Issuu on Google+


Millennium Hollywood Community Response Matrix Source The Dell

2 | Millenium Hollywood

Factual

Non Factual

MHP Response (JN)

Increasing the present zoning from a 4.5:1 ratio to a 6:1 ratio would allow the developer to increase the project size from 825,000 SF to 1.1 Million SF

A 4.5:1 ratio allows us to develop 875,228 sf. Moving to a 6:1 ratio would allow 1,166,970 sf. This increase of nearly 291,742 sf represents the opportunity to provide an additional 164 dwelling units and nearly 300 permanent new jobs under the plan submitted for the base entitlement.

Allowing a reduction in the City’s parking requirement for the proposed 35,000 SF health club from 10-spaces/1000 to 2-spaces/1000. The reduction in parking spaces would have 280 health club users looking for parking on Hollywood’s streets.

While the Project is being designed with code required parking based upon a shared parking scenario, it is also being developed to meet demand. Additionally, the Project will supplement the program with valet parking. Anyone trying to park in the Project will not be turned away to public street parking.

The Community Redevelopment Agency’s development requirements were put in place to maintain Hollywood’s historic core and [requires] redevelopment to enhance and complement existing development and the livability of the surrounding residential communities. Allowing Millennium/ Argent to eliminate their development’s adherence to the CRA guidelines creates a massive project totally out of scale with the Hollywood area.

The Project is compatible with the Community Redevelopment Agency’s guidelines as set forth in the Hollywood Redevelopment Plan, as analyzed in the Draft EIR. By developing density and height outside the historic core and focusing height and density in specific corridors, Hollywood will achieve enhanced liveability and protection of the historic district. Further, it is widely viewed that development even with high density or substantial height often enhances the smaller scale historic development. There are many examples of this all over the world, including here in Los Angeles (i.e., Downtown library building).


Millennium Hollywood Community Response Matrix Source

Factual

Non Factual

MHP Response (JN)

The Dell and Hollywoodland emails

The plan currently offers no mitigation for fire, roads and emergency service.

Information regarding the Project has been reviewed by the fire department and the police department. Both departments submitted written correspondence regarding the Project and mitigation measures are included regarding fire, police, and emergency services to the satisfaction of the departments.

The Dell and Hollywoodland emails

The Plan sets a precedent under which similar developments can [line] all major Hollywood boulevards [with tall buildings]. The new Hollywood Community Plan is allowing buildings several times higher than anything that is currently there and there are no height restrictions pending for the Vine St. corridor.

There have never been specific height restrictions other than through limitations on floor area ratio (FAR). The allowable FAR for the site has remained the same in all other community plans to date. Additionally, there are very few large sites available within the Vine and Sunset corridors that could allow buildings of significant height to be developed. Currently it is believed that there are less than five properties to build any project of significant height along Vine Street between Fountain and Yucca. Finally, the adopted height limits under the new Hollywood Plan would prevent development from creating a “picket fence� effect in the Historic District.

The Dell and Hollywoodland emails

There are also no current plans to upgrade electrical, sewer or any other infrastructure in regards to this project or any other developments in Hollywood.

We have obtained Will Serve letters from utility providers. No infrastructure deficiencies were identified.

3 | Millenium Hollywood


Millennium Hollywood Community Response Matrix Source

Factual

Non Factual

MHP Response (JN)

The Dell and Hollywoodland emails

The towers will obscure all view from the hills and surrounding area of the Capitol Records building and all views of the hills from the Vine St. corridor.

Information regarding the Project has been The proposed tower locations for the Project are south of the Capitol Records building, thereby not obscuring the views from the hills of Capitol Records. The Project is designed to protect existing view corridors of the Capitol Records building from recognized and valued view corridors. As for the views of the hills from Vine Street, these views are usually pedestrian oriented and are periodic and partial as the pedestrian moves along Vine Street. In addition, the existing urban setting provides both occasional open views, as well as obstructed views of the hills and the Hollywood sign. However, from all perspectives, the development standards would limit the tower to very narrow configurations to minimize obstruction either of the hills or from the hills.

Hollywoodland

When the Hollywood Community Plan was passed, the City Council had the opportunity to amend it before they voted and include Vine St. ‘Height Limits’ in The HCP. Cahuenga to Vine were not included in the Hollywood Community Plan with regards to Height Limits. So the city has allowed Unlimited Heights there. City Council did not amend it. 

There have never been specific height restrictions other than through limitations on floor area ratio (FAR). The allowable FAR for the site has remained the same in all other community plans to date. Additionally, there are very few large sites available within the Vine and Sunset corridors that could allow buildings of significant height to be developed. Currently it is believed that there are less than five properties to build any project of significant height along Vine Street between Fountain and Yucca. Finally, the adopted height limits under the new Hollywood Plan would prevent development from creating a “picket fence” effect in the Historic District.

4 | Millenium Hollywood


Millennium Hollywood Community Response Matrix Source Whitley Heights

Whitley Heights

5 | Millenium Hollywood

Factual

Non Factual

MHP Response (JN)

Renee Weitzer, TLB office, was at the Hollywood Hills West Plum Committee meeting where Millennium Rep made a presentation and she heard/witnessed all of the stakeholders’ and HHWNC Board members’ reasons for opposing the project.

Ms. Weitzer’s primary concern was whether the RDA would be providing funding to the Project. We indicated that the answer was no - no RDA funding was requested. Ms. Weitzer acknowledged project concerns regarding height, traffic, public infrastructure, and community benefits. The Project team has and continues to be vigilant in trying to address all of these concerns. While we understand we cannot satisfy everyone, we will strive to do so in our ongoing dialogue with community stakeholders.

Excerpts that were read from Millennium’s traffic study, which were so shocking the presenter was left speechless and could not answer most of the questions asked about what it included or DID NOT include. It was referred to as ‘bogus’ by the committee and unacceptable.

The characterization of this meeting is highly inaccurate. The representative presenting the material not only discussed the intersection mitigation measures that were included in the Draft EIR, but also those which were not included as a result of them being rejected by the Department of Transportation (DOT). The presenter additionally discussed the Draft EIR traffic study adopted by the DOT.

We intend to stay on top of LaBonge about this. To remind him of his speech opposing these heights at the City Council Hearing.

Millennium respects and encourages anyone from the community to voice their opinions. We have and continue to work with the public to discuss design issues and community benefits to ensure that any impacts of the Project will be diminished.


Millennium Hollywood Community Response Matrix Source

Factual

Non Factual

MHP Response (JN)

HUNC Extension Letter

HUNC only just received the DEIR, which is sizable in length and heavy on details, in early November.

Extension Letter

It is very difficult to respond to a project that does not include a specific proposal, but instead a matrix of options that range between FARs of 4.5 to 6. HUNC has gone on record opposing any kind of skyscraper, and would prefer lower heights.

the proposed Project and its supporting EIR, that complexity is offset by the fact that the public is given assurance about the magnitude and range of the Project. This is not typical of developers. In fact, the developer’s contractual obligations substantially eliminate the ability of the developer to change the Project without additional public review.

Reference was made at our Board meeting by a Millennium representative to community benefits, but these are to be negotiated between the developer and the City, which make it difficult for our Board to see what the final package might be for the project.

Members of the public have the ability to comment on community benefits. Additionally, Millennium has met and will continue to meet with community groups to discuss issues that each community may have with the development as well as what additional benefits, if any, may be provided to address those issues.

We are underwhelmed by what we have heard, showers for bike riders for example, and curious whether the City will ask for tangible improvements that will help mitigate not just the impact that the project will have on the intersections deemed by a traffic consultant to be impacted, but more generally across Hollywood to help improve overall mobility.

6 | Millenium Hollywood

DEIR HAND DELIVERED TO HUNC ON 10/25/2012

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) allows for two time periods depending on the scope of the project for public review. For standard projects, a 30-day review is provided. For substantial projects, a 45-day review is provided. This EIR is consistent with other projects in the area and in compliance with CEQA.


Millennium Hollywood Community Response Matrix Source

Factual Given how long we have waited to engage in this conversation and how incomplete and at the same time overwhelming the information about this project is, we ask for an extended Public Comment period so that we and other interested community groups can fully consider the potential impact to local small businesses and residents.

7 | Millenium Hollywood

Non Factual MHP has been engaged with HUNC since 2007 meeting with their PLUM committee 2 or 3 times a year; monthly in recent years

MHP Response (JN) Millennium has been in discussions with community members since 2007, with hundreds, even thousands of communications having been made to and with community stakeholders. We continue to maintain these relationships and welcome any further communication.


info@millenniumhollywood.net 1680 North Vine Street, Suite 1000. Hollywood, CA 90028


Millennium Hollywood Fact & Fiction Brochure