|
Present- |
Council Members Murphy, Ramos and Vander Borght. |
|
Absent - - - - |
Council Members Campbell and Golonski. |
|
Also Present - |
Ms. Alvord, City Manager; Mr. Barlow, City Attorney; and, Mrs. Wilson,
Deputy City Clerk.
|
|
Oral
Communications |
There was no response to the Mayor�s invitation for oral communications on
Closed Session matters at this time.
|
|
5:12 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:
Contracts and Retirement Issues.
|
|
|
b. Conference with Real Property Negotiator:
Pursuant to Govt. Code �54956.8
Agency Negotiator: Community Development Director/ Susan M.
Georgino.
Property: Opportunity Site #6B-Bounded by Magnolia Boulevard,
First Street, Orange Grove Avenue and Bonnywood Place (I-5 Freeway).
Opportunity Site #7-Bounded by Magnolia Boulevard, railroad tracks and
Olive Avenue � adjacent to the Downtown Burbank Metrolink Station.
Party With Whom Agency is Negotiating:
Del Rey Properties, 1036 North Lake Street, Burbank, California 91502.
Name of Contact Person:
Maribel Leyland.
Terms Under Negotiation:
Sale of City and Agency-owned property located on Opportunity Site 6B and
Opportunity Site 7.
|
|
Regular Meeting
Reconvened in
Council Chambers |
The regular meeting of the Council of the City of Burbank was reconvened
at 6:51 p.m. by Mr. Vander Borght, Mayor.
|
|
Invocation
|
The invocation was given by Pastor Paul Clairville, Westminster
Presbyterian Church.
|
|
Flag Salute
ROLL CALL |
The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Sadie Misenhimer.
|
|
Present- |
Council Members Golonski, Murphy, Ramos and Vander Borght. |
|
Absent - - - - |
Council Member Campbell. |
|
Also Present - |
Ms. Alvord, City Manager; Mr. Barlow, City Attorney; and, Mrs. Wilson,
Deputy City Clerk.
|
|
301-1
Laszlo Tabori
World Class
Runner and
Coach |
Mayor Vander Borght
presented a commendation to Coach Laszlo Tabori, in recognition of his
outstanding contributions to track and field. He acknowledged Mr. Tabori
as a true community treasure, who is a world class runner, coach, resident
and business owner in the City for 11 years.
|
|
301-1
National Park
and Recreation
Month |
Mr. Vander Borght
presented a proclamation in honor of National Park and Recreation Month to
Mr. Hansen, Park, Recreation and Community Services Director.
|
|
301-1
Message of
Respect |
Michael Hastings,
Co-Chair of the National Law Enforcement Memorial Fund, introduced winners
of the Message of Respect essay contest sponsored by Crown Realty and
Development LLC on respect for law enforcement. Mayor Vander Borght
presented Certificates of Recognition to Benji Baker,
John
Burroughs
High School and Sadie Misenhimer, Theodore Roosevelt Elementary School,
and congratulated them on their outstanding participation and achievement.
|
|
Law Enforcement
Efforts |
Mr. Vander Borght
requested Chief Hoefel to provide an update on the law enforcement efforts
that transpired over the last 24 hours. Chief Hoefel commented on the law
enforcement activities with 16 other law enforcement agencies with regard
to the Vineland Boys street gang.
|
|
406
Airport Authority
Report |
Commissioner Brown
congratulated the Chief and the Burbank Police Department on their law
enforcement efforts. He reported on the Airport Authority meeting of June
20, 2005 and noted that the Authority approved the purchase of four diesel
buses which will be available in six months as opposed to the one or
two-year waiting period for Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) buses. He stated
that the buses would be retrofitted with the latest emission control
devices at the earliest opportunity. He also informed the Council of the
retirement of Glendale Commissioner Carl Messeck.
Mayor Vander Borght
encouraged the Airport Authority to consider the purchase of CNG buses in
the future and to pursue the acquisition of an additional CNG fueling
station. Commissioner Brown responded that the Authority will continue to
work with the City towards the acquisition of CNG buses and establishment
of a second CNG fueling station.
|
|
7:27 P.M.
Hearing
1701
ZTA 2005-46
Multi-Family
Residential Dev.
Standards |
Mayor Vander Borght
stated that �this is the time and place for the hearing on Project No.
2005-46, a Zone Text Amendment modifying multiple-family residential
development standards, and a related Negative Declaration.�
|
|
Notice
Given |
The Deputy City
Clerk was asked if notices had been given as required by law. She replied
in the affirmative and advised that the City Clerk�s Office received
notice of two telephone calls and one piece of written correspondence on
the matter.
|
|
Staff
Report |
Mrs. Lazar, Senior
Planner, Community Development Department, requested the Council consider
a Zone Text Amendment to reduce multiple-family residential densities and
implement new multiple-family residential development and design standards
to the Zoning Code. She noted that the proposed changes respond to the
Council�s concerns about multiple-family residential densities and the
quality and compatibility of new residential development in two ways; by
reducing the permitted densities by approximately 30 percent, and
introducing new development standards that address compatibility and
quality of design. She noted that the goal of the new standards is to
maintain the quality, integrity and distinct character of the
multiple-family residential neighborhoods while continuing to allow for
new housing. She reported that the Planning Board held a public hearing
on May 23,
2005 on the proposed standards and the Negative Declaration prepared for
the ZTA, and voted unanimously to recommend that the Council approve the
multiple-family standards as proposed with no modifications. She added
that since the ZTA affects numerous residents and property owners, staff
made extensive community outreach to receive public in-put. She
elaborated on the noticing and public outreach efforts and stated that
should the Council approve the ZTA, there were various options on how to
handle the numerous project applications in the permitting process at the
time the new standards become effective.
Mr. Forbes, Senior
Planner, Community Development Department, discussed several proposed
standards that the Council expressed concern about at the
April 26, 2005 Study
Session, including:
The 20-foot buffer
area required between an R-1 single-family property and a multi-family
property. He noted that currently, a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is
required for a driveway to provide alley access, and the buffer area
cannot be used as the required on-sight open space area. He noted that
the 20-foot buffer area requirement can be a substantial limitation on
multi-family development especially when abutting an R-1 Zone. He stated
that the primary concern with the use of the buffer area for open space is
noise; however, the Code currently does not prohibit project residents
from using the buffer area for recreational purposes but prevents the area
from being used by a project designer to satisfy the open space
requirement. He added that using the space for recreational purposes is
likely to generate some noise and noted staff�s recommendation to allow
designers to count the area towards the required open space.
With regard to the
driveway issue, Mr. Forbes noted that staff opined that allowing alley
access would have a minimal impact on the adjacent R-1 property and does
not necessitate requiring a CUP. He added that alley access should be
encouraged for multi-family properties to minimize curb cuts and
interference with pedestrian traffic on sidewalks. He noted that
requiring a discretionary approval process such as a CUP for alley access
encourages designers to provide access from the street.
Mr. Forbes then
clarified staff�s suggestion that garage door openings facing the street
serve a common garage area and not an individual garage. He explained
that the requirement was intended to apply only to doors that are on the
front or street- facing side yard elevation, and was not intended to
prevent doors that are located away from the street on the interior or the
rear of a project from providing access to individual private garages. He
noted that the language has been revised accordingly.
Mr. Forbes also
added that requirements for landscape maintenance and the need for all
landscaping to be properly irrigated and maintained for the life of the
project have been added to the standards.
Mr. Forbes noted
that staff continues to recommend not requiring landscape buffers for
driveways and surface parking areas on lots smaller than 12,000 sf, noting
that there are limitations on the ability to provide surface parking along
with landscaping. He stated that while as much landscaping as possible is
encouraged, it would not be practical to require a three-foot buffer for
surface parking on lots smaller than 12,000 sf.
With regard to tree
size requirements, Mr. Forbes noted that trees larger than a 24-inch box
are generally not as readily available and are more costly, and that the
five-foot side and rear yard areas pose challenges in planting a 24-inch
box or larger. He added that staff recommended maintaining the existing
requirements.
Mr. Forbes also
reported that all special area requirements will be eliminated, with the
exception of those pertaining to the Rancho area. He noted that the
Rancho area standards will however be mandatory for all properties, so
that the City has the ability to enforce them.
Mr. Forbes noted
that the Planning Board recommended approval of the standards as proposed
by staff including the above changes; however, some issues were raised
regarding: requirement to use the same primary material on multiple
structures which may cause unintended monotony, noting that the language
has been revised to allow the Community Development Director to make
exceptions for townhouse and other detached projects where a variety is
desired; allowing balconies on elevations adjacent to or abutting R-1 Zone
properties; requiring guest spaces to be unsecured; and, establishing
different densities and standards for different corridors in the City. He
added that there would be no changes to the Zone Map as part of the
proposed amendment and that all changes to the Zone Ordinance would be to
the text, standards and densities for existing zones.
Mr. Forbes stated
that following the Council study session, staff further analyzed the
densities, specifically in relation to lot size. He noted that the
density numbers were slightly adjusted; however, the overall highest
density level was not increased. He noted staff�s intention to
incentivize lot assembly by limiting the number of units that can be built
on a single lot. He added that the modified density numbers were
presented to the Planning Board on
May 23, 2005
and approval was recommended.
With regard to when
and how the standards would apply to projects already in the approval
process, Mr. Forbes stated that staff recommended that all projects with a
Development Review application deemed complete by the effective date of
the ordinance be allowed to continue under the current standards. He
noted that there are approximately 45 multiple-family projects
representing 322 total dwelling units in the project review process and
that there was an opportunity for additional applications which could be
submitted and deemed complete before the new standards become effective.
He informed the Council of other options on the effectiveness of the
standards, including Development Review approval, plan check submittal and
building permit issuance.
Mr. Forbes concluded
with staff�s opinion that the proposed changes will effectively address
development concerns and recommended approval of the standards as
proposed, applicable to all projects that do not have a completed
Development Review application on file by the effective date.
|
|
Citizen
Comment |
Appearing to comment
on the matter were: Jacque Lynn Colton; Marko Babineau; Tony Rondinella;
Eden Rosen; Dan Moore; Esther Espinoza; and, Mike Nolan.
|
|
Staff
Rebuttal |
Mr. Forbes responded
to public comment with regard to the application of the standards to
projects already in process.
|
|
Hearing
Closed |
There being no
further response to the Mayor�s invitation for oral comment, the hearing
was declared closed.
|
|
Council
Deliberations |
Mr. Golonski
requested that the effective date be considered separately and that the
details of the standards be considered first. He was agreeable to most of
the proposed standards with the exception of the buffer zone use and
balcony height, stating his preference not to change the existing Code.
Ms. Murphy expressed
support for the five-foot balcony height, maintaining the CUP process for
the driveway and use of the buffer zone as an open space.
Mrs. Ramos expressed
support for the five-foot balcony height, maintaining the CUP process for
the driveway alley access and concurred with staff�s recommendation on the
buffer zone use.
Mr. Vander Borght
expressed support for maintaining the CUP process for the driveway
considering proximity to R-1 property, using the buffer zone as a common
open space and the five-foot balcony height. He acknowledged the impact
that density reduction may have on many property owners but noted its
need, and cited the deteriorating traffic impacts.
Mr. Golonski noted
the impacts of high density development, and stated that if no changes are
made to the density standards, more draconian changes will be necessary in
the future. He also noted that the recycled properties which are more
dense do not provide affordable units. He acknowledged that there are no
means to change standards without impacting property owners, but noted the
need to preserve the ability for all multi-family property owners to build
at a rate that the community can accommodate.
Ms. Murphy noted the
traffic impacts, stated that traffic studies indicate that the City does
not have pass-through traffic, and added that denser development will only
exacerbate the situation.
Mr. Golonski
requested the Council consider an Interim Development Control Ordinance (IDCO)
for a 45-day period at the
July 12, 2005
meeting, applicable to all projects that have not received a building
permit. He noted his desire to see as many projects as possible meeting
the new standards, and stated that numerous projects have been approved
since discussions on the issue started.
Mrs. Ramos disagreed
with adopting an IDCO and supported reducing densities as the correct
direction, with completion of a Development Review application as the
cut-off point.
Ms. Murphy and Mr.
Vander Borght were not supportive of the IDCO but were agreeable to the
standards being applicable to Development Review applications deemed
complete by staff.
Mr. Golonski
requested that as an alternative, the Council consider an IDCO with the
ability to proceed under a CUP, subject to review by the Planning Board,
and possibly the Council, for compatibility.
Mr. Vander Borght
requested clarification on the potential impact of the proposed standards
to the density bonus law and Mr. Forbes responded that since its State
law, it would have the same application under the new standards. He
explained that since the by-right densities will be lower, what can be
achieved under a density bonus would also be less. He noted that there is
currently one application in process for a density bonus project and
stated that the application would probably be deemed complete prior to the
effective date of the new densities.
There was Council
consensus for the five-foot height for balconies, allowing use of the
buffer zone for common open space and continuing with the CUP process on
usage of the 20-foot buffer zone for driveway access adjacent to R-1
property.
|
|
Motion |
It was moved by Mrs. Ramos and seconded by Ms. Murphy that "the following
resolution be passed and adopted and the following ordinance be introduced
and read for the first time by title:�
|
|
1701
Adopt Neg. Dec. for Project No.
2005-46 (Multiple Family
Res. Dev.)
|
RESOLUTION NO. 27,003:
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK ADOPTING A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION FOR PROJECT NO. 2005-46 (MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS).
|
|
1701
Amend Ch. 31
Relating to Multi
Family Res. Dev.
(Project No.
2005-46)
|
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING CHAPTER 31 OF
THE BURBANK MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS (PROJECT NO. 2005-46). |
|
Adopted |
The resolution was adopted and the ordinance introduced by the following
vote:
Ayes: Council Members
Golonski, Murphy, Ramos and
Vander Borght.
Noes: Council Members None.
Absent: Council Member Campbell.
|
|
Reporting on
Closed Session |
Mr. Barlow reported on the items considered by the City Council and the
Redevelopment Agency during the Closed Session meetings.
|
|
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:
Jonathan Gorman,
introducing the Burbank Weekly publication; Don Elsmore, on the Airport
Authority meeting; David Gordon, playing a video of a 1996 staff
presentation to the Planning Board on the NBC Master Plan; Eden Rosen, on
graffiti removal; David Piroli, on the NBC Master Plan; Esther Espinoza,
on law enforcement efforts and gang activity; and, Mike Nolan, on law
enforcement efforts.
|
|
Staff
Response |
Members of the Council and staff responded to questions raised.
|
|
Agenda Item
Oral Communications |
Mr. Vander Borght called for speakers for the agenda item oral
communications at this time.
|
|
Citizen
Comment |
Appearing to comment were:
David Gordon, on the
A-1 North Property and on traffic issues; Don Elsmore, on the Airport
Authority meeting; Eden Rosen, on the proposed Emergency Medical Service
(EMS) fee adjustments and in support of the contract probation officer;
Mike Nolan, in support of the proposed EMS fee adjustments; and, Esther
Espinoza, on soundproofing homes in Sun Valley.
|
|
Staff
Response |
Members of the Council and staff responded to questions raised.
|
|
9:19 P.M.
Recess |
The Council recessed to permit the Redevelopment Agency to hold its
meeting. The Council reconvened at 9:20 p.m. with the same members
present.
|
|
Motion |
It was moved by Ms. Murphy and seconded by Mrs. Ramos that "the following
items on the consent calendar be approved as recommended.�
|
|
1007-1
1009-1
Establish Title
For Budget
Assistant |
RESOLUTION NO. 27,004:
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK ESTABLISHING THE TITLE
AND SPECIFICATION FOR THE CLASSIFICATION OF BUDGET ASSISTANT (CTC NO.
0110) AND PRESCRIBING CLASSIFICATION CODE NUMBER, SALARY AND SPECIFICATION
THEREOF.
|
|
1007-1
1009-1
Establish Title
For Budget
Analyst |
RESOLUTION NO. 27,005:
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK ESTABLISHING THE TITLE
AND SPECIFICATION FOR THE CLASSIFICATION OF BUDGET ANALYST (CTC NO. 0109)
AND PRESCRIBING CLASSIFICATION CODE NUMBER, SALARY AND SPECIFICATION
THEREOF.
|
|
1007-1
1009-1
Establish Title
For Senior
Budget Analyst |
RESOLUTION NO. 27,006:
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK ESTABLISHING THE TITLE
AND SPECIFICATION FOR THE CLASSIFICATION OF SENIOR BUDGET ANALYST (CTC NO.
0759) AND PRESCRIBING CLASSIFICATION CODE NUMBER, SALARY AND SPECIFICATION
THEREOF.
|
|
404
907
Agmt. w/L.A.
County for
Probation Officer |
RESOLUTION NO. 27,007:
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING THE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF BURBANK AND THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES TO PROVIDE GANG
ALTERNATIVE AND PREVENTION PROGRAM SERVICES (GAPP).
|
|
1602
3rd Amend. to
PSA w/Kimley-
Horn for
Traffic Study |
RESOLUTION NO. 27,008:
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING THE THIRD
AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
BURBANK AND KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES FOR PREPARATION OF A TRAFFIC STUDY.
|
|
Adopted |
The consent calendar was adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Council Members
Golonski, Murphy, Ramos and
Vander Borght.
Noes: Council Members None.
Absent: Council Member Campbell.
|
|
911
Amend Ch. 25 �
Sewers |
Mr. Andersen, Principal Engineer, Public Works Department, requested the
Council consider an ordinance amending Chapter 25 (Sewers) of the Burbank
Municipal Code (BMC) to comply with the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (USEPA) regulations and adopt a Negative Declaration.
He noted that the City�s Sewer Use Ordinance provides the authority for
the City to regulate the discharge from industries within its boundaries.
He added that the Ordinance was last updated over ten years ago and
requires modifications to conform to current USEPA regulatory language.
Mr. Andersen then noted other proposed changes to Chapter 25 of the BMC,
including: 1) addition of Article 10, Storm Water and Runoff Pollution
Control, which will incorporate the actual language of the Los Angeles
County Code into the BMC rather than by reference; 2) addition of
Resolution No. 17,805 language which provides circumstances in which the
City would pay for the repair of a building sewer that had been crushed or
misaligned by parkway trees; 3) a requirement that all new and remodeled
properties install, operate and maintain an approved backwater valve on
their building sewer unless proven that such a device is unnecessary. He
noted that this requirement will apply to all buildings that are
newly-constructed, modified and having a building permit valuation of
$50,000 or more, replacing the building sewers, or repairing building
sewers with an aggregate repair length in excess of ten feet. He
explained that backwater valves prevent the backup of wastewater into a
building in the event of a sewer blockage; 4) a requirement that Food
Service Establishments (FSE) install, operate and maintain a grease
interceptor, unless a conditional waiver is granted by the Director or a
designee. He noted that this requirement will apply to all FSEs that are
newly-constructed or modified and having a building permit valuation of
$50,000 or more, and will reduce sanitary sewer overflows caused by grease
originating from FSEs; and, 5) various language clarifications and
updates.
Mr. Andersen reported that pursuant to Section 15063 of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a Negative Declaration was prepared. He
added that the public review period began on May 3, 2005 and concluded on
May 24, 2005 but no comments were received. He noted that on June 8,
2005, the proposed changes were presented to the Board of Building and
Fire Code Appeals which voted unanimously to recommend that the Council
adopt the changes as proposed.
|
|
Motion |
It was moved by Ms. Murphy and seconded by Mrs. Ramos that �the following
resolution be passed and adopted and the following ordinance be introduced
and read for the first time:�
|
|
911
Adopt Neg. Dec.
Relating to BMC
Ch. 25 (Urban
Storm Water
Mitigation Plan) |
RESOLUTION NO. 27,009:
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK ADOPTING A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION RELATING TO THE AMENDMENTS TO BMC CHAPTER 25 REGARDING THE EPA
REQUIREMENTS FOR CONTROLLING DISCHARGES FROM PUBLICLY OWNED TREATMENT
PLANTS AND REGARDING CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD�S
STANDARDS FOR THE URBAN STORM WATER MITIGATION PLAN.
|
|
911
Amend Ch. 25
of the BMC
Relating to
Discharges from
POTWS |
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING VARIOUS
SECTIONS OF CHAPTER 25 OF THE BURBANK MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO
DISCHARGES FROM PUBLICLY OWNED TREATMENT WORKS (POTWS) AND RELATING TO THE
REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD�S
STANDARD URBAN STORM WATER MITIGATION PLAN (SUSMP).
|
|
Adopted |
The resolution was adopted and the ordinance introduced by the following
vote:
Ayes: Council Members
Golonski, Murphy, Ramos and
Vander Borght.
Noes: Council Members None.
Absent: Council Member Campbell.
|
|
905-1
Analysis of Fees
And Revenue
Collection
Procedures for
EMS |
Interim Fire Chief Pansini presented an analysis of fiscal and
administrative issues related to paramedic transportation and billing
procedures, and discussed proposed changes to Article V of the Burbank
Citywide Fee Schedule and the effects those modifications may have on
Burbank residents and General Fund revenues. He informed the Council that
in recent years, the City has been adopting fees at or near the maximum
allowed by the County of Los Angeles (County) for both Advanced Life
Support (ALS) and Basic Life Support (BLS) transport. He noted that
typically, fee increases were under ten percent; however, the most recent
fees adopted by the County Board of Supervisors are considerably higher
than average, 16.5 percent and 21.5 percent for ALS and BLS, respectively.
He added that staff was directed to provide further explanation of what
caused this drastic change and how the change affects service payers in
Burbank.
Chief Pansini reported that currently, Burbank�s fees for ALS and BLS
transport are the lowest in the County. He noted that while it is always
beneficial to Burbank customers to charge the lowest fee possible, this
discrepancy in fees creates some consistency issues with the Area C
partners who often respond to incidents in Burbank. He added that many
local cities, including Glendale and Pasadena, have language written
within their fee schedules which automatically increases paramedic
transportation fees when the County adjusts its allowable rate. This
allows the cities to stay consistent with what other jurisdictions are
charging and eliminates the loss in revenue due to the lag time between
the County decision and their internal City processes to amend their fee
schedules.
Chief Pansini discussed the options available for patients who cannot
afford the payments, such as: payment plans for as little as $5 per month;
fee waivers; and, assistance with applying for Medi-Cal. He informed the
Council that the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Membership Program
offers Burbank residents an affordable means of paying for emergency
paramedic and ambulance transport costs not covered by medical insurance.
He explained that an enrollment fee of $4 per month covers an entire
household and there is no limit to how often members can use this
service.
Chief Pansini informed the Council that ambulance transportation revenues
for Fiscal Year (FY) 2004-05 are projected at $1.2 million, approximately
$50,000 less than the previous fiscal year and added that based on current
trends, these revenues are expected to decrease by another $35,000 in FY
2005-06 from write-downs. He stated that should the Council choose to
adopt the proposed resolution and align the City�s paramedic ambulance
fees to the maximum rate allowed by the County, the anticipated revenue
increase is $93,000 and after the write-down-related losses, an additional
$58,000 in revenue to the General Fund in FY 2005-06 would be realized to
help offset the growing costs of providing EMS services to the public.
Chief Pansini concluded with staff�s recommendation to amend the Burbank
Fee Schedule to align paramedic fees with the current rates allowed by the
County and incorporate language allowing automatic adjustments to the
paramedic ambulance service fees in order to conform to the County�s
general public ambulance rates.
It was the Council�s
consensus to approve the automatic fee increase with direction that the
fee increase be placed on the Agenda as a consent item for informational
purposes.
|
|
Motion |
It was moved by Ms. Murphy and seconded by Mrs. Ramos that �the following
resolution be passed and adopted:�
|
|
905-1
Analysis of Fees
And Revenue
Collection
Procedures for
EMS |
RESOLUTION NO. 27,010:
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING ARTICLE V,
SECTION 1 OF RESOLUTION NO. 26,994, THE BURBANK FEE RESOLUTION, RELATING
TO PARAMEDIC AMBULANCE SERVICES.
|
|
Adopted |
The resolution was adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Council Members
Golonski, Murphy, Ramos and
Vander Borght.
Noes: Council Members None.
Absent: Council Member Campbell.
|
|
Ordinance
Submitted |
It was moved by Ms. Murphy and seconded by Mrs. Ramos that �Ordinance No.
3674 be read for the second time by title only and be passed and
adopted.� The title to the following ordinance was read:
|
|
202
203
Amend Ch. 2
Relating to
Membership Expansion on
Various Boards |
ORDINANCE NO. 3674:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK AMENDING SEVERAL
SECTIONS OF CHAPTER 2 OF THE BURBANK MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO MEMBERSHIP
EXPANSION OF VARIOUS CITY BOARDS, COMMITTEES AND/OR COMMISSIONS AND
ABSENCES AND VACANCIES DUE TO MILITARY SERVICE.
|
|
Adopted |
The ordinance was adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Council Members
Golonski, Murphy, Ramos and
Vander Borght.
Noes: Council Members None.
Absent: Council Member Campbell.
|
|
Ordinance
Submitted |
It was moved by Ms. Murphy and seconded by Mrs. Ramos that �Ordinance No.
3675 be read for the second time by title only and be passed and
adopted.� The title to the following ordinance was read:
|
|
411
Natural Gas
Project Agmt. |
ORDINANCE NO. 3675:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BURBANK APPROVING ENTERING INTO
THE NATURAL GAS PROJECT GAS SALES AGREEMENT (Project A).
|
|
Adopted |
The ordinance was adopted by the following vote:
Ayes: Council Members
Golonski, Murphy, Ramos and
Vander Borght.
Noes: Council Members None.
Absent: Council Member Campbell.
|
|
9:55 P.M.
Reconvene Redev.
Agency Meeting |
The Redevelopment Agency meeting was reconvened at this time.
|
|
Final Open
Public Comment
Period of Oral
Communications |
There was no response to the Mayor�s invitation for speakers for the final
open public comment period of oral communications at this time.
|
|
301-2
Memorial
Adjournment |
There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting
was adjourned at 9:55 p.m. in memory of Derek Hanway.
Josephine Wilson, Deputy City Clerk
|
