A plea for partnership in third-airport debate

For a region with more than its share of internecine battlesbetween city, suburbs and state, not much can top the fight over aproposed third major airport for the Chicago region.

It has poisoned the political atmosphere, impeding compromiseand progress on important issues ranging from school reform andeducation funding to riverboat casinos for Chicago and a new stadiumfor the Bears. Political spite has ruled for too long, and nowthreatens this region's standing as the nation's premiertransportation hub and convention center.

The bickering must stop. All sides must recognize that nothingcan be allowed to jeopardize Chicago's natural advantage - itsmidcontinental location at the center of the nation's transportationsystem and an economically thriving hinterland. From that flows thisregion's economic vitality - a fact that has been understood by everygeneration of Chicagoans preceding ours. It explains Chicago's veryexistence and its historical development as a waterway, then railroadand now highway and aviation hub.

For anyone to argue that this natural advantage must in any waybe restricted to serve a narrow political or economic self-interestis not just blind, but also destructive of the regional commonweal.But that is exactly what is happening, as our comprehensive series,"A Third Airport," reveals: Other airports, growing faster thanO'Hare, are catching up. Astonishingly, some regard this retreatfrom leadership as reasonable, even advisable.

We don't.

Nor do we agree with those who see the solution in purely blackand white terms, an either-or proposition between the growth ofO'Hare or the construction of a new south suburban airport. O'Hareneeds, at a minimum, to remain the nation's most efficient andon-time facility. As our series pointed out, technologicalenhancements can reduce delays and increase flight capacity, but anew runway ultimately might be necessary.

Nothing, however, should be done that is unmindful of theairport's neighbors, many of whom were there long before the airportbecame the giant it is today. We're not sure that the decades ofdistrust, nurtured by the city's stubborn refusal to listen to thepleas of the airport's neighbors, can ever be erased. The city'ssoundproofing program is welcome, but it is only a beginning.

O'Hare's ability to absorb growth is finite, however. Manyaviation studies, including those in which Chicago has participatedand agreed with, have concluded that the region will need increasedair capacity. Planning for that capacity at an airport in theregion's underserved southern and eastern communities must continueapace. Acquiring the land, if necessary to preserve the site fromencroaching development, must not be ruled out. Wait too long, andthe airport will have to be located even farther out, thus becomingan even greater force for urban sprawl.

At the same time, officials must proceed with planning foralternatives - among them the construction of high-speed rail linkingChicago with Midwestern cities. The point is, preparing for thisregion's growth must not amount to a zero-sum game, in which oneproposal wins and all others lose.

The difficulties of building a new airport are formidable. Theyinclude issues of financing, displacement, ground access and theenvironment. Some of those issues, including noise pollution andresidential displacement, argue for an airport at the fringes ofurban development. But that also imposes other requirements likelyto cause problems, such as the need for high-speed transit betweenthe airport and the city.

Those problems are not insurmountable, however, as studies haveshown. No other proposed airport has been studied as much. The needis well-established, but not the political solution. That willrequire compromise and partnership. Because the airport is for theregional good, the city, suburbs and state should share the airport'scontrol, as well as its jobs, contracts and other benefits.

Soon, Illinois will unveil the latest study - on the airport'sfinancial feasibility. This study is crucial: A new regional airportmust be workable, and it must not drain other necessary publicprojects. It must be able to attract passengers and airlines on itsown merits. It must have the support of the aviation industry. Itmust not weaken O'Hare and Midway airports, the region's importanteconomic engines. Nor must it siphon off the revenues generated bythese airports.

If it turns out that building a new airport is not a viable wayto nurture and expand the region's economy and jobs, then so be it.But not to make an effort in partnership to find out, because ofshortsighted, parochial or vindictive reasons, is inexcusable.

A plea for partnership in third-airport debate

For a region with more than its share of internecine battlesbetween city, suburbs and state, not much can top the fight over aproposed third major airport for the Chicago region.

It has poisoned the political atmosphere, impeding compromiseand progress on important issues ranging from school reform andeducation funding to riverboat casinos for Chicago and a new stadiumfor the Bears. Political spite has ruled for too long, and nowthreatens this region's standing as the nation's premiertransportation hub and convention center.

The bickering must stop. All sides must recognize that nothingcan be allowed to jeopardize Chicago's natural advantage - itsmidcontinental …