Comments   Add a Comment                                                                    
 

Airport Fan posted at: 5/1/2008 5:36:54 PM Good Day Mr. Curry, I was wondering when construction is expected to begin on the crosswind runway? Will or has the airport authority applied for a grant?, what is the expected cost. Also, has any progress been made on the customs facility? Thank You

Jason posted at: 5/2/2008 11:02:56 AM "Mr. Curry, let me start by saying congratulations, I think this is great news. The airport needs as much room to grow as possible and this is truly a breakthrough. Persistence has paid off for the airport and your staff. This will allow the facility to grow to meet the demands of its current customers and increase its marketability to future users. That being said, there are some challenges concerning the lengthening of runway 2/20. I too thought it might be extended out to 5500 or 5600 feet; but the closer I look at it, this may not be completely possible (especially if large transport category aircraft are to utilize it). On the south end, there isn’t enough room for the standard RSA (1000 feet in length). There is only about 700 feet from the end of the runway to the Grand Calumet River (although an EMAS installation may be a solution). Also consider approach and threshold siting requirements while clearing the Toll Road and its interchange ramps with Cline Avenue (especially for a precision approach). There is just over 1000 feet from the southern end of the runway to the Toll Road right-of-way. This may require a displaced threshold and/or higher approach minimums. On the north end, the new EJ&E overpass will cross the NS Sugar Track on the 2/20 extended centerline (“Long Term Railroad Alignment 1D” as depicted in the ALP approved by the FAA on October 17, 2001). This causes the greatest impact on obstacle clearance/approach and threshold siting requirements. Further to the north, the stacks of the closed Mitchell power plant, standing about 230 feet above the airport, are also on the extended runway centerline. Allowing for a standard 1000 foot RSA on the north end erodes potential runway length as well. Taking these into account, I would estimate the new runway could be about 5000 to 5100 feet long with possibly a 200 foot displaced threshold on the south end and as much as a 900 foot displaced threshold on the north end. Perhaps not enough for airline aircraft but this is a substantial improvement from the current crosswind runway. This would be fully usable for all but the largest of general aviation operations (G550, Global Express, BBJ). Please don’t take these comments as a criticism of your efforts. Quite the contrary, you have succeeded where many others have failed. In addition, you and your staff are exploring new territory for the airport and the Region every day. This has been needed for a long time. Dealing with politicians, corporate executives, big business (railroads, airlines, etc), and the court of public opinion can never be easy. I very much respect your experience, professionalism, perseverance and enthusiasm. You work in the airport management and planning areas of aviation day in and day out and I know you are as up to date as anyone on these topics. I on the other hand am not. As I have said before in the NWI Times newspaper comment boards, I am far from being an expert by any means. Consider the preceding text as the possibly uninformed thoughts of a corporate pilot with an overactive interest in airport design (especially Gary/Chicago). Keep up the good work and fighting the good fight because it IS appreciated by many of us out here. I look forward to communicating more in the future. Thank you for your time and attention. Best regards" P.S. The new website looks great!

Chris posted at: 5/2/2008 12:00:41 PM Airport Fan, there is no concrete date that has been established for the construction of the crosswind runway, however, I would anticipate approximately 5 years. The initial plan is to extend the existing runway first to 8,900 feet. Once we extend the primary runway then we can apply for the funding to extend the crosswind. The extension of the crosswind will generate a full blown Environmental Impact Study. The crosswind runway is currently 3,603 feet and 100 feet wide and we feel that initially we can extend it to 5,500 feet. At the same time I will also request that we widen the runway to 150 feet which gives us more capabilities. Therefore we would extend 1,897 feet and widen for the entire length of 5,500 feet. I would estimate the cost to be approximately $110 million dollars with a significant amount of that funded by the Federal Government. We have not applied for a grant as of yet because we want to get our major project completed first which is extending the primary runway. The Customs Facility is moving along but slower than I would like. Senator Bayh has engaged Customs and Border Protection from the Federal side and the airport has designed building plans for the approval of Customs and Border Protection We must continue to work with the RDA for funding and we hope that process can be expedited. I hope I have answered all of your questions. Thanks

Chris posted at: 5/2/2008 12:17:15 PM Jason, excellent questions. As you are probably aware I worked with Boeing and Jeppesen as a procedure designer and looked at several of the issues that you have discussed. As I recall, if the CSX track is abandoned we can extend to 5,500 feet and EMAS will be considered or a modified version of EMAS for the Runway Safety Areas. You will notice in my comments above that I would recommend extending and widening of the crosswind. The toll road did penetrate a precision approach but not by much (maybe 10 to 20 feet perhaps from memory) so the minimums or THAT would be above 200 feet. Keep in mind that as construction continues at some point we may be able to lower the toll road much like we are doing for Interstate 90 so I do believe anything is possible. You seem to know a lot about my world in dealing with everyone who has interest in the expansion of the airport. I hope I have answered your questions and if there are any others feel free to write back. My team with Jeppesen did design the RNP procedures for Runway 12/30 and there could be some advantages in using that type of procedure for the crosswind.

Airport Fan posted at: 5/3/2008 3:11:44 PM Mr. Curry, thanks for the info, another question that I have is the mention of a possible third runway, what would be the dimensions of this proposed runway? Also, what has been the main concerns from EJ&E concerning the relocation of their rail line.

Jason posted at: 5/4/2008 8:35:31 PM Chris Thanks for the insight. I do have a few more questions if you have time. 1. What part of Interstate 90 is being lowered? 2. Is it OK to use a 34:1 slope for obstacle clearance when roughly judging these matters, or is it recommended to try for the 50:1 surface when considering a precision approach? I have a copy of AC 150-5300 I downloaded but am not formally trained. 3. Is there still the attempt to get the customs facility included into a revised master plan? I imagine this would slow things down. Also, is this facility on hold until the RDA's 'hired consultant' reviews the 'direction the airport is headed' (cargo vs. passenger)? That sounds like an additional hurdle that will only hinder a September start-of-service (VivaAerobus). 4. Is there a copy of the master plan available online or by other means? I have a copy of the ALP from the internet but didn't know if the rest was available. For example, the City of Cincinnati has posted the entire Lunken Airport (LUK) master plan on their website (including surveys of the runways, wind rose, alternatives considered, etc.). As I said, answer when you have time. And if I'm taking up too much of your time let me know. Thanks again. Jason

Chris posted at: 5/5/2008 9:29:17 AM Airport Fan, in the Master Plan under the High Case scenario (which is everything you would possibly ever want) a third proposed runway is included. Although it may be possible somewhere far into the future it is not on the immediate radar of the airport. As per the EJ&E, their main issues were that the relocated track would be 5,263 feet further than the existing route. They wanted a lump sum payment to compensate for the additional length, which may no longer be required. With the relocated track proposed to be at grade versus elevated where they are now, it would have exposed them to more pedestrians. Prior to some further engineering, the climb gradient was steeper than before and one of the curves was tighter than before. Those issues mentioned above are what I consider major and there are several other issues that I would consider minor but have been impediments to negotiation.

Chris posted at: 5/5/2008 11:02:09 AM Jason, I will answer your questions in parts. Interstate 90 is being lowered between Grant and Durbin Street and will be expanded to become 3 lanes. We have designed procedures and used the 34:1 slope for clearance. We plan to have the Customs Facility added to the ALP, which I believe we can do rather quickly. The airport does not intend to slow down until the RDA hires consultants. It is our position to submit the application and let them determine what is necessary to have it approved. We will look into placing our Master plan on the website in the near future. Thanks

Airport Fan posted at: 5/5/2008 9:24:19 PM Thanks for the info, concerning extending the crosswind runway, is 5500' the max. it can be extended or would further extension be possible in the distant future if needed. Thanks

Chris posted at: 5/6/2008 9:33:02 AM Jason, 5,500 feet is the maximum length for the near future. Once you go past 5,500 feet you really get into an extensive array of rail lines to the north of the airport. Thanks

Airport Fan posted at: 5/12/2008 6:18:47 PM Mr. Curry, What is the status of the grant needed to build the proposed customs facility and what date would this be needed by in order to have the facility ready by September 1? Also, if service is started, would only another 5000 passengers have to pass through the airport in order to qualify for the 1 million dollar grant from the DOT? I seen reports that 5000 passengers passed through the airport via Skybus. Thank You

Airport Fan posted at: 5/13/2008 5:56:52 PM Mr Curry, what is the latest date construction would have to start in order to have the customs facility ready by Sept. 1? Also, if VivaAerobus is able to fly from GYY, would the passenger numbers from the Skybus era count towards the 10000 passenger count needed to get the 1 million dollar grant from the DOT? Thank You

Chris posted at: 5/19/2008 9:32:56 AM Airport Fan, to date approximately 3,598 passengers have enplaned (originated) at the Gary Airport. It is true that 5,000 people transitioned the airport, but only the passengers that originate in Gary count, which is around half of that 5,000. We have had some charter activity as well which counts toward that total. (Skybus 3,175 + Charter 423 = 3,598). Both count towards meeting the 10,000 passenger threshold for $1 million AIP funding. I believe that in order to meet the September 1, 2008 start date for Viva Aerobus, construction must begin by mid June.

Airport Fan posted at: 5/31/2008 3:11:48 PM Mr. Curry, it seems there has been movement in the talks with the railroads concerning the main runway extension. If an agreement is made, how soon could construction start, how long would the construction period take and how long after construction is finished could the extended runway be in service? Thanks

Chris posted at: 6/2/2008 10:49:06 AM Airport Fan, if we came to an agreement with the Memorandum of Understanding, I believe it would take at least 3 months to formulate a legal agreement. At that point construction could begin. The duration of the construction would have a completion date of late 2010. At that point the full length of the runway could be utilized.

Airport Fan posted at: 6/25/2008 5:57:53 PM Good day Mr. Curry , I was wondering before United flight 1020 , when was the last time a flight diverted to GYY . Thank You

Airport Dog posted at: 6/27/2008 10:34:54 AM And another milestone today with the PMOU signed by the railroads and the airport! Congratulations everybody! I know the engineering of this project is just beginning but is there a rough idea of how the tracks will be reconfigured. I believe there were issues concerning grade level crossings (rail-on-rail) as well as radius-of-curve and gradient problems expressed by the railroads. Might there be a tunnel involved?

Chris posted at: 6/27/2008 12:32:37 PM Airport Fan, the last divert that landed at the airport was July of last year. What they have done on several occasions is hold above and in the proximity of the Gary Airport in case landing at O'Hare is not possible.

Chris posted at: 6/27/2008 12:38:17 PM Airport Dog, we have resolved the grade level crossings with a bridge and the radius of the curve through engineering. Although briefly explored in the early phase of discussion, the idea of a tunnel is simply too expensive and our proximity to the lake highlights the issue with water. Thanks for the congratulations.

Jason posted at: 6/28/2008 9:26:57 AM Mr. Curry, it's Saturday and I hope you get a weekend off (so don't answer this 'til Monday). I have a question. The RDA has its four focuses (the airport, South Shore, Marquette Plan, and regional bus system). The airport faces issues concerning environmental cleanup, wetlands mitigation and overall wildlife control for the area around the airport. My question is, can the airport and RDA work together on some of these issues? Can some of these agendas be rolled in together? For example, the Marquette Plan calls for making the lakefront greener and more accessible to the public with improved beaches, bike trails, nature preserves, etc. If you have not seen some of proposals, I can send you the PDF that used to be on the NIRPC website. Can the 'greening' of these areas, especially the nature preserves that are returned to the 'natural dune and swale', somehow be counted as a credit towards the wetlands displaced by the airport. Some of the funding is coming from the same place. It's a regional solution as the Marquette Plan encompasses the lakeshores of Lake and Porter Counties (if not LaPorte County also). If the airport were somehow linked with those improvements, perhaps some folks in areas like Porter County, who complain about giving to the RDA, will see this as a positive contribution. Some of the money given to the RDA would come directly back to Porter County to improve and/or expand the Dunes National Lake Shore for example. Hopefully this is not a conflict of interest. It seems that there are some needs the airport has that would also satisfy the wants of others (and as I said earlier, some of the money is coming from the same place anyway). Just a thought, and let me know if you would like to receive the Marquette Plan PDF. Thanks and Best Regards Jason

Chris posted at: 7/1/2008 1:54:49 PM Jason, the airport and RDA has worked together on the environmental clean-up and wetland mitigation. The initial $20 million dollars that was given to the airport was to purchase and clean-up properties with environmental challenges. The schedule for the airport was released well in advance of some of the other projects they are working on. Therefore, our plan of action has been in place for sometime. When we were looking for ways to mitigate wetlands, disturbance of dune and swale and other environmental challenges, we held several meetings and site visits with the regulatory agencies. It was clear to me that their preference was to obtain and preserve properties rather than create. They collectively explored properties in NWI that were acceptable and preferred areas. I am not sure if making the Lakefront greener would satisfy their requirements. If all of the land purchases that we have identified to date are acquired our mitigation requirements with the regulatory agencies would be complete. It may have been an easier task if both projects were on similar timetables. I understand that the goal of the RDA is to combine as many projects as possible with the most value and encourage all agencies to work together. Hopefully, I have answered your questions, if not please write.

Iwantta Fly posted at: 7/7/2008 12:33:38 PM I was told that an airline was coming to Gary can you tell me when and where they will fly?

Jason posted at: 7/11/2008 11:15:25 AM So it seems that since the airport and Marquette Plan are on such different timetables (the airport set to be completed much earlier), the idea of combining those projects, and therefore funding, may not quite work out. That's understandable. But, in the future I would hope this might be a possibility. Perhaps when 2/20 is extended to 5500 feet (and beyond) the Marquette Plan funding and groundwork will be underway. Naturally, the 'greening' of the lake shore would have to be the proper type of 'greening', i.e. a dune and swale nature preserve of some sort, to qualify as replacement wetlands displaced by the airport. It makes sense that the environmental agencies would always prefer leaving the natural habitats in place verses replacing/relocating all aspects of the ecosystem. Sometimes, as you know, that in not always possible and it's nice to have a backup. Did the initial $20 million include just the purchase and cleanup of contaminated sites needed for the runway expansion (such as MIDCO and Conservation Chemical), or did it also include the purchase of land off-airport for the construction of 'replacement' wetlands? Overall, how close (percent or acreage wise) would you estimate the airport is in obtaining the property it needs for the 12/30 lengthening project? I hope the railroad engineering work is coming along well and without too many snags. Are there any intentions to release this final plan for the relocation to the public (on this website perhaps)? Lastly, nice interview with Ms. Brackett for the NewsHour. All very well said. Sorry it couldn't be about the booming success of the airport, but that is a story to be told in the future. Regardless of the past, the airport will be well poised and prepared for the future. Thanks Jason

Chris posted at: 7/11/2008 1:34:18 PM Iwantta Fly, the airline that has expressed interest in coming to the Gary Airport is a Mexican carrier; VivaAerobus with daily non-stop flights to Monterrey, Mexico. A customs facility must be built to accommodate international flying and the airport has submitted to the RDA for some of the funding.

Harry Cavallaris posted at: 7/18/2008 1:45:54 PM Chris; I know this email won't make the site just like you getting the International Terminal at the airport. But you need to get real. I read the article on your looking for RDA Funding for this and it is not realistic to hinge the success of the airport on international flights. Just because you have 1 carrier that wants this to happen doesn't make sense. You have to market to US based carriers that do not cost you anymore money just to do business with them. Please stop looking for more money and come up with some ideas with what you already have in place. If that is not feasable then shut the place down and save us all some money.

Chris posted at: 7/25/2008 2:25:48 AM Harry, the airport is not pinning its success on 1 carrier. There are several carriers that have expressed interest if we can process international passengers. I am only trying to be proactive and I do believe that an international carrier will benefit a large segment of the Chicagoland and NWI population. I would love to have a domestic carrier but the industry has turned more to the international market and air carriers are cutting domestic capacity because the money is simply not there. I try to look at the long-term vision for the airport and a customs facility, which is needed to process passengers and cargo in the future. When an airline is ready to move you can't always ask them to give you a year to construct a facility that they deem to be necessary. You will continue to lose out on opportunities.

Iwanna Fly posted at: 7/25/2008 2:11:35 PM Well Chris it is nice for you to answer Harry's question after your meeting; outlined in the Times and Post and as he suspected no more money for the customs facility. Even with the new landing strip, millions wasted, you still will not have a carrier. It is time for this foolishness to stop! The only long-term vision is for you to collect a paycheck for a long-term.

Chris posted at: 7/25/2008 3:01:56 PM Iwanna Fly thanks

Jason posted at: 7/25/2008 10:08:35 PM Doesn't sound like Iwanna Fly is living up to his/her/its name. Maybe change the name to Iwanna Buy a Clue.

Airport Dog posted at: 7/25/2008 10:12:52 PM Iwanna Fly, didn't anyone tell you that you can't fly if you're a big fat Wet Hen? I'd like to see you conduct yourself as well as Mr. Curry has with your job under the uninformed and uneducated public microscope. You really have no idea, do you?

Iwanna Fly posted at: 7/31/2008 3:58:26 PM Dear Jason and Airport Dog; Please tell me when you think there will be a carrier at the airport. Also, name calling, isn't that a little childish.

Airport Fan posted at: 8/3/2008 6:59:09 PM Mr. Curry , I was wondering what led the airport board to "suspend " the request for funding for the custom facility . Also , what where the 15 question the consultant hired by the RDA want to ask and have there been contact from VivaAerobus concerning service ? Thanks

chris posted at: 8/18/2008 9:44:54 AM Airport Fan, sorry for not getting back sooner as we have been quite busy preparing for the air show. I believe that the authority elected to suspend the customs facility because they did not want it to take away from the funding of the railroad project. I won't type every question that was asked but I will summarize the 15 questions. They were related to use of facilities, type of airspace, use of runways, largest aircraft used at the airport, property acquisition, TSA, airport and Chicago board functions, past airlines statistics etc........ I have informed VivaAerobus of the decision to suspend building the facility by the board. Unless they are willing to delay service to the Chicago area they would need to look at alternative airports other than Gary.

BG325 posted at: 8/19/2008 12:50:03 PM My children and I attended the Gary Air Show in July and the Chicago Pre-Show this past Sunday. I considered these events to be a great time for all. The audience consisted of many people from different regions and different ethnic backgrounds, who all shared one common interest; their love of the airport! The Gary/Chicago International Airport has served as a unique asset, that can accommodate a variety of interests such as; travel, entertainment as well as an educational experience. Yet, I feel the municipal politicians do not value the importance of our local airport. The Gary/Chicago International Airport location is supreme in comparisons to Midway and O’Hare and with the proper support the airport can only increase the value of the City. I hope our local officials recognize and work to enhance the true value of the Gary/Chicago International Airport and embrace it as a significance transportation gateway, which provides jobs, generates revenues and that is close to home.

John posted at: 8/29/2008 1:23:21 PM I was wondering what is the largest aircraft that can use the airport and what would be the largest aircraft that could use the airport once the main runway is expanded ?

chris posted at: 9/2/2008 4:13:00 PM John, the aircraft that can use the aircraft now and in the future is based on maximum takeoff weight and is evaluated on the hottest projected day of the year. Having said that, the largest aircraft that can use the airport now is a Boeing 757. The largest aircraft that can use the airport at 8,900 feet is Airbus 300-600.

John posted at: 9/3/2008 6:10:32 PM Thanks for the info Chris , would the B767 or A330 be able to use the airport at 8900 feet? Thanks

Chris posted at: 9/4/2008 4:36:00 PM John, in general a Boeing 767 and A-330 would require a runway at least 10,000 feet in length at maximum takeoff weight. Thanks

Gary Lifer posted at: 9/12/2008 12:25:16 PM I have been following this airport development for over 30 years and feel that it is time for this waste of tax dollars to end. Your budget has been cut and now you will go looking for different forms of government funding. No carrier will look to come to Gary knowing that now that the airport is even further in the hole than it has been in the past. So to all of your supporters on this page who want to know about all of the specifics of what types of planes can come and go, it doesn't matter because no planes are coming or going.

Gary Lifer posted at: 9/16/2008 4:41:42 PM I was wondering why there is a sign on the highway for the airport when there are no carriers at the airport?

Airport Fan posted at: 9/22/2008 4:58:15 PM Gary Lifer ,You have a defeatist attitude, check out the article " FAA head calls for new Chicago airport " on the nwi.com website . Also,check out flightaware.com or fboweb.com and enter GYY in the airport code box and you will see the flights to and from the airport. Mr. Curry , any chance of adding a flight tracker link to GYY's website ?

Gary Lifer posted at: 9/24/2008 1:27:34 PM I was referring to Commercial Carriers not the small craft you are counting. Those small planes can not help support the airport and don't need the expansion. If those are the only planes coming in then no more money is needed for the airport. Finally in this current economy the money for this airport could be used to fund other things like healthcare and education or even pave a few roads that are being used by more than a handful of small planes at the airport.

chris curry posted at: 10/8/2008 10:01:54 AM Gary Lifer, there is a sign on the highway because the airport has long term leases on the billboards. It is better to continue to advertise the name in some manner so that people are familiar with the airport. Although, we do not have commercial service at this time, we do receive an ample amount of cargo and charter aircraft operations.

chris curry posted at: 10/8/2008 10:05:18 AM Airport Fan, we will explore the option of adding flight tracker to the website. I think it provides a great link for passengers to view flight activity. Thanks

John posted at: 10/31/2008 11:53:17 AM I noticed that the main runway will be extended,during the extension, will the runway be reinforced to handle heavier aircraft? I read that the runway is currently rated at 250 k for a double tandem aircraft.

chris posted at: 11/7/2008 10:03:55 AM John, initially the runway extended pavement will not be reinforced more than what we have currently. This will not preclude us from landing aircraft that weigh more as long as the amount of landings by heavier aircraft does not exceed 500 operations per year. This will allow us to keep the cost down initially and when the total runway is reinforced in the future, the entire runway will be on the same pavement maintenance schedule.

John posted at: 11/17/2008 5:30:54 PM Thanks for the info Mr. Curry. How long until the next pavement maintenance cycle? Would this entail repaving the runaway,etc. How long would the runway be out of action? Thank You

Gary Liferc posted at: 11/19/2008 10:19:36 AM Does it really matter how long it will be until the next repaving? There are no large planes accessing the airport now. Lets pave some streets in Gary!

chris posted at: 11/19/2008 2:02:08 PM Gary Lifer, unfortunately the Gary Airport does not own any City of Gary streets. I would suggest you contact the City of Gary, General Services Dept. Thanks

chris posted at: 1/26/2009 4:35:42 PM Harry, its great to hear from you again. As you are aware the airline industry and the economy has been on a downward spiral. I wish I could predict the time that airlines will decide to expand domestically. Since we cannot, we will continue to build the infrastructure so that when the time comes we will not have the impediments that we face today. In addition we will continue to meet with airlines in an attempt to attract commercial service. For future airline information continue to monitor the website. Thanks

Airport Fan posted at: 2/25/2009 6:24:35 PM Good Day Mr. Curry, I was wondering if construction will start this spring on the extension of runway 12/30 ? Thank You

Chris posted at: 2/26/2009 3:45:54 PM Airport Fan, I am hopeful that the construction will start by the end of the summer. We had a modification to our railroad track alignment that the Canadian National must agree. They are currently reviewing that modification and I hope to have an agreement signed in 60 days.

Airport Fan posted at: 4/10/2009 5:35:36 PM Good Day Mr. Curry , I saw that the RDA consultant has finally published their report,is this report availible online ? Thanks

Jim posted at: 4/11/2009 3:32:54 PM Chris, Is there a plan 'B' if the CN does not move the tracks located west of the airport? Also, is there other wetland in Lake County available besides the school board property that is currently a hot topic?

Chris posted at: 4/16/2009 11:14:56 AM Airport Fan, I am not sure the report is on the RDA's website. I will say that based on prior reports generated by the RDA, they are placed on their website.

Chris posted at: 4/16/2009 11:18:41 AM Jim, There is not Plan B if the CN does not move the tracks. However, there is two plans for how those tracks can be moved. It is simply not possible to extend the runway to the southeast because of the Calumet river. In addition, I am sure there are other properties located in Lake County but are quite small parcels. The two school board properties total 103 acres owned by one entity. I would assume for the airport to acquire the same amount of acreage it may require numerous individual entities and a long period of time.

Jason posted at: 8/19/2009 8:11:40 AM Chris, I was curious as to how the negotiations with CN were going. A NWI Times article stated that finalization of the agreement was hoped for within 90 days (from June 23). It's only been about 60 days but I didn't know if you had any updates. Also, has the Gary school board given up the land needed by the airport? I thought I remember hearing something about eminent domain proceedings. Thank you in advance for you time and attention.

Chris posted at: 8/27/2009 10:35:07 AM Jason, the negotiations with the Canadian National railroad are going very well. In June we agreed on the new alignment that will extend around the perimeter of the airport to the northwest. Yesterday, the Airport Authority approved our counsel to seek additional help from a firm located in Washington DC that specializes in railroad negotiations. He also has a working relationship with CN counsel so it should help to expedite the legal process. We are still planning on a completion date of September 30 for a full binding legal agreement. In June 2009, the City of Gary Board of Public Works approved the use of eminent domain to acquire properties owned by the Gary Schools. It is expected that the legal process should take 4 to 6 months. Thanks.

Jason posted at: 10/5/2009 2:09:16 PM Chris, it seems that the new rail alignment has been agreed upon by all parties. Is there any plan to release to the public what this new alignment looks like? The Times article titled 'More Gary airport hurdles crop up' states that the tracks will run through Western Scrap's property. Will the tracks also run through Swift Trucking's property across the street (at 6500 Industrial Highway)? It seems that the environmental status of Western Scrap has been assessed in the past. Some study has been done by the EPA (EPA superfund site IND095258075) and by Clean World Engineering Ltd. (Environmental Site Assessment for the Airport Authority). What extra study might be needed or required by law? Also, if the acquisition of Western Scrap is a hurdle/extra cost, why not just use the Long Term Rail Alignment 1D as shown in the ALP approved 10-17-01? It seems this alignment would avoid the Swift Trucking property as well as Western Scrap, it would have the larger radius curves the railroads desire and the tracks would be in their final location (no need to move them twice) should the new terminal, parking garage, etc ever be constructed per the ALP. Although I have never seen a current property map, I thought much of the property along the north side of Chicago Avenue and south of the CSX trackage was already owned by the airport (Truck City of Gary, etc). Can you shed some light on these questions? Thanks.

Chris posted at: 10/7/2009 11:00:10 AM Jason, the new rail alignment has been agreed upon by the Canadian National Railroad and the Gary Chicago International Airport. We will release the drawing to the public once we have agreed on the land that is necessary to accommodate the relocation. We would like to ensure that any of the business owners affected have been notified and have entered into negotiation with the airport to purchase the properties. The article in the Times was a little misleading because the property owned by Summit Inc. (Western Scrap) is not considered to be a hurdle for the airport. We have been in negotiation with the owner for a few months and all conversations have been very cooperative. I don't view cooperative conversation to be a hurdle. We have a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) assembled by our environmental consultant which is under review to address the superfund site and other properties with environmental concerns. The Regional Development Authority is considered to be a major source of funding for the future development of the airport. It was decided that the shorter route was easier to finance and only required negotiation with one railroad as opposed to three railroads necessary for the long term rail alignment 1D. The airport owns most of the property located north of Chicago Ave and under both plans Swift Trucking was not significantly affected, if at all by either of the railroad alignments considered.

 

Name
Email
Message

Enter the code shown: