Opponents Seek to Stall Burbank Airport Expansion

A Burbank group said Tuesday that it has gathered enough signatures to stall plans for a new $300-million Burbank Airport passenger terminal by forcing a citywide vote on the controversial project.

Group leaders said the initiative drive is intended to keep a lid on aircraft noise and local traffic by limiting growth at the airport, which is used annually by 4.7 million passengers.

“This is a small regional airport that serves local residents,” said Ted McConkey, a former Burbank councilman. “It’s not designed to be a dumping ground for overcrowded airports in other parts of the region. We want to keep this airport for its intended purpose.”

Airport officials want to build a new terminal to better handle passenger demand. The current 170,000-square-foot facility is too close to the east-west runway under current Federal Aviation Administration standards, but opposition from neighbors has stalled modernization plans for years.

The measure submitted by the group, Restore Our Airport Rights, could kill plans for a proposed 330,000-square-foot passenger terminal by limiting expansion to 200,000 square feet. It also would impose a flight curfew from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m., and place a 10% cap on the number of future flights and passengers.

The next city election is in February 2001, and the group needs at least 5,214 valid signatures to qualify for inclusion on the ballot.

About a dozen people joined McConkey in submitting the petitions Tuesday at City Hall.

“If this initiative isn’t a referendum for the City Council to change its ways, then nothing is,” said Kevin Muldoon, 41, of Burbank.

Volunteers said that about 100 people participated in the signature drive, concentrating on voters who live south of the airport, beneath the main takeoff route.

If approved, the initiative would put a cloud over long-running negotiations between city and airport officials over the proposed 14-gate terminal. Burbank Mayor Stacey Murphy said she still hopes that a preliminary agreement on the project, reached last year, will hold.

“This is the first time that all sides in this controversy have been willing to sit down together and hammer out a resolution,” she said. “We are going to continue to try to do that.”

Airport officials declined to comment.

The preliminary terminal agreement includes a curfew on flights from 11 p.m. to 6 a.m. and an annual payment of $1.5 million to the city of Burbank from airport revenues. It also would permanently ban easterly takeoffs.

Among those attacking the agreement’s various provisions are airlines, Los Angeles residents and some elected officials. Burbank suspended negotiations last month.

The initiative group began collecting signatures in October, two months after city and airport negotiators signed the draft agreement to relocate the existing passenger terminal.

In a statement, Burbank City Manager Robert R. “Bud” Ovrom said he believed the initiative was legally flawed but would not elaborate. Ovrom said city officials will meet with FAA Director Jane Garvey April 7 in an effort to revive stalled negotiations.