SF Gate: Why airports keep growing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



=20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This article was sent to you by someone who found it on SF Gate.
The original article can be found on SFGate.com here:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=3D/news/archive/2002/10/09/f=
inancial1114EDT0076.DTL
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday, October 9, 2002 (AP)
Why airports keep growing
NICOLE HARRIS, The Wall Street Journal


   (10-09) 08:14 PDT (AP) --
   ATLANTA -- If Bill Hammack does his job right over the next two years,
hardly anyone will notice.
   The job? Supervising the moving of 27.7 million cubic yards of dirt to
Atlanta's Hartsfield International Airport from land more than five miles
to the south. Once it finally arrives, the dirt will be used to form a
thick foundation for a new concrete runway intended to relieve congestion
at the world's busiest airport.
   A look at Atlanta's dirt deal illustrates why runway projects continue
across the country even as many airlines struggle to survive. In congested
areas like Atlanta, the projects are so complex and controversial they
take years to get off the ground. Even the disastrous effects of the Sept.
11 terrorist attacks aren't disrupting a five- to 10-year expansion plan
when long-term forecasts still project an increase in air travel.
   According to the Federal Aviation Administration, 18 major hub airports
have proposed or begun building new runways at a cost of about $10
billion. But many of the projects require lengthy reviews by numerous
city, state and federal regulatory agencies. San Francisco airport
officials, for example, have spent $70 million over the past three years
on research, planning and environmental studies just to see if they can
start work to separate the facility's four runways, a delicate process
given the airport's proximity to San Francisco Bay. In Louisville, Ky.,
the airport agreed to move a community of 540 homes away from the noise of
its runways and to build a new city for the uprooted families. And in
Seattle, airport officials are in their 15th year of planning a
controversial third runway that will require three retaining walls to keep
a 17 million-cubic-yard embankment out of a nearby creek and other
wetlands.
   In Atlanta's case, the plan is to move the runway dirt -- enough to fill
the Georgia Dome football stadium six times -- without disturbing the
environment or neighboring communities. A 5.5-mile-long electric conveyor
belt will wind over streams, through woods and across five roads,
including an interstate highway. To keep the dust down, the dirt will be
sprayed with water and enclosed in covered bins. Two control towers
equipped with video monitors will track the dirt's 30-minute trip to the
construction site. Total project cost: $350 million, plus a $10 million
bonus for on-time arrival by November 2004.
   The fifth runway project is part of a 10-year, $5.4 billion expansion of
the airport, which served 75.8 million passengers in 2001. Once
constructed, the runway will save the airline industry $5 million a week
by cutting delays, says Benjamin DeCosta, the airport's general manager.
   Like their counterparts elsewhere, Atlanta airport officials have endured
opposition from local communities that didn't want another runway. They
met their biggest challenge, though, when the dirt deal was mired in a
nasty political scandal. C.R. Thornton, a local real-estate investor who
owned the dirt needed for the construction and first proposed the
conveyor-belt delivery method, pleaded guilty to making an illegal
contribution to former Atlanta Mayor Bill Campbell. Mr. Thornton
eventually sold his interest in the project to John D. Stephens, a local
pipeline contractor who is now a subcontractor in the dirt project.
   When the project was put out to bid early last year, a consortium of thr=
ee
companies known as 5R (for 5th Runway) Constructors LLP was the sole
bidder, having agreed to use the conveyor method of getting the dirt to
the site. After the City Council rejected the contract amid a public
outcry over the contribution scandal, the price and the lack of other
bidders, 5R sued in federal court.
   In February, a court-appointed arbitrator awarded the contract to 5R,
noting that the conveyor belt was the cheapest and most effective method
of getting the dirt to the construction site. To oversee the project, 5R
tapped Mr. Hammack, a 55-year-old accountant who got his start crunching
numbers for projects at CW Matthews Contracting Co., one of the three
companies in 5R and one of the airport's oldest contractors.
   Construction of the conveyor belt required the approval of more than 20
regulatory agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency, the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Georgia Department of Transportation.
"There were some agencies that I never heard of," Mr. Hammack says.
   Built on compacted earth and railroad ties, the conveyor belt will run d=
ay
and night and move up to 8,000 tons of dirt an hour. At the end of the
line, the belt shuffles the dirt among four giant discharge bins, which
are equipped with sensors to detect when they're full. From there, dump
trucks will cart the dirt to the runway, which will stretch 9,000 feet,
crossing 16 lanes of highway.
   Even before putting the dirt on the conveyor belt, workers will have to
transform the mixture of rock and soil at the quarries into a uniform
material. Too much rock could make the material too dry; too much dirt
could make it too wet. The moisture level affects how well the material
"compacts," or sticks together, at the construction site. So 5R erected
"scalping" machinery to sift the rock and soil through large screens.
Separate crushing plants pound large slabs of rock into smaller, more
manageable pieces.
   But all the technology and equipment are no match for nature. During
recent testing, a rain storm made the dirt too wet to load onto the
conveyor. "You basically just have to wait until it drains and dries,"
says one worker on the project.
   During a test of the unloading system, Mr. Hammack and his team discover=
ed
the dirt was coming off the conveyor belt too fast. Instead of the planned
20 seconds, the dirt was delivered in four seconds, sending it over the
sides of the dump trucks.
   That problem was relatively easy to fix by just slowing down the opening
of gates where the trucks are loaded. The big test will come next month,
when the entire system is set to be up and running, with a total of some
300 workers on two shifts.
   If all goes well, travelers should see the results in three years or so.

Paving The Way

   Eighteen major hub airports have proposed building new runways at a cost
of about $10 billion. A sampling of some of the most costly projects
proposed or under way:

   Airport Estimated Cost

   San Francisco International $3 billion to $5 billion

   Hartsfield Atlanta International $1.3 billion

   Lambert-St. Louis International $1.1 billion

   Seattle-Tacoma International $773 million

   Baltimore/Washington International $600 million

   Minneapolis-St. Paul International $563 million

   George Bush Intercontinental $260 million
   (Houston)

   Source: Federal Aviation Administration

=20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright 2002 AP

[Index of Archives]         [NTSB]     [NASA KSC]     [Yosemite]     [Steve's Art]     [Deep Creek Hot Springs]     [NTSB]     [STB]     [Share Photos]     [Yosemite Campsites]