A chunk of Echo Park now going for $2.85 million

Double lot on Sunset Boulevard is up for sale at $2.85 million

Eastside Property ECHO PARK — It’s been a few years since any new housing has been built along Sunset Boulevard in the central part of Echo Park.  The last new project, the Sunset 5 at Sunset and Portia Street, was built more than five years ago, with no other new development taking place. But, as property values and rents have risen, a double lot next to the Sunset 5 has hit the market at an asking price of $2.85 million, with the LoopNet listing promoting  it as an “ideal potential apartment, condominium or mixed-use development site.”

The the nearly 13,000-square-foot  property is currently occupied by a group of apartment units and a home, with one of the structures dating back to 1902, according to online property records.  The nearly $3 million asking price might seem steep but the listing says the property’s high-density zoning makes for a “redevelopment opportunity.” Says the listing:

Echo Park is undergoing a resurgence that rivals any in the Los Angeles area. The property is in a prime location just east of Echo Park Avenue and west of Dodger Stadium. This prime Echo Park location is walking distance to Echo Park Lake and Sunset/Alvarado.

Is this section of Sunset Boulevard ready for new homes or will it be several more years before any development takes place?


  1. There’s a beautiful old single family house and a 5 unit apartment on that property. That’s quite a few folks who will have to relocate. Sadly, this old home is not in the HPOZ for Angelino Heights which would save it from development.

    • @Alex Why is it sad that this land is not immune to development?

      Why would these shoeboxes deserve to be preserved? https://www.google.com/maps/@34.075201,-118.255074,3a,75y,15.19h,71.04t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s9ePW-hmD-QLjKjmEFvs7hA!2e0

      Why would these two structures deserve to be preserved, is there something special about them? https://www.google.com/maps/@34.075643,-118.254753,3a,53.1y,199.93h,94.5t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sdb6Hdk2rpwKoOhUkvlH6tw!2e0

      The anti development sentiment regarding properly zoned areas is astounding. I have yet to hear any explanation from a nimby like Alex why they support higher rents and lower supply in the face of rising demand in housing.

      • Alex has been swilling the anti-gentrification kool-aid.

        That being said, I am no fan of increased density, especially when that density is not near major transit (rail, really), because increased density will lead to more cars.

        I am pro-development, but anti-overdevelopment.

        • @true, I don’t think anyone wants to see la turn into any sort of manhattan type density monster, but clearly that’s not where we are headed.

          You’re not making a great case on over-development. First of all Total miles driven, especially in urban areas, has been on the decline since 2007, so congestion is not a mounting problem at all. See: http://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/updates/DOT-Miles-Traveled.php
          Ride sharing and public transport usage is way up among younger generations: http://www.advisorperspectives.com/dshort/commentaries/US-PRIG-Decline-in-Driving-in-Cities.php

          With more technology making use of underutilized resources (4 -5 empty seats per car, uber & lyft) you can bet on continued maximization of finite resources allowing for more development, more economic opportunity for businesses and their employees, more opportunity for families to own homes at affordable prices, all leading to a stronger community.

          i wish these clueless nimbys would stop with the tired, wrong arguments. If they were really truthful they would tell you how selfish they are for wanting to price out newcomers and their disdain for economic progress.

          • Thx for the feedback, but I wasn’t making a case for anything, actually.

            But, now that we’re on the topic .. you mention “tired, wrong arguments”.

            Then, you cite national vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and national estimated per capita VMT as a proxy for Los Angeles, and a measure of congestion in LA.

            The study shows national per capita VMT has dropped to 1995 levels.

            Answer this: is congestion in LA a) better b) worse c) the same as it was in 1995?

          • Great point for sure, would be very enlightening to see stats for LA rather than nation as a whole.

      • I agree we need more housing, but the new housing being built in LA isn’t the sort of housing we need. Luxury apartment buildings have been built much faster than they can be filled, but affordable housing has lagged far behind. Based on the median income of LA County, half the households are cost-burdened if their rent that is higher than $1400 per month. I’m willing to bet the existing housing stock on those lots meets that criteria and that whatever ultimately gets built there will not.

      • its sad because people currently live in those houses, and have lived there for years. If these buildings are sold for redevelopment, they will be forced out of their homes. That’s not cool.

        • that’s the cost of renting. it’s pretty clear in any rental agreement. if you are concerned about not having control of your abode, you have the option of looking to buy a house.

  2. A few transit improvements (like a DASH bus on Sunset between Echo Park Blvd and Union Stn) could go a long way towards mitigating density related congestion.

    • Yes.

      Its hard to get downtown from Echo Park on the Dash. And the routes are very circuitous so it takes forever.

    • What about the 2 / the 4 / the 704? Plenty of transit from around that corner to downtown or union station already (although there ought to be another line to Union Station than the 704…)

      • The 2 and 4 don’t go to union station, you have to take a second bus there making it really complicated to get to the gold line, flyaway, etc. The 704 goes directly there but it’s an express line with a limited schedule. The latest bus is around 8pm weekdays and even earlier on weekends and holidays.

    • How about city buses that don’t make people captive audiences to loud, shrill television commercials? Los Angeles, moronic and venal to the end

  3. If you can’t build on Sunset, where exactly CAN you build?

  4. I’m not anti development at all. I happen to admire and am a fan of historical buildings like the single family home on this lot. When the new Library was built on Sunset many years ago, there was a beautiful old four-plex that was moved from the lot down the street to Angelino Heights where is sits now, fully renovated and lived in. Los Angeles is not known for it’s love and respect for architecture. If it weren’t for the folks that fought for historical zones, a good number of historical buildings in LA would be gone. My point is, without HPOZ rules, developers can generally tear down what they want and I do not think this is good for LA on the whole. Once again, I am not anti development, I am pro smart development.

    • understood alex, didn’t mean to jump on ya hard. but there is a limit on what is considered historical and for good reason otherwise progress will be stifled. I fail to see what would be special about these structures that would even deserve mention here…

  5. And the likelihood a developer is going to pay $2.85 million for the property and build affordable housing for middle class non-tech types? Zero.

    • why would you expect more for less money? Where does that ever happen? What new housing will do is provide more supply, and those tech dudes willing to spend big bucks on a nice, new apartment will move in here, and they won’t be competing with those looking for more affordable places, meaning those places will stay affordable. get it?

  6. Sunset 5 right next to this lot is a joke…they have their parking entrance off the stinky dusty alley behind Sunset, and I always see a Bentley pulling into this building. That’s what Echo Park is turning into!

  7. I live on sunset next to guisados . I will have to move cuz they sold the property to a developer. He wants to build apartments there . I been living there for 22years it’s very sad

Post a Comment

Please keep your comments civil and on topic and refrain from personal attacks. The moderator reserves the right to edit or delete any comments. The Eastsider's Terms of Use and Privacy Policy apply to comments submitted by readers. Required fields are marked *