|
By Anita Varghese
Special to The Lookout
June 28 -- The City of Santa Monica is gearing up
for a crucial August meeting with the Federal Aviation Administration
over runway safety enhancements at Santa Monica Airport.
Agency officials drew the ire of residents who live near
the airport after the FAA abruptly proposed a new runway plan
that further curbs proposed safety measures at the airport
near the southeastern edge of the City.
Announced at a March Airport Commission meeting, the move
took City staff by surprise and prompted them to present an
update to the City Council Tuesday. (see
story)
“Every time we think we are moving toward some resolution,
the FAA changes its position,” said Council member Ken
Genser. “The FAA should provide a level of safety to
every resident who lives near any side of the airport. We
are frustrated with the length of time this is taking.”
City staff recently visited FAA offices in Washington, D.C.
to review the agency’s plans for the airport and relay
public opinions regarding runway safety, which led to the
scheduling of an August 14 public hearing.
“The FAA wants to bring this issue to closure, and
I think the August 14 meeting would be an opportunity for
the City to make a big decision,” said Robert Trimborn,
Santa Monica Airport’s acting director.
Discussions between the City and the FAA involve a concept
called declared distances and energy absorbing materials,
EMAS or Energy Materials Arresting System.
Declared distances create areas on runways that serve as
an aircraft overrun area.
EMAS is a crushable concrete bed that absorbs aircraft energy
and captures an airplane’s landing gear. EMAS is designed
to bring an aircraft to a stop within the boundaries of an
airport.
Santa Monica Airport has no setup to slow an aircraft down
or stop an aircraft from careening past the runways.
An FAA proposal currently on the table features a combination
of a 130-foot EMAS bed with a 25-foot lead-in area for a total
runway safety area of 155 feet.
The agency has also pledged to study the effectiveness of
imbedding the entire 155-foot EMAS system within a 300-foot
declared distance area.
“Because of the close proximity of homes to the runway
ends, the City must demand an effectiveness rating of at least
90 percent,” said Kathy Larson, a representative from
Friends of Sunset Park.
“Of course the community would prefer a 100-percent
effectiveness rating, but the way to achieve that would be
to close the airport,” Larson said.
Current FAA regulations on airport layouts reflect newer
practices that maximize safe operation of aircraft at airports.
While the regulations apply to new airports or new facilities
at existing airports, they are not imposed upon existing airports
such as 88-year-old Santa Monica Airport, unless those airports
undergo major changes to their facilities.
“Everybody from pilots to passengers to residents would
be better off if we shorten the runway and make a safer EMAS
than what is being proposed now,” said Council member
Bob Holbrook. “This is a matter we will not take lightly.”
| 
