DOCSLIB.ORG

Airport-Airline Competition Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

UPDATE TO AIRLINE COMPETITION PLAN Philadelphia International Airport Prepared for Federal Aviation Administration in compliance with requirements of AIR21 Prepared by City of Philadelphia Division of Aviation Philadelphia, Pennsylvania November 2015 UPDATE TO AIRLINE COMPETITION PLAN Philadelphia International Airport Prepared for Federal Aviation Administration in compliance with requirements of AIR21 Prepared by City of Philadelphia Division of Aviation Philadelphia, Pennsylvania November 2015 CHICAGO AMSTERDAM CINCINNATI BERN DALLAS BOLOGNA SAN FRANCISCO GLASGOW WASHINGTON, D.C. LONDON TORONTO MANCHESTER MUMBAI READING www.leighfisher.com Executive Summary ES‐1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Scope of 2015 Airline Competition Plan Update The City of Philadelphia (City), owner and operator of Philadelphia International Airport (Airport) is required to prepare and periodically update an Airline Competition Plan describing the City’s programs and initiatives to enable and encourage competition among airlines at the Airport. Airline Competition Plans are required under Section 155 of the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (AIR‐21) and are submitted to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). FAA approval is required as a condition for the City to receive federal grants‐in‐aid or have additional passenger facility charge (PFC) applications or amendments approved. The sCity ha received FAA approval of its original Airline Competition Plan submitted in August 2000 and of updates submitted in February 2002, March 2004, and April 2008 (the 2008 Update). Under guidelines set forth in the FAA’s Airport Improvement Handbook Order 5100.38D (AIP Handbook) Appendix X dated September 30, 2014, this 2015 Competition Plan Update (2015 Update) is required to describe the provisions of a new Airport‐Airline Use and Lease Agreement (Airline Agreement) that became effective on July 1, 2015. The update is organized according to the AIP Handbook. As well as summarizing the new Airline Agreement, this 2015 Update documents progress made by the City in implementing the construction programs, policies, and initiatives described in the earlier Competition Plan reports. Besides successful negotiation of the new Airline Agreement, initiatives undertaken by the City since 2008 have involved the expansion and reconfiguration of terminal facilities, accommodation of new entrants, and increasing the number of common use gates available at the Airport. Implementation of Initiatives from 2008 Update Specific initiatives documented in the 2008 Update and their implementation status are as follows: Expanded Terminal E to provide 5 additional gates for preferential or common use. A project to expand Terminals D and E is nearing overall completion and provided a net increase of 5 gates. Three new gates are leased on a preferential‐use basis to Southwest Airlines, and two new gates are available for Domestic Common Use. Increased gates available on a common use basis. The City has increased the number of gates available on a common use basis from 22 in the 2008 Update to 29 as of August 2015. Accommodated new service by Alaska, Jet Blue, Qatar, and Spirit. Alaska started service at the Airport in June 2012 and as of April 2015 is scheduled to operate one daily departure to one destination (Seattle.) JetBlue Airways started service in May 2013 and as of April 2015 is scheduled to operatee fiv daily departures to one destination (Boston.) Qatar Airways started service in April 2014 and as of April 2015 is scheduled to operate one daily departure to one destination (Doha, Qatar.) Spirit Airlines started service in April 2013 and as of April 2015 is scheduled to operate an average of three daily departures to four destinations (Las Vegas, Dallas, Chicago, and Myrtle Beach.) New Airline Agreement The 2008 Update provided an overview of the Airline Agreement that extended to June 30, 2011 (prior Airline Agreement). The prior Airline Agreement was further extended twice – once to June 30, 2013 City of Philadelphia Philadelphia International Airport Competition Plan Update November 2015 PHL ES‐2 and again to June 30, 2015. With each of these extensions, the only material change was to expand the pre‐approved capital improvement program to include additional projects. Effective July 1, 2015, the City and the Signatory Airlines have negotiated a new Airport‐Airline Use and Lease Agreement that extends five years to June 30, 2020, with two optional one‐year extensions thereafter to June 30, 2022 (new Airline Agreement). The prior Airline Agreement incorporated the City’s objectives to accommodate expanded service by both new entrant and incumbent airlines and facilitated gate access to any airline desiring to serve the Airport. Specific provisions of the prior Airline Agreement, which were retained in the new Airline Agreement, covered: Conversion of airline premises from exclusive‐use to preferential‐use or common‐use status Designation of City control of domestic common‐use gates Accommodation and gate recapture rights Preapproval of a capital improvement program that is not subject to further airline majority‐ in‐interest (MII) approval Limitations on MII provisions for projects that are not included in the preapproved capital program City review and approval rights for accommodation or sublease arrangements between airlines Explicit dispute resolution procedures Under the first extension of the prior Airline Agreement, the Signatory Airlines pre‐approved $250 million in projects in support of the airfield components of the City’s long‐range Capacity Enhancement Program (CEP), including a portion of on‐ and off‐Airport facility relocations, certain land acquisition, and a portion of the wetlands reclamation and mitigation necessary for the CEP. Under the second extension of the prior Airline Agreement, the Signatory Airlines pre‐approved $734 million in projects both in support of the CEP and to fund other capital improvement projects, including: Extension of Runway 9R‐27L to the east by 1,500 feet to a total length of 12,000 feet and the construction of Taxiways EE and H in order to improve the flow and sequencing of aircraft to and from Terminals E and F and reduce taxiway complexity; Planning, design, and initial construction of the Terminal Modernization Program, which includes a redesigned and enhanced Terminal B and C ticketing area, which will include a new, automated baggage handling and screening system and a new, more spacious, centralized passenger security screening checkpoint to provide for greater efficiency and enhanced passenger flow; Replacement of the current rental car facility surface lots with a new, multi‐story consolidated rental car facility; An initial design for an automated people‐mover system between concourses that will make it easier for passengers to connect to other flights; City of Philadelphia Philadelphia International Airport Competition Plan Update November 2015 PHL ES‐3 Airside improvements to include new taxiway/aircraft holding bays/apron to better queue for departure; Continued rehabilitation of other existing airport infrastructure projects to include security upgrades, roof and window replacements, escalator upgrades, airport restrooms, roadways, concession programs and flight information display systems. The second extension also updated maintenance responsibilities between the City and the airlines serving the Airport. This update to the City’s Airline Competition Plan is intended primarily to provide to the FAA information regarding the provisions of the new Airline Agreement. The City continued the precedent established with the extensions of the prior Airline Agreement to expand the pre‐approved projects to include: 1. An additional $100 million to $250 million for the Terminal Modernization Program; and 2. Planning, design, and construction of a new FAA control tower consistent with FAA approved locations; or 3. Initial phases of planning, design, and construction of an extension to Runway 8‐26 and related airfield and terminal improvements up to $300 million. By December 31, 2016, the Signatory Airlines must select at least one of the three projects to proceed with, and at least one of the projects must be #2 or #3. In addition to these projects, an additional $173 million in renewal and rehabilitation projects were approved concurrently the execution of the new Airline Agreement. The new Airline Agreement largely clarifies provisions and simplifies language in the prior Airline Agreement. A number of sections in this 2015 Update indicate that there has been no change since the 2008 Update, as the provisions of the prior Airline Agreement were transferred to the new Airline Agreement. The 2015 Update provides FAA information regarding those provisions that have changed between the prior and new Airline Agreements. The 2015 Update also provides information on the policies, capital programs, and other initiatives demonstrating the City’s commitment to providing an operating environment that promotes competitive airline service to the Philadelphia region. City of Philadelphia Philadelphia International Airport Competition Plan Update November 2015 PHL 2015 Update i CONTENTS This Competition Plan Update is organized in accordance with the guidance provided in the FAA’s AIP Handbook. Section Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................. ES‐1 Scope of 2015 Airline Competition Plan Update ....................................................
Recommended publications
  • Business & Commercial Aviation

    Business & Commercial Aviation

    BUSINESS & COMMERCIAL AVIATION LEONARDO AW609 PERFORMANCE PLATEAUS OCEANIC APRIL 2020 $10.00 AviationWeek.com/BCA Business & Commercial Aviation AIRCRAFT UPDATE Leonardo AW609 Bringing tiltrotor technology to civil aviation FUEL PLANNING ALSO IN THIS ISSUE Part 91 Department Inspections Is It Airworthy? Oceanic Fuel Planning Who Says It’s Ready? APRIL 2020 VOL. 116 NO. 4 Performance Plateaus Digital Edition Copyright Notice The content contained in this digital edition (“Digital Material”), as well as its selection and arrangement, is owned by Informa. and its affiliated companies, licensors, and suppliers, and is protected by their respective copyright, trademark and other proprietary rights. Upon payment of the subscription price, if applicable, you are hereby authorized to view, download, copy, and print Digital Material solely for your own personal, non-commercial use, provided that by doing any of the foregoing, you acknowledge that (i) you do not and will not acquire any ownership rights of any kind in the Digital Material or any portion thereof, (ii) you must preserve all copyright and other proprietary notices included in any downloaded Digital Material, and (iii) you must comply in all respects with the use restrictions set forth below and in the Informa Privacy Policy and the Informa Terms of Use (the “Use Restrictions”), each of which is hereby incorporated by reference. Any use not in accordance with, and any failure to comply fully with, the Use Restrictions is expressly prohibited by law, and may result in severe civil and criminal penalties. Violators will be prosecuted to the maximum possible extent. You may not modify, publish, license, transmit (including by way of email, facsimile or other electronic means), transfer, sell, reproduce (including by copying or posting on any network computer), create derivative works from, display, store, or in any way exploit, broadcast, disseminate or distribute, in any format or media of any kind, any of the Digital Material, in whole or in part, without the express prior written consent of Informa.
  • Airline Competition Plan Final Report

    Airline Competition Plan Final Report

    Final Report Airline Competition Plan Philadelphia International Airport Prepared for Federal Aviation Administration in compliance with requirements of AIR21 Prepared by City of Philadelphia Division of Aviation Philadelphia, Pennsylvania August 31, 2000 Final Report Airline Competition Plan Philadelphia International Airport Prepared for Federal Aviation Administration in compliance with requirements of AIR21 Prepared by City of Philadelphia Division of Aviation Philadelphia, Pennsylvania August 31, 2000 SUMMARY S-1 Summary AIRLINE COMPETITION PLAN Philadelphia International Airport The City of Philadelphia, owner and operator of Philadelphia International Airport, is required to submit annually to the Federal Aviation Administration an airline competition plan. The City’s plan for 2000, as documented in the accompanying report, provides information regarding the availability of passenger terminal facilities, the use of passenger facility charge (PFC) revenues to fund terminal facilities, airline leasing arrangements, patterns of airline service, and average airfares for passengers originating their journeys at the Airport. The plan also sets forth the City’s current and planned initiatives to encourage competitive airline service at the Airport, construct terminal facilities needed to accommodate additional airline service, and ensure that access is provided to airlines wishing to serve the Airport on fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory terms. These initiatives are summarized in the following paragraphs. Encourage New Airline Service Airlines that have recently started scheduled domestic service at Philadelphia International Airport include AirTran Airways, America West Airlines, American Trans Air, Midway Airlines, Midwest Express Airlines, and National Airlines. Airlines that have recently started scheduled international service at the Airport include Air France and Lufthansa. The City intends to continue its programs to encourage airlines to begin or increase service at the Airport.
  • Why Some Airport-Rail Links Get Built and Others Do Not: the Role of Institutions, Equity and Financing

    Why Some Airport-Rail Links Get Built and Others Do Not: the Role of Institutions, Equity and Financing

    Why some airport-rail links get built and others do not: the role of institutions, equity and financing by Julia Nickel S.M. in Engineering Systems- Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2010 Vordiplom in Wirtschaftsingenieurwesen- Universität Karlsruhe, 2007 Submitted to the Department of Political Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Political Science at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY February 2011 © Massachusetts Institute of Technology 2011. All rights reserved. Author . Department of Political Science October 12, 2010 Certified by . Kenneth Oye Associate Professor of Political Science Thesis Supervisor Accepted by . Roger Peterson Arthur and Ruth Sloan Professor of Political Science Chair, Graduate Program Committee 1 Why some airport-rail links get built and others do not: the role of institutions, equity and financing by Julia Nickel Submitted to the Department of Political Science On October 12, 2010, in partial fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Political Science Abstract The thesis seeks to provide an understanding of reasons for different outcomes of airport ground access projects. Five in-depth case studies (Hongkong, Tokyo-Narita, London- Heathrow, Chicago- O’Hare and Paris-Charles de Gaulle) and eight smaller case studies (Kuala Lumpur, Seoul, Shanghai-Pudong, Bangkok, Beijing, Rome- Fiumicino, Istanbul-Atatürk and Munich- Franz Josef Strauss) are conducted. The thesis builds on existing literature that compares airport-rail links by explicitly considering the influence of the institutional environment of an airport on its ground access situation and by paying special attention to recently opened dedicated airport expresses in Asia.
  • 21 December 2020 Case No.: 2018-AIR-00041 in the Matter Of

    21 December 2020 Case No.: 2018-AIR-00041 in the Matter Of

    U.S. Department of Labor Office of Administrative Law Judges 2 Executive Campus, Suite 450 Cherry Hill, NJ 08002 (856) 486-3800 (856) 486-3806 (FAX) Issue Date: 21 December 2020 Case No.: 2018-AIR-00041 In the Matter of KARLENE PETITT Complainant v. DELTA AIR LINES, INC. Respondent DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING RELIEF This matter arises under the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (“AIR 21”), which was signed into law on April 5, 2000. See 49 U.S.C. § 42121. The Act includes a whistleblower protection provision, with a Department of Labor complaint procedure. Implementing regulations are at 29 C.F.R. Part 1979, published at 68 Fed. Reg. 14,100 (Mar. 21, 2003). The Decision and Order that follows is based on an analysis of the record, including items not specifically addressed the arguments of the parties, and the applicable law. I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Complainant filed an AIR 21 complaint with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) on June 6, 2016. In its July 13, 2018 letter, OSHA, acting on behalf of the Secretary, found that the parties are covered under the Act, but there was insufficient evidence to establish reasonable cause that a violation occurred. Accordingly, OSHA dismissed the complaint. On August 1, 2018, Complainant objected to OSHA’s findings and requested a formal hearing before the Office of Administrative Law Judges. Subsequently, on August 27, 2018, this matter was assigned to the undersigned. On August 28, 2018, this Tribunal issued the Notice of Assignment and Conference Call. Complainant responded to the Notice of Assignment by letter dated September 6, 2018, and attached her statement, which was originally transmitted as part of her Complaint to OSHA.
  • Garmin Reveals Autoland Feature Rotorcraft Industry Slams Possible by Matt Thurber NYC Helo Ban Page 45

    Garmin Reveals Autoland Feature Rotorcraft Industry Slams Possible by Matt Thurber NYC Helo Ban Page 45

    PUBLICATIONS Vol.50 | No.12 $9.00 DECEMBER 2019 | ainonline.com Flying Short-field landings in the Falcon 8X page 24 Regulations UK Labour calls for bizjet ban page 14 Industry Forecast sees deliveries rise in 2020 page 36 Gratitude for Service Honor flight brings vets to D.C. page 41 Air Transport Lion Air report cites multiple failures page 51 Rotorcraft Garmin reveals Autoland feature Industry slams possible by Matt Thurber NYC helo ban page 45 For the past eight years, Garmin has secretly Mode. The Autoland system is designed to Autoland and how it works, I visited been working on a fascinating new capabil- safely fly an airplane from cruising altitude Garmin’s Olathe, Kansas, headquarters for ity, an autoland function that can rescue an to a suitable runway, then land the airplane, a briefing and demo flight in the M600 with airplane with an incapacitated pilot or save apply brakes, and stop the engine. Autoland flight test pilot and engineer Eric Sargent. a pilot when weather conditions present can even switch on anti-/deicing systems if The project began in 2011 with a Garmin no other safe option. Autoland should soon necessary. engineer testing some algorithms that could receive its first FAA approval, with certifi- Autoland is available for aircraft manu- make an autolanding possible, and in 2014 cation expected shortly in the Piper M600, facturers to incorporate in their airplanes Garmin accomplished a first autolanding in followed by the Cirrus Vision Jet. equipped with Garmin G3000 avionics and a Columbia 400 piston single. In September The Garmin Autoland system is part of autothrottle.
  • 150/5360-9: Planning and Design of Airport Terminal Building Facilities At

    150/5360-9: Planning and Design of Airport Terminal Building Facilities At

    Portions of this AC are under review for update. Please contact the National Planning and Environmental Division for assistance. ADVISORY CIRCULAR DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration I Washington, D.C. Subject: PLANNING AND DESIGN OF AIRPORT TERMINAL BUILDING FACILITIES AT NONHUB LOCATIONS i 1. PURPOSE. This advisory circular provides guidance material fbr t planning and design of airport terminal buildings at nonhub locations. 2. RELATED READING MATERIAL. Appendix 1 contains a listing of documents containing supplemental material relating to terminal building planning and design. Ordering information is also contained therein. 3. BACKGROUND. Advisory Circular (AC) 15015360-7, Planning and Design considerations -for Airport Terminal Building Development, provides guidance for the planning and design of airport terminals. The material contained within it is applicable to all airports serving air carriers, regardless of size. Because of this wide range of coverage, the material is necessarily very general in nature and of limited usefulness in pro- viding detailed planning guidance, particularly for less sophisticated, low activity airports. 'To remedy this, a contract was awarded to the airport facility consulting firm of Arnold Thompson Associates, Inc., to provide assistance in the development of guidance material for the planning of terminal building facilities at nonhub locations. The nonhub category of airports was chosen as it represents a range of airports with relatively unsophisticated and uniform characteristics. The results of this contractual effort are presented in this circular. I *hi% WILLIAM-V. VITALE - Director, Office of Airport Standards Initiated by: AAS-200 CONTENTS Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION paragraph Page 1. Description of a Nonhub Airport .......................... 1 2 .
  • Airport Terminal Beacons Recommended Practice

    Airport Terminal Beacons Recommended Practice

    Airport Terminal Beacons Recommended Practice Page | 1 1.0 Table of Contents 2.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 4 3.0 BACKGROUND OF AIRPORT TERMINAL BEACONS ......................... 4 4.0 TECHNOLOGY DISCUSSION .................................................................. 6 4.1. What is an Airport Terminal Beacon? ............................................................................... 6 4.2. Building Beacon Business Models .................................................................................... 7 4.2.1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 7 4.2.2. Overview .............................................................................................................................. 7 4.2.3. Impact on Technology Deployment .................................................................................. 8 4.2.4. Building the Business Case ............................................................................................... 8 4.2.5. Options for Implementation ............................................................................................... 8 4.2.6. Recommendation ................................................................................................................ 8 4.2.7. Implementation Approach .................................................................................................. 9 4.3. Common Use
  • Oxford Researchers Partner with American Airlines, British Airways and Oneworld to Analyze COVID-19 Testing Trial Results

    Oxford Researchers Partner with American Airlines, British Airways and Oneworld to Analyze COVID-19 Testing Trial Results

    NEWS RELEASE Oxford Researchers Partner with American Airlines, British Airways and oneworld to Analyze COVID-19 Testing Trial Results 12/10/2020 The trial has also been extended to include British Airways’ daily Miami service and its second service from New York’s John F. Kennedy Airport. FORT WORTH, Texas — American Airlines, British Airways and oneworld® have teamed up with researchers at the Oxford Internet Institute (OII), the University of Oxford, in the review and analysis of survey data from the COVID-19 testing trial recently launched by the airlines and alliance. The project, Trust, Testing and Travel, Technology Use, Traveller Knowledge and Compliance with COVID-19 Health Rules, involves OII researchers analyzing aggregated, nonpersonal survey data from air travelers on their behavior and sentiment toward trial testing. The airlines and the alliance have created a taskforce to evaluate the results of the trial. The task force, comprising oneworld member airline representatives and independent medical experts, will work with OII, to consider the results and implications of the survey data from participants in the trial. Professor Phil Howard, Director of OII, said, “The University of Oxford is already playing a leading role in the ght against COVID-19 with development of a vaccine. I’m delighted that researchers at the OII will be working to analyse and review survey data from this important trial so that we understand more about the options available for safer air travel.” In a joint statement, American, British Airways and oneworld said, “We are pleased to be working with one of the 1 world’s leading academic institutions to review the results of our testing trial passenger survey, which we hope will help provide governments on both sides of the Atlantic with the evidence they need to unlock travel and kick-start the global economy.
  • What Do Travelers Expect of Airport Terminals?

    What Do Travelers Expect of Airport Terminals?

    2/26/2020 Airport Magazine - December 2019/January 2020 - What Do Travelers Expect Of Airport Terminals? What Do Travelers Expect Of Airport Terminals? BY JOSEPH CHANG, RA i New terminal designs not only are adding needed capacity to meet growing traveler volumes, but recent passenger surveys conclude that they are improving traveler satisfaction (J.D. Power 2018 Passenger Satisfaction Survey). https://www.airportmagazine-digital.com/airportmagazine/december_2019_january_2020/MobilePagedArticle.action?articleId=1548638&app=false#articleId1548638 1/6 2/26/2020 Airport Magazine - December 2019/January 2020 - What Do Travelers Expect Of Airport Terminals? ir travel remains a stressful experience for many travelers, but increased efforts to improve the basic drivers of passenger satisfaction — clean modern facilities, A efficient security processes, courteous staff, and better dining and shopping options — are making airports a less stressful part of the journey. Beyond meeting these practicalities, airports are undertaking new designs to create terminals where travelers enjoy spending their time. How terminal designs enrich and provide travelers a genuinely rewarding experience often depend on the trip’s purpose and individual traveler personas formed by culture, personality, gender, physical and cognitive condition. Business travelers want terminal designs and services that deliver convenience, control of their travel options, and facilities that enhance "on-the-go" productivity and promote personal well-being. As a group, they are more apt to embrace technology to speed their way through airport processes. A survey of business travelers (Egencia Business Travel and Technology Survey, July 2017) found that 50 percent of global respondents would avoid human interaction on the road unless they are having a problem.
  • Flying Under the Radar: Multimarket Contact and Tacit Collusion in the U.S

    Flying Under the Radar: Multimarket Contact and Tacit Collusion in the U.S

    Flying Under the Radar: Multimarket Contact and Tacit Collusion in the U.S. Airline Industry A SENIOR THESIS Submitted to the Faculty in the Department of Economics at Miami University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of Departmental Honors By Henry Jameson Shaneyfelt* Miami University Spring 2021 ABSTRACT This paper serves to identify the effects of multimarket contact on tacit collusion through the measures of average price and price dispersion. Implementing methods used in Evans and Kessides (1994) and Ciliberto and Williams (2014), I employ gate-use data to instrument for the average multimarket contact variable and address any potential bias from endogeneity. Additionally, squared gate-use instruments, which are novel to the existing literature, are included in the analysis. When using the novel instruments, a significant positive relationship is found between average multimarket contact and both prices and price dispersion. Advisor: Dr. Charles Moul *I would like to sincerely thank Dr. Moul for all the help he has provided me throughout this process. I would also like to thank the Miami University Economics Department for giving me the opportunity to complete this research project. 1 Introduction The majority of classical microeconomic theory is based in the analysis of market behavior that does not extend beyond the market’s scope. External markets and their effects on firm behavior are typically not studied at length. However, the modern-day economy is seeing an increasing number of firms competing with rival firms in numerous differing markets at a given time. An intriguing attribute of this newly structured economy is the ability for firms to interact with rivals across markets.
  • IARO Report 21.15 Airport Rail Links in the Planning Stage

    IARO Report 21.15 Airport Rail Links in the Planning Stage

    IARO report 21.15 Airport Rail Links in the Planning Stage The EuroCAREX cargo rail express network includes plans for links to several airports. 1 IARO Report 21.15: Airport Rail Links in the Planning Stage Published by: International Air Rail Organisation Suite 3, Charter House, 26 Claremont Road, Surbiton KT6 4QZ UK Telephone +44 (0)20 8390 0000 Fax +44 (0)870 762 0434 Website www.iaro.com Email [email protected] ISBN tba © International Air Rail Organisation 2015 £250 to non-members IARO's mission is to spread world class best practice and good practical ideas among airport rail links world-wide. 2 Contents Chapter Page 1 Introduction 4 2 Planned Air-Rail Links 5 3 Western Rail Access to Heathrow 8 4 Glasgow Tram-Train Link 12 5 US Case Studies 16 6 Conclusions and Learning Points 24 IARO's Air/Rail conferences and workshops 26 3 1. Introduction This report looks at airport rail links in the planning stage, and is largely based on an IARO workshop held at Heathrow Airport, London, UK, in November 2014. Using examples of airport rail links in which IARO members have been involved, it seeks to answer the following questions: • Can we forecast air-rail link patronage? • Why do some plans succeed, and others fail? • Should we plan in-house or use consultants? • How do we get stakeholders involved? • Who pays and how do we negotiate between stakeholders? • What opportunities are there for IARO members? The examples discussed at the workshop were the Western Rail Access to Heathrow (WRAtH) project, the Glasgow Airport TramTrain Link, plus a number of projects in the USA.
  • Building Area Development

    Building Area Development

    4 Building Area Development OVERVIEW The building area of an airport encompasses all of the airport Typical Airport Building Area Functions property not devoted to runways, major taxiways, required • Air passenger terminal clear areas, setbacks, and other airfield-related functions. • Automobile parking • Rental car pick-up and drop-off Common uses of building area land at airports similar to • Administration building or airport offices Sonoma County Airport, i.e., those offering both commercial • Fixed base operations (FBO) facilities • Based aircraft tie downs and storage and general aviation services, are listed in the box to the right. hangars • Transient aircraft parking This chapter discusses the factors that affect the siting and • Pilots’ lounge / flight preparation room • Fuel storage and dispensing equipment development of building area facilities at Sonoma County • Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting (ARFF) Airport. Two separate types of facility needs are examined: facility • Aircraft washing area commercial aviation and general aviation. The focus is on • Air traffic control tower providing direction for the appropriate development and use of Figure 4A, the Terminal Area Concept these Airport building areas. Plan and the Airport Layout Plan (ALP) are presented at the end of this chapter. DESIGN FACTORS Many factors will influence the planning and, later, the development decisions associated with Sonoma County Airport’s commercial and general aviation building areas. Most of these factors can be grouped under four basic headings: Demand — The forecasts developed in Chapter 2 indicate that additional aviation-related facilities are warranted. In particular, additional air passenger terminal and based aircraft storage facilities will be needed to handle the projected demand.