Quote:
Originally posted by island911
abandon? - no. share? - yes.
Tell me, the third runway . .. that is a stream of dump-trucks dumping, 24 hrs a day, for how many YEARS?
and what does that do to our roads?
NO WAY does that 3rd ruway cost less than getting Everett going. That was just BAD regional planning . .. driven by greed and power-bases.
|
That's an intriguing idea for a regional airport. Sharing with Boeing. Might be a good idea, and perhaps it should get looked at. It looks as if it would be cheaper than our runway. Certainly cheaper than our whole modernization project.
Two shifts, when weather permits, but not 24 hours. Still, it is wear and tear on our roads. It's 850,000 truckloads.
So, we agree on some stuff. But the remark about bad regional planning and greed, well that is a remark that would be appropriate after quite a bit of fact-finding that I'm not convinced has been done in your case. Truth is, Sea-Tac airport passed its capacity a few years ago. It was designed for something like 25m passengers per year and we hit something like 27m a few years ago. It needed to be expanded. Or, again, build an entire new airport. Colossally expensive. I don't believe that sharing Payne with Boeing would have satisfied this (Seattle) region's growth. Lots of folks looked at this and considered many options. They firmly believe that good stewardship of public funds was achieved with this decision. To disagree, one would have to understand the decision, the alternates and the criteria/consequences. They are complex. I work with folks who seem to be doing the best they can. But maybe they made a mistake by not phoning you. Oh, wait. There were public hearings. Nevermind.
