KCRag Forum

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.

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

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.

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?