The case for Palmdale Airport, part I

Editorial Focus: The following is the first in a two-part series of opinions rebutting, point by point, the published comments on Palmdale Airport by Dan Garcia, former Los Angles Airports Commission chairman.

Response: To our knowledge, it was never proposed that Palmdale replace LAX as an international hub. It is far from ludicrous, however, to suggest that Palmdale could become an international gate, especially in the long-term future to which the Los Angeles Airports Master Plan is directed.

As Garcia observed, shortages in regional aviation capacity are most acute for international traffic. In the foreseeable future, Palmdale might well be a key reliever airport by accepting domestic flights to free up gates at LAX, by hosting international flights, by accepting supersonic operations not now possible at LAX or by all three.

Assertion: "By the late '70s, even Palmdale Airport supporters had lowered the projected potential future passenger volumes from 100 million to 12 (million to) 14 million per year. This would make Palmdale's regional airport not an international destination."

Response: The statement represents a maximum of conjecture from a minimum of fact. Traffic projections were those of the Department of Airports - including the original 100 million number used to justify purchase of 17,000 acres for "Palmdale Intercontinental Airport." The D.O.A. chose the name, not people in Palmdale.

Assertion: "LAWA's efforts to place even commuter flights out of Palmdale Airport have previously failed due to lack of passenger demand. Last month, United Express announced it was terminating its service from Palmdale to LAX."

Response: Absence of air service operations at Palmdale is not a result of lack of demand. Surveys of locally originated ticketing reveal a strong local passenger demand and a preference for flying to and from Palmdale. But the demand is for point-to-point connection to a major east-west hub. It is not for noncompetitive, overpriced, infrequent 60-mile commuter flights to L.A. International.

America West Airlines was operating profitably with Palmdale service to its Las Vegas hub, and that service was dropped only due to an industrywide airline turndown.

Assertion: ". . . Ontario airport has essentially taken precedence over Palmdale because of the 2 million-plus people who now live, work and commute east of Ontario."

Response: The former commissioner would seem to want to have it both ways. In the same article he said the region would STILL be short of capacity, even if El Toro was built and Ontario and Burbank expanded - hence, his argument for doubling LAX, while dismissing the Palmdale solution.

While he cites population numbers for distant (from L.A.) areas of San Bernardino and Riverside counties, he ignores the millions in the San Fernando, Santa Clarita and Antelope valleys and eastern Kern County who would benefit from Palmdale airport flights.

Assertion: ". . . the Palmdale Airport draft EIR advocated the need for a new highway through the San Gabriel Mountains to make ground access work. This was obviously never done and was abandoned. Dreams for high-speed rail connections have repeatedly been touted as another means of making Palmdale viable, but dropped each time because of astronomical (multi-billion dollar) costs. Even if a high-speed rail system were in place, rail alone provides no more than 25% of passenger volumes to any airport in North America."

Response: Excelling neither as historian nor visionary, Garcia assumes full buildout of infrastructure BEFORE maturity. Hardly anything is constructed to maximum capacity - not even LAX. There was talk (in the late '60s) of a tunnel under the San Gabriels.

Let's talk about what's real and here - an expanding and still expandable Antelope Valley (14) Freeway that is far less congested even at peak hours than the gridlocked 405; existing Metrolink service to the San Fernando Valley and L.A.; and easy right of way for elevated high speed-trains right along the freeway route.

LAX expansion is expected to cost $8 billion to $12 billion (in today's dollars.) We could do a lot of transit work for a fraction of that total - if visionaries decide.

Assertion: "If Palmdale were to be the major airport substitute for LAX . . ."

Response: We digress briefly to point out a disconnect in the entire premise of the former commissioner's view of Palmdale, the fallacious notion that Palmdale is to be a "substitute" for LAX. PALMDALE SPELLS RELIEF for LAX - not replacement.

Assertion: ". . . one must also question the air quality impact of hauling passengers and cargo long distances."

Response: Palmdale Regional Airport is closer to many L.A. area destinations than Ontario or even LAX itself. And taking into account the time of travel to and from locations and airports, Palmdale is arguably as fast or faster to reach. Air pollution is worse from engines idling on the 405 in heavy traffic. Before throwing out "distance," objections, consult a map.