Last night, under the cover of darkness, Mayor Daley closed Miegs field and had the runway torn up. Today he said the closing was due to security reasons, as the airport is in the middle of the Chicago no-fly zone. The current governor has stated that he has no problem with this action.
Mayor Daley has wanted to close Miegs Field for at least the last 7 years and turn it into a public park. (There is also controversy around where the money for the park will come from.) Nearly all the Chicago lakeshore is now public parks. These parks are widely enjoyed by many, but one more won’t hurt. The Park district has leased the land to those who run the airfield for a nominal fee for many years. It was kept open as a trade for support on O’Hare expansion. The last traces of that support died recently in our republican controlled congress.
The airfield is used mainly by government officials, and those with private planes. The average flight has about 3 people on it. The airfield is not operable for about 100 days out of the year. Its attraction is that you can land there and be in the loop in a very few minutes. From O’Hare it takes about 45 minutes by the El and longer by car, sometimes much longer. Flying up from the state capitol to O’Hare to visit down town, and you well could spend more time in the car than in the plane.
Here are some links related to the history of the closing an facts about Miegs:
So, is the closing of Miegs Field a cowardly act that breaks promises and hurts Chicago by depriving it of a vital resource, or is it about time that these 90 acres of land be turned over for the enjoyment of the people instead of being used for the convenience of a few of the rich and powerful or is it just a legitmate action to promote the safety of those who live and work withing the potential striking distance of a would be terrorists who could use the airstrip to attack.
As you say, Daley has wanted to close Miegs and turn it into a park for several years now, and by rights should have been able to do so before. I don’t see Miegs as much of a “vital resource” and it was supposed to be a park in the first place. I say let it go and plant on it.
I just hope it doesn’t turn into another Millennium Park money pit.
Coupla questions for you (and Broomstick will be along shortly to take up the cudgel, I’m sure):
Are the current parks inadequate to meet public demand?
What size aircraft could use Meigs, and are they big enough to hurt anything larger than themselves? Where, for that matter, did the 9/11 planes take off from - it wasn’t even from the same city, if you’ll recall.
If the public was in favor of it, why was it “necessary” to do it in the middle of the night, while stranding airplanes without warning?
Isn’t the “convenience of the rich and powerful” part of what is needed to keep them interested in and investing in the city?
We can always use more parks. This is not in and of itself a reason to close an airport, of course, but when you have 2+ million people living at a density of some twelve thousand per square mile, more green space is always a good thing. Plus, recessions are excellent times for public works projects like building parks.
Fairly small, but while Meigs was in service, the no-fly zone border was necessarily still quite close to downtown. With Meigs out, the no-fly bubble can be expanded considerably, putting the Loop at less risk from bigger planes. Even small planes, though, could cause a lot of damage. Remember, it wasn’t the plane crash itself but the burning fuel that took out both WTC towers; and they were restricted to only using the jet fuel in the planes. Think what a terrorist could do with a nastier bomb on one of these little planes, coming in for a landing at Meigs and diverting the couple hundred yards into the Sears Tower…
Because no matter how many people are for it, a vocal minority can tie up stuff like this indefinitely in the courts. This is, generally, a good thing, and I do have to disapprove of the method in which Daley did this (while at the same time admiring the political finesse it must have taken to do it so quickly and quietly).
Uh, whatever. Chicago itself has nearly three million people; Cook County over five; and the whole metro area well upwards of eight million, making it roughly the third-largest market in the US. It is also one of the major North American transportation hubs. We don’t need an extra airport to “keep them interested”.
I am a pilot. I have flown into Meigs in my own private plane. I am not rich nor powerful…at least I don’t think so. I suppose that if you compare me to a farmer in Mozambique I’m rich and powerful.
I would love to educate more people about the importance of airports to the nation’s economy, the amount of business and employment they create, etc. but that would take a while. If you’re really interested, visit www.aopa.org for more detail (you’ll see the howls of protest at the Meigs closure leading off the debate).
The nation needs more airports, not fewer. About one airport closes every two weeks in the U.S…did you realize that? Usually for reasons of urban sprawl or other local agendas, like Mayor Daley’s. The consequences of this will be felt in a very real way in about 15-20 years when the nation’s busiest airports and airways are straining at capacity (like they were during the boom days of 2000 and 2001) and people are desperate for reliever airports like Meigs, and Pal-Waukee (in the Northern Chicago suburbs) to siphon off aviation traffic from maxed-out airports like Midway and O’Hare.
The Meigs debate has been going on for years - if you go to the AOPA’s website you’ll see how “we” finally thought we had won by getting Daley to promise keeping Meigs open in exchange for other favors.
What I have never really been able to figure out is why he was SOOOO intent on shutting the thing down. What was the burning issue that made this such a high priority for him? The amount of park space it adds to Chicago’s overall total is pretty trivial…did he want to name it after himself, or grant a casino license to some buddy? It never made sense to me.
We can always use more parks. This is not in and of itself a reason to close an airport, of course, but when you have 2+ million people living at a density of some twelve thousand per square mile, more green space is always a good thing. Plus, recessions are excellent times for public works projects like building parks.
>>> I would argue that a balance is necessary. An airport as close to a world-class business center downtown as Meigs is to Chicago is an immensely valuable resource; and one who’s replacement cost would run into $100’s of millions of dollars, and probably never get off the ground again due to the legal wrangling it would involve.
Fairly small, but while Meigs was in service, the no-fly zone border was necessarily still quite close to downtown. With Meigs out, the no-fly bubble can be expanded considerably, putting the Loop at less risk from bigger planes. Even small planes, though, could cause a lot of damage. Remember, it wasn’t the plane crash itself but the burning fuel that took out both WTC towers; and they were restricted to only using the jet fuel in the planes. Think what a terrorist could do with a nastier bomb on one of these little planes, coming in for a landing at Meigs and diverting the couple hundred yards into the Sears Tower…
>>>Small planes cause practically no damage. The 15-year old who flew the C-172 directly into a building in Florida caused about as much damage as expected - a few broken windows, some minor interior damage, etc. About what you would expect from driving a car straight into a building, because within +/- 50%, a car has the same momentum, fuel, etc. as a small plane. The commercial jets that hit the WTC had many, many orders of magnitude more… Should we disallow all cars driving in downtown Chicago, too?
Because no matter how many people are for it, a vocal minority can tie up stuff like this indefinitely in the courts. This is, generally, a good thing, and I do have to disapprove of the method in which Daley did this (while at the same time admiring the political finesse it must have taken to do it so quickly and quietly).
>>>> I don’t know how to respond to this. It seems like an uninformed majority could make a worse decision, and may have done just that.
Uh, whatever. Chicago itself has nearly three million people; Cook County over five; and the whole metro area well upwards of eight million, making it roughly the third-largest market in the US. It is also one of the major North American transportation hubs. We don’t need an extra airport to “keep them interested”.
>>>> There are several articles going back over the years about businesses in nearby cities (Madison, WI…Detroit, etc.) who have suffered serious impacts to their businesses or gave up efforts in Chicago altogether after Meigs was first temporarily shuttered a few years back. I’ll see if I can dig up some cites.
[nitpick]As of this year, DCA is now the third largest market/population centre in the nation. Though less than four percent larger in land mass than Chicago/cook county, DCAnow has almost 15% more people in it. Unless you meant something else by market size. In that case, nevermind.[/nitpick]
I don’t see how Meigs can be seen as a “reliever” airport for either O’Hare or Midway. Virtually none of the traffic to O’Hare can even land at Meigs; the runway is too short and the necessary facilities are absent. Meigs is closed, on average, 100 days a year and has woefully inadeqate parking or facilities to handle any significant volume of commercial traffic. There is no place on or near Northerly Island to build additional parking or facilities that would not destroy cherished lakefront parkland. I just can’t see how calling Meigs a “relief” airport can be anything other than patently silly.
Did people whine this much when Crissy Field in San Francisco closed, too?
Sorry if this wasn’t clear, but I was more-or-less conceding that point. I think that, in general, quietly doing something under cover of night and avoiding public debate is a Bad Thing. (In the specific case of my alma mater’s president knocking down a grove of beautiful old elm trees he found ‘unsightly’ and ‘blocking the view from the street of the main building’, I was pretty pissed.) In this case, I approve of the end, but that doesn’t mean I approve of the means. I am, however, impressed that he managed to pull it off.
Have you ever heard the expression “Time is Money”? Many business executives fly because they can use smaller airports that are often closer to their destinations. An hour or more sitting in traffic is time that is not spent making money for their companies. And I can tell you that sitting in traffic is no fun. If you want to be sharp for a meeting, you don’t want to be sitting in a car. And I guess you don’t care about jobs. Yes, airports generate jobs. Corporate pilots have to be employed. Flight instructors would find it rather convenient if they had a place to teach from. You think avgas is free? Nope! Someone has to sell it and pay taxes to the city. And as Broomstick pointed out in another thread, if there is no airport then there is no control tower. I guess if you make the TFR area big enough, you won’t need anyone to keep an eye on it, eh?
And about people “whining”. I rmember when people were trying to close down a small airport in the Bay Area. (I don’t remember which one.) Then came the Loma Prieta earthquake. Guess where the search teams flew into? Guess where emergency supplies came in? I read that the residents suddenly liked that little airport. But I guess Chicago doesn’t really need to have someplace for search and rescue teams to go in case of a catastrophe. Someone trapped in a basement or something can just wait while the teams make their way through damaged streets and heavy traffic. After all, we’re only talking about lives; and a park is so much more important.
Did you know that by law, airline pilots are required to retire on their 60th birthday? Did you know that only about 40% of airline pilots (from what I’ve read in other threads) come from the military? If small airports are closed, where will replacement pilots come from? Flying is much more expensive than I’d like it to be. If I were in a small town making minimum wage, I’d probably be less likely to get a pilot’s license and persue a career in aviation than someone who is making twenty bucks an hour in a large city.
Broomstick can tell you, and she probably will, that closing the airport will drive businesses out of Chicago. But what city wants to keep taxes? Better to let them go someplace else where they actually want more business revenues.
To answer the OP, what Daley did was despicable. He accepted funds for the expansion of O’Hare in exchange for keeping Meigs Field open. Since he’s renegged on his part of the bargain, it sounds an aweful lot like theft or fraud to me.
Check out the Pit thread ElvisL1ves linked. Maybe you’ll see some of the costs of this cowardly act.
Johnny L.A., could you please specify what funds were accepted? From what I read the bill that allocated the funds for OHare expansion as well as officially committed Meigs to stay open until 2026 were killed by the Republican majority congress. I believe it was even filibustered against by Senator Fitzgerald. If that is correct how can Daley be the one reneging on a deal?
Also can someone please explain to me how someone that owns and has the legal right to control a parcel of land already can make a landgrab for it?
Uh, no, he did not. The FAA already confirmed that Meigs Field was a “uncommitted airfield”, meaning that all federal funds allocated to that airfield had been paid back. No federal (or state) funding of any sort had been committed to Chicago or to O’Hare conditioned on Meigs Field remaining open.
This is one of the many false statements that the Friends of Meigs Field seem to be circulating. I do not trust them as a source of factual information.
Oh, and on the earthquake issue: Meigs Field is more likely to be made unusuable by a killer earthquake than O’Hare or Midway. Meigs is on the lakeshore, built on landfill. In the event the New Madrid lets go, my bet is that Meigs Field will be submerged. Can’t exactly land on it in that condition. The field isn’t even usable almost a third of a time because of weather.
As to business: One of the big appeals of Meigs, supposedly, is its proximity to McCormick Place. Well, the odd thing is, McCormick Place has a rather high vacancy rate right now, and has been losing tenants and conventions steadily for years. The area has been reverting to warehousing and manufacturing; not at all the high-scale business center it’s supposed to be. You know where the action is? Rosemont. Why? It’s next to O’Hare. Meigs Field is only important to a very small number of business (like Boeing) that routinely fly in their top execs on private planes. This is a drop in the bucket compared to the regular business execs who fly into O’Hare on commercial aviation (first class, of course). And, of course, two of the largest employers in the area, American and United, have their headquarters near O’Hare. Meigs’ unusuability by regular commercial air operators renders the “business-attraction” argument largely null.
My own small take on the whole “we can always use more parks” angle is that it is a load of bull. The entire lakefront from Hollywood to what? 95th Street? is one freakin’ park!
Now of course we don’t want to put any money for parks in the neghborhoods where people actually live!!! God forbid, some [sub]minorities[/sub] :eek: might actually benefit from Da’Mayors’ largesse in handing out city funds to his fence building buddies and landscape contractors!
No, let’s keep all the park develeopment in that little strip from Streeterville up to Hollywood[sub]except that strestch from Irving to Foster…you, know, by Uptown![/sub]
[pointless rant]Feh, I’m sick of Chicago, I know I copped out by moving to Evanston but you know what? I haven’t had a gun stuck in my face since January 14th, and I haven’t gotten a SINGLE bullshit parking ticket! At least here I can go buy a beach token, or head out to a neighborhood park and actually see that my tax money is being spent if not wisely, at least even handedly[/rant]
I guess my point is that Mayor Daley has no concern whatsoever for the needs of Chicagoans outside his circle of cronies and the lakefront North side constituents who vote like automatons as long as their property values are enhanced through short sighted “beautification” plans. Infrastructure? Well we gotta make sure Wacker is pretty, but who cares about the crumbling bridges out in the neighborhoods, the streets on the W side that are frankly impassable, the mass exodus of light manufacturing jobs, the sewers that need replacement (unless he cons the State into paying for it by claiming its under a Federal Highway- See Sheridan Road)…argh I’m too ticked off to go on.
Meigs Field is just a symptom of a complete disregard for the needs of the people, all he wants are monuments to himself and his “legacy”.
Much of the general aviation traffic (i.e. light planes, corporate jets, etc.) that formerly used Meigs will now have to use O’Hare or Midway, which will cut into the amount of airline traffic. That’s how Meigs was a reliever airport.