snasteve wrote:

As someone who lives in Orange County, it would not be accurate to describe the inland empire as such these days. Yes the incomes are probably less, but they aren’t exactly low income you can’t be poor and live in California much anymore. If anything, the flight path into Los Angeles is over decidedly lower income areas. I personally would rather live in the IE or Palm Springs than there.

The way housing prices are, lower income is leaving the state entirely.

I think a lot of people still associate the IE with financial problems because it was the epicenter of the housing bubble meltdown in 2008. It bottomed out and has recovered since then, of course - but it was reported on so heavily at the time that I think for many the two have become indelibly linked. Areas like Fontana and Rialto are pretty scroungy, but there are some very well-off parts of Riverside, Rancho Cucamonga, Redlands, etc. - all within ONT's catchment area.

And I agree - the approach into LAX passes over some of the most economically desperate parts of the entire metro area. Inglewood is starting to gentrify (and the new stadium will only speed that up) but Lennox, Watts, Westmont, Lynwood, South Gate, etc. are still pretty rough in a lot of areas.

There's definitely potential for more service at ONT, and I imagine more service will come. But it is never going to be LA's Newark or Gatwick.

nine4nine wrote:

I’m tired of people thinking ONT is the saving grace for LA area airports. In the current state It’s not. The place isn’t bustling even during peak travel times. It serves the IE (low income market), the high desert (another low income market) and a small portion of Northern OC and that’s about it. Have any of you ever tried driving the 10 or 60 or 91 or 210 to/from Ontario from LA? It’s an f’ing nightmare. The only thing that can help is direct rail service to the airport from various areas. I tend to travel from very south OC to BUR because I can catch the train (1 hour 29 min) at the pier station and take it directly to the BUR terminal. And flights are a fraction of what they are at SNA. If ONT can do similar it would for sure be a plus.

Nobody characterized ONT as the "saving grace for LA area airports." Let's try to walk you through this: in 2016, LAX released a report estimating that 21% of traffic originated from Orange County and the Inland Empire. ONT is advantageous for all of the IE and all of OC, sans the NW communities along the 405 (although during period of heavy traffic, ONT will be advantageous). It doesn't break down LA County, but if you include the portions of Eastern LA County closer to ONT, that number's going to climb to 25% to 30%. Plus, there's portions of LA County where LAX may be closer, but ONT will be a faster drive at least part (or even most) of the day.

One can reasonably conclude that ONT is more advantageous, from a commuting perspective, for up to a third of LAX's current users. The reason they travel from LAX is because it offers more direct flights in higher frequency at better pricing. But if LAX truly reaches capacity, airlines will naturally begin to look at ONT for expansion, just as there's been a rise of interest in BUR, LGB and SNA in recent years. That's especially true given that LA/OC's population will likely stagnant in the future, whereas the IE will continue to grow. It's not that we're cheerleader for ONT. It's not that we're suggesting persons headed to Torrance, Hollywood or Downtown will use ONT. It's that we're pointing out that a natural "reliever" airport already exists in the region: IF LAX reaches capacity (and that's a big if), ONT will naturally grow, and people to who ONT is a shorter commute will naturally go there.

Sorry to disappoint a.net, but LA isn't going to build another airport in our lifetimes. So for those dreaming of that multitrillion dollar airport build on reclaimed land on an island in the Pacific... dream on.

LAX reaching capacity is a big IF, anyway. The LA Times did a good story a few months back highlighting that more than a third of Millennials in SoCal lived at home still -- double the national average. The Times talked to various experts who predicted that 2 to 2.5 MILLION Millenials who grew up in SoCal will leave the area (although it's unclear if they're including the hundreds of thousands who've already left). Now, if only the current Adminstration would end the "buy a house, run up housing prices so that locals can't afford them and get a Green Card FREE" program...

jsnww81 wrote:

And I agree - the approach into LAX passes over some of the most economically desperate parts of the entire metro area. Inglewood is starting to gentrify (and the new stadium will only speed that up) but Lennox, Watts, Westmont, Lynwood, South Gate, etc. are still pretty rough in a lot of areas.

Not some, but THE most economically depressed areas. You can readily rent a 3 bedroom, 2 bathroom home in South Central LA for around $800 -- slightly more than a quarter of the County average. The LA Times has done a couple pieces lately highlighting how LAX has never taken any measures to reduce noise in the region, which is pretty loud.