I am sure that most people aren't going to feel bad for LVMH, but it is facing some opposition in trying to bring the first Cheval Blanc Hotel to North America. Last year, Beverly Hills City Council approved the hotel development on Rodeo Drive, but since then, enough signatures were collected that a special election is going to be held later this month for the ~22,000 residents who are registered to vote in Beverly Hills. And from the sounds of it, the results will decide the fate of the project.

As I understand it, there are two mains groups that are upset:

1. A union representing hotel workers

2. Local area residents

The official message from group #1 is that they want affordable housing. But there is speculation that they just want the hotel to be unionized. I don't don't, so let's move on to group #2. Why would residents be opposed to this project?

One way to think about this is that LVMH is trying to build a fancy new $2,000 per night hotel in one of the richest cities in the US, on one of its most luxurious streets. So, you would think that there would be a fit and that more than a few rich people would be excited about such a development. I guess this is true — and Council did vote in favor last year — but clearly there are other concerns:

...some people were unhappy a 109-room hotel, framed by Rodeo Drive, Little Santa Monica Boulevard and Beverly Drive, would rise nine stories on one side and tower over surrounding retail and commercial spaces sitting at three and four stories high. Four buildings would have to be razed, and the idea of more traffic coming to the area was unsettling.

It seems to be about scale:

...Cheval Blanc opponents want to keep that small town vibe. “The area is charming and beautiful right now, and, if and when they are able to put that project out there, it will not be. It is very nice to be around low-rise buildings. You can sit at a sidewalk café in Beverly Hills and look across the street and see the hills. It is a very good feeling,” said Darian Bojeaux, an attorney who has lived in the city for 35 years and signed the petitions launching a special election. “Let them build a code-compliant hotel that is three stories high. Let them build something nice that doesn’t ruin the city.”

Here's an aerial of said small town vibe for context (I've marked the number of proposed storeys):

What's interesting about this situation is that it seems to isolate the concerns. Because what is being proposed here is an obviously compatible use. It is a rich thing in an area for rich people. Residents don't seem to be saying that this is a problem. Instead, it is height that could potentially "ruin the city." (Ignore for a second that there's already an office building of similar height across the street.)

What this tells me is that if you're thinking about proposing nine storeys of Ferragamo and Balenciaga, that's probably not small town enough. Saint Laurent needs to be no more than three.

MAD Architects recently completed its first project in the United States at 8600 Wilshire Boulevard in Beverly Hills. It's interesting (and beautiful) in that it was designed to resemble a village of gabled residences sitting on top of a green hillside.

The green hillside is actually a three-storey concrete podium that is covered in what is said to be the largest living walls in the country. The gabled houses on top are wood-frame construction and were assembled to create an open-air courtyard in the middle of the site. Eighteen residences in total. Prices starting from USD 3.7 million (as of May 2019).

At five storeys, I suppose you would call this a mid-rise building. The site area is about 25,700 square feet and the building area is not even 48,000 square feet, according to ArchDaily. So the overall density on the site is actually remarkably low. At least compared to what we're accustomed to building in Toronto. It might be dense for Beverly Hills.

I would love to see the development math for a site like this. After I got over the architecture, the first thing I thought was, "you could never build a mid-rise building like this in Toronto." I suspect it's also not obvious in Los Angeles. And you probably need "starting from 3.7 million" in order for it to pencil.

Photo by Darren Bradley via Dezeen

Bloomberg Businessweek just published this article summarizing the impact that Bird and its electric scooters are having on Los Angeles. Here are a couple of highlights:

- Bird launched a year ago and is, today, valued at around $2 billion.

- The company has around 15,000 scooters on the road in Los Angeles. We already know that this is making some/many people grouchy.

- The cost to rent a scooter is $1 plus $0.15 a minute.

- LA has an incentive program in place that allows Bird to expand its fleet within low-income areas. Still, their scooters tend to be concentrated in wealthier areas of the city.

- Beverly Hills is trying to figure out how to handle/regulate these scooters and currently has a 6 month ban in place.

- Supposedly, you can ride a Bird through West Hollywood but you’re not allowed to park it anywhere.

The company is based in Santa Monica, so it’s not surprising that they have such a stronghold in the LA market. Still, there appears to be a lot of latent demand for this kind of mobility.

According the US Department of Energy, almost 60% of vehicle trips in the US last year were less than 6 miles. And around 40% were less than 2 miles. 

So these “last mile scooters” do appear to have a lot of utility. Do any of you regularly use an electric scooter to get around?