dumped on future city councils. One of the basic tenets noted in the
brochure is that the agreement "must provide certainty to residents and
businesses in Burbank." Of course, no certainties are actually included
in the framework.
One of the supposed benefits of the framework is that the terminal
would be closed from 11 p.m. to 6 a.m. In essence, this would be a form
of a curfew. It sounds like a good idea, but the Air Transport
Association has already threatened a lawsuit challenging it. Since a
nighttime closure of the terminal is essentially a curfew, a FAA Part 161
study is required.
Setting aside the possibility of even more expansion in the future,
let's look just at the first phase envisioned in the framework.
Try to visualize the size of the present terminal in comparison to the
Media City Center Mall. After deducting the outdoor luggage area, the
present terminal is less than 160,000 square feet. According to an
earlier editorial in The Leader, the mall is 355,000 square feet, almost
the identical size of the first phase of the terminal expansion. Is there
anyone that doesn't think that an efficient new terminal, the size of the
Media City Center Mall, can't handle at least three times as many
passengers and flights as the present inefficient terminal?
In their original design, the airport planned for 15,000 square feet
of administrative space. They have now upped that figure to 35,000 square
feet. Why? Think back a year or so ago. At that time Pasadena Airport
Commissioner William Paparian suggested that space be included in the
terminal design for a customs facility to accommodate international
flights. My guess is that the extra 20,000 square feet is being set aside
for just that, use in international flights.
Does the first phase of the expansion require any limits on the number
of passengers or number of flights? None whatsoever. Murphy and Golonski
have wimped out on this issue and will let a future council deal with it.
The only possible limits on the number of flights will come via the