If you are a resident of West Seattle, then the idea that Boeing Field will become a major short-haul airline terminal for Southwest Airlines, and maybe others, is one to be immediately and strongly resisted.

But, if you are a frequent business flyer and must spend your work week going to and from an airport and getting the best deal for your dollar, then Southwest's desired move is one you will find attractive.

The immediate objection is the potential noise that upward of 200 flights in and out of what is officially known as King County International Airport will mean to Ballard, Magnolia, and West Seattle. Not only will Southwest be there, but the cargo lines will continue to use the airport.

Alaska Airlines says it would need to move some flights to Boeing because of competition, but it remains to be seen if struggling Alaska will be financially able to make such a move.

Southwest says it plans to use only advanced 737-700 twin jets. These planes are able to take off at a steeper climb rate, getting the plane away from neighborhoods more quickly. The planes are quieter on landing.

Still, there will inevitably be noise to people living below. Living near an airport has its negatives. Southwest will undoubtedly have to offer noise abatement to residents who will suffer more than acceptable noise impact.

That aside, the move to Boeing Field is good for passengers. Southwest will actually pay $130 million for a new terminal, not ask taxpayers to foot the bill. Further, the airline will buy new Boeing jets to use, adding to the stability of the Boeing workforce in this area. It should contribute to the cost of additional highways and off-ramps.

Making money is something all businesses struggle to do, and Southwest recently had its 116th quarterly profit and dividend. It is the national leader in low-cost service for its passengers. It makes a profit providing something many people want cheaply.

The Port of Seattle vigorously rejects this move. Port Chief Executive M.R. Dinsmore says "various players stand to win or lose . . . but I say that citizens as a whole - that's you and me - would lose." What he means is Southwest moving from Sea-Tac would mean fewer airlines to pay the huge cost of the remodeling and airport runway construction of Sea-Tac.

For a while, he may be right. But projections say Sea-Tac will reach another passenger saturation point in the next decade so Southwest's move will merely slow down that need for even more expensive expansion at Sea-Tac.

We are not endorsing this move - yet! We do not know the actual impacts yet. But we think the idea is worthy of consideration. Besides noise, only one thing may kill this plan in the long run. That is the closeness of Boeing to Sea-Tac and the intersection of the two flight paths. The final decision may be made not by residents, but by the Federal Aviation Administration which controls flight paths over our cities.

Still, open your minds to the possibility of a short, inexpensive journey to Boeing Field to take your business trip. Most business travelers are not interested in glitzy shopping or fancy eateries when they travel. They want a quick, cost- effective trip with a minimum of hassle.