Tonight, here's a bit of HEAVY KANSAS CITY READING for our more educated readers with a mind for deets.
Check it:
Show-Me Blog: The Comparative Expense Of The Proposed New Terminal Plan For Kansas City International Airport
"The purpose of this essay is to analyze the cost of a proposed new terminal plan at Kansas City International Airport (MCI or KCI) versus a possible major renovation of the existing terminals. The new terminal plan that the Kansas City Aviation Department (KCAD) has proposed envisions a new single terminal that will replace the current three-terminal design, with supporting improvements to the roadways, parking lot, and airfield. The focus here is limited to a discussion of the costs of this proposal and the costs of existing terminal repairs, as defined in statements from KCAD officials and publicly released documents."
Now, here's why this is important . . .
The Report The Airport Advisory Group Doesn’t Want You To See
The SHOCKER . . . (ouch) . . .
"All the cost data and concluded that over 30 years, it would be cheaper to renovate the Kansas City International Airport (MCI) twice than to build a new $1.2 billion terminal."
Again, this is just another Kansas City mistake under the current political epoch that seems more interested in eco-devo schemes than any reasonable consideration of costs.
Developing . . .
Stopped Reading at "show-me"...
ReplyDeleteDoesn't everybody assume it will cost at least double what they say it will cost? Kind of like Denver? C'mon, KCMO is involved. You know there will be scam on top of scam. Cost triple and twice as long. On top of all that, we don't need it.
ReplyDeleteWhich local firms are the beneficiaries of this boondoggle?
ReplyDeleteRage! Rage! Also this money could be used by the fire department! Correct, just like the street car funds!
ReplyDeleteTotally ridiculous
ReplyDeletelol the show me is like the onion
ReplyDelete28 pages. here's the condensed version: PROGRESS BAD TAXES BAD FUTURE BAD REAGANOMICS SO SOOOOOO GOOD.
ReplyDeleteIt appears the high level of stocks has not had the desired effect on ramping animal spirits among the general population, as optimism is now back at crisis lows.
ReplyDeleteHow about rather than robbing the tax payers the city do what it is good at. Make an airport tax zone. Charge those who stay in those hotels, ride taxis, dine and fly pay for the airport through taxes and surcharges.
ReplyDeleteKansas City Council roundup: Can you spare another $10M?
ReplyDeleteWhy pay less when you can get half as much for twice the price?
ReplyDeleteNow we got 'em. No train and NO airport.
ReplyDeleteF'in delusional.
I guess they will have to cut out grape juice for the Baptists, Foot Washing for the Muslims, Fundamentalist Mormon wedding chapel, Amish candy stands, Lesbian showers, Shriner's felt reconditioning.
ReplyDeleteMensa boy says:
ReplyDeleteI WANT IT, waaaaaaaaaaaaahhhh! I need a job after 2015!!!!!!
Where's the link to the actual report?
ReplyDelete@710: Data not necessary here. We respond to stimuli sans the effort to get the facts.
ReplyDeleteLast guy interested in objective assessment turned the lights out about 2 years ago.
8:32 AM pretty cute how you sarcastically lobby for your piece of the pie on a new unwarranted and ungodly costly airport...Nice try self serving GEEK.
ReplyDeleteWhat's the surprise here? OF COURSE a new terminal is going to cost way more then renovations to the existing ones, even the "advisory committee" admitted as much. The real mystery is how many times the original estimate of $1.2B will a new terminal actually cost. Based upon the stacked-deck of committee members and the recent experiences with the streetcar, my guess is at least two times this estimate, maybe more.
ReplyDeleteI guess the other mystery is how little the FAA will actually contribute to the project. As they are on-record stating this would be a very low priority project for them as the current airport is in compliance, and considering the weak standing of our locally elected representatives, I'd say we're probably looking at almost no federal contribution.
ReplyDeleteAirport is separately funded from all other functions, so it doesn't really matter what everyone wants -- they can do what they want. Sad, but true nonetheless.
ReplyDeleteI don't see why so there is so much whining. My guess is that most of the whining is coming from folks who ride busses, not airplanes.