Cover Image

Not for Sale



View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( 65


The National Academies | 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 64
64 implementation would achieve the threshold results. Also results and are consistent with the airport operator's goals considered in the analysis is whether the related effects of and objectives for the parking program. These strategies and strategy implementation are consistent with the goals and packages of strategies represent the range of viable alterna- objectives for the parking program. Related effects in addition tives to manage or resolve parking constraints at an airport. to parking demand, as discussed in Chapter 5, include potential The viable alternatives are carried forward to the comparative effects on financial performance, vehicle traffic, the environ- analysis phase. ment (i.e., air quality), and customer service. If only one strategy or package of strategies is identified as The following steps, depicted in Figure 4, are recommended viable through the alternatives analysis, the airport operator to evaluate strategies under consideration in the alternatives does not need to conduct a comparative analysis. This viable analysis phase. Combinations of strategies, referred to as strategy is the preferred strategy. "packages of strategies," can be analyzed using the same steps once the analyses of individual strategies are complete. Comparative Analysis Phase Steps in the alternatives analysis phase are as follow: If a preferred strategy or package of strategies was not iden- Step 4--Project parking-related outcomes of each strategy tified in the alternatives analysis phase, the remaining viable or packages of strategies using predictive tools or method- alternatives are analyzed for comparison in this phase, as shown ologies. (See Chapter 6 for information on predicting the in Figure 5, to identify the best solution for the airport oper- outcomes of selected strategies.) ator given the environment in which the airport operates, as Step 5--Evaluate the projected parking-related outcomes well as the goals and objectives for the parking program. The of each strategy (or packages of strategies) for the ability to following steps will assist an airport operator in comparing achieve the targeted or threshold results, and eliminate those viable alternatives and identifying a preferred alternative: strategies that would not achieve the threshold results. Step 6--Calculate related effects of strategies (or packages Step 9--Rank each alternative based on how well it meets of strategies) using outputs of predictive methodologies the primary objective(s) of the parking program. or other information. Actual calculations in this step will Step 10--Develop a subordinate ranking based on how depend on the objectives defined for the parking program well each alternative meets the secondary objectives of the and their prioritization. For example, projected revenues, parking program. estimated costs, vehicle traffic impacts, or environmental Step 11--Compare implementation requirements (such as impacts might be of concern to the airport operator. financial resources, level of effort, timeframe) and related Step 7--Evaluate the related effects of each strategy (or effects (such as financial performance) among alternatives. package of strategies) to identify effects that are unacceptable Consider other factors unique to the airport that are relevant based on the goals and objectives for the parking program to selection of an alternative, including the benefits derived and eliminate these strategies. If the strategy (or package of and negative effects of each alternative. strategies) achieves the targeted results (defined in Step 5), and if the related effects of the strategy (or package of Steps 9 through 11 should provide sufficient differentiation strategies) are consistent with the goals and objectives, carry among the viable alternatives for an airport operator to make the strategy (or package of strategies) forward to the compar- a final selection of a preferred strategy or package of strategies ative analysis phase. If the effects of the strategy are consistent to manage or resolve parking constraints. with the goals and objectives and the strategy achieves the threshold results but not the targeted results, carry the Strategy Selection Example strategy forward to Step 8. Step 8--For strategies projected to achieve the threshold An example of the strategy selection process based on a results, determine if they can be packaged with other strate- theoretical airport parking scenario follows. The subject air- gies to potentially achieve the targeted results. If so, repeat port is a medium-hub airport experiencing a constrained analysis and evaluation Steps 4 through 7 for the package parking situation in 2009. Table 16 summarizes the key attrib- of strategies. If not, consider whether achievement of the utes of the airport's parking program and constrained park- threshold results is sufficient for further consideration and ing situation for the theoretical scenario. carry the strategy forward to the comparative analysis phase or eliminate the strategy. Nature and Causes of Constraints In Steps 4 through 8, an airport operator identifies the When the garage, located in the terminal area, reaches 90% strategies and packages of strategies that achieve the targeted capacity, extra personnel are assigned to assist customers in

OCR for page 64
65 Source: Ricondo & Associates, Inc., and DMR Consulting, November 2009. Figure 4. Strategy selection--alternatives analysis phase.

OCR for page 64
66 Source: Ricondo & Associates, Inc., and DMR Consulting, November 2009. Figure 5. Strategy selection--comparative analysis phase.

OCR for page 64
67 Table 16. Key attributes of airport parking program and parking constraints, 2009, theoretical airport. Attribute Description Objectives of Parking Program Primary: Maintain or enhance net revenue. Secondary: Consider customer service implications and minimize excess vehicle traffic caused by constraints. Additional Information Relevant to No land is available to expand terminal area parking. Provision and Management of Parking Program Fifty percent of employees using terminal area parking work for employers who have the right to terminal area employee parking through lease agreements with the airport operator. Parking revenue control system is 2 years old. It is capable of processing differential rates, but not variable rates. Airport management will not approve the investment for system upgrades. Airport-Operated Parking Supply Public parking supply = Y Terminal area garage parking is 40% of airport-operated parking supply (0.4Y) Daily rate = X Hourly rate = 0.2X Remote surface parking with shuttle bus is 60% of airport-operated parking supply (0.6Y) Daily rate = 0.75X Privately Operated Parking Supply Multiple facilities with shuttle service Supply is 30% of airport-operated public parking supply (0.3Y) Daily rates vary by facility from 0.6X to 0.85X. Employee Parking Supply Remote employee lot serves some employees that work in the terminal area with a shuttle bus. Customers of Public Parking Supply Terminal area parking: short-term parkers, long-term parkers, and some employees in terminal area Remote parking: long-term parkers Constrained Parking Problem Since 2006, terminal area public parking has been full on Tuesdays through Thursdays most weeks in the spring and fall. Remote parking has excess capacity except for holiday periods. Remote employee lot has excess capacity. Source: DMR Consulting, November 2009. finding a space. Private automobiles are "stuffed and stacked" that (1) long-term parkers shifted to single-party drop-off before the garage is closed. This adds another 5% capacity modes in anticipation of busy periods, (2) short-term parkers to the garage, but sometimes private automobiles remain in used the terminal curbside rather than parking, or (3) long- unofficial spaces for several days. Extra personnel were deployed term parkers dropped off members of their travel party at the in the garage for 48 days in the previous year (2008). Garage terminal curbside before parking. During these periods, the parking was closed on 20 days, and drivers of private auto- airport operator received customer complaints, primarily mobiles were diverted to remote parking, or they chose to use from business travelers with trip durations of 2 days or less privately operated off-airport parking. The number of private who had difficulty finding an available parking space within automobiles denied access to the garage is difficult to quantify the garage. because a computerized "Lot Full" sign board is activated when Data from the revenue control system indicates the average designated spaces are 100% full. The airport's website pro- distribution of exits by length of stay in the public parking vides information on whether the two parking facilities have facilities during constrained periods in spring 2009, as shown space available or are full. Vehicle traffic counts conducted in Table 17. at various locations within the terminal area indicate that Data from the O&D airline passenger survey conducted terminal area vehicle traffic also increased during the con- in spring 2008 indicated that the majority of customers strained periods. The increase in vehicle traffic may indicate using remote parking are traveling for nonbusiness purposes.