LAX’s Big Problem Is on the Ground : Clean air: It’s the region’s pollution hot spot, so the airport must reduce vehicular traffic.

Southern California’s aggressive proposals to control the country’s worst air pollution, from banning charcoal-lighter fluid to reformulating hair sprays, make national news. Despite dramatic advances in reducing direct emissions from vehicles and industry, we are still not facing up to one of the largest pollution sources in the South Coast Basin: Los Angeles International Airport.

LAX is Los Angeles’ air pollution hot spot. More trips originate and end at the airport than any other destination in the entire region. Recent estimates suggest that LAX is responsible for the generation of almost 28 million vehicle trips a year. Moreover, airport management has ambitious plans to increase the number of passengers traveling through LAX that would ultimately add 10 million vehicle trips each year to and from the airport.

LAX is owned by the city and is operated by a city agency, the Department of Airports. Its management has the responsibility of regulating all ground transportation at the airport. A special division of the Department of Airports, the Landside Operations Bureau, is specifically responsible for managing traffic, parking and ground transportation. But so far, this bureau has been little more than a name on the door.

Why is the airport unwilling to join the thousands of other industries and public institutions that must adapt to air pollution reduction measures? Simply put, the management of the airport does not want to accept any responsibility for ground-level pollution.

Ultimately, the airport’s reluctance is based in the fear that if LAX management assumed responsibility for resolving this problem they would have to spend money and effort on resolving an environmental issue. Instead, the airport is intent on increasing the airport’s role as a pollution source rather than reducing the volume of emissions from the ground traffic it generates. Yet, the airport has almost unlimited ability to raise revenue to solve the traffic problems it creates by raising the fees it charges airlines to take off and land.

The lack of traffic management is readily apparent when one travels to LAX. The scene is one of pure chaos--extreme traffic congestion from passenger cars, buses, shuttle vans and others on both the arrival and departure levels at LAX.

What might a comprehensive traffic reduction plan for LAX look like? For one, it could effect positive incentives for airport travelers to take mass transit. This includes both buses (such as the Van Nuys Flyaway) and high occupancy airport shuttle services. Passengers are not likely to take advantage of such services, unless airport management makes some tough decisions about allocating curb space and provides clear, comprehensive information available to arriving passengers. At the same time, inside space for parking at the airport needs to be reduced and prices raised to reinforce the message that single-passenger cars are not an acceptable way to get to LAX.

The curbs are jammed with hundreds of vans hustling for customers. Many travelers get on a van once and really get taken for a ride--far out of their way. Victims of such runarounds usually give up on shuttle vans and go back to driving, either their own cars or single-passenger taxis.

Competition among transportation companies can help keep prices down and sources up, but competition is not the only value at stake here. Ultimately, if the airport won’t face up to its responsibilities and develop a ground traffic management plan to reduce the number of vehicles coming into LAX, then the Air Quality Management District will move to require every major indirect source of air pollution, including the airport, to adopt a mandatory plan for reducing vehicle miles traveled.

Wouldn’t it be better for both the airport and the region if airport management showed some leadership by cleaning up its entry and exit mess?