Viewing page 93 of 105

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

To placate the citizens of one community in the normal take-off path from San Francisco, a voluntary program was begun to use a different runway whenever possible (consistent with safe operations). While this diverted traffic from one community, it increased the kerosene fumes and jet blasts in another. After airport officials had met many times with numerous groups of irate citizens, a local engineer proposed the erection of an experimental sound barrier. This concrete structure would be built at the end of a runway to deflect sound and fumes from the neighboring community. No real data has been shown to prove that it would serve its purpose; but it is absolutely certain that it would decrease the utility of the runway and compromise safe operations!

In another part of the area an ambitious subdivider seeks new zoning which would permit him to fill in marshy areas and build new houses under the airport's final approach. Somewhat higher land is already subject to flooding by high tides or heavy rains. But there is not clear assurance that the subdivider will not be allowed to proceed. We may yet see homes built on the filled-in swamp, where the airport noises are built-in.

While the plans for the concrete sound barrier have not permanently been laid to rest, at least one alternate suggestion has been proposed. One thoughtful builder offered instead to build a tall apartment house near the end of the runway, It, too, should deflect the noise of the airport while serving a useful purpose! He reasoned that its subsequent owners should have no cause to complain about airport noises, since the airport would have been constructed first. Presumably that would be his rationale for the apartment renters too.

In the area of ground transportation, few airports would rate well. Usually limousine service is infrequent, uncomfortable, or slow. Taxi service may be expensive. Large numbers of employees must drive to work because there is not public transportation. At most of our major airports hundreds of acres of valuable land are unnecessarily used in parking lots. Many such lots could be converted into highly valuable, tax-paying industrial sites if good public transportation were available. In some areas it costs the taxpayers ten thousand dollars to provide one single automobile parking space. Probably no one has calculated the benefits that could accrue to the community if the parking lots were industrialized and the airport employees provided with adequate public transportation.

Are there, then, solution to some of the problems of airports and their neighbors? Or must we continue along the same uncertain path until conflicts and congestion become so bad only major surgery will save the patient? Reasonable solutions would appear to be yet possible in all of the major areas.

Significant advances have been made in the areas of materials flow and in passenger handling. These logistical problems are similar to those encountered in any complicated industry, and they may be attacked by sound logistical procedures.

Many urgent needs in the area of safety have been spelled out by such groups as the Air Line Pilots Association, the Air Transport Association, and others. 

Z2466.10