KCRag Forum

GRID wrote: ↑Mon Nov 05, 2018 12:19 pm Any frequent flyers think this new terminal seems kind of small? It just looks oddly small to me. Maybe it doesn't need to be any bigger, but for a major mid sized airport, it just looks small for a modern single terminal. And not having a couple of covered ped bridges from the garage to the terminal just screams to me that this thing is going to be built "cheaply". It's going to be a bare bones terminal. It will be better than the current KCI, but this won't be anything to brag about once it's open.

Looks like the design phase is still pretty fluid at this time. I will wait for the final design before I make any judgments.
The terminal is supposed to be 1,050,000sq ft total. Would like to see some updated renderings of the concourses.

I wonder at what design % they're at. If we're going to close financially, it can't be too low.

WoodDraw wrote: ↑Mon Nov 05, 2018 5:35 pm I wonder at what design % they're at. If we're going to close financially, it can't be too low.

It's design-build so I would expect it to be less complete than you would expect. 100% will be only months before opening

I'm certain the total electrical load is done, they know where the major conduit will route and they know where all panels will be. They absolutely have the water/sewer design done. They know where the structural walls will be and how the roof is designed.

most items the costs are fairly standard industry-wide. they'll know the general cost to put in bathrooms per square foot on a good, better, best scale even if they don't know exactly how high up the counter will be (will they have a child height one?), the exact materials, exactly where the soap dispensers will be (Wall mounted? sink mounted?), the final color of the paint, the exact tile design or such.

Look at the images and you don't see final check in kiosk design. The visible baggage handler the only thing that's final is where the luggage comes out. Notice the mockup seating has no electrical plugs or tables at all so there's no way that's final yet. They can change the exact height and materials of things like bathroom stall walls and where art goes for a while

They know where the structural walls will be and how the roof is designed.

Oh we know how the roof is going to be designed. Flat and cheap, missing the glorious wavy scallops that made for a masterful design in the first round of renderings. So frustrating, I can't let this go!

While the scallops would be cool, most popular buildings have flat roofs. Union Station(inside), 1 World Trade Center, etc

For sure, I don't mind a flat roof, in fact generally prefer them and wish they were used more frequently on the residential side in KC. Just this particular downgrade. We had a very nice, unique design, that was silently totally removed without any pushback.

I will say that I appreciate that the latest renderings still show a lot of glass and natural light. Getting a lot of new Love Field vibes, which is a good thing. Just want a little more pop, curves, color, something with a bit of wow factor.

The garage overpowers the terminal at this point, which is true of many airports, but wanted better here.

rxlexi wrote: ↑Tue Nov 06, 2018 11:53 am We had a very nice, unique design, that was silently totally removed without any pushback.

The garage overpowers the terminal at this point, which is true of many airports, but wanted better here.

You assume there was no pushback

No one cares about the airport front door. Everyone wants to get to and through the entry/exit hall as quickly as possible which is why the garage is so close. That's the convenience factor that was easily the #1 want. For most people better is what they designed.

flyingember wrote: ↑Tue Nov 06, 2018 10:13 am

WoodDraw wrote: ↑Mon Nov 05, 2018 5:35 pm I wonder at what design % they're at. If we're going to close financially, it can't be too low.

It's design-build so I would expect it to be less complete than you would expect. 100% will be only months before opening

I'm certain the total electrical load is done, they know where the major conduit will route and they know where all panels will be. They absolutely have the water/sewer design done. They know where the structural walls will be and how the roof is designed.

most items the costs are fairly standard industry-wide. they'll know the general cost to put in bathrooms per square foot on a good, better, best scale even if they don't know exactly how high up the counter will be (will they have a child height one?), the exact materials, exactly where the soap dispensers will be (Wall mounted? sink mounted?), the final color of the paint, the exact tile design or such.

Look at the images and you don't see final check in kiosk design. The visible baggage handler the only thing that's final is where the luggage comes out. Notice the mockup seating has no electrical plugs or tables at all so there's no way that's final yet. They can change the exact height and materials of things like bathroom stall walls and where art goes for a while

Thanks for the good response.

Is the 1% for art deal part of this project? Since it isn’t municipal bonds I am not sure.

cityscape wrote: ↑Wed Nov 07, 2018 11:06 am Is the 1% for art deal part of this project? Since it isn’t municipal bonds I am not sure.

Apparently so.

https://twitter.com/justinmeyerkc/statu ... 13282?s=21

According to Edgemoor on WDAF the new terminal will now be completed by late Summer to Fall 2023 after the council
meeting discussion today. 5 years from now. As long as the committee signs the agreement on December 15th for construction to begin after the new year. If not completed by Fall 2023, Edgemoor will pay 35,000 a day to the city.

Link?

yes strange, WDAF link says

"According to this plan, the airport will be completed in January 2023. If not, Edgemoor will be penalized $35,000 per day. It's possible that the project could cost less in the end. If it costs more, Edgemoor will have to pay for overages."

Is it 5 years from when city executes agreement which would be Dec 2023

https://fox4kc.com/2018/11/01/with-cost ... -terminal/

It's a bit frustrating to.see amenities being cut without much of any input from fliers. Things like

* Skywalk from parking garage
* Architecturally interesting building design
* Signature fountain
* Roof that covers all depatire traffic Lanes
* Reduction in number of lounges (Meyer said 3 lounges early on now down to 1)

Yet silly stuff like glass jetbridges will still end up in the plan because airport officials think they are neat. Why not interact with fliers...what is important to us....going to guess not getting rained on when dropped.off or walking from.garage is going to rank higher than seeing the apron when walking onto my plane

Thanks for posting that link. The report had an Edgemoor Rep on that didn't say December 2023 - He said if the groundbreaking paperwork would be signed by December 15 this year, it is feasible that the completion date is 2023. The earlier the better.

I thought this was supposed to be done by 2020?

Didn't Burns & McDonnell offer up a nice, new airport solution to the city well before the voter referendum and heavily criticized bidding process began? Did we just burn that bridge for a wishful (promise) lie that we could get an airport sooner, and for cheaper if we went with ______ company?

As of July, they showed an underground airport connection in lieu of the skybridge. Are we certain that’s not still in there?

https://www.flykci.com/media/7685/19jul ... mittee.pdf

Regardless, I’m okay with a crosswalk as long as they signalize it. Plenty of other airports do this and it seems to work just fine.

I'm sure you could go to arrival level and walk but still interacting with traffic, not temperature controlled, and more likely to have to take an elevator to access it....just less convenient

im2kull wrote: ↑Thu Nov 08, 2018 6:45 pm Didn't Burns & McDonnell offer up a nice, new airport solution to the city well before the voter referendum and heavily criticized bidding process began? Did we just burn that bridge for a wishful (promise) lie that we could get an airport sooner, and for cheaper if we went with ______ company?

You're dreaming if you think it would have been cheaper.

Under the bid proposals Edgemoor was originally at $1 billion which was up to $2.2 billion with financing costs included. (35 years)
B&M's no bid proposal was $2.9 billion with financing costs included.

Their No bid cost was 130% of Edgemoor's bid cost. That's without the size increase.
At the end of the day the size increase would have seen everyone's price go up. But B&M was already at 130% the price and no one had the tariffs in play when they bid.

Their plan, except for the shape, was the same basic design (this article has the same costs as the link below)
https://www.kshb.com/news/local-news/ma ... al-airport

*maybe* we could have got more per dollar but that's wishful thinking at best. And one key piece had the financing as different. Edgemoor had the only 100% privately financed bid and they're responsible for cost overages.

What you're seeing right now is planning up front under this risk profile. They can't pass on cost increases and extra labor for additional days through change orders. They need to identify the total price up front. Once the agreement is finalized they will hit both cost and date targets because their profits are on the line if they don't. The streetcar used a similar overage risk model with success.

For comparison this is B&M's LAX project. They went 66% over budget.
https://www.dailybreeze.com/2015/09/17/ ... udit-says/

The first scope of


Source for costs.
https://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/ ... loper.html

Why do governments bid when they don’t know exactly what they want? It seems that would cause massive increases in price. If you contracted with a house builder and then added a bedroom midprocess they would hit you with a “it’s gonna cost ya” mega increase for sure.

Why didn’t we reopen the bid process when we learned we needed 20%+ increase in the size of the airport?