Planning Board Minutes
May 9th, 2
022
CALL
TO ORDER 6:01 p.m
.
INVOCATION Mr. Atte
ukenian led th
e invocation.
FLAG
SALUTE Mr. Rizzott
i led th
e flag salute.
ANNOUNC
EMENTS
HEARINGS
1. Project
No.
22-000
2020 |
Commun
ity
Facility Fe
es
Zone
Text
Ame
ndment |
Resolution
None.
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION:
A Zo
ne Text Amendment for proposed updates to Community
Facility
Fees (Title 10, Chapter 1, Article 22 of the Burbank Municipal Code),
which includes a comprehensive update to the City’s
Developm
ent Fee Program. Development Impact Fees are f
ees
charge
d to new development projects to offset the impacts to certain City inf
rastructure systems caused by the new development.
ROLL CA
LL
Presen
t- - - - Plann
ing Board Members: Vice Ch
air, Christopher Rizzotti and
Boa
rd Member s, Apr
aham Atteukenian , Michae
l Elric and
Robert Mo
naco
Abse
nt- - - - Boa
rd Member Tamm
y Heiner
Also P
resent- Sen
ior Assistant City Attorney, Iain MacMillan; Assistant
Commun
ity Development Director, Fred Ramirez; Assista
nt
Commun
ity Development Director, David Kriske; Plann
ing
Man
ager, Scott Plambaeck; Sen
ior Administrative Analyst ,
Beve
rly Ibarra ; Exe
cutive Assistant , Nat
alie Amela and
Inter
mediate Clerk, Kyle Joffee.
DRAFT
Me
eting Disclosures:
Mr.
Ramirez info
rmed the Board tha
t Board Member Elric had
sub
mitted questions via email to
which
the Plann
ing Divisi
on had
create
d responses for an
d those responses would be included in
staff
’s presentation of the Project.
Notic
es Given:
Mr. Ram
irez info
rmed the Board that the notices have been given.
Staff
Report:
Be
verly Ibarra pres
ented this item to the board.
Applic
ant Presentation:
None
.
Public
Comment:
Sim
on Hamell, inqu
ired ab
out money for schools, the diffe
rence in
pri
ce for multi-un
it and single-fam
ily projects, and untracked hours in
the
plan check process.
Response
to Public Comment:
Ms.
Ibarra clarified that the school district sets their own fees, which
is reg
ulated under a separate law. Sh
e also no
ted the reason for the
diffe
rences in fees from single family and multifamily. Sh
e also
clarifie
d that plan review fees are not covered under impact fees.
Applic
ant Response to Public Comment:
None
.
Boa
rd Q&A:
Mr. Elr
ic aske
d how fees are raised and who decides to raise the
fee
s.
Ms.
Ibarra informed the Boa
rd that fe
es are raised by the City Council
aft
er establishing a ne
xus be
tween the impacts of new development
an
d the capital improvements needed to address those impacts Mr.
Elric asked how the list for new facilities in Exhibit C was com
piled.
Ms.
Ibarra responded tha
t the Parks and Recreation Department
ba
sed their list off necessary capital infrastructure based off Parks an
d Recreation needs that are needed to su
pport new development
as
well as the priorities of City Council and the Parks and Recreation bo
ard. Sh
e also noted that a similar process was undertaken for all no
ted infrastructure needs noted in the nexus study.
DRAFT
Mr. E
lric asked how old the ne
xus stu
dy is.
Ms.
Ibarra informed the Boa
rd that the current impact fees are based
off
the nexu
s stu
dy from 1993 and that the proposed fees in this
repo
rt are based off a ne
w nexus stu
dy tha
t was completed this
year.
Mr.
Elric inquired about whether recently dis cusse
d capital project
idea
s can be added to the new nexu
s stud
y.
Ms.
Ibarra responded by saying that staff are recommending that City
Council consider subsequent updates to the De
velopment
Imp
act Fees based on an updated n exu
s stud
y if specific
infrast
ructure
can be identified to support those plans.
Mr. E
lric asked how often the nexu
s stud
y will be updated?
Ms.
Ibarra answered by saying the State of California requires an up
dated nex
us stud
y every 8 years, however staff is recommending
to
City Council that this study be completed sooner in li ght of the
an
ticipated specific plans that are currently being devel op ed and/or
up
dated by City staff.
Mr. E
lric asked what the average inflation rate on construction costs is an
d whether there is a cap on fee increases be
cause of infla
tion.
Ms.
Ibarra responded by saying that inflation is usually between two an
d four percen
t and that there is currently no cap on fee increases.
Mr.
Elric inquired about how discounts are being applied to aff
ordable housing.
Ms.
Ibarra informed the Boa
rd that a fifty percent fee would be
imp
osed on affordable housing units as op
posed to the eighty
pe
rcent fee for market rate units.
Mr.
Atteukenian requested clarification on the definition of “new de
velopment”.
Ms.
Ibarra clarified that proje
cts will
receive credit for demolished
area
s and “new
development” means any added gro ss
area to the
alr
eady existing no
n-reside
ntial pro
perty.
She also clarifie
d that
de
velopment impact fees would not apply to existing residential units tha
t are being remodeled, added on to, or demolished to construct an
ew. She also noted that any new residential units beyond those DRAFT
alr
eady existing would be required to pa y th
e development impact
fee
s.
Mr.
Monaco inquired about how it was determined that multi -fa mily
prop
erties create less tr an
sportation trips th
an single -fam
ily
prop
erties.
Mr.
Kriske informed th
e Board tha
t the determination was made on
a
per-cap
ita ba
sis and that pe
r-cap
ita on
e unit of a single -fam
ily
reside
nce produces more tr ips tha
n one unit of a multi -fam
ily
reside
nce.
Mr. Mon
aco requested clarification on how fees are assessed.
Mr. K
riske clarified that fees are established on a per-un
it basis.
Mr.
Monaco asked
who would make the decision to start charging
the
maximum fee and how would that decision be made.
Mr.
Kriske answered by saying that the City Council would make that de
cision and could choose any fee within the range provided in the ne
w nexu
s stu
dy.
Mr.
Elric requ
ested clarification on whether ADU’s are charged
de
velopmental impact fees.
Ms.
Ibarra clarified that under Stat
e ADU
law
that any ADU under
75 0 square feet is exempt from de
velopment imp
act fees.
Mr.
Elric inquired about why hotels will be charged by
square footage
pe
r room as opposed to square footage of the entire property.
Mr.
Kriske explained that the shift to charging per room is b eing
prop
osed be
cause the room is what drives transportation activity.
Mr.
Rizzotti inquired about whether fees f or
a restaurant in a hotel
will
be calculated by square footage.
Mr.
Kriske answered by saying that generally the restaurant as a
ho
tel amenity has been addressed as part of the per-room
calcula
tion of
development impact fees. Ho
wever, if the hotel has a
sep
arate intense-use
amenity it may be charged on its own.
Mr.
Rizzotti asked if there was any discussion to
distinguish fees
be
tween short -term
profit driven projects and long -ter
m resident
ho
me improvement projects.
DRAFT
Mr.
Kriske clarified that impact f ee
s rarely ap
ply to single family
proje
cts.
Delibe
ration:
Mr.
Atteukenian thanked staff for their presentation and stated his sup
port for the project.
Mr. E
lric stated his support for the project.
Mr. A
tteukenian pro
posed a motion to approve a
resolution of the
Plan
ning Board of the City of Burbank approving a Zo
ne Text
Am
endment (Project
No. 22-00020
20) for
proposed updates to
Commu
nity Facility Fees (Title 10, Chapter 1, Article 22 of the Bu
rbank Municipal Code), which
includes a comprehensive update
to t
he City’s Development Fee Program, base
d on the Findings of
Fact
and subject to the recommended Conditions of Approval.
Se
conded by Mr. Elr
ic, ca
rried by a vote 4-0.
Motion passes.
ORAL
COMM
UNICATIONS Non
e.
REPORTS
None
.
AP
PROVAL OF
MINUT
ES
Mr. M
onaco ma
de a motion to approve the minutes from the
Plan
ning Board meetings of April 1 5, 2
022. Seconded by,
Mr. A
tteukenian, ca
rried by a vote 4-0.
Motion passes.
ITEM
S FROM THE
PL
ANNING BOARD
Mr.
Elric recom
mended the council update the nexus study in
orde
r to create op
portunities for a
horse park as well as new
pa
rks and trails in the Golden State District.
Mr. Ram
irez acknowledged and noted the comment.
Mr.
Rizzotti inqu
ired about the current and future plans for
pa
rks.
Mr.
Ramirez informed the Boa
rd that they will be viewing the
prop
osed specific pla
n for the Golden State, Me
dia, an
d
Downto
wn districts and that a discussion on
this topic of open
spa
ce and parks ca
n be held at that time.
DRAFT
CITY P
LANNER
COMM
ENTS
ADJOUR
NMENT
TO TH
E
PL
ANNING
BOA
RD ME
ETING
OF MAY 9TH 20
22. Mr. Ram
irez welcom
ed Michael Elric to the Boa
rd an
d
tha
nked Tra
nsportation Planning staf
f for their hard work on
the the
repo
rt.
Resp
ectfully Submitted,
Se
cretary of the Planning Board
DRAFT