Steve Rose Says To Heck With Your Input, Kansas City

So we're still kicking around the idea of a new, 1 billion dollar, single terminal for our airport or doing the fiscally and environmentally responsible thing and revamping the existing ones. Seems our Kansas City Star wrote and posted an article by local opinion-meister Steve Rose. I found the article under this headline:

Steve Rose: What if a new KCI 

never gets off the ground?

But on Facebook, last evening, it was posted under this heading and I think it's far more accurate.

Kansas City Council must avoid a public vote on KCI upgrade

Here's the gist of it, according to the Star.

Steve Rose claims that, "for the good of the entire metro, Kansas City must get around a public vote and not allow the naysayers to set the agenda for Kansas City’s future."

What gets me about this is that Mr. Rose is saying not only should we commit to spending a billion dollars or so on a new, single terminal, throwing and walking away from the existing but screw you, Kansas Citians, we also don't want your opinion on the matter. 

It's the people's airport, it's our airport and God knows the people's money, more importantly, out of our own pockets, but don't let us have a voice in the matter, eh, Mr. Rose?

What part of Democracy is that?

We have a functioning airport. It was and still is a good design. It could be upgraded and redone FAR more responsibly and efficiently both in money and design, achieve the security and other goals we want and need and save untold millions of dollars. 

The Airport Authority has been intentionally not keeping up the existing buildings because they're gunning for a pretty, shiny, new, very expensive airport and gift to themselves.

Here's what we ought to do.

For security, let's have all travelers go to and enter what is now Terminal B. Then, those same travelers could go to their gate for their flight, either in that same Terminal B or, by added walkways, out to either Terminal A or B. 

If you look at Denver's airport, as one great example, you know they have transportation from the check in building, out to the gates and flights.  We're helped greatly because we don't need to do the shuttles they did. 

This would be extremely workable and again, fiscally and environmentally responsible, both. It would keep costs for the airport down. 

It's the right thing to do.

And all of this includes asking the people in the area--who will have to pay for it all, don't kid yourselves--what they want.

Anything less is an economic dictatorship.

Links:

Save KCI! | Because Better Solutions Come From Honest Discussions

Save KCI | Facebook

Save KCI (@SaveKCI) | Twitter

Breaking news on Southwest Airlines' take on our airport

According to Missouri Representative Sam Graves Facebook page today:

At today's KCI Terminal Advisory Group meeting, Southwest Airlines officials cautioned that a new terminal is "unlikely to significantly increase non-stop flights or passenger demand" and could be "so expensive that it drives up costs and drives away airlines." 

It's as they're saying, as we've said all along, if we build it, they won't necessarily come.

Could we put nails in this coffin now?

Please?

That noise you just heard was any new airport being killed

First, Representative Sam Graves has made it clear, time and again, that tearing down our existing airport only to throw it away and build a new one is absurd. Here is his website from last August:

Congressman Sam Graves : Latest News : ICYMI: No new KCI

Then, last week, Southwest Airlines--our biggest tenant at the airport right now--came out squarely, publicly against the costs of the new debacle airport:

Southwest Airlines wants a bigger voice on KCI's future

Apparently, according to a report on KCPT, Southwest had told public officials for some time that they were against this whole idea. It's only just now they decided to go public.

Then, today, I saw this little YouTube video from our own one-and-the-same KCPT and their Kansas City Week in Review  show. It's loaded with not just cautions but good to great reasons Kansas City shouldn't--and even likely won't--tear down our current airport, only to build a new, extremely expensive new one:



God, I loved that.

Seems as though common sense and fiscal responsibility is going to prevail after all.

But stay tuned.


 

Kansas City: Prepared to get screwed

Yes, we're about to be screwed, Kansas Citians. Wait for it.

The big, main story on the front page of the Star today tells it:

Terminal A is the likely destination of the new KCI

Aviation director tells the City Council the preferred choice is to build a new all-in-one terminal there.

For reasons that only appeal to airport authorities, security companies and airline companies, our beloved Kansas City International Airport (MCI) is still, still being considered for total demolition and replacement.

Sure, it's convenient. Sure, we like it and sure, it will be hugely, hugely wasteful, expensive and senseless to tear the whole thing down and build an entire new one but that's just what our own airport authority wants to do.

Screw you people.

Screw your opinions and preferences.

We're getting a new airport terminal whether we like it or not.

Those ultra-convenient drop-offs and pick-ups we've always enjoyed?

They'll be gone.

The functional buildings and functionality of the airport? 86'ed.

And the worst part of it all?

We get to pay for it all.

It's disgusting.

If you agree, go here and tell them so at the Star's poll today: http://www.kansascity.com/2012/10/19/3874571/poll-what-should-be-done-with.html

Link: http://www.kansascity.com/2012/10/18/3873386/terminal-a-seems-likely-site-of.html

Omaha flooding

 

A friend of my Sister-in-Law sent this picture to her earlier this week, showing the Omaha airport as they were flying out. As you can see, there is already a great deal of water and flooding in the area. As my brother said, hopefully, for their sake, the levees keep the river out of the airport. I wouldn't bet on it, at this point, since the river is far from cresting, apparently, and they announced yesterday they were releasing far more water up North, in the Dakotas. Hope and/or pray for the best, folks. It isn't pretty and it's getting worse.

A toast, tribute and salute to Southwest Airlines

I post this for two reasons.  First, just to entertain you, in case you missed it.  It is rather funny and fun.  Second, to give Southwest Airlines its due.  I firmly believe this Filipino Cebu airline and its staff wouldn't be doing this and having fun like this unless Southwest did it first, partly for fun and partly to entertain their passengers.  Southwest proved a long time ago you can have fun, still do serious business and make a profit.

So good on you, Southwest Airlines.   You're not perfect but you get us where we need or want to go usually as inexpensively as possible, more on time than any other airline usually and, finally, you put fun in commercial flying.

Airlines making profits--and how that effects you and me

Have you seen, this week, how airlines are finally making profits? Wow. How long has that been? I don't know when the last time was I saw where an airline--other than Southwest--made money. Check it out: Delta, United and US Airways all reported profits. American Airlines, sadly, missed out on the little party--can you imagine the heck that's being raised over there, in their boardrooms? I love this quote from Deseret News: "American parent AMR Corp. lost $10.7 million in the second quarter, a huge improvement over the loss of $390 million in the same period last year. Still, the loss stuck out compared with the combined $1 billion in profits reported by US Airways, Delta Air Lines Inc. and United parent UAL Corp." Ouch. Anyway, the way this effects you and me back down here on Main Street is that this came about in two ways: the airlines have cut capacity so there are fewer seats up there, meaning we'll be more crowded on the planes--and those charges for your bags are definitely not going away. Links to associated posts: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-07-14/delta-may-lead-airlines-profit-with-more-fliers-fewer-seats.html http://www.deseretnews.com/mobile/article/700049978/Airline-profits-up-except-for-American.html

Simplify! Simplify!

With a nod to Henry David Thoreau.

On a business flight today, I read an article in the in-flight magazine about a new trend in for runners and their running shoes.

The trend stems from research that finds that, since the 1930's, our speed runners have been running slower and slower, first, and second, virtually all runners have been experiencing more and more injuries. (For more information, see Christopher McDougall, "Born to Run").

What's that tell you?

It seems the running shoe companies have been making our shoes more and more complicated, technical and expensive with the result that it's worse for us and our feet.

Crazy.

Fit in with our current economic downturn, it seems we've come upon a time where we're to simplify. My Mom would have loved this if she were here.

So, herewith, are some thoughts on how we could and should, possibly, simplify further:

--How about we take all the chemicals out of our food? For thousands of years, we've and eaten our our food without them. It's only been in the last 50 years that we've introduced them to our food and lives and it hasn't been with good results. Can we agree on that? Does cancer mean anything to these corporations?

--How about taking our cattle out of the mud and feces-loaded feed lots, with the idea that we'll have less deadly e coli in our food?

--Could we take BPA out of our plastic food service pieces (utensils, cups, etc.). It's thought--strongly--to cause problems with our children's develpment, at minimum.

There's a few thoughts.

There are a lot more, I'm sure. Stay tuned.

Link: http://health.usnews.com/blogs/on-fitness/2009/04/28/born-to-run-christopher-mcdougall-says-humans-evolved-to-run-like-the-tarahumara.html

 

Late Autumn sunrise on the Rocky Mountains