Council denies extra discretionary density for Glen Oaks housing project after neighbors, planners spar over size and parking

The Glendale City Council on Sept. 30 voted to deny a discretionary density bonus request for a proposed 43‑unit housing project at 441–445 West Glen Oaks Boulevard.

Project and request: The applicant sought approval to demolish two existing buildings (eight units) and build a new four‑story, 43‑unit multifamily development that would include nine affordable units (six very‑low income and three moderate income) and a semi‑subterranean parking level with 29 spaces. Because state density bonus law (and local implementing rules) grant a baseline density bonus, the developer would have been able to build 36 units by right; the council had discretion to approve the additional discretionary density above that baseline (the applicant requested an extra 7 units) and related waivers.

Council action and rationale: After public testimony and a staff report, council voted to deny the discretionary portion of the requested density bonus. The roll call on the motion to deny showed four votes in favor of denial and one opposed (Councilmembers Azadarian, Garpetian, Kasakhian and Mayor Najarian voted yes; Councilmember Rotman voted no).

Why it mattered: Speakers at the hearing included neighbors and community advocates who said the project would substantially increase site density, reduce unit sizes (a number of proposed studios were under 600 sq. ft.), and add parking pressure to an already constrained neighborhood near Kaiser Permanente and several schools. Several speakers urged the council to preserve existing family‑friendly unit mix or insist on more open space and parking. Supporters, including housing‑advocacy callers and project proponents, argued the site is near transit (a future bus rapid transit stop) and that the proposal adds affordable units and much‑needed rental capacity.

Concessions and waivers: The project also requested several waivers (unit‑size reductions, increased lot coverage, reduced setbacks and decreased landscape/open‑space percentages). City legal staff explained that waivers tied to the density bonus are not discretionary if denying them would physically preclude the developer from building the density they are legally entitled to; council therefore faced a narrow choice: approve the discretionary density (and associated waivers as needed to realize the design) or deny the discretionary density, which would require the applicant to redesign to the 100% density bonus they already may claim by right.

Public and staff follow‑up: Council directed that the denial be reflected in the formal action; staff will advise the applicant on next steps. Some council members urged the developer to consider a redesign with more open space, fewer sub‑600‑sq‑ft units and clearer plans to address parking and neighborhood compatibility.

Ending: The decision preserves more local control over the size and scale of this specific project while leaving intact the state density bonus baseline (36 units) the applicant may pursue by right unless the applicant withdraws or redesigns.