Planning for Offsite Airport Terminals (2010)

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.

There are costs and benefits associated with the financial performance of the offsite terminal and transportation link. Additionally, there are potential on-airport cost savings and revenue impacts and other important benefits due to vehicle trip reduction and emissions savings that may influence the project sponsor to go forward with an offsite terminal and transportation link even if it is projected to lose money. This chapter is organized into three sections: • Financial performance of an offsite terminal and transportation link, • Other benefits, and • On-airport financial impacts. Financial Performance of an Offsite Terminal and Transportation Link The projected financial performance of the offsite terminal and transportation link may influ- ence the project scope or the decision to go forward with the project. This section presents guide- lines for developing the pro forma and information on the revenues and costs generated by an offsite terminal and transportation link. Guidelines in Developing the Pro Forma The pro forma is the vehicle for developing financial projections for the project and can be used as a tool to test scenarios during project planning such as different fare levels, parking rates, and costs and revenues associated with different amenities. Depending on the goals and objectives of the project, it may be acceptable for the offsite termi- nal and transportation link to lose money, at least in the early years of the project, while the cus- tomer base is developing. One way to handle this in the pro forma is to treat the loss, or part of the loss, as a “contribution” or “investment” toward the primary project goals. For example, if the pri- mary goal is traffic mitigation, the loss could be treated as a mitigation contribution. If the primary goal is customer service, the loss could be treated as a customer-service contribution. Revenue Sources Potential revenue sources include bus fare, parking fees, concession revenue and tenant rents, advertising, partnerships, and funding assistance such as grants. Bus Fare The project sponsor should introduce a fare on the airport transportation link that reflects local market conditions and is consistent with the project goals and objectives defined at the 39 C H A P T E R 5 Costs and Benefits

beginning of the project. In theory, the market will support a price point that is considerably above any available combination of commuter-oriented public transportation services and below the price of on-airport parking, direct taxi/limousine service, and door-to-door shuttle services. The price-sensitive customer will compare the cost of using the airport transportation link and offsite terminal parking (if applicable) with the cost of more direct services, factoring in the size of the travel party (per-person fares) and the number of days away (daily rates). The time-sensitive customer will be less concerned about cost and more concerned about travel time, convenience, and reliability. The following analysis can serve as a starting point for determining the fare on the airport transportation link: 1. Calculate the fare required to achieve cost recovery (breakeven fare) on annual bus capi- tal and operating costs for passengers using the service during the third or fourth year of service, when ridership has reached maturity. During the first 2 to 3 years of service, the off- site terminal and bus link will be building its customer base as it becomes known and accepted by customers. Typically by the third or fourth year of service, the customer growth rate will be similar to the air passenger growth rate. Although it is instructional to determine the breakeven fare based on first and second year ridership projections, this calculation will most likely yield a fare so high that it discourages ridership. For a facility with constrained parking, full ridership potential for the bus may not be realized. This should be incorporated into the cost recovery analysis. If airport employees will be charged a lower fare than air passengers to use the service, cal- culate the breakeven passenger fare based on projected air passenger ridership and bus oper- ating expenses less employee fare revenue. When establishing an amount for bus capital and operating costs, the project sponsor should make a decision about what percentage of the ter- minal capital and operating costs will be allocated to the bus operation and what percentage will be allocated to the parking operation. 2. Compare the breakeven fare to the user cost of other modes in the market area, particularly the low-occupancy-vehicle modes with which the airport transportation link is intended to compete. Travel party size and days away will influence this comparison. There are two ways to calculate the user costs of other modes in the market area, the difference being in how the cost of using an automobile is calculated: • The true cost of the trip to the passenger includes automobile operating costs and out-of- pocket costs (see Table 8). • Out-of-pocket costs include only the cost of using a service. For a pick-up or drop-off trip, the traveler may consider the cost to be nothing or the cost of the price of gas; for long-term parking, most travelers would consider the cost to be the parking fee and the price of gas. Figure 4 presents an example of the difference between the true cost and out-of-pocket costs for an access trip to the airport. The project sponsor may also consider introducing special fare categories for specific customer groups or categories such as children, senior citizens, or weekend travelers. Data on the breakeven fare for the transportation link compared with other modes in the market is one methodology that will allow the project sponsor to deliberate on the appropriate fare to charge in the context of its goals and objectives and to calibrate the fare to market conditions. Another approach would be for the project sponsor to offer a fare on the airport transportation link and a daily long-term parking rate at the offsite terminal that results in cost recovery or a profit for the project, with bus revenue subsidizing the parking operation or parking revenue subsidizing the bus operation. Alternative methodologies would incorporate revenue sources in addition to the transportation link and parking. 40 Planning for Offsite Airport Terminals

Parking Fees Air passengers who typically drive to the airport and use long-term parking will compare the price of long-term parking at the offsite terminal with the cost of parking they normally use at the airport as a factor in deciding whether to use the offsite terminal or drive directly to the airport. The proj- ect sponsor should be familiar with parking rates at on-airport and off-airport parking facilities (including discount rates) when developing parking rates for the offsite terminal. The parking rate at the offsite terminal should be priced lower than the parking facilities in the vicinity of the airport. The project sponsor should compare the breakeven parking rate for the third or fourth year of the project with long-term parking rates on- and off-airport as a point of departure for ratemak- ing. During the third or fourth year of a successful offsite terminal, ridership on the airport Costs and Benefits 41 Mode/ Party Size 1 2 3 4 Offsite terminal bus dropped off at terminal Bus fare x party size Bus fare x party size Offsite terminal bus, long-term parking at offsite terminal ((bus fare x party size) + (daily parking rate x days)) /party size ((bus fare x party size) + (daily parking rate x days/2a)) /party size Other Modes Taxi (taxi fare + tip) / party size ( taxi fare + tip) / party size Door-to-door van (door-to-door van fare + tip) x party size (door-to-door van fare + tip ) x party size Private automobile, drop-off 1 (automobile operating cost 3 x 2) / party size (automobile operating cost3 x 2) /party size Private automobile, long-term park 2 Lowest on-airport daily parking rate [(automobile operating cost 3 + parking cost 4) / 2] / party size [(automobile operating cost 3 + parking cost 4) / 2] / party size Private automobile, long-term park 2 Lowest off-airport daily parking rate [(automobile operating cost 3 + parking cost 4) / 2] / party size [(automobile operating cost 3 + parking cost 4) / 2] / party size Private automobile, long-term park 2 Highest daily parking rate [(automobile operating cost 3 + parking cost 4) / 2] / party size [(automobile operating cost 3 + parking cost 4) / 2] / party size Additional modes fare x party size fare x party size Source: DMR Consulting 1 A pick-up or drop-off trip by private automobile requires a two-way vehicle trip for a one-way air trip. For a drop-off trip, the driver travels to the airport and drops off the passenger and then departs the airport. For a trip by private automobile using long-term parking, the automobile remains at the airport until the air passenger returns; therefore, it is a one-way automobile trip for a one-way air trip. The American Automobile Association offers a per mile automobile operating cost that could be used for this calculation. 2 The total cost of parking is divided in two to apportion the cost between two one-way trips. 3 Automobile operating cost = per mile automobile operating cost x distance from offsite terminal to airport. 4 Parking cost = daily parking rate x number of days. Table 8. True cost methodology for calculating one-way travel cost of airport ground transportation modes.

transportation link should be close to maturity. The breakeven parking rate is computed by divid- ing the annual capital and operating cost of the parking facility by the projected number of occu- pied parking spaces by day for the year. When establishing an amount for capital and operating costs of the parking operation, a determination must be made on what percentage of the capital and oper- ating costs of the offsite terminal will be allocated to the bus operation and what percentage will be allocated to the parking operation. If the offsite terminal is co-located in an intermodal center, it is possible that parking rates will be determined by the property owner. This may impact parking utilization and ridership if park- ing is priced too high. Concession Revenue and Tenant Rents This category includes revenue from vending machines and pay phones, concessionaires, and tenants such as food and beverage, retail, and rental car companies. Advertising Depending on project goals and objectives, revenue could be generated by selling advertising space on the property, in the terminal, and on the bus. The project sponsor should consider how particular advertising methods may impact the identity or image of the offsite terminal. Exam- ples of advertising options include • Billboards on the property; • Advertising inside the terminal or the parking facility; • Advertising placards inside the bus; • Items to distribute to passengers on the bus such as luggage tags with a company logo or a complimentary copy of a newspaper or magazine; • Advertising placed on the back of bus tickets or parking tickets; • Naming rights to the terminal, the parking facility, or sections of either; and • Advertising on the outside of the bus is not recommended unless it is subtle since the identity of the bus is important in attracting riders (this will be explained in Chapter 8: Branding, Advertising and Customer Service). 42 Planning for Offsite Airport Terminals Assumptions: Distance = 21 miles Per mile automobile operating cost = $.52 Airport daily parking rate = $12 Party size = 1 Length of stay = 3 days User Cost, One-Way Automobile Trip Mode True Cost Out-of-Pocket Cost Drop-off $21.84 $0.00 Long-term park $28.92 $18.00 A pick-up or drop-off trip by private automobile requires a two-way vehicle trip for a one-way air trip. For a drop-off trip, the driver travels to the airport and drops off the passenger and then departs the airport. For a trip by private automobile using long-term parking, the automobile remains at the airport until the air passenger returns; therefore, it is a one-way automobile trip for a one-way air trip. The long-term parking cost for a one-way trip is the total parking cost Figure 4. Comparison of user costs to access airport.

Partnerships Partnerships may supplement revenue or lower costs. For example, the governing body in the jurisdiction in which the offsite terminal is located may provide a subsidy for the service or cover specific costs such as advertising to ensure the service is available for residents, businesses, or tourists, thereby increasing the appeal or visibility of a location. This might also be offered in the form of low rent or reduced rent by the property owner. If revenue sharing is a condition of the partnership and the project sponsor is the airport operator, this may be considered to be revenue diversion and should be explored with the FAA. Funding Assistance Funding assistance such as grants and funding vehicles may also supplement revenue or lower costs. Potential funding sources are explored in Chapter 7: Plan of Finance and Financial Feasibility. Cost Categories It is important for the project sponsor to estimate all the costs associated with planning, devel- oping, and operating the offsite terminal and transportation link. Cost categories include capital and operating costs plus overhead. Capital Costs Included in capital costs are the following: • Bus—any costs related to acquiring or equipping buses and capital costs of fare collection equipment. • Parking—costs related to designing, constructing, and equipping the parking facility, includ- ing revenue control equipment and video monitoring equipment. Table 9 presents an esti- mate of construction costs for surface parking spaces as of January 2008. The cost of parking will vary by the type of facility and by labor and materials costs in the specific airport market area. Table 10 contains links to websites providing construction cost estimates for structured parking. Costs and Benefits 43 Range High Medium Low Cost $4,000 $3,000 $1,600 1Does not include cost of land. Source: Jacobs Consultancy Structured Parking Website Parking Structure www.rsmeans.com/calculator/index.asp Surface Parking www.city.newport-beach.ca.us/PlnAgendas/i03222007- 05-02.htm tp.osu.edu/planning/southcampparkplan/AppendixD.htm www.vtpi.org/parking.xls www.vtpi.org/tca/tca0504.pdf Source: Jacobs Consultancy Table 10. Internet references for parking construction costs. Table 9. Construction cost per surface parking space,1 January 2008.

• Terminal—costs to design, construct, equip, furnish, and finish the terminal. Purchase price of property, if purchased, can be included here or apportioned between terminal and parking. • Site preparation—costs to prepare the site including environmental impact studies, mitigation, and access from public streets to the facility. • Project development—any other costs related to project development such as studies to proj- ect ridership and site selection analysis. If more than one property or geographic location is being considered, the project sponsor will determine how much of the cost should be allocated to the selected project. Operating Costs Included in the operating costs are the following: • Bus—all costs related to the bus operation, which may include bus leasing costs; personnel; fuel; maintenance; fare collection (operating); or contract costs if operated and/or maintained by a third-party operator. • Parking—costs to operate parking, which may include personnel, electricity, facility and equipment maintenance, cleaning, security, or contract costs if operated by a third party. • Terminal—terminal operation costs, which may include personnel (e.g., terminal manager, bus ticket sales, and custodial staff); electricity and other utilities; maintenance; cleaning; secu- rity; or contract costs if operated by a third party. Leasing costs, if the property is leased, can be included here or apportioned between the terminal and parking. • Advertising—costs to advertise the offsite terminal and transportation link. • Administrative overhead—staff of the project sponsor who are not directly involved in the operation and upkeep of the offsite terminal and transportation link may charge time spent on the project to a cost center, or a percentage of operating costs may be applied as an esti- mate of staff time spent working on the project to account for time spent on duties such as per- formance measurement, reporting, accounting, surveying, and studies. The project sponsor may decide to exclude administrative costs from the pro forma. Other Benefits Other benefits of the offsite terminal and airport transportation link include reduced vehicle trips, savings in vehicle-miles traveled, and emissions savings. Trip Reduction and Savings in Vehicle-Miles Traveled Trip Reduction Every customer of the offsite terminal and transportation link who would have used a lower- occupancy vehicle to travel to and from the airport represents a reduction in vehicle trips traveled on the regional roadways between the offsite terminal and the airport, local roadways used in the vicinity of the airport, on-airport roadways, and potentially on the terminal curbs. The number of vehicle trips generated by an air passenger is related to the travel party size and the mode used. Table 11 shows vehicle trips generated per enplaning passenger (VTPP) for sample passenger trips to an airport. The best source of information for estimating vehicle trip savings for all passengers using the offsite terminal is an O/D air passenger survey, if available, that collects information on mode choice to the airport, travel party size, and resident status for a typical travel period. A typical travel period is a period that represents a typical passenger mix and volume of business and plea- sure travel for the individual airport. The data can be used to develop a spreadsheet that calcu- lates an average VTPP factor. This factor is then multiplied by the number of air passengers using 44 Planning for Offsite Airport Terminals

the airport transportation link to estimate vehicle trips saved to the airport. Table 12 provides a template to arrive at the VTPP factor. The VTPP factor is as follows: Typically this calculation will be used to estimate annual trips saved or average daily vehicle trips saved. If the customer base for the offsite terminal and transportation link is projected to be pre- dominantly residents, then the above template should be developed based on mode share and travel party size of resident air travelers. For HOV trips to the airport, including shared-ride vans and buses, a vehicle trip per passenger number can be calculated, but its use in a vehicle trip savings calculation would be suspect since scheduled HOV trips will still occur and many shared-ride vehicle trips will still occur with the other passengers that would have been in the vehicle. A similar factor can be developed for airport employees and applied to the number of employ- ees projected to use the transportation link. However, unless the airport has an active employee transportation program encouraging the use of ridesharing and alternative modes to get to work, most employees will drive alone. Therefore, it’s reasonable to assume that one vehicle trip is saved for every employee using the offsite terminal and transportation link. Net vehicle trips saved includes vehicle trips saved by airport employees and air passengers and adjusts the savings by the number of trips made by the airport transportation link, if the vehicle is a bus or a van. If the transportation link is a rail link, the number of trips equals zero: The estimated number of net vehicle trips saved can be used as part of project evaluation dur- ing project planning, and actual vehicle trips saved can be used to measure progress once a ser- vice is operational. Metrics can also be developed for financial performance such as cost (or deficit) per vehicle trip saved. Net vehicle trips saved air passenger vehic le trips saved employee vehicle trips save  d trips made by airport transportation li nk Air passenger vehicle trips saved average VTPP p  rojected (or actual) air passengers using transportation link Costs and Benefits 45 Mode (Examples of Single-Party Vehicles) A: Number of Vehicle Trips to Airport B: Number of Empty Vehicle Trips Departing Airporta C: Party Size Vehicle Trips per Passenger = (A + B)/C Private automobile: long-term parking 1 0 2 .5 Private automobile: long-term parking 1 0 1 1 Private automobile: drop-off 1 1 2 1 Private automobile: drop-off 1 1 1 2 Taxi 1 .4b 2 .7 aVehicles that are not parked at the airport for the duration of the air traveler’s trip depart the airport. All drop-off trips by private automobile will depart the airport without air passengers. A percentage of taxi trips and private limousine trips will leave the airport empty. b In this case, 40% of taxi trips depart the airport without a passenger. Source: DMR Consulting Table 11. VTPP by mode.

Vehicle-Miles Traveled Savings in vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) is also a measure of performance and is a benefit derived from offering the offsite terminal and transportation link. An offsite terminal located 15 miles from the airport that attracts as many customers as does an offsite terminal located 10 miles away offers 50% more savings in regional VMT, even though the number of vehicle trips saved from each offsite terminal is equal. For an offsite terminal and transportation link located at a site with little or no public trans- portation access, it is reasonable to assume customers will use low-occupancy modes to access the offsite terminal. Thus, there will be no savings in VMT between the trip origin or destination and the offsite terminal. The savings in VMT will occur between the offsite terminal and the airport: For an offsite terminal and airport transportation link located at an intermodal facility, some customers may take advantage of high-occupancy modes to the offsite terminal to use the air- port transportation link. Prior to the introduction of the airport transportation link, these cus- tomers may have taken low-occupancy modes to the airport. The savings in VMT for this type of trip would be greater than the distance between the off- site terminal and the airport. If a significant number of the offsite terminal customers use HOV modes to transfer to the airport transportation link, data for estimating the savings in VMT between the origin or destination point and the offsite terminal can be gathered as part of a user Net savings in VMT net vehicle trips saved distance between offsite terminal and airport 46 Planning for Offsite Airport Terminals Mode A: Share of O/D Passengers B: Number of O/D Passengers1 = A x (average daily O/D passengers) C: One- way vehicle trip D: Empty Trip2 E: Average Party Size F: Total Vehicle Trips = B/E x (C+D) VTPP Private automobile: pick-up/drop-off 1 1 =F/B Private automobile: long-term park 1 0 =F/B Rental car 1 0 =F/B Taxi 1 0<=taxi<=1 =F/B Single-party limousines 0<=limo<=1 =F/B Other single-party modes 0<=other modes<=1 =F/B Total Will be less than 100% unless there are no HOV modes to the airport Sum column N/A N/A N/A Sum column Average VTPP = Total F/ Total B 1Typically applied to average daily air passengers. 2Empty trips for commercial vehicles can be calculated if data is available or estimated based on knowledge of the service. Taxi regulations at the airport will influence the number of empty vehicle trips. Source: DMR Consulting Table 12. Template to develop average VTPP factor.

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 Costs and Benefits 47

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 48 Planning for Offsite Airport Terminals Airport/Route O/DEnplanements Enplaning Air Passenger Ridershipa Share of O/D Enplanements LAX: VNY FlyAway 19,520,000 342,005 1.8% LAX: Union Station FlyAway 19,520,000 110,535b 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% aAir passenger ridership only. Employee ridership is significant on each service. bRepresents 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. Table 13. Market share of express bus ridership, BOS and LAX, 2006.

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. Costs and Benefits 49