Failure to Address Demand Will Harm the Community

Van Nuys Airport is a critical and vital engine that drives the economic health of the entire San Fernando Valley and beyond.

The contribution of the airport to the Valley is in the vicinity of $1.2 billion per year, accounting for 3,400 jobs directly at the airport and for 6,500 indirect and multiplier-effect jobs, according to a Los Angeles World Airports impact study.

And this is just the measurable effect. The presence of the airport is a major attraction to big business, the entertainment industry and corporate headquarters. There are at least 40 major corporate users of Van Nuys Airport. Can we risk the possibility of those corporations moving their thousands of jobs and multimillions of dollars of input into our Valley somewhere else by curtailing airport operations? I certainly don’t think it is worth the risk.

Does this mean we should not address the noise problem? (Yes Virginia, there is a noise problem, and it is significant.) No, it does not. It means we need to balance the economic benefit with the detriment to the people affected by airport noise.

The Van Nuys Airport master plan is in the final stages of the approval process. Let us remember what a master plan is: It is a land-use plan and only a land-use plan; it is not an operational plan and not a leasing plan.

There are legal constraints. The quit-claim deed under which the city of Los Angeles acquired the airport property requires that it be used for aviation purposes only. Any non-aviation use must be approved by the Federal Aviation Administration.

Further, federal regulations prohibit land-use plans from discriminating among types of aircraft. The aviation use designation is therefore open to all types of aircraft. The master plan’s opponents are doing the same thing the folks in Burbank are doing, demanding of the airport and city something the airport and city have no power to grant. This is disingenuous at best; obstructive and destructive at worst.

The master plan must address the future. We are not in the situation of, “Build it and they will come.” We are in the situation of, “They are coming whether we build it or not.” To not address the forecasted demand would be both irresponsible and detrimental to the airport and the community.

*

The “preferred alternative” put forth by the airport can barely accommodate projected need to 2020. If we restrict the land at the airport, we create a scarce resource that is highly priced and thus drive out all the small, privately owned propeller aircraft. We create a jet-only airport, as only the large, expensive and nosier corporate jets would be able to afford the facility.

So what is the solution to the noise problem? First and foremost, the mandate of the FAA must be changed. The FAA has made it very clear that local noise issues are, were and ever shall be local issues in which the FAA will not become involved. The problem with this is the FAA has absolute jurisdiction over anything that can actually affect noise, such as flight paths, minimum altitudes, takeoff and landing parameters, etc. Our representatives in Congress must make the FAA change its tune and become an agency that responds to local problems and helps solve them. Are you listening Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Sherman Oaks)?

The FAA is, at the moment, the perpetrator of the problem, rather than the purveyor of the solution, as it should be. In the meantime, lets put some teeth into the “Fly Friendly” program and fine those that violate it.

*

The city must also do its part. Los Angeles allowed residences to be built adjacent to the airport. This was a major mistake, one the city must correct without hurting the airport. The City Council should enact an immediate and permanent moratorium on any new noise-impacted uses near the airport. It should buy out any homeowner or property owner who wants out of the area and, over time, convert the entire area to non-noise-impacted uses. This is the only real and permanent solution: Get the homes away from the airport.

So let’s have a Van Nuys Airport master plan that accommodates the increased demand while dealing only with that which is appropriate to a land-use plan; let’s change the mandate of the FAA, and let’s stop demanding what the city and airport cannot give.