Back to Squawk list

Santa Monica Firms Contract for Shorter SMO Runway

Enviado há
 
The Santa Monica city council in California has agreed to a $3.5 million “guaranteed maximum price” contract to Aecom to shorten the runway at Santa Monica Airport (SMO) from 5,000 feet to 3,500 feet. The August 8 approval of the contract is in line with the city’s timeline to begin work on shortening the runway in October and complete the project by December 7, when new FAA charts are ready for release. (www.ainonline.com) Mais...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


indy2001
indy2001 9
At one time, Douglas Aircraft was located in Santa Monica so you would think the town would be more pro-aviation. However, in 1958 the city refused to lengthen the runway so that DC-8s could be tested there. As a result, Douglas moved its plant to Long Beach, along with 44,000 jobs. Nothing like forward thinking!
PilotSwede
Tyler Girouard 6
Good ol' California politics.
jwmson
jwmson 8
It takes a village to raise a bunch of idiots.
arielgrinstein
Ariel Grinstein 7
$3.5 million to repaint runway markings. Good for them.
tcmarks
Tim Marks 3
3.5M to bulldoze the entire runway - yes it will be much shorter. This is the playbook from Chicago where hishighness Daley took out Meigs Field one Sunday night while the FAA and aviation community was fast asleep. now it is a sanctuary-city park where people go to get mugged quite often.
Ruger9X19
Ruger9X19 9
Nope the $3.5M is to Repaint the numbers and paint a displaced threshold and some taxiway removal as the article says "While the initial plan would keep pavement intact, ... Gertsen noted removal of runway pavement could be a much costlier endeavor, with environmental ramifications."
soolish
scott sewell 3
This is about a small group of rich people in Sunset Park who have spent a gizillion dollars to stop planes from flying over their houses. I doubt they will ever realize in property value the amounts of money they have spent. There is no "People's Republic of Santa Monica" going on here. The issue is NIMBY (not in my backyard) pure and simple. It is about lawyers, influence peddling, campaign contributions and wealthy and selfish snobs. Most of the rest of the city doesn't care about the airport (by a few hundred votes) and the FAA caved when they held all the cards. The city does not even control the land the airport is on. It is perpetually leased to the Federal Government. Shameful, and another instance of a narrow group acting against the public interest.

The template here does not bode well for GA or suburban airports surrounded by growth which is why the FAA should have stood up to the airport opponents. How the city can justify 3.5 million for an action which will be moot in a few years (when the airport closes) is beyond me and a tribute to the power of wealthy homeowners. These are the same kind of people who try to close access to public beaches. Sad.
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 1
Well written Scott. No doubt you're right.
chrisrobey
CHRIS ROBEY 3
Reminds me of the situation about three years ago when there was a change of government in the Australian state of Victoria. The new leftist government stopped the building of a new cross city motorway in Melbourne which would have alleviated chronic traffic congestion. Only trouble was that it cost one thousand million dollars of taxpayer's money to NOT, repeat NOT, build this motorway, due to reneging on existing contracts that had already been entered into!
WALLACE24
WALLACE24 3
Sweet! It frees up some space. Maybe they can get a new Taco Bell or something.
Bernie20910
Bernie Behling 5
Whole Foods probably already has an option on the space.
vulcancruiser
Larry Loffelmacher 1
The mental midgets at SMO in charge should just end it.......stick a big orange balloon in the middle of the runway and give sightseeing rides......
cozytom
tom brusehaver 1
I think they ought to rotate the runway 90 degrees. Make it 3500 ft long, but 4800 ft wide. That should be following the rules.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
It seems to me that repainting the lines and numbers, and adjusting the lighting would accomplish the same thing at significantly less cost. The only paving needed would be run up area and intersection at runway's end. The fight will come when they decide which end. Politicians are always willing to accept the low bid on the highest cost of any project
jbsimms
James Simms 1
People Democratuc Republic of Santa Monica strikes again 😔😩😭😬
harmgb
harm buning 3
I'm not sure all the anti-aviation folks agitating against SMO are Democrats.
paulgilpin1953
paul gilpin 1
and you mis-interpret JS comment.
any tyrant, worldwide, includes the word "democratic" in the name of their country.
it is done for a reason.
and it's not a good reason.
Bernie20910
Bernie Behling 0
True, there's still a Communist Party.
96flstc
96flstc 1
This is really an economic crime perpetrated by socialists who oppose the moneyed crowd operating aircraft at SMO. Recognize how much revenue the airport generates and what its loss will mean. The airport will be replaced by swing sets, Tai Chi classes, the homeless and people selling ice cream from push carts. How much revenue will that generate? Not too much, so your taxes will increase to support your park. Donald Douglas is turning over. View "One Six Right" - when its gone, its gone forever.
Albatross777
Thomas Weisberg -4
Here is Hoping the next Airport they shorten is Carlsbad (KCRQ). People in SOCALknow what right for there community. They have increase Bus service to downtown and reduced commerce into SMO area. SMART MOVE!

Entrar

Não tem uma conta? Registre-se agora (gratuito) para funcionalidades personalizáveis, alertas de vôo e mais!