►
From YouTube: Burbank City Council Special Joint Meeting with Planning Commission - February 28, 2023
Description
Burbank City Council Special Joint Meeting with Planning Commission - February 28, 2023
A
A
A
We
have
Vice
chair,
Abraham
atikunian
and
our
fellow
Commissioners
Mr
Michael
Elric
Mr,
Robert,
Monaco
and
Ms
Samantha
Wick
is
Mr
Monaco
here
or
oh
they're.
Oh
there
I'm,
sorry,
yes,
that
says
Mr
Monaco.
Yes,
all
right!
Thank
you
all
for
being
here
today.
I'm
reading
my
script
I'm
going
through
it
all
right,
okay.
A
So
this
again
vice
mayor
Schultz
is
joining
us
remotely
this
evening,
hello
vice
mayor
I
can
see
him
on
my
screen
here
on
September
13th
2022,
the
State
Assembly
passed
assembly,
Bill
2449,
which
permits
teleconferencing
for
public
meetings
if
there
is
just
cause
or
emergency
circumstances
to
justify
the
teleconferencing
vice
mayor
Schultz
currently
serves
on
the
American
public
Power
Association
policy
makers
Council.
He
is
currently
attending
the
APPA
legislative
rally
in
Washington
DC,
and
we
appreciate
the
vice
mayor
for
being
burbank's
Public
Power
Advocate.
Thank
you
vice
mayor
for
joining
us
remotely.
A
B
Good
evening,
Mr
Mayor
vice
mayor
council
members
and
the
public
this
evening
we're
having
a
special
study
session
on
housing
legislation.
It's
it's
a
good
thing
to
do,
but
it
also
happens
to
be
a
requirement
of
our
settlement
agreement
concerning
the
Pickwick
housing
litigation
from
late
last
year.
It's
an
obligation
to
provide
this
training
to
the
council,
the
planning
board
and
to
the
community
by
the
end
of
March
of
this
year,
and
so
that's
kind
of
the
urgency
of
finding
a
spot
and
the
council's
busy
agenda
to
deliver
this
content.
B
So
it's
both
an
obligation,
but
also
an
opportunity
to
go
through
the
legislation.
It's
fairly
dense
material,
the
slide
deck
was
posted
on
the
agenda
and
we
have
afforded
several
places
in
the
slide
deck
for
there
to
be
questions
from
the
city.
Council
I've
asked
the
city
clerk
to
set
a
10-minute
timer
for
each
of
three
question
periods.
Just
so
we
can
get
through
the
material
before
6
PM
there'll
be
a
fourth
period
for
Council
to
ask
questions
at
the
end
of
the
slide
deck.
There's
no
time
limit
on
that.
B
It's
just
whatever
the
council's
pleasure
is
to
move
on
with
their
other
business,
so
it
can
be
as
long
or
as
short
as
the
council
deem
sufficient
to
cover
the
material
members
of
the
public.
Ask
appeared
and
asked
questions
at
the
earlier
public
comment
period
and
the
public
will
also
be
able
to
ask
questions
if
the
general
public
comment
period
or
make
comments
and
and
counsel
can
certainly
give
further
direction
or
ask
for
additional
items
at
Future
agenda
meetings.
B
But
this
tonight
this
item
is
intended
to
satisfy
the
city's
obligation
under
the
settlement
agreement
and
to
that
I
would
like
to
introduce
Ms
Barbara
kautz
from
Goldfarb
and
Littman.
She
is
a
recognized
expert,
Statewide
recognized
expert
in
Community,
Development
and
housing.
She
served
for
several
decades
as
a
community
development
director
in
planning,
and
it
also
has
a
relatively
short
a
couple
decades
career
as
a
an
attorney
both
advising
Municipal
clients
and
housing
and
non-profits
is
truly
an
expert
in
this
subject.
B
C
C
So
let
me
give
a
little
bit
of
an
overview,
so
I
was
asked
to
describe
the
major
State
planning,
laws
and
I.
Think
the
council
in
the
commission
probably
know
there's
been
a
flood
since
2017.
I
think
they've
probably
been
over
a
hundred
bills
related
to
housing
that
the
legislature
has
adopted
to
to
those
of
us
who
are
trying
to
implement
them.
The
attorneys
and
the
planners
they're
complicated
they're,
frankly
often
poorly
drafted.
They
have
a
lot
of
ambiguities.
C
So,
even
though
this
is
a
very
long
presentation
as
I
went
through
it
on
the
plane,
I
thought.
Oh,
my
God.
How
long
is
this
we're
really
only
kind
of
presenting
the
highlights
and
we'll
I'll
do
my
best
to
answer
any
questions
about
details
that
people
have,
but
just
just
so
everybody's
aware
that
there's
a
lot
of
details
that
there's
just
not
time
to
go
through
and
that
I
think
people
would
die
a
boredom
if
I
tried
to
if
I
tried
to
do
that.
C
C
Sorry,
so
in
terms
of
how
this
presentation
is
organized
I
have
a
few
slides
just
about
the
housing
crisis
and
about
the
really
serious
situation.
The
state
and
many
people
are
in.
That's
led
the
legislature
to
adopt
these
these
bills.
Then
I'm
going
to
go
through
the
major
State
housing
laws,
starting
with
the
housing
accountability
act,
which
is
sort
of
the
overview
of
all
of
it
and
which
is
intended
to
make
it
very
difficult
to
deny
housing
projects
and
really
does
that.
C
C
But
so
let
me
start
with
the
housing
crisis,
so
this
chart
I,
think
is
kind
of
the
most
serious
I
would
say
in
terms
of
what
the
housing
problem
is.
And
if
you
look
at
the
highlighted
lines,
the
blue
lines
you'll
see
that
80
percent
of
lower
income,
households,
which
in
lar
is
either
a
single
person
earning
less
than
66
750
dollars
a
year
or
a
family
of
four
earning
less
than
95
000
a
year.
C
C
And
you
can
see
that
a
lot
of
the
a
lot
of
The
Angst
has
to
do
with
the
real
collapse
in
housing
starts
since
the
Great
Recession.
The
last
time
it's
estimated
I've
heard
different
numbers
that
the
state
needs
to
build
180
000
units
a
year.
The
state
needs
to
build
200
000
units
a
year,
but
you
can
see
that
the
last
time
the
state
was
close
to
that
was
around
2003
2005..
This
chart
star
stops
in
2019,
but
the
number
hasn't
gone
much
Beyond,
125
000.
C
Since
then,
so
you
can
see
that
there's
been
a
complete
collapse
in
housing
starts
in
California
since
the
since
the
Great
Recession,
the
numbers
increased
a
little
bit
since
the
state
started
adopting
these
bills.
But
it's
come
nowhere
close
to
restoring
restoring.
What's
happened,
what
you
know
the
kind
of
construction
that
was
happening
prior
to
the
Great
Recession,
the
burbanks.
This
is
burbank's
housing
construction,
which
really
has
seems
to
have
collapsed
even
further.
C
A
lot
of
red
what
I've
read
said
that
one
of
the
results
of
the
Great
Recession
was
that
there's
huge
labor
shortages
in
construction
workers.
We
all
know
about
increasing
construction
costs.
Now
that
interest
rates
are
higher,
have
are
higher
again.
The
number
of
building
permits
is
declining
rather
than
increasing
Rising
inequality.
Lots
of
different
reasons,
but
zoning
and
planning
approvals
are
the
area
in
which
the
legislature
has
focused
its
efforts.
There's
very
few
bills
that
deal
with
these
other
issues.
C
I
did
I
looked
at
the
Urban
Land
Institute
magazine
and
developers
say
the
biggest
issues
are
interest
rates,
cost
of
capital
and
the
availability
of
Labor
and
I
think
the
legislature
feels
they
can't
do
anything
about
those.
So
they
can't
focus
on
zoning
and
planning
approvals.
As
you
know,
many
legislators
come
from
local
government
and
they
feel
that
they
that
they
know
it
and
I
I
think
we
all
have
to
be
honest.
C
Accountability
Act
was
to
make
it
much
harder
to
turn
down
housing
developments,
so
the
housing
accountability
act
applies
to
Housing
Development
projects.
It
does
not
apply
according
to
a
recent
court
decision
to
a
project
that
includes
only
one
single
family
home,
but
it
applies
to
obviously
any
any
residential
project
of
two
or
more
units.
It
applies
to
a
mixed,
a
mixed-use
project
where
two-thirds
of
the
units
are
residential.
Two-Thirds
of
the
square
footage
is
residential,
transitional
and
Supportive
Housing
and
Emergency
Shelters,
and
some
of
the
key
Provisions
that
have
been
adopted
in
recent
years.
C
Are
these
one
the
opportunity
for
an
applicant
to
submit
what's
called
a
preliminary
application
and
that
freezes
developments
the
city's
development
standards
as
of
the
date
that
the
applicant
submits
this
preliminary
application,
which
you
could
call
an
abbreviated
planning
application
so
that
so
so
long
as
the
applicant
submits
everything?
That's
on
the
list
in
the
legislation
they're
entitled
to
freeze
the
city's
planning
planning
and
zoning
regulations
and
anything
that's
not
in
effect.
As
of
the
date,
this
is
submitted
can't
be
imposed
in
the
project.
That's
one
change!
C
If
there
are
any
inconsistencies
between
the
project
and
the
city's
zoning
and
planning
standards,
and
if
there
are-
and
if
the,
if
the
letter
doesn't
include
something
or
if
the
deadline
is
missed,
then
the
project
is
deemed
consistent
with
the
city's
planning
standards.
Whether
or
not
it's
actually
consistent
and
I
just
saw
a
superior
court
case
out
of
San
Marino,
where
somebody
missed
the
deadline
and
the
court
said.
Well,
then
it's
you
know
the
Project's
deemed
consistent,
whether
or
not
it's
actually
consistent.
C
This
is
a
big
pressure
on
the
staff.
Then
the
project
is
assumed
to
be
consistent.
If
there's
substantial
evidence
that
would
allow
a
reasonable
person
to
assume
consistency,
which
is
very
legalistic
lawyerly
language,
but
what
it
really
means
is,
if
somebody
can
make
a
good
argument
about
why
their
project
is
consistent,
I
mean
I.
Think
I
would
phrase
it
like
this.
That
seems
kind
of
a
reasonable
argument.
Then
it's
supposed
to
be
found
consistent,
whether
or
not
it
really
is
consistent
and,
lastly,
there's
a
provision
that
says
that
no
rezoning
is
required.
C
C
So
so,
but
clearly,
if
there's
a
height
limit
of
75
feet
and
the
project
is
50
feet,
okay,
then
it
could
theoretically
be
denied,
or
if
it
does
comply
with
all
the
objective
standards,
then
the
project
has
to
result
in,
what's
called
a
specific
adverse
impact
on
public
health
and
safety
and
a
specific
adverse
people
say.
Well,
you
know
people
tend
to
think
of
specific
adverse
impact
like
a
SQL
impact.
C
Like
a
environmental
impact,
you
know
you're
having
an
impact
on
fuse,
maybe
you're
having
some
impact
but
to
make
this
finding
under
the
housing
accountability
act.
It
has
to
be
a
quantifiable,
quantifiable
and
unavoidable
impact,
and
this
is
what
really
has
limited
it.
That's
based
on
objective
identified,
written
public
health
or
safety
standards
so
and
also
the
impact
cannot
be
mitigated
so
I've
tried
to
think
of
examples.
C
One
might
be
you
know,
septic
tank
requirements.
These
don't
apply
in
Burbank,
though,
or
well
water
requirements
where
it's
just
not
possible
to
meet
the
health
and
safety
standards
or
possibly
a
requirement
to
underground
Utilities
in
a
very
high
fire
hazard
Zone.
Maybe
there's
no
other
way
to
mitigate
that
impact
of
than
to
actually
underground
the
utilities,
but
it's
but
I
actually
haven't
don't
have
a
client,
yet
who's
been
able
to
make
this
finding
yeah
I
mean
doesn't
mean
it
can't
be
made
I'm
just
saying.
C
And
then
the
legislative,
and
then
the
bill
also
makes
it
requires
addition,
an
additional
finding
to
deny
a
project
that
has
20
percent
lower
income
units
or
a
hundred
percent
moderate
income
units,
and
the
city
has
to
be
able
to
make
in
addition
to
making
the
finding
I
already
read.
Let's
say
that
the
project
doesn't
comply
with
objective
standards.
The
city
also
has
to
make
one
of
these
five
findings.
C
These
are
quite
summarized
because
they're,
pretty
lengthy
in
the
in
the
statute
that
the
city
has
met
all
its
obligations
under
the
housing
element
law
to
actually
build
all
the
housing
at
the
right
income
levels.
That's
almost
impossible
for
communities
to
make
this
specific
adverse
impact.
Finding
the
denial
is
required
to
comply
with
state
or
federal
law,
maybe
something
related
to
storm
water
that
it's
proposed
on
agricultural
land
or
there's
inadequate
water
or
sewer,
or
that
it's
inconsistent
with
both
the
zoning
ordinance
and
the
general
plan.
C
C
So
I
have
here
examples
of
you
know:
density
height,
lot
coverage,
setbacks,
floor
area
ratio
requirements.
Those
are
all
generally
considered
to
be
objective
standards.
Courts
have
found
some
of
the
the
standards
I
have
on
the
right
as
not
objective
a
requirement
to
reflect
the
look
and
feel
of
the
community.
Be
compatible
with
adjacent
uses
or
the
site
not
is
not
physically
suitable
for
the
proposed
use,
which
is
actually
a
map
act
requirement,
but
the
court
said
that
was
not
an
objective
standard.
C
Now
there
are
ways
to
deal
with
these
issues
with
objective
standards,
for
instance
reflecting
the
look
and
feel
of
the
community.
The
city
could
adopt
detailed
design
standards.
That
would
explain
what
that
means
in,
if
you
think
about
Downtown
Santa
Barbara,
they
have
detailed
design
standards
about,
but
the
look
and
feel
of
downtown
Santa
Barbara's
supposed
to
be,
but
they
have
to
be,
they
have
to
be
defined.
C
C
Here
was
an
objective
standard
and
it
had
a
standard
that
if
the
height
varies
by
more
than
one
story
between
buildings,
okay,
that's
pretty
objective
a
transition
or
step
in
height
is
necessary,
and
there
was
also
a
graphic
in
the
design
guidelines
showing
what
was
intended
by
this
and
in
the
hearings
on
this.
This
City
attorney
said
the
standard
was
objective
and
after
a
lot
of
controversy,
the
city
turned
down
this
project,
but
the
court
decided
that
was
not
an
objective
standard
for
a
whole
variety
of
reasons.
C
C
Remember
this
reasonable
person's
standard
which
the
court,
which
they
felt
first
of
all
under
the
reasonable
personal
standard,
either
interpretation
worked
so
it
had
to
be
approved.
And
secondly,
since
both
interpretations
were
reasonable,
the
court
said.
Well,
then
it's
probably
subjective
since
there's
two
reasonable
approaches
to
this.
C
Other
issues
were
that
the
standard
didn't
Define
what
a
transition
meant
and
the
step
in
height
didn't
talk
about
how
much
it
had
to
be
stepped
back.
Was
it
the
whole
length
of
the
building
or
just
a
bit
anyway?
It
it
describes.
You
know
the
kind
of
the
kind
of
detailed,
detailed
standards
that
the
courts
are
looking
for
to
make
a
standard
objective.
C
C
Mateo
could
have
actually
applied
a
condition
of
approval
to
the
project
to
make
the
floor
step
back
where
it
wasn't
stepped
back,
but
any
of
those
and
and
so
that
subjective
standards
can
be
used
to
apply
conditions
so
that
a
couple
of
times,
but
it
said
that
but
those
but
those
conditions
can't
reduce
the
density
of
the
project.
They
can't
make
an
affordable
project
infeasible
and
they
can't
effectively
deny
the
project
also
for
a
project.
E
E
E
Then,
on
page
nine
we
have
the
many
causes
and
when
I
look
at
the
many
causes,
they
really
it.
In
my
opinion,
A
lot
of
them
apply
to
during
the
pandemic
and
after
the
pandemic,
like
labor
shortage
construction
costs,
material
shortages,
we
all
know,
interest
rate
has
gone
up
and
so
I'm
a
little
bit
puzzled
to.
E
Why
did
it
stop
it
2019
at
125.
It
was
also
2017
and
2019
were
almost
the
same
level
of
development
and
back
then
the
economy
was
booming,
I
mean
everybody
was
investing,
I,
think
I
was
living
here
and
I.
You
know,
I've
seen
people
spend
money
in
build,
so
I
kind
of
don't
see
the
correlation
between
the
2019
and
the
and
the
many
causes.
Because
to
me
this
applies
to
pandemic
and
after
pandemic
yeah.
C
I
think
many
of
these
things,
though,
did
it
did
particularly
the
labor
shortage
during
the
you
know
during
the
Great
Recession
a
lot
of
workers
and
excuse
me
a
lot
of
workers
and
also
firms
exited
the
construction
business,
because
you
can
see
how
it
collapsed
and
I
I've
attended
some
webinars
where
it's
it's
a
constant
problem.
Also,
you
know
there's
more
controls
on
there's
a
reduced
immigration,
so
immigrants
were
an
important
part
of
the
construction
labor
force.
C
So
even
so
anyway,
I
think
that's
been
a
constant
problem
since
since
then,
so
I
actually
I
think
your
questions
are
very
good
and
I
haven't
done
a
comprehensive
look
at
the
house
at
the
housing.
I
have
there's
another
there's
another
slide.
We
thought
about
showing,
but
it
you
know
we're
kind
of
getting
too
long,
but
it
shows
that
multi-family
construction
more
or
less
recovered
after
the
Great
Recession,
but
single-family
construction
has
never
recovered.
C
It
was
much
higher
and
then
it's
Contin
and
it's
and
it's
much
lower
now
than
it
was
before
the
Great,
Recession
and
I.
You
know
it
may
be
a
question
of
the
State
running
out
of
places.
You
know
for
those
grand
single
family
developments
that
occurred
in
the
50s
60s
70s
I,
don't
really
know
what
the
what
the
answer
to
that
is
anyway,
I
think
I
I.
C
E
F
C
G
C
C
G
And
the
reason
why
I
ask
is
because,
looking
again
at
what
Miss
Mullins
was
talking
about
with
the
causes,
is
that,
as
and
as
you
pointed
out
earlier,
is
that
on
page
nine
is
that
most
of
these
causes
have
are
completely
out
of
our
control
as
the
city?
Yes,
and
so
I'm,
just
wondering
if
the
arena
numbers
are
there's
any
kind
of
at
the
state
level
consideration
to
look
at
the
arena
numbers
to
see
if
they're,
actually
reasonable
numbers
to
expect
our
city
to
cities
to
be
reaching
for
I,
totally
believe
in
stretch
goals.
G
I
think
that's
great.
But
in
order
to
if,
if
we're
expected
to
reach
those
goals
in
a
under
an
umbrella
where
we
have
very
little
control
of
the
variables
of
what's
stopping
us
from
reaching
those
numbers,
that
seems
like
kind
of
it's
like
a
setting
up
for
failure.
So
I'm
just
curious.
If
there's
any
kind
of
Readjustment
being
considered
for
the
Reno
numbers.
C
G
C
In
those
workshops
where
I
think
the
numbers
are
really
unreachable
is
in
the
lower
income,
housing
numbers
because
there's
not
enough,
there's
not
enough
subsidy,
there's
not
enough
money
in
the
state
for
every
city
to
meet
its
its
its
Arena
numbers.
I
mean
the
subsidy
per
unit
is
extremely
high
and
there
aren't
there
just
aren't
the
resources
yeah.
G
Maybe
it's
like
you
were
saying
that
the
the
fact
that
the
needs
to
create
the
housing
that
we
need
is
not
providable
by
the
cities
and
that
if
we
to
meet
those
Arena
numbers,
we
need
to
partner
with
the
state
and
counties
to
help
us
fund
those
lower
cost
housing
and
subsidize
them.
So
we
can
meet
Arena
numbers.
So
maybe
it's
more
of
a
the
reader
numbers,
maybe
are
more
accurate,
but
we
need
some
more
support
and
I'm
just
curious.
If
that's
part
of
the
conversation
too
yeah.
C
I
think
that's
part
of
it.
I
mean
you
know
the
legislature
when
they
eliminated
Redevelopment
eliminated
about
a
billion
dollars
a
year.
That
cities
were
had
available
to
assist
with
housing,
and
you
know
there
there's
been
a
lot
of
money,
but
it's
never.
It's
never
been
totally
restored.
Okay,
great.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Mr.
G
H
Thank
you,
Mr
Mayor,
excellent
presentation.
I
am
following
from
here:
I
have
two
questions:
I'm
gonna
depart
and
I
disagree
a
little
bit
with
the
thought
process
of
two
of
my
colleagues.
I
want
to
look
at
slide.
Nine
I
understand
that
there
are
other
Market
forces
that
play
back
the
production
of
housing,
but
ma'am.
Would
you
agree
that
there
are
examples
prior
to
these
state
laws
of
cities
weaponizing
or
using
their
zonic
code
or
process
of
approving
or
entitling
projects
to
essentially
say
no
to
all
housing
developments?
C
Yeah,
I
and
and
I
thought
that
I
said
that
there's
no
doubt
that
Planning
and
Zoning
plays
a
part
in
I.
Look
this
way,
there's
no
doubt
that
Planning
and
Zoning
plays
a
part
in
you
know.
In
the
housing
crisis,
I
mean
I
was
a
planner
for
30
years
and
I
mean
I
I.
Think
anyone
who's
gone
to
a
lot
of
public
hearings
knows
how
you
know.
Housing
projects
have
been
killed.
So
there
was
a
reason
for
the
state
to
do
it
I.
But
it's
not
it's
not
the
total.
H
I
appreciate
that
and
I
agree
with
you,
I
think.
There's
many
reasons.
The
second
question
I
have
is
on
slide
13.
It
would
seem
to
me
that
it
best
so
the
term
a
direct
adverse
impact,
which
is
one
of
the
reasons
to
deny
a
project,
an
outstanding
state
law.
It
would
seem
to
be
a
best.
A
council
or
a
planning
board
could
easily
be
confused
about
what
that
means,
and
at
worst
it
could
be
weaponized
as
a
means
to
to
erroneously
deny
a
project.
H
C
There's
very
little
case
law
in
this.
The
one
case
that
I'm
aware
of
was
decided
before
the
current
language
was
in
the
statute,
but
it
has
to
be
an
a
specific
adverse
impact
on
public
health
and
safety,
and
it
has
to
be
based
on
objective
standards.
So
I
worked
in
one
Community,
where
there
was
concern
about
whether
the
evacuation
routes
were
adequate.
C
That
certainly
seems
like
a
health
and
safety
issue,
but
the
city
had
no
no,
no
adopted
standards
for
evacuation,
and
so,
even
though
that
that
certainly
a
legitimate
concern
and
the
project
didn't
require
any
environmental
review
so
that,
even
though
that's
certainly
a
legitimate
health
or
safety
concern,
the
city
could
not
use
that
to
deny
the
project
and
there's
language
in
the
statute.
That
says
it's
expected
that
this
finding
will
be
made.
Rarely
and
as
I
said,
none
of
my
clients
so
far
have
felt
comfortable
being
able
to
make
such
a
finding.
A
C
A
C
C
C
The
most
important
change
here
has
been
the
increase
in
the
Regional
Housing
needs
allocations
to
cities.
In
this
current
six
cycle,
you
can
see
that
burbanks
increased
by
looks
like
about
three
and
a
half
times
between
the
fifth
cycle
and
the
sixth
cycle,
rather
than
needing
to
have
zoning
to
accommodate
20
about
2700
units.
C
The
only
way
to
reduce
density
is
if,
in
the
same
evening,
the
Council
of
the
city
increases
density
and
some
other
site
to
make
up
for
the
loss
of
density
and
the
statute
is
written
to
say
that
increase.
It
includes
any
change
that
would
reduce
the
amount
of
development
on
the
site.
Reduced
height,
increase
setbacks,
less
floor
area.
You
have
to
account
for
that
and
show
that
other
changes.
Other
changes
which
are
adopted
the
same
night
make
up
for
any
kind
of
loss
that
occurred.
C
One
of
my
clients
is
attempting
to
get
a
moratorium
for
a
small
area
in
town,
because
a
sewer
is
failing.
That
seemed
to
me
to
be
an
imminent
threat
to
health
and
safety,
but
but
it
has
to
be
something:
that's
that's
that
critical,
and
if
the
city
had
growth,
control
limits
with
a
cap
which
it
does
not
hcd
has
interpreted
it
to
say
that
those
limits
can't
be
enforced.
C
Ab
2011
and
sb6
allow
multi-family
development
where
it
may
not
have
been
permitted
previously
in
zones,
and
this
is
a
language
used
in
the
statute
where
commercial,
retail
or
parking
are
principally
permitted
uses,
and
it's
effective.
July
1st
2023
I'll
say
that
AB
2011
is
probably
the
most
complicated
Bill
I've
ever
read
it.
It
has
two
Provisions.
One
section
applies
to
affordable
housing
developments
which
have
somewhat
looser
standards,
and
the
other
section
applies
to
mixed
income
projects
which
have
to
have
somewhere
between
13
and
15
percent,
affordable
and
there's
just
numerous
numerous
requirements.
C
So
this
this
lists
some
of
the
requirements,
but
certainly
not
all.
It
applies
only
to
multi-family
housing
and
it
those
bills
will
go
into
effect
on
July
1st
can't
be
next
to
a
site
with
more
than
a
third
industrial
uses.
There's
an
error
on
this
slide.
I
need
to
fix
so
also,
if
the.
If
the
area
is
covered
by
a
neighborhood
plan,
which
includes
a
specific
plan,
the
city
has
lots
of
specific
plans.
C
Both
bills
require
payment
of
prevailing
wages
and
sb6
also
requires,
what's
called
a
skilled
and
trained
Workforce,
which
effectively
requires
that
union
labor
be
used
or
that
a
project
labor
agreement
be
entered
into.
There's
a
provision
for
not
using
Labor
a
skilled
and
trained
Workforce.
If
the
developer
attempts
to
puts
out
bids
and
can't
find
union
labor
very
another,
very
complicated
provision,
but
generally,
but
both
bills
require
prevailing
wages,
regardless
of
whether
union
labor
is
used.
C
No
parking
can
be
required
for
these
projects,
except
for
parking
for
electro
electric
vehicles,
disabled
parking
or
for
bicycle
parking
for
the
Mixed
income.
Projects
need
to
be
the
housing
needs
to
be
more
than
500
feet
from
a
freeway.
It
needs
to
be
more
than
3
200
feet
from
oil
and
gas
facilities,
it's
possible
to
exempt
some
parcels
by
allowing
more
development
on
some
sites
and
less
on
the
other
same
kind
of
the
same
policies
in
the
housing
crisis
Act,
but
but
anyway,
there's
a
lot
of
site
and
project
criteria
that
apply.
C
There's
also
detailed
requirements
for
setbacks.
Anyway,
it's
very
it's
very
lengthy
and
very
complicated,
very
complicated
legislation.
One
of
my
colleagues
has
been
working
on
it
forever
and
we
still
keep
finding
new
things
in
it
and
then
last
the
last
one
I'm
going
to
talk
about
here
is
density,
bonus
law.
C
So
a
project
is
eligible
for
a
density
bonus
if
it
has
anywhere
from
five
percent
to
a
hundred
percent,
affordable
housing
and
the
bonus
it's
entitled
to
depends
on
on
the
affordability
of
the
units.
You
get
a
bigger,
bigger
bonus
for
very
low
income
units
than
you
do
for
moderate
income
units
and
then,
of
course,
the
percentage
of
housing
that's
affordable.
C
If
it's
ten
percent
moderate
income
units
and
only
gets
a
five
percent
bonus,
a
hundred
percent
affordable
housing
project
is
entitled
to
an
80
bonus
for
all
the
lower
income
units.
But
if
it's
within
half
a
mile
of
a
transit
station
again,
it
gets
unlimited.
Unlimited
density
projects
can
get
anywhere
from
one
to
four
incentives
or
concessions
which
are
modifications
of
the
city's
development
standards
to
save
money.
The
developer,
the
definition
is
that
they
result
in
an
identifiable
reductions
in
costs,
but
they're
entitled
also
to
unlimited
waivers
of
the
city's
development
standards.
C
The
most
recent
case
on
that
one,
which
is
Bankers
Hill
150
versus
the
city
of
San
Diego.
The
court
of
appeal
in
that
case
said
that
developers
were
entitled
to
waivers
for
the
project
as
designed
unless
the
city
there's
three
findings
that
can
be
used
to
deny
a
waiver
one,
the
specific
adverse
impact
finding
again,
violation
of
state
or
federal
law,
or
an
impact
on
a
historic
historic
structure
on
the
California
register,
so
very
diff,
so
only
so
waivers
can
only
be
turned
down
on
in
limited
circumstances.
C
These
projects
are
also
entitled
to
reduce
parking
requirements
again,
depending
on
the
affordability
and
the
use.
The
housing,
accountability,
Act
ab2011,
SB
35,
which
I'll
get
to
all
of
them,
say
that
a
project
that
received
density
bone,
a
density,
bonus,
waivers
concessions,
parking
reductions
is
considered
to
be
consistent
with
City
standards.
C
If
it's
a
moderate
income,
if
they
use
moderate
income
units,
they're
they're
entitled
to
a
10
bonus
and
if
they're,
low
income
units
they're
entitled
to
the
27
and
a
half
percent
bonus,
but
in
either
case
once
a
Project's
eligible
for
a
density
bonus.
It's
entitled
to
unlimited
waivers
and-
and
you
know,
some
concessions
in
reduced
parking
requirements.
C
This
was
a
density
bonus
project
proposed
in
San
Francisco.
The
the
city's
zoning
would
have
required.
The
middle
building
is
the
new
building
and
the
cities
stand.
The
city's
zoning
would
have
required
what
you
see
on
the
left,
but
the
developer
was
proposing
on
the
right
just
to
get
a
sense
of
the
kind
of
waivers
that
could
be
requested.
D
G
G
B
G
C
H
Thank
you,
Mr
Mayor,
two
questions
I'm
well
familiar
with
the
arguments
about
I'm
talking
about
AB
2097,
the
elimination
of
parking
minimums
within
a
proximity
of
high
Transit
corridors,
I'm
familiar
with
the
arguments
against
it
and
the
arguments
for
local
control.
Can
you
speak
to
the
policy
rationale
for
why
the
legislature
looked
at
parking
minimums
as
one
way
to
reduce
the
cost
of
housing.
C
I
mean
what
I've
read
in
terms
of
the
I've
I've
heard
a
couple
of
arguments.
One
argument
is
that
private
developers
are
better
able
to
determine
parking
needs
in
cities
and
that
they,
you
know
when,
when
a
project
is
built,
if
a
developer
believes
that
the
that
the
parking
is
needed,
the
developer
will
provide
it.
C
D
H
Thank
you
very
much.
My
only
other
question
is
kind
of
looking
at
the
inverse
of
that.
So
the
legislatures
looked
at
eliminating
parking
minimums
to
your
knowledge
or,
if
there's
any
other
member
of
Staff,
who
can
answer
it?
That's
okay,
too,
has
there
been
a
discussion
about
parking
maximums
we're
putting
a
limitation
on
how
much
parking
can
be
required.
H
E
C
G
You
Mr
Mayor,
thank
you,
Mr
vice
mayor
for
reminding
me
about
the
the
parking
question,
very
good
questions
and
I
wanted
to
follow
up
with
it
says
I
think
in
oh
gosh,
I'm,
not
sure
which,
which
which
a
b
or
s
b.
This
is
but
that
all
on
page
26,
that
no
parking
can
be
required,
except
disabled
EV
and
for
bikes.
G
D
G
G
C
C
Right
here,
so
the
projects
that
have
to
be
approved
ministerially
are
accessory
dwelling
units
SP
sb9
projects
which
are
either
two
unit
developments
or
or
what
are
called
Urban
lot.
Splits
splitting
a
single
family
property
into
two
and
allowing
two
units
on
each
site:
SB
35,
which
is
a
streamlined
ministerial
review
for
housing
developments
and
ab
2011
housing
projects
in
commercial
zones,
which
I've
already
talked
about
and
which
references
the
SB
35
guidelines,
and
it's
basically
sets
up
a
process.
That's
very
similar
to
SB
35.
Once
a
project
manages
to
qualify
for
ab2011.
C
So
I
have
a
couple
slides
here
on
adus
and
sb9,
but
I
I
think
that
the
council
has-
probably
you
know,
heard
about
both
of
these
both
of
these
numerous
times
before
so
I.
Think,
as
the
council
knows,
that
all
the
accessory
dwelling
unit
Provisions
allow
accessory
dwelling
units
in
residential
zones
in
connection
with
both
single-family
and
multi-family
housing
requires
ministerial
approval
in
60
days
and
overrides
any
City
standards.
C
The
state
adopted
yet
more
changes
to
the
Adu
laws
last
year,
so
the
critical
ones
were
that
attached,
adus
that
are
attached
to
the
home
can
be
25
feet
high
or
the
height
limit
in
the
zone.
If
that
happens,
to
be
lower
than
25
feet
before
that
the
maximum
height
had
been
16
feet
in
some
areas
also,
the
height
can
be
18
feet.
They
they
clarified
that
structures
up
to
800
square
feet
are
allowed
in
the
front
yard
and
they
also
restricted
the
cities.
C
With
sb9,
which
was
not
a
which
was
adopted
in
which
became
effective
last
year,
January
1st
2022,
the
intent
there
was
to
allow
four
units
on
a
single
family
lot
requires
again
that
there's
two
ways
to
do
it.
One
is
to
not
do
a
lot
split.
You
can
construct
two,
what
are
called
primary
dwelling
units
either
two
single-family
homes
and
or
a
duplex
plus
a
couple
of
adus.
Without
splitting
your
lot
or
someone
can
split
the
lot
in
two
and
build
two
units
in
each
site
could
be
two
duplexes.
C
It
could
be
a
single
family
home
in
an
Adu,
but
essentially
allows
any
owner
of
a
single
family
home.
To
do
that.
In
order
to
do
an
urban
lot
split,
though
the
owner
has
to
sign
an
affidavit
saying
that
they
intend
to
live
in
the
site
for
three
years,
so
I
think
that
has
somewhat
confined
it
to
mostly
owner
occupants
again.
If
the
units
are
no
more
than
800
square
feet,
the
city
needs
to
waive
all
of
its
development
standards
in
order
to
allow
those
units
to
exist.
C
So
this
process
is
still
called
by
almost
everybody
SB
35
projects,
either,
though,
even
though
SB
35
was
adopted
in
2017
and
has
been
amended
numerous
numerous
times,
but
it's
that's
easier
than
calling
it
The
streamlined
review
process,
so
people
everybody
calls,
seems
to
call
it
still,
SB,
35
and
anyway,
so
generally,
a
qualifying
project.
You
know
it
has
to
be
a
multi-family
residential
project
has
to
be
two-thirds
of
the
square.
Footage
has
to
be
residential
as,
like
the
housing,
accountability
Act.
C
It
has
to
have
at
least
10
percent
lower
income
in
Burbank.
Although
you
require
that
for
most
of
your
projects
anyway,
the
general
plan
or
the
zoning
has
to
allow
residential
or
mixed
use,
and
the
language
in
SB
35
is
very
specific
that
if
there's
any
really
difference
between
the
general
plan
and
the
zoning,
the
general
plan,
the
general
plan
applies,
it
has
to
be
a
site
where
no
housing
was
occupied
by
tenants
in
the
last
10
years.
C
If
there's
more
than
10
units,
the
project
has
to
meet
prevailing
wages
and
it
has
to
be
consistent
with
objective
standards.
But
again,
people
can
request
that
applicant
can
request
density
bonus
waivers
if
not
there's
other
qualifications
as
well.
It
can't
be
a
wetland
if
it's
in
a
flood
plain
or
or
in
a
high
fire
hazard
Zone
it
has
to
meet
certain
standards.
C
One
thing
is
that
applicant
under
SB
35,
an
applicant
can't
even
submit
an
application
until
a
tribal
consultation
is
consulted,
it's
completed,
so
that
requires
the
city
to
notify
the
tribes
involved
that
are
considered
to
be
involved
with
Burbank.
The
tribes
get
30
days
to
respond
and
then,
if
they,
if
they
choose
to
respond,
then
until
there's
an
agreement
reached
between
the
city
and
the
tribe,
the
applicant
can't
submit
the
application
and
it
really
puts
the
really
unless
there's
an
agreement
reach
between
the
city
and
the
tribe
or
the
tribe
declines
to
participate.
C
The
project
can't
proceed
under
SB
35,
so
the
so
the
tribes
can
control
what
projects
can
qualify,
but
the
the
tough
is
that
the
city
has
to
complete
the
consistency
review
like
the
one.
That's
done
for
the
housing,
accountability
act
within
60
or
90
days
after
the
project
submitted,
not
after
it's
complete
but
after
it's
submitted.
C
So,
even
if
it's
a
very
incomplete
application,
the
applicant
has
to
get
is
entitled
to
get
a
very
detailed
list
of
the
problems
with
the
project
within
60
or
90
days,
and
the
same
threshold
applies
over
150
units
or
less
60
days.
More
than
150
units
90
days,
ab20
and
and
then
the
city
has
to
reach
a
decision
they
can
complete.
They
can
hold
design
review
hearings
which
are
quite
limited,
but
they
have
to
reach
a
decision
within
90
to
180
days
after
submittal.
C
C
This
is
just
a
little
chart
about
AB,
2011
versus
SB,
35
I.
Think
I
think
the
advantages
of
ab2011
to
a
developer
is
it
allows
residential
development
in
a
commercial
Zone,
whereas
SB
35
it
has
to
already
be
zoned
residential
and
that
there's
no
required
travel
tribal
consultation.
That's
an
that's
a
benefit
to
a
developer
under
AB,
2011
and
I.
Think
anyway,.
C
C
So
it's
very
limited
time
for
Community
input.
Although
you
can
have
a
public
hearing
once
the
project
appears
to
be
consistent,
the
scope
is
very
limited.
The
statute
says
that
the
hearings
can't
chill
inhibit
or
preclude
the
ministerial
approval.
So
you
know
you
have
very
limited
discretion
and
really
what
the
public
can
influence
is
very
limited.
That's
how
the
legislature
wanted
it
to
be,
and
under
sp-35
only
standard
conditions
can
apply.
C
There's
something
else
called
by
right
approvals,
which
applies
to
housing
element
sites
that
neither
need
to
be
up
zoned
for
lower
income,
housing
or
sites
that
were
what
we
call
reused
sites,
see
sites
that
were
shown
in
the
last
housing
element,
but
not
developed
and
are
shown
in
this
housing
element
for
lower
income
housing,
and
it
applies
again.
It's
a
it's
their
projects
that
don't
have
any
review
under
the
California
Environmental
Quality
act.
C
C
It
also
applies
to
supportive
housing
developments
that
meet
some
standards
and
what
the
state
calls
low
barrier.
Navigation,
centers,
which
are
kind
of
a
enhanced
Emergency,
Shelters
I,
guess,
I'd
call
them,
and
here
at
least
there
is
not
a
the
kind
of
accelerated
timeline
for
buy
right
projects
and
the
city
has
a
little
bit
more
flexibility
in
imposing
design
conditions,
but
the
city
still
because
it's
a
housing
project
needs
to
find
inconsistencies
within
you
know
or
tell
the
developer.
B
C
C
The
Attorney
General
was
unhappy
with
Pasadena's
sb9
ordinance
and
without
actually
involving
an
hcd
sent
them.
You
know
sent
them
the
equivalent
of
a
notice
of
violation.
Hcd
can
decertify
a
housing
element.
If,
if
the
city
isn't
doing
what
it
promised
to
do,
isn't
adopting
the
house,
the
zoning
they
have
a
new
division
of
proactive
enforcement,
they've
been
they
respond,
mostly
on
mostly
by
complaints.
I
got
an
email
from
hcd.
C
C
The
lawsuit
risk
has
come
from
these
active
third-party
litigants,
so
they've
sued
at
least
10
Southern,
California
cities
and
12
Bay
Area
cities
about
their
housing
element
yeah,
and
they
often
join
in
which
they
did
in
year
in
the
litigation
that
the
city
had
so
the
developers
sued
the
city.
But
a
group
called
UMB
law
also
sued
the
city,
so
they
also,
they
often
pile
on
to
these
and
they've
been
actively
promoting
the
use
of
the
builders
remedy.
C
Housing
cases
in
general
have
not
gone
well
for
cities.
That's
why
we
usually
try
to
settle
cases.
If
we,
you
know
if,
if
they
seem
settled
settleable,
the
courts
have
been
very
pro-housing,
very
Pro,
the
count,
the
cities,
housing
law,
the
one
case
where
they
maybe
will
uphold
it
in
a
a
challenge-
is
involving
the
California
Environmental
Quality
act,
although
that's
you
know,
that's
that's
iffy.
So
in
general,
in
general,
the
courts
have
been
very
strong
about
upholding
the
legislators
sure's
right
to
adopt
these
laws
and
the
city
risks.
C
The
staff
has
indicated
to
us
that
they
intend
to
hold
Community
Information
meetings
even
with
the
ministerial
projects,
SB
35,
AB,
2011,
post-project
signs
and
also,
of
course,
the
the
usual
electronic
notification
and
mail
Public
Notices.
These
last
two
slides,
which
can't
really
be
read
very
easily,
are
basically
what
the
we're
just
including
them
so
they're
in
the
packet
for
people
to
look
at.
But
these
are
the
city's
efforts
to
date
with
all
the
laws
which
has
involved
a
huge
amount
of
staff
staff
time.
G
Yeah,
thank
you
and
bit
by
smeared
us
too.
Thank
you
so
much
for
this
presentation.
I
I
thought
I
knew
a
lot
about
these
a
b
and
SBS
and
I
learned
a
lot
today.
So
thank
you
so
much
a
general
question
about
the
provisions
in
the
various
laws
that
give
allowances
per
percentage
of
low-cost
housing
for
these
low-cost
housing
units.
Are
they
all
required
to
be
deed,
restricted?
Yes,.
C
C
G
So
a
builder
can't
build
with
a
certain
percentage
of
low
income
and
then
a
year
later,
you
know
pick
somebody
in
and
resell
it
as
a
higher
income.
Again,
I
have
to
keep
it
at
the
low
price
for
55
years,
okay,
yeah
great
and
then
also
just
a
general
question
actually
for
staff.
It
was
mentioned
that
it's
important
for
the
community
to
be
able
to
keep
track
of
these
developments.
G
C
E
I,
think
it's
very
obvious
from
the
presentation
that
our
power
is
being
taken
away
and
the
state
has
given
that
power
to
developers
to
come
in
and
you
know,
make
housing
happens
in
the
City
of
Burbank,
which
in
a
way
it's
saddened
me
personally,
because
I
think
especially
over
the
parking
situation,
the
parking
that
would
impact
our
neighborhoods
winning
impact,
the
adjacent
housing
and
neighborhoods.
But
we
know
that
we
don't
have
the
power
when
they
allow
them
to
come
in.
E
Just
because
they're
near
Transportation
I
mean-
and
you
have
nothing
to
do
with
this
I
just
wanted
to
share
somewhat
of
you
know
what
I
hear
from
the
community
and
and
also
the
concerns
that
we
hear
about
wise
in
the
city
trying
to
stop
this,
and
why
do
we
allow
development
to
happen?
The
way
they
happen
today-
and
this
was
very
obvious
in
your
presentation
us,
because
the
state
allows
them
to
do
so
and
we're
restricted
to
how
much
we
can
actually
do
with
that.
E
I
I
do
want
to
recommend
something
to
city
manager
if
it's
possible
in
regards
to
making
this
material
available.
I
know
we
have
the
front
page
of
our
City
website.
It
would
probably
be
helpful
maybe
to
have
that
presentation
on
the
front
page.
So
maybe
the
public
does
they
don't
have
to
go.
Look
for
it
under
granicus
or
study
session,
just
as
a
form
of
if
possible,
it
can
be
done
just
a
quick
link
for
study
session
and
that
would
also
provide
the
attached
materials
so
to
make
it
accessible
to
the
public.
F
Just
going
off
of
what
councilmember
Mullen
said,
I
also
know:
we've
received
some
comments
from
the
public
asking
for
more
time
to
speak
on
this
issue
and
ask
more
questions
and
I
really
commend
you
for
putting
such
a
lengthy
bit
of
information
into
this.
No
I
I
hear
you
listen
I
used
to
work
for
the
state.
This
is
not
something
I
could
have
wrapped
up
in
in
the
time
that
you
wrapped
it
up.
F
H
H
So
the
two
things
I
wanted
to
close
on
are
we're
here
today
in
part
because
of
the
Pick
Quick
and
I
won't
waste
our
time
going
back
to
the
slide,
but
in
one
of
your
slides
you
were
doing
a
comparison
side
by
side
of
Senate,
Bill,
35
and
assembly
bill
2011..
So
I
guess
my
question
with
regards
to
Senate
Bill
35
is:
would
you
agree
that
the
takeaway
is,
if
you're
a
local
municipality
under
the
state
law
as
it
is?
H
C
E
H
Thorough
job
appreciated
the
analysis
of
assembly
bill
2011..
Are
you
able
to,
as
you
sit
here
today,
give
us
just
a
30
second
preview.
I
know
that
there's
more
coming,
there's
Senate
Bill
4,
making
its
way
through
this
legislature.
Right
now,
can
you
give
the
public
just
a
taste
of
what
kind
of
issues
the
legislature
is
grappling
with
this
cycle.
C
I
was
sent
a
list
of
400
bills,
something
like
400,
400
out
bills.
There's
a
lot
of
spot
bills
in
the
legislature.
I
you,
you
know
what
a
spot
bill
is.
It
says
I
want
to
do
something
about
housing,
but
it
doesn't
really
say
what
some
of
the
ones
that
struck
my
mind.
There
was
one
that
would
require
it's
by
the
author
of
ab2097.
C
That
would
require
allowances
for
shared
parking.
Senator
weiner
wants
SB,
35
is
actually
about
to
Sunset,
so
he
has
I
think
it
would
some
sunset
in
2025.
So
he
wants
to
extend
that
there's
another
very
complicated
bill
that
I
think
has
slipped
under
everybody's
radar.
That
is
trying
to
tie
the
California
Environmental
Quality
act
to
to
the
housing,
accountability,
Act,
I,
read
it
and
I
thought.
Oh,
my
excuse.
No
I
won't
say
my
I
read
it
and
I
thought.
How
will
anybody
interpret
this?
This
is
so
difficult.
C
C
H
Well,
thank
you
again
outstanding
presentation
and
for
what
it's
worth
and
for
the
Publix
consumption,
Senate
Bill
4
as
I
recall,
would
apply
a
very
similar
model
as
assembly
Bill,
2011
and
or
Senate
Bill
35,
but
to
a
higher
in
higher
education
institutions
and
religious
institutions.
So
I
think
there
is
certainly
more
more
to
come
and
more
for
us
to
monitor
as
a
city.
But
thank
you
ma'am
great
report.
Thank.
C
A
A
I
Council
members
I
would
just
encourage
you
and
I'll
piggyback
off
Ms.
Mullins
I
would
encourage
you
to
meet
with
our
rep
local
representatives
to
do
your
best
to
fight
for
our
city
to
to
paint
every
Community
with
the
same
broad
brush
up
and
down
California.
It
doesn't
make
Burbank
special
anymore.
People
live
in
this
city
for
a
reason:
I
sell
this
city
every
day.
I
know
what
makes
it
special
and
to
paint
the
city
with
the
same
broad
Rush
as
every
other
community
I
heard.
San
Francisco
mention
here
several
times
this.
I
I
We
probably
should
have
supplied
more
housing
in
the
past,
but
we
need
to
do
whatever
we
can
to
have
our
local
Representatives
just
move
the
pendulum
a
little
further
in
our
Direction,
because
if
we
don't
have
control
over
our
community,
we
will
lose
what
makes
it
special
and
I
think
we
have
a
staff.
Here.
We
have
council
members
here.
We
have
Community
here.
That
knows
what
is
special
about
Burbank
and
we
should
have
some
say
in
that
and
that's
what
I'm
saying.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.