I hate to pour cold water on this idea but let me tell you why I--from Bay City--fly out of Flint. First, they have many more choices of airlines so that I can hopefully get a reasonable fare. Second, they are right off the expressway and very easy to get to. Third, it takes me about 45 minutes to get there as opposed to 30 for Tri-City. Tri-City will never be able to compete with Flint unless they get a few more airlines willing to add them to their routes. Flint has the added benefit of drawing passengers from the northern suburbs of Detroit--people who don't want to drive through the mess in Detroit and pay the outrageous parking fees at Metro and wait in the security lines. Good luck to Tri-City but it'll take more than a new terminal to win back my business.

It will be a beautiful building, but unfortunately my wife and I fly out of Flint not because of the building but to save significant dollars. The cost to fly from Flint is anywhere from $75 or more less than a ticket to the same destination from Tri-City, even using the same airline! (Northwest/Delta)

Lovely conceptual drawings although I do hope that gravity defying overhang is well supported. It isn't likely to surpass Bishop architecturally but that's ok, too. However I totally agree with sunbeamf that the basic reasons most leisure travelers (and probably some business travelers who would not care to be identified) do not fly out of MBS are the following: Higher fares as a rule and absurdly high fares in some cases, limited arrivals/departures, limited connections AND a limited number of airlines from which to choose. Until MBS is able to attract and RETAIN a low-cost carrier(s), Bishop will continue to win out in terms of boardings especially when folks are pinching pennies. My guess is they will drive the extra miles to Bishop to save the $75-200 extra it would cost them to fly from MBS if they feel they must fly to their destination.