Traffic and Pollution Costs Exceed Airport Growth Benefits

Airport bureaucrats want to expand San Jose International Airport (SJC) so they can compete with San Francisco and Oakland International. Improved management and facilities ARE needed. But the "Project Case" or "Alternative A" build-outs will clog freeways and increase pollution, leaving San Jose a less attractive place to live or locate a business.

The Chamber of Commerce recommends this expansion, but do they understand the Environmental Impact Report (EIR)? Neighborhood volunteers, local businesses and environmentalists working on this project see major flaws in those proposals. Moderate growth programs like "No Project" or "Alternative B" would bring broader benefits for lower costs.

• Traffic:
  According to the EIR, freeways near the airport, (101,87, and 880) are near saturation and "Project Case" and "Alternative A" will bring gridlock to all three. Airport created traffic jams will effect a majority of San Jose residents, but nothing is proposed to reduce congestion.
• Cost:
  Airport staff and air carriers want nearly a billion in city and federal dollars for this expansion. Did past airport expansions deliver more jobs? From 1985 to 1995 SJC's air cargo grew 665% and passenger traffic grew 90%. But jobs in the greater San Jose area grew by only 3.9%. Maybe employers go to cities that offer a better quality of life?
• Pollution:
  A build-out will dump 4,500 more pounds of toxins into our air every day. The Chamber demands an end to SJC's night-time noise pollution curfew to maximize the new facilities. Thousands of children will no longer be able to get a full night of sleep.
• Bigger is not always better.
  The EIR says that air traffic will grow 30% without improvements and more runways will not make SJC safer. A huge cargo hub benefits some businesses but damages many others. San Jose can and should have a better airport. Join your neighbors in demanding responsible growth at SJC. Let's make it better before we make it bigger.