| Frequently Asked Questions |
- What is the Final EIR?
The Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required for City decision-makers to use in assessing the various environmental impacts of the project. It compares the various Master Plan alternatives being considered for the future of the Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) and addressed the potential environmental effects of the proposed Master Plan improvements.
The Final EIR was prepared based upon the Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) published in January 2001 and a Supplement to the Draft EIS/EIR published in July 2003, public and agency comments received on those documents, and written responses to those comments.
Back to top
- Why is this process necessary?
These kinds of environmental studies are required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) laws as part of the planning and decision-making process. The Supplement to the Draft EIS/EIR provides the basic foundation of environmental information required for public input and decision-makers on Alternative D. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Los Angeles World Airports (LAWA) are working together, as Lead Agencies, to complete the NEPA and CEQA process requirements for the LAX Master Plan.
Back to top
- What is the Final LAX Master Plan
The Final LAX Master Plan is a vision for the future. It describes how LAX can accommodate its appropriate share of the aviation demand in meeting the region's future needs, while balancing those needs with environmental concerns, safety and security, and the concerns of the airport's neighbors.
The Master Plan presents the essential elements of the LAWA Staff Recommended Alternative, Alternative D, including how it was developed and the consideration of some 30 different airport layouts. The Master Plan explains why the Recommended Alternative was chosen by staff and provides the basis for preparation of the regulatory entitlements and/or mitigation measures that would implement Alternative D. Upon approval, it also will be used as a broad policy statement regarding the conceptual strategic framework for future improvements at LAX.
Back to top
- What is the approval process for this plan?
The next step, as part of the environmental clearance process, will be a joint hearing on May 24, 2004, conducted by the Board of Airport Commissioners (BOAC) and City Planning Commission (CPC) to receive testimony from the public in preparation for its subsequent determination on the Final EIR, Final Master Plan and entitlements.
On June 14, 2004, the joint hearing will be conducted for the BOAC to consider and take action on the Final EIR, Final Master Plan, entitlements, and other Master Plan Program documents. The CPC and the Advisory Agency will also take action on the elements of the application under their jurisdiction.
The BOAC and CPC recommendations are then transmitted to the City Council for consideration and action.
Subsequent to the City of Los Angeles' decision-making process, the FAA will make certain modifications and additions to the Final EIR document in order to produce the Final EIS, in fulfillment of FAA's policies and procedures relative to NEPA. The FAA will then provide a Record of Decision (ROD), which is the federal approval if the EIS/EIR. Construction can then commence.
Back to top
- Q5. Where can I get more information about the details of the Final LAX Master Plan and Final EIR?
The Final LAX Master Plan and Final EIR will be posted on the project website at www.laxmasterplan.org. In addition, copies of the documents will be distributed to more than 50 libraries and other public offices throughout the region. Locations are listed on the project website.
All LAX Master Plan Program documents will be available for review at the LAX Master Plan Public Reading Room located in the Imperial Terminal/Flight Path Learning Center, Room 10-A, 6661 Imperial Highway, between the hours of 8:00AM and 5:00PM, Monday through Friday, excluding holidays.
Back to top
- What would be involved in the Staff-Recommended Alternative
The Staff-Recommended Alternative is Alternative D. This alternative is focused on enhanced safety and security measures. This alternative separates the commercial and private vehicle landside components of the airport from the passenger processing facilities and gates to provide greater security. A new landside Ground Transportation Center (GTC) and a new Intermodal Transportation Center (ITC) with connection to the Green Line would provide parking and curb front services. New on-airport roadways would be developed to support the GTC and ITC. The Central Terminal Area would be redeveloped to support a variety of enhanced security measures. An automated people mover system conveniently connects the GTC, ITC, and new consolidated rental car facility, to the Central Terminal Area. A center taxiway would be added between the runways for increased safety and more efficient movement of aircraft. Gate space is reconfigured to allow LAX to accommodate approximately 78.9 million annual passengers. Cargo space is designed to accommodate approximately 3.1 million annual tons.
Back to top
- How would safety be affected by the Master Plan?
LAX operates safely today and it will operate safely tomorrow. Air safety is the number one concern of both LAWA and the FAA.
Improving the airfield would make it possible to operate the airfield safely while at the same time making it more efficient. The construction of center taxiways in both the north and the south airfields would reduce the possibility of runway incursions and increase runway safety. Existing runways would be realigned to provide more separation of large and small aircraft for take-offs and landings. For aircraft on the ground, the plan would increase the physical separation between runways and taxiways, and enlarge aircraft maneuvering areas and clearances, allowing aircraft to circulate more efficiently and with fewer delays. The design of the north airfield would accommodate Group VI (new large aircraft) while design standards for the south airfield would be to Group V (747) standards.
Back to top
- How does the Master Plan address security?
Alternative D features new and redeveloped facilities that provide greater security of passengers as they move from landside to airside operations. The new landside facilities separate vehicle access and substantially reduce the potential for a vehicular bomb or other devices to incapacitate core airport facilities, including the FAA control tower, Central Utility Plant, and fueled aircraft. The landside facilities would also be designed to accommodate preliminary security measures such as canine patrol units, security cameras, behavioral observation and advanced technology devices. Updated law enforcement and fire facilities to enhance the ability of these departments to respond to emergency situations and facilitate coordination with other emergency response agencies would be developed.
Back to top
- How much passenger demand would Alternative D accommodate?
Alternative D is designed to accommodate approximately 78.9 million annual passengers, approximately the same level of activity as forecast for the No Project Alternative, and about 19 million fewer passengers annually than the forecasted unconstrained LAX demand in 2015.
Back to top
- How can LAX limit the amount of passengers it handles?
LAX cannot legally turn away any passenger or aircraft that wants to come to LAX. However Alternative D would reconfigure the gates and terminal building frontage to place important practical constraints on numbers of operations and passengers handled at LAX. The number of gate positions would be reduced from 163 to 153, thus effectively limiting the throughput at LAX.
The LAWA Staff-Recommended Alternative, Alternative D, would increase daily flights by less than 45 flights daily over the 1996 baseline levels, and would handle approximately the same number of flights as the No Project Alternative.
Back to top
- What will the noise impacts be?
Under Alternative D, the total population exposed to a widely recognized noise impact threshold would be virtually the same as those exposed under the No Project Alternative. The analysis reveals little difference between the aircraft noise exposure patterns. In fact the number of persons exposed to noise in excess of 65 CNEL, when compared to the 1996 Baseline Conditions, decreases by more than 6,000 persons.
The widely recognized noise impact threshold is called the 65 decibel Community Noise Equivalency Level (CNEL).
Back to top
- How will LAWA mitigate the noise impacts?
Although the existing noise impact would not substantially change, there are three major ways that LAWA proposes to continue with the voluntary program to mitigate the noise impact of LAX on the local community: 1) purchase and relocate homes and apartment complexes, 2) soundproofing, and 3) enforcement of nighttime, over-ocean operations by arriving and departing aircraft.
Back to top
- What will the air quality impacts be?
Increased aircraft activity would potentially increase air pollution in the South Coast Air Basin. However, on a relative basis, the contribution of sources under Alternative D is estimated to be lower than those under the No Action/No Project Alternative. This decrease is due to more efficient aircraft operations and improved traffic flows on and near LAX. Emissions for Alternative D would also be lower than Alternative A, B, and C due to fewer aircraft operations. Accelerated conversion of ground support equipment to alternative fuels and reduction of maintenance activities at LAX proposed under Alternative D would further reduce emissions.
The Final EIR includes several dozen mitigation measures that could reduce airport-related air quality impacts. The final list of measures will be decided in the next several months during the public and agency comment period, and will be set in the Final EIR.
Back to top
- What kinds of air quality mitigation measures are under consideration?
The highly successful Van Nuys FlyAway park-and-ride program will be expanded to a number of other areas around the region, removing thousands of LAX-bound vehicles from the freeways.
LAX now provides special aircraft electrical power at almost all of its passenger air carrier operations gates so that it is no longer necessary for pilots to idle their auxiliary power engines, thereby reducing tons of aircraft emissions per year.
The Consolidated Rental Car Facility (RAC) will consolidate all on-airport rental car operations and connect to the Central Terminal Area and Intermodal Transportation Center via a people mover system, eliminating the impacts of more than 1 million shuttles trips a year.
More than 80 percent of the airport's gates are using energy-saving preconditioned air, resulting in a reduction of tons of aircraft emissions annually.
The airport operates a 55-bus clean fuel fleet system. LAWA has also converted more than 45 percent of its 730-vehicle fleet to clean-burning fuels. As more vehicles wear out and are replaced, the number of clean fuel vehicles will increase.
Back to top
- Would the Master Plan ease traffic congestion and long lines that sometimes occur inside of LAX?
Yes, traffic congestion at LAX would be eliminated by implementation of the plan. The new alternative removes commercial and private vehicles from the Central Terminal Area and develops new landside facilities and an on-airport roadway system on the eastern end of the airport property. The new facilities offer improved curb front access and more than 36 new lane-miles to improve ground access and circulation. An automated people mover system and consolidated rental car facilities provide further relief to traffic congestion.
Back to top
- What about traffic congestion inside the airport if nothing is done?
Existing airport roadways would have to absorb about 25 percent more traffic during peak periods. Since the Central Terminal Area is already at saturation point during peak hours, we would be facing gridlock at the terminals.
Back to top
- How does the Master Plan address off-airport traffic issues?
The Master Plan includes massive congestion relief components and the Supplement to the Final EIR studies show that these measures can significantly reduce the surface street and freeway impact of meeting local future aviation services demand.
The congestion relief package includes, as a recommended mitigation measure to improve traffic flows, direct freeway access to the airport from the local freeways, taking thousands of vehicles off local streets. LAX is one of the only major airports in the country that lacks this kind of direct freeway access and the proposed mitigation measures would correct this obvious flaw in the airport's current roadway support system.
The expanded FlyAway Program and Metro Green Line connection to the Intermodal Transportation Center and the Automated People Mover System are additional ways that the airport would encourage use of mass transit by making the use of transit both convenient and cost effective.
Back to top
- What traffic mitigation measures would be employed to discourage residential street use?
By designing convenient easy access to the proposed Ground Transportation Center, the proposed Intermodal Transportation Center and the proposed consolidated rental-car facility (RAC), and by implementing mitigation measures that improve access to and from the I-405 and I-105 Freeways, there would be disincentives to "back-pedal" streets in order to reach the new airport facilities.
LAX would also provide greatly improved signage to guide passengers onto desired routes and access points away from residential streets and increase the number of FlyAway stations. LAWA continues to work with LADOT on traffic devices that would improve airport traffic flow to LAX and away from residential streets.
Back to top
- What will happen to traffic around the airport if the Master Plan is not implemented?
Growth in the region and at LAX will occur regardless of whether an airport Master Plan is implemented, leading to increased traffic volumes throughout the region and in the vicinity of the airport. Drivers naturally will seek out the less congested routes among the city streets. Because most airport traffic needs to access the airport through the Sepulveda/Century Blvd. interchange, without implementation of a Master Plan, traffic congestion can be expected to increase along those corridors and adjacent city streets.
Back to top
- How much air cargo activity would be accommodated at LAX in 2015?
LAX is currently the fifth busiest cargo airport in the world handling some 2 million tons of cargo per year. Alternative D is designed to accommodate approximately 3.1 million annual tons of cargo in 2015, the same activity level that would be accommodated under the No Project Alternative.
Back to top
- Would the Master Plan displace homes and businesses?
Proposed additional land requirements in Alternative D would be approximately 77 acres, which represents only a 2 percent increase in the airport's total land mass.
LAX, independent of the Master Plan, already has underway a major acquisition and relocation plan for noise mitigation purposes. There is no additional acquisition of homes proposed in Alternative D over the existing noise mitigation program. The property of approximately 38 commercial businesses would be acquired.
By law any relocated homeowners and businesses must have comparable replacement housing in place before they move.
Back to top
- What is LAWA doing to ensure that its minority and low-income neighbors do not bear an undue burden of increased airport activity and share in the benefits of the project?
The Master Plan environmental documents set out the first steps for a proactive Environmental Justice (EJ) Program. The EJ Program is being developed in collaboration with the airport's neighbors and is led by an Environmental Justice Task Force.
LAWA has conducted workshops specific to Environmental Justice within the minority and low-income communities affected by the LAX Master Plan. These workshops have allowed LAWA to work with the community to develop programs and mitigation measures that would provide direct benefits of the modernization program to these communities. Job outreach and training programs would be a key part of the effort.
Additional workshops and meetings will be held at times and places readily accessible to minority and low-income individuals to involve the community in further development of programs associated with implementation of the Preferred Master Plan Alternative.
Back to top
- What is the construction phasing for the Master Plan?
Alternative D is comprised of a number of projects that overlap and would be built in three phases from the Record of Decision (2004) to the horizon year 2015.
Phase I: Relocate South airfield runway (RW 25L), South airfield center taxiway, Intermodal Transportation Center (ITC), connection to the Green Line, Consolidated Rental Car facilities, the roadways between the ITC and the new Ground Transportation Center (GTC), Automated People Mover System, demolition of parking structures in the Central Terminal Area (CTA), develop the GTC, and landside terminals in the CTA.
Phase II: Relocate midfield ancillary facilities and clear midfield area, tunnel from CTA to Satellite concourse, construct midfield aprons and taxiways, baggage system from CTA to Satellite concourse, rework southern CTA concourses, construct Satellite concourse.
Phase III: North airfield ancillary facilities, rework Tom Bradley International Terminal, rework fuel farm, construct north CTA concourses, aprons, and taxiways, rework north airfield taxiways, construct north airfield center taxiway, construct relocated north runway (RW 6R-24L).
Back to top
- Would all the projects be lumped into one Environmental Impact Report?
All of these projects are addressed within the Supplement to the Final EIR at a program level of analysis. During the course of implementing these projects, each individual project would be required to undergo a project level evaluation to determine what additional environmental analysis may be required.
Back to top
- How much would Alternative D Cost?
The estimated cost would be up to $9 billion, as much as $6 billion less than the additional runway options.
Back to top
- Who would pay for the Master Plan improvements?
The Master Plan improvements would be funded primarily by passenger facility charges, landing fees, airport facility leases, concession fees, and airport revenue bonds. Federal Airport Improvement Program grants and federal and state funds for infrastructure and transportation projects important to the state's economy are also expected to help finance aspects of the project. The Master Plan would receive no funding from the General Fund of the City.
Back to top
- Why not leave LAX alone and develop other airports in the region?
The role LAX serves as the primary international airport of the region gives prominence to the need to modernize the facilities at LAX to ensure that the appropriate activity levels uniquely served by LAX are maintained and that the region secures the associated economic benefits. Many of today's facilities at LAX, from the airfield to the terminals, date back to the 1960s and 1980s and are in dire need of modernization simply to sustain and serve the current demand in a safe, secure and efficient manner.
In fact, the LAX Master Plan assumes that the LAX share of the region's passenger service will drop sharply, even with improvements in its ability to serve the projected demand.
As population density increases in outlying areas of the region, other airports must play larger roles in absorbing growing demand for air travel, particularly for domestic flights. Those other airports include Ontario, Palmdale, Long Beach, Burbank, and John Wayne. LAWA is already aggressively pursuing growth for its facilities at Ontario and Palmdale.
Back to top
- What role does the Enhanced Safety and Security Alternative of the LAX Master Plan play in overall regional airport planning?
The LAX Master Plan has been built on an assumption that all local commercial airports will be needed to accommodate Southern California's future air transportation needs. The Enhanced Safety and Security Alternative is designed to accommodate approximately 78.9 million annual passengers, approximately the same activity level of the No Project Alternative. LAWA encourages the development of the region's other airports. In fact, there is no way to meet regional demand without major development at the region's other airports.
Back to top
- What is LAWA now doing to help the rest of the region meet demand?
LAWA also operates two of the region's other important commercial airports: Ontario International Airport (ONT) and Palmdale Regional Airport (PMD). The ability of these airports to absorb their share of the region's increased passenger and cargo demands is a central part of LAWA planning. LAWA has master planning efforts underway at ONT and at PMD to examine their potential to accommodate increased demand.
Back to top
|