Railing Against Airport Connectors

Stephen Smith questions the reasoning behind this increasingly popular breed of capital project, arguing the real benefits of connectors rarely justify their hefty price tags.
October 18, 2010, 1pm PDT | Lynn Vande Stouwe
Share Tweet LinkedIn Email Comments

Smith contends that because airport connectors are poorly integrated with existing transit systems and usually have only two stops-a local hub and the airport-they offer little or no secondary benefits or opportunities for transit-oriented development. He calls out the Bay Area's proposed Oakland Airport Connector as the most wasteful example, saying the project is simply a $500 million replacement of an existing a three-mile bus route that will cost riders double the fare.

Smith writes:

"Airport connectors are often little more than highly inefficient subsidies to the airline industry, wealthy frequent fliers, and construction unions – which, now that I think about it, might explain why legislators love them so much.

Full Story:
Published on Friday, October 15, 2010 in Market Urbanism
Share Tweet LinkedIn Email