volunteers to work with clients is limited. Because of the kind of
service BTAC provides, we need to present the best impression
possible both to our clients and to the general public. A new
facility will have the amenities needed for the services.
How about reinstating compatibility to code?
First, let me say that I am generally supportive of the
development of multi-family housing here in Burbank. Over the past
several years, Burbank has added many more jobs than it has housing
units, and since there is essentially no room to build single-family
homes, it seems to me that the only way to provide additional housing
is to allow construction of multi-family residential units.
Even though I am basically biased in favor of development of
multi-family units, I strongly support the proposal by council
members Campbell and Golonski to add a compatibility requirement to
the approval process for multi-family units.
In areas such as Valencia and Irvine, in which large parcels of
land are being developed under a citywide master plan, it is possible
to write building codes that work. Our situation in Burbank is
entirely different than Valencia and Irvine. We are built out, and
often times a large multi-family project impinges unnecessarily upon
nearby single-family dwellings.
It is not possible to write a code that covers all the bases for a
city like Burbank, which has diverse and intermingled types of
housing. Human input is needed -- one code will not fit all
situations, no matter how well it is written.
It is my understanding that prior to the passage of Measure 1, a
compatibility requirement was included in Burbank's building codes
for multi-family projects. Why it was dropped, I do not know.
If a compatibility requirement is restored to our codes it will
afford neighbors of a proposed multi-family development the right to
an open hearing by the Planning Board and possibly the council as
well. Without the compatibility requirement, if neighbors object to
some aspect of a proposed project, they are likely to be told "Too
bad, it meets code and you have no right to even object."