Gary International--Chicago's 12th airport

[skyduster]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

let's please leave political rantings out of this thread.

if you have an axe to grind against "conservatives" or "liberals", there are thousands of outlets on the world wide web to vent your anger.

however, this thread isn't on of those outlets.

What an unfair thing to say. I'm disappointed you misunderstood my post in such a manner.

I was criticizing ideological purists, regardless of their position on the political spectrum.

It was a perfectly valid response to a "free market" mantra regarding public infrastructure. These are core issues to traditional left-right debates that I didn't introduce to the discussion. Jp did....and he's welcome to discuss whatever he wants relevant to the topic, as I should be as well.

"Ranting" against conservatives or liberals? No. But thanks for you well-intended mediation.

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs

And just to keep the record straight I didn't say GYY failed. I only pointed out that the commercial service offerings 'failed' and there are currently no commercial flights offered.

That's the same thing, bro.

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs

And I will point out again that the runway length is sufficient to land anything that can land at MDW. And the terminal has functional capacity. There are no physical impediments to offering service.

Not quite. MDW is severely limited in what types of aircraft it can use. Nothing bigger than a B737, basically. GYY is looking to expand its runways:

Gary airport gets $5M federal grant to extend runway

Additionally, GYY lacks the public transit connections that MDW has.

So, yes there are physical impediments, to name a few. Although, it goes way beyond physical impediments. Successful airports are usually not created by market forces. They're created by public policy. It's public infrastructure. A key point here that you're ignoring.

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs

Do you really think that I started a thread and did not go to the website? I know this is a controversial issues on this forum. I fully expected to get push-back and I am prepared to support my statements and I am also open to reasoned and informed data that is contrary to my stance. BTW, nowhere in GYY marketing materials or airport documents or the Landrum & Brown report is the current terminal mentioned as a deterrent to attracting commercial service right now. In fact the selling point of GYY would be that you can be dropped off or park (you have to since there is no public transit to the terminal) and go through baggage check and ticketing and be on your flight. How much time would you spend in the terminal?

Quote from Landrum and Brown Pg 76..The passenger terminal, has been renovated and though somewhat dated, remains functional.

Search for the word "terminal" in that same Landrum-Brown document, and you find a whole host of problems with the terminal. Yes, it's "functional", but:

"It is equipped with federally required security equipment and two passenger loading bridges, which access to three narrow body aircraft parking positions."

...which speaks to the limiting smallness of the place.

Same with the following:

"By modern standards, the terminal is somewhat shallow from front to rear. This could impact passenger flows from gate areas to baggage claim while passengers are checking baggage and moving to the gates."

"Baggage claim is adequate for a one level flight operation"

"The ticket lobby is equipped with eight agent positions and ticket counters, backwall and baggage wells with scales."

Also:

"The carpet is worn and water stained, indicating a possible roof leak. If regular scheduled service was imminent, a minor remodeling effort could put the terminal in good presentable working order."

...which begs the question of which comes first, investing in the place, or attracting business, and we disagree on which should come first.

And:

"...terminal improvement plans and infrastructure modifications still to be initiated..."

Again, it's not the terminal alone that's the problem. In fact, the very small terminal could be the very consequence of an airport that's not being promoted by local government(s), hence is not being invested in, hence not attracting and keeping carriers.

And again, I want to emphasize that I don't necessarily think GYY should become a major airport right now. But when the need arises, it's a far more sensible option than building Peotone and/or depending on very distant airports (Milwaukee, Rockford, etc), should ORD and MDW reach capacity.

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs

This is a ridiculous statement.

It's perfectly valid. You're applying the "free market" argument in a discussion regarding public infrastructure, and where "competitors" are limited and incomparable to each other.

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs

I started this thread using market statistics that questioned the market viability of Gary and the "market" will remain the fundamental issue in this thread.

And I'm participating in your thread challenging your idea of "market".

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs

Thank you for acknowledging my point that Mitchell is a Chicago market airport-which serves a portion of the Chicago market.

You're welcome? I wasn't quite supporting your argument. I thought this was quite obvious by placing the term "Chicago market airport" in quotes.

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs

I still stand by my thesis which is that GYY has a limited future in the Chicago market place. And it is losing ground month by month to Milwaukee and Rockford as "reliever" airports to O'Hare and Midway. And South Bend will continue to be stiff competition within the NW Ind market. The commercial passenger market demand for GYY is non-existent.

But you've failed to explain why this is the case, and you've come full circle, with your sole explanation being "market forces". Could you be more vague?

In conclusion, our entire debate can be summed up like this:

Which comes first? Investment? or Demand?

You're arguing that demand should come first, and GYY obviously doesn't have the demand. I'm saying that GYY won't have the demand without investment and political will.

[Kngkyle]

Originally Posted by skyduster

Ummm...I wasn't ranting against "conservatives" or "liberals". I made a perfectly valid response to a "free market" charge regarding public infrastructure. If you don't belong to either of the political extremes, than you shouldn't have gotten offended.

Please don't horridly misinterpret/misstate me, and then use it against me in such a holier-than-thou manner.

I don't think he was referring to your post. There were other posts that have been deleted that were politically charged.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by skyduster

What an unfair thing to say. I'm disappointed you misunderstood my post in such a manner.

I was criticizing ideological purists, regardless of their position on the political spectrum.

It was a perfectly valid response to a "free market" mantra regarding public infrastructure. These are core issues to traditional left-right debates that I didn't introduce to the discussion. Jp did....and he's welcome to discuss whatever he wants relevant to the topic, as I should be as well.

"Ranting" against conservatives or liberals? No. But thanks for you well-intended mediation.

my post was not directed at you, but thanks for getting all defensive anyway.

[The Urban Politician]

Getting back to Gary--perhaps if Indiana stopped being so "fiscally conservative" (as you lauded) and actually invested a bit more money into Gary Airport, it can finally become the 3rd airport Chicagoland needs. You can't just keep throwing nickels and dimes at the place and expect it to catch on. How about a real investment? It's ridiculous that the city of Chicago is subsidizing an airport in another State!

[mohammed wong]

Glad that Chicago is investing in the Gary Airport though.

Us big cities have to stick to together,
Too bad the southshore line station isnt closer though.

Found this info from wiki

For many years airplanes seen in the Chicago Air & Water Show have flown from here, including the military's C5A Galaxy and the Thunderbirds. Since 1999, the Gary Air Show has based their operations here as well

and

Numerous businesses, including Boeing, Menards and White Lodging Services, base their corporate aircraft here.

and

its 25 miles (40 km) southeast of the Chicago Loop

[globill]

Originally Posted by The Urban Politician

^ It's ridiculous that the city of Chicago is subsidizing an airport in another State!

Actually, investing in Gary's airport is very much in the city of Chicago's best interest. A viable thriving Gary/Chicago Airport would do wonders for the south side of the city, particularly when compared to the sprawl monster that Peotone would cause.


And remember, the long-term plan is to integrate the airport seamlessly with the SouthShore/Amtrak lines, tying the airport quite squarely with downtown Chicago. The Gary Airport would offer a direct non-automobile link to Hyde Park, McCormick Place, the South Loop and Millenium Park, as well as Union Station via Amtrak.

And Gary, East Chicago, and Hammond are the "urban" areas of NWI, so again, if you favor the redevelopment/regeneration of the urban areas of Chicagoland, you'd have to support Gary over Peotone.

[The Urban Politician]

Originally Posted by globill

Actually, investing in Gary's airport is very much in the city of Chicago's best interest. A viable thriving Gary/Chicago Airport would do wonders for the south side of the city, particularly when compared to the sprawl monster that Peotone would cause.

^ ....so let me get this right: you tell us that Illinois and Chicago are "broke" because of those spendthrift, "corrupt cronies", yet you condone Chicago subsidizing an airport in another state? On the same token you praise Indiana for being "fiscally sound", without noting the irony of that statement--well of course Indiana is fiscally sound, I'd be fiscally sound too if a city in another State was subsidizing my infrastructure!

I'm not arguing against Gary as a great 3rd airport for Chicagoland. Far from it, I support it. But it's not going to happen until your "fiscally sound, pro-business" leaders in Indiana stop leeching from Chicago and throw in some real investment. How about some serious money and a serious plan? How about going out there and courting some commercial airlines not named "Hooters Air"?

[globill]

Originally Posted by The Urban Politician

^ ....so let me get this right: you tell us that Illinois and Chicago are "broke" because of those spendthrift, "corrupt cronies", yet you condone Chicago subsidizing an airport in another state? On the same token you praise Indiana for being "fiscally sound", without noting the irony of that statement--well of course Indiana is fiscally sound, I'd be fiscally sound too if a city in another State was subsidizing my infrastructure!

I'm not arguing against Gary as a great 3rd airport for Chicagoland. Far from it, I support it. But it's not going to happen until your "fiscally sound, pro-business" leaders in Indiana stop leeching from Chicago and throw in some real investment. How about some serious money and a serious plan? How about going out there and courting some commercial airlines not named "Hooters Air"?

Indiana is not "leeching" from Chicago. The city of Chicago strategically chose to ally itself with Gary in an attempt to squash a competitor to O'Hare (Peotone).

Its decision to do so had nothing to do with Indiana politics, simply the city's own self-interest. Having said that, Indiana has only recently awoken to the potential benefits that might be forthcoming from a viable Gary/Chicago Airport.

And yes, Indiana is in a much, much better fiscal position to contribute to that. And as I mentioned previously, there used to be a very high level of distrust between Gary/Lake County/Indy officials about how to proceed regarding infrastructure.

But such disagreements are melting away...Lake County in particular is rapidly developing a broader mind as regards regional development.

And not to worry, railroad tracks are going to be moved, runways will be extended, and Gary/Chicago will eventually take off.

[The Urban Politician]

Originally Posted by globill

And not to worry, railroad tracks are going to be moved, runways will be extended, and Gary/Chicago will eventually take off.

^ I truly hope you're right, but I so far am not encouraged.

Btw, I believe a nobrainer step in seriously becoming Chicago's 3rd (or 4th, according to your perspective) airport is to change the airport's name. "Chicago-Gary Airport" comes to mind, or perhaps eliminate the name "Gary" altogether. Naming it after some great President or leader as the Peotone people are doing (ie "Abe Lincoln") would be a good idea. Brand building is important.

Since Indiana is a largely Republican State, perhaps name it after a great Republican President? Oh wait, there's no such thing!

[jpIllInoIs]

Originally Posted by globill

"Its decision to do so had nothing to do with Indiana politics, simply the city's own self-interest. Having said that, Indiana has only recently awoken to the potential benefits that might be forthcoming from a viable Gary/Chicago Airport."

What potential? What is viable? In the Landrun & Brown report L&B it says very plainly that scheduled commercial service will not be Gary 's market.

And yes, Indiana is in a much, much better fiscal position to contribute to that.

Indiana is in a better position to contribute? Then why is 99% of Gary's operating budget derived from Chicago airport landing fees? If Indiana has recently awoken to the potential of Gary, you would think they would be putting a budget together for this imminent expansion...but the facts are the state is relying on Chicago for operating funds and Federal grants for expansion.

And as I mentioned previously, there used to be a very high level of distrust between Gary/Lake County/Indy officials about how to proceed regarding infrastructure.

That is interesting...this newfound trust..well Gary will have to parlay that into dollars soon as the City of Gary is $3.5 million in arrears in payments to the Regional Development Authority which is the joint compact between Lake County, Porter County, Gary,Merrillville & Valparaiso (L&B Appx A-10).

Just how long will Porter County and Valparaiso continue to contribute $3.5 mil each to this compact with Gary not paying dues. Don't forget that Valpo has an airport too, with a longer runway that is already along the tracks of the proposed HSR. No $50mill realignment needed. And with 4 lane Interstate bypass right there.

But such disagreements are melting away...Lake County in particular is rapidly developing a broader mind as regards regional development.

These broader minds will turn very parochial if there is not significant results by 2015. The whole RDA compact expires then, The Federal appropriation expires that year and the Chicago contract is renewed at Chicago's pleasure. And we are still in an airline recession and the industry has shown NO INTEREST in flying out of Gary.

The big plan under the Landrum & Brown report is to generate LEISURE travelers. That is intermittent flights from Allegiant Air and charter flights. But the SWOT analysis points out that Gary has a poverty rate within a 20 min drive of around 50%. So the hope is to draw charter and leisure AWAY from Midway. But remember that the leisure travelers come from areas of moderate to high to very high wealth. Will those travelers CHOOSE to fly out of Gary, remember the consumer has a choice.

The Landrum & Brown report cites the growth of Allegiant Air in Rockford (145,000 in 2008)and South Bend (95,000 in 2008) as evidence of a market for leisure and charter. But the consumer and the airlines have already chosen those 2 airports in addition to MDW & ORD & MKE...WHY would they switch Gary? There needs to be a compelling economic or operational reason. The L&B report acknowledges such, Gary airport will need to offer tax incentives and landing incentives (not collecting landing fees) But in the same breath acknowledges that the city of Gary is broke and the tax base continues to spiral downward and that the airport currently looses $400,000 dollars per year. So the question remains..Who will back the incentives??

And the number one threat continues to be Chicago's willing participation in the compact. Much has changed since that compact was first signed.

1) New Mayor coming on may not be on board with overall plan
2) Democratic Gov. favors Peotone development
3) The airline retrenchment leaves absolutely no appetite for Gary within industry.
4)Gary's new focus on Charter & Leisure may not appeal to Porter County since they can do the same thing at Valpo municipal.
5) CN now owns the EJE and is not easily persuaded to do anything that does not suit their business interest.
6) IF HSR really does manifest..why is Gary even needed? Those 400-500 mile trips would seem to be a fit for Gary but now they are on the train.
7) Milwaukee Mitchell's phenomenal growth has already relieved O'Hare of overcrowding. As I said before..Milwaukee has WON the race to be Chicago's 3rd airport.
8) emergence of Rockford (Cargo + Allegiant) and South Bend (Allegiant+Delta+ United) as fringe mini service airports
9) South Bend already has in-terminal rail service that cuts right through Gary's turf.

And not to worry, railroad tracks are going to be moved, runways will be extended, and Gary/Chicago will eventually take off.

When CN is good and ready but if they are not moved by 2015 the $57 mil Fed grant is gone.

[globill]

http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/l...64f19ffa3.html

[nomarandlee]

Board member Silas Wilkerson asked Lyp for a date on which all those agreements might be in place. Lyp said he could not give a date, but said construction should be able to start in the spring.
The owner of the Gary Jet Center warned the board that extending the runway is essential to his business and others at the airport, such as the Boeing Corp. executive flight facility.

"The reality is, the railroads don't want this to happen," Gary Jet Center owner Wil Davis told the board. "The status quo is what they want, and we can't accept the status quo."

The Federal Aviation Administration has warned the airport that if the runway is not lengthened by Sept. 30, 2013, it will declare the current 7,000-foot runway shorter by 1,000 feet, which would make the airport out of bounds for larger jets. The FAA would take that action because the runway currently lacks mandated 1,000-foot safety areas at its ends.


Awesome news.

[skyduster]

Originally Posted by globill

But such disagreements are melting away...Lake County in particular is rapidly developing a broader mind as regards regional development.

And not to worry, railroad tracks are going to be moved, runways will be extended, and Gary/Chicago will eventually take off.

Hopefully. We badly need the type of bi-state cooperation that you see in Metro NYC (NY-NJ), in the interests of a large urban area that overlaps 2 states.

[Chicago103]

Milwaukee Airport may be Chicago's third airport to those living in Lake or McHenry counties in Illinois but to the rest of Chicagoland it is far away. I live near Midway Airport and to me Wisconsin is quite far off my radar screen, the same is true really for most people living in the city or the southern part of the metropolitan area. More of the region's population is actually in closer proximity to Northwest Indiana than it is to Wisconsin. Milwaukee Airport and Rockford is about equidistant to South Bend, Indiana's airport from downtown Chicago, so that gives you a clue at how far away it is. Gary/Chicago Airport is closer than Milwaukee, Rockford, South Bend or Peotone to downtown Chicago and that's what matters most.

[The Urban Politician]

Originally Posted by globill

http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/l...64f19ffa3.html

^ Alright! Finally a strip long enough for drag racing (since it probably won't be used for anything else)!

[The Urban Politician]

Originally Posted by globill

http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/l...64f19ffa3.html

^ Alright! Finally a strip long enough for drag racing (since it probably won't be used for anything else)!

[jpIllInoIs]

Originally Posted by Chicago103

Milwaukee Airport may be Chicago's third airport to those living in Lake or McHenry counties in Illinois but to the rest of Chicagoland it is far away. I live near Midway Airport

If you live near Midway then why would you need to use GYY? And the same logic holds for those in the Northern and Northwestern Suburbs. Most would never consider going to Gary. And their can be only one Third airport, and Mitchell is it.

Gary/Chicago Airport is closer than Milwaukee, Rockford, South Bend or Peotone to downtown Chicago and that's what matters most.

What mattered most was that Chicago needed a RELIEVER Airport. No one ever said that the Third Airport was going to replace O'Hare and become the primary Airport for Chicago-land being all things to all people. The argument was always about relieving O'Hare so that O'Hare would function more fluidly and thus the national airline flow would function more fluidly.

The Landrum & Brown report makes it is crystal clear that Gary's future as a commercial airport is a long shot at best and that any commercial gains will come at the expense of MIDWAY.

The immediate focus is to move the rail line which is on an elevated embankment and actually poses a hazard during take off and landings. Otherwise the runway will be reclassified downward to a 6000ft strip, which would effectively eliminate any large jets.

Meanwhile the big idea in the L&B report is to attract Leisure and Charter business, which would require incentives to draw them away from MIDWAY, O'Hare, Mitchell, South Bend, Rockford.

Then they need to actually extend the runway to 8000ft, and harden the aprons, then they need to reposition the secondary runway to function as a true bad weather runway. Currently it is questionable if the N-S direction would qualify.

And the entrance roadways need to be improved and a new terminal needs to be built and ideally an Amtrak station would be built, and it still does not bring the So. Shore into the terminal ala South Bend, so an inter-modal terminal needs to be built -- then they might have a fully functional airport. Which could then compete with Milwaukee to be the RELIEVER airport that Chicago needed back in the 1990's.

Meanwhile Mitchel has expansion plans of their own, as does O'HARE in a massive way.

[The Urban Politician]

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs

And the entrance roadways need to be improved and a new terminal needs to be built and ideally an Amtrak station would be built, and it still does not bring the So. Shore into the terminal ala South Bend, so an inter-modal terminal needs to be built -- then they might have a fully functional airport. Which could then compete with Milwaukee to be the RELIEVER airport that Chicago needed back in the 1990's.

^ But Indiana would never pay for all of that.

'Fiscal discipline' is the new buzzword for "unwilling to fund the infrastructure needed to promote economic growth". Hence NW Indiana will remain Chicagoland's economic toilet (but hey, at least they have casinos and sand dunes!)

[skyduster]

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs

If you live near Midway then why would you need to use GYY?

Because the flight that you want (departure time, price, seat availability, etc) may not be available from the airport closest to you.

I live in the NW side...O'Hare is much more convenient for me...but I have used MDW a few times, as do many of my friends that live near me.

Again, all these airports do not directly compete with each other.

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs

And the same logic holds for those in the Northern and Northwestern Suburbs. Most would never consider going to Gary. And their can be only one Third airport, and Mitchell is it.

Come on, let's be real. If by "Northern and Northwestern Suburbs" you're talking about the northernmost reaches of McHenry and Lake Counties, then yeah. But if we're talking about northern and northwestern Cook, and even southern Lake, all those folks are far closer to GYY than to Milwaukee.

But again, the point here is that a theoretical 3rd Chicago airport (and please don't say Milwaukee is a Chicago airport)...if the need for a 3rd airport arises...GYY makes more sense than building Peotone.

[jpIllInoIs]

RTS Story

Gary, Ind., airport and railroad ink deal
Thursday, November 04, 2010

Canadian National Railway Co. has signed a deal authorizing the moving of its tracks to make way for the expansion of Gary/Chicago International Airport's main runway, the Northwest Indiana Times reports. Airport officials say the railroad inked the deal Nov. 2, just three business days after the airport authority board approved the deal.

The purchase-and-sale agreement now approved by both parties means final design work and construction can begin on moving tracks that sit on an embankment just 130 feet from the northwest end of its main runway. Once the tracks are moved, the runway can be extended to 8,900 feet in length from its current 7,000 feet.

The expansion project is being funded with grants from the Federal Aviation Administration, as well as contributions from the Northwest Indiana Regional Development Authority and the Chicago/Gary Airport Authority.