Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sunset Vine Sv2 Project topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
PLUM denies environmental appeal; approves 170‑unit mixed‑use project at Sunset and Vine
Summary
The PLUM Committee denied an appeal by SAFER and sustained the Planning Commission’s approval of a Sustainable Communities Environmental Assessment (SCIA), site plan review, conditional use permit and density bonus for an 8‑story, 170‑unit mixed‑use building at Sunset and Vine.
The Planning and Land Use Management Committee denied an appeal by the Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility (SAFER) and sustained the City Planning Commission’s approvals for the Sunset‑Vine (SV2) project, an eight‑story mixed‑use building with 170 residential units and 16,680 square feet of commercial space.
City Planning staff presented findings that the project’s environmental clearance by Sustainable Communities Environmental Assessment (SCIA) was adequate. Stephanie Escobar of City Planning summarized the project scope: demolition of four commercial buildings and a vacant duplex; construction of a 201,134‑square‑foot mixed‑use building with 170 residential units (26 units for very‑low‑income households and 8 for low‑income households), retention of an existing 19‑story tower and a two‑story commercial building, provision of 284 parking spaces and 24,997 square feet of open space.
Appellant counsel Chase Preciado argued that the project was ineligible for a SCIA because its floor area ratio exceeded base zoning limits, the project had not implemented feasible mitigation measures from the RTP/SCS program EIRs, and the project would cause significant air quality and indoor air impacts from diesel particulate matter during construction and formaldehyde from building materials. Preciado cited consultant memos asserting cancer risk estimates that exceed South Coast Air Quality Management District thresholds.
Applicant counsel Dale Goldsmith, joined by development and environmental consultants, told the committee the city and the applicant had submitted technical responses showing the appellant’s memos relied on unrealistic assumptions and flawed methodologies. Goldsmith said the project was consistent with state density bonus law, the SCIA properly evaluated applicable program‑level mitigation, and that expert rebuttals refuted the appellant’s air‑quality claims.
The Hollywood Chamber of Commerce provided public comment in support of the project, noting it would add 170 units including affordable units and ground‑floor retail that would enhance pedestrian life.
After limited discussion, the committee voted to deny the appeal and to sustain the Planning Commission’s determinations. The roll call recorded five ayes.
The committee’s action sustains the Planning Commission’s land use approvals and the SCIA environmental clearance recorded in the planning file (council file 25‑0209). No modifications to the project were made by PLUM at the hearing.
Next steps: the project remains subject to the conditions of approval and any remaining administrative clearances and permits identified in the Planning Department report.
