Build the new KCI in Johnson County? (Kansas City, Oakland: house, live in)

[luzianne]

Originally Posted by Mamabadger

Could someone tell me what the commute time is from western Shawnee/Lenexa area to KCI? Relocating to the area in June - hubby will be traveling on and out of KCI frequently - yet also has frequent mtgs in JoCo. Realtor suggested the above area as one that would accommodate both needs and said commute was not bad from this area due to proximity to 435. Coming into town on Monday to house hunt - but considering other areas too. Thx!

It's not bad. It depends on traffic, but if no traffic probably 20 minutes, 30 max. I live in Prairie Village and with no traffic I can get home in less than 30 minutes. If I were you I'd look further north, in Shawnee, to lessen the commute though - like west of 435, east of 7, north of Shawnee Mission Park, south of the river. Depends what you are looking for, but there's lots of newer housing along Shawnee Mission Parkway and Johnson Drive, west of 435 and east of 7 Highway. But I grew up out there and I'm partial to that area.

[kcmo]

Originally Posted by Ztonyg

There are trade offs whenever and wherever you decide to locate an airport.

Out here in Phoenix, as I mentioned earlier, the main airport is in the center of the metro area and 3 miles from Downtown.

The advantage is that almost nobody (except in the exurbs) complains that the airport is inconvenient. In fact, it's located within a 40 minute drive of at least 80-90% of the metro area's population. The disadvantage is that it is landlocked, is constantly subjected to noise ordinances and complaints by surrounding neighbors, and it effectively limits the maximum height of buildings in downtown Phoenix. Also, much of Phoenix's general aviation traffic is dispersed between several suburban airfields.

Kansas City and Detroit have the airport located in a similar position to downtown and the core of the suburban sprawl. In Kansas City the majority of the metro area population is South and East of the airport. In Detroit, the majority of the metro area population is North and East of the airport. In fact, Detroit's wealthiest suburban county border (Oakland) is about 25 minutes north of the airport similar to Kansas City's wealthiest suburban county border (Johnson) being about 25 minutes south of the airport. There haven't been calls in Michigan to open a second airport in Oakland county (to commercial service). The NIMBYs would've hated to have the airport there.

KCI should stay where it is. They just need to make sure that they build a cost-effective terminal structure for present (and projected future) needs.

DC, San Diego and San Jose are other cities with near downtown landlocked airports. Most large airports are in far flung locations though.

[Mamabadger]

Originally Posted by luzianne

If I were you I'd look further north, in Shawnee, to lessen the commute though - like west of 435, east of 7, north of Shawnee Mission Park, south of the river. Depends what you are looking for, but there's lots of newer housing along Shawnee Mission Parkway and Johnson Drive, west of 435 and east of 7 Highway. But I grew up out there and I'm partial to that area.

Thx!! This happends to be one of the exact areas we are looking in!

[denverian]

Originally Posted by Mamabadger

Thx!! This happends to be one of the exact areas we are looking in!

From out in that area, you take 435 up to the airport. It's basically a "country drive" the entire way. Traffic would be a non-issue.

[kcmo]

Originally Posted by denverian

From out in that area, you take 435 up to the airport. It's basically a "country drive" the entire way. Traffic would be a non-issue.

Kind of like taking 470 to DIA

[denverian]

Originally Posted by kcmo

Kind of like taking 470 to DIA

Except on 470, they charge $8 one way! I've only used that toll road once to get home from work, when the 25/225 freeways were totally jammed/accident filled. It was out of my way, but faster since nobody can afford to use it.

[Versatile]

Originally Posted by kcmo

A metro that won't spend a 1 billion to build a new terminal and bring the terminal out of the 1960's thinks it's a good idea to:

Mothball an entire airport with three modernized long runways (all with approaches that have little noise pollution over residential areas).

That is less than 30 minutes from half of the metro including the downtown to plaza core.

Waste all road and taxi way infrastructure at KCI.

Close a relatively new control tower and close the new economy parking lots.

And proceed to build a brand new airport that will be at least twice as far from downtown and about the same distance or further from as many people as a new airport would be closer to. For every person an airport in Gardner would be closer to, you would have at least that many that would become further away.

A new KCI with thousands of acres of flat land and clearing out all the approaches of any homes for miles beyond the ends of the runways will cost at least six billion and will no doubt cause planes to fly over heavily populated areas unless the airport is built close to or in Miami County or southern Cass County. (bannister and RG are not options).

Meanwhile, the I-29 corridor will quickly become an eyesore with massive closed runways that will take decades to redevelop and thousands of rooms in dozens of hotels will become unnecessary blight do to lack of demand without the airport.

All to be a little closer to people in Johnson County but only to those in South JoCo because trust me, any new airport built in the southern metro will be very far south. Like 30-40 minutes south of 435 and ridiculously far from downtown, the stadiums etc. Say goodby to any potential that KC did have for reviving its convention business. Not only will the airport be an hour and a half from downtown, it will cost a fortune to fly into it because of 6-8 billion in debt service.

Yep. That's KC for ya. Wouldn't surprise me one single bit...

Why wouldn't RG work? Why do all those house needed to be deleted? Plenty of airports that fly over houses

[kcmo]

Originally Posted by Versatile

Why wouldn't RG work? Why do all those house needed to be deleted? Plenty of airports that fly over houses

I tried to explain it below...

Originally Posted by kcmo

Richards Gebaur . Honestly same deal. People are quick to name RG as a could have been location for a commercial airport. That site is almost as bad as Bannister. I’ll list a few reasons.

No Room. Sure the air force base had a long runway. But it was ONE runway. There is no room to build another north/south runway. You would have to go to the other side of the BNSF tracks or tunnel the track under the airport (prohibitively expensive). There is zero room for an east/west runway which KC needs when the winds change direction. The E/W runway at RG was a very short general aviation runway. So basically in order to use RG as a replacement for KCI, you would have to go from three long runways to one long runway. That will no doubt cause constant delays.

Environmental. It would be nearly impossible to get through all the environmental issues of building a new airport at RG and extremely expensive to deal with any environmental issues if it’s even possible. RG is on the edge of the Blue River Valley. You cannot just go in there and clear out all that land and build and airport the size of KCI which is about 4-6 times the footprint of the old RG airport. The feds wouldn’t even allow it to happen. Noise would also be a huge issue. KCI’s flight patterns are perfect because the approaches to the runways generally are over undeveloped land for miles. That would not be the case for RG.

NIMBYs. Do you honestly think that Loch Lloyd, Belton, Grandview, Martin City etc residents will not throw a complete fit if an airport of that size were proposed for their backyard. Ten or more years of lawsuits, many of which the city will likely loose will not be fun. Not to mention all of the lawsuits by people that don't want the existing airport to move because they have a vested interest in its current location.

RG is not an option. It was an air force base. It would not have worked for a major commercial airport and it was way too expensive to maintain as a general aviation airport. That’s why the city closed it. There was no reason to keep maintaining a 10,000 long runway for a handful of Cessnas. The airshow was nice, but the big airshow went away when the base closed, not when the city closed the gen aviation airport. That was an awesome airshow because it was an air force base. The base closed! KC has a great airshow at downtown airport now. KC has redirected the FAA money it was getting for RG to Downtown airport and has since created one of the best gen avation business airports in the country. When RG was open, KCMO had two crappy gen aviation airports.

So bottom line is RG won’t work.

[kcmo]

Originally Posted by denverian

Except on 470, they charge $8 one way! I've only used that toll road once to get home from work, when the 25/225 freeways were totally jammed/accident filled. It was out of my way, but faster since nobody can afford to use it.

Yea, most bypass tollways are like that. There is one here in DC that nobody uses even while the beltway is jammed. Ever driven through Austin on I-35, if you have, you know how congested it is. I was just there and they have built a 75mph bypass around I-35 that nobody wants to use because of tolls.