Unfettered Letters

‘Bored’ with convenience at KCI

I agree with the letter writer (1/3) who said it’s time to bulldoze the three KCI Airport terminals.

As a longtime flyer, I am growing bored with KCI’s excellent service, easy access to ticket counters, quick and simple security screening, uncomplicated luggage return and convenient parking. I long for the pushy crowds, long waits, half-mile walks, impossible parking and palpable anxiety of the big centralized terminal systems like Chicago’s O’Hare, Atlanta’s Hartsfield or California’s Los Angeles International Airport.

So bring on the bulldozers, and let the excitement of chaos begin!

Shirley Phillips
Stilwell

Time to update KCI

Siding with a long-range airport plan, I’ve come to the conclusion that it’s time to bow to modernity and start over again at KCI, with one major terminal instead of three.

For years after KCI opened, I loved going there, walking on the polished parquet floors (long gone) and enjoying the ease of access. Plus, the terminals were new and relatively appealing visually.

But over the years, things have changed. In recent visits to the airport, I’ve found a dark and gloomy place with not an inkling of energy or excitement. Yes, the terminals are still convenient, but I think the funereal atmosphere and the lack of light and amenities, including food options, have cast the die.

Kansas City has become a more dynamic, more competitive city, thanks largely to the Sprint Center and the Power & Light District. Now we need an airport that parallels our overall resurgence.

For comparison, just look at the nearby St. Louis, Louisville and Chicago Midway airports. All are miles ahead of KCI on almost every level, and they generate the excitement that should attend most travel experiences.

Bring on the dozers. The three-terminal era is done.

Jim Fitzpatrick
Kansas City

Combining FYI and Preview

I was disappointed to find that the Thursday FYI section of The Star has become part of the Preview section.

During the eight years my husband and I have lived in the Kansas City area, we’ve watched The Star shrink to fewer and fewer pages. Now, someone decided that if the paper reduces the size of the comic strips and crams them onto the smaller pages of Preview, another section of the paper can vanish.

The Monday edition of the paper is now so brief that I wonder if it warrants the use of the carrier’s gasoline to make deliveries.

Please, the U.S. newspaper industry is faced with ever-declining readership. The answer to this dilemma is not to decrease the number of pages. Instead, work toward improving quality of content.

Jane Henley
Lee’s Summit

As an attorney, I frequently have to read the fine print, but your newly shrunken comics section in the Preview section is nearly unreadable. Is it your plan to continue to shrink them until everyone over 40 stops reading them?

William E. Pray
Leavenworth

KCI not for shopping

In regard to Joe Guarino’s letter on Kansas City International Airport and one terminal (1/21): I would love to have connection walkways between the terminals. However, I thought one went to an airport to fly somewhere, not to have a true retail experience. I don’t know anyone who would go to the airport to just to shop.

Shelly Brown
Liberty

KCI, business travelers

In response to Rep. Sam Graves’ As I See It (1/15, “Customer convenience is first”), our airport is not convenient to business travelers, and the reality is that they make up 70 percent of an airline’s business.

Besides convenience to the everyday traveler (connections, parking) a one-terminal system would combine the traffic to form a true retail experience. Many airports have great shops, restaurants etc.

Think of the boost to the local economy, the jobs it would create and the impression it would give to travelers about what a great city this is. Everyone knows that travelers spend a lot of money in airports. Why don’t we take advantage of that?

A one-terminal system could also serve as a showcase first step into our wonderful, under-rated city. Maybe a fountain in the middle of the new terminal. How about a museum that shows off how important our history is to the landscape of America itself?

Our airport can still be convenient to the vacation traveler. We just need to be a little creative. In the past several years Kansas City has done some wonderful things to upgrade its image. Let’s keep the momentum going by building a first-class airport.

Joe Guarino
Kansas City

Don’t ruin KCI

I find it unbelievable that 12 persons setting in Kansas City’s City Hall (along with the mayor) will have the final say about a possible new terminal that would replace the airport’s three C-shaped terminals.

These same 12 self-absorbed persons cannot have abandoned buildings torn down or the sewer system fixed. But they can try and make a fool of the mayor over a new contract for the city manager, when the mayor should have had the final say.

Now these same 12 councilpersons, who represent fewer than 500,000 people, will have the power to commit the metropolitan area of 2 million to their actions.

The security expenses will never equal the estimated $1.5 billion price tag. Try and estimate the cost 15 to 20 years in the future. Also they seem very concerned that concessionaires can make more money, all at the cost to the traveling public.

Just ask the traveling public in Kansas City, and the majority will say leave it as it is. If is not broken do not attempt to fix it.

Richard Koop
Raytown

Editor’s note: The plan, developed by the city’s Aviation Department and consultants, also must receive approval from the Federal Aviation Administration.

Scrutinizing KCI plan

How gratifying it was to see again in that I’m not the only person who is quite satisfied with the airport as it is (1/9, Local, “KCI plan to get scrutiny”).

We like the layout, and we don’t need more restaurants and shops and longer lines through security.

Expansion has another downside, though, that I haven’t seen mentioned. Airplanes are disastrous contributors to carbon emissions and thus to global warming. It seems insane to plan for so many more daily flights in 20 years that we’ll need more airport space. Surely by then it will be abundantly clear that we need fewer flights, not more.

Perhaps by 2028 we will only need Terminal C, and the others can be made into energy-efficient housing for airport personnel!

Karin McAdams
Prairie Village

I’d like to offer my observations as someone who uses KCI frequently.

I travel in and out of this airport virtually every week, sometimes twice per week. I travel across North America, and have become familiar with most airports in the United States and the major ones in Canada.

I’m all for improvement and making our metro area the best it can be in all regards. But, speaking from experience, I believe KCI is a great airport. The recent changes in the terminals have been nice improvements. The short-term and circle parking are great. The new economy parking is an improvement.

The major pain I experience is waiting for the red buses, to transport me from one terminal to another. Ten to 15 minutes is the norm, and I have waited as long as 30 minutes.

I’d suggest buying more buses and hiring more drivers. This would be an easy fix.

A longer term improvement, sticking with the three terminals, would be to build some sort of rail transit between the terminals. That surely would be more cost effective than starting over and would preserve much of what is awesome about KCI.

Lane M. Crosser
Lenexa

KCI’s design

The following information appeared on CNN.Money a few days ago: “(The) president of America’s Research Group said research shows that mall traffic was down since late November… ‘Our consumer surveys tell us that more people think malls are inefficient. They can’t park near the stores where they want to shop and they can’t get in and out (of malls) quickly.’.”

People who are avoiding malls for Christmas shopping for these reasons will avoid airports that have the same inefficiencies.

Arguments that centralized security screening is more efficient are dangerous and ignorant. Terrorists target areas with large groups closely packed together because they are assured of more victims. Highly emotional, inexperienced criminals need mass targets.

Military and law enforcement personnel are trained to disperse to avoid presenting a single lucrative target. Dispersed security actually makes passengers and visitors safer at Kansas City International Airport.

Jack Hammell
Leavenworth

I’d like to agree with Jennifer Randle’s note (12/12, Letters) about being against the proposed changes to our unique and convenient airport.

All of my relatives live out of town, and when they fly in for a visit, the first thing they comment on is how easy it is to get their luggage.

When we are figuring out how much time we need to get to the airport at the end of their visit, they usually say, “Your airport is so easy. You can get your ticket, drop off your luggage and go through security right in the same area.”

They spend the extra time visiting with us instead of walking four miles through a terminal and moving like herded cows through along security line.

What other city has an airport like ours? I love it! Leave it alone. Why fix what isn’t broken?

Like Jennifer wrote, it would cost much less than a billion dollars to build an additional circular terminal if needed.

I have an idea. Let’s use the “extra” money we save to pay for light rail to get us out there.

Now, that would be wise and convenient.

Jenny Whitehead
Kansas City

KCI future

If the graphic in The Star is accurate (12/8, Local, “Vision for KCI layout still the same”), the favored master plan for the improved airport gives us 52 ramps in a single terminal when the existing facility has 54 ramps. That seems like a step in the wrong direction.

The consultants tell us it is possible to build a centralized security checkpoint center that would service the three existing terminals, and practically in the same breath they tell us such a configuration would not help the concessionaires and retailers. So is that the main priority?

Have these consultants spent any time at Kansas City International Airport to find out why it was ranked first among medium-size airports for customer satisfaction? From curb to boarding pass to gate, KCI is unmatched for convenience to the traveling public.

How does putting the concessionaires and retailers in a single concourse help them reach maximum profits when the majority of travelers flying out of KCI do not have to spend hours waiting for connecting flights? Giving such importance to the retail operations in an airport seems better suited to the hubs where you have the time to wander around while you wait for your next flight.

Paton Eliot
Overland Park

Saturday’s KCI article explains why consultants persist in recommending an unpopular plan to replace, rather than upgrade, our airport terminals. They say the airport is inefficient because it requires more checkpoints. Most important, apparently, is the “inability for retailers to reach maximum profits.”

Cost-benefit analysis can support any desired alternative, depending on what factors are considered. If user-friendliness and customer satisfaction were valued appropriately, they would certainly outweigh “maximum retailer profits.”

Better inter-terminal transportation, as in Atlanta, would be a good expenditure. Don’t create the long security lines that others suffer at Washington-Dulles and other airports.

Don’t fix what is not broken.

Roy Busdiecker
Overland Park

Don’t change KCI

So the vision for KCI has not changed (12/8, Local, “Vision for KCI layout still the same; A single terminal remains consultants’ top choice in the proposed master plan they unveil”). Consultants from Orlando think they know more than we do about our airport.

For what, in all likelihood, will cost more than $1 billion, KCI can eliminate multiple security checkpoints and allow airport vendors to “reach maximum profits.”

I know that when I fly, I am seeking one huge security checkpoint where I can stand in line for hours, then visit boring retail shops paying inflated prices for cheap tourist items. And the pleasure of being able to stand in line or wait for a seat at restaurants with bad food, again at inflated prices — not.

Do these consultants think travelers and citizens here are idiots?

If the airport needs to grow, let’s add a fourth circle terminal for perhaps 10 percent of the cost while keeping the convenience we have learned to enjoy.

We can pay for a lot of security checkpoints, for a lot of years, with over a billion dollars.

I hope the City Council and the Federal Aviation Administration have some members with common sense who know to turn down this proposal.

Jennifer Randle
Overland Park

I would like to express my opinion on the proposed KCI expansion.

I am a frequent flier from KCI to Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport. I would think most people would agree that KCI is very convenient in both security and walking distance to your gate from your car.

To say KCI is “inefficient because of the inability for retailers to reach maximum profit” is totally bogus. If Kansas City and Platte County must pay a billion dollar figure to help maximize retailer’s profits, then we should be building another retail mall instead of a new airport. Last time I checked, I go to KCI to fly to another destination, not shop or have a gourmet meal.

Chris Catalano
Leawood