CBS4 is reporting that the City of Denver is threatening to pull the contract on the Great Hall redevelopment. Internal documents show the airport has accused the development team (primarily led by Ferrovial and Saunders construction) of disrupting the airport in the busiest time of the year and delays over concrete issues. Originally promised to be complete by 2021, the project is now delayed and may not be finished until 2023-2025.

https://denver.cbslocal.com/2019/07/26/ ... isconduct/

The airport and Great Hall partners have been engaged in mediation, in the hopes of resolving their differences. But the four letters indicate the relationship is anything but harmonious.

In one letter, DIA officials accuse Great Hall Partners of “Intentional Interference with Airport Activities,” a breach of contract.

DIA officials contend some temporary walls on level 5 surrounding domestic baggage claims have remained up far longer than necessary.

“Developer has refused to remove the McCain Walls surrounding the baggage carousels with no reasonable explanation for such refusal,” reads the letter.

How does a renovation of a large hall of a relatively new airport (by US standards) take 7 years.

I mean, #berlinbrandenburg much?

It’s an absolute disaster-zone trying to navigate the terminal, and I work there! I can’t imagine how stressful it is for a visitor.

I dropped off my mother last weekend. I parked in short term, we went to Level 6 to check in. We then had to go outside in the middle of a thunderstorm to navigate to the WN lobby. It’s a complete mess.

jetmatt777 wrote:

It’s an absolute disaster-zone trying to navigate the terminal, and I work there! I can’t imagine how stressful it is for a visitor.

I dropped off my mother last weekend. I parked in short term, we went to Level 6 to check in. We then had to go outside in the middle of a thunderstorm to navigate to the WN lobby. It’s a complete mess.

Really? If you check in on the app/online, you’d hardly notice any construction at all. I walk straight in from the train station to security every Monday. The only time I see the construction is coming up from the train.

It’s a claustrophobic mess at baggage claim with the temporary walls up. Plus, I ripped a wheel off my rollaboard on a loose automatic door threshold transition the last time I went through. Just my experience...security was fast, though.

jetmatt777 wrote:

It’s an absolute disaster-zone trying to navigate the terminal, and I work there! I can’t imagine how stressful it is for a visitor.

I dropped off my mother last weekend. I parked in short term, we went to Level 6 to check in. We then had to go outside in the middle of a thunderstorm to navigate to the WN lobby. It’s a complete mess.

It is by far one of the most disruptive terminal construction projects I have seen. Having to walk outside through a very narrow loading and unloading area in order to get from one airlines check in area to another is terrible, especially if you can't control where you get dropped off such as if you arrive by shuttle.

In addition the signage of how to get around all the temporary walls is terrible so you are left confused on how to get where you need to go.

The construction plus the mad house security is from 4-9 am makes it truly one of worst and most anxiety producing travel experiences I have had and that was with pre-check and with plenty of time to make my last three flights. I can't imagine what it would be like if you were cutting it even a little bit close.

I do about 50-60 flights through Denver every year... it has gone from my favorite airport in the US to one of the worst.

I would echo what the others here have said. In addition, the management recently banned Uber from dropping you off at departures, and they now can only drop you off at arrivals which makes little sense.

For pickup, it’s at the same tiny island as shuttles and coach cars and is terribly congested and inefficient, very reminiscent of LGA.

I really wonder who is managing this airport and why they are making such terrible choices in regards to passenger experience.

It's a mess.

And as someone who lives in Denver and DEN is my home airport, I still fail to see the need for the project. Not sure why anyone would want to stop to hang out in the Great Hall before or after a flight or while connecting at DEN.

jeepyjeep wrote:

It's a mess.

And as someone who lives in Denver and DEN is my home airport, I still fail to see the need for the project. Not sure why anyone would want to stop to hang out in the Great Hall before or after a flight or while connecting at DEN.

This. DEN was a nice airport already (albeit far away). Wildly unnecessary.

DEN is a mess right now! Horrible atmosphere and It took 3 rounds to get on a train from B. The lyft/Uber area moved to level 5 and was chaos as well. Not enough room at all.

Baggage claim was disorganized. It is sad how awful DIA is now and is going to be for many years of construction.

I would recommend SLC any day for connections over DIA now. The only nice thing is 4 cars on the train from DIA to downtown now. Hopefully the media keeps airport officials honest.

Damn. The complete redevelopment of LGA will take less time.

303dk wrote:

jetmatt777 wrote:

It’s an absolute disaster-zone trying to navigate the terminal, and I work there! I can’t imagine how stressful it is for a visitor.

I dropped off my mother last weekend. I parked in short term, we went to Level 6 to check in. We then had to go outside in the middle of a thunderstorm to navigate to the WN lobby. It’s a complete mess.

Really? If you check in on the app/online, you’d hardly notice any construction at all. I walk straight in from the train station to security every Monday. The only time I see the construction is coming up from the train.

I’ve too noticed that the pain can be minimalized of you don’t need to go to the ticket counters. Most of the time I do online check-in/mobile boarding pass, have my family drop me off in front of the AS counters (no matter which airline I’m flying), go down the escalators right there and through security. Security is terrible early in the morning, but by mid/late-afternoon (a lot of my flights leave in the 7-8pm window) isn’t too bad. The train really sucks, but 99% of the time I’m flying out of A so I’m not stuck on it for that long (I’d use the A Bridge in a heartbeat every time if they had a dedicated precheck line, and when arriving, even if arriving on B or C, I get off the train at A and walk the bridge the rest of the way).

The worst of of it all that I’ve seen is in the baggage claim area. Most of the time I don’t have checked bags, but still usually walk through it to get to passenger pickup. Absolute chaos.

This so called great hall is such a waste no one wanted it but the airport ceo and city. Now it looks like it will be in development hell for the foreseeable future.

It’s sad to think they could have focused on what the airport really needs. (More gates and a bigger international arrivals hall)

ual4life wrote:

This so called great hall is such a waste no one wanted it but the airport ceo and city. Now it looks like it will be in development hell for the foreseeable future.

It’s sad to think they could have focused on what the airport really needs. (More gates and a bigger international arrivals hall)

I used to fly in and out of DEN 2-3 times a week and cant remember a single time that I didnt check in, take bridge security and then sit in a lounge or restaurant in A concourse.

I understand having a central space with food and shopping like LHR T5 etc, but the damn thing needs to be entirely airside. Otherwise, no one is going to use it.

Antarius wrote:

How does a renovation of a large hall of a relatively new airport (by US standards) take 7 years.

I mean, #berlinbrandenburg much?

Renovations are always time consuming vs new builds, add in the complication of the building you are renovating also needing to remain fully operational throughout the renovation and it can add years onto the project before you even factor in unexpected issues or supplier/vendor delays...say for example a lorry transporting a escalator for the building crashes on route, it might take the vendor months to make a new one as they would have to fit it into the existing work list

This will the mean other works around that part has to be rescheduled etc, unless you’ve worked in the major projects renovation industry it’s hard to comprehend just how quickly plans can get flushed down the drain

Pi7472000 wrote:

DEN is a mess right now! Horrible atmosphere and It took 3 rounds to get on a train from B. The lyft/Uber area moved to level 5 and was chaos as well. Not enough room at all.

Baggage claim was disorganized. It is sad how awful DIA is now and is going to be for many years of construction.

I would recommend SLC any day for connections over DIA now. The only nice thing is 4 cars on the train from DIA to downtown now. Hopefully the media keeps airport officials honest.

All the problems you mention impact people traveling to and from Denver, so I don't think SLC does them any good. None of these issues would seem to impact a person making a connection. I guess maybe the train, if you are a UA passenger who has to switch concourses, but crowded trains seems to have little to do with the construction.

ual4life wrote:

It’s sad to think they could have focused on what the airport really needs. (More gates and a bigger international arrivals hall)

They are building out a lot of gates right now.

Antarius wrote:

I understand having a central space with food and shopping like LHR T5 etc, but the damn thing needs to be entirely airside. Otherwise, no one is going to use it.

The concept is most of the Great Hall would be post security, pre-train or pre-bridge to A.


I personally would like to see the train fixed. I think they can go to 4 car trains, but I haven't heard anything.

Antarius wrote:

How does a renovation of a large hall of a relatively new airport (by US standards) take 7 years.

I mean, #berlinbrandenburg much?

Government corruption I assume

ADent wrote:

I personally would like to see the train fixed. I think they can go to 4 car trains, but I haven't heard anything.

Any idea what is stopping them? Do they not have enough rail cars to make them all 4 car trains?

msp747 wrote:

ADent wrote:

I personally would like to see the train fixed. I think they can go to 4 car trains, but I haven't heard anything.

Any idea what is stopping them? Do they not have enough rail cars to make them all 4 car trains?

The train stations would have to be rebuilt to allow for longer platforms.

Could they have pulled the contract of the developer who envisioned the Westin Hotel? Can we get in the way back machine and make that happen?

I worked in DEN for a year at southwest. Internally the airport is stuck in the 90s and all concourses need a face lift. The bathrooms are cold and smelly even when empty. And the concourse train is extremely inefficient, many times have had to force myself to the front of the crowd so i wouldn't be late or i would squeeze in like a sardine. They either need to add more lines/cars or bore a walkway with moving sidewalks all the way to the concourses.

And working in baggae claim was nevwr pleasant. Low ceilings made I noisier and hotter and the carpet smelt terrible. The whole airport needs to switch to tile.

jetmatt777 wrote:

msp747 wrote:

ADent wrote:

I personally would like to see the train fixed. I think they can go to 4 car trains, but I haven't heard anything.

Any idea what is stopping them? Do they not have enough rail cars to make them all 4 car trains?

The train stations would have to be rebuilt to allow for longer platforms.

I guess I must be mistaken, but I thought they had doors that were not in use that could be activated.

msp747 wrote:

jetmatt777 wrote:

msp747 wrote:

Any idea what is stopping them? Do they not have enough rail cars to make them all 4 car trains?

The train stations would have to be rebuilt to allow for longer platforms.

I guess I must be mistaken, but I thought they had doors that were not in use that could be activated.

All 4 boarding positions are presently used. They currently use 4 cars per train.



This image shows 3 out of the 4 typical boarding positions

I knew this project was going to turn into a massive Clusterf^&k the first time I saw the announcement. I still think the entire Great Hall project to put most of the space post-security is incredibly ill-conceived and I hate that I might ultimately be proven right. The only real benefit would be to straighten out the security checkpoints and increase passenger throughput but I don't see how forcing everyone to schlep to the north end of Level 6 is going to make that process any more efficient than what currently exists.

Maybe it's just me but in some of the comments here it seems like there's confusion with the various trains at DIA. As far as my memory goes (back to 1995) the automated people mover between the concourses has always run with 4-car trains. If anyone remembers differently then by all means correct me but I recall that capacity was adjusted through frequency, not by adding/subtracting cars.

RTD's commuter rail service between DIA and Denver started running in Spring 2016 with 2-car trains. Those were expanded to 4-car trains in January of this year (same schedule and frequency).

niagara484

niagara484 wrote:

I knew this project was going to turn into a massive Clusterf^&k the first time I saw the announcement. I still think the entire Great Hall project to put most of the space post-security is incredibly ill-conceived and I hate that I might ultimately be proven right. The only real benefit would be to straighten out the security checkpoints and increase passenger throughput but I don't see how forcing everyone to schlep to the north end of Level 6 is going to make that process any more efficient than what currently exists.

Maybe it's just me but in some of the comments here it seems like there's confusion with the various trains at DIA. As far as my memory goes (back to 1995) the automated people mover between the concourses has always run with 4-car trains. If anyone remembers differently then by all means correct me but I recall that capacity was adjusted through frequency, not by adding/subtracting cars.

RTD's commuter rail service between DIA and Denver started running in Spring 2016 with 2-car trains. Those were expanded to 4-car trains in January of this year (same schedule and frequency).

niagara484

Unfortunately I agree with everything you say about this project. On top of this project the Pena widening project should start next year as well and of course will start with the portion near the airport which isn't as bad as the two lane stretch from Tower to I-70.

It has always been 4-car trains in the airport, going back to 1998 for me. The RTD trains are currently 4-car trains with almost all of the stations between the airport and Union Station unable to handle longer trains since the stations were only built for 4-car trains with the exception of DIA and Union Station.

Yep 4 cars. I have not been out in awhile.

I thought maybe there was room for one more car if they rebuilt the stations, but looking at photos it doesn't like it would be easy. And it wouldn't fit between escalators.

Who designed these trains if 5 concourses were in the master plan? I know we have more O&D than originally planned, but even with the B & C concourse build out will make things worse.

niagara484 wrote:

I knew this project was going to turn into a massive Clusterf^&k the first time I saw the announcement. I still think the entire Great Hall project to put most of the space post-security is incredibly ill-conceived and I hate that I might ultimately be proven right. The only real benefit would be to straighten out the security checkpoints and increase passenger throughput but I don't see how forcing everyone to schlep to the north end of Level 6 is going to make that process any more efficient than what currently exists.

Maybe it's just me but in some of the comments here it seems like there's confusion with the various trains at DIA. As far as my memory goes (back to 1995) the automated people mover between the concourses has always run with 4-car trains. If anyone remembers differently then by all means correct me but I recall that capacity was adjusted through frequency, not by adding/subtracting cars.

RTD's commuter rail service between DIA and Denver started running in Spring 2016 with 2-car trains. Those were expanded to 4-car trains in January of this year (same schedule and frequency).

niagara484

There are three main reasons that the Great Hall project was necessary, they are:
1. Most of the mechanical systems are more than twenty five years old at this point and need to be repaired or replaced, the airport looked at an option; that included upgrading every system in its current location and the cost was 250+ million, while making the terminal look nice, it would not do much to increase capacity. The terminal was built for 50 million pax a year, this year the airport will have close to 67 million.
2. From point 1, they needed to add capacity, the renovation will add 30 million more to the capacity, with the new layout there will be a similar number of ticket counters and more TSA lanes.
3. Many experts have said the current layout with security lines being surrounded by a mezzanine is incredibly insecure for active shooters situation, unfortunately we have to plan for situations like that now and that is the main reason for security to move to level 6.


The trains will begin receiving additional cars next year, this will allow them to increase the frequency and replace the original sets of cars the airport opened with. Every station is capable of handling 6 cars trains, with minor modifications, there is no timeline for increasing the length at the moment just the frequency.

For all the complaining, if you’re just connecting or if you take the A line and don’t check bags, the construction has no effect.

It was quicker to win World War 2 than it is to reconfigure an airport for a food court. How complicated is it?

jetmatt777 wrote:

msp747 wrote:

jetmatt777 wrote:

The train stations would have to be rebuilt to allow for longer platforms.

I guess I must be mistaken, but I thought they had doors that were not in use that could be activated.

All 4 boarding positions are presently used. They currently use 4 cars per train.



This image shows 3 out of the 4 typical boarding positions

What is that thing, Logan's Run meets Maya ruin terrarium? I like it, but it needs some reptiles or dinosaurs on it.

How'd they mess up the bathroom design so bad? It's not like bathrooms were new in 1995. Walking into people walking out because the portal is bad design.

This whole plan was unnecessary!!!
It made no sense from the start!!
The terminal layout was fine as it was.
Stupid stupid stupid.

DEN1895 wrote:

niagara484 wrote:

I knew this project was going to turn into a massive Clusterf^&k the first time I saw the announcement. I still think the entire Great Hall project to put most of the space post-security is incredibly ill-conceived and I hate that I might ultimately be proven right. The only real benefit would be to straighten out the security checkpoints and increase passenger throughput but I don't see how forcing everyone to schlep to the north end of Level 6 is going to make that process any more efficient than what currently exists.

Maybe it's just me but in some of the comments here it seems like there's confusion with the various trains at DIA. As far as my memory goes (back to 1995) the automated people mover between the concourses has always run with 4-car trains. If anyone remembers differently then by all means correct me but I recall that capacity was adjusted through frequency, not by adding/subtracting cars.

RTD's commuter rail service between DIA and Denver started running in Spring 2016 with 2-car trains. Those were expanded to 4-car trains in January of this year (same schedule and frequency).

niagara484

There are three main reasons that the Great Hall project was necessary, they are:
1. Most of the mechanical systems are more than twenty five years old at this point and need to be repaired or replaced, the airport looked at an option; that included upgrading every system in its current location and the cost was 250+ million, while making the terminal look nice, it would not do much to increase capacity. The terminal was built for 50 million pax a year, this year the airport will have close to 67 million.
2. From point 1, they needed to add capacity, the renovation will add 30 million more to the capacity, with the new layout there will be a similar number of ticket counters and more TSA lanes.
3. Many experts have said the current layout with security lines being surrounded by a mezzanine is incredibly insecure for active shooters situation, unfortunately we have to plan for situations like that now and that is the main reason for security to move to level 6.


The trains will begin receiving additional cars next year, this will allow them to increase the frequency and replace the original sets of cars the airport opened with. Every station is capable of handling 6 cars trains, with minor modifications, there is no timeline for increasing the length at the moment just the frequency.

How would they get 6 cars on that train? The Stations simply don't have the space unless they fill the first few, close the doors, move the train up and fill the next few cars.

Dare I say that Berlin (BER) might open before Denver (DEN) gets done with this "renovation". I was through there last week and it was a complete mess.

flybry wrote:

This whole plan was unnecessary!!!
It made no sense from the start!!
The terminal layout was fine as it was.
Stupid stupid stupid.

I do agree with moving security to level 6, but I agree the Great Hall project as a whole is overkill.

They should have focused on building more gates and renovating the existing portions of the concourses more so than the Great Hall. Also, the customs hall needs expanding too.

I fly into DEN every other week and everything about the experience is lacking and it doesn’t seem to be making any progress. Crazy the airport is so new, land/space is so plentiful, etc yet the nothing is remarkable.

DEN1895 wrote:

There are three main reasons that the Great Hall project was necessary, they are:
1. Most of the mechanical systems are more than twenty five years old at this point and need to be repaired or replaced, the airport looked at an option; that included upgrading every system in its current location and the cost was 250+ million, while making the terminal look nice, it would not do much to increase capacity. The terminal was built for 50 million pax a year, this year the airport will have close to 67 million.
2. From point 1, they needed to add capacity, the renovation will add 30 million more to the capacity, with the new layout there will be a similar number of ticket counters and more TSA lanes.
3. Many experts have said the current layout with security lines being surrounded by a mezzanine is incredibly insecure for active shooters situation, unfortunately we have to plan for situations like that now and that is the main reason for security to move to level 6.

.

The terminal sees no where near the 67M passenger number. Fewer than 40M are local passengers so that is the number actually using the terminal. Connecting passengers don't (and won't, no matter people's pipe dreams) go over to shop at the Mall. The only valid concern ever raised is point 3, but you'd be better off hiring more security than flushing Billions of dollars down the drain for no discernable gains as they are doing today.

They could easily add more TSA capacity in the current framework if they could solve the train issue. They could squeeze several more lines in, they could force A gate passengers to use the bridge checkpoint (don't stop the train outbound from the terminal at A) etc etc.

mkorpal333 wrote:

DEN1895 wrote:

niagara484 wrote:

I knew this project was going to turn into a massive Clusterf^&k the first time I saw the announcement. I still think the entire Great Hall project to put most of the space post-security is incredibly ill-conceived and I hate that I might ultimately be proven right. The only real benefit would be to straighten out the security checkpoints and increase passenger throughput but I don't see how forcing everyone to schlep to the north end of Level 6 is going to make that process any more efficient than what currently exists.

Maybe it's just me but in some of the comments here it seems like there's confusion with the various trains at DIA. As far as my memory goes (back to 1995) the automated people mover between the concourses has always run with 4-car trains. If anyone remembers differently then by all means correct me but I recall that capacity was adjusted through frequency, not by adding/subtracting cars.

RTD's commuter rail service between DIA and Denver started running in Spring 2016 with 2-car trains. Those were expanded to 4-car trains in January of this year (same schedule and frequency).

niagara484

There are three main reasons that the Great Hall project was necessary, they are:
1. Most of the mechanical systems are more than twenty five years old at this point and need to be repaired or replaced, the airport looked at an option; that included upgrading every system in its current location and the cost was 250+ million, while making the terminal look nice, it would not do much to increase capacity. The terminal was built for 50 million pax a year, this year the airport will have close to 67 million.
2. From point 1, they needed to add capacity, the renovation will add 30 million more to the capacity, with the new layout there will be a similar number of ticket counters and more TSA lanes.
3. Many experts have said the current layout with security lines being surrounded by a mezzanine is incredibly insecure for active shooters situation, unfortunately we have to plan for situations like that now and that is the main reason for security to move to level 6.


The trains will begin receiving additional cars next year, this will allow them to increase the frequency and replace the original sets of cars the airport opened with. Every station is capable of handling 6 cars trains, with minor modifications, there is no timeline for increasing the length at the moment just the frequency.

How would they get 6 cars on that train? The Stations simply don't have the space unless they fill the first few, close the doors, move the train up and fill the next few cars.

Unfortunately I was unable to find a good station picture online, but there is about one car length on either side of the current 4 car set up. It is most noticeable in the Main Terminal, after you come own from security there is a short distance that you walk to get to the trains, currently the space has giant billboards covering the space. While 5 cars would require very little modification to the stations, 6 cars would need more extensive renovations.

Rdh3e wrote:

DEN1895 wrote:

There are three main reasons that the Great Hall project was necessary, they are:
1. Most of the mechanical systems are more than twenty five years old at this point and need to be repaired or replaced, the airport looked at an option; that included upgrading every system in its current location and the cost was 250+ million, while making the terminal look nice, it would not do much to increase capacity. The terminal was built for 50 million pax a year, this year the airport will have close to 67 million.
2. From point 1, they needed to add capacity, the renovation will add 30 million more to the capacity, with the new layout there will be a similar number of ticket counters and more TSA lanes.
3. Many experts have said the current layout with security lines being surrounded by a mezzanine is incredibly insecure for active shooters situation, unfortunately we have to plan for situations like that now and that is the main reason for security to move to level 6.

.

The terminal sees no where near the 67M passenger number. Fewer than 40M are local passengers so that is the number actually using the terminal. Connecting passengers don't (and won't, no matter people's pipe dreams) go over to shop at the Mall. The only valid concern ever raised is point 3, but you'd be better off hiring more security than flushing Billions of dollars down the drain for no discernable gains as they are doing today.

They could easily add more TSA capacity in the current framework if they could solve the train issue. They could squeeze several more lines in, they could force A gate passengers to use the bridge checkpoint (don't stop the train outbound from the terminal at A) etc etc.

I agree the terminal does not see 67 million passengers a year, but the airport uses the general airport traffic statistics when they are talking about capacity. The current design of the airport was designed to support 50 million passengers a year with 40% O&D traffic with 60% connecting, this would have about 20 million passengers going through the terminal annually. Last year with 64 million passengers and a 64% O&D rate that puts the terminal at roughly 41 million passengers passing through the terminal. The only reason the terminal has lasted as long as it has in its current configuration is due to the rise of mobile ticketing and the drop in passengers checking bags due to bag fees.

The airport also recently added 1 more check lane to each checkpoint, but any additional lanes would require the removal of the shops currently along the North and South checkpoint. TSA also prefers the idea of having only two checkpoints, as the fewer checkpoints they have, the easier it is to staff, they already cannot staff the A bridge after 6 or 7 at night. I do not see how hiring more security would prevent an active shooter situation as someone can make it from the curb to the walkway above the security checkpoints in less than a minute, only a better designed security area can help prevent that.

While the final cost is unknown due to the delays with the concrete, the original cost was only $670 million with a $120 million in a contingency fund, the total of $1.8 billion included a 34 year management and maintenance contract.

Conspiracies aside, was DEN really needed? Was Stapleton too congested/outdated that they needed to build a huge new airport away from civilization?

Super80Fan wrote:

Conspiracies aside, was DEN really needed? Was Stapleton too congested/outdated that they needed to build a huge new airport away from civilization?

Yes. Stapleton had a poor runway design that was not suited for the weather patterns of the area (runways were too closely spaced). It also had no room to expand due to being hemmed in by neighborhood development and the Rocky Mountain Arsenal land (which contained a lot of toxic waste).

Plus, leaders rightfully foresaw the potential for DEN to be a an even bigger hub in the future than it already was, due to its favorable geography.

Could it have been built a bit smaller? Sure. But I think it was well worth the investment. It took a while to get things going, but now it’s a huge asset to the Colorado economy. And other than a few flaws (i.e, no pedestrian tunnel in addition to the trains), IMO, it is a beautiful, spacious, well laid out airport.

BNAMealer wrote:

Super80Fan wrote:

Conspiracies aside, was DEN really needed? Was Stapleton too congested/outdated that they needed to build a huge new airport away from civilization?

Yes. Stapleton had a poor runway design that was not suited for the weather patterns of the area (runways were too closely spaced). It also had no room to expand due to being hemmed in by neighborhood development and the Rocky Mountain Arsenal land (which contained a lot of toxic waste).

Plus, leaders rightfully foresaw the potential for DEN to be a an even bigger hub in the future than it already was, due to its favorable geography.

Could it have been built a bit smaller? Sure. But I think it was well worth the investment. It took a while to get things going, but now it’s a huge asset to the Colorado economy. And other than a few flaws (i.e, no pedestrian tunnel in addition to the trains), IMO, it is a beautiful, spacious, well laid out airport.

Thanks, have really no clue about how Stapleton was so any info is helpful.

Super80Fan wrote:

Conspiracies aside, was DEN really needed? Was Stapleton too congested/outdated that they needed to build a huge new airport away from civilization?

Stapleton definitely needed to go. It was close to town, but that was about the only thing it had going for it. The runways were too close together - when the weather was good, they could land staggered parallel streams (as is done at SFO nowadays) but if it was cloudy or inclement weather, they had to go down to a single stream, and things gummed up horribly. Add in Denver's notorious shifting winds and ATC was constantly having to flip arrivals and departures around.

The terminal was located pretty centrally... almost too centrally, as during hub banks there wasn't much room for planes to queue, especially if takeoffs were to the north or the west. The finger layout of the concourses wasn't conducive to much more expansion (Concourse E was the last big addition in 1987) and near the end, a lot of the building was starting to look really dumpy. United's concourses and Concourse E were shiny and new, but Concourses C and D were in really rough shape when I flew through Stapleton in 1993.

DIA got a lot of flak when it opened, but it was 300% the right thing to do. I can't imagine how Stapleton would have coped through the economic boom in the late 1990s.

jsnww81 wrote:

Super80Fan wrote:

Conspiracies aside, was DEN really needed? Was Stapleton too congested/outdated that they needed to build a huge new airport away from civilization?

Stapleton definitely needed to go. It was close to town, but that was about the only thing it had going for it. The runways were too close together - when the weather was good, they could land staggered parallel streams (as is done at SFO nowadays) but if it was cloudy or inclement weather, they had to go down to a single stream, and things gummed up horribly. Add in Denver's notorious shifting winds and ATC was constantly having to flip arrivals and departures around.

The terminal was located pretty centrally... almost too centrally, as during hub banks there wasn't much room for planes to queue, especially if takeoffs were to the north or the west. The finger layout of the concourses wasn't conducive to much more expansion (Concourse E was the last big addition in 1987) and near the end, a lot of the building was starting to look really dumpy. United's concourses and Concourse E were shiny and new, but Concourses C and D were in really rough shape when I flew through Stapleton in 1993.

DIA got a lot of flak when it opened, but it was 300% the right thing to do. I can't imagine how Stapleton would have coped through the economic boom in the late 1990s.

Thanks

I live now on what was Runway 35L. I would love to see an overlay map of Stapleton with the airport versus Stapleton of today. It would be so interesting to see what now resides on where the concourses were, etc. Of course only the Control Tower remains, now the Punch Bowl Social Club.

globalflyer wrote:

I live now on what was Runway 35L. I would love to see an overlay map of Stapleton with the airport versus Stapleton of today. It would be so interesting to see what now resides on where the concourses were, etc. Of course only the Control Tower remains, now the Punch Bowl Social Club.

Which is one of the coolest places in all of Denver.

There should be some images online because for a long time, several google earth zoom levels still showed the runways.

Yes Stapleton needed to go however DEN did not need a redo, especially the grand hall.

globalflyer wrote:

I live now on what was Runway 35L. I would love to see an overlay map of Stapleton with the airport versus Stapleton of today. It would be so interesting to see what now resides on where the concourses were, etc. Of course only the Control Tower remains, now the Punch Bowl Social Club.

I was curious as well and found this.

https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?i ... c22f4d30cb

Go to the content tab and just unclick the "USA Topo Map" to go between now and then. The "now" may be a few years old, but at the northern part of 35R you can still see some of the remains of the runway location.

If you head south of Stapleton you can also do the now/then on Lowry, or many other locations in Denver.

Here's a side by side view: https://www.dropbox.com/s/jxnlo21h2hn2m ... M.png?dl=0

ytib wrote:

globalflyer wrote:

I live now on what was Runway 35L. I would love to see an overlay map of Stapleton with the airport versus Stapleton of today. It would be so interesting to see what now resides on where the concourses were, etc. Of course only the Control Tower remains, now the Punch Bowl Social Club.

I was curious as well and found this.

https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?i ... c22f4d30cb

Go to the content tab and just unclick the "USA Topo Map" to go between now and then. The "now" may be a few years old, but at the northern part of 35R you can still see some of the remains of the runway location.

Courtesy of Google Earth.
https://imgur.com/a/J5HxQX6

DEN1895 wrote:

While the final cost is unknown due to the delays with the concrete, the original cost was only $670 million with a $120 million in a contingency fund, the total of $1.8 billion included a 34 year management and maintenance contract.

Concrete delays are a nationwide issue at this point from my understanding., or at least it is a Mountain West regional issue. There is a lack of truck drivers available for both the concrete pouring and the removal of old materials (think dump trucks).