It is. A republican administration would be bad for the prospects of any infrastructure project relying on Federal Funds.
FAA has signed off on the environment assessment for the new consolidated terminal at the airport.
The project keeps moving forward.
The project keeps moving forward.
https://www.flystl.com/newsroom/stl-new ... n-stls-ctpjshank83 wrote: ↑Oct 25, 2024FAA has signed off on the environment assessment for the new consolidated terminal at the airport.
The project keeps moving forward.
A rendering of a single-terminal Lambert airport concept.
Lambert airport
By Jacob Kirn – Managing Editor, St. Louis Business Journal
Oct 28, 2024
The federal government has found that Lambert airport's $3 billion plan for redevelopment as a single-terminal facility does not have the potential for significant environmental impacts, another step toward completion of the project.“We are pleased to have reached this latest milestone in our efforts to secure and build a proposed consolidated terminal at St. Louis Lambert International Airport,” Jerry Beckmann, St. Louis Lambert International Airport's deputy director for planning and development, said in a news release. “This action by the Federal Aviation Administration is key as we move forward with our planning.”
Lambert still must convince the airport's airlines, the largest being Southwest Airlines, to pay for the project overhaul.
Lambert said in a statement Monday that it's working with them on a new use and lease agreement that would be enacted if and when construction of the new terminal is authorized. It expects that authorization to come when 90% of the design of the western half of the new terminal is completed.
Airlines, which pay for the development through rates and fees, will have to give the OK for the project to advance past the current roughly 10% design phase to 30%, 60% and 90%, at which time construction could be authorized, Airport leader Rhonda Hamm-Niebruegge has said.
The city of St. Louis, which owns and operates Lambert, last month issued a request for qualifications for firms interested in designing the terminal; statements were due Oct. 25.
Airport leadership envisions creating, at a cost of $3 billion, a 62-gate, dual sided, single-concourse facility, with more concessions, a larger on-site parking garage that would triple the airport’s number of parking spots and an improved roadway system for easier drop-off and pickup.
As of May, Lambert estimates were that 90% of the single-terminal design could be finalized by June 2026, with construction on the new terminal's west wing beginning that year, and construction on an eastern wing beginning in late 2028. The airport said Monday that the city could break ground in 2026, with completion in 2032.
The St. Louis Airport Commission in May OK'd the facility's amended agreement with its airlines, pushing it out to June 2027 from June 2025.
That dictates fees, which are largely unchanged, according to the airport's leader, but also authorizes another $650 million in spending on the single-terminal project, which has been billed as costing $3 billion. Lambert already has taken on debt for an initial $331 million in so-called single terminal enabling projects, paid back by airlines through rates and charges.
Separately, the St. Louis Airport Authority, operated by the city, recently issued a request for proposals to gauge developers’ ideas for a 315-acre property next to Lambert, being referred to as the West Carrollton Development Area, on the west side of Interstate 270 in Bridgeton. The onetime residential neighborhood was acquired by the airport using local and federal funds as part of a $2.6 billion airport expansion in the 1990s and early 2000s. Full redevelopment proposals are due Jan. 31.
- 2,056
Man... things are really ramping up. ^huge project 
Starting to get excited and I feel like there's still a handful of projects coming as rates continue to project downward.
Starting to get excited and I feel like there's still a handful of projects coming as rates continue to project downward. - 2,631
I would really like to see them enclose the T1 Metrolink stop. It would be worth it considering it would now be handling 100% of our airport traffic. It can be fairly harsh up there in bad weather
- 2,419
Aren't there some airport renderings that show it being enclosed?
Haven't seen anything about enclosing that stop as of now.RockChalkSTL wrote: ↑Oct 30, 2024Aren't there some airport renderings that show it being enclosed?
- 226
I’m sure I can find it somewhere in this thread but will there be a new adjacent parking garage (tear down of current T1 garage) and will there be a consolidated car rental facility?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
dbehrens011 wrote: ↑Oct 30, 2024I’m sure I can find it somewhere in this thread but will there be a new adjacent parking garage (tear down of current T1 garage) and will there be a consolidated car rental facility?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not in the current plans. But I personally wish they would find a way to do it.dbehrens011 wrote: ↑Oct 30, 2024will there be a consolidated car rental facility?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- 3,430
It really would be inexcusable to make it work in the redesign with Metrolink sitting there. There's no need to have all those shuttles. Greatly simplify the airport experience for visitors who need to rent a car, greatly improve experience for pickup/drop-off drivers, frees up space for more useful purposes around the area.gary kreie wrote: ↑Nov 02, 2024I’d be nice to have one close enough to the terminal to walk or tram to without a bus ride. Like Minneapolis. In the linear space of current terminal D?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Jshank and others in the know, has this been brought up at all the planning meetings? I know there were a few public input opportunities.
If they have it hasn’t been public. I think connecting one to T2 Metrolink makes a ton of sense.RuskiSTL wrote: ↑Nov 03, 2024It really would be inexcusable to make it work in the redesign with Metrolink sitting there. There's no need to have all those shuttles. Greatly simplify the airport experience for visitors who need to rent a car, greatly improve experience for pickup/drop-off drivers, frees up space for more useful purposes around the area.gary kreie wrote: ↑Nov 02, 2024I’d be nice to have one close enough to the terminal to walk or tram to without a bus ride. Like Minneapolis. In the linear space of current terminal D?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Jshank and others in the know, has this been brought up at all the planning meetings? I know there were a few public input opportunities.
I would beg to differ on this whole utilization of T2 metrolink makes a ton of sense as having lightrail moving people within the airport template on 15 to 30 minute headways and or utilizing a short train with more cost of having it manned continuously to operate & maintain makes no sense to me. Instead, the new arrangement for T1 roadways and new parking structure actually sets up a new T1 metrolink pass through station within the parking structure that will also facilitate future westward metrolink expansion.jshank83 wrote: ↑Nov 03, 2024If they have it hasn’t been public. I think connecting one to T2 Metrolink makes a ton of sense.RuskiSTL wrote: ↑Nov 03, 2024It really would be inexcusable to make it work in the redesign with Metrolink sitting there. There's no need to have all those shuttles. Greatly simplify the airport experience for visitors who need to rent a car, greatly improve experience for pickup/drop-off drivers, frees up space for more useful purposes around the area.gary kreie wrote: ↑Nov 02, 2024I’d be nice to have one close enough to the terminal to walk or tram to without a bus ride. Like Minneapolis. In the linear space of current terminal D?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Jshank and others in the know, has this been brought up at all the planning meetings? I know there were a few public input opportunities.
Automated people movers are intended, designed and move people efficiently on headways of a few a minutes within relatively short distances or within the confines of the airport. That is why they are used at every other airport known to man while Lightrail, or commuter rail or heavy rail is the mass transit vehicle getting people to the airport. Phase II is easy in my simple mind - Demo most of D and T2 & then incorporate a new automated people mover from T1 to a new Consolidated Rental Car/Parking facility that could probably incorporate a hotel. You can even keep intention of having T2 metrolink stop.
I’m fine with any plan that consolidates rentals cars and gets rid of shuttles. New track or finding a way to use existing track. I’m good with eitherdredger wrote: ↑Nov 03, 2024I would beg to differ on this whole utilization of T2 metrolink makes a ton of sense as having lightrail moving people within the airport template on 15 to 30 minute headways and or utilizing a short train with more cost of having it manned continuously to operate & maintain makes no sense to me. Instead, the new arrangement for T1 roadways and new parking structure actually sets up a new T1 metrolink pass through station within the parking structure that will also facilitate future westward metrolink expansion.jshank83 wrote: ↑Nov 03, 2024If they have it hasn’t been public. I think connecting one to T2 Metrolink makes a ton of sense.RuskiSTL wrote: ↑Nov 03, 2024It really would be inexcusable to make it work in the redesign with Metrolink sitting there. There's no need to have all those shuttles. Greatly simplify the airport experience for visitors who need to rent a car, greatly improve experience for pickup/drop-off drivers, frees up space for more useful purposes around the area.
Jshank and others in the know, has this been brought up at all the planning meetings? I know there were a few public input opportunities.
Automated people movers are intended, designed and move people efficiently on headways of a few a minutes within relatively short distances or within the confines of the airport. That is why they are used at every other airport known to man while Lightrail, or commuter rail or heavy rail is the mass transit vehicle getting people to the airport. Phase II is easy in my simple mind - Demo most of D and T2 & then incorporate a new automated people mover from T1 to a new Consolidated Rental Car/Parking facility that could probably incorporate a hotel. You can even keep intention of having T2 metrolink stop.
Amen. Currently, it's a mess. Go to any other modern airport and you can walk to a garage with rental cars. Not hard..jshank83 wrote: ↑Nov 04, 2024I’m fine with any plan that consolidates rentals cars and gets rid of shuttles. New track or finding a way to use existing track. I’m good with eitherdredger wrote: ↑Nov 03, 2024I would beg to differ on this whole utilization of T2 metrolink makes a ton of sense as having lightrail moving people within the airport template on 15 to 30 minute headways and or utilizing a short train with more cost of having it manned continuously to operate & maintain makes no sense to me. Instead, the new arrangement for T1 roadways and new parking structure actually sets up a new T1 metrolink pass through station within the parking structure that will also facilitate future westward metrolink expansion.jshank83 wrote: ↑Nov 03, 2024
If they have it hasn’t been public. I think connecting one to T2 Metrolink makes a ton of sense.
Automated people movers are intended, designed and move people efficiently on headways of a few a minutes within relatively short distances or within the confines of the airport. That is why they are used at every other airport known to man while Lightrail, or commuter rail or heavy rail is the mass transit vehicle getting people to the airport. Phase II is easy in my simple mind - Demo most of D and T2 & then incorporate a new automated people mover from T1 to a new Consolidated Rental Car/Parking facility that could probably incorporate a hotel. You can even keep intention of having T2 metrolink stop.
- 1,642
Remember 2015 when Trump would always talk about how American airports are garbage compared to Abu Dhabi or Singapore or something? All that would have included infrastructure. Time to bring that talking point up and fast! Literally hours!JaneJacobsGhost wrote: ↑Oct 23, 2024It is. A republican administration would be bad for the prospects of any infrastructure project relying on Federal Funds.
That he thought they were trash and then proceeded to do nothing about it?leeharveyawesome wrote: ↑Nov 05, 2024Remember 2015 when Trump would always talk about how American airports are garbage compared to Abu Dhabi or Singapore or something? All that would have included infrastructure. Time to bring that talking point up and fast! Literally hours!JaneJacobsGhost wrote: ↑Oct 23, 2024It is. A republican administration would be bad for the prospects of any infrastructure project relying on Federal Funds.
- 1,642
The 2016 infrastructure plan was super underreported and just barely got started. Go back and look at how pretty solid and optimistic it was about American airports and cities.
That's the problem with this do nothing DC swamp bureaucracy. 4 years later and STL can't even distribute COVID funds properly.
That's the problem with this do nothing DC swamp bureaucracy. 4 years later and STL can't even distribute COVID funds properly.
- 3,430
It's just a talking point if it can't get passed, the current administration was able to get infrastructure funding through, based on the evidence I'd agree that the GOP seems bad for the future of infrastructure projectsleeharveyawesome wrote: ↑Nov 05, 2024The 2016 infrastructure plan was super underreported and just barely got started. Go back and look at how pretty solid and optimistic it was about American airports and cities.
That's the problem with this do nothing DC swamp bureaucracy. 4 years later and STL can't even distribute COVID funds properly.
- 1,797
You’ve got to have something better than a failed bill in a Republican controlled Congress, right?leeharveyawesome wrote: ↑Nov 05, 2024The 2016 infrastructure plan was super underreported and just barely got started. Go back and look at how pretty solid and optimistic it was about American airports and cities.
That's the problem with this do nothing DC swamp bureaucracy. 4 years later and STL can't even distribute COVID funds properly.
- 1,642
What's new! Details!gary kreie wrote: ↑Nov 05, 2024Just flew through the new American terminal at La Guardia. Can we do that?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I feel like La Guardia was probably a pet project of Trump. He always bad-mouthed it because it's a "disgrace" and then just pork barreled a sh*t load of funds towards it when briefly POTUS. Good place to start though.
Here's the website for the new LGA.
https://www.anewlga.com/about-the-project/In 2015, a comprehensive plan to construct a whole new LaGuardia Airport was unveiled with the goal of creating a world-class, 21st century passenger experience featuring modern customer amenities, state-of-the-art architecture, more spacious gate areas and a unified terminal system. The $8 billion project, two-thirds of which is funded through private financing and existing passenger fees, broke ground in 2016.