Quote:
Originally Posted by delts145
Wasn't it more of dealing with the reality and aftermath of 9-11. The necessity of getting by as best as one can during some very difficult times for all of the industry. If an airport wasn't expanded before 9-11, it was pretty much out of luck. It actually looks like many of the bright and newly expanded domestic airports of the 90's are going to see a significant downsizing in their out and inbound flights. Not only are the airlines being forced to merge or go under, but many airports/metros in a way are going to have their services absorbed by a lucky minority, such as SLC.
|
Ah, Delts, you are always such a gentleman, a trait to be admired. Tis true that all airports in the US after 9-11 put things on hold. But my concerns about SLC Int go way back before 9-11.
I have been flying in and out of SLC Int on business since the late 70's (that's 1970's, not 1870's), and airport development has always been ad hoc, catch-as-catch-can, path of least resistance.
There have always been master plans, but those master plans seem to get circumvented when it comes time to spend money. What irks me most is what appears to be a lack of understanding of the economic value of that airport to the entire region. Local leaders give it lip service, but not much else.
I assume Salt Lake City has the primary responsibility for setting policy and direction for the airport. Maybe it's time to move that responsibility state-wide since what goes on at the airport affects a much larger area than Salt Lake City. Sometimes local governments are not well equipped to deal with large, sophisticated, critically important issues. We would never expect a city to be responsibile for a freeway system within its boundaries. Maybe it's now time to apply the same logic to the airport.