Nearly 100 residents were ready to go to war against a proposed high-rise apartment building on Huntley Drive after a virtual neighborhood meeting held Wednesday by the developers failed to win them over.
When they were made public last week, plans to construct the eight-story tower on this sleepy, narrow street of single-family homes and small apartment complexes shocked those living in the vicinity, who fear the impact on their neighborhood will be overwhelmingly negative.
Neighbors threatened legal action before the meeting had even concluded.
“Not only do I drive, but my home is right next to the building site. My house is 100 years old. I have gone through the construction of the specific Design Center, and was able to recover some things for my home. My house will not be able to stand with you guys building something like this. This is not going to happen.”
In their presentation, the developers mentioned that the project had been submitted to the city with 20% of the units designated for low-income individuals.
The project will contain features such as a front yard setback, parking entry, lobby entry, and setbacks on the side yards. The presentation included floor plans, unit details, and a roof deck design.
They described the building as an eight-story project with various design elements aimed at breaking up the facade, including large windows and angling of the building. They highlighted the project’s proximity to the Pacific Design Center and its large parking lot.
Residents voiced their concerns about the impact on their property values and quality of life, as well as concerns about increased traffic and parking issues.
They alleged the project violated federal law, particularly related to environmental quality and groundwater usage. They questioned the amount of groundwater the project would require and the impact of pumping it into the sewer system. They also inquired about the quantity of garbage generated by the building and its effect on traffic and waste management.
“The building itself is so epically wrong for the neighborhood that it renders all the important conversations that should be happening at this meeting moot.”
Another resident highlighted the deteriorating infrastructure and plumbing issues in the area, emphasizing the potential consequences of construction on an already problematic soil type and earthquake-prone region. They raised questions about the electrical infrastructure’s ability to support the project and its impact on the local power grid.
Residents also expressed concerns about the increased runoff due to climate change and flooding issues in the area, as well as the potential harm to the environment. They mentioned the impact of increased traffic and the absence of sufficient parking spaces.
Others questioned whether there was an initial plan for the property before the developers took advantage of the builder’s remedy and increased the scale of the project. They expressed frustration with the lack of transparency regarding the project’s history and intentions.
The discussion then shifted to questions about the project’s compliance with zoning regulations and the decision to provide 100% affordable units. Residents inquired about the reasoning behind this decision, but the response from the project representatives did not provide a clear answer.
Residents also raised concerns about the narrow sidewalks in the neighborhood and the potential challenges posed by the project’s expected number of residents and commuters. They emphasized the need for thoughtful design and consideration of the neighborhood’s existing infrastructure.
They highlighted the issue of parking spaces provided by the project and the changing state laws that no longer required parking for certain developments near transit areas. The project representatives explained the impact of these legislative changes on parking requirements.
One resident emphasized that the proposed eight-story building was out of proportion with the neighborhood, and the main focus of the conversation centered on the excessive height of the project.
“Everybody involved is focused on one thing, and one thing only: an eight-story project that simply doesn’t belong on that street. Now, you might be able to get this built as a result of the Builder’s Remedy, and I think they probably read the regulations literally. Again, I would say it’s possible, but in good conscience? Yes, technically, you might be able to do it, but whether or not you should is a different story.”
There was also a discussion about affordable housing and the importance of addressing the housing needs of the community while ensuring that the scale and design of the development were appropriate. They inquired about the possibility of land swaps or other alternatives to the current development plan and questioned its compliance with the state’s Builders Remedy law.
“This neighborhood has always been beautiful and lovely, with charming and wonderful neighbors. You are destroying it. It’s clear you have no shame in doing so. The impact of your actions is simply horrible.”
There were concerns about the developer’s intentions, with some residents doubting whether the project genuinely aimed to provide affordable housing. They questioned the developer’s motivation and suggested that the project might exploit legal loopholes to maximize profit rather than address the community’s housing needs.
Residents expressed their desire for the city council to oppose the project and called for a more transparent and inclusive development process that considered the community’s input and concerns.
There were calls for legal action against the project, and residents were urged to document who received notices and who didn’t. They stressed the importance of gathering information and documentation to address the situation effectively.
Residents also questioned the compliance of the project with state regulations and the timeline for the city to become compliant. They requested recommendations from the meeting and expressed their intention to mobilize more residents against the project.
if they can build, they will. I hope I’m wrong, but let Weho’s history speak for itself.
Perhaps WEHOonline.com could do a followup article including a legal description of the BUILDER’S REMEDY according to the Planning Department, when it was devised, enacted and how many projects have elected this method for their projects. The community at large deserves to know about this travesty which may be visited upon their neighborhood in the near future.
We put in a public records request for that information but so far no replys.
This is a good looking building, and would help contribute much needed housing. I hope they build it!
There is plenty of housing. What is needed is affordable housing. The developer is displacing 8 renters who currently have affordable housing including a veteran in exchange for 10 affordable housing units (in 3 years if they are lucky) and 40 apartments that will rent for more than $4000/unit. That is hardly providing additional affordable housing. It’s actually reducing affordable housing for several years. This building is a scam and it WILL be stopped in its tracks.
Do you live on this street? Do you understand how it will impact those who do? I’m waiting…
great! it’s a “good-looking building”. Excuse me but, there’s a neighborhood involved, AND a community, and with longterm residents, and with environmental and situational impacts, not to mention parking and traffic
But HEY! If it “looks good”, DO IT! SHEESH
Great! Propose they put it next to your residence and suffer through 4+ years of construction. With NO parking. I’m Pre-Development. But this is madness.
While the original design may not have been this extreme, it would be interesting to know exactly who informed the developer as to the parameters of this loop hole. Was it unsolicited direction from the planner?
I doubt anybody told this developer. They are very shrewd and this isn’t their only project. They knew the loophole existed and filed for multiple developments knowing the city can’t stop them. The city can make recommendations but they have very few options to stop them. The city made a colossal error by not getting their low income housing plan approved by the state and West Hollywood basically had no zoning in place since the state did not approve anything. Any developer could file anything they wanted as long as 20% of the units were set aside for lower income… Read more »
Where would the other “multiple developments” be located in the city and do you have the dates of applications that were filed and completed?
There was someone on the Zoom call who said their neighborhood near the old French Market has a Zoom call with this same developer this upcoming week. Requests have been made from the city for a complete list of all projects in WEHO who have filed for developments under this “builders remedy” loophole. The information by law is supposed to be provided within 10 days. Over the next few weeks residents in WEHO will know a lot more about this greedy Beverly Hills developer and others like him. Nobody would deny this developer a reasonable development on this property but… Read more »
When the developer wanted to build the 4 story condo building on Horn and Shoreham we asked the planning commission and finally the city council can it be 2 stories instead? And then asked for a compromise of 3 stories and still it was approved for 4 stories. The construction was a big problem and mess for several years. They left the security gate open every night illegally and had a fake phone number on the sign out front for the construction foreman. They illegally pre-staged before 8am and did many illegal things weekly and never got fined. And did… Read more »
Having been to all the Wetherly Palm meetings, I can tell you the developers don’t give a damn about the communities concerns, they’re just going through the motions as required. When it comes before the planning commission, the developer will likewise reject most of their recommendations and keep reminding the commission they have no choice but to approve the project under state law or face a costly lawsuit. Public comment is going to be a waste of time, other than being cathartic. After the planning commission rubber stamps the project, someone will likely appeal to the city council, but they’re… Read more »
Isn’t the Wetherly Palm project an entirely affordable housing project being developed by a non-profit? You make them sound like some evil for-profit developer. That is a totally different kind of project than what is being proposed on Huntley.
Would like to hear from Council Member Meister who apparently opened this Pandora’s box without expertise on the matter of It would appear as though she failed to make an assessment of what appeared as somewhat of a gamble requesting an extension on the Housing Element Deadline.
Additionally, the behavior of residents at last night’s meeting was as horrific as the proposed project. Seems a scorched stance is no way to begin a dialogue.
I was on that call and I cannot blame the people on N.Huntley Drive for being angry. People get very emotional about this subject. If you lived next to this project you would be very upset too. This developer who lives in Beverly Hills has been hiding behind his LLC but people now know who he is. He could have easily developed a reasonable project for the neighborhood but instead he decided to create chaos and havoc. His project will be delayed for years with litigation and he’ll be paying Wells Fargo for the money he borrowed from them to… Read more »
There are many excellent comments and WeHo residents are smart. We need to get together, see what lawyers we have that are on our side and figure out how to make this guys life miserable unless he compromises. He’s the same guy building an 8 story building w 34 units and only 10 yes 10 parking spaces on edenburgh next to the laurel pet hospital. We just had a bogus meeting too. We need to band together now. If anyone is working on the Huntley project, reach out to me and I’ll try to connect the Edinburgh folks who are… Read more »
Hi Samantha –
We do indeed have a large (50+) member group opposed to the Huntley development. Please reach out to me there using the email: [email protected] and we’ll see what we can wrangle up together. Thanks! – L
She’s easily reached via email from the WeHo website. I’d be curious her thoughts as well.
Putting an 8-story building on Huntley… it seems like a practical joke.
Like putting a 7 story building with roof deck on Wetherly and Cynthia
A bunch of young decision-makers who dream of living in NYC but don’t have the guts to do it, so instead turn WeHo into a concrete jungle.
I don’t see how they have a chance. The best thing people can do is stop voting the same way they’ve been voting. The bozos that are making these laws are put in power by the people. Vote differently, and take away their power to destroy.
Pitch forks and torches on Huntley……..No Bueno!
This developer refused to answer question after question including who actually owns this development. Everything is a big secret. The entire neighborhood is ready to sue these crooks. People were really angry and rightfully so. The city made a colossal mistake and these people are taking advantage of a loophole thanks to some serious incompetence by the city. Someone needs to find out why the property shows a sale price of $1.4 mil in 6/2020 when the pending sale price in Dec 2019 said it was $2.8 mil. Seems like some shady tax dodging here. I hope something is uncovered.
Wait until you look into former city planning commissioner David Aghaei purchasing property from Beverly Hills Baptist Church for 1.5MM then immediately flipping it for 2.65MM to West Hollywood Community Housing Corporation for affordable housing funded by city/tax payer money.
Corruption at every level.
I couldn’t help but think of another awful scenario… Of the developers starting construction and then running out of money and leaving a vacant property like what has happened in other locations! Hey! This is West Hollywood, and nothing is outside of the realm possibility in this crazy city lately!!