Booklet Hopes to Give Flight to Airport Ideas : Lindbergh Field: Pamphlet outlines alternatives and is designed to spark debate in public forums.

Public debate on the decades-old controversy of whether to build a new international airport in San Diego County took a new turn Wednesday with the release of a 15-page booklet designed to spark public discussion on a series of airport options.

“We want to get back to some common sense and thoughtfulness. We want to create the space for public discussion. . . . We need in order to think clearly and to see the public interest in issues that are very complex,” said Charles Nathanson, executive director of San Diego Dialogue, a nonpartisan organization composed of about 80 business leaders, media representatives, scholars, educators and civic leaders.

Faced with tough questions about whether and where to build a new airport in San Diego County, the group produced the booklet to explain the pros and cons of four alternatives to the airport question.

The choices range from building a binational airport that would straddle the U.S.-Mexico boarder at Otay Mesa to studying whether Southern California even needs another international airport.

Dialogue members hope the booklet, which they plan to distribute to the public along with a questionnaire, will pave the way for discussion of the controversial issue in the style of college classroom debates.

“You need to build some sort of rational consensus in order to solve any difficult problem, but we’ve lost that art. . . . One of the reasons we’ve lost it is that we’ve become advocates rather than analysts,” said Dialogue chairman William McGill.

To reintroduce the “lost” art of consensus building, McGill and his colleagues designed the booklet to be used in public debate and in group discussions accompanied by moderators to help understand the complex issues that surround each alternative.

Toward that goal, graduates of LEAD San Diego, a leadership training program for young executives, have volunteered to moderate discussions throughout the county at the public’s request.

Questionnaires have been included in the booklet to gauge the public’s response to airport options and issues. At the end of May, Dialogue members will present the public and the San Diego City Council with preliminary findings based on the completed questionnaires.

The decision by San Diegans to build a new airport or make do with Lindbergh Field will dictate whether the region will become a major gateway to the Pacific Rim and Mexico.

Many proponents of building a new airport favor the TwinPorts alternative, which involves developing a binational airport jointly with Mexico on a 3,000-acre site in Otay Mesa that would be used in conjunction with Tijuana’s Rodriguez Field.

Although such a plan would be a first step toward overcoming a history of transportation isolationism between the United States and Mexico, it would probably mean the closure of Lindbergh Field, Nathanson said. The border site would concentrate both the positive and negative effects of a new airport in South County.

Two other alternatives involve Miramar Naval Air Station, a major training, support and repair base for fighter jets.

Relocating to Miramar, however, would be a tough sell to La Jolla residents and the military in particular, which would probably have to leave the base, Nathanson said. In addition, moving the military would be costly, and there’s no guarantee that the airport could generate the volume of air traffic needed to pay for itself.

Another alternative seeks to expand San Diego’s existing airport by acquiring the Marine Corps Recruit Depot, the 451 acres immediately north of Lindbergh Field.

Doubling the size of Lindbergh Field would permit the airport to offer direct overseas flights, Nathanson said. But the option lacks a long-term economic stimulus that would accompany a new airport.

Critics say doubling Lindbergh Field would cost in the neighborhood of $500 million, but the resulting airport still wouldn’t be big enough to be a major gateway to the Pacific Rim and Mexico, Nathanson said.

At the other end of the spectrum are those who support yet another alternative: deferring a decision altogether.

Proponents of the final option would use the lag time to assess whether it would make more sense to improve San Diego as a link to other major airports rather than building a new airport or expanding Lindbergh Field, Nathanson said.

Building a new airport in another county is also viewed by some as a way to meet Southern California’s growing air traffic demands without burdening San Diego County with the expenses, risks and noise, Nathanson said. But the proposal to build in another area would also leave the county void of a long-term economic plan.

Included in the booklet are expanded arguments by critics and advocates of each alternative. Those interested in obtaining a copy of the booklet can call the Dialogue office at 534-3435.