LAX Expansion and Air Pollution

The author of “Airport Expansion” (letter, Feb. 28) is under the misconception that L.A. Councilwoman Ruth Galanter or someone else proposes the total relocation of LAX to Palmdale.

California’s population is on the increase, and the numbers of LAX’s air passengers and its volume of air cargo are rising much faster. Presently, LAX is one of the smallest international airports; it was not originally designed to handle tens of millions of travelers and triple the volume of cargo over its current capacity.

Over-congestion causes unsafe conditions, excessive noise, unmanageable ground traffic and air pollution far in excess of permissible standards. These problems will only be compounded if uncontrolled expansion at this location continues.

The need for other Southern California airports to help handle the overflow of LAX cannot be denied. An airport at Palmdale will have to be developed sooner or later, and the longer this is delayed, the greater the problems and the higher the costs. If not Palmdale, then what?

ANDREW STEFANSKI

Westchester

*

Hazardous pollution in L.A. is 426 times higher than the EPA limit (March 1). The source of the pollution is supposedly cars and diesel engines. But what about airplanes? The number of airplanes over the South Bay increased tremendously last year. They are flying lower now, increasing air and noise pollution. The 405 Freeway is nearly always a parking lot. The noise from the planes wakes us at night. What will happen after the expansion of LAX?

Nobody cares about those of us living in the South Bay area. Nobody listens to us. Do L.A.’s officials care about people, or only about businesses and money?

MARINA GURVICH

Manhattan Beach