As long as you're a lawyer, you'll be ok in the America of tomorrow.

Man, that Karaganis dude is real scum. He continues to urge the families to fight, even though he knows that the odds are overwhelmingly against them. Meanwhile, he happily accepts their money. By now, all of that money could have been spent on respectful, ceremonial movings of the interred people, instead of the no-frills, quick, efficient job that the city seems to be doing.

I honestly don't think moving a grave is that big of a deal, especially if family members can use it as an occasion to reflect on their deceased loved ones.

The real question is why do these people care so much? Its not like they are digging up these caskets and throwing them in a wood chipper. Its not like Lincoln Park where large parts of the cemetery were just forgotten and still sit there today. They are respectfully moving them over a few miles.

Isn't it also true that the cemetery is from around 1850, and that there have been no interments there in a 100 years or something?

Assuming that's the case, most of the citizens whining about the graves are talking about dead relatives whom they've never actually met. In fact, dead relatives that even their grandparents had never met.

Ancestors and family are important and should be respected, but you can't cling forever.

A bit off-topic: Gary expansion
 

Just a bit off topic, but does anyone have any links to the "master plans" for the Gary airport expansion? The Gary International airport website doesn't contain much information.

Speaking of Gary^
 

Gary airport gets latest piece of grant


March 4, 2010
POST-TRIBUNE STAFF REPORT

Gary/Chicago International Airport received its fifth installment of federal funding to support airport expansion efforts, U.S. Rep. Pete Visclosky, D-Merrillville, said Wednesday.

The $5 million grant will go toward the airport's runway extension project and is part of a $57.8 million allocation over 10 years. To date, the airport has received more than $25 million from its grant awarded by the Federal Aviation Administration.

The project will expand the airport's runway from 7,000 to 8,900 feet. The extension also calls for the relocation of railroad tracks owned by Canadian National Railway. Airport Director Chris Curry said the two groups are in the final stages of signing an agreement to allow the project to begin in the summer.

"The Gary Airport is one of Northwest Indiana's untapped resources with high potential to transform the region," according to Visclosky in a statement. "These substantial investments in airport improvements can put people to work in the near term while laying the foundation for robust new industries that will create new jobs in Northwest Indiana."


http://www.post-trib.com/news/lake/2...rt0304.article

Gary Proposal
 

OK, I did again. I got to thinking as to how Gary could potentially become the 3rd airport with a better design.

Some information is from the FAA Record of Decision (ROD) for GYY, available here: http://www.faa.gov/airports/environm...a/rod_gary.pdf

Picture attached. Essentially I created a parallel runway, tried to figure out good places to place a PAX terminal, and an intermodal terminal. Comments welcome!

http://www.millenicom.com/users/cjdugan/GYY_options.jpg

10 years? If it takes that long to extend Gary's runway, how long is it going to take to build the Peotone airport?

re. post 807

Nice job Jenner, though what about a crosswind runway? and also, aren't the new future terminals supposed to somehow link directly with the southshore line? I have high hopes for the development of GCIA as our region's true "third" airport and see it eventually as being the region's answer to Newark Liberty. It really could transform Gary. Forget that Peotone nonsense.

The current crosswind runway would be eliminated. I couldn't see any room to place any additional cross wind runway. Additionally, I'm concerned with my 2nd runway being too close to the road, and it may not be as long as the projected 8900 ft runway. There is also the hazard that the runways align with the Midway runways, in that ATC would have to do some serious traffic control.

I am not sure if the south shore line has been established to Gary via Metra. I saw a station in Hammond for Amtrack, but even that would be far away. I'm not too concerned about commuter rail traffic to Gary, but that could be worked in the future. I'm just not sure what the future plans for commuter rail are for the Gary area.

I've looked in the possibilities of Gary acquiring land to the east, and move roads, railroad tracks, and businesses. I didn't study it for too long, but it looks rather counter-productive in that I couldn't get a runway alignment that would make the runways longer, or aligned differently from Midway. Additionally, the cost to move all the rail and roads would take enormous sums of money.

Maybe I'll look at it again when time permits. :)

^Not enough (FAA-required) separation between your runways.

South Shore Line runs just south of Gary Airport.

I thought the diagram was rather good but my first thought also went to if the runways were to close together.

As long as railroads are being re-located, why not place the second parallel runway to the northeast, on the other side of a slightly re-aligned Industrial Parkway? This would also mean the existing terminal facilities wouldn't have to be demolished, and could just be expanded as demand warrants.

Realistically, in the near-to-medium term, the only rail connection will be a quick shuttle bus ride to the Clark South Shore station. It's hard to picture a a full intermodal station plan that wouldn't cost a fortune.

Yeah, the runways are too close together based on standards found here:
FAA Airport Specs.

Apparently, the master plan can call for 3rd runway. I haven't seen any documents about the master plan, so I'm not sure where the 3rd runway would be.

Interestingly enough, the GCIA website has a feature where you can leave the airport director some questions, and he'll respond! Perhaps I'll leave a couple of questions.

Story found here.

Gary airport on track for moving tracks

Meeting next week critical, but big decisions remain

By Keith Benman - keith.benman@nwi.com, (219) 933-3326 | Posted: Saturday, March 6, 2010 12:05 am | (4) Comments


After nine years of negotiations, Gary/Chicago International Airport is closing in on a final agreement on moving Canadian National railroad tracks that block the expansion of its main runway, Airport Director Chris Curry said.

Airport officials will be meeting next week with Canadian National representatives at the airport and hopefully will iron out any last-minute details in the agreement, Curry said.

"We are hoping that sometime in March, we could have a full, binding agreement that will put an end to these discussions that have taken place since 2001," Curry told The Times Editorial Board at a meeting Thursday.

Hopes have risen before that a deal was near. Twice in the last two years the airport has signed preliminary memorandums of understandings with railroads on the project, but those were not followed by final agreements.

When the airport received a letter of intent for $57.8 million in FAA funding in January 2006, airport officials said they could have work on moving the tracks completed as early as 2008 and the runway expansion completed in 2010.

The deal the airport and railroad will work on next week is a slimmed-down version of a previous plan that would have included two other railroads. The slimmed-down plan has an estimated price tag of $30 million to $35 million.

The plan would clear the way for the $90 million extension of the east-west runway. But it would not clear the way for expanding the north-south runway, which is a project in the airport's long-term plan.

The airport's largest tenant and business, the Gary Jet Center, is pushing hard for the more expansive plan.

Owner Wil Davis said that plan is the one already approved by the Federal Aviation Administration and the one that would best serve the airport's long-term interests because it would clear the way for eventual expansion of the north-south runway.

"That's what we have to stay focused on and that's what we have to get done," Davis said.

The Northwest Indiana Regional Development Authority is expected to kick in a good portion of the funding for the project, so it also will have a role to play in which plan is selected. RDA Executive Director Bill Hanna has been involved in the airport's negotiations with CN.

In addition to CN, the more expansive plan includes work on tracks owned by CSX Corp. and Norfolk Southern Corp. It has an estimated price tag of at least $45 million.

Curry said on Friday the airport continues to negotiate "simultaneously" on both plans, meeting as recently as last week with a CSX official.

The slimmed-down plan has its own set of complications. To implement it, the airport must buy or condemn the property of Summit Inc., which operates a scrap yard that stands in the way of the proposed rail route. Paying for that property could add to the plan's expense.

Also, the more expansive plan involving all three railroads would qualify for up to $27 million in FAA and other funds, while the slimmed-down plan would qualify for less.

"The first priority is to get one signed legal agreement," Curry said. "And priority two is to get two signed legal agreements."

That way, both the airport authority and the RDA can be presented with the options and make a decision, Curry said.

The airport also expects to be able to move forward soon on acquiring land owned by Gary Community School Corp., which it also needs to make way for the runway expansion, Curry said.

The airport also expects to take delivery this month of a $449,732 business and strategic plan being prepared by airport consultant Landrum & Brown.

"March for us could be a very, very good month," Curry said. "We have a lot coming together at once."

Recent developments in negotiations to move railroad tracks that block expansion of Gary/Chicago International Airport's main runway:

Jan. 16, 2006: Gary airport lands $57.8 million for runway expansion under Federal Aviation Administration letter of intent. Airport officials say EJ&E Railway Co. tracks blocking expansion of runway could be moved as early as 2008.

Sept. 26, 2007: Canadian National Railway Co. announces it has an agreement to buy EJ&E tracks running from Waukegan, Ill., to Kirk Yard in Gary. Track blocking expansion of Gary airport is last stretch before Kirk Yard.

April 24, 2008: U.S. Rep. Pete Visclosky, D-Ind., announces he has secured a deal between CSX Corp. and Norfolk Southern Corp. that will clear the way for moving EJ&E tracks and expansion of main runway at Gary airport.

June 27, 2008: Preliminary memorandum of understanding reached between airport, CSX, Norfolk Southern, CN and EJ&E on moving tracks to make way for runway expansion. E. Hunter Harrison, then-CEO of CN, praises deal.

June 26, 2009: Airport and CN reach preliminary agreement on slimmed-down, less-expensive plan for moving railroad tracks. Agreement does not include CSX and Norfolk Southern.

Jan. 31, 2009: Canadian National closes on its $300 million purchase of EJ&E Railway Co.

Feb. 2010: Gary airport submits to CN a final draft of agreement to move EJ&E tracks to make way for runway expansion.

Source: Times archives

I've been busy. You can read here that Gary has hired
Landrum and Brown to produce/revise a master plan for the Gary Airport.

Here is a copy of the most important part:

Ok, here is a new image for a proposal for Gary. You can see a larger version here.

http://www.millenicom.com/users/cjdu...ptions_1sm.jpg

Gary would have to buy more land to the north, in order to accomodate the new runway. They would also need to realign US 12 and the railroads.

Yellow is US 12.
Red is the NS "Sugar Line". Both US 12 and the railroad would go in a tunnel underneath the new runway.

The new runway is approximately 2800ft from the centerline of the existing runway and extension. Both runways would be 8900ft. The new parallel runway may be extended another 100-200ft on the south end, but may be unlikely. I'm not sure that it would buy you much. The parallel taxiway is about 550-600ft away from the runway, in accordance to FAA airport design.

The crosswind runway is preserved, with the planned extension. In this case, I have it rotated a couple of degrees from the current runway, but maintaining a pivot point at the southern end. The unfortunate aspect is that it bisects the terminal grounds.

I have the terminal/concourse split in 2: the terminal at the top northwest, and the extended concourse on the otherside of the 2/20 runway.

I would image that the current 12/30 runway taxiway may need to be moved 100-150ft north, in order to accommodate bigger planes and bring it into FAA compliance.

I'd be interested to see what Landrum & Brown will create. Comments welcome!

ORD-Loss of Traffic
 

I know this is an expansion thread, however, I just saw latest numbers form Airport Council International (ACI) and O'Hare is now 4th in number of passengers and total flights are ~750K. Order is ATL, LHR and Beijing Capital in terms of total passengers. I am a bit surprised at the huge loss of traffic, could some explain why ORD experienced a much higher loss that other US airports.

You'd have to look at the stats the airport itself puts out. My guess is that United, and American in particular, cut back on a lot of flights and started flying more of those smaller regional planes. The number of destinations hasn't changed much.

^The only stats I've seen are YTD through October - so it's possible O'Hare would still finish in the #2 spot for the year, but barely (because of the air travel peak during the winter holiday).

That said, it's otherwise a reflection of the broader economy and, as Rail points out, the big airlines trimming capacity dramatically (which in turn would somewhat raise ticket prices and provide an additional dampening of quantity demanded). Given the Delta/Northwest merger it's not surprising that Atlanta didn't see much of a hit - maybe someone else can confirm but I would assume the combination would result in reduced capacity out of the lesser hubs like Memphis and Cincinnati and consolidation of operations through Atlanta.

How did some other hubs like DFW, DEN, or LAS fare?