Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Thank you.

Good evening and welcome to the Monday, August 24th, 2026 regular meeting of the City of Burbank Planning Commission. Before we begin our meeting, there will be one 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 hearing public comment periods. If you would like to participate, In the public comment period, by making an in-person comment, please complete a completed speaker card to 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. Please join me for a moment of reflection. This moment is intended to begin our meeting with a positive and collective support for our beloved community. The Planning Commission welcomes everyone joining us this evening. We encourage you to take a moment to reflect on our community and the work we will be doing tonight. Although each of us has our own unique reasons for being here, we are united in our passion for our wonderful city. As we pause, let us consider our own individual contributions and what they mean to those around us. Let us find solace in knowing that by working together with a shared spirit of community and partnership, we will always act responsibly for the city of Burbank. Will everyone please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Madam Clerk, will you please conduct the roll? Chair Wick?

Present. Vice Chair Safarian? Present. Commissioner Van Gorder?

Present.

Commissioner Bennett?

I'm here.

And Commissioner Mendez?

Here.

Do we have any announcements from city staff?

Chair, no announcements from staff.

Thank you. 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 THE PLANNING DIVISION. FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WISH TO COMMENT BY TELEPHONE, PLEASE CALL 238-3335 TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION. CALLERS WILL BE PLACED IN A QUEUE 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 computer and take your phone off speaker when you deliver public comment. Madam Clerk, do we have any speakers here tonight or callers on the line? Great. Our first speaker is Corey Mensing.

Good evening.

Hello. I don't really have anything prepared, and if I could state the obvious, it is so hot. So I'm still catching my breath from walking over here. I just wanted to introduce myself. Again, my name is Corey Mensing. I am on the Heritage Commission. I'm not speaking on behalf of the commission in any way, but I just wanted to introduce myself. I have watched a few planning commission meetings. We have some overlaps. I'm really interested in what you're all doing, but I also wanted to welcome you to attend our meeting. So we meet the first Thursday of every month. So I think our next meeting is next week, September already. I think it's next Thursday, yeah. So next Thursday at 5.30. One other thing I'm working on, sorry, I'm still catching my breath, is EV charging infrastructure in the city. So it's not one department's accountability. So I've talked to Burbank Water and Power. I brought this up to city council and I may bring it up again tomorrow night. But I found out the hard way that you cannot charge in a public station between 3 and 5 a.m. It's the most expensive charging session ever. I have been working with BWP on that. I found out more information last Thursday, which I probably will share tomorrow night. But I just wanted to bring that up to this group as you're planning future development in Burbank. We're gonna need more infrastructure, and I think the code is a little behind where we're at now, so planning again for the future is probably gonna be really beneficial. I'm trying to turn my hard lesson into hopefully someone else's good fortune in the future. But again, I just wanted to introduce myself. Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Are there any other cards? We have no more speakers or callers.

No more speakers or callers? OK, great. There being no further public comment, I now declare the public comment period closed. Moving on to hearing items. There are no hearing items in one report on tonight's agenda. Moving on to number H, reports to commission. Now is the time for reports from city staff. There was one report to the commission and a study session for the draft downtown transit oriented development specific plan policy document project number 1818-0003736. City staff requests feedback from the planning commission on the draft downtown TOD specific plan to ensure it aligns with community priorities and council objectives. The specific plan is a result of a six-year planning effort that included extensive public engagement, technical analysis, and policy development. It establishes a coordinated strategy to facilitate housing development for the high-quality transit while supporting affordability, reducing vehicle trips, and strengthening downtown Burbank as a regional employment center. Before we begin, do any planning commission members have any legal, financial, or any other conflict of interest regarding tonight's hearing?

No. No.

No. No. No. All right. Hearing five no's. Have any planning commission members had any communications, including written or oral, with any person about this project?

No.

No. No.

Madam Chair, I've spoken to a bunch of just different community members, and no one in particular stands out. But, yeah, I've had a lot of conversations about how we're developing in downtown over the past few months.

Okay. Mr. City Attorney, you good with that? You can be objective?

It appears he can be objective based on the fact that he doesn't recall anyone specific.

Right.

And it sounds like it was general conversations.

Got it. Mr. Ramirez, have the notices required by law been given?

Yes.

Are there any written communications on this matter?

Leonard, have we received any? No communications.

Okay.

Will the representative of the Community Development Department please introduce yourself and summarize the matter before us?

Yes. Good evening, Commissioners. May you please bring up the presentation? Good evening, Chair Wick and Commissioners. My name is Leonard Bechet, Principal Planner with the Planning Division and Project Manager for the Downtown TOD Specific Plan. Our team has previously provided two updates to the planning commission that included the project's purpose, vision, and guiding principles, and draft development potential. And we've also had a couple of scoping meetings for our environmental document in the past. Today I'm pleased to present an overview of the completed administrative draft of the downtown TOD specific plan. And staff is seeking general planning commission feedback to ensure that the plan continues to reflect city council and community priorities, including adding more housing, especially workforce and affordable units, to balance our jobs and housing, expanding the Civic Center, redeveloping the Burbank Town Center, creating a safe, attractive, and vibrant downtown, supporting a walkable, transit-oriented, mixed-use environment, and protecting our existing neighborhoods. The Downtown TOD Specific Plan is a comprehensive planning initiative aimed at encouraging housing near high-quality transit while supporting affordability, reducing vehicle trips, and reinforcing downtown Burbank's role as a regional employment and entertainment center. It builds on our prior downtown planning efforts, the 1997 Burbank Center Plan and the 2012 North San Fernando Boulevard Master Plan, by establishing a unified land use vision and objective development standards that align with recent state housing laws, emphasizing streamlined, objective residential development The project also includes a general plan amendment and a program EIR under CEQA. This specific plan project is funded through City Council appointed general funds and grant funding from the State Senate Bill 2 Planning Grant Program and Metro's Transit Oriented Development Planning Grant Program. This project has six phases. Work began in 2020 with the discovery phase, followed by the visioning phase to shape the plan's guiding principles, overall framework, goals, and policies. The team then developed land use alternatives and growth scenarios. We are now nearing the end of the plan preparation phase, which includes completing the draft specific plan and the program EIR. The plan preparation phase has taken longer because the city is developing four specific plans at the same time, including this one. This coordinated effort ensures that all plans align and that our utility system can support the projected growth studied in each plan's environmental review. The project team has worked closely with BWP and Public Works to align our land use planning with their ongoing utility planning work being carried out by these teams. The draft specific plan is now available for public review and the project team anticipates releasing the draft program EIR in the fall for public review. Planning Commission review and City Council review and adoption of the specific plan and the EIR is anticipated for winter 2027. The Downtown TOD specific plan includes 10 chapters with appendices to be released with the final draft. The first two chapters cover the plan's purpose, process, and background. Chapter 1 explains what a specific plan is, how this one applies to downtown Burbank, its relationship to existing plans and regulations, the planning and outreach process, and, once completed, an overview of the environmental assessment from the draft program EIR. Chapter 2 provides the background that shaped the plan, including downtown's history, existing physical conditions, placemaking characteristics, and key opportunities and constraints that inform the plan's goals and policies. The three photos on the bottom of the slide show how San Fernando Boulevard, the main street of downtown, has evolved over time. The map to the right of the slide shows the existing distribution of land uses in downtown. Chapter three outlines the plan's vision, guiding principles, framework, goals, and policies. These were shaped by city council direction and extensive community input, including workshops, surveys, walking tours, stakeholder meetings, and discussions with city departments, divisions, boards, and commissions. Together they reflect the community's vision for downtown's future. The map shown highlights the districts, corridors, and neighborhoods that these goals and policies support. Chapter 4 illustrates the results of the public planning process. It introduces key transit-oriented development principles, presents the overall vision for the plan area, and describes each downtown neighborhood, district, and corridor in more detail. The map shows a fully built-out downtown, and the images highlight the plan's major strategies, which include adding housing throughout downtown, redeveloping the Burbank Town Center, expanding the Civic Center, creating a stronger sense of place with improved streetscapes and pedestrian-friendly buildings, and managing our parking to meet demand while protecting nearby neighborhoods. This slide shows how the Civic Center could evolve over time. Image A illustrates the first phase which is now underway, a new central library, city offices, a public plaza, and parking structure on the CSB block. Image B shows the possible removal of the Orange Grove parking structure and redevelopment of the north side of Orange Grove Avenue with mixed-use housing, underground parking, and space for utility infrastructure. Image C shows potential redevelopment of the surface lot north of City Hall with new open space, mixed-use housing, underground parking, and areas for civic events. And the central image depicts the full build-out, including future reuse of the existing library site once the new library opens, potentially for housing, office, commercial, or civic uses. The images on the right show the renderings of the new open space and Paseo being developed with the new central library project. The project team coordinated closely with city leadership to ensure the plan aligns with this major civic investment. This slide shows how the Burbank Town Center could evolve over time. Image A illustrates potential redevelopment of the former IKEA site with mixed-use housing and new streets and open spaces. Image B shows possible redevelopment of the Town Center parcels along the freeway with mixed-use housing, retail and restaurant uses, offices, and open space. Image C depicts potential redevelopment of the Office Depot corner bakery sites with mixed-use housing, commercial space, and open space areas. The central image shows a fully transformed Burbank Town Center as a vibrant urban neighborhood with housing, retail, restaurants, entertainment, plazas, new streets, and a reconnected San Fernando Boulevard, either as a paseo or a multimodal street. The project team has coordinated closely with Burbank Town Center stakeholders to align our visions for this key area. Chapter 5 describes the plan for a pedestrian-friendly public realm with tree-lined streets, parks, plazas, and green belts that support walking, biking, transit use, and outdoor activities. The map and images highlight key projects, such as streetscape upgrades, a new green screen along I-5, opening San Fernando Boulevard through the town center, new civic and town center open spaces, and activated alleys and paseos. Chapter 6 presents the strategy for creating multimodal streets that serve pedestrians, cyclists, transit riders, and drivers, consistent with the 2020 Complete Our Streets plan. It provides the framework and objectives for this approach. The map and images highlight key mobility projects, including upgraded bike facilities, new streets to break up super blocks, improvements to freeway and railroad crossings like the Olive and Magnolia Bridges, better transit access, and enhanced intersections and crosswalks. The images on the left of the slide show recently completed mobility projects in downtown, including the reconfiguration of San Fernando Boulevard into a one-way street with expanded outdoor dining areas and new pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure constructed as part of the recently completed 777 Front Street and First Street Village housing projects. I've also included two teaser images on the right, which show the potential for an upgraded and expanded Olive Avenue bridge over Interstate 5. This project will be projects including managing downtown parking, maintaining on street parking, activating parking structure ground floors with commercial uses, repairing and replacing aging structures, expanding the parking district, improving wayfinding, supporting rideshare access, and providing bicycle parking. Chapter 8 addresses utilities and infrastructure, including public facilities, water, energy, and sewage systems. The project team has been coordinating closely with BWP and Public Works to align the plan with ongoing utility planning. This chapter is still in progress and will be finalized after the utility analysis and draft program EAR are completed. It will summarize existing system capacity and identify needed improvements to support future growth. Chapter 9 provides the land use regulations and objective development standards for the specific plan area. It includes the zoning framework, an updated land use table with clarified and revised use definitions based on community and business feedback, and standards for building size and height, pedestrian-oriented design, open space, signage, parking, landscaping, mechanical equipment placement, and trash management. The images on the right illustrate the building types expected in each land use zone. Overall, the plan promotes context sensitive development by focusing taller, denser buildings in the downtown core and transitioning to lower scale development near existing residential neighborhoods along the plan's edge. This slide shows the zoning map on the left and the maximum building height map on the right. The updated zoning designations builds on existing downtown plans and the Burbank 2035 general plan and establishes the following zones. The downtown zone in red will allow a mix of residential and commercial uses appropriate for the downtown core. The urban general zone in orange will allow a mix of residential, commercial, and light industrial uses. The urban corridor zone in pink will allow a mix of residential and commercial uses that are appropriate for proximity to existing neighborhoods. The creative workforce zone in light blue will allow a mix of commercial and both light and heavier industrial uses with limited residential uses in the form of live work housing or housing projects that utilize an appropriate state preemption law. The urban neighborhood zone in peach will allow both single and higher density multi-family housing and some commercial uses And lastly, the neighborhood zone in yellow will allow single family, lower density, multifamily housing, and limited commercial uses. The height map follows existing patterns. Lower heights near residential edges and taller buildings towards the center of the plan. Heights from 40 to 205 feet are allowed by right. The freeway height overlay allows heights up to 205 to 240 feet with an administrative use permit and up to 300 feet with the conditional use permit. This slide shows the maps for maximum residential density and maximum non-residential intensity, or FAR. These maps will replace the density and intensity designations in the Burbank 2035 General Plan. Density is increased in key areas, such as the downtown core, and intensity is increased in the west and south industrial areas, while the rest of the plan will see moderate increases in density and intensity. Chapter 10 outlines how the plan will be implemented, including key regulatory actions, programs, improvement projects, potential funding sources, and the entitlement process for future development. Work on this chapter is ongoing to ensure a realistic, comprehensive implementation strategy aligned with the plan's goals and standards. The project must comply with CEQA, so a program EAR is being prepared. The process began with three notices of preparation and 30-day scoping periods for each. We are now nearing completion of the draft program EAR. Once finished, it will be released for a 45-day public review period, during which agencies and the public can comment. Afterward, the team will prepare responses, finalize the EAR, complete required environmental findings, and if needed, prepare a statement of overriding considerations. The city council will then consider the project. If approved, a notice of determination will be filed with the county and state. The draft program EAR is expected to be released for public review in the fall of 2026. The administrative draft of the specific plan is now available for public review and the project team will be gathering feedback through the summer and early fall. Two upcoming community open houses will be held on the project on Saturday, August 29th from 9 a.m. to 11 a.m. and Wednesday, September 2nd from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. and the community services building community room 104. The project team will also be making presentations to city boards and commissions throughout the fall. The draft program EAR is expected to be ready for public review in the fall. The final specific plan and program EAR revised based on public and stakeholder input are anticipated by the end of 2026, followed by planning commission and city council hearings in winter of 2027. The downtown TOD-specific plan provides a clear framework for future growth, housing, mobility improvements, public investment, and neighborhood preservation in downtown Burbank, helping the city meet state housing requirements while maintaining a local vision and control. Again, staff is seeking General Planning Commission feedback to ensure the plan continues to reflect city and community priorities, including adding more housing, especially workforce and affordable units, to balance jobs and housing, creating a safe, attractive, and vibrant downtown, supporting a walkable transit-oriented mixed-use environment, and protecting our existing neighborhoods. This concludes staff's presentation on the draft downtown TOD specific plan. The public is encouraged to attend upcoming outreach events and contact staff using the information on the screen. Staff are available by phone, email, or in person for anyone unable to join the scheduled events. Project materials, including the draft specific plan and updates, are available at www.downtownburbanktod.com. Furthermore, hard copies of the draft specific plan can be reviewed at the planning and city clerk public counters and the Burbank Central, Buena Vista, and Northwest branch libraries. Thank you.

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 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 Commission. Callers will be placed in a queue 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 computer and take your phone off speaker when you deliver public comment. Madam Clerk, do we have any speakers here tonight or callers on the line?

I have no speakers or callers right now. Okay.

We'll give it a minute. No? Okay. There being no further public comment on this item, I now declare the public comment period closed. Would the representative of the Community Development Department like to make any further comments?

I have no further comment at this time.

Great. I now declare this item closed and the Planning Commission will now discuss and provide comments. What is the Planning Commission's pleasure? Anyone want to jump off and go first?

commissioner bennett sure i'll go first i'll take the bullet i have thoughts um i'll just make one general comment which is that uh there was a lot to read here and i was very busy this weekend um so i would appreciate in the future if i could have had a little more time uh to review the plan i know we have a lot of plans coming up so for future plans if i could have two weeks instead of three days that would be that'd be very much appreciated um Secondly, I just wanted to start by reading a passage here from the Burbank Center plan, which was so thoughtfully attached. I will note that I was graduating college when this was written, if I need to date myself in any way. But it says here, this is on page VII, so seven but not seven, of the executive summary. In addition to improving transportation opportunities, the plan also recognizes the access limitations that have restricted development within the planning area. The plan proposes the following street improvements to contribute to the implementation of the land use goals and objectives of the plan. And it starts off by talking about expanding east-west pedestrian cycle and vehicle access between the city center and city center west, realigning Front Street and improving the intersections, extending Flower Street, widening the Magnolia and Olive Avenue bridges, constructing a pedestrian bridge across the interstate, extending First Street to Providencia, and extending Verdugo over the railroad tracks. And I will point out that I don't believe any of those things happened. I understand that is not the fault of anyone in this room. I think there are probably several people in this room who weren't alive when those words were written. But I will admit that I just wanted to point that out so that hopefully we do better this time around than the not succeeding at many of those very useful improvements, I think, 30 years ago. Okay, first thing. You mentioned that you had had outreach to the Burbank Mall. So, they're okay with their building getting torn down, since that's kind of the plan?

So they're working right now on a, like a 25 year master plan. So we've been essentially kind of sharing our vision with them and making sure that we're kind of in alignment.

Sure.

I would say that, um, it's necessarily, it's going to be something that will happen kind of evolving, building around the edges. I think the mall will be there. for the foreseeable future.

Sure. Well, they just renovated it, so I assume so. Yeah.

But we were essentially looking to kind of guide them on how we would want to see the out parcels redeveloped.

Sure. I mean, I don't disagree with your vision. Like, I think it would be interesting to have that road reconnected and certainly to redevelop the IKEA site in the process and to have, like, a fully linked downtown. But I just wanted to make sure that, you know, they were okay with that. Okay. I'll skip that. The plan is generally centered around the Metrolink station. And I understand that, but I think that there is a fundamental – There's a fundamental flaw in that perspective in that I don't think anyone actually comes to Burbank for recreational purposes on the Metrolink. No one is taking the Metrolink to see a movie at 8 o'clock at night. The Metrolink doesn't run that way. Yes, people take it to come here for work and leave Burbank to go to work. But my suspicion is that the actual transit node of the city is the semi-wasteland on First Street where all the bus stops are that no one wants to look at. And I didn't see anything in this plan about that. Now, interestingly, that place is actually at the foot of Palm, and I can imagine a city gateway from those bus stops leading into Barney's, the future Scum and Villainy, up the stairs to the mall and things like that. But it seems to me that the reality of the transit hub of this city is that street more so than the Metrolink station. I may also point out that it's borderline impossible to get from the Metrolink station to downtown. I know you're aware of that. And there's some of that in this plan. But that would need to be deeply addressed. That elevator is a non-starter. And I'm just going to leave it at that. I think most people are aware of how that works.

OK. We've seen the My Burbank News reports on the elevator. Yes.

Yes. OK. I said that. I said that. There was a sentence in the plan when talking about the Magnolia and Olive Street bridges and talking about widening that. And there was sort of a... Sort of a vague reference to we couldn't possibly reduce the number of lanes on the bridges today, dot, dot, dot. So we have to widen them. And I wanted to, I guess I wanted to challenge that. Like, why couldn't we take out a lane on each of those bridges and use that to build a cycle track or more pedestrian space or something like that?

That would be something that we would essentially look at with our transportation planning and public works departments. So I just want to point out that you bring up a lot of good points and a lot of what you've brought up is already being considered. Sure. That's great. So we are looking at essentially putting in a transit hub kind of at the base of first street and olive.

Okay.

And then also we're looking at improving access. So with the front street, or the, yeah, the Fred Street project, there'll be an additional elevator, two elevators in the public transit plaza that are currently under plan check. So that would allow another access point to the transit center to downtown.

Well, not to downtown, to the top of the death bridge that you better not fall off of or else you're going to get squished on the freeway, just to be clear.

It would essentially be built, and then as that bridge gets expanded in the future, it would be there to accommodate that access.

I understand. I've walked over that bridge a lot. So did me. Because I live on Magnolia, basically, and I take my life into my hands every time I do it. I don't do it much anymore because of that. But fair enough. Do I have anything else? Oh, yeah. The plan does reference micromobility, and it kind of vaguely hand waves at the fact that it's not really super legal in this city in the first place, but then it also kind of mentions it as a solution. So, like, is there going to be an initiative to... Like have Metro bike rental in the city to be more friendly towards scooters and things like that? Or, I mean, I guess it seems a little disconnected to me, the city's attitude toward micromobility, but the hope that it could be, as I think the plan says, a last mile solution.

So it's added in for consideration for us to look at as an implementation measure.

Sure.

We essentially wanted to ensure that, you know, we weren't leaving any stone unturned.

Yes.

This specific plan in and of itself is not going to make all these changes come to pass. But it essentially reiterates what we put into the Complete Our Streets plan.

Yes.

And then it also essentially kind of updates that vision for how specifically we want to see stuff in downtown. Sure. So it would essentially be looked at as implementation.

Yeah.

and the council would have the ability in the future to consider it if they wanted to direct staff to look at that further.

Sure. Final question. On the zoning map, specifically the height map, sort of the core of San Fernando is specifically outlined in yellow, I believe it is, as the 40-foot height, which is very different and distinct from the areas around it and much shorter than the areas around it. Assuming that I've read that correctly, and of course, please feel free to correct me on that. Assuming that I read that correctly, I'm just wondering why it was called out that way.

So the purpose for making those heights lower along San Fernando Boulevard was essentially from a community concern that they didn't want to see that pedestrian-friendly feeling of the street get taken away from projects that would come in and basically build taller street walls up against that street. So we kind of looked at different ways to try to control that. And we essentially just rested on the fact that most of those street fronts and buildings that are there now haven't changed in the last 30 years. And they're not likely to change beyond kind of if they're able to be incorporated into larger projects. So we essentially slide at the heights of those buildings if they were to come in and propose something to just about a 40 foot height. so that we would continue to kind of preserve that pedestrian-oriented feeling of San Fernando Boulevard.

I guess I'm a little confused why a seven-story building is not pedestrian-friendly.

It would essentially change the kind of feeling of walking down that street. Right now it's kind of more pedestrian-friendly because you have the smaller buildings and lower buildings, and so it allows for light to kind of pass into that area. And when you start introducing taller buildings, and a lot of the community brought up Glendale as an example, and Brown Boulevard. And so we essentially took that to heart to say, okay, we'll look at preserving at least that stretch. Because that stretch is the part of downtown that has remained consistently successful in the last 40 years from the Burbank Center plan that we basically built off of and into now. So we essentially wanted to protect that particular area. and allow for heights and development and density to kind of increase in other areas away from there.

I have spent a great deal of time working in Glendale, and I have many, many thoughts about Brand Boulevard that I will absolutely not go into right now. But that's fine, and I'm good. Thank you.

All right. Thank you so much. Anyone else?

No more comment? No, I don't have a lot of comments at this time, but I do want to touch to that point. I actually do appreciate that you guys are keeping the heights lower from a planner's perspective and a community member's perspective. Definitely breaking up the massing does create a more community feel. It allows walkability. It's just a better feeling versus, yes, like Brandon Central where you're walking and you feel like you're getting lost in the buildings. So I did appreciate that. I just want to note that. That's something that we're trying to fix in Glendale as well. Thank you so much.

If I could piggyback off that, I mean, shade is nice and important. And we're going to need a lot more of that moving forward in that our, I mean, it's what, 102 or 105 out today? So I hope that we are... thinking about how height and shade can interact in a lot of these places. I am curious about a couple of things. One, you mentioned replacing the Orange Grove parking structure. Can you speak a little bit more on that? I wasn't aware that that structure isn't a long-term thing.

So this is really just a vision. Essentially, that parking structure is more than 60 years old. And so at some point, the city will have to look at either repairing it and doing major repairs or essentially demolishing it. So it was kind of looked at in the grand scheme of re-envisioning the Civic Center, especially when it came to looking at different ways to accommodate the new central library, the additional office space, and then parking. and then also opening up Civic Center for housing opportunities. So it's something that if the city decides to move in a direction of demolishing the parking structure, one idea and one vision would be to essentially make it an underground facility and then build housing on top of that. And then it would also leave us room for utility infrastructure. That's also needed in downtown as well to support our public developments in the future.

If I can add just real quick, Fred Ramirez, Assistant Director, I think one of the other things that we were looking at too is that the potential, looking at the possibility of replacing that parking structure with more than one use in those areas. So in other words, looking at the possibilities of having mixed-use projects. That reinstitutes some of the parking, but do it in a way that you can get other uses on the site so that we could create more of a vista up the street by eliminating the large structure across the roadway. And in doing so, we'd be able to create additional frontages. Because as you walk from CSB building down to San Fernando, you do hit this kind of open area with open space and then a solid wall And then you get over into where Don Cuco's is and then you have kind of your normal lower street frontages. So the idea is to have the possibility of adding more uses including housing in those areas and introduce other infrastructure that's necessary to support a lot of the development in there. I think one of the concepts was looking at upgrading some of the infrastructure for power that would need kind of like a smaller substation facility and we could probably incorporate that into that area. So nothing's set in stone, but it's just looking at every parcel, including those city parcels, in a way where we try to maximize their usability in the long term, as opposed to just having one sole purpose and one location. We're also looking at the surface parking lots and seeing how those can be reinvigorated and introduced. But those nodes of the Civic Center and the Town Center Mall are, and then in the middle of that, you have San Fernando Boulevard TO BE ABLE TO KIND OF TIE THOSE THINGS TOGETHER AND HAVING HIGH NOTES OF ACTIVITY CLEARLY AROUND HERE AT CITY HALL, BUT TYING IT ALSO TO THE MALL AND KIND OF HAVING THAT CONNECTION. AND THEN DULY NOTED THAT, YES, THE ELEVATORS IN AND OF ITSELVES AREN'T THE OPTIMAL SITUATION FOR CONNECTIVITY. but we're kind of working from the outside in. The actual elevators that are being proposed for Front Street are actually offset 15 feet from the current bridge, and they're purposely designed that way so that at the point when we do build out the bridge, you can actually widen it to be able to get to that area. And I think Public Works has been looking at, I'm not sure where they're at in the process, but they were also looking at raising the railings on the bridges in the interim I've also walked that bridge, and I have to say I'm not the fondest person of heights, but when you're walking it, I tend to hug the curb as opposed to the rail. But you're right, when we get a gust of wind or something, or someone that you see is very courageous riding a bike, I have to commend those people. But those are a lot of the things that we're grappling with. But I did want to bring up that is that that structure, it's safe. the parking structure safe, so let's be clear on that. But does it maximize the ability to be able to use that space and get a lot more activity there? That's where I think there's a conversation both for you on the council to contemplate is if we create those opportunities, If in the future the council decides that they want to do an RFP, a request for proposals for redevelopment of those areas, I think it's in line with what we're looking at doing. And then ultimately at the Civic Center, we're looking at the possibility of a new parking structure. So if that can support the offset of demolition of this parking structure, and then we get an adaptive reuse project on these other lots, then you start creating a big catalyst project to draw a lot more people downtown. And to the point that... Commissioner Bennett mentioned there's going to be other modes of transit, public transit, that are looking at bringing greater accessibility on the north side of the freeway, and the Civic Center is a major hub in addition to the stuff that's happening on First Street and Front Street. So I just wanted to add that to it. No doubt, and then also acknowledge, yes, three days before the meeting, I just wanted to make sure, and Leonard, you can correct me if I'm wrong, but the idea is that we're providing this information now We're going to allow the commission to kind of continue to provide feedback. And this was kind of a first step dip to let you see the document. But you're going to get an updated version of the document at the time when the when all the comments are received.

I think that said these are yours to keep. So continue looking at them. We're essentially going to be continuing to take comments from the public and from whoever wants to leave us comments probably up until the end of September. And then as we get into release of the EIR, we'll look at that point at essentially getting an updated draft of the specific plan out. The intent would be to have both documents out for public review by the end of the year so that we could essentially have it to the decision makers in advance of when we come to you guys in the early winter for consideration.

Sorry, I just want to make a small comment, if I could, for a moment on the Orange Grove garage. I like the suggestion, honestly, and the plan, because when you're walking up Orange Grove, it's a dead zone there, right? There are further buildings, especially as you're walking north, the west side, but no one ever thinks to go there from San Fernando because there's a big wall, as you said, in the way, right? So I completely agree with that. modifying that space to make it a continuous street north and south there would be an improvement. Sorry, please go ahead.

Yeah, thank you. You mentioned underground parking during a lot of that, and I just wanted to note that underground parking is so much more expensive. And, I mean, that's a lot of what, as I'm going around talking to folks, people like the free parking, and that's a long conversation to have with them because... ubiquitous free parking is in of itself um led to a lot of bad expectations from folks and the new the paid parking program does generate open spaces which is great um but at this moment people can assume i can get to the orange grove parking structure and from there engage the whole of the downtown for free so i mean the an underground parking garage would be interesting it would take away the viewing spot that some families and I'd like to go to on 4th of July to see actual fireworks when there, when there was a time. Yeah. I mean, yeah, I, uh, I hope that there's, um, or rather I trust that the new civic center will have higher places from which we can gaze out upon the summer night, um, which is really, really lovely. Um, I do appreciate that we're going to have a lot more time with this document because you used the word dip, and this is like a dunk. This is more than a dip, it's a dunk. I recall from the last specific plan that we were talking about, I wanted to make sure that we had development agreements for hotels. I don't remember seeing anything like that in here. I will admit that this very, very large document, I might have missed it. I just, for the record, just wanted that added to the record. Yeah, and then I really appreciate, as much as I've heard about mixed use, I want to see a lot more of that. I was surprised to see that the old IKEA shell at present is not part of the freeway height extra allowance. Because I mean, that strikes me as a place that can be developed pretty tall and not set up or set away from the freeway enough that a lot of people complain about the cruise ship or the big giant block of the refrigerator just off to the 5. We can have height at the IKEA building. And I think that incentivizing with a particularly high height would be a wise thing to do. Yeah. Otherwise, thank you very much for the dip.

All right. Commissioner Mendez, do you have comments? Okay, no problem. I have a couple of questions. Just general questions. You know, we're talking about adding housing. We're talking about changing the configuration of some of our streets. I'm assuming, especially with San Fernando and some of the other streets, making it a little bit smaller for ease of walkability. And everything else, we're talking about adding extra trees, extra vegetation. How closely are we working with fire agencies? Thinking about that our fire seasons are longer and hotter. We just had that fire in the hillside. Thank you, Burbank Fire, for getting that out. And then also, too, in Santa Clarita this morning, there was a fire in the downtown area that engulfed three or four businesses. So I just am curious how closely we're looking into that. And if we're not, we really need to work with fire just to make sure.

Yes, of course. So we have been working closely with Public Works and fire. So essentially, what is in the specific plan comes from the stuff that was set in motion in the completed streets plan, which fire and public works and our transportation planning division teams worked together to create. And then essentially additional stuff that's come up as some of those projects have been implemented. So as you'll see, when we started the specific plan, a lot of what we had in here, like San Fernando reconfiguration, um, extension of certain streets at that time was kind of a, just, you know, being brought up and approved. And now we've seen a lot of those changes happen. And so with this iteration, we've essentially presented to our city departments and divisions, given them the opportunity to review and then specifically with fire and with public works traffic division, because we too, you know, want to make sure that what we put into this essentially aligns with their ability to provide a service to the public realm and then also the emergency services. So we will be meeting with them individually to essentially get their comments. and take their feedback in this draft plan. And as we, uh, essentially identify kind of pinch points or areas, we'll work with them to ensure that, uh, what ultimately gets put into the final draft will be able to support their continued, you know, their continued work and keeping our city safe in the future.

Sure. If I may just, um, to Leonard's point, uh, the process of developing the plan and it's been a while, but, um, the, Part of the reasoning for taking this long, too, is that Leonard and transportation planning with the consultants have met with fire and public works to make sure that we can maintain the safe ingress and egress through the area, while at the same time, as much as we can, introduce a lot more pedestrian and bicycle traffic. infrastructure in the area but there's a balance there and one of the ways that we've looked at it is to see how much of the complete streets can be implemented while still maintaining that continuity of service that's expected from our highly rated fire department and police department with that we've also looked at areas where the vision that was in the complete streets plan maybe requires a little bit of adjustment to incorporate and maintain that access for safety and in those instances where there are situations where they might be technically infeasible certain things have been removed from a design standpoint so that it doesn't affect that but We've been very fortunate with our two emergency service providers with Fire and PD that they've been a very willing participant and they've been in the discussions. Even now, as Leonard is working with the team, we have follow-up meetings to go over every street segment, every section, just to make sure that it works. And they've also provided a lot of input when it comes to the height of structures and how we are able to provide emergency services to the taller structures. that are being contemplated. So yeah, it's been a very collaborative process with our colleagues in the different departments. And I think the plan in its final form will reflect that balancing the needs of the community as well for bicycle and pedestrian amenities.

Thank you so much on that. And then just a comment about the sewer. I'm really glad to hear that there's a sewer study because I know with the media district-specific plan, the capacity was a little bit different than anticipated, so I'm really happy to hear about that. Will there be any more walking tours? Because I feel like in the past, I feel like I walked over the Olive Avenue Bridge with you, Fred, at a walking tour, so... I mean, we're here to... Right.

We don't anticipate any more walking tours. And I was just thinking, you know, just this weekend that it's a good thing. We do have our two upcoming open houses on Saturday and next Wednesday. BUT IT WOULD NOT BE WISE TO DO WALKING TOURS IN THIS HEAT.

JUST SOME TIME BEFORE THIS COMES TO COMMISSION OR FOR THE PUBLIC.

WE MAY CONSIDER DOING SOMETHING AS WE GET CLOSER TO RELEASING MAYBE A FINAL DRAFT. WE'RE WAITING TO SEE KIND OF WHAT COMMENTS WE GET AND HOW MUCH WE HAVE TO END UP UPDATING THE SPECIFIC PLAN. So the example I use is Media District. You saw a version of that very early version, and then there was a lot of work that went into update it. And so they did additional kind of study sessions and stuff to kind of look at that. But that's something that we'll take note of tonight as an interest, and we'll look to see how we can accommodate that in the time that we have before we get to a decision and get it before you for consideration on a recommendation to council.

If if there is an interest though because we do take your direction as staff if there is an interest during this period to have kind of a very strategic you know walk through or tour we can we can try to accommodate that just like if there's an interest at the end of this. If you want to have a follow up meeting where we reconvene kind of study session with you and get Additional input by all means we'll try to work that in as well. I do want to say though just to come on record I know you guys noticed I commented on the on the bridge and it is very safe I just want to make sure I also want to caveat or put a pin on Our bridges are safe and the railings are safe. They might be short, but they are safe so I just want to make sure I was reminded by our city attorney and Just to ensure that they are safe, but there are things that we all would wish were enhanced. So I just want to make sure, since this lives in the video world archives forever, and I just want to be mindful of that. Sorry, Chair.

No, no problem. Yes, I have never felt safer on a bridge than when I walked it. So there's that. I would just, closing my comments, just echo, you know, thank you so much for this. And it's really dense, so thank you for your presentation. I would... I would say as far as parking, as much as we're trying to move away from parking and cars for alternative transit, thank you for looking at all aspects of parking, whether it's above ground, underground. I think that that's really important, especially too with The farmers mark with the farmers market that will be really relocated to the plaza People with groceries. I'm assuming that a lot of the mixed-use retail will have grocery stores dry cleaners STORES THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE GOING TO, HOPEFULLY PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THE AREA WILL BE WALKING, BUT IF PEOPLE WANT TO COME FOR A LITTLE BIT FURTHER, SO DEFINITELY THANK YOU FOR LOOKING AT ALL KIND OF ASPECTS, INCLUDING THE MICROUCES LIKE SCOOTERS AND STUFF LIKE THAT. I KNOW AS COMMISSIONER BENNETT SAID, THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF DISCONNECT. And also two other things in closing. You can see fireworks at the Burbank Mall parking structure. So as we've established, the mall will be there for the foreseeable future. So your fireworks should be safe even if there's construction. And I was born before 1997. Okay. And that's it for me. Are there any further questions? No. Okay.

I had one more. I want to make sure that everybody else got to speak first. We're talking about imagining reconnecting San Fernando Boulevard. Are you imagining connecting that to continue to go one way forward? East. Or I guess, what was that? Thank you. I'm bad with these things. Or are you imagining a one-way street going down? Because I'm hearing a lot talking about pedestrianism, making sure it's multimodal friendly. We want to have that third space experience for people in this reimagined Burbank town center. Are you imagining one-way streets, or are you imagining widening San Fernando back out to two, then you got both directions going, and then it's just another crossing at Magnolia?

So for that particular stretch, I believe at this time we're looking at having it two-way. That actually, between, and correct me if I'm wrong, but it's Grinnell and Sam or Magnolia that's actually private so the San Fernando that exists on the other side of Macy's those streets kind of within that area are private so we're essentially looking to keep them the two-way the narrowed kind of configuration and then the ample space for the pedestrian and then the bicycle infrastructure but uh you know again it's something that we're we're kind of looking to in the future and that's a good question I don't know if we've Looked at it further beyond that, but I'll essentially add it to the list to talk about with the transportation planners to see if we need to make that adjustment in the street section. But there is a street section that kind of shows what a future San Fernando extension would look like.

I like seeing your first note here on the transformation of Burbank Town Center. New multi-family housing with tree-lined pedestrian paseo. Excellent. I'd like to see height. I'd like to see density. I'd like to see trees and narrow streets that encourage, like, use your feet, use a bike. Getting that, like, on-the-ground experience of our city, like a third space. A lot of what I'm hearing as I'm talking to folks is they want third spaces. And we don't provide terribly money, which is why I was like, no, my precious orange... parking structure. That's where I sometimes run into people on the roof and watch fireworks once a year. But yeah, that making it making it feel welcoming, and pedestrian forward, I think would be a really good direction to start from. So thank you.

Thank you. Any further questions, comments?

Oh, please. I would like to make a comment. I really appreciate this opportunity. I think it's a lot of work, and God willing, we will get there. So thank you very much. I think it's fantastic.

All right.

I would like to take their offer up of having another study session on the depth here, something that gives us more time to really dig in.

Absolutely. Yep, absolutely. Study session and walking tour.

And walking tour, yeah. Yes, concurrently.

If we anticipate that, I'm sorry, Chair, if I may. Please. Gets into a conversation, I forget. Yeah, we're here to listen to you. If we do do a walking tour, we just have to be mindful since if all of you anticipate going to it, we'll just have to work with the city attorney's office on how we notice it, start it, maybe do a tour through the downtown core area. We'll see what the weather is, but we'll try to plan that for sure. When it comes to the study session, Basically, this is like your first week of actually getting the document and looking at it. Is it, and this is input I need from you, would like three weeks? In other words, if we're looking at something now, no less than three weeks out from now, but it could be a little bit beyond that before we get back to you because we have other items on the agenda. So I just want to be mindful of that. Or I'll throw this out there. Would you be open to, and we'll try to make it short so you're not here a long time, if we had a special meeting, just study session for the TOD? as one of the meetings in between. We'd have to notice it accordingly, but if we can do that on a Monday, that works for you all, maybe four weeks out from now? Because it would just be to get your input, but of course the public would be allowed to comment as well.

I don't necessarily, I'll seek from other commissioners as well, but I mean, I don't have a problem. I think it's staff's pleasure because we want to be respectful of staff time too. But I mean, I'm fine even if it needs to be four weeks out at the end of September. I'm good with that. And as far as the walking tour, I kind of assumed it would be a noticed meeting just because Do any other commissioners have input on that?

End of September is great.

Okay. I'm okay with that.

Yeah. I think also, yeah, the three weeks is perfect for me, at least with my work schedule.

Three to four? Three to four. Yeah, I'm okay with three to four. Okay.

If we had a special meeting at three to four?

Three to four weeks, or I mean, don't we have... Oh, three to four weeks. Oh, I thought you said... Yeah, not days. Oh, my God. Do we not... So I know we have a meeting September 14th. Do we have a meeting... I mean, I know we typically have a meeting September 28th.

If we know it's out to September, it might be just after September, but I'll just need to find out... We have a big effort in front of us to get to you the media district specific plan. So I just want to be mindful of that because that's a lot of work. But then I have to plan accordingly with both my colleagues here on when we can have the study session. But let us get back to you and we'll email you all on possible dates and then we'll find out.

Do we have any legal requirements like we have to do the study session in 30 days or something like that?

No, not at all. I think your comments, when you've had enough time and it sounds like three to four weeks out, will give you sufficient time to look at it. We can have a very laser-focused study session with you on that issue. Okay.

I think whatever staff's pleasure is fine with us. All right. No further comments? All right. Moving on. Now is the time for approval of the minutes from the June 22nd, 2026 Planning Commission meeting. Are there any questions, comments, and or motion? Commissioner Van Gorder.

Motion to approve the minutes from the June meeting.

From June 22nd, 2026? The very same.

Thank you.

All right. We have a motion. Do we have a second?

Yes, I'll second.

All right, we have a motion and a second. Madam City Clerk, may we have a roll call? Chair Wick? Yes.

Vice Chair Safarian? Yes. Commissioner Van Gorder? Yes. Commissioner Bennett? Yes. And Commissioner Mendez.

Yes, I guess I wasn't here. You could abstain. Abstain. Abstain, yeah. Motion passes. Thank you. All right. Minutes approved. Thank you. Now is the time for introduction of additional agenda items. Planning Commission members may introduce new items for discussion, but no action may be taken to take place except to place the item on a future agenda. Do members of the Commission have any items to introduce? Seeing none, now is the time for city planner comments. Are there any comments from the city planner?

Uh, yes, chair just wanted to, um, uh, acknowledge, I think, uh, commissioner Bennett's been asking in the past for us to give you an update on upcoming items for the commission meeting. So, uh, before the end of this week, we'll email you with the upcoming items for the, I think we probably haven't for the next two meetings. So we'll get that information so you guys can plan accordingly for those efforts.

Always appreciate it.

Thank you so much.

Thank you for that. All right. We will now adjourn to the Planning Commission meeting on Monday, September 14th at 6 p.m. The meeting will be held in person in the City Council Chambers at 275 East Avenue. The public is invited to attend the meeting in person or to 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 appropriate time during the meeting by leaving an e-comment on the city webpage at www.burbankca.gov slash e-comments by calling in directly to the Planning Commission meeting at 818-238-3335. Thank you all for your participation.