Does the City Need a Bookend?

A 34-story, 400-foot-tall condominium/mixed-use project with 249 residential units has been proposed for 8300 Wilshire at the far eastern boundary of Beverly Hills, replacing a single-story strip mall now at that location.

This is a major project, characterized by the developer as one that will provide an eastern gateway “bookend” to pair with the One Beverly Hills western gateway bookend now under construction. Accordingly, it is called “The Eastern.”

Given its size and complexity, I thought it would be useful to provide a detailed description and articulate the pros and cons as I see them now.

[SPOILER ALERT: given the unknowns and variables and the likelihood of some changes, I cannot and should not now say whether I am for or against it. This will undoubtedly change but for now I shall endeavor to maintain neutrality.]

⸻

What is The Eastern?

The building is proposed just west of the southwest corner of Wilshire and San Vicente. The net square footage of the property is 38,113 sq ft, currently occupied by a small strip mall called the Landmark Center. It is owned by Antignas Wilco LLC and Lanier Too LLC, and the applicant is MPLA Wilshire LLC.

The project is located in the City’s Mixed Use Overlay Zone, which extends along Wilshire Blvd from Rexford on the west to the City’s eastern border and includes parts of La Cienega Blvd, Robertson Blvd, and Olympic Blvd.

The proposal includes:

• Ground floor retail

• 473 parking spaces (below and above grade)

• 249 residential units:

• 11 “affordable” apartments for very low income residents

• 11 “affordable” apartments for moderate income residents

• 227 market rate condominium units

• Total size: 434,780 sq ft, including 10,174 sq ft for restaurants

The condos will average ~1,400 sq ft, smaller than other new Beverly Hills condos. Estimated average sale price: $3M. Maximum monthly rents for affordable apartments depend on income category:

• Very low income (2-bed, 3-person household): ~$1,105/mo (less utilities)

• Moderate income (2-bed, 3-person household): ~$2,431/mo (less utilities)

⸻

What are the paths to Beverly Hills land use entitlements?

There are four potential paths: By Right, Builder’s Remedy, State Density Bonus, and Specific Plan. Here’s a simplified summary:

By Right:

Fully compliant with City zoning/building rules — no discretionary review. Used mostly for single-family homes. Not applicable here.

Builder’s Remedy:

For applications submitted before adoption of a General Plan Housing Element. Must include at least 20% affordable units (now reduced to 15%). For 249 units, that’s 50 units at 20% or 38 at 15% — much more than the 22 proposed. The developer did not choose this route.

State Density Bonus:

Provides bonuses for projects with affordable units.

• Base density: 1 unit per 550 sq ft → 38,113 ÷ 550 = ~70 units.

• With bonuses: up to 140 units + more via waivers/concessions.

• Here, the applicant aims to boost this to 249 units and a height of 400’ with waivers.

• City Inclusionary Housing Ordinance requires 10% low-income units: so 25 units needed for 249 units — but only 11 low-income units proposed.

Specific Plan:

Allows alteration of zoning/density/height/etc. City Council must find that public interest requires the change. Usually includes a Development Agreement with a large “public benefit” fee.

Example: One Beverly Hills paid $100 million to the City. A Specific Plan can be overturned by Referendum (as happened with Cheval Blanc).

⸻

Commissioners’ Reactions

Alan Block:

“I don’t believe a 400-foot, 34-story structure is appropriate on this small parcel of land. One Beverly Hills had much more land and public benefit including 3 acres of park-like space. The Eastern offers less than 10% affordable units — not enough.”

Lori Greene Gordon:

“I am concerned about the precedent.”

Andy Licht:

“A 34-story building here would disrupt the city’s character, overwhelm infrastructure, and compromise its unique, low-rise charm.”

Joe Shooshani:

“We must meet RHNA quotas. The location is suitable, far enough from the core. I support redesignating east of La Cienega for high-rises (15+ stories). This sacrifice benefits the city overall, while preserving other neighborhoods.”

⸻

Advantages & Disadvantages

Potential Advantages:

• A beautiful building and eastern gateway.

• Offers ample parking (current law can’t require any).

• Proximity to Metro stations (La Cienega/Wilshire: 0.3 mi; Fairfax/Wilshire: 0.7 mi).

• 22 affordable units — more than any other project to date.

• Revitalizes the city’s eastern edge.

• Supports the Connect Beverly Hills walkability plan.

• Via a Development Agreement, could generate significant funds for the City.

Potential Disadvantages:

• Would be the tallest building in Beverly Hills; could overshadow nearby areas.

• Site is earmarked in the Housing Element for up to 69 affordable units — but only 22 are planned → shortfall of 47.

• Adds traffic to an already congested corridor.

• Sets a precedent: If this Density Bonus/waiver combo allows a 400’ tower with only 22 affordable units, how can the City deny similar proposals? Could create a new “Wilshire Corridor” from Rexford to San Vicente.

⸻

Final Thought

So, that’s a lot to consider.

What do you think?