Rethinking Airport Parking Facilities to Protect and Enhance Non-Aeronautical Revenues (2021)

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.

43 Adapting Parking Facilities for Other Vehicular Uses Together with Chapter 5, this chapter addresses the question, “If total parking demand reduces, what can an airport do with the excess parking capacity?” In response to the recent rapid growth in TNC activity at airports and the corresponding stress the activity has placed on many airport curbsides, this chapter focuses on ways parking structures can be adapted for vehicular uses other than parking, such as pickup and drop-off areas for commercial vehicles. In particular, this chapter presents potential configurations for TNC loading facilities that can fit within parking structures, a method to evaluate configuration efficiency, and other potential considerations. Given that parking structures and surface lots are designed to accommodate automobiles, the structural design, vehicle circulation elements, pedestrian circulation elements, utilities, and other aspects are generally compatible with other land uses that also process or store auto- mobiles. At airports, the anticipated continued shift in demand from parking to TNCs has contributed to (a) the potential for surplus parking spaces and (b) increased congestion on curbsides. Therefore, this chapter focuses on adapting parking facilities for use as passenger pickup sites by commercial ground transportation services, TNCs in particular. ACRP Report 146 summarizes a wide range of best practices for the management, control, and business arrangements related to commercial ground transportation at airports. These best practices include recommendations regarding passenger loading configurations and use of parking structures and surface lots as commercial vehicle loading and storage/staging facilities. Prior to the introduction and growth of TNCs at airports, several airports used (and continue to use) portions of a close-in parking structure as boarding areas for passengers using taxicabs, limousines, shared-ride vans, courtesy vehicles, scheduled van services, or some combination of these services. At these boarding areas, the physical arrangements and the type of vehicles permitted to use these areas vary. At airports serving Indianapolis, New Orleans, and San Francisco, vehicles load in a traditional nose-to-tail manner. Within Boston Logan’s Terminal B parking structure and a parking structure at Minneapolis-St. Paul International, vehicles stop in angled spaces. C H A P T E R 4

44 Rethinking Airport Parking Facilities to Protect and Enhance Non-Aeronautical Revenue Key advantages and challenges of these boarding areas include: When ACRP Report 146 was published in 2015, TNCs had only recently appeared at many airports. As such, the report did not explicitly consider the use of parking facilities for TNC loading. As shown on Table 2-3, as of January 2020, eight large-hub U.S. airports required that TNCs load passengers within existing surface parking lots or parking structures. Some medium-hub airports (e.g., Louis Armstrong New Orleans International) and small-hub air- ports (e.g., Harrisburg International) also required that TNCs load passengers within existing surface parking lots or parking structures. Those airports generally use one of five loading configurations for a dedicated TNC loading area: Advantages Challenges Boarding areas are typically convenient to the terminal area and offer weather protection, benches, and other amenities. Parking structures typically have limited vertical clearances (e.g., 9 feet or less) that prevent use by larger vehicles, such as buses and vans with header boards. Further, the floors (other than on grade) are not designed structurally for the loading of buses and shuttle vans. The limited vertical clearances are actually beneficial in preventing such vehicles from entering the parking structure. Vehicular access to these areas can be controlled through card- or automatic vehicle identification (AVI) activated gate arms. Column grids within parking structures may result in sub-optimal parking configurations and constrained vehicle circulation. There is reduced curbside activity. Pedestrian volumes associated with commercial vehicles may tax capacity of garage elevators. Areas within repurposed garages may not have lighting, heating, or air conditioning equivalent to terminal space. Accumulations of waiting passengers could trigger “public assembly” building code requirements, such as fire sprinklers, and increased structural loads. Loading Configuration Example Airport Using Configuration in a Parking Facility Linear loading, single-side of an aisle (similar to a typical airport curbside) San Francisco International (roof of garage), Los Angeles International (former surface parking lot) Linear loading, both sides of an aisle Nashville International (ground level in garage), Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Sawtooth loading Las Vegas McCarran International (middle level in garage) Angled pull-through spaces Detroit Metro (middle level in garage) Angled pull-in / back-out spaces Seattle-Tacoma International (middle level in garage)

Adapting Parking Facilities for Other Vehicular Uses 45 The next sections present typical layouts of each configuration, key aspects of each configu- ration, and a comparative evaluation. The methodology and findings are intended to support the comparative evaluation of the relative benefits and limitations of each option; they are not intended as a definitive capacity analysis. 4.1 Evaluation Criteria Each configuration can be evaluated to identify the relative efficiency, safety, customer experience, flexibility, and other criteria. 4.1.1 Efficiency One possible measurement of each layout’s efficiency is a passenger loading zone (PLZ) productivity index model, which measures the number of vehicles that can be processed in an hour for a given length of curb. To compare dissimilar configurations, such as a linear loading plan where vehicles are aligned nose-to-tail along a curb versus one where they load side-by-side (e.g., angled pull-through spaces), the PLZ calculates the number of vehicles processed in an hour per 100 linear feet of a given configuration. A higher PLZ score indicates a more efficient layout. The PLZ scores were developed using vehicle microsimulations of each configuration that were calibrated to in-field observations. To provide a direct comparison, each configuration was applied to a hypothetical parking garage aisle measuring 260 feet long and 60 feet wide. As shown in the following sections, each configuration’s 260-foot-long area included transi- tion zones at the beginning and end of the loading area, and some configurations included a pedestrian crossing zone at one end of the area. The remaining area was divided into individual loading spaces. The microsimulation results indicated the maximum number of vehicles that could be processed through each configuration. The maximum volumes were then divided by the length of the zone occupied by loading spaces to calculate the PLZ (i.e., the PLZ calculation excludes the transition zones as these may be heavily influenced by site-specific conditions). The PLZ scores were predominately impacted by the following factors: Factor Impact Vehicle dwell time Longer dwell times reduce PLZ scores, and vice versa Maneuvering into and out of spaces Configurations that are more difficult for a driver to maneuver into and out of have lower PLZ scores Area required per space Configurations requiring more area per loading space have lower PLZ scores Pedestrian activity Configurations that increase the number of pedestrians crossing traffic have lower PLZ scores Of these, the most influential factor in overall capacity is dwell time, which is the time the vehicle is stopped waiting for passengers to approach and load the vehicle. For typical domestic air travel there is a mix of very short dwell times (the passengers get directly into the vehicle, without putting luggage in the trunk), moderate dwell times (driver typically parks, leaves vehicle, and opens trunk and helps load luggage), and long dwell times, which may reflect passengers with significant luggage, a need to install a car seat, or difficulty locating the passenger.

46 Rethinking Airport Parking Facilities to Protect and Enhance Non-Aeronautical Revenue The methodology and results presented in this section assume a median 40-second dwell time for all configurations. This dwell time assumption reflects configurations and TNC operating practices that allow a TNC vehicle to stop immediately adjacent to their waiting passenger party. As described in the discussion of each configuration, some configurations may require additional signage or other elements to improve the configuration’s ability to achieve the assumed median dwell time. 4.1.2 Other Evaluation Criteria Other evaluation criteria applied to each configuration include: Pedestrian safety. Extent to which a configuration minimizes opportunities for vehicle-pedestrian conflicts. Vehicle safety. Extent to which a configuration minimizes vehicle conflicts. Certain maneuvers, such as backing out of parking spaces into moving traffic or pulling out and around or through other stopped vehicles, reduce this rating. Resiliency. Ability for a configuration to accommodate surges in demand that exceed capacity without significantly obstruct- ing traffic flow. Customer experience. Ability for passengers to readily identify and reach their TNC vehicle. Flexibility. Ability for the configuration to adapt to changes in operations and demand levels. Driver training. Extent to which a configuration may require additional driver familiarity to ensure smooth operations. Capital costs. Likely relative magnitude of cost for improvements above and beyond paint, curbs, and bollards. Operating costs. Extent to which additional staff are required to support and/or enforce the operation. 4.2 Loading Configurations This section presents the five distinct loading configurations and their ratings against each evaluation criteria. 4.2.1 Linear Loading, Single-Side of Aisle Figure 4-1 depicts the linear configuration assumed in the hypothetical garage structure. As shown, after allowing for lane tapers at either end, the loading area provides nine loading spaces, assumed to be 24-feet-long each, served by two through lanes. This configuration does not use the full width of the hypothetical garage area. Efficiency. Based on vehicle modeling, each space can turn over approximately 27 times per hour, a turnover rate that reflects the median dwell time, time to maneuver into and out of spaces, and delays due to vehicle congestion. This configuration was determined to be able to serve up to 243 vehicles per hour. As the area occupied by the nine loading spaces is 216 feet long, the PLZ score is 113 (243 ÷ 216 × 100 = 112.5, rounded to 113). At an international terminal and popular vacation destinations, the median dwell time can often be longer than the average assumed in this section (e.g., one minute or more) due to increased size and quantity of luggage, the much higher likelihood that travelers will use carts to transport luggage, and higher number of child car seats. In 2019, TNCs introduced a loading operation at selected airports intended to reduce dwell times by reducing the amount of time required for a passenger to match with their TNC vehicle. Upon requesting a ride, the passenger is provided a unique code (similar to a personal identification number, or “PIN”). Once at the TNC loading area, the passenger approaches the first vehicle in a queue of waiting vehicles and shows their PIN to the driver. The driver enters the PIN into their mobile app and the passenger’s information, including destination, is transmitted to the driver. Such a system would likely improve the capacity of any of the configurations described in this section.

Adapting Parking Facilities for Other Vehicular Uses 47 Pedestrian safety. This configuration includes no pedestrian crossings and would only experience double-parking during peak periods. Thus, this configuration rates highly compared with other configurations. Vehicle safety. This configuration is rated as neutral compared with the other configura- tions. During peak periods, some vehicles may need to back up to maneuver out of loading spaces. If vehicles are double-parked, vehicles parked along the curb may need to maneuver between stopped vehicles. Resiliency. This configuration rates highly compared with the other configurations. During peak periods, vehicles can utilize the second lane to double-park while still preserving the third lane for through traffic. Customer experience. This configuration is rated as neutral compared with the other configurations. Vehicles parked in the curb lane may obstruct customer view of approach- ing vehicles. Flexibility. This configuration rates highly compared with the other configurations. As demands increase, this configuration can be converted to the linear loading, both sides of aisle configuration (described in Section 4.2.2), which provide vehicle loading positions on the opposite side of the aisle. Driver training. This configuration rates highly compared with the other configurations as it is similar to typical airport and non-airport environments. Thus, drivers would likely need minimal training. Capital costs. This configuration rates highly compared with the other configurations. Capital costs would likely be limited to paint, curbs, bollards, and signs. For longer versions of this configuration, multiple zones and associated signage may be required to help distribute passenger demand along the full length of the available curb. Operating costs. This configuration rates highly compared with the other configurations as it would require no additional staff to assist customers and drivers with the operations (except, perhaps, during very peak periods of demand and congestion). Figure 4-2 depicts an example of a linear, single-side of aisle configuration. 4.2.2 Linear Loading, Both Sides of Aisle Figure 4-3 depicts how a linear loading plan using both sides of the aisle fits within the hypothetical garage area. In this configuration, a passenger loading area and associated loading spaces are provided on each side of the 60-foot garage bay. As shown, the vehicle area and both passenger waiting areas can fit between the column grid centerlines. A pedestrian crosswalk provides pedestrian access to the vehicles loading on the opposite side of the aisle. In this scheme, 18 spaces are provided (nine spaces on each side of the aisle). To improve the ability of a passenger and driver to locate each other, this configuration can be supplemented by signs that identify individual spaces or zones containing several spaces. Source: Walker Consultants. Figure 4-1. Linear loading, single-side configuration.

48 Rethinking Airport Parking Facilities to Protect and Enhance Non-Aeronautical Revenue Depending on the operations provided by the TNC company, a passenger could indicate their preferred space or zone, the passenger could be assigned a specific space or zone, or the driver, upon arriving in a space or zone, could contact (e.g., using a text message) the passenger indi- cating the space or zone they are parked in. Efficiency. Based on modeling, each space can turn over approximately 25 times per hour, a turnover rate that reflects the median dwell time, time to maneuver into and out of spaces, delays due to pedestrian crossing activity, and delays due to vehicle congestion. This configuration was determined to be able to serve up to 450 vehicles per hour. As the area occupied by the 18 spaces is 216 feet long, the PLZ score is 208 (450 ÷ 216 × 100 = 208.3, rounded to 208). Pedestrian safety. This configuration is rated as neutral compared with the other configura- tions as pedestrians can be directed to cross the drive aisle at a single location. Vehicle safety. This configuration is rated as neutral compared with the other configurations. During peak periods, some vehicles may need to back up to maneuver out of loading spaces. If vehicles are double-parked, vehicles parked along the curb may need to maneu- ver between stopped vehicles. Resiliency. This configuration rates as neutral compared with the other configurations. During peak periods, vehicles can utilize the second lane to double-park, but there is a chance that double-parked vehicles would obstruct both through lanes. Customer experience. This configuration is rated as neutral compared with the other con- figurations. Vehicles parked in the curb lanes may obstruct customer view of approaching vehicles. Source: InterVISTAS, 2019. Figure 4-2. Linear loading, single sides of aisle configuration, Los Angeles International Airport. Source: Walker Consultants. Figure 4-3. Linear loading, both sides of aisle configuration.

Adapting Parking Facilities for Other Vehicular Uses 49 Flexibility. This configuration rates highly compared with the other configurations. This configuration can open as a linear loading, single-side of aisle configuration and convert to a linear loading, both sides of aisle configuration, as needed. Driver training. This configuration rates as neutral compared with the other configurations as left-side vehicle loading is rare at U.S. airports. Thus, drivers would likely need some training to acclimate to left-side spaces. Capital costs. This configuration rates highly compared with the other configurations. Capital costs would likely be limited to paint, curbs, bollards, and signs. To direct customers to spaces on the opposite side of the aisle, more signage may be required than for the linear loading, single-side of aisle configuration. Operating costs. This configuration rates as neutral compared with the other configurations as it may require staff to control the pedestrian crosswalk. Figure 4-4 depicts an example of a linear loading, both sides of aisle configuration. 4.2.3 Sawtooth Loading Figure 4-5 depicts how a “sawtooth” loading configuration providing 16 loading spaces could fit within the hypothetical garage area. In this configuration, each space would be approximately 26.5 feet long. Sawtooth spaces are commonly found at transit centers and incorporated into bus bay parking design. The vehicle pulls into the angled curbside and when ready to exit, can pull forward, avoiding any need to reverse to enter or exit a space. By avoiding any require- ments for a vehicle to reverse, the configuration allows each space to serve a higher number of vehicles during a given time period. In this configuration, a passenger loading area and associ- ated loading spaces are provided on each side of the 60-foot garage bay. Because each space is Source: InterVISTAS, 2019. Figure 4-4. Linear loading, both sides of aisle, Nashville International Airport. Source: Walker Consultants. Figure 4-5. Sawtooth loading configuration.

50 Rethinking Airport Parking Facilities to Protect and Enhance Non-Aeronautical Revenue angled, each space requires more roadway width than those under a linear loading configura- tion. Thus, to provide the spaces and two through lanes, a limited portion of each pedestrian waiting area may need to extend beyond the column centerline. To improve the ability of a passenger and driver to locate each other, this configuration can be supplemented by signs that identify individual spaces or zones containing several spaces. As noted in the description of the linear loading, both sides of aisle configuration, there are multiple ways the zone indicators could be used to help passengers find their vehicles. Efficiency. Based on modeling, each space can turn over approximately 29 times per hour, a turnover rate that reflects the median dwell time, time to maneuver into and out of spaces, delays due to pedestrian crossing activity, and delays due to vehicle congestion. This configuration was determined to be able to serve up to 464 vehicles per hour. As the area occupied by the 16 loading spaces is 212 feet long, the PLZ score is 219 (464 ÷ 212 × 100 = 218.9, rounded to 219). Pedestrian safety. This configuration is rated as neutral compared with the other configura- tions as pedestrians can be directed to cross the drive aisle at a single location. Vehicle safety. This configuration rates highly compared with the other configurations as all vehicle maneuvering is forward. Resiliency. This configuration rates as neutral compared with the other configurations. During peak periods, vehicles can utilize the second lane to double-park, but there is a chance that double-parked vehicles would obstruct both through lanes. Customer experience. This configuration is rated as neutral compared with the other con- figurations. Vehicles parked in the curb lanes may obstruct customer view of approaching vehicles. Flexibility. This configuration rates highly compared with the other configurations. This configuration can open a single-side system and convert to using both sides of the aisle when needed. Driver training. This configuration rates as neutral compared with the other configurations as left-side vehicle loading is rare at U.S. airports and sawtooth spaces are not typically used for automobiles. Drivers would likely need some training to acclimate to the left-side spaces. Capital costs. This configuration rates highly compared with the other configurations. Capital costs would likely be limited to paint, curbs, bollards, and signs. To direct customers to spaces on the opposite side of the aisle, more signage may be required than for the linear loading, single-side of aisle configuration. Operating costs. This configuration rates as neutral compared with the other configurations as it may require staff to control the pedestrian crosswalk. Figure 4-6 depicts an example of a sawtooth configuration using one side of the aisle. 4.2.4 Angled Pull-Through Spaces Figure 4-7 depicts how a “pull-through” loading configuration providing 20 loading spaces could fit within the hypothetical garage area. Pull-through space design separates entry and exit lanes with angled spaces in between so that a vehicle can pull forward into a space and exit forward into a separate exit lane. Pedestrians can cross to their vehicle at multiple points and thus, do not require a dedicated crosswalk. As shown, on the side of the aisle opposite the passenger waiting area there is a slight gap between the column centerline and the vehicle lane to provide clearance from the column. As a result, the column centerline through the passenger waiting area bisects the area. Figure 4-7 depicts a flow whereby stopped vehicles are facing away from the passenger waiting area. This configuration provides for easier loading of luggage

Adapting Parking Facilities for Other Vehicular Uses 51 into vehicle trunks and, in states that do not require front license plates, ensures passengers can see the license plates from the waiting area. It also has pedestrians crossing the vehicle entry path, which means vehicles are likely to be traveling slower (as they look for their passenger or empty loading spot) than they would on exit. Alternatively, an airport could have the stopped vehicles facing toward the passenger waiting area, but the configuration shown in Figure 4-7 is typically preferred. This configuration also creates a potential complication in that drivers approaching the area may not be able to readily see empty spaces further downstream. Thus, this configuration can be augmented by a system that uses indicator lights (such as that described in Section 4.3) showing drivers location of available spaces. Once parked, the driver can text the passenger with their location. Efficiency. Based on vehicle modeling, each space can turn over approximately 25 times per hour, a turnover rate that reflects the median dwell time, time to maneuver into and out of spaces, delays due to pedestrian crossing activity, and delays due to vehicle con- gestion. This configuration was determined to be able to serve up to 500 vehicles per hour. As the area occupied by the 20 loading spaces is 208 feet long, the PLZ score is 240 (500 ÷ 208 × 100 = 240.4, rounded to 240). Pedestrian safety. This configuration is rated less desirable compared with the other con- figurations as pedestrians cross vehicles at multiple locations along the curb. Vehicle safety. This configuration rates highly compared with the other configurations as all vehicle maneuvering is forward with less need to maneuver around stopped vehicles. Source: J. Orth, 2017. Figure 4-6. Sawtooth loading configuration, Las Vegas McCarran International Airport. Source: Walker Consultants. Figure 4-7. Angled pull-through loading configuration.

52 Rethinking Airport Parking Facilities to Protect and Enhance Non-Aeronautical Revenue Resiliency. This configuration rates poorly compared with the other configurations. During peak periods, if a space is not available, a vehicle must wait in the entry drive aisle. Customer experience. This configuration is rated highly compared with other configurations as there are no parked vehicles obstructing customer views of approaching traffic. Flexibility. This configuration rates poorly compared with the other configurations. Unlike the linear and sawtooth configurations, capacity cannot be easily expanded within the defined area. Driver training. This configuration rates poorly compared with the other configurations as pull-through loading spaces are very uncommon in the United States. Drivers would likely need some training to acclimate to the configuration as well as the use of indicator lights that identify available downstream spaces. Capital costs. This configuration rates as neutral compared with the other configurations as it could require a system that uses indicator lights showing which spaces are available and may require signage identifying the location of individual spaces. Operating costs. This configuration rates as neutral compared with the other configurations as it may require staff to assist customers in locating their vehicle and crossing entering vehicles. Figure 4-8 depicts an angled pull-through configuration. 4.2.5 Angled Pull-in/Back-out Spaces Figure 4-9 depicts how a “pull-in/back-out” configuration might look within the hypothetical garage area. As shown, 22 loading spaces could be provided in the area. Upon entering the area, the driver would pull into one of the available spaces. After the passenger and baggage are loading, the driver would back out of the space to exit. Similar to the pull-through configuration, this configuration creates a potential complica- tion in that drivers approaching the area may not be able to readily see empty spaces further downstream. Thus, this configuration can be augmented by a system that uses indicator lights showing which spaces are available. Once parked, the driver can text the passenger with their location. Source: Walker Consultants, 2019. Figure 4-8. Angled pull-through configuration, Detroit Metropolitan Airport.

Adapting Parking Facilities for Other Vehicular Uses 53 Efficiency. Based on vehicle modeling, each space can turn over approximately 15 times per hour, a turnover rate that reflects the median dwell time, time to pull into and back out of spaces, and delays due to vehicle congestion. This configuration was determined to be able to serve up to 330 vehicles per hour. As the area occupied by the 22 loading spaces is 228.8 feet long, the PLZ score is 144 (330 ÷ 228.8 × 100 = 144.2, rounded to 144). Pedestrian safety. This configuration is rated highly compared with the other configurations as there are no vehicle-pedestrian conflict points. Vehicle safety. This configuration rates poorly compared with the other configurations as all vehicles must reverse out of loading spaces into a travel lane. Resiliency. This configuration rates poorly compared with the other configurations. During peak periods, if a space is not available, a vehicle must wait in the travel lane until a space becomes available. Customer experience. This configuration is rated poorly compared with other configurations as the parked vehicles will very likely obstruct customer view of approaching vehicles. Flexibility. This configuration rates neutral compared with the other configurations. As noted above, indicator lights could be required to achieve full utilization of the spaces. If the configuration changes in the future, those lights may need to be relocated. Driver training. This configuration rates neutral compared with the other configurations as pull-in/back-out spaces are less common in the United States. Drivers would likely need some training to acclimate to the configuration as well as the use of indicator lights that identify available downstream spaces. Capital costs. This configuration rates neutral compared with the other configurations as it could require a system that uses indicator lights showing which spaces are available and may require signage identifying the location of individual spaces. Operating costs. This configuration rates neutral compared with the other configurations as it may require staff to assist customers in locating their vehicle and crossing entering vehicles. Figure 4-10 depicts an example of the pull-in/back-out configuration. 4.2.6 Configuration Comparison Table 4-1 summarizes the evaluation of the five loading configurations. As shown, the linear loading, single-side of aisle configuration has the lowest efficiency but rates highly for most other criteria. Conversely, the most efficient configuration (pull-through) is less resilient to accommodate surges in demand, less able to increase capacity, and less familiar to drivers. An airport’s choice of the best configuration for their situation will need to reflect how each configuration might fit within the space available as well as the importance airport manage- ment places on each criterion. Source: InterVISTAS. Figure 4-9. Pull-in/back-out loading configuration.

54 Rethinking Airport Parking Facilities to Protect and Enhance Non-Aeronautical Revenue 4.3 Examples and Lessons Learned In addition to the base layout of a TNC loading area, there are several additional consider- ations for airports planning a TNC loading area within a parking structure. The following suggestions reflect comments provided by staff at airports that have relocated TNC pickup areas into parking structures. Automated Parking Guidance System Space Availability Lighting. APGS space availability lighting (shown in Figure 4-11) indi- cates to drivers the locations of available spaces. A sensor above each space determines whether or not the space is occupied and that information is displayed via an indicator light also located above each space (in Figure 4-11, a green light indicates an available space while a red light indicates an occupied space). A similar, camera-based system is described in Section 7.1.7 of this guide- book. As noted above, for angled pull-through spaces, APGS can increase capacity as it reduces the likelihood that drivers, who may not be able to see downstream available spaces, would wait for a closer space to become available. Las Vegas McCarran International relocated a TNC pickup area into an existing park- ing garage with multiple long rows of parking. The long rows made it difficult for drivers to quickly identify available spaces. To mitigate that challenge, airport management chose to install an overhead APGS system to denote space availability. Once a driver is in a pickup spot, they contact the passenger indicating their location. Zonal Space Numbering. Identifying zones within the loading area helps TNC passengers and drivers coordinate exact pickup locations, which mitigates pedestrian roaming inside the garage and ensures better safety. As of January 2020, zonal numbering is used at Los Angeles International, Nashville International, and San Francisco International airports, among others, and passengers choose the sections where they would like to meet their driver. At Nashville International, this has resulted in an uneven distribution of demand among the multiple zones available. Figure 4-12 depicts the Nashville International Airport TNC loading area, which is located on the ground level of a parking garage. Passengers enter the area from the right of the image and can choose between nine zones located on both sides of the first aisle (TNC Zones A1 through B3) and on one side of Source: InterVISTAS, 2019. Figure 4-10. Pull-in/back-out loading configuration, Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. Costs for APGS in parking structures can vary from less than $400 per space to over $1,000 per space. Key elements in the cost include (a) whether the system was included in the original structure design (as opposed to being designed for installation in an existing structure) and (b) the number and complexity of supplemental signs used throughout the structure to indicate the number of available spaces on floors, sections, and individual aisles. In addition to improving a driver’s ability to locate an available space, an APGS can reduce the number of spaces required.

Linear, single-side of aisle Linear, both sides of aisle Sawtooth, both sides of aisle Pull-through entry Pull-in/back out Criteria Explanation Efficiency PLZ: 113 PLZ: 208 PLZ: 219 PLZ: 240 PLZ: 144 Hourly vehicles served per 100 linear feet Pedestrian safety Minimal concerns Vehicles encounter pedestrians at single location Vehicles encounter pedestrians at single location Vehicles encounter pedestrians at multiple locations Minimal concerns Minimize pedestrian-vehicle conflicts, enhance level of safety Vehicle safety Some vehicles may need to reverse during busy periods Some vehicles may need to reverse during busy periods All maneuvering is forward All maneuvering is forward All vehicles must reverse into travel lane Minimize vehicle-vehicle conflicts Resiliency Vehicles can double-park and still preserve through lane Vehicles can double-park but may obstruct both through lanes Vehicles can double-park but may obstruct both through lanes If spaces are unavailable, waiting vehicles obstruct entry If spaces are unavailable, waiting vehicles obstruct entry Ability to accommodate surges that exceed capacity Customer experience Parked vehicles may obstruct customer view of approaching vehicles Parked vehicles may obstruct customer view of approaching vehicles Parked vehicles may obstruct customer view of approaching vehicles No obstructions to customer view of approaching vehicles Parked vehicles more likely to obstruct customer view of approaching vehicles Ability for passengers to readily identify their vehicle Flexibility Can be converted to parallel double-sided loading if needed Can open using single-side loading with opposite side opened when needed Can open using single-side loading with opposite side opened when needed Cannot be expanded if more capacity is required If space guidance is used, equipment may be in wrong place for other uses Ability to accommodate changes in future operations and demands Driver training Conventional pickup configuration for airports and other environments Left-side loading is rare at U.S. airports Left-side loading is uncommon at U.S. airports; sawtooth stalls are not typical for automobiles Very uncommon configuration for passenger loading or parking Uncommon configuration for passenger loading Similar to typical configurations Capital costs Cost likely limited to paint, curbs or bollards, and signage Cost likely limited to paint, curbs or bollards, and signage Cost likely limited to paint, curbs or bollards, and signage May require automated space guidance to indicate space availability to drivers May require automated space guidance to indicate space availability to drivers Need for improvements above and beyond paint, curbs, bollards, and signage Operating cost Requires no pedestrian control May require pedestrian control at crosswalk May require pedestrian control at crosswalk May require staff to direct customers to vehicle locations May require staff to direct customers to vehicle locations Requirement for staff to support and/or enforce the operation Example airports San Francisco, Los Angeles Nashville, New Orleans Las Vegas (single sided) Detroit Seattle-Tacoma Better than other configurations Neutral Poorer than other configurations Table 4-1. TNC loading configuration summary.

56 Rethinking Airport Parking Facilities to Protect and Enhance Non-Aeronautical Revenue Figure 4-12. TNC loading area, Nashville International Airport. Source: InterVISTAS. Source: Port of Portland Figure 4-11. Automated parking guidance system space availability indicators.

Adapting Parking Facilities for Other Vehicular Uses 57 the second aisle (TNC Zones C1 through C3). When the area first opened, passengers overwhelmingly preferred TNC Zone A1 as it did not require that they cross a drive lane, and it was the closest zone to where they entered the area. As a result, distribution of demand between the zones was very uneven, and congestion in high-demand areas often blocked the entire first drive aisle. To distribute and mitigate the congestion, airport staff allocated TNC Zones A1 through A3 to one TNC operator and Zones B1 through C3 to the other TNC operator (TNC services at the airport are currently provided by two companies). Furthermore, the TNC operators have modified the mobile apps to identify to passengers that zones located further from the pedestrian entrance (such as A2) are “preferred.” The Nashville expe- rience demonstrates that at airports with delineated zones, staff may need to work with TNC operators to modify the allocation and with mobile apps to improve the distribution of demand along the available capacity. Accommodating Unfamiliar Users. Airport officials should assume that both passengers and drivers using the TNC loading area are unfamiliar with the airport layout. At many airports, a large share of annual passengers (e.g., approximately 50%) use that airport once per year or less. Similarly, TNCs may experience high driver turnover such that a high share of TNC pickups are by drivers that use the airport less than once per month. Thus, wayfinding and signage are critical for both passengers and drivers. Pedestrians require connected and integrated signage from the terminal to the TNC loading area and drivers require signage starting from the airport entrance. Global Positioning System Connectivity. TNC apps rely on global positioning system (GPS) or Wi-Fi boosters to provide the locations of passengers and vehicles. Improving cellular connectivity signal strength inside a garage by installing cellular phone signal boosters or amplifiers, as well as Wi-Fi boosters, can improve communications for both TNC passengers and drivers. Vertical Pedestrian Circulation. Elevator and escalator systems within an airport parking structure may not have been designed to accommodate the large volumes of passengers using TNCs, which have higher turnover rates per space than typical airport public parking spaces. Thus, airport officials should analyze the capacity of these systems as they evaluate potential TNC pickup locations within parking structures. Possible solutions include either locating the boarding area on a level requiring no pedestrian level changes or including capacity improvements in the plan and budget. Ventilation and Climate Control. Airport parking structures are typically not designed to be places of assembly. Thus, TNC loading areas in garages typically do not have any special ventilation or an enclosed waiting area. Normally, as long as only light duty, passenger vehicles (as currently used by TNCs) use the loading zone, additional ventilation is not required. However, higher vehicle volumes and vehicle idling in TNC loading areas may cause airport management to consider improving ventilation in the area. If a climate-controlled waiting area is provided, its intended use is as a waiting area for passengers until the TNC app indicates that their vehicle is approaching and the passenger should proceed to the loading zone. Building codes may require that an enclosed waiting area be sprinklered. If the loading area is on the garage roof, a canopy may be provided over passenger waiting areas. Pedestrian Protections. When locating a TNC loading area in a garage, passenger waiting areas are typically protected by curbs, bollards, or other types of barriers. Use of bollards or other barriers may be preferable to raised curbs because (a) they are easier to remove if the loading area is moved or reconfigured, (b) they remove trip hazard, and (c) they are easier to negotiate for passengers with rolling luggage, luggage carts, and wheelchairs. At one small-hub U.S. airport, over a 6-month period in 2019, approximately 41,500 total TNC pickups were made by over 2,000 individual vehicles. Of those, over 20% made only one pickup during the 6 months and over 57% made one pickup per month or less.

58 Rethinking Airport Parking Facilities to Protect and Enhance Non-Aeronautical Revenue Flexibility. Given the dynamic and ongoing changes occurring in technology and consumer preferences (as described in Chapter 3), TNC pickup areas and associated policies should have a measure of flexibility to account for potential changes in TNC demand levels, the products and services offered by TNC companies, and how TNC companies choose to match passengers with drivers. In addition, plans and policies should reflect that the TNC industry includes multiple companies and that these companies may manifest each of these changes in different ways. If possible, the plans for opening day should have contin- gency plans for reconfiguration and/or expansion in the event one or more of the TNC companies choose to operate in a way not envisioned during the planning. TNC Coordination During Planning. To mitigate the potential that TNCs use the area in an unexpected way, planning for TNC loading areas should seek to involve TNC repre- sentatives throughout the process. The planning process should also identify the changes TNC operators will need to implement on their apps to direct their passengers to the new locations and the changes in driver training. Despite coordination throughout the process, however, airport officials should still identify potential contingencies in the event that TNC operators use the new location in an unexpected manner.