The timing of two news reports Monday was quite auspicious, but they also leave some unanswered questions.
City officials say the planned terminal improvements and construction of a new parking garage at Long Beach Airport should go ahead as planned. I reported Monday that the City Council on Tuesday will discuss funding options for the airport projects, including possible passenger fee and parking rate increases.
Meanwhile, an article came out the same day in the Los Angeles Times that says many airports' expansion projects, including Long Beach's, may be at risk. This excerpt sums it up nicely:
Thanks to higher oil prices, fares are rising, airlines are cutting flights, older gas-guzzling planes are being mothballed and passenger fees are being added almost weekly. Now improvements worth hundreds of millions of dollars at aging passenger terminals and other airport facilities are in jeopardy.
So, which is it? Hopefuly, Long Beach airport officials will have some answers Tuesday, and certainly the council's discussion should be a lively one.
The fact is, there are more than few people around Long Beach who would love to see the airport expansion project crash and burn.
Paul Eakins reports on Long Beach City Hall, and local and regional
politics. A newcomer to the Press-
Kris Hanson reports on the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles,
covering environmental issues, economic triumphs and
pitfalls and trade trends of America’s largest port.
He also writes a weekly column “On The Waterfront”,
appearing Tuesdays, and also produces an occassional video
and column titled “On The Job,” which follows the hard-working
men and women who keep Southern California’s economy humming.
Karen Robes Meeks came to work for the Press-
I believe your comment in this brief airport article re "The fact is, there are more than few people around Long Beach who would love to see the airport expansion project crash and burn" is misleading and a poor choice of words. First, there is no expansion planned for the airport, never was. The legally agreed upon flight number caps remain intact to everyone's mutual satisfaction. The issue is modernization of an aging infrastructure, one that is long overdue, to efficiiently operate under such legal agreements. The word "expansion" is a scare tactic word used to derail the progress of this important modernization effort. Second, please do choose your words a bit more carefully when the subject is aiports, airplanes, passengers, etc. "Crash and burn" are terms that are inapropriate in this context. The airport is a vital part of Long Beach history, recent business success and a hugely convenient way to fly. The modernization effort - even if delayed by an economic slowdown - helps make sure that this continues in the 21st century.
Not me...build, build, build. Let the NIMBY's move somewhere else. Long Beach should be proud of it's airport. I often visit a coffeehouse on Cherry@Carson which is right under the LB Airport take-off flight path. This past Sunday my conversation was interrupted four times in an hour, but as the planes flew over head, I reminded myself that's the price of sensible commerce
Hey MG,
Why would you go to place where planes fly overheard for an hour just for coffee?
Long Beach City Council says passenger traffic which was 1,200,000 this year will increase to 4,000,000 as there rational for this upgrade.
Question....if the number of flights are to remain the same, how do you increase the load factor by over 300%?
Hi Dan,
Because 4 planes in an hour don't detract from the great coffee and the atmosphere, in fact they remind me of the improvements this city has made. Remember Long Beach Airport 10 years ago? WinAir? It was a sad embarrassment to our city. This is progress.