A building at 9268 W. Third Street, which is being considered as a location for future affordable housing, was previously the offices of indie film company Lakeshore Entertainment. (photo by Joey Waldinger)

In 1987, the nonprofit Menorah Housing Foundation built an affordable senior housing facility at 225 N. Crescent Drive in Beverly Hills. Affordable units have since been included in new projects, but thirty-six years later, it remains the city’s only large-scale affordable housing development. Mayor Julian Gold and Councilman John Mirisch, who serve on the ad-hoc affordable housing subcommittee, are hopeful that will soon change.

In April 2022, subcommittee consultants released a request for affordable housing proposals on city-owned properties, garnering 27 submissions from 13 developers, real property development manager Logan Phillippo said. The City Council discussed three of the proposals during a closed session on June 27.

“Senior affordable housing has been an ongoing discussion for quite a while, and we’ve taken a number of steps along the way,” Gold said. “And what we’re going to do [at the closed session] is the next step in that conversation.”

The council is considering three proposals at 9268-9298 W. Third Street, and two at 330-346 Foothill Road, Phillippo said. The buildings on West 3rd Street are occupied by the Beverly Hills Employee Federal Credit Union and a tenant service company contracted by the city, while the land on Foothill Road is home to a public works facility, a dog park, tow yard and a vacant office building.

Although an agenda for the closed session indicated that council members would consider all five proposals, Gold said the discussion would focus only on the Third Street properties. He declined to provide specifics about the proposals, and said it is too early to know when any would be discussed at a public council meeting.

“That’s a step or two ahead,” Gold said. “The council would have to make a determination that it wanted to pursue something. Once we made that determination, we would engage the community with it, but until and unless we make that decision, it’s premature [to say].”

Mirisch also said it was too early to know whether the council would decide to pursue any of the proposals, though he hopes “the council will be agreeable to move forward as fast as we can.”

If the council decided to pursue one of the Third Street proposals, the next step would be to approve an “exclusive negotiation agreement” with the chosen developer, Phillippo said. The city is considering proposals for the Foothill Road land under an entirely different process, he added.

“The larger parcel, which is the area that currently holds the dog park and the public works yard and all that, that larger parcel is not part of this conversation,” Gold said, in reference to the land on Foothill Road.

After that land was declared surplus during a Jan. 24 City Council meeting, opening it up to development, the city issued notices of availability to affordable housing developers, school districts and open space organizations, as mandated by California’s Surplus Land Act.

Five developers submitted notices of interest to build affordable housing, and city officials met with each to discuss their interest. Two of those developers later submitted proposals that are now being reviewed by the city, Phillippo said.

“There’s a good faith negotiation period that is part of the state’s process. That’s what we’re going through right now,” he added.

The City Council declared the land surplus after United Talent Agency, which has offices across the street, signaled its interest in leasing the land, but the city has not explored the possibility further, Phillippo said.

“We’re aware of their interest, but beyond that we really haven’t received or discussed anything because we’re going through the surplus land process,” he said.

The surplus land declaration drew criticism from some residents who claimed the council was not forthcoming about plans to redevelop a plot of land that provides valuable city services. In May, resident Darian Bojeaux filed a lawsuit alleging the City Council violated the Surplus Land Act and the Brown Act, which governs how legislative bodies conduct public hearings.

That lawsuit is currently pending, though Bojeaux said she considered filing for an injunction when she learned the city was discussing affordable housing on the Foothill Road land. Bojeaux is not against the land being designated for affordable housing as long as that is what a majority of residents want, she added.

Mirisch said it was impossible to gauge community support since the proposals haven’t been publicized, but he expects most residents will be in favor.

“Residents will hopefully be supportive,” he said. “We hope residents will take advantage of it.”