redzeppelin From United States of America, joined Feb 2012, 858 posts, RR: 0 Posted (4 years 3 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 3427 times:
One of the local papers in SLC printed an article yesterday with some updates on the new terminal plans. There isn't much new here, but it does resolve a few of the questions that were debated in the previous thread, which has been archived so I wasn't able to just put this there. The article also includes a photo gallery with a bunch of recent pics of the terminal facilities and airfield operations.
GSPSPOT From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3383 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (4 years 3 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3179 times:
I've never flown thru or to SLC, but my partner has on business (and really liked it). Looks like a very nice facility as-is, but they always have to plan for the future... And seismic improvements are a definite plus!
jkudall From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 615 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (4 years 3 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2953 times:
Some key things to point out regarding the project:
- Enplanement costs to the airlines will only go up 3 cents per enplanement as a result of the redevelopment, going from $3.58 to 3.61, still one of the cheapest hubs to operate from and still DL's cheapest hub as far enplanement costs go.
- Both DL and WN (SLC's largest carriers) are on board with the redevelopment and increased costs. DL in particular has been heavily involved in the redevelopment process and will continue to be. The option of a complete rennovation to the current facilities was also considered, but all parties agreed a new facility was the way to go.
- Not only is SLC airport currently debt-free (hardly any major airport is debt free), they already have $250 million cash saved going towards the project.
- While the ultimate plan of phase 1 initially reduces the number of aircraft parking spots from 86 to 74, all gates will be able to accomodate a wide variety of aircraft and will have jetways as opposed to having separate gates and facilities for mainline and regional aircraft. Ultimately, this allows gates to be utilized more often rather than sit idle and allows more flights to operate even though the number of parking spots is less. Future phases, which aren't included in this 1.8 billion budget and include the north satellite concourse will add additional gates as needed. The terminal will be able to grow easily as demand warrants.
- The phasing, implementation, and size of the project can be changed as it is built.
- Seismic concerns were a primary reason as was the limited capacity of the current facilities in the need for a new terminal. Much of the current facilities are over 50 years old and the airport handles more than double the number of passengers it was originally designed for.
slcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 4426 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (4 years 3 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 2684 times:
It really seems like they spent alot of time and came up with a really good plan that everyone approves
When you consider they have no debt, $250 million + in the bank, and the hub airline Delta is supporting this construction it seems like its the right thing to do for everyone and the city. SLC is running no risk here in this plan and its pretty clear Delta wants a better facility and hub for connections and the future. They are not running some over the top plan with huge costs or need to lure new tenants to pay for it. In this economy its a good time to add some construction jobs and do these necessary improvements.
DEN cost $12.24 per passenger
SLC new cost $3.61 per passenger
I promise you Delta looking at United is so happy they stuck with SLC especially once they have more gates for mainline and larger RJs to work with.