|
We understand how important it is that we look at the entire picture when dealing with air quality, noise, safety, and
other impacts on communities from aircraft operations. LAX operations directly affect the region’s air quality, as well
as what jet operations are sent to Santa
Monica
Airport. The EIR has not adequately addressed
air quality impacts regarding LAX expansion plans.
Let
us not be lax in our efforts to understand what the City of Los Angeles
is committing the region to, as it moves forward with LAX expansion plans.
______________________________________
Dear All:
There is some new and important information that has been posted on the ARSAC website.
It might be a good time to familiarize yourselves with the current situation.
Our (ARSAC)website is continually being updated with the most recent information/news
and will be your best source of information regarding LAX.
If you can give again - more thanks.
Sincerely,
Nora MacLellan, ARSAC Secretary
12/21/2007
______________________________________
__________________________________________________________
A message from The Alliance for Regional Solutions to Airport
Congestion: ARSAC is left with
no option but to file a lawsuit against the City of Los Angeles and LAX to stop the construction of parts of the expansion plan.
We have hired Jan Chatten Brown who is a well known Environmental Law
Attorney to represent us.
Among other arguments as a basis for bringing a lawsuit will be violations of the California Environmental Quality
Act.
ARSAC needs your help!
Donations for the lawsuit will not be public information.
We encourage you to work with us in alerting all of your neighbors, friends, and
acquaintances of the urgency to help in the legal/political fight to stop the madness.
Please
make your check payable to:
ARSAC Legal Fund,
322 Culver Blvd., #231
Playa del Rey, CA 90293
(Please note we are not a non profit organization so your donations are not tax deductible.)________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________
City Agrees to Craft New LAX Overhaul
Los Angeles Times - December 1, 2005
· In exchange for area communities dropping their lawsuits, most of the latest plan will be shelved. Rebuilding
of a runway will proceed.
By Jennifer Oldham, Times Staff Writer
After 11 years
and $150 million in design costs, the city has shelved its latest plan to modernize Los Angeles International Airport
and will start over to craft a proposal that will do more to improve security and refurbish the aging facility.
The
plan had drawn criticism from the city's new mayor, poor reviews from security experts and lawsuits by airport-area residents.
All but one of its elements will be reconsidered and some of the most controversial, including a check-in center near the
San Diego Freeway, are almost certainly dead.
The airport intends to begin
work early next year on the one project still on track: the $300-million rebuilding of the southern runway complex, which
federal officials maintain is critical to preventing close calls between aircraft. It will be the first major construction
at the 77-year-old airport in more than two decades.
The city consented to review the $11-billion modernization effort
in exchange for a promise from airport-area communities to drop federal and state lawsuits that challenged the plan and could
have prevented work on the runways.
As part of the deal, Los Angeles also agreed
to try to slow passenger growth at LAX, study how to spread air traffic around the region, explore ways to cut congestion,
and speed up efforts to reduce noise and air pollution.
The settlement allows the city to overhaul the outdated Tom
Bradley International Terminal and install explosives detection machines in the airport's complex baggage system. These projects
are separate from the modernization plan.
Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who opposed many of the major elements of the
plan, will now have an opportunity to remake predecessor James K. Hahn's controversial blueprint for LAX.
The city
and county of Los
Angeles, three cities near the airport,
residents and a small army of attorneys spent weeks negotiating the legal settlement, which will be announced today at a news
conference on the tarmac.
"This is an extraordinary achievement," said Lydia Kennard, who is the new executive director
of the agency that operates LAX and was instrumental in bringing about the deal. "This is heralding a new level of cooperation
and trust between the parties."
Residents and politicians also lauded the deal, which was described to reporters in
a briefing Wednesday, calling it "historic."
"For many, many years, it seemed very much a David and Goliath uphill
battle, with not a lot of support from politicians and broken promises," said Jennifer Dakoske Koslu, president of the Alliance for a Regional Solution to Airport Congestion, a residents group. "It seemed like we were never going to succeed.
I think we're all very pleased with the settlement."
Villaraigosa, who was widely credited with bringing the feuding
parties together, hopes the agreement will placate airport-area residents, who despised the LAX expansion plan drafted by
Mayor Richard Riordan and the revision offered by Hahn.
Jaime de la Vega, deputy mayor for transportation, said Villaraigosa
made a campaign promise to settle the lawsuit. "He wanted to put this behind the city," De la Vega said.
On Sept. 29,
the mayor called airport officials, politicians, residents and their respective attorneys to a meeting in an airport boardroom
and asked that they set aside their differences. Nine weeks later, after many hours of intense negotiation, they signed the
preliminary pact.
Settlement participants said Wednesday that the mayor could not have accomplished his goal without
the help of Kennard, his hand-picked airport director, who immediately began attending the negotiating sessions after she
started at Los Angeles World Airports on Oct. 8. Kennard had been the city's airport director before, from 1999 to 2003.
The
deal must still be ratified by the Federal Aviation Administration, the Alliance for a
Regional Solution to Airport Congestion, Los
Angeles County and
the cities of Los Angeles, El Segundo, Inglewood and Culver City.
Local lawmakers said they were confident that their city councils and the county
Board of Supervisors — most of which have received closed-session briefings on the agreement —
would approve the deal.
"I think they will see the good in this for our city, just as I do," said El Segundo Mayor
Kelly McDowell. "Everybody benefits, everybody gave a little and everybody got a lot."
McDowell and others hope FAA
officials will decide within days not to contest the deal.
Donn Walker, an FAA spokesman, said: "We will review this
agreement, but we won't be able to comment on it until we've looked at it."
Despite optimism that federal
officials will approve the deal, airlines object to one of the most controversial elements — a plan to decrease the
number of gates where airplanes park from 163 to 153.
"There are a number of complexities associated with the settlement
agreement that was reached without airline input," said David A. Castelveter, a spokesman for the Air Transport Assn., an
airline trade group. "We will conduct a careful and thorough review of the agreement."
Carriers do not support a reduction
in airplane parking spots, he said. The cash-strapped airlines would be required to pay up to half the costs of modernizing
LAX through higher rents and landing fees. Federal grants and fees paid by passengers would make up most of the rest.
Even
so, airlines said they support the plan to move the southernmost runway 55 feet closer to El Segundo, widening the distance
between the two parallel runways enough to create a central taxiway. Airport officials said the work should not delay flights.
They
said the settlement also allows them to begin construction next year on several other projects. One of these is the $410-million
upgrade of the Tom Bradley terminal that includes expanded gates for the massive 555-seat Airbus A380.
Also on deck
is a $400-million project to overhaul the airport's complex baggage system and install explosives-detection machines.
"We're
not losing any time," said Paul Haney, an airport spokesman. "We'll be improving the airport while we figure out what our
next project will be."
To devise a new plan, airport officials will meet with residents and airlines to come up with
projects that will improve security at LAX and update its worn-out terminals.
Rand Corp. experts have criticized the
check-in center, saying it would make travelers more vulnerable to a terrorist attack. And passengers have long viewed the
airport as one of the nation's most inconvenient and unkempt such facilities.
Several projects in the modernization
plan, including a new terminal on the western edge that would replace the remote gates near the sand dunes and a consolidated
rental car facility, are seen as likely contenders for any new plan.
But some of the most controversial proposals put
forward by Hahn — including the check-in center and the demolition of Terminals 1, 2 and 3 and of parking garages in
the central terminal area — are considered moribund.
Airport officials will not acknowledge this directly, however,
because the massive check-in center must remain in play, at least on paper, to make the traffic analysis work in environmental
studies.
If the city officially killed some projects, it might have to go through the lengthy environmental review
process again.
Los Angeles City Councilman Bill
Rosendahl, whose district includes the airport,
said the projects "that are bad, we're going to replace them, we're going to have alternatives."
In the settlement,
the city also agreed to:
• Take steps to contain passenger growth if LAX serves 75 million passengers in
2010. If that threshold is reached, the airport will eliminate two gates a year for five years, reducing the total number
to 153. LAX expects to handle 62 million passengers this year.
• Invite the FAA, the Southern California
Assn. of Governments, airport operators and area counties to develop a plan to encourage airlines to spread air traffic among
the region's airports, including Ontario International and the Palmdale facility, both of which the city of Los Angeles operates.
•
Accelerate the disbursement of up to $240 million to soundproof homes in unincorporated Los Angeles County areas, El Segundo and Inglewood.
•
Begin a traffic study to figure out how to unlock congestion on roads around the airport and ask the FAA to allow the airport
to fund up to $3.3 million in intersection and roadway improvements in El Segundo and $33 million in improvements to the Century
Boulevard corridor in Inglewood.
• Ensure that myriad measures to ease traffic, air pollution
and noise that were included in a separate agreement with residents don't fall by the wayside. These include the conversion
of ground equipment at LAX to low-emissions technology and providing electricity to gates where airplanes park.
•
Reconsider extending the Metro Rail Green Line to LAX.
• And spend $3 million to remove abandoned asphalt
streets on the dunes west of the airport and replace them with native plants.
For all its complexity, airport officials
said, one of the most important things about the deal is that it allows them to start construction at LAX for the first time
since the upper-level roadway and the Tom Bradley terminal were built in preparation for the 1984 Olympics.
"We got
there," said Kennard. "No one ever thought we could get there."
_____________________________________
_______________________________________
Deal cut to halt LAX lawsuits - Los Angeles Daily News
City agrees to limit passengers, noise
Los Angeles city
officials will announce today that they have cut a deal to end litigation over the modernization of LAX, with opponents agreeing
to trust the mayor and City Council to abandon the most controversial elements of the $11 billion plan.
Under the proposed settlement, the grass-roots Alliance for a Regional Solution to Airport Congestion and other opponents will drop lawsuits
that have stalled the controversial plan for Los Angeles
International Airport developed by former Mayor James Hahn.
In exchange, the city promises to limit passenger traffic
by gradually closing airplane gates, to give critics and neighbors a greater voice in upgrading one of the nation's busiest
airports, and to help fund noise- and traffic-mitigation projects in their communities.
"This is an historic day of developing trust and friendship
with our neighbors," Airport Executive Director Lydia Kennard said at a briefing Wednesday, in advance of a formal announcement
today.
The proposed settlement would allow $4 billion in runway
and other improvements, but does not resolve for certain some of the more hotly contested elements of the plan, including
an off-site ground transportation center where all passengers and baggage would be screened.
While it still needs approval from a variety of agencies,
including the Federal Aviation Administration, the City Council and the county Board of Supervisors, the agreement would end all pending lawsuits
and the parties would agree to no further legal action involving the master plan.
The deal had been urged by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa
and LAX-area Councilman Bill Rosendahl, and was hammered out over the past three weeks. Aides said
the mayor met with all the principals in late September and early October, as well as holding several private sessions in
his City Hall offices to push the settlement.
"I am elated that at long last, we have the ability
to move forward with a rational, community-sensitive plan," said a statement issued by Villaraigosa, who was attending a meeting
of the nation's mayors at Harvard University.
Debate and legal challenges have marked the effort to
improve LAX since former Mayor Richard Riordan first proposed the idea in 1993. At one point, he suggested expanding the airport
to 100 million passengers a year and tripling the amount of cargo it handles.
Hahn revised the plan after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to emphasize security. However, the plan
came under fire by security experts, who said an off-site terminal would actually increase the potential for terrorism by
concentrating all passengers in one place.
After protests and lawsuits, Hahn agreed to a scaled-back
version that created a two-tier program that would "green-light" projects such as runway improvements and "yellow-light" those
that required more study. The scaled-back plan also limited the number of passengers to less than 79 million a year.
In his mayoral campaign, Villaraigosa pledged to scrap
nearly all "yellow-light" projects - including the off-site terminal - and to urge a regional approach to air travel.
Councilman Bernard Parks, an outspoken critic of the
Hahn plan, said he had yet to be briefed on the proposed deal, but that his main concerns remain adopting a regional approach
to air traffic and eliminating the ground-transportation center.
A key element of the settlement proposal involves limiting
passenger traffic at LAX, which is expected to hit 63 million this year.
The FAA does not allow airports to cap the number of
passengers, but Kennard said LAX can be designed to limit growth. Once annual passenger traffic hits 75 million, the airport
would shut down two gates a year for the next five years.
That would reduce the number of airport gates from the
current 163 to 153, limiting the number of flights that could be accommodated, although much larger planes are expected to
come into use in the years ahead.
The deal also would commit the city to a 30-month timetable
for studying all other projects in the plan to determine which should proceed and which should be abandoned - including a
ground transportation center, a people-mover and the razing of Terminals 1, 2 and 3 in favor of a new concourse.
The settlement, however, would allow plans for a new
Western Satellite Concourse - at an estimated cost of $1.6 billion - and for work to proceed on a new baggage-handling facility.
In addition, Kennard said Los Angeles World Airports,
the city's airports department, is reserving the right to look at other projects that had been earlier cleared for approval,
such as a separate facility for rental cars.
Those are some of the elements being reviewed by the
Rand Corp., an early critic of the Hahn plan, which has since been retained to conduct a security study of the airport.
The department agreed to speed payments totaling $266
million for noise and traffic mitigation projects in neighboring cities, paying it over 10 years rather than the 15 years
originally envisioned.
There also would be a separate community-benefits program
valued at $500 million that would provide jobs and training as well as mitigation projects.
The airports department also agreed to form a working
group of officials to develop plans to increase use of Ontario and Palmdale airports - including transportation improvements - and agreed to establish eight Park and Ride FlyAway
operations around the county.
"The main thing we won was an opportunity to bring a
group of people together to get them to agree on a rational approach to development at the airport," Rosendahl said. "We have
never had that.
"Now, we will sit down and be able to take this out
of the world of litigation and work together on modernization and, more importantly, work immediately to improve traffic safety."
For master-plan opponents, the proposed deal was viewed
as a way to have a say on the airport's future growth.
"We think this is a turning point in the future of LAX,"
said Jan Chatten-Brown, attorney for the ARSAC, the citizens group that filed the initial legal action against the airport
plan.
"I think the most important things are that this will
give us input into how the airport is developed and have the airport take a real approach to seeking a regional solution to
the air transportation needs," Chatten-Brown said.
El Segundo Mayor Kelly McDowell - whose city has fought
for decades with Los Angeles over the airport - said the settlement addresses the main concerns
of his residents.
"What we wanted from Day One, what all the petitioners
wanted, was a way to limit capacity at LAX," McDowell said. "I believe this settlement achieves that."
"This is something where both sides gave up something,"
McDowell said. "We think this will end up being good for El Segundo and for LAX."
Kennard said she believes the proposed deal could be
approved by the start of the new year, with a goal of starting construction on widening the airport's south runways early
next year.
Work already has started on the Tom Bradley International
Terminal and a baggage-loading facility, airport officials said. Kennard said the mayor and airport officials will decide
which additional projects might be accelerated, such as securing funding to bring the Green Line light rail into LAX, and
road, communication and parking-lot improvements.
Rick Orlov, (213) 978-0390 rick.orlov@dailynews.com
PROPOSED LAX SETTLEMENT
Here of some of the provisions of the proposed settlement:
Reduce the number of gates in operation by two a year,
to a maximum of 10, once annual passenger traffic reaches 75 million.
Develop a 30-month process for reviewing all issues
and projects including a ground-transportation center, noise, traffic and pollution.
Invite the Federal Aviation Administration, the Southern
California Association of Governments, neighboring counties and airport operators to form a working group to develop a regional
air transportation plan.
Develop a regional plan to encourage greater use of
Palmdale and Ontario airports.
Create a working group with Alliance for a Regional Solution to Airport Congestion to deal with LAX neighbors' concerns.
Provide $266 million to Los Angeles County, Inglewood, El Segundo and other affected areas for noise and traffic mitigation. _______________________________________
____________________________________________________________
LAX Runway Plan Lands With a Thud
Los Angeles Times
September 17, 2005
By
Jennifer Oldham, Times Staff Writer
Airport officials have failed
to adequately address increased noise and cancer risks during construction to move the southernmost runway at Los Angeles
International Airport, residents of nearby communities charge.
The project's lengthy environmental
study also does not include measures to lessen the effects of the additional air pollution caused when airplanes taxi farther
and idle longer while the runway is shut down, according to comments that residents and their attorneys submitted to Los Angeles
World Airports, the city's airport department.
Arguing that the health risks
diminish the residents' quality of life and could shorten their lives, attorney Berne C. Hart wrote that the airport department
"must commit to mitigating these impacts to the maximum extent feasible." Hart represents Los Angeles
County, Inglewood and Culver
City.
The comment period on the 1,370-page
environmental study ended Thursday, with the agency receiving 22 letters totaling about 275 pages. State law requires the
city to study and mitigate the project's effects on surrounding areas.
The comments ranged from highly technical legal
opinions to handwritten notes.
The agency is required to address the comments in a final document, to be released later
this year.
The Airport Commission and City Council must approve the environmental study before work can start on the
runway.
The project will move the runway 55 feet closer to El Segundo and install a parallel taxiway between the two
runways in an effort to reduce the possibility of aircraft collisions.
More than 80% of close calls at LAX occur on
the south side when a pilot who has landed on the outer runway fails to stop on taxiways that cross the inner runway and comes
too close to airplanes that are taking off.
Officials hope to begin construction early next year and expect the project
to take 26 months. The runway will be closed for eight months; airport officials say it will not cause any disruption to travelers.
The effort is the first in a series of major updates planned for the airport in the next decade.
Several themes
ran through the comments, including the contention that the environmental study significantly understates noise, air pollution,
health and traffic problems that the construction will cause.
Consultants also failed to analyze the long-term effects
of reconfiguring the south runway and how operations of the massive 555-seat Airbus A380 — expected to begin flying
into LAX in 2007— would affect surrounding neighborhoods, according to the letters.
Moving the runway "seems
to be an enlargement of LAX primarily to serve the Airbus A380," wrote Linda Peterson, chairwoman of the Los Angeles International
Airport Advisory Committee. If Los Angeles World Airports "is truly seeking a regional approach, we would expect more of an
effort to route these new large aircraft to Ontario or Palmdale."
The city of Los Angeles also
operates Ontario International Airport and Palmdale Airport.
The
document has "persistent flaws" and buries readers "under mountains of paper," wrote Robert S. Perlmutter and Gabriel M.B.
Ross, attorneys for the city of El Segundo.
El Segundo, Inglewood, Culver City, the county and airport-area residents have sued the city of Los Angeles charging that
environmental studies for the entire $11-billion LAX modernization plan also understate the effects of noise, air pollution
and traffic.
On Friday, airport officials sent a letter to attorneys for El Segundo denying a request to extend the
comment period for the south runway environmental study. El Segundo's attorneys had asked for a 30-day extension, saying that
airport officials failed to provide information they wanted on the project's effects on air quality in a timely manner.
Comments
received by the agency this week argue that the runway study is poorly written and violates state law because it fails to
discuss alternatives to moving the runway.
"The document is difficult to read," wrote Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles) in a seven-page letter. "It relies excessively on acronyms. It is replete with technical jargon that goes unexplained."
Residents
and attorneys also questioned whether the city's airport agency had enough evidence to show that moving the runway 55 feet
would markedly improve safety at LAX, because pilots would still cross the inner runway from the center taxiway.
"Clearly,
a massive project that will cost over a quarter-billion dollars and not remove the underlying problem that initiated it should
bear close examination," wrote A. Dwight Abbott, mayor of Palos Verdes Estates.
County officials also demanded in a
letter that the City Council take another vote on the LAX modernization plan.
The county
Airport Land Use Commission ruled in August 2004 that the proposal would create more noise
and safety risks in nearby communities, making it inconsistent with a 1991 county land-use plan. Under state law, the 15-member
City Council had to muster a 10-vote supermajority to override the finding — which it did in December.
Now, the
county argues its Airport Land Use Commission had the authority under state law to accept an appeal from El Segundo. In its
appeal, El Segundo argued that the city's plan will allow LAX to grow to serve 89 million annual passengers and fails to spread
air traffic growth to other airports in the region. The county commission ruled in favor of El Segundo's appeal and contends
that the City Council is required to secure a 12-vote majority to override that decision.
The city disagrees.
"It
is our position, and has been for some time, that the commission doesn't have the authority to take the action they have taken,"
said Jonathan Diamond, a spokesman for the city attorney's office. "The council doesn't have to take another vote."
###
_______________________________
Headlines from the Daily News – September 3rd, 2005
City attorney: Foe of LAX expansion can be on panel
A longtime
opponent of expansion plans at Los Angeles International Airport
can serve as a member of the city Airport
Commission - as long as she recuses herself from decisions involving a lawsuit over airport modernization, the City Attorney's
Office said Friday.
The legal opinion regarding Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's
nomination of attorney Valeria Velasco of Playa Del Rey, however, also raised questions on how effective she could be on the
seven-member panel overseeing airport operations.
Velasco had been president of a group known as ARSAC
that opposed the $11 billion modernization plan for LAX and filed suit in January to try to block its implementation.
After Villaraigosa nominated her to the Airport Commission,
Velasco resigned her post with ARSAC. Villaraigosa issued a statement saying he believes the legal opinion clears the way
for her appointment.
"While the city attorney concludes that Ms. Velasco must
recuse herself from acting on matters before the board involving the lawsuit, she understood that would be required of her,"
Villaraigosa said. "I nominated Valeria Velasco because of her extensive knowledge and involvement in airport and neighborhood
issues."
Councilman Tony Cardenas, chair of the City Council's
Commerce, Energy and Natural Resources Committee that will review the appointment, had asked for the legal opinion to ensure
there was no conflict of interest.
Cardenas' chief of staff, Jose Cornejo, said the legal opinion does not
necessarily resolve the issue.
"We need to make sure we have a functioning board and
our concern is the extent of items to which she will be disqualified from," Cornejo said. "There are many issues that relate
to and indirectly impact the master plan. Will she be forced to recuse herself on 50, 75 or 80 percent of the items?"
Chief Deputy City Attorney Richard Llewellyn, who wrote
the opinion, said matters would have to be decided on a case-by-case basis.
Velasco did not return calls seeking comment Friday.
Rick Orlov, (213) 978-0390 rick.orlov@dailynews.com
______________________________
Daily Breeze
Saturday, September 03, 2005
|
Mayor's airport panel nominee cleared |
|
Valeria Velasco cannot be excluded from board based
on her role in a lawsuit against it, city attorney says.
By Alison Shackelford Hewitt
Copley
News Service
Playa del Rey resident Valeria Velasco, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's controversial nominee to the Board of Airport Commissioners,
can legally become a board member despite her role as president of a community group that is suing the commission, the Los
Angeles City Attorney's Office concluded Friday.
As long as Velasco steps down as president of the Alliance for a Regional Solution to Airport Congestion and "renounces
financial interest" in the lawsuit -- in other words, promises that she will not gain or lose money based on the outcome of
the suit, or contribute money to fund it -- she can serve on the commission, the opinion from City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo's
office said. |
|
However, Velasco would have a conflict of interest that would disqualify her from participating in commission votes related
to the lawsuit, which challenges the commission's redevelopment plan for Los Angeles
International Airport, Delgadillo's office said.
Velasco already has resigned as president of ARSAC and has said she will recuse herself from commission votes related to
the group's lawsuit. She did not respond to repeated requests for comment Friday.
Villaraigosa said he was satisfied with the city attorney's decision.
"I am pleased that the city attorney's opinion reaches the same conclusion that I reached when I nominated Valeria Velasco,"
he said in a written statement. "Her extensive knowledge and involvement in airport and neighborhood issues does not disqualify
her from serving on the board."
The City Council still must approve the appointment before Velasco can become a commissioner. The council is scheduled
to take up the issue Tuesday, and Villaraigosa urged "swift action" on the appointment.
Delgadillo's office issued the opinion in response to a request from Councilman Tony Cardenas, who was among several council
members concerned that Velasco's conflict of interest would be so great that she would seldom be able to vote on issues before
the commission. On Friday, Cardenas' office continued to express skepticism about
the wisdom of appointing her.
"We need to make sure we have a functioning board, and our concern is the extent of items to which she will be disqualified
from voting on," Jose Cornejo, Cardenas' chief of staff, said in a written statement.
"There are many issues that relate to and indirectly impact the master plan. Will she be forced to recuse herself on 50,
75 or 80 percent of the items that (the commission) will address in the next year?" Cornejo asked.
The legal opinion released by Delgadillo cautioned that "Ms. Velasco may be disqualified on other (LAWA) matters, depending
on the matter's relationship to the ARSAC lawsuit," and went on to explain that potentially disqualifying issues would have
to be examined case by case.
The opinion also said that simply living near LAX does not mean Velasco would have a conflict of interest on votes that
could affect residents in the area. As long as the changes affect Velasco and other residents in a similar way, Velasco can
still vote with the rest of the board, the city attorney's opinion said.
###
_______________________________
COMMUNITY CALL TO ACTION
-
PLEASE CONTACT CITY ATTORNEY ROCKY DELGADILLO-
IN SUPPORT OF VAL VELASCO'S NOMINATION TO THE
BOARD OF AIRPORT COMMISSIONERS
– BOAC
TO CONCERNED RESIDENTS AGAINST LAX EXPANSION:
Mayor Villaraigosa
recently nominated Val Velasco, our long time Westchester/Playa del Rey friend
and community advocate against LAX expansion, to the Board of Airport Commissioners.
Pro
airport expansionists are fighting back to block her appointment.
It is important that we respond by phone and/or e-mail!!!!!
Val
has worked tirelessly and without compensation
for years to save LAX impacted areas from numerous airport expansion plans that would negatively impact all of us, our families,
and the City of L.A. as well as surrounding communities for years to come. She has fought for a regional transportation plan that would relieve the over burdening
of LAX from increased passenger capacity, improve airport safety, help address environmental concerns and target future growth
to Ontario and Palmdale airports.
City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo not only plans to review Val’s appointment to determine whether she can serve as a commissioner; he now
wants to review the Alliance for Regional Solutions to Airport Congestion (ARSAC)
organization’s bylaws, too.
Like
many of you, I have known Val personally for years and am a member of ARSAC and have supported their efforts and vision for
a regional airline transportation system. Airport expansionists and the not-smart
developers have hurt the environment for far too long!!!!!
We
need Val, with her unblemished integrity and expertise, to represent us on the Board of Airport Commissioners.
I URGE YOU TO TELEPHONE/E-MAIL CITY
ATTORNEY DELGADILLO AT: (213) 978-8100 - rdelgadillo@atty.lacity.org
TELL CITY ATTORNEY DELGADILLO YOU SUPPORT VAL’S APPOINTMENT TO THE BOARD OF AIRPORT COMMISSIONERS!
|
Don’t hesitate, please call/e-mail today. We all have a vested
interest in Val representing us on the Board of Airport Commissioners.
Thank
you,
Sheila Mickelson
P.S.
Please forward this to your e-mail contacts.
|
Delgadillo to review eligibility of controversial
airports nominee |
|
By David Zahniser
Copley
News Service - Saturday, August 13, 2005 |
|
Los Angeles City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo said Friday he is trying to determine whether airport commission nominee Valeria
Velasco should be kept off the panel because of her previous lawsuit against Los Angeles World Airports.
Delgadillo was asked last month to determine whether Velasco's role as president of the Alliance for a Regional Solution
to Airport Congestion, a group suing to stop former Mayor James Hahn's $11 billion airport plan, would disqualify her or her
fellow commissioners from voting on the lawsuit.
But Delgadillo described plans for a broader legal review of Velasco, saying her involvement in a lawsuit against LAWA
raises "a bunch of red flags" about whether she should be a commissioner.
"We're going to start with whether or not she can be appointed, period," Delgadillo said in remarks made after he spoke
to the Los Angeles Current Affairs Forum.
Delgadillo, who has yet to interview Velasco, said he hopes to review the ARSAC bylaws, determine the nature of the group
-- including its nonprofit status -- and the nature of Velasco's involvement in the lawsuit.
Velasco would not comment Friday. But Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who nominated Velasco, last month, voiced disappointment
that Delgadillo is reviewing whether she should serve on the panel.
"I'm frankly a little concerned that my lawyer, because that's what he is, would say that," the mayor said. "But I hope
that he was misquoted."
Velasco, who lives in Playa del Rey, resigned as ARSAC president last month, just days after Councilman Tony Cardenas asked
Delgadillo whether her conflict of interest would prevent the commission from discussing the LAX lawsuit.
In previous conflict-of-interest cases, Delgadillo has determined that some conflicts are so great that they prevent an
entire city commission from taking action on an issue. If that occurred with Velasco, it would mean that Villaraigosa had
effectively denied his seven airport appointees the ability to deliberate over the lawsuit talks.
Westchester resident Denny Schneider, who serves on the ARSAC board,
said Velasco eliminated the conflict by resigning from the group. "All I can say is it amazes me that someone who has worked
for the community as hard as she has at her own expense, time and effort is being hassled so much," he said.
Delgadillo said he hopes to give Villaraigosa options about how Velasco can "put herself in a better position" in the wake
of the lawsuit.
Even if the mayor receives a legal opinion opposing Velasco's service on the commission, he or the City Council could choose
to ignore it, Delgadillo said.
"Now we can give that advice, and our client can act anyway contrary
to our advice," he said. "That's something they have the ability to do, but it's going to come with consequences."
From the August, 2005 C.R.A.A.P. Report:
Mayor Villaraigosa names six new nominees for Los Angeles Board of Airport Commissioners.
At a news conference on July 25th near LAX,
Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa announced his nominations for the Board of Airport Commissioners. Six of the nominees are new and
one is carried over from the former Board that served under Mayor Hahn. The nominees expressed their desire to work with our
new Mayor to develop a regional airport system. The crowd, gathered at the news conference to hear the nominee announcements,
cheered the loudest when Val Velasco’s name was announced. Val has been very active in the effort to implement a regional
airport system approach to air travel in the Los Angeles basin for the last ten years. She is an attorney
and president of the Alliance for a Regional Solution to Airport Congestion (ARSAC). Joan and I know Val and
are thrilled with her nomination. Her nomination, along with the other six nominations, sends a clear message that Mayor Villaraigosa
intends to implement a regional airport system. All seven nominees will need approval by the City Council.
______________________________________________
Los
Angeles Times - California IN BRIEF LOS ANGELES COUNTY / LOS ANGELES
Lawsuits Target LAX
Environmental Studies
July 15, 2005
From Times Staff and Wire Reports
Los Angeles County and the cities of Inglewood and Culver City have sued the federal Department of Transportation and the Federal Aviation Administration, claiming that environmental
studies completed for the city's modernization plan for Los Angeles International Airport are deficient.
The suit,
filed in the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, argues that the $11-billion proposal understates
the pollution that would result from increased air operations at LAX.
###
______________________________________________
RE:
FRIDAY LA TIMES Friday, June 24, 2005
ARTICLE (BELOW) ON INCREASED INCURSIONS AT LAX
This is yet another attempt to justify Hahn's plan. Two elements in the article
said it all; Each incursion was a pilot error ON THE GROUND and the incursions were blamed on INCREASED TRAFFIC.
Rather than another LAX expansion, first increase the FAA controllers to their
full complement so they can better police the ground, and second, divert additional traffic to the other regional airports!
Mike DiGirolamo, Deputy Director LAWA, is correct, “we have to get out there and
start focusing people on the problems.”
ARSAC and other critics of the expansion have been noting that there are more,
better collision avoidance systems that could be implemented at LAX that would fix the problem just as well (or better) than
rebuilding LAX ... AND AT A MUCH BETTER COST ALONG WITH ESTABLISHMENT OF A REAL REGIONAL SOLUTION THAT REMOVES THE RISKS OF
HAVING MOST PASSENGER AND CARGO TRAFFIC IN ONE LOCATION.
Denny Schneider, VP ARSAC Info@RegionalSolution.org
Los Angeles Times – Friday, June 24, 2005
4 Near
Misses Reported at LAX
· Runway incidents, three of them
in the last week, didn't place anyone in danger but did involve violations of safety rules, FAA spokesman says.
By Jennifer Oldham, Times Staff Writer
Aircraft at
Los Angeles International Airport came too close four times in the last month, a spate of incidents that officials
attributed to human error and a record number of international flights.
The events, three of which occurred in the
last week, are the first runway safety violations recorded at LAX since November.
"Given what we know so far,
no one on any of these planes was really in any danger," said Donn Walker, a spokesman for the Federal Aviation Administration.
"But we have pretty stringent safety parameters, and they were violated and that does concern us."
Federal aviation
officials will investigate the incidents, and then the FAA will classify them as to severity.
In the most serious
recent event, which occurred Sunday at 9:45
p.m., the pilot of a United Express jet bound for Santa Barbara had to abort his takeoff and slam on his brakes after a Continental Express jet moved too close to the runway.
Controllers
told the Continental Express pilot, who had just landed on the outer runway on the airport's south side, to stop behind several
sets of "hold bars" painted on a taxiway at midfield. He correctly repeated the instruction to controllers.
Then controllers
cleared the United Express plane for takeoff on the inner runway. Moments later, they saw the Continental Express jet pass
over the hold bars and stop about 39 feet from the edge of the runway. They ordered the United Express pilot to abort his
takeoff. The United Express plane skidded to a halt by the Continental jet, with just 100 feet between them.
The other
three incidents, which occurred since May 23, also involved aircraft crossing or moving too close to a runway where an airplane
was readying for takeoff.
Two of those occurred on the south side and one on the north side.
"A combination
of the increased flights and the outdated airfield layout — that's what's driving the spike in runway incursions," said
Paul Haney, a spokesman for the city's airport agency.
The events are a reminder that LAX has a reputation among pilots
as a dangerous place to be on the ground. From 2000 to 2003, LAX led the nation in near misses between aircraft. From 1997
to 2000, the airport recorded 13 serious near crashes on the ground — the most among the nation's busiest airports.
Near misses between aircraft have declined since airport officials launched an intensive campaign to educate pilots
about the challenges posed by the airport's unique layout. The airport also added lighting and other warning signals on the
airfield.
In 2003, LAX posted 11 incidents. Five were recorded in 2004, three of them in the same month last summer.
The airport has two sets of parallel runways, one pair on the north side and a second on the south. Airplanes that
land on the outer runways must cross the inner runways, where jets take off, to reach the terminals.
The airfield's
runway configuration can lead to confusion among pilots, who repeat controller instructions to stop well before the inner
runway but sometimes fail to stop.
"Oftentimes that's the toughest one for us to catch," said Mike Foote, a controller
in the LAX tower and local president of the National Air Traffic Controllers Assn. "When they actually read it back correctly,
you start to move on and you leave that situation behind and you turn around and you realize the guy has actually crossed
the runway."
The other recent incidents at LAX include:
• On May 23 at 8:13 p.m. a controller told
the pilot of an American Eagle turboprop bound for San Diego to taxi into position on the inner runway on the south side and
hold. The pilot correctly read back the instructions.
The controller then cleared an American Airlines 757 from Newark to taxi across the inner runway. The turboprop took off without clearance but was at least 4,500 feet from the 757.
• On Tuesday at 2:45
p.m., the pilot of a United 737 was told to wait behind
the hold bars on a taxiway between the two sets of parallel runways on the south side. The pilot read back the instructions.
American Airlines flight
1606 was taking off on the inner runway when the United pilot told controllers that he had crossed the bars. The controller
decided it was too late to abort takeoff. The American MD-80 came within 350 to 400 feet of the United jet.
•
On Wednesday at 1:13 p.m., Southwest Airlines flight 2197 landed on the outer runway on the airport's north
side. Controllers, distracted by an America West plane that was landing, cleared another Southwest jet to take off on the
inner runway. During a mix-up, Flight 2197 came too close to the inner runway and at one point was 200 feet from the departing
jet.
The number of international
flights at LAX was up about 14% in May and June, according to the city's airport agency. Officials agree that additional flights
can lead to more mistakes.
Officials hope to correct the problems on the airport's south side by moving the southernmost
runway 55 feet closer to El Segundo and building a taxiway down the middle. That project is part of the first phase of an
$11-billion plan to modernize LAX.
The city's airport agency plans to release an environmental study for the project
in late July. Mayor-elect Antonio Villaraigosa has said he favors the first phase of the modernization plan, which includes
this project.
Airport officials said they are concerned that the incidents mean that some pilots are still unaware
of the dangers at LAX.
"After what's happened in the last couple weeks, we will have to get out there and start refocusing
people on the problems," said Michael DiGirolamo, a deputy airport executive director.
____________________________________________________________
Los Angeles Times
May 21, 2005
FAA Approves
LAX Modernization Plan
· The action pushes the $11-billion proposal to the top of the mayor-elect's agenda.
By Jennifer Oldham and Jessica Garrison, Times Staff Writers
Federal officials
signed off on the city's $11-billion modernization plan for Los Angeles International Airport
on Friday, allowing construction to start and forcing Mayor-elect Antonio Villaraigosa to make the issue a top priority.
Villaraigosa
said he had spoken with U.S. Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta after the decision was announced and told him that he
opposed some of the plan's major components. Villaraigosa wants to eliminate a controversial passenger check-in center near
the San Diego Freeway.
"He indicated that the decision
was well on its way, and that they could not delay it because it was all ready to be issued," Villaraigosa said of the conversation.
The
Federal Aviation Administration must complete an environmental impact report and sign off on the city's plan, but its decision
Friday does not mean the city must follow the plan to the letter.
"This doesn't require the city or the airport to
take any action at all," said Donn Walker, an FAA spokesman. "It simply means if they want to they can go ahead and implement"
their airport plan.
The approval comes just three days after voters replaced the airport plan's two strongest proponents
— Mayor James K. Hahn and Councilwoman Cindy Miscikowski — with Villaraigosa and Bill Rosendahl, who oppose the
proposal.
The FAA's action will require Villaraigosa, who has not offered a comprehensive alternative blueprint, to
make some tough decisions about LAX this summer. The city is currently spending about $2 million a month to design projects
and to pay for legal costs. Some of the money is being spent on parts of the proposal that Villaraigosa opposes.
"I
believe that we need to develop a regional approach to expanding capacity," he said, adding that he thinks other airports
should absorb some of the growth in passenger traffic.
On Friday, the airport-area's congressional representatives
also decried the FAA's 58-page ruling.
"The only thing I can conclude is this may be an effort by someone to try to
move the process forward faster and disregard the fact that we have a new councilman … and a new mayor," said Rep. Maxine
Waters (D-Los Angeles).
Waters and Rep. Jane Harman (D-Venice), who both endorsed Villaraigosa, have repeatedly called
on Los Angeles officials to revamp the plan, which was introduced by Hahn shortly after the
Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The plan is highly unpopular in airport-area communities.
On Tuesday, Villaraigosa outpolled Hahn in most of these areas.
Officials hope to break ground on the first construction
project, moving the southernmost runway 55 feet closer to El Segundo, next spring. The city must first hire a contractor,
and the Airport Commission and the City Council must sign off on the project and its environmental documents.
Costs
related to the plan are sure to mount as opponents file suit in the next 60 days to challenge the federal environmental impact
report. When asked if her clients — Inglewood, Culver
City and Los Angeles
County — would sue in federal court, attorney Barbara Lichman said: "There's no question about it."
The city is currently facing litigation brought in state court by these entities and airport-area residents. The lawsuit
alleges that the complex environmental studies for the LAX plan understate the effects of noise, air pollution and traffic.
A hearing is scheduled in August.
How Villaraigosa chooses to fix LAX could have wide-ranging implications for his
administration. Reworking the city's aging airport, which was used by about 60 million travelers last year, has proven to
be problematic for both Hahn and his predecessor, Richard J. Riordan. The city has spent $147 million in the last 10 years
trying to rework the world's fifth-busiest airport, which consistently ranks near the bottom in surveys of traveler satisfaction.
Riordan left office before his expansion plan was approved. Hahn's plan faced certain defeat in the City Council last
year before Miscikowski — who currently represents the airport area — suggested splitting the plan's projects
into two phases.
The first phase features the most popular elements, including a transit hub near the Century Freeway,
a consolidated rental car center in parking lot C and a people mover.
More controversial components, including a check-in
center in a Westchester neighborhood, the demolition of terminals 1, 2 and 3 and the building of a terminal in the middle
of the airport's horseshoe-shaped roadway, are part of a second phase. These so-called "yellow-light" projects require additional
traffic, environmental and safety reviews before they could be built.
Hahn lauded the FAA's decision Friday.
"I
am pleased," he said in a statement, "and look forward to working with labor, businesses, public safety officials and other
stakeholders throughout the city as we continue to make LAX a model for safety, security and passenger convenience."
But the mayor is unlikely
to see any actual progress on his plan before he leaves office.
Villaraigosa is likely to make a decision about LAX
in conjunction with Rosendahl, a former local television host who won Miscikowski's seat. Rosendahl said Friday that he would
"expect a reconsideration and another opportunity to weigh in on the issue."
"The mayor-elect …
and I will talk a little bit more about our common strategy," he said.
Community leaders and legal experts questioned
whether Rosendahl would be able to request another council vote on Hahn's LAX plan.
"I think it's a hard thing to do
to have council members go back on a vote so shortly after their original vote," said Brendan Huffman, director of public
policy at the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce.
Legal experts said that Villaraigosa could order the Airport Commission
to start the whole process over. But he has said that he wanted the first phase of Hahn's plan to move forward.
Complicating
the matter is Villaraigosa's assertion that he would kill the proposal's most controversial projects. Attorneys for the city
and opponents argue that removing the second phase would invalidate the plan's environmental analysis. The new mayor also
would have to grapple with how to hold capacity at LAX to 78 million passengers. The plan to do that, by removing 10 gates
for airplanes, is part of the second phase.
If he does away with that phase, Villaraigosa would also jeopardize part
of a $500-million agreement tied to Hahn's plan that is designed to ease noise, air pollution and traffic and provide jobs
to residents living near LAX.
Architects of this deal said Friday that the community benefits were linked to individual
projects and that schools near the airport would probably lose a large portion of funding if the controversial projects were
cut.
"If the yellow-light projects are scaled back, then the benefits tied to those projects would be scaled back or
eliminated," said Danny Tabor, a former Inglewood city councilman. He said the coalition that negotiated with airport officials
to reach a community-benefits agreement was hoping to meet with Villaraigosa soon.
"We really need to show him how
it all fits together so he has a clear understanding of the various aspects of the master plan."
Other airport-area
residents also hope to get the mayor-elect's ear, saying they will withdraw litigation if he agrees to a proposal they plan
to release next week. The document will ask for a security study of the plan, a limit on passenger growth and an increase
in landing fees as an incentive for airlines to fly the new 550-seat Airbus A380, the largest airliner ever built, to city-owned
airports in Ontario and Palmdale.
"They could have variable landing fees … that would make alternative airports
much more attractive," said Jan Chatten-Brown, an attorney who represents airport-area residents. "There are other airports
in the Greater Los Angeles area that have the capacity to take up the burden, and a lot of these communities want these flights."
###
_______________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
L.A. Daily News
Article Published: Friday, May 20, 2005 - 8:30:56 PM
PST
Hahn's messy legacy
LAX: FAA approves modernization though
opposed by Villaraigosa
By Beth Barrett, Staff Writer
Federal aviation officials on Friday approved Mayor James Hahn's $11 billion
plan to expand and modernize Los Angeles International
Airport even as his successor, Councilman Antonio Villaraigosa, renewed his commitment
to sharply scale back the massive project.
The Federal Aviation Administration's action on the LAX master plan sets the stage for reopening debate on the project,
which got City Council approval last year as one of the cornerstones of Hahn's re-election campaign.
Villaraigosa, who opposed the plan and campaigned for a broader regional air traffic strategy, got a courtesy call from
U.S. Secretary of Transportation Norman Y. Mineta on Friday informing him of the FAA action.
The mayor-elect said he reiterated his opposition to Mineta to key elements in the master plan -- specifically the most
controversial and expensive, including a ground transportation center east of the airport, known as "yellow light projects."
He said he was told the approval means the city's proposed mitigations are sufficient to address the environmental issues
but does not commit the city to doing the work.
"As it was explained to me, it's not critical. It doesn't as I said prohibit us from continuing to move toward ensuring
the yellow light projects never become a reality," Villaraigosa told reporters at City Hall.
"My position is still clear: I don't support the yellow light projects. I believe we need to develop a regional approach
to expanding airport capacity in this region and continue to work toward that goal."
Villaraigosa, like most other elected officials, supports the proposed so-called "green light" projects, which include
reconfiguring the south airstrip, a consolidated rental car center, and some transportation improvements.
It was widely believed around City Hall that the Hahn administration had pressured the FAA for the approval prior to Villaraigosa
taking office July 1.
"Our timing was completely independent of anything going on in the city," said FAA spokesman Donn Walker. "It was a pretty
normal time frame."
In a statement, Hahn said he was pleased with the FAA's decision and looked forward to "working with labor, businesses,
public safety officials and other stakeholders throughout the city" in making LAX safer, more secure and convenient for passengers.
His spokeswoman, Shannon Murphy, said that while the mayor has always wanted to move the master plan forward, there was
"no additional effort" to ensure it happened before he left office.
Congresswoman Maxine Waters, D-Los Angeles, who had urged Mineta to hold off
on a decision, condemned the FAA action, said Edgar Saenz, her special assistant for airport
affairs.
"She thinks the timing is strange, inappropriate and appears rushed when three days ago (voters) elected a new mayor who's
been forcefully clear that Alternate D (the approved option) is dead," Saenz said. "We feel it's unfortunate in the wake of
this election."
Saenz added that Waters also spoke with Mineta on Friday and was told the local FAA office already had "pulled the trigger."
That was consistent with statements by Villaraigosa, who said Mineta told him the decision was "well on its way, and that
they could not delay it, because it was already to be issued."
Opponents to the master plan said they were optimistic that Villaraigosa would follow through with his campaign promises
and not allow any momentum generated by the federal decision to sidetrack him.
"Obviously there was a lot of pressure put on the FAA by the outgoing administration. I don't think it was serendipity,"
said environmental attorney Jan Chatten-Brown, who represents the Alliance for Regional Solutions to Airport Congestion, a
broad coalition of cities and community activists opposed to LAX expansion.
"Nothing compelled them to act in the time frame," she said.
However, she said the FAA's decision has "no real legal significance" in that it's an authorization, and not a mandate
to move ahead.
"When a mayor (Villaraigosa) and council representatives are strongly opposed to it ... it's pretty clear it's not going
to go forward as approved. We feel absolutely confident there will be a dramatic and very beneficial change in the plan at
LAX, and a move toward obtaining a regional solution."
Councilman-elect Bill Rosendahl, who will represent the district that contains LAX, said he was disappointed in the FAA's
action, saying opponents would regroup to oppose beginning any "yellow light projects."
"It's not over," Rosendahl said.
Councilwoman Cindy Miscikowski, who now represents the Westside area and brokered the two-tier project master plan, said
she was "thrilled" by the FAA's decision.
"This allows breathing room."
_________________________###___________________________________
FAA denies request to delay airport modernization plan
Five Democratic members of Congress
had asked the agency to hold off ruling on the plan until a panel hears appeals by county and city of El
Segundo.
By Ian Gregor Daily Breeze Friday,
February 25, 2005
Federal
officials have rejected a request to delay the Los Angeles International
Airport modernization plan until all appeals of the controversial proposal are
heard.
Five Democratic members of Congress, including South Bay Reps. Jane
Harman, Maxine Waters and Juanita Millender-McDonald, had asked the Federal Aviation Administration to hold off ruling on
the plan until an obscure county panel considers appeals of the project that were filed by Los Angeles County and the city
of El Segundo.
FAA officials, however, decided this week that there is "no
substantive reason" to further delay a process that has taken 10 years and cost the city of Los Angeles
$130 million.
"Ten years and two council votes later, it's time to move forward
with the process," FAA spokesman Greg Martin said. "There are some critical safety and airfield improvements we need to get
moving on."
The FAA expects to issue its Record of Decision on the LAX plan
next month, Martin said. He stressed that the agency has not decided whether to approve the plan.
The FAA's decision to adhere to its initial timetable provoked an angry response from Harman.
In a letter to U.S. Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta, Harman said she was "extremely
disappointed" that the FAA is poised to rule on the entire LAX modernization plan rather than limit its decision to a handful
of popular modernization projects. She implied that she and Mineta had discussed the possibility of a limited FAA ruling,
and urged the secretary to instruct the agency to undertake such an action.
A
City Council aide said local officials had discussed asking the FAA if it could issue a decision only on the popular, or "consensus,"
projects. But the aide said he didn't know if anyone had made a formal request to that effect.
Robert Johnson, director of public affairs for the U.S. Department of Transportation, said Mineta has a
policy of not commenting on his discussions with members of Congress.
"I'm
not in a position to get into relating what was discussed during those exchanges," Johnson said.
Another federal official, however, said the FAA can issue decisions only on an entire plan it is presented
with and not on portions of a plan. In the case of LAX modernization, the Los Angeles City Council approved the entire plan
while limiting which projects can be built without additional rigorous reviews.
"The FAA can't cherry-pick certain aspects" of a plan, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
Last December, the City Council decided that popular LAX modernization projects --
including southern runway improvements and an on-airport rental car facility -- can be built relatively soon. Controversial
projects -- such as the new entrance in the Manchester Square neighborhood
1½ miles east of the airfield -- would have to undergo further studies and security analyses before construction could begin.
Martin, the FAA spokesman, said the agency might perform additional reviews of controversial
projects that the City Council makes changes to in the future.
The five members
of Congress asked the FAA earlier this month to delay its decision because the Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Commission
may take until May to rule on the appeals of the LAX plan. The appeals argue that the plan is inconsistent with the county's
airport noise and safety regulations.
Several lawsuits also have been filed
challenging the plan's environmental review.
____________________________________________________________
Major Hurdles for LAX
Suits
Los Angeles Times January 16, 2005
· Experts say attacks on environmental studies often delay but rarely
halt airport expansions. However, this project's complexity may aid foes.
By Jennifer Oldham, Times
Staff Writer
As
airport officials pull together hundreds of documents in response to a quartet of lawsuits challenging the city's modernization
plan for Los Angeles International Airport, environmental law experts say
opponents face serious obstacles in their bid to halt the long-awaited overhaul.
Airport neighbors argue in litigation filed this month in Superior Court that environmental studies for the LAX plan
understate how much noise, traffic and air pollution will be created and fail to deal with the effect on nearby communities.
The City Council overwhelmingly approved these studies and the $11-billion plan last month.
Challenging environmental studies in court to try to block airport projects is a common tactic. Typically,
the cases delay projects for years and add to their costs, experts say, but they rarely stop them.
"The usual thing around the country is these projects get built," said Victor B. Flatt, an environmental
law professor at the University of Houston. "It's hard to derail them, because there are powerful interests that want them."
Airport projects often move forward, legal experts said, because judges are reluctant to second-guess environmental
studies.
"Cities start with a leg up in these cases," said Sean Hecht, executive
director of the UCLA Environmental Law Center. "The presumption is that cities have the power to have a fair amount of discretion in decision-making."
The Times asked four environmental law experts to review the lawsuits filed by the
city of El Segundo; a group of Southland residents; a coalition of homeowner associations; and Los Angeles County, which was
joined by Inglewood and Culver City.
The lawsuits share a similar theme,
claiming that the city violated state law by understating the airport's passenger capacity, by ignoring public comments and
by making last-minute changes without additional analysis. The suits ask the court to invalidate the council's approval and
bar any work until a more detailed study is completed.
To prevail under California law, opponents must show that the
city based its decision on inaccurate and incomplete information, and failed to examine significant effects of the project.
Proving that Los
Angeles used such information will be difficult, the legal experts
said. Each side is likely to provide the court with data from its own experts.
"The
courts tend to look at that and say, 'That's just a battle of experts,' and the agency is entitled to some deference," said
Robert Verchick, an environmental law professor at Loyola University in New Orleans.
But the LAX case is unusually complex. The 30,000-page
state environmental study discusses four expansion alternatives, leaving city officials at somewhat of a disadvantage because
there are many ways opponents can attack both the analysis and the process.
"There
are so many issues here that seem to be at least potentially serious from a plaintiffs' point of view that I would say they
likely have some real hope" that the council's decision will be overturned, Hecht said.
Opponents may also have an advantage, experts said, if they can persuade a judge that the city left information out
of its environmental studies. The lawsuits, for example, note that the city failed to study the LAX project's effects past
2015, even though construction is likely to continue after that year.
A second
significant piece of missing information, litigants argue, involves additional analysis that they say the city should have
conducted after it made 11th hour changes to the plan.
The foes' cases are
"definitely strengthened by an omission like that in the impact statement," Verchick said.
To mollify critics, Mayor James K. Hahn modified his plan and placed projects into two phases.
A transit hub, an elevated tram, a consolidated rental car center and the relocation
of the southernmost runway 55 feet closer to El Segundo were included in the first phase.
A second set of projects, which require further environmental, traffic and security review, include more controversial
elements, among them a remote check-in center and demolition of three terminals.
California environmental law is stronger than a similar federal statute and gives opponents a second way to challenge the LAX
plan: by attempting to show that the city airport agency could have selected another alternative.
For instance, the lawsuits argue that environmental studies fail to address the possibility of dispersing
travelers to other airports or capping LAX capacity at 78.9 million annual passengers, measures that would lessen effects
on surrounding communities.
But challengers may have a tough time convincing
a judge that these alternatives are feasible, because LAX cannot force airlines to take service to other airports and federal
law prohibits the airport agency from limiting passenger growth.
In all likelihood,
experts say, opponents are relying as much on the extreme complexity of the litigation as the legal weight of their arguments.
Officials have already spent 10 years and $147 million studying how to update LAX.
"Lawsuits by expansion opponents can sometimes succeed, even if they fail, because they can delay the expansion process
and drive up expansion costs," said Maureen Martin, a senior fellow for legal affairs at the Heartland Institute in Chicago.
The petitions "are extremely long and contain dense language and an abundance of acronyms," Martin said. "This creates
a daunting task for the judges unlucky enough to be assigned to the cases and slows down the review process — which
likely is one of the opponents' goals."
That strategy has worked elsewhere,
although it hasn't ultimately stopped construction.
During the last two
decades, communities ringing airports in or near Seattle, Oakland, St. Louis, Dallas,
Boston and
Memphis, Tenn., among dozens of others, have sued over
modernization plans.
In most of these cases, the airport neighbors filed
their cases in state and federal courts and claimed that environmental reports did not adequately analyze the effects of passenger
growth.
Expansion opponents hope that tying up airport plans in court will
forestall development because environmental data may get stale, airlines may cancel service, the city may be unable to pay
for the project or the proposal may lose political support.
In
St. Louis they nearly "pulled it
off because of 9/11," said Mike Donatt, a spokesman for Lambert-St. Louis
International Airport. "We already had approval and had
broken ground, but if they had delayed approval and it coincided with 9/11, they might have stopped everything."
Lawsuits claiming that the airport lacked the ability to override local zoning laws
delayed construction on a new runway at Lambert for about a year, Donatt said.
In Washington state, airport-area cities' lawsuits pushed back the completion date for a third runway at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport by about eight years.
Twenty-three lawsuits were filed
over the project, and the runway cost jumped from $400 million to $1.1 billion, said Paige Miller, president of the Port of Seattle
Commission, which runs the airport.
In Los Angeles, a judge is likely to consolidate the four cases filed here, experts say. There's also a chance that
opponents will withdraw their suits, if they reach a compromise with L.A. officials. The city continues to negotiate with El Segundo, Inglewood and the county.
The critical question now is whether the state court will bar the city from starting construction. Airport officials
hope to begin work on the new southern runway in September.
Judges are often
reluctant to get involved in public policy issues by blocking construction, said UCLA expert Hecht, but if they think they
might ultimately ask the city to do additional analysis, they are likely to issue a restraining order.
"If the court finds anything wrong with the process," he said, "the typical remedy is to rescind the approval
and make the city do whatever is necessary to change the project."
__________________________________________________________
LOS ANGELES TIMES
- January 7, 2005
2 More Lawsuits Filed
Over Hahn's LAX Plan
Three suits now seek
to invalidate the City Council's approval of the project and to have a new environmental impact report done
By Jennifer Oldham, Times
Staff Writer
The county of Los Angeles,
two cities and a group of residents sued the city of Los Angeles on Thursday over
its modernization plan for Los Angeles International
Airport, claiming its voluminous environmental studies were flawed and asking the
court to order the city to conduct additional analysis.
The two lawsuits, filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court,
join a similar petition submitted Monday by the city of El Segundo. Under state
law, opponents of the LAX plan have until today — one month after the City Council's approval of the proposal —
to challenge the $11-billion plan in court.
The county joined with the
cities of Inglewood and Culver City
in one of Thursday's lawsuits, and the Alliance for a Regional Solution to Airport
Congestion filed the second action. The city of Los Angeles, the City Council,
Mayor James K. Hahn, the Airport Commission and the city's airport agency were named in both.
All three suits filed
this week share a similar theme: that Los Angeles violated state environmental
law by misrepresenting the airport's passenger capacity, by ignoring public comments and by failing to include adequate measures
to ease additional noise, air pollution and traffic.
The lawsuits also claim that the plan's environmental studies
understate its negative effect on air quality, noise and traffic.
Hahn's LAX plan "is the quintessential red herring
aimed at disarming the opposition of public entities … which represent virtually all of the many thousands of citizens,
predominantly minority and low-income, who will suffer the vast bulk of the project's adverse environmental impacts," according
to the 59-page petition filed by the county and the cities of Inglewood and Culver City.
All three suits ask the
court to invalidate the City Council's approval of the LAX plan last month and bar any work until a more detailed analysis
is completed.
The three lawsuits could be consolidated if a judge finds that they contain similar allegations.
The Federal Aviation Administration reiterated that litigation wouldn't deter the agency from issuing a decision
on the plan by the end of March.
The mayor's office said that it had expected the litigation and that it remains
in negotiations with the county and neighboring cities to find a way to address their concerns.
"The mayor is confident
we'll be able to reach an agreement that everyone is satisfied with," said Elizabeth Kaltman, a mayoral spokeswoman. "Mayor
Hahn is also confident that the EIR will stand up to scrutiny."
County supervisors said Thursday that they filed
suit to preserve their legal options, but added that if their concerns are not met, they would proceed with the litigation.
"The county's lawsuit is a placeholder, if negotiations with the city of Los Angeles
fail," said Supervisor Don Knabe, who represents airport-area residents.
The county has demanded that city officials
cap LAX at 78 million annual passengers and eliminate the centerpiece of Hahn's plan, a remote check-in center near the San
Diego Freeway.
The city has argued that it cannot legally constrain passenger growth at LAX and cannot scrap the
check-in center without starting the process over.
To mollify critics, the mayor's LAX plan was modified earlier
last year to divide it into two phases.
The first includes a transit hub, an elevated tram, a consolidated rental-car
center and the relocation of the southernmost runway closer to El Segundo.
The most controversial projects, including
the check-in center, were put in a second phase in which they would undergo more rigorous environmental, traffic and security
studies before construction.
The lawsuits charge that this last-minute change violated state law because officials
didn't conduct additional environmental studies on the altered plan.
"The division of the LAX Master Plan into projects
that will definitely go forward and those that may not renders the description of the expansion plan and its impacts unreliable,"
wrote Jan Chatten-Brown, an attorney for the Alliance for a Regional Solution
to Airport Congestion, in its 34-page petition.
________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
More
LAX lawsuits filed
L.A. Daily News
Article Published: Friday, January 07, 2005
County joins cities, others in opposition
By Rick Orlov
Staff Writer
Opposition to Mayor James Hahn's $11 billion modernization and expansion
plan for Los Angeles International Airport
mounted Thursday with Los Angeles County,
two cities and a citizens group filing lawsuits seeking to block it from going forward.
The suits are similar to one filed Monday by the city of El
Segundo saying that the environmental studies backing the plan are inadequate and based on outdated
information.
Hahn, who helped shepherd the plan through the approval process, voiced
confidence in the supporting environmental studies.
"We expected these lawsuits and we are still negotiating with the county
and others in the hope we can resolve all the issues," Hahn spokeswoman Elizabeth Kaltman said. "The mayor is committed to
finding solutions. But, also, he is confident the environmental impact reviews will stand up to court scrutiny."
City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo said his office also was prepared to
defend the plan.
"We fully expected a number of lawsuits to come from the expansion of
LAX," Delgadillo said. "This office remains steadfast and prepared to defend the city of Los Angeles
with respect to any of those lawsuits."
City officials said they hope a judge will combine the various suits
so there is just one court proceeding.
The county suit includes complaints by the cities of Inglewood
and Culver City. The county argues that the modernization proposal is misleading
and violates its own airport master plan.
"(It) is the quintessential red herring aimed at disarming the opposition
... of the many thousands of citizens who will suffer the vast bulk of the project's adverse environmental impacts," the county
suit said.
The county says the city failed to adequately address issues such as
traffic congestion, noise and air quality, as well as how their impacts can be mitigated.
Also filing a challenge was the Alliance
for a Regional Solution to Airport Congestion, which describes itself as a grass-roots organization seeking to create a regional
air traffic plan.
"The biggest concern is the failure of the city to consider a range
of alternatives, including one that would distribute the benefits, as well as the burdens, of having an airport," said attorney
Jan Chatten-Brown, who represents ARSAC.
"There are communities in outlying areas that are better suited and
that want to see more airport business."
Chatten-Brown said she was referring to city-owned airports in Ontario
and Palmdale, which Los Angeles officials say they want to make greater use of.
Hahn has touted the recent expansion of air service at Ontario
and Palmdale, but said their future growth will depend on airlines making greater use of the facilities.
The ARSAC suit also questions a "green light-yellow light" priority
system, in which the entire plan was approved but with the intention of only going forward immediately on noncontroversial
elements while other parts will be postponed for possible further study.
"Essentially, their EIR is fundamentally flawed ... because it is an
ever-changing project," Chatten-Brown said. "The insertion of the yellow light-green light concept adds an uncertainty about
what the project will be."
Chatten-Brown also criticized the city for basing its environmental
review on conditions in 1996 rather than using more recent data.
_________________________________________
El Segundo
files suit over L.A. mayor's LAX project
Daily Breeze – January 04, 2005
City is first of four which will
sue, arguing that reviews on the environmental impacts of the proposed $11 billion plan are inadequate.
By Ian Gregor
Daily Breeze
El Segundo on Monday filed a lawsuit challenging Mayor James Hahn's $11 billion-plus modernization plan for Los
Angeles International Airport, becoming
the first of four public and private agencies that have indicated they will sue by week's end.
The Superior Court
lawsuit alleges that the project's environmental review violates the California Environmental Quality Act by failing to analyze
or lessen its noise, traffic and air quality effects and by providing no assurances that LAX's growth will be constrained.
Additionally, El Segundo claims that the Los Angeles City Council rushed its approval of the plan before seeing the results
of an ongoing RAND Corp. security study. El Segundo also alleges that the council made "significant 11th-hour changes" to
Hahn's original modernization proposal by approving a $3 billion compromise plan brokered by Councilwoman Cindy Miscikowski.
"The communities surrounding LAX ... have for decades endured the significant adverse environmental consequences of intensive
airport operations," El Segundo's 13-page complaint says. "The project will aggravate LAX's adverse impacts on the surrounding
communities by increasing the airport's capacity and by causing significant environmental impacts without adequate mitigation."
Representatives of Los Angeles County,
Culver City and the Playa del Rey-based Alliance
for a Regional Solution to Airport Congestion, or ARSAC, also said they will file lawsuits against the project. Their objections
are similar to El Segundo's.
State law requires that lawsuits against the LAX Master Plan be filed by Friday, 30
days after the Los Angeles City Council approved it.
It's unclear whether lawsuits could delay construction on modernization
projects, which could begin in 2006.
The Federal Aviation Administration still expects to issue a decision on the
LAX plan in the first quarter of 2005, said FAA spokesman Donn Walker.
"Nothing has changed," Walker
said.
Elizabeth Kaltmann, a Hahn spokeswoman, said the mayor expected El Segundo would sue before Friday's deadline
to preserve its legal options."We're still in negotiations with El Segundo," Kaltmann said. "(Hahn) is confident we'll be
able to resolve their claims."
El Segundo Mayor Kelly McDowell and John Musella, a spokesman for county Supervisor
Don Knabe, whose district includes LAX, said recently that they're optimistic agreements can be reached with Los
Angeles.
Deborah Fancett, Culver City's assistant
chief administrative officer, said her city also intends to continue negotiating with Los Angeles.
But Los Angeles officials have not taken seriously Culver
City's concerns, which she said focus on the plan's traffic effects.
Jan Chatten-Brown, a
Santa Monica attorney representing ARSAC, said Los Angeles
has not negotiated with her client. "So far L.A. has been very reluctant to come
to the table to discuss the issues that are at the heart of ARSAC's concerns," Chatten-Brown said. "Maybe this lawsuit will
get them there."
The Los Angeles City Council staved off some challenges to the airport plan last month by approving
a landmark agreement that would confer up to $500 million in benefits on communities and schools around LAX in Inglewood,
Lennox and South Los Angeles.
LAX also is negotiating an amendment
of a smaller benefits agreement that Inglewood and the airport signed in February
2001. Inglewood Mayor Roosevelt Dorn has said he wants more than $200 million for his city.
Inglewood City
Administrator Mark Weinberg would not say Monday whether his city will file a lawsuit against the LAX plan.
The
$3 billion compromise LAX plan that Miscikowski brokered would allow popular projects to move forward relatively quickly,
including improvements to the southern runway complex and the Tom Bradley International Terminal, an on-airport rental car
facility and a center linking the Green Line and buses with a people mover that would serve the terminals.
Another
$8 billion in controversial projects, including a new check-in center 1½ miles east of the airfield, would be postponed pending
additional environmental and security studies.
___________________________________________________________
El Segundo Sues Over LAX
Plan
LOS ANGELES TIMES
- January 4, 2005
City alleges Los Angeles' environmental studies
failed to adequately analyze traffic, noise and other effects on nearby communities.
By Jennifer Oldham, Times Staff Writer
The
city of El Segundo sued the city of Los Angeles
on Monday, claiming that environmental studies completed for a Los Angeles International
Airport modernization plan failed to adequately analyze air pollution, traffic,
noise and other effects on surrounding communities.
In a 12-page petition, filed in Los Angeles County Superior
Court, El Segundo's attorneys argue that in a rush to approve the $11-billion plan, Los Angeles
violated state environmental law.
State law requires airports to
complete an environmental impact report, or EIR, with expansion plans to identify measures that will ease the effects on surrounding
communities.
"The great quantities of time and money expended by the parties in the LAX Master Plan environmental
review process have not resulted in a high-quality, or even an adequate, EIR," the petition filed by San Francisco-based Shute,
Mihaly & Weinberger states. "In fact, the environmental documentation leaves many of the public's concerns unaddressed
and questions unanswered."
El Segundo's lawsuit is the first of several expected this week from residents and cities
near the world's fifth-busiest airport. Under state law, the parties have until Friday to challenge the plan. The Alliance for a Regional Solution to Airport
Congestion, a group that represents residents living around LAX, plans to file suit Thursday. Los Angeles County officials said they would file by Friday.
The city of Inglewood has also threatened to sue.
El Segundo's lawsuit against the Los Angeles City Council, Mayor James K. Hahn,
Los Angeles
World Airports and the Airport Commission, asks
the court to order them to conduct an additional environmental review. The suit also requests that the court bar Los Angeles from starting work until it complies
with state environmental law.
The City Council last month overwhelmingly approved Hahn's plan to renovate the airport.
The proposal, in two phases, calls for a transit hub, an elevated train and a consolidated rental-car center, along with moving
the airport's southernmost runway closer to El Segundo. Airport officials hope to start construction on the runway later this
year.
Los Angeles officials said the lawsuit came as no surprise and noted that they are continuing to negotiate
with El Segundo to limit annual capacity at LAX to 78.9 million passengers, pay for noise mitigation and traffic improvements,
and address how to fix the southern runways.
"The mayor isn't dissuaded by the lawsuit," said Elizabeth Kaltman,
a spokeswoman for Hahn. "We all assumed they would preserve their right to sue. The mayor is confident that we will be able
to resolve their claims" out of court.
El Segundo officials said the lawsuit's confrontational tone belied a "very
cordial and, at this point, friendly" relationship between the cities.
"I'm optimistic," said Kelly McDowell, El
Segundo's mayor. "We've been going at it for what seems like a long time, but in this set of discussions compared to the length
of time with which we've been dealing with the problem, it's not. We've been talking since last May, but we've been dealing
with this for decades."
The Federal Aviation Administration, which must sign off on Hahn's LAX plan and which has
worked closely with Los Angeles officials on the environmental studies, said litigation would not force the agency to alter its schedule.
The FAA plans to issue a decision before the end of March, said Donn Walker, an agency spokesman.
The lawsuit reiterates
long-standing complaints El Segundo has had with the airport planning process, which spanned 10 years and cost Los Angeles $147 million.
El Segundo
has argued repeatedly that Hahn's plan fails to limit annual capacity at LAX to 78.9 million passengers — a figure the
mayor promised to stick to when he campaigned for office in 2001.
Because the updated airport's capacity will be
far greater than the 78.9 million passengers used in the environmental report, it understates the effect on surrounding communities,
the lawsuit argues.
In a "rush" to approve the project, the lawsuit contends, the city made "significant 11th-hour
changes" to the proposal and did not conduct additional environmental analysis.
Those alterations included moving
the most controversial projects — including a remote check-in facility near the San Diego Freeway and the demolition
of Terminals 1, 2 and 3 — to a second phase where they can't proceed without further environmental, traffic and security
studies. The lawsuit also challenges one of the major arguments for Hahn's plan: that if the airport isn't modernized, residents
will suffer the noise, air pollution and traffic that accompanies growth without the mitigation measures provided in the plan.
Environmental studies for Hahn's plan, the lawsuit contends, also rely on outdated data and fail to analyze effects
after the year 2015.
In addition, the 30,000-page EIR is "written in overly complicated technical jargon" and is
"well over" the 300-page length that state law suggests, the suit alleges. Los Angeles' airport agency also made it difficult for residents
to review the document because it charged $6,500 for a copy, and because the electronic version was unreliable, the suit charges.
The lawsuit says El Segundo's comments, "supported by substantial evidence and extensive credible expert analysis, have been largely ignored." Instead,
it charges that Los Angeles "attempted to bury" El Segundo "in increasingly large mountains of paperwork."
___________________________________
The following information
is from:
Alliance for a Regional Solution to Airport Congestion
322 Culver Blvd. #231, Playa del Rey, CA 90293 (310)
827-7411
Contact Us
PROTECT SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
THE CONCENTRATION OF A MAJORITY OF SO CAL AIR COMMERCE IN ONE
PLACE IS A RECIPE FOR DISASTER.
FROM THE Los Angeles Daily News
Hahn's $9.1 billion plan for "modernizing" Los Angeles International Airport is a frog. It costs too much and would only serve to worsen traffic on the 405 Freeway
while creating a monstrosity of a single check-in center. That's why the only people who support the plan are those who stand
to profit from its implementation, namely contractors and unions.
CLICK HERE AND EMAIL EVERY LA CITY COUNCIL MEMBER TO VOICE YOUR
OUTRAGE!
TELL THEM, "I DEMAND HONESTY IN CITY GOVERNMENT. I WANT A REASONABLE, WELL
THOUGHT OUT MODERNIZATION PLAN FOR LAX THAT PROVIDES A TRUE CAP ON A SAFE, SECURE AIRPORT AND A TRUELY REGIONAL SOLUTION TO SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA'S AIR TRAVEL NEEDS. I DO NOT WANT NOT A FABRICATED "CONSENSUS" THAT IS ACTUALLY A PUBLIC WORKS BOONDOGGLE
ESTIMATED TO COST $9.6 BILLION YESTERDAY, $11 BILLION TODAY, AND PERHAPS $19 BILLION TOMORROW. FINIALLY I WANT A TIMETABLE
FOR THIS PROCESS BASED UPON THE CONCEPT OF DOING IT RIGHT INSTEAD OF WHEN THE NEXT ELECTION IS"
Below
is the information on how to contact individual Los Angeles City Council Members or the Mayor by phone, fax or e-mail
or regular mail.
Address for Mayor & Council
Members: 200 N Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Mayor James K. Hahn.Phone: (213) 978-0600, Fax: (213) 978-0656, Email:jhahn@mayor.lacity.org
Ed Reyes, 1st District.Phone:
(213) 485-3451, Fax: (213) 485-8907, Email:reyes@council.lacity.org
Wendy Greuel, 2nd District.Phone:
(213) 485-3391, Fax: (213) 680-7895, Email:greuel@council.lacity.org
Dennis Zine, 3rd District.Phone:
(213) 473-7003, Fax: (213) 485-8988, Email:zine@council.lacity.org
Tom LaBonge, 4th District.Phone:
(213) 485-3337, Fax: (213) 624- 7810, Email:labonge@council.lacity.org
Jack Weiss, 5th District.Phone:
(213) 473-7005, Fax: (213) 978-2250, E-Mail:weiss@council.lacity.org
Tony Cardenas, 6th District.Phone:
(213) 473-7006, Fax: (213) 847-0549, Email:cardenas@council.lacity.org
Council President Alex Padilla,
7th District.Phone: (213) 847-7777, Fax: (213)847-0707, Email: padilla@council.lacity.org
Bernard Parks, 8th District.Phone:
(213) 473-7008, Fax: (213) 485-7683, Email:parks@council.lacity.org
Jan Perry, 9th District.Phone:
(213) 473-7009, Fax: (213) 473-5946 Email:perry@council.lacity.org
Martin Ludlow, 10th District.Phone:
(213) 473-7010, Fax: (213) 485-9829, Email:ludlow@council.lacity.org
Cindy Miscikowski, 11th District.Phone:
(213) 485-3811,Fax: (213) 473-6926, Email: miscikow@council.lacity.org
Greig Smith, 12th District.Phone:
(213) 473-7012, Fax: (213) 473-6925, Email:smith@council.lacity.org
Eric Garcetti, 13th District.Phone:
(213) 473-7013, Fax: (213) 613-0819, Email:garcetti@council.lacity.org
Antonio Villaraigosa, 14th
District.Phone: (213) 473-7014, Fax: (213) 847-0680,
Email: villaraigosa@council.lacity.org
Janice Hahn, 15th District.Phone:
(213) 473-7015, Fax: (213) 626-5431, Email:hahn@council.lacity.org
__________________________________________________________
The ARSAC Viewpoint
(Alliance for a Regional Solution to Airport Congestion)
WILL YOU BE IMPACTED BY THE IMPENDING LAX EXPANSION?
YOU BET!
Think the 405 is bad now? Just wait
till another 30+ million cars and trucks annually are forced onto it by LAX expansion.
Think LAX expansion will relieve Burbank Airport? Think again. Everyone hates
LAX now; with 10-20 years construction work and additional traffic on the 405, everyone is going to look for other airports
to use. Low cost airlines like Southwest have threatened to move from LAX to other local airports if the Mayor’s
plan is implemented. Burbank will feel increased pressure for expansion. That means more traffic on the 101 too.
And of course ticket prices will go up!
Someone has to pay for all of the unnecessary construction. Estimates by one airline was $35 per ticket or more depending
on the final project costs. Further, taxpayer dollars will be required for off airport projects that are not “specifically
airport related” but are exacerbated by LAX traffic—that money that could be used to maintain or fix your
neighborhoods.
Further, all of the push for LAX expansion
is diverting attention from fixing all of the Van Nuys airport issues such as limiting helicopter activity times and outlawing louder
stage 2 aircraft.
LAST YEAR, Alternative D was so universally
unacceptable that it was referred to by many in the City Council as “fatally flawed” and “dead on arrival.”
Council member Miscikowski has come to the Mayor’s rescue. She unveiled a “consensus” plan for which
there is NO AGREEMENT.
LAX-area Councilwoman Miscikowski (who terms
out of office next year) agrees to approve the entire Alternative D Master Plan first and to then add more “reviews”
of the most onerous project elements before they are built. Although Council member Miscikowski states opposition to
her "yellow light" projects and require additional review for these items, she will not be in office to fight against them.
Even the LA City staff report approved by the joint Commissions last month referred to the Miscikowski approach as an
“Alternative D implementation plan!” A plan that deletes, not delays, the unacceptable projects should be
enacted.
We hear that when the City Council
votes in September or October to authorize this plan your Valley City Council
members plan to vote with Councilmember Miscikowski as a courtesy to the Council member whose district includes LAX.
YOU MUST SPEAK UP—LOUDLY and CLEARLY—TO YOUR COUNCIL MEMBER AGAINST THIS PLAN.
Protest the waste of your
money. The community you save will be your own…
Please send a copy of your
correspondence to the Alliance for a Regional Solution to Airport Congestion at info@regionalsolution.org . Thanks.
Below is more discussion for those who want
more detail of this issue.
--------------------------------
LAX Master Plan Design Alternative D is
reported to be a 10-12 year, $9+ billion public works project to change LAX access. This is the largest Southern California public works project—EVER. Mayor Hahn and Councilmember Miscikowski are working to have it approved in
September, BEFORE YOU HAVE A VOICE in the upcoming election. Since LAX is owned and operated by the City of Los Angeles
no other approvals (other than a layout approval by the FAA) is required to move forward. The Los Angeles
County Airport Land Use Committee, this month, may invoke a requirement for a super majority vote
of 10 Council members instead of 8 for approval. None of the surrounding cities have a voice in the decision.
· This Hahn-Miscikowski plan
fails to make LAX secure.
· This plan increases
inconvenience and will cost airport users and taxpayers. One airline estimated at least $35 per ticket.
· The ongoing
construction will even further increase inconveniences in and around LAX and drive increased activity to regional airports
such as Burbank until outlying airports increase their capacity to accommodate their growth needs.
Summary of Alternative D Master Plan Changes:
· Auto access to the
Central Terminal Area and CTA parking are to be eliminated. The footprint of LAX is extended a mile and a half east
into Manchester Square with a new Ground transportation Center check in and parking facility. Passengers will either check luggage in Manchester Square or carry it
onto trains. Checked baggage may be transferred using a new $ billion tunnel constructed over an earthquake fault.
An expensive, elevated automated people mover system is to be added to carry travelers to the Central Terminal Area from
Manchester Square and outlying areas.
· Parking Lot C is
replaced by a consolidated rental car facility.
· Northside terminal
concourses will be torn down to facilitate a new centerline taxiway and lengthened runways.
· A new terminal facility
will be built west of Bradley International.
· Additional changes
to the southern runways and taxiway system are also scheduled.
· An Integrated Transportation
Center will be built across from the present Green Line train termination so that people can transfer to the new automated
people mover system to enter LAX.
· Nominal cargo facility
changes will be enacted on the south and east ends of LAX to increase cargo 50%.
· Employee parking
will be added.
Reasons to question LAX Master Plan Alternative
D
·
Still facilitates growth at LAX and
detracts from regional disbursement that is more appropriate and convenient for high growth areas.
·
Expensive for airlines with shaky finances.
·
Impacts local business, and surrounding
communities.
·
Traveler inconveniences and added costs—at
least $35 per ticket
·
Adds potential for future expansion
in an area already gridlocked.
·
Probable disruptions of air service
during long construction period.
Runways and Air
Terminals:
-Reconfigured terminals
cause airlines major expenses; many are already losing money. Substantial reconfiguration costs.
-Runway extension
requirements are drafted but not finalized by the FAA for “Newer, Larger 600+ passenger Aircraft.” Future
changes may be required.
-Alternative D
creates longer runways and additional taxiways which are the largest increase in runway capacity ever (presently limited by
other constraints).
-Greater noise
impact on residents. The FAA can authorize multiple, simultaneous landings; flight paths will be spread all over the
basin.
-The number of gates
is reduced but enhancements for larger aircraft allow increased capacity per gate. New terminals west of Bradley International
can be added in the future. Expert review indicates overall LAX capacity is still increased despite Hahn no expansion
pledge.
-Ends of Bradley
International Terminal (and those west of Bradley) may accommodate A380 or other newer, larger aircraft.
Check in and Safety:
1. -Alt D precludes autos from central terminal; Manchester Square will have local traffic impacts. Possible 405 freeway
impacts by the increased numbers of cars and hundreds of thousands of additional cargo trucks.
2. -Off site facility (Ground Transportation Center) and Intermodal Transportation Center in Alt D
provide questionable security improvement, but being away from LAX grounds splits security and emergency forces.
3. -Alt D transports passengers and baggage through unsecured areas.
4. -Increases security delays for baggage check in. D calls for multiple screens away from passengers
and/or lugging of bags to central terminal area on new automated people mover which is, at best, inconvenient.
5 - Calls for transport over uncontrolled areas; has expensive systems such as billion
dollar tunnel in an earthquake fault area.
6. -Undefined access from local hotels and business areas unlike other alternatives.
7. -Resources are not easily shared between check in and aircraft support areas. Emergency services
and evacuation is complicated.
8.
-Surrounding residential communities closer to LAX in Alt D.
9.
-Increased Cargo and on-airport access can still make LAX vulnerable.
Traffic Flow and
Impact on surrounding communities improved:
1.
-Traffic will infuse into neighborhoods as freeway backs up.
2.
-Makes true intermodal connectivity difficult. People arriving from all parts of
Southern California via rapid transit busses and trains will have to transfer
several times. Still limits access to “Green Line” or other trains.
3.
-Some streets such as Aviation, LaTijera, Sepulveda, Lincoln, and Manchester will be subjected to more rental car and taxi traffic.
4.
-Consolidated rental car facility is an improvement, but should be located in Continental City instead of removing Lot C’s convenient
parking.
Harsher Experience
for Travelers and Local Communities:
1.
-Removes some newly blighted areas (Manchester Square) and beautifies, but eliminates walkable business area in
support of local business.
2.
-Increased cargo adds traffic and may conflict with passenger travel.
3.
-INCREASES POLLUTION from more traffic.
4.
-ELIMINATES promised park in area where parks are scarce.
–Removes most affordable housing in area.
Again, In Summary of the Hahn-Miscikowski Alternative D Plan:
· Everyone agrees
that air commerce capacity is important to Southern California and must be addressed. The Hahn-Miscikowski version of Alternative D, the alternative being approved, has significant draw backs and the environmental
documents are fatally flawed. The over 3000 comments were provided during review did not result in any significant changes
to the plan.
· Another Expansion
of LAX risks the Los Angeles and the Region economy because it continues concentration of air commerce in one location without
back up in case of problems.
· Councilwoman Miscikowski’s
agreed upon approach with Mayor Hahn to implement Alternative D—deferring portions of the plan—doesn’t fix
draw backs. Project reviews are set to be piecemeal instead of integrated. Although calling for more reviews,
no assurances preclude unacceptable aspects, like Manchester
Square will be imposed. Although the Manchester Square
GTC is deferred, the attendant people mover is not.
· Do it right the
first time! There are better ways to modernize LAX and make it safe and secure for far less money.
· The approval cycle
for Alternative D is being rushed to judgment. The promised Rand Corporation Overall Evaluation of Safety/Security versus
Cost to be performed and assessed has been divided into stages and is not funded.
· Projects of immediate
need, as Bradley International Terminal improvements, are being done under a filed negative impact declaration without further
review; the argument that Master Plan approval is urgent to allow this is spurious.
· Transportation infrastructure
around LAX is already over stressed. People travel two or three hours to use LAX. This traffic gridlock wastes
large amounts of energy and creates pollution in addition to one of the largest polluters, LAX.
· It takes about 10
years to expand an airport. If capacity remains concentrated at LAX the next time more capacity is needed there will
be no alternatives but to constrain the economy. Slack capacity in outlying airports is currently available but will
disappear if action is not taken soon. Further, population (incompatible land uses) will grow around the other airports
if not addressed now.
· Los Angeles World
Airports, a Department of the City of Los Angeles, owns four airports including outlying ones. It is only now starting to address building
their capacity because the City derives taxes from the businesses surrounding LAX.
· Just Say NO!
Pass a resolution and send letters to your Council members, to support doing it right the first time instead of expending
billions of dollars and then having to fix it.
Another
expansion could be disastrous —Present Concentration of 75% passenger and cargo traffic at LAX risks our economy from
any disaster—We need a regional solution.
The Hahn-Miscikowski Plan
calls for complete approval of the environmental review documents of Alternative D FIRST and then negotiating what will actually
be implemented. This Plan calls for implementing only some of Alternative D initially—the "agreed upon items"
--yet they are not.
Although the Manchester Square Ground Transportation Center Plan is not part of implementation phase one in the Miscikowski Plan, the people
mover that supports it is. The roadway systems in support of the new GTC are to be initiated. The Central Terminal
Area may become closed to auto traffic, but the alternatives to handle parking are not fully implemented. Southern runway
modifications are in the immediate implementation phase one, but several alternative methods remain an option. Bradley
Terminal changes and gate modifications to support the A380 Airbus 600+ passenger aircraft are included in phase one, but
these are also being approved in a separate Notice of Preparation/Environmental Impact Negative Declaration.
A comprehensive review
of project elements can’t be done without taking all of the aspects into consideration at one time. This
is not being done.
Comprehensive, wide-ranging
assessments of each element of the plan are promised as part of a series of controls to be implemented by a Los Angeles City Specific Plan. The controls, we are told, call for effective public hearings.
Yet the even more demanding and comprehensive Master Plan Process which solicited over 3000 comments didn’t change
anything! When the initial Specific Plan was established at the joint Commissions Hearing on June 14 the public received
the documents on the SAME DAY that they were invoked--not much public review, was it?
Congressmen Harman and
Waters issued a joint statement opposing Alternative D and chastised the approach as favoring expediency over security
and safety.
------------------
THERE IS A LESS EXPENSIVE
ALTERNATIVE NAMED ALTERNATIVE E-1...
Basic terminal configuration
left intact. Changes to the concourses represent major
investment costs for cash strapped airlines. Airline security experts indicate that the CTA is security upgradeable
and defensible. Anti-terrorist conditions can be implemented. Further, an optional Lot C drop off area for “commuter”
passengers is to be created to reduce congestion in the CTA and can service as a redundant back up in case of a CTA incident.
A380 Airbus Accommodation; double height gates added at the ends of Bradley. International terminal
and baggage handling areas to be upgraded to facilitate passenger clearance in a more timely manner. Loose gates to
be reconfigured along back of Bradley.
Limited changes of parking
facilities. Consolidated rental car facility created and
moved to Continental City area with freeway access. This multistory facility will house rental car
activity. As the corner of Aviation and Imperial Highways is highly congested, Aviation will be subterranean along LAX
so there is no longer a bottle neck. Lot C will remain the “moderate priced parking” and Lot B will be long
term and employee parking along with the new western area employee parking. Private parking lots will remain fully accessible
and functional.
Green Line transportation
connection will be expanded. Adding to the existing route,
the below grade route will follow the MTA owned right of way north through the Crenshaw area all the way to Union Station.
A regional transportation center will be incorporated at the north-west corner of Century and Aviation to connect all busses
and taxis. Flyaway check in activities will continue to be encouraged.
Northside Development
to house more LAX operations related support and will be built
as a sound barrier to reduce impacts on Westchester-Playa del Rey from on-airport operational noise.
Cargo handling facilities
will remain fully functional on south side with controlled
access as will those on the north and east.
South runway separation
of 50’ more is an accommodation to LAX/Airlines desires.
This relates to the A380 and a desire to address incursion avoidance. Incursion avoidance has not been demonstrated.
Northside runways and concourses are left intact.
Numbers of gates are reduced
to stay at the agreed upon 78 MAP capacity by removing out of
terminal, auxiliary gates that have been incrementally been added since the 1982 Master Plan Approval.
------------------
Southern California aircraft passenger and cargo needs ARE increasing. Currently all of our eggs are in one
basket—LAX. A natural or terrorist catastrophe can devastate the Southern
California economy if LAX has a major incident.
LAX is the fifth busiest airport (second in
cargo). Even since 9/11 cargo demand continues to grow and be concentrated at LAX. Despite the high usage, LAX
has one of the smallest land mass footprints of any large airport. The corresponding sky above it is also limited.
Think about the safety risks. The population around LAX is highly concentrated. It thereby impacts more people than airports
situated in outlying areas.
Transportation infrastructure around LAX is
already over stressed. People travel two or three hours to use LAX. Inconveniences are increasing. Traffic
gridlock wastes large amounts of energy and creates pollution. According to a Times article cargo destined for other
regions is already being diverted around Los Angeles due to the congestion. This is costing jobs.
There is a better way…a regionalized
system.
For even more information: http://www.regionalsolution.org or phone Alliance for a Regional Solution to Airport Congestion (ARSAC)
Val Velasco, President
(310) 827-7411
Denny Schneider, Vice President
(310) 641-4199
Letter to Mayor Hahn from Congresswomen Jane Harman and Maxine Waters
July 14,2004
The Honorable James K Hahn
Office of the Mayor
Los Angeles City Hall
200 North Spring Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Dear Jim:
We are writing to express our disappointment and grave concern with the July 6 action of your Airport
Commission, which seems to give short shrift to essential security issues at Los Angeles International Airport.
In May, you announced that you were directing the RAND Corporation to conduct a thorough cost-benefit
analysis of safety and security at LAX. The contract approved by the commission this week simply does not do that.
The objective of a cost-benefit analysis is to study all the security risks at LAX and determine
which modernization proposals will do the most to protect against the widest array of potential terrorist threats. The scope
of work approved by the commission is far too narrow and confining to meet that promise.
Absent such a full-scale study, any City Council deliberations on a Master Plan and EIR/EIS will
be made in a vacuum. The phased approach endorsed by the commission leaves far too many questions to be answered at a later
date, long after an EIR/EIS has been approved and sent to the FAA. Surely, the security of airport customers, employees and
passengers is threatened by such a rush to judgment.
There is a better way: RAND should be asked to conduct the promised comprehensive cost-benefit analysis,
and the legal issues to support breaking the EIR/EIS into parts should be carefully considered. Once that information is available,
the City of Los Angeles can approve the sensible, consensus elements of the Master Plan EIR/EIS, and explicitly reject those
remaining elements not supported by security concerns and community desire.
Such an approach, backed by sound legal opinion, will make security - not speedy approval - the imperative
of future deliberations. Given the significant terrorist threat to LAX, we can in good conscience do nothing less than that.
Regards,
Jane Harman
Member of Congress
Maxine Waters
Member of Congress
A
message from Mike Gordon, former City of El Segundo Mayor and now a candidate for California State Assembly, 53rd District.
Subject: We still need your help to fight LAX Expansion!!
Thank you for signing our petition
to fight LAX Expansion. You have joined thousands of neighbors in saying “no” to the City of Los Angeles’
plans to expand this airport. To date, we have collected more than 10,000 signatures and we’re well on our way to collecting
thousands more.
And our efforts are paying off!
Just last week, Mayor Jim Hahn conceded there was little support for his plan and instead agreed to support a compromise plan
proposed by Los Angeles City Councilwoman Cindy Miscikowski. This is a victory for all of us and we should be very proud.
But the fight is not yet over.
The compromise plan makes many promises, some of which will be very difficult to keep. In particular,
1.
The compromise does not guarantee that the controversial parts of the Mayor’s plan – those raised in the
text of our petition – will not be implemented. In fact the Mayor’s plan could still go forward by a majority
vote of the L.A. City Council in the future.
2.
The compromise fails to guarantee that airport capacity will be limited to 78.9 million annual passengers.
3.
The compromise fails to stop the proposed Ground Transportation Center (GTC) in Westchester.
4.
The compromise fails to protect airport neighbors – the Southern runway is likely to be moved closer to neighborhoods,
presenting safety, pollution and noise concerns for the communities in the surrounding areas.
In short, the compromise is a
huge leap of faith for us, and does not guarantee that our concerns are being addressed.
We know that our petition has
already made a difference, so we can’t let up in our efforts.
Here’s what you can
do to help. Please forward this e-mail to your friends, neighbors and colleagues, and ask them to join you in signing
the petition. By visiting www.StopLAXExpansion.com, you can sign the petition on-line or download a PDF version of it which you can mail back to me at Mike
Gordon, 214 Main Street, #365, El Segundo, CA
90245.
If you have any questions, please
do not hesitate to contact me at (310) 322-2234 or via e-mail at MikeGordon@friendsofmikegordon.com.
Together we can make a difference!
Regards,
Mike
Mike Gordon
Officials Question Timing of LAX Security Study
LOS ANGELES TIMES July 16, 2004 by Jennifer Oldham, Times Staff Writer
Two federal lawmakers are questioning whether the City Council will have all
the information it needs on security issues at Los Angeles International Airport when council members vote this fall on Mayor
James K. Hahn's modernization plan.
Reps. Jane Harman (D-Venice) and Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles), who represent
airport-area residents, are concerned that the council will have only one part of a two-phase Rand Corp. analysis by September.
In a letter to the mayor, the congresswomen wrote this week that the scope
of the first report was too narrow and would not help the council adopt an LAX plan that protected against the "widest array
of potential terrorist threats."
When Hahn called for the Rand review in May, he said it would "assess the security
components" of his $9-billion modernization plan in time for the City Council vote.
Council members said they hoped
to use it to decide if the mayor's plan adequately addressed security needs at LAX.
But the city's Airport Commission
adopted a two-step approach last week, giving Rand a $291,000 contract to analyze security at the existing facility.
The
think tank will not study the security implications of the specific projects in Hahn's plan until next year.
"Absent
such a full-scale study, any City Council deliberations on a master plan and [environmental documents] will be made in a vacuum,"
Harman wrote.
"The phased approach endorsed by the commission leaves far too many questions to be answered at a later
date, long after [the environmental report] has been approved and sent to the FAA."
Harman commissioned an initial
Rand study, which was released May 14, 2003. It found that concentrating
travelers at a remote facility near the San Diego Freeway could lead to more casualties if an attack occurred.
The
remote check-in center was considered a centerpiece of Hahn's plan.
In the first study, Rand will identify security
weaknesses at the existing facility, including scenarios for how terrorists might attack LAX, which targets would probably
appeal to them and the estimated damage should they attack those sites.
The think tank will also conduct a cost-benefit
analysis on improving security at LAX.
Hahn and Councilwoman Cindy Miscikowski, who drafted an implementation plan
that postpones the most controversial elements of the mayor's proposal, disputed Harman's assertions, saying the first Rand
study would answer the significant questions.
"The mayor is confident that the study conducted by Rand will provide
ample information to the council prior to their vote," said Elizabeth Kaltman, a Hahn spokeswoman.
In addition, Miscikowski's
implementation plan requires the city's airport agency to conduct a security analysis of each project in Hahn's plan before
the projects are allowed to move forward, said David Kissinger, the councilwoman's airport relations deputy.
Harman
also forwarded to the mayor a legal opinion she solicited from Santa Monica-based law firm Chatten-Brown & Associates,
finding that Miscikowski's compromise plan could subject the city to litigation because it postponed projects that were essential
to mitigate noise, air pollution and other effects.
For example, if Los Angeles were to defer building a remote check-in
facility, as Miscikowski proposes, the city could be subject to a lawsuit that would require officials to build the center
because it was considered a mitigation measure, wrote environmental attorney Jan Chatten-Brown.
But Miscikowski disagreed,
saying her plan didn't remove elements from Hahn's proposal precisely because doing so would require the city to redo its
environmental analysis.
Chatten-Brown's opinion "really purports to say exactly what I've been saying all along, and
that is that you can't take out parts of the master plan and keep the environmental documents whole," the councilwoman said.
From: COUNCILWOMAN CINDY MISCIKOWSKI'S
JUNE-JULY 2004 ENEWS
AIRPORT UPDATE- On June 14, a joint hearing of the Board of Airport Commissioners and the City Planning Commission certified
the LAX Master Plan which included my Consensus Plan for LAX. Now it goes to the Los Angeles County government for review
and then Los Angeles City Council. It is important to remember that the Consensus Plan for LAX is still a work in progress
and I am continuing to consult a wide variety of stakeholders for their input on how best to put forward a plan that gets
something done at LAX and that meets the needs of the residential and business communities impacted by the airport. City Council
will likely vote to certify the plan in the Fall, after which it will go to the federal government for approval.
I am grateful to have received feedback from so many people and groups on this plan, and I'd like to take a moment to
clarify a key question that I have heard a few times. The Consensus Plan consists largely of a "specific plan", which is an
urban planning tool that is actually a law. Under the specific plan, the airport cannot build the more controversial parts
of the plan, such as the Manchester Square terminal which I oppose, without extensive public review, new environmental studies
and mandated feedback from a stakeholder group consisting of individuals from a wide variety of backgrounds, including local
residents, local businesses, government, the aviation industry and others.
This means that even though I will be leaving office in a year, the law will remain in place and enjoy all the strengths
and powers of any law. The specific plan's legal standing will force future councils and administrations to consult the communities
before proceeding with capital development at LAX.
I feel that this plan is the strongest legal tool possible that will protect communities around the airport from additional
capacity and geographical expansion. For more details on the Consensus Plan for LAX, please contact David Kissinger of my
staff at (310)568-8772.
Response to Cindy Miscikowski's Newsletter:
Alliance for a Regional Solution to Airport Congestion, ARSAC, is the organization whose
no expansion pledge was signed by Mayor Hahn. LAX expansion is controversial since the Mayor is failing to meet
his signed campaign pledge to limit LAX and to foster a regional solution to airport capacity needs.
ARSAC agrees that the present LAX Master Plan expansion is a critical
issue of importance to the entire City and region because it is the largest public works project ever undertaken. The economic impacts of the Mayor’s Plan on the entire region can be devastating.
Implementation documents approved by the joint Commissions appointed by the
Mayor this month were released to the public the same day that they were approved. Despite strongly antagonistic
positions to the Mayor’s plan by numerous surrounding Cities and other governmental entities, community groups, and
all but one bankrupt airline and it’s affiliates, LAX Expansion plans are being ushered through the approval cycle with
the objective of finalization this fall before the next Mayoral race and before a full cost-benefits evaluation by RAND Corporation.
ARSAC opposition to the plan fostered by Councilmember Cindy Miscikowski focuses
on a call for first approving all of Alternative D including all of the most onerous parts. Councilwoman Miscikowski
tells us that the LAX specific plan is a LA City law. Any city law can still be changed by a simple majority
of the City Council. We continue to await an explanation how a specific plan will be more protective than the entire
master plan process during which over 3000 sets of comments resulted in no changes to Alternative D.
We and others continue to wonder aloud if the approval of the entire Alternative
D would be negated if any of the many onerous aspects of Alternative D such as the building of Manchester Square or the demolition
of perfectly good terminals on the north side to add new taxiways are eliminated in the future. We expect that those
who might benefit from Alternative D construction will sue to force completion of Alternative D once it has been approved.
The Miscikowski Plan is really "the insiders’ compromise plan" rather
than "consensus plan" because there is no consensus for the items being approved. The Miscikowski Plan provides a false
expectation to the public that only the "green lighted" projects will be built. Nothing in the documentation we have
seen to date actually says that. Further, the Miscikowski Plan provides an easy way for other Councilmembers to
say that they oppose Alternative D and yet vote in favor of it.
We are circulating a petition noting that Alternative D or its derivitive is
a bad plan. We urge you to help us collect signatures and to contact your Councilmembers and tell them that we
want a plan that is done right the first time--not a plan that spends several billion dollars and hopes that the rest will
be done correctly. The web address for a copy of the petition or for our speaker’s bureau to answer any of
your questions is http://www.regionalsolution.org .
Sincerely Yours,
Dennis J Schneider, Vice President - ARSAC
To the LA Neighborhood Councils, from Mayor Hahn and Councilwoman Miscikowski:
June 23, 2004
Dear Los Angeles Neighborhood Councils:
On June 14, 2004, the Les Angeles Board of Airport Commissioners and the City Planning Commission voted
unanimously to advance the Consensus Plan as part of the LAX Master Plan process. As the extensive media coverage indicates:
the emerging consensus o n implementation of the LAX Master Plan has moved us an important step closer to City Council review
and action by year-end.
It is important for the neighborhoods of Los Angeles to understand
this important public works program and how it relates to our overall commitment to a regional approach to airports. We asked
the staff of Los Angeles World Airports (LAWA) to offer all Neighborhood Councils informational briefings ever the next several
months.
If you would like your Neighborhood
Council to receive a tailored presentation (anywhere from 10 minutes to 30 minutes) at a future meeting, please contact Barbara
Yamamoto at (310) 417-0445 or at byamamoto@lawa.org . Please provide your first
and second choice for a meeting time and date. Prior to the briefing, LAWA will follow-up with you to determine areas of interest
so the briefing can address the issues that matter most to your neighborhood.
The Neighborhood Council system was
created to empower stake holders to represent the voice of their community. That is why we are, committed to ensure you are,
kept informed on important projects and programs underway in our City.
Thank you for your attention and interest.
We hope you will take this opportunity to schedule an LAX Master Plan briefing at one of your future Neighborhood Council
meetings.
Very truly yours, [original signed]
JAMES K. HAHN,
MAYOR
CINDY MISCIKOWSKI,
COUNCILMEMBER, COUNCIL DISTRICT 11
A response to Mayor Hahn's and Councilwoman Miscikowski's letter to the LA Neighborhood
Councils
Alliance for a Regional Solution to Airport Congestion
322 Culver Boulevard, Ste. 231 Playa del Rey, CA 90293
(310) 827-7411 info@regionalsolution.org
June
28, 2004
Department of Neighborhood Empowerment
Greg Nelson, Department Manager
Ref:
Your e-mail Friday,
June 25, 2004 4:49 PM Subject: DONE: LAX Master
Plan
ARSAC
agrees that the present LAX Master Plan expansion is a critical issue of importance to the entire City because it is the largest
public works project ever undertaken. The economic impacts of the Mayor's Plan
on the entire region can be devastating. This issue is controversial since the
Mayor is failing to meet his signed campaign pledge to limit LAX and to foster a regional solution to airport capacity needs.
Despite strongly antagonistic positions
to the Mayor's plan by numerous surrounding Cities and other governmental entities, community groups, and all but one bankrupt
airline and it's affiliates, LAX Expansion plans are being ushered through the approval cycle with the objective of finalization
this fall before the next Mayoral race and before a full evaluation by RAND Corporation.
Implementation documents approved by his joint Commission hearing this month were released to the public the same day
as their approval.
This past year DONE advanced a training
session to address the LAX issue at its citywide conference in the Convention Center.
All sides of the issue were discussed. Your most recent e-mail fails in
that fairness test. Your e-mail calls for NCs to directly contact LAWA for a
presentation. LAWA presentations are very polished to support their recommendations,
but offer no alternative information. We have found that it is not only what
is presented that is of concern, but what has been neglected. Several NCs have
already passed resolutions opposing the Mayor's plan and the attempt to keep it alive by deferring decisions on parts of it.
Since DONE's primary purpose is to
foster grass roots participation in government, we call upon you to distribute this letter, the attached petition noting why
this is a bad plan, and an e-mail address for our speakers bureau info@regionalsolution.org.
In case we would like to provide more
information on request of a neighborhood council leader, we request a copy of the e-mail list you have used for your distribution
of the Mayor's letter.
Sincerely
Yours,
Dennis J Schneider, Vice President
P.S.
Under the California Public Records Act, you have ten days to determine whether to comply with the request, as follows:
California Government Code §6256. Any person may receive a copy of any identifiable public record or copy thereof. Upon request,
an exact copy shall be provided unless impracticable to do so. Computer data shall be provided in a form determined by the
agency. Each agency, upon any request for a copy of records shall determine within
10 days after the receipt of such request whether to comply with the request and shall immediately notify the person making
the request of such determination and the reasons therefore.
The following is from:
BERNARD C. PARKS
COUNCILMEMBER 8TH DISTRICT
DEAR SUPPORTER,
I HAVE RECENTLY TAKEN AN ALTERNATIVE POSITION ON THE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN. THIS PLAN WAS RECENTLY SUBMITTED TO THE JOINT
MEETING OF THE BOARD OF AIRPORT AND THE CITY'S PLANNING COMMISSIONS.. PLEASE LET ME KNOW WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT THE 8TH DISTRICT'S
EFFORTS..THE REFERRED ATTACHMENT "TASK FORCE" REPORT CAN BE LOCATED ON THE 8TH DISTRICT WEB-SITE..
BERNARD C. PARKS
COUNCILMEMBER 8TH DISTRICT
LOS ANGELES CITY COUNCIL
200 N. SPRING ST. #460
LOS ANGELES CA. 90012
213-473-7008
213-485-7683 (FAX)
WWW.LACITY.ORG/COUNCIL/CD8
The Council member is opposed to the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR)
and the Final Master Plan (Alternative D) which were submitted for approval and adoption to the Board of Airport and Planning
Commissions.
For more go to:
http://www.lacity.org/council/cd8/Community_Reaction_Report.pdf
Dennis J Schneider, Vice President - ARSAC
on Councilman Park's plan:
Councilmember Parks believes
that it is a more honest approach to the LAX Master Plan questions to actually make a decision--now--about to what will be
done with LAX. Further, his plan is consistent with the compromise, smaller changes, proposed by
many community organizations and the airlines who agree that LAX needs to be updated but without creating the largest
public works project ever.
I would like to add that when Councilman Parks gave testimony at the Joint Commission Hearings on LAX Expansion, he
said that the environmental reports were outdated and not properly done. He said that the noise and air pollution on LAX neighboring
communities needs to be better mitigated. (Martin
Rubin)
|
