PHILADELPHIA | Lowrise/General Developments Thread II

[Easiered]

Originally Posted by Urbanthusiat

Not quite, only 8 floors.

I counted more in the rendering.

[Urbanthusiat]

Originally Posted by Easiered

I counted more in the rendering.

Maybe an old rendering? I'm getting 8.

[WilliefromPhilly]

Originally Posted by PHLtoNYC

Some promising PHL updates on the horizon.

A few questions (for the aviation nerds)...
1. It has been said that replacing terminals at PHL is difficult due to land constraints, but LaGuardia (a more constrained airport) was able to do it successfully. Is there another reason why it may be difficult at PHL?

2. Is it possible for PHL to close/knockdown 1 or 2 dated terminals and build 1 new grand terminal in their place? I haven't flown out of PHL in years (just pick people up, which is easy), but for PHL regulars, what are your thoughts on the status/future of the airport?

PHL could need 20 new gates by 2040, and other takeaways from its $556 million budget proposal
https://www.inquirer.com/business/ph...-20240403.html

Work is underway at the airport to receive visitors in 2026 when Philadelphia will be host to FIFA World Cup games, the MLB All-Star Game, and the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence.

To prepare for visitors, improvements will be made including to passenger waiting areas, garages, roadways, and signage, according to the budget proposal. The proposal also noted restroom upgrades, which have been ongoing since 2012. Beyond 2026, the PHL is in the midst of updating the airport’s master plan which began in 2019 and has identified the need for adding around 20 gates by 2040.

“We’re constrained by land and water,” said Api Appulingam, the aviation department’s chief development officer. “When we build, we essentially have to build on top of what we currently have. We’re looking at how do we do that in a strategic manner without interrupting any of our current operations.”

Many terminals at PHL were built in the 1950s and don’t support the needs of passengers, with the exception of Terminal A-West which is built in a modern way, she said. Advance planning will be done in 2027 or 2028 and then move into the designing phase of the facilities.

The aviation department’s prepared testimony identified a gap in nonstop service to Central and South America from PHL and said it’s looking for a carrier to better serve these destinations. The airport also is looking to increase capacity to Asian destinations from Philadelphia.

PHL's expansion should be modeled after LGA's expansion. PHL has to build vertically rather than horizontally. There are plenty of airports that are constraint by land and water and still find ways to expand. PHL needs to be creative and think outside of the box

[Mr Saturn64]

Originally Posted by PHLtoNYC

2. Is it possible for PHL to close/knockdown 1 or 2 dated terminals and build 1 new grand terminal in their place? I haven't flown out of PHL in years (just pick people up, which is easy), but for PHL regulars, what are your thoughts on the status/future of the airport?

I don't think so. Each terminal serves a different airline/type of airline, and I'm not sure they can really share the space. I think a complete renovation/modernization is a better and more realistic idea than that, as much as I would like that.

I think PHL is definitely on the upswing, but I still have issues with it, mostly in the next part of my comment.

Originally Posted by PHLtoNYC

The aviation department’s prepared testimony identified a gap in nonstop service to Central and South America from PHL and said it’s looking for a carrier to better serve these destinations. The airport also is looking to increase capacity to Asian destinations from Philadelphia.

One thing that has always pissed me off is how few airlines actually fly out of Philly. PHL has 17. (counting regional airlines like United Express and Delta Connection). That sounds good, but compared to others.... Boston has 50, Newark has 35, BWI has 21, Dulles has 49. Even way smaller cities have more; Raleigh has 21.

Of the 15 cities with the biggest GDPs in the country, only two don't have a flight to East Asia. One is Philadelphia, the other is Miami.

It seems clear that there is a desire to expand Philadelphia's international presence, and I wish them the best of luck.

[ScreamShatter]

PHL has done a decent job with renovations. It’s actually nicer than many airports. The problem is a) not enough space at gates for people, b) very expensive to fly out of it compared to NYC and DC, c) lack of international flights, and d) lack of non-American carriers.

They definitely need to figure out a way to expand.

[UrbanRevival]

Originally Posted by ScreamShatter

PHL has done a decent job with renovations. It’s actually nicer than many airports. The problem is a) not enough space at gates for people, b) very expensive to fly out of it compared to NYC and DC, c) lack of international flights, and d) lack of non-American carriers.

They definitely need to figure out a way to expand.

This is my view, too. The facilities are generally functional; not awful but definitely could stand to feel more modernized with roomier seating areas and taller ceilings allowing for more natural light.

The far more critical issue is service: international destinations have long punched way below their weight at PHL for a Top 10 metro. It's the biggest downfall to being sandwiched between DC/NYC; many carriers probably feel like they have enough economies of scale with two other markets within a 120 mile radius serving copious international routes.

But this is a topic that should be continued to be lobbied by every local/state economic development-related professional in Philly and Harrisburg. International connections are absolutely crucial for Philly's continued momentum and vitality and increasing its global profile.

American is one major carrier that clearly sees the growth potential at PHL as a transatlantic hub, especially as East Coast airspace is finite; it's a matter of convincing other carriers to do the same.

[cardeza]

Originally Posted by ScreamShatter

PHL has done a decent job with renovations. It’s actually nicer than many airports. The problem is a) not enough space at gates for people, b) very expensive to fly out of it compared to NYC and DC, c) lack of international flights, and d) lack of non-American carriers.

They definitely need to figure out a way to expand.

Not sure where you are flying, but it is not always more expensive. I tracked flights for months to Punta Cana and Newark and JFK were more expensive. Ive compared other times as well and even if they were cheaper it was hardly enough to justify the travel cost and time. PHL is very competitive to major destinations in the US and Carribean- maybe less so to Europe due to lack of flight competition.

[cardeza]

Originally Posted by Mr Saturn64

I don't think so. Each terminal serves a different airline/type of airline, and I'm not sure they can really share the space. I think a complete renovation/modernization is a better and more realistic idea than that, as much as I would like that.

I think PHL is definitely on the upswing, but I still have issues with it, mostly in the next part of my comment.



One thing that has always pissed me off is how few airlines actually fly out of Philly. PHL has 17. (counting regional airlines like United Express and Delta Connection). That sounds good, but compared to others.... Boston has 50, Newark has 35, BWI has 21, Dulles has 49. Even way smaller cities have more; Raleigh has 21.

Of the 15 cities with the biggest GDPs in the country, only two don't have a flight to East Asia. One is Philadelphia, the other is Miami.

It seems clear that there is a desire to expand Philadelphia's international presence, and I wish them the best of luck.

I cant dispute your claim about the number of airlines flying out of BWI but it is dominated by SW and the destination options from BWI are definitely not superior- especially if you don't want to fly SW. I have checked BWI for flights as an alternative numerous times and either there is no direct flight, the prices are about the same or I have to use SW. LAst time I flew from BWI was 2014. I was just considering BWI for two flights this year- one to CA and other to the DR.

[jaysb]

Originally Posted by cardeza

Not sure where you are flying, but it is not always more expensive. I tracked flights for months to Punta Cana and Newark and JFK were more expensive. Ive compared other times as well and even if they were cheaper it was hardly enough to justify the travel cost and time. PHL is very competitive to major destinations in the US and Carribean- maybe less so to Europe due to lack of flight competition.

My fam of 4 usually trips to Europe twice a year, I cannot recall the last time we flew out of Philly. EWR/JFK are usually half the price. PHL->Europe serves a lot of connecting flights while EWR/JFK serve their home market.
Competition is real, I lived in MIA for two years, there were like 80 airlines serving that airport (pre-pandemic- I didn't think there were that many airlines period haha); flights to LATAM were so cheap, even on American.
Newark is a great 2nd airport at a little over an hour by car. JFK sucks. (not trying to sound braggadocios, just my anecdotal experience with PHL).
It's cool American is serving some smaller markets from here, Copenhagen, Dubrovnik, etc. And yes, the Caribe isn't too bad from PHL.

[PhillyPDX]

Originally Posted by UrbanRevival

This is my view, too. The facilities are generally functional; not awful but definitely could stand to feel more modernized with roomier seating areas and taller ceilings allowing for more natural light.

The far more critical issue is service: international destinations have long punched way below their weight at PHL for a Top 10 metro. It's the biggest downfall to being sandwiched between DC/NYC; many carriers probably feel like they have enough economies of scale with two other markets within a 120 mile radius serving copious international routes.

But this is a topic that should be continued to be lobbied by every local/state economic development-related professional in Philly and Harrisburg. International connections are absolutely crucial for Philly's continued momentum and vitality and increasing its global profile.

American is one major carrier that clearly sees the growth potential at PHL as a transatlantic hub, especially as East Coast airspace is finite; it's a matter of convincing other carriers to do the same.

It bothers me to no end that PDX and PHL have pretty much stagnated in growth, while other airports boom (I want direct flights!). in the 5 years pre-pandemic PHL was the slowest growing top 30 size airport (discounting highly constrained Midway), growing traffic by a mere 10%. Meanwhile EWR added 30%. You need more traffic to get more routes, and more routes bring more traffic. In 2014 PHL and BOS carried almost exactly the same number of passengers, in the ensuing 5 years, BOS increased by 33%. There are 2 daily flights PDX to BOS but none to PHL. Damn.

[PhilliesPhan]

Originally Posted by ScreamShatter

PHL has done a decent job with renovations. It’s actually nicer than many airports. The problem is a) not enough space at gates for people, b) very expensive to fly out of it compared to NYC and DC, c) lack of international flights, and d) lack of non-American carriers.

They definitely need to figure out a way to expand.

These are exactly my problems with PHL, along with baggage claim and the arrivals terminals. It would be nice if it didn't take 30-45 minutes to claim my checked bag. Also, aside from the fact that the arrivals terminals look shabby, the food options outside of the secured areas are nonexistent.

With that said, PHL is much better than people give it credit for. I love the fact that I can easily walk between terminals, the food options are actually very good for an American airport, and the fact that it's connected to Center City by rail gives it a HUGE advantage over most American airports. If PHL could successfully expand, modernize, and add Asian (Tokyo or Shanghai/Beijing?), South American (Buenos Aires is my personal wish), and African (resume the Casablanca route!) destinations, it could be even better.

[Radio5]

Originally Posted by cardeza

Not sure where you are flying, but it is not always more expensive. I tracked flights for months to Punta Cana and Newark and JFK were more expensive. Ive compared other times as well and even if they were cheaper it was hardly enough to justify the travel cost and time. PHL is very competitive to major destinations in the US and Carribean- maybe less so to Europe due to lack of flight competition.

Going anywhere west is more expensive, I've found... Austin, LA. It was about $100 more to go from Philly than EWR or JFK.

[cardeza]

Originally Posted by jaysb

My fam of 4 usually trips to Europe twice a year, I cannot recall the last time we flew out of Philly. EWR/JFK are usually half the price. PHL->Europe serves a lot of connecting flights while EWR/JFK serve their home market.
Competition is real, I lived in MIA for two years, there were like 80 airlines serving that airport (pre-pandemic- I didn't think there were that many airlines period haha); flights to LATAM were so cheap, even on American.
Newark is a great 2nd airport at a little over an hour by car. JFK sucks. (not trying to sound braggadocios, just my anecdotal experience with PHL).
It's cool American is serving some smaller markets from here, Copenhagen, Dubrovnik, etc. And yes, the Caribe isn't too bad from PHL.

American is adding 3 or 4 more european destinations this year. If Europe is the primary place you fly, I'm sure Newark is better- but thats not where most people are flying from PHL and for domestic flights I haven't seen much evidence going to Newark makes sense. Hour drive? Maybe in the middle of the night. Tolls are probably $30-$40k plus fuel, time and traffic. To me savings need to be in the hundreds of dollars to justify going north and my understanding is EWR is hardly a nice airport. My brother lives about 30 minutes north of BWI and still flys out of Philly half the time because of limited options from BWI and the distance and hassle of going to Dulles isn't worth it.

[cardeza]

Originally Posted by Radio5

Going anywhere west is more expensive, I've found... Austin, LA. It was about $100 more to go from Philly than EWR or JFK.

$100 isn't much considering it will cost me $50+ to get to Newark and much more to get to JFK plus 1.5-2.5 hrs of travel time. For a family of 4 or 5 then it may make some sense, but for one ticket or even 2 thats not enough to justify the hassle and time IMHO.

[Mr Saturn64]

Originally Posted by cardeza

Not sure where you are flying, but it is not always more expensive. I tracked flights for months to Punta Cana and Newark and JFK were more expensive. Ive compared other times as well and even if they were cheaper it was hardly enough to justify the travel cost and time. PHL is very competitive to major destinations in the US and Carribean- maybe less so to Europe due to lack of flight competition.

Your last point is entirely correct. Philly-Punta Cana is served by American, Frontier and Spirit. London and Dublin are the only European cities served by multiple airlines out of PHL. I've actually been looking at going to Dublin, and the fares out of Newark are way cheaper than they are in Philly. If I go on this trip, I'm flying out of Newark. I have a friend who is Greek, and he goes to Greece all the time, with a layover in London. He hasn't been to PHL in almost a decade because the fares in Newark are so much better.

Originally Posted by cardeza

I cant dispute your claim about the number of airlines flying out of BWI but it is dominated by SW and the destination options from BWI are definitely not superior- especially if you don't want to fly SW. I have checked BWI for flights as an alternative numerous times and either there is no direct flight, the prices are about the same or I have to use SW. LAst time I flew from BWI was 2014. I was just considering BWI for two flights this year- one to CA and other to the DR.

That's fair enough. BWI and PHL have similar passenger numbers, but PHL does do much better on international flights.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was thinking about airlines that could feasibly come to PHL. These were ones I came up with:

- Copa (They're looking for a Central American carrier, every other airport in the NE has this)
- Aeromexico/Avianca/Volaris (Latin American carriers, they want one or more)
- Iberia (OneWorld partner, looking at closer-range NA destinations with the Airbus A321 XLR)
- Icelandair (Doing great business in North America, could come back)
- Emirates/Turkish (Both are looking to be the biggest airline in the world, can connect people to India where we get a lot of travelers)
- Japan Airlines (Hey, a man can dream, right?)

Any others?

[cardeza]

Originally Posted by PhilliesPhan

These are exactly my problems with PHL, along with baggage claim and the arrivals terminals. It would be nice if it didn't take 30-45 minutes to claim my checked bag. Also, aside from the fact that the arrivals terminals look shabby, the food options outside of the secured areas are nonexistent.

With that said, PHL is much better than people give it credit for. I love the fact that I can easily walk between terminals, the food options are actually very good for an American airport, and the fact that it's connected to Center City by rail gives it a HUGE advantage over most American airports. If PHL could successfully expand, modernize, and add Asian (Tokyo or Shanghai/Beijing?), South American (Buenos Aires is my personal wish), and African (resume the Casablanca route!) destinations, it could be even better.

Baggage at PHL travels a substantial distance and some has to be placed on vehicles and driven underneath the main terminal to be moved to the conveyor belts, but I have not had consistent long waits for baggage- sometimes it takes a while, but other times its been on par with other airports. At larger airports I think you can consistently expect inconsistent waits. I would say we waited about 10-15 minutes for baggage to show from the time we arrived at baggage claim the last time I checked bags back in December.

[Arch+Eng]

Originally Posted by WilliefromPhilly

PHL's expansion should be modeled after LGA's expansion. PHL has to build vertically rather than horizontally. There are plenty of airports that are constraint by land and water and still find ways to expand. PHL needs to be creative and think outside of the box

Am I missing something? PHL doesnt seem constrained by land. Why couldnt they do something like this?

[Redddog]

Originally Posted by jaysb

My fam of 4 usually trips to Europe twice a year, I cannot recall the last time we flew out of Philly. EWR/JFK are usually half the price. PHL->Europe serves a lot of connecting flights while EWR/JFK serve their home market.
Competition is real, I lived in MIA for two years, there were like 80 airlines serving that airport (pre-pandemic- I didn't think there were that many airlines period haha); flights to LATAM were so cheap, even on American.
Newark is a great 2nd airport at a little over an hour by car. JFK sucks. (not trying to sound braggadocios, just my anecdotal experience with PHL).
It's cool American is serving some smaller markets from here, Copenhagen, Dubrovnik, etc. And yes, the Caribe isn't too bad from PHL.

truth. We are looking at flights to Poland (wife and daughter going to Taylor swift in Warsaw) and PHL is way more expensive than NY area.

In general, with the exception of Caribbean, PHL is ALWAYS more expensive. Before we moved here, we had to come to CHOP every 3 months. Sometimes I would meet my wife and son and would fly. Regularly, I would have to book a flight to Newark and "miss" my connection in PHL (for about a year, the flight from Rochester would go through PHL to get to Newark). A straight flight to PHL was at least double and usually more than double.

Why? What makes it so much more expensive?

[cardeza]

Originally Posted by Arch+Eng

Am I missing something? PHL doesnt seem constrained by land. Why couldnt they do something like this?

Parking garages and I-95 are fairly significant barriers to expansion to the west. PHL still hasnt matched 2019 passenger numbers so its not quite at the point where expansion is critical to thriving. It can move more people for sure with current layout. Also, people need to remember the capital plan is approved by the airlines and this is one reason why the prior capacity enhancement project died- the airlines did not support the proposed cost because of what they would end up passing on to customers and they were not convinced of the ROI.

[cardeza]

Originally Posted by Redddog

truth. We are looking at flights to Poland (wife and daughter going to Taylor swift in Warsaw) and PHL is way more expensive than NY area.

In general, with the exception of Caribbean, PHL is ALWAYS more expensive. Before we moved here, we had to come to CHOP every 3 months. Sometimes I would meet my wife and son and would fly. Regularly, I would have to book a flight to Newark and "miss" my connection in PHL (for about a year, the flight from Rochester would go through PHL to get to Newark). A straight flight to PHL was at least double and usually more than double.

Why? What makes it so much more expensive?

There is a lot of traffic from PHL to florida, carribean and SE cities like ATL and Charlotte and any American hub. I do not think its accurate to say its always far more expensive unless you're going to Carribean. I flew to El Paso via a connecting flights last year- it was not cheaper from the other airports.