East Hollywood Target Plan Headed to Central Area Planning Commission

The store is proposed for the corner of Sunset and Western.

Plans for a Target shopping center on the corner of Sunset Boulevard and Western Avenue are moving along for consideration by the Central Area Planning Commission Tuesday, points out Hollywood Unbound.

The panel will review the project's environmental impact report in which the proposal calls for a 163,862-square-foot store with an additional 30,887-square feet for smaller retail spaces in a three-level building.

The city's planning department recommends the  approval with some changes including that Target build up to a maximum height of 74 feet rather than Target's request of 84 feet.

View the complete report on the city's website.

According to the report, the city has on file five letters in support of the project from residents. Two with the following points:

  • The new store will positively impact this neighborhood, and will transform this corner. This corner has slid into decay because nothing has been allowed to be constructed due to opposition of people who do not live in the neighborhood.
  • Currently people have to drive to other cities to shop at Target. This new store will be more convenient and will encourage people to take transit. This site is currently dilapidated and vacant. A new Target will be a major improvement to the area and would be a catalyst for change.

The Central Area Planning Commission will meet Tuesday at City Hall, 10th Floor, 200 N. Spring St. at 4:30 p.m.

ruth August 13, 2012 at 04:25 PM
Why does Patch only quote the PRO side of the Target story? How about some 'fair and balanced ' reporting. How about this is Garcetti's plan (again!) for taller taller and more massive than originally proposed. How many above ground levels of parking for this monster?? More of his constant chipping away at Hollywood with his UPZONING , all over town..HIS Nightmare VISION..the Horrible Garcetti Hollywood Community Plan, while people FLEE in droves (so much for his and city planning lies about the increases in Hollywood population!)..and next up..his PRO SUPER GRAPHICS covering buildings all over town..the Garctetti VISION for Hollywood. Why don't they cover buildings with super graphics and build this super sized Target in his sleepy little corner of town? Never will happen. Sensible Developments will never happen as long as the little dictator, Garcetti, so beholdin to developers, is running the show.
Steven W August 13, 2012 at 04:44 PM
The Hollywood Studio District Neighborhood Council has taken a position on this project with several recommendations. For a copy of our letter submitted to both Council Member, Eric Garcetti and Planning Department, please email <chair@hsdc.org>.
Lindsey Baguio (Editor) August 13, 2012 at 04:48 PM
Hi Ruth, The intention of this post was to get out the word that the planning commission is considering the EIR tomorrow. It is by no means an in-depth report of the project. If there were people who wrote letters in opposition of the project, I would have included that as well. Thanks for reading!
Chandler Poling August 13, 2012 at 05:39 PM
I used to live in this area (Fountain/Western to be exact) and now live a little more West but would still consider this area heavily trafficked by myself. I am in total support of this structure and welcome taller buildings in the Hollywood area.
Lynn Shepodd August 13, 2012 at 06:12 PM
It will be a needed improvement for an ugly, virtually, dead spot in the city. This is a city. It must provide shopping for people. As long as Target chips in generously for neighborhood and infrastructure improvements and has ample parking, I support it being there. I shop at Food For Less on the other corner and always shake my head as to why the dead corner has languished so long. Good to know there is a plan.
Steven W August 13, 2012 at 08:50 PM
I also support planned growth along both Sunset & Hollywood Boulevards, allowing for an increase in density in those areas makes sense and is good planning. We are going to grow and I am grateful we now have the Hollywood Community Plan that allows growth to occur in those corridors. I also support below grade parking in all major projects, such as Target.
Steven W August 13, 2012 at 09:05 PM
Part 1 I thought about this long and hard, putting myself in Target's shoes. I consulted with a few developer colleagues and thought the following analysis might be helpful? a) Parking above ground costs approx $20,000 per space. Parking below grade will cost approx $10,000 per space more, for the 1st subterranean level (because you do not hit water at that depth). b) We do not know how many parking spaces per level Target has plans to provide per above ground level. However, we do know that an average parking space is calculated at 400 sq ft per space (this includes 200 sq ft for the actual space and another 200 sq ft as a pro rata share for drive aisles, drive ways, etc). We also know that the lot is approx 160,000 sq ft. assuming that the useable area after set backs, is 136,000 sq ft, Target will provide approx 340 spaces per above ground (136,000 sq ft divided by 400 sq ft). c) If Target would put only 1 level below grade, it would increase their construction costs by approximately $3,400,000 (340 parking spaces x $10,000 each) d) Target's construction costs are estimated to be approx: $38,100,000, as follows: 340 spaces per level x 2 above ground levels (at $20,000 per space) = $13,600.000 :140,000 sq ft Store on top level at $175 / sq ft = $24,500,000 e) Therefore, if Target were to make one of the 2 parking levels below grade, it would increase their construction costs by approx 9%. This is an acceptable variance in construction cost overruns.
Steven W August 13, 2012 at 09:06 PM
Part 2 f) Additionally, the following observations: 1) 9% is approx 1 year of carry on the project, and a small price to pay for Target to get permission to get the project started right away - rather than suffer the delays of debating the issue. 2) At a 6% cost of money for Target, the annual cost of the $3,400,000 would be $ 204,000 per year ; and this would have the effect of increasing their occupancy cost or "rent" by $1.46 per sq ft per year of $.12 Cents per sq ft per month - this is not a lot for any tenant. 3) This $12 Cents per sq ft does not seem like a lot to preserve the view corridor for the neighborhood and assist with SNAP compliance. This solution would could solve so many issues and allow Target to go full steam ahead with BROAD support from the community. I am still hopeful that we can persuade Target to respond to this reasonable request from the community.
george August 14, 2012 at 12:33 AM
Convenience for a growing materialistic population comes at a big cost to our environment, wwe need a shift in direction in this country, and a local gov't that will initiate eco-friendly packaging in our restaurants and businesses, food and product distributors need to come up with eco packaging as well, we can send a spacecraft to Mars but we can't solve our waste problem..
george August 14, 2012 at 12:39 AM
Wow, really impressed with all your facts and figures, can only imagine your potential as an environmentalist, the observations of the waste we create as a society needs to be addressed. You could make change happen, I know it.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something