I found the April 14 article “Original Architect Critical of Airport Update” to be of great interest and it raised several questions in my mind. As a native Pittsburgher, I viewed our heavily used pre-9/​11 hub facility with great pride. It’s pretty sad these days to walk to the end of concourses A and B and find them nearly deserted.

After the loss of our hub status, the general consensus in the local media and among many patients from my medical practice who were associated with the airlines was that once the bonds were paid off, the plan was to drop the landing fees as low as possible in the hope of regaining hub status. Those bonds are now paid off, but instead of seeking to re-establish the airport as a hub, we are instead being sold on the concept of a replacement for the landside terminal.

While I have little doubt that some of the components of our 1992 airport need to be updated or replaced, does this really justify the cost of closing the landside terminal and replacing the existing road system and parking garage? Furthermore, the cost of just throwing away these serviceable structures needs to be figured into the cost equation.

But most important, what happened to the idea of restoring our hub status through charging the lowest possible landing fees? I do not purport to be an expert on the airline industry and perhaps that concept is no longer possible in today’s world. But rather than just proposing a new landside terminal, the Airport Authority really owes the citizens of Allegheny County an answer as to why this idea is no longer possible, and if it is possible, why it is not being pursued.

Neal A. Schorr
Marshall

First Published: April 16, 2019, 4:00 a.m.