|
Present- |
Council Members Golonski, Murphy, and Vander Borght. |
|
Absent - - - - |
Council Members Campbell and Ramos. |
|
Also Present - |
Ms. Alvord, City Manager; Mr. Barlow, City Attorney; and, Mrs. Campos,
City Clerk.
|
|
Oral
Communications |
There was no response to the Vice Mayor�s invitation for oral
communications on Closed Session matters at this time.
|
|
4:39 P.M.
Recess |
The Council recessed at this time to the City Hall Basement Lunch
Room/Conference Room to hold a Closed Session on the following:
|
|
|
a. Conference with Labor Negotiator:
Pursuant to Govt. Code �54957.6
Name of the Agency Negotiator: Management Services Director/Judie
Sarquiz.
Name of Organization Representing Employee:
Represented: Burbank City Employees Association, Burbank Management
Association, Burbank Firefighters Chief Officers Unit, and Burbank Police
Officers Association; Unrepresented, and Appointed Officials.
Summary of Labor Issues to be Negotiated:
Current Contracts and Retirement Issues.
|
|
|
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): 3
|
|
|
d. Name of Case: Nolan v. Alvord.
Case No.:
BS092136
Brief description and nature of case:
Injunctive Relief.
|
|
Regular Meeting
Reconvened in
Council Chambers |
The regular meeting of the Council of the City of Burbank was reconvened
at 6:39 p.m. by Mrs. Ramos, Mayor.
|
|
Invocation
|
The invocation was given by Mr. Kramer, Community Assistance Coordinator.
|
|
Flag Salute
ROLL CALL |
The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Mr. Kramer, Community
Assistance Coordinator.
|
|
Present-- |
Council Members Campbell, Golonski, Murphy, Vander Borght and Ramos. |
|
Absent - - - - |
Council Members None. |
|
Also Present - |
Ms. Alvord, City Manager; Mr. Barlow, City Attorney; and, Mrs. Campos,
City Clerk.
|
|
Reporting on
Council Liaison
Committees
|
Mr. Vander Borght
reported on the Transit Task Force Committee meeting he attended with Mr.
Campbell.
Mrs. Ramos reported
on a meeting with the Mayor, City Manager and staff of the City of
Glendale to discuss regional transportation issues.
|
|
406
Airport Authority
Meeting Report |
Commissioner
Lombardo commented on the Federal Aviation Administration communication
systems outage in Southern California and noted that late-night departures
were anticipated. He then reported on the Airport Authority meeting of
September 7, 2004 at which the Authority received an update from the
environmental consultant on a further analysis of the bus purchase
proposal, noting the consultant�s recommendation to undertake a
demonstration project with hybrid buses. He also reported that a special
meeting was scheduled for September 15, 2004 to consider a paint scheme
for the existing terminal and receive a presentation on the Airport fire
station remodeling. He noted that no action would be taken on the items.
Commissioner
Lombardo also informed the Council that the Authority would not be
releasing the California Environmental Quality Act document related to the
proposed Airport Development Agreement for another week to allow for
further analysis.
The Council noted and filed the report.
|
|
6:56 P.M.
Hearing
1702
IDCO for R-1,
R-1-E and R-1-H
Single-Family
Residential Zones |
Mayor Ramos stated that �this is the time and place for the hearing on the
proposed Interim Development Control Ordinance pertaining to the R-1,
R-1-E, and R-1-H single family residential zones within the City.�
|
|
Notice
Given |
The City Clerk was asked if notices had been given as required by law.
She replied in the affirmative and advised that no written communications
had been received.
|
|
Staff
Report |
Mr. Forbes, Senior
Planner, Community Development Department, reported that over the past two
years, the City has witnessed a high volume of single-family residential
remodeling and rebuilding projects in response to high land values and low
interest rates. He noted that residents expressed concern with the scale
of several projects which are out of character with the surrounding
neighborhoods. He added that in January 2004, the Council directed staff
to begin a study of single-family development standards to determine what
changes might be needed.
Mr. Forbes informed
the Council that staff hosted two community meetings in May and July 2004
at which input was received from residents regarding the current and draft
standards proposed by staff to address the concerns about single-family
development. He noted that recognizing the still-increasing levels of
concern across the community, staff recommended that the Council adopt an
Interim Development Control Ordinance (IDCO) to regulate single-family
development until a full set of permanent standards can be presented to
the Council. He noted that unlike other IDCOs, the proposed IDCO would
allow for single-family developments to be built in the R-1, R-1-E, and
R-1-H zones, subject to the interim standards which would replace existing
Code standards. He noted that the proposed interim standards are based
upon draft standards that will be proposed as permanent standards;
however, they are not intended to address every aspect of single-family
development but those areas that most significantly affect the size and
character of single-family homes.
Mr. Forbes then
discussed the major changes in the proposed standards, including: height
of main dwelling; height of accessory structures; limiting homes to two
stories; grade level determination; restricting second floor area to 75
percent of first floor area; maintaining front yard setbacks at the
existing 25 feet but requiring an additional five-foot setback for garages
parallel to the street; increasing the rear yard setback from five feet to
25 feet with detached accessory structures allowed to cover up to 50
percent of the rear yard area; maintaining the interior side yard setback
at five feet but further limiting permitted encroachments; maintaining
street-facing side yard setback at ten feet but further limiting permitted
encroachments; increasing accessory structure setbacks from zero to
three-foot minimum interior side and rear setbacks (five-foot setback for
detached second dwelling units); increasing the setback for decks and
balconies on accessory structures to ten feet; reducing lot coverage
calculation from 60 percent to 45 percent including non-enclosed
structures; and, reducing the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) from 0.6 to 0.4 not
including garages.
Mr. Forbes noted
that a comparison with 15 other Southern California cities indicated that
all the proposed interim standards were generally comparable and in many
cases less restrictive. He also discussed the main concerns expressed at
the community meetings, including: the current development standards
being too lenient; support for reduction in height, lot coverage and the
FAR; and, the proposed standards being too restrictive. He noted that the
most frequently raised concern was neighborhood compatibility with new or
remodeled existing development. He stated that staff continues to
recommend against any kind of design review process and no such process is
proposed as part of the interim standards. He also noted that staff was
in the process of studying various options for a discretionary approval
process or other means of accommodating unique situations such as where
most of the existing homes in the neighborhood already do not comply with
the current standards.
Mr. Forbes informed
the Council that pursuant to the California Government Code, the Council
must make specific findings in adopting or extending an IDCO, that there
is a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, or welfare
posed by the continued development of single-family homes under the
current development standards. He added that the IDCO must be adopted as
an urgency ordinance by a four-fifths vote of the Council and may
initially be in effect for 45 days, after which time the Council would
have the option of holding another public hearing to consider extending
the IDCO for up to two years. He also added that staff recommended that
the interim standards apply to all projects that have not been submitted
for plan check. He noted that there were currently 62 single-family
projects submitted for plan check but have not yet received approval or
building permit, including 47 additions, seven new homes and eight
accessory structures or garages. He explained that staff considered a
phased-in approach that would allow applicants that have already invested
time and money preparing drawings, but have not yet submitted the drawings
for plan check by the effective date of the IDCO, to still be subject to
the current regulations. However, given the difficulty in using such a
standard, the urgency surrounding the matter, and the desire expressed by
the Council and the community to stop out of character single-family
development as soon as possible, staff recommended that the effective date
of the IDCO be used as the absolute cutoff, thereby requiring that any
project not submitted for plan check comply with the interim regulations.
He noted that approximately half of the projects awaiting plan check
would comply with the interim standards and most of the homes that would
not comply had only minor issues, many of which were related to accessory
structure placement, rear yard encroachment and lot coverage. He added
that only a few homes exceeded the interim FAR standard and none exceeded
the interim lot coverage standard.
|
|
Citizen
Comment |
Appearing to comment
in support of the Interim Development Control Ordinance (IDCO) were: Bob
Olson; Carolyne Gladstone; and, Blanche Antilla. Commenting in opposition
to the IDCO were: Mellisa Wong; Nataly Margossian; Jerry Day; Mark Bove;
Natasha Hoiseck; Thaer Mahmoud; Ara Aroyan; Majdi Bitar; Paul Boghossian;
Carolyn Berlin; Mark Stebbeds; Ron Vanderford; Ryan Jay; Vahe Hovannessian;
David Piroli; Tracy Lynch; Howard Rothenbach; Mike Nolan; Ross Gunnell;
Zorica Tanaskovic; Eden Rosen; Patrick Murphy; Matt Cramer; and, Phil
Berlin, who also expressed concern with the noticing procedure for the
public hearing. Also, Frank Montano and Louise Penn commented on view
protection issues; and, Mark Barton, reiterated public comment.
|
|
Rebuttal |
Mr. Forbes responded
to public comment with regard to: the number of homes currently in plan
check; noticing procedure and requirements for the public hearing; IDCO
application; setback requirements for substandard lots; number of homes in
the City built at 0.6 FAR; setbacks for garage additions and accessory
structures; FAR and lot coverage; parking requirements; improvements to
non-conforming structures; story limits for homes in the hillside area;
and, height limit requirements. He also noted that the ordinance was not a
substitution for the view protection ordinance.
|
|
Hearing
Closed |
There being no further response to the Mayor�s invitation for oral
comment, the hearing was declared closed.
|
|
Motion |
Following Council deliberation it was moved by Mr. Vander Borght and
seconded by Mr. Campbell that "the following urgency ordinance be
introduced and adopted as amended:�
|
|
1702
IDCO for R-1,
R-1-E and R-1-H
Single-Family
Residential Zones
|
ORDINANCE NO. 3646:
AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK ESTABLISHING
INTERIM DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS IN THE R-1, R-1-E, AND R-1-H SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL ZONES, TO ALLOW THE COUNCIL TIME TO STUDY AND CONSIDER
ENACTMENT OF ZONING MEASURES PERTAINING TO SINGLE-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT
WITHIN THESE ZONES,
with the Floor Area
Ratio reduced from 0.6 to 0.45 and height limit reduced from 27 feet to 22
feet to the ceiling. Also, any project in plan check or with a completed
file application for a Conditional Use Permit or any discretionary permit
would be exempt from the Ordinance.
|
|
Adopted |
The ordinance was introduced and adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Council Members
Campbell, Golonski, Murphy,
Vander Borght and Ramos.
Noes: Council Members None.
Absent: Council Members None.
|
|
10:29 P.M.
Recess |
The Council recessed at this time. The meeting reconvened at 10:41 with
all members present except Mrs. Ramos.
|
|
Reporting on
Closed Session |
Mr. Barlow reported on the items considered by the City Council during the
Closed Session meeting.
|
|
Initial Open
Public Comment
Period of Oral
Communications |
Mr. Vander Borght called for speakers for the initial open public comment
period of oral communications at this time.
|
|
Citizen
Comment |
Appearing to comment were:
Sandra Clark; John
Sorrell; Dinora Quispe; Brian Mosdale; and, Angela Wright, in opposition
to the sidewalk construction project on Ontario Street. Also, Phil
Berlin, commented on Airport issues; Kevin Muldoon, on housing development
standards, inquiring as to the status of video streaming and pedestrian
safety devices; Mark Barton, on the Downtown Wayfinding Signage Program;
Eden Rosen, on noise pollution and traffic at the intersection of Clark
Street and Victory Boulevard; Ron Vanderford, on the proposed Airport
Development Agreement; Howard Rothenbach, inquiring whether contractors
are liable for not wearing appropriate safety equipment when providing
services and inquiring when Third Street will be repaved; Mark Stebbeds,
on the Interim Development Control Ordinance; David Piroli, on the
sidewalk construction project and the proposed Airport Development
Agreement; and, Susan Bowers, expressing confidence in the Council to
protect the interests of the residents with regard to the proposed Airport
Development Agreement.
|
|
Staff
Response |
Members of the Council and staff responded to questions raised.
|
|
Agenda Item
Oral Communications |
Mrs. Ramos called for speakers for the agenda item oral communications at
this time.
|
|
Citizen
Comment |
Appearing to comment
were Carolyn Berlin, on the Interim Development Control Ordinance (IDCO),
giving a status report on the Burbank_Voters_and_Taxpayer�s group
membership and requesting a vote on the proposed Airport Development
Agreement; Phil Berlin, making a public records request for Property Tax
and Sales Tax revenues received from the Empire Center and requesting a
vote on the proposed Airport Development Agreement; Mark Stebbeds,
distributing an article on the harm caused to children by smog, requesting
a full Environmental Impact Report and a vote with regard to proposed
Airport Development Agreement; Kevin Muldoon, requesting a vote on the
proposed Airport Development Agreement; Ron Vanderford, commenting on
Airport issues; Ross Gunnell, on the IDCO criteria; Zorica Tanaskovic, on
the guidelines and appeal process for the issuance of park permits for
commercial uses on City-owned property and on the IDCO criteria; Eden
Rosen, on Airport issues and on the length of the process for the issuance
of park permits for commercial uses; David Piroli, requesting a vote on
the proposed Airport Development Agreement; Howard Rothenbach, requesting
that the Council express their individual opinions with regard to putting
the proposed Airport Development Agreement on the ballot; Mike Nolan, on
the sale of the B-6 property; and, Mark Barton, on Airport issues.
|
|
Staff
Response |
Members of the Council and staff responded to questions raised.
|
|
Motion |
It was moved by Mr. Campbell and seconded by Mr. Golonski that "the
following items on the consent calendar be approved as recommended.�
|
|
Minutes
Approved |
The minutes for the regular meetings of August 3, August 10, August 17 and
August 24, 2004 were approved as submitted.
|
|
304-1
Donation to
Police Dept. |
RESOLUTION NO. 26,786:
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING FISCAL YEAR
2004-2005 BUDGET ACCEPTING MICHEAL CUNNINGHAM�S DONATION OF $3,000 FOR THE
CITY�S YOUTH ACADEMY PROGRAM.
|
|
801-2
907
Drug Asset
Forfeiture |
RESOLUTION NO. 26,787:
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING THE FISCAL
YEAR 2003-2004 BUDGET TO APPROPRIATE UNEXPENDED FUNDS RESULTING FROM
ACCUMULATED INTEREST FROM UNEXPENDED ASSET FORFEITURE FUNDS ($53,858.24)
AND RETURNED ASSET FORFEITURE CHECKS FROM THE STATE AND FEDERAL
GOVERNMENTS ($38,349.93).
|
|
1007-1
Revise Title of
Risk Mgmt. Asst.
to Liability Claims
Coordinator |
RESOLUTION NO. 26,788:
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK REVISING AND RE-TITLING
THE SPECIFICATION OF RISK MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT (CTC No. 0728) TO LIABILITY
CLAIMS COORDINATOR (CTC No. 0485).
|
|
1007-1
Revise Spec. of
Water Meter
Mechanic |
RESOLUTION NO. 26,789:
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK REVISING THE
SPECIFICATION OF WATER METER MECHANIC (CTC No. 0989).
|
|
1301-3
Final Change
Order for B.S. No.
1135 � Sidewalk
Repair Project |
RESOLUTION NO. 26,790:
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING A FINAL
CHANGE ORDER IN THE AMOUNT OF $146,911.47 FOR THE 2003-2004 SIDEWALK
PROJECT, BID SCHEDULE NO. 1135.
|
|
804-3
701
Global Language
Materials Grant
Program |
RESOLUTION NO. 26,791:
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING THE FISCAL
YEAR 2004-2005 BUDGET TO APPROPRIATE $10,000 AWARDED FROM THE GLOBAL
LANGUAGE MATERIALS GRANT PROGRAM THROUGH THE LIBRARY SERVICES AND
TECHNOLOGY ACT FUNDS FROM THE CALIFORNIA STATE LIBRARY.
|
|
1502
1st Amend. to
Agmt. with
Southland Transit
Svcs. |
RESOLUTION NO. 26,792:
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING THE FIRST
AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURBANK AND SOUTHLAND
TRANSIT SERVICES, INC.
|
|
1502
1st Amend. to
Agmt. with
Super Shuttle |
RESOLUTION NO. 26,793:
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING THE FIRST
AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURBANK AND ARCADIA TRANSIT
INC. dba SUPER SHUTTLE.
|
|
Adopted |
The consent calendar was adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Council Members
Campbell, Golonski, Murphy
(abstaining on Resolution Nos. 26,792 and 26,793),
and Vander Borght.
Noes: Council Members None.
Absent: Council Member Ramos.
|
|
907
Reward for
Info. Leading to
the Arrest of
Suspects in a
Murder Investigation |
Deputy Police Chief
Koch requested that the Council authorize a $15,000 reward for information
that would lead to the information and conviction of the suspect(s) in the
Sharon Santos murder case. He informed the Council that Warner Bros. has
offered $25,000, and the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors has
offered $10,000 and that the $15,000 appropriation would bring the total
reward to $50,000.
|
|
Motion |
It was moved by Ms. Murphy and seconded by Mr. Campbell that �the
following resolution be passed and adopted:�
|
|
907
Reward for
Info. Leading to
the Arrest of
Suspects in a
Murder Investigation |
RESOLUTION NO. 26,794:
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING THE FISCAL
YEAR 2004-2005 BUDGET FOR THE PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT
OF $15,000 FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING A REWARD FOR INFORMATION LEADING
TO THE ARREST AND CONVICTION OF SUSPECT(S) IN THE SHARON SANTOS MURDER
INVESTIGATION.
|
|
Adopted |
The resolution was adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Council Members
Campbell, Golonski, Murphy, and
Vander Borght.
Noes: Council Members None.
Absent: Council Member Ramos.
|
|
804-4
Wastewater
Treatment
Revenue Bonds,
2004 Series A |
Mr. Hanway,
Financial Services Director, requested Council approval of the issuance of
Wastewater Treatment Revenue Bonds, 2004 Series A in an amount
not-to-exceed $21,000,000. He reported that on April 27, 2004, the
Council appointed a Financing Team to review the potential of refunding
the Wastewater Treatment Revenue Bonds, 1995 Series A with a bond issue
that would include $5 million of funds for planned capital expenditures.
He noted that that the criteria for the potential refunding was a minimum
net present value savings of three percent with an additional new money
piece of five million. He noted that the current net present value
savings factor is at 3.85 percent.
|
|
Motion |
It was moved by Ms. Murphy and seconded by Mr. Campbell that �the
following resolution be passed and adopted:�
|
|
804-4
Wastewater
Treatment
Revenue Bonds,
2004 Series A |
RESOLUTION NO. 26,795:
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AUTHORIZING THE
ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $21,000,000 PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF WASTEWATER
TREATMENT REVENUE BONDS, 2004 SERIES A, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING AND
DIRECTING EXECUTION OF A THIRD SUPPLEMENTAL INDENTURE OF TRUST RELATING TO
SUCH BONDS AND AN ESCROW DEPOSIT AND TRUST AGREEMENT RELATING TO THE
REFUNDING OF ALL OR A PORTION OF THE CITY�S OUTSTANDING WASTEWATER
TREATMENT REFUNDING REVENUE BONDS, 1995 SERIES A, AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF
BONDS, APPROVING THE FORM, AND AUTHORIZING DISTRIBUTION, OF AN OFFICIAL
STATEMENT FOR USE IN CONNECTION WITH THE SALE OF SUCH BONDS AND
AUTHORIZING OFFICIAL ACTION.
|
|
Adopted |
The resolution was adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Council Members
Campbell, Golonski, Murphy, and
Vander Borght.
Noes: Council Members None.
Absent: Council Member Ramos.
|
|
703
804-2
Park Permits for
Commercial Uses
on City Property |
Mr. Hansen, Park,
Recreation and Community Services Director, reported that on August 17,
2004, the Council provided direction to staff regarding revisions to the
proposed guidelines and criteria for the issuance of commercial park
facilities, the appeal process and the Burbank Fee Resolution. He noted
that in response to the Council�s concerns, staff has added a provision to
the guidelines and criteria to limit the length of time an individual
permit can be issued to a maximum of 90 days. With regard to redesigning
the appeal process, he reported that the Council has been provided with
three appeal options; to the Park, Recreation and Community Services
Board, the Permit Appeals Panel or directly to Council. He noted that the
length of time for the Director to act upon an application was extended to
14 days to allow for public noticing. Also, use permits would be accepted
no sooner than 110 days or no later than 45 days prior to the date of the
proposed event. He added that the definition of interested party was also
expanded to include individuals who would be directly impacted by the
proposed permitted activity.
Mr. Hansen informed
the Council that staff proposes to set the administrative fee for the
re-issuance of a permit when there have been no adverse effects on the
surrounding community or negative impacts on other uses of the facility at
a substantially reduced fee of $20 as compared to the initial application
process fee of $185. He also noted additional minor changes to the Fee
Resolution relative to descriptive terms. He concluded with staff�s
recommendation that the appeals process be initiated through the Park,
Recreation and Community Services Board and if necessary be further
appealed to the Council.
|
|
Motion |
It was moved by Mr. Campbell and seconded by Mr. Golonski that �the
following ordinance be introduced as amended and read for the first time
by title only and be passed to the second reading and that the following
resolution be passed and adopted:�
|
|
703
Park Permits for
Commercial Uses
on City Property |
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING SECTION 5-802,
5-804 AND 5-805 OF THE BURBANK MUNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHING THE TIME
DEADLINES FOR PARK FACILITIES USE PERMIT APPLICATIONS AND ESTABLISHING THE
PERMIT APPEALS PROCESS FOR RECREATIONS AND COMMERCIAL USE PERMITS, with
direction for an appeals process to the Park, Recreation and Community
Services Board and an interim appeals process directly to the Council.
|
|
703
804-2
Park Permits for
Commercial Uses on City
Property |
RESOLUTION NO. 26,796:
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING ARTICLE IX OF
RESOLUTION NO. 26,737, THE BURBANK FEE RESOLUTION RELATING TO PARKS AND
RECREATIONS FEES.
|
|
Adopted |
The ordinance was introduced and the resolution was adopted by the
following vote:
Ayes: Council Members
Campbell, Golonski, Murphy, and
Vander Borght.
Noes: Council Members None.
Absent: Council Member Ramos.
|
|
1402
Prima Facie
Speed Limits on
Various Streets |
Mr. Johnson,
Assistant Public Works Director, Traffic Engineer, requested Council
approval of changes to the Burbank Municipal Code (BMC), regarding maximum
speed limits in certain street segments to conform to requirements
established by the California Vehicle Code (CVC), the State of California
Traffic Manual and the Burbank Superior Courts for the purpose of speed
enforcement.
Mr. Johnson
recounted that staff provided an overview of the City�s speed limits at a
Study Session on July 27, 2004. He added that the Council directed staff
to re-evaluate the recommendation to raise speed limits on Pass Avenue
between Alameda Avenue and Verdugo Avenue from 30 to 35 miles per hour
(mph), and Riverside Drive between Olive Avenue and Buena Vista Street
from 30 to 35 mph. He noted that a re-evaluation was completed which
considered the neighborhood character, driveways and road alignments and
that the analysis showed that the proposed speed limit on Pass Avenue is
appropriate for conditions, but the speed limit on Riverside Drive should
remain at 30 mph to be consistent with segments on either side.
Mr. Johnson reported
that staff therefore recommends that the speed limit on Pass Avenue
between Alameda Avenue and Verdugo Avenue be increased to 35 mph and that
the speed limit on Riverside Drive between Olive Avenue and Buena Vista
Street remain at 30 mph, which is consistent with all other segments along
the arterial street.
|
|
Motion |
It was moved by Ms. Murphy and seconded by Mr. Campbell that �the
following ordinance be introduced and read for the first time by title
only and be passed to the second reading.� The ordinance was introduced
and the title read:
|
|
1402
Prima Facie
Speed Limits on
Various Streets |
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING SECTION
29-1501 AND CONSOLIDATING AND DELETING SECTIONS 29-1502 AND 29-1503 OF THE
BURBANK MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SPEED LIMITS.
|
|
Carried |
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Council Members
Campbell, Golonski, Murphy, and
Vander Borght.
Noes: Council Members None.
Absent: Council Member Ramos.
|
|
Ordinance
Submitted |
It was moved by Mr. Golonski and seconded by Mr. Campbell that �Ordinance
No. 3647 be read for the second time by title only and be passed and
adopted.� The title to the following ordinance was read:
|
|
1702
ZMA and ZTA
for Fairview St.
And Niagara St.
(Project No.
2004-68) |
ORDINANCE NO. 3647:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING A ZONE MAP
AMENDMENT AND A ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT, PROJECT NO. 2004-68 (Fairview Street,
and Niagara Street between Verdugo Avenue and Clark Avenue).
|
|
Adopted |
The ordinance was adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Council Members
Campbell, Golonski, Murphy, and
Vander Borght.
Noes: Council Members None.
Absent: Council Member Ramos.
|
|
Final Open
Public Comment
Period of Oral
Communications |
Mr. Vander Borght called for speakers for the final open public comment
period of oral communications at this time.
|
|
Citizen
Comment |
Appearing to comment were
Mike Nolan, on the sale of the B-6 Property; Ross Gunnell and Zorica
Tanaskovic on the parks permit guidelines appeals process.
|
|
Staff
Response
|
Members of the Council and staff responded to questions raised.
|
|
Adjournment |
There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting
was adjourned at 12:44 a.m.
____________________________
Margarita Campos, City Clerk
|
|
|
|
