Questions Needing Answers on Airport Issue
It’s overcast and the type of weather that makes you want to cuddle up with a good report from the FAA on how to size an airport terminal.
I have been reading all weekend on the FAA’s recommendations, consultant recommendations, other airport terminal projects and the proposed Long Beach Airport terminal improvements. And I have a number of issues that I will ask to be addressed at Tuesday’s Council meeting:
Size: Again, what I have found is that airport terminal sizing is based upon “peak demand” which is a formula calculating how many passengers (not planes) use the airport during the day and an estimate of projected growth for the airport. The rough figure given by FAA (which also cautions of overestimating size) is 150 square feet x the “peak demand” figure for the airport. In other words, if the “peak demand” is 900 passengers then the needed square footage would be 135,000 square feet. (adjust accordingly.) FAA provides a handy sheet that airports can use to calculate their peak demand — and I found it very interesting that one needs to take into account the type of plane and the capacity of these planes — which is why Long Beach could see more passengers coming to the airport and still keep the same number of planes.
Airlines Suing: The FAA leaves the decision making to the local jurisdiction as to what constitutes “reasonable access to airport facilities.” I cannot find one instance of an airline suing a city because they won’t expand an airport. Threatened suits have all been around the issue of municipal airports not giving certain airlines access to existing gates at an airport.
Type of Airport: Long Beach is not a “hub” and 40-60% of its flights are not “long haul.” Therefore, we don’t need the holding areas and the concession areas that those airports do need. We need improved space and reconfigured space.
Airport Master Plan: Where is our master plan for the airport? How big do we want to grow? We need a plan that shows all uses — cargo, general aviation, commercial. The proposed improvements only address the commercial segment of our airport. What about the rest? How do the other segments of the airport impact our commercial and commuter airtraffic and space needs?
Costs: What is the price tag on the proposed improvements? How will they be financed? Who will pay for them?
Councilmembers Rae Gabelich, O’Donnell and Uranga have placed an item on the agenda which would incorporate some of the requests of the appellants regarding the EIR. I was asked to sign on late Thursday (the deadline for the agenda) and I would have, but I wanted two issues strengthened: 1) I do not think it will protect the city/residents by requiring an EIR after we exceed 4.2 million annual passengers — that’s like closing the barn door after the horse got out. We need to be clear that we will not build capacity beyond 4.2 million annual passeners; 2) I want language regarding that the city will not undertake this terminal improvement without securing adequate financial resources that do not in any way impact the city’s budget.
Stay tuned. Tuesday is going to be very interesting.
