Due to overwhelming community and expert opposition, on December 2, 2015, the West LA Area Planning Commission unanimously overturned the City’s approval of this oversized project on a fragile steeply sloping coastal bluff at the intersection of Sunset Blvd and Marquez Avenue!

Click here to read the Planning Commission’s Determination Letter, which cites many violations of City zoning, the Coastal Act and overturns the City’s approval of the MND for the project based on significant concerns with traffic, geology, hydrology, hydrogen sulfide gas, easements and cumulative impacts .

Click here to read Marquez Knolls Property Owners Association’s February 2016 newsletter article regarding MKPOA’s critical role in opposing this dangerous development.

5 Reasons to Oppose the 17000 Sunset Development

  1. Traffic and Parking Nightmare
  • Over 100 new parking spaces at busy corner of Sunset & Marquez, the gateway to Marquez School and the Lake Shrine.
  • No realistic planning for ingress/egress or overflow parking in this accident-heavy traffic and parking zone.
  • Years of grading, hauling and construction affecting traffic and safety on Sunset.
  1. Violates LA City Zoning and Coastal Act
  • Violates second-story step back, side yard minimums and height limits of LA Zoning.
  • Violates density, landform alteration, bluff setback and public view protections of CA Coastal Act.
  1. Eliminates One of the Last Major Public Ocean View from Sunset Blvd.
  1. Earthquake/Landslide/Environmental Risks Not Addressed 
  • Site is a steep bluff with serious earthquake risks and a history of landslides.
  • Project does not comply with current LA City seismic slope stability standards.
  • Site so risky that City/Coastal Commission made residents below say their homes face “extraordinary hazard from landslides and earthquakes”, and now the City approved this five-story complex directly above them!
  • Hydrogen sulfide gas risks and related sulfuric acid runoff risks to Santa Monica Bay have not been adequately studied.
  1. Nonconforming Project Will Form Wall of Buildings Along Coastal Bluff 
  • This massive project on this coastal bluff, far taller than neighboring buildings and directly across the street from single-family homes, was APPROVED by the City and is being appealed.
  • The project destroys a beautiful coastal bluff at 17000 Sunset Blvd, by removing 45,000 cubic yards of soil and fill for a five-story project with two additional stories of subterranean garage.
  • The same developer, Gabaee, owns the two lots next to this Project on the bluff and will create a continuous wall of five-story projects along Sunset if not stopped here.
  • Gabaee has obtained favors from the LA City Council to gain approval of other non-conforming projects. We must not let that happen on this valuable coastal bluff!


17000 Map

click here to see the bluff on Google Street View

bluff palisades (1)

35 thoughts on “

  1. I vehemently oppose the illegal building of this complex. If it’s not allowed by city and coastal commission rules for anyone else to build this sketchy/dangerous complex. Then it’s illegal. Plain and simple.

  2. California is in dreadfully serious drought; how much more water will be lost when the new tenants start watering their stupid lawns and flushing their toilets ?

  3. I will be attending the hearing on January 21st at 4:30. Address is on this website. Very important to show up for everyone to know all the opposition that exists!

  4. Which city agency approved this fiasco and why?
    Has the coastal commission approved it? It is hard to believe they would approve such a building.
    I have dealt with the Coastal Commission, they are nice people. They should be contacted for further details.

    • Hi Sharon,

      Thank you so much for your great comments!
      The City of LA Zoning Administrator approved this project, and 11 community members have appealed it to the West Los Angeles Planning Commission. This project hasn’t been reviewed yet by the Coastal Commission, since the project has to get City approval before they seek the permit they need from the Coastal Commission.
      We want to stop it at the City since, per our Municipal Code, the City isn’t supposed to approve projects that don’t comply with the Coastal Act.
      We are speaking with Richard Bloom, and he promised to reach out to Mike Bonin to share his concerns about this project.Thankfully, we have some officials who respect the law.
      Thanks again and hope to see you at the hearing!

  5. I don’t believe the size of this project is appropriate for the location. I intend to focus on why the developer was given variances for so large a project on a steep hillside.

  6. Look at the previous attempts to
    Build on that bluff, they all came down. I think its suicide to build on that loose sandy lot w/ gophers degrading the bluff integrity & I agree the project is not “local” friendly…

  7. not only do I oppose this project, but I think the news should be contacted to look into potential special favors given by the city to this developer. I Think it’s important to put pressure on any politicians that may have done favors illegally by broadcasting it publicly

  8. The project is being built on a filled in canyon and watercourse, not solid ground. it is next door to the Palisades’ biggest landslide that demolished a major botanical gardens in the 1940s. Subsequent landslides covered PCH. No amount of “mitigation” can guarantee that in an El Nino year the project will not cause sinkholes below the 29-unit neighborhood directly beneath it. This project requires a full Environmental Impact Report, which it has somehow avoided. In addition, the City Planning Agency’s relationship with this developer, who also owns the degraded apartments next door and who has done nothing to repair a ruined sewer system that has dumped fecal material on the homeowners below and on Pacific Coast Hwy, must be investigated and revealed. No new project by this developer should, by law, be allowed until he completely replaces the corroded pipes of his sewer system.

  9. I oppose the project.

    If I voted for approval of the project, I would be concerned about my personal liability when the disaster occurs.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s