DAL: Master Plan & Reconstruction

[CTroyMathis]

A breakthrough: Approval of Love Field plan is significant
03/07/2002

This is progress: Dallas Love Field has the green light to proceed with plans to become an efficient, recognized midsize airport with limited flights. Nearly a year after the Dallas City Council approved a new master plan for Love Field, the U.S. Transportation Department has blessed the arrangement.

The master plan's approval by the Transportation Department and the Federal Aviation Administration is very important. At long last, airlines and Love Field neighbors know that the maximum number of gates at the airport will be 32.

The decision to limit flights by limiting gate expansions will enable Love Field to concentrate on being a quality airport that focuses on regional service. In turn, Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport can proceed with expansion plans without fear that Love Field will become a serious competitor for long-haul flights.

Now that federal authorities have approved the plan, Dallas city officials should press ahead with one key proposal – demolition of most of the east concourse. American Airlines has said it will assume responsibility for the demolition. And Southwest Airlines has agreed to build a cargo operation in place of the concourse.

We hope both airlines are willing to begin the work quickly. The removal of the old concourse is an important step in limiting growth at Love Field.

The plan also calls for an improved roadway system around the airport. And it includes better monitoring equipment to test noise levels and environmental pollution.

The city currently is constructing parking facilities at Love Field that will address overcrowding. City officials should look for ways to meet environmental and traffic needs as well.

The battle over an expanded Love Field raged in the courts for years. The skirmish created unfortunate divisions between Dallas and Fort Worth. With the cities now out of court and a master plan approved in Washington, it is vital that Love Field's controlled growth become a point of cooperation rather than controversy.

This plan shows that the airport can be a responsible neighbor as well as an important Dallas asset. That is why it has drawn near unanimous support from area homeowners as well as aviation officials.

Let the work now proceed on creating the Love Field of the future.

[maconahey]

http://dallaslovefieldmasterplan.com/ :eek:

[BigD5349]

There's a link to the new Love Field master plan on the Observer's website this morning:

http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/unfairpark/2008/04/love_the_love_field_master_pla.php

I was at Love Field on Friday afternoon. It was packed. I "love" Love Field normally, but when the terminal is literally wall-to-wall people, it's pretty miserable -- dimly lit, cramped, low ceilings, people sitting on the floor everywhere, etc. Hobby and Bergstrom are better able to handle large spikes of passengers.

[dfwcre8tive]

Attached are the 3 options:

[hamiltonpl]

Option C! I'll go get a shovel and start.

[xen0blue]

What's the point in "modernizing" it if they are just going to end up reducing the number of gates by 12 anyway?

[interestedobserver]

What's the point in "modernizing" it if they are just going to end up reducing the number of gates by 12 anyway?When was the last time you flew out of the West Concourse on a busy weekday?

[RobertB]

Option C! I'll go get a shovel and start.
I haven't flown out of Love (or DFW, for that matter) in forever, but I'm afraid Option C -- wipe it all out and start over from scratch -- will have too much of the airport out of commission. Where are the passengers going to depart *from* while everything's being levelled? DFW?

Option B looks like a better plan to me, because you can keep using the West Concourse while the North Concourse is being demolished and rebuilt.

Option A is the required "do (almost) nothing" alternative.

The biggest advantage of Option C over Option B, after the construction is complete, is that you have quick transfers from any airline to another. But with SWA the dominant carrier, I think you end up just fine with one wing for them and their transfers, and another for the other carriers.

The one thing I would hope for is the removal of the faux-modern aluminum sheathing (if it's even still in place -- like I said, it's been years). I liked Love Field better when it looked like actual 1950s, not the 1950s idea of the 2000s.

[interestedobserver]

The biggest advantage of Option C over Option B, after the construction is complete, is that you have quick transfers from any airline to another. But with SWA the dominant carrier, I think you end up just fine with one wing for them and their transfers, and another for the other carriers.Option B does separate Southwest's gates (12 in West, 4 in North). The distance could make last-minute gate changes annoying, not to mention longer walks for people making connections.

[BigD5349]

City looks at new terminal options for Dallas Love Field
Dallas Business Journal - by Margaret Allen Staff Writer
Monday, April 28, 2008 - 4:03 PM CDT

The city of Dallas could build a new $571 million passenger terminal at city-owned Dallas Love Field. That's one option recommended in a modernization plan set to be revealed to Dallas City Council members Monday.

The plan, set to be presented by city staff as a briefing to the council's Transportation Committee, outlines three options for a new terminal, all of them running from $150 million to $400 million more than originally estimated.

The controversial 2006 reform of the 1979 federal Wright Amendment phased out the short-haul limit to flights from Love Field. It also called for the city and the airport's fortress carrier, Southwest Airlines Co., to invest a minimum of $150 million and a maximum of $200 million to modernize Love Field with a new passenger terminal. That cap can only be exceeded, however, if both agree.

All three options exceed the cap, and all three call for some demolition of existing terminal space and some construction of new space. The existing terminal area is 860,000 square feet and has 43 gates, but only half the space is utilized, and only 20 of the gates are active, according to the city's document.

The recommended options assume 5.86 million passenger boardings, with an average of 22,498 a day, or 2,250 an hour.

The 2006 reform calls for flight restrictions to be phased out by 2014, but a new terminal couldn't be completed until 2017 without working outside the city's normal project development process, according to the document.

Using an entity called a "Local Government Corporation," the city would assign development of the project to a third party, in this case, Southwest Airlines, to get it completed by 2014, according to the document.

mallen@bizjournals.com | 214-706-7119

[jsoto3]

It certainly would be tricky and not ideal, but it looks to me as though construction of Option C could be phased such that at least 10 gates are always open.

[eirin]

I wonder if they could re-orient the runways while they're at it, and get rid of those pesky height restrictions for downtown.

[aygriffith]

Option C's construction would actually be quite easy. This kind of construction was standard fare at many airports 15 to 20 years ago. You build the eastern half of the new terminal pictured in C while leaving most all of the gates on the west side of the West Concourse open. Once the east part of the new terminal is done you open it up and demolish the old west concourse. The design in C allows for better growth in the future and easier expansion of the terminal if needed. Option A shouldn't even need discussing, it isn't a comprehensive update. Option B might be more friendly to trying to get another airline to base service out of Love on a new east concourse of its own. But then again separate concourses is the reason we are where we are today, it turns into a hodgepodge of different airlines designs and each terminal's success and upkeep ebbs and flows with the success of the airline occupying the terminal. At its height Love had 61 gates some of which were in very ramshackle additions that wouldn't pass for frieght terminals today.

Option C is the best for the future growth of Southwest once this whole Wright Amendment is out of the way. I really think once the consolidation talks are done and there is more stability in 12 to 24 months that Love needs to really start trying to attract a viable carrier to launch a hub out of Love field. Midwest Airlines, Alaska, or Airtran. Midwest is one of the most enjoyable airlines I have flown on both from comfort and customer service. Its flights out of DFW always are full with business travelers that don't want to mess with AA. And Alaska airlines is really a powerplayer on the west coast and could do more business with a good marketing campaign.

And also... where is the Star Telegram article loaded with quotes from Mike Moncrief and DFW airport boardmembers in reaction to the city council talks on Love Field? Its usually a pretty quick reply from the FW crowd whenever there is news about something new for Love Field. They start on the rant about how Dallas never honored their side of the DFW airport bargain and continues to this day to hurt the fortunes of DFW airport and accessability to airlines for Fort Worth citizens. All this being said as they make serious money off of Alliance airport and always want to add passenger service out of there.

[interestedobserver]

I don't see how any new-entrant carrier can start a hub out of Love as long as Southwest, American and Continental hold all the gates. I know there's the gate-sharing provision, but I still don't see how anything more than token service is feasible.

[UptownDallas]

I don't see how any new-entrant carrier can start a hub out of Love as long as Southwest, American and Continental hold all the gates. I know there's the gate-sharing provision, but I still don't see how anything more than token service is feasible.

Correct.... as part of the agreement, Southwest, Continental and American locked up all the gates under long-term leases. All future service is to be directed towards DFW.

[UptownDallas]

And also... where is the Star Telegram article loaded with quotes from Mike Moncrief and DFW airport boardmembers in reaction to the city council talks on Love Field? Its usually a pretty quick reply from the FW crowd whenever there is news about something new for Love Field. They start on the rant about how Dallas never honored their side of the DFW airport bargain and continues to this day to hurt the fortunes of DFW airport and accessability to airlines for Fort Worth citizens. All this being said as they make serious money off of Alliance airport and always want to add passenger service out of there.

The final compromise closely resembles what DFW and Ft. Worth originally desired.

First of all, roughly a third of the terminal capacity is being demolished, never to be rebuilt.

Second, Southwest is giving up gates (granted, some aren't being used at present) and will be permanently locked in at 16 max unless AA or CO gives up gates--- highly unlikely... CO is hugely profitable at Love, and AA, although it loses bucket loads of money at Love, will continue to use its gates as "blockers" to prevent entry by other airlines.

Third, although the new Love Field terminal will be nice, it will drive operating costs at Love Field way, way up... this, in combination with all the new revenue sources at DFW (gas lease, taxes on off-airport parking operators, captive real estate development company, etc.) will serve to narrow or eliminate the cost savings airlines operating at Love Field presently enjoy. This, in turn, will hurt the competitiveness of Love Field over the long term.

[downtownguy25]

Heres a better idea, take out the entire airport and build homes or offices there. Instead of losing money on that land the city could make money. With out the airport it would also increase the property values of the homes in the area as well.

[Mballar]

I would like to see them consider plans for the future people mover to DART's Love Field Station in the master plan.

[Alex Rodriguez]

Option C will be the one they go with. It is the one the Director and his staff have expressed as the most desirable for 2 reasons.

1) You end up with all 20 gates in one concourse, you have one security checkpoint and one checked area.

2) It is the least disruptive to the existing concourses during construction. Most of the work will be done in the area of the North concourse which only holds some SWA office space and training facilities. Demolish North Concourse and build most of the new will little if any disruption.

[RobertB]

I wonder if they could re-orient the runways while they're at it, and get rid of those pesky height restrictions for downtown.
I'm sure they would, if the "height restrictions" were anything more than an urban legend. :D

[TexasPlus]

I wonder if they could re-orient the runways while they're at it, and get rid of those pesky height restrictions for downtown.Sure, no problem now that Al Gore has this pesky "Global Cooling/Warming" thingy under control we just need to call him up and request he arrange to change the direction of the prevailing winds so we can change the direction we point these runways. When you call Al, don't forget to tell him the direction would you like the new runways to face.

[Tnekster]

When was the last time you flew out of the West Concourse on a busy weekday?

I did a couple of times in the past month. I have never seen Love so busy, and had to park so far away.

[TexasPlus]

I would like to see them consider plans for the future people mover to DART's Love Field Station in the master plan.You will probably need to buy ...errr elect a whole new set of politicians to replace the ones currently under contract to AAmerican in order to accomplish this goal.

[BigD5349]

When was the last time any of you saw a queue of airplanes at Love Field? This scene was from last Friday. Alot of the backups were caused by a thin line of storms that moved across Texas. I've never seen the terminal so full of people. It's a glimpse of a post-Wright amendment world.

[interestedobserver]

Nice photo, BigD.


I did a couple of times in the past month. I have never seen Love so busy, and had to park so far away.Yeah, it can really be a full house during prime hours... parking lots and concourse. With passenger tallies only going up, it makes sense to update and expand the terminal space before the Wright perimeter bids adieu in 2014.

[sterling]

I would like to see them consider plans for the future people mover to DART's Love Field Station in the master plan.

Since when did air travel become about coddling people? Let those people get to their flights by pulling up their own bootstraps. Seriously, it's amazing the "future" people mover isn't part of THIS future. "Oh gosh, it just slipped our minds". More likely, no one wanted to fight over the 800 lb. gorilla in the room.

[UptownDallas]

When was the last time any of you saw a queue of airplanes at Love Field? This scene was from last Friday. Alot of the backups were caused by a thin line of storms that moved across Texas. I've never seen the terminal so full of people. It's a glimpse of a post-Wright amendment world.

Actually, due to the hard gate cap limitations imposed by the Wright Amendment revisions, air carrier traffic has only increased by around 10% at Love Field, and it's difficult for it to grow much beyond current levels.

What has increased is passenger volume. Load factors are up on existing flights as passengers are now able to make onward connections in other cities.

[Sky Time]

Option C is the best and, as stated before, allows gates to be left open during the construction. But they can also board and un board planes away from the terminals with those mobil stairs during all this.

If Love wants to keep up with the traffic increase that is happening and will be continuously growing, they need a terminal with everything in one concourse to allow for flight changes and other un tangibles. And the idea to get rid of LOVE all together is a bad idea and the quickest way to get Southwest Airlines to leave Dallas and set up there HQ somewhere else, who really wants that?.

[aygriffith]

Dallas should also use this as way to convince Southwest to move their office space to the CBD district after they demo the concourses with the offices and training facilities. Contenental is located in downtown Houston and even has a building named after them. There would seem to be plenty of space in the CBD that could be put together and marketed toward Southwest with the possibility of even changing the name of a building to the Southwest Airlines Center.

[interestedobserver]

Yes, but downtown Houston is much closer to where many Continental executives live (River Oaks neighborhood) versus Intercontinental. Also, there's a certain prestige factor associated with having a downtown skyscraper HQ amongst many other Fortune 500 companies.

Southwest execs don't strike me as the types who care about prestige, but the main reason why I think a move to the CBD is highly unlikely is I don't think they're going to want to give up the convenience of working right at the airport since a downtown move probably won't benefit the commutes of many HQ employees.

[RobertB]

Yes, but downtown Houston is much closer to where many Continental executives live (River Oaks neighborhood) versus Intercontinental. Also, there's a certain prestige factor associated with having a downtown skyscraper HQ amongst many other Fortune 500 companies.

Southwest execs don't strike me as the types who care about prestige, but the main reason why I think a move to the CBD is highly unlikely is I don't think they're going to want to give up the convenience of working right at the airport since a downtown move probably won't benefit the commutes of many HQ employees.
On the other hand, the SW HQ will soon be a short train ride away from downtown. (Love Field itself notsomuch, unfortunately.)

On the third hand :) Southwest already owns (or leases, or whatever) their corporate HQ. Are they going to pack up and move just... "because"? Like you said, the corporate culture doesn't really point in that direction.

[TexasPlus]

Dallas should also use this as way to convince Southwest to move their office space to the CBD district after they demo the concourses with the offices and training facilities.Your years too late for this suggestion. All offices except inflight training related were moved to the headquarters building a few years ago. About two years ago the major expansion of the headquarters building was completed. All inflight training then moved across the field into the new training facilities. The only space used at the terminal is directly related to operations.
A second huge hanger replaced and expanded on two smaller hangers opened about 6-8 months ago. With SWA owning most of the property on the NW side of the airport, I doubt you will see much off site movement.

[jsoto3]

http://cbs11tv.com/video/?id=29574@ktvt.dayport.com

[mjblazin]

I think it's a truism in the airline industry that corporate HQs belong at the airport. Was it Pan Am that moved to downtown and we know how that story ended.

[gshelton91]

http://cbs11tv.com/video/?id=29574@ktvt.dayport.com

wow this is big news --- So we are getting the best most expensive airport redevelopment option plus an underground people mover to the DART station --- this is awsome

[Mballar]

wow this is big news --- So we are getting the best most expensive airport redevelopment option plus an underground people mover to the DART station --- this is awsome
I don't think the story mentioned anything about an underground people mover. I know this was discussed during the Wright repeal negotiations, but I haven't heard anything about it recently.

[hamiltonpl]

I don't think the story mentioned anything about an underground people mover. I know this was discussed during the Wright repeal negotiations, but I haven't heard anything about it recently.
Watch it again -- at the very end.

[Mballar]

Watch it again -- at the very end.
Thanks. I caught it the second time. That's great news.

[PuddinHead]

wow this is big news --- So we are getting the best most expensive airport redevelopment option plus an underground people mover to the DART station --- this is awsome


What a waste of funds. It is ashame we could not take the debt the city will owe for the convention center hotel, the people mover and the cost of the legend terminal and use the funds to improve the quality of life in our city instead. Imagine using that billion or so of money to improve our streets, parks and water and sewage systems instead of funding pork projects for big business.

[hamiltonpl]

What a waste of funds. It is ashame we could not take the debt the city will owe for the convention center hotel, the people mover and the cost of the legend terminal and use the funds to improve the quality of life in our city instead. Imagine using that billion or so of money to improve our streets, parks and water and sewage systems instead of funding pork projects for big business.
None of it is being paid for by the city. Instead, the evil that is Southwest Airlines is footing the bill. :2ontome:

[ksig121]

What a waste of funds. It is ashame we could not take the debt the city will owe for the convention center hotel, the people mover and the cost of the legend terminal and use the funds to improve the quality of life in our city instead. Imagine using that billion or so of money to improve our streets, parks and water and sewage systems instead of funding pork projects for big business.

I think that this wil lbe a great complimentary investment to our shiny new convention center hotel. Conventioneers won't even have to rent a car. They will be able to hop on the people mover and catch a train right down to their hotel. :inclouds:

[PuddinHead]

None of it is being paid for by the city. Instead, the evil that is Southwest Airlines is footing the bill. :2ontome:


You are wrong. The airport construction is being paid for by both the City and Southwest. Soutwest will eventually pay the off the city debt incurred to build the airport with user fees. The people mover and the Legend terminal are all costs that the city is responsible for.

[TexasStar]

Fantastic news. This is really a huge deal for air travelers.
I love living in such a can-do city!

[dfwcre8tive]

Dallas City Council vows to fund Love Field modernization
12:00 AM CDT on Thursday, June 26, 2008
By RUDOLPH BUSH / The Dallas Morning News
rbush@dallasnews.com
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/DN-councilnotes_26met.ART.West.Edition1.4d6e617.html

The Dallas City Council resolved Wednesday to fund the modernization of Love Field, a massive project that will see the airport undergo major construction through 2014.

The plan includes an agreement among the cities of Dallas and Fort Worth, Southwest and American airlines and Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport.

The modernization project, which probably will cost hundreds of millions of dollars, is not expected to cost taxpayers anything. But fees will increase on tickets into and out of Love Field.

[tamtagon]

I hope the transition area between the DART train station and Love Field underground people mover includes baggage check in.

[downtownguy25]

I think that this wil lbe a great complimentary investment to our shiny new convention center hotel. Conventioneers won't even have to rent a car. They will be able to hop on the people mover and catch a train right down to their hotel. :inclouds:

If they dont rent a car thats millions of dollars in taxes the city will lose. Doesnt Dallas have one of the highest car and hotel taxes to pay for something... drawing a blank as to what it pays for.

[Alex Rodriguez]

Some like Puddin Head will cry over spilt milk, but the fact is the Wright Amendment was repealed by Congress and will be gone by 2014. End of Story.

So now, you have a choice. You have an asset with a known future, processing passengers that will be coming and going from all corners of the country. Non Stop. Do you:

1) Leave the asset alone and go with it as is?
2) Do you do some modest upgrades and hope it will be serviceable for the next 15 years?
3) Or do you go all out and redo the asset and bring it up to the standards of a modern national airport.

Obviously Dallas chose #3. It makes the most sense because Option #3 can be done with minimal disruptions. It will be built in the area occupied by the North Concourse, which is only used for office and training space. Build the new concourse while daily operations continue uninterrupted. The Baggage Claim is the only area inside the building that has been upgraded in the last 20 years, and it will not handle the increase in passengers. The only area ready to go for the future is the parking garage. This is a great plan, taking full advantage of the DART Rail line stop on Denton Drive in front of the SWA Headquarters building.

I am pleased to see Dallas thinking big, it will pay off for Dallas in the long term.

[ksig121]

If they dont rent a car thats millions of dollars in taxes the city will lose. Doesnt Dallas have one of the highest car and hotel taxes to pay for something... drawing a blank as to what it pays for.

There will still be plenty of revenue from the car rentals at DFW. Remember, Love is dropping down to ~21 gates, so DFW will still have most of the air traffic in the area. Besides, those folks will be using hotel rooms. The tax in question was levied on rental cars and hotels. Having larger conventions with more room nights will capture some of the lost revenue from Love Field car rentals.

[mjblazin]

The 5% car rental tax is for the American Airlines Center and only applies to rentals within city limits, i.e., not DFW.

[ksig121]

The 5% car rental tax is for the American Airlines Center and only applies to rentals within city limits, i.e., not DFW.

My mistake. Thanks for the correction.