 |
 |
|
|
EDITORIAL RCAA is still trying to sort out the news that Southwest Airlines and Alaska Airlines might leave Seattle-Tacoma International Airport to escape the big cost increases for airlines being levied to pay for the Airport's expansion. Obviously, there is for RCAA an element of “We told you so”. RCAA has been warning for years that Sea-Tac's expansion would cost too much and would produce too little gain for the money--especially the $1 billion-plus third runway. What would happen, we asked, when the airlines go bankrupt or want out? The Port's financial projections depend on all the airlines staying and paying much higher rates. It's not certain that Southwest or Alaska actually will move, but the magic words, “Your costs are so high that we might leave”, have now been spoken. There are serious leaks in the dike. If Southwest or Alaska doesn't in fact go, someone else will. That airline will enjoy a nice competitive advantage, operating out of Boeing Field or Paine Field with costs far below those of their competitors. Where Will It End? Even if Southwest does move to Boeing Field, that is not the end of the story. Inevitably, someone one will start to use Paine Field. There is a significant local market in the Everett-South County area, & room for growth at Paine Field (1284 acres, compared to BFI's 596, & very few flights per day at present). A few additional flights in & out each day would not have much impact on neighbors (almost nothing compared to Sea-Tac). And then there's Portland, a genuine international airport, with all needed facilities. For a lot of fliers, Portland is about as close as Sea-Tac. For others who live or work closer to Sea-Tac, why not drive an extra hour or so to Portland, & save a lot of money, if the price is right, & the time spent is right? Whither the Port of Seattle? The Airport brings in 71 percent of the Port's revenue. Even the members of the Port Commission now realize that if just one airline declines to pay an exorbitant price to fly in & out of Sea-Tac Airport, then the entire Port operation (warehouses, marinas, Fishermen's Terminal, cargo docks, cruise-ship terminals, industrial parks, housing projects & other real-estate speculations) is in jeopardy. The Port of Seattle is all one “business”, heavily in debt, and faces the potential of grave problems in meeting its debt obligations should the Sea-Tac revenue stream fail to increase at the expected rate. Noise Issues Must Be Addressed Equally obvious, we hope, is our concern for the nearest neighbors of Boeing Field. Frankly, we had always thought that the exodus from Sea-Tac would begin with a move to Paine Field, or to Portland, not to BFI. And that may yet turn out to be the case. Either way, the management of all the airports need to exert themselves to protect their neighbors from excessive noise and air pollution. Neither airport can refuse to let a scheduled airline use the runways, but an airport need not provide terminals, hangars & so on at its own expense, unless it wishes to. So, there is plenty of room for shrewd bargaining, based on solid understanding of the possible impacts. King County and Snohomish County governments need to learn as much as possible about the noise characteristics of the aircraft that new airline tenants propose to bring with them. They will need to have serious discussions about scheduling. They need to bring the neighbors – even those most opposed to any new air traffic – into the discussions very early on, & sincerely. Scheduled airlines will use Paine & BFI. That will take some pressure off Sea-Tac as an airport (though increasing pressure on the Port's finances). But these changes are NOT long-term solutions. They do not satisfy the regional goal, established a decade ago, for at least one new major airport serving the metropolitan area. Soon now, this state is going to have to get its act together and at least landbank plenty of acreage for the airport of the next century. |
|
|
| Home | What's the Latest? | Links | Library | Newsletter | About Us | ||
