Nor would a new runway, which would be built partly on fill in the river and which would require moving United Parcel Service's large airfreight facility, attract coveted nonstop international service to Asia, South America, and Africa that the business and hospitality communities want, says the airline that transports nearly 70 percent of air travelers here.
After months of discussions and an apparent impasse with the city, US Airways is taking its message to civic and business leaders in an effort to put the brakes on the overhaul the Federal Aviation Administration approved a year ago.
US Airways and Southwest Airlines Co. wrote the airport in summer 2010, expressing concerns about the costs they would bear and what they called premature construction of a runway that alone would not greatly alleviate delays in takeoffs and landings because the airspace here, shared with New York, is the most congested in the world.
Tensions have surfaced because the city wants airlines to sign a 15-year lease that includes paying for the runway, which the city estimates would cost $1.8 billion and which the airlines say would cost $3 billion.
If they do not come to terms by July, the city "will go in a different direction," said Rina Cutler, the city's deputy mayor for transportation. "We would not do a lease-and-use agreement. Part of it would be an ordinance, which will set rates and not allow them to vote yea or nay.
"We are going to move forward. We are going to do the runway."
An ordinance, if passed by City Council, would replace a lease and would allow the city to dictate rates and charges to airlines. Under an ordinance, airlines would have no financial commitment to the airport beyond 30 days and could, for example, take their flights elsewhere.
