SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Transportation (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=25)
-   -   CHICAGO: ORD & MDW discussion (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=87889)

sentinel Aug 10, 2023 8:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom In Chicago (Post 10010836)
Not speaking for anyone but myself, but aside from being the boondoggle that it is, it's simply too far away from anywhere people want to be when they fly into Chicago. . .

. . .

There are millions of other people in the surrounding metropolis, including parts of Indiana and Michigan (and yes, even on the Southside of Chicago too!), that would benefit from a southern regional airport, not to mention the economic benefits of having it within Illinois borders, compared to Gary airport, etc. It's already accessible via main highways, and can ULTIMATELY be a boon to the entire NE regional economy.

To fixate on the notion that it's not necessary in the long run is not only shortsighted, but also a capitulation to the incorrect notion that Chicago+land cannot, will not and does not need to grow further.

twister244 Aug 10, 2023 9:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sentinel (Post 10011225)
There are millions of other people in the surrounding metropolis, including parts of Indiana and Michigan (and yes, even on the Southside of Chicago too!), that would benefit from a southern regional airport, not to mention the economic benefits of having it within Illinois borders, compared to Gary airport, etc. It's already accessible via main highways, and can ULTIMATELY be a boon to the entire NE regional economy.

To fixate on the notion that it's not necessary in the long run is not only shortsighted, but also a capitulation to the incorrect notion that Chicago+land cannot, will not and does not need to grow further.

Again though - If the market necessitates the need for the airport, then sure. If there's market analysis that dictates the need for a new airport, happy to see it. However, if this is just a politician trying to put a Monorail in their town, then no - I'm against that.

sentinel Aug 10, 2023 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by twister244 (Post 10011258)
Again though - If the market necessitates the need for the airport, then sure. If there's market analysis that dictates the need for a new airport, happy to see it. However, if this is just a politician trying to put a Monorail in their town, then no - I'm against that.

https://idot.illinois.gov/transporta...ect-study.html

"The vision for the South Suburban Airport involves designing and constructing a supplemental, commercial service airfield that will serve the greater Chicagoland area. Located conveniently outside of Chicago, a major transportation hub in America’s heartland, the South Suburban Airport will offer travelers and businesses an expanded array of options in air and freight travel to meet their growing transportation needs."
______________________________________________________________________________

https://patch.com/illinois/newlenox/...-hastings-says

“For people who feel that the South Suburban Airport is a threat to Midway, is a threat to O’Hare, would complete with Rockford, would compete with the Quad Cities, I just think we’re just in a very, very unique geographic situation with an immense amount of growth compared to other regions of the state,” Hastings told Patch on Friday.

Hastings, who represents constituents in both Will and Cook County, said that considering other transportation options throughout the region between the interstate systems, trains, and the Intermodal Transportation Center in Joliet, adding a regional airport only makes sense. He said the airport would be a “natural complement” to other transportation hubs.

He said a new airport “ties everything together” and believes that the job creation and investment into the Southland region would be substantial, Hastings told Patch...
"

"...“What you don’t want is, if you build it, they will come,” Pritzker said previously, according to the report. “Just building the thing and hoping that people will show up to essentially pay for the airport having been built.”

Yet, Hastings said he would have never helped introduce legislation — or even supported it — if he felt like the project would lead to a dead end. Whether that means cargo companies coming forward or regional carriers committing to fly in and out of the South Suburban Airport, Hastings believes it provides a unique opportunity for the region.

He compares the project to Gerald R. Ford Airport in Grand Rapids, Mich., which has been providing international travel for years. The airport allows local residents to fly in and out of the city without having to travel to bigger airports such as Detroit and Chicago.

Like the south suburbs, the Grand Rapids region has continued to develop and grow and has supported having the airport there. Similarly, Hastings believes the addition of an airport in the South Suburban region could only be a positive for local residents and the region’s economy as well.

Hastings points to the fact that Target and Solo Cup will add warehouses along the I-57 corridor in addition to the four Amazon regional distribution centers that already exist. He says that adding an airport to the mix only will help to drive the local economy, while also providing residents with an alternative to driving farther away to fly to certain destinations.


He says as a lawmaker who represents the region, he and others like Harris have to do what they can to help prepare the South Suburbs for natural growth, which he said the additional airport would do while helping generate “a lot of success” for the region."

Steely Dan Aug 10, 2023 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sentinel (Post 10010800)
Curious, why do you hate it so much?

because it's like field of drems.

"build it, and they will come"

or more accurately in this case: "build it, and they will sprawl"



the last thing NE IL needs is more mindless cornfield-gobbling sprawl.

i fully support doubling and tripling down on our existing infrastructure.

twister244 Aug 10, 2023 11:04 PM

Ok, but the only people being quoted in those links is.... wait for it.... local politicians!

Quote:

Other news outlets, including WTTW, have reported that Pritzker has expressed hesitation with the project until cargo companies express their intent to actually use the airport if it is built.
https://news.wttw.com/2023/03/21/sou...eotone-airport

Quote:

While much has changed in the 20 years since the Environmental Law and Policy Center’s deputy director Kevin Brubaker began fighting a south suburban airport, there’s been one constant: It’s a solution in search of a problem, he said.

“It was first proposed as a solution to the fact that we couldn’t expand O’Hare Airport. Well, then we expanded O’Hare Airport. Then they decided we needed a new passenger facility for the south suburbs, but the airlines showed zero interest in it,” he said. “So now it’s purportedly a solution to our air cargo problems. But we don’t have air cargo problems. We have O’Hare, we have Rockford, we have Gary. There’s lots of air cargo capacity already in the Chicago area.
Again - The only people pushing this are the local senators trying to land a vanity project for their constituents. I've seen this first hand, and it doesn't work, unless there's an actual need for it. Building something just because some local senators want it is not a good justification for millions of tax payer dollars being spent.

If there was a real need for a third airport, and it was clear O'Hare expansions wouldn't meet those needs, and the additional cargo would benefit the area economy, then I would be in complete support. However, I still haven't seen any evidence that justifies the existence of a new airport.

SIGSEGV Aug 11, 2023 1:46 AM

There's already one failed airport in Illinois (mid-america). A cargo airport might make sense but it would probably make sense closer to Joliet...

Kngkyle Aug 11, 2023 2:39 AM

The Peotone Airport is an even bigger boondoggle than the Red Line extension. It makes zero sense to build this when there isn't a single airline (cargo or passenger) that has expressed any interest in operating out of it.

The state can keep the land they already bought in the event the situation changes in a few decades.

OrdoSeclorum Aug 11, 2023 1:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom In Chicago (Post 10010836)
Not speaking for anyone but myself, but aside from being the boondoggle that it is, it's simply too far away from anywhere people want to be when they fly into Chicago. . .

. . .

The Peotone airport wouldn't be built because of demand for an airport. People aren't going to drive halfway to Peoria (I can't believe how far it is from the region's center of gravity when I notice I'm there!) to fly to Orlando or Vegas or one of the three or four other conceivable routes. And there aren't enough residents in that part of the region to support a significant airport. It would be a drag on Illinois infrastructure spending and resources in *a way that makes everything else worse.*

The most important reason to oppose it is because it will fracture O'Hare somewhat. ATL and DFW and DEN and ORD are economic drivers because everyone goes to one airport and the node creates a network effect. If JFK and Newark were in one place instead of two, it would be better than the sum of their parts.

Peotone is only talked about because it's a way to get political support from semi-downtstate residents and politicians that want to see development move away from Chicago. That's it.

If Chicago needs a third airport to meet regional travel demand or serve high volume long distance routes, Gary already exists.

moorhosj1 Aug 11, 2023 1:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OrdoSeclorum (Post 10011659)
The most important reason to oppose it is because it will fracture O'Hare somewhat. ATL and DFW and DEN and ORD are economic drivers because everyone goes to one airport and the node creates a network effect. If JFK and Newark were in one place instead of two, it would be better than the sum of their parts.

Everything converging on one location has downsides (I.e. all CTA trains going to the Loop) and Midway is already the 25th busiest airport in the country. The city of Newark has 300k people and the airport helps keep down NYC congestion. ATL is about to run into problems because they are out of space to expand. I thought competition was good?

Quote:

Originally Posted by OrdoSeclorum (Post 10011659)
Peotone is only talked about because it's a way to get political support from semi-downtstate residents and politicians that want to see development move away from Chicago. That's it.

If Chicago needs a third airport to meet regional travel demand or serve high volume long distance routes, Gary already exists.

Pritzker lives in Chicago and he signed the bill to study the airport. Gary is not in Illinois, so the economic benefits to our state (I.e. parking, jobs, gate fees) are limited.

Busy Bee Aug 11, 2023 2:13 PM

Annex NW Indiana. Problem solved.

OrdoSeclorum Aug 11, 2023 3:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moorhosj1 (Post 10011674)
Everything converging on one location has downsides (I.e. all CTA trains going to the Loop) and Midway is already the 25th busiest airport in the country. The city of Newark has 300k people and the airport helps keep down NYC congestion. ATL is about to run into problems because they are out of space to expand. I thought competition was good?



There's a place for secondary and tertiary airports. Midway is full. If after O'Hare is built out with the new terminals the next step will be probably be to build western terminals. If at some point O'hare is too busy to accommodate all of the flights to New York and Mexico City and Frankfurt and we need a third airport to handle Las Vegas and Orlando overflow, the right move is to expand the Gary airport which already exists, is closer to the center of population and is served by rail to Chicago. It would be great if that airport wasn't in another state. But if the point is to simply make work for people, not build good projects, we can pay them to dig holes and fill them in again. If that isn't enough work, we can give them smaller shovels.

Analysts think that the Peotone airport is a waste of resources and poorly located. The plan to use it as a cargo airport now is a backdoor attempt to get it built.

The far south end of the metro area way, way past Joliet, like Bourbonnais and Kankakee, simply doesn't have all of the infrastructure that sprawls out to the west, northwest and west to Aurora, Woodstock and Kenosha. I know why landowners out there would like to build a far south highway to Kokomo and build an extra airport there--there's room for it and it would make their property values go up. Doesn't mean we need to listen to them. Pritzker is throwing them a bone by agreeing to have it studied again.

Tom In Chicago Aug 11, 2023 3:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OrdoSeclorum (Post 10011659)
If Chicago needs a third airport to meet regional travel demand or serve high volume long distance routes, Gary already exists.

Correct. . .

Quote:

Originally Posted by Busy Bee (Post 10011697)
Annex NW Indiana. Problem solved.

Or create a bi-state entity like the Port Authority that can more successfully develop and maintain Gary. . . THAT would be a real driver of economic growth in the area as the infrastructure already exists. . .

. . .

As others have already said, the idea of Peotone is a political project that has yet to suss out any viable solutions that the state of Illinois - or Chicagoland for that matter - can afford to bother with. . .

The Illiana Expressway makes more sense than an airport at Peotone, and I don't see any reason to spend any time thinking about THAT either. . .

. . .

Steely Dan Aug 11, 2023 5:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV (Post 10011432)
There's already one failed airport in Illinois (mid-america).

One would hope that our dumb state would've learned from its past mistake.

But alas, our dumb state is dumb.

nomarandlee Aug 14, 2023 12:24 PM

Midway Airport
 
As reported over at airliners.net by numerous forumers it seems that Runway 31R/13L is permanently closed.

This has led to conjecture that, given its closure, it may open up the possibility of expanding the A and B terminals. Theoretically, if that was done, each terminal could be further by approximately at least another 400 feet.

Just doing rough sketching seems that could add up to another 15-20 gates total.

sentinel Aug 14, 2023 1:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomarandlee (Post 10013235)
As reported over at airliners.net by numerous forumers it seems that Runway 31R/13L is permanently closed.

This has led to conjecture that, given its closure, it may open up the possibility of an expansion of the A and B terminals. If that was done, each could be further by approximately another 400 feet.

Just doing rough sketching seems that could add up to another 15-20 gates total.

Link, please?

Steely Dan Aug 14, 2023 2:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomarandlee (Post 10013235)

Just doing rough sketching seems that could add up to another 15-20 gates total.

Wow, that would be a gigantic increase in gate capacity for MDW, which currently has 43 gates.

nomarandlee Aug 14, 2023 5:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sentinel (Post 10013274)
Link, please?

https://www.airliners.net/forum/view...64f&start=1000

https://www.airliners.net/forum/view...1000#p23915949

sentinel Aug 14, 2023 6:18 PM

Awesome, thanks

sentinel Aug 14, 2023 6:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomarandlee (Post 10013235)
As reported over at airliners.net by numerous forumers it seems that Runway 31R/13L is permanently closed.

This has led to conjecture that, given its closure, it may open up the possibility of expanding the A and B terminals. Theoretically, if that was done, each terminal could be further by approximately at least another 400 feet.

Just doing rough sketching seems that could add up to another 15-20 gates total.

But like you mention, it's conjecture, and I have not seen or read anything that would indicate any expansion at Midway in the immediate future.
I guess, why would they close a major runway now for work that hasn't even been released yet? Any runway reduction/elimination would surely reduce operations, how many flights come in and out of the airport, no? Unless there is information that I'm missing :shrug:

nomarandlee Aug 14, 2023 7:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sentinel (Post 10013606)
But like you mention, it's conjecture, and I have not seen or read anything that would indicate any expansion at Midway in the immediate future.
I guess, why would they close a major runway now for work that hasn't even been released yet? Any runway reduction/elimination would surely reduce operations, how many flights come in and out of the airport, no? Unless there is information that I'm missing :shrug:

Right, it remains a theoretical proposition. Still, even posing it as a theoretical possibility would be impossible to consider without the runway closing.

I am unsure if the operational limits imposed on Midway are more of a runway capacity problem or a gate capacity problem. I have always assumed it's more the latter. Though with more gates would come the need for more/larger holding bays (that, looking at the airport layout, could also be enlarged even with terminal expansion).

From what I remember reading, the runway that would be closed is relatively little used by private general aviation aircraft, not used by commercial carriers. I guess officials figure that they only need two smaller runways for general aviation aircraft (as opposed to the three currently), with the two largest used for the commercial operations.


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:23 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.