Angry Residents Voice Opposition to Airport Expansion Plan

It was only seven months ago that Bea Carenco, 62, and her husband paid off the mortgage on their two-bedroom home in Hawthorne. In four months Carenco’s husband plans to retire. So when she heard that a proposal to expand the Hawthorne Municipal Airport would require the removal of her home as well as up to 172 others, she got very upset.

“At our age this is not the time to start over again,” said the 25-year resident. “We planned to spend the rest of our lives in this house.”

Carenco joined more than 100 Hawthorne residents who went to City Hall on Wednesday night to voice their opposition to the proposed expansion. The meeting, which was interrupted several times by applause and shouts from angry residents, was to gather public reaction to six alternatives for the airport’s future and to provide information about the environmental impact caused by any expansion.

The residents’ anger was not diminished by the city’s promise that they would get fair market value for their homes and money to help them move.

It was not the first time these residents have worried about being relocated. The homes in the middle-class residential neighborhood north of the airport narrowly missed being razed several years ago to make way for the Century Freeway. And in recent months Hawthorne planners have suggested that the area be rezoned from residential to freeway commercial, which would also lead to condemnation.

“The city has screwed around with us for 20 years,” an elderly man in the front row said amid shouts of “Amen” and “Hear, Hear.”

“First it was the proposed freeway and now this,” he said. “I’m not very happy with the City of Hawthorne.”

This was the third forum held by the 12-member advisory committee to discuss the six alternatives for the airport. The options were proposed by a consulting firm hired to update the city’s 1979 airport master plan, which provides guidelines for its future use.

The committee’s next meeting will be in early August.

Representatives of the Irvine-based consulting firm, Foresite West, provided an inch-thick planning document outlining six options, including four for expansion, one for no growth and one for airport closure. Both the no-growth and the airport-closing options are not recommended by the consultants, and it is considered unlikely that the council will choose either.

All the expansion plans would involve removing homes in an area north of the airport, which is bounded by Prairie Avenue, 120th Street, Crenshaw Boulevard and Northrop Aircraft’s design and development facilities.

The most conservative of the four plans would require removal of 72 homes to make 11.6 additional acres available for airport development. The most drastic calls for removing 173 residences to provide 25 1/2 more acres. The alternative preferred by the consultants would provide 20 more acres for airport use by removing 106 residences.

Robert D. Trimborn, airport administrator, said expansion would not only provide much needed aircraft parking, but would attract new businesses to Hawthorne and increase city revenue through sales and business taxes. The expansion would not change the size or direction of the airport runway, he said.

“Although demand use of the airport has recently dropped, we expect demand for the use of the airport to increase greatly in the next few years,” Trimborn said.

Representatives from Foresite West reminded the capacity crowd that no decision has been made and that the recommendation had still not been presented to the City Council. But audience members were not put at ease.

“How about considering the social/economic impact on the people who are going to lose their homes,” shouted one man while the consultants discussed noise and air quality issues.

Fair Market Price

James Holley, one of the consultants, told the audience that if an expansion plan were approved and houses were removed, the city would abide by California Redevelopment Law, which requires the city to pay a fair market price for the homes and provide financial assistance to relocate the residents.

“We will go out of our way to protect the rights of these people,” Trimborn said after the meeting. He noted that financial assistance for renters in the area would be included. But that was not much consolation to Carenco or her neighbors.

“I don’t know what they are supposed to give us for what we have,” she said. “It looks like a loss all the way around.”

Trimborn said he sympathized with the residents but reminded them that they will have a chance to voice their opposition when the proposal is before the City Council.

Trimborn argued that improvements to the 46-year-old airport are badly needed. He said land transportation has become so congested that the demand for corporate and business flights are expected to increase. Improving the facilities at Hawthorne Municipal Airport would attract these flights, he argued.

The proposed expansion also would capitalize on a growing demand for storage place for small aircraft, Trimborn said. The airport has a waiting list of 55 applicants for tie-down parking spaces and 141 hangars, he said. It has not been estimated how much more income the expansion would generate for the city, he said.