The 1992 ordinance did not affect the uses permitted; instead, it stated that all uses that are permitted or conditionally permitted could take advantage of the existing parking, no matter what the previous use was.

There were other economic development strategies put into motion during this time after the exodus of Lockheed and the aerospace industry from Burbank.  A development impact fee credit pool was created and funded, development review was streamlined and financial incentives were offered to businesses which relocated into the City.  This was all in an effort to attract new restaurant and retail uses into the City and specifically into Downtown.  At that time there was less demand on the Downtown infrastructure and there was balance between economic development goals and sound land use planning.  Retail and restaurant uses were allowed to come into the specific area by right (to stimulate the business environment and activity in Downtown) with a sole reliance on existing infrastructure, specifically parking.

1997 Burbank Center Plan

From 1992 to 1997, the Downtown area received an influx of restaurant uses and some new retail uses.  The second wave of economic development strategies came in 1997 when the Burbank Center Plan (BCP) was adopted.  Still part of the zoning code, the BCP is an economic revitalization plan that addresses long-range land use and transportation planning for the City Centre and South San Fernando Redevelopment Project Areas.  The BCP focuses on ten major development opportunity sites, which were at the time of adoption, vacant, underutilized or contained incompatible uses for the area.  These ten opportunity sites were viewed as catalysts for future development based on their strategic location and potential for recycling.  Of the ten opportunity sites, six sites were located in the Downtown.  Today five of the six sites are in varying phases of redevelopment.

The BCP also contains land use and development standards designed to encourage mixed-use projects that help minimize the volume of vehicular traffic by facilitating the development of a variety of compatible land uses within close proximity to public transit and the core of the City.  The BCP recognizes the need for retail in the Downtown to balance with restaurant and entertainment uses and also the need for pedestrian oriented uses which would limit the number of trips within the Downtown.  The plan calls the Downtown area the Burbank Village.  This plan expanded on the goals of the General Plan and added specific objectives for development in the BCP area.  Specifically, the policies for the Burbank Village are to:

• Encourage new businesses which are pedestrian-oriented and are retail or entertainment in nature

• Continue to foster an inviting pedestrian environment through appropriate streetscape elements, which may include decorative sidewalks and crosswalks, street furniture, landscaping, bike racks, news racks, street trees and tree well covers, and lighting

• Require site designs for mixed use development that have ground floor retail, restaurant or entertainment with second floor office and/or multi-family residential

• Encourage the continued development of entertainment and restaurant uses in the Burbank Village area to maximize the area�s potential as a daytime, evening and weekend activity center

• Support future development of retail, restaurant and entertainment uses with parking, transportation and land use policies

• Allow retail and restaurant establishments at or near sidewalks and pedestrian alleys

• Promote landscaped setbacks in front of Burbank Village buildings when possible

• Encourage innovative and creative facades and signage which are designed to attract pedestrians

While the purpose of the 1992 code amendment was to stimulate activity and investment into the Downtown, the goal in 1997 clearly involved more long range thinking and there was a concern for balance of activities that would have the effect of sustaining an economically vibrant Downtown.

2003 Property Based Improvement District

As the Redevelopment Agency continued its efforts in physically developing the opportunity sites, a third wave of Downtown economic revitalization strategies began roughly three years ago.  The Agency conducted comprehensive analyses on demographics and market forces, necessary infrastructure improvements (such as a wayfinding program, smart signage, parking management and streetscape upgrades) and tenant attraction programs.

Another important component of the Downtown revitalization efforts was the formation of a property-based business improvement district (PBID).  This year-long formation process involved a multitude of meetings with business owners, property owners and other stakeholders in the Downtown area.  The result of this process was the creation of a special district, whereby the property owners voted for self-taxation as a means to improve the Downtown infrastructure, operations and maintenance, marketing and promotions, and overall environment and ambiance enhancement.  A Downtown Management Plan was approved and the Downtown Burbank Partnership, Inc. Board of Directors is working through project and program priorities for the betterment of Downtown Burbank.  Agency and PBID staff is continuing focused efforts in the area of marketing with the goal of filling the Downtown vacancies with complimentary, quality tenants.  The Redevelopment Agency has a Downtown Tenant Assistance Program, which is designed to attract the type of quality tenant that will enhance the synergy in Downtown.

Code Change Needed

As the Downtown�s momentum increases, the City and Redevelopment Agency believes it is appropriate to revisit some of the business inducements that were codified in the early 1990s, specifically restaurant uses and the potential impacts on parking.  As mentioned, certain entitlement allowances were made as a means to attract restaurants.  Now that the Downtown has a healthy inventory of restaurants and is, in fact, in need of additional retail uses, it is appropriate to implement a review process for new restaurants coming into Downtown, specifically when a change of land uses (i.e. converting retail to restaurant use) is being proposed.  The purpose of this proposed review or AUP process is not to discourage development in Downtown, rather to ensure that there is a cohesive balance.  At the present time, there is nothing the City can do to restrict large or small retail spaces from converting to high-volume, high-occupancy restaurant space thereby affecting the shared parking district.

Because of the changes in the Downtown, this area is experiencing distinct peak parking hours.  It seems that many of the uses are the same or similar with similar parking and traffic patterns.  Different types of restaurants can have different traffic and parking patterns.  Fast food restaurants, for example, have higher trip generation and higher turnovers.  Quality restaurants, those often with white tablecloths and a full service reputable menu, usually have lower trip generations and a lower turnover of parking.  The BCP has many goals for this area related to pedestrian orientation.  This cannot be achieved with the same restaurant uses; restaurants need to be mixed with retail and entertainment.

Although the code amendment of 1992 was probably necessary to stimulate new restaurant tenants to the Downtown, the focus now needs to be more on retail and possibly additional entertainment.  This is not to say that new restaurants are not needed, but the City now needs to scrutinize more on the type of restaurants for the Downtown and look more closely at how the restaurant will contribute to the goals established for the area.

The ideal way to look at this issue would be a comprehensive look at the downtown parking area and specifically how the shared parking concept is working given the existing mix of uses.  Then we would look at what development standards could be implemented to address any areas of problems.  This way each new tenant would not be scrutinized individually, instead the appropriate development standards would be applied.  The City has begun the process for a comprehensive parking study and hired a consultant to examine the existing parking demands and offer recommendations for solutions.  Unfortunately, the analysis on this study will not be available until late this summer and then there would be months of needed additional analysis and research to draft the appropriate development standards.  Staff believes that if we wait until the study and standards are complete, the City risks the chance of more uses coming to the Downtown that might not fit with our economic and development goals and available parking for this area.  The goal is for the AUP process to act as a temporary solution until we can fully analyze the results of the parking study and determine if there are better solutions for promoting or attracting an appropriate balance of tenants.  The AUP process will also be helpful until we establish a method to require mitigation should certain tenants impact the Downtown shared parking arrangement.

By way of example, the City of Santa Monica faced similar problems in their Third Street Promenade area.  However, they rushed to create an ordinance that limited the amount of restaurants rather than allow them through an AUP type of process.  Eventually, the city lost much of its restaurant space and found they were inundated with retail space.  This turned the area into simply a shopping district rather than a downtown experience.  Now, the city has been forced to again make a code amendment, this time one that restricts the amount of retail space.  The approach that staff is recommending is in an attempt to avoid those problems.

Parameters of the Ordinance: 

Requirements:  The proposed ordinance would require that new restaurants in the Downtown receive approval of an Administrative Use Permit (AUP) before opening business. (Exhibit A)  The AUP would be approved or denied by staff (the Community Development Director) based on staff�s ability to meet the required findings.  This AUP process would follow the process already outlined in code which would involve a noticing requirement and allow an appeal procedure to the Planning Board and ultimately the City Council.  The noticing requirement for this downtown restaurant AUP, however, would require noticing to the property owners and tenants within the eight block parking district rather than the 1000 foot radius requirement for other AUPs.  Such uses which currently require an AUP are residentially adjacent schools and post production facilities that do not provide 3.3 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet.

Findings:  The findings relate to the various issues/problems with downtown restaurants.  These are:  parking generation, over concentration of certain types of restaurants and overall lack of stimulation of the pedestrian environment.  The findings require that the new restaurant is a type that would contribute to the shared parking district.  The findings would also give value to uses that bring customers to their site in the Downtown versus those that focus on a catering or delivery type of business.  There has also been concern over the years because some restaurants have placed too much emphasis on their bar business rather than their dining room business.  A finding would require that the main purpose of the restaurant be their dining room and not the bar (this can be based on a site plan).  Because a quality design contribute to the walkability of the Downtown and overall economic vitality and because quality design and improvements are objectives of the BCP, the City would evaluate how much the new tenant invested in improving the former retail property.  The City would like to promote all businesses in the Downtown, but the findings will focus on providing a balance factoring in the type, the interior and exterior improvements and the parking generation.  Therefore, each restaurant would be placed into a category of Quality restaurant, Family, High Turnover Sit Down or Fast Food.  These are based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers trip and parking generation books.  Then each restaurant would be judged to determine if they do or do not contribute to a balance.

Applicability:  As stated before, the proposal is to grandfather existing restaurants, meaning that an existing restaurant may remain without an AUP.  The proposal is also to allow new restaurants to operate within previously existing restaurant space if the new restaurant is a similar type.  This relates to what category of restaurant it is: quality, family, high turnover sit down or fast food.  If the use is upgrading (from a high turnover sit down to a quality, for example) the AUP would also not be required.  Staff is proposing that the ordinance apply to new restaurants on the day the ordinance is effective and would not apply to existing restaurants with approved business licenses or with approved tenant improvement building permits.  The ordinance would also not apply to the PD zones in the Downtown as they have vested rights.  In addition, certain restaurant types, like drinking establishments, require a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) in the downtown.  As this is a more restrictive requirement, the AUP process would not apply to uses which are already required to follow the CUP process.

Environmental Review:

The project is exempt for the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to guideline �15061(b)(3) as the project would not have a significant effect on the environment.  Adoption of the ordinance will simply require an additional level of review for new restaurant projects to insure that the parking and traffic associated with them will not negatively impact the Downtown parking district.  In addition, each restaurant that is subject to the AUP will be required to undergo the appropriate CEQA review.

DOWNTOWN BURBANK PARTNERSHIP, INC. (P-BID) BOARD OF DIRECTORS:

The P-BID Board, at their special meeting of June 2, 2004, voted 9-0 (with two members absent) to recommend approval of the proposed ordinance.  The Directors noted that an extra layer of review will be good for the Downtown area and that this ordinance will force new operators to carefully consider their own business needs before entering a site that may not be adequate.  They felt this ordinance allowed staff to look at the totality of impacts and benefits of a proposed restaurant to determine if it is an appropriate balance for the Downtown.  They were concerned that there is no discretion now for restaurants to enter all tenant spaces in the Downtown.  The Directors were pleased with the appeal process in instances where there is a disagreement with staff�s assessment of the proposed restaurant. (Exhibit A)

PLANNING BOARD ACTION:

The Planning Board, at their meeting of May 17, 2004, voted unanimously to recommend approval of the ordinance. (Exhibit A)  The Planning Board had comments and questions regarding the ordinance. (Exhibit B)  Specifically, the Board suggested providing a sunset clause in the ordinance.  Because staff has stated that the ultimate goal may be to develop standards and a more specified use list for restaurants in the Downtown, the Planning Board felt that a sunset clause would insure that such development standards are created in a timely manner.  Staff agrees that the AUP process should be an interim measure and any new ordinance could replace the existing AUP requirement.  A sunset clause is proposed that would allow staff two years to complete an amended ordinance and allow the Council the option to continue the ordinance for another year.

The Planning Board also noted that the ordinance will not apply to an existing restaurant space which is replaced with a restaurant of higher quality.  They stated with this provision, the City may therefore receive an undue concentration of the higher quality restaurants.  While the goal of this ordinance is to prevent an overconcentration of the same types of restaurants, it is also to prevent an overconcentration of certain restaurants which have higher impact on parking.  Therefore, staff is not concerned about this possible upgrade allowance in the ordinance.

The third specific question the Planning Board had was if an existing restaurant wants to add a liquor license, would that trigger an AUP.  Although increased parking may not be the issue with this change, there is a possibility of problems depending on changes to the interior and exterior space.  For example, restaurants that want to change and possibly expand a bar area because of adding a liquor license may attract larger amounts of people.  These larger groups of people could have an effect on parking.  Staff, therefore, has added a section in the ordinance to clarify this position and require the AUP for this type of change.

Planning Board Members stated that they felt this was an appropriate interim measure.  They also stated a code amendment in the future would be the best action for the City to take to give property owners more predictability in their planning efforts for new tenants.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that City Council adopt the proposed ordinance for Project No. 2004-75, a Zone Text Amendment.

LIST OF EXHIBITS

Exhibit A          Planning Board Resolution #2931 dated May 17, 2004

Exhibit B          Planning Board Minutes from May 17, 2004

go to the top