So lets build a massive airport no airline said they would serve, cost taxpayer money and destroy thousands of acres of farmland. I agree a third airport option has to be developed in Chicago. But O'Hare also needs to be modernized for several reasons. First the infrastructure is in place as is the airline service and route network. The second thing is if a new airport is built it will take time for airlines to commit to service. ORD is a boon for United and American you think they are going to support a competing airport. Not unless they can retain the duopoly they have hat ORD. Same goes for Southwest at Midway. I live in the path of ORD expansion, I got out because I knew it was coming.

Why don't people get it, the Airport was there it was going to grow. Also, the NW suburbs of Chicago really only developed after ORD was developed. Motorola, my company etc are in the NW suburbs because of convenience of ORD.

The cemetary issue, should not be an issue. As I said cemetaries have been moved and cut in half for expressways and railways in the name of federal commerce. It is not if Chicago is going to dig up the remains and incinerate them. The disinterment will be done with religious figures and will pay to reinter the remains only a few blocks away.

^ I support ORD expansion, but I also believe Chicago should move towards establishing a third airport to alleviate future congestion. Gary should be that third airport. I totally agree that Peotone is a retarded idea, but Gary has the backing not only of Daley but of the Indiana State Govt, and is undergoing millions of dollars infrastructure improvements as we speak.

And even while Hooters Air ( :haha: ) stopped serving Gary, another airline (I'm blanking on who right now) just recently announced it will begin service to Gary's airport.

Finally, the lopsided-ness of the Chicago area (north and west rich, south and southeast poor) is getting old and stupid. It's time an economic engine gets built for the south side. Peotone is not the answer, but some day Gary may be.

That's usually if parties contracted into it. Otherwise, it's very rare.

1. There is no contract between the city and the homeowners.

2. If I sue for damages, I damn well can include legal fees. . .

Yes. . .

Exactly. there is no contract.

You can include anything you want under liberal pleading rules.

Under the American system everyone usually pays their own legal fees.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Rule

The homeowners had every right to fight the expansion and state their position in court, even if you don't believe they were on the right side.

It is not really the homeowners fighting, it is the suburban governments, and these guys are not doing this out of any altrustic, safe the poor people, motive. They are pissed about the amount of tax income their villages are going to lose. Yeah everyone has a right to fight but maybe if they would have used their heads not their hearts things would have been much better.

I'm not saying they don't have a right, it's just obnoxious that they exercise that right at cost to the rest of the region when they could have otherwise received above market value for their property standing in the way of necessary improvements.

But who said it was necessary?

^ it's neccessary for chicago to move forward.

these pissant suburbs should not have the right to stand in the way of mighty chicago. suburbs are stupid and little. chicago is big and important.

if daley II had bigger balls, he'd just send in the CPD '68 convention style and "eliminate" the opposition. that would be fun to see; the mayor of EGV whipped into the bloody pulp at the end of a baton controlled by a foaming at the mouth seargent.

i think more of our regional problems need to be solved with military answers. fuck laws and the courts; it's so much quicker and more decisive when your enemy simply doesn't exist anymore.

:previous:

I think you are drunk.

^That's par for the course with Dan.

steely Dan did you kill someone today my man lol j/k,but seriously fuck the suburbs Chicago is like god to them,they only exist because of the city with the big shoulders and this is going to happen one way or another period.

Even though the topic title is O'Hare expansion, let's get back to Gary vs. Peotone.

The Gary airport sits on a large expanse of property. There's plenty of room to expand when demand would warrant it. It's close to major highways that lead downtown and it's close to an existing commuter train line that already has a stop for the airport. The local community would absolutely love for it to expand and become busy.

Compare that with Peotone, which would be in the middle of nowhere with no transportation infrastructure leading to Chicago. Not only that, but it's farther away than Gary and nobody living near it wants it.

Gary is simply the logical choice for a 3rd airport. In the meantime, O'Hare expansion needs to kick it into a higher gear!

I actually found the final airport layout plan (long term plan) for Peotone, and it looks quite sweet and massive. I just don't want it built out in Peotone... that's the thing.

But seriously, this makes the O'hare expansion plan look small by comparison.

http://masterplan.southsuburbanairpo...ps/1998alp.pdf

I still can't believe I found it. I'd like to see Gary eventually expanded to half that capacity.

^ Seeing as Gary already exists and with the current expansion complete will be able to handle decent size planes and flight volumes, is near an expressway and a rail line, it seems foolish not to set it up for spillover traffic onces O'hare+Midway are maxed out.

Moderator or not, take a f**king chill pill!

^ i think it's quite clear from the tone of that message that i was just goofing around, and yes, i was a wee bit schnockered to boot. whenever i'm sauced my fascinations with totalitarianism always bubble to the surface.

Actually it is quite hard to get the tone from a written message. I have tried this kind of humor myself on this site and others and all it does is tend to get people in trouble or make enemies in the long run.