Friday, October 28, 2016

Developer planning multi story apartment building for Silver Lake [updated]

Rendering of proposed apartment building | Silver Lake Neighborhood Council

SILVER LAKE —  A developer is proposing to demolish a cluster of one-story buildings on Griffith Park Boulevard to construct a 22-unit apartment complex. The building, located on a lot that stretches between Griffith Park Boulevard and Hyperion Avenue, would rise three stories above a partially underground parking garage  at 2409 Griffith Park Boulevard.  The Eastsider has contacted Canfield Development for details.

The proposed building would be too high in an area where most adjacent homes and commercial buildings are only one or two stories high, said one Silver Lake resident. It’s “incredibly inappropriate” to have the building loom over one-story homes and apartments next door, said the Silver Lake woman.

A representative of Canfield, which is seeking a zoning variance to build the apartments, is scheduled to discuss the project  during the neighborhood council’s Urban Design & Preservation Advisory Committee on Wednesday, June 11 at 6:30 p.m. The meeting is open to the public.

* Update:  A previous version of this story cited a Planning Department summary that described the project as four stories of apartments over one level of parking. But Brian Gelt,  vice president for Development & Construction at Canfield, said the actual plans call for three stories of housing over one level of semi-subterranean parking. “Our plans or elevations are preliminary at this point and we wanted to wait to give them out until we heard the feedback of the community,”  he said.

Eastsider Advertising


  1. I wish they would locate these sorts of residential buildings on Sunset or Santa Monica (especially those ones that have been held up for years), but at least this location is walking distance to lots of restaurants and groceries, and some of the residents may have convenient bicycle commutes. And most importantly, it’s adding more residences in the neighborhood without contributing to any more traffic on the winding streets in the hills.

    • Not contributing any more traffic? Are you nuts? No matter what you would like to dream, all those people will be driving cars. You will be hard pressed to find much of anyone who pays the price those units will rent for who is going to ride the bus or ride a bike everywhere. They will be in cars, expensive cars.

      Also, the developer might want to say it is only three stories, but I have eyes, and that rendering from the developer is definitely a rendering of four stories.

      This is way out of line for any residential area of one and two story residences, as are all the small lot subdivisions on residential streets around here. These together have already made great inroads to ruining this area. And they have served only to skyrocket housing prices astronomically, not lower them, because developers are making unconscionable amounts of money to tear down and build huge, and are willing to bid way beyond anything any owner-occupant could ever pay.

      • Tim, take a chill pill! Kenny clearly said “adding more residences in the neighborhood without contributing to any more traffic on the winding streets in the hills.” Note, he said ON_THE_WINDING_STREETS_IN_THE_HILLS. He did not say they wouldn’t contribute to any more traffic, period. He said the winding streets in the hills are not impacted with traffic from developments on Sunset and Santa Monica.

      • An up to 10-unit small lot would be much more appropriate here.

    • @Kenny: +1

  2. Fallopia Simms

    What is the threshold that activates “need to be close to transit”, I’m not sure. But, if we’re really serious about smart growth this isn’t in that spirit. This needs to be placed close to transit, hell I’ll even take a very active bus line. But give me something to argue the case for density. Not placed in the most backwards and peripheral full-on suburban end of Silver Lake. Calm Hyperion or road diet it before doing this. But please give me something to argue with.

  3. Fallopia Simms

    Kyle have you checked out the frequency of the nearest bus line which happens to be the 175?

    This is not in the spirit of sustainable nor smart growth. Yes, we should build as dense as possible along Sunset/Santa Monica where we have the 2 (night owl service), 4 (24-hour service!), the 704 (rapid skip-stop service) and lax parking requirements in these “transit zones” as well. But back off in what is basically Glendale adjacent? If Hyperion would be put on a road-diet and bike lanes installed with pedestrian enhancements I may feel more apt to go along with this. But this will ONLY be a car-centric development and that’s what I’d like to see us move away from. We can’t even realistically ask for less parking.

    • “Bike lanes” for WHOM?!? The bike lane on Rowena is emptiest when it’s supposed to be used the most during rush hour. I know because I walk or drive through there on a regular basis. The bike-lane lobby is an agenda without a demand. This entire strategy of shaming drivers into “dieting”(?!) is ass-backwards. Promote cycling, cultivate the culture, and perhaps then you’ll have an authentic need and demand. Not a patronizing agenda based on knowing what’s good for the rest of us, whether we like it or not.

      • Bravo! Rowena is a disaster. Cars, motorcycles & scooters are passing on the right in the bike lanes causing accidents, minor so far.

      • It wasn’t just for bikes that Rowena had to go on a diet. Cars were irresponsible as usual. Speeding in a school zone. Treating a neighborhood street as just another cut-through be damned the people and businesses interacting with it. And worse, hitting and killing pedestrians. You must be regulated. The corporate takeover by the auto, oil and rubber industries of the city with the largest rail system on the planet is coming to an end. Road diets now! Road diets forever!

    • I probably should read the whole thread before commenting, hehe…

  4. Developers are always just after $$$. They typically don’t care about the neighborhood in which they are building. I agree that the rendering appears to be four stories which is way too high for that neighborhood. Griffith park has a lot of single story homes. It is a very residential street and not very commercial. Hyperion is more commercial but the businesses tend to be 1 or 2 story. This should at the very least be limited to 3 stories.

  5. Canfield Development is seeking zoning variances from the City of Los Angeles Department of Planning in order to build a 33,000 square-foot, 55-foot high residential building in Silver Lake, on a building site that spreads across two different zones between Hyperion Ave. and Griffith Park Blvd.
    Hyperion is a C2 or “commercial” zone. Griffith Park is an RD2 or “reduced density” zone.

    If granted, the proposed variances would result in a building 83% taller than the current zoning permits in the Hyperion zone along with 233% greater density (3.3 times the number of units) than allowed by the zoning in the “reduced density” zone. Additionally, the developers are asking for a variance to build 67% more square footage than the current zoning permits in the Hyperion zone.

    There is nothing preventing Canfield from building structures that conform to current zoning regulations and they have not presented any legitimate arguments as to why these variances are necessary.

    I attended the zoning hearing on Wednesday September 17, 2014.
    I oppose approving variances for the proposed development by Canfield on Hyperion Ave./Griffith Park Blvd.
    I welcome development of the property.
    It is my opinion that a building of the style and size that Canfield proposes is wrong for the character of Silver Lake that has made it one of the most desirable neighborhoods in the United States. Thank goodness appropriate zoning is in place.
    After becoming aware of the proposed development, I attended and spoke at the SLNC UD&P and Governing Board meetings. I came away from these meetings extremely disappointed. I feel the SLNC does not accurately represent the neighborhood by endorsing this project. To confirm this and garner support, just before the zoning hearing I canvassed the East side of Griffith Park Blvd. within 500 feet of the site and found 100% of residents (16 signatures) who opened their doors to speak to me opposed granting variances for the project and signed a written petition. Many residents said neighbors on the West side of the Griffith Park Blvd. were upset about the development, but I haven’t had time to canvass there yet. I also started a change.org petition and invited some Silver Lake people I knew to sign and spread the word. Momentum is building on this petition, which currently has 138 supporters:

    Please go to my change.org petition and show your objection to granting variances for this project, and email [email protected] and [email protected] to voice objection because we only have 1 week from the zoning hearing that happened on the 17th to do this.

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 *