Quote:
Originally Posted by 202_Cyclist
PragmaticIdealist:
With all due respect, air travel certainly is a key enabler of economic growth but the rate the landing fees are set at at LAX and Ontario has almost no effect on job growth or other macroeconomic conditions in Southern California. High unemployment and one of the most depressed housing markets in the US is a far more accurate explanation of why Ontario has been losing flights.
|
If an airline has to charge passengers double to fly from ONT, instead of LAX, and, if that premium results in a loss of ridership from ONT to LAX that, in turn, leads the airline to discontinue one or more flights from the former airport, then, for those many desirable employers who located near ONT to have access to one or more of those flights, there becomes a need to relocate, especially as the condition persists.
The fees at ONT are, by far, the highest of those being charged by airports in the SCAG and SanDAG regions. And, some officials with the L.A.W.A. finally admitted recently that they have only been paying lip service to the obligations the agency is under to regionalize air-travel demand at LAX.
Airlines are also desperate to have more assurances that reliable ground access to the airports in the Inland Empire will be available in the medium and long terms. Freeways between downtown Los Angeles and ONT, for instance, are expected to create travel times of more than two hours by 2035. So, high-speed rail to and from the Inland Empire is not an option; the mode and the routes are absolutely necessary for the economic competitiveness of the entire SCAG region. Additionally, San Diego County has no suitable locations for new airports or expansions while Lindbergh Field is currently operating well over capacity. So, high-speed rail is expected to better connect Inland Empire airports with the more southerly urban core, as well.