The runway south of Gowen road has been a smokescreen all along. It was built for National Guard use BUT it has always been the plan to have a full length runway there.

The Airport is just another city department that is more motivated by individual’s dreams of glory, power, control and money than common sense.

It is just like the bogus “regional transit” issue – they assume that bigger means more money and more power. I got a call from ACHD doing a “survey” and was livid at the way all the questions are framed. You cannot answer any of the questions without responding in such a way as to “suppport the effort”. I hung up on them.

The people at the state level better understand that this regional transit thing – like the airport – is just big government (and big egos) trying to get even bigger.

Airports are a big revenue generators… BOI would be a good western US freight hub, due to it’s location and great climate. (nothing gets rained on here.)

Freight is were the real money is. One FedEx DC-10 leaving HongKong for the US has $3.5 million in revenue on board….just one plane, one flight. They pay cash for airplanes…a tree hugger group will not stop that kind of money, but why fight at all.

The public has been known to mess up and airport plan… with one word, Noise.

Smart people would be building away from the airport and flyways. Smart airport operators would develop noise sensitive arival and departure proceedures while their airport is still in the desert and not the city. Smart airport operators would even ask the military to keep the noise down.

I for one, like the military noise….makes me feel safe 🙂

Calling the purpose of the third runway a “smokescreen” is a bit dramatic. If I remember correctly, the airport’s published long term plan has always been to expand that to a length that can accommodate almost any plane.

One of the worst kept secrets in the valley for the last 20 years has been that we have been trying to attract a hub for one of the major cargo carriers.

Just in case you all are wondering, those jobs pay 3-4 times what call center jobs pay, and bring the type of in-migration that an area would typically want.

As for Boise becoming a major commercial airport for passenger traffic, I just don’t see that happening. SLC, PDX, and SEA are already established major hubs with tons of infrastructure. Boise may become a major feeder airport as it grows, but that is probably about it for at least the next 25 years.

As for all the vitriol I see expended against a regional transit (taxing) authority on these forums, I think a bit more time on Eagle Road, State Street, or 84 during rush hour may change your minds. If we don’t figure out some way to solve our transportation issues, we hear headed towards gridlock in less than a decade. A RTA is a good first step, a consolidated bus system would be next, and light rail or something similar should be the ultimate goal.

At least the airport board has the courage to put their heads in the clouds once in a while.

But you want to put up SIGNS showing TOURISTS how to get to things in Boise? YOU want to turn Table Rock in to a freaking tourist attraction.

How do you think those tourists would get here?

What do you think tourists would do after visiting? Yeah… they’d want to move here!

I don’t mind you being anti-growth – everyone’s allowed an opinion. But at least be consistent.

Boise’s going to grow – whether you like it or not. But please save us the Tim Eyeman routine – you sue for attention, not for altruism.

I had to park in the stupid overflow lot off Orchard the other day. Who’d I curse? Davey… he wants to bellyache so we can’t build a freaking parking garage.

Why don’t you redeem yourself and get the bonding requirement lowered to 50% plus one instead of 2/3rds. If all you want is a “vote of the people” – as you repeatedly claim – let’s even the playing field.

EDITOR NOTE–Your mayor and council have yet to put the airport or police buildings up for a vote. Cry when you are hurt, not before. I supported the library bond, but your mayor said after it failed that it was an outdated plan from the Cole’s era and they really didn’t need the money. You are addressing your complaints to the wrong guy.

Mr. Logic, I hear ya. Will be very hard to get Canyon County to pay its fair share, but that is a must of any plan.

Not Dave, I’m glad to know that I’m not the only one takes Dave’s name in vain due to the airport parking situation.

EDITOR NOTE–Jon, have YOU demanded an election to voice your support of a plan–40% of which is dedicated to the rental car companies?

If the demise of John Anderson were a rumor, I would not spread it. When King Beiter wants to change his cast of “friends”, it comes to pass.

“Some early plans and “head in the clouds” ideas were floated at a recent meeting according to a confidential GUARDIAN source.”

With the possible exception of the Gowen Road relocation (which is mentioned in the Airport Master Plan 2001 Update) all the items mentioned in the BG article were presented by Airport officials at a Boise Metro Chamber of Commerce Aviation Forum meeting back in August 2005. That’s over a year ago. The presentation is available on the Airport web site http://www.cityofboise.org/Departments/Airport/PDF/MasterPlan08-03-05.pdf.pdf. The 2001 version of the (Airport) Master Plan is also available on the airport web site.

If I recall correctly, the Gowen Road realignment was the subject of public meetings held earlier this year by ACHD. There’s no big secrets here.

I agree “Improvement and expansion are not synonymous.” For my money most of these projects are improvements. The third runway, which has been discussed for at least 30 years that I’m aware of, looks to the future and the next generation of aircraft – passenger and cargo. If the air cargo area is moved to the new runway area the current air cargo hodge podge (in my opinion) is transformed and air cargo operations become more efficient for both vehicles and aircraft. The noise level moves further south (won’t all those future homeowners out on the desert be thrilled?). Other facilities date, literally, from WWII. Even the expansion on the Orchard Street side of the airport may be a good thing. General aviation has long been a mainstay of the airport. Perhaps some of these new facilities will provide more general aviation hanger space.

The BG article, and the master plan, help explain what appears to be preliminary work for Orchard Street relocation. That work has been underway for several years now. The mini golf course is gone, utility lines have been laid across the current Orchard Street alignment, and the old sewer holding ponds have been abandoned and, it appears, are currently in the process of being dismantled. Surveyors can be seen working in the area on a regular basis.

Growth in the Valley will come. It can be slowed but not stopped completely. How we plan for and manage the growth is a good subject for discussion in this forum. Is it better to plan now for future growth now or be reactive to it when it occurs? I’ll opt for planning.

Speaking of planning, it appears from the Airport web site that they are soliciting public comments (probably because Federal regs require a public comment/hearing process) on their current Master Plan update. Granted this is another exercise in futility for the public, but the opportunity to comment is being offered. If you’re interested, comment.

JQP

Spuds and others,

Boise’s Visibility issues would be a non-issue had the former airport director (JA) had the foresight to build one of the newest military hangers a few feet farther from the runway.

Because of this error the lowest allowed visibility for landing opps at BOI are something like 1800 feet. If the runway environment was less obstructed it could go much lower. At some airports it’s at 0 feet. More common is either 300 or 600 feet depending on aircraft equipment….that’s so low that finding the gate after landing is the biggest problem.

The point is; the visisbility commonly goes below 1800 feet but very rarely below 600 at BOI. The new runway to the south should allow for very low visibility opps. If JA and friends didn’t plan it that way the new man had better.

As for polution… Your right, Jets do burn huge amounts of fuel…several truck loads for a big jet on a long trip. The biggest Boeing holds 53,000 gals!!

Oh but JetA (Kerosine) exaust smells good… much cleaner than diesel. If one stands at the end of the runway fence you can even get little dropplets blown onto your cloths.

But just imagine this… More junk comes from a super-volcano eruption (like Yellowstone) in 30 minutes then all pollution, from all humans, from all time… somehow Mother Nature always cleans up the mess.

I’m gonna move anyway because the Boise pollution is bad…no getting around that one.

Okay, I gotta ask this. Do any of you even fly out of this @#%& city!!!?? Do any of you know how hard it is to get a decent parking spot on a busy day at the airport? Have any of you realized how hard it is to get a @#$%& seat on an airplane on a busy day, and better yet do any of you have even a clue what you guys are talking about!!!??!

As an aviation enthusiast myself, Boise is growing. People are moving here whether you like it or not. Cutting back airport growth is not going to do a single damn thing about it. We need airport growth to accomidate all of these people coming in. Have you seen the statistics of our airport growth? every year we get about 7-10% more passengers flying through here, and trying to bring down the airport plane is pure insanity.

You know why flights are delayed when there is smog? Its because we only have CAT I status, which is the lowest of the lowest of the lowest quality landing system, which can easily close the airport. In the maste plan, we’re upgrading to the highest landing system designed – CAT III, which will allow airplanes to land in virtually any fog condition, even 0/0 visibility.You guys are acting like complete lunatics.

Boise is growing, and if you’re too blind to see this, which apparently many of you are, then please get out, because you are doing nothing but trying (and sometimes succeeding) to bring down Boise growth, and to me, that’s absolutely ridiculous!

EDITOR NOTE–Anthony, talk to Team Dave and the council about a bond election as required by the Constitution. They steadfastly refuse to hold the election and “you guys” hold the pursestrings. They have spent tens of thousands denying people a chance to vote on parking. Your landing system upgrade has been approved I think.