BRACING FOR TURBULENCE.

Airports executive director Lydia Kennard faces long list of opponents as she tries to sell LAX expansion plan to council and public

WHEN Lydia Kennard peers into the future the picture isn't pretty.

At Los Angeles International Airport, annual passenger traffic is expected to increase from 65 million today to as many as 89 million over the next 15 years if all of Kennard's improvements come to fruition, and the facility is already operating at 50 percent over capacity.

As for regional demand, the L.A. area's airports -- including LAX, Ontario International, Van Nuys and Palmdale -- are expected to see a near doubling of their combined volume by 2020, to 157 million passengers.

It's Kennard's job to prepare for that awesome onslaught.

Kennard was appointed by Mayor Richard Riordan to head the department in 1999, after she had served for five years as the top deputy.

On Jan. 18, her office released a draft master plan for expanding LAX. It calls for rebuilding four runways, constructing a new international terminal, adding an expressway to the San Diego (405) Freeway and extending the Metro Green Line into the airport.

The public now has six months to comment on the environmental studies before the issue goes to the L.A. City Council for consideration. The vote could ultimately go either way, but at least one thing is certain -- Kennard faces the fight of her life.

A long list of opponents led by El Segundo and Inglewood has lined up against the expansion. Further clouding matters is the fact that LA. will have a new mayor and six new council members by the time the proposal comes up for consideration.

Question: What will LAX be like in 15 years if no expansion is undertaken?

Answer: By 2015, according to our projections, the airport is going to grow to a maximum of about 79 million passengers annually from about 65 million today, and that's (without any improvements). Today, traveling in or out of Los Angeles is difficult, at best, given we're operating at 50 percent overcapacity. If we do nothing, we'll basically be cramming 79 million passengers into a facility that was built for 40 million. That is not an attractive world for the traveling public, and certainly not for our neighbors.

Q: Critics argue that by expanding LAX, it will end up shouldering more than its share of the burden of growth. What do you think?

A: I would hope the critics are as diligent about (encouraging other airports to help carry the burden). The focus an us is a direct result of the fact that we're the only ones taking action. We're the only ones planning for the future, not only at LAX but all of our facilities. In 1998, we built a brand new facility in Ontario that now has the capacity to handle about 10 million annual passengers. And we have an agreement with the airlines to build another terminal that will get us up to 12 to 15 million passengers. We're working very, very closely with our partners Caltrans and the High-Speed Rail Commission to figure out an innovative way to make Palmdale more accessible to a greater population base. We're absolutely doing our part.

Q: The expansion of LAX is expected to significantly increase noise and air pollution, especially in the surrounding communities. Do you think you can adequately address those problems?

A: Absolutely, and we're required to do so. What we have today is really unmitigated growth. With the modernization program, we will be required -- as a result of the entitlement and improvement process -- to put in place extremely significant infrastructure. This proposed plan has $2 billion to $3 billion in transportation improvements, including building an expressway, extending the Green Line into the airport, building a ring road and a people mover.

Q: How difficult will it be to win approval of the master plan given the intense opposition from neighbors?

A: Let me say, we find intense support also. We have a tremendous mount of support among the business community, among labor and among many members of the residential communities whose livelihoods are dependent, directly or indirectly, on this aviation facility. There are close to 1 million direct or indirect jobs that are generated. There are about 62,000 jobs alone in Council District 6, which immediately surrounds the airport, that are tied to aviation.

Q: Why don't we hear more from these supporters?

A: Well, we do because we're in the trenches, and I think you're going to hear more (from them). We think a lot of people, prudently so, have reserved comment until the documents (the environmental studies and master plan) were out. Now they'll have the opportunity, during the six-month comment period ... to review and evaluate and draw their own conclusions about the benefits of the program.

Q: Why has the expansion plan taken so long to come to fruition? Now you face a changing of the guard at City Hall.

A: From a purely technical standpoint, this is a challenging, complicated plan, and there are no easy solutions. It took this long because we needed to listen to the public and explore all the possibilities. I am not at all regretful that it took this long because I think the results are far better than the earlier plan.

Q: What are your chances of success, given the city will have new mayor and six new council members?

A: I'm very optimistic about our ability to inform our decision-makers on the value of this program. Doing nothing would absolutely denigrate the quality of life in the community that's around us.

Q: Critics say Riordan treated the expansion as a PR battle rather than attempt to build consensus. What do you say to that?

A: I strongly disagree. This has been an evolutionary process. It has taken about six years to get to this point. The original concept that came out in 1977 was what we would call big-build programs. In late '98, when I first took over the leadership of the program, the mayor was very willing to revisit where we were. He was very open to looking at this program in a different way. The decision not to build a new runway was in direct response to concerns of the local community.

Q: Do you think the increased congestion at LAX will ultimately help win approval for the expansion?

A: Clearly, a lot of people who use this facility today find the conditions -- particularly at peak hours -- intolerable. Every single day we are running 50 percent overcapacity. We do extraordinary remedial measures just to keep this facility operating at the level it is. And it is clearly not optimal. We have over 300 traffic officers who are trying to move that traffic. Yet we have extreme delays on the ground and extreme delays in the air -- and that will only increase. At some point, even the remedial measures won't be able to be helpful.

Q: What kind of pressure do you feel personally to do something about the overcrowding?

A: I happen to be a planner by background, and this is so challenging for me professionally and extremely interesting. I'm equally impassioned about trying to find a balance between the need for aviation facilities and the real-life concerns of residents and others who co-exist with us. That's the real challenge, finding the balance. But I do strongly believe it can be done.

Lydia H. Kennard

Title: Executive Director

Organization: Los Angeles World Airports 

Born: Los Angeles

Education: B.A. in urban planning, Stanford; master's in city planning, MIT; law degree, Harvard.

Career Turning Point: Deciding to get dual degrees in law and planning.

Most Admired Person: Her father, Robert Kennard, who always encouraged her to excel.

Hobbies: Snow skiing, tennis

Personal: Married; two children