urbanSTL

RuskiSTL wrote: ↑

Jan 05, 2022

ldai_phs wrote: ↑

Jan 05, 2022

New construction gates are designed for larger airplanes with higher load factors. You cannot compare gates to gates alone. Slide says 18 gates today to 22 domestic + 3 FIS in terminal 2 in 2040. Not as much growth as I had hoped for by Southwest. During the Q&A they mentioned Southwest operational difficulties with having such a long walk between their gates. They need the double-sided concourses a new terminal would offer to continue growing here. So Southwest supports the new project and seems likes its required if they are going to grow here.

I'm quite ignorant about T2, is there anyway to add a moving walkway in there?

There is a LONG moving walkway from Gates E34 back to E33... From E24 to E4 there are no moving walkways and quite a hike.   
Here is walking from E34 to E33 using the moving walkways:

symphonicpoet wrote: ↑

Jan 05, 2022

gone corporate wrote: ↑

Jan 05, 2022

Has the presentation been put online yet? Anyone have a link to it? Thanks

If it has I can't find it, but here's a couple of my screen grabs adding to what CityScene already shared. (Mostly the same, but larger versions.)

OK.  This is all pretty sweet!  In fact the only thing I'd change or rather add, would be to expand the upper level out over the additional arrival lanes.  This part wouldn't even need to be structural.  At the least they could put up some sort of separate cover system like the canopy's at the cortex metrolink or even translucent etfe panels to let in light but still provide cover for those loading, waiting on shuttles or crossing over to the consolidated garage.  Loading in the rain and the snow especially, suuucks!                         

I like the plan overall.

I think the preferred plan is the best option. Quit piecemealing things together and do it right. I’d hate to see T2 go already but there isn’t any point to keep 2 terminals. Southwest seems to be on board, so to me that means it’s time to just make it happen.

Southwest is outgrowing T2. I think they could add one more bank of 3 gates then that’s the end of it. It really might be time to consider swapping them into C. I know it is something they considered previously. Although it isn’t as nice it would solve the baggage issues and long walk issue. I wouldn’t think it would take THAT much convincing for the C airlines to move to T2. It also would setup southwest to be first into the new terminal. It looks like the first section done would be about 25 gates. That works out well for Southwest. Just swap them out of being in C to the new terminal.

I will be curious what they do with the T2 space after the new setup is built out. You really have a lot of options there with the metro stop. Big garage, hotel, put a rental car center there, or a combo of things.

Price is my only pause but again the airlines have to know a general price tag. If they are on board as they seem to be then carry on. I will be interested to see what kind of money they could possibly get from the feds for it.

I would add that it was very much my impression that none of the drawings are really "plans" so much as concepts for what could be. They don't even hire the architects and structural engineers until much further into the process. This is all very preliminary. It's interesting. But there's a lot more to happen. That said . . . I have complete faith in the airport team to make things happen. I think they've earned our respect at this point.

The History of Lambert Airport
https://www.stlmag.com/news/jet-age-design/

symphonicpoet wrote: ↑

Jan 06, 2022

I would add that it was very much my impression that none of the drawings are really "plans" so much as concepts for what could be. They don't even hire the architects and structural engineers until much further into the process. This is all very preliminary. It's interesting. But there's a lot more to happen. That said . . . I have complete faith in the airport team to make things happen. I think they've earned our respect at this point.

I do feel like instead of just a going through the motions thing like in 2012 they are looking to actually do something with this one. Which is good to see.

While the terminal layout, gates etc. are most important, I think any new terminal MUST have a large food court area where many of the major restaurants are consolidated. While there could still be restaurants and stores spread throughout the terminal, it would be nice to have a central location with lots of tables and food options. Peers such as Pittsburgh, Milwaukee and Dallas-Love have a major dining area. That is a must. I would also like to see some better, bigger name retail in the terminal.

Also, as a previous poster mentioned, a large one-stop shop for rental cars would be great. We need a large garage where all of the rental car companies are based. Let the parking companies have all of the lots across I-70.

Also, I would hope that the drop-off and pick-up areas can be streamlined to be more efficient. It is quite crazy when the airport is busy. I hate mix of random people picking up, rental car and lot buses all blending together for a traffic nightmare.

Last thing, I sure hope they play up STL's place in the history of flight, full scale 'Spirit of STL' plane, full size Super-Hornet and other artifacts that will make Lambert stand out as a unique and cool airport for visitors. I would also like a grand entrance with a grand video board like major airports. I know I am being greedy, but when exiting to the baggage and lots, I would like a GRAND 'welcome to St. Louis" sign that maybe allows you to walk through a huge Arch or something uniquely STL. The sign when going down to the baggage claim in T2 is rather unremarkable.

Just a few things on MY wishlist.

Completely agree with the central food court idea. Charlotte is another example of this done right. The food court is big, architecturally significant, and feels big city. Better retail is also very possible here now that the flyers would all be in one place.

I like the idea of starting from scratch here, the renovations were nice but T1 still feels terribly outdated. The ceilings are so low it feels like Penn Station at times.

It's probably not "untouchable", it would just add a lot more hoops to jump through / could really delay any timeline & increase budget.  My presumption is that the DoD would need a long runway (pun intended) to identify, review and then approve a new site + the potential roadblocks associated with purchasing the property from the federal government.

DogtownBnR wrote: ↑

Jan 06, 2022

While the terminal layout, gates etc. are most important, I think any new terminal MUST have a large food court area where many of the major restaurants are consolidated. While there could still be restaurants and stores spread throughout the terminal, it would be nice to have a central location with lots of tables and food options. Peers such as Pittsburgh, Milwaukee and Dallas-Love have a major dining area. That is a must. I would also like to see some better, bigger name retail in the terminal.

Also, as a previous poster mentioned, a large one-stop shop for rental cars would be great. We need a large garage where all of the rental car companies are based. Let the parking companies have all of the lots across I-70.

Also, I would hope that the drop-off and pick-up areas can be streamlined to be more efficient. It is quite crazy when the airport is busy. I hate mix of random people picking up, rental car and lot buses all blending together for a traffic nightmare.

Last thing, I sure hope they play up STL's place in the history of flight, full scale 'Spirit of STL' plane, full size Super-Hornet and other artifacts that will make Lambert stand out as a unique and cool airport for visitors. I would also like a grand entrance with a grand video board like major airports. I know I am being greedy, but when exiting to the baggage and lots, I would like a GRAND 'welcome to St. Louis" sign that maybe allows you to walk through a huge Arch or something uniquely STL. The sign when going down to the baggage claim in T2 is rather unremarkable.

Just a few things on MY wishlist.

Great ideas! Can you please submit this as a post on NextSTL and deliver it to the airport commission. Would be really nice if the community could have some visuals/mockups to get behind!

^Sure, I would be happy to do that!

dweebe wrote: ↑

Jan 06, 2022

Laife Fulk wrote: ↑

Jan 06, 2022

It's probably not "untouchable", it would just add a lot more hoops to jump through / could really delay any timeline & increase budget.  My presumption is that the DoD would need a long runway (pun intended) to identify, review and then approve a new site + the potential roadblocks associated with purchasing the property from the federal government.

I didn't know if it was an assumption of the feds being the feds and that acquiring the property would be a mess: or if they had broadcasted out that they weren't going anywhere and to not even bother asking. It sure doesn't seem anywhere near as busy as it used to be.

Also, it’s not just as easy as saying sure we will sell it to the city, even if they wanted to sell. The way I understand it every government entity from the Air Force to the Park Service to all the way down the list gets a shot at saying they want it first. I doubt any would but the process of all of the government organizations saying no would be slow.

Was just thinking about how to convey ways a new single terminal could/should be best designed.  Could we post examples of good terminal design at other airports (like DogtonwBnR did for the food court) that could be used as inspiration?

I'll start: One of the main complaints is how cramped the current terminals feel, and I think a large portion of this isn't just how narrow the T1 terminals are but how low the ceiling is.  I think the ceilings should be 20-25' feet at minimum - I've always felt that not only would a taller terminal feel bigger than one of the same width but lower ceilings, but that 'soaring' ceilings are the perfect representation of the airport experience.  I'll use the Miami terminal as an example:



-RBB

^ Great point! I would like to see a much grander terminal. Even Oklahoma City has very high ceilings which give their smallish terminal a much bigger feel. I sure hope this project is done right, even if it takes longer to reach substantial completion.

Dallas love, on a larger scale is IMO what we need. Honestly what most airports around our size and smaller should be.

DogtownBnR wrote: ↑

Jan 06, 2022

While the terminal layout, gates etc. are most important, I think any new terminal MUST have a large food court area where many of the major restaurants are consolidated. While there could still be restaurants and stores spread throughout the terminal, it would be nice to have a central location with lots of tables and food options. Peers such as Pittsburgh, Milwaukee and Dallas-Love have a major dining area. That is a must. I would also like to see some better, bigger name retail in the terminal.

Also, as a previous poster mentioned, a large one-stop shop for rental cars would be great. We need a large garage where all of the rental car companies are based. Let the parking companies have all of the lots across I-70.

Also, I would hope that the drop-off and pick-up areas can be streamlined to be more efficient. It is quite crazy when the airport is busy. I hate mix of random people picking up, rental car and lot buses all blending together for a traffic nightmare.

Last thing, I sure hope they play up STL's place in the history of flight, full scale 'Spirit of STL' plane, full size Super-Hornet and other artifacts that will make Lambert stand out as a unique and cool airport for visitors. I would also like a grand entrance with a grand video board like major airports. I know I am being greedy, but when exiting to the baggage and lots, I would like a GRAND 'welcome to St. Louis" sign that maybe allows you to walk through a huge Arch or something uniquely STL. The sign when going down to the baggage claim in T2 is rather unremarkable.

Just a few things on MY wishlist.

I think all of that save possibly the food court was mentioned in the meeting. The consolidated rental car business was a lower priority, but they did talk about the desire for one. The roadways were a fairly high priority and placemaking was absolutely an important part of that conversation: keeping the terminal visible, having grand signs saying "welcome to St. Louis" and alternately "welcome to the airport" were specific points of discussion. They know the flight history and want to play it up. Getting planes is probably a challenge. (The historical society keeps taking theirs away, so maybe the airport needs to acquire their own. It never ceases to amaze me how many large installations are "loans." Like the rocket that used to be outside McDonnel Planetarium, for instance. Or the big history of flight painting that used to be near the baggage claim exits.)

I think the T2 baggage claim wall was specifically addressed in a previous art installation RFP. Not sure how far along that process is, but they're addressing it. (I think the RFP went out last year sometime. Not quite recalling for sure, but yeah, that's an ugly wall. It needs help. And I think they know it.)

Something needs to be done because Lambert is horrible. Even after the updates.

jshank83 wrote: ↑

Jan 06, 2022

symphonicpoet wrote: ↑

Jan 06, 2022

I would add that it was very much my impression that none of the drawings are really "plans" so much as concepts for what could be. They don't even hire the architects and structural engineers until much further into the process. This is all very preliminary. It's interesting. But there's a lot more to happen. That said . . . I have complete faith in the airport team to make things happen. I think they've earned our respect at this point.

I do feel like instead of just a going through the motions thing like in 2012 they are looking to actually do something with this one. Which is good to see.

Agreed. Sorry if I implied otherwise. I'm just trying to say it's still the very beginning of the process. It will be a long slog, but it does feel real this time. I don't get the impression ant of this is just pie in the sky dreaming. I think they want to build all of it. I just meant to say the diagrams aren't even a first phase rendering towards an actual plan, but rather a conceptual statement of intention.

Obviously the huge influx of infrastructure and other monies that created a surplus have sped up these projects, but do you think KCI played a role in STL getting on the ball and coming up with a new plan. Or Is KCI irrelevant to STL? I've heard conflicting views on KCI's impact on STL. I figure this project has been on the minds of Lambert/regional leadership for some time. 

I'm sure it's a mixture of both, but primarily that this is something St. Louis leadership has wanted done for a while. 

symphonicpoet wrote: ↑

Jan 06, 2022

jshank83 wrote: ↑

Jan 06, 2022

symphonicpoet wrote: ↑

Jan 06, 2022

I would add that it was very much my impression that none of the drawings are really "plans" so much as concepts for what could be. They don't even hire the architects and structural engineers until much further into the process. This is all very preliminary. It's interesting. But there's a lot more to happen. That said . . . I have complete faith in the airport team to make things happen. I think they've earned our respect at this point.

I do feel like instead of just a going through the motions thing like in 2012 they are looking to actually do something with this one. Which is good to see.

Agreed. Sorry if I implied otherwise. I'm just trying to say it's still the very beginning of the process. It will be a long slog, but it does feel real this time. I don't get the impression ant of this is just pie in the sky dreaming. I think they want to build all of it. I just meant to say the diagrams aren't even a first phase rendering towards an actual plan, but rather a conceptual statement of intention.

I was just adding onto what you said. No disagreement here with your original thoughts.