Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Burbank council clears way for trade and vocational schools in industrial zones
Summary
City Council introduced an ordinance to create a distinct 'school, trade/vocational' land use that will be allowed in M‑1 and M‑2 industrial zones with conditional review and a one‑space‑per‑student parking standard; planning staff said the change implements the city's economic development goals.
The Burbank City Council on Dec. 9 introduced an ordinance to amend the city’s zoning code to establish 'school, trade/vocational' as a separate land use and to allow such schools in M‑1 (limited industrial) and M‑2 (general industrial) zones subject to a Conditional Use Permit.
Senior Planner Vanessa Quito told the council the change responds to repeated inquiries from prospective operators and the city’s 2024–2028 Economic Development Strategic Plan, which identified higher education and job‑training as emerging local industries. The proposed code would remove the older vocational reference in the general school definition, add a standalone definition for trade/vocational schools, and set a parking standard of one on‑site space per student with options for shared parking or reductions supported by a parking study.
One public speaker, Levonie Sountz of Southern California Health Institute, told the council her allied health vocational program has operated for 30 years and supports the amendment as a way to expand workforce training locally. Staff said two inquiries for vocational schools were pending and that applicants could submit CUP applications after the ordinance’s effective date; existing schools in commercial zones would remain conforming under the clarified table.
Council members asked how the amendment would protect adjacent residential areas; staff said the CUP process requires findings on compatibility, parking and neighborhood impacts and that administrative use permits would apply where adjacency protections are appropriate. Councilmember Rosati moved to introduce the ordinance and Councilmember Anthony seconded; the motion passed 5‑0.
