SAN ANTONIO │ City and Metro Off-Topic Thread

[forward looking]

[QUOTE=Keep-SA-Lame;9835909]Absolutely love the agave concept.
A simple solution to Salado Creek. Run Salado Creek through big box culverts and then build the airport grounds over the top of these concrete drains. If.... there is enough fall over the area ,entry to exit, real or man-made. With permission from the State of course. Permission probably won't be granted but, there is a good chance that if there is absolutely no other way to enlarge the S.A. Airport- permission might very well be granted. Another riparian area could even be re-created somewhere else along the Creek to replace the old one.
This method also would prevent flooding, rather than the Creek running along the top of the ground. Flooding in San Antonio is an unforgettable sight, alright. A very swiftly running, roiling mass of water with logs, branches, plastic, wood, all bobbing up and down and very muddy, eventually running south towards San Antonio Bay near Corpus.

To re-route the Creek is another way if there is another route for it to take. A linear park could be made, perhaps along a smaller tributary?

Edit: Took a closer look at your first map, which raised some alarms. That whole wooded area to the north is Salado Creek. Bulldozing that would be an ecological disaster since it's some of the last crumbs of intact riparian habitat left on the north side. Apart from that, it's a major floodplain, so even if you do what we usually do and assign a value of $0 to the natural world, building in a flood plain is a bad idea, particularly in this part of the world (I've seen Salado Creek at full flood twice in my life, and it's a sight to behold believe me). Anything you might do to mitigate that risk would be costly.

[Daren]

How do you know this is a solution? Are you an engineer? What data are you looking at? What report has led you to this conclusion? Have you consulted with anyone?

[Keegan-B-SATX]

REVISED AIRPORT IDEA

Great to read all the input some of you had on my original idea, the input regarding Salado Creek was something I completely overlooked, so thank you.
Yes unfortunately cost and practicality is part of reality, But I just want to think outside the box a bit and think BIG.

With that said here is my next idea.

This next design does not relocate buildings like last time and only expands existing runways and tarmac.


The Terminals are Inspired by The Incheon International Airport with their sleek curves and unique layout. I obviously made a couple changes to not blatantly copy it.

The design calls for 43 Gates and only 3 terminals (A,B, & C)

To make this as practical as possible I could see the city build this in 3 phases with the following hypothetical years.

Phase 1. (2025-2028) Build Terminal C while current operations go on as normal at the airport.

Phase 2. (2030-2035) Once C is complete move all current terminal A operations to C.
Demolish Existing terminal A. Then construct New Terminal A.

Phase 3. (2040-2045) Once new Terminal A is finished move Existing B operations to A. Demolish B and build New B.


Here is a picture of Incheon International so you can get the basic idea.
Credit: https://www.itsliquid.com/incheon-international-airport.html

[forward looking]

I have laid out more than one solution here. I have been in the airport, dam, bridgework, power plant and more, business for a very,very, long time. Box culverts are a very common solution, actually for floodwaters usually. You are not an engineer or else you would have known this. You've never even heard of a box culvert? Ever even remember seeing a box culvert? Have you ever seen a 747 taxi over the top of a very large concrete tunnel? I have. Sure it would work if that is what is needed here.
A hefty crane would place these linear precast structures unless they were framed and formed on site, if too large. I am sure the state would not allow this method=solution any more citing environmental reasons. A concrete floor for a creek is probably not allowed, currently. Have I consulted with anyone? I am not involved with this project so why would, or even could I? This was merely an entry on a forum.
In airports up north where wing de-icing takes place there is a lot of glycol and water solution left over from the process. There are huge underground storage tanks placed underground before construction begins in order to accept this liquid run off. The solution is then pumped into trucks for disposal or moved into holding ponds on airport property and then moved away from the airport by truck for recycling. Ever heard of this either?
Probably not I would say. Yes, I was an engineer at one time. Retired now however. For a long time. Fourteen years.

Originally Posted by Daren

How do you know this is a solution? Are you an engineer? What data are you looking at? What report has led you to this conclusion? Have you consulted with anyone?

[Keep-SA-Lame]

[QUOTE=forward looking;9837345]

Originally Posted by Keep-SA-Lame

Absolutely love the agave concept.
A simple solution to Salado Creek. Run Salado Creek through big box culverts and then build the airport grounds over the top of these concrete drains. If.... there is enough fall over the area ,entry to exit, real or man-made. With permission from the State of course. Permission probably won't be granted but, there is a good chance that if there is absolutely no other way to enlarge the S.A. Airport- permission might very well be granted. Another riparian area could even be re-created somewhere else along the Creek to replace the old one.
This method also would prevent flooding, rather than the Creek running along the top of the ground. Flooding in San Antonio is an unforgettable sight, alright. A very swiftly running, roiling mass of water with logs, branches, plastic, wood, all bobbing up and down and very muddy, eventually running south towards San Antonio Bay near Corpus.

To re-route the Creek is another way if there is another route for it to take. A linear park could be made, perhaps along a smaller tributary?

It would need to be more along the scale of something like the San Pedro or San Antonio river tunnels, not a mere box culvert. That would probably run in the hundreds of millions of dollars at least. Seems simpler and cheaper to just relocate freight or buy non flood plain land. There's also a lot of private aviation facilities that could easily be moved to Stinson if we decide freight has to stay at SAT for some reason.

[Daren]

Originally Posted by forward looking

I have laid out more than one solution here. I have been in the airport, dam, bridgework, power plant and more, business for a very,very, long time. Box culverts are a very common solution, actually for floodwaters usually. You are not an engineer or else you would have known this. You've never even heard of a box culvert? Ever even remember seeing a box culvert? Have you ever seen a 747 taxi over the top of a very large concrete tunnel? I have. Sure it would work if that is what is needed here.
A hefty crane would place these linear precast structures unless they were framed and formed on site, if too large. I am sure the state would not allow this method=solution any more citing environmental reasons. A concrete floor for a creek is probably not allowed, currently. Have I consulted with anyone? I am not involved with this project so why would, or even could I? This was merely an entry on a forum.
In airports up north where wing de-icing takes place there is a lot of glycol and water solution left over from the process. There are huge underground storage tanks placed underground before construction begins in order to accept this liquid run off. The solution is then pumped into trucks for disposal or moved into holding ponds on airport property and then moved away from the airport by truck for recycling. Ever heard of this either?
Probably not I would say. Yes, I was an engineer at one time. Retired now however. For a long time. Fourteen years.

Again How do you know these are solutions? I am not saying you are wrong. Don't get mad. lol

[forward looking]

How do I know? Call it perspective.
As I explained earlier. As I also know of flood control dams north of the city. North of Loop 1604. And. One south of 1604 and Culebra Rd.
Could these fail? As surely I am typing here these will be breached. We might get caught like California is now. If. A low pressure storm less powerful than a Hurricane or even presently according to Climatologists a Hurricane, were to get caught by a colliding cold front over the City or in the nearby Hill Country.
Oh yes those living around UTSA , Bandera Rd. and 1604. One is earthen, the other shot rock.
What is shot rock? I know, I don't suffer fools very well. Then. What is it exactly that which you know?QUOTE=Daren;9838385]Again How do you know these are solutions? I am not saying you are wrong. Don't get mad. lol[/QUOTE]

[forward looking]

Hundreds of millions of Dollars ? I have, been out of the business for some time I admit but I can't see that the costs of tunnels would be so high. THAT expensive. Alright...
Who are you and how much do you know about man hours ,machines, materials, and bidding costs? Hell for that much money we may as well erect a dam like Olmos Dam, shore up Salado Creek and then make a recreation area just like Lions Park Lake on the Southside.
This would also be convenient for the emergency landings of distressed aircraft.

Besides from what I have learned about our airport expansion anyway, is that there is no real estate adjacent to the airport for an expansion.
This is why I entered what I have.
[QUOTE=Keep-SA-Lame;9838233]

Originally Posted by forward looking

It would need to be more along the scale of something like the San Pedro or San Antonio river tunnels, not a mere box culvert. That would probably run in the hundreds of millions of dollars at least. Seems simpler and cheaper to just relocate freight or buy non flood plain land. There's also a lot of private aviation facilities that could easily be moved to Stinson if we decide freight has to stay at SAT for some reason.

[Riverranchdrone]

Just do what Austin did to Waller Creek.

[JACKinBeantown]

I've often thought a runway bridge would be a possibility to extend the runway north toward/over Mud Creek and the Wurzbach Parkway.


Google Maps satellite view of the north end of the runway:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/San+An...b10a016bc!8m2!3d29.4251905!4d-98.4945922



Ye olde runway/taxiway bridge:

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/77/f8/be/77f8befcc42794ab061cc75dcfa4d775--engineering-singapore.jpg

[Spoiler]

If we're just fantasizing here, we should relocate the airport, maybe east of downtown, and turn the current airport into Downtown Northside.

[SproutingTowers]

Originally Posted by Spoiler

If we're just fantasizing here, we should relocate the airport, maybe east of downtown, and turn the current airport into Downtown Northside.

I studied the topography map of San Antonio and only found two sites where is flat enough for an airport. East near 1604 & I-10 but may interfere with Randolph AFB and south 410 & 290 next to Mission Espada. Both would require multiple land purchases and residential relocations.

[ILUVSAT]

Originally Posted by JACKinBeantown

I've often thought a runway bridge would be a possibility to extend the runway north toward/over Mud Creek and the Wurzbach Parkway.


Google Maps satellite view of the north end of the runway:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/San+An...b10a016bc!8m2!3d29.4251905!4d-98.4945922



Ye olde runway/taxiway bridge:

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/77/f8/be/77f8befcc42794ab061cc75dcfa4d775--engineering-singapore.jpg

The image depicts a taxiway. There is quite a large difference in land required (or size of tunnel) between a taxiway and a runway. I'm pretty sure the FAA would require a huge clearance for a runway over a road or highway (i.e., a tunnel several hundred feet wide). Is it possible? Yes.

[Keegan-B-SATX]

Originally Posted by SproutingTowers

I studied the topography map of San Antonio and only found two sites where is flat enough for an airport. East near 1604 & I-10 but may interfere with Randolph AFB and south 410 & 290 next to Mission Espada. Both would require multiple land purchases and residential relocations.

I didn't even consider the idea of relocation. That's a great idea worth looking into. I'll take a look at these two locations and see if I can draw up something just to for the heck of it👍🏻

[JACKinBeantown]

Originally Posted by ILUVSAT

The image depicts a taxiway. There is quite a large difference in land required (or size of tunnel) between a taxiway and a runway. I'm pretty sure the FAA would require a huge clearance for a runway over a road or highway (i.e., a tunnel several hundred feet wide). Is it possible? Yes.

Thanks. Yes, I see that the airplane is taxiing. (Sarcasm intended with a smile. ) It was a prettier picture than the ones I found with the plane taking off.

Anyway, as you said, it is possible. Wurzbach and those power lines could always be lowered and/or covered. I don't expect it to happen, but I just wanted to share my thought.

[Keep-SA-Lame]

I know we're just fantasizing, but I still don't see the point of moving the airport. It's a fairly huge plot of land in a central location. Much more important airports have made do with significantly more constrained sites. Even if SA suddenly became a significant hub and we needed three runways and multiple new terminals, I'd imagine it would significantly more economical to start acquiring the industrial parks around the airport for new land before you move it completely to a new greenfield site. For example, that whole area between 281 and the airport, where the Post Office is. That's not exactly high dollar real estate. And since it's commercial, you'd be side stepping the bad politics of demoing neighborhoods that have throttled expansion plans at places like Heathrow. And even if it was more expensive somehow, the good central location justifies keeping the airport where it is. Just seems like wanting something new just because it's new, to me. Would it be cool to do something like Mueller there with the land? Definitely. But if we're just talking about having the best airport possible, let's keep it where it is.

[Spoiler]

Originally Posted by Keep-SA-Lame

I know we're just fantasizing, but I still don't see the point of moving the airport. It's a fairly huge plot of land in a central location. Much more important airports have made do with significantly more constrained sites. Even if SA suddenly became a significant hub and we needed three runways and multiple new terminals, I'd imagine it would significantly more economical to start acquiring the industrial parks around the airport for new land before you move it completely to a new greenfield site. For example, that whole area between 281 and the airport, where the Post Office is. That's not exactly high dollar real estate. And since it's commercial, you'd be side stepping the bad politics of demoing neighborhoods that have throttled expansion plans at places like Heathrow. And even if it was more expensive somehow, the good central location justifies keeping the airport where it is. Just seems like wanting something new just because it's new, to me. Would it be cool to do something like Mueller there with the land? Definitely. But if we're just talking about having the best airport possible, let's keep it where it is.

Because redeveloping airports into urban centers is what I like to fantasize about. Don't yuck my yum.

[JACKinBeantown]

Originally Posted by Spoiler

Because redeveloping airports into urban centers is what I like to fantasize about. Don't yuck my yum.

Don't harsh my mellow.

[forward looking]

Soaking wet From all the Rain on your Parade? It is just like San Antonio to go on the cheap here; instead of going brand new and State of the Art.
It isn't always about -new for the sake of new- but an upgrade. The airport looks like "Small Potatoes Airport " to me whenever I deplane... When was the Airport built?
Look at what just happened the other week to the FAA.

The last time I flew all we passengers had to board three times, until we boarded an airplane capable of flight. The first airplane , we were all smilingly told , that, the airplane computer failed in the upload of the needed software for our flight. We were not given an excuse-that I can remember- for the flight cancellation we all boarded for the second time around. The third time was a charm for flight. We all optimistically entered the airplane. However when we finally landed, well, the car rental agency airport office I had made our reservations with was closed at two in the morning.
Perfect.

Originally Posted by Spoiler

Because redeveloping airports into urban centers is what I like to fantasize about. Don't yuck my yum.

[JACKinBeantown]

Alright... time to pull out the kangaroos.


https://i.makeagif.com/media/6-22-2014/ZvFLwC.gif