►
From YouTube: Burbank Planning Commission Meeting - April 24 2023
Description
Burbank Planning Commission Meeting - April 24 2023
A
A
Good
evening
it's
approximately
603
and
I'm
going
to
call
this
meeting
to
order.
Welcome
to
the
regular
meeting
of
the
Burbank
Planning
Commission
on
Monday
April
24th
2023.
Before
we
begin
our
meeting,
there
will
be
a
general
period
of
public
comment
tonight
during
oral
Communications
persons.
Speaking
during
the
general
public
comment
period,
May
provide
the
Planning
Commission
oral
communication
on
any
matter
concerning
City
business
members
of
the
public
May
comment
in
person
or
by
telephone
during
the
general
public
comment
period.
A
If
you
would
like
to
participate
in
the
public
comment
period
by
making
an
in-person
comment,
please
present
a
completed
speaker
card
to
the
planning
staff.
If
you
would
like
to
participate
in
the
public
comment
period
by
telephone,
please
call
818-238-3335.
We
will
announce
when
the
phone
lines
are
open.
B
Sid
wakes
up
in
the
morning,
and
he
checks
the
obituaries,
and,
if
he's
not
in
there,
it's
going
to
be
a
good
day.
Every
day
is
important.
Every
day
is
precious
today
is
known
as
a
today
is
more
important
than
the
day
before,
but
not
as
important
as
the
next
day.
Keep
that
in
mind
live
be
happy,
be
thankful.
D
A
There
are
two
public
hearings
on
tonight's
agenda
item
number.
One
now
is
the
time
and
the
place
for
the
public
hearing
on
item
project
number
two:
two
dash
zero:
zero:
four:
three
zero:
five:
a
conditional
use
permit
to
operate
a
restaurant,
slash
drinking,
a
slab
instrument,
Magnolia
corner
and
an
administrative
use
permit
to
allow
a
reduction
in
parking
at
2623,
West
Magnolia
Boulevard.
Before
we
begin
do
any
planning
board
members
have
any
Legal,
Financial
or
other
conflict
of
interest.
Regarding
this
hearing,
no.
A
G
B
A
I
will
say
that
many
members
of
the
public
have
reached
out
to
me
via
email
and
text,
message
about
this
meeting
tonight
and
I
told
them
they
should
come
and
present
their
their
concerns,
and
one
person
gave
me
their
concerns
via
text
and
I'll.
Read
that
during
during
the
course
of
the
evening,
Mr
Ramirez
have
the
notices
as
required.
Been
law
been
given,
yes,
yeah.
So
are
there
any
written
Communications
on
this
matter?.
E
A
H
Good
evening,
chairman
Rosati
members
of
the
board,
man,
please
have
the
presentation.
Thank
you.
My
name
is
Joseph
vanibucci
I'm,
an
associate
planner
with
the
planning
division
of
the
Community
Development
Department
for
your
consideration
tonight
is
Project
number
22-0004305,
a
condition.
An
application
for
conditional
use,
permit
and
administrative
use
permit
at
the
proposed
Magnolia
Corner
Restaurant,
located
at
2623
West
Magnolia
Boulevard,
the
applicant
is
applying
for
cup
and
an
AUP
concurrently
and
therefore
pursuant
to
Burbank
Municipal
Code,
section
10-1-1909.2
c
Planning
Commission
approval
of
the
AUP
is
required.
H
H
H
The
project
site
is
located
within
the
Magnolia
Park
General
business
Zone
referred
to
as
the
mpc3
zone.
The
mpc3
zone
is
intended
for
General
commercial
uses
that
provide
goods
and
services
to
the
surrounding
residential
areas
and
for
office
and
mixed
use.
Complexes
that
are
compatible
with
adjacent
land
uses
the
site
and
the
commercial
Corridor
it
is
located
within.
It
is
adjacent
to
R1
single-family
residential
neighborhoods.
H
The
use
has
been
the
site
of
a
neighborhood
serving
restaurant
since
1939
and
patrons
to
The
Establishment
have
been
from
the
surrounding
residential
neighborhood.
The
Magnolia
Park
commercial
Corridor
is
characterized
by
wide
sidewalks
and
low-lying
commercial
retail
buildings
allowing
for
an
attractive
retailing
experience.
H
The
applicant
is
proposing
a
restaurant
slash
drinking
establishment
at
this
location
pursuant
to
Burbank
Municipal
Code,
section
10-1-1,
6.1,
Planning
Commission.
Approval
of
a
cup
is
required
for
any
establishment
proposing
to
sell
alcoholic
beverages
for
on-premises
or
off-premises
consumption.
Therefore,
the
application
is
subject
to
the
approval
of
a
cup.
H
H
H
The
project
proposes
a
reduction
in
the
outdoor
patio
space
to
400
square
feet,
highlighted
here
in
yellow,
since
January
2017
Burbank
PD
has
received
on
117
calls
for
service
at
this
site,
and
I
will
speak
in
more
detail
about
these
calls
for
service.
Later
in
this
presentation
to
protect
the
surrounding
residential
neighborhood
noise
impacts,
staff
recommends
a
condition
of
approval
that
the
outdoor
seating
area
closed
at
10,
pm
daily
and
there'll,
be
no
music
or
Amplified
sound
allowed
outside
the
premises.
At
any
time.
H
H
The
sale
of
beer
wine
and
distilled
Spirits
is
proposed
to
take
place
within
the
restaurant's
proposed
operating
hours.
Only
with
alcohol
service
proposed
to
end
30
minutes
before
closing,
the
proposed
use
would
operate
similarly
to
other
commercial
uses
in
the
surrounding
neighborhood
and
other
permitted
restaurant
drinking
establishments
in
the
city,
meaning
that
there
will
be
a
designated
area
for
eating
a
kitchen
to
prepare
and
serve
food
as
well
as
a
small
bar
area.
H
H
H
Furthermore,
the
site
has
historically
operated
successfully
without
on-site
parking.
The
reduction
in
the
parking
requirement
would
would
reduce
the
required
parking
provided
on
site
to
five
spaces,
and
the
applicant
has
proposed
three
spaces
on
site
shaded
here
in
red,
located
at
the
rear
of
the
property
and
accessed
by
the
alley.
H
The
applicant
is
also
secured
parking
off
site
through
an
informal
parking
agreement
that
will
be
memorialized
with
the
city
as
a
condition
of
approval.
The
agreement
allows
the
applicant
to
reserve
two
spaces
exclusively
for
patrons
of
the
restaurant
drinking
establishment.
The
donor
parking
site
is
located
at
811
North
Buena
Vista.
H
If
the
Planning
Commission
approves
the
administrative
use
permit,
the
project
would
meet
the
parking
space
requirement
with
three
parking
spaces
proposed
on-site.
An
agreement
to
provide
two
parking
spaces
off-site
staff
recommends
a
condition
of
approval
that
a
sign
be
posted
on
site,
indicating
that
additional
parking
is
provided
off-site
within
the
surface
parking
lot
located
at
811,
North
Buena,
Vista,
Street.
H
Public
notice
for
this
Planning
Commission
hearing
was
provided
in
accordance
with
state
and
local
laws.
Several
calls
in
support
of
the
project
were
received.
As
of
tonight's
hearing,
with
one
call
received
expressing
opposition
to
the
proposed
use
I
believe
you
mentioned
that
chairman,
you
mentioned
that
you
had
received
some
calls
and
texts
about
the
about
the
project
tonight
as
well.
H
Staff
has
determined
that
allowing
a
type
47
ABC
license
to
this
project
site
would
be
consistent
with
the
city's
zoning
code
regarding
the
type
of
use
allowed
in
the
mpc3
zone
and
the
purpose
of
commercial
Corridor
General
plan
land
use
designation
by
facilitating
a
neighborhood
serving
commercial
use.
The
re-establishment
of
a
restaurant
drinking
establishment,
the
project
site,
subject
to
the
recommendation,
recommended
conditions
of
approval.
H
H
As
discussed
previously,
the
applicant
has
requested
an
administrative
use
permit
to
reduce
the
parking
requirement
from
10
spaces
per
thousand
to
3.3
spaces
per
thousand
square
feet
of
gross
floor
area
based
on
the
code
requirement
and
the
parking
policy
for
outdoor
dining
17
spaces
would
be
required.
Approval
of
an
AUP
would
reduce
the
on-site
parking
requirement
from
17
to
5
parking
spaces.
H
As
mentioned
previously,
the
previous
restaurant
business
tenant
had
their
cup
revoked
due
to
numerous
and
repeated
violations
of
the
Los
Angeles
County
Health
officers
orders
during
the
covid
pandemic.
Additionally,
Burbank
PD
received
117
calls
for
service
to
the
site
over
a
five-year
period
from
January
2017
to
today
between
January
2020,
2017
and
March
13
2020,
which
is
the
date
of
the
LA
County
Health
officers
issue.
When
the
LA
County
Health
officer
issued
a
local
State
of
Emergency
due
to
covid
Burbank
PD
received
35
calls
for
service.
H
This
translates
to
about
an
average
of
one
call
a
month
of
those
35
calls.
12
were
due
to
public
disturbance,
with
the
remainder
spanning
reported
calls
for
drunken
disorderly,
suspicious
activity
and
Burglar
Alarm
calls,
while
82
of
the
117
calls
were
received
after
the
declared
state
of
emergency
staff
cannot
speculate
as
to
whether
those
calls
are
not
related
to
the
complaints
received
by
the
LA
County
Department
of
Public
Health.
H
It
is
staff's
assessment
that
the
proposed
conditions
of
approval
provide
sufficient
safeguards
to
operate
a
neighborhood-serving
use
of
this
type,
while
mitigating
impacts
of
the
surrounding
neighborhood
and
land
uses
due
to
the
negative
impacts.
The
previous
tenants
actions
pose
to
the
surrounding
community
staff
recommends
additional
conditions
of
approval
to
ensure
the
use
does
not
negatively
impact
the
surrounding
neighborhood.
H
The
class
1
categorical
exemption
is
applicable
because
the
project
involves
minor
interior
changes
to
the
restaurant
floor
plan
to
accommodate
alcohol
storage
and
no
and
minor
exterior
alterations.
Minor
changes
to
the
on-site
parking
facility
and
the
nature
of
the
current
operations
as
neighborhood
serving
restaurants
will
remain
the
same.
H
Therefore,
staff
recommends
the
Planning
Commission
approve
the
cup
and
the
AUP
applications
based
on
the
determination
that
all
the
required
findings
can
be
made
for
project
number
22-0004305
and
adopt
the
attached
resolution
with
the
proposed
conditions
of
approval.
This
concludes
my
presentation
and
I'm
available
for
any
questions.
The
commission
may
have
thank.
A
I
I
I
would
like
to
tell
you
the
story
of
this
project.
Basically,
Stevie
one
day
was
driving
through
the
neighborhood
on
his
way
and
he
saw
that
this
location
was
closed.
We've
seen
it
before.
He
remembers
this
location.
It
was
not
too
small,
not
too
big,
perfect
for
his
first
restaurant,
his
shot
at
opening
his
first
restaurant,
so
he
asked
around
and
eventually
he
found
the
owner
of
the
property.
Who
was
pretty
much
now
stuck
with
a
vacant
lot,
because
the
previous
operator
of
tinorm
flats
has
pretty
much
vacated
so
he
asked
her.
I
I
So
this
is
their
dream
to
have
always
opened
a
restaurant
and
in
this
dream,
I.
Opening
a
restaurant
is
not
an
easy
task,
let
alone
this
being
their
first
restaurant,
that
they're
opening
and
it
will
take
a
tremendous
amount
of
effort
for
them
to
make
this
restaurant
successful.
They're,
not
a
big
brand
name
that
can
attract
Regional
draw.
I
I
So
I
hope
the
commission
will
find
it
to
help
them
succeed
because
they
know
that
they're
going
to
be
a
member
of
this
community,
a
community
that
he
once
belonged
to
long
time
ago,
and
they
know
that
their
traffic
is
going
to
come
from
the
neighboring
residential
and
businesses,
because
that's
who's
going
to
support
his
restaurant.
The
businesses
that
are
open
during
the
daytime
to
eat
lunch
there
and,
as
it
draws
into
the
evening,
the
local
families
from
the
local
places
will
walk
to
his
restaurant.
I
So
I
hope
the
council
will
help
him
succeed
and
I
just
want
to
make
it
abundantly
clear.
He
has
no
relations
to
the
previous
owner.
This
is
a
brand
new
business
and
I
hope
he
is
not
penalized
for
the
sins
of
the
previous
owner
and
I
would
like
to
turn
the
floor
over
to
Stevie,
so
he
officially
can
introduce
himself
and
welcome
you
guys
to
hopefully
his
future
restaurant.
J
J
J
I
used
to
travel
through
this
big
Bond
of
the
train
station
and
as
we
come
through
the
train
station,
there's
all
these
restaurants
and
kiosks
and
things
selling
things
and
I
remember
telling
myself
as
I
was
walking
through
this
years
and
years
and
years
and
years
I
wish
I
wish
I
wish
one
day.
I
can
open
a
restaurant,
something
same
like
same
thing
like
this.
J
And
then
one
day
after
we
moved
to
Monrovia
I
said
you
know,
let's
drive
by
over
there.
Let's
go
look
I
when
I
drove
by
I
saw
it
was
all
gated
up
and
I
was
like
that's
odd.
Why
is
this
place?
You
know
get
it
up
and
with
further
you
know,
looking
into
it,
I
found
out
what
had
happened
and
everything
and
I
thought
to
myself.
Wow,
you
know
I
was
telling
her
wow.
You
know
this
could
be
something
that
about
my
dream
that
we
can
make
a
reality.
J
We
can
make
something
you
know
neighborhoodly
and
the
place
that
you
know
we
can
walk
to
and
go
have
some
food
and
and
a
drink
with
our
friends
and
and
or
neighbors
or
whoever
and
so
fast
forward
to
to
now
we
had
the
opportunity
to
purchase
it.
It's
been,
it's
been
really
really
I
mean
since
I
mean
I'm
not
like
how
you
would
say
a
regular
investor
that
comes
into
the
restaurant
business
and
they've
got
millions
of
dollars
backing
it.
C
J
And
for
her
because
it's
it's
brought
us
to
at
least
the
point
where
we've
purchased
the
place.
You
know.
Maybe
it's
not
a
restaurant
yet,
but
it's
it's
right
there
for
us,
so
we've
kind
of
put
all
our
eggs
in
one
basket
more
than
all
our
eggs,
because
I
had
a
I
had.
Luckily
we
had
a
a
good
friend
of
ours
that
also
has
a
young
child
and
and
we
we
hang
out
a
lot
and
he
was
like
yeah.
Let's
do
it
together,
you
know.
J
We
hope
that,
really
that
we,
you
know,
have
an
opportunity
to
actually
open
it
and
show
the
community
that
we
really
just
want
to
have
a
community
restaurant
where
everyone
can
come
hang
out,
you
know,
have
some
food
have
a
drink
and
then
walk
home,
and
hopefully,
after
today
you
know
we
can.
We
can
say
soon
enough,
we'll
we'll
have
that
so,
oh
and
another
thing
is,
if
it
all
goes
well,
obviously,
we
want
to
plan
to
move
back
to
Burbank.
J
A
We
will
now
open
up
the
public
hearing.
Do
you
speak
from
any
persons
who
wish
to
speak
on
this
matter?
Each
person
may
address
the
Planning
Commission
for
a
maximum
time
of
three
minutes
from
members
of
the
public
who
wish
to
comment
in
person.
Please
present
a
completed
speaker
card
to
the
playing
division
staff.
A
If
you
wish
to
speak
by
telephone,
please
call
818-238-335
to
address
the
planning
board.
Callers
will
be
placed
in
the
queue
until
all
persons
comments
have
been
received.
Phone
lines
are
now
open.
Please
bear
with
us,
as
we
get
the
first
few
callers
through
for
callers.
Please
remember
to
lower
the
volume
on
your
TV
or
your
computer
and
take
the
phone
off
speaker
when
you
deliver
your
comment.
A
C
M
M
M
I
hope
that
and
I
also
appreciate
the
fact
that
staff
did
mention
that
there
are
going
to
be
they're
going
to
be
looking
at
any
sort
of
complaints,
but
I
have
to
tell
you
the
energy
and
the
enthusiasm
from
the
young
man
and
him
being
here,
I'm
excited
to
see
what
he
might
bring
to
Burbank
to
kind
of
make
it
a
little
bit
more
exciting
place
on
Magnolia.
So
thank
you
very
much.
Thank.
N
N
I
was
able
on
one
of
my
walks.
I
met
Mr
two
and
accosted
him
basically
and
said:
are
you
going
to
be
the
new
owner
and
we
spoke?
I
met
his
wife
at
that
time
it
was
a
brand
new
baby
and
I
went
back
and
told
the
ladies
at
the
Christmas
party
I
had
the
big
scoop
on
what
was
going
to
happen
at
tinhorn
Flats,
everyone
was
thrilled.
N
We
need
local
neighborhood
businesses.
A
restaurant
like
this
gentleman
just
mentioned
that
we
can
walk
to
again.
We
can
bring
friends
when
they
come
over
and,
as
you
know,
Magnolia
Park
itself
is
Real
Slim
on
restaurants.
I
think
you
can
count
how
many
there
are
on
one
hand
and
I
think
it's
wonderful
if
he
is
given
the
chance.
Whatever
happened
before
happened
before.
N
O
O
Filming
sometimes
the
studios
rented
out
once
a
month
once
every
six
months
once
a
week,
I
mean
it
varies
on
how
often
it
rents
out
as
a
and
it's
nowhere
mentioned
about
this.
Sometimes
it's
just
a
few
hours
a
day
or
two.
Sometimes
it
takes
over
the
neighborhood
for
a
week.
So
my
family
has
owned
a
house
there
for
since
the
70s.
So
we've
seen
the
history
of
multiple
owners,
some
better
than
others.
My
one
biggest
concern
is
always
parking
littering
loitering,
sometimes
Sports
in
the
streets.
You
know
we
understand
some
of
it's.
O
You
know
part
of
the
neighborhood,
but
we
want
to
make
sure
it's
safe.
We
want
to
make
sure
that
kids
can
be
in
that
neighborhood.
Since
it's
been
closed,
parking
everything,
cleaning,
everything's
been
a
breeze,
but
we
do
want
to
encourage
a
business.
We
understand
that
the
owner
wants
to
start
new.
We
just
want
to
make
sure
that
some
of
these
are
addressed
by
their
own
employees
by
some
of
the
course
people
visiting
the
establishment-
and
we
hope
they
do
do
community
draw.
P
P
We
do
need
more
restaurants
and
businesses
in
Burbank
and
Magnolia
Park.
My
biggest
concern
is
parking
as
of
right
now,
I
already
have
to
strategically
move
my
car
around
every
day
to
make
sure
that
I
have
parking
in
front
of
my
own
home
on
trash
takeout
day.
We
have
to
move
our
cars
or
move
our
cans
in
front
of
our
neighbors
home.
P
So
parking
is
a
major
concern
and
I
understand
that
that's
been
addressed
in
the
planning
committee,
but
I
don't
feel
that
five
spots
is
sufficient
for
an
establishment
that
size
so
I'm,
hoping
that
if
it
is
approved,
I
hope
that
it
is
approved.
Maybe
the
permitting
requirements
on
Naomi
are
changed,
such
that
it's
right
now,
I
think
it's
two
hours
without
permit
I'd
like
to
see
it
permitting
all
day
with
parking
on
Magnolia
Park.
Only
if
possible.
P
There
are
other
restaurants
in
Magnolia
Park
that
have
provided
parking
either
on
the
premises
or
around
the
corner.
But
as
we
know,
people
go
to
the
path
of
least
resistance
and
they
find
parking
wherever
it's
available.
So
if
that's
right
in
front
of
a
home
or
or
in
front
of
the
business
they're
going
to
park,
there,
they're
not
going
to
drive
a
street
over
to
look
for
two
extra
parking
spots.
So
that's
all
I
have
thank.
A
A
A
A
We
have
had
many
issues
with
employees
having
parked
in
front
of
our
house
for
hours
and
hours
patrons
that
have
been
intoxicated,
leaving
their
cars
for
several
either
one
night
or
several
nights,
sleeping
in
their
cars
having
sex
in
the
cars
leaving
condoms
on
our
lawn
vomiting
on
our
property,
Lawns
and
garden
beds,
and
please
try
to
explain
that
to
your
children.
I
think
it's
important
for
law
enforcement
to
be
monitoring
during
business
hours
and
respond
quickly
to
ensure
that
the
neighborhoods
are
protected.
A
A
L
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
so
much
for
allowing
us
to
pipe
in
on,
on
this
occasion
of
something
new
coming
to
Burbank
I
think
it's
very
exciting.
I
live
off
of
Magnolia
on
Myers
and,
as
so
many
have
said,
we
don't
have
a
lot
of
opportunities
to
just
walk
and
have
a
wonderful
meal
and
possibly
a
drink
and
a
glass
of
wine
with
dinner
and
I
just
love.
L
What
these
two
gentlemen
have
presented
to
the
commission
I
understand
some
of
the
parking
issues,
but
I
think
that
tinhorn
flat
was
a
very
different
operation,
a
very
different
vibe
than
what
these
people
are
trying
to
do
here
in
the
neighborhood,
and
it
just
sounds
to
me
like
something
that
would
really
be
a
welcome
entity
in
a
welcome
business
and
something
that
we
can
all
feel
really
good
about.
Just
walking
to
and
being
a
part
of
the
community.
So
I
just
wanted
to.
You
know,
express
my
support
and
and
wish
them
well.
R
Hi,
my
name
is
Jeff
and
I.
A
resident
of
Burbank
I
wanted
to
say
that
I've
never
had
any
problem
parking
there
on
Magnolia
in
front
of
Mimi's
or
across
the
street,
and
I
want
to
welcome
Stephen
and
his
family
to
the
neighborhood
and
wish
them
well
and
say
that
I
can't
wait
for
this
Bistro
to
open
and
I
wanted
to
ask
the
commission
about
the
parking
regulation
and
the
new
parking
spaces
behind
the
restaurant
I
just
wanted
to
know
why
that's
required
if
it
wasn't
required
of
the
business
that
was
there
previously.
A
J
A
S
S
If
those
are
the
conditions
for
which
a
restaurant
wants
to
open
in
our
neighborhood,
we
are
ready
to
welcome
them
and
look
forward
to
them
opening
their
doors
as
soon
as
possible,
and
we
hope
that
the
Planning
Commission
will
planning
board
will
give
a
thumbs
up
to
an
establishment
that
is
well
needed
in
this
area.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
A
B
H
Well,
we
didn't
have
a
transportation
plan
or
a
parking
study
done
or
anything
like
that.
However,
we
did
know
did
note
in
the
staff
report
that
there
is
ample
parking
available
in
the
evening
hours.
We
anticipate
that
you
know,
as
the
most
the
other
retail
establishments
close
throughout
the
throughout
the
day
that
the
parking
will
be
on
street
parking
will
be
available
along
Magnolia.
But
in
addition
you
know:
there's
there
are
Apple
parking
spaces.
B
R
B
G
H
H
F
H
F
H
E
You
just
just
to
clarify
chair
that.
So
if,
if
there
are
members
of
the
public
or
someone
in
attendance
watching
on
TV,
they
can
contact
the
Community
Development
Department's
planning
Division,
and
then
we
can
route
them
to
the
appropriate
staff,
whether
it's
at
public
works
or
actually
within
transportation
planning,
to
look
at
anything
if
they're
looking
at
permitting
speed,
humps
or
those
things.
These
are
typically
things
that
are
discussed
in
collaboration
and
then
ultimately,
there's
a
whole
process
where
you
can
apply
for
other
restrictions.
But
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
to
your
point.
E
Commissioner:
Wick's.
The
condition
wouldn't
be
one
on
the
project,
if
that's
an
interest
of
the
public,
but
it
would
be
one
that
we
could
follow
up
and
and
provide
guidance
to
them
as
to
how
to
go
about
that
process
of
implementing
some
sort
of
change
to
the
Limit
time
limit
on
site
or
even
permitting
in
the
neighborhood.
A
E
You
know
I'm
not
as
familiar
with
our
film
permitting
process.
However,
this
is
a
conditional
use
permit.
So
if,
under
the
purview
of
the
commission,
you
decide
that
there's
conditions
that
need
to
be
imposed
to
protect
neighboring
land
uses
from
potential
impacts.
That
is
something
that
you
could
propose
as
a
condition
that
the
site
not
be
available
for
filming
and
if
the
applicant
feels
that
that
is
something
he
can
live
with,
they
can
live
with
as
part
of
the
approval.
A
E
T
T
Filming
within
a
certain
distance
of
residential
uses
requires
notice
to
the
adjacent
residents
if
it
occurs
outside
of
regularly
permitted
hours
which
are
listed
in
our
film
permit
regulations
which
are
online,
and
in
that
instance,
there
is
an
opportunity
for
the
public
to
contact
the
film
permit
office,
as
well
as
the
production
company,
with
concerns
about
the
filming.
So
there
is
a
process
in
the
city
for
how
we
permit
filming
with
on
public,
as
well
as
private
property.
Okay,.
A
B
I
Was
actually
brought
in
as
a
consultant
to
help
him
with
the
whole
entitlement
process
of
this
project,
the
architect
that
actually
did
the
work
and
the
design
of
this
site
is
actually
someone.
I
have
worked
with
many
times
and
one
day
I
got
a
call
out
of
the
blue
and
he
said:
hey
you
interested
in
a
project.
I
said
well.
What
is
this
project
is
that
here's
the
address,
take
a
look
and
I
googled.
I
The
project
and
I
was
like
whoa,
took
two
seconds
of
Google
search
to
bring
up
all
the
bad
histories
from
it
and
I
was
like
okay.
So
what
am
I
doing
over
here-
and
they
told
me
that
you
know
help
this
guy
he's
gonna
have
some
issues
with
navigating
this
whole
process
and
I
hope
you
can
help
him
with
it
and
help
assist
him
with
the
project.
So,
I
being
that
you
know
the
nature
of
the
project,
I
want
to
help,
make
it
a
successful
project.
So
that's
why
I
decided
to
join.
B
C
G
A
Okay,
you
have
one
question
and
I
have
some
questions.
Yeah
sure
I'll
go
first
step
up
the
microphone
I'm
going
to
ask
you.
Some
pointed
questions,
sure
and
I
think
it's
important
that
we
get
this
right
from
this.
From
this
from
this
body,
there's
been
117
calls
you
heard
police
calls
to
this
neighborhood
I've
gotten
some
calls
I've
gotten
some
text
messages,
I've
gotten
some
emails,
so
I
guess.
My
first
question
is:
why
did
you
apply
for
a
type
47
liquor
license
instead
of
type
41.
J
So
the
reason
why
is
because,
if
like
my
wife,
for
example,
she
loved
drinking
margaritas
so
I
think
on
a
41,
you
can't
make
margaritas
so
for
an
instance.
In
another
example,
I
like
to
enjoy
a
nice
old-fashioned
every
once
in
a
while
and
yeah
and
I
think
probably
on
I,
don't
know
what
a
41
is.
I
know
a
47,
because
that's
what
I
researched.
J
A
J
J
C
J
They're
over
served
or
getting
drunk.
You
know
it's
hey,
you
know.
Maybe
it's
time
to
stop
drinking
and
you
know
here's
a
here's,
a
free
bread
on
the
house
or
something
but
I
I,
don't
intend
to
have
people
drunk
walking
around
loitering
parking
up
people's
in
front
of
their
houses.
I.
Think
that's
really
crummy
for
me.
So.
J
I
C
E
If
it's
revoked
by
ABC,
it
comes
at
significant
cost
because
it
limits
the
operational
capacity
of
the
site,
so
I
think
there's
both
safeguards
as
far
as
how
they
get
their
license
and
then
the
ongoing
training,
which
is
conditioned
into
the
project
and
my
recollection,
is
that
there's
also
situations
where
ABC
goes
and
confirms
that
they're
following
those
requirements
and
in
instances
where
there
may
be
even
stings
from
police
and
local
law
enforcement
to
verify.
If
there's
an
issue
of
potential
serving
to
minors
and
whatnot.
J
Gonna
Park
in
the
frontal
Magnolia
when
they
can,
or
they
honestly
they
can
park
on
the
other
spot,
but
what
I'm
hoping
is
to
and
what
I've
done
is
to
try
to
hire
people
within
the
the
area,
so
they
can
bike
in.
They
can
because
chat
by
what's
the
channel
or
bike
path
is
right.
There
it's
super
near
and
from
that
you
can
go.
You
know
anywhere
from
North
Hollywood
over
to
there
within
a
few
minutes
on
a
bicycle,
so
I'm
hoping
that
I
can
gather
employees
within
the
area.
J
J
A
And
I
believe
you
and
I
look
I
want
it
to
be
a
raging
success,
but
I
don't
want
it
to
be
I,
don't
want
it
to
be
at
the,
and
you
know
what
I've
lived
in
I
lived.
One
block
from
there
on
Florence
for
I
grew
up
there
for
30
years
of
my
life,
so
I
know
the
area.
Well.
I
know
that
the
ownership
of
this
location
over
the
past
since
nineteen
74.
A
it
will
be
a
success
because
I
know
that
the
people
in
that
area
like
to
walk
and
come
out
to
very
little
food
places
in
the
area,
so
I
want
it
to
be
a
success,
but
not
at
the
detriment
of
the
the
residents
and
I'm
looking
at
it
from
from
their
point
of
view.
So
if
you're,
okay
with
that,
I
would
like
to
make
a
condition
that
the,
if
you're,
going
to
have
10
employees
that
they'll
park
somewhere,
not
on
the
residential
and
there's
plenty
of
parking
on
Magnolia.
A
J
Yeah
yeah
I'm
100.
Well
that
goes
without
saying:
I
don't
want.
You
didn't
even
have
to
say
that
to
me
I
mean.
Obviously
we
do,
but
I
would
not
want
someone
parking
in
front
of
the
gentleman's
house
or
the
lady's
house.
I
don't
want
you
know,
that's
not
neighborly
sure
I
wouldn't
do
that
and
I.
Don't
think
anyone
that
works
in
the
place
should
either.
I
I
You
mind
if
I
speak
to
this
I
have
a
feeling
why
some
of
the
past
that
location
was
so
popular
because
it
I've
seen
the
old
pictures
of
it.
I
mean
I,
don't
it
looks
like
a
western
movie,
so
I'm
pretty
sure.
That
probably
was
why
it
was
so
popular.
But
I
don't
know
if
you
guys
ever
seen
what
it
looks
like
today,
it's
quite
dilapidated
from
what
it
is
and
being
that
there
are
plans
to
renovate
this
location.
It's
going
to
lose
a
lot
of
the
old
western
characteristics
because
it's
very
deteriorated.
I
A
J
A
A
J
J
J
F
J
J
I,
don't
have
anything
yet,
but
I
do
plan
on
doing
all
those
things
it's
just
taking
so
long
to
get
up
to
this
point,
I
didn't
even
know
if
it
was
going
to
happen
or
not
so
I
I
didn't
want
to
put
more
money
into
it
and
then
lose
it.
So
I
don't,
but
I
will
and
100
will
do
that
for
myself.
Obviously,
because
I
want
to
protect
my
investment
and
make
it
as
as
as
good
as
I
can
make
it.
You
know.
J
F
J
Yesterday,
realistically,
though,
realistically
I
I
was
hoping
that
I
would
be
open
in
July.
You
know,
I
was
hoping
I
would
be
open
in
December.
You
know,
but
I
I
understand
the
process
now
and
I
know
it
takes
some
time
and
there's
a
lot
of
things
to
go
through
so
I
think
because
the
type
47
license
takes
at
least
from
what
I've
been
told
so
far
from
the
broker
is
it
takes
at
least
six
months
to
transfer,
so
I
can't
have
any
alcohol
or
anything
for
at
least
six
months.
J
I
Wrapping
up
his
design
for
the
Interior
right
now
and
he's
planning
to
submit
it
to
building
and
plan
checks,
so
that's
gonna,
probably
cycle
for
a
little
bit.
So
once
he's
finished
with
that,
he
needs
to
get
his
construction
crew
or
find
a
get
a
couple
of
construction
bids
together.
So
we
could
actually
build
out
the
place
he
was
originally
hoping
to
save
some
money
on
the
construction
costs,
because
you
know
this
is
this
project
is
costing
quite
a
lot
of
money,
but
yeah
yeah
unfortunate
construction
is
what
it
is
right.
I
J
J
A
G
I'm
confident
in
the
applicant
I've
been
to
Tim
Horton
Flats
plenty
of
times
and
there's
always
been
parking
up
front,
always
I
like
that
they're
going
to
provide
signage.
You
know
for
the
additional
parking
and
also
I
like
what
you
said
about
the
employees
not
parking
in
the
residential
area.
If
they
can
avoid
that
somehow,
okay.
C
B
A
conditional
use
permit
to
operate
a
1708
square
foot,
restaurant
drinking,
slash,
drinking
establishment
and
an
administrative
use
permit
to
allow
a
reduction
in
required
parking
from
10
spaces
per
thousand
square
feet
to
3.3
spaces
per
thousand
square
feet
of
growth.
Floor
area.
Based
on
the
findings
of
fact
and
subject
to
the
attached
conditions
of
approval
project
number
22-0004305.
A
F
A
F
I,
just
I
just
want
to
say
that
I'm
for
this
project,
but
we
given
the
history
of
the
property
and
I'm,
not
just
talking
about
the
previous
tenant,
but
with
everything
we.
You
have
exactly
one
chance
to
get
this
right
with
the
city
and
I
think
you
know
that
and
it's
not
it's
not
a
threat,
but
it's
just
for
the
neighborhood.
The
neighborhood
deserves
a
really
really
good
establishment.
The
city
deserves
a
good
establishment
and
you
yourself
deserve
a
good
establishment.
So
please
please
use
careful
consideration
when
you're
operating.
Please
train
your
bartenders.
F
Please
train
yourselves,
do
not
do
not
let
it
get
out
of
hand.
It
doesn't
sound
like
the
kind
of
establishment
that
will
get
out
of
hand,
but
please
please
just
use
common
sense
and
protect
the
neighborhood
as
much
as
you
can,
because
they
deserve
this,
and
this
is.
This
has
been
a
long
time
coming.
A
A
I
would
I
would
say
you
should
walk
over
to
Poquito
Mas
he's
been
there,
I,
don't
know
30
years
he
got
a
beer
and
wine.
He
got
a
liquor
license
from
us
a
few
months
ago
in
the
neighborhood
that
came
out
to
support
him
was
amazing.
They
could
not
speak
higher
of
his
commitment
to
the
neighborhood,
moving
trash
cans
and
asking
patrons
to
move
cars
and
moving
cars
for
patrons,
and
just
it
was
amazing.
So
it
takes
a
lot
of
effort.
A
You
know,
obviously
you
have
the
stack
kind
of
against
you
from
what
was
there
before
I
I
would
just
say,
as
Miss
Wick
said,
just
do
everything
you
can
and
you
may
want
to
ask
you
know
this
is
your
first
Venture
and
the
restaurant
business
is
tough,
so
you
may
want
to
talk
to
the
the
owner
of
that
establishment
because
he's
been
in
Burbank
for
a
long
long
time.
So
that's,
that's
all
I
have
to
say
on
the
issue.
E
A
B
B
A
B
A
F
A
U
Please
thank
you
good
evening,
chair
with
audio
members
of
the
commission.
My
name
is
Amanda
Landry
senior
planner
with
CDD
planning
I'm
here
tonight,
with
my
colleagues
associate
planner,
Greg,
mirzabakian
and
Joseph
pengillidan
and
with
us
we
also
have
the
assistant
community
development
director
for
transportation.
U
I
can
keep
going
while
it
comes
up.
It's
a
lot
of
text
so
but
David
Christie
is
here
in
the
audience
to
answer
any
transportation
related
questions
and
for
your
consideration
tonight
is
his
own
text
amendment
to
establish
objective
design
and
development
standards
for
mixed
use
and
multi-family
residential
only
projects
in
non-residential
zones.
U
There
are
also
many
other
eligibility
and
project
requirements
that
need
to
be
met
in
order
for
a
development
project
to
be
processed
pursuant
to
ab2011
among
these
requirements,
the
development
project
must
be
multi-family,
which
means,
for
this
case
five
or
more
units
it
is,
it
must
be
allowed
in
any
Zone
where
office
retailer
parking
are
a
permitted
use.
So
this
opens
up
quite
a
few
areas
of
land
that
are
zoned
for
non-residential
use
for
these
types
of
developments.
U
So
under
state
law,
the
city
is
required
to
implement
the
provisions
of
ab2011.
If
it
is
invoked,
however,
it
will
be
challenging
for
the
city
to
implement
the
required
streamline
Ministry
overview
as
the
Burbank
Municipal
Code
The
BMC
lacks
separate
design
and
development
standards
for
multi-family
residential,
only
and
mixed-use
projects
in
non-residential
zones,
and
this
is
because
the
BMC
has
historically
been
drafted,
with
the
assumption
that
local
control
and
discretion
over
the
details
of
such
development
is
usually
worked
out
through
an
extensive
discretionary
review
process
such
as
a
conditional
use,
permit
plan
development
development
review.
U
So
it
is
clear.
The
city
needs
to
establish
a
more
robust
set
of
standards
that
can
be
applied
to
the
streamlined
Minister
overuse
mandated
by
AB,
2011
and
sb35,
as
well
as
mixed-use
projects
in
general.
That
are
already
permitted
under
the
code
through
the
Dr
and
cup
process,
and
it's
also
clear
that
this
needs
to
be
done
before
even
more
streamlined,
Ministry
overview
applications
are
submitted
and
before
AB
2011
takes
effect
on
July
1st
2023.
U
So,
although
there
is
now
a
great
sense
of
urgency
to
establish
objective
design
and
development
standards,
the
goal
of
the
CTA
is
to
develop
is
to
develop
standards
that
will
apply
to
any
future
applications
for
ministerial
streamlined
reviews,
while
maintaining
local
control
and
incorporating
long-established
standards
or
concepts
that
are
Burbank
specific,
but
will
now
comply
with
state
standards
and
a
significant
effort
was
taken
to
replicate
or
reflect
these
standards
or
the
intent
of
these
standards.
In
the
in
the
proposed
on
text.
Amendment.
U
So,
using
that
General
approach
to
the
ZTA
process
of
focusing
on
the
established
standards
and
Concepts
that
are
Burbank
specific,
but
now
tweak
to
comply
with
State
mandates.
A
set
of
multi-family
residential,
only
objective
design
and
development
standards
were
crafted,
taking
into
consideration
that
additional
refinement
was
needed
so
that
they
would
be
both
objective
standards
and
appropriate
for
their
presence
and
it
builds
a
commercial
environment.
U
So
this
slide
here
shows
just
a
snippet
of
the
areas
of
development
that
we
have
addressed,
that
cover
site
design,
bulk
and
mass
modulation,
parking
requirements,
and
so
on,
along
with
some
architectural
standards
and
just
for
reference.
They
include
maximum
lot
coverage,
maximum
Heights
setbacks,
parking
requirements
and
open
space
requirements.
U
In
this
case,
it
was
a
little
bit
more
difficult
because
there
were
no
existing
for
mixed-use
developments,
no
existing
standards
for
mixed-use
developments
and
our
results.
The
mixed
use,
standards
that
were
crafted
for
this
ETA
while
are
consistent
with
the
proposed
multi-family
residential
standards
to
the
extent
possible.
They
also
incorporate
specific
standards
to
address
the
commercial
component
of
mixed-use
developments
and
those
include
operational
and
performance
standards.
U
Flexibility
and
building
design,
open
space,
publicly
accessible,
open
space
and
then
the
identification
of
compatible
uses
as
part
of
a
mixed-use
development
and
again,
these
standards
are
intended
to
ensure
contextually
appropriate
design.
That
is
also
sensitive
to
the
lower
scale
residential
zones.
U
And
this
slide
just
shows,
in
addition,
the
extra
areas
of
focus
that
were
paid
attention
to
beyond
what
the
multi-family
development
standards
did.
So
here
we
see
an
unbundled
parking
requirements,
publicly
accessible,
open
space,
screening
of
equipment,
performance
standards,
and
that
means
things
like
venting
from
the
commercial
properties
away
from
the
residential
hours
of
operation.
Things
of
that
nature
to
help
protect
the
residents
that
live
both
on
the
site
and
adjacent
to
the
site.
U
U
And
then
there
are
a
few
tweaks
proposed
to
the
useless
table
in
our
Municipal
Code
right
now.
The
Burbank
middle
school
code
does
indicate
both
mixed
use
and
multi-family
residential
uses,
but
we
just
clarified
it
or
proposing
clarifications
so
that
the
mixed
use
section
now
reads:
multi-family
residential
with
commercial
and
any
con.
So
that
means
it
can
be
in
any
configuration
not
just
above
commercial
and
then
multi-family
residential
only
is
being
updated
to
show
that
with
an
S.
U
So
when
permitted
by
state
law
it's
allowed,
but
otherwise
it's
not
not
allowed
and
whether
a
use
is
allowed
on
a
particular
site
will
always
be
subject
to
applying
divisions,
review
upon
project
submittal.
So
we'll
double
check
everything,
even
though
the
code
says
this
week
review
each
project
upon
the
middle.
U
The
California
government
code,
section
65860,
requires
that
modifications
to
the
zoning
code
be
consistent
with
the
adopted
General
plan
and
the
rest
of
the
zoning
code.
The
proposed
Zone
text
amendment
is
consistent
with
at
least
28
of
the
Burbank
2035
General
plan,
land
use
and
Mobility
related
goals
and
policies,
and
the
ZTA
will
promote
context,
sensitive
design,
adjacent
to
single
family
and
multiple
family
residential
zones.
U
U
So
there
is
an
urgent
need
to
establish
these
objective
design
and
development
standards
for
streamlined
ministerial
reviews
in
non-residential
zones
and
with
a
very
narrow
window
of
opportunity.
Planning
staff
has
developed
a
comprehensive
set
of
objective
objective
development
standards,
with
the
intent
to
better
protect
the
city's
vision
for
commercial
neighborhoods
that
may
house
these
projects,
as
well
as
any
residential
neighborhoods.
That
abut
them,
and
this
effort
will
enable
the
city
to
efficiently
process
future
projects
and
maintain
local
control
to
the
extent
possible.
U
Therefore,
staff
is
recommending
that
the
Planning
Commission
adopt
a
resolution
of
the
punting
Commission
of
the
City
of
Burbank,
recommending
the
city
council
adopt
an
ordinance
of
the
city
council
of
the
City
of
Burbank
amending
title
10
chapter
1,
zoning
of
the
Burbank
municipal
code
to
establish
objective
design
and
development
standards
for
mixed
use
and
residential.
Only
projects
in
non-residential
zones.
U
And
then
the
city
council,
public
hearing
will
also
have
an
opportunity
for
engagement
from
the
public
and
then
there's
also
extensive,
ongoing
engagement
related
to
the
specific
plan
updates
that
continues
to
go
on
for
those
focused
Geographic
areas
and
for
all
of
these
public
events
they
are
published
in
the
newspaper.
The
city
has
a
social
media
blast
and
e-news
e-notify
that
we
have
been
taking
advantage
of
for
so.
The
public
is
aware
of
this
project.
Moving
forward.
U
A
Thank
you.
We
will
now
open
the
meeting
to
hear
from
any
persons
who
wish
to
speak
on
this
matter.
Each
person
may
address
the
planning
board
for
a
maximum
time
of
three
minutes
for
members
of
the
public
who
wish
to
comment
in
person.
Please
present
a
completed
speaker
card
to
the
planning
division
staff.
If
you
wish
to
speak
for
to
members
who
wish
to
speak
by
telephone,
please
call
818-238-335
to
address
the
planning
board.
A
Callers
may
be
placed
in
the
queue
until
all
person
until
until
all
in-person
comments
have
been
received,
the
phone
lines
are
now
open.
Please
bear
with
us,
as
it
may
take
a
couple
of
minutes
for
the
first
callers
to
get
through
the
line
for
callers.
Please
remember
to
lower
the
volume
on
your
TV
or
your
computer
and
take
the
phone
off
speaker
when
you
deliver
your
comment.
A
V
I
think
they're,
controversial,
SB,
35
and
ab
2011,
and
there
probably
will
be
challenges
as
time
goes
on.
If
these
Zone
text
amendments
are
made
and
then
somebody
challenges
and
is
successful
in
overturning
SB,
35
or
AB
2011,
will
these
changes
if
adopted
then
be
repealed
as
well,
or
these
things
are
that
are
going
to
stand
regardless
of
what
happens
at
the
state
level
and
what's
being
mandated
by
the
state
to
to
the
city?
A
M
M
So
200
plus
you
know
individual
bedrooms,
so
it
is
nice
to
hear
an
another,
an
acronym
ZTA
which
wow
okay.
Thank
you.
I
can
understand
that,
but
I
don't
know
what
the
way
that
the
commission
does.
So
it
asks
for
some
help.
I
would
ask
for
your
guidance,
as
you
volunteer
of
your
time,
and
thank
you
very
much
for
that
for
being
here
when
you're
doing
this,
but
to
help
those
of
us
who
are
much
more
in
neophytes
and
ignorant
to
what
this
actually
means.
Staff
understands
it.
M
They
know
it
I,
don't
know
it
and
what
what
does
it
mean?
What
am
I
going
to
see
on
Magnolia,
which
the
the
gentleman
Stevia
I'm
excited
for
him
who
is
presenting
for
his
cup
I
wish
everything
could
have
a
cup
I
wish
that
if
it
was
a
violation,
you
could
go,
that's
not
what
we
allowed
you
to
do
it
you're
gone
or
you're
done.
M
I,
don't
I,
don't
see
that
happening
because
a
part
of
it
that
kind
of
concerned
me
is
that
you
want
to
have
rigorous
control
asterisk,
as
long
as
it
is
in
line
with
State
guidelines.
Well,
hello,
folks,
State
guy
State
guidelines
are
a
hammer.
Let
me
take
that
back
they're,
like
a
bomb,
that's
getting
dropped
on
us
and
again
Empire
Avenue,
SB,
35.,
local
control
to
the
extent
possible
second
asterisk.
M
It's
great
that
you're
going
to
be
trying
to
go
for
some
sort
of
local
control
when
the
state
has
basically
taken
all
of
it
away
from
us.
So
if
there's
anything
that
the
commission
could
do,
I
would
encourage
and
advocate
for
that.
Thank
you
very
much
for
your
time
this
evening
and
again,
thank
you
for
your
service.
Thank
you.
A
A
A
And
states
that
there
has
been
a
compliance
with
BMC
10-1-
1994,
because
notice
was
published
in
the
newspaper
10
days
prior
to
the
planning
hearing.
I
would
expect
that
if
someone
responded
to
the
notice,
they
would
want
to
see
the
materials,
but
the
materials
for
the
agenda
item
were
not
available
until
about
5
PM
on
Friday
April
21st.
So
when
the
notice
was
posted,
the
materials
were
not
available
to
the
public.
It
seems
to
me
that
adequate
notice
necessarily
includes
the
availability
of
the
materials.
At
the
time
the
notice
was
posted.
A
A
Nevertheless,
as
the
materials
are
voluminous
and
subject
matter,
complicated
I
have
brief
comments
at
this
time,
while
the
staff
report
states
that
some
examples
of
changes
exhibit
one
two
attachment
a
seam
set
forth.
The
objective
standards
applicable
in
all
of
the
properties
indicated
that
the
maps
attached
a
to
Exhibit
C
but
doesn't
show
the
differences
in
each
of
the
individual
zones
between
what
is
codified
now
and
what
may
be
codified.
A
If
the
CDD
recommendations
are
in
place,
so
she's
looking
for
a
before
and
after
chart,
that's
not
provided
maybe
such
a
chart
in
time
prohibited,
but
ideally,
I
would
like
to
see
such
a
comparison,
especially
for
properties
in
the
Rancho,
the
property
next
to
Circle
K,
which
is
currently
a
horse.
Rental
Barn
is
prime
example
as
to
the
intersection
of
two
on
Street
Trails,
two
dirt
trails
and
the
Mariposa
Bridge,
because
there
is
no
comparison,
chart
and
Analysis
of
the
impact
of
that
particular
property.
A
A
Exhibit
B
working
giraffe,
complete
streets,
objective
design,
development
standards
does
not
reference
anything
with
regard
to
equestrian
priority
streets.
The
city-wide,
complete
Street
plan
adopted
in
2020
includes
chapter
10
equestrian,
which
sets
forth
equestrian
priority
streets
and
sets
forth
objective
standards
with
regard
to
Trails
further
in
the
staff
report
at
Pages,
14,
17
and
18,
there
are
citations
to
policies
in
Burbank
2035
with
regard
to
complete
streets
and
equestrians.
Why
is
there
not
a
mention
of
equestrian
equestrian
priority
or
like
in
or
like
in
exhibit
B.
A
A
If
I
recall,
the
other
question
was
regards
to
the
media
District's
specific
plan
and
the
the
questions
that
they
were
asking
are.
What
protections
will
be
in
place
where
currently
mixed
use
is
not
not
applicable,
but
now
mixed
use
may
be
applicable,
and
how
does
that
relate
to
it
being
butted
up
against
Residential.
A
U
Yes,
Amanda
Landry,
CDD
planning
I
will
make
some
brief
responses
to
a
few
of
the
items
brought
up
by
the
public
and
then
I'll
ask
my
colleague,
David
Christie,
to
speak
more
to
the
complete
streets
and
equestrian
trail
design
issues
I'll
just
kind
of
go
in
order
on
a
few
ideas
that
came
up.
These
projects
are
under
AB,
2011
and
SB.
35
are
a
streamlined
ministerial
reviews.
The
city's
review
Authority
for
these
the
decision
makers
is
going
to
be
the
city
council.
U
That's
how
it
currently
is
structured
with
a
sp-35
projects,
and
it
will
be
the
same
for
ab
2011
projects.
The
city
council
will
be
considering
an
amendment
to
clarify
that
in
the
near
future,
so
they
are
when
they
do
this
performance
of
their
ministerial
design
review.
It's
limited
again
only
to
compliance
checks
for
verification,
for
compliance
with
any
of
the
objective,
design
and
development
standards
on
the
books.
U
At
the
time
the
application
was
submitted
and
with
ab2011
coming
online
on
July
1st
2023,
we're
probably
going
to
be
seeing
more
applications,
and
more
of
these
will
be
going
for
the
city
council
there's
a
very
short
window
of
opportunity
for
us
to
take
this
into
consideration
and
have
some
objective
design
and
development
standards
on
the
books
while
where
there
currently
are
none,
we
had
some
questions
about
the
parking
requirements
so
under
SB,
35,
AB,
2011
and
even
under
density
bonus
regulations
and
TOD
regulations.
Parking
can
be
significantly
reduced
or
waived.
U
That's
something
the
applicants
can
do
regardless
of
what
development
standards
we
put
on
the
books.
However,
if
someone
does
come
in
and
wants
to
build
a
typical
like
a
small
mixed
use
with
like
four
units
above
like
2
000
square
feet
of
commercial
sort
of
what
you
would
see
on
main
streets
in
our
recent
past,
they
would
have
to
go
through
a
conditional
use,
permit
process
and
a
development
review,
and
they
would
be
subject
to
compliance
with
parking
standards
that
we're
putting
into
place
because
they
are
coming
in
through
the
cities
process.
U
If
they
invoke
AB,
2011
or
sp35,
then
they
can
waive
those
parking
requirements
for
the
notification.
The
the
question
about.
Why
aren't
all
the
materials
available,
the
date
of
publication,
of
the
notice
they
are
never
available
on
that
date?
They're
always
pushed
to
the
public
on
the
Friday
before
the
commission
meeting
they're
never
available
10
business
days
before
the
meeting.
U
Although
there
are
working
documents
available
on
online
to
some
extent
and
staff
is
always
available
for
questions
or
comments
or
have
appointments
to
anyone,
that's
interested
in
the
process
or
to
make
comments,
but
the
full.
The
entire
staff
report
and
completed
attachments
are
not
on
of
the
date
of
publication
of
those
Public
Notices.
U
They
are
available
on
the
website
by
six
on
the
Friday
before
the
Planning
Commission
meeting
for
the
question
about
what
is
the
difference
before
before
and
after
I
wanted
to
make
clear
that
the
development
standards
for
the
multi-family
residential
in
non-residential
zones
and
the
mixed
use
are
completely
new
standards.
There
is
no
change
from
before
and
after
because
there
are
none
so
currently
if
a
project
is
submitted,
a
residential
project
is
submitted
on,
say,
a
C3
property.
There
are
no
residential
standards
to
apply
to
that
project.
U
They
only
have
to
meet
the
very
limited
commercial
development
standards
same
with
mixed
use.
There
are
no
mixed-use
development
standards,
so
we
only
apply
what
development
standards
are
on
the
books.
There's
a
small
area
in
the
Burbank
Center
plan,
where
it
talks
about
just
kind
of
combining
multi-family
with
commercial,
but
it
there.
It
doesn't
address
any
of
the
conflicts
that
arise
between
those
two
sets
of
development
or
the
actual
issues
that
arise
during
for
that
type
of
development,
and
it
has
been
very
rarely
exercised.
U
Let
me
see
for
the
media
District
specific
plan
questions
they're
they're,
going
through
an
extensive
update
process.
At
this
time
there
has
been
quite
a
bit
of
community
outreach,
but
that
specific
plan
isn't
expected
to
come
online
until
the
end
of
this
year,
and
that
is
after
the
date
that
AB
2011
goes
into
effect
on
July
1st.
U
So
there
will
be
a
window
of
time
where
there
is
nothing
to
protect
the
people
in
the
media
district
from
development
that
comes
in
under
any
of
these
regulations,
because
the
media
District
specific
plan
regulations
at
this
time
are
so
worded
so
that
they
are
not
objective
standards
and
we
can't
enforce
them.
So
there's
these
sort
of
aspirational
language
in
those
developments,
the
standards,
but
they
are
not
objective
development
terms
and
we
can't
enforce
them,
so
they
can't
apply.
E
Question
before
you
do,
let
me
just
augment
what
Amanda
was
mentioning
too
I
think
there
was
a
question
from
one
of
the
speakers
as
to
examples
so
a
case
in
point.
You've
you've
seen
you've
not
interacted
with
these
projects,
but
the
Pickwick
project,
which
is
on
it,
was
a
commercial
site
right
commercial
use
that
then,
was
converted
into
residential.
E
If
you
recall,
there
was
a
lot
of
angst
and
consternation
from
some
members
of
the
public
that
why
were
the
Development
Centers
that
we
were
applying
to
it
so
limited
like
why
weren't
we
asking
for
more
things
through
that
process
and
the
fact
is
those
standards
weren't
in
place.
So
what
this
type
of
a
project
does
is
in
the
case
of
Empire,
you
know
what
standards
did
you
apply
there?
Well,
it's
industrial
zone
property.
E
In
addition
to
that,
what
this
also
does,
is
it
references
the
fact
that
SB
35
projects
in
those
corridors
would
also
have
to
apply
these
development
standards?
So
when
you
have
a
mixed
use,
project
or
100
residential
project,
or
even
in
other
cases
where
it's
not
an
SB
35
or
an
AB
2011?
But
someone
wants
to
do
an
info
project
of
these
types.
E
When
an
applicant
comes
to
submit
an
application,
they
can
look
at
those
standards
and
then
to
their
best
of
their
ability
and
whatever
the
limitations
of
the
law
is
to
design
a
project
so
that
it
integrates
better
into
the
neighborhood
as
best
it
can,
but
absent
that
we're
very
limited
in
what
can
we
can
request
or
suggest,
because
they
can
invoke
that
provision
of
the
law
that
says
I'm
only
going
to
comply
with
the
objective
standards
on
the
books?
In
addition
to
that,
and
David
will
talk
a
little
bit
greater
about
this.
E
Is
the
city
is
undertaking
a
longer
term
effort
to
establish
kind
of
a
a
database
of
objective
development
and
design
standards?
The
chapter
that's
in
front
of
you
is
the
first
chapter
of
multiple
chapters.
This
particular
one
David
will
speak
about
in
Greater.
Detail
focuses
on
the
infill
development
along
the
commercial
corridors.
There
was
a
question
regarding
the
equestrian
section
of
the
complete
streets
and
how
that
would
be
implemented.
E
We'd
have
to
do
a
separate
chapter
to
codify
those
requirements,
and
what
you
have
in
front
of
you
is
what
we
could
honestly
put
together
in
such
a
short
window
to
be
able
to
one
bring
it
before
the
commission
and
then
go
to
council
and
have
something
presented
in
front
of
them
and
codify,
so
that
we're
basically
only
like
two
days
difference
between
the
effective
date
of
ab2011
and
when
these
standards
would
take
effect.
So
it's
not
perfect.
E
We'll
also
take
additional
input
and
the
council
will
but
we're
in
a
better
position
with
these
regulations,
and
we
are
absent
them
because
at
least
now
we
have
objective
development
standards
that
we
can
refer
applicants
to
instead
of
what
we
currently
have,
which
is
hit
or
miss
on,
depending
on
what
zone
it's
in
and
the
type
of
development
they're
going
to
make
for
the
project.
But
I
just
wanted
to
add
that
David.
W
Yes,
good
evening,
chair
Rosati
and
members
of
the
commission,
David
Christie
assistant,
community
development,
director
for
transportation
and
my
team
and
I
were
responsible
for
helping
the
planning
division
with
crafting
the
objective
design
standards
for
complete
streets
and
as
Mr
Ramirez
mentioned.
This
is
a
first
cut.
W
We
are
trying
to
capture
with
this
first
cut
kind
of
the
standard,
basic,
primarily
pedestrian
realm
and,
to
some
extent,
bicycle
realm,
right-of-way
improvements
that
come
with
land
use
and
how
we
can
put
those
into
standards
that
can
just
be
objectively
applied
to
projects
without,
as
Mr
Ramirez
and
Ms
Landry
stated
without
us,
as
professionals
having
input
and
decisions
made
about
those
improvements.
So
pedestrian
realm
improvements,
sidewalk
widths,
the
arrangement
of
the
sidewalk
curb
radii
crosswalks.
W
But
we
need
to
work
out
those
details
in
a
bit
longer
fashion
or
maybe
as
part
of
the
specific
plans
that
we're
working
on,
which
is
why
they're
not
initially
included,
but
we
did
want
to
focus
on
kind
of
bread
and
butter,
complete
Street
safety
and
improvements
that
we
know
we
ask
for
of
most,
if
not
all
projects
but
we're
finding
with
SB
35
projects
and
potentially
with
the
2011
projects.
We
don't
have
the
ability
now
to
ask
for
it.
W
If
it's
not
explicitly
part
of
a
standard,
we
have
our
complete
streets
guidelines,
but
we
don't
have
standards.
So,
specifically,
with
the
equestrian
improvements,
you
know
we
have
a
map
of
equestrian
priority
streets
and
the
complete
streets
plan.
Talks
about
on
those
streets
consider
equestrian
improvements
on
them.
We
focused
at
the
at
the
community
level
at
the
city
council
level
on
a
particular
kind
of
network
of
potential
future
equestrian
Trails.
W
But
then
the
map
is
all
sorts
of
streets,
and
if
we
kind
of
just
objectively
applied
a
standard,
we
might
be
putting
little
fragments
of
horse
trail
on
every
equestrian
street.
So
we
need
a
little
more
nuance
and
a
little
more
planning
to
figure
out
how
to
objectify
and
put
more
concrete
standards
for
some
of
the
equestrian
improvements,
because
they
don't
lend
themselves
to
be
kind
of
very
basic,
whereas
every
every
other
land
use
project
has
a
sidewalk
most
projects
maybe
have
an
intersection
and
those
things
we
can.
E
E
The
importance
of
this
is
that
as
comprehensive
and
as
large,
an
area
as
specific
plans
cover
that
we're
talking
about.
There
are
still
pockets
of
corridors
that
are
non-residential
zoned
areas
where
these
type
of
infill
can
occur,
and
this
would
be
this
would
cover
all
those
areas
up
until
the
specific
plans
are
in
place.
But
then
those
standards
would
would
apply
and
someone
would
have
to
take
an
application
through
and
look
at
those
standards
and
see
what
they're
going
to
comply
with
or
what
they're
going
to
invoke.
E
You
know
a
waiver
or
a
concession
or
something
under
different.
You
know
land
use
requirements
like
density
bonus
law
or
SB
35,
so
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
to
add
that
so
it's
not
like
it's
set
in
stone
today
and
can't
be
modified,
but
what
it
does
is
it
gives
us
a
leg
up
by
having
standards
in
place
that
we
could
refer
to
which
don't,
as
Miss
Landry
noted,
don't
exist
in
those
two
areas.
Currently
in
our
code.
T
A
U
Clarifications
to
the
commenter
on
the
r1h
exclusion
from
non-residential
zones
that
was
on
exhibit
two
to
attachment
a
page
one,
and
that
was
a
little
oversight.
We
just
missed
it
so
we'll
make
sure
that
it's
corrected
moving
forward
to
include
r1h,
and
then
there
was
also
a
question
that
had
come
through
about
cup
requirements
for
other
land
uses
as
part
of
mixed-use
development.
U
Av
2011
doesn't
excuse
you
from
having
to
go
through
a
cup
for
the
land
use.
It
only
allows
or
requires
the
city
to
allow
the
structure
to
be
built,
but
whatever
use
goes
into,
that
structure
still
has
to
go
through
the
city's
permitting
process
so
say.
For
example,
someone
wanted
to
sell
alcohol
at
a
convenience
store
as
part
of
a
mixed-use
development.
They
have
to
obtain
that
cup
for
the
alcohol
sales,
but
we
have
to
allow
the
development
of
the
structure
to
be
filled
with
whatever
use
is
allowed.
U
G
T
X
There
is
actually
a
requirement
in
SB
in
AV
2011
that
the
site
isn't
a
site
or
a
joint
to
a
site
where
more
than
a
third
of
the
square
square,
footage
is
dedicated
to
Industrial
use
and
that
is
defined
as
a
site
that
is
currently
being
used
as
an
industrial
site
was
most
recently
permitted
or
was
designated
as
an
industrial
use
which
is
defined
in
the
statute,
and
the
latest
version
of
the
general
plan
and
industrial
use
is
defined
as
use.
That
includes
utilities,
manufacturing,
Transportation
storage
and
maintenance
facilities
and
warehousing
uses.
X
So
to
the
extent
that
the
statute
defines
industrial
use
if
the
adjacent
site
or
the
site
itself
does
not
contain
a
third
of
the
square
footage
dedicated
to
Industrial
use,
it's
potentially
still
allowed
to
be
developed
with
a
mixed
use
or
residential
project.
If
it
does
not
meet
those
qualifiers.
That
I
mentioned
earlier.
E
The
difference
being
under
sp-35
if
the
general
plan
allows
a
residential
use
on
a
Zone,
including
Industrial,
then
under
sb35
you
can
submit
a
development
proposal
for
residential
on
an
industrial
Zone
lot.
That's
why
you
have
them
submitted
on
Empire!
That's
why
you
have
them
submitted
at
910,
Mariposa.
G
E
E
So
this
is
a
this
is
the
difference
because
I
think
SB,
35
and
ab
2011.
We
need
to
kind
of,
even
though
they're
following
similar
processes,
the
requirements
and
the
conditions
upon
which
you
apply
for
one
or
the
other
are
not
exactly
the
same.
So
in
the
case
of
SB
35,
there's
language
in
the
statute
and
in
our
ordinance
that
in
those
areas
where
there
is
conflict
between
the
zoning
and
the
general
plan,
if
residential
is
allowed
in
the
general
plan,
then
you're
allowed
to
submit
an
application
for
residential
development.
E
That
is
the
case
at
Pickwick.
That
is
the
case
at
the
industrial
sites
on
Empire.
Is
they
have
industrial?
When
you
go
and
look
at
the
list,
it
doesn't
list
residential.
However,
when
you
go
to
the
general
plan,
it
references
you
back
to
the
zoning
it
references
in
the
zoning
code,
a
consistency
table
that
is
derived
directly
from
the
general
plan
residential
is
allowed
there,
and
residential
density
is
also
allowed
in
the
general
plan
at
that
location
under
its
land
use
designation.
So
it's
it's
actually
in
both
locations.
E
E
That's
a
whole
different
discussion
and
we
have
to
deal
with
things
like
no
net
loss,
which
means
that
we
can't
just
down
zone
or
remove
zoning
designations
on
properties
without,
in
essence,
finding
out
where
we're
going
to
shift
that
established
development
potential
to
another
location,
because
that's
that
would
be
a
violation
of
State
housing
law
and
land
use
regulation.
So
that's
why
we're
not
doing
that?
What
we're
doing
now
is
what's
allowed
in
the
statute
under
AB
2011
is
to
establish
standards
that
would
create
objective,
Development
Centers
on
a
process
for
ministerial
review.
E
That's
why
this
particular
one
references
you
to
a
set
of
standards
for
mixed
use
and
multi-family.
It
also
identifies
that
you'd
go
through
a
similar
checklist
review
process,
as
you
do
for
SB
35,
and
that
the
council,
because
it's
an
option
available
in
the
code,
would
take
on
ministerial
review
of
ab2011
projects
like
they
do
for
sb35.
X
I
can
take
that
one.
So
those
are
two
separate
state
laws.
So
someone
could
there
was
no
there's
not
really
a
reason
why
somebody
would
elect
to
use
both
SB
35
and
ab2011
have
some
advantages.
Each
one
has
different
advantages.
For
example,
ab2011
allows
you
if
you're
near
transit
to
a
pure
density,
sb35
does
not
include
that
language,
and
vice
versa.
X
G
U
T
You
and
to
the
extent
that
there's
no
conflict
with
state
law
and
the
project
is
something
that
falls
Within
These,
objective
standards,
so
to
the
extent
that
it's
multi-family,
residential
in
a
commercial
or
in
a
non-residential
zone
or
mixed
use
in
a
non-residential
Zone
than
our
local
objective
standards
in
this
proposed
ETA
will
apply
to
that
project.
Okay,
does
that
make
sense?
Yeah,
okay,.
E
And
just
just
to
take
it
one
step
further
right
now
today,
if
we
got
an
application
for
an
SB,
35
we'd
be
limited
to
what's
on
the
books,
for
that
particular
Zone,
because
this
also
includes
the
mix
right
when
we
do
a
mixed
use.
Project
includes
residential
and
Commercial.
It
goes
without
saying,
but
in
the
past,
when
we've
been
able
to
kind
of
Frankenstein
development
standards
is
under
the
plan
developments.
E
So
you
remember
First,
Street
Village
and
the
others,
but
the
state
regulations
make
these
things
now
buy
right
ministerial,
approved
projects.
So
that's
why
it's
important
to
have
these
standards
in
place
because
in
essence,
they
codify
the
objective
standards
that
we
now
have
kind
of
a
starting
off
point
where
everybody's
on
equal
footing-
and
you
have
to
begin
the
process
addressing
the
type
of
whether
it's
a
multi-family
residential,
only
or
a
mixed
use
under
the
standards
that
are
in
place.
E
So
they
are
kind
of
in
essence,
Shoring
up
our
regulations,
which
we
don't
have
the
benefit
of,
but
to
Greg's
point
and
Amanda's
point.
If
you're
an
SB
35,
you
follow
the
SB
35
requirements.
If
you're
an
AB
2011,
you
follow
the
ab.
2011
I
didn't
write
these
codes,
but
in
the
codes
themselves,
ab2011
references
to
kind
of
the
checklist
review.
That's
in
sp35.
E
It's
kind
of
very
circuitous,
but
we
got
to
work
with
the
cards
or
dealt
the
reality
of
it
is
in
my
experience
with
this
is
the
standards
that
staff
collectively
with
Transportation
have
put
together,
puts
us
in
a
much
better
position,
because
when
we
were
reviewing
the
ones
on
Empire
and
we're
currently
reviewing
some
of
them,
we're
very
limited
to
like
what
we
can
apply.
So
when
people
get
frustrated
and
say
why
can't
we
ask
for
more
common
open
space?
Why
can't
we
ask
for
more
private
open
space?
E
Why
is
the
design
doesn't
have
modulation?
Why
doesn't
it
kind
of
create
a
better
infill
of
a
project?
That's
more
sensitive
to
the
neighborhood?
It's
because
those
standards
don't
exist,
and
this
is
an
effort
to
try
to,
in
essence,
crystallize
what
we've
heard
and
take
actually
to
be
quite
clear
to
refer
back
to
existing
code
in
a
way
that
provides
that
neighborhood
context
in
those
situations,
because
I
anticipate
and-
and
this
is
the
one
thing
that
really
concerns
me-
is
absent.
E
These
standards
on
on
July
1st,
we
may
get
a
project,
let's
say
on
Magnolia,
where
someone
takes
a
whole
commercial
strip
right
adjacent
to
R1
and
basically,
if
they
meet
certain
standards,
they're
able
to
up
the
height
up
the
density
and
provide
very
limited
to
No
Parking
On
Site.
But
with
these
standards
at
least,
we
have
a
starting
off
point
that
mitigates
some
of
that,
so
that
that's
really
the
intent
here.
A
E
U
So
if
a
specific
plan
was
in
place
by
2022,
yes,
if
they
are
not
currently
in
place,
they
are
subject
to
this
AB
2011
regulations.
When
the
new
regulations
come
a
specific
plan
regulations
come
online,
then
those
become
the
objective
design
standards
that
apply
to
those
projects,
but
they
were
only
excluded
from
Ab
2011.
If
you
had
a
specific
plan
with
objective
design
standards
in
place
in
2022,
so
we
missed
that
deadline.
A
U
A
A
A
U
Well,
there's
sites
that
it
can
go
into,
but
yeah
sp35
has
a
much
broader
capability
across
the
city
and
these
regulations
would
apply
to
those
projects
as
well.
So
while
it
isn't
a
total
security
blanket,
it
is
offering
up
regulations
where
there
are
none.
So
it's
better
than
something
is
better
than
nothing.
E
In
a
chair,
if
I
may
nothing
here-
and
hopefully
this-
maybe
we
weren't
clear
in
saying
this,
but
this
doesn't
Stave
off
ab2011
applications
say
it
again.
This
doesn't
Stave
off
AB
2011
application;
in
other
words,
it
doesn't
stop
them
from
occurring.
The
intent
here
is
understanding
the
cards
that
were
dealt.
E
Think
from
that
standpoint,
that's
what
we're
looking
at
it
is
we're
we're
mitigating
the
fact
that
we
don't
have
these
standards
to
apply
to
a
project
and
we're
doing
it
not
in
the
most
ideal
situation,
because
it'd
be
great
if
we
had
if
they
gave
us
a
year
to
prepare
for
these
standards.
But
we
were
given
a
really
short
window
from
when
it
was
approved
to
Here.
We
are
now
and
considering
every
other
obligation.
We
have
with
four
other
specific
plans
in
the
queue.
E
What
you
have
is
is
just
that
it's
it's
a
set
of
standards
that
help
us
in
the
immediate
But.
Ultimately,
I,
anticipate
that
over
time,
they're
gonna
we're
gonna
have
to
update
these
and
tweak
them.
Because
statute
may
change
and
that's
what
happened
with
us
with
Adu
we're
like
on
our
I've,
been
here
since
2017.
I,
think
we're
on
our
fourth
or
fifth
Adu
Amendment,
and
that's
because
every
time
we
modify
something
the
state
would
come
back
and
say:
oh
well,
we
removed
that
requirement.
E
So
now
you
got
to
amend
your
code
or,
if
not
your
code's
invalidated.
So
those
are
what
we
anticipate.
It's
not
set
in
stone
done
forever.
We
anticipate
we're
going
to
be
having
this
conversation,
both
with
you
all
and
the
council
in
the
long
term,
on
how
we
deal
with
infield
development,
especially
as
State
Law
changes,
and
we
get
more
intensification
because
my
understanding
is
there's
100,
more
bills
in
the
queue
and
that's
that's
kind
of
been
the
you
know
par
for
the
course
of
the
last
four,
at
least
so.
A
B
B
I
mean
that's.
My
next
question
is,
is:
do
we
take
on
the
responsibility
we
being
Burbank
now
again,
I
may
be,
I
have
only
been
here
since
2019.
My
frame
of
reference
is
again
New,
York,
City
Etc.
Is
there
a
way
of
proactively
doing
a
development
and
saying?
Well,
we
have
an
affordable
housing
project
here,
and
this
is
the
standards
it's
an
80
20.
E
So
there
is
a
way
it's
a
big
lift
as
you're
aware
under
SB
35
in
particular
right
the
last
time
around
when
we
were
SB
35
was
applied
to
us.
Our
housing
production
numbers
didn't
meet
the
minimum
thresholds
under
the
statute.
My
recollection
is
in
I
think
it's
mid
mid
cycle
of
our
current
planning
housing
element
planning
cycle,
which
is
six
cycle
in
2025.
E
The
state
will
look
again
at
the
different
cities,
housing
production
numbers
and
my
recollection
I
have
to
go
back,
but
I
think
we
have
to
basically
be
at
50,
plus
one
right
in
all
the
different
income
levels
to
be
able
to
considered
outside
of
the
SB
35
application
to
us.
So
it's
a
big
lift
I
mean
we're
already
in
2023.
Our
housing
element
was
from
2021
and
then
we're
we're
looking
at
from
two
years
from
now
to
basically
build
effectively
half
of
8772
units
in
all
the
in
all
the
different
income
levels
right.
E
So
it's
it's
a
huge
lift,
so
I
would
say
to
be
realistic.
We're
kind
of
under
SB
35
as
long
as
it
exists,
and
it
doesn't
if
it
doesn't
have
a
termination,
Clause
I,
know,
there's
some
discussion
about
extending
that
time
frame,
passed,
I
believe
it's
2026,
but
but
the
here
we
are
like
we're
dealing
with
the
cards
were
dealt,
and
that
is
absent
standards.
It's
just
more
frustration
to
the
community
right
that
it's
like
well,
what's
what's
staff's
point
of
reference
and
when
these
applications
come
in
right
now,
it's
very
limited.
E
What
we
can
do,
but
I
I
would
feel
more
comfortable
with
the
standards
in
place
and
me
vigorously
defending
those
standards
and
them
having
to,
in
essence,
prove
back
to
us
that
no,
that
we're
Exempted
from
that
one.
We're
Exempted
from
this
one
I'd
rather
go
meticulously
one
through
each
one
right,
because
right
now
absent
this,
my
my
focus
and
my
purview
over
their
project
is
so
limited,
and
so
we
end
up
in
a
situation
where
here
we
are
coming
to
the
council
and
saying
this
is
what
you
get
and
there's
not.
E
But,
right
now
our
process
is
is
still
in
in
its
infancy
in
the
sense
of
developing
the
specific
plan.
So
I
think
that's
where
your
work
will
be
very
important
is
how
do
we
craft
things
so
that
the
community
gets
what
they
want
and
that
the
argument
that
the
state
and
and
certain
Advocates
of
this
effort
always
tell
the
cities?
Oh
it's.
You
always
put
restrictions
on
the
production
of
housing.
So
now
we're
forced
to
put
this
in
place
and
force
you
to
build
housing,
so
I
think
I
think
we
take
the
opposite
right.
E
We
show
our
production
numbers,
we
show
how
we
streamline
it,
but
you
know
that's
kind
of
for
the
future.
The
Here
and
Now
is
we're
dealing
with
this
issue
right
here.
Right
now
and
ab
2011
is
eminent.
It's
coming
on.
July,
1st
and
I.
I
really
worry
about
not
having
standards
like
this
in
place
and
then
just
what
we
could
get
absent.
This
alternative.
B
E
B
Have
so,
in
other
words,
we
have
some
sort
of
and
I
hate
that
term
infrastructure
in
place
that
if
we
wanted
to
start
doing
this
on
our
own
and
come
up
with
a
plan,
and
we
are
the
ones
that
control
the
land,
we
control
the
project
and
we're
adhering
to
the
economic,
slash,
Financial
aspects
of
the
deal,
in
other
words,
we're
meeting
standards
for
affordable
housing
Etc.
If
we
can
do
that,
we
can
sort
of
like
beat
them
to
the
punch.
Is
that
right?
If.
E
That's
a
good
step,
but
but
the
reality
of
it
is
it's
a
it's.
It
is
we
we
understand
it's
a
heavy
lift
the
city
collectively,
when
we,
when
the
council
approved
the
housing
element,
understood
that
the
production
numbers
are
a
huge
ask
and
to
the
point
where
the
community,
we
still
have
to
assess
this
right
right.
What's
the
impact
infrastructure,
what's
its
impact
to,
how
is
it
going
to
integrate
into
the
into
the
different
neighborhoods
or
adjacency
to
neighborhoods?
G
E
Any
development
standard
that
the
council
approves
will
be
helpful
because
it
explains
or
well
if
it's
an
objective
standard
will
help
explain
to
a
developer,
what's
expected
of
them
as
well
as
staff.
There
are
a
lot
of
planning
efforts
currently
underway
and
the
timing
of
which
they
can't
all
be
done
in
one
Fell
Swoop
right
now,
what's
in
front
of
you
is
what
we
could
physically
bring
forth
with
a
focused
effort
and
that's
the
ab
2011.
E
council
is
going
to
be
considering
in
the
case
of
equestrian
and
the
Rancho
they've
already
given
a
green
light
for
Rancho
specific
plan
included
as
part
of
that
are
development
standards,
Mr
Christie's,
actually
working
on
an
equestrian
trail
that
will
actually
help
refine
what
those
standards
are
going
to
be.
It's
quite
possible
that,
once
those
standards
are
kind
of
in
essence,
applied
to
a
project,
and
we
have
specifics,
those
would
be
objective
Sanders
and
they
could
easily
be
incorporated
into
the
other
thing.
E
G
E
Well,
no
I
think
we
look
at
it
this
way.
The
stuff
in
the
right-of-way
I
think
there's
a
much
stronger
case
for
things
in
the
right-of-way
that
are
codified
to
be
followed.
I
think
where
they're
going
to
really
push
is
on
what
limitations
you're
making
to
the
site
to
allow
someone
to
build
the
M,
the
building
envelope
to
accommodate
the
number
of
units
that
they're
Allowed
by
right
to
build
out?
E
E
So
those
are
the
kind
of
things
it
all
has
to
be
kind
of
relative
to
what
you're
doing
to
impact
the
building
envelope
for
them
to
build
their
project
under
these
statutory
requirements,
but
I
think
we're
in
stronger
footing
to
say,
let's
codify
dimensions
for
sidewalks,
that's
codify
things
like
equestrian
tail
Dimensions.
Once
we
have
those
and
that
way
at
least
it's
there
right.
That
was
one
of
the
debates
during
the
Pickwick
is.
Why
wasn't
that
policy
applied?
E
Well
because
we
don't
have
it
as
a
codified
standard,
so
we
need
to
codify
it
as
a
standard.
So
then
we're
all
in
the
same
place
and
say:
okay
now
we
can
move
forward
with
that.
So
what's
in
front
of
you
is,
is
not
all-encompassing.
It's
the
best
of
what
we
have
in
the
immediate,
but
I
agree
with
you.
One
of
the
things
is
that
soon
thereafter
we
should
be
looking
at
these
other
things
to
kind
of
again
play
catch
up
to
Mr
Monaco's.
E
R
E
U
U
E
So
Amanda,
maybe
you
can
clarify
for
them.
So
there's
two
there's
two
maps
on
the
screen.
There
is
a
attachment
a
to
Exhibit
C
page
one
and
then
there's
page
two
and
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong
and
Greg
and
Amanda
collectively,
but
ab2011
has
certain
areas
from
which
you're
precluded
from
building
right,
also
like
proximity
to
freeway
yeah.
U
U
Right
so
there's
some
some
other
exclusions
built
into
a
2011,
so
I
covered
some
of
them
in
the
presentation
we
just
talked
about
some
of
them
here,
but
additionally
they
cannot
require
the
demolition
of
one
to
four
dwelling
units.
So
you
can't
find
a
site
that
already
has
like
a
two
duplexes
and
say
you're
gonna
do
an
AB
2011
there,
because
it
already
has
this
housing.
U
You
cannot
demolish
a
listed
historic
resource.
If
it's
a
vacant
site,
it
can't
have
any
tribal
cultural
resources
and
it
cannot
be
within
a
very
high
fire.
Hazard
severity
Zone
and
it
can't
demolish
any
deed,
restricted
housing.
So
it
can't
demolish
any
affordable
housing
or
senior
housing
and
it-
and
it's
so
so.
U
A
C
A
E
But
but
one
thing:
if
you
go
to
page
two
and
and
you
all
have
it
in
front
of
you,
if
you
look
at
it
kind
of,
looks
like
a
river,
but
it's
the
500
foot
buffer
that
runs
along
the
five
freeway
and
then
the
other
one
that
goes
on
the
134
freeway.
And
then
you
see
those
those
circles
that
kind
of
go
along
the
commercial
corridors.
If
you
look
at
that
area,
there
are
large
swaths
of
the
commercial
Corridor
kind
of
from
the
media
District
to
downtown
where
there
are
potential
locations.
E
Similarly,
there
are
locations
at
the
intersect
of
Hollywood
Way
in
Thornton
in
that
area.
There's
other
locations
further
north
by
Avion,
where
there
may
be
other
potential
sites,
and
then
even
portions
of
Glen
Oaks
above
where
we're
at
now
that
our
potential
sites
that
could
be
AV
2011
sites,
so
so
there
are.
The
big
concern
is
there's
a
lot
of
areas
that
could
be
impacted,
but
we
won't
know
specifically
if
that
site
is
one
until
we
actually
look
at
it
and
apply
all
these
different
options
and
exceptions.
C
A
X
Mean
the
two
grayish
kind
of
lines
along
the
the
freeways
yeah
that
is
a
500
foot
buffer
from
the
freeway
from
the
edges
of
the
freeway,
that
all
every
single
parcel
in
that
zone
would
be
excluded.
They
would
not
be
able
to
build
so
many
of
the
sites
that
are
shown
along
the
free
or
near
the
within
500
people.
Freeway
would
not
be
able
to
take
advantage
of
this
law,
so
that
would
that
would
include
many
of
the
sides
in
the
media
District,
as
well
as
downtown
and
closer
to
the
airport
as
well
and.
A
B
E
I
I
I
think
that
one's
a
little
too
theoretic
for
for
my
liking-
okay,
commissioner
Monaco,
but
but
let's
give
you
one
that
is
real
world.
That's
been
happening
to
a
lot
of
cities
that
don't
have
a
certified
housing
element
and
that's
called
the
builders
remedy
and
in
the
builders
remedy
you
can
take
a
site
even
if
it's
not
zoned,
for
residential
and
proposed
residential
development
there.
So
what
I?
E
What
I
would
say
is
we
want
to
make
sure
we
are
following
our
housing
plan
program,
including
building
our
production
numbers,
because
you
know
the
state's
going
to
admit
mid-cycle
will
be
tasked
with
reporting
back
to
them.
How
effective
are
opportunity
sites
were
in
the
production
of
Housing
and
what
I
would
hate
to
do
is
to
implement
things
or
not
meet
metrics
that
the
state
is
expecting
and
have
them
feel
like.
You
know
what
we're
going
to
have
to
decertify
your
housing
element
for
non-compliance
with
what
you're
expected
to
do.
God
forbid
that
happened.
E
Now
we
don't
have
a
certified
housing
element
and
then
I
don't
know
if
the
law
is
going
to
change.
But
if
Builder
remedy
is
still
an
option,
we
could
you
know
we
could
potentially
get
C
applications
or
even
have
them
limit
our
our
building
permit
issuance
until
we
figure
out
how
to
produce
more
housing,
so
that
would
be
detrimental
to
the
city
on
other
facets.
So
I
think
we're
very
fortunate.
F
E
My
apologies,
commissioner
week
so
in
there's
kind
of
a
couple
of
things
in
play.
When
we
talk
about
time
frames,
we
have
the
housing
element,
planning
cycle
and
Reporting
periods
for
the
metrics
there
and
then
there's
the
provisions
in
ab2011
that
were
in
essence
saying
that
if
you
had
a
specific
plan
by
2022,
you
could
in
essence
say
in
these
particular
areas.
Ab
2011
doesn't
apply.
Unfortunately,
we
were,
we
have
been
and
are
continuing
to
work
on
our
specific
plan.
So
our
specific
plans,
don't
inoculate
us
from
having
to
apply
AB
2011.
E
However,
Miss
Landry
brought
up
the
fact
that,
once
those
standards
are
in
place,
those
standards
would
be
what
you
would
have
to
be
your
starting
off
point
and
if
you're
going
to
apply
for
an
AB,
2011
or
an
sb35,
then
then
that's
the
standards
that
you
would
be
looking
at
and,
whether
you're
going
to
argue
well
I'd
like
to
get
a
concession
or
a
waiver
from
XYZ.
Those
are
the
standards
that
you
would
be
referring
to
in
the
specific
plan
once
in
place,
but
what
it
doesn't
give
us
is
that
inoculation
of
of
saying.
E
A
G
F
I
agree:
I
mean
I
I'm,
not
going
to
speak
for
the
rest
of
the
commission
for
staff,
but
SB
35,
AB
2011
it
it's
challenging
for
all
of
us
and
to
what
Mr
Donahue
said
that
this
is.
This
is
really
difficult.
Stuff
I'm
sitting
up
here
and
my
background's
in
urban
planning
and
I
find
myself
Googling
a
lot
of
different
things.
So
it's
it's
really
challenging.
F
So
I
would
encourage
everybody
to
just
keep
on
asking
questions
for
staff
if
there's
any
way
possible
to
just
make
make
it
as
easy
as
possible
for
residents
to
understand,
because
I
think
it
is
really
important
that
residents
understand
because
it
it
not
only
helps
us
down
the
line.
It
also
helps
you
because
then
maybe
you
won't
be
Fielding,
a
million
calls.
You
probably
still
will
be,
but
I
don't
know.
Would
that
with
that
being
said,
something's
better
than
nothing?
A
B
A
I'm
just
gonna
say
that
I
I
really
don't
see
any
of
the
logic
in
any
of
these
assembly
bills
and
Senate
bills,
and
it's
defying
the
rules
of
planning
and
urban
planning
and
I'm
sure
it's
probably
difficult
for
you
guys
considering
you
were
educated
in
this
field,
and
you
know-
and
none
of
this
really
makes
sense,
building
a
400
unit.
Building
with
no
parking.
A
A
You
know
in
2019,
when
we,
when
we
did
the
first
major
Adu
revision,
I
didn't
vote
for
it
and
I
brought
up
the
fact
that
in
1989,
the
voters
of
Burbank
passed
measure,
one
slow
growth,
Initiative
for
condos
and
apartments
by
cup
and
and
in
2019.
The
current
Council
extended
measure
one
ten
years
and
from
what
I
understand
the
California
Constitution
prohibits
legislation
from
overriding
a
voter
approved
measure.
A
A
A
Let
them
make
the
decision
to
overturn
or
approve
this,
but
at
some
point
and
I,
don't
know
how
old
I'll
be,
but
at
some
point
I
think
people
are
going
to
get
tired
of
this
and
they'll
look
at
our
leaders
or
our
our
congressmen,
our
Senators
our
assembly,
people
and
say
what
what
are
we
doing
and
why
are
we
doing
this?
This
is
not
what
the
reason
why
I
live
here
and
we
want
a
say
in
our
community
and
the
only
way
that
starts,
if
you
say
no
so.
B
I
think
it's
going
to
be
also
very,
very
important
for
you
folks,
because
you're
going
to
turn
into
targets
and
I
really
feel
you're
going
to
have
to
simplify
this
for
the
public,
because
you're
going
to
have
a
lot
of
conflicting
views,
you're
going
to
have
some
very
nasty
demographic
conclusions
and
I,
don't
know
how
to
make
that
any
clearer.
Okay,
because
we
had
that
issue.
I
will
suggest
that
you
look
at
the
problem
that
they
had
in
Yonkers,
where
the
term
NIMBY
actually
originated.
F
I
do
agree
with
you
fundamentally
saying
no,
but
I
also
don't
want
the
city
to
be
bogged
down
in
litigation,
so
I
do
agree
with
you.
Maybe
there
will
be
the
time
and
place
to
say
no
I.
Don't
necessarily
think
this
is
the
issue
for
me:
I,
completely
respect
that
it's
the
issue
for
you,
but
I'm
sure
we're
going
to
have
much
more
spirited
debates
on
this
moving
forward.
B
I
know
this
is
this
is
clearly
something
that
we're
doing
to
placate
the
powers
in
Sacramento
that
has
absolutely
a
neutral
effect
on
us.
We
aren't
standing
up
for
our
community
and
we're
not
being
proactive
in
trying
to
circumvent
what
is
going
to
be
forced
down
our
throat
so
and
when
it
comes
to
a
vote,
I
guess
we'll
have.
A
I'm
going
to
acknowledge
that
I
completely
understand
what
staff
is
trying
to
do
and
I
completely
understand
how
much
work
they
put
into
this
I
know
that
you're
trying
to
offer
some
protections,
but
if
one
of
these
things
goes
in
and
one
of
my
examples,
then
okay,
so
it's
doesn't
have
as
much
density
as
maybe
it
should.
But
these
things
are
killers
for
our
community
and
you
know
again:
it's
we
are
at
a
very
low
level.
It's
up
for
our
leaders
to
say
no
and
I
think
I.
A
A
Now
is
the
time
for
oral
Communications
from
the
public
any
person.
Speaking
during
this
period,
May
address
the
commission
on
any
matter
concerning
City
business.
Each
person
may
address
the
Planning
Commission
for
a
maximum
time
of
three
minutes
for
members
of
the
public
who
wish
to
comment
in
person.
Please
present
a
completed
speaker
card
to
planning
division
staff.
If
you
wish
to
speak
for
members
of
the
public
that
wish
to
comment
by
telephone,
please
call
818-238-3335
to
address
the
planning
board.
Callers
may
be
placed
in
the
queue
until
all.
In-Person
comments
have
been
received.
A
A
A
M
Good
evening
again,
David
Donahue
a
pleasure
to
be
in
front
of
you
for
the
third
time
this
evening.
I
would
like
to
support
the
comments
made
by
commissioner
Monaco
and
in
particular,
really
Echo
what
you
said
to
chair
Rosati.
We
did
disagree,
I,
consider
myself
a
yimby
as
far
as
accessory
developing
units,
but
I
do
feel
extremely
strong
about
sp-35.
M
I
do
commend
staff
for
their
work
and
their
effort
on
this
presentation.
I
think
they
did
a
great
job
and
they
they
do
have
their
hands
tied.
But
again,
I
would
like
to
support
the
efforts
of
what
you
just
said,
chair
razadi
and
commissioner
Monaco,
for
what
you
did
and
I
do
respect
what
the
other
Commissioners
are
doing,
I
think
again,
I.
Thank
you
very
much
for
your
service
and
your
perspective.
It's
very
valuable
to
the
community.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
L
Hi
good
evening
Mission,
commissioner
Rosati
and
Commissioners
wow
what
a
mess
I
have
to
agree
with
commissioner
rizzotti,
however,
being
a
low-income,
Burbank
resident
for
over
23
years
well,
I
was
probably
middle
income
before
I
got
evicted
and
got
pushed
out
of
my
apartment
of
23
years.
We
have
a
big
mess
going
on.
A
A
Motion
passes,
introduction
of
additional
agenda
items.
Now
is
the
time
in
to
and
place
to
introduce
additional
agenda
items
planning
board
members
May
introduce
new
items
for
a
discussion,
but
no
action
may
take
place
except
to
place
it
on
a
future
agenda.
Do
any
members
have
anything
to
introduce,
seeing
none.
E
E
So
it's
kind
of
tough
when
you're,
measured,
everybody's
being
measured
by
the
same
stick:
people
that
don't
want
to
do
you
know
really
adamantly
don't
want
to
do
housing
and
then
here
you
are
you've,
done
quite
a
bit
to
move
the
needle
in
a
positive
direction.
So
I
commend
you
I
empathize,
with
the
frustration
and
just
wanted
to
make
sure
you
know
we
we
hear
you
from
both
sides
and
that
does
that
record
of
that
information
will
also
be
communicated
to
the
council.
E
So
I
wanted
to
make
sure
I
re-emphasize
that,
because
sometimes
it's
lost
in
this
process,
but
but
it's
your
words
and
your
feedback
do
matter
to
us.
The
public
is
hearing
as
well
and
we'll
have
a
updated.
You
know
community
meeting
where
we'll
hear
more
feedback,
I
think
that'll
be
helpful
as
well
and
then
eventually
take
out
all
that
information
account
so
at
a
future
meeting
date.
So
I
wanted
to
just
kind
of
close
that
loop
on
that.
E
The
other
thing,
too,
is
I,
know
a
lot
of
the
public
will
go
to
you
all
as
a
group
to
give
you
feedback
on
a
particular
project.
It
would
be
helpful
when
you
get
a
chance.
I
know
sometimes
they're
giving
you
you
may
be
getting
emails
like
last
minute
before
you're
walking
in
the
door.
So
I
totally
understand
that,
but
where
you
can
forward
that
information
to
us,
even
if
it
is
just
electronically,
that
would
be
helpful
just
so
that
we
can
print
it
out
and
give
it
to
the
whole
commission.
E
So
sometimes
you
know
it's
good
for
you
to
have
that
info,
but
then
I
also
want
to
make
sure
that
if
we
get
it
as
public
information
that
we
make
it
available
to
the
public
so
where
you
can
or
if
you
have
constituents
on
a
regular,
provide
you
with
feedback
on
items,
please
we
we
can
be
communicated
as
well
or
just
forward
it
to
us
when
you
get
a
chance,
but
that
would
be
helpful.
Thank
you.
A
E
E
E
You
know,
give
you
feedback
or
give
you
some
additional
information,
and
then,
if
you
still
want
your
comments,
communicated
I
I
wouldn't
negate
someone
from
communicating
with
you
directly
by
all
means,
but
as
soon
as
we
get
it,
even
if
it's
last
minute,
you
know
we'll
have
somebody
print
them
out
and
get
them
to
you
guys.
So,
just
where
we
can,
let's
just
keep
those
lines
of
communication,
open,
public
and
and
commission
like
so.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
Great,
we
now
adjourn
the
planning
board
meeting
to
Monday
May
8th
2023
at
6
PM.
The
meeting
will
be
held
in
person
in
the
city
council
chambers
at
275,
East,
Olive
Avenue.
The
public
is
invited
to
attend
the
meeting
in
person
or
view
the
meeting
online
or
on
television.
The
public
will
be
able
to
provide
public
comment
in
the
following
three
ways
in
person
at
the
meeting.