PAPERBACK Free PDF AccessFree Resources |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
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 15
3
BALANCING NEEDS IN THE FUTURE
AIRPORT TERMINAL
The workshop participants agreed that all of the various
problems cited in their discussions are likely to be encountered
in the planning, design, and management of any large airport
passenger terminal, but that the relative significance of these
problems depends on the unique character of each individual
airport and terminal building. The specific location, local air
travel market, airlines, existing facilities, and institutional and
political arrangements--within the context of the national and
international air transport systems--shape the passenger terminal.
There is no single best design.
Nevertheless, the participants also agreed that the same key
issues must be addressed at any airport, if the passenger terminal
is to be a fully effective element of the air transportation system.
Many of these issues were raised in workshop discussions and are
summarized in six broad categories in Table 3-1. New informa-
tion, operating technologies, or management tools will be required
for the resolution of these issues.
Having identified the key issues that must be faced in devel-
oping future airport passenger terminals, the participants formed
three groups to discuss how these issues might ideally be resolved.
Each group discussed these issues from one of three points of
view: passengers, airlines, airport operators. Each of these groups
might be expected to have rather different perspectives on what
the ideal future terminal building would be, but these perspec-
tives highlight the common needs for information, operating
technologies, and management tools.
PASSENGER'S PERSPECTIVE
While the passenger terminal continues to evolve, the
essential needs of air passengers remain the same: reasonable
15
OCR for page 16
.
TABLE 3-1 Issues Faced in the Development of Future
Passenger Terminals
Major Issues
Factors to Consider
Definition of the future
market
Issues and opportunities
for demand management
Implications of growth of
very large terminals
Concerns for passenger
security
Integration of support and
service systems
Globalization of air transport
system
The United States as a foreign
tourist destination
Aging of domestic population
Coordination of high-speed
ground transport and air routes
in multiairport systems
Pricing of space, goods, and
services
Marking and design of direction
flow ("wayfinding")
Location and sizing of passenger
services and amenities
Evolving multiuse facilities
Accommodation of aircraft
geometry
Apron space, building contact
Role and place of concession
Auto parking and ground access
Flexibility and multistage
development
Baggage handling
Deliveries for concessions
and airline catering
Access by airline and airport
personnel
Access by visitors and greeters
Space requirements for all
utility systems
Distribution of supplies
Baggage system and space for it
Waste removal
Peoplemovers and walkways as
aids or barriers
16
OCR for page 17
TABLE 3-1 Cont'd
New planning and design
process needs
Fueling systems
systems
, cargo handling
Fiscal planning and management
Early involvement of key
interests
Glamour and function
Mediation of private roles of
users and public process of
planning
NOTE: This list of issues is based on workshop discussions and
is not intended to establish priorities or to be a complete or
balanced portrayal of all policy and technical issues.
walking distances, fast and efficient processing, adequate space,
physical conveniences, and readily available and understandable
information to help negotiate departures, arrivals, and transfers.
These essential needs should be reflected in an underlying simi-
larity of passenger terminals, even though the demands of speci-
fic markets and airline practices shape each unique building.
Passenger surveys and professional opinions seem to agree that
the best terminals share some of the following features:
· peoplemovers or other systems to aid mobility as an integral
part of the terminal design;
· pleasant environment for people, including good visual and
acoustical features, extensive and intelligent use of art and
landscaping, and a strong "sense of place";
· logical and apparent circulation patterns, reinforced by clear
and consistent graphics and information systems;
o sensitive accommodation of groups that may have particular
needs, such as elderly people, people traveling with infants or
small children, and handicapped people;
· accessible concessions offering an appropriate variety of
services, goods, and prices; and
o good and reliable information on flight schedules and airline
and flight boarding locations.
Workshop participants asserted that greater attention should
be given to defining those similarities that seem to make a
17
OCR for page 18
.
successful terminal, formulating better guidelines for these
aspects of the terminal, and developing lower-cost systems that
can improve the performance of the terminal. Better analytical
tools should be developed to assess terminal building perfor-
mance. Model and local building codes should not treat airport
terminals as auditoriums or other public use facilities; rather,
they should address the particular life safety and health concerns
of an airport. Interactive passenger information systems could be
developed, including more extensive training of airline and air-
port personnel to provide customer service and information.
Low-speed, low-cost transportation systems such as accelerating
walkways and cable-driven peoplemovers can be perfected for
airport applications. High-volume baggage inspection and
handling equipment is needed, as are improved systems for
delivery and waste removal for food and beverage concessions.
Participants suggested that an institutional mechanism is
needed to provide balanced advice to airport operators and
terminal designers for improving the performance of passenger-
terminal facilities.
Existing organizations bring together
interests ot airlines or airport operators; but there is no ongoing
forum for the interests of these groups and those of passengers,
concessionaires, equipment manufacturers, and other concerned
groups to address the issues that arise in regard to the terminal
building.~5 Such a forum could not only help to motivate general
improvements in planning, design, and management but could
provide an objective third-party review of plans for terminal
building development at individual airports. The advice of such
a review could give passengers and concessionaires a stronger
voice in the terminal building design process and help communi-
ties gain the highest possible return on their airport terminal
investment.
i5 The Industry Working Group (IWO) and International
Industry Working Group (IIWG), sponsored by the Air Transport
Association of America (ATA), International Air Transport
Association (IATA), Aerospace Industries Association (AIA),
American Association of Airport Executives (AAAE), and Air-
port Operators Council International (AOCI) address a variety of
technical matters associated with air transportation.
|6 Workshop participants envisioned a nonbinding critique or
"design audit" that would assist designers and airport owners.
18
OCR for page 19
AIRLINE'S PERSPECTIVE
There is little reason to expect a significant change in the
deregulated free-market environment in which airport authorities
and airlines now operate. While different airlines may adjust
their services to capture particular markets, the efficient use of
aircraft will continue to be their primary interest. Future ter-
minal buildings should contribute to reducing aircraft turn-
around time, and the industry can afford to invest in making
improvements.
With current designs, the minimum turnaround time requires
that parked aircraft have direct contact with the terminal
building. Baggage-handling systems may become less centralized,
particularly at airports with large numbers of flights that serve
a route hub. Advanced robotic devices might support their sort-
ing of transfer baggage at gate areas.
Workshop participants suggested that a means to increase
berth turnover rates and thereby reduce the needs for passenger
holdrooms and apron-building frontage would be to service air-
craft at remote apron locations and pull them up to the passenger
terminal for passenger boarding. However, concerns for passen-
ger security and the opportunities to expand concession services
may combine to expand the need for terminal building space.
Efficient use of the entire volume of space enclosed in the
terminal will become increasingly important, warranting more
construction below the ground level and on levels above the
principal passenger concourse. Safety concerns currently are the
basis for restricting the use of space above or below active aprons
and taxiways.
Workshop participants considering the airlines' perspective
noted that the best airports, in terms of their contribution to the
community, are those that have been developed and operated
with an effective partnership between airlines and operators.
While airlines are generally satisfied with current operating and
decision-making procedures that influence terminal building de-
signs, the pressures of competition have greatly diminished the
use of the "tech committees as a means for airlines, airport
operators, concessionaires, equipment manufacturers and other
interested groups to discuss the future of a particular airport.
Participants proposed that some forum is needed to foster the
i7 Prior to deregulation, representatives of airlines serving an
airport could freely discuss operations and strategy with one
another without fear of giving competitive advantage or violat-
ing antitrust regulations.
19
OCR for page 20
cooperation and joint action needed to solve problems of common
concern.
Workshop participants also noted airlines' renewed interest
in developing terminal buildings that use bold architecture and
advanced functional systems to support or strengthen the airline's
positive public image. Such designs may represent a notable
increase in capital cost for the terminal, but this cost typically
has a much smaller impact on the airline's overall operating ex-
penses, particularly at large centers of airline activity. Bold
architectural statements are thus more likely to be made at the
largest airports, but only to the extent that airlines perceive that
their profitability allows them to make the extra incremental
investment that is required.
OPERATOR'S PERSPECTIVE
Workshop participants discussing the operator's perspective
focused on the evolution of the terminal building to meet chang-
ing airline needs and emphasized the need for modularity or
other design features that give the operator flexibility to adapt
to these changes. While greater mechanization is likely in systems
for baggage and passenger transfer and aircraft servicing and
support, care should be taken to avoid the use of technologies
that may have limited lifetimes that would lock the terminal into
an inefficient physical configuration or the failure to provide
adequate space for future expansion and reconfiguration of
facilities.
The need for flexibility is not limited to the physical aspects
of a terminal. Impediments to terminal development include im-
portant but time-consuming environmental and community plan
reviews and the lack of uniform criteria for judging the per-
formance of terminal buildings. Concerns about legal liability
for equipment malfunctions hinder the development of new tech-
nologies for terminal buildings. Research and development are
particularly needed to reduce the size and to improve the per-
formance of equipment for security screening of baggage and
other materials entering the terminal building area.
Broader market research would help to define terminal
building performance requirements. Better planning and design
coordination among operators, airlines, concessionaires, equip-
ment suppliers, and designers would help to ensure that these
requirements are met. All interested groups should seek to avoid
~8 The United Airlines terminal at Chicago~s O'Hare Inter-
national Airport was cited as a recent example of such a design.
20
OCR for page 21
the adversarial relationship that frequently occurs in current
terminal building planning and design.
The workshop participants noted that new basic design con-
cepts for future passenger terminals may be proposed, but that
passenger boarding through loading bridges from the terminal
building is likely to continue as the preferred mode of operation.
Airline data systems will similarly continue to be the basis for
providing information to passengers. New concepts, if they are
developed, are more likely to evolve from experience at many
airports than to emerge as a single revolutionary change at any
one location.
21
OCR for page 22
Representative terms from entire chapter:
passenger terminals
