Glendale directs new conditional‑use process for largest drive‑throughs, orders city‑selected traffic analyses
Loading...
Summary
After weeks of public comment and staff study, the Glendale City Council voted to require conditional‑use permits for high‑trip drive‑throughs and to direct staff to draft updated development standards and queuing requirements for other drive‑throughs.
The Glendale City Council on Tuesday directed staff to create a hybrid approval process that will require conditional‑use permits for high‑trip drive‑through restaurants and formal development standards for lower‑impact locations.
The council voted to have staff return with revised development standards, a conditional‑use permit (CUP) process for the highest‑traffic drive‑throughs (tier 3 and tier 4 in the consultant’s proposal), and new queuing‑analysis requirements. Council members also directed staff to study minimum setback distances from freeway on‑ and off‑ramps, and other sensitive uses, and to prevent queuing that spills onto public streets. The city will select the traffic consultant that performs any supplemental queuing/traffic analyses used to evaluate future applications.
Why it matters: Council members said the move responds to repeated complaints from residents about traffic, safety and idling near existing drive‑throughs and aims to give staff clearer tools to prevent new projects from blocking neighborhood streets or freeway ramps.
Planning staff had presented two contrasting approaches: clear, objective development standards that would set minimum lot sizes, queue lengths and other numeric rules; or a CUP process that would allow conditions tailored to a site. Senior planner Aram Calvert told the council that standards are “very clear and objective” while CUPs provide flexibility to tailor mitigation to context. The council adopted a hybrid approach to use both instruments.
Public comment was heavy. Dozens of residents and neighborhood groups urged limits on drive‑throughs at specific corners such as Pacific and Burchett, describing long back‑ups, noise, litter and safety concerns near schools and freeway ramps. Supporters of tighter rules urged the city to require applicant‑supplied queuing analyses and asked that the city, not applicants, select traffic consultants.
The action: Council voted to direct staff to draft and return with (a) development standards for low‑ and moderate‑trip generators, (b) a CUP process for the highest‑trip generators (tier 3 and tier 4), (c) minimum queuing and lot‑size guidance tied to the consultant’s tiering study, (d) an evaluation of minimum distances from freeway on‑ and off‑ramps and other sensitive uses, and (e) a policy for alley access and queuing. The motion passed on a roll call vote recorded as: Brotman — yes; Garpetian — yes; Kasakian — yes; Najarian — yes; Mayor Asadarian — yes.
Next steps: Staff said the work will require additional analysis and hearings. Planning staff estimated the drafting and public‑hearing process could take months (minimum of several months), and that any development‑standards proposal and CUP ordinance would be returned to the Planning Commission before final council action.
Details worth noting: The city’s consultant documented a four‑tier framework based on observed queueing at 19 local drive‑through facilities; the council specifically requested that tiering be linked to measurable queuing analyses so that applicants and staff can determine which regulatory track applies. The council also asked staff to evaluate how existing entitlements should be treated if a business grows substantially after approval.
