Yes, there's a new article in the Star on the Airport Authority's desire for a new airport:
Political turbulence rattles plans for a single-terminal KCI
What gets me, though, and I keep saying it, is why--why--is no one talking about or suggesting we update the existing facility?
Why?
I know "new' is sexy, especially in this land we call America but can we stop throwing away whole buildings?
Should we not, can we not update and innovate and not throw these things in the trash dumps? Can we not improve and in the meantime, save?
Doesn't that make sense? In so many ways?
I find it extremely difficult to believe that any environmental study that's done on this new airport proposal could come to any conclusion but that updating and renovating and innovating the existing buildings is the absolute best way to go, and in a few different ways, not the least of which is cost.
