Meeting Date: 01/14/15 06:00 PM

Meeting Type: Regular

Location: William & Ariel Durant Public Library

Wednesday, Jan. 14, 2015, 6pm-8pm
William & Ariel Durant Public Library 7140 Sunset Blvd Los Angeles, CA 90046
The quorum for Hollywood Hills West Neighborhood Council Planning, Land Use & Management committee is three. Public comments on agenda items will be heard when the item is considered. Public comments on other matters within the committee's jurisdiction may be made during the Public Comment period. Public comments are limited to two minutes per speaker; That limit may be modified at the discretion of the committee. Speakers are requested to sign in at the meeting. Action may be taken on any agenda item except Public Comment, announcements and reports. You may request a copy of printed materials that are distributed at the meeting. You may record the meeting by audio, video or photographic means as long as it is not disruptive. Meeting notices and agendas are posted at the William and Ariel Durant Public Library and at the Fuller Ave. entrance to Runyon Canyon. If you need translation or accommodation for a disability, please call the city Department of Neighborhood Empowerment at least three business days in advance (213-978-1551, or toll-free 3-1-1). The city is a covered entity under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act. If you believe the council is not following the law or its own rules you may file a grievance in writing with copies to both the Chair and the Secretary. The HHWNC bylaws can be found at Please be respectful of others, even when you differ with them. 
1. Call to Order & Welcome
2. Approval of Dec. 1, 2014, PLUM Committee meeting minutes. 
3. Approval of Jan. 7, 2015, PLUM Committee meeting minutes.
4. General updates from Issue Chairs and Chairman.
5. Update on creation of Position Papers – Casey Maddren, Infrastructure Chair & Dietrich Nelson, Emergency Chair
6. 8150 Sunset Blvd. – Barbara Witkin, Area 7 Chair
Discussion of and possible vote on the Jan. 7, 2015, PLUM meeting on 8150 Sunset Bvld., key issues raised, and PLUM Committee statement on the project’s DEIR.
7. 1718 and 1722-1730 North Las PalmasAvenue; 1719-1719 and 1727-1727 Cherokee Avenue- Brian Dyer, Area 3 Chair
Discussion about the DEIR for this project with representatives of the developer.
8. Preview of upcoming projects
9. Old Business
10. Public Comments.
11. Adjournment. 


HHWNC PLUM Committee Meeting
Jan. 14, 2015
PLUM Committee Members in attendance
Cyd Zeigler, Casey Maddren, JoAnn Koplin, Jim Geoghen
Brian Dyer (Area 3)
Other HHWNC committee members in attendance
Carl Ripaldi (Environment)
Call to Order 6:03
Approved Dec. 1 meeting minutes w/ corrections (Koplin/Maddren)
Infrastructure update
Water concerns on 8150 and the water supply in Hollywood. City says there’s plenty of water, but we’re all being asked to cut our water usage 20%.
Traffic update
Went to street closure meeting for CD13. O’Farrell has said full closures of Hollywood Blvd in front of Chinese will be limited to three a year, not including the Oscars and possibly the Grammys. Exceptions might be considered. There will be lane closures.
Housing update
Looking at vacancy rates to understand the different areas’ needs, how it could impact new projects and vice versa. AirBnB seems to be on the rise in the area. We need to have a great idea on how we define vacancy in regard to AirBnB. It’s in use but not being used as a residence.
Jeff Papes: Ginosi – People who are responsible for renting out Rubix & Jefferson for AirBnB.
Area 3 – Brian Dyer
A building was torn down without permits, so they are looking into that. AirBnB seems to be growing in the area while parking is getting tighter. Seeing high-end cars parked on the street with hang tags (first time he’s seen that) because parking in residences isn’t sufficient.
Demolished building was the Regency.
1718 Las Palmas
They are back to talk about the DEIR and some design issues that they’ve been asked to address.
They are now providing setbacks
They’ve increased security
Added a dog run
Will be replacing trees
Did earthquake studies on the properties
Some concerns voiced is it’s beyond code for commercial parking but it’s still removing significant parking in the area. Loss of parking concern.
The turnout on meetings for this project is indicative that it doesn’t rile people up.
There are many masters in this process. Can’t make everyone happy but trying to be responsive.
Talked about Las Palmas & Franklin intersection
Encouraging them to look at intersection.
Q: Will there be Sidewalk closures during construction?
A: Construction details are worked out with building & safety after approval. Will work with NC so there are no surprises. Inconvenience bad enough, surprise is worse.
Carl Ripaldi had asked previously about coordinating construction.
A: That’s not developer’s responsibility – up to the Council office to coordinate all of that.
Q: The cumulative projects count in the DEIR – is it correct? He found discrepancies.
A: The numbers come from the planning dept.
Says there would be impact on Police Dept. but the developer feels it’s not very large because the per capita number of the area went down.
They will get the answer. There’s the legal process of development that can be challenged, and it often makes no sense. How did they determine this or that? It’s all technical.
Q: Parkland and Rec. A lot is relying on whether the Central Park gets built.
A: When look at parkland they can’t use that park in the analysis. They do the analysis on existing space today.
Q: DEIR reads as though the project is relying on the park being built.
Q: A lot of stairway walks that through the area, through whitley heights. A lot of people use those.
A: Discussion about how there’s X square feet on the project and
Q: Why do you say that there is no impact on parks because people will use open space on the property?
A: The City’s interpretation of CEQA is that there is that impact is mitigated by the open spaces. The project has put in a dog run because people have asked for it.
There are millions of dollars in fees each project generates for the city. It goes into the general fund. That money doesn’t go into the area. Always said somebody should do an audit to see what percentage of money stays in the area.
Q: What is ratio of studios to 1BR to 2BR? Where is parking?
A: Everyone in studio & 1BR gets one parking spot. There is no real way to rent residents more space. They could possibly rent some of their commercial spaces to residents.
Q: What steps are you thinking of to eliminate the parking issue?
A: Hasn’t been experience that most 1BRs have to cars. They could accommodate a quarter of Studio & 1BRs with a second space.
Q: They have new design that is response to NC and City Council. Where did they get the design?
A: Someone voiced displeasure with previous design. They don’t want controversy – good or bad – based on design. They hired another architect and got designs that were unique and iconic. Spent $100k and six months on new design. Design is qualitative.
Sometimes you might not like the design but you should appreciate how they got there. Whether you agree with the design or not, this isn’t a “box.” That’s what a lot of people have said. There is no “Hollywood design.”
Koplin commented about mass & scale
A: Height is 54’ to 71’ – there are buildings that are 55’ and 80’ nearby.
Zeigler questions about setbacks
A: Set back retail by 10’ for safety issue. Front of building is set back by about 10’ at street level. There is no setback of the upper floors.
Zeigler question about private open space
A: Balconies can be counted as open space to an extent. There is a 9’ setback that is a walking path that is public open space.
Maddren question about rooftop entertainment
A: Not live band or flashing lights. There’s a pool, there’s a yoga, there’s a projection. Not allowed to be used for anyone but residents and restricted time. Could be amplified music and sound. Midnight is latest time. Occupants will be natural noise control.
Zeigler question about sending traffic away from F-grade intersections.
A: Not really a way to do that. Some directed traffic in the neighborhood.
Q: Two parking spaces for commercial?
A: There are 51 additional spaces that aren’t assigned to anyone. Employees and patrons can park there. They have bike parking but they are not using that to get rid of required parking.
Q: Traffic in this area is so bad. We need traffic study. This is not to be taken lightly. Going onto Hollywood Blvd. is very hard.
Q: The design. Why did the design not come out of the neighborhood but came out of the city council office?
A: It wasn’t coming out of the council office but also the scoping meeting comments.
Views from Hollywood Blvd. – they have made sure that the building doesn’t obstruct view from S side of Hollywood
Stuiod: low as 350 or so for studio
24 Very low income units
Q: QIMBY fees?
A: They are putting in money but whether the area gets them or not is the question not up to them.
Q: Will security cameras be facing Hollywood Blvd?
A: They will work with LAPD on the location.
Q: What about lighting for the walk on S side of the building?
A: Musso & Frank might be building some kind of structure along the walkway so they want to make sure it doesn’t become a tunnel.
Update on position papers
Density & Scale: Maddren took all the worksheets and identified concerns. He’s created a rough draft of the position paper. Hoping to present to the full PLUM Committee in February.
Safety: Nelson & Ripaldi met and they have a list of things they think make sense. They’re hoping to have something for February.
Koplin: Started this process with questionnaires to Areas and that it would be Area-based. Concerned that it won’t be specific enough to have effect.
Maddren: Don’t have to present something that says “this is what everyone agrees on.” It can focus on what the concerns are.
Koplin: Concerned we’re moving too fast. There are other issues to address.
Comment: Give the draft to the Areas and let them weigh in.
8150 Sunset DEIR
Zeigler sent proposed letter to committee members. Only addition is to research true current vacancy rates.
3 yes, 0 no, 1 abstain to approve sending the letter to the Planning Dept. on behalf of the PLUM Committee.
Public Comment
Question about 7107 Hollywood Blvd. Stakeholder asked for update on the project.
Adjournment at 7:39pm