Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
After HCD notice, council rescinds denial and approves 236 North Central Stage 2 design review
Summary
Following a Housing Accountability Act notice from California HCD, council rescinded an earlier denial and approved Stage 2 design review and a related alley vacation for the 236 North Central mixed‑use housing project. Supporters said the city must comply with state law; opponents pressed historic preservation and park commitments.
The Glendale City Council voted to rescind its October denial of the Stage 2 design review for the proposed mixed‑use redevelopment at 236 North Central Avenue and approved the project with conditions, after staff reported a notice from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) that the denial violated the Housing Accountability Act.
What HCD found: staff said HCD concluded the project complied with the city's general plan, zoning and objective downtown specific plan standards and that the city failed to make required findings of specific, unmitigable public health or safety impacts. HCD required a written response to the city by January 29.
Public testimony: supporters including housing‑advocacy groups and callers argued the city lacked legal authority to deny the project and urged approval so the city could avoid penalties and litigation. Opponents objected to perceived broken promises (a formerly proposed park), loss of a larger affordable unit mix, and the treatment of the Sears/Masonic properties. Developer representatives said they had engaged in design work, traffic analysis and historic evaluation over multiple years and maintained the project includes affordable housing units and options for a city‑built park as a condition.
Council action: after discussion, council voted to rescind the prior denial and to approve the Stage 2 design review with modified conditions (one staff‑requested sentence removed concerning the Paseo activation). The council also approved the conditional vacation of a portion of Alley 239 to enable the project and adopted plan documents associated with the vacation. Several councilmembers emphasized their discomfort at being legally constrained but said they would approve the project to avoid state penalties.
Vote and legal posture: council recorded roll calls on rescission and approval (motions carried). Staff and the city attorney noted the limited discretion available under state law when a project meets objective standards.
Next steps: staff will record the approvals, proceed with the alley vacation conveyance upon project completion and continue dialogue about public mitigation measures, the promised park and design refinements where feasible within the law.
