This agenda contains a summary of each item of business which the Council may discuss or act on at this meeting. The complete staff report and all other written documentation relating to each item on this agenda are on file in the office of the City Clerk and the reference desks at the three libraries and are available for public inspection and review. If you have any question about any matter on the agenda, please call the office of the City Clerk at (818) 238-5851. This facility is disabled accessible. Auxiliary aids and services are available for individuals with speech, vision or hearing impairments (48 hour notice is required). Please contact the ADA Coordinator at (818) 238-5021 voice or (818) 238-5035 TDD with questions or concerns.

CLOSED SESSION ORAL COMMUNICATIONS IN COUNCIL CHAMBER:

Comments by the public on Closed Session items only. These comments will be limited to three minutes.

For this segment, a PINK card must be completed and presented to the City Clerk.

CLOSED SESSION IN CITY HALL BASEMENT LUNCH ROOM/CONFERENCE ROOM:

a. Conference with Legal Counsel � Existing Litigation:

Pursuant to Govt. Code �54956.9(a)

1. Name of Case: In the matter of the application of Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority � Administrative (Variance) Hearing conducted by Cal Trans.

Case No.: OAH No. L2001-110412

Brief description and nature of case: Administrative review of Airport noise variance standards.

2.  Name of Case: City of Burbank v. Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority.

Case No.: BC259852

Brief description and nature of case: Declaratory Relief.

b. Conference with Legal Counsel � Anticipated Litigation (City as possible plaintiff):

Pursuant to Govt. Code �54956.9(c)

Number of potential case(s): 1

c. Conference with Legal Counsel � Anticipated Litigation (City as potential defendant):

Pursuant to Govt. Code �54956.9(b)(1)

Number of potential case(s): 1

6:30 P.M.

INVOCATION: Reverend Tania Kleiman, Olive Branch Ministries.

The Courts have concluded that sectarian prayer as part of City Council meetings is not permitted under the Constitution.

FLAG SALUTE:

ROLL CALL:

ANNOUNCEMENT: WEDNESDAY NIGHT PRIME TIME PROGRAMS.

PRESENTATION: COLONY THEATER OVATIONS.

PRESENTATION: ENVIRONMENTAL AMBASSADOR PILOT PROGRAM GRANT.

PRESENTATION: BURBANK TOURNAMENT OF ROSES.

PROCLAMATION: AMELIA EARHART WEEK.

COUNCIL COMMENTS: (Including reporting on Council Committee Assignments)

INTRODUCTION OF ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS:

At this time additional items to be considered at this meeting may be introduced. As a general rule, the Council may not take action on any item which does not appear on this agenda. However, the Council may act if an emergency situation exists or if the Council finds that a need to take action arose subsequent to the posting of the agenda. Govt. Code �54954.2(b).

6:30 P.M. JOINT PUBLIC HEARING WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY:

1. OPPORTUNITY SITE NO. 2 (OLD POLICE BLOCK) BURBANK VILLAGE WALK � THE OLSON COMPANY:

The purpose of this item is to continue the public hearing, previously noticed to occur on this date, to present the information necessary for the Redevelopment Agency and the City Council to consider the proposed sale of Agency property and development entitlements for the Burbank Village Walk project (The Olson Company, Applicant). The specific land use applications for the 140-unit residential and 14,000 square foot restaurant/retail project included: Planned Development No. 2002-1; Development Review No. 2002-11; Tentative Tract Map No. 53905; a Mitigated Negative Declaration; Development Agreement; and the associated legal documents. The specific Agency Board consideration included the Disposition and Development Agreement and related legal documents.

The public hearing for the subject project was rescheduled to January 7, 2003 to allow additional time for the Developer to analyze their unit design to assure themselves and the Agency that the project best reflects the present residential market. The Developer has submitted plans that they feel better meet the market demand. However, additional time is needed for the Developer to reanalyze the project economics, which will require amendment to the draft Disposition and Development Agreement and related redevelopment documents.

Staff will renotice the hearing in a local newspaper and will ensure that all revised documents are available for public review as required by law.

Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the public hearing be continued to February 11, 2003.

REPORTING ON CLOSED SESSION:

AIRPORT AUTHORITY MEETING REPORT:

2. AIRPORT AUTHORITY COMMISSIONER REPORT:

At the request of the Burbank representatives to the Airport Authority, an oral report will be made to the City Council following each meeting of the Authority.

The main focus of this report will be issues which were on the Airport Authority special meeting agenda of December 30, 2002. Other Airport related issues may also be discussed during this presentation.

Recommendation:

Receive report.

FIRST PERIOD OF ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: (One minute on any matter concerning City Business.)

There are four segments of Oral Communications during the Council Meeting. The first precedes the Closed Session items, the second and third segments precede the main part of the City Council�s business (but follow announcements and public hearings), and the fourth is at the end of the meeting following all other City business.

Closed Session. During this period of oral communications, the public may comment only on items listed on the Closed Session Agenda(s). A PINK card must be completed and presented to the City Clerk. Comments will be limited to three minutes.

First Period of Oral Communications. During this period of Oral Communications, the public may comment on any matter concerning City Business. A BLUE card must be completed and presented to the City Clerk. NOTE: Any person speaking during this segment may not speak during the third period of Oral Communications. Comments will be limited to one minute.

Second Period of Oral Communications. This segment of Oral Communications immediately follows the first period, but is limited to comments on agenda items for this meeting. For this segment, a YELLOW card must be completed and presented to the City Clerk. Comments will be limited to four minutes.

Third Period of Oral Communications. This segment of oral communications follows the conclusion of agenda items at the end of the meeting. The public may comment at this time on any matter concerning City Business. NOTE: Any member of the public speaking at the First Period of Oral Communications may not speak during this segment. For this segment, a GREEN card must be completed and presented to the City Clerk. Comments will be limited to three minutes.

City Business. City business is defined as any matter that is under the jurisdiction of the City Council. Although other topics may be of interest to some people, if those topics are not under City Council jurisdiction, they are not City business and may not be discussed during Oral Communications.

Videotapes/Audiotapes. Videotapes or audiotapes may be presented by any member of the public at any period of Oral Communications or at any public hearing. Such tapes may not exceed the time limit of the applicable Oral Communications period or any public comment period during a public hearing. The playing time for the tape shall be counted as part of the allowed speaking time of that member of the public during that period.

Videotapes must be delivered to the Public Information Office by no later than 10:00 a.m. on the morning of the Council meeting in a format compatible with the City�s video equipment. Neither videotapes nor audiotapes will be reviewed for content or edited by the City prior to the meeting, but it is suggested that the tapes not include material that is slanderous, pornographic, demeaning to any person or group of people, an invasion of privacy of any person, or inclusive of material covered by copyright.

Printed on the videocassette cover should be the name of the speaker, the period of oral communication the tape is to be played, and the total running time of the segment. The Public Information Office is not responsible for "cueing up" tapes, rewinding tapes, or fast forwarding tapes. To prevent errors, there should be ten seconds of blank tape at the beginning and end of the segment to be played. Additionally, the speaker should provide the first sentence on the tape as the "in cue" and the last sentence as the "out cue".

As with all Oral Communications, videotapes and audiotapes are limited to the subject matter jurisdiction of the City and may be declared out of order by the Mayor.

Disruptive Conduct. The Council requests that you observe the order and decorum of our Council Chamber by turning off or setting to vibrate all cellular telephones and pagers, and that you refrain from making personal, impertinent, or slanderous remarks. Boisterous and disruptive behavior while the Council is in session, and the display of signs in a manner which violates the rights of others or prevents others from watching or fully participating in the Council meeting, is a violation of our Municipal Code and any person who engages in such conduct can be ordered to leave the Council Chamber by the Mayor.

Once an individual is requested to leave the Council Chamber by the Mayor, that individual may not return to the Council Chamber for the remainder of the meeting. BMC �2-216(b).

Individuals standing in the Council Chamber will be required to take a seat. Also, no materials shall be placed in the aisles in order to keep the aisles open and passable. BMC �2-217(b).

Your participation in City Council meetings is welcome and your courtesy will be appreciated.

COUNCIL AND STAFF RESPONSE TO FIRST PERIOD OF ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:

SECOND PERIOD OF ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: (Four minutes on Agenda items only.)

COUNCIL AND STAFF RESPONSE TO SECOND PERIOD OF ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:

CONSENT CALENDAR: (Items 3 through 7)

The following items may be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a Council Member so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent calendar and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. A roll call vote is required for the consent calendar.

3. SUBMISSION OF THE FISCAL YEAR END 2001-02 COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT:

The purpose of this report is to formally submit the Fiscal Year End 2001-02 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) to the City Council.

The City Council engaged an independent certified public accounting firm to perform an annual audit of the City of Burbank and its component units. The results of the audit performed are formally published in the CAFR.

Fiscal Year 2001-02 is the first year that the City of Burbank has reported the annual financial results under the new reporting model required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 34 (GASB 34), Basic Financial Statements-and Management�s Discussion and Analysis (MD&A)-for State and Local Governments. Because this reporting model changes significantly both the recording and presentation of financial data, the CAFR is significantly different than in previous years.

The statements, under GASB 34, are presented on a government-wide basis, which is designed to provide readers with a broad overview of the City�s finances, similar to a private-sector business. These statements show the June 30, 2002 fiscal year balances and overall results of operations for the period then ended, for all funds of the City, Redevelopment Agency, Housing Authority, Parking Authority, the Burbank Community Services Fund, and Youth Endowment Services (YES) Fund. The new statements are as follows:

• The statement of net assets presents information on all of the City�s assets and liabilities, with the difference between the two reported as net assets. Over time, increases or decreases in net assets may serve as a useful indicator of whether the financial position of the City is improving or deteriorating. One major component of this statement is worth noting. For the first time, with the adoption of GASB 34, the City of Burbank has inventoried, valued, recorded, and is depreciating general government infrastructure assets (e.g., roads, easements, bridges, sidewalks, storm drains, etc.) for financial reporting purposes.

• The statement of activities presents information showing how the City�s net assets changed during the most recent fiscal year. All changes in net assets are reported as soon as the underlying event giving rise to the change occurs, regardless of the timing of related cash flows. Thus, revenues and expenses are reported in this statement for some items that will only result in cash flows in future fiscal periods (e.g., earned but unused vacation and sick leave).

Both of the government-wide financial statements distinguish functions of the City that are principally supported by taxes and intergovernmental revenues (governmental activities). The governmental activities of the City include general government, public safety, public services, culture and recreation and interest on long-term debt. The business-type activities of the City include operations of the electric, water, wastewater, solid waste utilities, and golf course.

Another new feature of the GASB 34 format is the Management�s Discussion and Analysis (MD & A). This analysis begins the financial section of the CAFR and serves as an executive summary.

The CAFR will be submitted for a national achievement award to the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA). In order for a city to earn this award, the city must publish an easily readable and efficiently organized CAFR, whose contents conform to the standards of the award program. This report must satisfy both generally accepted accounting principles and applicable legal requirements. This award is valid for a period of one year only. The City of Burbank has received this award for 18 consecutive years, and staff believes that the report submitted to the City Council will continue to conform to the standards established by this award program.

Additionally, the CAFR is sent out to numerous financial institutions in order to comply with various financial and subsequent bond disclosure requirements.

Recommendation:

Note and file.

4. APPROVAL OF FINAL TRACT MAP NO. 53381:

Staff is requesting City Council approval of Final Tract Map No. 53381. The property covered on Final Tract Map No. 53381 is a one-lot subdivision totaling 28,356 square feet. Located at 4100 Kling Street, the property is in the R-4 Medium Density Multiple Family Residential zone. The property is owned by T.A. Patty Development, INC., a California Corporation.

Prior to August 2001, the property at 4100 Kling Street contained a surface parking lot. In August 2001, the property owner requested City approval to convert the property from the surface parking lot to a condominium subdivision containing 16 four-bedroom townhouse units with two-car garages. The 16 condominium units are currently under construction. Final Tract Map No. 53381 finalizes the conversion of the property from the surface parking lot to the condominium subdivision.

All conditions of approval and all requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act have been met. According to the State Subdivision Map Act, chapter 3, article 4, section 66458, and the provisions of Chapter 27 of the Burbank Municipal Code, the City Council must approve Final Tract Map No. 53381 if it conforms to all the requirements. If such conformity does not exist, the Council must disapprove the map at the meeting it receives the map, or at its next regular meeting. If the City Council has not authorized an extension to allow more time to disapprove the map, and the map conforms to all requirements, the map shall be deemed approved by operation of law.

Recommendation:

Adoption of proposed resolution entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING FINAL MAP OF TRACT NO. 53381 (4100 KLING STREET).

5. APPROVING CONTRACT DOCUMENTS AND AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE 2001-2002 GENERAL FUND VANOWEN STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, BID SCHEDULE NO. 1131:

Staff is requesting City Council approval of contract documents and award of a construction contract for Bid Schedule No. 1131, 2001-2002 General Fund (G.F.) Vanowen Street Improvement Project.

As a result of heavy vehicular traffic, Vanowen Street (between Hollywood Way and North Buena Vista) has deteriorated to a condition that warrants repair. Funding for this project was included in the City Council-adopted 2001-2002 Capital Improvement Program.

The scope of work for this project includes street resurfacing with asphalt-rubber hot mix (rubberized asphalt), repair of damaged concrete improvements, and new sidewalk construction. By using rubberized asphalt, the City will be recycling approximately 8,310 used tires.

On November 26, 2002, 10 contractors submitted bids for this bid schedule, ranging from $234,971 to $304,882. E.C. Construction Co. of South El Monte, California submitted the apparent low bid, which is 29.9 percent below the engineer�s estimate of $335,000. This contractor has completed several projects with the City, the most recent being the Public Works Yard resurfacing project, with satisfactory results.

Construction of this project is planned to occur between March and April 2003. Sufficient funding for this project is available.

Recommendation:

Adoption of proposed resolution entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING AND ADOPTING CONTRACT DOCUMENTS, PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, AND DETERMINING THE LOWEST RESPONSIBLE BIDDER, ACCEPTING THE BID, AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT FOR THE 2001-2002 GENERAL FUND VANOWEN STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, BID SCHEDULE NO. 1131.

6. RESOLUTION TO SUMMARILY VACATE A PORTION OF THE PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT AFFECTING THE NORTHWEST 2.5 FEET OF THE 7.5 FOOT EASEMENT ALONG THE NORTHEAST BOUNDARY OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 220 SOUTH SUNSET CANYON (V-349):

The applicant, Heidi Trotta, is requesting to vacate the subject easement area for the purposes of constructing a swimming pool. The proposed Resolution will consider the vacation of a portion of a Public Utility Easement (PUE) affecting the Northwest 2.5 feet of the 7.5 foot easement along the Northeast boundary of the property located at 220 South Sunset Canyon Drive. Both the Public Works Department and Burbank Water & Power have determined that the southwesterly 2.5 feet are not necessary, and that the remaining 5 foot easement is sufficient. The proposed vacation has been submitted to all appropriate City departments and outside public utilities companies. There are no public utilities in the area to be vacated and staff has not received any objections to the proposed vacation. It has been determined that the remaining 5 foot easement would be sufficient in size to contain the utilities and provide adequate access.

Recommendation:

Adoption of proposed resolution entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK ORDERING THE SUMMARY VACATION OF A PUBLIC SERVICE EASEMENT AT 220 SOUTH SUNSET CANYON DRIVE, BURBANK, CALIFORNIA (V-349).

7. AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE SANTA MONICA MOUNTAINS CONSERVANCY AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES FOR THE SANTA MONICA MOUNTAINS CONSERVANCY TO PURCHASE THE TAX DEFAULTED PROPERTY ADJACENT TO BRACE CANYON ROAD:

The purpose of this report is to consider a request by the Santa Monica Mountain Conservancy (SMC) for the Mayor to sign the SMC�s agreement with the County of Los Angeles as to the purchase price of the property located adjacent to Brace Canyon Road, and to obtain City Council approval to purchase the property from the SMC for the amount of their costs.

The subject property is located at the foothills of the Verdugo Mountains and is surrounded by other single family residential properties within the City of Burbank, along with land being held as part of the City�s Mountain Reserve. The property is zoned R-1 single family residential and has been improved with an existing Los Angeles County Flood Control facility that is encumbered by a public utility easement. As a result, this easement does not allow the property to be developed in accordance with the development standards of Chapter 31 of the Burbank Municipal Code (BMC).

On October 29, 2002, the City Council, in closed session, authorized staff to work with SMC to acquire their interest in the Brace Canyon property once the SMC transaction with the County has been completed. The SMC is in agreement with this proposal. The Burbank Municipal Code permits the City Manager to acquire property administratively with a value less than $10,000. The City will purchase the SMC interest in the property for the amount paid by the County which is expected to be $2,965 in delinquent taxes plus transaction costs. The total is not expected to exceed $4,000.

Recommendation:

Adoption of proposed resolution entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING THE SALE PRICE OF CERTAIN TAX DEFAULTED PROPERTY AS BETWEEN THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY AND THE SANTA MONICA MOUNTAINS CONSERVANCY.

END OF CONSENT CALENDAR *** *** ***

REPORTS TO COUNCIL:

8. APPOINTMENT TO THE GREATER LOS ANGELES VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT:

The purpose of this report is to request the City Council to consider making one appointment to the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District Board of Trustees (District). The vacancy is for a four-year term that will end on January 1, 2007.

On November 1, 2002, the City Clerk's Office began advertising and accepting applications for one appointment as Burbank�s Trustee to the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District Board of Trustees. The deadline to submit applications was set for November 27, 2002 and then extended to December 27, 2002. As of that deadline, the City Clerk's Office received applications from Harvey Paskow and Adam Rocke.

The District provides vector (insect) control services throughout its service area which includes 34 cities and certain portions of the unincorporated area of Los Angeles County. Their member cities cover a large geographic area stretching from Long Beach to Santa Clarita. Trustees are required to attend monthly meetings at the District�s headquarters and are paid $50 for each meeting they attend in lieu of expenses.

RANDOM DRAWING OF APPLICANTS:

The City Clerk's Office conducted a random drawing to select the order that the two applicants will appear on the voting sheets. The order is as follows:

1.  Harvey Paskow

2. Adam Rocke

VOTING PROCESS:

The Council votes on the number of vacancies on the Board, Commission or Committee. For example, if there is one vacancy on the Board, Commission or Committee, each Member is allowed one vote. The applicant receiving the majority of votes will be appointed.

This process is based on past practice. The Council could certainly make any desired changes to the process. If changes should be requested, staff would recommend that the process be clarified prior to any voting.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the City Council consider making the appointment to the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District Board of Trustees for the term ending January 1, 2007.

9. AUTHORIZATION TO ACCEPT SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL GRANTS FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2003:

Staff requests City Council approval of a resolution authorizing the acceptance of grant funds from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for two Safe Routes to School grants. Administered by Caltrans, the Safe Routes to School grant program is designed to improve and enhance the safety of pedestrian and bicycle facilities and related infrastructure on identified school travel routes. The program provides 90 percent financing for projects deemed of significant importance to school safety.

In May 2002, City Council authorized staff to apply for two Safe Routes to School grants. Caltrans notified staff on November 5, 2002 that both grants were approved for a total of $139,500. The two Burbank grants were among a total of 87 approved projects in the state and 14 projects approved for funding in Los Angeles and Ventura counties. The two approved school safety projects include the following elements:

Sidewalk Construction � A total of 2,500 linear feet of sidewalk will be constructed near three schools to improve accessibility to intersections controlled by school crossing guards or stop signs. The total construction cost of this project is $80,000. Sidewalk will be constructed for:

George Washington Elementary School on Winona Avenue (850 feet)

Emerson Elementary School on Kenneth Road (150 feet)

Bret Harte Elementary School on Ontario Street (1,500 feet)

Pedestrian Protection at Traffic Signals � Additional safety devices will be installed at four traffic signals to extend green walk time for schoolchildren where traffic volume is high, the crosswalk is long, or traffic speeds are high. The extended green walk time will insure that children have adequate time to cross the street with minimal impact on the intersection efficiency. The total construction cost for this project is $75,000. The safety devices are planned at:

San Fernando Road and Buena Vista Street (Washington School)

Victory Boulevard and Olive Avenue (Walt Disney School)

Victory Boulevard and Alameda Avenue (McKinley School)

Alameda Avenue and Main Street (McKinley School)

The Safe Routes to School grant program funds 90 percent of the total construction cost of each project. The total cost of the two projects is $155,000, $139,500 of which is covered by the Safe Routes to School grant. The remaining $15,500 is a local contribution required by the Safe Routes to School grant. The $139,500 covered by the grant will be initially fronted from Fund 125 (Gas Tax Fund). Caltrans will reimburse the City for these costs at the end of the project.

The $15,500 local contribution is currently available in the Flashing Beacon Crosswalk Improvements. The improvements programmed with the Flashing Beacon Crosswalk project are complete, and about $23,000 remains in the project from savings due to work performed by City forces originally programmed to be completed by contract.

Recommendation:

Adoption of proposed resolution entitled:

(4/5 vote required)

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003 BUDGET FOR THE PURPOSE OF RECEIVING AND APPROPRIATING SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL GRANT FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $139,500 FROM THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, AND THE CITY�S LOCAL CONTRIBUTION IN THE AMOUNT OF $15,500.

10. DEVELOPMENT OF A COMPREHENSIVE CITY POLICY ON BURBANK-GLENDALE-PASADENA AIRPORT FACILITIES: ZONING/SPECIFIC PLAN PROCESS:

This item was continued from the City Council meeting of December 17, 2002. On November 5, 2002, staff presented to the City Council a proposed outline for a process that would result in the development of a comprehensive City policy for future development of facilities at the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport, including the development of a specific plan. The Council requested that additional information be provided in several areas, including a better defined and more directed scope of work for the entire plan and policy development process and additional information and options for completing the proposed process using in-house staff.

Staff believes that the Council�s goal is to provide the City, to the extent permitted by law, with a greater ability to direct and/or restrict development that may be inconsistent with existing and emerging City policies. The Council directed staff on November 5 to pursue the creation of permanent zoning measures that similarly would ensure compatible development. These zoning and land use controls would constitute only part of the overall City airport policy. Staff has identified three possible courses of action to establish the zoning and land use measures desired by the Council. These options are not mutually exclusive and multiple options may be pursued simultaneously. In pursuing any of these options, staff would look to the Public Evaluation and Review Committee process; Council dialogue; discussions with the cities of Glendale and Pasadena, the Federal Aviation Administration, the Airport Authority, and other agencies; and other ongoing airport discussions for guidance on existing and emerging City policies that would impact the zoning and/or specific plan process. The options are as follows:

1. Conditional Use Permit (CUP) or other discretionary approval for all airport development: This option would amend the Zoning Ordinance such that most or all uses in the Airport zone, including air passenger terminals, would require a CUP or other similar discretionary approval from the City. Staff would look at various options for creating a similar type of permit and discretionary process to achieve the desired goal of ensuring consistency with City policy.

2. Airport Zone Development Standards: The option would amend the Zoning Ordinance to create development standards for the Airport Zone, to the extent permitted by law. The goal of this option would be to put in place a set of development standards that reflect, to the extent legally permissible, all City policies related to various types of airport development. Air passenger terminals and other types of airport development would continue to be allowed by right in the Airport Zone, and the City would rely upon the established development standards to ensure that airport development is consistent with existing and emerging City policies.

3. Airport Specific Plan: The third option would involve the preparation of a comprehensive specific plan document similar to the Media District Specific Plan and Burbank Center Plan. A specific plan would provide a comprehensive planning strategy for the airport area and would provide the City with the greatest degree of protection against incompatible airport development by creating a complete set of land use policies and associated development standards. A specific plan would include some of the components of an airport master plan, and would provide the City with the ability to analyze airport development in the long-term and consider the cumulative impacts of airport development.

Per the Council�s direction, Community Development Department staff members would be responsible for managing these efforts and completing most of the work. Staff would hire consultants only when necessary due to the need for specific expertise or for other task-specific requirements. To the extent City staff would be managing the overall process and consultants would only be performing specific tasks, consultant costs would be minimized.

Recommendation:

Staff recommends that the City Council direct staff to proceed with preparation of an Airport Specific Plan. A specific plan would incorporate zoning controls and land use policies, would examine options for various airport development scenarios, and would provide the City with the ability to look at long-term airport development issues and consider the cumulative impacts of airport development.

11. LOS ANGELES EQUESTRIAN CENTER ADVISORY BOARD:

The City of Los Angeles will be establishing an Advisory Board for the Los Angeles Equestrian Center. Los Angeles has proposed that the Advisory Board be comprised of two representatives each from the cities of Burbank and Glendale, the Equestrian Center and the City of Los Angeles. The Advisory Board will advise the Los Angeles Recreation and Parks Board of Commissioners on various issues including capital improvements and remodeling, trails, services and events, as well as review and recommend on any proposed non-equestrian events. Staff recommends soliciting for Burbank representatives by means of the traditional methods used by the City Clerk�s office as well as by means of a letter sent to residents in the Rancho residential area.

Recommendation:

Direct staff to begin soliciting applications for two positions and two alternates to serve on the proposed LA Equestrian Center Advisory Board.

12. REQUEST FROM THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS AND BURBANK CHAMBER OF COMMERCE TO CONDUCT CANDIDATE FORUMS IN FEBRUARY 2003:

The purpose of this report is to present the City Council with two requests, one from the League of Women Voters of Glendale/Burbank, and one from the Burbank Chamber of Commerce, to conduct Candidate Forums. For the League of Women Voters it is proposed that the Forum be conducted in the City Council Chamber on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. and broadcast live on Channel 6 and replayed as often as reasonably possible prior to the Primary Election. The proposed Chamber of Commerce Forum would also take place in the Council Chamber, at a date and time to be determined.

The League of Women Voters has requested the City to consider facilitating, at its cost, the production and broadcast of the Candidates Forum in the City Council Chamber. The League has stated that the Forum will last approximately two hours. A similar request has been received from the Executive Director of the Burbank Chamber of Commerce.

On May 21, 1996, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 24, 741, which established policies regarding the use of City cable broadcast facilities for Election Candidate Forums. Through adoption of the Resolution, the Council expressed its belief that "it would be in the public interest for the City to permit, at no cost recovery, access by qualified organizations to use City facilities for the purpose of broadcasting debates and forums provided that neutrality is maintained in how the program is conducted so as to ensure that public funds are utilized solely for public education and information."

In the Resolution, the League of Women Voters was recognized by the City Council as a neutral, non-partisan organization that meets all established requirements. Additionally, as required by the Resolution, the League of Women Voters does not endorse or back candidates for elective office or take positions on local measures. They have, however, taken positions on State measures. The Chamber of Commerce has also conducted forums for municipal candidates in the past.

The League of Women Voters is proposing that the Candidates Forum commence at 7:00 p.m. and will address all candidates running for City Council and School Board. The League President will introduce the program and then other League members will ask questions of the candidates. The League President will then close the program which they anticipate lasting two hours. Likewise, the Chamber of Commerce proposes a forum that is "non-partisan and fair to all."

The League of Women Voters has conducted Candidate Forums in the past and indicates that feedback from the public in Burbank and Glendale in recent years has shown that this city-sponsored voter forum reaches a wide audience. The Candidates Forum is proposed to be held on Wednesday, February 12, 2003, at 7:00 p.m. during the Wednesday Night Prime-Time Programs segment. It is anticipated that the Forum will cost approximately $395 to produce, broadcast, and replay on Channel 6. The Chamber of Commerce also has a track record of successfully staging candidate forums, and cost to the City would be roughly the same.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the City Council consider the request from the League of Women Voters to conduct a Candidates Forum on February 12, 2003. Because the League of Women Voters meets the requirements outlined in Resolution No. 24,741, staff is supportive of approving their request and having the City pay the production and broadcast costs of the Forum. It is also recommended that the City Council consider the request from the Burbank Chamber of Commerce in a similar light.

ADOPTION OF PROPOSED ORDINANCES:

13. AMENDING THE BURBANK MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 5, ARTICLE 8, SECTION 5-801(A)(1), PERMITS FOR THE USE OF PARK FACILITIES:

The purpose of this report is to amend Burbank Municipal Code, Chapter 5, Article 8, Use of Park Facilities, Section 5-801, Permits for the Use of Park Facilities. It is staff�s recommendation that Subsection (a) Use of Park Facilities, item (1) any group of fifty (50) or more persons be amended to read any group of twenty-five (25) or more persons.

The goal of the park reservation program is always to best serve the recreation needs of both residents and non-residents through administering the usage of park facilities. In addition to providing for park areas to be reserved in advance, the program also assures staff availability in opening and closing facilities based upon reservation needs. The Burbank Police Department Park Patrol detail is also notified of specific reservation and use information, and is then able to ensure that those using the park facilities are not concerned with individuals or groups who would otherwise diminish the recreation experience.

During Fiscal Year 2001-02, staff received a number of complaints from neighbors of individual parks concerning excessive usage by private groups. A meeting was scheduled to discuss specific concerns and potential solutions. Staff also received complaints from permitted groups concerning overcrowding in the parks.

Park, Recreation and Community Services staff met with the designated Police Officer assigned to the Park Patrol detail. During the course of his and other assigned officers� patrols, they contacted numerous groups, many of which fall under the 50 person threshold. Such groups, who do not require special services, are not required to obtain a permit which makes it difficult to know where and when these gatherings will take place. As such, certain popular parks are being overused contributing to excessive noise, neighborhood parking issues, and potential control problems. This information was also confirmed by Park, Recreation and Community Services staff assigned to weekend duty.

By requiring medium sized groups (25-50) to obtain permits, staff will be in a better position to oversee park usage. Once the maximum level of permit groups has been met at one of our facilities, any additional permitted groups would be directed to other parks.

Ultimately, this will provide a better quality experience for the individual permit groups and it will provide better control within the park. Also of note is that anyone securing a permit is the point contact in an inquiry or investigation if there is any misuse of the facilities attributable to the group. Obtaining a contact person, if the group does not have a permit, is very difficult, even in the field. In addition, this new policy will also benefit the neighbors of our parks, who initially brought these concerns to our attention.

Requiring medium sized groups to obtain a permit also provides more control over facility usage and resultant parking issues. The permitted groups will also be directed to specific designated locations in the interior of the park. This will have a positive affect on the excessive noise levels that occasionally occur in the surrounding neighborhoods.

It is anticipated that the City of Burbank will receive a limited amount of additional revenue from the adoption of this proposed ordinance. It is not anticipated that the additional permitting will require any increased staffing.

This ordinance was introduced at the December 17, 2002 City Council meeting.

Adoption of proposed ordinance entitled:

AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING BURBANK MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 5-801 RELATING TO USE OF PARK FACILITIES.

14. AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE BURBANK MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO NEWSRACKS AND AMENDING ARTICLE 1 OF RESOLUTION NO. 26,258 RELATING TO THE COSTS OF FINGERPRINTING FEE FOR BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS:

This Ordinance will amend Chapter 20 of the Burbank Municipal Code relating to the regulation of newsracks. Specifically, the amendment will provide that newsracks that display "harmful matter" as defined by the California Penal Code must comply with the state law requiring supervision of such newsracks by adults and that those adults must submit to a background investigation prior to acting as supervisors of the newsracks.

The background investigation provided for the proposed ordinance requires the submission of fingerprints to the Department of Justice (DOJ). The DOJ charges a fee to provide criminal history information assessed through the use of fingerprints. In order to account for this cost, an amendment to the City�s Fee Resolution is submitted to the Council with the proposed ordinance.

This ordinance was introduced at the December 17, 2002 City Council meeting.

Recommendation:

Adoption of proposed ordinance entitled:

AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE BURBANK MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE REGULATION OF NEWSRACKS.

RECONVENE the Redevelopment Agency meeting for public comment.

THIRD PERIOD OF ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: (Three minutes on any matter concerning the business of the City.)

This is the time for the Third Period of Oral Communications. Each speaker will be allowed a maximum of THREE minutes and may speak on any matter concerning the business of the City. However, any speaker that spoke during the First Period of Oral Communications may not speak during the Third Period of Oral Communications.

For this segment, a GREEN card must be completed, indicating the matter to be discussed, and presented to the City Clerk.

COUNCIL AND STAFF RESPONSE TO THE THIRD PERIOD OF ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:

ADJOURNMENT.