1999 AGN MAR 16 Misc Add 01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

The proposed expansiop of LA'C. Is it Safe? Is 'rt� Fair? Is it Prudent? And, Is it Necessary? !s it Safe? � It will significantly increase the air traffic congestion in the Los Angeies area. • It will significantly increase traffic congestion and air poilution in communities around LAX: It will more ttaan double diesel truck traffic around the airport. • It will increase air poiiution from both planes and vehicles (particularly diesel trucks) in Los Angeles' and su�rrounding cities. � It will likely cause adverse health impacts, particularly for children and seniors. Is it �Fai�r? � � . . . . It will concentrate the hardships of congestion, air poilution and noise in communities near LAX, yet it will not proportionally benefit those communities. It will disproportionately burden low income neighborhoods under the flight path and in their communities where traffic will increase. Each county sY�ould meet its own air travel needs, and bear its own burdens to the extent possible. LAX neighbors should not bear every other county's burdens related to air travel. The proposed expansion at LAX will undermine the ability of airports closest to the new population growth centers to expand to accommodate their own air travelers. Is it Prudent? • The $12 billion price tag makes the LAX expansion one of the most expensive airport projects ever. Denver's controversiai airport only cost $4.2 billion (twice what it was originally projected to cost). • The City of Los Angeles should have learned. from LA DWF, LA City Hall and MTA's exeessive c�ebt and cost overru.n problems. Do we really need another $8-12 billion dollar mismanaged budget? • Bonds to finance such an investment may be very risky, relying on projections oi air traffic growth over 25 years or more. The City of Los Angeles should have learned from LADWP's problems that predicting the next twenty-five years is dicey. • The proposed expansion at LAX is the least cost effective airport investment in Southern California. On a per-MAP basis, LAX wi11 be 5-7 times more expensive than EI Toro. • New job projectians are not exclusively dependent upon inereasing capacity at LAX, but rather wili result from comparable increased airport capacity elsewhere in the region. ts it Necessa�y? • We don't have to concentrate all commercial aircraft activity at LAX. There are eleven other regional airpo�ts which can be developed to absorb some of the air traffic growth. • These othe� airports are in the areas of the greatest population and job growth. LAX is in the areas of the least population and job growth. • Many of these other regional airports are actively supported by their communities, often with little or no local opposition. They primarily need access to regional capital to fulfill the rale. • Perceived congestion and ine�ciencies at LAX can be handled through upgrades to existing baggage, concession, terminal and transit operations. I � _ _ _ __ _ _ _ . _