Kevyn Orr made a decision to keep this airport in operation. There is at least one individual who wants to establish a commercial airline with Coleman Young as its hub.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/18/b...=business&_r=0
Printable View
Kevyn Orr made a decision to keep this airport in operation. There is at least one individual who wants to establish a commercial airline with Coleman Young as its hub.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/18/b...=business&_r=0
$83M brings back City Airport passenger service
http://www.detroitnews.com/story/new...udy/110062586/
Is the $83 million worth the investment? Where would these $83million in funds come from? The article says there are federal and state funds available, and the city would have to find money as well.
What do you think?
The mayor favors conversion to an industrial park that would employ at lot more people than a small airport.
I think a commercial airport would work. Low cost carriers like Frontier and Southwest could escape Spirit’s grip on the DTW low cost market. Plus, it would be more convenient for east side and east suburb residents.
Subject gets kicked around every decade.....bottom line is: runway[[s) not long enough for commercial flights & cannot be expanded due to neighboring cemeteries. Along with many other issues.....
Attachment 35094
Could it become a regional airport? I'm thinking of airlines which fly say the E-175 or 190 type aircraft.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smirnoff
Great for trips to the Twin Cities, Chicago, Indy, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, D.C. or Baltimore, etc.
Would that type of service be profitable for an airline or is it the lesser or least profitable service [[compared to say a flight to Seattle [Amazon-land], L.A., Vegas, Phoenix, etc.)?
I don't see how $83M is a wise investment unless they can provide some kind of analysis of what a regional airline would bring to the area in terms of investment and jobs. The I-94 industrial park has finally seen some activity in it, but there is still quote a bit of space to fill in there. Do we really need another huge park opening up right now? I understand there may be more potential for jobs/investment/tax revenue if it were converted, but there is no telling how long that may take.
I live 10 minutes from city airport, and it would be great to take an uber and catch a flight. That being said, it is in the middle of one of the worst areas of Detroit. Not sure many suburbanites are ready to fly out of there anytime soon.
Not an expert, but an industrial park sounds like a better bet to me. If the runway isn't going to be expanded I don't see how it's going to make money, to say nothing of the costs of expansions and modernization.
Also not an expert but seems if airlines really wanted to locate there you could get signed contracts for a certain no. of flights with a penalty if they backed out before committing to any investment.
This. The region has too much air capacity anyways. Metro Airport is massively underutilized. Toledo, Flint and Lansing have underutilized airports. Why should taxpayer dollars go towards more uneeded capacity?Quote:
Originally Posted by Shai_Hulud
City airport site has good railroad access and is perfect for logistics or warehouse type operations.
Just one of the other BIG obstacles.....Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMichigan
Take the $83 Million and put it towards a rail connection from Downtown to the two DTW terminals. Much better use of the funds.
Why do we need commercial service at city airport? Having all of the commercial airlines operating at DTW creates more competition, and in turn lower prices for the customers. Why would we want to reduce a portion of that competition, when DTW is underutilized and in great shape?
Build a frequent rail connnection, and DTW [[with a lot more flights and destinations) could be just as convenient to downtown as an Uber ride to city airport.
The biggest mistake in hindsight was putting Metro in such a decentralized location.
I understand why it was done at the time, but it's a PITA to get to for anyone on the east side or in the northern suburbs.
Compared to other cities, it just feels waaay out there. It's practically the equivalent of DC if it had to rely solely on Dulles.
True.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bham1982
Metro Detroit has a bad habit of building infrastricture [[including road) for these 2-4 million additional people that won't be comimg in the forseeable future.
I hear they may turn it into a dragstrip, so people will stop street racing. Might not be a bad idea. Chief Craig is probably on board, since he has a 69 G.T.O.
I echo a number of posters here. City Airport is not an asset to the city, and really never could be at this point. Sinking lots of money into it in the hopes of getting more regional business is counterproductive from an economic growth perspective. In addition to the already stated excess airport capacity, the runways will never allow for the big planes that would make it potentially viable. I remember- in the 90's I think- Southwest actually wanted to acquire the long-term lease to the airport and make it a hub, but the lack of runway growability [[not really a word, I think) scuttled those plans. The $83M would be better spent on connecting DTW to downtown and the region, and selling or leasing the land to private developers.
I find myself, sadly, agreeing with the naysayers here on a practical level. But, damn, it would be nice to have a usable airport somewhere near me that I could get to in 15-20 minutes, instead of having to always drive across the entire city out into the nether regions just to catch a flight.
Back during the days of ProAir [[one of the most misnamed companies ever), it was so great being able to just drive up there and jump on a plane and find myself in NYC in a couple of hours. Even if their service was terrible and amateurish, just the ability to get out quick, without all the extra traffic hassle, was way worth it.
But, yeah, since CAY/DET is effectively unable to expand, and since Metro has excess capacity, and with transit links to Metro being a much better use of large amounts of money, I think this isn't a great idea and that ol' City's days should probably be, rightly, numbered.
Taking a step our of our current circumstances to imagine the near future, I agree with the previous comment it may soon be an enormous asset to have an airport within the city. It won't necessarily need runways capable of landing Dreamliners. Think drones and small aircraft. Autonomous self-piloting hover pods. I'm only kidding a little as I type that. Yeah, not tomorrow, but their day will come.
And with growing security and border hassles facing international travel, a smaller airport closer to the city center serving domestic flights could become ever more important, a la Laguardia in New York and Congonhas in São Paulo. It would be a big time saver to fly out of there, and not just for east siders. And an air train? There's already a track. If not those specific rails, there's the right of way where more can be built.
American heavy industry is almost certainly not the future. But if the decision is to create an industrial park, why sell now? The value of that real estate is near historic lows. Let's do our due diligence. Are there companies clamoring for land for factories in Detroit? Let's make sure there's that before going all in on an unproven idea. Is there no other space in the city for industry? Come on.
I'm making these numbers up, but I doubt you'll disagree: 99% of industrial buildings don't need 260 acres of space. Or even 26. For every gigafactory, how many industrial buildings occupy 2.6 acres or less?
Small businesses are still what primarily fuels our economy. More convenient air travel to and from city airport would be good for businesses big and small and ordinary citizens too.
My suggestion is not to rule out other possible uses of the airport. But I want much better research.
The present is not the future. Of course. Let's make sure we're planning for further ahead.
bust, I do agree with the gist of your argument, except for one thing: opportunity cost. While there would be some utility to a functional, modern airport in the city, is it worth the upfront cost [[$83M), ongoing subsidies and not using the land for something else for 20 years in the hopes that someday there might be enough business to warrant keeping it as an airport? I'm a firm "no" on that question. Yes, we lose something if that land becomes something else. But we're losing a whole lot [[and not just money) keeping it what it is.
There was an airline talking about doing that but with smaller 10 to 15 passenger planes,like the Hondas,or battery/fuel which would have brought the cost of fuel down to pennies compared to what is flying today,and that airport was mentioned as a hub.Quote:
Originally Posted by emu steve
More so geared to shorter runs,Chicago for the day and back etc.
Kinda like a uber plane.
But it is also a part of the bigger picture areo park thing,so it is not going anywhere soon,the same guy that owns the bridge owns the land needed for the runway expansion.
Off course but he now kinda controls,air,port,land and border crossing transportation,and the future of.
Do we know how much it costs the city to run CAY?Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeyinBrooklyn
I seem to remember during bankruptcy that the amount was not insubstantial.
Mikey, I agree the expense required to keep City Airport open is a liability. That's it's biggest problem. [[It's Coleman Young Jr. official name is another, whether that's deserved or not.)
But what a coincidence you mentioned opportunity cost. I almost included a discussion of opportunity cost in my previous post. I guess now I should.
Opportunity cost is the cost of potential gains from alternatives when a particular direction is chosen. In this case, what is the cost of the lost opportunity to have a closely situated airport that offers much more convenient travel than DTW? Of a very central regional base for drone and small aircraft logistics? How do those costs compare with the cost of the lost opportunity to have an industrial park there instead?
Estimating those costs requires thoughtful speculation. But I suggest the benefits of the airport are potentially greater, if harder to estimate. The benefits of an industrial park can be estimated by assessing interest industry has demonstrated situating there that wouldn't otherwise situate somewhere else in Detroit, and projecting the benefits they'd bring into the future. Thus far that seems to be zilch.
If there are industries ready to occupy that land, let's hear about them. How long are they ready to commit, and what benefits they will bring? And this is important: would they otherwise not locate in Detroit? Choosing this location instead of some other in Detroit doesn't help Detroit.
I'm open to pursuing that path if those benefits merit the opportunity cost of losing the airport.
But it would be a foolish decision to jump down that path, or any other, without first estimating opportunity costs. And not just for today, but tomorrow, and the future as best as we can imagine it.
^ well put,investors do not care about the Detroit Of yesterday,they look at it with the same view,where is the city going to be 5-10-20 years down the road.
You guys are really in a unique situation,you are making decisions today that is going to effect the future of your city for generations to come,you are actually in control of building an American city on a scale that this country has probably not seen in the last 100 years.
There used to be scheduled airline service at Coleman Young Airport and it was a convenient alternative to Detroit Metro. I remember picking my wife up there after she flew in from Indianapolis during the early 1990s. I also remember being shocked at the extent of the blight as I drove up Gratiot from I-94.
And it's gotten worse since then.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat001
I envision a hub similar to Porter Air's hub at Toronto Lakefront Airport.
I fly them on a regular basis and the service is great, including free beer.Quote:
Porter Airlines is a regional airline headquartered at Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport on the Toronto Islands in Toronto, Ontario, Canada.[1]Owned by Porter Aviation Holdings, formerly known as REGCO Holdings Inc., Porter operates regularly scheduled flights between Toronto and locations in Canada and the United States using Canadian-built Bombardier Dash-8 Q 400 turboprop aircraft.
A Seattle-area startup, backed by the venture capital arms of Boeing Co [[BA.N) and JetBlue Airways Corp [[JBLU.O) announced plans on Thursday to bring a small hybrid-electric commuter aircraft to market by 2022.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-aerospace-hybrid/boeing-backed-hybrid-electric-commuter-plane-to-hit-market-in-2022-idUSKBN1CA16A
I am in for free beer though.
I am all for keeping the airfield. “Mothball it” if you have to. I think it would be foolish to replace it with an industrial park given the other availability of land throughout the city.
That all being said, don’t waste money on subsidizing commercial air service there. DTW, while inconvenient to eastsiders, is still a regional asset that is often overlooked economically.
And for those who think DTW is to far away, here is a comparison of driving distance from Airport terminal to city center:
DTW to Detroit - 20 miles
ORD to Chicago - 18 miles
SEA to Seattle - 16 miles
DEN to Denver - 26 miles
YYZ to Toronto - 18 miles
So Detroit is far from alone in having an airport far away from downtown. And of the 5 above, only one doesn’t have a rail connection between the two.
Years ago there was significant commercial activity at the airport.
Southwest [[SWA) had several flights a day to Chicago Midway and Kansas City. I flew those routes frequently. The planes [[all 737s) were generally full. SWA also flew out of Metro at the same time and I forgot the reason SWA terminated Detroit.
There were also a couple of commuter airlines that flew to Chicago Meigs Field and Cleveland's riverfront airport.
City airport has no future as being a mainstream commercial airport. It's already been discussed to death in other threads. It's not even a "this is what might work the best even if we all know it would never happen" type of thing. Spending the 83 million just brings city airport on par with its equivalents in other cities, which are closing or struggling. That is the best case scenario.
The study says that if city airport were better managed it could roughly break even. Investing 23 million now is cheaper than subsidizing the airport into perpetuity. Spend 23 million now and get a "free" airport for the foreseeable future. The airport *does* provide some value.
If the entire justification for spending the full 83 million to bring substandard commercial service to an airport in the ghetto is that it's closer to downtown, then I don't think it's a good justification. Google transit says that at the moment it takes 22 minutes to get downtown from DTW and 15 minutes from City Airport. You have to drive/taxi/uber for either of them.
DTW is a good airport. Planes are not people and Romulus and DTW are well suited for planes. Airports take up insane amounts of space, and create a lot of noise. DTW is also under capacity and it has the typical amenities [[except transit). Cities are for people, not planes. Bring the people to the planes, not the planes to the people.
I agree with Atticus's earlier post that if having an airport "close" to downtown is the goal, it would be better to spend the money creating a transit connection from DTW to downtown.
60-80 million doesn't pay for much but if city council wants to flush that much down the toilet for city airport then they should be willing to invest more in order to get a DTW transit connection. If it really is about quality air travel and not just about pride.
And as far as Duggan goes, it's true that city airport is a large continuous site that would work well for an industrial park. But it's also true that directly south of the airport are several empty large industrial lots which neither businesses or the city seem to have any interest in developing. It's just that politically "THOUSANDS of JOBS JOBS JOBS" sounds better than "we're not bothering with city airport anymore". And the city would spend more money subsidizing an industrial development there than it would be spending to fix the current airport anyway.
Mothballing the airport should be considered.Quote:
Originally Posted by Atticus
Regarding the cities listed, they all except Detroit also have secondary public use airports closer to downtown. Midway Airport is about 10 miles from Chicago's loop; Boeing Field is 6 miles from downtown Seattle; Centennial Airport is 19 miles from downtown Denver; Bishop Airport is just offshore downtown Toronto. They all except Centennial handle domestic and international flights.
More considerations for evaluating opportunity cost: How valuable would faster and more convenient air travel be to companies considering where to [[re)locate? Especially companies engaged in businesses that will be particularly relevant in the future. How much would it benefit the companies already here?
The consensus seems to be the American economy is moving away from heavy industry toward service industries. People who provide white collar services fly a lot. Videoconferencing will continue improve, but as teams and clients get ever more distributed I expect it will be a long time before consultants, product managers, tech leads, salespeople, executives, etc. don't fly a lot.
Meanwhile what matters to the traveler is not just the time spent getting to or from the airport, it's also the time required getting to or from the gate once there. It seems to me the time required to check in, pass through security, and travel the distance to the gate is significantly more at DTW than at most other airports -- especially the latter two. This time at New York's Laguardia is usually much less than at JFK. This time at DET should be even less.
And waiting in turn to take off or land at busy airports is time wasted too.
That said, I'm fully on board with the idea to provide fast transit to DTW. It won't reduce time once at the airport, but it would help a lot, not least to be current with the competition. Maybe it's the best idea.
I just want to see more evidence DET isn't a better future asset as an airport than as an industrial park.
PS. Anyone not already familiar with flightaware.com: it's my pleasure to introduce it in the links. :)
Two things:
1. The Bombardier Dash-8 Q 400 linked in the article above is the squirreliest looking modern plane I've seen.
2. Spending $83M now on the airport just to break even doesn't make sense. Nor does selling the land - it's not like we're out of land in the rest of the city. Mothball it, or do the minimum to keep it running, and it's available in future for uber planes or other future uses.
Maybe we can land our jet packs there. I hear they'll be available in the next 5 years or so...
Maybe they can move the Grand Prix to there like they used to do in Cleveland and still do in a few places to some extent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cincinnati_Kid
First thing to do is get that hateful bastard's name off of it.
I never understood the drive for a commercial airport. It should revert to a smaller executive and General Aviation airport. Nothing over 50 passengers or so. Use it as a hop service to DTW, maybe even with helicopters. Also could be for sightseeing flights.
Run special shuttles downtown for the Yuppie crowd to get between the two.
Reopen McNichols.
Dragstrip could be good as an addition ... close it to air traffic on Sundays.
With all the wide open vacant land and rundown ramshackle building begging to be razed, the 'industrial complex' could be almost anywhere else.
I had to map it because I didn't remember it being so short a distance. It may be 18 miles on the map, but it seems like 100 when driving it, or so I remember. I drive 18 miles or more now just to get to a grocery store; 10 to get to a gas station, but it only takes a few minutes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Atticus
That 18 miles from Downtown to DTW can take an hour or more.
Maybe if you're holding your speed down to 20mph due to the current snowstorm... I-94 is a straight shot out to Metro, under normal traffic conditions, guaranteed half an hour or less. Of course, if it takes you over a half hour to find your way on to the freeway system... then it could take "an hour or more".Quote:
Originally Posted by Meddle
^^ In my days there, 'normal traffic' on 94 was bumper to bumper, a sea of taillights running 20 or less from the Lodge to Southfield.
Other than the "rush" hour back ups most times traffic flows fairly well in/out of the city. Those times I'd agree 10 or 20 miles does seem to take forever...;)
From downtown, the distance to Metro isn't AS bad.
But the main point is being missed, that being most of the region's population lives north and east of downtown. If you're in Grosse Pointe or even most of Macomb / Oakland County, DTW might as well be a road trip
^^ Which is why Selfridge might be a good option.
Very good point, 313WX.
Sea-Tac airport may be 15 minuts from downtown Seattle )on a good commute day...or at 3 AM) as Atticus indicated, but if you live in Everett, it's more like an hour and a half. To that end, Paine Field, on the north side of Seattle/Everett is going to start commercial flights in the fall, with Alaska, Southwest and United using the facility.
It makes me wonder in a way if Bishop Airport in Flint should become a second "Detroit Metro" airport. It's convenient to Oakland County, and although it's flight distribution isn't the greatest, I'd consider it over Detroit Metro to fly home [[Ferndale).
Because of our sprawly region, no matter where the airport is, it's going to be far away from someone.Quote:
Originally Posted by 313WX
Even if City Airport had commercial service and it was wildly successful it's still only capable of handling a small fraction of what DTW does, so most people would still have to fly through DTW anyway.
I recall hearing they were seriously considering putting the airport in South Warren [[back when the land was still undeveloped). That would have been a far more central and convenient location IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason
Several locations in/around Warren were under consideration.
Attachment 35122
I still say Selfridge is the best plan for an east side facility. The purple area could be redeveloped for public access while maintaining security for the rest of the base. There's already an interchange there, though it might have to be worked on if traffic got too heavy.
City could then be a commuter hub for DTW, SANGB, Bishop and Windsor.
Bring back flying schools too with cost available rates.
Attachment 35123
Revitalize the City Airport so that smaller Boeing heys could fly in and out of there for local trips from other states within the country. The Metro Airport could take in local and international flights. Dignitaries, celebrities, and execs could use Detroit City Airport when flying into town so that the commute would be shorter getting to their destination from the airport especially in the winter. Gratiot could be redesigned from the airport to downtown Detroit to have express lanes from the Airport to downtown
I'm with you all the way on this. Selfridge has been a waste of money for almost 30 years. They used 9-11 as an excuse to keep it viable by basing homeland security there, but it outlived its' usefulness years ago. Having outdated A-10 squadrons in an urban area is a waste of our money, and the refueling jets can easily go elsewhere. There was movement and dispute on this about 5 years ago, as someone started to buy up all the property on Joy Rd for the purposes of freight flights and storage. People were being accused of having inside information about the base's future use, including Candice Miller. I live directly under the North/South runway, and I would be very pleased to drive to Selfridge instead of Metro for a flight. Most of my neighbors are dead-set against the move though, and I'm not really sure why. There's not much difference to me if a commercial airliner falls on my house as opposed to one full of jet fuel. The noise factor is about the same. Between the Base, Metro Beach, and DNR areas, Harrison Twp is more than 50% public land, which keeps taxes dirt cheap. Any talk of change makes people in this area very paranoid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Meddle
That subdivision you see on the bottom of your pic was never supposed to be built. The Base ran out of money to purchase land for a safe runway egress, and warned the Township to never build there. They did anyway.
Used City Airport many times when Southwest was there. I thought it was a beautiful thing while it lasted.
^ be on the receiving end of one of those A10s,I bet you will not think they are outdated then.
Source for this map?Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeM
http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/776946375Quote:
Originally Posted by Gsgeorge
No more hateful than that 'Bastard' that has run Oakland County for the last 40 years.Quote:
First thing to do is get that hateful bastard's name off of it.
No argument. Or the one than ran Wayne County.
But the topic is City Airport, so ....