U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Happy Easter!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Missouri > Kansas City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-13-2017, 08:36 AM
 
Location: Washington, DC area
10,705 posts, read 18,488,746 times
Reputation: 5405

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ztonyg View Post
That misguided Missouri bond law is the only reason we're even having this discussion.

If that law didn't exist we would be discussing the opening of the new terminal right now. A new terminal that would've cost the taxpayers nothing and probably allowed for more flights.

Unfortunately, anyone who thinks that Southwest will add more flights to Kansas City is probably dreaming. Due to the inaction of renovations at KCI, Southwest has focused on Denver and St. Louis instead.
So true. KC has really dropped the ball on their airport.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-13-2017, 10:05 AM
 
Location: Peoria, AZ
941 posts, read 1,004,168 times
Reputation: 1015
Quote:
Originally Posted by kcmo View Post
So true. KC has really dropped the ball on their airport.
If Kansas is serious about this, it could prompt Missouri to drop the law requiring a vote.

If that happens, KCI could finally get the terminal replacement that it desperately needs.

I think that the chances of convincing the Missouri legislature of the importance of this are probably greater than convincing the citizens of Kansas City.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2017, 11:43 AM
 
1,298 posts, read 982,763 times
Reputation: 658
Quote:
Originally Posted by adebord View Post
KIXD doesn't need any runways. It's a fully functional class D and could become a class C with radar services without much change (same as wichita or omaha).

The only thing that would need to be built is a terminal and decent access to I-35.
I thought the point was for this fantastical new airport in JoCo to actually rival and/or replace MCI. Here's the current KIXD side by side with MCI. Seems to me they'll need a lot more than a new terminal and a new access road...

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2017, 12:01 PM
 
Location: Florida and New England
1,101 posts, read 1,304,160 times
Reputation: 1358
For the sake of comparison, I searched the distances from New Century (KIXD) and from KCI (KMCI) to various points in the metro and beyond:

To Lee's Summit: KIXD -- 36 miles; KMCI -- 42 miles

To the Plaza: KIXD -- 27 miles; KMCI -- 24 miles

To Overland Park: KIXD -- 20 miles; KMCI -- 30 miles

To Blue Springs: KIXD -- 44 miles; KMCI -- 40 miles

To Downtown: KIXD -- 30 miles ; KMCI -- 20 miles

To Liberty: KIXD -- 46 miles; KMCI -- 21 miles

To Olathe: KIXD -- 7 miles; KMCI -- 39 miles

To Lawrence: KIXD -- 27 miles; KMCI -- 50 miles
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2017, 12:45 PM
 
12,607 posts, read 14,605,815 times
Reputation: 14096
Quote:
Originally Posted by rwiksell View Post
But since you mentioned the convenience factor, you really are showing your hand here. You want an "international airport" that's more convenient to the "majority" of the metro population, and to areas south and west. But the majority do not live in Johnson County. And let's be real. The airport would not be at 95th and Metcalf. It would be way out in the corner of the county, such that it would be no closer to Jackson County residents than KCI is.

Nobody is suggesting that more than half of KCI's passengers come from Kansas. But that means (at least) the other half is coming from Missouri. KCI is situated near the Kansas state line, and is equally distant from the two halves (JoCo and JaCo) of the bulk of the metro's population. (If anything, it's more convenient to Johnson County than to Jackson County.) So what's the issue?

I currently live in Springfield, MO, and do almost all my flying out of KCI. Sure, I wish it was closer, but if you have a 45-minute drive to the airport, that's NOTHING to complain about.

If mentioning the convenience factor is showing my hand, then I have never tried to hide my hand; I have been saying that all along. I don't care what out of towners think of the airport. I don't care what people who don't even LIVE in Kansas City think of the airport. I don't think we should replace the airport to impress or please other people. KCI is already an international airport. That hasn't stopped it from being convenient. But if a new airport is built it should be because Kansas Citians decide it needs one, not because politicians want it and certainly not to impress people from out of town.


Ever since the news broke that a terminal is being considered for Johnson County, I have seen numerous sources saying that MORE THAN HALF of KCI's passengers are from the Kansas side and that it is ridiculous that the people that use the airport the most have no say.


Sorry, but LOTS of people would complain about a 45 minute drive to an airport. Don't out of towners already complain that the airport is in BFE (again, not that I care what they think)? If THEY complain about it, why wouldn't local people complain about it? Just because you don't think it should be an issue for other people because you drive from Springfield doesn't mean other people wouldn't prefer it to be closer to the metro. The airport was built up north, probably anticipating that the city would grow in that direction. It has somewhat, but it has grown much more south and west than it has north.


Actually the airport wouldn't be as far out as the stadiums are.

Last edited by luzianne; 02-13-2017 at 01:22 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2017, 01:03 PM
 
Location: Germantown, Philadelphia
3,653 posts, read 1,767,273 times
Reputation: 2198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ztonyg View Post
If Kansas is serious about this, it could prompt Missouri to drop the law requiring a vote.

If that happens, KCI could finally get the terminal replacement that it desperately needs.

I think that the chances of convincing the Missouri legislature of the importance of this are probably greater than convincing the citizens of Kansas City.
Well, if it's changing the law we're talking about, the legislators are the only people who count here.

I suspect the city's delegation in Jeff City would be happy to assist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2017, 01:09 PM
 
12,607 posts, read 14,605,815 times
Reputation: 14096
Something doesn't seem right about changing the law to bypass voters so politicians can push something through.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2017, 01:09 PM
 
Location: Germantown, Philadelphia
3,653 posts, read 1,767,273 times
Reputation: 2198
Quote:
Originally Posted by luzianne View Post
If mentioning the convenience factor is showing my hand, then I have never tried to hide my hand; I have been saying that all along. I don't care what out of towners think of the airport. I don't care what people who don't even LIVE in Kansas City think of the airport. I don't think we should replace the airport to impress or please other people. KCI is already an international airport. That hasn't stopped it from being convenient. But if a new airport is built it should be because Kansas Citians decide it needs one, not because politicians want it and certainly not to impress people from out of town.
Technically, I'm one of those "people from out of town," but Kansas City is my home. I was around when KCI opened.

And I suspect that if you were to poll the majority of area residents, including those who live within the Kansas City city limits, who actually fly into or out of that airport, they'd agree that the city should get on with building a terminal suited for today's air travel regime.

The folks inside City Hall are on board for sure.

Shouldn't the assessments of those who actually use the airport carry some weight? It may have worked all right before 9/11, though even with the simple metal detectors, the configuration was less than ideal, but it definitely isn't built for the security requirements we now have in place.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2017, 01:31 PM
 
12,607 posts, read 14,605,815 times
Reputation: 14096
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarketStEl View Post
Technically, I'm one of those "people from out of town," but Kansas City is my home. I was around when KCI opened.

And I suspect that if you were to poll the majority of area residents, including those who live within the Kansas City city limits, who actually fly into or out of that airport, they'd agree that the city should get on with building a terminal suited for today's air travel regime.

The folks inside City Hall are on board for sure.

Shouldn't the assessments of those who actually use the airport carry some weight? It may have worked all right before 9/11, though even with the simple metal detectors, the configuration was less than ideal, but it definitely isn't built for the security requirements we now have in place.
I think if you were to poll the majority of area residents you would find just the opposite, because that is what KC residents have been saying all along - that they don't want to change the airport.


And I think city hall will use any tactic they can, including touting "security requirements" to get what they want.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2017, 01:53 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh PA
401 posts, read 299,960 times
Reputation: 426
Kansas is going to build a new commercial airport? Lol haha, that's the stupidest and funniest thing I have heard in a while. What next Brownback? A subway system for Wichita?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Missouri > Kansas City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top