Salt Lake:Official development news thread

[urbanboy]

Originally Posted by delts145

I get impatient though when told that we have to abandon energy sources, which are still in abundance enough to give us several hundred years of additional supply. Yes, to strong research and implementation of renewable supply. But also yes, to strong research and implementation on recovering pollutants at the manufacturing source.

This is an ethical issue as well. We need to stop inefficient developments from destroying our environment, namely the air we breath! This is serious and should be dealt with as soon as possible! What unhealthy levels will we allow our air to get to before we decide to make some drastic changes? There are higher cases of children with asthma per capita in the Salt Lake Metro today than there were a decade ago. People are leaving the metro because of health concerns related to the pollutants in our air! I bet, and there is no way to really measure this, people are dying sooner because of our bad air quality. We must start now! Also, we should not base our economy, or infrastructure, on any non-renewable energy source, because once it's gone, we'd be screwed!

[UTPlanner]

Future Mayor, I will be in Vegas at the National Conference. I'm definitely looking forward to it. If any planners or students can go, you should, if only for the networking opportunities. The classes are great but to be able to get to know professionals around the country. Especially for students out there, the cost is considerably less.

[delts145]

I thought a lot of you would enjoy this read from Atlanta. There are real term parallels, and in many ways it gives us some insight and clues as to Metro Salt Lake becoming a major North American linchpin of international trade and air transportation. I can't wait to see what great opportunities that this is going to create for the Wasatch. Paris is just the beginning. It won't be long before we will be able to board a plane in Salt Lake, bound non-stop to many of the great capitals of the world. Subsequently, just think of the incredible opportunities that this will create for empire building (TOWERS, and more TOWERS.) Also, I think Skywest and it's St. George base are going to explode as this development is implemented.

Delta merger will keep Atlanta dominant in global business

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Published on: 04/15/08

How lucky can we be.

The announced merger of Delta Air Lines and Northwest is the best news Atlanta has had in a long time.

MARIA SAPORTA

• E-mail Saporta
Recent columns



Given the recent twists and turns of the volatile airline industry, the outcome easily could have left Atlanta without its hometown airline. And Atlanta without Delta's headquarters would have been too devastating a blow to imagine.

That scenario came dangerously close to becoming reality. First, Delta entered into bankruptcy, exposing the financial vulnerabilities of both the airline and the industry.

Then, US Airways saw an opening and launched an intense effort to acquire Delta — a move that would have moved the airline's headquarters out of Atlanta.

Amazingly, Delta was able to maneuver itself out of bankruptcy. Delta also was able to launch its own counter-campaign to keep the airline independent and based in Atlanta.

But the threats did not disappear.

Several months ago, another nightmare scenario arose. The possibility of United Airlines acquiring Delta. Again, that would have meant the end of the Atlanta-based airline. United would have gobbled up the Delta name and moved the headquarters to Chicago.

Again, that would have shot a bullet through Atlanta's economic heart.

By contrast, the Delta-Northwest merger is the fairy-tale ending to a story that easily could have been woven into a tragedy.

In short, Atlanta wins. Atlanta wins big.

The headquarters of the largest airline in the world will be based in Atlanta, the home of the busiest airport in the world.

That guarantees Atlanta's dominance on the international stage and catapults the city's status as an economic powerhouse.

More so than ever, Atlanta will be the crossroads for business and pleasure travelers seeking easy access all over the United States and to every major international city.

For Sam Williams, president of the Metro Atlanta Chamber of Commerce, the merger represents a new plateau, just as significant as the 1996 Summer Olympic Games.

"That's how big this is for me," Williams said. "It's huge because it will assure Atlanta the global connectivity for international trade and tourism. And it will continue the dominant position of Atlanta as a nationwide center for companies that have employees that have to commute nationally and internationally for their daily business."

The merger also means that the triumvirate of Atlanta, Delta and Hartsfield-Jackson remains solid. Ever since Delta moved its headquarters from Monroe, La., to Atlanta in 1941, the growth of the airline, the city and the airport have been intertwined.

It's hard to envision how the continued growth of the city and the airport could have occurred without a home-based Delta linking Atlanta to the entire world.

Atlanta did beat the odds of keeping Delta intact.

Consider that Delta has not had a homegrown CEO since Ron Allen left the airline in 1997.

Consider that Richard Anderson, Delta's current CEO, had been CEO of Northwest and a big player in the Minneapolis community, Northwest's headquarters.

Consider that few of the directors on Delta's board have deep ties to Atlanta.

None of that boded well for Delta's future in Atlanta. Several leaders in the business community were clearly worried that Delta wouldn't remain as a stand-alone, Atlanta-based airline.

But Phil Kent, CEO of Turner Broadcasting System, remembered a dinner that Anderson had with key Atlanta business executives. "Richard Anderson told us all he was going to keep the headquarters here, and he was true to his word," said Kent, who said he was "thrilled."

Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin also recognized Anderson. "We give special thanks to Richard Anderson for being tenacious and smart and of being supportive of Atlanta," she said. "Kudos to the team, both the Delta and the Northwest teams, that put this together."

The Delta-Northwest merger also is reassuring on another level. In the past several years, Atlanta has lost the headquarters of some of its top corporate citizens — BellSouth, Georgia-Pacific, John H. Harland Co., and Scientific-Atlanta, among others. And there's constant paranoia that Atlanta-based SunTrust could be acquired by an out-of-state bank.

Losing another corporate headquarters, especially one as vital to the city's economy as Delta, would have been a debilitating blow to our ego.

After all, Atlanta is a business town. It's a city that was built by business leaders seeking to make it a welcoming place for commerce and development. And most of Atlanta's civic endeavors are initiated by the business community, working with local governments to give the city and the region a competitive edge.

So Atlanta is lucky that Delta is not going away. In fact, Delta is going to be bigger than ever, which only bodes well for the future.

"It's really important," Franklin said of the Delta-Northwest merger. "It's one of the most important things that could happen to Atlanta."

[RFPCME]

"It's really important," Franklin said of the Delta-Northwest merger. "It's one of the most important things that could happen to Atlanta." Delts.

I was in Atlanta today on business, and the atmosphere in the business community is not quite as optimistic as the Atlanta Journal Constitution would have you believe. There are a number of people that think Delta will fold regardless of the merger.

Don't break out the champagne (or root beer) yet. The Delta/Northwest merger is going to be a tough row to hoe, even if it gets regulatory approval. Why?

The other American legacy carriers, specifically United and Continental, will probably merge sooner than later, creating an even larger airline. American will probably gobble up Alaskan Airlines, which is not a huge deal but does give American more routes.

All of these airlines are in better financial shape than Delta or Northwest. They are based in larger metropolitan areas and have stronger international routes, although Delta is improving fast.

Delta and Northwest have other problems as well. Their fleets don't match up well, with Delta being primarily a Boeing/McDonnell Douglas user and Northwest being an Airbus/McDonnell Douglas carrier. This means it will be next to impossible to achieve economies of scale on aircraft maintenance and repair.

Delta's western hub in Salt Lake is a weak link compared to Denver or Phoenix, United and US Air hubs. The infrastructure at SLC International is terrible and will take years and enormous investment to catch up to the other hubs. The State and other government entities are not likely to be as supportive of airport rehabilitation as the visionaries on this website. In fact, it would make a lot of sense to relocate the SLC hub to Vegas, which would pour billions into airport improvement to attract such a lucrative addition.

Minneapolis and Detroit are almost as bad, although Hartsfield-Jackson in Atlanta is a superb airport.

So there are a lot of issues to be solved before the economic boom from a super hub in SLC is realized.

[RFPCME]

Originally Posted by urbanboy

This is an ethical issue as well. We need to stop inefficient developments from destroying our environment, namely the air we breath! This is serious and should be dealt with as soon as possible! What unhealthy levels will we allow our air to get to before we decide to make some drastic changes? There are higher cases of children with asthma per capita in the Salt Lake Metro today than there were a decade ago. People are leaving the metro because of health concerns related to the pollutants in our air! I bet, and there is no way to really measure this, people are dying sooner because of our bad air quality. We must start now! Also, we should not base our economy, or infrastructure, on any non-renewable energy source, because once it's gone, we'd be screwed!

Urbanboy:

Per usual, much of what you write is spot on. There must be a shift away from fossil fuels that should have begun a long time ago. But I am a scientist by training and have lived and worked in technology most of my life. And the switch you are advocating is going to take time, even if we through money at it so fast that it would not be wisely spent.

Currently, the best and fastest way to achieve sustainable, clean energy is nuclear. Fusion power plants have no waste and actually create fuel at the same time. But there are risks, although I'm beginning to believe the risks are being mitigated fairly fast.

As far as cars go, the hybrids are practically zero level emissions now, with negligible CO2. And they will get better. My interests in hybrid cars has always been from an emission standpoint, not for mileage, although you get both. The same approach to trains and trucks is also possible, but much further out.

A very quick way to dramatically improve energy consumption and air quality would be to put very heavy highway use and fuel taxes on trucks, forcing much more railroad use which is much more efficient and cleaner. But I can hear the hew and cry from truckers now, which have almost untouchable status in American culture. Further, truckers are heavily subsidized by taxes if you consider the roads we provide for them(Have you been on I-80 east of Evanston in a while, especially in Nebraska? The trucks have decimated the road bed, and there is no money to re-establish it. The abuse of the privilege to use American roads is embarrassing.)

At some point, we are going to have to realize we have to make a choice between the convenience truck transportation offers and the horrific costs we all bear (economically and environmentally) from trucks.

I am all for a guy making a living driving a truck. And in reality, I don't see trucks going away any time soon. But if we want some quick, effective fixes to our environmental and energy needs, nuclear power and heavy taxation of trucks (at least to the point where they are paying their share like airlines and railroads) are options.

[Future Mayor]

Originally Posted by urbanboy

I may, I'm still deciding.

Originally Posted by UTPlanner

Future Mayor, I will be in Vegas at the National Conference. I'm definitely looking forward to it. If any planners or students can go, you should, if only for the networking opportunities. The classes are great but to be able to get to know professionals around the country. Especially for students out there, the cost is considerably less.

UTPlanner, yes it is a great opportunity to network, and there are some very interesting and educational classes. I was able to attend last year in Philly and will be attending this year in Vegas. And yes for students it is very inexpensive.

If time permits those of us on here could try to meet up for or a game of craps, or both.

VEGAS, BABY, VEGAS!

[SLC Projects]

I was just watching the news and they were talking about the Delta merge and they were saying that the Salt Lake Airport will see a major expansion within the next five years.

[skyguy414]

Originally Posted by SLC Projects

I was just watching the news and they were talking about the Delta merge and they were saying that the Salt Lake Airport will see a major expansion within the next five years.

Unfortunately, I have heard this many times before in the last 15 years and they have done little to nothing as far as building the new terminal and concourses. I will believe it when I see them building it.

[RFPCME]

Originally Posted by skyguy414

Unfortunately, I have heard this many times before in the last 15 years and they have done little to nothing as far as building the new terminal and concourses. I will believe it when I see them building it.

A very realistic position to take...I worry that Salt Lake has missed its window of opportunity at the airport.

[delts145]

Originally Posted by RFPCME

A very realistic position to take...I worry that Salt Lake has missed its window of opportunity at the airport.

A very realistic position to take, would be that the likelyhood of a merger is born out of shear necessity and will definately happen. There is no choice for the big carriers, but to merge or seriously risk going under. All of the fained posturing and threats by certain politicians will not change the inevitable.

Regarding the expansion of Salt Lake International, whether it CONTINUES in increments or in one big swoop, it will expand. Short of a total doomsday scenario, this is also inevitable.

Salt Lake is in a unique position to benefit from this merger. Salt Lake's international connections will expand tremendously. On the domestic scene, the excess fat of those redundant routes which Delta/Northwest currently occupy will be trimmed. There will be stopovers in Minneapolis or Salt Lake that will be eliminated. However, in the final scenario, Salt Lake should actually gain more domestic stopovers than it will lose. The hubs which should worry the most will be those such as Memphis. After the merger is approved there will eventually be an elimination of certain cities such as Memphis as a hub, and possibly a minor downsizing of Cincinnati. It is highly likely that Detroit and Minneapolis will be forced to duke it out. However, it would be ludicrous to say the same for Salt Lake and Denver. This is NOT a United/Delta merger!

Another big plus for Salt Lake, will be the Utah based and extremely loyal Skywest, which will continue to fill in the gaps of those domestic routes which are not as profitable for a larger carrier such as Delta/Northwest.

This isn't the first time that the question of Salt Lake's hub status has been put to the test. Each time, there has been a list of those who seem weirdly anxious for a SLC downfall. Each time, whether it was mergers, or hub competition with Cincinnati, Dallas, or Phoenix, etc., Salt Lake has not only survived, but thrived in spades. There are good reasons for that, and it isn't blind luck.

[SLC Projects]

Originally Posted by skyguy414

Unfortunately, I have heard this many times before in the last 15 years and they have done little to nothing as far as building the new terminal and concourses. I will believe it when I see them building it.

That is true. I remember working at the airport back when I was 19 in 1999 and I would hear all kinds of rumors about how the airport was going to get a major makeover. However all they did back then was repaint the red and brown walls.
Since then they added on here, they added on there, but nothing too big. I'm sure alot of it had to do with 9-11 and Delta filing for chapter 11. However now I do have high hopes that with this merge this will finally get these guys off their butts and get this project going.

[Future Mayor]

9-11 was the largest factor as to why the Airport hasn't been expanded yet. If I am not mistaken the orginal expansion plan called would have had us near completion at this time. As for the hub moving from Salt Lake City to either Vegas or Phoenix I don't expect either one of those to happen either. McCarren in Vegas has pretty much reach it's expansion capacity, there is no additional room for an additional runway and currently has Southwest as its major tenant. As for Phoenix, I wouldn't expect Delta to move a hub their either, with a US Airways hub. Most major airlines sign exclusive agreements with the cities were they have hubs and are not willing to allow another major carrier to be on equal footing with them. There are obviously airports with multiple carriers but those are the exception. As was the case with Delta leaving Dallas. While Dallas is a large airport, they also have American which is based there. Delta would continue to be second fiddle to American. Delwest(Delta/northwest) is and can continue to be the 800 lbs gorilla on the block by retaining SLC as it's hub. They would play second fiddle to US in Phx and SW in LV, despite the fact that they are larger, because both already have the operation agreements in place.

[DENrising]

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

9-11 was the largest factor as to why the Airport hasn't been expanded yet. If I am not mistaken the orginal expansion plan called would have had us near completion at this time. As for the hub moving from Salt Lake City to either Vegas or Phoenix I don't expect either one of those to happen either. McCarren in Vegas has pretty much reach it's expansion capacity, there is no additional room for an additional runway and currently has Southwest as its major tenant. As for Phoenix, I wouldn't expect Delta to move a hub their either, with a US Airways hub. Most major airlines sign exclusive agreements with the cities were they have hubs and are not willing to allow another major carrier to be on equal footing with them. There are obviously airports with multiple carriers but those are the exception. As was the case with Delta leaving Dallas. While Dallas is a large airport, they also have American which is based there. Delta would continue to be second fiddle to American. Delwest(Delta/northwest) is and can continue to be the 800 lbs gorilla on the block by retaining SLC as it's hub. They would play second fiddle to US in Phx and SW in LV, despite the fact that they are larger, because both already have the operation agreements in place.

I agree with this assessment. SLC will continue to be Delta's major Western hub. Now, like JFK, Delta has increased international capacity at LAX, but in now way could LAX (or PHX, DEN, LAS, etc.) become a replacement for the SLC hub. The fact remains, SLC is just too darned centrally located in the Western states and Skywest will continue to be a major player connecting Bozeman (and many other smaller communities) Montana and now The City of Lights. With this merger I too have a few wishes:

1. Non stop service SLC to Tokyo (trim a daily trip from Detroit and/or MSP)
2. Non stop service SLC to South America (Brazil, Argentina, Chile)
3. New midfield SLC Concourse, there is no need to totally get rid of the current configuration. The midfield would be similar to those at DIA and allow larger, Intercontinental jets (777's) to manevuer better than in the traditional current arrangement. Midfield would need new customs area, use the current customs area in West Terminal 2 for expanded Skywest gates.
4. Connect midfield concourse with underground transport system (I like the McCarran D Gates as an example), or again DIA.
5. Third parallel N-S runway, the longest one at SLC.
6. Entice either FedEx or UPS to open a western hub at SLC, their only hubs right now are back east. Ok, this one isn't related to the Delta merger, but it makes sense for these companies. Try sending a Fedex from say Seattle to Phoenix. How does it go, SEA>MEM>PHX??
7. Airport LTR and quickly. I HATE taking the UTA bus from Downtown to SLC.

Someone please diagram a midfield. What about 20 or so gates?

[wrendog]

The midfield concourse is already in the master plan. along with a parallel concourse where the current one stands. The PDF with renderings are post on this forum somewhere..

[jmonkey]

The pre-9/11 plan:

[DENrising]

Well that plan is quite ambitious, and it may be further in the future. In my post, I'd hope for at least one of these midfield concourses, the sooner, the better. I think for the traffic here, Concourses A, B, C and D work just fine as they are. My main point was to build at least one midfield, as quickly as possible to entice Delta to expand SLC as a TransPac, Latin America Gateway for the new airline.

[ski_steve]

Ill post it here too.

The College of Architecture + Planning

Invites you to view



Both Sides of the Trax:
Investigations in the Gateway District

An Exhibition of Student Projects
Friday, April 18, 2008

6pm-9pm

AIA Utah Offices
329 West Pierpont Avenue
Salt Lake City, Utah 84101

Join us during gallery stroll


The groups presenting are:

Transportation- Analysis on Airport line trax options
Civic Space and Culture- the North Temple viaduct
Greenfrastructures- Homeless Garden
Independent Local business- Historical district and local business
Historical Presentation- Historical district and local business

[skyguy414]

A new efficient terminal complex is desperately needed. The airport just needs to grow a pair and take a chance for once.

Here is the most recent (that I know of) layout from the 2006 master plan. Sorry it isn't a very good quality picture. If anyone has better design layouts or depictions, please post them.

From SLC Airport Master Plan

While it has been revised countless times, the 2006 version reflects a better design if you ask me because it potentially allows for better flexibility as for its use when compared with the older layout in the previous picture. The top left section (north concourse, west side) is planned for regional aircraft but a large section of it could be easily re-designed for use by larger mainline aircraft as well as the demand for regional aircraft fluctuates (which it has been doing lately). The layout with the "pods" attached to the concourse shown in the older layout from 2002 would not allow this flexibility. The one consolidated terminal is also good and follows the standard today in new airports and new terminals being built worldwide. And as demand increases, there is still room to expand the concourses and even add additional concourses to the north if necessary.

I think one of the main reasons the airport hasn't really done much so far except talk is because they want to see where the market is going before they invest over $1 billion for this new terminal complex. I can understand that, the industry is very volatile. They also wanted to ensure SLC's future as a hub would continue. But with the NWA/Delta merger, I think SLC's future is very secure as a hub. The airport needs to do this project soon to remain a key player in the airline industry.

As for the current terminals and concourses, they just need to go. As it is now, the airport has far surpassed capacity and there are no available gates for new airlines to move into or expand. The facilities are too small, overcrowded, and out-dated. There are so many things the airport needs that it doesn't have or doesn't have enough of. In addition, the current airport terminals are not very pleasing to the eye and a new modern and attractive terminal will say a lot about our city. For many people, our airport will instill the first and last impression of our city. And I think it should be a good one.

[RFPCME]

Originally Posted by skyguy414

A new efficient terminal complex is desperately needed. The airport just needs to grow a pair and take a chance for once.

Here is the most recent (that I know of) layout from the 2006 master plan. Sorry it isn't a very good quality picture. If anyone has better design layouts or depictions, please post them.

From SLC Airport Master Plan

While it has been revised countless times, the 2006 version reflects a better design if you ask me because it potentially allows for better flexibility as for its use when compared with the older layout in the previous picture. The top left section (north concourse, west side) is planned for regional aircraft but a large section of it could be easily re-designed for use by larger mainline aircraft as well as the demand for regional aircraft fluctuates (which it has been doing lately). The layout with the "pods" attached to the concourse shown in the older layout from 2002 would not allow this flexibility. The one consolidated terminal is also good and follows the standard today in new airports and new terminals being built worldwide. And as demand increases, there is still room to expand the concourses and even add additional concourses to the north if necessary.

I think one of the main reasons the airport hasn't really done much so far except talk is because they want to see where the market is going before they invest over $1 billion for this new terminal complex. I can understand that, the industry is very volatile. They also wanted to ensure SLC's future as a hub would continue. But with the NWA/Delta merger, I think SLC's future is very secure as a hub. The airport needs to do this project soon to remain a key player in the airline industry.

As for the current terminals and concourses, they just need to go. As it is now, the airport has far surpassed capacity and there are no available gates for new airlines to move into or expand. The facilities are too small, overcrowded, and out-dated. There are so many things the airport needs that it doesn't have or doesn't have enough of. In addition, the current airport terminals are not very pleasing to the eye and a new modern and attractive terminal will say a lot about our city. For many people, our airport will instill the first and last impression of our city. And I think it should be a good one.

Well said. Amen!

[RFPCME]

Originally Posted by SLCrising

Well that plan is quite ambitious, and it may be further in the future. In my post, I'd hope for at least one of these midfield concourses, the sooner, the better. I think for the traffic here, Concourses A, B, C and D work just fine as they are. My main point was to build at least one midfield, as quickly as possible to entice Delta to expand SLC as a TransPac, Latin America Gateway for the new airline.

SLCrising:

If I remember the SLC International plan correctly, the north terminal and connecting railtransit would be built first. Then the south terminal would come next, which is pretty much what Cincinnati did quite successfully.

My issue is that the airport authority will wait and wait until SLC misses some of the opportunities the merger mania will bring.