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.