Terminal Gridlock

Terminal Gridlock At Burbank, the issue is local control — making it national By John F. Infanger, Editorial Director July 2001 The original United Airport at Burbank and terminal were constructed in 1930 Dios Marrero...

Mired in Politics
The airfield constraints here have been on the radar scope of the Federal Aviation Administration for years. The local issue is becoming increasingly national following the Southwest incident and with the initiation of the FAR Part 161 study, which is being used here as an instrument to attempt to implement a curfew. Nationally, industry is watching FAA’s handling of this Part 161 and one being conducted at Naples, FL, as communities look to see what the agency will allow. [In essence, Part 161 is intended to allow consideration of more local say in airport matters; however, its counterbalance is forcing a community to study in-depth its reasons for action. What will be permitted and how much study is enough are among the questions still to be answered by FAA.]
"The 161 is really geared toward trying to implement an enforceable, mandatory full nighttime curfew," explains Marrero, "and if we’re successful in doing so, it would be the first such restriction approved by the FAA and implemented by a local airport. The 161 is symptomatic of a trend that has existed here to be the most innovative and aggressive in trying to address urban noise impact. We are surrounded by an urban area and we are respectful of that. You have to face the reality that people in urban areas have expectations and a certain amount of consideration from their governmental authorities and react accordingly."
Meanwhile, trade groups such as the National Business Aviation Association and the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association are expressing opposition to the curfew.

Property and Size
At Burbank Airport, plans have come and gone, only to be replaced by new plans. "There was an attempt that moved fairly quickly in the early ’80s," recalls Gill. "It cleared all of the environmental hurdles, even got to conceptual design, for a building on a portion of the Lockheed property where the skunkworks facilities, the so-called Plant B-6 property, is located. By 1985, Lockheed withdrew its willingness to sell a portion of the property for the terminal. At the time, they were unwilling to state any particular reason." It later was revealed that Lockheed was building the components of the F-117A Stealth Fighter there. The airport sought a new property solution.
By the ’90s, however, Lockheed was again willing to sell the property, beginning a new debate. In fact, the new parcel was larger.
Explains Gill, "The interesting part of the first half of the 1990s was that there was real consensus at the political level, both on the airport commission and the three constituent cities. Notably, Burbank’s priority at the time was to recover from the prospective loss of Lockheed as a corporate member of the community, and the freeing up of over 300 acres of prime real estate, never mind the thousands of jobs that went with it."
In 1995, says Gill, consensus stopped with the election in Burbank of a restrict-the-airport plank. "It flipped 180 degrees," he says.
All that, says Gill, "ultimately led to what I’ll call the current generation of terminal discussion."
Because its size is an inherent restriction, any property the Burbank Airport would acquire would be city property. Burbank, by court decree, has the right to exercise approval of the purchase of land. That, according to Gill, means the airport could pay Lockheed $86 million on which it does not have legal authority to build a terminal. Burbank subsequently put a deadline for getting an agreement, one that’s quickly approaching.
Says Gill, "The window of opportunity on which everybody across the board says is the best piece of property is about to disappear." The city of Burbank is also in agreement, says Gill, but it wants to control terminal size and get a curfew implemented.
Burbank has successfully engineered consensus on the size of the facility. In effect, it’s a modern version of what exists, except it’s safely away from airfield operations. The curfew to limit noise is in line with Burbank’s history as a leader, says Marrero.
The frustration over the purchase of the Lockheed property — part of which was purchased for airfield safety — has led the authority to announce an alternative site on property it already owns, taking Burbank out of the purchase loop. It still, however, has authority over zoning.
Meanwhile, almost as an aside, a citizens group has capitalized on the debate and through an initiative and referendum process gotten the citizenry directly involved in the terminal decision. "No matter what we and the city council do, it still has to go out to a vote of the voters," explains Gill. "That referendum passed very easily last November."
The organizers, however, are not satisfied and have qualified for a special election October 9th calling for even more restrictions. Unique for this election is that it will be done via the U.S. mail, offering voters ease in casting their ballots.

We Recommend

  • Blog

    At Burbank, the Bob Hope Airport Awaits Word from FAA ...

    … on whether or not its Part 161 study and application for a proposed curfew will be officially endorsed as a “complete application†by the agency. After years of study and...

  • Article
    An Attempt to Limit Noise

    An Attempt to Limit Noise

  • Blog

    At Burbank and San Jose ...

    ... two airport initiatives are being revisited. At Bob Hope Airport, officials are again exploring how to impose a nighttime curfew from 10 p.m. to 6:59 a.m. At San Jose, another study is to be...

  • Article

    Representing Change

    Representing Change Attorney Peter Kirsch talks about Naples, Burbank, and local control By John F. Infanger, Editorial Director October 2001 The times, they are a-changin...