Home / Insights / Permitting & Land Use
Permitting & Land Use
Zoning code modernization is the dominant activity across LA County cities in this period, with multiple jurisdictions simultaneously updating general plans, redesignating land use maps, and codifying new design standards. Objective Design Standards (ODS) for multi-family and mixed-use projects are moving through adoption in at least three cities: Calabasas enacted Ordinance No. 2026-424, Pomona advanced through first and second readings of its ODS amendment, and Culver City adopted the Fox Hills Specific Plan with accompanying zoning code text and map amendments. Long Beach is executing the most structurally significant reform, creating two new zoning districts—Mixed-Use Main Street (MU-M) and Commercial Main Street (C-M)—and simultaneously rezoning properties along the Greater Bixby Knolls Area corridors, supported by multiple CEQA addenda and both General Plan map and text amendments across several consecutive meetings.
State housing law is a fresh and divisive pressure point. Culver City introduced an ordinance to implement SB 79 (Abundant and Affordable Homes Near Transit Act), while Glendale moved in the opposite direction with an urgency ordinance to temporarily exempt Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone properties from SB 79's requirements, citing local safety constraints. This fire-hazard carve-out is the sharpest inter-city policy divergence in the dataset. Culver City also enacted a drive-through use moratorium—initially 45 days, then extended to 10 months—reflecting a localized anti-auto-oriented-development stance absent from peer cities. Calabasas separately adopted a general plan ordinance protecting open space, and Claremont reviewed a short-term rental pilot ordinance, illustrating that smaller cities are using this cycle to fill regulatory gaps in emerging land-use categories.
Explicit spending is concentrated in planning capacity rather than land acquisition. Redondo Beach added $500,000 to its plan check and permit staffing contract (new cumulative total: $1,000,000) and authorized an eighth $48,010 amendment to its General Plan update consultant agreement with PlaceWorks, signaling a sustained and expanding planning workload. A separate $35,000 marina parking study points to focused attention on coastal commercial zoning standards. Long Beach sold two city-owned parcels for $37,500 and $11,000, modest disposals consistent with surplus property clearance. Signal Hill is negotiating a Heritage Square Disposition and Development Agreement covering approximately 1.9 acres of city-owned land in its Central Business District—the largest discrete site disposition in the dataset by scale, though no dollar figure is disclosed. Culver City separately executed a parking license agreement for a mixed-use project at 9814 Washington Boulevard and authorized extended construction hours for another mixed-use development, both indicating active pipeline delivery in its commercial core.
(Synthesized from the 120 most recent items.)
What to watch AI-generated
Key items (8)
- [33] Adopt ordinance amending Title 22.11, 22.12, 22.15, 22.30, 22.40, and 22.41 of the Long Beach Municipal Code (ZCA24-005) to establish two new zoning districts, Mixed-Use Main Street (MU-M) and Commercial Main Street (C-M) that will implement the Neighborhood Serving Corridor Low (NSC-L) and Community Commercial (CC) PlaceTypes of the Long Beach General Plan Land Use Element and minor amendments to all existing zoning districts contained within Title 22, read the first time and laid over to the next regular meeting of the City Council for final reading; — Long Beach, 2026-06-09 · Establishes two new zoning districts (Mixed-Use Main Street and Commercial Main Street), the most structurally consequential land-use change in the dataset, reshaping major commercial corridors region-wide.
- [26-926] CC - CONSENT ITEM: Adoption 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, 2026-06-08 · Adopts the Fox Hills Specific Plan with zoning code text and map amendments, the largest site-specific mixed-use planning action in Culver City's current cycle.
- [26-930] CC - ACTION ITEM: (1) Discussion of Potential Drive-Through Ban; (2) FOUR-FIFTHS VOTE REQUIREMENT: If Desired, Adoption of an Interim Urgency Ordinance Establishing a 45-Day Moratorium on the Issuance of Any New Building Permits or Entitlements for New Drive Through Uses; and/or (3) If Desired, Direction to Prepare a Regular Ordinance for Direct Consideration by City Council, or for Consideration by the Planning Commission for Recommendation to City Council; and/or (4) Direction to the City Manager as Deemed Appropriate. — Culver City, 2026-06-08 · Initiates a 45-day drive-through moratorium—subsequently extended to 10 months—marking a sharp, city-specific departure from auto-oriented land use policy.
- [10.a.1] Intro. of Ordinance to Delay Effectuation of Senate Bill 79 ("The Abundant and Affordable Homes Near Transit Act") for Certain Sites Located Within the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone and/or Containing a Locally Designated Historic Resource. — Glendale, 2026-06-09 · Introduces an ordinance delaying SB 79 implementation in Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones, the clearest example of local resistance to state housing mandates in the dataset.
- [6] Adoption of Ordinance No. 2026-424 - Objective Design Standards (ODS) for Multi-Family and Mixed-Use Projects — Calabasas, 2026-05-27 · Adopts ODS for multi-family and mixed-use projects, part of a region-wide wave of design-standard codification also moving through Pomona and referenced in multiple continued-matter signals.
- [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 · Adds $500,000 to the plan check and permit staffing contract (total $1,000,000), the largest single planning-capacity expenditure in the dataset and a direct signal of permit volume pressure.
- [12] CD 14 STATUTORY EXEMPTION, BOYLE HEIGHTS COMMUNITY PLAN UPDATE (BHCPU) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) NO. ENV-2016-2906 AND ADDENDUM, MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, PLANNING AND LAND USE MANAGEMENT (PLUM) COMMITTEE REPORT and ORDINANCES FIRST CONSIDERATION relative to implementing the Boyle Heights Community Plan. — Los Angeles, 2026-06-24 · First consideration of the Boyle Heights Community Plan Update ordinance, one of the few full community plan adoptions in the dataset and a precedent for LA's broader planning update schedule.
- [26-1563] HERITAGE SQUARE DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT — Signal Hill, 2026-06-09 · Heritage Square Disposition and Development Agreement for approximately 1.9 acres of city-owned land in the Central Business District—the largest publicly disclosed site disposition by scale in the dataset.
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Culver City |
12% |
— | — |
| Long Beach |
10% |
$10.7M | $22.98 |
| Signal Hill |
10% |
— | — |
| Claremont |
8% |
— | — |
| Redondo Beach |
8% |
$1.1M | $15.13 |
| Glendale |
7% |
$300K | $1.53 |
| Los Angeles |
7% |
— | — |
| Calabasas |
6% |
— | — |
| Pomona |
5% |
— | — |
| Sierra Madre |
3% |
— | — |
Named decisions on this topic
Biggest dollars
Contested votes
Vote records are partial — captured only where a city publishes minutes or an official council journal (chiefly Long Beach and Los Angeles); 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.
Annual Budget Study Sessions — Glendale, Sierra Madre, Signal Hill
Glendale, Sierra Madre, and Signal Hill are each holding multi-department budget study sessions, reviewing proposed spending across city departments and capital projects as part of their annual budget process. AI summary
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
Objective Design Standards for Multi-Family Housing — Calabasas, Glendale
Calabasas and Glendale are both adopting objective design standards for multi-family residential and mixed-use development, establishing clear, measurable criteria to guide the appearance and layout of new housing projects. AI summary