KCRag Forum

All they had to submit were qualifications by last week w/ financing details submitted by the 10th. No sexy pictures.

Had a guys stop by our house today to ask if we supported a new terminal, specifically the Burns and Mac proposal. He asked if we'd like a free yard sign for supporting the plan. He didn't say who he was with but I assume the city?

.

Does anyone see a reality in this world where they don't pick Burns and Mac?

WoodDraw wrote:Does anyone see a reality in this world where they don't pick Burns and Mac?

Yes, if someone comes in 10% lower

I just so happened to catch the business session (well part of it) where they discussed your question pash. At the beginning of this process the council stated they wanted to use the standard procurement process the city has with some small exceptions (releasing the number of proposers and quicker announcement of winner)

That process says the bids remained silent to public. Even the full council doesn't see them. The task force sees them all (2 council members are in that) and the final winner is presented to council for approval. Legal was saying changing that process now and letting the full council see all bids would be problematic for various reasons.

I don't know where the business session finished up on that point but it was last Thursday so the decision has been made.

.

The council biffed this by saying they wanted to use the standard process.

I don't see the risk here. It's a set amount of funds already agreed to by the airlines. You look at qualifications, not a huge decision being made honestly.

Those B&M commercials are definitely trying to influence the deciding task force though...and then later voters assuming they get the call.

Set funding sets the stage

The city has a fairly clear set of requirements, not going to see the size of areas change and none of the plans are going to be crazy designs, probably will look like other airports to a large degree with finishes differing from other cities. I expect the overall experience would be indistinguishable between the four options.

it's probably going to come down to who can brings the quickest timeframe, best financing, best ability to do the work and the like.

Like B&M promised to get done quicker than the city's goal. That's the kind of thing I expect the committee will see.

.

the bridge that planes can go under is quite cool. they clearly came with their A game.

One thing their presentation didn't give is the one thing old kci fans want to hear about. Steps from curb to gate.

I'm guessing people will freak out about the walkway.

KCPowercat wrote:One thing their presentation didn't give is the one thing old kci fans want to hear about. Steps from curb to gate.

less than people walk inside a Walmart I'm sure.

Very rudamentary measurement of their design shows 700 feet from curb to furthest away gate (35 gate option with iconic bridge)

Closest gate....130 feet.

.

pash wrote:

KCPowercat wrote:One thing their presentation didn't give is the one thing old kci fans want to hear about. Steps from curb to gate.

bobbyhawks wrote:I'm guessing people will freak out about the walkway.

The basic design of ticketing, security, and baggage in a building near the curb with the gates in a more or less separate building connected by a walkway is the aviation department's only design the airlines have agreed to fund, and I think the RFP specified that arrangement, so all of the proposals are going to look roughly alike in that regard.

There's no way to fit the necessary number of gates into the footprint they're demanding and yet place them all near the entrance, nor does centralized security really allow it anyway. So that's that.

True, with a slight edit.

From city documents, the runway position set the terminal design. Needed a certain spacing in feet to pull airplanes back from the gate and not back into the taxiways.

I expect future expansion would expand the eastern building to the south with wings extending out to the west or SW, increasing distances inside security but allowing for moving walkways to make it quicker.

There's a fly through video available on AECOM's site:

https://kcipartnership.com/our-vision-p ... o-the-city

That video... I mean, I'm not totally in love with the mall food court feel, but holy hell what a vastly less unpleasant place to spend time the airport would be.