Airport Layout Plan update on Wednesday at 3pm.
https://www.flystl.com/uploads/document ... Update.pdfsymphonicpoet wrote:^Thanks for the heads up!
^^^Zoom link
- 1,291
I wonder how much rebuilding the concourses would effect the airport's CPE? The costs associated with the construction of 11/29 have only fairly recently come down to average levels. I know CPE doesn't play a huge role in how airlines determine services, but I'd hate to lose frequencies or marginal routes due to increased airport fees.
- 6,120
^The present management has done a very good job at maintaining and incrementally improving what's already there while gradually bringing the CPE down. I expect they know how to build on that without breaking the bank.
^ also no matter what they decide it is probably 2030 at the earliest before they get plans together and it built. So more debt will be off by then.
IIRC, KC's first single terminal master plan was in 2008 and the master plan that they actually pushed forward wrapped up around January 2016. They paused the new terminal efforts in 2016 while they pursued other civic projects and then brought it back up in 2017. Terminal approved in late 2017, Design started in early 2018, and construction start in March 2019.
So if the City/Airport/Airlines are serious about this new layout plan, we could see construction starting in 2024/2025 and an opening before the end of the decade.
So if the City/Airport/Airlines are serious about this new layout plan, we could see construction starting in 2024/2025 and an opening before the end of the decade.
^ Agreed. The last ALP had potential concourse reconstruction starting between 2023 and 2028. Obviously those dates won't be true today...but airport management seems to have their head on straight. I'd say it also helps that Greater St. Louis is finally taking an interest in the airport, especially with the Lufthansa thing. And plenty of fresh, federal money is soon to be coming down the pipe.
Personally I like the idea from the 2012 ALP. One long linear concourse attached to the original Main Terminal building. Yamasaki's original terminal design is already more beautiful and architecturally significant than just about any newer mid-sized airport I've been in or seen photos of. Plus the MetroLink is already attached to the terminal. Just make it a little longer and ditch the East Terminal expansion proposed here.
![]()
Personally I like the idea from the 2012 ALP. One long linear concourse attached to the original Main Terminal building. Yamasaki's original terminal design is already more beautiful and architecturally significant than just about any newer mid-sized airport I've been in or seen photos of. Plus the MetroLink is already attached to the terminal. Just make it a little longer and ditch the East Terminal expansion proposed here.
I wouldn’t hate it if the city and county chose to invest a $500m NFL settlement into the airport. Mutually beneficial investment.
Isn’t debt cheap right now? We could see some urgency to take advantage, especially if airlines are onboard. Southwest shows no signs of backing off STL and could explain the delay in baggage improvements.
Isn’t debt cheap right now? We could see some urgency to take advantage, especially if airlines are onboard. Southwest shows no signs of backing off STL and could explain the delay in baggage improvements.
^ Considering the amount of people on social media saying the region will never see anything transformative from that money, I’m inclined to agree.
Let the RSA have their take and the City and County combine the rest and rebuild the terminal.
Let the RSA have their take and the City and County combine the rest and rebuild the terminal.
- 2,929
Exciting... I'm also thinking that STL Lambert Airport could see changes come in rental car parking. Right now, we have a half a dozen sites across I-70 from the terminal. What if they consolidated into a new omnibus rental car site? I'm sure Enterprise Holdings would smile on such a thing.
Really, really, really hoping there's increased efforts towards air cargo, and not just Cargo City.
Really, really, really hoping there's increased efforts towards air cargo, and not just Cargo City.
Hey guys, huge fan of the discussions on here about the airport! Especially since we are due for an update to our current terminal/concourse structure, could we combine both the NFL settlement money and the federal funds due to us (or at least a part of the combined windfall) to make a commitment or "down payment" towards the construction of a unified terminal? The rest could be made up of new bond measures or minor tax increases (which I know wouldn't be ideal, but given our state legislature and party politics, we don't have many alternatives), and would give us a path forward towards a new terminal while attempting to keep our CPE fees low and hopefully exciting new carriers in establishing interest and possible new routes to STL. Just throwing some ideas against the wall and seeing what sticks...
This is all very curious. Our non-profit had a zoom with Sam Page (prior to the NFL settlement) and he mentioned potential land/opportunity zones near the airport and that would be a great location especially as Lambert is going to be totally different in the next couple years. I didn’t press that as it would derail the conversation but wondered what was in the works and if funding has already been identified. Also, that comment seems like it’s fast-tracked. Maybe not. But hope so.
Sc4mayor, Would this be the layout plan presented on the 3 pm zoom? Looks like this a two part plan, appease Southwest with Terminal 2 expansion to the east/reconfigure freight & do away with Concourse D and second part to build a Terminal 1 linear concourse and do away with Concourse A, B & C. Not sure what is highlight in place of Concourse D but maybe garage?sc4mayor wrote: ↑Jan 04, 2022^ Agreed. The last ALP had potential concourse reconstruction starting between 2023 and 2028. Obviously those dates won't be true today...but airport management seems to have their head on straight. I'd say it also helps that Greater St. Louis is finally taking an interest in the airport, especially with the Lufthansa thing. And plenty of fresh, federal money is soon to be coming down the pipe.
Personally I like the idea from the 2012 ALP. One long linear concourse attached to the original Main Terminal building. Yamasaki's original terminal design is already more beautiful and architecturally significant than just about any newer mid-sized airport I've been in or seen photos of. Plus the MetroLink is already attached to the terminal. Just make it a little longer and ditch the East Terminal expansion proposed here.
I agree on the 2012 ALP with a long term plan of simply having one Terminal and one linear concourse as the better plan but assume Terminal 2 expansion to the East has everything to do with what Southwest wants, willing to support...
As far as metrolink, wish County and City would get on board with slight realignment through airport so it could extend farther west for future expansion. Don't see expansion getting across Missouri River in St. Charles but surprise the county doesn't push to get to Earth City. But even a short extension to St Charles side would be a plus with more dense fill being proposed along the river & next to I70. Seems like a St Charles station within a short walk, bike ride from Streets of St Charles, Casino and old town St. Charles not a bad IMO
- 2,419
I wish St. Charles would get on board with having Metrolink, especially as their downtown/riverfront area is expanding and really growing.
It's like they're embracing some urbanism, but... hold it right there! - We're not embracing that much urbanism!
The Earth City idea is compelling, but then wouldn't you reach the same roadblock? Wouldn't a new pedestrian bridge have to be built connecting St. Charles County with St. Louis County? And if St. Charles knows it's being built with the intention of it being a Metrolink supplement, won't they just stonewall the process and kill it where it stands?
It's like they're embracing some urbanism, but... hold it right there! - We're not embracing that much urbanism!
The Earth City idea is compelling, but then wouldn't you reach the same roadblock? Wouldn't a new pedestrian bridge have to be built connecting St. Charles County with St. Louis County? And if St. Charles knows it's being built with the intention of it being a Metrolink supplement, won't they just stonewall the process and kill it where it stands?
^ Getting off thread, but even if metrolink never crosses the river I think it would be a good idea for County to look at expanding current spine just a bit further west vs a new build with Daniel and would take it over Cross County extension. You would get 2-3 more stations with say a stop at Lindbergh Ave (corridor ripe for better county bus service) & then onto Earth City with jobs node on one side of I70/entertain w casino/music venue on other side of I70. The cost to rebuild through airport would be pricey on per mile basis but think it would worth it if metrolink offered some service west of the airport IMO
Keeping to the off topic comments. The City and County need some big infrastructure spending including Lambert itself but hope that it doesn't involve Rams Settlement monies. I think the city would be better off if the Rams funds can continue to move Convention Center Expansion & Upgrades along but also go towards removing the raised section of freeway immediately east of the Dome. Put Rams Settlement funds or at least cities portion into rebuilding, reconnecting and supporting affordable housing in the immediate neighborhood. Between Restore funds, Infrastructure funds and reduction in debt the city and county can make some things happen at Lambert & the immediate area without Rams Settlement funds IMO
Keeping to the off topic comments. The City and County need some big infrastructure spending including Lambert itself but hope that it doesn't involve Rams Settlement monies. I think the city would be better off if the Rams funds can continue to move Convention Center Expansion & Upgrades along but also go towards removing the raised section of freeway immediately east of the Dome. Put Rams Settlement funds or at least cities portion into rebuilding, reconnecting and supporting affordable housing in the immediate neighborhood. Between Restore funds, Infrastructure funds and reduction in debt the city and county can make some things happen at Lambert & the immediate area without Rams Settlement funds IMO
No, I believe that Zoom is tomorrow. And I think it’s just gonna be an update to the number 3 survey…not the entire ALP. This image was from the 2012 ALP.dredger wrote: ↑Jan 04, 2022Sc4mayor, Would this be the layout plan presented on the 3 pm zoom? Looks like this a two part plan, appease Southwest with Terminal 2 expansion to the east/reconfigure freight & do away with Concourse D and second part to build a Terminal 1 linear concourse and do away with Concourse A, B & C. Not sure what is highlight in place of Concourse D but maybe garage?sc4mayor wrote: ↑Jan 04, 2022^ Agreed. The last ALP had potential concourse reconstruction starting between 2023 and 2028. Obviously those dates won't be true today...but airport management seems to have their head on straight. I'd say it also helps that Greater St. Louis is finally taking an interest in the airport, especially with the Lufthansa thing. And plenty of fresh, federal money is soon to be coming down the pipe.
Personally I like the idea from the 2012 ALP. One long linear concourse attached to the original Main Terminal building. Yamasaki's original terminal design is already more beautiful and architecturally significant than just about any newer mid-sized airport I've been in or seen photos of. Plus the MetroLink is already attached to the terminal. Just make it a little longer and ditch the East Terminal expansion proposed here.
I agree on the 2012 ALP with a long term plan of simply having one Terminal and one linear concourse as the better plan but assume Terminal 2 expansion to the East has everything to do with what Southwest wants, willing to support...
As far as metrolink, wish County and City would get on board with slight realignment through airport so it could extend farther west for future expansion. Don't see expansion getting across Missouri River in St. Charles but surprise the county doesn't push to get to Earth City. But even a short extension to St Charles side would be a plus with more dense fill being proposed along the river & next to I70. Seems like a St Charles station within a short walk, bike ride from Streets of St Charles, Casino and old town St. Charles not a bad IMO
Airport related things cannot be paid for by tax increases. They have to be paid mostly by rent from airlines/concessions/rental cars, parking, and PFCs ($4.50 fee added to every ticket.)AJ1289 wrote: ↑Jan 04, 2022Hey guys, huge fan of the discussions on here about the airport! Especially since we are due for an update to our current terminal/concourse structure, could we combine both the NFL settlement money and the federal funds due to us (or at least a part of the combined windfall) to make a commitment or "down payment" towards the construction of a unified terminal? The rest could be made up of new bond measures or minor tax increases (which I know wouldn't be ideal, but given our state legislature and party politics, we don't have many alternatives), and would give us a path forward towards a new terminal while attempting to keep our CPE fees low and hopefully exciting new carriers in establishing interest and possible new routes to STL. Just throwing some ideas against the wall and seeing what sticks...
Now the city could give up the 6 million they get from the airport every year. STL is one of the few airports grandfathered into the city being able to pull money out of the airport. Most cities aren’t allowed to do that.
I always thought they should have built a consolidated rental facility in the big parking lot next to the north Hanley metro station. Just take the train to it. Make rides between the airport and it free. Give metro a cut off money for use of the train by passengers. Super easy.gone corporate wrote: ↑Jan 04, 2022Exciting... I'm also thinking that STL Lambert Airport could see changes come in rental car parking. Right now, we have a half a dozen sites across I-70 from the terminal. What if they consolidated into a new omnibus rental car site? I'm sure Enterprise Holdings would smile on such a thing.
Really, really, really hoping there's increased efforts towards air cargo, and not just Cargo City.
^ I don't think you would have sufficient number of trips. As a business traveler I would hate the idea of waiting 20 to 30 minutes for a ride to Consolidated Rental Center.
Spend $20 million for some more vehicles and run a rail shuttle from the terminal to Conrac?dredger wrote:^ I don't think you would have sufficient number of trips. As a business traveler I would hate the idea of waiting 20 to 30 minutes for a ride to Consolidated Rental Center.
If you charge a couple bucks per rental tax to go towards metro, maybe you could work something out to have more trains. At least on that section. But I honestly have no clue how doable that actually is.
Metro has everything it needs to make this happen, including the trains. It does single track between T1 and T2 but that is a minor operational barrier.jshank83 wrote:If you charge a couple bucks per rental tax to go towards metro, maybe you could work something out to have more trains. At least on that section. But I honestly have no clue how doable that actually is.
Dedicating another train to bounce between Hanley <> T1/2 alongside normal Red Line service would be enough for every 4 to 5 mins.
Wrap the airport specific train in a fancy “airport tram” branding, have the airport dedicate security, and improve way-finding inside the airport as “Rental Car Tram”.
$0.25 to $0.50 a car would cover this.
^another reason I wanted this is then you get rid of all the extra shuttles clogging up pickups and arrivals. Way too many to have each one have their own shuttle. Find a way to put them all together to have one train/bus for all (I’ll always to partial to a train though, especially if it adds money/riders for metro). Then you have more room for cars and other shuttles.