Days after Chicago released more details about the cost of a multibillion-dollar plan to modernize and expand O’Hare International Airport, an aviation consultant said Thursday that the project could be so expensive that it would turn the world’s busiest airfield into a white elephant.
The expenses associated with the proposal could make it too expensive for budget air carriers to use the airfield and discourage other airlines from using it, said Jon Ash, managing director of a Washingtonaviation firm hired by opponents of the plan.
“What you can potentially create here is a Catch-22, and that takes you into a downward spiral,” said Ash of Global Aviation Associates Ltd.
But city and airline officials disputed his claims, saying the plan makes fiscal sense and will reduce delays, which will save the airlines money and passengers time.
“The airlines are certainly cost-sensitive, no doubt about it,” said Mary Frances Fagan, a spokeswoman for American Airlines. “But we have done a careful analysis and have decided it’s better to spend the money to build new runways in the long run because it will save money in delays.”
The Suburban O’Hare Commission, which is fighting the expansion, sponsored a breakfast meeting Thursday for the Elk Grove Village business community where Ash spoke.
His comments came on the heels of Chicago’s release of a 20-year master plan that showed the price of doing runway work, new terminals and other facilities as $14.8 billion, putting it closer to the suburban group’s cost estimates. The city says the $6.6 billion figure for runway work and a western terminal with about 55 gates has not changed.
Still, the city’s announcement helped boost attendance at Thursday’s forum, said Elk Grove Village Mayor Craig Johnson, the commission’s vice chairman. Last week, about 100 people were registered. After the city released the new numbers, the registration swelled to 350, he said.
“We have been beaten up an awful lot over the past few years,” Johnson said. “Anyone who followed the press over the weekend saw, lo and behold, we have been right.”
“We are not up here to say we told you so,” he added. “We’re here to say you need to see the entire picture. We need to look at what’s best for the region. We need to work together to make sure we all can survive and not be led down a primrose path that can lead to disaster for our communities and more importantly for you folks, the business community.”
In his report, Ash based his analysis on the assumption that parking and retail revenues, among other things, would cover $5 billion of the project’s cost and $10 billion in bonds would be issued to cover the rest. Factoring in interest rates and a more conservative estimate on airline traffic increases, he says the percentage of each passenger’s ticket fee used to pay airport facility costs would jump to 17.7 percent from about 6.2 percent, he said.
Such an increase would make it difficult for budget airlines and possibly other airlines to operate at the airport, he said. Instead, a flight from Norfolk, Va., to Albuquerque, he said, might connect in Dallas rather than Chicago because it would be cheaper, he said.
United Airlines spokesman Jason Schechter said Ash’s calculations are based on hypotheticals. Overall, he said, the airline is supportive of the modernization project.
“We expect the cost to be reasonable, given the work that needs to be done,” he said.
Rosemarie Andolino, executive director of the O’Hare expansion project, said, “The most important thing here is the airlines know their business and they completely support this project.”
