The Planning Commission at a special meeting on Oct. 21 denied a development plan review and density bonus permit utilizing the state’s Housing Accountability Act Builder’s Remedy provisions for a proposed 26-story mixed-use building at 8844 Burton Way.
The vote was 4-1, with Commissioner Terri Kaplan voting against the denial of the review and permit.
The commission’s decision came following a nearly four-hour deliberation, which included public comment that at times became personal as residents suggested that commissioners were not taking their concerns seriously.
The applicant’s requests were denied on five counts, according to Commissioner Gary Ross, who summarized the reasoning behind the decision while making a motion to deny.
Ross cited an alleged violation of the California Health and Safety Code 17929, which prohibits the isolation of affordable housing units to a specific floor or area on a specific floor; an alleged lack of evidence to support the applicant’s claims that it would not be economically feasible to build affordable units on the top 19 floors; the applicant’s alleged refusal to provide evidence to support the need for transparent as opposed to opaque guardrails; health and safety concerns raised by residents during public comment, alleging that traffic created by the new development would prevent them from accessing necessary medical care at nearby Cedars-Sinai; and allegedly insufficient evidence that the Beverly Hills Fire Department is capable of addressing fires of more than 100 feet high.
It was unclear how existing law applied to some of the allegations. For example, California Health and Safety Code 17929 prohibits mixed-income multifamily structures from isolating affordable housing units “to a specific floor or an area on a specific floor.”
Affordable units in the Burton Way development would be spread throughout the bottom five floors of the building, as currently proposed.
Dave Rand, an attorney representing the applicant, told the Courier that the commission’s vote was “shocking.”
“The city is absolutely playing with fire here,” he said. “The commission had zero legal basis to deny this project, as was told to them repeatedly by their own staff and city attorney. I was shocked by the brazen disregard for the law.”
City Attorney Laurence Wiener told the Courier that “as requested, staff will prepare a resolution of denial to be brought back at the next Planning Commission meeting,” adding that the decision is subject to appeal.
The application for the Burton Way project was first submitted to the city by developer Crescent Heights in March 2024. At that time, it was proposed to be 20 stories and 223 feet tall. Earlier this year, the applicant submitted revised plans that increased the project’s height to 26 stories and just over 309 feet.
The project would include 200 residential units with 22 designated for extremely low-income and moderately low-income households. Parking spaces for 316 vehicles would be available, along with over 42,000 square feet of open space and a rooftop deck.
The commission’s vote to deny the permits came as a surprise to many involved in the project. In August, a Los Angeles Superior Court judge ordered the city to process the application for a Builder’s Remedy project on South Linden Drive after finding the city to be in violation of the state’s Housing Accountability Act and Permit Streamlining Act for having rejected the development.
That decision was expected to set a precedent for the way the city handles applications for Builder’s Remedy developments.
During public comment, resident Renee Strauss, who opposed the Burton Way development, expressed her frustration with commissioners who have said they have very little discretion about whether or not to approve Builder’s Remedy projects based on state law.
“Mr. Wolfe brought up on several occasions, as did … Mr. Milkowski, that your hands are tied … don’t let us feel as a community like we are being silenced, and our words don’t matter,” she said.
Resident Janet Fox singled out City Planner Edgar Arroyo, suggesting that city staff is at fault for all Builder’s Remedy projects in the city after not submitting a Housing Element to the state in a timely manner.
“You comment ‘our hands are tied,’ … but you don’t look at Ed Arroyo and the planning staff who failed, who were neglectful in not providing a timely compliance element,” she said.
The commission directed staff to draft a resolution memorializing their findings, which will be brought back for finalization at their next meeting on Oct. 29.
There is now a 14-day appeal period during which anyone can appeal the commission’s decision.
Rand told the Courier that his team will wait to see what happens at the Oct. 29 meeting before taking further action, although he noted that he will prepare legal analyses to present at that meeting.
Following that meeting, he said, “If they continue to disregard the law, we will appeal.” If necessary, he said, they will “one hundred percent litigate” the issue.
In other business, the commission approved a development plan review and density bonus permit for a new six-story development at 9945 Durant Drive, as well as two permits to allow rooftop restrooms and a walkway in the front yard to exceed 5 feet in width.
The project was found to be exempt from further review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The project, which will include 29 residential units, will occupy the parcel that currently houses several multifamily residential buildings at 9937, 9941 and 9945 Durant Drive. Of the 29 units, three will be reserved for very low-income households.
Commissioner Terri Kaplan commended the developer for their “thoughtful” design.
“It’s true, it’s very different from what exists,” said Kaplan. “It’s true it is somewhat—in my opinion, modestly—larger than what’s going on in the area, and as importantly, it furthers our quest to create more housing in accordance with state mandate. I think it is a positive development for our community.”
