Comments
MY POV - When Los Angeles was awarded the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games, City Hall reassured the public that this would be a “no-build” Olympics. Officials emphasized that Los Angeles already possessed the venues and infrastructure necessary to host the Games, and the LA28 organizing committee proudly declared that the 2028 Games would be “the first-ever Olympics to not build permanent infrastructure.”
That promise is now in serious doubt.
On Tuesday, February 3, the Los Angeles City Council is scheduled to vote on a proposed Zoning Code Amendment Ordinance that would exempt Games-related temporary and permanent projects from nearly all existing planning, zoning, and environmental review requirements. The ordinance represents a dramatic policy reversal—one that could fundamentally reshape land-use decision-making across the city under the banner of the Olympics.
One provision is especially alarming. It states that an Olympic or Paralympic project “shall not be considered a project nor require any review procedures under any Specific Plan, Supplemental District, Redevelopment Plan, or Special Zone.” In plain terms, this would allow permanent construction to proceed without adherence to adopted plans, zoning standards, or environmental safeguards.
United Neighborhoods for Los Angeles (UN4LA) strongly opposes this ordinance and questions its legality. We are not alone. At least nine neighborhood councils submitted Community Impact Statements opposing the proposal, yet only three were acknowledged on the January 13 agenda of the City Council’s Planning and Land Use Management (PLUM) Committee.
The Lincoln Heights Neighborhood Council captured the broader concern succinctly, warning that granting CEQA exemptions and expedited land-use approvals “will negatively impact our marginalized communities of Lincoln Heights, Chinatown, El Pueblo, Boyle Heights, and more by accelerating gentrification and displacement.” Those impacts would not be confined to any single neighborhood; they would ripple across Los Angeles.
City officials have suggested that environmental review might still occur—but astonishingly, only after projects are completed. Such an approach would invert the very purpose of environmental review, which is intended to identify and mitigate harm before irreversible damage occurs.
During the January 13 PLUM Committee meeting, Councilmember Nithya Raman raised concerns that the ordinance could open the door to construction in environmentally sensitive areas such as Griffith Park and the Sepulveda Basin. When she asked whether a list of planned projects existed, City Planning staff acknowledged that no comprehensive list has been prepared.
Representatives from the Office of Major Events offered a handful of examples—EV charging stations, a pentathlon swimming facility, and “a bunch of roads throughout the Sepulveda Basin.” Beyond those vague references, the public has been given no clarity about the scale, location, or permanence of the projects being contemplated.
While the ordinance identifies certain projects that would be excluded, it relies largely on broad categories rather than specifics. One such category includes digital signage, which could encompass digital billboards. It may also enable the installation of extensive “wayfinding” kiosks on city sidewalks—an idea the City Council has debated for years but never fully approved. The ordinance could also waive requirements for certain Games-related transit projects, though rail lines are explicitly excluded.
UN4LA opposes this ordinance not only because it threatens environmentally sensitive areas like Griffith Park and the Sepulveda Basin, but also because it undermines community planning, transparency, and accountability. The proposal abandons the careful checks and balances that protect neighborhoods from piecemeal, politically driven development.
Most troubling, the ordinance directly contradicts the foundational promise of a “no-build” Olympics. Rather than limiting construction, it would enable a scattered, ad-hoc building spree—one carried out without meaningful review, public disclosure, or enforceable safeguards.
Los Angeles can host a successful Olympics without sacrificing its planning framework, its neighborhoods, or its environmental protections. UN4LA urges City leaders to reconsider this ordinance and ensure that any Games-related project—temporary or permanent—is subject to full environmental review and compliance with existing planning and zoning laws.
The Olympic Games should leave a legacy of civic pride, not a precedent for bypassing democratic governance.
Recommendation Report with Draft Ordinance
(Casey Maddren is president of United Neighborhoods for Los Angeles (UN4LA [www.un4la.com]) and a CityWatch contributor.)
