Click for next page ( 48

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 47
Costs and Benefits 47 survey. This data should be gathered and analyzed once ridership has reached maturity, typically in the third or fourth year of service. Necessary data would be obtained by asking the following questions: Where do you live? Where did you begin your trip to the offsite terminal? How did you get to the offsite terminal? and If the offsite terminal and airport transportation link were not available, how would you travel to the airport? The estimated savings in VMT can be used as a performance measure during project planning, and actual VMT savings can be used to measure progress once a service is operational. Metrics can also be developed in relation to financial performance such as cost (or deficit) per VMT saved. Emissions Savings An offsite terminal and transportation link can potentially reduce air emissions. However, there is not a direct relationship between VMT and air pollution impacts. Buses and cars emit pollutants at different rates, depending on the particular pollutant. In addition, each pollutant has a different impact on health and greenhouse warming. A transit air benefits calculator was developed for this project. The purpose of the calculator is to help the sponsor of the offsite ter- minal and transportation link determine the net environmental benefits resulting from the reduction in low-occupancy vehicle trips by offsite terminal customers. The appendix begins with a primer identifying and describing the impacts of various pollutants, which is followed by a user guide for the transit air benefits calculator. On-Airport Financial Impacts A successful offsite terminal and transportation link may offer savings in on-airport costs. It may also be responsible for lost on-airport parking revenue from customers who would have otherwise parked. On-Airport Cost Savings To the extent that airport expansion, reallocation of space, or additional operational costs can be reduced or avoided due to the offsite terminal and transportation link, the cost savings should be considered in the context of the projected or actual financial performance of the offsite ter- minal and transportation link. Example situations include, but are not limited to the following: Airport roadway and terminal curb space is at capacity and introducing one or more offsite terminals may Mitigate the need for expansion and/or Reduce the level of traffic management and enforcement resources. Airport passenger parking is reaching capacity and introducing one or more offsite terminals may Reduce on-airport public parking demand, eliminating, reducing, or delaying capital costs associated with expansion and/or Eliminate the need for additional on-airport employee parking or enable some on-airport employee spaces to be converted to other uses if the offsite terminal is utilized by airport employees. In all likelihood, introduction of one offsite terminal will not eliminate the need for an existing terminal, a terminal expansion, or a new on-airport terminal because provision of

OCR for page 47
48 Planning for Offsite Airport Terminals Table 13. Market share of express bus ridership, BOS and LAX, 2006. Enplaning Air Share O/D Airport/Route Passenger of O/D Enplanements Ridershipa Enplanements LAX: VNY FlyAway 19,520,000 342,005 1.8% b LAX: Union Station FlyAway 19,520,000 110,535 0.6% FlyAway System 19,520,000 452,540 2.3% BOS: Braintree Logan Express 12,465,000 169,360 1.4% BOS: Framingham Logan Express 12,465,000 174,835 1.4% BOS: Woburn Logan Express 12,465,000 83,220 0.7% Logan Express System 12,465,000 427,415 3.4% a Air passenger ridership only. Employee ridership is significant on each service. b Represents air passenger ridership during the 1st year of service. Air passenger ridership on the Union Station FlyAway increased by approximately 25% during the second year of service. Source: DMR Consulting based on data from LAWA and Massport. all of the services offered in an airport terminal in the offsite terminal is likely to be more expensive per passenger, even if real estate is less expensive at the offsite terminal. The offsite terminal will not capture as many passengers as the on-airport terminal because the market area for one offsite terminal is a fraction of the market area for the entire airport. Chapter 3: Market Determination provides an explanation of how to estimate the market area for an off- site terminal. Table 13 shows annual O/D air passenger enplanements at BOS and LAX and the number of enplaning air passengers using their offsite terminals. Although each route carried a healthy rider- ship, the individual routes served less than 2% of enplaning air passengers. Unless regulations are changed, passengers must still clear security at the airport. The typical air passenger will feel more comfortable if the majority of his or her waiting time prior to the flight is in proximity to the flight boarding area. For that reason, passengers will prefer to linger at the airport and not at the offsite terminal. On-Airport Revenue Reduction Offsite terminals will reduce future on-airport revenue from air passengers who would have accessed the airport by private automobile and used on-airport long-term or short-term park- ing. Revenue from on-airport taxi and limousine usage trip fees will also be lower, to the extent that passengers who would have traveled to the airport by these modes choose to use the offsite terminal. Assuming that the airport access mode distribution of air passengers using the offsite terminal would have been approximately the same as the access mode share distribution of the overall air passenger population if the offsite terminal did not exist, one methodology for esti- mating revenue loss is the following: 1. Apply mode shares from the air passenger survey as in Table 12 to projected or actual passen- gers using the airport transportation link. Eliminate the proportion of passengers who would use privately operated off-airport parking from this calculation. 2. Divide by average travel party size as in Table 12 to calculate the number of vehicles by mode that would be traveling to the airport. 3. Multiply the estimated average length of stay for vehicles parking at the offsite terminal by the on-airport parking rate. If there is more than one on-airport long-term parking rate, apply the proportion of on-airport vehicles by parking facility to the number of long-term vehicles

OCR for page 47
Costs and Benefits 49 parked at the offsite terminal and multiply the resulting vehicles by length of stay, by the com- mensurate rate. 4. Multiply the average on-airport ticket price for short-term parking by the number of vehicles that would have used short-term parking on-airport. Apply the split between pick-up/drop- off using short-term parking and curb pick-up/drop-off to the number of pick-up/drop-off vehicles to get the number of vehicles that would have used short-term parking. 5. Multiply the taxi access fee by the number of taxis that would have traveled to the airport. This can be obtained from calculations in Table 12. 6. Multiply the limousine access fee by the number of limousines that would have traveled to the airport. This can be obtained from calculations in Table 12. 7. For any other low-occupancy-vehicle modes, multiply the fee by the number of vehicles that would have traveled to the airport. This can be obtained from calculations in Table 12. 8. The total on-airport revenue lost is the sum of the revenue lost from each mode. If the majority of air passengers using the terminal are projected to be residents, use the mode share and average vehicle occupancies for residents to estimate revenue loss. If the split of resi- dents and non-residents is projected to be closer to the split for the overall airport O/D popula- tion, use the mode share for the overall airport population. Passengers that would have used pri- vately operated off-airport parking that use the offsite terminal represent a gain in overall revenue to the airport operator. If the offsite terminal offers amenities that cause passengers to spend significantly less time at the airport, there may be an impact to on-airport revenues. The net impact would be determined by comparing changes in on-airport revenue streams with similar revenue streams generated by the offsite terminal.