We need a new airport!!!

Transportation topics in KC
kboish
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2333
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 12:25 am
Location: West Plaza

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Post by kboish » Fri Apr 13, 2018 12:27 pm

Here is the link you can use to find any past presentation/city meeting
http://kansascity.granicus.com/ViewPubl ... ?view_id=2

Here is the link for the meeting we are talking about
http://kansascity.granicus.com/MediaPla ... p_id=10768

kboish
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2333
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 12:25 am
Location: West Plaza

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Post by kboish » Fri Apr 13, 2018 12:38 pm

Go to around the 33:30 minute where Shields starts asking questions. She does a good job clarifying what the hell they were saying.

kboish
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2333
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 12:25 am
Location: West Plaza

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Post by kboish » Fri Apr 13, 2018 12:42 pm

Shortly after that (36:00) Fowler asks about growth projects staying at 4%.

kboish
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2333
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 12:25 am
Location: West Plaza

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Post by kboish » Fri Apr 13, 2018 12:46 pm

Upon rewatching, something worth highlighting is that they will build the current terminal's systems (baggage, entry/exit, ticketing, etc) to handle 42 gates. They will simply be able to slap on another 3 gates if they need to. If they did need to expand to 50 in the future, they would need to add additional capacity, but they are identifying the how and where for those additions now, though not including them in today's build out.

WoodDraw
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1289
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:53 pm

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Post by WoodDraw » Fri Apr 13, 2018 12:59 pm

Ty

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6778
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Post by flyingember » Fri Apr 13, 2018 1:03 pm

Makes sense. I recall one of the big failures of the current terminals is the baggage systems don't interconnect.

To me the idea of expanding from 42 to 50 means adding another entrance, ticketing counter and such and this future round of gates could actually be in the state of future terminal 2. (the idea being you go to a closer entrance for convenience)

Planning now seems to mean
The baggage systems should be able to pass luggage back and forth, either security entrance should work, and such

cityscape
New York Life
New York Life
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 3:41 pm
Location: Overland Park

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Post by cityscape » Fri Apr 13, 2018 2:25 pm

Why does no one explain to Loar that there were NEVER 90 gates. The gates were numbered 1-90 but they skipped many numbers. Also, those gates were tiny and were meant for smaller aircraft. They really didn't try and explain the reason for why it is only perceived that we're going to less gates and thus I feel like she's going to continue to ask the same harping question over and over.

On another note, while I agree that 60 days is not a huge disruption to timeline, I am worried about scope creep and this project slipping 60 days at a time. I understand the concept of do it right once, but that should not be the get out of jail free card for letting the project fall behind. Hopefully Edgemoor really does have a sound plan to ensure this project stays on track, I'm not personally convinced that they do.

hartliss
Western Auto Lofts
Western Auto Lofts
Posts: 643
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 4:05 pm
Location: Brookside

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Post by hartliss » Fri Apr 13, 2018 3:37 pm

cityscape wrote:Why does no one explain to Loar that there were NEVER 90 gates. The gates were numbered 1-90 but they skipped many numbers. Also, those gates were tiny and were meant for smaller aircraft. They really didn't try and explain the reason for why it is only perceived that we're going to less gates and thus I feel like she's going to continue to ask the same harping question over and over.

On another note, while I agree that 60 days is not a huge disruption to timeline, I am worried about scope creep and this project slipping 60 days at a time. I understand the concept of do it right once, but that should not be the get out of jail free card for letting the project fall behind. Hopefully Edgemoor really does have a sound plan to ensure this project stays on track, I'm not personally convinced that they do.
Keep in mind the delay is a result of the airlines wanting to add gates and they are the ones paying for it. It is a hugely complex project and I would prefer we get it right the first time, however, if we keep running into delays then I will be concerned. One thing that wasn't mentioned at the meeting was the labor harmony agreement. At last check, the two sides still had distance and I am not sure where that is at in the process.

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6778
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Post by flyingember » Fri Apr 13, 2018 8:45 pm

hartliss wrote:however, if we keep running into delays then I will be concerned.
I expect them to keep running into delays.

Projects taking longer than expected it true of nearly every large public project.

WoodDraw
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1289
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:53 pm

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Post by WoodDraw » Fri Apr 13, 2018 8:58 pm

I'm less worried about edgemoor than I am about the city and airlines when it comes to delays.

Trying to move forward at 30% makes me think we'll see more delays.

User avatar
normalthings
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1080
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Post by normalthings » Fri Apr 13, 2018 10:19 pm

en08 wrote:One of the biggest things that concerns me about Kansas City's development is KCI. While our airport is convienient and nice on the inside, it is not adequate anymore for a city of Kansas City's size. First off, it's structure makes it seem small. When people come to Kansas City, they think we are a small city just because our airport doesn't seem that big (in reality it is fairly large, having 90 gates). Also, it is extremley inconvienient for connecting passengers since there is a security checkpoint at EVERY gate, and you have to go through security again to get food, a magazine, or use the bathroom (in some cases). Kansas City would be a PERFECT hub city due to it's central location for a major airline, and probably would easily become a hub if only we had a bigger airport. Memphis, a city half of our size, has a much larger airport, and is thus a hub. So does Salt Lake City. We are in dire need of a new airport-- I know that we just spent alot of money on renovating KCI, but why! The airport is so old, it is not up to date for the 21st century.
The second post on this thread mentions the 90 gate misnomer. The 90 gate misconception was and still is somewhat widespread.
What most people don't know is that 90 gates actually was the plan at one time. Terminal D (Clover Leaf 4)

cityscape
New York Life
New York Life
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 3:41 pm
Location: Overland Park

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Post by cityscape » Sun Apr 15, 2018 11:52 am

My biggest concern with the renderings and the square footage descriptions is that it really feels like this airport is going to feel cramped around the gates. The width of the concourse seems way too small. Doesn't allow for restaurants between gates which means they'll all be grouped together, not necessarily a bad situation, but not ideal in my opinion. The best concourses seem to have a cluster of gates (4-6) separated by a restaurant/retail area. The way this terminal looks to be built is that we'll have all restaurants and retail grouped along the center spine and then airline gates in long running halls (endless rows of seats). Anyone see this differently based on what has been submitted to date?

User avatar
KCPowercat
Power & Light
Power & Light
Posts: 28623
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: Quality Hill
Contact:

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Post by KCPowercat » Sun Apr 15, 2018 12:15 pm

Based on the renderings, there is only 4-6 gates on each side of the central hubs. I'm sure there will be some small kiosks between gates...looking at like the IND airport, it has a similar layout and has kiosks between gates.

User avatar
KCPowercat
Power & Light
Power & Light
Posts: 28623
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: Quality Hill
Contact:

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Post by KCPowercat » Sun Apr 15, 2018 12:19 pm

Assuming the renderings are to scale (the rendering is overlaid on top of the current terminals), the width of the legs appears to be as wide if not wider than the current terminals width curb to plane.

Looking at other airports (PDX, IND, AUS) looks like the width is 90-125'....I think that's what we should be demanding/expecting....

User avatar
normalthings
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1080
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Post by normalthings » Sun Apr 15, 2018 3:33 pm

cityscape wrote:My biggest concern with the renderings and the square footage descriptions is that it really feels like this airport is going to feel cramped around the gates. The width of the concourse seems way too small. Doesn't allow for restaurants between gates which means they'll all be grouped together, not necessarily a bad situation, but not ideal in my opinion. The best concourses seem to have a cluster of gates (4-6) separated by a restaurant/retail area. The way this terminal looks to be built is that we'll have all restaurants and retail grouped along the center spine and then airline gates in long running halls (endless rows of seats). Anyone see this differently based on what has been submitted to date?
Image

2016 design I found after a quick Google search. The City Council meeting last week noted that the SQ Footage of the airport will change but they haven’t nailed down a number yet.

cityscape
New York Life
New York Life
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 3:41 pm
Location: Overland Park

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Post by cityscape » Mon Apr 16, 2018 10:26 am

Thank you, that helps answer some of my questions.

User avatar
normalthings
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1080
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Post by normalthings » Wed May 09, 2018 11:41 pm

Heard the MLK Street community group is now considering renaming the terminal

missingkc
Colonnade
Colonnade
Posts: 813
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2002 7:16 pm
Location: Charlotte, NC

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Post by missingkc » Thu May 10, 2018 5:45 am

I like that idea.

User avatar
normalthings
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1080
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Post by normalthings » Thu May 10, 2018 7:02 am

I am not sure if they mean the terminal or the airport would be renamed. Renaming the terminal generally seems pointless. Renaming the airport would be strongly opposed by KCAD and I generally a bad idea. Having an airport named after anything but its location just causes confusion, makes marketing harder, and makes selling that airport to airlines harder(especially foreign ones).

User avatar
KCPowercat
Power & Light
Power & Light
Posts: 28623
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: Quality Hill
Contact:

Re: We need a new airport!!!

Post by KCPowercat » Thu May 10, 2018 9:40 am

They won't change the airport name....I'm sure the terminal will be named for someone but I'm a fan of that being a local honor....like Truman or buck.

Post Reply