We need a new airport!!!

[bobbyhawks]

I'll continue to harp on it as long as people tell me how convenient the current and potentially refurbished KCI layout is, but this morning's line at the Southwest security entrance was overflowing, wrapping partially around itself, and TSA pre-check was consistently ~20-30 people deep. There were a bunch of kids flying to some convention all stacked up in line, which just shows that the airport is not designed to handle any real influx into one security checkpoint at once. I'd hate to be someone without pre-check or A-list who was banking on the "convenience" of KCI this morning. As usual, nowhere to sit even away from your gate, and the world's worst Starbucks, which is actually your only real breakfast option.

[KCPowercat]

Traffic at kci is increasing and our airport design can't handle it. It's really that simple.

[hartliss]

Appears the city will solicit other bids: http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/n ... rport.html

[grovester]

Not sure this was their plan, but they have at least changed the narrative about the airport.

[flyingember]

At this point there's a good baseline with the current plan but it would be nice to see some more ideas.

What would be really interesting is for a company to come in with a really competitive renovation plan that comes in way lower than the city's numbers and produces something equally useful to building new.

[KCFan]

At this point there's a good baseline with the current plan but it would be nice to see some more ideas.

What would be really interesting is for a company to come in with a really competitive renovation plan that comes in way lower than the city's numbers and produces something equally useful to building new.

I don't see any way that a renovation of the existing terminals produces something as efficient or nice as a single terminal. If the semi-circle were such a wonderful and improved design, wouldn't someone have copied it in the past fifteen years? But I'm fine with the city opening it up to bids - it's the smart thing to do. I'd like to get the best design and best bang for our buck. We should be shooting to have the best airport in the country for our money - screw Indianapolis - we're coming for you!

[OPIchabod]

No renovation please. See Kauffman Stadium and Arrowhead.

[shinatoo]

No renovation please. See Kauffman Stadium and Arrowhead.

KCI renovation would be a disaster. TSC renovation was a huge success. Not what I wanted but very well done, and we got 25 years of additional use for a 1/4 of the cost of building new. Hell, maybe 40 years for Arrowhead.

[KCPowercat]

People hate chance

[KCPowercat]

Things that could be announced between now and November vote that would significantly help the vote (not saying probable)

* More direct flights announced by Southwest
* International direct announced
* New TSA rules that further inhibit current security or bag check lines
* Frequent transit announced by ridekc in partnership with airport (eg. quick service dedicated bus to downtown)
* Preliminary design announced detailing conveniences over current design.
* User fee increases defined

[WoodDraw]

Preliminary design would be huge, but hard to get that without $$$.

[grovester]

Should insist that design and $$$ be submitted together.

[aknowledgeableperson]

Things that could be announced between now and November vote that would significantly help the vote (not saying probable)
...
* User fee increases defined

Of course feel free to correct me but I seem to remember the cost of renovation being slightly less than or the same as building new. Of course renovation costs can vary depending on the degree of renovation and/or existing layout modified. So please update what are the latest costs of the two paths?

[KCPowercat]

New building was cheaper and operation costs lower in a new building.

[Highlander]

Things that could be announced between now and November vote that would significantly help the vote (not saying probable)
...
* User fee increases defined

Of course feel free to correct me but I seem to remember the cost of renovation being slightly less than or the same as building new. Of course renovation costs can vary depending on the degree of renovation and/or existing layout modified. So please update what are the latest costs of the two paths?

Renovation is not a path forward. Anyone seriously considering this is plain crazy. The terminal buildings are themselves obsolete. They are too narrow to function as terminals today and there is no way to fix that problem. Any renovation discussion needs to be shitcanned from the start.

[Sani]

Not to mention there isn't a renovation plan that doesn't include central screening areas, thus still eliminating the "convenience" that everyone harps on. People need to realize the days of a checkpoint for every few gates is going away, one way or another.

[swid]

I went to the Downtown Neighborhood Association-hosted airport listening tour on Tuesday - while nothing new was discussed that hasn't been mentioned over the past few years, there were some interesting tidbits:

- Both the city and the airlines went into this process initially believing that a major renovation would be cheaper than a terminal rebuild, but after the numbers came out about the same for both, the airlines refuse to support anything other than a new terminal.
- KCI is the largest airport in the country that doesn't segregate arrival and departure traffic.
- The new terminal's adjacent parking garage would be a *shorter* walk into the terminal than the current parking garages inside the circles are.
- The new garage will have a dedicated area for commercial vehicles and buses; also, the garage is designed to accommodate light rail running through it (if/when that ever happens).
- The number of security lanes would go up from the current 9 to 11 or 12.
- The airport has/soon will be retiring nearly all of its debt, so nearly all of its ticket fees can go to paying down any bonds issued on a new terminal.
- The ticket fees are expected to go from about $6/ticket to about $9/ticket; the increased fee would still be around 25th percentile among their peer airports and substantially lower than St. Louis' fees.
- The airlines have agreed to take on more risk in cost-sharing agreements if a new terminal is built.
- In the absolute worst-case scenario of the airport defaulting on its debt somehow, taxes would not go up on KCMO residents; the bondholders would end up owning parts/all of the airport.
- The airlines initially refused to have restrooms added to security-side areas, citing gateside space needs and that the restrooms would be (and still are) maintained by the airlines, not the airport authority.

All in all, I *really* hope that the city and airport authority can get its act together on consistent messaging to the public, as this is about as much of a slam dunk of an infrastructure project as you could conceivably hope for.

[KCFan]

Thanks for the update. I've been told that Southwest essentially can't get any more flights into Chicago or Dallas and need flights in the central U.S., which is why they've added so many more flights in St. Louis rather than KC (just can't connect passengers in KC). And apparently they can't make any promises because if fuel prices skyrocket or we hit a recession, they need the business flexibility to cut back flights. I've also been told that KC is one of the largest cities in the country without a daily non-stop to Europe and that there is a massive economic impact to the metro if we can secure one. Right now, we have enough people flying to Europe every day to justify it, but I'm sure if they could connect flights in regionally, it would be a slam dunk to get one.

I really do think a new airport is a slam dunk when people sit down and look at all the information, but people have such short attention spans, get their information differently, and a lot go into it thinking KCI is the world's best airport so they literally won't listen to any other viewpoint. Today's news that the airlines want a vote no later than November maybe sheds some light on why the city has so frantically been trying to push the Burns & McDonnell proposal through.

[swid]

Yep, that was brought up as well - while Southwest won't explicitly confirm it, they've strongly and repeatedly hinted that they'd add more flights if a new terminal was built, and as SW is beefing up its international network, it's likely that KC would have regular service to Mexico.

The new terminal would have 4 gates that (depending on the need) could accommodate dual boarding of wide-body aircraft, international arrivals, or overflow capacity in delay/diversion scenarios.

[KCFan]

St. Louis just got a non-stop to Cancun on Southwest.