CITIES SEEK ANSWERS FROM FAA.

Byline: Susan Abram Staff Writer

GLENDALE - City leaders from Burbank, Glendale and Pasadena agreed Wednesday to ask the federal government for assistance on how to proceed with building a new airport terminal.

During the landmark meeting between the three city councils and the Airport Authority held at the Glendale Hilton, leaders agreed to form a delegation to travel to Washington, D.C. to meet with Federal Aviation Administration officials.

The goal is to cull advice from the FAA and bring it back for more discussion, and ultimately place the decision in the hands of voters.

``We must work in concert with the FAA so we can come back with a federal direction to a local solution,'' said Burbank Mayor David Laurell. ``I don't think there is any reason why we can't do that.''

This was a year when issues surrounding the Burbank Airport took twists and turns - from the overturning of Measure A, the voter approved anti-expansion initiative, to squabbles between the Burbank City Council and the Airport Authority on how to proceed with federally mandated security enhancements.

On Wednesday, members of the three city councils agreed that any decision to build a new terminal must be made by local government.

Also, in a letter sent Wednesday to FAA Administrator Marion Blakley, U.S. Reps. Adam Schiff, D-Pasadena, Brad Sherman, D-Sherman Oaks, Howard Berman, D-Mission Hills, and Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles, all signed on their support to help Burbank achieve a local solution to the airport issue.

``We continue to believe that the complex issues surrounding a replacement terminal should be resolved through a local process that includes meaningful input from all the relevant stakeholders, including the residents of communities near the airport, the City of Burbank and the Airport Authority,'' according to the letter.

For years, the Airport Authority, which runs the airport, has tried to proceed with plans for a new terminal building, arguing that the current one sits too close to the centerline of the runway.

But Burbank city officials, citing noise and other concerns from the local community, have resisted.

Last month, the Airport Authority agreed in a 5 to 4 vote to abandon its long fight to build a new passenger terminal, saying it was a hopeless cause in the face of broad community and political opposition.

The authority notified the FAA of its decision, asking the federal agency to step in and make a decision.

Though the authority has not voted on whether to sell the 59-acre property where the new terminal would have been built, Burbank council members were offended that the authority did not consult them.

If the authority chooses to sell the property, the City Council would have no veto power over that decision. ``I was a little disturbed that the Airport Authority would go to the FAA and ask them to step in,'' Burbank Councilwoman Stacey Murphy told the panel. ``(The FAA) doesn't understand all the idiosyncrasies of our city.''

Only Glendale councilman Dennis Weaver vocalized his opposition to sending a delegate, saying the endeavor would prove futile.

``I don't think I'll vote for that because I think it's a waste of time,'' Weaver said. ``All the years I've been around, the FAA has told us the terminal was unsafe. They didn't tell us what to do with it then, and I don't think they're going to tell us now.''

Historically, Burbank's two neighboring cities have been in favor of airport expansion, but a new regime seems eager to be more supportive. Glendale's interest stems from noise complaints from the Northeastern part of the city.

The FAA has said a flight curfew could only be imposed once an expensive noise study, known as Part 161, had been completed. The study is expected to be complete by next year.

Pasadena Mayor Bill Bogaard said he was willing to speak to his council about sending a delegate.

``From what I understand, a new terminal isn't the issue,'' Bogaard said. ``Mitigating factors, such as noise and traffic, are the key to finding a solution.''