KCRag Forum

Many design decisions were driven by TWA, which envisioned the facility as its hub, with 747s and Supersonic Transports whisking people from America's heartland to all points on the globe. Streets around the airport included Mexico City Avenue, Brasília Avenue, Paris Street, London Avenue, and Tel Aviv Avenue.

TWA vetoed concepts to model the airport on Washington Dulles International Airport and Tampa International Airport, because those two airports had people movers, which it deemed too expensive. TWA insisted on "Drive to Your Gate" with flight gates 75 feet (23 m) from the roadway (signs along the roadway showed the flights leaving each gate). The single-level terminals had no stairs, similar to a plan that would be built at Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport.
TWA's vision

TWA's vision for the future of flight that had been pioneered by the TWA Flight Center at JFK Airport in New York City (which also featured cars close to the gates design) proved troublesome almost from the start.

The terminals turned out to be unfriendly to the 747 since passengers spilled out of the gate area into the halls. When security checkpoints were added in the 1970s to stem hijackings, they were difficult and expensive to implement since security checkpoints had to be installed at each gate area rather than at a centralized area.

As a result, passenger services were nonexistent downstream of the security checkpoint in the gate area. No restrooms were available, and shops, restaurants, newsstands, ATMs or any other passenger services were not available without exiting the secure area and being re-screened upon re-entry.

Shortly after the airport opened, TWA asked that the terminals be rebuilt to address these issues. Kansas City, citing the massive cost overruns on a newly built airport to TWA specification, refused, prompting TWA to move its hub to Lambert-Saint Louis International Airport in St. Louis, Missouri.[12]

KCPowercat wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 11:06 am What are the common arguments against a private airport? I'm up for exploring it.

KCPowercat wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 11:06 am What are the common arguments against a private airport? I'm up for exploring it.

flyingember wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 1:51 pm

KCPowercat wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 11:06 am What are the common arguments against a private airport? I'm up for exploring it.

100% private?

No public meetings
No public finances, investors will demand profits from the airport. No public votes on items that would raise prices
Their choice on what amenities are inside the terminal and where
They own the land, they make deals with airlines to land there
Public services have to be contracted/purchased from the city
Will be more regional. Imagine seeing ads to fly from KC as if it was Fantastic Caverns

For the new terminal
The city would need to approve building a new terminal in terms of the permit approval process. No public selection of the builder. No selection of the time frame. No minority or women owned requirements.

More demands for public incentives to keep service levels up.

smh wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 1:38 pm

KCPowercat wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 11:06 am What are the common arguments against a private airport? I'm up for exploring it.

That it is a public good. But that's about the extent of my understanding.

KCPowercat wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 2:20 pm

smh wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 1:38 pm

KCPowercat wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 11:06 am What are the common arguments against a private airport? I'm up for exploring it.

That it is a public good. But that's about the extent of my understanding.

An airport seems lesser extent than other infrastructure. Seems to be operated almost privately now.

normalthings wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 2:28 pm

KCPowercat wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 2:20 pm

smh wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 1:38 pm

That it is a public good. But that's about the extent of my understanding.

An airport seems lesser extent than other infrastructure. Seems to be operated almost privately now.

My greatest fear would be preferential treatment given to 1 big carrier. However, that’s pretty much how it works now. Other western private airports generally manager to a lot Gates in a fair manner.

WoodDraw wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 2:31 pm

normalthings wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 2:28 pm

KCPowercat wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 2:20 pm

An airport seems lesser extent than other infrastructure. Seems to be operated almost privately now.

My greatest fear would be preferential treatment given to 1 big carrier. However, that’s pretty much how it works now. Other western private airports generally manager to a lot Gates in a fair manner.

Dumb question, but when you say western are you referring to the western us or the western world?

I know nothing about this and have to figure out what dumb question to ask next to understand this.

normalthings wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 2:17 pm

flyingember wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 1:51 pm

KCPowercat wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 11:06 am What are the common arguments against a private airport? I'm up for exploring it.

100% private?

No public meetings
No public finances, investors will demand profits from the airport. No public votes on items that would raise prices
Their choice on what amenities are inside the terminal and where
They own the land, they make deals with airlines to land there
Public services have to be contracted/purchased from the city
Will be more regional. Imagine seeing ads to fly from KC as if it was Fantastic Caverns

For the new terminal
The city would need to approve building a new terminal in terms of the permit approval process. No public selection of the builder. No selection of the time frame. No minority or women owned requirements.

More demands for public incentives to keep service levels up.

Many(almost all) of the “cons” above already occur in the current management structure.

Private airports make their money on F&B, Services, and Amenities. That’s why you see soo many restaurants and shops when traveling Europe.

In regards to the new terminal, the city permitting department goes through the permit process with any project including the New Terminal. Let’s not forget that without the city referendum process, CFRG, and general slow gov. action, we would about to be opening the new terminal.

Eon Blue wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 6:12 pm Isn’t St. Louis pursuing airport privatization?

beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 7:03 pm What is the average costs of our city debt? If it’s cheap money, why pay it off?

FangKC wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 10:58 pm

Eon Blue wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 6:12 pm Isn’t St. Louis pursuing airport privatization?

It's more like Rex Sinquefield is pursing airport privatization.