PURPOSE:

The purpose of this report is for City Council to consider a second reading of an ordinance to approve a development consisting of 276 multifamily residential units (including 44 townhome style units and 232 stacked flats) and 1,000 square feet of retail space at 1935 North Buena Vista Street.

BACKGROUND:

On November 1, 2005, the City Council held a noticed public hearing on this item. During that hearing, ten (10) members of the public spoke about the project. At the conclusion of public testimony, the City Council began deliberations on the project. During its deliberations, the Council made a number of changes to the proposed conditions of approval. Since these changes impacted the overall site plan for the project, the City Council voted to continue the item until December 6, 2005, in order to allow the developer to prepare new plans reflecting the changes to the proposed conditions of approval.

On December 6, 2005, the City Council was presented with revised plans reflecting the changes made during the previous meeting. The City Council approved the project as revised, and added a condition that the applicant fund the cost of additional safety equipment at the rail crossing of Buena Vista Street at Vanowen Street needed to establish a Quiet Zone in this rail corridor. The City Traffic Engineer has estimated that the cost of the necessary equipment will be approximately $440,000. The Council decided to permit the applicant to offset all but $75,000 of the cost through a financially equivalent reduction in the affordable housing requirement.

The applicant has submitted data that indicates that the transition of a one (1) bedroom affordable units and a two (2) bedroom affordable unit to market rate units would result in a savings of $495,700. This data has been verified by Keyser-Marston Associates. In exchange for the transition of these units from affordable to market rate status, the applicant will pay for the cost of quiet zone improvements up to a maximum of $570,700 prior to the issuance of building permits.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: This item was originally scheduled to be considered by the City Council on December 13, 2005. At that meeting, it was requested by the City Council and members of the public that additional information be provided as part of this report.

Redevelopment Funding of Quiet Zone Project

On December 13, Councilmember Golonski suggested the possibility of reconsidering requiring the developer to fund the Quiet Zone project in order to insure that the project provide the full affordable housing requirement. In lieu of developer funding, it was suggested that the Redevelopment Agency might be able to fund the improvements. The developer�s affordable housing obligation would be twenty-eight (28) units.

The Quiet Zone project is not presently a capital improvement project that is being contemplated by the Redevelopment Agency. While it would be possible for the Agency to fund this improvement, it would necessitate a reprioritization of the Agency�s planned capital improvement projects which could create delays or postpone other projects that are being planned.

CEQA Analysis

During the December 13 City Council meeting, a concern was raised about the adequacy of the environmental analysis for the project, which resulted in a determination that a Mitigated Negative Declaration be prepared for the project. Specifically, concerns were raised that, given the level of hazardous substances identified throughout the entitlement and construction process for the Burbank Empire Center (the site of the former Lockheed B-1 plant), there might be chemicals present on the project site which would make the site unsuitable for residential uses.

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) authorizes the use a Mitigated Negative Declaration for projects that will not result in a significant environmental impact when prescribed mitigation measures are incorporated into the project design. Section 3.4.7 of the Initial Study prepared for this project discusses the potential for impacts resulting from Hazards and Hazardous Materials. As indicated in the Initial Study, a Phase II analysis of the site was conducted in October of 1997. As part of this analysis, thirteen (13) borings were taken to maximum depth of twenty-two (22) feet with soil samples taken at depths of 5, 10, 15, and 20 feet. These samples were analyzed to determine whether any volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and heavy metals (arsenic and chromium). These analyses determined that there were no VOCs found in the soil and the relative concentrations of heavy metals were within the naturally occurring range.

Unlike other properties owned by Lockheed (e.g. the B-1 plant), the project site was not utilized for industrial purposes. For most of its history, the site (known as the annex) was utilized as a CADAM facility for the development of CAD software. The site did have an underground storage tank which was removed in April 1989 with no signs of appreciable leakage. Prior to Lockheed�s purchase of the property, the site was a scrap metal yard. While many of the former industrial sites operated by Lockheed have deed restrictions that restrict the use of the property, there are no deed restrictions or similar limitations on the use of the project site.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council move a second reading of the PD ordinance and approve the project as modified by the City Council on December 6, 2005.

go to the top