Monday, January 14, 2019, 6:30 PM

Fire Station 82 Annex
1800 N. BRONSON AVENUE, L.A., CA 90028
Second Floor Conference Room

The public is requested to fill out a "Speaker Card" to address the Board on any item of the agenda prior to the Board taking action on an item. Comments from the public on Agenda items will be heard only when the respective item is being considered. Comments from the public on other matters not appearing on the Agenda that is within the Board's subject matter jurisdiction will be heard during the Public Comment period. Public comment is limited to 2 minutes per speaker, for a maximum of 20 minutes total for Public comment, unless waived by the presiding officer of the Board. Agenda is posted for public review at Counterpoint Records and Books 5911 Franklin Ave, on our website at, and with EmpowerLA. In compliance with Government Code section 54957.5, non-exempt writings that are distributed to a majority or all of the board in advance of a meeting may be viewed at the scheduled meeting (or location noted in the Agenda item) or by making arrangements with our office (contact information above). As a covered entity under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the City of Los Angeles does not discriminate on the basis of disability and upon request, will provide reasonable accommodation to ensure equal access to its programs, services, and activities. Sign language interpreters, assistive listening devices, or other auxiliary aids and/or services may be provided upon request. To ensure availability of services, please make your request at least 3 business days (72 hours) prior to the meeting you wish to attend by contacting the Neighborhood Council Support Help Line (213) 978-1551 or email Note: Agenda items may be taken out of order or merged as deemed appropriate by the Board. Action may be taken on all items. To subscribe directly to our Agendas, go to


  1. Roll Call (2 minutes)
  2. Approval of Minutes (5 minutes)
  3. Public Comment on items not on the Agenda (2 minutes each) (5 minutes)
  4. Comments from any City, County, State or Federal representatives in attendance (5 minutes each) (15 minutes)
  5. Introduction of Neighborhood Housing Services of LA County (NHSLA), Jaime Del Rio, Community Organizer (5 minutes)
  6. Update from Budget Advocate (5 minutes)
  7. HUNC Committee & Liaison announcements on items not on the Agenda (5 minutes)
  8. Discussion and possible vote to move the Monthly board meeting to the second Monday of the month (10 minutes)
  9. PLUM Committee
    1. Report by Committee Chair
    2. 5752 Valley Oak Drive: Motion to approve with condition. Project: To add an over in height fence at a height of 7 feet with pedestrian height of 9’3” for a total of 45 linear feet within the front yard set back. Actions(s) Requested: Approval of pedestrian gate at a height of 9’3” and fence for a total of 45 (sic) linear feet at a height of 7 feet in the front yard for a total of 45 linear feet. Conditioned that the homeowners association for the area approves the project. (10 minutes)
    3. Discussion and possible motions regarding the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Hollywood Community Plan Update (public comment for the draft EIR to end January 31, 2019). (35 minutes)
      1. HUNC requests a 30 day extension to comment due to the holidays and Brown Act caused delays in ability to review. Due to the resulting short time to comment, HUNC can only submit the below comments. The following is in no way indicative of the totality of HUNC’s concerns as the entire plan needs to be reviewed and the Brown Act precludes the neighborhood council from conversations outside of regular board and committee hearings. HUNC will therefore be providing more comments as soon as possible.
      2. Earthquake and Hollywood Fault Line: While CBIA v. BAAQMD lawsuit decision held that CEQA generally does not require a lead agency to consider impacts of existing environment on future residents or users of a project, the fact that the HCPU is the prototype for all other communities in Los Angeles and the fact that the Hollywood Fault Line is an established fault line, the potential impact of earthquakes of various magnitudes must be considered in the HCPU draft EIR. The potential property damage and loss of life are significant and must be studied and included in the draft EIR in relation to the type and location of development.
      3. The HCPU should be required to have its own emergency plan separate but in compliance with the City Disaster Preparedness Plan element under the General Plan due to:
        1. Proximity to the Hollywood fault line.
        2. The limited access in some of the hillside area.
        3. The high number of tourists and the need to accommodate multiple languages.
        4. The existence of liquefaction and the allowance of constructing buildings past height restrictions.
      4. The affordable housing incentives and requirements are severely inadequate as well as the treatment of those living in affordable housing who will be displaced by the higher priced apartments being supported by the HCPU. While the city has been using and plans to continue using AB1505, the rate of affordable housing it creates is not enough to replace the RSO stock that is being destroyed and the affordable housing that is still needed to cover the present population of Hollywood (see attached HUNC position paper regarding housing in Hollywood).
      5. The proposal to increase the FAR to 6.1 is excessive given the earthquake and building density issues in Hollywood. This ratio far exceeds the ability of the infrastructure, traffic and road usage to be handled safely in Hollywood.
      6. The HCPU fails to examine other alternatives such as a decrease in population and the down-zoning that downsizing should trigger. The current plan is only assuming an increase in growth of population. The plan fails to acknowledge the saturated increase of studio or single-bedroom units which don’t foster family growth. By not increasing the single-family homes for ownership or rental, the future population of Hollywood won’t be based on the expansion of families, but rather on a transient population of single individuals who eventually move to other locations in the city to raise a family. This population demographic won’t lead to an increase in population, but rather a swapping out of one person for another. Therefore, the projected population growth numbers can’t be adequately assessed as live births are the main source of population increase, not migration.
      7. Designating Beachwood Drive as a Collector Street does not take into account that a majority of the street does not meet the definition of Collector Street for much of its length above Franklin Blvd. Beachwood Drive needs to be designated as a Local Street Limited.
      8. HCPU fails to acknowledge the option of land swapping for privately owned parcels with city owned parcels in order to create more parks or parking structures. Parking structures should be encouraged on land that can’t be developed due to contamination issues.
      9. Other issues as determined by the HUNC board.
    4. Discussion and possible motion regarding HUNC’s Housing Policy Position draft response to forward to Councilmember Ryu and LA City Council:

      The Hollywood United Neighborhood Council (HUNC) would like to express its belief that the current draft of the Hollywood Community Plan does not do enough to support the construction of affordable housing. While the city has generally been a champion of new developments, these projects overwhelmingly are built to rent at market rate and serve only the high-income residents of the city. These new developments also tend to have a “halo” effect of rising rent prices in non-RSO housing nearby. The result is displacement of the city’s most vulnerable residents, in many cases directly onto the streets, fueling the city’s continuing homelessness crisis. While the city has granted some incentives for transit-adjacent developments, the small number of additional affordable housing being created does not nearly meet the city’s needs. Since Proposition 10 was defeated at the ballot box in November, the only way the city has to accommodate low-income individuals is to simply build more affordable housing, at a much greater rate.

      Hollywood in particular has a very well-established homeless population and a changing development pattern that has seen the construction of more high-income housing that is at odds with the needs of its largely low-income residents. However, in the 138-page November 2018 Hollywood Community Development Plan Draft, the phrase “affordable housing” appears only 14 times, with nearly no specifics on how more development will be encouraged besides the existing incentives. Additionally, the draft EIR specifically does not address the social or economic effects of displacement of low-income residents and only specifies where housing will be built and not what kind. Los Angeles and Hollywood in particular must aggressively defend and expand affordable and RSO housing in its borders to protect the low-income population that is vital to its economy from permanent displacement or homelessness. These efforts belong in any future development plan for the Hollywood neighborhood.

      HUNC would like to offer its support to the city council in developing new incentives for the construction of affordable housing, as well as potential legislation to address the issue that can be placed in a revised Community Development Plan. HUNC would also like to express its interest in the construction of more affordable housing within its boundaries. We look forward to working more with the City Council to address this pressing crisis. (5 minutes)

  1. Homelessness & Social Services (2 minutes)
    1. Report by the Committee Chairs
  2. Transportation & Works Committee
    1. Report by Committee Chair (2 minutes)
  3. Outreach Committee
    1. Report by Committee Chairs (5 minutes)
    2. Discussion, and possible motion to recommend funding of up to $500 for flyers, food, beverages and incidentals for Plant and Tree Give-Away to be scheduled for April (Earth Day) /May/June 2019 (2 minutes)
    3. Discussion, and possible motion to ratify Outreach recommend funding of up to $400 to print updated homeless services card. (2 minutes)
    4. Discussion, and possible motion to recommend funding of up to $2500 for food, beverages, incidentals and HUNC branded emergency back-packs for completion of 7-week Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) training to be scheduled for April/May 2019 (2 minutes)
    5. Discussion, and possible motion to recommend funding of up to $500 for flyers, food, beverages and incidentals for completion of First/Aid CPR training to be scheduled for April/May/June 2019 (2 minutes)
    6. Discussion, and possible motion to recommend funding of up to $300 for flyers, food, beverages and incidentals for completion of Stop the Bleed class to be scheduled for April/May/June 2019 (2 minutes)
  4. Update on upcoming NC elections and activities (5 minutes)
  5. Renters and Housing Issues Committee
    1. Report by Committee Chair (2 minutes)
  6. Finance
    1. Discussion of current fiscal year budget and possible motion for adjustment (5 minutes)
    2. Discussion and vote to approve pending Monthly Expense Report for submission (5 minutes)
  7. Board Member announcements on items not on the Agenda (2 minutes)
  8. Old/Ongoing Business (1 minute)
  9. New/Future Business (1 minute)


A simple majority vote by the Board members present, not including abstentions, at a meeting at which there is a quorum, shall be required to take official action, unless specified otherwise in the Bylaws  ( Reconsideration: The Board may reconsider and amend its action on items listed on the agenda if that reconsideration takes place before the end of the meeting at which it was considered or at the next regular meeting. The Board, on either of these two days, shall: (1) Make a Motion for Reconsideration and, if approved, (2) hear the matter and take an action.  If the motion to reconsider an action is to be scheduled at the next meeting following the original action, then two items shall be placed on the agenda for that meeting: (1) A Motion for Reconsideration on the described matter and (2) a [Proposed] action should the motion to reconsider be approved.  A Motion for Reconsideration can only be made by a Board member who has previously voted on the prevailing side of the original action taken. If a Motion for Reconsideration is not made on the date the action was taken, then a Board member on the prevailing side of the action must submit a memorandum to the Recording Secretary identifying the matter to be reconsidered and a brief description of the reason(s) for requesting reconsideration at the next regular meeting. The aforesaid shall all be in compliance with the Ralph M. Brown Act.