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.
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2015 www.TRB.org Research Sponsored by the Federal Aviation Administration SubScriber categorieS Aviation â¢ Terminal and Facilities A I R P O R T C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M ACRP SYNTHESIS 62 Cell Phone Lots at Airports A Synthesis of Airport Practice conSultantS Lois S. Kramer and Sydney Mandel KRAMER aerotek, inc. Boulder, Colorado
AIRPORT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM Airports are vital national resources. They serve a key role in transportation of people and goods and in regional, national, and inter national commerce. They are where the nationâs aviation sys- tem connects with other modes of transportation and where federal responsibility for managing and regulating air traffic operations intersects with the role of state and local governments that own and operate most airports. Research is necessary to solve common oper- ating problems, to adapt appropriate new technologies from other industries, and to introduce innovations into the airport industry. The Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) serves as one of the principal means by which the airport industry can develop innovative near-term solutions to meet demands placed on it. The need for ACRP was identified in TRB Special Report 272: Airport Research Needs: Cooperative Solutions in 2003, based on a study sponsored by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The ACRP carries out applied research on problems that are shared by airport operating agencies and are not being adequately addressed by existing federal research programs. It is modeled after the successful National Cooperative Highway Research Program and Transit Cooperative Research Program. The ACRP undertakes research and other technical activities in a variety of airport subj ect areas, including design, construction, maintenance, operations, safety, security, policy, planning, human resources, and administra- tion. The ACRP provides a forum where airport operators can coop- eratively address common operational problems. The ACRP was authorized in December 2003 as part of the Vision 100-Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act. The primary partici- pants in the ACRP are (1) an independent governing board, the ACRP Oversight Committee (AOC), appointed by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation with representation from airport operating agencies, other stakeholders, and relevant industry orga- nizations such as the Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA), the American Association of Airport Executives (AAAE), the National Association of State Aviation Officials (NASAO), Airlines for America (A4A), and the Airport Consultants Council (ACC) as vital links to the airport community; (2) the TRB as program manager and secretariat for the governing board; and (3) the FAA as program sponsor. In October 2005, the FAA executed a contract with the National Academies formally initiating the program. The ACRP benefits from the cooperation and participation of air- port professionals, air carriers, shippers, state and local government officials, equipment and service suppliers, other airport users, and research organizations. Each of these participants has different interests and responsibilities, and each is an integral part of this cooperative research effort. Research problem statements for the ACRP are solicited period- ically 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 identifying 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 professionals, the intended users of the research products. The panels prepare 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 selecting research agencies has been used by TRB in managing coop- erative research programs since 1962. As in other TRB activities, ACRP project panels serve voluntarily without compensation. Primary emphasis is placed on disseminating ACRP results to the intended end-users of the research: airport operating agencies, service providers, and suppliers. The ACRP produces a series of research reports for use by airport operators, local agencies, the FAA, and other interested parties, and industry associations may arrange for work- shops, training aids, field visits, and other activities to ensure that results are implemented by airport-industry practitioners. ACRP SYNTHESIS 62 Project A11-03, Topic S03-09 ISSN 1935-9187 ISBN 978-0-309-27192-9 Library of Congress Control Number 2015937579 Â© 2015 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB or FAA endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in the document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE 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 Governing Board of the National Research Council. Such approval reflects the Governing Boardâs judgment that the program concerned is of national importance and appropriate with respect to both the purposes and resources of the National Research Council. The members of the technical committee selected to monitor this project and to review this report were chosen for recognized scholarly competence and with due consideration for the balance of disciplines appropriate to the project. The opin- ions and conclusions expressed or implied are those of the research agency that performed the research, and, while they have been accepted as appropriate by the technical committee, they are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, or the Federal Aviation Administration of the U.S. Department of Transportation. Each report is reviewed and accepted for publication by the technical committee according to procedures established and monitored by the Trans- portation Research Board Executive Committee and the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board of The National Academies, the National Research Council, and the Federal Aviation Administration (sponsor of the ACRP) do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufac- turersâ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the clarity and completeness of the project reporting. Published reports of the AIRPORT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from: Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet at http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore Printed in the United States of America
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished schol- ars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon 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 techni- cal 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 Acad- emy 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 achieve- ments of engineers. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., 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, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Victor J. Dzau 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 Academyâs purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Acad- emy, 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. C. D. Mote, Jr., 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 Transportation Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisci- plinary, and multimodal. The Boardâs 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 Transporta- tion, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org
TOPIC PANEL S03-09 LOURENÃO W. DANTAS, Massachusetts Port Authority, East Boston, MA HAROLD A. DEDE, JR., Slidell, LA LYNDA DODD, City of PhoenixâSky Harbor International Airport, Phoenix, AZ DOROTHY HARRIS, Denver International Airport, Denver, CO PETER MANDLE, LeighFisher, Burlingame, CA ELIZABETH C. SMART, St. Louis Lambert International Airport, St. Louis, MO YU ZHANG, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL AMY HANSON, Federal Aviation Administration Chicago Airports District Office (Liaison) ANEIL PATEL, Airports Council InternationalâNorth America (Liaison) SYNTHESIS STUDIES STAFF STEPHEN R. GODWIN, Director for Studies and Special Programs JON M. WILLIAMS, Program Director, IDEA and Synthesis Studies JO ALLEN GAUSE, Senior Program Officer GAIL R. STABA, Senior Program Officer DONNA L. VLASAK, Senior Program Officer TANYA M. ZWAHLEN, Consultant DON TIPPMAN, Senior Editor CHERYL KEITH, Senior Program Assistant DEMISHA WILLIAMS, Senior Program Assistant DEBBIE IRVIN, Program Associate COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMS STAFF CHRISTOPHER W. JENKS, Director, Cooperative Research Programs MICHAEL R. SALAMONE, Senior Program Officer JOSEPH J. BROWN-SNELL, Program Associate EILEEN P. DELANEY, Director of Publications ACRP COMMITTEE FOR PROJECT 11-03 CHAIR JULIE KENFIELD Jacobsen/Daniels Associates LLC, Garden Ridge, TX MEMBERS JOSHUA ABRAMSON, Easterwood Airport, College Station, TX DEBORAH ALE FLINT, Port of Oakland, Oakland, CA DEBBIE K. ALKE, Montana Department of Transportation, Helena, MT DAVID N. EDWARDS, JR., Greenville-Spartanburg Airport Commission, Greer, SC LINDA HOWARD, Independent Aviation Consultant, Bastrop, TX ARLYN PURCELL, Port Authority of New York & New Jersey, New York, NY CHRISTOPHER J. WILLENBORG, Massachusetts Department of Transportation, East Boston, MA FAA LIAISON PAUL DEVOTI AIRCRAFT OWNERS AND PILOTS ASSOCIATION JOHN L. COLLINS AIRPORTS CONSULTANTS COUNCIL MATTHEW J. GRIFFIN AIRPORTS COUNCIL INTERNATIONALâNORTH AMERICA LIYING GU TRB LIAISON CHRISTINE GERENCHER Cover figure: Lihue Airport Cellular Lane sign. Credit: Peter B. Mandle.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS To each participant, the Research Team is grateful for their contribution of data and insights. Boston Logan International, LourenÃ§o Dantas, Senior Transportation Planner Charlotte Douglas International, Valerie Boston, Assistant Parking/Bus Operations Manager Denver International, Harold Hensley, Parking Manager Indianapolis International, Kent Ebbing, Director of Parking Operations LambertâSt. Louis International, Ann Linhorst, Ground Transportation Officer Louis Armstrong New Orleans International, Harold A. Dede, Jr., Landside Manager (retired) McCarran International, Scott Van Horn, Airport Concessions Manager Oakland International, Stephen Gordon, Airport Business Manager Phoenix Sky Harbor International, Floyd Johnson, Landside Superintendent and Lynda Dodd, Parking Manager Pittsburgh International, Eric M. Ruprecht, Vice President of Commercial Management & Properties Portland International, Dawn Huddleston, Commercial Roadway Manager Ronald Reagan Washington National, Gary Myers, Manager Salt Lake City International, Bruce Barclay, Operations Manager, Parking & Shuttle Operations San Antonio International, Tamera Marberry, Parking and Ground Transportation Manager San Francisco International, Abubaker Azam, Assistant Deputy Airport Director of Operations SeattleâTacoma International, Jeff Hoevet, Sr. Manager, Airport Operations Tampa International, Karl Martin, Operation Manager of Parking/Ground Transportation Toronto Pearson International, Carlo Cordi, Manager of Parking and Groundside Operations
A cell phone lot is typically a free parking lot at an airport that allows greeters to park temporarily until a traveler is available for pickup. These lots can assist airport operators in managing curbs and they keep greeters from waiting in unsafe areas on airport roads. However, there is a question about whether the benefits of a cell phone lot outweigh the operating and maintenance costs and foregone revenues. Cell phone lots have ardent advocates and vocal opponents. Some of the earliest cell phone lots were a response to new security requirements implemented after 9/11 to restrict parking directly adjacent to or under a terminal. These lots provided alternative parking capacity for greeters and reduced traffic circulating past the airport curbside. Some airports with adequate parking capacity have not provided a cell phone lot, but have opted to offer customers 30 or more minutes free in hourly parking areas. Whatever the solution, free parking products do not cover airport sponsor capital, operational, and maintenance costs for these parking areas. Airport operators are taking a second look at free parking products to see if they can find alternative ways to develop revenue streams at cell phone lots. For example, Denver Inter- nationalâs new Final Approach cell phone lot includes restaurants, a childrenâs seating area with iPads, a gas station, and a convenience store. Parking remains free, but the cell phone lot concessions generate revenue for the airport. Furthermore, the cell phone lot not only is a draw for greeters waiting to pick up arriving passengers, but also for airport employees, many of whom do not work in the terminal area and like the convenience of the restaurants and a service plaza. The scope of the report included online research of 110 airports as well in-depth discus- sions with 21 Canadian and U.S. airports. Lois S. Kramer as Principal Investigator and Sydney Mandel and Max Spiro, KRAMER aerotek inc. collected and synthesized the information and wrote the report. The members of the topic panel are acknowledged on the preceding page. This synthesis is an immedi- ately useful document that records the practices that were acceptable within the limitations of the knowledge available at the time of its preparation. As progress in research and prac- tice continues, new knowledge will be added to that now at hand. Airport administrators, engineers, and researchers often face problems for which infor- mation already exists, either in documented form or as undocumented experience and prac- tice. This information may be fragmented, scattered, and unevaluated. As a consequence, full knowledge of what has been learned about a problem may not be brought to bear on its solution. Costly research findings may go unused, valuable experience may be overlooked, and due consideration may not be given to recommended practices for solving or alleviat- ing the problem. There is information on nearly every subject of concern to the airport industry. Much of it derives from research or from the work of practitioners faced with problems in their day-to-day work. To provide a systematic means for assembling and evaluating such useful information and to make it available to the entire airport community, the Airport Coop- erative Research Program authorized the Transportation Research Board to undertake a continuing project. This project, ACRP Project 11-03, âSynthesis of Information Related to Airport Practices,â searches out and synthesizes useful knowledge from all available sources and prepares concise, documented reports on specific topics. Reports from this endeavor constitute an ACRP report series, Synthesis of Airport Practice. This synthesis series reports on current knowledge and practice, in a compact format, without the detailed directions usually found in handbooks or design manuals. Each report in the series provides a compendium of the best knowledge available on those measures found to be the most successful in resolving specific problems. PREFACE By Gail R. Staba Senior Program Officer Transportation Research Board FOREWORD
CONTENTS 1 SUMMARY 3 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION History of Cell Phone Lots, 3 Types of Cell Phone Lots, 3 When Cell Phone Lots Are Useful at an Airport, 3 Purpose of the Synthesis, 4 Synthesis Study Approach, 4 Report Structure, 6 7 CHAPTER TWO RESULTS OF INTERNET RESEARCH ABOUT CELL PHONE LOTS Incidence of Cell Phone Lots at U.S. and Canadian Airports, 7 Size of Cell Phone Lots, 7 Airports Without Cell Phone Lots, 7 Cell Phone Lots and Free Hourly Parking, 9 Airports with More Than One Cell Phone Lot, 9 Airports That Combine Cell Phone Lots with Other Parking Products, 9 Airports That Integrate a Cell Phone Lot with a Travel Plaza Concession, 9 Amenities, 10 Rules and Hours of Operation, 10 Customer Experience at Cell Phone Lots as Reported in Social Media, 10 12 CHAPTER THREE SURVEY RESULTS Initial Reasons for Opening a Cell Phone Lot, 13 Cell Phone Location and Relocation, 13 Ground Transportation Mode Choices, 14 Relationship Between Arriving Passengers and Cell Phone Lot Spaces, 14 Percent of Cell Phone Lot Spaces to Total Airport Parking Spaces, 15 Determination of Demand for Cell Phone Lot Spaces, 15 Most Effective Location for a Cell Phone Lot, 16 Cell Phone Lot Operator, 16 Capital, Operating, and Maintenance Costs, 17 Use of the Cell Phone Lot and Customer Surveys, 17 Amenities, 17 Cell Phone Lot Issues, 17 19 CHAPTER FOUR HIGHLIGHTS FROM AIRPORT INTERVIEWS Boston Logan International (BOS), 19 Dallas/Fort Worth International (DFW), 21 Denver International (DEN), 22 Eppley Airfield (OMA), 23 Indianapolis International (IND), 23 John F. Kennedy (JFK), La Guardia (LGA), and Newark Liberty (EWR), 24 LambertâSt. Louis International (STL), 24
Louis Armstrong New Orleans International (MSY), 27 McCarran International (LAS), 28 Oakland International (OAK), 28 Phoenix Sky Harbor International (PHX), 30 Pittsburgh International (PIT), 31 Portland International (PDX), 33 Reagan National Airport (DCA), 34 Salt Lake City International (SLC), 36 San Antonio International (SAT), 38 San Francisco International (SFO), 39 SeattleâTacoma International (SEA), 41 Tampa International (TPA), 43 Toronto Pearson International (YYZ), 45 47 CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSIONS 49 GLOSSARY 50 ACRONYMS 51 BIBLIOGRAPHY 52 APPENDIX A AIRPORTS RESEARCHED FOR CELL PHONE LOTS 55 APPENDIX B ONLINE SURVEY INSTRUMENT 63 APPENDIX C TELEPHONE INTERVIEW GUIDE