232 Tower Drive project

The appellant argued builder's remedy law unfairly punishes Carthay Circle residents for Beverly Hills' housing element failure, that AB 130's CEQA exemption should not apply retroactively, and that a traffic engineer's report documents unmitigable health and safety impacts.

The applicant's land use attorney called it a 'baby builder's remedy project' within half a mile of the D-Line with 20 percent affordable units, argued the AB 130 CEQA exemption plainly applies, and later offered to revisit adding parking in exchange for a continuance.

A Carthay Circle resident who supports transit-oriented development in principle but argued Tower Drive is too tiny a street for this project, citing parking, safety near the park, and the high water table at the nearby intersection.

A former and current Tower Drive resident worried about construction noise and danger for the adjacent two-story building, the loss of the street's village character, and noted the applicant was told residents can't get parking permits.

Carthay Circle Neighborhood Association board member urged the council to grant the appeal, calling the massing out of scale and warning of combined impacts with the 8300 Wilshire tower; asked that construction trucks be barred from cutting through Carthay Circle.

A third-generation Schumacher Drive resident behind the project argued 55 units against 13 parking spots will bring circling, distracted drivers, endangering children near the park.

A Tower Drive resident of ten years called the 13-space parking plan 'outrageous' and urged the council to reject the project in its current form, noting elderly and infirm neighbors would suffer.

A 60-year Tower Drive property owner tallied an existing 150-space parking shortfall on the street and said the 8300 Wilshire project's only entrance is on Tower Drive, making the intersection dangerous.

Argued the city could have prevented builder's remedy exposure by certifying its housing element on time like other cities did by 2022, and said the appellant's traffic report alone justifies denial.

A physician and 25-year resident said a 55-unit building with 13 spaces will delay physicians, nurses, and first responders on streets with no parking capacity left, affecting patient outcomes.

A 23-year Tower Drive resident described finding only one open spot at 5:50 p.m. among 62 spaces and pleaded with the council to visit the street, saying the area is saturated and residents feel ignored.

A 22-year Tower Drive resident who loves the street's village character urged the council not to permit the eight-story building, noting visitors won't use the subway.

A caller who argued the HAA still permits denial on quantifiable adverse impacts and said the strongest argument is the project's adjacency to the Carthay Circle HPOZ in a separate jurisdiction, urging the council to fight as if it were their own street.