City begins enforcing ban
CITY HALL On the day before a ban on larg-er, faster jet aircraft was to go into effect at the Santa Monica Airport, officials with the FAA filed a cease and desist order calling on City Hall to put the decision on hold until the federal agency can complete an internal investigation.
City officials said Wednesday that they planned to proceed with the ban on Category C and D aircraft at 12:01 a.m. today and will have officers with the Santa Monica Police Department issuing citations to pilots or operators who break the law.
“The City Council has decided that the city must go forward with the implementation of the ordinance to protect public safety, so we are proceeding,” said Kate Vernez, assistant to the city manager.
The FAA claims the ban is likely unlawful because it would restrict access to aircraft that currently have the right to land at the airport.
The council enacted the ban in March after roughly six years of negotiations with the FAA failed to generate an agreeable plan that would improve runway safety at the airport.
City Hall and the FAA have been at odds over operations at the airport for years, with federal officials resorting to legal action to prevent City Hall from enacting a management plan that called for the elimination of larger aircraft. That led to a settlement agreement good through 2015, at which time many residents and city officials hope they will be able to gain more control over flights.
City officials are concerned about the lack of runway safety measures to protect residents against the possibility of jets overrunning the runway. Some homes are located within 300 feet of the ends of the runway, and the number of Category C and D aircraft using the airport has increased by about 30 percent over time.
Combine that with the fact that the airport has no runway protection zones or safety areas to protect against a possible runway overrun, which city officials believe are the makings of a possible disaster in which many lives could be lost.
The FAA has made several offers to install runway safety areas and collapsible concrete at the west end of the runway to protect against overruns. The concrete, called an Emergency Material Arresting System (EMAS), is a precautionary safety measure protecting against aircraft from overshooting the runway and into homes. It is meant to handle planes traveling at up to 70 knots.
The 70-knot EMAS would be designed to stop roughly 97 percent of operations at the airport and 90 percent of C and D classified jets. The enhanced safety measure would consume more runway than the 40-knot EMAS, which the FAA previously proposed and city officials turned down as being insufficient.
Along with the enhanced EMAS bed, the FAA also offered to reduce noise and pollution by changing the alignment of aircraft on Runway 21 where the majority of operations take place, adjusting the line of planes so that emissions go down the taxiway instead of toward nearby homes. The FAA is also offering adding information about the noise abatement procedures and lack of runway safety areas through electronic notifications sent to pilots who file their flight plans into or out of Santa Monica.
The FAA has also suggested that City Hall look into purchasing homes at the west end of the runway to create protection zones, something elected officials are opposed to given the lack of housing in Santa Monica and the impact the plan would have on homeowners.
“We’ve worked very hard for nearly six years to come to an agreement with the city that would satisfy safety concerns and maintain safe access to the airport...,” said Ian Gregor, spokesman for the FAA. “We made multiple safety proposals and the city rejected all of them. Our goal has always been and continues to be reaching an agreement with the city.”
The FAA remains willing and ready to move forward with safety proposals presented in the past, Gregor said.
“We certainly hope the city abides by the cease and desist order,” Gregor said.
If not, the FAA could file suit. City officials said they are expected to receive a letter from the U.S. Attorney General’s office in response to ban.
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on April 24, 2008. Read the original PDF.