U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
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)
 
 
Old 04-29-2014, 03:27 PM
 
Location: Florida and New England
1,513 posts, read 1,616,571 times
Reputation: 2215

Advertisements

Lots of complaints, and still the sentiment is to simply rehab KCI in place? I think if there is ever an opportunity to move the airport to reflect the modern population distribution of the metro, this is that time. Yes, it would cost a couple of billion to make Richards-Gebaur (or New Century or even the old Bannister Mall) into a viable airport, but the city is talking about north of one billion anyhow, and we will still be stuck with the hour drive to central Platte County.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-29-2014, 04:03 PM
 
Location: Washington, DC area
11,002 posts, read 20,638,291 times
Reputation: 6029
Quote:
Originally Posted by westender View Post
Lots of complaints, and still the sentiment is to simply rehab KCI in place? I think if there is ever an opportunity to move the airport to reflect the modern population distribution of the metro, this is that time. Yes, it would cost a couple of billion to make Richards-Gebaur (or New Century or even the old Bannister Mall) into a viable airport, but the city is talking about north of one billion anyhow, and we will still be stuck with the hour drive to central Platte County.
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...

Last edited by kcmo; 04-29-2014 at 04:18 PM..
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2014, 07:51 AM
 
Location: Florida and New England
1,513 posts, read 1,616,571 times
Reputation: 2215
It is one proposal of many possible proposals. What we know now:

--the city (or at a minimum its aviation department) wants to spend probably two billion dollars to demolish existing terminal A (unoccupied now), do significant infrastructure work, and build a sprawling new terminal partly to centralize the security function (which function may radically change by the time the dust settles).

-- there is existing land, graded, at Richards Gebaur (around 135th and Holmes or so) which has supported an airport in the recent past; there is a functional airport at New Century which could take commercial flights with moderate modifications

-- the population trendlines indicate continued southward movement of the metro

-- the great majority of employment (which is what brings travellers to the metro) is now concentrated along the I-435 axis.

-- the time and mileage of getting to/ from KCI for a significant part of the metro is wasteful and also conducive to sprawl, sprawl that didn't exist when KCI was first built

Yes, a new airport location will cost money, in fact more money than a total rehab of the Platte City KCI campus. There would be new roads and rental car facilities, etc. But it is a proposal that should be analyzed rather than discarded.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2014, 09:56 AM
 
2,202 posts, read 2,540,794 times
Reputation: 1969
Quote:
Originally Posted by westender View Post
-- the population trendlines indicate continued southward movement of the metro

-- the great majority of employment (which is what brings travellers to the metro) is now concentrated along the I-435 axis.
False and false.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2014, 09:58 AM
 
2,202 posts, read 2,540,794 times
Reputation: 1969
Quote:
Originally Posted by kcmo View Post
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...
The metro doesn't think that. A few JoCo boosters do. It's not even a serious topic of discussion in this metro.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2014, 10:30 AM
 
Location: Washington, DC area
11,002 posts, read 20,638,291 times
Reputation: 6029
Quote:
Originally Posted by westender View Post
It is one proposal of many possible proposals. What we know now:

--the city (or at a minimum its aviation department) wants to spend probably two billion dollars to demolish existing terminal A (unoccupied now), do significant infrastructure work, and build a sprawling new terminal partly to centralize the security function (which function may radically change by the time the dust settles).

-- there is existing land, graded, at Richards Gebaur (around 135th and Holmes or so) which has supported an airport in the recent past; there is a functional airport at New Century which could take commercial flights with moderate modifications

-- the population trendlines indicate continued southward movement of the metro

-- the great majority of employment (which is what brings travellers to the metro) is now concentrated along the I-435 axis.

-- the time and mileage of getting to/ from KCI for a significant part of the metro is wasteful and also conducive to sprawl, sprawl that didn't exist when KCI was first built

Yes, a new airport location will cost money, in fact more money than a total rehab of the Platte City KCI campus. There would be new roads and rental car facilities, etc. But it is a proposal that should be analyzed rather than discarded.
But KC doesn’t need a new airport. KC’s airport just needs a new terminal building. HUGE difference.

I don’t see how anybody can remotely justify the expense of building a brand new airport regardless of location when KC’s airport is fine.

The location is fine too.

The metro is no longer only growing south. The Northland has been growing just as fast or faster than Johnson County over the past decade. I mentioned before that the Northland has 75% of the population of JoCo and believe it or not, many people choose to live in the Northland and many companies are based in the Northland because of the convenience of the airport. KCI is not out in a field like most people in Johnson County think. It’s actually very close to the 350,000 people in the northland, Fort Leavenworth, KS (one of KCIs biggest customers), St Joseph, KCK (and KCK’s extensive industrial district), and it’s not a terrible drive to downtown, the plaza etc. KCI is pretty convenient to half of the metro. It makes zero sense to spend north of six billion dollars to move to the other size so it becomes convenient to the other half of the metro while leaving the half of the metro that built near KCI hanging. Especially those residents and companies that actually chose to be near the airport rather than move to a location 70 miles away and complain about its location. KCI is now one of the driving forces of growth in KCMO’s northland. Why in the world would the city of KCMO mothball KCI and build a new airport closer to Johnson County? KCMO does some pretty stupid things, but that would be economically suicidal for the city in all kinds of ways. Destroying a perfectly good airport and going into huge debt to build a new one to serve its primary competitor in a different state. There are so many reasons this is illogical. A new terminal will cost between 1 and 2 billion. A new airport (which is absolutely not needed) would cost at least six billion, probably closer to ten billion. KC could build one hell of a regional light rail system for that extra 5-6 billions dollar it wasted on moving the airport.

But let’s pretend KCI fell into a sink hole and needs to be rebuilt in a new location. Where would you put it?

You mentioned Bannister. Just bringing up Bannister makes me wonder if you know anything about airports. I’m not even going to list all the reasons it won’t’ work there, but it won’t.

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.

Where else could you build a new airport out south?

You would have to go WAY south. In Cass County you would have to go south of 187th Street to avoid as much development as possible and find enough suitable land. In Johnson County you would have to go south of 200th St (basically Miami County). Jackson County’s topography would be too challenging plus you would have to go clear to Lone Jack. The only place you could really build a new airport within 40 miles of downtown would be on the other side of the Missouri river in southern Leavenworth County and that wouldn’t make a whole lot of sense.

But since this is all about having it closer to Johnson County, let’s say it’s built at 199th and Pflumm.

Do you really think this would be good for anybody except developers in southern Johnson County and Miami County? People complain now when KCI is 20 minutes from Downtown. What will they say when it’s 60 minutes or longer? That would kill KC’s conventions and Overland Park will never be a national convention destination no matter how much people there think it would.

Spend a billion dollars. Bring KCI out of the 1960’s by building a modern, efficient terminal to compliment a great suburban location with three long uncongested runways etc. Spend another billion bringing light rail to KCI from Downtown. Then you have like 6 billion left over from not building a new airport do what you want with. Like finally working across state lines and building a regional transit system, continuing to build up downtown and play catch up there etc.

Last edited by kcmo; 04-30-2014 at 11:48 AM..
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2014, 11:15 AM
 
Location: Washington, DC area
11,002 posts, read 20,638,291 times
Reputation: 6029
Oh and one more tid bit for people that think KC's economy revolves around JoCo. JoCo is an important part of metro KC, but it's the only county in Kansas that really does well while the MO side has more counties with more going on.

from:
http://www.flykci.com/_FileLibrary/F...ile%20size.pdf

You can see that in 2010. 35% of passengers using KCI were from JoCo and WyCo. 65% were from MO side and St Joe. Pretty much in line with the population of the metro.

Development in the Northland is going to easily surpass JoCo with the First and Second creek water shed sewers opening up (across I-29 from KCI) that is projected to add 75,000 new residents (Green shaded area on map below) That's in addition to the rapidly expanding areas near Shoal Creek (Blue shaded area below) which will continue to boom and add another 40,000 residents over the next ten years as well. Plus many other smaller infill projects throughout the northland. The Northalnd is where JoCo was in the 1980's. The area near KCI will not look the same in ten years.

http://fox4kc.com/2013/04/10/kansas-...sewer-project/

Compared to developing areas in southern JoCo, most of the northland growth could be considered "infill" development as they are within 15 miles of downtown KCMO.


Last edited by kcmo; 04-30-2014 at 11:38 AM..
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2014, 12:58 PM
 
Location: Florida and New England
1,513 posts, read 1,616,571 times
Reputation: 2215
I do think that the airport will _not_ move. But it is always interesting to hear and to debate these proposals.

If KC has significant growth further southward (and I believe that is the trendline), AND if the traffic worsens (and of course it might improve), then I think there is an outside chance that an airline starts commercial operations out of New Century.

Bannister wouldn't work, looking at the topography. Richards-Gebaur would require some kind of clearing for a longer east-west runway, and of course there is the related infrastructure.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2014, 01:57 PM
 
992 posts, read 978,617 times
Reputation: 838
I am not saying move the airport, but could we please get just a few commercial flights out of Wheeler/Downtown to major hubs so downtown and the city has a more convenient drive to air travel access? Runway 1/19 can more than accommodate regional jets - which are a lot quieter now and would probably conform to noise abatement procedures. Also, you could convert or rehab the old terminal for access...

I would prefer to avoid driving all the way up to KCI altogether, and would prefer to just get to KMKC from which I could get to a major hub like KORD in about an hour.

The Northlands seem extremely sparse to me...granted, in the seven years I have been here the only time I have ever gone to the Northlands was to go to the airport (and one time for a Superbowl party, I think).

Last edited by KC_Sleuth; 04-30-2014 at 02:05 PM..
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2014, 03:36 PM
 
Location: A safe distance from San Francisco
10,244 posts, read 7,062,373 times
Reputation: 10992
Quote:
Originally Posted by KC_Sleuth View Post
I am not saying move the airport, but could we please get just a few commercial flights out of Wheeler/Downtown to major hubs so downtown and the city has a more convenient drive to air travel access? Runway 1/19 can more than accommodate regional jets - which are a lot quieter now and would probably conform to noise abatement procedures. Also, you could convert or rehab the old terminal for access...

I would prefer to avoid driving all the way up to KCI altogether, and would prefer to just get to KMKC from which I could get to a major hub like KORD in about an hour.

The Northlands seem extremely sparse to me...granted, in the seven years I have been here the only time I have ever gone to the Northlands was to go to the airport (and one time for a Superbowl party, I think).
It can indeed, as it accommodated 707s back in the day - including Air Force One for Presidential visits in the 70s and 80s after everything else had moved to KCI.

That little airport was a sight to behold up until 1972.
Rate this post positively 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.


 
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:

Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 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.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top