Eppley passenger record

sokkerdewd · Post by **sokkerdewd** » Wed Jan 12, 2005 9:29 pm

Eppley set a new passenger record in 2004...

Click the link for details:

http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_pg=46&u_sid=1307891

OmahaDevelopmentMan · Wed Jan 12, 2005 10:14 pm

YES! great news(even though this was expected). I was wondering when this would come out.

StreetsOfOmaha · Post by **StreetsOfOmaha** » Thu Jan 13, 2005 12:01 am

Great!!!

AZCorey · Post by **AZCorey** » Mon Jan 24, 2005 11:25 pm

Man, after flying into Eppley last month, and with all the travelling I've done recently, I really would love to see an 'Eppley expansion and renovation'....I know it's an easy airport to navigate through, but it really seems very outdated....gives kind of a negative first impression of a very up and coming city!

eomaha · Post by **eomaha** » Mon Jan 24, 2005 11:34 pm

You know I'm sorry, but that is such BS.... Eppley is not outdated... it looks just fine. I've been through many airports in much larger cities (including bustling Sky Harbor). Eppley looks great... and is one of the cleanest airports I've ever seen (the new carpet certainly looks as good as any major airport I've been in)... and most importantly, it is incredibly convenient. Okay... it doesn't have a big glass enclosed concourse, or an impressive ATC tower, or even a people mover (fortunately, it doesn't need it!). No... Eppley is just fine. In due time it will be expanded and renovated. In the meantime, it is servicing the metro well.

StreetsOfOmaha · Post by **StreetsOfOmaha** » Mon Jan 24, 2005 11:54 pm

Yeah, their orange and poop-brown pannels on their jetways are totally contemporary and on the cutting edge of design.

No, Eppley is not just fine. Yes, they threw down some new carpet, but it's going to take a whole lot more than that to bring it out of the dark ages.

Sure it's no fun to wait in a bustling, busy airport. But it's one of those things you just love to hate because you know it's the side effect of having a thriving, bustling city.

eomaha · Post by **eomaha** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 12:00 am

Aaron... I think you need to find a bigger city to live in. I really don't think you're ever going to be content in Omaha... if it means anxiously waiting for the day when you can wait in a crowd in the terminal.

StreetsOfOmaha · Post by **StreetsOfOmaha** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 12:03 am

Well I'll sure take that into consideration, Jeff.

DTO Luv · Post by **DTO Luv** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 1:10 am

I used to work at teh airport and people would always comment on how small the airport was. Many of those people weren't Omahans so it kind of left an unglamorous impression. As much as I would like to see a Qwest Center looking airport it won't happen for a long time.

eomaha · Post by **eomaha** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 1:22 am

"Oh... if only we could walk another 100 yards to get to the baggage claim!"

You know, we really should get together and write a letter to Don Smithey and the mayor and anyone else we can think of to let them know how cramped we are in our small airport. Why, it's shoulder to shoulder walking through the concourse.

DTO Luv · Post by **DTO Luv** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 1:28 am

No one's griping about how easy it is to use but how ugly and unimpressive it is.

AZCorey · Post by **AZCorey** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 2:13 pm

okay...everyone has their opinion....and are entitled to it....!!!

Whenever the subject of Eppley gets brought up by people who have been there, one comment is always made, 'boy is that airport ugly'!!!

Just because my opinion differs from yours, Jeff, does not mean it is BS, okay??

AZCorey · Post by **AZCorey** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 2:16 pm

and another thing....

I am fairly certain that it were announced that a new 3 or 4 terminal international airport was going to be built suddenly you would be excited and stoked...and wouldn't mind walking an extra 100 yards to the baggage claim! Besides, Omaha is the 16th fittest city, shouldn't be any problem at all to walk a little...

let's keep this real...and let's all feel like our opinions matter.

UNOstudent · Post by **UNOstudent** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 2:56 pm

eppley needs to do whatever it can to stay competitive. it is a fairly small and compact airport, but it does look outdated. a nicer and better airport with more amenities will attract more airlines and direct flights which will in return attract more people to fly in/out of eppley.

skinzfan23 · Post by **skinzfan23** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 3:15 pm

I think that Eppley could use something more to coincide with all the new development going on in the area. I am tired of everything always being made to look like it should have 20 yrs. ago. I think maybe some improved lighting more restaurants and definitely updated maps of the Omaha area where the phones to get information are located. I will agree that the airport is very clean, but I think especially the terminals where you wait looks like something out of the movie "the Terminal" with Tom Hanks. Maybe some art of brighter colors would look more attractive.

OmahaRules · Post by **OmahaRules** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 3:55 pm

New restaurants would be nice around that area. Maybe a Casino or two on the Iowa side.

guy4omaha · Post by **guy4omaha** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 7:27 pm

Not that it matters to anyone. But as I have stated in the past, in my opinion, Eppley is just fine. In fact I would say attractive, clean and efficient. And my business traveler friends almost remark to me, unsolicited, that they like our airport.

I think our airport decor is smart and clean looking and timeless. I imagine those of you who have posted to this thread to express your frustration with Eppley's look just can't fathom how I can have an opinion that contrasts so much with your own. But man, I just can't figure out where you come up with yours either. So I guess the only point I can come up with is that those of you who hate Eppley's look certainly are not the only opinion out there.

I don't know what some of you would decorate Eppley with instead of its current design. But my fear is that it would be some current fad and then we WOULD have to tear it out in ten years when it would indeed appear ugly.

As far as the size of the terminal, that is a two-edged sword. Bigger and more congested is not always better. If we go bigger, which someday we certainly will, I hope it can be done efficiently from a user-friendly standpoint. And yes, I hope the decor is as nice as what we currently have, poopy brown panels and all. Sorry Streets, no illwill intended at all, but your language is the most colorful to reference and copy.

eomaha · Post by **eomaha** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 7:51 pm

Well stated.

Okay, I will say one thing though, to which I can't imagine ANYONE would disagree. The website needs to be trashed!

Not even Sioux City's airport website 'SUX' as bad as ours.

http://www.flysiouxgateway.com
.
.
.

I stand corrected. No doubt they have something fabulous in the works though... which will soon put our pathetic site to further shame.

projectman · Post by **projectman** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 8:23 pm

Is there a shortage of web development professionals in this town?

StreetsOfOmaha · Post by **StreetsOfOmaha** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 9:25 pm

Yeah, the website is a disgrace.

And, Guy, very good points about difference of opinion....

But I'm sitting here trying to fathom how you think poop brown, vomit orange, pale tan faux brick, dark black tinted windows, a rusted blue "sculpture", and jankity baggage claims are "timeless".

Of course, the majority of those of us who live here aren't going to think anything of the decor of their airport. We already live here and know what we think of the city. It's visitors we're concerned about. Anyone who has EVER flown to another major city knows that Omaha's airport is lacking, be it in aesthetics, facility size, service, etc.

My general saying in life is "it's all relative". And, relative to other major airports in the country, Eppley sucks.

projectman · Post by **projectman** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 10:04 pm

Since we have the color pallate going, I prefer eggplant and aubergine. Perhaps celery, dusty rose or magenta

with a splash of Crispy Gingersnap.

guy4omaha · Post by **guy4omaha** » Wed Jan 26, 2005 7:51 am

Well Streets, I didn't think you were going to see my point at all on decor. We are just way too different in that arena. I don't think it makes either of us bad guys though. Maybe I just have bad taste or maybe its the other way around. Probably we just appreciate different things.

As far as your comments about how visitors to our airport, all I can say is that my unscientific sample of bringing consultants and other business people from other cities and places shows overwhelming support and appreciation for our airport. Maybe it is demographics. My group's age range is from 35 - 60 with a most of them being in the 45 to 55 age group.

Maybe if I worked with younger clientele more I would get completely different results. I would take my sons to the airport and try to get their opinion but I am afraid they are rather like their old man.

The more I think about it perhaps age is a factor. I remember in my much earlier days, I was sort of ashamed of how small Eppley was and how it felt like a ghost town compared to other airports. It is sort of difficult to make the comparison because Eppley is so much busier than 20 years ago. If you think its slow now, whew, you wouldn't believe how slow it used to be. Anyway, some of the things I used to dislike about the airport are now the very things I admire. And as far as the people (from out of town) I talk to, they appreciate the same things.

I want the airport to get bigger, offer more amenities, etc. But in my opinion there are a lot of good traits to carry into the future as well. As far as differences as how we all see things, yeah, it boggles the mind sometimes. Next time I have some time to wander at the airport, I am going to be on the lookout for all the various body fluid colors.

Oh, by the way, I have never been blessed with a short sentence or a short post. Can't hep it.

guy4omaha · Post by **guy4omaha** » Wed Jan 26, 2005 7:56 am

I reread your post Streets. Yes, I will agree that the baggage claim area is poopy. It needs to be updated. I sort of forgot about it because I so rarely check luggage. Hey, I got it. I understand, finally, one of your points.

Who would have thunk?

dmluvr · Post by **dmluvr** » Wed Jan 26, 2005 7:01 pm

Well, I can tell you, our airport is just as ugly. Which makes no sense, how to up and coming cities can have such issues, but yeah, we've had some pretty nice additions over the past fews years, (our baggage claims is very nice) but our concourse has got some serious issues, both interior and exterior....waaaaaay bad. DM international has come leaps and bounds....but still, consider your selves lucky

here's our website.....

http://www.dsmairport.com/

OmahaDevelopmentMan · Post by **OmahaDevelopmentMan** » Wed Jan 26, 2005 7:20 pm

I know Eppley might be clean, but poop brown and vomit orange sure doesn't look that attractive to me. THE CLEANNESS DOES NOT MAKE UP FOR THAT!!! I guess you can say that Eppley represents the days where poop brown and vomit orange looked modern...even though it represents dirtyness IMO now. I don't care how clean it is, the coloring makes it look dirtier that |expletive|!....oh wait thats what the colors are suppose to look like i guess, they did a good job then.

Swift · Post by **Swift** » Wed Jan 26, 2005 8:37 pm

Our airport is fast and efficient, most people agree on that.

I like the marble floor on the first floor, I think it is gorgeous when it is clean and the light shines on it from outside the windows. Other than that I don't think Eppley is very pretty at all.

I think that part of it is generational, but I would honestly put it in the same category as people my parents age wanting to move out to the suburbs (Eppley is pretty) while people my age are appauled by the suburbs (Eppley is not pretty).

The thing that is forgotten in so many airports, and especially in Eppley, is that you never get a second chance to make a first impression. The airport is the first impression people have of Omaha on a personal basis (by personal I mean that the view of the city as the plane lands is the first impression, but you're completely disconected from that).

More airports should be modeled off of the same ideals and aesthetics of old train stations. The airport should be an architectural icon of the city. We shouldn't be building Eppleys, Midways, SFO's when we really could be building Grand Central Stations, Penn Stations, or our very own (formerly) Union Station.

That's the biggest problem with Eppley...you walk off the plain and its "...this is Omaha." It should be "This is Omaha!"

Right now Eppley in general gives the feeling of being a strip mall. It almost looks to me like it was designed be people who usually only design strip malls.

guy4omaha · Post by **guy4omaha** » Wed Jan 26, 2005 11:13 pm

Swift wrote:...

I think that part of it is generational, but I would honestly put it in the same category as people my parents age wanting to move out to the suburbs (Eppley is pretty) while people my age are appauled by the suburbs (Eppley is not pretty).

More airports should be modeled off of the same ideals and aesthetics of old train stations. The airport should be an architectural icon of the city. We shouldn't be building Eppleys, Midways, SFO's when we really could be building Grand Central Stations, Penn Stations, or our very own (formerly) Union Station.

Ok so now I am out of touch, generationally speaking, on the suburbs too. News bulletin: Guy4Omaha, that vomit green, poopy brown lover, likes the suburbs too. Egad!!!

I think Omaha is better for having the suburbs (in its boundaries by-the-way) and the older more urban parts of town. The diversity adds to the city. I like the compact urban center and the history. But I also long for days when I can get out and move around and see the large homes, lawns, etc. I know I am not getting it again.

Regarding the Grand Central Stations, Penn Stations, etc., is there any city really that is willing and able to foot the bill for what something of this type would cost today? Is it even possible to find that type of workmanship anymore?

StreetsOfOmaha · Post by **StreetsOfOmaha** » Thu Jan 27, 2005 12:07 am

Swift wrote:Our airport is fast and efficient, most people agree on that.

I like the marble floor on the first floor, I think it is gorgeous when it is clean and the light shines on it from outside the windows. Other than that I don't think Eppley is very pretty at all.

I think that part of it is generational, but I would honestly put it in the same category as people my parents age wanting to move out to the suburbs (Eppley is pretty) while people my age are appauled by the suburbs (Eppley is not pretty).

The thing that is forgotten in so many airports, and especially in Eppley, is that you never get a second chance to make a first impression. The airport is the first impression people have of Omaha on a personal basis (by personal I mean that the view of the city as the plane lands is the first impression, but you're completely disconected from that).

More airports should be modeled off of the same ideals and aesthetics of old train stations. The airport should be an architectural icon of the city. We shouldn't be building Eppleys, Midways, SFO's when we really could be building Grand Central Stations, Penn Stations, or our very own (formerly) Union Station.

That's the biggest problem with Eppley...you walk off the plain and its "...this is Omaha." It should be "This is Omaha!"

Right now Eppley in general gives the feeling of being a strip mall. It almost looks to me like it was designed be people who usually only design strip malls.

EXTREMELY well said! I totally agree, Bob.

And Guy, I'm glad we see eye to eye on this. I'd have to agreee that it's a generational difference, and I completely respect that.

And I don't think Bob (Swift) was refering to the actual "craftsmanship", as far as carvings, sculpture, etc. specifically in reference to places like Union Station, Grand Central, etc. I think he's just talking about the overall scale and quality of design.

An AWESOME example of an airport that has embraced this ideal is Washington National. That airport is BEAUTIFUL. One of the older main parts of the airport was designed in a Deco style very similar to Omaha Union Station, and obviously inspired by the great train stations of the world. Then, the airport made a series of additions, each one with its own unique design that still meshed with and alluded back to the original design of the terminal. It's really quite spectacular. I think Omaha could definitely take some lessons from this, and other airports.

Finn · Post by **Finn** » Thu Jan 27, 2005 11:02 am

OK, I think it is a taste/opinion thing, not generational. I am in between the two age groups (just out of Guy's business clientele range) and I have to agree with Jeff and Guy. Eppley is fine. It is clean, convenient and attractive. I think some wish it had more of a "WOW" factor. I would not be against that - say a more grand entrance with more glass and an atrium. But the only thing that I have against Eppley is the conglomeration of advertisements lining the hallways to the gates. I do really like the sculpted brick carving on the north end of ticketing!

I think many are impressed with some great airport entrances that may leave a lasting impression but forget about the small crowded hallways and stairwells that they had to traverse between the terminal and the gate. I think the key with airports is CEILINGS! When you have that many people moving through an enclosed area, low hanging ceilings (especially with acoustic tiles) make the area feel cramped. Check this out next time you are moving through an airport. BWI has these low ceilings and is a terrible airport as far as congestion and aesthetics (it is actually the busiest of the three DC area airports!). Also, on your layover, walk around a little. Many times you have a quick layover in a new section of an airport that is beautiful, but you bypassed the congested, cramped (low-ceiling

) older sections of the same airport.

This reminds me of Washington DC's Reagan National (DCA). I cannot believe that this is your example Streets. It is one of the most beautiful airports in the country (and I travel a lot). The newer sections (terminals B & C) are beautiful. But the older terminal, Terminal A, is horrible. This is my "home" airport and I just spent a lot of time there last week as I was traveling to/from Vail. Talk about outdated; the hallway to the gates is cement! The hallway to the other terminals is very long, circuitous and has LOW CEILINGS! It is a pain in the |expletive| to move between the two sections and is easier and quicker to go outside and take the shuttle than walk (no people-movers). It is also very cramped with the only two baggage claims at the front entrance adjacent to the ticketing counters. This area is very dated with old carpet, ugly walls and no artwork. It is hard to get through when people are awaiting baggage. A truly ugly, congested terminal.

skinzfan23 · Post by **skinzfan23** » Thu Jan 27, 2005 2:47 pm

Yeah I just went to a Redskins game in DC earlier this month and Regan International is very outdated. I think Eppley has a few steps up on that.

StreetsOfOmaha · Post by **StreetsOfOmaha** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 12:00 am

Reagan National outdated? Please. They just finished a major expansion with beautiful architectural elements within the last 10 years.

And Finn. That "mod" circular 60s terminal is one of my favorite things about the airport. It's like I've always said, good design is good design. It doesn't matter what era it comes from. Every part of that airport is good design, at least aesthetically. Passenger traffic handling, etc. is another thing all together.

DMRyan · Post by **DMRyan** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 8:43 am

The old art deco-like portion of Regan is nice, not really eye catching in a design sense, but kind of homey for a major airport. The new addition is very nice and modern looking, but that 1960's (I think it's the round portion) is piece of |expletive|. It's clustered, undersized for current security restrictions and reeks of 1960's vomit architecture.

I can't put it any more bluntly how much that portion of the terminal sucks.

Finn · Post by **Finn** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 8:53 am

Streets wrote:

Reagan National outdated? Please. They just finished a major expansion with beautiful architectural elements within the last 10 years.

And Finn. That "mod" circular 60s terminal is one of my favorite things about the airport. It's like I've always said, good design is good design. It doesn't matter what era it comes from. Every part of that airport is good design, at least aesthetically. Passenger traffic handling, etc. is another thing all together.

Like I said, Terminals B and C are beautiful. But Terminal A is not good design - functionally or aesthetically.

DMRyan wrote

The new addition is very nice and modern looking, but that 1960's (I think it's the round portion) is piece of |expletive|. It's clustered, undersized for current security restrictions and reeks of 1960's vomit architecture.

That is Teminal A!!!!!

StreetsOfOmaha · Post by **StreetsOfOmaha** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 12:22 pm

I liked it. It was like the embodiment of surreal modernism during the middle of the last century.

Finn · Post by **Finn** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 1:36 pm

To each his own.

nativeomahan · Post by **nativeomahan** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 11:27 pm

DMRyan wrote:The old art deco-like portion of Regan is nice, not really eye catching in a design sense, but kind of homey for a major airport. The new addition is very nice and modern looking, but that 1960's (I think it's the round portion) is piece of |expletive|. It's clustered, undersized for current security restrictions and reeks of 1960's vomit architecture.

I can't put it any more bluntly how much that portion of the terminal sucks.

So right on!