Hide Article Text (OCR)
Editor: In 1967, the DFW 2001 Ultimate Master Plan was jointly developed and agreed to by the Host Cities and the DFW Airport. Now the guest, DFW Airport, wishes to unilaterally impose its Airport Development Plan. Good faith and coop eration have been replaced with deception and fear. Many of the facts surrounding this proposed plan have been ignored or whitewashed to fur ther the goals of the DFW Airport. It should not be forgotten that a primary goal of the airport is to satisfy its tenants. The largest tenant is American Airlines, and a major portion of the proposed improvements are solely for its benefit. This American Airlines Airport Development Plan, has been designed to benefit not all carri ers, passengers, and surrounding communities but one entity to the detriment of others. Even now, ground transportation and signage are biased to favor one carrier, not all. Let’s not kid ourselves, there is big money and profit potential behind most of these proposed changes, and the primary beneficiary is American Airlines. As an airline pilot, I operate in and around the DFW Airport regularly. This airport is not O’Hare, Laguardia, JFK or LAX. It isn’t even a Stapleton in Denver. The DFW Airport is a piece of cake to get in and out of. Most of the current backlog is due to inadequate taxiways, ramps, and gate configurations, not a lack of runway space. The majority of the ground congestion is attributed to American and Delta operations which comprise approximately 85 percent of the airport’s traffic. Backlog and congestion have little to do with terminals, or the original 13 ter minals would have been constructed long ago. A study by the FAA, DFW Airport and the North Central Texas Council of Governments indicated that if the proposed runways were built and Love and Meacham Fields were used to capacity, a new airport would still be needed by about 2005. Without new runways, DFW can meet the growing demand until the year 2000. With the present condition of U.S. airlines and their overcapacity, the antici pated level of growth may never come. Does it therefore seem prudent to spend $3.5 billion for five years of use? That amounts to $1,917,808.00 per day of use over that five year period. But, the question must also be asked, who would equally benefit. The cities and commu nities would also benefit and, home rule would not be jeopardized. Who would not benefit by a new airport? Any airline control ling the Dallas-Fort Worth market would be the big loser. A new airport would mean more competition and lower travel costs for the traveling public. The DFW Airport would have the general public believe it is on the verge of closure with the loss of tens of thousands of jobs possible. If that is the case, why are the bulldozers and earth moving equipment working daily to reconfigure the airport? How much of the proposed $3.5 billion expansion has already been started or completed? Why are they in such a hurry to begin construction when the FAA has not yet published its guidelines for runway separa tions? The fact is, the unilaterally proposed Airport Development Plan clearly violates the spirit and intent of the bilaterally agreed to DFW 2001 Ultimate Master Plan. The guest has become a bully, attempting to destroy 20 years of cooperation and commu nity development. I don’t oppose growth and expansion. I choose to live in Grapevine be cause of its heritage and role in developing North Central Texas. I do, however, oppose any legislated change to the Texas Constitution or the Municipal Airports Act of 1947 to further DFW Airport. James R. Hodgson Grapevine
Newspaper Details
Grapevine Sun
Grapevine, Texas, US
Sun, Feb 28, 1993
Page 5
Full Page
Clipped by
Anonymous
USA 13 Jun 2026
Other Publications Near Grapevine, Texas
Grapevine Sun
