If you'll excuse me for playing the devil's advocate: keeping an aerodrome active when all around is built up is asking for trouble - sooner or later there will be forced landings in the streets or houses or supermarkets
Yes, and what of it?
Jan, in the US airports are built to serve people, and oddly enough people live in cities. There are few or no better examples of a city that can benefit from GA than greater Los Angeles: traveling from Santa Monica to anywhere takes hours in stop and go traffic, or a few minutes in a light plane. If I lived there (I don't) I think a light plane would be a Godsend in how it allows one to escape quickly from Smell A, maybe the only thing that would make it bearable to live there. Yes, people land those planes in all sort of places in an emergency but the number of people impacted is almost zero, particularly in comparison to people killed in car accidents in the same area. Cities are like that, and light aircraft are a great tool to access the middle of cities. Especially so since single engine aircraft demonstrated reliability good enough to fly over cities... let's say 70 or 80 years ago! In LA they've been used for that purpose ever since.
Piperboy84, when approached by relentlessly self-absorbed people, I too enjoy making amply clear that I don't agree with them, or their agenda. I think many of them in areas like yours, including temporary immigrants buying & selling $1.5M houses, have never been confronted with the idea that somebody might have a different perspective than their own. I think the rather clear lesson in that regard is no bad thing. Good on you.