PREFACE
TO THE READER
This report presents the results of the first phase of a project
jointly sponsored by the Federal Highway Administration and the
Federal Aviation Administration. It outlines the process for planning
ground access to airports within the context of current laws,
regulations, and procedures. This report identifies the key
components of an airport access work program, discusses performance
measures, and provides extensive information on alternative strategies
for improving airport access conditions.
Phase II of this project will complete the sections listed in the
table of contents, including data collection and surveys, forecasting
patterns and demand, evaluation, and implementation.
Comments regarding the content of this report, or any recommendations
for additional guidance or available information/data that might
appropriately be included in this report should be forwarded to:
Mr. Lee Chimini
Federal Highway Administration
Intermodal Division, HEP-50
400 7th Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20590
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
TO BE SUPPLIED IN FY 1996
CHAPTER TWO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
OVERVIEW OF AIRPORT GROUND ACCESS PLANNING PROCESS . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1 OVERVIEW OF THE AIRPORT GROUND ACCESS PLANNING
PROCESS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2 PROBLEM DEFINITION AND POLICY CONTEXT. . . . . . . . . . . 5
Defining the Issues -- Examples from American
Airports. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Poor Accessibility and Economic Consequences. . . . . 5
Accommodation of Economic Growth. . . . . . . . . . . 8
Localized Air Quality Problems. . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Guaranteed Service Availability for Airport
Passengers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Environmental Mitigation for Surrounding
Communities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Problem Definition -- A Summary of Experience . . . . 9
2.3 AGENCIES, ROLES AND REGULATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
FAA Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
The Master Planning Process . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
FAA s Planning and Design Guidelines for
Airport Terminal Facilities. . . . . . . . . . 11
State and MPO Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
The Transportation Planning and Programming
Process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
The Management Systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
The Congestion Management System (CMS) . . . . 14
The Intermodal Management System (IMS) . . . . 15
Role of The Major Investment Study (MIS). . . . . . 16
Relationship Between Airport Access and the Clean
Air Act Conformity Regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Programming Highway and Transit Projects for
Airport Access . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Determining Conformity under the General
Conformity Regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
FAA Funding under the General Conformity
Regulations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.4 PREPARING THE WORK PROGRAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
CHAPTER THREE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
PERFORMANCE MEASURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.1 THE LOGIC OF PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.2 EXAMPLES OF PERFORMANCE EVALUATION MEASURES FROM TWO
STATES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Oregon Intermodal Management Systems Work Program . . . 26
The Development of a New Performance Measure at
Boston Logan International Airport. . . . . . . . . 32
3.3 AIRPORT GROUND ACCESS PERFORMANCE MEASURES -- AT THE
FACILITY LEVEL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
CHAPTER FOUR DATA COLLECTION AND SURVEYS . . . . . . . . . . . 39
TO BE SUPPLIED IN FY 1996
CHAPTER FIVE PATTERNS AND DEMANDS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
TO BE SUPPLIED IN FY 1996
CHAPTER SIX. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
ALTERNATIVES FOR IMPROVING AIRPORT ACCESS. . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
6.1 ACCESS ROADS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Considerations Related to Access Roads Off Airport . . . 44
Geometric Design Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Traffic Operations Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . 47
Considerations Related to Access Roads Near Airports . . 47
Geometric Design Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Traffic Operations Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . 49
Considerations Related to On-Airport Roads
(Excluding Terminal Curbside Areas) . . . . . . . . 50
Airport Circulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Principles for Design and Operation of Airport
Roads. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
Roadway Design to Accommodate Airport Taxi Cabs . . 57
Geometric Design Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Traffic Operations Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . 59
Transportation Enhancement Alternatives . . . . . . 61
Management of Traffic During Construction . . . . . 62
6.2 Parking Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Reallocation of spaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Methods Of Operation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Parking Rates and Pricing . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Alternative Types of Parking Facilities. . . . . . . . . 69
Structured Parking. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Off-Airport Facilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Remote Employee Parking. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
6.3 Curbside Capacity Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Curbside Operations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Private Vehicle Operations. . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
Taxicab Operations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
Scheduled Services. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
Nonscheduled Limousine and Charter Bus
Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
Courtesy Vehicle Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
Curbside Management Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
Objectives of Curbside Management . . . . . . . . . 74
Curbside Enforcement and Traffic Control. . . . . . 75
Curbside Construction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Horizontal Curbside Separation. . . . . . . . . . . 78
Vertical Curbside Separation. . . . . . . . . . . . 80
Supplemental Curbside Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
6.4 HIGH OCCUPANCY (HOV) MODES OF GROUND ACCESS. . . . . . . 83
General Planning and Design Considerations . . . . . . . 83
Market Segmentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Characteristics of Successful Airport Access
Modes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
Rubber-Tired Transit Service Options . . . . . . . . . . 87
Publicly Sponsored and Airport Sponsored
Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Traditional Public Bus Services. . . . . . . . 87
On-Airport Shuttle Services. . . . . . . . . . 88
Shuttles to Other Locations. . . . . . . . . . 88
Privately Sponsored Services. . . . . . . . . . . . 91
Taxicabs (includes medallion taxicabs,
radio cabs, or metro cars). . . . . . . . 91
Door-to-door, shared-ride vans . . . . . . . . 93
Fixed-Route, Scheduled Services. . . . . . . . 93
Prearranged Services. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
Chauffeured Limousine Services . . . . . . . . 93
Charter Vans and Buses . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
Courtesy Vehicles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
Airport Rail Services. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
Desirable Characteristics of Rail Service . . . . . 95
Desirable Characteristics of Airport Rail
Stations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
Access Characteristics of US Airports. . . . . . . . . . 98
Forecasting Use of New Access Modes . . . . . . . . 99
Access to Airports Served by Rubber Tired
Transit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
Airports With Rail Service. . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
6.5 Intermodal Transportation Facilities . . . . . . . . . . 111
On-airport Intermodal Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
Mini-Terminals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
Mega-Terminals/Ground Transportation Centers
(GTCS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
Intermodal Terminal Facility. . . . . . . . . . . . 114
Planning Issues to be Considered in Designing
On-Airport Intermodal Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
Off-airport Intermodal Facilities. . . . . . . . . . . . 115
Limited Service Terminals . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
Full Service Terminals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
Planning Issues to be Considered in Designing
Off-Airport Intermodal Facilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
6.6 Transportation Demand Management . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
Management of Employee Trips. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
Management of Passenger Trips. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
Management of Commercial Vehicles. . . . . . . . . . . . 120
TDM Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
High Occupancy Vehicles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
Financial Incentives. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
Information and Marketing . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
Parking Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
TO BE SUPPLIED IN FY 1996
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
CHAPTER TWO
OVERVIEW OF AIRPORT GROUND ACCESS PLANNING PROCESS
In this chapter several major planning issues related to
airport ground access improvements will be examined. Some of
these concerns are driven by issues central to airport
managers and operators themselves. Examples of these concerns
are the need to plan for expansion of airport capacity, need
to provide accessibility and support economic development in
key areas, and need to minimize environmental damage to
neighboring communities. Other issues are primarily of concern
to those with responsibility for transportation planning at
both the state and metropolitan level. Still other issues are
driven by the existence of various federal laws and
regulations. This chapter will review these key considerations
that evolve from the facility level, the metropolitan level,
the state level and the federal level.
This chapter is presented in two sections. First, a quick
overview of the proposed Airport Ground Access Planning
Process is presented. This overview establishes a seven step
planning process, each step related to succeeding chapters in
this Guide. Next, a summary of factors and concerns critical
in the undertaking of the first of these seven steps, Problem
Definition and Policy Context is presented. This section of
Chapter Two includes a review of various legal, regulatory and
institutional considerations that are necessary to understand
in the initial development of a work plan for an airport
ground access planning process.
2.1 OVERVIEW OF THE AIRPORT GROUND ACCESS PLANNING PROCESS
The planning process presented in this Guide has been designed
to encourage development of site specific analyses to be
carried out by regional and local planners in a manner
consistent with the planning process required for statewide
and system wide management systems. The planning process
described in this Guide has been designed to maximize
cooperation and collaboration between the airport-based
planning process and the state and metropolitan area
responsibilities for the preparation of the Congestion
Management System and the Intermodal Management System. The
chapters of this Guide have been organized to reflect the
steps of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act
of 1991 (ISTEA) planning process, as applied to the
development of airport ground access strategies and projects.
The seven steps of the process can be summarized as:
1. Define the problem: what is the policy issue being
addressed?
2. Given the understanding of the policy issue, establish
performance measures to be used in the program of monitoring
and evaluation.
3. Collect data needed to support the application of the
performance measures.
4. Understand existing and future conditions and
performance of the system.
5. Develop candidate strategies and actions.
6. Assess effectiveness of alternative strategies and
actions, and select cost-effective actions.
7. Implement, monitor and feedback using the established
performance measures.
The re-iterative nature of this program is illustrated in
Figure 2.1-1, which shows how program monitoring and feedback
is used throughout the process. Table 2.1-1 presents a brief
summary of each of the seven steps. The table provides a
description of the key aspects of each step, its basis in
federal regulations, and a list of examples of airport access
planning that illustrate the key issues in each phase. This
tabular summary gives particular attention to those steps in
the process that have been given new or heightened roles by
the ISTEA planning process, such as the importance of
performance measurement.
Click HERE for graphic.
Figure 2.1-1 - The Seven Steps of the Ground Access Planning
Process
2.2 PROBLEM DEFINITION AND POLICY CONTEXT
The earliest steps in the airport ground access planning
process must be based on an understanding of existing
requirements concerning the planning of airports and the
regional transportation system, coupled with a sensitivity to
the policy issues of local importance. Each of the following
chapters of this Guide is designed to help the transportation
planning practitioner understand a specific step in the
airport ground transportation planning process. In the first
step, an understanding is developed of the purpose and need
for improvements in airport ground access. This key step of
problem definition must be undertaken in the context of, and
with the understanding of, a wide variety of legislative,
regulatory and institutional concerns. Some of these
concerns are airport driven, -- driven by the needs of the
airport itself, while others are based in the need to deal
with factors that exist off the airport, including the need to
participate in the region s comprehensive transportation
planning and programming process.
Defining the Issues -- Examples from American Airports
One key to a successful airport ground access program is the
need to understand from the beginning the policy issues being
addressed in the development of the program. The ISTEA
planning process places a great emphasis on the early
development of performance measures, which aid in monitoring
of existing conditions, and in the prediction of changes in
performance as a result of the policy interventions under
examination. The derivation of these performance measures,
and examples of their use is discussed in Chapter Three of
this Guide. The key to successful selection of performance
measures is the clear understanding of the public policy
issues that are to be observed through the mechanisms of those
performance measures.
Separate American airports have developed ground access
strategies in response to highly differing policy concerns.
Those policy concerns range from a perception that lack of
access is constraining economic growth, in one case, to
concerns that too much traffic stemming from rapid growth is
causing environmental damage in another case. The breadth of
policy issues that lead to the adoption of an airport ground
access strategy can be seen in the following examples from
American airports.
Poor Accessibility and Economic Consequences
Perceived lack of accessibility is a key policy issue driving
many efforts to improve ground access conditions. One example
is the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey which has
calculated that more than $20 million per year are lost to
congestion induced delays for JFK alone, a calculation that
includes lost income to air travelers, automobile, limousine
and taxi drivers and airport employees. This kind of
inaccessibility has direct spin off implications for the
region s economy: the Authority reports that for firms leaving
the greater New York City area, poor access to the airports is
the second most mentioned reason for dissatisfaction with the
area. The Authority notes that growth at the New York
airports has
| TABLE 2.1-1 SEVEN-STEP AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS | |||
| Step | Basis in Regulations | Purpose | Examples in Airport Access |
| One: Definition Problem and Policy context |
"The IMS shall identify intermodal facilities and intermodal transportation systems and establish the demands placed upon them to accommodate intrastate, interstate, and/or international movements of people and goods." | Careful determination of central policy issues faced by the airport, its unique characteristic and setting defines what kinds of "performance" it is important to monitor. | An airport in a non-attainment area must lower total VMT associated with airport access. Isolation of a rural airport without adequate connection to the regions controlled access highway system. |
| Two: Define Performance Measures |
"Parameters shall be identified that are suitable to measure and evaluate the efficiency of intermodal facilities and systems in moving people and goods from origin to destination. Parameters may include total travel time, cost and volumes for moving cargo and passengers, origins and destinations, capacity, accidents, ease of access, perceived quality and the average time to transfer people or freight from one mode to another." | Early establishment of "the rules of the game", (i.e., the measures which will be used in the determination of the success or failure of the system performance). However, the selection of measures is undertaken only after agreement on the nature of challenge faced in and around the subject airport. | Quality of traffic flow on the access roads near and on the airport. Amount of choice offered to arriving passenger. Is there adequate taxi, shared ride van, and scheduled bus service? Percentage of region served by shared ride services? Percent of passengers that arrive by other than private vehicle or single ride taxi? Percent of passengers that arrive in vehicle with low emissions propulsion? |
| Three: Collect the Data Needed to Apply Performance Measures. |
"The IMS shall include a continuing data collection and system monitoring program. It shall include a base year inventory consisting of physical and operational characteristics of intermodal facilities and systems, and surveys of the operational and physical characteristics of intermodal facilities and systems based on performance measures established by State and local transportation agencies." | Data collection efforts should document both asset condition and level of performance. Airport access patterns are usually understood by examining a variety of data sources including: periodic ground access surveys, ridership and revenue data, and regional trip tables based on a simulated process. Operational characteristics may include time, cost capacity and usage. | Port Authority of New York and New Jersey program monitoring ground access patterns to JFK, LaGuardia and Newark airports in continuous operation for several decades. Highly valuable time series data in a consistent format is available for a wide variety of data categories. Changes in ground access market share by geographic area and travel market segment can be traced over several decades. |
| Four: Understand Patterns and Demands |
"Data collection and system monitoring shall be used by the States and local agencies to evaluate the performance of intermodal facilities and systems to determine the efficiency of the movement of people and goods." | Ground access problem can be identified, based on an understanding of existing and projected conditions and existing performance. Is demand skewed toward CBD, or focussed on some other concentrated district? Is congestion better or worse than it was five years ago? At times of greatest congestion, is the airport serving primarily resident non-business travelers, or nonresident business travelers? What will conditions be like 5, 10 or 20 years from now? | Pathbreaking work has been undertaken at the San Francisco airport to understand, and to model, existing conditions and patterns in ground access (e.g.,nature of elasticities with relation to price of parking, evaluation of policy options for managing and regulating shared ride van operators) for application to near and long term policy issues. The Washington, D.C. MPO has prepared an Airport Ground Access Element of their Airport System Plan. |
| Five: Develop Alternative Strategies and Actions |
"Statewide and local strategies and actions that improve the intermodal efficiency for the movement of people and goods shall be developed and evaluated. Methods for increasing productivity and the use of advanced technologies . . . shall be evaluated where appropriate. The evaluation program shall determine what project or combination of projects and actions would most effectively improve the intermodal productivity of transportation systems, in terms of the established performance measures, for both the short and long term." | Deficiencies of system have been established at a detail that should help to define a reasonable range of alternatives for testing and evaluation. It is critical that the options considered include a full range of possible solutions, beyond the initial concepts of highway and rail. In San Francisco the private sector has developed an elaborate shared ride van system, with the public sector examining major options to provide the appropriate level of regulation to those services. Water transportation services are a part of overall strategies in Boston and New York, and are under discussion in San Francisco. | Policies range from striping at curb that encourages non-SOV airport access to the creation of exclusive right-of-way service, such as at Cleveland, Chicago, and Atlanta. Physical examples include careful placement of public mode services at closer curb of main baggage claim area In New Orleans. Institutional examples include design of the franchise for ground access services at Charlotte or New Orleans, or the creation of new taxi cab system at Dulles. The creation of a two-tiered service level concept at Toronto Pearson airport responds to sudden growth of unregulated limo and black car services around the world. |
| Six: Analyze and Evaluate Alternative Strategies and Actions |
"The evaluation program shall determine what project or
combination of projects and actions would most effectively
improve the intermodal productivity of transportation systems, in
terms of the established performance measures, for both the short
and long term." |
Performance measures established early in the process are used to evaluate alternative actions and policies. Chapter Seven of this Guide examines a cross section of evaluation tools. The evaluation of alternative strategies can be based on indices that go beyond the analysis of vehicle flows, and include such concepts as the mobility of people and goods, and accessibility to various activities and land uses. | In New York Area, the airport access project is the subject of full major investment analysis, including preparation of a final environmental impact statement. In Salt Lake City analysis of alternatives focussed on near term options to deal with serious air quality non-attainment situation. In Boston, evaluation of alternatives shifted from an initial focus on availability of modes to an analysis of the total vehicle miles of travel implications of all modal options. |
| Seven: Implement and Monitor Selected Policy Interventions |
"A process for periodic assessment of the effectiveness of implemented strategies, in terms of the area's established performance measures, shall be implemented. The results of this evaluation shall be provided to decision makers to provide guidance on selection of effective strategies for future implementation." | Strategies implemented are influenced by goals, objectives and performance measures of specific cases under consideration. In Salt Lake, the dominant policy issue was air quality, not service quality; thus selected strategy changed the level of pollution from shuttle vans, rather than changing travel time. Salt Lake and Washington National provide space for all on-airport rental car operations in garage near terminal eliminating VMT caused by multiple courtesy vehicles by separate rental car companies. | Massachusetts Port Authority is monitoring and periodically reassessing its overall ground access strategy. The agency has monitored the air quality implications of its actions ranging from parking pricing policies to the monthly variations in ridership on its express bus services. A series of comprehensive ground access surveys are taken every five years, which make it possible to observe change in the travel behavior of different market segments of users. |
| Table 3.1-1 An Example of Goals, Objectives and Measures at the Systems Planning Level: From Oregon Intermodal Management System | ||||
| Goals | Objectives | Performance Measures | Data Needed | Source of Data |
| Accessibility Availability | Minimize Travel Time | Travel Time to Major Destinations | Airport and State Transportation Facility Information, Population and Employment data. Regional Transportation Simulations. | Should be available. |
| Optimize ADA Access | Extent of Attainment of ADA Compliance | Airport Compliance Schedules | On Site Inventory of Compliance | |
| Provide Peak Capacity | Extent of Vehicle Queuing, and Overall Delay | Quantification of Observed Delay and Back up | Review Carrier Logs for On-time Performance | |
| Affordability/ Cost Minimization | Minimize Social Costs | Subsidies and Environmental Costs | Revenue Recovery, Quantified Pollution Costs | FAA Summaries, Including Subsidies, Environmental Models |
| Minimize Capital Costs | Maximized Use of Existing Capacity | Cost Models, Condition Ratings | Master Plans, Construction Cost Data; Inventory | |
| Connectivity Between Modes | Connect to Major Routes | Service Availability Layover Times Between Modes. Travel Times. | Schedules, Limo/bus Timetables | Review Plans, Conduct On-site Inventory |
| Provide Access Between Modes | Parking Space per Passenger; Limo Space per Passenger; Loading Area per Passenger | Passenger Counts Parking/loading Areas | Review Plans, Conduct On-site Inventory | |
| Promote Easy Transfer Between Modes | Time and Distance of Transfer Between Modes less than N Minutes and N Feet | Facility Plans and Specifications, surveys, field | Inventory; Survey Customers On Quality of Transfer | |
| Convenience/ Benefit Maximization | Make Transit as Convenient as Possible | Availability of Remote Intermodal Ticketing and Luggage Support | Existing Ticketing Choices | Inventory Existing Services and Timetables |
| Promote Info on Intermodal Service Available | Level of Dissemination of Information on Options | Existing Information/Knowledge of Intermodal services. | Inventory Existing Information Strategies; Consumer Surveys | |
| Flexibility | Have Options Available for Bus, Limo and Shared Rider Services | Availability of Ground Access Options | Inventory of Services Available | Conduct Inventory of Existing Choices |
| Maximize Schedules | Three Round Trips/day between Commercial Airports | Schedules | Review timetables | |
| Provide Frequent HOV Service to Airports | Set Classification System by Market Density | Schedules | Review timetables | |
| Mobility | Make Airport Limo/bus Competitive with Autos | Ratio of Travel Times | Travel Times and Speeds | Travel time studies, schedules |
| Reliability | Improve on Time Performance at Terminals | Percent of Aircraft and Surface Transport Departures Outside of 15 Minute Schedule | On-time performance | Internal Logs of Carries |
| Safety | Improve Safety in Motion Both Air and Connecting Modes | Accidents per Passenger Mile | Accident Frequency and Severity Data | Collect Data from Police and FAA |
| Legal/ Regulatory | Reduce Obstacles to Service Provision | Minimized Limitations to Use of Facilities by HOV Modes | Synopsis of Current Regulations | Survey Users and Service Providers |
| Encourage Innovative Service | Extent of Innovative Management | Synopsis of Current Regulations | Survey Users and Providers | |
| Table 3.3-1 Performance Measures at the Facility Level: A Startup List |
||
| Policy Concern | Performance Measure | Data Source |
| 1 . Quality of Service on Access Facility | Level of service V/C Crowding conditions on transit if relevant |
Seasonal traffic counts Seasonal ridership counts Basic capacity data |
| 2 . Condition of Access Facility | Structural condition Design standards Ride quality |
Maintenance records Field examinations |
| 3 . Existence of Choices for Ground Access | Number of modes, by functional category | Schedules Operating agreements Permits etc. |
| 4 . Quality of Non-SOV Services | Headways Waiting times Vehicle cleanliness Quality |
Inspections User surveys Application of service standards |
| 5 . Mode Split to Non- SOV Modes | Percent of total airport users to shared ride services | User surveys, as updated with mode specific ridership reports |
| 6 . Role in Air Quality, Congestion Relief Strategies | Total VMT from airport ground access Surrogate calculations for total emissions |
Trip length data, by mode Emissions, by mode |
| 7 . Public Safety | Statistically valid patterns Community concerns |
Police records, Accident statistics |
| 8 . Public Information Community Acceptance |
Adequacy of signage Public information on modes Community involvement |
Canvas of facilities Inventory of services available |
| Table 6.1-2 Description of Typical Airport Circulation Systems. | |||
| Type of Layout | Description | Means of Expansion | Examples |
| Centralized | complex consists of a single building or a contiguous series of buildings. All passenger-related vehicles normally pass through same series of roadways. Public parking and car rental facilities are centrally located. | Terminal unit expansion along existing terminal area access road without loss of original ground access system concept. | Chicago O'Hare San Francisco Int'l, Los Angeles Int'l, Atlanta Hartsfield, Washington Nat'l Ft. Lauderdale Hollywood Int'l |
| Segmented | Terminal building divided into originating and departing passengers or grouping of airlines on either side. Originating passengers use one set of terminal frontage roads and terminating passengers the other. | Terminal unit extension with retention of the same ground access system. | Orlando Int'l, Jacksonville Greater Cincinnati |
| Decentralized | Airport access and terminal access roads funnel traffic to and from separate terminal facilities. Parking and car rental facilities are grouped on a terminal unit basis. | Addition of terminal units around the terminal access road with separate terminal frontage roads. | Kennedy Int'l, Kansas City Int'l |
| Unitized | Access from centrally located roadway. In some cases, may consist of a series of terminal buildings located in a linear fashion. | Addition of terminal units between terminal area access roads. | Dallas-Ft. Worth Int'l, Houston Intercont'l |
| Table 6.3-3 Characteristics of Airport Roadways. | |||||
| Characteristic | Primary Airport Access Roads | Terminal Area Access Roads | Recirculation Roads | Terminal Frontage Roads | Service Roads |
| Desirable Hourly Lane Capacity (veh/hr/lane) |
Arterials: 700-800 Freeways: 1200-1600 |
900-1000 | 600 | Inside lane: 0 Outside: 300 Additional thru lanes: 600 |
600-1200 |
| Average Speeds (mi/hr) |
Arterials: 20- 25 Freeways: 40- 50 |
20-25 | N/A | 10-20 | 15-20 |
| Desirable Demand Volume to Capacity Ratio | Arterials: 0.80 Freeways: 0.60 |
0.60-0.70 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| Desirable Minimum Number of Lanes and Lane Width | 2 lanes (12 ft) | 2 lanes (12 ft) | If 1 lane (20 ft) 2 or more lanes (12 ft) |
4 lanes: Adjacent to curb (8 ft + 12 ft) Through lanes (12 ft + 12 ft) | 2- lane, 2- way (12 ft) |