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 R1
ACRP
AIRPORT
COOPERATIVE
RESEARCH
PROGRAM
REPORT 55
Sponsored by
the Federal
Aviation
Administration
Passenger Level of Service
and Spatial Planning
for Airport Terminals
OCR for page R2
ACRP OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE* TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2011 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE*
CHAIR OFFICERS
James Wilding CHAIR: Neil J. Pedersen, Administrator, Maryland State Highway Administration, Baltimore
Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (re- VICE CHAIR: Sandra Rosenbloom, Professor of Planning, University of Arizona, Tucson
tired)
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Robert E. Skinner, Jr., Transportation Research Board
VICE CHAIR
MEMBERS
Jeff Hamiel
MinneapolisSt. Paul J. Barry Barker, Executive Director, Transit Authority of River City, Louisville, KY
Metropolitan Airports Commission Deborah H. Butler, Executive Vice President, Planning, and CIO, Norfolk Southern Corporation,
Norfolk, VA
MEMBERS William A.V. Clark, Professor, Department of Geography, University of California, Los Angeles
James Crites Eugene A. Conti, Jr., Secretary of Transportation, North Carolina DOT, Raleigh
DallasFort Worth International Airport James M. Crites, Executive Vice President of Operations, Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport, TX
Richard de Neufville Paula J. Hammond, Secretary, Washington State DOT, Olympia
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Kevin C. Dolliole
Michael W. Hancock, Secretary, Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, Frankfort
Unison Consulting Adib K. Kanafani, Cahill Professor of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley
John K. Duval Michael P. Lewis, Director, Rhode Island DOT, Providence
Austin Commercial, LP Susan Martinovich, Director, Nevada DOT, Carson City
Kitty Freidheim Michael R. Morris, Director of Transportation, North Central Texas Council of Governments, Arlington
Freidheim Consulting
Steve Grossman
Tracy L. Rosser, Vice President, Regional General Manager, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Mandeville, LA
Jacksonville Aviation Authority Steven T. Scalzo, Chief Operating Officer, Marine Resources Group, Seattle, WA
Tom Jensen Henry G. (Gerry) Schwartz, Jr., Chairman (retired), Jacobs/Sverdrup Civil, Inc., St. Louis, MO
National Safe Skies Alliance Beverly A. Scott, General Manager and CEO, Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority,
Catherine M. Lang Atlanta, GA
Federal Aviation Administration
Gina Marie Lindsey David Seltzer, Principal, Mercator Advisors LLC, Philadelphia, PA
Los Angeles World Airports Lawrence A. Selzer, President and CEO, The Conservation Fund, Arlington, VA
Carolyn Motz Kumares C. Sinha, Olson Distinguished Professor of Civil Engineering, Purdue University, West
Airport Design Consultants, Inc. Lafayette, IN
Richard Tucker Thomas K. Sorel, Commissioner, Minnesota DOT, St. Paul
Huntsville International Airport
Daniel Sperling, Professor of Civil Engineering and Environmental Science and Policy; Director, Institute of
EX OFFICIO MEMBERS
Transportation Studies; and Interim Director, Energy Efficiency Center, University of California, Davis
Kirk T. Steudle, Director, Michigan DOT, Lansing
Paula P. Hochstetler Douglas W. Stotlar, President and CEO, Con-Way, Inc., Ann Arbor, MI
Airport Consultants Council
Sabrina Johnson C. Michael Walton, Ernest H. Cockrell Centennial Chair in Engineering, University of Texas, Austin
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Richard Marchi EX OFFICIO MEMBERS
Airports Council International--North America
Laura McKee Peter H. Appel, Administrator, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, U.S.DOT
Air Transport Association of America J. Randolph Babbitt, Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration, U.S.DOT
Henry Ogrodzinski Rebecca M. Brewster, President and COO, American Transportation Research Institute, Smyrna, GA
National Association of State Aviation Officials Anne S. Ferro, Administrator, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, U.S.DOT
Melissa Sabatine LeRoy Gishi, Chief, Division of Transportation, Bureau of Indian Affairs, U.S.DOT
American Association of Airport Executives
Robert E. Skinner, Jr. John T. Gray, Senior Vice President, Policy and Economics, Association of American Railroads,
Transportation Research Board Washington, DC
John C. Horsley, Executive Director, American Association of State Highway and Transportation
SECRETARY Officials, Washington, DC
Christopher W. Jenks David T. Matsuda, Deputy Administrator, Maritime Administration, U.S.DOT
Transportation Research Board Victor M. Mendez, Administrator, Federal Highway Administration, U.S.DOT
William W. Millar, President, American Public Transportation Association, Washington, DC
Tara O'Toole, Under Secretary for Science and Technology, U.S. Department of Homeland Security,
Washington, DC
Robert J. Papp (Adm., U.S. Coast Guard), Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Department of
Homeland Security, Washington, DC
Cynthia L. Quarterman, Administrator, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration,
U.S.DOT
Peter M. Rogoff, Administrator, Federal Transit Administration, U.S.DOT
David L. Strickland, Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S.DOT
Joseph C. Szabo, Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration, U.S.DOT
Polly Trottenberg, Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy, U.S.DOT
Robert L. Van Antwerp (Lt. Gen., U.S. Army), Chief of Engineers and Commanding General,
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC
Barry R. Wallerstein, Executive Officer, South Coast Air Quality Management District,
Diamond Bar, CA
*Membership as of July 2011. *Membership as of June 2011.
OCR for page R3
AIRPORT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM
ACRP REPORT 55
Passenger Level of Service
and Spatial Planning
for Airport Terminals
TRANSSOLUTIONS
Fort Worth, Texas
STRATEGIC INSIGHT GROUP
Fort Worth, Texas
AVIATION RESOURCE PARTNERS
Fort Worth, Texas
KIMLEY-HORN ASSOCIATES
Fort Worth, Texas
Subscriber Categories
Aviation
Research sponsored by the Federal Aviation Administration
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD
WASHINGTON, D.C.
2011
www.TRB.org
OCR for page R4
AIRPORT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM ACRP REPORT 55
Airports are vital national resources. They serve a key role in trans- Project 03-05
portation of people and goods and in regional, national, and inter- ISSN 1935-9802
national commerce. They are where the nation's aviation system ISBN 978-0-309-21352-3
connects with other modes of transportation and where federal respon- Library of Congress Control Number 2011937379
sibility for managing and regulating air traffic operations intersects
with the role of state and local governments that own and operate most © 2011 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
airports. Research is necessary to solve common operating problems,
to adapt appropriate new technologies from other industries, and to
introduce innovations into the airport industry. The Airport Coopera- COPYRIGHT INFORMATION
tive Research Program (ACRP) serves as one of the principal means by
Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining
which the airport industry can develop innovative near-term solutions
written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously
to meet demands placed on it. published or copyrighted material used herein.
The need for ACRP was identified in TRB Special Report 272: Airport
Research Needs: Cooperative Solutions in 2003, based on a study spon- Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this
publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the
sored by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The ACRP carries understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB or FAA endorsement
out applied research on problems that are shared by airport operating of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the
agencies and are not being adequately addressed by existing federal material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate
research programs. It is modeled after the successful National Coopera- acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of
tive Highway Research Program and Transit Cooperative Research Pro- the material, request permission from CRP.
gram. The ACRP undertakes research and other technical activities in a
variety of airport subject areas, including design, construction, mainte-
nance, operations, safety, security, policy, planning, human resources, NOTICE
and administration. The ACRP provides a forum where airport opera-
tors can cooperatively address common operational problems. The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the Airport Cooperative Research
Program, conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of the
The ACRP was authorized in December 2003 as part of the Vision Governing Board of the National Research Council.
100-Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act. The primary partici-
pants in the ACRP are (1) an independent governing board, the ACRP The members of the technical panel selected to monitor this project and to review this
report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance.
Oversight Committee (AOC), appointed by the Secretary of the U.S.
The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to
Department of Transportation with representation from airport oper- procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved
ating agencies, other stakeholders, and relevant industry organizations by the Governing Board of the National Research Council.
such as the Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA),
The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the
the American Association of Airport Executives (AAAE), the National researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation
Association of State Aviation Officials (NASAO), and the Air Transport Research Board, the National Research Council, or the program sponsors.
Association (ATA) as vital links to the airport community; (2) the TRB
The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research
as program manager and secretariat for the governing board; and Council, and the sponsors of the Airport Cooperative Research Program do not endorse
(3) the FAA as program sponsor. In October 2005, the FAA executed a products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers' names appear herein solely because
contract with the National Academies formally initiating the program. they are considered essential to the object of the report.
The ACRP benefits from the cooperation and participation of airport
professionals, air carriers, shippers, state and local government officials,
equipment and service suppliers, other airport users, and research orga-
nizations. Each of these participants has different interests and respon-
sibilities, and each is an integral part of this cooperative research effort.
Research problem statements for the ACRP are solicited periodically
but may be submitted to the TRB by anyone at any time. It is the
responsibility of the AOC to formulate the research program by iden-
tifying the highest priority projects and defining funding levels and
expected products.
Once selected, each ACRP project is assigned to an expert panel,
appointed by the TRB. Panels include experienced practitioners and
research specialists; heavy emphasis is placed on including airport pro-
fessionals, the intended users of the research products. The panels pre-
pare project statements (requests for proposals), select contractors, and
provide technical guidance and counsel throughout the life of the
project. The process for developing research problem statements and Published reports of the
selecting research agencies has been used by TRB in managing cooper- AIRPORT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM
ative research programs since 1962. As in other TRB activities, ACRP
are available from:
project panels serve voluntarily without compensation.
Primary emphasis is placed on disseminating ACRP results to the Transportation Research Board
Business Office
intended end-users of the research: airport operating agencies, service 500 Fifth Street, NW
providers, and suppliers. The ACRP produces a series of research Washington, DC 20001
reports for use by airport operators, local agencies, the FAA, and other
interested parties, and industry associations may arrange for work- and can be ordered through the Internet at
shops, training aids, field visits, and other activities to ensure that http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore
results are implemented by airport-industry practitioners. Printed in the United States of America
OCR for page R5
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific
and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. On the
authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal
government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel
organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the
National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also
sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior
achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members
of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the
responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government
and, on its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the
Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of
science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in
accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the
National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and
the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine.
Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council.
The Transportation Research Board is one of six major divisions of the National Research Council. The mission of the Transporta-
tion Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange,
conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Board's varied activities annually engage about
7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia,
all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal
agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individu-
als interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org
www.national-academies.org
OCR for page R6
COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMS
CRP STAFF FOR ACRP REPORT 55
Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs
Crawford F. Jencks, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs
Michael R. Salamone, ACRP Manager
Lawrence D. Goldstein, Senior Program Officer
Tiana Barnes, Senior Program Assistant
Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications
Doug English, Editor
ACRP PROJECT 03-05 PANEL
Field of Policy and Planning
Theodore S. Kitchens, Newport News/Williamsburg International Airport, Newport News, VA (Chair)
Joseph Barden, HNTB Corporation, Los Angeles, CA
Dipasis Bhadra, Federal Aviation Administration, Washington, DC
Naren Doshi, MMM Group, Thornhill, ON
Manju Kumar, University of CaliforniaBerkeley, Berkeley, CA
David D. Tomber, Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, Seattle, WA
Elisha Novak, FAA Liaison
Christine Gerencher, TRB Liaison
OCR for page R7
FOREWORD
By Lawrence D. Goldstein
Staff Officer
Transportation Research Board
ACRP Report 55 examines passenger perception of level of service (LOS) related to space
allocation in specific areas within airport terminals. The objective of this research was to
evaluate appropriate level-of-service standards applied in the terminal planning and design
process while testing the continued validity of historic space allocation parameters that have
been in use for more than 30 years. These original standards have often been questioned but
never revised or replaced. To accomplish this objective, the researchers used a new approach
to measure how passengers perceive the sufficiency of space, relying on quantitative data in
combination with ethnographic interviews. Interviews were conducted on site within the
terminals at seven case-study airports. The research also examined what other factors might
affect positive perception of level of service, such as availability of extended information
resources plus opportunities for use of technology (wireless connectivity, power connec-
tions for computers and other electronic equipment, and other innovations).
ACRP Report 55 provides space allocation parameters for each terminal processing area,
as well as important considerations for refining specific applications. In addition, guidelines
include criteria for implementing these space allocation parameters, recognizing that higher
levels of area per passenger do not necessarily contribute to improved perception of LOS.
The research also concludes that perception of LOS is enhanced by effective information
displays that provide schedules and boarding information so that passengers do not have to
remain in the boarding area at all times.
Airport architects, engineers, and planners can use the guidelines provided to help deter-
mine space requirements and other design parameters that result in passengers perceiving
spatial areas to be both sufficient and efficient, while providing an acceptable level of ser-
vice. In addition, airport operators and airline personnel can use the information provided
to determine how to allocate terminal space to serve passenger needs efficiently and effec-
tively. Both groups can plan for and incorporate advanced information systems to broaden
the use of all space within the terminal, offering greater flexibility to meet changing demand
for service as a function of variable levels of activity.
The research for ACRP Report 55 shows that if airport planners and designers as well as
airline operators want to improve passenger perception of the quality of the airport termi-
nal, it is important to provide all processors and staffing necessary to minimize passenger
wait times at ticketing (counters and kiosks), security screening, and baggage claim areas.
To improve user perception of the quality of passenger services, designers and operators also
need to determine what amenities passengers rely on in an era of increasing demand for
communication and access to technology designed to enhance productivity as well as per-
sonal entertainment. An important conclusion of this research is that passengers want easy
OCR for page R8
access to information about flight status, clarity in signage, and additional amenities that
allow them to use their time productively or to relax and enjoy an escape from the demands
of travel.
A primary finding of this research is that larger space by itself does not always generate
increased passenger perception of high-quality LOS. Overall perception of quality of service
is the result of a combination of factors that address productivity during wait times as well
as access to a variety of services with options other than just waiting prior to aircraft board-
ing. In addition, if airport terminal designers and managers in concert with airline opera-
tors want to provide passengers with a world-class terminal, qualitative as well as quantita-
tive facility design factors should be considered early in the planning and design process. To
continue to improve the process of understanding passenger needs, more effective tech-
niques are necessary for surveying passengers and collecting and evaluating relevant infor-
mation. In particular, the airport industry needs to identify more effective ways to collect
data on how passengers perceive level of service and what quantitative and qualitative fac-
tors are important in a particular terminal environment.
OCR for page R9
CONTENTS
1 Summary
4 Chapter 1 Background
4 A Brief Historical Perspective of Air Passenger Level of Service
5 Research Approach
5 Research Objectives and Approach Evolve
7 Chapter 2 Research Approach
7 Project Description
7 Study Design
8 Data Collection Cities
8 Data Collection Methodology
14 Chapter 3 Findings and Applications
14 Airport Use of LOS Standards
14 Data Point Summary
14 Determination of Perception Turning Points for Area and Wait Time
17 Detailed Passenger Wait-Time Results
22 Detailed Passenger Density Results
29 Qualitative (Ethnographic) Results
32 Chapter 4 Conclusions and Recommendations
for Further Research
32 Conclusions
34 Recommended Further Research
36 Chapter 5 Space Allocation Guidelines
36 Background
36 A Few Words of Caution
36 Peak Occupancy Demand Forecast
37 Passenger Space Allocations
39 References
40 Appendix A Airport Snapshots
47 Appendix B Remaining Detailed Results
60 Appendix C Observations, Comments, and Suggestions
by Passengers
Note: Many of the photographs, figures, and tables in this report have been converted from color to grayscale
for printing. The electronic version of the report (posted on the Web at www.trb.org) retains the color versions.
OCR for page R10
AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Activities at airports are dynamic and ever-changing. These activities require constant monitoring and
staff attention. Even so, the airport staff at each of the seven research airports was gracious to give their
time to help our team gain access to the airport and provide information required to conduct our research.
In all cases, they helped us navigate local security protocols and requirements, and in many cases, they pro-
vided escorts from their own operations staff to allow us to do our work in a compressed time frame.
Special thanks go to the staff at Austin Bergstrom International Airport, especially Patti Edwards, Denise
Hatch, and Jonathan Lian; Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport, especially Jeff Fegan, Jim Crites, Chief
Charles Deel, Andy Bell, and Stephanie Green; Dulles International Airport, especially Jim Bennett,
William Lebegern, and Anthony Dockery; Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, especially Ben
DeCosta and Daniel Molloy; Las Vegas McCarran International Airport, especially Randy Walker and
Rosemary Vasilades; Louisville International Airport, especially Charles Miller, Karen Scott and Steve
Petty; and Oakland International Airport, especially Steve Grossman, Kristi McKinney, and Joan Zatopek.
This study relied on the services of a group of aviation industry professionals--referred to as the "Red
Team"--to review the initial analyses and findings of the research. These individuals contributed their
time and money to participate in the meeting and/or review the research findings and provide important
guidance. They include Bruce Anderson and Matt Lee (Landrum & Brown); Joel Hirsh (Hirsh Associates);
Marion White (Gensler); Natalie Martel (Tecsult/AECOM); Evan Futterman (Futterman Consultants);
Paula Hochstetler (Airports Consultants Council); Richard Marchi (Airport Council InternationalNorth
America); and David Lind, Jonathan Massey, Phil Mein, and John Murphy (Corgan).
Special thanks to two good business partners and friends: Joe Waller at HMS Host, who generously pro-
vided gift cards to use as thank you gifts for the time airport professionals took to respond to online surveys
and other data collection activities; and Les Cappetta and Patrick Murray, at SSP America, who generously
shared their proprietary research on passenger perceptions of level of service.
Finally, the research benefited tremendously from the guidance provided by our panel, listed in the front
pages of this book, especially our panel chair, Theodore Kitchens, who provided support and insightful
guidance at each step along the way.
