Airport Seeks Compromise With City

Moving to break a four-year stalemate, the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority agreed Monday to cut the size of its planned new terminal from 19 gates to 16 gates, and reduce the size of the facility by more than 100,000 square feet.

Burbank officials--who have sought a smaller terminal, a mandatory overnight curfew and a limit on the number of flights--reacted cautiously to the proposal but conceded that the authority was ceding ground.

“The bottom line is that this is not the end of the airport debate,” said Charles Lombardo, one of Burbank’s three commissioners on the Airport Authority. “It’s the start of a process.”

Authority spokesman Victor Gill said the airport’s proposal was a good-faith effort to break an impasse dating back to 1995.

“It represents the authority’s attempt to try and find some sort of compromise,” Gill said. “The timing is right.”

On May 5, the state Court of Appeal ruled that the city of Burbank has the right to review land-use decisions by the Airport Authority. The compromise proposal, Gill said, was filed to Burbank officials Monday and represents an acknowledgment of the city’s approval power.

Two other developments may have influenced the compromise proposal.

On May 13, the Federal Aviation Administration issued an opinion backing the Airport Authority’s contention that it could not impose a mandatory overnight curfew or a cap on flights without completing a lengthy noise study.

Burbank officials have resisted conducting such a study out of concerns it could lead to even weaker restrictions on flights than exist now. The airport currently has a voluntary curfew on airline flights between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m.

The other development that possibly triggered the compromise is a proposal by two Glendale City Council members to review the city’s representation on the Airport Authority. The move is widely seen as an effort to replace the current representatives with others who would be more sympathetic to Burbank’s position.

“The timing is interesting,” said Burbank City Manager Bud Ovrom. “Is it a genuine olive branch? Or is it being done to placate the Glendale City Council, which is due to discuss the airport [today]?”

Burbank, which once supported the expanded terminal, has been fighting the project since 1995. At that time, a new City Council majority came into power and argued that the new terminal would turn a regional airport into a busy national facility.

Since then, up to a dozen lawsuits have been filed by both parties in state and federal court. The city has fought to uphold its power to block the terminal, while the Airport Authority has argued that local government cannot impede the federal transportation system.

The FAA has said the current terminal, dating back to 1930, is too close to the east-west runway for safety. To replace it, the Airport Authority proposed building a 465,000-square-foot, 19-gate terminal on a 130-acre parcel owned by Lockheed Martin, with possible expansion to 27 gates.

The airport’s new proposal for 16 gates allows three more to be added, but no sooner than 2010. Any additional expansion would be subject to Burbank approval, airport officials said.

The size of the terminal also would be set at 330,000-square-feet but that could expand with “baggage-related space,” according to plans submitted to the Burbank Planning Department. Gill said no amount of space was specified, but said it could be about 75,000-100,000 square feet.

Despite scaling down the terminal, Burbank city officials still want to see an overnight curfew and a cap on flights. Two weeks ago, Rep. James Rogan (R-Glendale), said he was introducing legislation that would let the Airport Authority impose a curfew without conducting a federal noise study.