The Melrose Triangle Project, in the planning stages since 2003, is likely to be approved tonight by the West Hollywood City Council with some fixes to possible traffic problems.
The city’s Department of Community Development, responding to a request from the Council in August, is suggesting the developer fund several efforts on Almont Drive, which is the eastern border of the project, to reduce traffic problems. The Council at its Aug. 18 meeting endorsed the project but asked city staffers to return with ideas about addressing possible traffic problems.
These include construction of traffic circles on Almont Drive at Rangely, Dorrington and Ashcroft avenues, landscaping on the Almont Drive cul-de-sac and converting the north-south alley just east of Doheny Drive to a one-way alley. The estimated cost to the developer, the Charles Company, is $250,000.
The Community Development Department also plans to study the impact of eliminating left turns from northbound Doheny Drive by drivers wanting to head west on Santa Monica Boulevard. If the study shows a positive impact, the Charles Company would be asked to pay for implementing that change.
The Community Development Department memo to the City Council notes that the Los Angeles Conservancy has filed a lawsuit arguing that the city failed to study alternatives to the project that would have allowed the preservation of the Streamline Moderne building at 9080 Santa Monica Blvd., which will be demolished to construct the Melrose Triangle project. But the memo argues that that building has not been designated as a local cultural resource and that it has been altered in various ways since its redesign in the Streamline Moderne style in 1938.
The resolution that will be presented to the Council for a vote tonight will require the Charles Company to find a way to preserve the entrance to the 9080 Santa Monica building within the project, which the developer has agreed to do.
The development will consist of three buildings containing 303,000 square feet of commercial and residential space that will sit on a plot of land bounded by Santa Monica Boulevard, Melrose Avenue and Almont Drive at the city’s border with Beverly Hills. It is viewed by its supporters as a dramatic “gateway” to West Hollywood for those traveling east from Beverly Hills.
The Council will meet at 6:30 p.m. tonight at the Council Chambers at 625 N. San Vicente Blvd., south of Santa Monica.
Past The Historic Building that will be destroyed for this are tales told over and over again by our current city councils effect on our community. 1.The zoning laws in place to limit unsustainable density were made invalid by the city council using their trump card of “Overriding considerations” There was no effort by the council members to limit the size of this. 2..The serious responsibility to be stewards of our traffic conditions is ignored by allowing this much new density on this corner. And even with the “traffic calming” brought to the table, which is three proposed traffic circles… Read more »
Dear Rick, I beg to differ with our recollection. West Hollywood was quite pleasant back when I first moved here in 1981. It was not at all the way you claim. As far as the the street widening goes, I don’t see how that improved anything with the way it was designed. I remember they tore the whole street up and for a couple of years it was horrible around here. I don’t see that it helped. The summer Olympics were held in Los Angeles 1984. I can’t recall if West Hollywood had become a city by then? West Hollywood… Read more »
@Paul You you crazy for saying the quality of life in WEHO was better before it was a city. You have your own agenda, the city is 10 times better and nicer since 1984. It used to be filled with drug dealers and hookers on every block. Don’t you recall hookers on Sunset and SMB? They have cleaned it up and widen sidewalks, hid power-lines and made the city beautiful and livable. This is progress. Santa Monica did the same, the same place you think is better then WEHO has almost the same policies in place, WEHO is only getting… Read more »
I first moved to West Hollywood in 1981. Once upon a time, West Hollywood was where you could find affordable housing. They have strict rental control to prevent landlords from raising rents to outrageous amounts. There are a lot less now but some section 8 tenants renting in West Hollywood.. There are seniors who live on fixed incomes and many people who have AIDS/HIV reside in West Hollywood. They certainly are not going out to these obscenely over priced restaurants and/or night clubs. It is not all about high rollers who have expandable income to waste money at gay bars,… Read more »
Please Alison…this isn’t directed at one class of people or any area of town. Sure…maybe the city messed up the east side with not supplying enough parking. But why should we make the same mistake twice? And stop your entitlement opinions. There are low income people on the westside and throughout West Hollywood. Some of us have been here for decades! And whats wrong with affordable, free or timed limits? We have to put up with so much from these developers…why cant we have free parking if we go to a store? You obviously are new to “LA”. Weho used… Read more »
Jonathan with his “low-income” parking, which is an insult to those of us that are truly low income. NOBODY on that side of town is low income Jonathan. You guys can afford to pay for parking just like everybody else in this town. Why should you get free or low cost parking? SaveWeHo – You also. “affordable or free” parking. Where else in this city does anybody get affordable or free parking for residents? Surely not the eastern Gateway. It gives an hour free. Doesn’t matter if you are a resident or not, and that parking garage is a disaster.… Read more »
I dont feel this project is that ill-fitting to the area. Beats having an empty lot. Is it ugly? Yea. Is it too big? Probably. Will traffic increase? Of course. But I think we have to move forward and adapt. But what we CAN do is offer better entrances/exits and add more parking to the entire structure that will benefit other local businesses. That stretch of Doheny needs more parking. How about offering the USPS a space in here with easier parking? Lure them in since we lost the San Vicente location. The Troubador could use this complex for parking… Read more »
The City Council Decides more traffic is just what we need with this project. Another example of a developer getting to use the weho monopoly board to rake in profits while the impact and quality of life of the residents is sold away from them by long term incumbents
We should also be asking that the two levels of parking being removed per staff recomendations should be added back in as “public spaces” That can be used by neighbors to the south where parking is already a concern or for other area business employees or for general business parking needs. These could be sold for a reasonable monthly fee with revenue going to city projects, other parking structures needed in the city, neighborhood beautification, or for the developer to cover any maintenance expenses of these spaces only. We could call it our “low income parking program” think of all… Read more »