Dissent within the agency charged with finding a site for a new airport in San Diego County over whether or not it should continue in its study of joint-use scenarios with military installations became clear during a planning meeting Monday, Feb. 27.
Fresh off the heels of a Feb. 16 meeting in Washington D.C. between the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority’s Executive Committee and the office of the Secretary of the Navy, Monday’s presentation on concepts for three county military sites elicited unbridled criticism from some board members over the viability of ever gaining military consent.
Several variations of joint-use concepts were presented to the authority’s Strategic Planning Committee for Camp Pendleton, Naval Air Station (NAS) North Island and Marine Corps Air Station Miramar, all of which would provide for a dual runway civilian airport to concurrently serve military flight operations.
However, board member Mary Teresa Sessom set the tone early by reading a letter signed by Secretary of the Navy Donald C. Winter, addressed to Rep. Susan Davis (D-San Diego) after the authority’s meeting with his staff.
That letter was explicit in the Navy’s intention of keeping its bases off limits to civilian use, saying “national defense requirements preclude making any portion of any of these installations available for a new or dual-use commercial airport.”
The letter went on to say that the U.S. Department of Defense has “delivered this message clearly and consistently for many years to those who are studying future civilian aviation requirements in the San Diego area,” and that “longstanding evaluation criteria for joint-use leads to the inescapable conclusion that these installations cannot provide the home to a commercial airport or joint-use airfield.”
She followed the letter with a motion to forgo the staff’s presentation of the concepts in lieu of a motion to cease the study of military installations in the county, adding that the “continued pursuit of these bases holds the board up to ridicule and loss of creditability.”
The motion failed and the presentation by the authority’s staff research consultants continued.
For Camp Pendleton, the preferred concept would be built at the south corner of the property adjacent to Oceanside, east of Interstate 5. Miramar could see the relocation of major portions of Interstate 15 to accommodate a dual runway airport near an existing military runway.
A new airport at North Island promised to be the most complicated with two runways in a closed V shape, requiring a massive amount of fill to extend one runway into the ocean. The concept would also call for a significant reconfiguration of the base and there would be no access to the terminals from Coronado. Passengers would instead enter North Island via a security terminal on a portion of Lindbergh Field’s current site and travel through an underground transit system to the actual airport.
The presentation did little to change Sessom’s mind.
“We are focusing so intently on military sites that we haven’t allowed our very competent staff to think outside the box,” she said. “I don’t think we can wait until BRAC does something for us.”
Board member Robert Maxwell agreed, referring to Winter’s letter as a “direct order from the person at the highest level in our government.”
Dist. 4 Councilman Tony Young, a board appointee, disagreed.
“I don’t work for the Secretary of the Navy. I serve the city of San Diego,” he said. “I’m not going to be told what to do or what to think by Secretary of the Navy or anybody else.”
Despite the curt letter, Board member Paul Peterson said further exploration was warranted.
“For us to abandon what appears to be viable options would, I think, be a mistake,” he said.
The authority is facing increased pressure as the deadline for choosing a site draws near. A self-imposed goal of selecting that site by May will give the agency about four months to sell the concept to voters for the November ballot.
The full board meets Monday, March 6, to provide direction to its staff in regards to feasibility studies for the military joint-use concepts.