Mid City West Council Takes Up Proposed La Cienega Project on Tuesday

stark properties, west hollywood west residents association, mid city west community council
Solstice building proposed for 431 N. La Cienega Blvd.

L.A.’s Mid City West Community Council’s Planning and Land Use Committee has on its agenda for Tuesday a discussion of a proposed 56-foot high building on La Cienega Boulevard that has drawn opposition from adjacent homeowners in West Hollywood.

The building, a project of Stark Properties, an Ohio-based developer, would replace Mikey’s Car Wash at 431 N. La Cienega Blvd. Stark proposes to call it the “Solstice.”

Stark originally had proposed a six-story building with 87 apartments. That building would have been just under 67 feet high, a substantial increase over the 45-foot height currently authorized by the City of Los Angeles’ zoning law for that property. The ground floor of the building would have almost 3,000 square feet of commercial space, and there would be two levels of underground parking.

Stark’s newest plan calls for approximately 72 apartment units with 70 underground parking spaces in one level. The project would include eight units for very-low income renters. The building would be 56 feet high.

Stark also has proposed eliminating the five-foot public right away along Westmount Drive that currently is required by the City of Los Angeles. And it wants to eliminate the required 18-foot setback for a portion of the rear of the building.

The meeting will take place at 6:30 p.m. Tuesday at the auditorium at the headquarters of the L.A. Chapter of the National Council of Jewish Women, which is at 543 N. Fairfax Ave., Los Angeles.

The West Hollywood West Residents Association has alerted its members to the meeting, some of whom are expected to show up to speak about their concerns about the building’s height given its location right behind residences on Westmount Drive in West Hollywood. In August the WHWRA asked residents to ask the West Hollywood City Council to push the Los Angeles City Council for an environmental impact review of the project.

Stark Enterprises is said to have bought the property for $21.25 million, or about $652 a square foot, one of the most expensive property deals on a square foot basis in the area.

“The precedent that this project may set is of particular concern to the residents of Westmount and Westbourne Drives,” said an email from WHWRA. “Those concerns may have future impact on other WHW homes that abut commercial corridors. “


8 Comments
  1. There is no logical or appropriate reason this “scare piece” story is in WeHoVille. Henry Scott has censored and removed many comments I maid pointing out a new condo by Beverly Center is too tall. He removed it because that was n LA not.weho, so it was pulled from a story Henry Scott wrote about that same condo project.inLA and nowhere near the boarders of WeHo.

    This blog is a city contrived blog designed to look like a valid and legitimate news source WeHo residents can turn to to learn about WeHo issues. All the warning stories are for projects outside of WeHo and talk in detail of Meister organize a protest with signs to protect WeHo, but only projects outside WeHo while actively pushing the ongoing really destructive mega structures going up in WeHo.

    ALSO it is a close secret exactly where, when and how many more will be the final total LINING SMB. THIS IS JUST BELLS AND WHISTLES TO DISTRACT CONCERNED RESIDENTS AND APPEAR MEISTER CARES AND IS I. THE STREET PROTESTING ONLY LA PROJECTS.

    HENRY SCOTT HAS CENSORED SO MANY FACT BASED COMMENTS I’VE MADE EXPOSING MANY OF THE CORRUPT ACTIONS OF THE CITY INVOLVING HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ($700,000 just to gate the two new dog parks in a brand new 200 million redo of tiny WeHo Park. Don’t fall for the distractions WeHoVille writes as if news and know Henry Scott has removed so many comments based on fact and personal experience that would make residents question the fraud going on with the secret hundreds of millions of dollars passing through city hall for what, Robogarage where the cost per spot is more than 10times the cost of normal parking garages.

  2. This is a WeHo city stunt. The project issue not the city of WeHo. Regardless of design, this project is shorter smaller and less impactful WeHo, it’s residents and all than each and all of the much taller larger and on a much more congested portion of Law Cienega. Thanks all the finished WeHo giant PRISON BLOCK projects, those under construction and all the plans after getting rezoning the length of SMB through WeHo. About 75 to 80% of the entire length of SMB has zoning and plans to build an almost seamless tunnel of worse city destroying projects. Meister made a fuss over the Geary Project on sunset OUTSIDE OF WEHO with zero.power to influence what LA DOES. MEANWHILE, she and the rest created the new WeHo zoning and I’ve never heard a concerned peep from our elected council for negative impacts our own huger and in great number grow destroying the entire city and Soo negatively impacting all WeHo residents terribly.

  3. The article states this, but if anyone is unclear, this project is adjacent to West Hollywood, not in West Hollywood, and this is under the jurisdiction of the city of Los Angeles. It has impact on West Hollywood but the city government and its residents have no say in the decision although likely are permitted to comment at this hearing.

  4. THE SOLSTICE, with its euphamistic name, seems designed as a contribution to the current monotone architectural trend of structures devoid of human element, interest and design integrity. A virtual back stop to a charming residential community to its west and an uninspiring facade to the streetscape of La Cienega. Despite the elements mentioned by other commenters, this project is a lazy attempt to box a revenue stream with little respect to a sense of place and nothing to distinguish itself from the the endless CAD examples now in proliferation.

    The architectural legacy for this era, excepting few major projects, does not approach a passing grade.

  5. It is a fallacy that low income persons do not have cars. There should be a parking space for every apartment!

  6. Sad to see the car wash go. But for this project, parking needs to be doubled. 70 spaces for 72 apartments? Get real. Every apartment will have at least 2-3 people in them (to afford the rent). And then another level of parking for commercial space. 70 seems hardly enough. I suspect they will also use the parking for nighttime paid parking once the stores closes. I do feel bad for the small homes right behind it that will have a towering building behind them.

  7. Agree on parking! And can we do away with “compact” spaces in West Hollywood??
    Nobody fits in them so people park over the lines with cars taking up two spaces. It’s a cheap trick/loophole to come up with more spaces and it doesn’t work in practice!

  8. There should be one parting place for EACH and EVERY apartment PLUS spaces for commercial sites, no waivers provided or sold. PARKING for commercial clients too. DO NOT BACK AWAY from what is truly required please.

Comments are closed.