Airport Authority endorses Miramar for new airport site

[question everything]

Despite military protests, Airport Authority endorses Miramar for new airport site

By Karen Kucher
UNION-TRIBUNE BREAKING NEWS TEAM
and Jeff Ristine
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

5:44 p.m. June 5, 2006

SAN DIEGO – The San Diego County Regional Airport Authority's board of directors decided Monday to make a joint-use airport at Miramar Marine Corps Air Station its preferred site to replace Lindbergh Field as San Diego's airport.

(snip)

The authority, which was formed in 2001, was directed by the state Legislature to find a new regional airport to replace or augment Lindbergh. As envisioned by the authority's consultants, a joint-use airport would cost just under $6 billion and require two new runways that could allow 24-hour civilian air operations to exist side by side with military helicopters and jets. The question is to be put to voters in a November ballot measure.

(snip)

Military officials have called military and civilian use of the airport fundamentally incompatible, saying that a civilian airport would take valuable space away from the military airport's safety buffer. The joint-use plan proposes shifting carrier landing practice to the southernmost civilian runway, pushing flights over neighboring communities. It also would expand the boundaries of the footprint around Miramar designed to anticipate where a crash, should one occur, is most likely. Military officials also say they don't know where the combat aircraft loading area, where bombs and missiles are lifted into position, would be relocated. An area tentatively proposed as a new loading area has no safety zone, so ordnance would be pointed toward the base's facilities, aircraft or Interstate 15 before it is loaded.

(snip)

The new ballot language reads:

To provide for San Diego's long-term air transportation needs, shall the Airport Authority and government officials work to obtain approximately 3,000 of 23,000 acres at MCAS Miramar by 2020 for a commercial airport, provided necessary traffic and freeway improvements are made, military readiness is maintained without expense to the military for modifying or relocating operations, no local taxes are used on the airport, overall noise impacts are reduced, and necessary Lindbergh Field improvements are completed?


Find this article at:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20060605-1634-bn05airport2.html

[IndyJones]

1. I'm just glad it's not near my house. I don't see those residents

approving that at all. We'll see what happens.

[Solo_in_MD]

2. Not going to happen

There are clear demos already being shown about how the civilian planners ignored the safety requirements associated with ordinance. TNT trumps politics or at least it should.

This was a political move and nothing real (in terms of shared usage) will come of it.

[question everything]

3. Indeed. The Navy says NO and there is no Plan B

for that, or even if the proposal does not pass.

[Solo_in_MD]

4. Its brinksmanship, which is no way to deal with infrastructure issues

and the Marines are not going to relinquish Miramar.

Anyone know where the California delegation stands on this?

[question everything]

5. Duncan Hunter, a known freeper from the region

recently got an amendment to another bill to prevent joint use.

A Democrat from the region - Bob Filner - has been promoting fast speed trains, like Maglev, to send passengers to the inland counties that do have plenty of aviation capacity but cannot get enough people to use them.