7b supp
ITEM NO: 7b_Supp . DATE OF MEETING: September 8, 2015 SUSTAINABLE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN (SAMP) UPDATE September 8, 2015 Briefing overview Airport activity Where we are in the planning process Gate expansion concepts Airfield simulation modeling Landside modeling & concepts Public outreach Next steps 2 Airport activity Higher than previously forecasted growth in recent years Dramatic growth in 2015 Operations: 70% of SAMP 5-year forecasted growth anticipated in 2015 Passengers: 55% of SAMP 5-year forecasted growth anticipated in 2015 Higher than previously forecasted growth in recent years 3 Where we are in the planning process Analysis complexities Gate need Unconstrained 20-year forecast indicates a need for 35 gates Airfield modeling will determine airfield capacity Could determine a lower number of operations can be accommodated, even with improvements, resulting in a lower gate requirement One vs two terminals Analysis involves balancing airfield, terminal & landside capacity Potentially significant capital cost differences between alternatives Need to determine feasibility of required improvements under each alternative Landside modeling will inform one vs two terminal recommendation Analysis of options involves complex trade-offs 4 Where we are in the planning process Current work Refined gate expansion concepts Gate layout for each 5-year planning horizon On-going work to explore phasing for gates, terminal and hardstands Airfield Modeling Calibrated model of existing airfield Currently running model to assess existing airfield with increased activity Assessing impacts of runway/taxiway separation Refining landside concepts Iterative process with development of one and two terminal concepts Initial simulation modeling Short list of options based on pros/cons assessment 5 Gate expansion concepts One terminal 100% of 20-year activity accommodated Terminal expansion north and east in Main Terminal Relocate Upper Drive and expand APM required to connect passengers Lower Drive north and south One terminal option includes terminal expansion north & east 6 Gate expansion concepts Two terminals 70% of 20-year activity accommodated Second terminal and supporting in Main Terminal roadways 30% of 20-year activity accommodated Fewer improvements needed at in North Terminal Main Terminal Two terminal option relieves congestion at Main Terminal 7 Gate expansion concepts North Terminal concept Bag claim and check-in on same level Potential APM on upper level Tunnel connection for baggage & utilities Air Cargo Rd either in tunnel or terminates at S 160th APM Terminal Curbs Expressway LRT Expressway Gates East West Section through North Terminal & Roadways North Terminal section view 8 Terminal facility requirements Main Terminal implications Ticketing Level One terminal concept requires expansion north & east to accommodate 2034 demand for check-in & security screening Two terminal concept minimizes ticketing expansion (no impact to drives) Must expand ticketing north & east under one terminal concept 9 Terminal facility requirements Main Terminal implications Bag claim Level One terminal concept requires expansion north & south in addition to removal of ramps in existing claim area to accommodate 2034 demand for baggage facilities Two terminal concept minimizes expansion (no impact to drives) Must expand bag claim south & north under one terminal concept 10 Airfield simulation modeling Objectives Determine airfield capacity with almost 60% more annual aircraft operations in 2034 Determine timing and benefit of potential airfield improvements Determine number of gates needed in 2034 based on airfield capacity Quantify benefit of operational procedures for FAA tower and airlines Airfield modeling will determine airfield capacity 11 Airfield simulation modeling Potential airfield improvements and procedures Capacity determined by airfield layout and procedures 12 Landside Landside modeling Current work Calibrated existing base-year model Simulated future demand on existing roadway system for one terminal Next steps Simulate one terminal roadway improvement concepts Simulate two terminal roadway concepts Adjust model if airfield capacity is limited Modeling complete in Fall 2015 Landside modeling complete in Fall 2015 13 Landside Landside modeling Existing roadways Existing roadway gridlocks between 10- and 15-year timeframes Potential improvements will be developed & modeled Determine curb capacity Relieve bottlenecks on roadways Existing roadway gridlocks between 10- and 15-year timeframes 14 Landside Landside options for one terminal concept Challenges Terminal expansion to the east at check-in level impacts Upper Drive Removing bag claim ramps requires raising Lower Drive Requires significant capacity improvements for both the Upper & Lower Drives Challenging and costly to construct curbs and roadway connections while maintaining operations Capacity of access roadways needs to be enhanced Opportunities Less confusing for departing passengers (i.e. which terminal?) Challenging and costly to construct while maintaining operations 15 Landside Options for one terminal concept Option 1: Relocate Upper Drive to above relocated pedestrian bridge and level with 6th floor of garage Requires rebuild of Lower Drive, Service Tunnel & Main Terminal support structure Requires expensive relocation of garage vent stacks Creates viaduct structure over Lower Drive with limited natural light Expensive & difficult to construct drives improvements 16 Landside Options for one terminal concept Option 2: Relocate Upper Drive into 5th floor of garage Does not provide adequate Upper Drive capacity Not feasible due to constraint within garage: column spacing, vertical clearance Not feasible due to constraints within garage 17 Landside Options for one terminal concept Option 3: Relocate Upper Drive into 5th floor of garage + remove floors 6-8 above Adequate Upper & Lower Drive capacity Requires rebuild of Lower Drive, Service Tunnel & Main Terminal support structure Requires relocation of elevator cores Loss of long-term parking stalls and revenue Expensive to provide capacity & loss of garage revenue 18 Landside Landside options for two terminal concept Challenges Requires second roadway system to new terminal Crosses Airport Expressway and Light Rail Difficult connections to 160th Loop and SR 518 Busing and/or APM required to transport passengers from 2nd terminal to existing terminal and Light Rail station Opportunities 30% of vehicles diverted to 2nd terminal and off of existing terminal drives Potentially requires no capacity improvements to Upper & Lower Drives Easier to construct curbs and roadway connections while maintaining operations Easier to maintain operations during 2nd terminal landside construction 19 Landside Options for two terminal concept Option 1: Ingress crosses over Light Rail & Expressway Option 2: Ingress crosses under Light Rail & Expressway Need more technical analysis of north terminal roadways 20 Public Outreach Community open houses designed to engage regional audiences 1st Series: SAMP process, goals, forecast, and development concepts Des Moines, Seattle, Bellevue locations (Spring 2015) 2nd Series: Preliminary Alternatives (Fall 2015) 3rd Series: Preferred Development Alternative (Winter 2015) Federal, state, regional & local government briefings to date Airport-area city councils (5) South King County councilmembers (2) Congressional delegation Senate (2) and House (4) State Legislature Joint Transportation Committee Washington State Transportation Commission Puget Sound Regional Council Transportation Policy Board South King County Area Transportation Board, SeaShore Subarea Group King County Department of Health Ongoing engagement with tenants, operators, FAA, & TSA Engaging all stakeholder interests 21 Public Outreach Forums and focus groups to reach specialized audiences Local & regional planners on transportation issues Airport-area cities, WSDOT, Sound Transit, King County Targeted audiences on sustainability and triple bottom line Forums and small-group meetings Q3 2015 Environment, economic and social community emphasis Business outreach and economic development Upcoming survey of airport-area economic development managers, followed by business forums in the cities Regional business forum(s) on port-centered economic development, including lodging, concessions, land redevelopment, workforce needs Engagement with regional business, labor, contracting Engagement with local and regional communities and associations Airport-area and Puget Sound: chambers, EDCs, Area Rotaries and Kiwanis, ports association, labor & business Trade Development Alliance, Seattle Southside, travel associations Focus on Community and Economic Opportunity 22 Next steps Airfield Determine airfield capacity Test benefits of potential airfield improvements Gates Refine gate layouts & phasing Terminal Continued analysis of one vs two terminal concepts Landside On going capacity analysis through modeling Develop roadway layouts and assess challenges Support facilities Incorporate support facilities into overall land use plan 23
Limitations of Translatable Documents
PDF files are created with text and images are placed at an exact position on a page of a fixed size.
Web pages are fluid in nature, and the exact positioning of PDF text creates presentation problems.
PDFs that are full page graphics, or scanned pages are generally unable to be made accessible, In these cases, viewing whatever plain text could be extracted is the only alternative.