A controversial construction project in Los Angeles has been given the green light, despite strong opposition from local residents. On August 30, 2024, Dana Zinderman filed a complaint against the City of Los Angeles in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, alleging violations of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The dispute centers around a new development on Wilshire Boulevard in Westwood, where Belmont Village L.P. plans to build a 176-room eldercare facility and Westwood Presbyterian Church aims to construct a childcare center. The project, which is nearly 90 percent residential and located adjacent to mass transit, was approved by the City under a streamlined environmental assessment process allowed for transit priority projects (TPPs). Zinderman's petition sought to overturn this approval, arguing that the project did not meet TPP criteria and would have significant environmental impacts.
The City’s planning department had determined that the project qualified as a TPP, allowing it to use a Sustainable Communities Environmental Assessment (SCEA) instead of more extensive documentation typically required by CEQA. The SCEA included studies on greenhouse gas emissions and transportation impacts and concluded that with mitigation measures, the project would not cause significant environmental harm. Despite public opposition and appeals against the decision, including objections raised by Zinderman during public hearings, the City adopted the SCEA in May 2021.
Zinderman's petition for a writ of mandate filed in February 2022 claimed that the project did not qualify as a TPP and thus should not have been approved under an SCEA. She argued that the eldercare facility could not be considered residential because its residents are less likely to use public transit due to mobility issues. However, both the trial court and appellate court found substantial evidence supporting the City's classification of the project as a TPP. The courts noted that senior housing falls within legislative definitions of "residential" and does not require occupants to be able to drive or use public transit independently.
The court also upheld the City's findings that the project was consistent with regional policies aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions through high-density development near transit hubs. It rejected claims that removing existing structures for new construction would negatively impact housing availability or contradict sustainable community goals.
Ultimately, Zinderman's appeal was denied, affirming the City's approval of the project. The judgment stated that there was no prejudicial abuse of discretion by the City in approving the SCEA or classifying the development as a TPP.
Representing Zinderman was attorney Corin H. Kahn. The City’s legal team included Hydee Feldstein Soto along with Deputy City Attorneys Amy Brothers, Kathryn C. Phelan, and Clarissa Padilla from Best Best & Krieger law firm represented Belmont Village L.P., while Armbruster Goldsmith & Delvac’s Damon P. Mamalakis represented other real parties in interest. The case was presided over by Judge Mary H. Strobel under Case ID B329765.