Burbank planning commission upholds director, limits West Linden project to up to 11 units

The City of Burbank Planning Commission on Jan. 12 denied an appeal of the Community Development Director’s decision and upheld a conditional approval limiting development at 257 West Linden Avenue to up to 11 residential units.

Chair Wick and a unanimous commission vote (4–0) restored the director’s decision after nearly three hours of public comment and technical testimony. The director’s conditional approval followed staff findings that a prior 75‑unit, six‑story proposal exceeded the R3 zone’s allowable height and density and failed to meet multiple city development standards and state law. "Staff recommends adoption of the resolution denying the appeal and upholding the director's conditional approval of an 11 unit project at 257 West Linden Avenue," Daniel Via, principal planner, told the commission during the staff presentation.

Why it mattered: dozens of nearby residents testified that Linden is a narrow, dead‑end street with chronic parking and delivery congestion that can block driveways and hydrants. "After 04:00 it's difficult to find parking. After 06:00, it is impossible," said Molly Augustus, a long‑time neighbor. Multiple residents and several commissioners said they feared reduced emergency access for fire and medical apparatus.

Technical basis for the decision: transportation staff explained the appeal turned on whether the site qualifies as a "very low vehicle travel (VMT) area" under state density‑bonus law, which would allow higher density and reduced parking in some cases. The city used both its local VMT model and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) helper tool and concluded the site did not meet the required 15% threshold. The city also commissioned a third‑party review of the applicant’s consultant memo and found the applicant’s VMT calculations inconsistent with state guidance and industry practice.

Fire‑safety findings were central to the commission’s deliberations. Fire Marshal Joel Pedersen said the department conducted on‑site maneuvers and found the alley and existing access constrained by utilities and obstructions. "If there's a fire there, we got seven pieces of apparatus that need to get down there," Pedersen said, noting aerial apparatus require a 26‑foot unobstructed access width in locations serving truck companies. Staff and the fire department said the originally proposed building height, unit count and site configuration as submitted lacked the required secondary access and did not comply with the California Fire Code as adopted in Burbank.

What the approval means: staff said the director’s condition allows "up to 11 units" as an upper limit contingent on compliance with city development standards, the California Fire Code, and required affordability rules for density bonus eligibility. Daniel Via said the 11‑unit figure reflects six units available by right plus additional units that could be allowed under state density‑bonus provisions if the applicant provides 100% affordable units and satisfies other qualifiers.

Applicant position and next steps: the applicant’s representative said the site qualifies as a low‑VMT location under their consultant’s analysis and that design solutions — including an on‑site fire access lane and other plan‑check mitigations — could address fire‑access concerns. The applicant indicated they would refine designs in the plan‑check phase if the commission denied the appeal. Staff described the next steps clearly: if the applicant proceeds, they must submit construction drawings and pass plan check demonstrating compliance with the city’s development standards, fire code and any applicable state laws.

Vote at a glance: the motion to deny the appeal and affirm the director’s conditional approval (project number 25-0002550) passed 4–0. Chair Wick: yes; Commissioner Van Gorder: yes (mover); Commissioner Bennett: yes; Commissioner Mendez: yes.

Procedural note: staff emphasized that the director’s approval is a conditional, upper‑limit determination; any final building permits will require separate plan‑check review and specific design submittals to resolve the fire and access issues identified in the record. The commission adjourned and directed residents to follow the city’s permit and plan‑check process should the applicant submit revised drawings.