Controversial 8850 Sunset project approved by Planning Commission

In a divided vote that reflected the polarizing project, West Hollywood’s Planning Commission chose Thursday night to recommend the expansive 8850 Sunset Boulevard development to City Council.   

Vice Chair Michael Lombardi, along with Commissioners Mark Edwards, David Gregoire, and Lynn Hoopingarner, listened as Doug Vu, a planner with the city’s Community Development Department, presented the staff report. 

The matter discussed was the proposed redevelopment of a nearly 1-acre block on the south side of Sunset Boulevard between San Vicente Boulevard and Larabee Street. The Planning Commission was tasked with considering several actions to recommend to the city council, including the certification of the final environmental impact report, adoption of a mitigation monitoring and reporting program, adoption of findings of fact and a statement of overriding considerations, an amendment of the sunset specific plan to change development standards, approval of a development agreement with required public benefits, an amendment to the zoning map, and various land use entitlements including a demolition permit, development permit, conditional use permits, sign permit, administrative permit, and a vesting tentative map.

The project site, consisting of eight parcels, spans an entire block with approximately 260 feet of street frontage along Sunset Boulevard and 154 feet along both San Vicente Boulevard and Larabee Street. The site, which slopes downward by about 10% from Sunset Boulevard, currently houses four one- and two-story commercial buildings previously used for administrative offices, personal services, restaurants, retail, and nightclub uses, including the Viper Room, and a commercial parking lot. The site also features three roof-mounted billboards.

Located in the Sunset Boulevard commercial sub-area of the general plan, the area is a renowned urban corridor known as the Sunset Strip, featuring entertainment, restaurant, shopping, and hospitality venues that attract national and international visitors. The surrounding area mainly comprises commercial, retail, office, entertainment, and hotel buildings along Sunset Boulevard, with multifamily dwellings to the north and south.

The proposed mixed-use hotel and residential building would encompass approximately 269,000 gross square feet, with 228,000 square feet above grade, resulting in a floor area ratio of 5.7, atop an additional 96,000 square feet of underground parking and loading space across five basement levels. The 11-story building would rise to 160 feet at its highest point and include a luxury hotel with 90 guest rooms, accessory spaces, personal services, a spa, fitness room, five restaurant and cafe spaces, a bar and lounge, an outdoor pool and spa, a small neighborhood-oriented retail space, and a future location for the Viper Room nightclub. The residential component would offer 78 rental apartments, including 62 market rate units and 16 affordable units, an amenity room, and an outdoor pool with a terrace.

To accommodate vehicular parking, the project would provide 232 parking spaces on four of the five lower subterranean levels. The first basement level would feature hotel and residential lobbies, administrative offices, a fitness room, a spa, and the Viper Room nightclub. This level would also serve as the main entry for hotel patrons, commercial users, residents, and guests, with dedicated drop-off and pick-up areas accessed from a driveway on Larabee Street, leading to an exit onto northbound San Vicente Boulevard. The street level would include the hotel lobby, connected to a publicly accessible terrace, hotel and restaurant spaces, and the Viper Room lobby, with a native soil garden and observation area required as a public benefit for the billboards.

Levels two through six would house the residential apartments with private balconies, levels seven through nine would contain the hotel guest rooms, level ten would feature the hotel rooftop restaurant with outdoor dining, bar areas, meeting and event rooms, and the hotel outdoor pool, spa, and terrace. The top floor, level eleven, would host the residential amenity room, residential outdoor pool and terrace, and additional building equipment spaces.

In 2019, the city adopted an innovative Sunset Boulevard offsite signage policy, the first comprehensive update for billboards, tall walls, and other types of creative advertising along the Sunset Strip, a major economic engine for West Hollywood with a tradition of innovative and memorable signage. This policy aimed to enhance the unique traditions of Sunset Boulevard and integrate these offsite signs into the strip’s context. As part of this development project, the proposed full-motion animated and static billboards were awarded through the city’s Sunset Boulevard Design Excellence program.

The west-facing billboard, located at the corner of San Vicente, is a full-motion animated billboard measuring approximately 70 feet in height by 28 feet and 6 inches in width, with a screen area of 2,000 square feet. The east-facing billboard along Larabee Street is a static billboard measuring approximately 40 feet high by 25 feet wide, with a screen area of 1,000 square feet. These billboards substantially meet the relevant standards under the Sunset Boulevard signage policy. However, where billboards do not strictly meet each development standard, a project can be reviewed and approved as an alternative project. In this case, these billboards exceed the sign area and are being considered as an alternative project that, if approved, would require an extraordinary community benefit.

Ric Abramson, the city architect and manager of the Urban Design and Architecture Studio, spoke about the architecture and urban design aspects of the project. This mixed-use proposal is notable for its program stack, which refers to the arrangement of mixing uses. It features a ground floor with commercial and hotel amenities, followed by a cluster of residential units, a cluster of hotel rooms, a residential deck, and a hotel component at the top. This vertical stack alternates programs up the building, presenting circulation and program challenges that have been mostly resolved.

Several neighborhood meetings and design review sessions allowed the applicant to take public and commissioner input, leading to design adjustments. One significant change was the introduction of a full breezeway element down the center of the building along Sunset Boulevard, providing a break in the block-long facade and creating a social space for residents and hotel guests. This breezeway connects the sunset sidewalk to a rear lounge space.

The rerouting of driveway circulation was another positive change, with trash and loading entries and exits on Larabee Street, and all other exits now on San Vicente Boulevard. The design team also reevaluated the activation of the project’s perimeter, enhancing the three sides facing the public right of way. The east side includes a public realm enhancement for the billboard, the front along Sunset features outdoor dining with the breezeway component, and Larabee Street now includes a small pocket retail space to activate the street.

The upper levels of the building have undulating balconies that encircle the building, blending the hotel units and dwelling units into a cohesive architectural form rather than highlighting the mixed program. The project also features a variety of unit sizes from studios to three-bedrooms, providing a mix of lifestyles and socialization opportunities. Some minor adjustments might be needed, especially for the studio units, to ensure full accessibility.

The public realm enhancements and the integration of the billboard with the new building design were highlighted as successful elements of the project. The billboard’s design and creativity reflect an artful and innovative approach, complementing the overall architecture without competing with it. Rick Abramson confirmed he would be available for further questions throughout the night.

For the proposed project at 8850 Sunset Boulevard, the applicant requested an increase in the site’s height and density and proposed new billboards that necessitated placing the property into the city’s development agreement overlay zone. The commission needed to determine whether these changes were consistent with the general and specific plans for Sunset Boulevard, which aim to maintain it as a key destination for entertainment and a major economic engine of the city.

The project’s consistency with these goals is evidenced by its mix of uses: a hotel, nightclub, restaurants, neighborhood-serving retail, and residential units. This diversity would support both daytime and nighttime economies and help revitalize the area. The architectural design would activate Sunset Boulevard and maintain its eclectic urban environment with varied building heights and styles. Additionally, publicly accessible elements like an outdoor landscape terrace and an interactive native soil garden on San Vicente Boulevard would enhance the pedestrian experience, aligning with several general plan goals.

The commission was also tasked with evaluating the environmental review’s adequacy and deciding whether to certify the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the project. The EIR had to be comprehensive enough to enable informed decision-making regarding the environmental consequences of the project. This report included a broad range of environmental topics such as air quality, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and transportation, among others. The proposed mitigation measures were expected to reduce most impacts to less than significant levels, except for construction noise, which would affect the adjacent London Hotel.

An alternative project with reduced height and density was introduced in the final EIR, which would lower the impacts compared to the proposed project and not alter the impact conclusions of the draft EIR. Despite some significant impacts, the benefits of the project were deemed to outweigh these. Benefits included assisting the city in meeting its Regional Housing Needs Allocation, providing community benefits through tax-generating uses and public benefits, enhancing job opportunities near transit, contributing to local and statewide sustainability goals, and revitalizing Sunset Boulevard.

Hoopingarner inquired about the location of a music history gallery mentioned in the development agreement, clarified to be on the first floor in the Viper Room Sunset Lobby. The debate centered on whether this tenant space could qualify as a public benefit, determined to be open to the public from noon to 5:00 PM, meeting the criteria.

Parking arrangements, including 232 spaces, were discussed, with compliance with state law allowing a reduced parking ratio for projects providing affordable housing. Traffic flow and driveway placements along Sunset Boulevard were explained to preserve its pedestrian-friendly nature.

Questions arose about building adjustments, loading zones, inclusionary housing parking, and fire lane provisions. Concerns were also raised about the Breezeway’s public hours and seating arrangements for adjacent restaurants, as well as noise from events in the area.

The development agreement’s minor change provisions allowing up to 11 feet in building height were scrutinized, with Hoopingarner questioning potential benefits for developers. The 7% flexibility standard in the agreement and the distribution of inclusionary housing units were also debated.

Concerns arose regarding potential amendments and their impact on public benefits without requiring a full legislative review. The agreement allowed for minor changes, such as an 11.2 feet increase in building height, without reevaluating public benefits.

Hoopingarner raised inquiries about amendments’ implications on public benefits, particularly regarding a $4.9 million Music History Gallery. Questions arose about the valuation’s accuracy and whether it truly reflected additional developer investment.

Discussions delved into space occupancy within the development, emphasizing its role as an active community asset. The agreement’s requirements for maintaining occupancy levels in various spaces, including hotels and potentially residential areas, were examined.

Legal clarifications were sought on the definition of “landmark quality” and its assessment criteria for major amendments. The meeting aimed to ensure the agreement’s terms aligned with current standards while remaining adaptable to future changes without sacrificing public benefits.

Concerns were raised about the Vesting Tentative Tract Map’s purpose and its implications for residential units. Hoopingarner questioned discrepancies in square footage and floor area ratios between project versions.

Parking arrangements, noise regulations, and public benefit allocations were scrutinized. Hoopingarner sought clarity on operational aspects like delivery hours and noise levels, emphasizing the need for enforceable conditions.

Environmental impacts and financial justifications for public benefits were extensively discussed. Questions were raised about cost assumptions and mitigation measures for noise impacts.

During the meeting, concerns arose regarding traffic management and public benefit areas in a development project. Specifically, it was noted that the London hotel’s left-turn only policy might conflict with the incoming traffic for the new development, potentially complicating cross-traffic flow. Commissioner Hoopen Garner raised questions about managing a right-turn lane on Sunset, where a bus stop is located. DJ Moore mentioned Metro’s consideration of various options for the bus stop during construction, intending to restore it to its original location post-construction.

The discussion also addressed the public benefit area’s use, emphasizing the importance of maintaining it for public use and preventing conversion for restaurant outdoor dining. The possibility of adding a condition to ensure this was discussed.

Further, questions were directed to the project’s architect regarding privacy concerns related to the design of the courtyard balconies. The architect explained that balconies would include diagonal dividers to enhance privacy.

Another topic was the ventilation of stoves within the units. It was clarified that stoves would vent outside either through horizontal ducts or by rising to the roof, ensuring safety and compliance with building regulations.

Green building standards were also discussed, with concerns about meeting the minimum required points. The architect reassured that flexibility during the building permit process would allow for adjustments to meet green standards.

Public access to planned outdoor spaces was debated, with discussions on flexibility in access hours to ensure effective public use.

The conversation highlighted the complexities of integrating naturalistic elements into urban developments, technical challenges of building compliance, and environmental sustainability.

Concerns were expressed about the architectural and operational aspects of a new development, with attention to ensuring inclusionary units have guaranteed parking spaces. Architectural materials and restroom facilities were also discussed, along with the integration of exterior lighting and signage into the building’s design.

During the meeting, various design aspects and operational concerns of a new development were addressed. Discussions included the placement and impact of a large LED billboard, the design and function of architectural elements like skylights, and the management of parking for inclusionary housing units.

Operational concerns included ensuring that all staff have access to appropriate restroom facilities and managing valet tipping practices.

Attention was given to an eight-story LED billboard to minimize noise and vibration, with plans for maintenance every eight years. Concerns about architectural lighting led to discussions about softer lighting and adjusting skylight designs. Restroom accessibility for staff and the public was clarified.

The meeting closed with a consensus in favor of the project, highlighting the need for modern multi-unit buildings to address housing shortages. The final vote was noted with three commissioners voting in favor (Lombardi, Edwards, Gregoire), one commissioner voting against (Hoopingarner), and two commissioners recused (Carvalheiro, Matos).