Innovations for Airport Terminal Facilities (2008)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

8Three methods were used to collect relevant information on several topics that were either identified in the original project statement, or subsequently identified as being central to the topic of airport terminal landside facilities: 1. Review of relevant research in published literature and on the Internet; 2. Personal interviews with members of the aviation com- munity; and 3. On-site observations of recent innovations at airports in the United States, Europe, and Asia. Published Document Review The goal of reviewing recent and current research was to identify best practices and recent innovations or future trends in airport terminal planning and design specifically related to landside facilities as defined for this project. To streamline the research efforts, the following key topics were established: • Passenger satisfaction, • Aging passengers, • Industry initiatives, • Wayfinding, • Passenger processing, • Innovative terminal design/future trends, • Regional access to airports, • On-airport ground access, and • Public parking. The sources used in the research and the issues identified in relation to each of these topics are discussed below. Passenger Satisfaction Passenger satisfaction reports were reviewed to identify the crucial issues that passengers consider when determining whether their airport experience was satisfactory. Sources of passenger satisfaction data were Airline and Airport Passenger Opinions (www.airlinequality.com) (10); World Airport Awards (www.worldairportawards.com) (11); and North America Airport Satisfaction Study (12). The following issues were commonly identified by a number of passengers as having a positive or negative effect on their airport experience: • Wayfinding; • Multiple vertical transitions from public transportation to the gate; • Airport/airline staff friendliness; • Walking distances; • Availability of self-service check-in; • Availability of landside (i.e., pre-security) amenities; • Signage in the arrivals hall; • Queues at curbside, check-in, and security; • Connections to rental car pickup/drop-off; • Bag claim wait times; • Availability of real-time information pertaining to wait times and gate assignments; and • Availability of rail service to the city center. Aging Passengers One aspect in developing innovative concepts for airport terminal landside facilities is the effect of age on the ability of passengers and others to navigate through the complex facil- ities of an airport. In 2000, there were approximately 35 million people age 65 and older in the United States; that number is expected to increase to approximately 63 million by 2025, potentially representing 30 million to 60 million trips and $300 million and $3 billion in financial impact to airports and airlines, respectively (13). The major issues identified for the aging population are walking distances, waiting times, and wayfinding (13). In addition, a significant difference between disabled and aging passengers is that while disabled passengers C H A P T E R 2 Research Findings

are acutely aware of their limits, elderly people may also expe- rience reduced mobility, agility, and stamina, but do not want to be considered disabled (13). Key issues for elderly passengers include the following: • Elevators are preferred over stairs, escalators, and moving walkways. • Lighting is very important to wayfinding. • Prolonged standing while waiting at curbside, check-in, or security is a problem. • Seating is needed adjacent to the queues and in the bag- claim hall. • Information regarding the time required for arriving bags to reach the claim devices would help reduce prolonged standing. • Transporting baggage is very challenging. • Ground transportation should be as close to the bag-claim hall as possible (14). Industry Initiatives In 2004, IATA introduced a significant industry initiative entitled “Simplifying the Business,” which was intended to re- spond to the substantial financial hardships that the airline in- dustry experienced in the last few years by pursuing initiatives to improve customer service while lowering airline operating costs through better use of technology to process passengers, baggage, and cargo. The tenets of this initiative were as follows: • To implement 100% the use of e-tickets by the end of 2007, • To implement widespread use of CUSS kiosks, • To enable passengers to manage all appropriate aspects of the departure and arrival processes via self-service • To replace magnetic-strip boarding passes with bar-coded boarding passes • To build a collaborative framework for airports and airlines to identify and address baggage handling problems • To transition to e-freight to eliminate paper from the ship- ping process (15) IATA estimated that these six tenets could save the aviation industry as much as $6.5 billion annually (15). At many airports, new check-in strategies based on innova- tive methods of deploying self-service check-in kiosks have been implemented, allowing passengers to print boarding passes and/or bag tags without waiting in a queue for an airline agent. Wayfinding Wayfinding is much more than signage. Wayfinding allows passengers to orient themselves within the facility, provides critical information related to passenger journeys, and gives passengers clear and simple directions to their destinations. Through the research process, several key factors that make wayfinding more effective were identified. Importantly, the changing demographics of the traveling public (aging passen- gers, an increase in new/inexperienced passengers, etc.) present new challenges for airport wayfinding. To account for these changes, wayfinding must be easily understandable with simple nomenclature and primary directional messages. Wayfinding must also be intuitive, which can be accomplished by clear lines of sight, visible recognizable objects, and even retracing the path taken at the beginning of the trip on the return trip. Further, directional signage should be easily recognizable amid the background of competing signage frequently found at airports. Passenger Processing When considering the processing capabilities of airport facilities, it is important to view the terminal and ground transportation facilities as a complete system with a complex set of interrelated subsystems, including road and rail systems, vehicle-processing and storage facilities, pedestrian access, pedestrian circulation and processing, and baggage processing. With increasing numbers of passengers and the long lead times associated with major capital development projects, a number of issues related to passenger processing have become com- monplace at many airports. The following key issues were identified: • Overcrowded walkways reduce passenger flows. • Passengers are stressed by queues at check-in and the SSCP. • Wayfinding is convoluted and signage is often lost in the background. • Passengers use curbside check-in to avoid the chaos in the check-in lobby. • Passengers have different expectations depending on their level of experience with airline travel. Several approaches have been used at airports to help miti- gate or resolve these issues and to improve the passenger’s experience. Minimizing walking distances, particularly between ground transportation services or close-in parking and the terminal, helps reduce passenger fatigue and anxiety before they reach the potentially more stressful check-in and security processes. One approach, made possible as a result of the widespread implementation of SSDs, is to empower passen- gers to select the services they need as well as the location from which they select the required services (e.g., SSDs at a hotel or Internet check-in). For example, frequent business travelers—familiar with airport processes—may seek a fast 9

track to the SSCP after having checked-in remotely. As some queues may be unavoidable, another strategy is to provide passengers waiting in the queue with information pertaining to their journeys, such as flight/gate information or with en- tertainment distractions to make the wait less stressful. Innovative Terminal Design/Future Trends Modern airport terminal design is a vast departure from that of the past, but there are also many similarities. One of the most notable differences is the use of technology to make the buildings and processes more efficient and customer friendly. A review of case studies and press releases regarding new terminal projects identified the following innovative designs/ future trends: • As passenger processing speeds increase, the size of the facility and the staffing requirements can be reduced while customer satisfaction increases. • Many airport operators and the surrounding communities are considering massive investments in public trans- portation, particularly rail systems. The main goal will be to provide easy access between the terminal and intermodal facilities while at the same time providing a service that is financially feasible. • Passengers desire more choices for check-in so that they may avoid unnecessary queues or agent transactions. Because traditional ticketing/check-in layouts do not provide suffi- cient options, the focus has shifted to automated self-service operations in a variety of locations on and off the airport. • To improve flexibility, the shell of the terminal building can be a separate structure from the core facilities inside. As it is difficult to predict the needs of passengers and air- lines beyond 5 or 10 years, this separation would allow airport operators to minimize the cost of adapting to the changing needs of airport users. • Relocating the terminal curbside roadways into the parking garage could minimize at-grade crossings. Other tradi- tional terminal functions—check-in, baggage check, and rental car pickup/drop-off—are now being performed in the parking garage. • Enhanced wayfinding through the use of natural light, straightforward circulation, and large public spaces allows passengers to see more of the terminal and better orient themselves within the space. • Hotels and business centers integrated into the terminal facilities or located adjacent to the terminal provide a greater variety of services at the airport and attract cus- tomers other than those related to airline travel. • Renewed focus on the bag claim or arrivals hall as the pas- sengers’ first impression of the airport and surrounding area has led to more open spaces and better wayfinding in the terminal, close-in parking, and ground transportation. • Terminal roadways are being segmented by mode of trans- portation rather than by departures and arrivals (e.g., ground transportation centers). • Nonsecure people-mover systems are being used not only to transport passengers between terminals, but also to connect them to regional transit, consolidated rental car centers, and remote parking. In some locations, passengers are able to check in for their flights and check their baggage at the remote locations. These trends were important considerations for the innova- tions identified in Chapter 4 and the concepts incorporating the innovations illustrated in Chapters 5 and 6 and were improved upon by combining a number of innovations. Regional Access to Airports Due to increasing congestion on highways, many airport operators and local and state governments are considering mass transit, high-occupancy-vehicle (HOV) use, demand management programs, and the use of technology as potential solutions to roadway congestion. While the preferred trans- portation mode to access airports in the United States will likely continue to be the private vehicle, airport operators continue to seek the resources to provide alternative modes of transportation for access to the airport. The largest challenge to mass transit is funding. Securing public funding support is a major challenge for operators of both large and small airports seeking to provide HOV access by rubber-tired vehicles, a public rail system, or both. The emergence of the low-cost carrier business model has resulted in more point-to-point airline service and a dramatic increase in the numbers of passengers at small-hub airports (between 0.05% and 0.25% of total U.S. passenger boardings) and at airports near major metropolitan areas. The increase in passengers at airports served by low-cost carriers has effec- tively dispersed airport-generated traffic over a larger region and away from the dominant airport serving the metropoli- tan area. This dispersion reduces the ability of even the larger airports to justify expensive rail projects. On-Airport Ground Access The travel experience from the airport entrance to the aircraft departure gate is one of the most stressful parts of the passenger’s trip. Scheduled arrival and departure times dur- ing peak periods produce the most congestion on airport roadways—for example, drivers wishing to pick up passengers are often not aware of delays to arriving aircraft. Drivers who 10

reach the curb prior to the arrival of the individuals being picked up are typically forced to move by police or traffic enforcement agents, which increases recirculating traffic on already congested roadways and causes secondary problems, including • Increased parking along the shoulders of the access road- ways as drivers wait before returning to the curbside, • Potentially unsafe driving maneuvers resulting from driv- ers attempting to access impromptu parking areas or being uncertain about the return path to the terminal, • Operational effects on traffic as drivers travel slower than the traffic flow to lengthen their travel time back to the curb, and • Increased vehicle emissions. Recent innovations to improve on-airport ground access vary between physical improvements and technology-based operational improvements. Airport operators are providing dedicated short-term parking lots, frequently referred to as cell phone lots, for drivers to wait for their parties to arrive. These lots are typically provided free of charge and, in some cases, have large flight information display screens that notify drivers when flights have arrived. Other innovations designed to move vehicles more efficiently through the airport roadway systems include • Low-frequency advisory radio and variable message systems on overhead signage to notifying travelers of bottlenecks; • Peak-hour pricing discounts that reduce or eliminate park- ing fees, encouraging drivers to park their vehicles rather than circle on airport roadways; and • Automated vehicle identification (AVI), which can help track the number of commercial vehicle trips through the terminal core. Public Parking The demand for airport parking continues to grow. At most airports, parking is the number one source of nonairline revenue. At airports where parking lots are full on a daily basis, new ways to accommodate demand must be found. Building elevated parking structures is costly; therefore, many airport operators are exploring and implementing technology- based solutions that promote the increased use of available spaces as well as offering services to encourage customers to continue parking at the airport in the future. New “smart parking” systems work well in close-in parking garages where a network of different colored lights is used to guide passengers to available parking spaces. Other technolo- gies, such as “e-park,” allow customers to swipe the same credit card when entering and exiting the facility. In areas with local tollway systems, airport revenue systems compati- ble with the tollway authority’s payment transponder can be installed. At several airports, passengers are offered, for a small fee, the option to check their baggage and obtain a board- ing pass upon arriving at the parking facilities. Aviation Industry Interviews A crucial component in identifying common issues associ- ated with terminal landside facilities and recent innovations was to conduct interviews with a diverse set of representatives from the aviation industry, including airport management, airlines, airport technology groups, and airport ground trans- portation experts. A brief summary of the common issues identified in the interviews is provided below. Airport Management Many of the observations by airport management repre- sentatives related to the overall goal of reducing passenger stress and anxiety. One representative interviewed had devel- oped a “stress curve” equating stress reduction not only to improved passenger satisfaction, but also to increased con- cession revenues. Issues related to passengers getting to the airport included the general underutilization of transit systems by airline pas- sengers in North America. A theory expressed in the United Kingdom was that, for a landside transit network to be effec- tive, its own synergy is required, similar to the airside, where the addition of connecting passengers to the mix of originat- ing and terminating passengers enables the airlines to provide a more extensive route network. Considerable concern was expressed about curbside con- gestion and the reduction of recirculating courtesy vehicle trips for both congestion and environmental reasons. An in- novative concept is being introduced at the new Terminal 5 at Heathrow Airport: instead of a conventional linear curb, a departures forecourt is situated on top of the parking garage—this provides more flexibility for the different depar- ture functions and transportation modes. This concept has the added advantage that all vertical circulation on the land- side is on the pedestrian side of the roadway system. The issue of parking anxiety was also raised, and many examples of “smart” garages were noted in which vacant parking spaces are indicated along with advance notice of which garages, particularly at large airports, have available spaces via active signage or telephone information. Discussion of the check-in process mostly focused on the amount of automation possible. Use of the Internet to obtain boarding passes and use of SSDs at the airport are recognized as coming into general use. The general consensus is that 11

self-tagging of check baggage will eventually be available in the United States, with 80% or more of all passengers using self- service functions via kiosks at the airport or in remote locations or via the Internet. Common-use systems are seen as a viable approach, with a preference for the backbone and hardware being provided by the airport operator, with customization for each airline. The point was raised that, at single-carrier termi- nals (typically an airline hub), common-use systems are not as relevant as in terminals with multiple airlines. The increased flexibility offered by common-use systems leads to greater utilization, resulting in cost savings through staff reductions and increased capacity for the airlines; however, an unintended consequence of automation has been that staffing reductions can present serious problems during periods of irregular operations when large numbers of pas- sengers need to be rerouted. Changing demographics were discussed with the general assumption that leisure travel will increase, although it was thought that increased leisure travel would not drive the same level of ultra-low-cost travel in the United States as it has in Europe. Leisure travel has had a major effect on airport opera- tions through increased space requirements resulting from pas- sengers arriving at the airport much earlier, increased volumes of checked baggage, and a lack of passenger sophistication. SSCP queuing was raised as a concern by all, and it was generally agreed that, even though airport operators have in- vested in expanded screening, the TSA has not always staffed the SSCPs to capacity. Information regarding queuing times would be helpful to passengers and the registered traveler program could help; however, in its present form, this program is not perceived to be beneficial enough to attract large numbers of customers. Another common point was that the arrivals process is typ- ically less problematic than the departures process; however, it was noted that waiting times for checked baggage have in- creased, mostly as a result of staffing reductions and the lack of automation on the arrivals end. Meeters and greeters, who are not allowed on the airside, also present a problem as they typically receive arrival gate information that may not direct them to the point where their parties exit from the secure side of the terminal. Arrival points for domestic passengers should be designated and identified similar to arrival points for inter- national passengers. Airlines Motivated by a desire to improve passenger levels of ser- vice and operational efficiency, the airlines are aggressively pursuing the integration of technology into their passenger- processing functions industrywide. However, some debate is ongoing as to whether common-use equipment is necessarily the best way to achieve the airlines’ goals. For example, where an airline has complete occupancy of a terminal building at a hub airport, sharing technology with other airlines and terminals provides little benefit. Branding is also an issue. Whereas visual branding can be achieved through icons on flat-screen displays, airlines may consider their own particular process at a proprietary self-service kiosk to be superior to others and a common-use system would be mediocre by comparison. The participants also identified interface prob- lems with common-use systems, which often involve the airline having to adapt its software and technology to accommodate different operating systems at different airports. It was strongly felt that industry standards are necessary and that a common backbone would be ideal; once an airline’s icon is activated, the self-service process from thereon would be part of the airline’s proprietary system. Nevertheless, there seemed to be a consensus that common- use equipment is becoming more popular among airport management because of the benefits it provides, particularly in allowing flexibility for growth and contraction at both the check-in points and aircraft gates. This flexibility would be particularly advantageous at origin and destination airports and at spoke locations for hub-and-spoke airlines. A major advantage of CUSS kiosks is that they can more easily be made available at remote locations. Baggage check was also identified as a major issue. Ideally, the airlines would like passengers to divest themselves of their bags at the earliest opportunity. Also discussed were concepts of checking bags away from the airport—either at transit locations, which has been implemented at some locations in Europe, or at home or the office through a delivery service. Remote baggage check could result in the airlines receiving bags too early and having to deal with bag storage. On-airport remote baggage check was thought to be a positive concept, es- pecially in new construction situations where a high-speed belt could connect the check-in location with the baggage system. It was noted that in Japan, baggage-delivery services are available to accept bags from passengers immediately after the bags are claimed and then the bags are delivered to the pas- senger’s desired location. This service is especially beneficial when ongoing travel is by surface transit modes that may not be well suited for passengers traveling with large bags. Curbside check-in continues to be a major problem in that the length of curbside allocated for check-in is generally directly related to the ticket counter length inside the building, which may not be sufficient. Promising concepts include those ob- served at certain European airports, where a forecourt with a much larger area has replaced the departures curbside, enabling multiple functions to be performed, including baggage check. Self-tagging of check baggage was also discussed. It was generally thought that it would be beneficial for passengers to tag their own check baggage, as they do in certain European countries; however, the concern was raised that such a system 12

would require proper safeguards to prevent passengers from making false claims for undelivered bags. The sorting of arriving bags so that, particularly at large airports, bags could be delivered to multiple locations con- venient for the customer was also discussed. It was felt that this service would be too onerous on the airlines and, there- fore, unlikely to be adopted. Another common issue for arriving passengers is waiting for rental cars or courtesy shuttles, often late at night or in in- clement weather. The concept of arrivals lounges was dis- cussed, wherein passengers could wait and be provided with real-time information as to when their transportation would arrive. This concept would provide passengers with a better environment, better security, and less stress from wondering if and when a courtesy vehicle or bus will arrive. Airport Technology Groups Technology will continue to play an increasing role in passenger processing. While common-use systems are gaining acceptance, as mentioned in Chapter 1, obstacles still have to be overcome. One key challenge to widespread implementa- tion of common-use systems is the interface of hardware and software between the airport and the airlines. Also, airport management and the airlines may have different priorities as to how common-use systems should serve passengers, par- ticularly regarding the provision of information. Self-service kiosks, for example, have great potential for providing general information and even advertising, which could be beneficial to airport management from a passenger service and revenue point-of-view beyond the typical flight and boarding infor- mation, which would be the airlines’ priority. Radio-frequency identification (RFID) is generally accepted as excellent technology; however, it has been available for almost 20 years and still has not gained widespread acceptance primarily because of implementation costs. One of the many potential benefits of RFID is that a passenger’s bag could be permanently identified with an implanted chip and itiner- ary information could be added to the chip, resulting in simplification of the entire baggage-check process. RFID has the capability to store a great deal of information about the passenger and his or her general travel plans. Airport Ground Transportation Experts One of the biggest challenges facing airport planners and designers is curbside congestion. The driver of every vehicle entering the terminal area wants to load (arrivals) or unload (departures) near the terminal doors. This “pooling” of vehi- cles near the terminal doors creates bottlenecks, which make it difficult for through traffic to bypass the terminal. The common solution—forcing certain transit modes, such as commercial vehicles, to a second or third median curb— often causes pedestrian/vehicle conflicts. The introduction of the cell phone lot not only removes some vehicles from circling on terminal roadways, but also provides passengers the opportunity to inform their drivers where on the curb to pick them up. Another method to reduce congestion is to encourage commercial vehicle trip reductions through con- solidation of the shuttle bus systems for rental cars, hotels/ motels, and off-airport parking. Regional rail connections are also an important issue. Ridership as low as 10% to 15% of originating and terminat- ing passengers on the most highly used systems in the United States has been the main reason that these systems are difficult to justify economically and that they have not been widely implemented. The development of other functions and ameni- ties at airports, such as conference centers and retail develop- ment, could result in increased transit demand, providing greater justification for rail connection. Airport Site Visits On-site investigations of recent innovations at a variety of airports were conducted in the United States, Europe, and Asia. The focus of these investigations was to identify inno- vative methods for processing passengers. Innovations noted at Heathrow, Munich, Vienna International, and Hong Kong International airports are discussed below. London Stansted, London Gatwick, and San Francisco International airports were also visited to gain insight on specific topics, such as low- cost carrier operations (London Stansted) and the two-step check-in process (London Gatwick) in Europe and remote baggage check in the United States (San Francisco Interna- tional). While examination of the processes in place at these latter airports was beneficial to development of the innova- tions described in Chapter 4, more focus in this report is placed on the former airports as they provide examples of both facility and processing innovations. Terminal 5 at Heathrow Airport Heathrow’s Terminal 5 opened in March 2008. Two inno- vations at Terminal 5 that are pertinent to this research effort are the departures hall check-in process and the multifunc- tional close-in parking garage. The check-in process was de- signed assuming that 80% of passengers either would proceed directly to the SSCP (i.e., those passengers who checked in via the Internet or remote self-service kiosk and do not have check baggage); would check in using self-service kiosks (i.e., those passengers who need a boarding pass only) and then proceed immediately to the SSCP; or would deposit check baggage at a baggage drop and then proceed to the SSCP. The remaining 20% of passengers were assumed to use full-service 13

agent positions to obtain the necessary travel documents or check baggage. The full-service positions are located on the perimeter of the departures hall to encourage passengers to use the more prominently located self-service functions. The multifunctional parking garage (see Figure 2-1) includes a departures forecourt rather than traditional linear curbs located on different levels directly adjacent to the terminal building, as well as an intermodal station for rail service serv- ing the airport, surrounding communities, and the city of London. The garage is separated from the terminal by a pedestrian plaza, which enhances the transition between the terminal and the garage and minimizes at-grade pedestrian crossings of roadways. Munich Airport Munich Airport exhibits several innovations relevant to this research effort. The transit station for rail service between the city and the airport is located between the two passenger terminals and can be accessed via pedestrian routes from either terminal without crossing the roadways (see Figure 2-2). Above the transit station is a central termi- nal (landside only), which provides self-service check-in devices adjacent to the exit from the station platform; it also provides a remote check-in hall, which is staffed by agents, and has self-service baggage check capability. A further innovation is the use of four large forecourts on either side of Terminal 2 in lieu of conventional curbs. On one side of the terminal, two levels are provided for POV passengers— departures on the upper level and arrivals on the lower level. On the other side of the terminal is a similar arrange- ment for CV passengers. The area immediately in front of Terminal 2 is a pedestrian plaza. Munich Airport has a very large covered area between the two terminals, referred to as the Munich Airport Center, which is used for large public events and contains commercial func- tions. The center serves to publicize the airport and generate greater use of the regional transit system serving the airport. 14 Figure 2-1. Heathrow Terminal 5 conceptual section. Figure 2-2. Munich Airport conceptual site plan.

Vienna International Airport One key innovation related to Vienna International Airport is the City Airport Terminal located in the Vienna City Center, which provides remote check-in facilities via SSDs, with self-service baggage check and full-service agent positions (see Figures 2-3 and 2-4). The City Airport Terminal allows passengers to obtain boarding passes and check baggage using either self-service devices or full-service agents. Baggage must be checked at least 90 min prior to departure and is transported to the airport on the same train as the passengers. The baggage is off-loaded at the airport and inserted into the baggage-handling system directly for screening and delivery to the aircraft. Vienna International Airport was one of the first European airports where self-service baggage check was implemented (see Figure 2-5). Boarding-pass-only SSDs are located in front of the ticket counters. Passengers who check in via the Internet can proceed directly to the bag-drop-only counter positions and check their baggage with an agent. Passengers can also use the self-service baggage check-in positions. Airline per- sonnel are strategically positioned throughout the check-in hall to encourage the use of self-service devices and to assist passengers as necessary. Hong Kong International Airport An innovative approach used at Hong Kong International Airport to manage terminal curbside congestion involves the relocation of all private vehicle pickup/drop-off activity to auxiliary curbside areas within the terminal parking facilities. These curbside areas, located in the parking areas on both ends of the terminal, provide convenient access to the terminal building and prevent the addition of private vehicle traffic on the main terminal curbside roadways. As the taxicab curbsides are not directly adjacent to the terminal building, less security- related enforcement is required and drivers often opt to use immediately adjacent short-term parking spaces rather than dwell excessively at the auxiliary curb. The innovations described above serve as the foundation for developing innovations that address the common issues faced by passengers at airports in the United States. Since the U.S. airport operating environment is different from that at air- ports in Europe or Asia (higher level of POV activity, availabil- ity of curbside check-in, etc.), the innovations at those airports have been adapted to better suit U.S. airports. References to those airports are made throughout this report to provide examples of similar applications of each innovation. 15 Figure 2-3. Vienna City Airport terminal—exterior. Source: Corgan Associates, Inc. Figure 2-4. Vienna City Airport terminal—interior. Source: Corgan Associates, Inc. Figure 2-5. Self-service baggage check at Vienna International Airport. Source: Corgan Associates, Inc.