Cell Phone Lots at Airports (2015)

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.

3 HISTORY OF CELL PHONE LOTS Airport cell phone lots came into wide use following the tragic events of September 11, 2001. At that time, the FAA implemented a comprehensive change to security measures that included the forma- tion of TSA; temporary restrictions on unattended vehicles within 300 feet of the terminal; increased security and vehicle inspections; and prohibition of vehicles remaining at the curbside for extended periods. Security checkpoints in the terminal eliminated the possibility of meeting an arriving passen- ger at the gate. The introduction of cell phone lots provided an alternative to private vehicles waiting at the curb or along airport access roads to pick up arriving passengers; greeters could arrange, by phone, a rendezvous point once the arriving passenger was outside the terminal. The creation of cell phone lots also coincided with stepped-up in capability and use of mobile phones. Mobile phone access to the Internet was possible but not widespread until good quality 3G coverage was available in the mid-2000s. Adoption of mobile technology, combined with free park- ing at remote cell phone lots, suggested a way to reduce congestion at terminal curbsides and traffic circulating on airport roads. TYPES OF CELL PHONE LOTS Cell phone lots have few design standards. Because most lots represent non-revenue facilities, many airport operators view them as necessary, but try to limit investment and management costs of the lots. Figure 1 describes the spectrum of cell phone lots. Some cell phone lots are vacant lots, paved or unpaved, with no amenities. Airport operators may repurpose an existing paved lot, restripe the lot, and provide trash cans, lighting, and some type of security that might include fencing, regular visits by airport police, or cameras. Some airports have additional amenities such as restrooms, flight information displays (FIDS), and Wi-Fi. Other airport operators have integrated cell phone lots into existing parking options by offering up to an hour free, or by designating a specific area of a parking lot as the cell phone lot. A few airports have integrated the cell phone lot as part of an airport travel plaza, restaurant, or convenience store. WHEN CELL PHONE LOTS ARE USEFUL AT AN AIRPORT Airport operators provide cell phone lots for a variety of reasons: • As a customer service for greeters who would not likely wait in a parking lot or garage; • To reduce curb congestion and parking on access roads; • To improve roadway safety; • To lessen emissions by reducing circulating traffic; • To address parking space shortages in paid lots or garages by redirecting ultra-short term customers (less than one hour) to the cell phone lot; • To meet TSA and FAA security requirements; • To satisfy customer and local government requests for a cell phone lot. When cell phone lots have fewer than 30 spaces, they may not address all of the stated objectives for operating this type of parking facility. chapter one INTRODUCTION

4 PURPOSE OF THE SYNTHESIS The objective of the synthesis was to collect information on current practices to size, locate, develop, manage, and maintain cell phone lots at airports; and to evaluate their requirements and benefits. As such, this particular synthesis is narrow in scope: • What are the different characteristics of cell phone lots in terms of location, size, and amenities? • When are cell phone lots useful to an airport and why? • What does an airport need to know to determine demand and capacity requirements for a cell phone lot? • What part of the airport organization is responsible for cell phone lot management? • How are cell phone lots staffed and monitored? • What are typical hours of operations? • What sources of revenue fund capital and maintenance costs? • How much airport investment is needed for a cell phone lot? • How prevalent is third-party development and management of these lots? • Has any airport studied the impact of cell phone lots on other parking products or ground trans- portation choices? • What lessons can airports with cell phone lots provide an airport contemplating a new lot or reprogramming of an existing lot? SYNTHESIS STUDY APPROACH To address these questions, a four-step approach was taken: A literature review on current practices examined discussions about airport cell phone lots at airport industry conferences, written materials offered by industry journals on airport parking, and relevant ACRP publications, supported by an Internet search of the topic in newspapers and magazines. Internet research of the top 100 airports in the FAA’s National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) and a few Canadian airports identified those with cell phone lots and gathered basic (and available) data on such topics as airport size, cell phone lot size and amenities, and location. This infor- mation, which was collected and assembled into a database for analysis, is discussed in chapter three. Vacant Temporary Lot Permanent Paved or Unpaved Lot •Trashcans •Lighting •Security Cell Phone Lot as Part of Existing Parking Areas •Free parking, time limited •Subject to parking fees after minimum free time expires Lot with Some Amenities •Wi Fi •FIDS •Restrooms Lot with Concessions •Gas station •Restaurants FIGURE 1 Types of cell phone lots. Source: KRAMER aerotek inc. (2014).

5 More than 35 airports were contacted and invited to participate in an online survey and follow-up telephone interview. Of these airports, four did not have a cell phone lot and therefore only participated in the telephone interview. Twenty airports with cell phone lots began the online survey: 18 completed the survey and two airports provided a partial response. Where possible in the analysis, all airports responding to a particular question were reported: however, since not all airports responded to every question the number of responses was indicated in each table presented in chapter three. Chapter four presents highlights from the telephone interviews. Each airport representative that par- ticipated in an interview reviewed the highlights, suggested changes, and granted approval for publica- tion. A few participants requested confidentiality and therefore interview highlights are not published for their particular airport. Table 1 shows the airports that participated in the telephone interviews. In addition to varying size and location, representation from airports operated by authorities, counties, municipalities, and port commissions was also sought. Airports with Cell Phone Lots Hub Size Organization 2013 O&D Passengers (two-way) John F Kennedy International Large Authority 39,571,528 San Francisco International Large City/county 33,615,374 Denver International Large City/county 27,977,660 Boston Logan International Large Authority 27,768,574 Toronto Pearson International* Large Authority 27,082,102 Seattle–Tacoma International Large Port commission 24,059,336 Phoenix Sky Harbor International Large City 21,249,900 Tampa International Large Authority 15,672,754 Ronald Reagan Washington Nat’l Large Authority 15,506,872 Portland International Large Port commission 12,554,796 Salt Lake City International Large City 10,876,068 Lambert–St. Louis International Medium Airport commission 10,138,724 Austin–Bergstrom International Medium City 9,162,300 Metropolitan Oakland International Medium Port commission 8,727,266 Louis Armstrong New Orleans Int’l Medium City 8,593,536 San Antonio International Medium City 7,630,890 Pittsburgh International Medium Authority 7,490,376 Indianapolis International Medium Authority 6,936,244 Airports Without Cell Phone Lots McCarran Int’l (Las Vegas) Large County 33,438,548 La Guardia Large Authority 24,059,336 Newark Liberty International Large Authority 23,925,468 Dallas/Fort Worth International Large Multi-city/county 22,720,416 Eppley Airfield (Omaha)* Medium Authority 4,042,333 U.S. Department of Transportation, Origin Destination Survey of —U.S. Department of Transportation, ACAIS airport ranking (2013). airports, particularly airports with a large number of foreign flags. O&D survey raw data were Sources: Compiled by LeighFisher and KRAMER aerotek inc. Notes: The U.S.DOT O&D survey does not include data for foreign-flag airlines or non-revenue passengers; therefore, the raw data from the survey will understate O&D passengers at many used to estimate the number of connecting passengers. The number of originating passengers is calculated by subtracting connecting passengers from total enplaned passengers. This includes domestic and international O&D passengers traveling on U.S. and foreign-flag airlines as well as any passengers making connections between two international flights and non-revenue passengers. Total passengers for both directions multiplies estimates of originating passengers by 2. Connecting passengers— Airline Passenger Traffic, Domestic, online database [accessed September 2014]. Total enplaned passengers Connecting data not available for Toronto Pearson and for Omaha. Omaha passengers are total passengers and Toronto Pearson O&D passengers are 75% of total passengers. Percentage of connecting passengers estimated from 2009 MIDT data. TABLE 1 AIRPORTS PARTICIPATING IN THE TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS

6 There is very little published research about airport cell phone lots. TRB has published a number of studies and syntheses that complement this study and provide perspective about specific ways to improve customer experience or measure performance. Table 2 lists relevant studies that are com- pleted, pending, or in process. REPORT STRUCTURE Figure 2 shows the report organization with the summary and this introduction. Chapter two sum- marizes results of the Internet research about cell phone lots at 110 airports. Chapters three and four present a synthesis of the study findings. Chapter five contains a discussion of conclusions. Appen- dix A contains a list of the 110 airports studied by means of the Internet. Appendix B contains a copy of the online survey. Appendix C is the telephone guide used for follow-up interviews. Project Number Project Title ACRP 03-19 Passenger Value of Time, Benefit-Cost Analysis, and Airport Capital Investment Decisions ACRP 10-16 Ground Transportation at Airports: Best Practices ACRP Report 10 Innovations for Airport Terminal Facilities ACRP Report 19A Airport Performance Indicators ACRP Report 24 Guidebook for Evaluating Airport Parking Strategies and Supporting Technologies ACRP Report 30 Reference Guide on Understanding Common Use at Airports ACRP Report 34 Handbook to Assess the Impacts of Constrained Parking at Airports ACRP Report 52 Wayfinding and Signing Guidelines for Airport Terminals and Landside ACRP Synthesis 36 Exploring Airport Employee Commute and Parking Strategies ACRP Report 109 Improving Terminal Design to Increase Revenue Generation and Customer Satisfaction TRB Special Report 215 Measuring Airport Landside Capacity Source: Compiled by KRAMER aerotek, inc. (2014). TABLE 2 RELATED ADDITIONAL ACRP AND TRB PUBLICATIONS Overview Summary Introduction Cell Phone Lots in the U.S. Analysis Survey Results Highlights of Airport Interviews Conclusions Conclusions Further Research Appendices Internet Research Sample Online Survey Telephone Interview Guide References Glossary & Acronyms FIGURE 2 Report organization. Source: KRAMER aerotek, inc. (2014).