# Council BansFasterPlanes atAirport

November 28

-- Flying in the face ofthreatened federal litigation, the City Council approved an ordinance Tuesday to restrict faster, larger jets atthe 62-year-old Santa Monica Airport. The unanimous vote

--which bans C and D aircraft with approach speeds faster than 121 knots

-- comes after fives years ofnegotiations with the FAA, which opposes Cityproposals to shorten the runway and add safety areas ateither end that abide by current federal standards. City officials and residents who livenear the airport worry that soaring jettraffic

-- from 4,829 jet operations in 1994 to 18,100 lastyear --isputting neighboring homes, aswell as pilots, in danger. Before casting their vote, council members blasted aproposal byFederal Aviation Administration officials to address the problem bypurchasing neighboring homes. "I think we went above and beyond the callof duty trying to get somewhere with the FAA, but itisjust not happening when we get aletter that suggests we seriously consider buying up homes," saidMayor Richard Bloom. "The FAA is clearly not paying attention to the beliefs and norms in Santa Monica," Bloom said. ''We support letting people keep their homes and taking awayhousing when there is another reasonable alternative is offensive and absurd." Anticipating the council action, FAA officials vowed to take action Monday. ''What you are considering by this proposed ordinance is flatlyillegal asdrafted," Kirk Shaffer, FAA associate administrator for airports, wrote in aletter to the City. "The City should expect the agency to expeditiously use its authority and allavailable means, ifthe ordinance is adopted asproposed, to ensure that allfederal rights, investments and obligations areprotected and that no aircraft is denied access to SMO." The threatened litigation

--which willlikelytieup the new lawin the courts

--isnot the first time the City restricts jets and is sued by the federal agency.
In 1979, the Citybanned some jet access to the airport, whose B-II classification means the airport is suitable for category A and B aircraft with approach speeds slower than 121 knots. But litigation resulted in a 1984 settlement agreement governing airport operations until 2015. The agreement, FAA officials say,allows newer category C and D aircraft, which tend to be larger and faster jets. Shaffer, who said larger jets have always used the airport, said his administration is obligated to keep access available to C and D aircraft, because Santa Monica Airport is animportant reliever airport in the national system ofairports.

EXHIBIT 

# I.2:7ZJ1'

# J..JCity officials contend that the airport does not meet the FAA's own safety standards for B-II

airports and for airports that would accommodate C and D aircraft. To stop A and B aircraft overruns, SMa would need 300-foot runway safety areas atboth ends ofits sole runway, airport officials said. "The ordinance isnecessary because the airport has unique circumstances

--homes arejust across the street from the runway ends and within 300 feet ofthe runway ends," said Robert Trimbom, acting airport director. "Dangers resulting from homes being in close proximity to the runway and topography (the airport sits on aplateau) are worsened by the change in the fleet." Federal standards for C and D aircraft are 1,000- foot runway safety areas atboth ends ofarunway, Trimbom said.
For SMa, Trimbom said Shaffer has proposed asubstandard runway safety area and another inadequate safety enhancement called an Engineered Materials Arresting System (EMAS), abed of crushed concrete designed to capture the landing gear ofawayward aircraft. The combined runway safety area and EMAS bed, at 130 feet with a25-foot runway end setback, that Shaffer is suggesting does not meet the federal government's published standards and willnot catch any aircraft careening at speeds more than 40knots, said Trimborn.
"The number of faster aircraft has increased dramatically in recent years, faster aircraft that could travel further into residential neighborhoods in the event ofan overrun," Trimbom said. "Any minimal inconvenience to those traveling byprivate jet aircraft and any minor impact on commerce willbe greatly outweighed by the benefit ofprotecting the safety of airport neighborhood and the flyingpublic." Trimbom saidthe City's ordinance banning C and D aircraft at SMa would only "minimally impact" airtravel because only sixplanes in those categories are based atthe airport and fractional-share jetowners can easilytrade down to A or B aircraft. Municipal airports inLong Beach, Van Nuys, Burbank and Torrance-- and Los Angeles Intemational Airport

-- can accommodate C and D aircraft flying in and out ofthe Southem California region.
The ordinance willnot significantly reduce airand noise pollution at SMa, Trimbom said, nor willitban jets because many models ofjet aircraft can be classified asA or B. Some airport operators worried the ordinance would hurt their businesses, which were tailored to the 23-year-old settlement agreement between the City and FAA. "The 1984 setdement agreement was material inducement to the development of our parcel," saidJay Becker, arepresentative for an airport leaseholder. ''We spent millions ofdollars relying upon the fact that access to aircraft that could become our customers would be guaranteed.
"If you eliminate the top portion ofour clientele, how do you expect to compensate us?" Becker asked Council members. ''Would you write us abig check?" "A big part ofour growth comes from having an aircraft based in Santa Monica," saidDennis Gomez, director of aircraft operations for an investment company that has aC aircraft. ''We are acategory Caircraft operator, would be affected by this ordinance and therefore oppose it," Gomez said.

Council members were not persuaded.
"I have sympathy for those people whose business plans are affected," said Council member Kevin McKeown, "but in the interest of safety, we as aresponsible City Council can do nothing but pass the ordinance." Cathy Larson, co-chair ofthe Friends of Sunset Park Airport Committee, isconcemed the proposed ordinance willbe used by the FAA as a bargaining tool to establish asubstandard runway safety area and EMAS bed. "The City Council should direct staff not to trade the aircraft performance plan for alesser option," Larson said. "The tone ofMr. Shaffer's letter only confirms that the FAA isinterested in preserving access over the safety ofairport neighbors." In addition to his runway safety area and EMAS bed suggestion, Shaffer wrote inhis letter that many communities throughout the United States have considered home buyouts in cases where airport officials could not establish the standard FAA protection zone because neighborhoods are too close to airport property.
Shaffer said home buyouts are "the only certain way to remove allrisk ofharm to persons or property on the ground in those areas." Council member Bobby Shriver said airport neighbors should not expect asudden halt tojettraffic because the FAA may seek an injunction while apotentially arduous federal litigation process makes its way through the courts. Federal law trumps local and state laws, Shriver said, and the City could lose the case given the FAA's administrative and regulatory power. Litigation may have apositive effect, Shriver said, because airport neighbors can use the case to lobby their local Congressional representatives to pass new legislation governing airports in favor of safety for nearby residents.
A December 5meeting about the airport willbe held inWashington, D.C. that willinclude City officials, FAA officials and U.S. House Reps Jane Harman, John Mica,James Oberstar and Henry Waxman. ''We received acallfrom Congressman Waxman's district and Washington staff requesting that the Cityuse this rare opportunity to win safety enhancements for our airport," said Kate Vemez, the Santa Monica City Manager's Office assistant for community and government relations. After the meeting inWashington, D.C., Vemez said the City Council willhold apublic hearing inJanuary to review new findings.'

I http:«www.surfsantarnon ica.corn.ssrn

__ site/the] ookout/ news/News-Z007!Novernber20071 '

__

28_07

__ Council ,Bans_Faster _Planes_ at_Airport.htrn