Here in Boston, we punish success. Last week the Federal Aviation Administration said it would consider changes to flight paths at Logan Airport in response to noise complaints from a group of residents and elected officials. I worry about what this will mean for the rest of us.
I live in East Boston, less than a mile from the airport. After two years, I don’t notice the sounds anymore. What I do hear, figuratively anyway, is the churn of economic development — busy restaurants, full hotels, and business transactions occurring throughout our region.
Today Logan has the most direct domestic and international flights in its history. This didn’t just happen. It was the result of a deliberate effort by the state to court new airlines and persuade them to fly in and out of Boston. The result is more revenue for the region. Case in point: Governor Charlie Baker identified Logan as one of the key reasons that General Electric, among others, has chosen to move its headquarters to Boston.
The rest of the world looks at the growth in Boston’s air traffic with envy. In 2014, Logan attracted more new international flights than any other airport in the country, prompting The Wall Street Journal to write, “If there’s one US airport punching above its weight right now, it’s Boston’s Logan International.’’
Rather than celebrate the benefits of greater mobility, we zero in on the downside. One resident recently likened the airplane sounds to living beneath a railroad track. Congressman Stephen Lynch took it a step further. “This is an issue of social justice,’’ Lynch said, according to a Globe story. “These people have been abused and damaged by their government, by an agency of their government.’’
Missing from this conversation, and virtually all other public dialogues about Logan, is any sort of balance.
Logan is closer to downtown — just 3.5 miles away — than any other major city airport in the United States. In New York City, getting into Manhattan from JFK or LaGuardia adds 30 minutes to an hour to a traveler’s itinerary. In Boston, visitors arrive within minutes.
This is what’s called a competitive advantage. The airport is a boon for our region’s hospitals and universities, and its technology and tourist sectors. This means revenue, employment, and investment that support all of our jobs.
In other words, the economic engine that is Logan International Airport should be defended, not excoriated.
If there are legitimate steps that Massport can take to bend and shift air traffic, without disrupting its efficiency, the agency certainly should do so. After all, it was Massport that, in the 1980s, first introduced the soundproofing of private homes for affected residences beneath flight paths. Today, 11,000 properties have been covered within East Boston and other surrounding communities. The success of the program has prompted the FAA to adopt a similar program nationwide.
Everyone wants to go to heaven, but no one wants to die. In this case, we all want a roaring economy without the roar of a plane. We want more flight options at the moment we’re booking tickets but wish there were fewer planes at other times.
A busy airport helps a city stay healthy. If Logan cancels routes, suspends flight paths, or otherwise downgrades service, a few people might declare victory. But the rest of us will have lost.
Mike Ross is an attorney and former Boston city councilor. He writes regularly for the Globe. Follow him on Twitter @mikeforboston.
