an Ordinance Approving the Fox Hills Specific Plan, Zoning Code Text and Map Amendment, P2026-0100-SP, -ZCA, -ZCMA, to Implement the Fox Hills Specific Plan. — Culver City, 2026-05-26 · Fox Hills Specific Plan overhaul — the largest scope single-project land use action in the dataset, combining general plan addendum, zoning text and map amendments.
- [12] Recommendation to declare ordinance amending Title 5 of the Long Beach Municipal Code - Regulation of Businesses, Trades, and Professions, amending and restating Chapter 5.35, all relating to Microenterprise Home Kitchen Operations, read the first time and laid over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for a final reading. Approval of this ordinance will create a program that permits home-based food facilities to prepare and sell meals directly to consumers. (Citywide) — Long Beach, 2026-04-14 · Largest single dollar commitment in the dataset ($3M) for the home-based food facility permitting program, anchoring Long Beach's informal-economy formalization trend.
- [33] Recommendation to receive and file an update on the proposed Mobile Food Facility Ordinance recommendations; and Declare ordinance amending Title 5 and Title 8 of the Long Beach Municipal Code by repealing and replacing Chapters 5.37, 5.51, 8.40, 8.44, 8.45, and amending 10.24 all relating to mobile food facilities, read the first time and laid over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for final reading. (Citywide) — Long Beach, 2026-03-24 · $460K mobile food facility ordinance — the culminating item in a three-meeting regulatory sequence, showing how Long Beach iterates code to implementation.
- [26-0592] APPROVE THE THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH MELAD AND ASSOCIATES, INC. TO PROVIDE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHECK SERVICES AND INSPECTION AND PERMIT TECHNICIAN STAFFING SUPPORT AS NEEDED, ADDING $500,000 TO THE AGREEMENT, FOR A NEW NOT TO EXCEED TOTAL OF $1,000,000 FULLY OFFSET BY FEES APPROVE THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH BOWMAN INFRASTRUCTURE ENGINEERS LTD. TO PROVIDE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHECK SERVICES AND INSPECTION AND PERMIT TECHNICIAN STAFFING SUPPORT AS NEEDED, ADDING $500,000 TO THE AGREEMENT, FOR A NEW NOT TO EXCEED TOTAL OF $970,000 FULLY OFFSET BY FEES APPROVE THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH TRANSTECH ENGINEERS, INC TO PROVIDE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHECK SERVICES AND INSPECTION AND PERMIT TECHNICIAN STAFFING SUPPORT AS NEEDED, ADDING $500,000 TO THE AGREEMENT, FOR A NEW NOT TO EXCEED TOTAL OF $700,000 FULLY OFFSET BY FEES APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH TRUE NORTH COMPLIANCE SERVICES, INC. TO PROVIDE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHECK SERVICES AN — Redondo Beach, 2026-05-12 · $1M plan check and permit technician agreements — the largest permitting-capacity spend shown, reflecting operational staffing pressure on development review.
- [21] GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS and BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMITTEES' REPORT relative to amending Article 4, Chapter 10, of the Los Angeles Municipal Code (LAMC) concerning the City's commercial cannabis record refiling and renewal requirements. — Los Angeles, 2026-04-15 · Cannabis regulation amendment (record refiling and renewal) — part of LA's ongoing refinement of its cannabis permitting framework, a recurring multi-year thread.
- Coverage is 10 of LA County's 88 cities today, expanding across the county — not yet a full regional census.
- We compare shares of council attention (% of substantive items), not raw counts, so a small city and a large one compare fairly. Procedural boilerplate (minutes, warrants, proclamations, appointments, presentations) is stripped first.
- Dollars are $ on items naming an amount, deduped to one figure per item — not verified award totals. "—" means no amount was extracted, never that $0 was spent.
- The ingested window differs by city, so totals aren't over identical periods.
How cities compare on permitting & land use
Share of each city's council attention going to this topic (substantive items), and dollars per resident where amounts were extracted. We don't rank by raw counts.
| City | Attention share | $ (items) | $ / resident |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claremont |
11% |
— | — |
| Culver City |
10% |
— | — |
| Long Beach |
10% |
$10.7M | $22.87 |
| Redondo Beach |
9% |
$1.0M | $14.46 |
| Glendale |
8% |
$300K | $1.53 |
| Signal Hill |
8% |
— | — |
| Calabasas |
8% |
— | — |
| Los Angeles |
7% |
— | — |
| Pomona |
6% |
— | — |
| Sierra Madre |
4% |
— | — |
Named decisions on this topic
Biggest dollars
Contested votes
Vote records are currently ~96% Long Beach (from scanned minutes); this is not a cross-city contestedness comparison.
Flagged for review (5)
Recovered from PDF/scanned sources; titles not fully verified. Shown for transparency.
Cross-city precedents
Similar permitting & land use actions appearing in more than one city — starting points to investigate.
General Plan Annual Progress Reports — Calabasas, Glendale, Signal Hill
Calabasas, Glendale, and Signal Hill are each reviewing their annual General Plan progress reports, a standard requirement for California cities to track how well local development and land-use decisions align with their long-term planning goals. AI summary
Annual Budget Study Sessions — Sierra Madre, Signal Hill
Sierra Madre and Signal Hill are each holding budget study sessions in which city departments present spending plans and financial priorities to the council for review and deliberation ahead of budget adoption. AI summary