DSM Terminal-Area-Concept-Plan-Technical-Report - FINAL

Foth Infrastructure & Environment 

CONNICO 

Des Moines International Airport 

Terminal Area Concept Plan Technical Report 

Prepared for 

Des Moines Airport Authority 

Des Moines, Iowa 

April 2014 

Aerial Source: Google Earth

Table of Contents 

1. Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 

2. Existing Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 

• Airport Overview 

• Airfield Facilities 

• Passenger Terminal Complex 

• Ground Transportation Facilities and Conditions 

• Air Cargo Facilities 

• General Aviation and Support Facilities 

• Iowa Air National Guard Facilities 

3. Aviation Demand Forecast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 

• Forecast Approach 

• Forecast Summary 

• Economic Basis for Airline Traffic 

• Historical Aviation Activity 

• Aviation Activity Forecasts 

5. Concept Alternatives Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 

• Land Use Alternatives 

• Terminal Alternatives 

6. Preferred Alternatives Refinements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 

• Preferred Land Use Alternative Refinements 

• Preferred Terminal Alternative Refinements 

• Project Implementation Plan 

7. Preliminary Financial Capacity Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .82 

• Key Drivers 

• Industry Benchmarks 

• Preliminary Plan of Finance 

• Sensitivity Analyses and Financial Conclusions 

4. Demand/Capacity and Facilities Requirements Analyses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 

• Passenger Terminal Requirements 

• Ground Transportation Requirements 

• Airfield Requirements 

• Cargo, General Aviation, and Support Facility Requirements 

2 

TERMINAL AREA CONCEPT PLAN TECHNICAL REPORT 

Des Moines International Airport

Executive Summary 

Plan is needed to address obsolescence of existing passenger terminal and general aviation expansion 

KEY POINTS 

• Airport is growing and 

needs to replace its 

terminal. 

• A workshop approach 

was used to guide the 

Advisory Committee. 

The Des Moines Airport Authority (the Authority) 

undertook the preparation of this Terminal Area Concept 

Plan in support of needed improvements to the Des 

Moines International Airport (the Airport) terminal 

complex. The existing terminal building was first built in 

1948 and, although it has been subject to upgrades and 

improvements over the years, it has reached the end of its 

useful economic life. The Authority seeks a solution to the 

problems with the terminal complex, and wants to do so 

with a full understanding of the context of the Airport and 

the long-term needs of the other functional airport 

components (such as air cargo, the Iowa Air National 

Guard, corporate aviation, general aviation and airport 

support functions). In this sense, this document closely 

resembles an airport master plan. The planning effort 

includes key elements of a master plan, but with a distinct 

focus on the terminal area. 

Figure B shows enplanement projections rising at 3.4% 

annual until 2032. 

Figure A 

Passenger Congestion and Overflow at Peak 

The Planning Study 

The Terminal Area Concept Plan includes all of the elements of 

a classic master plan: inventory, forecasts, facility requirements 

analysis, alternatives analysis, financial capacity analysis, an 

environmental overview, and an airport layout plan (ALP) 

update. The study was overseen by an Advisory Committee, 

which met with Airport staff and the consultant team four 

times over a seven month period, in a workshop setting. The 

four workshops were organized as follows: 

Workshop #1 established the shortcomings of the existing 

terminal complex, presented long range demand forecasts, 

and described the preliminary financial capacity analysis. 

Figure C indicates shortcomings of the major functional 

components of the existing passenger terminal. Passenger 

activity levels are described as Million Annual Passengers 

(MAP), which reflects both enplanements and deplanements. 

The Situation 

The Authority operates the busiest and most successful 

airport in Iowa; and its activities are growing. The airfield 

system is effective in accommodating operational demand 

and supporting the Airport’s users. However, the 

passenger terminal building is inadequate. In 2013, pieces 

of the building structure literally fell from the ceiling to the 

floor. Major functional components of the terminal 

complex are beyond capacity, or near it. With passenger 

traffic increasing and airlines adding routes, the timing was 

right for the Authority to address the situation within the 

context of a long-range plan. 

Source: DSM Operations. 

Figure B 

Historical and Forecast Enplaned Passengers 

Figure C 

Existing Terminal Stress Chart 

The goal of plan was to: 

• Develop a long-term solution to the obsolescence of the 

existing passenger terminal complex and its lack of 

capacity expansion potential 

• Take a comprehensive look at each of the Airport’s 

functional components to ensure they could each grow 

and meet projected demands 

• Develop a terminal plan must be functional, affordable, 

and improve the passenger experience 

Illustrated on Figure A is a photo showing passenger 

congestion and overflow at the existing passenger terminal 

during peak. 

3 




Terminal plan considered long term needs of all airport functions 

KEY POINTS 

• Plan reviewed all Airport 

functional needs; 

including highest and 

best use in each 

quadrant. 

Workshop #2 presented long range facility requirements for 

the primary functional components of the Airport (including 

passenger terminal building, roadways, corporate aviation, 

military, air cargo, airfield, etc.) and explored at a high level 

alternative ways to meet those demands as shown in the 

summary in Table ES-1. The review was narrowed to the two 

top land use concepts (showing terminal development in the 

south or east “quadrants” of the Airport), each of which 

allows for compatible future development. 

A. Passenger terminal 

(square feet) 

B. Ground transportation 

Table ES-1 

Facility Requirements Summary 

Existing 

Facilities 

2.5 

MAP 

3.0 

MAP 

4.0 

MAP 

272,900 207,300 236,000 315,500 

Public parking (spaces) 4,258 4,220 5,100 6,800 

Employee parking (spaces) 273 280 300 340 

Rental car facilities (spaces) 370 350 420 570 

Quick turnaround (acres) 8.6 5.5 6.5 8.8 

C. Air cargo facilities (acres) 50.0 10.0 10.6 11.7 

D. General aviation 

Aircraft parking apron 

(positions) 

Aircraft storage facilities 

(square feet) 

E. Airline Support 

50.0 65.0 65.0 66.0 

294,000 286,000 326,100 428,200 

Fuel storage (gallons) 440,000 439,300 485,400 599,200 

Land Area (acres) 1.7 1.7 1.8 2.3 

GSE equipment parking 

areas (square feet) 

n.a. 32,300 37,800 49,200 

GSE gross land area (acres) 0.5 0.9 0.9 

Workshop #3 explored alternative passenger terminal 

development schemes for the two short-listed land use 

alternatives and presented results of the technical analyses 

conducted. This helped the Advisory Committee in their 

deliberations to select a preferred terminal alternative, which 

would then be further refined. 

Workshop #4 presented information on the refinement of 

the preferred terminal area concept, including project costs, 

financial capacity and an implementation plan. 

The Solution 

The Terminal Area Concept Plan Advisory Committee selected 

an alternative that would build a new terminal complex 

(terminal building, auto parking, roadways, etc.) in the south 

quadrant of the Airport. This is currently the site of air cargo 

operations. Following are some of the key reasons for 

selecting this site for a new terminal development area: 

• Site is currently underutilized, as a result of fundamental 

shifts in the air cargo industry. 

• The heavy apron built to support air cargo operations is an 

asset that can be more fully used to support commercial 

passenger airline operations 

• Compared to the alternative of replacing the terminal 

building at its current site, developing a new terminal 

building on the south site can be done without 

affecting passengers during construction. 

• The south site has greater expansion capabilities 

beyond the planning timeframe and as such was 

viewed as a better long range investment. 

The preferred terminal alternative is shown graphically 

on Figure D. It would be developed in two major phases, 

with initial build-out having 14 gates, and full build-out 

with four additional gates for a total of 18 gates. 

Additionally, as mentioned above, this site has capacity 

to expand with more gates as demand may dictate 

beyond the projected demand identified in this study. 

The initial phase includes a new loop roadway system for 

automobile access, a new parking garage (although the 

existing garage would continue to be used for long term 

parking), a central processor building (housing ticketing, 

bag claim, etc.) and a linear concourse with double 

loaded end caps. This is a very efficient layout and will 

serve the Airport well for decades. 

Figure D 

Preferred Terminal Alternative 

4 




Funding and implementation plans developed 

KEY POINTS 

• Phase 1 (14) gates 

estimated to cost $420 

million in 2014 dollars. 

• Inflation will increase 

construction costs to 

$538 million by 2024 

completion. 

Enabling projects that are needed in order to make the 

preferred alternative work are described as follows: 

• Negotiate agreement with Iowa Air National Guard 

(IANG) regarding property 

and facilities they need to support their new mission 

• Relocate Signature Flight Support and FedEx to the 

IANG site 

• Demolish select buildings in the south quadrant 

• Build new parallel taxiway on the southwest side of 

Runway 13-31 

The cost of this alternative (in 2014 dollars) is shown in 

Table ES-2 below. This includes hard construction costs as 

well as soft costs such as design, project management, and 

contingencies. 

The schedule for implementing the terminal program is 

shown in Figure E below, with a date of beneficial occupancy 

(opening date) of 2024. 

Figure E 

Project Implementation Schedule 

Conclusions 

• The Des Moines Airport Authority has developed a 

plan for a modern, fully functional passenger terminal 

complex to replace its aging and obsolete terminal 

infrastructure. Once completed, it will provide a high 

level of service to its passengers and serve the region 

effectively for decades. Implementing the plan 

requires many steps and there are challenges the 

Authority will face. Following are some conclusions 

and recommendations for moving the project forward. 

• The Authority should continue refining the plan 

through a programming effort, which will provide 

greater detail and clarity to the plan. This will likely 

reduce the magnitude of some of the contingencies 

included in the cost estimate. 

Table ES-2 

Refined Order of Magnitude Cost Summary 

• It is important to work with the airlines on this plan 

and seek alignment with them. 

The timeline for building the terminal and support facilities was 

established to take into account other priorities for Airport 

funding, especially the airfield which requires major 

rehabilitation. With inflation adjustments made for construction 

costs, and considering the implementation timeline, a 

conceptual funding plan for the $538 million project was 

developed, as shown on Figure F. 

Figure F 

Conceptual Funding Plan 

• The conceptual funding plan includes a $200 million 

plug for non-AIP grants. The Airport will need to get 

creative in finding these additional sources of monies 

in order to make the plan viable. 

• Negotiations with the IANG are an important element 

of moving the plan forward. A portion of the property 

that has been used by the IANG to support its 

previous mission is needed for key plan elements, 

especially corporate general aviation. 

5 



EXISTING CONDITIONS 

• Airport Overview 

• Airfield Facilities 

• Passenger Terminal Complex 

• Ground Transportation Facilities and Conditions 

• Air Cargo Facilities 

• General Aviation and Support Facilities 

• Iowa Air National Guard Facilities

Introduction and Airport Overview 

Key regional airport with strong local traffic base 

KEY POINTS 

• Most important Airport 

in Iowa 

• Over two million 

passengers served in 

2013 

Airport setting 

Des Moines International Airport (the Airport) is a civilmilitary 

public airport located three miles southwest of 

downtown Des Moines, in the southern portion of Polk 

County (Figure 1). It was opened in 1933 and has since 

served residents and visitors of the Des Moines Metropolitan 

Statistical Area (MSA) consisting of Polk, Dallas, Warren, Des 

Moines and Guthrie counties in Iowa. It is classified in the 

National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems as a primary 

commercial service airport and has an important role in the 

national, state, and local air transportation systems. 

Des Moines International Airport is a small air traffic hub and 

ranked as the 86 th largest passenger airport in the United 

States in 2012. It is primarily an Origin and Destination (O&D) 

airport with 96% of its passengers originating from the 

Airport and the remaining 4% connecting. 

This large O&D passenger base reflects the strength of the 

Des Moines MSA’s economy and its role as a business, trade, 

manufacturing, and government center. In August 2013, the 

Airport was served by four mainline passenger airlines, three 

low-cost carrier airlines, and seven regional affiliates, which 

together provided 49 daily nonstop departures to 15 

destinations. The Airport was also served by two national allcargo 

airlines – FedEx and UPS – as well as regional feeder 

cargo airlines. 

Figure 1 

Airport Vicinity Map 


7 



Airport Overview 

Airport setting and site overview 

Airport site overview 

The Airport occupies over 2,600 acres of land bounded by 

residential neighborhoods to the north; Fleur Drive to the 

east; Highway 5 to the south; and Highway 28 to the west. 

The main entrance to the passenger terminal is on Fleur 

Drive. 

Figure 2 presents the overall Airport site, which consists of 

the following primary components: 

• Airfield – The airfield takes up a majority of the total 

Airport land area, and includes two runways and 

associated taxiways, aprons, and other safety-related 

protection zones. 

• Passenger terminal building – The passenger terminal 

building is located in the east quadrant of the Airport and 

includes the terminal building, an intermediate connector, 

and the concourse to accommodate 11 aircraft gates. 

• Air cargo – The majority of 2 of cargo operations take 

place in the south cargo area. Two all-cargo carriers – 

United Parcel Service (UPS) and FedEx - operate their 

regional hub and express freight service out of these 

facilities. A small cargo operation also exists immediately 

south of the passenger terminal building. An East Air 

Cargo Building (Building 5) located on the south portion of 

the east quadrant is used by the commercial carriers for 

air cargo carried on commercial passenger flights. 

• General aviation – General aviation activities are scattered 

around the Airport. Elliott Aviation, a fixed-based 

operator (FBO), leases land to the north, east of the Iowa 

Air National Guard. Occupying portion of the east 

quadrant, north of the passenger terminal, is another FBO, 

Signature Flight Support. Aircraft storage facilities are 

located in the north, east, and south quadrants of the 

Airport. 

• Parking and ground transportation – Two 4-level parking 

garages are located in front of the passenger terminal 

building along with 5 surface parking lots distributed along 

Fleur Drive. Rental car lots are close-in to the terminal 

building , served by Cowles Drive and Duck Pond Road. 

The Quick Turn-Around (QTA) facility for wash, fuel, light 

maintenance and short-term storage of rental cars is 

located on South Airport Frontage Road adjacent to the 

rental car surface lot. 

• Support facilities – Primary support facilities include: airline maintenance 

facilities; fuel farm; Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) air traffic control 

facilities; employee parking; Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting (ARFF); and 

airfield / airport maintenance support facilities. 

LEGEND 

Figure 2 

Airport Site Overview 


8 



Existing Airfield Facilities 

Runway and Taxiway System 

The airfield is depicted on Figure 3, and consists of runways, 

taxiways, apron areas, and other facilities. Airfield facilities 

meet Airport Reference Code (ARC) D-IV criteria – meaning 

the runways and taxiways can accommodate air carrier 

aircraft with approach speeds up to 165 knots and 

wingspans of up to 170 feet. Airplane Design Group (ADG) 

IV aircraft include the Boeing 757-200/300 and Boeing 767- 

400, among others. 

Figure 3 

Airfield Facilities Map 


Runways 

The airfield currently consists of two runways and 

associated taxiways in a cross configuration. Runway data, 

including key airfield dimensions and navigational aids, are 

summarized in Table 1. 

Runway 5-23, running in the southwest - northeast 

orientation, is 9,003 feet long by 150 feet wide. The runway 

has both concrete and asphalt surfaces and is used for both 

arrivals and departures. A full-length parallel taxiway, 

Taxiway P, is located 400 feet south of Runway 5-23, while a 

partial parallel taxiway, Taxiway R, is located 400 feet north 

of the runway. 

Runway 13-31, running in the northwest - southeast 

orientation, is 9,001 feet long by 150 feet wide. The runway 

has an asphalt surface and is used for both arrivals and 

departures. A full-length parallel taxiway, Taxiway D, is 

located 400 feet north of Runway 13-31. 

Taxiways 

Figure 3 shows the taxiways that connect the runway 

system to the aircraft parking aprons. All taxiways at the 

Airport are at least 75 feet wide. Taxiway shoulders are 25 

feet wide, which meets the FAA design guidelines for 

Taxiway Design Group (TDG) 5 aircraft – equivalent to the 

Boeing 757-200/300 and Boeing 767-400 aircraft. 

Taxiways are designated with a single letter and includes the 

following: 

• Taxiway A connects the terminal ramp area to Taxiway P 

• Taxiway B connects the terminal ramp to Runway 5-23 

and the general aviation ramp to both Runway 5-23 and 

Taxiway D 

• Taxiway C connects the terminal ramp to Taxiway D 

9 



Existing Airfield Facilities 

Runway and Taxiway System 

• Taxiway D is the full-length parallel taxiway north of Runway 

13-31. Taxiways D-1, D-2, D-4, D-5, and D-6 serve as 

connectors from the runway to the general aviation, Iowa Air 

National Guard (IANG), and terminal ramp areas 

• Taxiway P is the full-length parallel taxiway south of Runway 

5-23. Taxiways P-1, P-3, P-4, P-5, P-6, and P-7 serve as 

connectors from the runway to the terminal and south cargo 

ramp areas 

• Taxiway R is the partial parallel taxiway north of Runway 5- 

23. Taxiways R-1, and R-3 serve as connectors from the 

runway to the general aviation ramp area 

Navigational Aids and Approach Minimums 

Navigational aids enable the Airport to accommodate air traffic, 

especially during periods of low cloud cover and reduced 

visibility. The navigational aids installed at the Airport enable 

aircraft to operate under most weather conditions. In addition 

to these navigational aids, the FAA Airport Traffic Control Tower 

(ATCT) is located on the north quadrant of the Airport (Building 

73), directly west of the Elliott Aviation hangar and east of the 

Iowa Air National Guard, see Figure 14. The ATCT operates 24- 

hours a day. 

Airport runways include precision instrument approach 

procedures to allow continuous aircraft operations during 

periods of low visibility. A precision approach utilizes groundor 

satellite-based navigational aids to provide pilots with 

definitive guidance on the horizontal and vertical position of 

the aircraft. 

Runways 5 and 13 are equipped with a Category I ILS, which 

allows aircraft approaches to a decision height of 200 feet 

above ground level (AGL), with visibility minimums of 2400 RVR 

(0.5 miles) and 1800 RVR (0.38 miles) respectively. 

Runway 31 is equipped with Category IIIB ILS approaches to 

allow aircraft to land in even the most challenging of visibility 

conditions. Execution of these approaches requires aircraft to 

be equipped with specific avionics and pilots to receive 

additional training. Pilots flying the Category IIIB approach are 

able to land with a zero-foot cloud ceiling with visibility as low 

as 600 feet. 

Table 1 

Runway Data 


Runway 13 Runway 31 Runway 5 Runway 23 

Airport Reference Code D-IV D-IV D-IV D-IV 

Runway length (feet) 9,001 9,001 9,003 9,003 

Runway width (feet) 150 150 150 150 

Runway end elevation (feet AMSL) 912.2 957.5 915.6 934.5 

Instrument approach procedures 

ILS CAT I 

RNAV(GPS) 

ILS CAT IIIB 

RNAV(GPS) 

ILS CAT I 

RNAV(GPS) 

VOR/DME 

RNAV(GPS) 

Runway approach slope 50:1 50:1 50:1 34:1 

Runway lighting HIRL HIRL HIRL HIRL 

Runway marking Precision Precision Precision Non-precision 

Pavement material Asphalt Asphalt 

Pavement strength (thousand lbs) 

Single gear 

Dual gear 

Dual tandem gear 

Approach aids 

133 (S) 

180 (D) 

340 (2D) 

VASI-4, MALSR, LOC, 

GS 

133 (S) 

180 (D) 

340 (2D) 

PAPI, ALSF2, 

Centerline Lights, TDZ 

Lights, LOC, GS 

Portland 

Cement/Asphalt 

133 (S) 

180 (D) 

340 (2D) 

PAPI, MALSR, LOC, GS 

Portland 

Cement/Asphalt 

133 (S) 

180 (D) 

340 (2D) 

PAPI, REIL 

Approach visibility minimums 1800 RVR 600 RVR 2400 RVR 1 mi 

ALSF-2 = High-intensity approach light system with centerline 

sequenced flasher 

AMSL = Above Mean Sea Level 

CAT = Category 

DME = Distance measuring equipment 

GPS = Global positioning system 

GS = Glideslope 

HIRL = High-intensity runway lights 

ILS = Instrument landing system 

LOC = Localizer 

MALSR = Medium-intensity approach light system 

with runway alignment indicator lights 

PAPI = Precision approach path indicator 

REIL = Runway end identifier lights 

RNAV = Area navigation 

RVR = Runway visual range 

VASI = Visual approach slope indicator 

VOR = Very high frequency omnidirectional range 

Sources: Airport Layout Plan, Des Moines International Airport, 2011. 

Airport Master Plan, Des Moines International Airport, 2007. 

10 



Existing Passenger Terminal Complex 

Terminal Complex Overview 

The Airport’s passenger terminal complex is located in the east 

quadrant of the Airport marked by Runway 23 to the north, 

Runway 31 to the south, and Fleur Drive to the east. It 

occupies approximately 90 acres of land, providing a home for 

the passenger terminal building, aircraft parking apron, east 

cargo facilities, Signature Flight Support, entrance / circulation 

roadways, and automobile parking areas – see Table 2. 

Figure 4 

East Quadrant Overview 


Passenger Terminal Building 

The original passenger terminal building was built in 1948 with 

an open concourse. In the late 1950s, the ground-load 

concourse was enclosed to provide shelter for the passengers. 

Then, in the late 1960s, a concourse was added on the second 

level to accommodate larger size aircraft and provide improved 

passenger level of service. The existing baggage system and 

passenger loading bridges were added in the 1980s. 

An overview of the existing terminal complex is shown on 

Figure 4. Floor plans of the terminal building are shown on 

Figures 5 through 7. 

Airport 

Building 

Number 

Table 2 

Existing East Quadrant Facilities 

Building Description 

Building Area 

(square feet) 

1 Passenger Terminal and Concourse 273,000 

2 Federal Inspection Facility (Customs) 5,335 

4 Deicer Storage Building 180 

5 East Air Cargo Building 7,150 

6 Parking Office 1,800 

7 Des Moines Flying Services Hangar 12,840 

8 Signature Maintenance Hangar 24,000 

9 Signature Storage Hangar 15,000 

10 Signature East Office / Hangar 30,620 

11 Storm Water Control Building 200 

Sources: 2011 Airport Layout Plan, Foth Infrastructure & Environment. 

2007 Master Plan report. 

11 




Existing Passenger Terminal Building 

The existing passenger terminal has 11 aircraft gates and 

consists of three primary levels, totaling approximately 

273,000 square feet. Concession support, airport support, 

maintenance, storage and mechanical spaces are located on 

the basement level. There’s a loading dock on the ground 

level located to the north of the existing passenger terminal 

where service items are received. 

On the first level are primary passenger processing areas: 

airline ticket counters and offices, baggage sorting and 

makeup devices, baggage claim, bag storage offices, rental car 

counters, concessions, meeter/greeter space, and airline 

operations spaces. The second level currently houses a 

staggered 6-lane security screening checkpoint, a central 

concessions node, and passenger holdrooms on the airside - 

Concourse A (5 gates) to the south, and Concourse C (6 gates) 

to the north. The airport administration offices are located 

landside on the second level. An approximately 1,600 sf 

Emergency Operations Center (EOC) is located on the third 

level, accessible from the airport administration area. The 

fourth level houses the original airport control tower and is 

not currently used. 

Table 3 summarizes the existing terminal space allocation. 

Figure 5 

Existing Terminal – Basement Level 


12 




Existing Passenger Terminal Building 

Figure 6 

Existing Terminal – First Level 


13 




Existing Passenger Terminal 

Figure 7 

Existing Terminal – Second, Third and Fourth Levels 


14 




Existing Passenger Terminal 

Table 3 

Existing Terminal Space Allocation Summary (in square feet) 


First Level 

Second Level 

Terminal Functions 

Basement Level 

Airline Ops/Apron 

Ticketing/ Bag 

Claim 

Airport 

Administration 

Concourse 

TOTAL 

Ticketing / Airline ticket offices 0.0 0.0 11,720.0 0.0 0.0 11,720.0 

Outbound baggage makeup area 0.0 0.0 16,955.0 0.0 0.0 16,955.0 

Inbound baggage delivery area 0.0 0.0 4,060.0 0.0 0.0 4,060.0 

Baggage claim area 0.0 0.0 7,440.0 0.0 0.0 7,440.0 

Security screening / TSA offices 84.6 0.0 1,965.0 0.0 12,160.0 14,209.6 

Concessions 0.0 0.0 4,240.0 0.0 9,406.0 13,646.0 

Holdrooms 0.0 3,595.0 0.0 0.0 18,411.0 22,006.0 

Restrooms 0.0 310.0 2,120.0 527.0 2,928.0 5,885.0 

Public circulation 6,860.4 1,005.0 32,010.0 6,310.0 17,985.0 64,170.4 

Bag storage office / Airline support 0.0 10,928.0 805.0 715.0 0.0 12,448.0 

Airport support 22,366.5 25,360.0 5,915.0 24,712.0 5,008.0 83,361.5 

Concessions support 3,669.2 1,790.0 3,685.0 0.0 0.0 9,144.2 

Rental car / Ground transportation 0.0 0.0 3,600.0 0.0 0.0 3,600.0 

Miscellaneous/others 702.7 186.0 0.0 3,613.0 0.0 4,501.7 

Subtotal 33,683.3 43,174.0 94,515.0 35,877.0 65,898.0 273,147.3 

Total Floor Area 33,683.3 137,689.0 101,775.0 273,147.3 

15 




Existing Passenger Terminal Situation 

KEY POINTS 

• Key terminal functional 

areas exceed their 

capacity during peak 

periods 

• The customer 

experience continues to 

erode 

Issues with an Aging Passenger Terminal Facility 

Throughout the past 65+ years, the existing terminal building 

had gone through many physical transformations, ranging from 

expansions, renovations, and modernizations, to address 

immediate issues and passenger demands. However, the 

existing structure and building systems remain original, have 

literally fallen apart and are beyond its useful lives. The 

existing structural column grid, designed to handle much lower 

passenger volumes, is inadequate to provide expansion and 

flexibilities to accommodate modern demands. Some 

outdated uses and functions, such as airline ticket offices, and 

the original airport control tower on the fourth level, are 

currently unused and not in optimal locations to attract 

leaseholds; therefore, have been non-revenue generators to 

the Airport. 

There’s also limited airside concessions to capitalize on 

passengers with longer airside dwell times due to current 

security protocols. With airlines trending towards flying larger 

and more fuel efficient aircraft, larger holdrooms that provide 

maximum exposure to concessions are in high demand. 

Restrooms also quickly become undersized with increased 

passenger traffic. 

The photos below provide a graphic illustration of the existing 

passenger terminal conditions, showing congestions at the 

existing terminal curbside, check-in/ticketing, security screening 

checkpoint, holdrooms, and baggage claim areas. 

Doubled parked vehicles during morning peak 

Terminal Curbside 

Check-in passenger queue overflow 

Check-in / Ticketing 

Overflow at security checkpoint queue 

Security Screening Checkpoint 

Passenger seating & staging overflow into circulation corridor 

Holdrooms 

Check-in overflow at Ticketing Lobby 

Check-in / Ticketing 

Baggage claim overflow into circulation corridor 

Baggage Claim 

16 



Ground Transportation Facilities 

Overview and Parking 

KEY POINTS 

• 2,073 spaces are 

currently available for 

close-in public parking, 

divided into short-term 

parking and long-term 

parking 

• 2,185 spaces are 

currently available for 

remote/economy 

parking and are served 

by an Airport shuttle 

• Employee parking is 

provided in a lot north 

of the terminal complex 

(273 spaces) 

• Three off-airport parking 

competitors operate 

approximately 800 

spaces 

• Hold areas for taxicabs 

(8 spaces) and 

limousines (3 spaces) 

are provided along the 

inbound roadways 

Existing ground transportation facilities are shown in Figure 8. 

There are four categories of ground transportation facilities : 

• Parking – two garages, five surface lots, and hold lots 

• Roadways – Cowles Drive and Duck Pond Road 

• Curbsides – two pick-up/drop-off areas at terminal 

• Rental Cars – close-in lots and a remote service area 

Parking 

A summary of the available parking facilities are shown in Table 

4. Two facilities are available for close-in short-term public 

parking (341 spaces). Three facilities, including two parking 

garages and their connectors, are available for close-in longterm 

public parking (1,732 spaces). Four economy surface lots 

are available for public parking (2,185 spaces) and are served 

by an Airport shuttle bus. Additionally, three off-airport parking 

companies operate approximately 800 spaces for public 

parking. A 273 space lot, north of the terminal complex, is 

provided for employee parking. Lastly, separate hold areas 

along the inbound roadways are reserved for taxicabs queuing 

(8 spaces) and limousines waiting for passengers (3 spaces). 

Table 4 

Overview of Parking Facilities 


Short-Term Parking Spaces 

North Garage Level 1 243 

Short-Term Surface Lot 98 

Total 341 

Long-Term Parking Spaces 

North Garage Levels 2-4 699 

Long-Term Surface Lot 280 

South Garage Lvls 1-4* 675 

Garage Connectors 78 

Total 1,732 

*The majority of Level 1 of the 

South Garage is dedicated to 

rental cars, with 18 spaces 

dedicated to public parking 

Economy Parking Spaces 

Lot #1 848 

Lot #2 658 

Lot #3 379 

Lot #4 300 

Total 2,185 

Employee Parking Spaces 

Total 273 

Off-Airport Parking Spaces 

Keck Lot 500 

Jet Parking 150 

1st Class Lot 150 

Total 800 

Figure 8 

Ground Transportation Facilities Overview 


17 



Ground Transportation Facilities and Conditions 

Roadways 

KEY POINTS 

• Terminal access is via 

Cowles Drive 

• Access to Cowles drive is 

primarily via Fleur Drive 

and secondary access is 

via Duck Pond Road 

• The existing roadways 

do not have capacity 

constraints, however, 

there are a variety of 

operational and safety 

concerns: 

— Two Lane Roads 

— Intersections 

— Decision Distances 

— Two-Way Decision 

Points 

— Channelization 

— Prioritized Access 

Route 

The roadway network for the terminal complex is shown in Figure 9. The 

passenger terminal is accessed via a roadway loop, Cowles Drive, accessed 

primarily via Fleur Drive, a major north-south arterial. There are two 

entrances , a channelized right turn and an un-signalized left turn off Fleur 

Drive. The Airport exit intersection with Fleur Drive is signalized. 

Secondary access to Cowles Drive is provided via Duck Pond Road, which 

parallels Fleur Drive from McKinley Drive on the north to Army Post Road 

on the South. To the South, the road becomes South Frontage road, wraps 

around the Runway 31 threshold, and provides access to Economy Lot #4 

and the Rental Car QTA. On the north side, the road wraps around the 

Runway 23 threshold and provides access to the general aviation complex. 

Cowles Drive does not have any capacity constraints. However, several 

airport roadway planning, operational, and safety considerations are 

discussed below. These issues are also identified in Figure 9. 

Maintain two lanes on inbound/outbound roadways – Primary access 

roadways should be at least two-lanes wide to avoid a single point of 

failure due to a traffic incident or similar event. 

Avoid intersections in final vehicular approach and exit – Drivers at 

airports are often unfamiliar with the roadways and can be distracted. 

Intersections on the Airport’s primary access road become safety hazards 

and congestion points. Cowles Drive has two intersections. 

Provide appropriate distances between ‘decision points’ – Airports should 

be particularly careful to provide appropriate distances between decision 

points. Short decision distances become safety hazards and congestion 

points. At three locations within the Cowles Drive loop, decision distances 

are sub-standard. 

Decision points should be limited to two options/routes – Decision points 

should be limited to two-way decisions, where drivers only choose 

between two options/routes. After the curbsides on Cowles Drive, there is 

a four-way decision point between two rental car lots, Economy Lot #3, 

and the main exit route. 

Create well defined channelization from toll booths and merges – At toll 

plazas and merging lanes there should be a well defined channelization. 

The existing public parking exit plaza has six lanes simultaneously merging 

into a single lane at Cowles Drive. 

Prioritize access route – Airport entrances should have prioritized access. 

The northbound entrance to the Airport does not have a signal; entering 

traffic must continually yield to southbound traffic on the busy Fleur Drive. 

Figure 9 

Airport Roadway Operational Issues 


18 



Existing Ground Transportation Facilities and Conditions 

Curbsides 

KEY POINTS 

• The inner curbside is 545 

linear feet and is 

dedicated to private 

vehicles 

• The outer curbside is 

571 linear feet and is 

allocated for use among 

commercial vehicles 

• Vehicular traffic counts 

were collected in April 

2013 and serve as the 

basis for traffic analysis 

in the study 

There are two curbsides running parallel to the face of the 

terminal building. Their allocation is shown in Figure 10: 

Inner Curbside is dedicated to use by private (non-commercial) 

vehicles. The length of the inner curbside is 545 linear feet. 

The front half of the curbside runs parallel to the ticketing 

lobby, and as such, is typically used for drop-offs. The second 

half of the inner curbside runs parallel to the baggage claim 

hall, and as such, is typically used for pick-ups. 

Outer Curbside is used for commercial vehicle drop-off and 

pickup. It is used by charter buses, taxi cabs, limousines, 

courtesy (hotel off-airport parking) shuttles, and the Airport 

parking shuttle. The total length of the outer curbside is 571 

linear feet. The outer curbside is accessed to/from the 

terminal building via four crosswalks. 

Traffic Volumes are shown in Table 5. This data was collected 

in April 2013. The Inner and Outer curbsides are analyzed 

separately. The peak daily volume was 692 vehicles for the 

inner curbside (Sunday) and 684 vehicles for the outer 

curbside (Monday). 

Hotel Van/ 

Off Airport Airport 

Daily Commercial Daily Private 

Day Taxi 

Limo 

Other 

Shuttle 

Parking Shuttle Shuttle 

Vehicle Total Total 

Mon 262 139 16 79 177 11 684 571 

Tues 189 168 11 77 171 11 627 489 

Wed 186 156 27 90 171 4 634 527 

Thu 214 146 13 80 177 10 640 626 

Fri 228 154 4 68 172 9 635 626 

Sat 135 122 7 70 161 9 504 477 

Sun 194 113 14 78 169 8 576 692 

TOTAL 1,408 998 92 542 1,198 62 4,300 4,008 

Avg. per Day 201 143 13 77 171 9 614 573 

Source: Des Moines International Airport, April 2013 

Table 5 

Vehicle Traffic Counts 


Figure 10 

Curbside Allocation 


Source: Des Moines International Airport, 2013 

19 



Ground Transportation Facilities 

Rental Cars 

KEY POINTS 

• Rental car facilities are 

divided into three 

distinct components: 

(A) customer service 

area, (B) ready-return 

facilities, and (C) the 

quick-turnaround (QTA) 

facility 

• Seven rental car brands 

are currently located on- 

Airport 

• The existing customer 

service area is 3,345 sq. 

ft. in the passenger 

terminal 

• There are three parking 

lots used for readyreturn 

in the terminal 

complex, providing 370 

standard parking spaces 

• The QTA is 4 acres and 

includes wash bays, light 

maintenance bays, fuel 

pumps, and stacking / 

storage space 

• 700 spaces in Economy 

Lot #4 are leased to the 

rental car companies to 

supplement their 

stacking / storage needs 

The rental car operation can be divided into three primary components: (A) customer service 

area, (B) ready-return spaces, and (C) the quick-turnaround (QTA) facility. While each of the 

facilities is evaluated separately, the facilities operate in unison and the demand/capacity on one 

facility can greatly impact the demand/capacity of its counterparts. 

There are currently seven rental car brands located on-Airport. Hertz, Enterprise, and National- 

Alamo control nearly 70% of the market between them. Dollar-Thrifty, Avis, Advantage, and 

Budget make up the remaining 30% of the market (ordered from largest market share to lowest). 

Customer Service Area 

The rental car customer service area is located in the terminal building, adjacent to the baggage 

claim carousels. The three largest brands (by revenue market share) lease 400 square feet suites 

while the four smaller brands lease 290 square feet suites. The suites are comprised of a 

ticketing counter area and a back office. A queuing area is provided for each suite. The total 

area in the terminal building designated to the rental car customer service function is 3,345 

square feet. 

Ready-Return Facilities 

Ready stalls are where vehicles are parked to await pick-up by a customer. Ready stalls are 

designed similar to public parking stalls. Return stalls are where customers return their vehicles. 

The Airport has three ready-return facilities, which are shown in Figure 11. Rental Lot #1 (104 

spaces) is adjacent to the south side of the terminal. Rental Lot #2 (98 spaces) is immediately 

south of the South Garage. Level 1 of the South Garage (168 spaces) is also leased to the rental 

cars. There are a total of 370 standard parking stalls leased to the rental car companies. 

Quick-Turn Around Facility 

The QTA is located approximately ½ mile south of the passenger terminal complex. The QTA 

contains five car wash bays, seven light maintenance bays, 20 fuel pumps, and approximately 

95,000 sq. ft. of stacking and storage space (see Figure 12). Each brand is assigned a light service 

bay. The car washes and fuel pumps are common-use facilities. The stacking/storage space is 

allocated in accordance with revenue market share. Combined, the QTA complex is 

approximately four acres. 

The new Economy Lot #4 is adjacent to the QTA. Currently, the rental car companies lease 700 of 

the 1,000 spaces in the lot. For storage, the brands stack vehicles nose-to-tail, allowing for the 

storage of more than 1,100 vehicles in this area. 

Figure 11 

Existing Rental Car Ready-Return Facilities 


Figure 12 

Existing Rental Car Quick-Turn Around Facility 


20 



Air Cargo Facilities 

Main Cargo Area in South Quadrant 

The Airport currently operates a split air cargo operation. On 

the east quadrant (see Figure 4), and located to the south of 

the existing passenger terminal are the original air cargo 

facilities including belly cargo. The remaining air cargo 

operations are located in the south air cargo area, to the south 

of the runway intersection, shown on Figure 13. 

Table 6 tabulates facility data, including building number, 

descriptions and building square footage for air cargo and other 

airport facilities. 

Airport 

Building 

Number 

South Cargo Area 

The existing air cargo apron occupies approximately 43 acres 

of pavement area. Two major all-cargo carriers, (UPS) and 

FedEx, operate out of this facility. UPS currently operates out 

of buildings 31 and 32 with their sorting facility in Building 35. 

FedEx handles its express freight service and air mail through 

an exclusive contract with the United States Postal Service. 

Table 6 

Existing South Quadrant Facilities 

Des Moines International Airport Figure 13 


Sources: 2011 Airport Layout Plan, Foth Infrastructure & Environment. 


Building Area 

(square feet) 

28 Consolidated Rental Car Facility 19,700 

29 Aircraft Maintenance Building 79,250 

30 ALSF Substation Building 1,630 

31 South Cargo Building 12,300 

32 South Cargo Building 28,000 

33 Small Office / Hangar 9,720 

34 Multi Tenant Hangar 16,250 

35 Cargo Air Sort & Office Building (UPS) 27,350 

36 South Executive "T" Hangar 12,150 

37 South GA "T" Hangar 21,000 

38 South GA Pilot Planning Building 150 

39 South GA "T" Hangar 21,000 

40 South GA Corporate Hangar 7,800 

43 Airport Sand/Salt Storage Facility 10,430 

44 Airport Snow Equipment Storage Building 23,250 

45 Fuel Farm Facility 

46 Aircraft Maintenance Building 15,900 

46A Pole Barn (Temporary) 1,640 

46B Pole Barn Sand Storage (Temporary) 7,180 

46C Pole Barn (Temporary) 4,600 

46D Garage (Temporary) 1,250 

47 Field Maintenance Storage Building 17,530 

49 Airport South IDF Building 270 

50 Ag / Chemical Storage Building 390 

51 Airport Carpentry Shop 1,340 

52 Storm Water Control Building 65 

53 Deicer / Water Metering Building 65 

54 UPS Deicer Building 130 

East Cargo Area 

South Quadrant Overview 


The east cargo apron area is approximately 8 acres, located 

directly south of the existing passenger terminal complex, as 

shown on Figure 4. United Airlines currently leases a portion of 

Building 5 to handle their belly cargo operation. The Federal 

Inspection Facility occupies Building 2. Its primary function is to 

perform inspections on cargo merchandises. No international 

commercial passenger screening is currently performed. 

21 



General Aviation and Support Facilities 

General Aviation Spread Out Over Three Quadrants 

General aviation (GA) facilities are spread out across three 

different quadrants on the Airport. Figure 14 and Table 7 

shows data and facilities located in the north quadrant. Figure 

4 shows general aviation facilities located in the east quadrant, 

and Figure 13 shows hangar facilities in the south quadrant. 

North Quadrant 

The biggest GA tenant on the north quadrant, located 

northwest of Runway 23, is Elliott Aviation. Elliott operates 

several commercial hangars with adjoining office spaces within 

the central complex. It occupies approximately nine acres of 

ramp area. 

Meredith Corporation, Principal Financial, and Mid America Jet 

Center also occupy a portion of the general aviation facilities 

located east of Elliott Aviation. 

To the west of Elliott Aviation is the Federal Aviation 

Administration’s (FAA) Airport Traffic Control Tower (ATCT), 

accessible from McKinley Avenue. On the north side of 

McKinley Avenue is the FAA Airway Facility Sector Office. The 

Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) facility is located south 

of Elliott Aviation. 

Table 7 

Existing North Quadrant Facilities 


East Quadrant 

North of the existing passenger terminal complex are FBOs 

Signature Flight Support, and Des Moines Flying Services. 

Cowles Drive, the main terminal access roadway, serves as the 

public access ways to these tenants. 

Figure 14 

North Quadrant Overview 


South Quadrant 

Located to the west of the UPS sorting facility (Building 35) are 

aircraft storage facilities. There are currently two 21,000 square 

feet T-hangars (Buildings 37 & 39), one 7,800 square feet 

corporate hangar (Building 40), and one 12,150 square feet 

executive hangar, served by a surface parking lot, accessible via 

South West 28 th Street. 

Airport 

Building 

Number 


Building 

Area 

(square feet) 

60 Principal Hangar 19,650 

61 Airport North IDF Building 300 

62 Meredith Flight Center 22,700 

63 Airport Surveillance Radar (FAA Radar Tower) 1,920 

64 Jet Center Hangar 22,500 

65 Des Moines Schools Aviation Lab 14,400 

66 Elliott Flying Service Executive Hangar 32,500 

67 Elliott Flying Service FBO Hangars 23,310 

69 Elliott Flying Service Hangar 24,200 

70 Aircraft Rescue Fire Fighting Facility (ARFF) 15,000 

71 Elliott Aviation 37,170 

72 FAA Airway Facility Sector 10,200 

73 FAA Airport Traffic Control Tower 7,600 

Sources: 2011 Airport Layout Plan, Foth Infrastructure & Environment . 


22 



Existing Iowa Air National Guard (IANG) Facilities 

The Iowa Air National Guard’s Mission Changed in 2013 

KEY POINTS 

• Facilities needed to 

support the previous 

F-16 mission are being 

re-examined by the 

Airport and Department 

of Defense 

Airport Building 

Number 

Table 8 

Existing Iowa Air National Guard Facilities 



100 Iowa Air National Guard Administration Building 

101 IANG Supply 

102 IANG Main Gate House 

103 IANG Supply 

105 IANG Vehicle Transportation 

110 IANG Facility 

124 IANG Squadron Operations 

125 IANG A/C Fuel Systems Maintenance 

132 IANG Civil Engineering 

160 IANG Propulsion Shop 

180 IANG Avionics Element 

228 IANG Engine Test Pad 

229 IANG Test Cell and Propulsion Storage 

231 IANG Disaster Preparedness 

240 Unknown 

251 IANG LIN 

252 IANG LOX 

270 IANG POL OPS Facility 

272 IANG Vehicle Check Point 

274 IANG LOX Maintenance 

276 IANG Jet Fuel Pumphouse 

277 IANG Jet Fuel Pump #1 

278 IANG Jet Fuel Pump #2 

302 IANG North Gatehouse 

310 IANG Security Police Storage 

312 IANG Security Police Storage 

313 IANG Security / Storage Corrosion Control 

314 IANG AGE Shop 

315 IANG A/C Corrosion Control 

316 IANG Heating Plant Building 

319 IANG Pump House for Fire Suppression 

320 IANG Munitions Administration & Trailer Maintenance 

322 IANG Munitions Maintenance & Inspection 

324 IANG Munitions Maintenance 

326 IANG Munitions Seg. Magazine Storage 

410 IANG Civil Engineering 

430 IANG Base Supply 

440 IANG Vehicle Maintenance / AGE 

Source: 2011 Airport Layout Plan, Foth Infrastructure & Environment . 

Iowa Air National Guard 

The 132 nd Tactical Fighter Wing of the Iowa Air National Guard 

(IANG) currently leases approximately 170 acres of airport 

property on the north side of the Airport. Their mission 

changed in 2013 from F-16 jets to drone operation. 

Figure 15 

Iowa Air National Guard (IANG) Overview 


The Airport is currently discussing with the IANG which facilities 

they will need moving forward, to support their mission. 

Figure 15 below and Table 8 to the left indicates land and 

facilities that are currently leased to the IANG. 

23 



AVIATION DEMAND FORECAST 

• Forecast Approach 

• Forecast Summary 

• Economic Basis for Airline Traffic 

• Historical Aviation Activity 

• Aviation Activity Forecasts

Aviation Demand Forecast 

Forecast Approach – Summary 

KEY POINTS 

• Passenger forecasts 

were developed using a 

variety of analytical 

tools to address key 

components of aviation 

activity. 

• Air cargo forecast were 

developed based on 

recent trends and key 

components of air cargo 

activity. 

• Developed forecasts are 

“unconstrained”, i.e., do 

not include specific 

assumptions of 

impediments to aviation 

activity growth. 

Forecast Approach 

• Passenger forecasts were developed using a variety of analytical tools, including trend analysis, 

regression models, and market share analysis, to address the key components of aviation activity (i.e. 

mainline and regional affiliate, originating and connecting passengers). In addition, recent trends in 

airline services in the Des Moines Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), particularly for low cost carrier 

services, were considered in the preparation of the passenger forecast. 

• As shown in Figure 16, the forecast approach incorporated a multi-tiered approach to evaluate 

passenger traffic in the Des Moines MSA. It was recognized that no one approach would provide input 

on all of the key factors that affect passenger and cargo activity in the Des Moines MSA. For example, an 

econometric analysis would provide input on the relationships between historical passengers and 

regional economic conditions but little to no input on such factors as (1) the role of individual markets in 

airline scheduling and service decisions, (2) recent trends in the airline industry that have affected an 

airline’s decisions in route planning and aircraft acquisition, and (3) new service development at the 

Airport. Input on these factors is important to the development of reliable forecasts that can serve as 

the basis for planning efforts at the Airport. 

• The air cargo forecasts were developed based on a review of the recent trends, an evaluation of key 

components of air cargo activity (i.e. enplaned and deplaned cargo [ freight and mail] for all-cargo and 

passenger airlines). 

• The aircraft operations forecast were derived from the forecasts of passenger and cargo activity for the 

Airport. Forecasts of aircraft operations were developed by (1) disaggregating the total demand into the 

components (i.e. mainline and regional affiliate) and (2) making assumptions about average aircraft size 

in terms of seats per departure and average enplaned passenger load factors (percentage of seats 

occupied, on average) for future years. In addition, the future aircraft fleet plans of the airlines serving 

DSM were also considered based on available information. 

• The forecasts are “unconstrained” and, therefore, do not include specific assumptions about physical, 

regulatory, environmental, or other impediments to aviation activity growth. 

Figure 16 

Multi-Tiered Forecast Approach 


25 




Forecast Approach – Air Service Region 

KEY POINTS 

• Future airline traffic 

trends at the Airport 

were based on statistics 

for the Des Moines 

MSA. 

• DSM’s overall catchment 

area is estimated to 

include 2.7 million 

people, averaging 0.59 

passengers trips per 

person in 2012. 

• As shown on Figure 17, a 50-mile radius centered at the Airport encircles the Des Moines 

MSA consisting of Polk, Dallas, Warren, Des Moines and Guthrie counties in Iowa. Because 

economic growth and activity within this area stimulate a significant portion of passenger 

demand at the Airport, statistics for the Des Moines MSA were used to evaluate certain 

long-term and future airline traffic trends at the Airport. 

• The secondary area served by the Airport, which includes many of the counties 

surrounding the Des Moines MSA, is defined by the location of and driving distance to 

other air carrier airports, as well as by the availability, price, and quality of airline service at 

those other airports. The overall catchment area for the Airport, as shown by the reddashed 

line on Figure 17, is defined by the Omaha International Airport, the northwest 

boundary of Highway 71, the Mason City Municipal Airport, Dubuque Regional Airport, 

and Kirksville Regional Airport. 

• DSM’s overall catchment area is estimated to include 2.7 million people (see Table 9). In 

2012, a total of 1.6 million passengers were enplaned at the airports in the DSM’s overall 

catchment area, average 0.59 passengers trips per person in 2012. 

Figure 17 

Airports Service Region 

Des Moines International Airport – September 2013 

Table 9 

Enplaned Passengers at Commercial Service Airports in DSM Catchment Area 

26 




Economic Basis for Airline Traffic – Historical and Forecast Economic Activity 

KEY POINTS 

• Economic activity in the 

Des Moines MSA is 

directly linked to the 

production of goods and 

services in the world, 

State, and nation. Both 

airline travel and the 

movement of cargo 

through the Airport 

depend on the economic 

linkages between and 

among the regional, 

national, and 

international 

economies. The Des 

Moines MSA is a major 

business and 

government center in 

Iowa. 

Figure 18 

Trends in Nonagricultural Employment 

Figure 19 

Non-agricultural Employment 

Figure 20 

Monthly Unemployment Trends 

Population The population of the Des Moines MSA 

increased an average of 1.5% per year between 1990 and 

2000 and 1.7% per year between 2000 and 2012, faster than 

population growth for the State and nation. Population in 

the Des Moines MSA is projected by Woods & Poole to 

increase an average of 1.1% per year between 2012 and 

2032, faster than growth forecast for the State (an average 

increase of 0.4% per year) and the nation (an average 

increase of 1.0% per year) during the same period. 

Nonagricultural Employment Since 1990, nonagricultural 

employment in the Des Moines MSA increased at average 

annual growth rates higher than those for the State and 

nation, as shown on Figure 18. Nonagricultural employment 

in the Des Moines MSA expanded during the 1990s, 

increasing an average of 2.2% per year between 1990 and 

2000, compared with slower growth between 2000 and 

2012 (an average of 0.9% per year). During the most recent 

recession, nonagricultural employment in the Des Moines 

MSA was less affected than in the State and the nation as a 

whole. In 2012, nonagricultural employment in the Des 

Moines MSA increased 2.2%, faster than that for the State 

(1.5%), and the nation (1.7%). Nonagricultural employment 

in the Des Moines MSA and the nation is projected by 

Woods & Poole to increase an average of 1.5% per year 

between 2012 and 2032, faster than growth forecast for the 

State (an average increase of 1.0% per year) and the nation 

(an average increase of 1.3% per year) during this period. 

Per Capita Personal Income From 2000 to 2011 (the most 

recent year for which data are available), per capita personal 

income (in 2005 constant dollars) in the Des Moines MSA 

increased an average of 0.6% per year, following strong 

growth between 1990 and 2000 (an average increase of 

1.7% per year), as shown in Table A-2 in the Appendix. In 

2011, the Des Moines MSA’s per capita personal income 

was 9.3% and 8.2% higher, respectively, than that for the 

State and the nation. Per capita personal income in the Des 

Moines MSA is projected by Woods & Poole to increase an 

average of 1.4% per year between 2011 and 2032. 

Nonagricultural Employment by Industry Sector 

Figure 19 shows a comparative distribution of 

nonagricultural employment by industry sector for the 

Des Moines MSA in 2000 and in 2012, and for the State 

and the nation in 2012. Employment in services 

(53.3%)—including business, education, health, and 

other services, such as leisure and hospitality—and 

trade (16.7%) accounted for 70.0% of total 

nonagricultural employment in the Des Moines MSA in 

2012. The government sector accounted for 13.0% of 

Des Moines MSA nonagricultural employment in 2012, 

reflecting the role of Des Moines as the capital of the 

State of Iowa. 

Unemployment Rates In addition to the employment 

trends cited above, the unemployment rate is also 

indicative of the general economic climate. Figure 20 

shows comparative annual unemployment rates in the 

Des Moines MSA, the State, and the nation as a whole 

for 2000 through 2012. Unemployment rates in the Des 

Moines MSA and the State have historically remained 

lower than national rates. In 2012, the unemployment 

rate in the Des Moines MSA and the State was 5.3% 

and 5.2%, respectively, lower than that for the nation 

(8.1%). 

Since the end of the current recession in June 2009, 

monthly unemployment rates in the Des Moines MSA, 

the State, and the United States have generally 

decreased, with month to month variations, as shown 

on Figure 3. In July 2013, the Des Moines MSA 

unemployment rate was 4.6%, less than that for the 

State (4.7%), and lower than the nation (7.7%). 

27 




Economic Basis for Airline Traffic – Industry Clusters and Tourism 

KEY POINTS 

• The economies of the 

Des Moines MSA and 

Iowa as a whole are 

driven by companies 

that export goods and 

services nationally and 

globally, bringing in new 

investment and jobs 

that support economic 

growth as well as air 

service development. 

Bioscience 

Logistics 

Financial Services 

Data Centers 

Table 10 

Greater Des Moines Region 

Top 20 Largest Employers in 2013 

Industry Clusters 

Companies that make up industry clusters, also referred to as the "traded 

sector", tend to cluster because they draw competitive advantage from 

their proximity to competitors, to a skilled workforce, to specialized 

suppliers, and to a shared base of sophisticated knowledge about their 

industry. 

According to the Greater Des Moines Partnership*, there are four industry 

clusters in the Des Moines MSA: 

Bioscience. Iowa State University (ISU), located 30 miles north of Des 

Moines in Ames, anchors the northern end of the Iowa innovation and 

bioeconomy corridor (between Ames and Des Moines). ISU is home to four 

major bioscience research centers. In addition to ISU’s research centers, 

the National Animal Disease Center located in Ames, Iowa, is the largest 

federal animal disease center in the United States. The Center conducts 

research to solve animal health and food safety problems faced by 

livestock producers and the public. 

Logistics. Located at the crossroads of Interstates 80 and 35, Des Moines is 

centrally located with easy access to the coasts and borders. Des Moines’ 

Foreign Trade Zone (#107) is located near Interstate 80 and 35, just a few 

miles from the Airport, and provides the facilities for importing, assembling 

with other components, repackaging, and exporting without going through 

formal customs procedures. The Des Moines MSA is served by Burlington 

Northern Santa Fe, Iowa Interstate, Norfolk Southern, and Union Pacific 

Railroads and is home to 60 national and regional trucking companies. 

Financial Services. According to the Iowa Economic Development 

Authority*, the city of Des Moines has the highest concentration of 

employment in financial services in the United States. As shown on 

Table 10, financial services and insurance companies are among the largest 

employers in the Des Moines MSA, including Wells Fargo and Company, 

Principal Financial Group, Nationwide/Allied Insurance, Marsh, and Aviva. 

Tourism 

According to the U.S. Travel Association**, domestic 

traveler spending in Iowa totaled $7.6 billion in 2012, 

representing an increase of 5.6% from 2011. Polk County, 

including the city of Des Moines, led all counties in 

domestic traveler expenditures, payroll income and jobs 

directly generated by these expenditures in 2012. 

Domestic traveler expenditures in Polk County reached 

over $1.7 billion in 2012, accounting for 22.8% of the 

state total. These expenditures generated $308.9 million 

in payroll income and 15,600 jobs for Polk County 

residents. 

The Iowa Events Center is located in downtown Des 

Moines and consists of the Community Choice Credit 

Union Convention Center (previously known as the 

Veterans Memorial Auditorium), the existing Polk County 

Convention Complex, the new Hy‐Vee Hall, and the new 

Wells Fargo Arena. In addition, the Iowa State 

Fairgrounds, located in eastern Des Moines, hosted more 

than 1 million visitors to the annual Iowa State Fair over 

an 11‐day period in 2012. 

** U.S. Travel Association, “The Economic Impact of Travel on 

Iowa Counties, 2012”, A Study Prepared for the Iowa 

Economic Development Authority Iowa Tourism Office, 

August 2013. 

Data Centers. Iowa’s favorable tax environment, low cost of power, and 

central geographical location have attracted the data centers for major 

corporations such as Google, Facebook, and Microsoft Corporation. In 

addition, companies that provide information technology services to 

businesses are located in the Des Moines MSA, including EdgeBCC, Vital 

support Systems, and Iowa Network Services. 

* The Greater Des Moines Partnership is the economic and community 

development organization serving the Greater Des Moines metro covering a 

eight‐county region (Dallas, Guthrie, Jasper, Madison, Marshall, Polk, 

Poweshiek, and Warren). 

28 




Economic Basis for Airline Traffic – Economic Outlook 

KEY POINTS 

• The economic outlook for 

the United States, the 

State of Iowa, and the 

Des Moines MSA forms a 

basis for anticipated 

growth in airline traffic at 

the Airport. 

• Factors expected to 

contribute to continued 

economic growth in the 

Des Moines MSA and 

associated increases in 

airline travel include 

(1) diversity in the 

economic base, which 

lessens its vulnerability 

to weaknesses in 

particular industry 

sectors, (2) growth in the 

Des Moines MSA industry 

clusters as described 

earlier, (3) generally 

lower labor and living 

costs compared with 

those in other similarly 

sized cities in the nation 

and other metropolitan 

areas in the Midwest, 

(4) an educated labor 

force able to support the 

development of 

knowledge‐based and 

service industries, and 

(5) continued 

reinvestment to support 

the development of 

tourism, conventions, 

and other businesses. 

Global Economy Globalization of the world economy has 

created linkages between national economies that relate not 

only to trade but also to airline travel. The Des Moines MSA and 

the State have strong linkages to the global economy through a 

number of industry sectors such as bioscience, financial services, 

and information technology. The economic growth of world 

regions, in terms of gross domestic product (GDP), is directly 

related to the growth in airline travel. Projections of GDP for the 

world regions are shown in Table 11. In emerging economies 

such as Brazil, India, and China with strong growth in GDP 

combined with a growing middle class, the growth in passenger 

traffic has been significant. Continued growth in the economies 

of the world regions most closely aligned with the Des Moines 

MSA economy and airline service at the Airport are expected to 

contribute to continued growth in passenger traffic at the 

Airport. 

U.S. Economy The U.S. economy continues to recover from the 

most recent financial crisis and global recession, although the 

pace of the recovery remains slow. The consensus among 

economists is that downturns following financial crises tend to be 

more prolonged than other downturns. In addition, such 

recessions raise the level and duration of unemployment, reduce 

the number of hours that employees work, and dampen 

investment. Continued high unemployment, lower disposable 

incomes, and reduced spending by businesses and consumers, 

particularly in the near term, have the potential to dampen 

growth in the U.S. economy and passenger traffic nationally and 

at the Airport. 

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) expects that U.S. 

economic growth, as measured by U.S. GDP in constant dollars, 

will increase 1.4% in 2013, reflecting an ongoing improvement in 

underlying economic factors and increases in federal taxes and 

reductions in federal spending that will limit growth. U.S. GDP is 

expected to increase 3.0% in 2014 and an average of 3.6% per 

year between 2013 and 2018. The CBO projects that the 

unemployment rate will average 8.0% in the 2013, decrease to 

7.6% in 2014, and decrease to 5.5% in 2018. The CBO’s 

projections are influenced to a large extent by fiscal policy 

specified by current law which resulted in tax increases and 

spending cuts in January 2013. In an alternative scenario, the 

CBO projects stronger economic growth (an estimated increase 

of 2.9% in U.S. GDP in 2013) if some or all of the fiscal 

restrictions are removed. 

Iowa Economy According to the Iowa Labor Market and 

Workforce Information Division, “the Iowa economy is 

expected to gain traction by the second half of 2013.” It is 

expected that: 

• Iowa’s industry sectors will increase hiring in 2013 due 

to a better housing market and increased construction 

activity. 

• In the next few years, Iowa construction projects 

include $900 million in construction at the University 

of Iowa, $580 million in construction spending in Cedar 

Rapids, mostly on public projects, and $600 million for 

highway construction and repairs by the Iowa 

Department of Transportation. 

• Employment in Iowa’s financial industry should 

continue to exceed national growth, reflecting an 

educated workforce and significantly lower labor costs 

compared to other financial hubs. 

• Employment in financial services, information 

technology, healthcare, and construction is expected to 

increase faster than the State average through 2020. 

Des Moines MSA Economy The economic drivers of the 

Des Moines MSA are diverse and include mature, 

stable, and emerging industries. According to a June 

2013 Moody's Analytics report: 

"The outlook for Des Moines is bright, and its 

economy will strengthen as financial services 

accelerate, helping to drive consumer spending. 

Construction is on the verge of an upswing. Farm 

incomes will grow, although at a slower pace, and 

the public sector will provide little support. 

Long‐term prospects are upbeat: A diverse industrial 

base, favorable business costs, and a skilled 

workforce lay the foundation for above‐average 

growth over the long run." 

Table 11 

Historical and Projected GDP Growth by World Region 

29 




Aviation Activity Forecast – Passenger Airline Traffic 

KEY POINTS 

• Forecasts of enplaned 

passengers were 

developed taking into 

account analyses of the 

economic basis for 

airline traffic, analyses 

of historical airline 

traffic, and an 

assessment of the key 

factors that may affect 

future airline traffic. 

• The number of enplaned 

passengers is forecast to 

increase from 1,038,484 

in 2012 to 2,046,000 in 

2032, an average 

increase of 3.4% per 

year. 

Assumptions 

• In the long term, changes in airline traffic at the Airport 

will occur largely as a function of growth in the 

population and economy of the Airport service region 

and changes in airline service. 

• Continued development of airline service at the Airport 

will not be constrained by the availability of aviation fuel, 

long‐term limitations in airline fleet capacity, limitations 

in the capacity of the air traffic control system or the 

Airport, or government policies or actions that restrict 

growth. 

• Considered recent and potential developments in the 

national economy and in the air transportation industry 

as they have affected or may affect airline traffic at the 

Airport. 

For 2013 through 2032, it is assumed that: 

• The U.S. economy will recover from the recession and 

sustained GDP growth will average between 2.0% and 

2.5% per year. 

• The economy of the Des Moines MSA would increase at a 

rate comparable to that of the nation as a whole. 

• A generally stable international political environment 

and safety and security precautions will ensure airline 

traveler confidence in aviation without imposing 

unreasonable inconveniences. 

• There would be no major disruption of airline service or 

air travel behavior as a result of international hostilities 

or terrorist actions. 

• Airline scheduling efficiencies and airport operational 

procedures would permit accommodation of the 

forecast demand. 

Enplaned Passenger Forecasts 

The number of enplaned passengers is forecast to increase 

from 1,038,484 in 2012 to 2,046,000 in 2032, an average 

increase of 3.4% per year (see Figure 21 and Table 12). 

The forecast of enplaned passengers are based on (1) the 

regression analysis and independent forecast of the key 

variables, (2) an evaluation of low-cost carrier service 

expansion at DSM, and (3) an assessment of the DSM 

catchment area and the additional passengers that could 

be capture through the forecast period. 

Figure 21 



Table 12 



• The Airport will continue to be the principal airport 

serving the Des Moines MSA, the overall DSM catchment 

area, and the State of Iowa. 

• Passenger traffic growth at the Airport will continue to be 

supported by local businesses with a continued demand 

for national and global connectivity. 

• Competition among the airlines serving the Airport and 

the Des Moines MSA will ensure the continued 

availability of competitive airfares. 

• The price of oil and aviation fuel would remain at 

historically high levels but would not return to the prices 

experienced in 2008. 

30 




Aviation Activity Forecast – Air Cargo 

KEY POINTS 

• Regression analysis for 

air cargo activity at DSM 

is not meaningful, since 

it has been driven more 

by the business plans of 

all-cargo airlines than 

economic activity in the 

Des Moines MSA. 

• Therefore, it is assumed 

that air cargo at the 

Airport would increase 

at rates comparable to 

the growth in the 

population of the Des 

Moines MSA, an average 

increase of 0.8% per 

year. 

As shown on Figure 22, total air cargo at DSM decreased an 

average of 4.3% between 1999 and 2012, with growth 

occurring between 2004 and 2006 (an average increase of 

5.0% per year) and 2010 and 2012 (an average increase of 

8.8%). 

The decreases in cargo at the Airport since 1999 are 

related to: 

• The slowdown in the regional economy related to the 

economic recessions in 2011 and 2008‐2009. 

• A reduction in available belly‐cargo capacity on 

passenger airline aircraft as a result of increases in the 

use of regional jet aircraft which have less cargo 

capacity than larger air carrier aircraft. 

• The availability of reduced‐cost belly‐cargo capacity, 

particularly on widebody aircraft designed for 

containerized cargo, and direct international freighter 

service at other gateway airports, such as Chicago 

O’Hare, Los Angeles, and Dallas/Fort Worth 

international airports. 

• An increasing trend among freight forwarders to bypass 

airports and truck cargo to gateways that have available 

reduced‐cost belly‐cargo capacity. 

Figure 22 

Historical Trend Analysis – Total Air Cargo 


Table 13 

HISTORICAL AND FORECAST AIR CARGO—BASELINE 


The definition of a regression model to represent air 

cargo activity at DSM is limited by: 

• Continued decreases in air cargo since 1999 which do 

not relate to traditional economic indicators such as 

Des Moines MSA employment or personal income 

which have generally increased between 1999 and 

2012 

• The data series for air cargo does not capture the 

entire cargo market including transport by other 

modes 

As a result of these limitations, a regression analysis was 

not meaningful. DSM air cargo trends have been driven 

more by the business plans of all‐cargo airlines than 

economic activity in the Des Moines MSA. The Airport 

has served as a second day hub for UPS but, due to less 

than expected demand for its second day product, UPS 

plans to transition out of its second day product. As a 

result, UPS cargo activity at DSM is expected to be 

limited. 

Therefore, it was assumed that air cargo at the Airport 

would increase at rates comparable to the growth in the 

population of the Des Moines MSA, an average increase 

of 0.8% per year, as shown in Table 13. 

• The reorganization and consolidation in the cargo 

industry in response to the increase in fuel prices in 

2008 and the national economic recession. 

Note: The forecasts presented in this figure were prepared using the information and 

assumptions given in the accompanying text. Inevitably, some of the assumptions 

used to develop the forecasts will not be realized and unanticipated events and 

circumstances may occur. Therefore, there are likely to be differences between 

the forecast and actual results, and those differences may be material. 

CAGR = Compound annual growth rate. 

Includes air freight and mail. 

Sources: Historical: Des Moines International Airport records. 

Forecast: LeighFisher, August 2013. 

31 




Aviation Activity Forecast – Aircraft Operations 

KEY POINTS 

• Forecasts of aircraft 

operations for passenger 

and cargo airlines, 

general aviation, and 

military activity are 

presented. 

• Total aircraft operations 

are forecast to increase 

an average of 0.9% per 

year from 80,036 

operations in 2012 to 

96,100 operations in 

2032. 

Assumptions 

• Forecasts of passenger aircraft operations were derived 

from forecasts of passengers using assumptions of (1) 

average aircraft size, measured by seats per aircraft 

operation, and (2) average aircraft utilization, measured in 

percentage terms (the “load factor”) 

• Assumptions regarding expected changes in aircraft size 

and assumed aircraft utilization together result in the 

calculation of the number of passengers per aircraft 

operation. The projection of aircraft operations is then 

derived by dividing the number of passengers by the ratio 

of passengers per aircraft operation. Table 14 summaries 

the data and assumptions for 2011 through 2032. 

Aircraft Operations Forecast Table 15 and Figure 23 

summarize the forecasts of total aircraft operations at the 

Airport, including commercial, general aviation, and military 

aircraft operations. 

Total aircraft operations are forecast to increase an average of 

0.9% per year from 80,036 operations in 2012 to 96,100 

operations in 2032. 

Commercial aircraft operations, including air carrier and air taxi 

operations, are forecast to increase from 44,200 operations in 

2012 to 60,700 operations in 2032, reflecting an increase in the 

average number of seats per operation. In 2032, commercial 

aircraft operations are forecast to account for approximately 

63% of total Airport operations. 

Table 15 

Historical and Forecast Aircraft Operations 


• Commercial aircraft 

operations, including air 

carrier and air taxi 

operations, are forecast 

to increase from 44,200 

operations in 2012 to 

60,700 operations in 

2032, reflecting an 

increase in the average 

number of seats per 

operation. 

Table 14 

Passenger Airline Aircraft Operations Forecast Assumptions 


Figure 23 

Historical and Forecast Aircraft Operations 


• In 2032, commercial 

aircraft operations are 

forecast to account for 

approximately 63% of 

total Airport operations. 

32 




Aviation Activity Forecast – Based Aircraft and Aircraft Fleet 

KEY POINTS 

• Forecasts of based 

aircraft at the Airport is 

forecast to increase an 

average of 0.7% per year 

between 2012 and 2032, 

consistent with the 

growth rates forecast for 

the nation as a whole. 

• Forecasts of the aircraft 

fleet were based on a 

2013 base year 

distribution of 

operations by 

equipment type. 

Forecasts airline fleet 

mix for 2017, 2022, 

2027, and 2032 are 

presented. 

Based Aircraft Forecasts 

As shown on Table 16, the number of based aircraft at the 

Airport is forecast to increase average of 0.7% per year 

between 2012 and 2032, consistent with the growth rates 

forecast for the nation as a whole. In the FAA 2012 TAF for the 

Airport, the number of based aircraft is forecast to remain 

unchanged through 2032. 

Table 16 




The forecasts of the aircraft fleet were based on a 2013 

base year distribution of operations by equipment type 

(e.g., Airbus 319, Boeing 737‐800). 

The 2013 distribution was developed using a combination 

of source data, including: published passenger airline 

Table 17 

Aircraft Fleet Mix 


schedules; DSM airport records, and the FAA’s databases 

including the Enhanced Traffic Management System 

Counts (ETMSC), Operations Network (OPSNET), and Air 

Traffic Activity Data System (ATADS). Historical and 

projected distributions are presented in Table 17. 

33 




Aviation Activity Forecast – Comparison with the FAA 2012 TAF 

KEY POINTS 

• The forecasts are 

compared for the 

components of total 

enplaned passengers, 

commercial aircraft 

operations, and total 

aircraft operations. 

• Forecast of enplaned 

passengers for DSM is 

higher than the TAF in 

2017 and 2022. The 

variance between the 

DSM enplaned 

passenger forecast and 

the FAA 2012 TAF is 

15.2% in 2017 and 

26.8% in 2022. 

Table 18 

FAA TAF Forecast Comparison 

Des Moines International Airport (2012 – 2027) 

The DSM planning forecasts are outside of the allowed 

variance* from the FAA 2012 TAF for the following 

reasons: 

• Economic and business trends in the Des Moines MSA 

discussed in Chapter 2, “Economic Basis for Airline 

Traffic” as well as recent traffic trends at DSM reflecting 

the expansion of low cost carrier service suggest that 

DSM passenger traffic will increase at a rate faster than 

forecast in the FAA 2012 TAF for DSM (an average of 

1.5% per year) and for the airports in the DSM 

catchment area and adjacent region (an average of 2.4% 

per year), as shown in Figure 24. 

• Historically, DSM has accounted for nearly 30% of 

passengers enplaned at the regional airports shown in 

Figure 7‐1. In the DSM planning forecasts, it is assumed 

that DSM will increase gradually to 32% during the 

forecast period. In the FAA 2012 TAF, DSM accounts for a 

decreasing share of the passengers enplaned at the 

regional airports, as shown in Figure 25. 

Figure 24 

FAA 2012 TAF for DSM Catchment Area Airports and 

Adjacent Airports (1990-2032) 

Figure 25 

DSM Forecast Share of Regional Enplaned 

Passengers (1990-2032) 

• Forecast of commercial 

operations for DSM is 

lower than the TAF in 

2017 and 2022. The 


DSM commercial 

operations forecast and 


12.5% in 2017 and 

13.3% in 2022. 

• Forecast of total aircraft 

operations for DSM is 

lower than the TAF in 

2017 and 2022. The 


DSM total aircraft 

operations forecast and 


10.7% in 2017 and 

11.1% in 2022. 

Table 18 presents a comparison of the aviation activity 

forecasts prepared for DSM and the FAA 2012 TAF for the 

Airport. The forecasts are compared for the components of 

total enplaned passengers, commercial aircraft operations and 

total aircraft operations. The format of Table 18 is based on 

the template provided by the FAA for the comparison of 

airport planning forecasts and the FAA TAF. As required, the 

results are presented for the base year of 2012 and forecast 

horizons years which are equal to the base year, plus 1, 5, 10 

and 15 years (2013, 2017, 2022, and 2027). 

• In recent years, the number of passengers per 

commercial operation has increased at DSM as airlines 

replace 50‐seat regional aircraft with more fuel efficient 

larger aircraft. In the DSM planning forecasts, it is 

assumed that the number of passengers per commercial 

operation will increase an average of 1.5% per year, 

reflecting upgauging in airline fleets. In the FAA 2012 

TAF, the number of passengers per commercial 

operation is forecast to decrease an average of 0.7% per 

year, as shown in Figure 26. 

* As stipulated in the FAA forecast guidance, the planning 

forecasts must “differ by less than 10 percent in the 5‐year 

forecast period, and 15 percent in the 10‐year forecast 

period”. 

Figure 26 

Historical & Forecast Passengers per Commercial Operation 


34 



DEMAND/CAPACITY AND FACILITY REQUIREMENTS ANALYSES 

• Passenger Terminal Requirements 

• Ground Transportation Requirements 

• Airfield Requirements 

• Cargo, General Aviation, and Support Facility Requirements

Passenger Terminal Requirements 

Methodology and key assumptions 

KEY POINTS 

• For the development of 

terminal facility 

requirements, the ACRP 

terminal requirements 

model was used. The 

ACRP model evaluates 

facility requirements of 

major functional areas 

based on performance 

metrics. 

• Facility requirements for 

the following areas of 

the terminal were 

determined: 

— Apron gates 

— Ticketing / Check-in 

— Security checkpoint 

— Outbound baggage 

screening 

— Outbound baggage 

make-up 

— Concessions 

— Holdrooms 

— Baggage claim 

— Restrooms 

— Secondary and other 

areas 

Terminal requirements are driven by forecast aviation demand: 

• Based on projected levels of passenger activities at 2.5, 3.0 and 4.0 million annual passengers (MAP) 

which is expected to occur around 2018, 2027, and 2042, respectively 

• Peak period demand derived from the forecast are used as a basis for sizing the facility requirements. 

Number of passengers during the peak hour is shown in Figure 27. Rolling hourly enplaned 

passengers are shown on Figure 28. 

Development of terminal requirements are based on airport data and industry design standards: 

• The industry-standard Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) terminal requirements model 

are used to assess the facility requirements for each PAL. 

• The ACRP model looks at the major functional areas of both airside and landside terminal operations 

to evaluate the facility requirements based on performance metrics such as targeted passenger wait 

time and level of service (LOS). Key assumptions were developed from data provided by the Airport, 

as well as data collected at other similar U.S. airports. 

Level of Service (LOS) is defined as: 

• A qualitative and quantitative measurement of comfort experienced by passengers using the airport 

terminal facility. The capacity of each element of a terminal facility can vary depending on the level of 

crowding and/or processing time that is considered acceptable. Terminal should be designed to 

maintain a certain LOS, even during the peak periods of the day, typically chosen as the peak hour of 

the average day in the peak month (ADPM). The International Air Transport Association (IATA) 

delineates level of service into 6 categories: 

1,800 

1,600 

1,400 

1,200 

1,000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

- 

Figure 27 

Number of Passengers During the Peak Hour 

2013 2.5 MAP 3.0 MAP 4.0 MAP 

Enplaned passengers Deplaned passengers Total passengers 

Figure 28 

Rolling Hourly Enplaned Passengers (June 3, 2013) 

• MAP stands for Million 

Annual Passengers, and 

includes enplaning and 

deplaning passengers. 

• LOS C is typically recommended as a design objective since it denotes good service at a 

reasonable investment. Therefore, the facilities for DSM are planned for LOS C. 

• Some factors that influence LOS for terminal planning are : 

– Passenger queuing space 

– Target maximum wait time 

– Linear frontage (e.g. for baggage claim) 

36 



Required space (sf) 

Count (ea) 


Summary of findings 

KEY POINTS 

• Existing facilities for 

ticketing, outbound 

baggage screening and 

make-up, holdrooms, 

and restrooms are 

inadequate. 

• Other terminal facilities, 

e.g. apron gates, 

security checkpoint, will 

be inadequate to meet 

forecast demand 

between 2.5 MAP and 

3.0 MAP. 

Most existing terminal facilities will be inadequate to meet forecast 

demand between 2.5 MAP and 3.0 MAP (see Figures 29 and 30): 

Figure 29 

Existing Terminal Stress Chart 

Figure 30 

Existing Terminal Stress Plan 

Primary facilities are sized based on the area required for the 

functional components, passenger queuing, circulation, and for nonpassengers 

(e.g. employees, meeters and greeters, well-wishers) 

where applicable. 

Secondary facilities (e.g. airline operations, TSA admin/staff support, 

ground handling services, facilities support areas) are sized relative 

to the primary facilities requirements, and will be included in sizing 

the passenger terminal alternatives. 

Total space and unit requirements for each of the primary facilities 

are summarized on Figures 31 and 32. 

45,000 

40,000 

35,000 

30,000 

25,000 

Figure 31 

Total Space Requirements for Primary Facilities 

120 

100 

80 

Figure 32 

Total Unit Requirements for Primary Facilities 

20,000 

60 

15,000 

40 

10,000 

5,000 

20 

0 

Ticketing Security Outbound 

baggage 

screening 

Outbound 

baggage 

make-up 

Concessions Holdrooms Baggage 

claim 

Existing Baseline 2.5 MAP 3.0 MAP 4.0 MAP 

Restrooms 

0 

Gates Ticketing positions Security lanes Baggage claim 


Source: LeighFisher, February 2014. Source: LeighFisher, February 2014. 

37 




Apron gate 

KEY POINTS 

• Gate requirements are 

based on existing gate 

utilization and assumes 

the pattern will remain 

relatively stable 

throughout the planning 

period. Changes in 

passengers per gate 

would be due to changes 

in fleet seating capacity 

and/or passenger load 

factors, rather than the 

increasing number of 

departures per gate. 

• Additional gate would 

be required by 2.5 MAP. 

Three additional gates 

would be needed by 3.0 

MAP and seven would 

be needed by 4.0 MAP. 

1. 

Activity Forecasts 

Annual enplaned passengers 

(millions): 

• Baseline: 1.1 

• 2.5 MAP: 1.25 

• 3.0 MAP: 1.5 

• 4.0 MAP: 2.0 

Annual passenger aircraft 

departures (thousands): 


• 2.5 MAP: 18.5 

• 3.0 MAP: 20.9 

• 4.0 MAP: 27.6 

2. 

Assumptions 

Target gate utilization: 

4.4 daily departures/gate 

(based on 2013 ADPM). 

Future gate requirements: 

Derived based on forecast 

annual enplanements and 

departures, assuming the 

same gate utilization factor 

as it is today. 

3. 

Existing Facilities 

Passenger gates: 

• 11 NBEG (Narrow-Body 

Equivalent Gates) 

• All of which are contact 

gates with loading 

bridges except Gate A5. 

4. 

Requirements 

Passenger gates: 

• Baseline: 11 

• 2.5 MAP: 12 

• 3.0 MAP: 14 

• 4.0 MAP: 18 

Based on the terminal requirements model results: 

• Additional gate would be required by 2.5 MAP, as 

shown below. 

Table 19 

Narrow-Body Equivalent Gates 

Source: ACRP Report 25, Airport Passenger Terminal Planning 

and Design. Volume 1: Guidebook. 


Apron gate requirements are expressed in terms of the 

number of “Narrow-Body Equivalent Gates”: 

• Definition of “gate” can vary, this metric is used to 

normalize the capacity to that of a typical narrow-body 

aircraft gate. 

• The amount of space required is based on the maximum 

wingspan of aircraft in its respective aircraft group. 

• Requirements for different mix of aircraft can be 

converted using the factors on Table 19. 

38 




Ticketing / Check-in 

KEY POINTS 


ticketing / airline checkin 

were developed for 

the number of staffed 

positions and space 

required. 

• Input data includes an 

estimate of how early 

the passengers arrive at 

the airport before their 

scheduled flight time, as 

well as the number of 

enplaned passengers per 

airline during the peak 

30-minute period. 

• Based on LOS C, 

requirements analysis 

showed that the existing 

queuing space is 

insufficient and 

additional self-service 

kiosks would be needed 

by 4.0 MAP. 

1. 


Average Day Peak Month 

peak hour enplaning 

passengers (total): 


• 2.5 MAP: 853 

• 3.0 MAP: 1,022 

• 4.0 MAP: 1,396 


peak 30-minute enplaned 

passengers (2013): 

• American: 67 

• Delta: 88 

• Frontier: 38 

• Allegiant: 80 

• United: 114 

• US: 47 

• Southwest: 53 

2. 

Assumptions 

Check-in preferences (%): 

• Kiosks 47 

• Counters 30 

• Curbside 5 

• Offsite 18 

• Total 100 

Target maximum wait times 

for counter positions (min): 

8-10 

Average processing times 

(min/pax): 

• Kiosks 2.5 

• Counters 3.0 

• Curbside 2.0 

3. 


Ticketing positions (ea) 

• Kiosks 30 

• Counters 54 

• Bag drops 25 


• Total 111 

• Includes all available 

positions (leased and not 

leased). 

Ticketing area (sf) 

• Counters 1,190 

• Queue 1,520 


• Ticket office 2,530 

• Circulation 2,250 

• Misc* 4,900 

• Total 12,780 

*Includes oversize bags, 

unused counters and bag 

belts 

4. 

Requirements 

Ticketing positions (ea) 


• 2.5 MAP: 55 

• 3.0 MAP: : 66 

• 4.0 MAP: 85 

Ticketing area (sf) 

• Baseline: 6,650 

• 2.5 MAP: 7,700 

• 3.0 MAP: 8,970 

• 4.0 MAP: 11,700 


• Insufficient queuing space – deficit of 1,400 square feet– 

with the existing layout. 

• Additional self-service kiosks would be needed by 

4.0 MAP, other ticketing counters (agent, bagdrop, 

curbside) will be sufficient throughout the planning 

period. 

• Detailed requirements for ticketing positions and area 

are provided below. 

120 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

0 

14,000 

2 

25 

30 

54 

Ticketing Positions (ea) 

1 

12 

21 

1 

13 

23 

1 

16 

28 

15 18 21 


Agent Kiosk Bagdrop Curbside 

Ticketing Area (sf) 

1 

20 

37 

27 

12,000 

10,000 

4,898 

2,442 

8,000 

6,000 

4,000 

2,000 

0 

2,251 

1,311 

2,527 1,725 

385 

70 

1,520 2,912 

1,553 

1,988 

70 

3,346 

1,827 

2,363 

3,836 

4,984 

1,194 636 743 878 1,132 

70 

3,075 


Counter Queue Curbside 

Airline office Circulation Miscellaneous 

70 

39 




Security checkpoint 

KEY POINTS 

• A more conservative 

throughput of 170 

passengers per hour per 

lane was assumed to 

plan adequately for 

future demand. 

• Passengers in the 

existing conditions are 

processed at one of the 

six security screening 

checkpoints (SSCPs). 

The existing 

configuration is 

sufficient to guarantee 

an acceptable level of 

service with maximum 

wait time of 20 minutes 

until 4.0 MAP, when two 

additional lanes would 

be required. 

1. 




passengers: 


• 2.5 MAP: 458 

• 3.0 MAP : 549 

• 4.0 MAP : 751 

• Includes 10% crew/ 

employees that require 

screening. 

2. 

Assumptions 

Target maximum wait times 

(minutes): 20 

Lane throughput 

(pax/lane/hour): 170 

Queuing space LOS C 

requirement (sf/pax): 12.9 

Security lane and spatial 

requirement derived using 

the peak 30-minute 

enplaning passengers based 

on queuing model satisfying 

the targeted maximum wait 

times. 

3. 


Security lanes: 

• Regular 4 

• Overflow 2 

• Total 6 

Security space (sf) 

• Screening 7,820 

• Queue 2,590 

• Total 10,410 

4. 

Requirements 

Security lanes: 

• Baseline 4* 

• 2.5 MAP 5* 

• 3.0 MAP 6* 

• 4.0 MAP 8* 

* Does not include dedicated TSA 

Pre-check lane 

Security space (sf): 

• Baseline 9,380 

• 2.5 MAP 11,260 

• 3.0 MAP 13,490 

• 4.0 MAP 18,250 


• Existing security queuing space is inadequate by LOS C 

standard. 

• Two additional checkpoint lanes will be needed by 

4.0 MAP. 

• Detailed requirements for security lanes and area are 

provided below. 

9 

8 

7 

6 

5 

4 

3 

2 

1 

0 

6 

Security Lanes (ea) 

4 

5 


6 

8 

• By 2.5 MAP, it is 

estimated that the 

security checkpoint 

space will become 

inadequate. 

20,000 

18,000 

16,000 

Security Area (sf) 

2,240 

14,000 

12,000 

10,000 

8,000 

6,000 

4,000 

2,000 

2,593 

7,817 

1,120 

2,657 

5,600 

1,400 

2,864 

7,000 

1,680 

3,406 

8,400 

4,812 

11,200 

0 


Screening Queue Allowance 

40 




Outbound baggage screening 

KEY POINTS 

• Outbound baggage 

demand was estimated 

based on assumptions of 

the number of checked 

bags and percentage of 

passengers with checked 

bags during the peak 

hour. 

• The peak hour baggage 

demand was compared 

to the hourly screening 

machine throughput to 

calculate requirements 

for the number of 

screening equipment 

and space for 

equipment and 

adequate circulation. 

1. 



peak hour bags to process: 


• 2.5 MAP: 661 

• 3.0 MAP: 792 

• 4.0 MAP: 1,082 

• 62% of passengers has 

checked bags, each with 

an average of 1.3 bags. 

2. 

Assumptions 

Screening alarm rates (%): 

• Level 1 EDS* 97 

• Level 2 OSR 25 

• Level 3 ETD 20 

* Excludes 3% oversize bags 

requiring ETD inspections. 

Screening processing rates 

(bags/hour): 

• Level 1 EDS 250 



3. 


Screening space (sf) 

• Sorting matrices & 

conveyors 2,280 

• Baggage screening 

equipment 3,030 

• Circulation 900 

• Total 6,210 

Screening equipment (ea) 

• Level 1 EDS 3 



• Total 16 

4. 

Requirements 

Screening space (sf) 


• 2.5 MAP 7,830 

• 3.0 MAP 7,830 

• 4.0 MAP 9,950 

Screening equipment (ea) 

• Baseline 7 

• 2.5 MAP 8 

• 3.0 MAP 8 

• 4.0 MAP 11 


• Additional Level 1 EDS equipment will be required by 2.5 

MAP. Level 2 OSR and Level 3 ETD equipment will be 

adequate through the planning period. 

• Outbound baggage screening space will be inadequate 

by 2.5 MAP. 

• Detailed requirements for screening equipment and area 


12,000 

10,000 

8,000 

6,000 

4,000 

2,000 

2,275 

900 

Baggage Screening Area (sf) 

2,680 

670 

3,030 2,680 

3,480 3,480 

870 870 

3,480 3,480 

4,420 

1,105 

4,420 

• Based on the analysis, 

additional screening 

equipment (Level 1 

EDS), as well as 

additional screening 

space of approximately 

400 sf, would be needed 

by 2.5 MAP. 

0 

18 

16 

14 

12 

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 

0 


10 

3 

Baggage Screening Equipment 

2 

2 

3 3 

Baggage screening equipment 

Circulation 

Conveyors and sorting matrices 

2 2 

2 2 

4 4 


Level 1 EDS Level 2 OSR Level 3 ETD 

3 

3 

5 

41 




Outbound baggage make-up 

KEY POINTS 

• Outbound baggage 

makeup requirements 

were based on the 

number of departing 

flights in the peak twohour 

staging period. 

Outbound baggage 

makeup requirements 

were estimated by 

baggage make-up device 

(i.e. carts including 

tugs). 


the baggage make-up 

area is currently 

inadequate – an 

additional 2,900 sf 

would be needed to 

provide sufficient space 

to satisfy 3.0 MAP. 

1. 


Annual passenger aircraft 

departures (thousands): 


• 2.5 MAP: 18.5 

• 3.0 MAP: 20.9 

• 4.0 MAP: 27.6 

2. 

Assumptions 

Average number of carts per 

departure: 2.5 (2 for RJ, 3 for 

NB) 

Average number of 

departures within two-hour 

staging period: 1.1 

Area per cart (sf): 300 

Outbound baggage makeup 

requirement derived based 

on the total space required by 

the number of baggage trains 

at each gate within a twohour 

staging period. 

3. 


Make-up space (sf) 

• Make-up 6,110 


• Total 10,750 

4. 

Requirements 

Make-up space (sf): 


• 2.5 MAP 11,760 

• 3.0 MAP 13,800 

• 4.0 MAP 17,640 


• Baggage make-up area is currently inadequate. 

• Detailed requirements for screening equipment and area 


20,000 

18,000 

16,000 

14,000 

12,000 

10,000 

8,000 

6,000 

4,000 

2,000 

0 

4,640 

6,110 

Baggage Make-up Area (sf) 

1,800 

1,960 

9,000 9,800 

2,300 

11,500 

2,940 

14,700 


Baggage make-up area 

Baggage train circulation allowance 

42 




Concessions 

KEY POINTS 


the concessions include 

the total space for 

concession services 

only; back-of-house 

space that is necessary 

to support them, such as 

storage areas, kitchens, 

employee lockers, 

loading docks, and 

administrative offices 

are included in the 

secondary facilities 

evaluation. 

• It is assumed that 75% 

of the concessions 

would be post-security, 

where passengers would 

be more relaxed and 

more inclined to use the 

services. 

1. 



(millions): 


• 2.5 MAP: 1.25 

• 3.0 MAP: 1.5 

• 4.0 MAP: 2.0 

2. 

Assumptions 

Planning factors 

(sf per 1,000 pax): 

• F&B 8.0 

• Retail 4.0 

• Services 0.5 

• Total 12.5 

Split (%): 

• Pre-security 25 

• Post-security 75 

• Total 100 

Concessions space 

requirements derived based 

on the planning factors 

multiplied by the forecast 

annual enplaned passengers. 

3. 


Concession space (sf) 

• Pre-security 8,420 

• Post-security 9,400 

• Support 4,970 

• Total 22,790 

Concession space breakdown 

(sf) 

• F&B 12,820 

• Retail 5,000 

• Services - 

• Support 4,970 

• Total 22,790 

4. 

Requirements 

Concession space (sf): 


• 2.5 MAP: 19,630 

• 3.0 MAP 23,550 

• 4.0 MAP 31,400 


• More of the existing concessions area should be 

allocated to post-security for revenue maximization. 

• Detailed requirements for concessions area by function 

and location are provided below. 

30,000 

25,000 

20,000 

15,000 

10,000 

5,000 

0 

9,400 

8,420 

Concessions Area (sf) - Location 

Pre-security 

Post-security 

10,313 

11,719 

14,063 

3,438 3,906 4,688 

18,750 

6,250 


Note: Excludes concession support space. 

• Based on industry 

planning guidelines, 

more of the existing 

concessions should be 

allocated post-security. 

Additional concession 

space would be required 

by 3.0 MAP. 

18,000 

16,000 

14,000 

12,000 

10,000 

8,000 

6,000 

4,000 

2,000 

- 

Concessions Area (sf) - Function 

16,000 

12,820 

12,000 

10,000 

8,800 

8,000 

5,000 4,400 5,000 

6,000 

- 550 625 750 1,000 


Note: Excludes concession support space. 

43 




Passenger Holdrooms 

KEY POINTS 

• Holdroom requirements 

include seating and 

standing areas for 

passengers, an airline 

agent check-in podium, 

space for boarding 

queue, and space for 

circulation and airport 

amenities. 

• Holdroom sizing is based 

on the average seating 

capacity of the typical 

aircraft expected to use 

the gate. Percentage of 

passengers to be seated 

or standing, as well as 

average area per 

passenger are based on 

Level of Service C. 

1. 



(millions): 


• 2.5 MAP: 1.25 

• 3.0 MAP: 1.5 

• 4.0 MAP: 2.0 

2. 

Assumptions 

Average number of seats on 

design aircraft: 89 

Passengers split (%): 

• Standing 20 

• Seated 80 

• Total 100 

Passengers space 

requirement for Level of 

Service C (sf/pax): 

• Standing 10 

• Seated 15 

3. 


Holdrooms space (sf) 

• Holdrooms 20,170 


• Total* 24,090 

*Includes holdroom space 

at Gate A5, which is 

currently not utilized. 

4. 

Requirements 

Holdrooms space (sf): 


• 2.5 MAP 27,540 

• 3.0 MAP 32,130 

• 4.0 MAP 41,310 

• Includes 5% allowance 

for amenities, 35% for 

circulation. 


• Existing holdroom space is insufficient unless the 

holdroom at Gate A5 (3,600 square feet ) is utilized to 

meet baseline demand. 

• Concessions planning will have an impact on holdroom 

size requirements. 

• Detailed requirements for holdroom area and circulation 


45,000 

40,000 

35,000 

30,000 

25,000 

20,000 

15,000 

10,000 

5,000 

3,600 

3,920 

16,566 

Holdrooms Area (sf) 

6,545 

7,140 

18,700 20,400 

8,330 

23,800 

10,710 

30,600 


existing holdroom 

space is insufficient to 

accommodate baseline 

demand. 

0 


Holdroom area Holdroom circulation Misc 

44 




Baggage claim 

KEY POINTS 


baggage claim 

considered both the 

passenger flow and the 

baggage flow. 

• To provide level of 

service C, several things 

were considered: the 

exposed length of the 

device (i.e. claim 

frontage), off-load space 

(to allow baggage carts 

to be pulled adjacent 

and handlers to load 

bags onto the claim 

device), total claim unit 

length (i.e. carousel 

frontage), and baggage 

hall space. 

1. 



peak hour bags to process: 


• 2.5 MAP: 661 

• 3.0 MAP: 792 

• 4.0 MAP: 1,082 

• 62% of passengers has 

checked bags, each with 

an average of 1.3 bags. 

2. 

Assumptions 

Claim frontage per person at 

Level of Service C (feet): 1.5 

Carousel unit 

frontage (feet): 150 

Carousel module (sf): 4,400 

Includes 20% of space for 

baggage offices, 15% for 

meeter/greeter lobby, and 

25% for circulation. 

3. 


Baggage claims (ea) 

• Units 2 

Existing baggage claims are 

flat plate units; for future 

requirements, carousel type 

units are recommended. 

Baggage claim space (sf) 

• Claim area 7,440 

• Baggage offices 810 

• Meeter/greeter 680 


• Offload 4,060 

• Total 20,120 

4. 

Requirements 

Baggage claims (ea) 

• Baseline 2 

• 2.5 MAP 2 

• 3.0 MAP 2 

• 4.0 MAP 3 

Baggage claim space (sf) 


• 2.5 MAP 20,050 

• 3.0 MAP 20,050 

• 4.0 MAP 30,080 

Based on the terminal requirements analysis: 

• Bag claim area is currently inadequate for the baggage 

offices, meeter/greeter lobby, and offload area. Future 

space requirements are based on carousel type bag 

claims. 

• Detailed requirements for various baggage claim areas 


35,000 

30,000 

25,000 

20,000 

15,000 

10,000 

5,000 

4,060 

5,200 

7,130 

2,511 

680 

805 

1,116 

1,488 

Baggage Claim Area (sf) 

5,200 5,200 

2,970 2,970 

1,320 

1,760 

1,320 

1,760 

7,440 7,440 8,800 8,800 

7,800 

4,455 

1,980 

2,640 

13,200 


the baggage claim area 

is currently inadequate 

particularly in the 

following areas: 

— Baggage offices 

0 


Claim area (carousels) 

Meeter/greeter lobby 

Inbound baggage offload area 

Baggage service offices 

Circulation 

— Meeter/greeter lobby 

— Off-load 

45 




Restrooms, Secondary and Other Areas 

KEY POINTS 

• Restroom requirements 

are estimated separately 

for pre-security 

(including check-in 

lobby and arrivals lobby) 

and post-security (i.e. 

boarding area), based on 

the peak 30-minute 

arriving and departing 

passengers demand, as 

well as the percentage 

of meeter/greeter and 

well-wishers that will be 

using the facilities. 


the existing space for 

restrooms in postsecurity 

is currently 

inadequate. 

• Secondary facilities 

include airline support, 

airport support, and 

facilities support and 

services. 

1. 




passengers*: 


• 2.5 MAP: 270 

• 3.0 MAP: 324 

• 4.0 MAP: 442 

*Excludes connecting passengers 


peak 20-minute deplaned 

passengers: 


• 2.5 MAP: 331 

• 3.0 MAP: 397 

• 4.0 MAP: 543 

2. 

Assumptions 

Meeter/greeter 

(per deplaned pax): 0.2 

Well-wishers 

(per enplaned pax): 0.2 

Number of fixtures 

(per 100 pax): 1 

Restrooms area (sf): 

• Men/Women 70* 

• Family 100 

*area per fixture 

Restrooms split (%): 

• Women 60 

• Men 40 

Restrooms space split (%): 

• Pre-security 30 

• Post-security 70 

3. 


Restrooms space (sf) 

• Pre-security 2,120 

• Post-security 3,240 

• Total 5,360 

4. 

Requirements 

Restrooms space (sf): 


• 2.5 MAP 7,590 

• 3.0 MAP 8,970 

• 4.0 MAP 12,140 


• Existing terminal provides adequate pre-security 

restrooms, but can provide more space post-security to 

meet passenger needs. 

• Detailed requirements for restrooms are provided below. 

14,000 

12,000 

10,000 

8,000 

6,000 

4,000 

2,000 

7,000 

6,000 

0 

3,238 

Restrooms Area (sf) - Pre/Post Security 

4,520 

5,180 

6,050 

2,120 2,180 2,410 2,920 

8,350 

3,790 


Pre-security 

Post-security 

Restrooms Area (sf) - Mens/Womens/Family 

• The space allowance for 

secondary areas are 

calculated as a 

percentage of total 

major departures 

and/or arrivals 

functional areas. 

Secondary and Other Areas 

Requirements for secondary and other areas are sized based 

on existing facilities, relative to the space requirements for 

the primary area for each passenger demand level. 

Secondary facilities include: 

– Airline support (e.g. airline operations) 

– Airport support (e.g. Transportation Security Administration 

and staff support, ground handling services, operations and 

maintenance) 

– Facilities support and services (e.g. loading dock, 

trash/recycling) 

Additional areas include: 

– Building structure which includes foundations, columns, 

cores, walls, internal partitions, support structural 

framework, etc. 

– Building mechanical systems which include mechanical 

system/electric rooms, plumbing spaces, ducts for 

heating/ventilation/air conditioning, etc. 

5,000 

4,000 

3,000 

2,000 

1,000 

0 

6,650 

4,900 

4,130 

4,480 

3,570 

3,290 

2,450 2,730 

994 994133 400 400 400 500 


46 




Terminal Requirements Summary 

Terminal requirements are summarized in the table below: 

47 



Peak Occupancy (stalls) 

Peak Occupancy (stalls) 

Spaces 

Spaces 

Ground Transportation Requirements 

Parking 

KEY POINTS 

• Approximately 4,300 

spaces are available for 

public parking 

• Today, only 

approximately 3,425 

public spaces are 

occupied on a typical 

busy day 

• By 3.0 MAP, 5,100 public 

spaces are estimated to 

be required, translating 

to approximately 5 acres 

of additional parking 

• By 4.0 MAP, 6,800 

spaces are estimated to 

be required, translating 

to approximately 16 

acres of additional 

parking 

1. Existing Facilities 

Public Parking 

Parking Spaces 

• Short-term 341 

• Long-term 1,732 

• Economy 1,885 

• Economy 4* 300 

• Total 4,258 

* Economy Lot #4 currently 

has 1,000 parking spaces. 

Approximately 700 of those 

spaces have been leased to 

the rental car companies 

2. Methodology and Assumptions 

Current Demand Determination 

• ‘Typical busy day’ in past 12 months is used to identify existing design-day 

• All public parking facilities are evaluated combined, since distribution 

between parking products is determined by policy decisions and price points 

Key Assumptions 

• Demand will grow at same rate as passenger traffic 

• 10% ‘circulation’ factor is added to demand 

4,000 

3,500 

3,000 

2,500 

2,000 

1,500 

3,424 occupied spaces 

0 100 200 300 

Day Ranks 

3. Requirements 

Public Parking stalls required: 

• 2.5 MAP 4,200 

• 3.0 MAP 5,100 

• 4.0 MAP 6,800 

Additional Spaces required: 

• 2.5 MAP 0 

• 3.0 MAP 850 

• 4.0 MAP 2,550 

Additional Area required: 

• 2.5 MAP 0 

• 3.0 MAP 5.3 acres 

• 4.0 MAP 15.8 acres 

As shown in Figure 33, existing 

public parking spaces are 

inadequate by 3.0 MAP. 

7,000 

6,000 

5,000 

4,000 

3,000 

2,000 

1,000 

Public Parking 

3,770 4,220 

5,090 

6,760 

0 

Baseline 2.5 MAP 3.0 MAP 4.0 MAP 

(2013) 

Requirements (spaces) Existing (4,258 spaces) 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0 

Employee Parking 

270 280 300 

340 


(2013) 

Requirements (spaces) 

Existing (273 spaces) 

• 273 spaces are available 

for employee parking 

• The employee parking 

lot is currently nearing 

capacity and will slightly 

exceed capacity 2.5 MAP 

Employee Parking 

Parking Spaces 

• Total 273 

Current Demand Determination 

• ‘Typical busy day’ in past 12 months is used to identify existing design-day 

Key Assumptions 

• Demand will grow at same rate as aircraft operations 

• 5% ‘circulation’ factor is added to demand 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 

257occupied spaces 

0 100 200 300 

Day Ranks 

Parking stalls required: 

• 2.5 MAP 280 

• 3.0 MAP 300 

• 4.0 MAP 340 

Additional Spaces required: 

• 2.5 MAP 10 

• 3.0 MAP 30 

• 4.0 MAP 70 

Additional Area required: 

• 2.5 MAP 0 acres 



As shown in Figure 33, existing 

employee parking spaces 

are marginal at 2.5 MAP and 

will become insufficient by 

3.0 MAP. 

Figure 33 

Parking Stress Chart 

48 



Feet 

Feet 

Feet 


Roads and Curbsides 

KEY POINTS 

• Under the existing 

enforcement conditions, 

the inner curbside 

(private vehicles) is 

approaching a capacity 

constraint 

• If “active loading / 

unloading only” were 

enforced on the inner 

curbside, there would 

be enough passenger 

vehicle curbside 

capacity through the 

planning period 

• The outer curbside is 

currently at capacity, but 

is expected to operate at 

a borderline acceptable 

level through 3.0 MAP 

• Existing entrance and 

exit roadways have 

operational constraints 

but not capacity 

constraints 

• Roadway capacity 

constraints are not 

expected to occur in the 


The roadway and curbside facility requirements to accommodate 

demand throughout the planning period are summarized in this 

section. Requirements are based on industry best practices related 

to airport roadway planning. 

Curbsides 

Traffic counts from April 2013 were used to define peak day 

volume. An analysis of the schedule revealed that approximately 

8% of departing seats occur during the peak hour, which was 

increased to 10% for a conservative estimate. Once the peak hour 

volumes for the peak day in April was determined, the volumes 

were adjusted for the peak month. Using historical data, June was 

identified as the busiest month, with approximately 23% higher 

traffic volumes than April. The resulting traffic volumes are shown 

below. Traffic was grown in direct proportion to forecasted growth 

in airline passenger traffic. Figure 34 shows insufficiencies in the 

existing curbsides by 2.5 and 3.0 MAP levels. 


Curbside Length (linear feet) 

• Inner 545 

• Outer 571 

Traffic 

PM Peak Hour (13:30-14:30) 

April 2013 Traffic Counts 

adjusted for peak month and 

peak hour 

Vehicle Type 

Vehicles 

Taxi 32 

Hotel Shuttle 21 

Limo 3 

Off-Airport Parking 11 

Airport Parking Bus 14 

Private Vehicles 

Arrivals 52 

Departures 33 

Total 167 

2. Activity Forecasts 3. Assumptions 4. Requirements 

Grown in direct proportion to 

forecasted growth in airline 

passenger traffic 

Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 

Vehicle Type 

2.5 MAP 4.0 MAP 

Taxi 39 62 

Hotel Shuttle 25 40 

Limo 4 6 

Off A/P Parking 13 21 

A/P Parking 14 14 


Arrivals 63 100 

Departures 40 64 

Total 198 308 

The traffic volumes were combined with the assumed dwell 

times and adjusted by the Poisson distribution to assure that 

enough spaces were available 95% of the time (a level of 

service C standard). The resulting curbside requirements are 

shown in the graphs below. 

Roadways 

The roadways have several operational issues, but do provide 

sufficient capacity . With the traffic volumes shown in the 

curbside analysis below, a single-lane entrance and exit 

roadway would meet capacity requirements. However, it is an 

industry standard to provide two-lane entrance and exit 

roadways to avoid a situation in which an accident or similar 

event could prevent access to the terminal. 

Length of curbside required is dependent 

on dwell time. Two scenarios were 

evaluated: (a) dwell times with current 

enforcement and (b) dwell times 

enforced for active loading/unloading 

Dwell Time Assumptions (min.) 

Vehicle Type 

Current 

Enforcement 

Active 

loading / 

Unloading 

Taxi 2.7 2.7 

Hotel Shuttle 3.5 3.5 

Limo 10 10 

Off A/P Parking 3.5 3.5 

A/P Parking 4 4 


Arrivals 8.7 3.5 

Departures 3.0 2.5 

Inner Curbside 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

200 

Outer Curbside 

Current Enforcement 

230 

270 

300 340 390 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

4.0 MAP 

3.0 MAP 

2.5 MAP 

Existing 

320 

500 


(2013) 

340 340 340 

240 270 270 

Legend – Level of service during peak periods 

Unacceptable 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

Pick-up Requirements 

Total Available Curbside (545 ft.) 

340 

390 


(2013) 

Figure 34 

Existing Curbsides Stress Chart 

Inner 

Marginal 

Stricter Enforcement 

180 200 

Outer 

Acceptable 

230 

270 

180 180 200 230 


(2013) 

Drop-off Requirements 

Arrivals Curbside (285 ft.) 

Taxi, Charter, and 

Airport Requirements 

Courtesy and Limo 

Requirements 

Total Available 

Curbside (571 ft.) 

Courtesy and Limo 

(232 ft.) 

49 



Spaces 

Acres 


Rental Car Facilities and Hold Lot 

KEY POINTS 


2. Methodology and Assumptions 

3. Requirements 

600 

Ready-Return Spaces 

• The rental car customer 

service facilities (Rental 

Car Counters and Ready- 

Return Spaces) will 

experience capacity 

constraints by 3.0 MAP 

• The existing QTA 

combined with the 

leased space in Economy 

Lot #4 is expected to 

provide enough space 

until 4.0 MAP 

• The construction of a 

Hold Lot is dependent 

on local policy decisions, 

but if built should 

accommodate 15 taxis, 5 

limos, and 3 buses to 

accommodate 2.5 MAP 

demands 

Rental Car Facilities 

Customer Facilities: 

• Customer Service Area 

3,345 sq. ft. 

• Ready-Return Spaces 

370 spaces 

Quick Turn Around (QTA): 

• Wash and Fuel Facility 

4.3 acres 

• Storage (Economy Lot #4) 

700 spaces (4.3 acres) 

Hold Lot 

• Hold areas are divided into 

two primary areas: taxi 

queue and limo hold area 

• Current hold areas have 

room for eight taxicabs 

and three limos 

Rental Car Facilities Model 

• Created in conjunction with rental car industry leading architects 

• Model is based off inputs from a variety of Airports 

• Fundamentally based off rental car fleet size. To estimate the 

fleet size, a benchmarking ratio of 2,000 vehicles per MEP was 

created. 

• Growth for ready/return and QTA facilities increases in direct 

proportion to forecasted growth in O&D commercial passenger 

traffic. While the rental car industry is relatively volatile with a 

long history of new entrants and merges, the total market 

demand for vehicles will likely be unaffected by the changes. 

• Estimates individual facility needs for customer service facilities 

(queue space, counters, administration space, etc.) , ready/return 

spaces, and QTA (wash, fuel, maintenance, and storage) 

• For rental car operations with less than 4,000 vehicles and more 

than 4 companies, there is a reduction in operational efficiencies, 

resulting in increased requirements relative to benchmarks 

Potential Solutions 

• Policy regarding a hold lot is determined by local staff and politics 

• Current solution, the taxi ‘hold lot’ is a queue along the inbound 

roadway, typically occurring in a third lane on the right 

• Alternative 1: a paved parking lot with simple restroom facilities 

• Alternative 2: combine the hold lot with a gas station / convenience 

store along the primary route for rental cars (see example below) 

Customer Service Area (CSA) 

• 2.5 MAP 2,900 s.f. 

• 3.0 MAP 3,500 s.f. 

• 4.0 MAP 4,100 s.f. 

(add approximately 1,000 s.f. 

for a separate customer service 

bldg.) 

Ready-Return (R/R) Spaces: 

• 2.5 MAP 350 

• 3.0 MAP 420 

• 4.0 MAP 570 

QTA: 




As shown on Figure 35, CSA 

and R/R will be inadequate by 

3.0 MAP. 

The size of commercial vehicle 

hold lots are often determined by 

policy (how long taxis have to 

wait, what is the quality of the 

facilities, etc.) 

Taxis (estimated 2-3 hour wait) 

• 2.5 MAP 15 

• 4.0 MAP 25 

400 

200 

0 

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 

0 

310 350 

420 

570 


(2013) 

Requirement (spaces) Existing (370 spaces) 

Quick-Turnaround 

4.9 5.5 

6.5 

8.8 


(2013) 

Requirement (acres) Existing (8.6 acres) 

Figure 35 

Rental Car Facilities and Hold Lot Stress Chart 

• Current hold area requires 

taxis to cross three lanes of 

traffic 

Taxi Hold Lot 

Limos and 

Busses 

Limos: 

• 2.5 MAP 5 

• 4.0 MAP 10 

• During peak hours, taxicabs 

are frequently re-circulating 

on the airport roadways 

waiting for space in the taxi 

queue 

Convenience 

Store 

Fuel 

Pumps 

Potential 

Cell lot 

Charter buses: 

• 2.5 MAP 3 

• 4.0 MAP 5 

Existing hold log is alreading 

insufficient to meet current 

demand, as illustrated on 

Figure 35. 

50 



Airfield requirements 

Runway length requirements 

KEY POINTS 

• Runway length 

requirements were 

evaluated for the 

selected aircraft types: 

— MD-83 

— Airbus 300-600 

— Airbus 330-300 

— Boeing 747-400 

— Boeing 767-300 Freighter 

• Existing runway length 

of 9,000 feet is sufficient 

to support all selected 

aircraft up to 80% of 

their useful load, and all 

of the selected aircraft 

for the selected 

destinations. 

Methodology: 

• Evaluation of runway length requirements involved: 

– Assessment of aircraft manufacturer’s published 

takeoff and landing criteria, as reported in 

aircraft planning manuals 

– A more detailed evaluation of the aircraft takeoff 

performance capabilities, as measured by 

takeoff weights and payloads. 

Assumptions: 

• The aircraft types considered were from the forecast 

prepared for the master plan, as well as the 

published flight schedules for commercial 

passenger, air taxi, and cargo operations based on 

FAA Traffic Flow Management System Counts 

(TFMSC) data, for the period CY 2005 to CY 2012. 

• The analysis of takeoff and landing runway length 

requirements incorporated the following 

assumptions: 

– Ambient temperatures of 86 F, reflecting the 

mean maximum temperature of the hottest 

month. 

– Existing airport elevation of 958 feet. 

– Zero wind, unless otherwise noted. 

Findings: 

• Figure 36 presents the results of the takeoff 

runway length evaluation. The existing runway 

length is sufficient to support all selected aircraft 

up to approximately 80% of their useful load. 

Aircraft do not typically operate at 100% of their 

useful load for practical reasons: (1) the aircraft 

may not be accommodating a full passenger load 

and (2) the aircraft may not be traveling 

sufficient distance to require a full load of fuel. 

• Figure 37 presents the results of the takeoff 

runway length requirements for selected 

destinations. The existing runway length of 

9,000 feet can accommodate all of the selected 

aircraft for the selected destinations. 

• Table 20 presents the results of landing runway 

length evaluation. Landing runway length 

requirements are shown for both dry and wet 

conditions. The existing runway lengths are 

sufficient to accommodate the aircraft fleet mix. 

Useful Load Takeoff length requirements were evaluated based on the 

aircraft’s “useful load” (as shown on Figure 38). Useful load is defined as 

the maximum takeoff weight minus the aircraft empty weight. An 

aircraft’s useful load can be used to transport either fuel or payload (i.e., 

passengers, baggage, and cargo), and within certain limits, useful load 

can be allocated between fuel and passengers/cargo. 

Figure 38 

Figure 36 

Figure 37 

Table 20 

RUNWAY LANDING LENGTH SUMMARY 

Landing length requirement 

(ft) 

Aircraft 

Dry 

Wet 

B767-300 Freighter 6,270 7,180 

B747-400 6,490 7,190 

A330-300 5,640 n.a. 

A300B4-600 6,140 n.a. 

MD-83 5,300 6,140 

(1) Requirements based on standard day temperature (15ºC), zero wind, zero 

runway slope, no reverse thrust, and airport elevation of 985 and maximum 

design landing weight, unless otherwise stated. 

Sources: Aircraft Characteristics for Airport Planning, published by the Boeing 

Company and Airbus Industrie. 

51 



Airfield requirements 

Airfield capacity and delay 

KEY POINTS 

• Airfield capacity is 

evaluated based on the 

Annual Service Volume 

(ASV) and average 

aircraft delay methods 

from the current FAA’s 

Advisory Circular 

150/5060-5, Airport 

Capacity and Delay. 


the existing airfield can 

accommodate forecast 

aviation demand 

throughout the entire 

planning period of the 

master plan, with 

average aircraft delay of 

less than 1 minute per 

operation. 

Methodology: 

• Annual Service Volume (ASV) is an estimate of how 

many aircraft operations an airport can accommodate 

in a year, and is calculated using the methods 

specified in the current FAA’s Advisory Circular 

150/5060-5, Airport Capacity and Delay (the AC). It is 

defined as the point at which further increases in 

demand will result in disproportionate increase in 

average aircraft delay. 

ASV = Cw x D x H 

Cw is the weighted average hourly capacity of the 

airfield. 

D is the ratio of annual to ADPM demand. 

H is the ratio of ADPM demand to peak-hour 

demand. 

• Average aircraft delays is estimated based on the ASV 

methodology described in the AC. This methodology 

is based on the relationship between the ratio of 

annual demand to ASV and average annual aircraft 

delay, as shown on Figure 41. 

Assumptions: 

• Annual capacity was based on the hourly capacities 

and runway use percentages from the previous 

master plan, as shown on Table 21. 

• Demand factors (i.e., D and H) were calculated based 

on the aviation forecast prepared for the master plan. 

Findings: 

• As shown on Figure 39, the existing airfield can 

accommodate an 148,700 operations a year, which 

exceeded the forecast aviation demand throughout 

the entire planning period. 

• As shown on Figure 40, average aircraft delay is 

estimated to be less than 1 minute per operation 

throughout the entire planning period. 

Figure 41 

Aircraft Delay Curve 

FAA AC 150/5060-5, Airport Capacity and Delay 

Table 21 

Runway Use Percentages and Hourly Capacities 

Figure 39 

Figure 40 

ASV = 148,700 

Source: Des Moines International Airport, Master Plan 2007 

52 



Air Cargo Facility Requirements 

All-Cargo 

KEY POINTS 

• Approximately 50 acres 

are currently reserved 

for air cargo operations 

at the Airport, mostly in 

the south quadrant of 

the site. 

• The facilities are not 

fully utilized and can be 

downsized. 

• By the end of the 

planning period, 12 

acres should be reserved 

for air cargo activity. 

The air cargo facility requirements to accommodate demand 

throughout the planning period are summarized in this section. 

Requirements were based on industry best practices related to 

cargo facility planning. The following functional areas were 

examined: 

• Processing and Warehouse Space. Processing and warehouse 

space consists of enclosed areas used to store and sort air 

cargo, as well as to provide office and other space to facilitate 

air cargo operations. Warehouse facility requirements and 

use, typically expressed in pounds or tons of cargo per square 

foot of warehouse space, vary significantly by airport, 

depending on the mix of cargo operators. Airports with 

higher concentrations of integrated carrier activity have much 

greater facility use ratios. 

1. 


All-cargo apron (s.y.) 

• South 177,000 

• East 27,000 

• Total 204,000 

Warehouses (s.f.) 

• Bldg 31 12,300 

• Bldg 32 28,000 

• Bldg 35 27,350 

• Total 67,650 

• Approx. 68% of total square 

footage is leased 

Total land area (approx.): 50 

acres 

Existing warehouse utilization 

(based on leased space only): 1.5 

ton/s.f. 

2. 


All-cargo airline air cargo 

(millions of pounds) 

• 2012: 147.8 

• 4.0 MAP: 172.7 

• Compound annual growth 

rate (CAGR): 0.8% 

Annual cargo aircraft 

operations 

• 2012: 5,456 

• 4.0 MAP: 5,427 

• CAGR: 0.0% 

Airports that accommodate more heavy freight, including 

international cargo, must accommodate longer dwell times and, 

therefore, have lower ratios of cargo tonnage per square foot of 

cargo warehouse space. For planning purposes, the generally 

accepted cargo facility use ratio is between 0.5 ton, for a low 

automation, mostly manual, facility, and 1.6 tons annually per 

square foot of warehouse space for a highly automated cargo 

facility. In 2012, the Airport achieved a warehouse utilization of 

1.5 tons of cargo per square foot. It was assumed that this rate 

would be maintained throughout the planning period, resulting 

in a total of 54,000 square feet of warehouse being required by 

4.0 MAP to handle forecasted cargo volumes. 

3. 

Assumptions 

Target warehouse utilization: 

1.5 ton/s.f. 

0.5 ton/s.f. = Low automation 

facility 

0.9 ton/s.f. = Automated facility 

1.6 ton/s.f. = Highly automated 

facility 

Number of warehouse levels: 

1.0 

Target land requirement ratio: 

3.3 

Overall land area (warehouse 

building and landside facilities) 

derived using a ratio relative to 

cargo warehouse space 

4. 

4.0 MAP 

Requirements 

All-cargo aircraft stands (sized 

for ADPM) 

• ADG II 1 

• ADG IV 7 

• Total 8 

Warehouse and land 

requirements (s.f.) 

• Warehouse 53,700 

• Ramp 334,600 

• Landside 123,500 

Total land area (approx.): 12 

acres 

South cargo area is adequate 

throughout planning period 

• Ramp Area. The ramp area includes paved airside 

areas used for aircraft parking while air cargo is 

loaded and unloaded. For larger air cargo 

complexes, ramp area may include a maneuvering 

area for aircraft to access parking positions, as 

well as storage areas for ground support 

equipment (GSE) used to load air cargo onto 

aircraft, unload air cargo from aircraft, or service 

aircraft. The aircraft parking requirements were 

calculated based on future ADPM demand. Based 

on the forecasts, it was determined that 

approximately 8 aircraft will have to be 

accommodated during the ADPM by 4.0 MAP, 

distributed as follows: one ADG II, and seven 

ADG IV aircraft. This corresponds to a 335,000 

square foot apron area. 

• Landside Areas. Air cargo landside areas include 

areas that provide for vehicle access and 

circulation from the Airport’s primary roadway 

network, parking for employees and visitors, and 

parking for the trucks delivering air cargo to 

processing and warehousing facilities and for 

taking delivery of air cargo from these facilities. 

An allowance was included for landscaping and 

other improvements in the calculation of total 

required landside areas. Overall land area, which 

includes the warehouse building footprint and the 

associated landside facilities, is derived using a 

ratio relative to the gross floor area of cargo 

warehouse space. The traditional cargo industry 

gross floor area to land requirement ratio is 1:3.3. 

By 4.0 MAP, 124,000 square feet should be 

reserved for landside facilities associated with allcargo 

operations. 

53 



Air Cargo Facility Requirements 

Belly Cargo 

KEY POINTS 

• Building 5 will be 

sufficient to handle belly 

cargo throughout the 

planning period. 

• Current belly cargo 

facility utilization is low 

and could be increased 

to optimize future space 

usage. 

1. 


Warehouse (s.f.) 7,150 

Ramp (s.f.) 17,700 

Landside (s.f.) 16,300 

1/3 of Building 5 is used for 

belly cargo (Bays 2 and 3) 

Total land area:

General Aviation Facility Requirements 

General Aviation Apron and Aircraft Storage Facilities 

KEY POINTS 


square yards of itinerant 

general aviation apron 

are projected to be 

required to 

accommodate demand 

by the end of the 

planning period. 


square yards of based 

general aviation aircraft 

parking apron is 

projected to be required 

to accommodate 

demand by 4.0 MAP. 

• By 4.0 MAP, 368,200 

square feet of 

conventional hangar 

space is projected to be 

required. In addition, a 

total of 60,000 square 

feet of T-hangar space 

will be required. 

General aviation facility requirements to accommodate 

demand through the planning period are summarized in 

this section. Overall GA facility requirements were 

derived based on a review of existing facilities, GA 

demand trends, activity forecasts, and discussions with 

key stakeholders. 

Aviation Forecast 

• Total general aviation operations at the Airport are 

forecast to remain relatively constant throughout the 

planning period, declining slightly from 31,962 

operations in 2012 to 31,600 operations in 2032. 

Itinerant general aviation operations are forecast to 

increase an average of 0.1 percent per year from 

2012 to 2032, while local GA operations are forecast 

to decrease 0.6 percent per year over the same time 

period. Itinerant operations accounted for 80.5 

percent of total GA operations at the Airport in 2012. 

This trend is expected to continue and itinerant 

operations are forecast to account for the majority of 

GA traffic at the Airport throughout the planning 

period. 

• Total based aircraft at the Airport are forecast to 

increase an average of 0.7 percent per year, 

increasing from 108 aircraft in 2012 to 124 by 2032 

(4.0 MAP). The based aircraft fleet will evolve toward 

more business/corporate jets, while the number of 

piston and multi-engine turboprop aircraft based at 

the Airport will decrease. 

Aircraft Parking Apron 

• Aircraft parking aprons provide space for itinerant 

and based general aviation, allowing passengers to 

access FBO facilities, fueling, and ground 

transportation and allowing service trucks and FBO 

personnel access to the aircraft. Itinerant and based 

aircraft apron requirements were calculated using 

the following methodology and assumptions: 

– In accordance with FAA guidance, itinerant aircraft apron 

requirements were determined assuming 360 square yards 

of apron for 50 percent of the itinerant aircraft using the 

Airport on the busy day of the peak month. The “busy day” 

is defined as 110 percent of the activity on the ADPM. 

Approximately 15,300 square yards of itinerant general 

aviation apron are projected to be required to 

accommodate demand by the end of the planning period. 

– Based aircraft parking apron requirements were 

determined assuming that 30 percent of based single and 

multi-engine aircraft will use ramp parking throughout the 

planning period. In accordance with FAA guidance, it was 

assumed that 300 square yards of apron space will be 

required per based aircraft tiedown position. It was 

assumed that no based jet aircraft will use tiedown space. 

Approximately 6,900 square yards of based general 

aviation aircraft parking apron is projected to be required 

to accommodate demand by 4.0 MAP. 

4.0 MAP 

3.0 MAP 

2.5 MAP 

Existing 

Tie 

Downs 

Figure 43 

Existing General Aviation Stress Chart 

Conv. 

Hangars 

T- 

Hangars 

Aircraft Storage Facilities 

• The Airport currently provides a total of 240,000 square 

feet of conventional hangar space and 54,000 square feet 

of T-hangar space. 

• Aircraft storage facility requirements are based on the 

forecast number and fleet mix of based aircraft. Aircraft 

storage facility requirements were based on the following 

planning assumptions and guidelines: 

– Throughout the planning period, the owners/operators 

of approximately 70 percent of single- and multi-engine 

aircraft will desire hangar space. Of these, 90 percent 

will be accommodated in T-hangars and 10 percent will 

be accommodated in conventional hangars. All 

corporate jet aircraft will occupy conventional hangar 

space. 

– Storage requirements in conventional hangars were 

calculated using the following assumptions: 2,750 

square feet per multi-engine aircraft, 1,400 square feet 

per single engine aircraft, and 1,000 square feet per 

helicopter. An average of 8,000 square feet of hangar 

per jet aircraft was used. While this allowance is higher 

than FAA guidelines, it reflects the current operating 

conditions at the Airport, with a high proportion of large 

business jets. 

– Each T-hangar consists of 1,200 square feet. 

• By 4.0 MAP, 368,200 square feet of conventional hangar 

space is projected to be required. In addition, a total of 

60,000 square feet of T-hangar space will be required. 

• Shown on Figure 43 is a stress chart showing deficiencies 

in existing aviation facilities to meet forecast demand. 

Legend – Level of service during peak periods 

Unacceptable 

Marginal 

Acceptable 

55 



Storage Requirements (gallons) 

Airline Support Facility Requirements 

Fuel Storage Requirements 

KEY POINTS 

• Airline support facilities 

include: 

— Fuel storage 

— Ground support 

equipment maintenance 

and storage 

— Deicing facilities 

— Aircraft maintenance 

— Flight kitchen 

• Fuel storage capacity 

should be increased by 

160,000 gallons to a 

total of 600,000 gallons 

to maintain 7 days of 

reserve by 4.0 MAP. 

1. 


Fuel Storage 

• Jet fuel used by the passenger and all-cargo airlines is currently 

stored in two above ground storage tanks located on the south 

side of the Airport, with a total gross storage capacity of 440,000 

gallons of jet fuel. Requirements for fuel storage facilities were 

focused on the Airport’s main fuel farm. It was assumed that any 

expansion plan for the general aviation fuel farms would be the 

result of a business decision by the FBOs to construct additional 

storage capacity. 

• Requirements were based on an analysis of historical fuel 

flowage and aircraft operations data for the Airport in 2012. 

• Fuel storage requirements are expressed in terms of gross tank 

storage volume as well as land area required so that the Airport 

can (1) prepare to accommodate future demand for storage 

capacity without interfering with the business decisions of the 

passenger and all-cargo airlines; and (2) ensure that no other 

facilities encroach on the area required for future fuel storage 

facility development. 

• The 440,000-gallons of jet fuel storage capacity, situated on 

approximately 1.7 acres of land, provided a 7-day reserve supply 

of jet fuel in 2012. By 4.0 MAP, storage requirements would 

range from approximately 260,000 gallons for a 3-day reserve to 

860,000 gallons for a 10-day reserve, occupying land areas 

ranging from 1.0 acre to 3.2 acres, as illustrated on Figures 44 

and Table 22. 

• The number of days’ supply of fuel stored onsite in reserve is a 

business decision to be made by the airlines serving the Airport. 

In addition, the number and configuration of the tanks to be 

provided are ultimately determined by the airlines based on 

operating considerations, such as the tank filling and fuel settling 

process, as well as the reserve supply desired. 

900,000 

800,000 

700,000 

600,000 

500,000 

400,000 

300,000 

200,000 

100,000 

Figure 44 

Fuel Storage Requirements 

2.5 MAP 4.0 MAP 

3.0 MAP 

0 

2015 2020 

Year 

2025 2030 

3-day supply 5-day supply 7-day supply 10-day supply 

Table 22 

Fuel Storage Land Area Requirements 

3-day reserve supply 

Fuel storage (gallons) 

Land area (acres) 










Requirements 

4.0 MAP 

Existing capacity - 440,000 gallons 

256,800 

1.0 

428,000 

1.6 

599,200 

2.3 

856,000 

3.2 

56 



Airline Support Facility Requirements 

KEY POINTS 

• Additional GSE storage 

will be required to 

support the expansion 

of the passenger 

terminal building. 

• It is recommended that 

a GSE maintenance 

facility be built to 

minimize maintenance 

activities occurring on 

the apron. 

• A new consolidated 

deicing facility will be 

required to handle 

future traffic levels. 

• No additional airline 

support facilities are 

required to handle 

projected traffic 

throughout planning 

period. 

1. 


Ground Support Equipment Maintenance and Storage 

1.1 acre will be required for on-stand and on-apron 

storage of GSE equipment. Additionally, an acre parcel 

should be reserved for a GSE maintenance facility. 

Deicing facility 

A new deicing facility will be required to handle future 

activity levels. A 1.6-acre composite deicing pad can 

accommodate two narrowbody aircraft simultaneously 

or one widebody aircraft. Additional taxiway 

connectors would be required to link the new pad to 

the existing airfield system. 

Aircraft Maintenance 

Requirements for facilities that are leased by the 

airlines or directly support airline operations are 

typically established based on airline business 

decisions. The need for aircraft maintenance facilities 

is not necessarily related to the number of aircraft 

operations at a given airport and it is, therefore, 

difficult to forecast demand for such facilities. 

Hangar #29 is too small and needs to be expanded or 

relocated to larger site. 

Flight Kitchen 

No flight kitchen currently operates at the Airport. 

When required, in-flight meals are either prepared 

offsite and are trucked to the Airport or loaded at the 

hub for a round trip. As an industry trend, the need for 

flight kitchens has diminished over the past decade as 

the result of airline cutbacks on complimentary 

onboard meal service. Even with the slight increase in 

the availability of buy-on-board meal service, the 

packaging and distribution of these on-board meal 

types are more efficient than that for the hot meals 

that were common in the past. Therefore, as a result 

of this trend, it is expected that future activity at the 

Airport will not be sufficient to sustain operation of a 

flight kitchen and no on-Airport flight kitchen is 

recommended throughout the planning period. 

1. 


On-stand storage is provided in 

between gates on the terminal 

apron. 

1. 


UA leases a garage a garage space space to 

perform 

to perform 

maintenance 

maintenance 

on 

equipment. 

on equipment. 

All other airlines perform the 

maintenance All other airlines on the apron. perfo 

Ground Support Equipment Storage Requirements 

2. 

Methodology and Assumptions 

On-stand equipment areas for equipment that must be readily 

accessible when an aircraft pulls onto a stand, calculated by: 

1 - Estimating the number of GSE pieces required to support 

airline operations at the future gates 

2- Converting the number of pieces into a required square 

footage 

3- Adding a 30% allowance for circulation 

On-apron equipment areas for backup GSE used for routine 

aircraft handling as well as less-frequently used maintenance 

equipment, calculated by: 

1- Assuming that GSE in mid-term hold equal 35% of staged GSE 

2- Converting the number of pieces into a required square 

footage 

3- Adding a 20% allowance for circulation 

Ground Support Equipment Maintenance Facility Requirements 

2. 

Assumptions 

• Percentage of GSE vehicles in workshop 8% 

• Workshop area per vehicle (s.f.) 500 

• Gross land area multiplier 4 

3. 

PAL2.0 Requirements 

Equipment parking areas 

(square feet): 

• On-stand 37,200 

• On-apron 12,000 

• Total 49,200 

Or 1.1 acre 

3. 

PAL2.0 Requirements 

Workshop requirement: 

10,000 square feet 

Total land area (approx.): 0.9 

acre 

57 



Airport Support Facility Requirements 

General Aviation Apron and Aircraft Storage Facilities 

KEY POINTS 

• Airport support facilities 

include: 

— Aircraft rescue and fire 

fighting 

— Airport maintenance 

— Airport administration 

— FAA facilities 

• Maintenance facilities 

need to be expanded 

and consolidated. 

• Other airport support 

facilities will be 

adequate through the 


Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting 

The ARFF facility will be adequate throughout the planning period: 

1. 


• The facility is currently classified as Index C 

• No index increase is expected based on the forecast future fleet mix 

• No additional ARFF equipment will be required throughout the planning 

period 

• The existing facility meets FAR-mandated response time requirements thanks 

to its location immediately north of the intersection of Runways 13-31 and 5- 

23. Unless significant airfield expansion is recommended, this location will be 

adequate throughout the planning period. 

Airport Maintenance Facility 

Building and airfield maintenance facility needs do not necessarily increase 

proportionally with activity, but are more a function of the overall pavement, 

grassy areas, and terminal square footage requiring maintenance as well as 

climatic conditions (for snow/ice removal). At DSM, maintenance facilities will 

need to be consolidated as well as expanded to handle the improvement 

projects that will be recommended as part of the Terminal Area Concept Plan. 

Maintenance areas located inside the terminal building are addressed in the 

terminal requirements analysis. 

Airport Administration 

Administration space is currently sized adequately and an increase in the 

number of administrative staff at the Airport is not anticipated. Therefore the 

current administration space is adequate throughout the planning period. 

FAA Facilities 

The FAA has not indicated that the ATCT is undersized or in need of 

rehabilitation at this time. 

During the alternatives evaluation phase, additional analyses will be required 

to determine if the development recommendations impact the line-of-sight 

between the ATCT and all movement areas on the airfield. 

58 



CONCEPT ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS 

• Land Use Alternatives 

• Terminal Alternatives

Land Use Alternatives 

Alternatives analysis and evaluation 

KEY POINTS 

• The initial step in the 

alternatives screening 

process was to look at 

the needs of each 

functional component 

and develop layouts 

showing how these 

“chunks” of land could 

be organized 

• Land Use Alternatives 1 

and 3 were selected as 

the top two 

This section of the technical report documents the 

alternatives analysis portion of the Terminal Area Concept 

Plan study. This plan element was accomplished in two 

rounds – first a high level screening of on-airport land uses 

and then development of terminal facility alternatives on 

the short-listed land use alternatives. 

To develop the land use alternatives, the size of the area 

needed to support long term facilities/operations for each 

of the Airports functional areas was determined. These 

areas were placed in various configurations around the 

airport based on size, relationship to airfield as well as to 

other uses, and particular geometric needs. For example, 

general aviation facilities are located in three different 

quadrants and there was a stated desire to consolidate 

that function into a single quadrant for reasons of 

efficiency. Also, consideration was given to the fact that 

certain facilities (such as the IANG) reflected sizable 

investments in infrastructure and the planning team was 

careful with suggestions on which facilities should be 

relocated. 

The process of screening the alternatives is graphically 

shown in Figure 45. The primary tool used in the screening 

process was a list of pros and cons of each alternative. 

These were presented to the Advisory Committee, who 

deliberated and determined the short list. 


Figures 46 through 49 on the following pages present 

graphically each of the four land use alternatives prepared 

for this study. The figures also include a listing of the pros 

and cons associated with each alternative. 

Shortlisted Land Use Alternatives 

Alternatives 1 and 3 were shortlisted for further analysis. 

Key reasons the Advisory Committee chose these land use 

alternatives include: 

• Alternative 1 – This land use alternative was chosen 

because of the existing investment in terminal support 

infrastructure and the desire to explore if it was feasible 

for building a new terminal building in this area. 

• Alternative 3 – This land use alternative shows 

development of a new terminal complex in the south air 

cargo area. The extensive amount of heavy-duty apron 

was viewed as an asset that could be readily adapted to 

commercial passenger aircraft parking. 

Figure 45 

Flow Chart of Land Use Alternatives Screening Process 


60 




Long list land use alternatives – Alternative 1 

Figure 46 

Land Use Alternative 1 


shortlisted 

Pros 

• 20 year demands can be accommodated with this configuration. 

• Reconfiguration of IANG leasehold areas provide operational flexibility 

and other opportunities to Airport 

• Maintains each major functional component largely within its current 

proximity, preserving infrastructure investments 

• Least amount of disruption for non-terminal functions 

• T-hangars can continue to be developed in their current area through a 

logical expansion pattern 

Cons 

• Large Signature FBO complex in existing terminal area must be relocated 

to north GA/Corporate land use area 

• Construction phasing of a terminal on the current site can add 

complexities and costs, as compared to a new building on a greenfield 

site 

• Excess air cargo facilities (including aircraft parking apron) will continue 

to be underutilized 

• Corporate GA will be fully consolidated, providing efficiencies and deconflicting 

the terminal area 

• Terminal expansion can be phased as budget allows 

61 





Figure 47 



Pros 

• 20-year demands can be accommodated with this configuration 



• Opportunities for establishing and expanding the passenger terminal 

area are significantly improved 

• Excess air cargo facilities, primarily aircraft parking apron, would be 

more fully utilized by a passenger terminal use 

Cons 

• Cost to convert air cargo area (apron/utilities) to passenger terminal use 

could be significant 

• Cost to relocate air cargo facilities to existing terminal area could be 

significant 

• Impact of air cargo use on east site, near residential, could result in 

impacts 

• T-hangars would need to be relocated to the north quadrant 

• Vehicular access to passenger terminal area improved over current 

situation 

• Airline facilities (maintenance hangar) would need to be removed to 

make room for the terminal development 

• Allows Signature FBO to remain in place and potentially expand 

• Fuel farm is close to the airlines, who are a major user 

62 





Figure 48 



shortlisted 

Pros 





area are significantly improved 




situation 

Cons 



• Cost to relocate air cargo facilities to existing terminal area could be 

significant 

• T-hangars would need to be relocated to the north quadrant 

• Signature FBO would need to be relocated to the north quadrant 




• Air cargo to be relocated to the east quadrant 

63 





Figure 49 



Pros 





area are significantly improved under this scheme 




situation 

Cons 



• Cost to relocate air cargo facilities could be significant 

• T-hangars and Signature FBO would need to be relocated to the north 

quadrant 




64 



Terminal Alternatives 

Initial list and screening of alternatives 

KEY POINTS 

• Two terminal 

alternatives were 

developed for each of 

the short-listed land use 

plans 

• Initial evaluation 

reduced the terminal 

alternatives from four to 

two 

This section describes the development and evaluation of 

the terminal complex alternatives. Alternatives were 

formulated to meet the requirements documented in the 

facility requirements section. 

Terminal area alternatives were developed and evaluated 

through an integrated and collaborative approach. 

Working in close collaboration with executive management 

at the Des Moines International Airport and the Terminal 

Area Concept Plan Advisory Committee, a set of goals and 

objectives were established for the Master Plan project. 

The goals and objectives identified were: 

• Develop a long-term solution to the obsolescence of the 

existing passenger terminal complex and its lack of 

capacity expansion potential 

• Provide a comprehensive look at each of the Airport’s 

functional components to ensure that corresponding 

components could grow and meet projected demands 

• Propose a terminal plan that is functional, affordable, 

and enhances the overall passenger experience 

An initial set of alternatives was formulated based on longterm 

development options to inform near-term strategies. 

Aircraft gate capacity was studied to identify potential for 

growth at both the south air cargo site and the existing 

terminal site. Through primary screening of the initial 

alternatives, two options were selected for further 

development. Detailed plans and cost estimates were then 

prepared for the shortlist alternatives, which were subject 

to secondary screening evaluation. These screening 

criteria were established to evaluate financial, operational, 

and environmental impacts of each alternative, which led 

to the ultimate selection of a preferred terminal 

alternative. Figure 50 illustrates a flowchart of the 

terminal alternatives screening process. 

Initial Terminal Area Alternatives 

Informed by the two short-listed land use alternatives 

addressed in the previous section, two potential sites were 

identified for passenger terminal area development – the 

current south air cargo site and the existing terminal area. 

Four initial terminal alternatives were generated to explore 

and understand the feasibilities and constraints on each 

site. Figure 51 shows two alternatives on the south air 

cargo site – Alternatives 1 and 2. Alternative 1 capitalizes 

on the existing cargo apron for the initial 14 gates required 

by 3.0 MAP, which requires some demolition of existing 

facilities to implement. On the other hand, Alternative 2 

requires demolition of four existing aircraft hangars and a 

cargo sorting facility to the west in order to build the new 

aircraft apron needed to meet gate demand. This option 

imposes more disruptions to current airport operations as 

compared to Alternative 1. Both options require construction 

of a full-length parallel taxiway southwest of Runway 13-31 as 

well as new access roadways and a 4-level garage to support 

the concept. The full-build 18 gates scenario is shown on 

both options meeting 4.0 MAP requirements. 

Figure 52shows two alternatives on the existing terminal site 

– Alternative 3 and 4. Alternative 3 indicates a new terminal 

Figure 50 

Flow Chart of Terminal Alternatives Screening Process 


and concourse offset to the northwest of the existing 

terminal, which would require complex phasing to construct 

while the Airport remains in operation. Alternative 4 is easier 

to phase with the new terminal located just north of the 

existing, providing the least amount of disruption to existing 

operations during construction. Since Alternative 3 imposes 

the most disruptions to current Airport operation, which 

could be expensive and a cause for passenger dissatisfaction, 

this option was quickly dismissed as an infeasible alternative. 

Based on the pros and cons described herein, the Terminal 

Area Concept Plan Advisory Committee selected Terminal 

Alternatives 1 and 4, representing the south cargo site and 

the existing terminal site, respectively, for further refinement. 

65 




Long-list terminal alternatives 

Figure 51 

Long-list Terminal Alternatives – South Air Cargo Site 


Figure 52 

Long-list Terminal Alternatives – Existing Terminal Site 


shortlisted 

TERMINAL 

ALTERNATIVE 1 

TERMINAL 

ALTERNATIVE 3 

TERMINAL 

ALTERNATIVE 2 

shortlisted 

TERMINAL 

ALTERNATIVE 4 

66 




Short-listed Terminal Alternative 1 

Terminal Alternative 1 

Figures 53 and 54 show the more developed Alternative 1 

with a two-level terminal processor at approximately 250 

feet deep by 600 feet wide that’s centrally located on the 

existing aircraft apron. Both passenger processing for 

departures and arrivals are located on the ground level, 

with the security screening checkpoint and a single-loaded 

concourse (approximately 80 feet wide) running along the 

northwest-southeast direction situated on the second 

level. The linear concourse is configured to accommodate 

18 gates, required by 4.0 MAP, with expansion capabilities 

on both the southeast or southwest end, as shown dashed. 

A four-level parking garage is provided directly across from 

the terminal processor with an elevated pedestrian bridge 

linking Level 2 of the garage to the second level security 

screening checkpoint for passenger convenience. The 

public garage footprint measures approximately 360 feet deep by 

840 feet wide and can hold roughly 1,080 parking spaces on each 

level with Level 1 dedicated for rental car ready/return 

operations. Future expansion is available directly to the east and 

west of the proposed garage. 

Additional required infrastructure includes new terminal access 

roadways and two parallel terminal curbsides - with an inner 

curb to serve private vehicles and an outer curb dedicated to 

commercial vehicles. The terminal loop road wraps around the 

Airport’s existing fuel farm facility to avoid expensive relocation 

costs. A new fuel access road is shown west of the existing fuel 

farm to provide vehicular access to the fuel farm and airport 

maintenance facilities that will remain in this area. A 340-space 

employee surface parking lot is provided west of the new parking 

garage and a potential hold lot is shown north of the existing 

surface Lot #4 (existing rental car stacking and storage lot). 

The existing parking garages will be converted to provide 

remote parking and a new shuttle route will be needed to 

transfer passengers between the facilities potential. Future 

expansion sites for surface parking lots are shown dashed on 

Figure 54. 

For safety reasons (avoiding crossing an active runway) a fulllength 

parallel taxiway southwest of Runway 13-31, as shown in 

Figure 53, is required if a passenger terminal building is built on 

this site. A west deicing pad able to accommodate two 

narrowbody aircraft, parked side-by-side, as well as additional 

apron to park four remain overnight (RON) positions on the far 

west end and three RON positions on the far east end are also 

needed as a part of this terminal alternative. 

Figure 53 

Terminal Alternative 1 – 3D Massing Overview 


Figure 54 

Terminal Alternative 1 – Full Build Scenario (18 Gates) 


Aerial Source: Google Earth 

67 





Terminal Phasing 

Terminal Alternative 1 should be constructed in two phases – 

Phases 1 and 2, as shown on Figure 55. Enabling projects are 

organized as Phase 0. 

Phase 0 requires relocation of Signature Flight Support from 

the existing east quadrant into the Iowa Air National Guard 

(IANG) site to the north. As of the writing of this document, 

the Airport is in discussions with IANG personnel regarding 

the ultimate makeup of the IANG facilities , although it is 

assumed a portion will be given back to the Airport since the 

IANGs mission has changed and there are facilities they no 

longer need or can support. The Airport plans to convert 

approximately 18 acres of the IANG site, located immediately 

west of the existing north general aviation quadrant, into a 

new and consolidated Fixed Based Operator / General 

Aviation facility. Once Signature Flight Support vacates the 

east quadrant, the air cargo operators will relocate to this site 

and allow for demolition and site preparation to take place at 

the south cargo site. A new fuel access road will also be 

constructed in this phase to provide dedicated access to the 

fuel farm and airport maintenance facilities while demolition 

takes place. 

Phase 1 is the first construction phase that requires building a 

full-length parallel taxiway on the southwest side of Runway 

13-31 in order to operate the new south passenger terminal. 

The entire terminal processor, a linear concourse - singleloaded 

- to accommodate 14 aircraft gates (meeting 3.0 MAP 

requirements) with 4 narrowbody RON parking positions 

west of the new terminal building will also be built under this 

phase. This concourse configuration takes full advantage of 

the existing cargo apron with a small apron addition needed 

at the northwest corner to serve as a west deicing pad able 

to park two side-by-side narrowbody aircraft. New terminal 

access roadways, curbsides, Air Operations Area (AOA) 

perimeter fences, first phase of the new 4-level parking 

garage (610 spaces per level) with rental car ready/return on 

Level 1, a customer service building with an elevated 

pedestrian bridge, and a temporary surface lot east of the 

new garage to hold 430 parking spaces are also shown to 

occur in Phase 1. A new shuttle route along the existing 

Airport Frontage Road will be needed to transfer passengers 

between the new passenger terminal to the existing parking 

garages (to be converted into remote parking spaces). A 

340-space employee parking lot east of the new parking 

garage and a potential hold lot along the new shuttle route 

will also be provided during this phase. 

Phase 2 will require demolition of Building 31, the south 

cargo building, prior to the new apron construction needed 

to provide 4 additional aircraft gates (for a total of 18 gates) 

and 3 remain overnight (RON) aircraft parking positions to 

meet passenger demand at 4.0 MAP. The 4-level parking 

garage will be expanded to the east to handle a total of 

1,080 parking spaces per level. Two potential lots are 

identified east of the new parking garage to accommodate 

future parking demands (shown dashed on Figure 55). 

Cost Estimates 

The costs to build Terminal Alternative 1 are shown in Table 23 

below. Separate cost estimates were developed for the flat 

work (civil engineering) and vertical (buildings) portions of the 

proposed development, using different estimators specializing 

in those areas. Construction costs are the hard costs associated 

with the construction of the facilities; while soft costs include 

items such as design, construction administration, and 

contingencies. As this is a conceptual plan, there are generous 

contingencies (calculated based on a percentage of the 

construction cost estimates) build into the soft costs. At this 

initial stage of plan development, the cost to build Terminal 

Alternative 1 to accommodate 14 gates is approximately $464 

million, with another $57 Million to add four gates in Phase 2. 

Table23 

Terminal Alternative 1 – Rough Order of Magnitude Cost Summary 


Source: Foth Infrastructure & Environment; and 

CONNICO, December 2013 

68 




Terminal Alternative 1 - phasing 

Figure 55 

Terminal Alternative 1 - Phasing Plans 


Phase 1 work: 

1. Construct new fulllength 

taxiway 

2. Build new terminal 

and apron for 14 

gates and 4 RON 

positions 

3. Construct deicing 

pad for 2 side-byside 

narrowbody 

aircraft 

4. Construct new 

roadways and 

curbsides 

5. Build Phase 1 of 

new 4-level garage 

structure, 

employee parking 

and hold lot 

EXISTING SOUTH AIR CARGO SITE 

PHASE 1 (14 GATES) 

Phase 0 work: 

1. Relocate 

“Signature” FBO 

to Iowa Air 

National Guard 

(IANG) site 

2. Relocate Air 

Cargo to old 

“Signature” site. 

3. Demolish existing 

buildings and 

access roads as 

shown dashed 

4. Build new fuel 

access road 

PHASE 0 

Phase 2 work: 

1. Demolish Building 

31 (South Cargo 

Building) prior to 

construction of 

Phase 2 


apron for 4 gates 

and 3 RON 

positions 

3. Construct Phase 2 

of new 4-level 

garage structure 


69 





Terminal Alternative 4 

The existing terminal complex sits on an already constrained 

site in the east quadrant, framed by the two runways on the 

west and Fleur Drive, a major traffic thoroughfare, to the east. 

Figures 56 and 57 below show a concept for the development 

of Alternative 4, which takes into account these physical 

constraints. 

Alternative 4 was developed with a main intent to explore 

viable terminal options on the east quadrant that makes full 

use of existing infrastructures to minimize construction cost. 

As shown on the full build scenario on Figure 57, a new twolevel 

terminal processor (250 feet deep by 600 feet wide) is 

strategically located parallel to Runway 5-23, rotated roughly 

45° east of the existing terminal structure. This placement 

would allow construction of the first terminal sub phase to 

have the least amount of impact to current airport operations. 

Similar to Terminal Alternative 1, both passenger processing 

for departures and arrivals are located on the ground level, 

with the security screening checkpoint and the singleloaded 

main concourse (approximately 80 wide) running 

along the southwest-northeast orientation on the second 

level. The linear concourse with an angled bend at the 

southwest end is configured to accommodate 18 gates, 

required by 4.0 MAP, with expansion capabilities on the 

southwest end to accommodate two additional aircraft 

gates, as shown dashed. 

A new four-level parking garage is provided directly across 

from the terminal processor, parallel to the new terminal 

curbsides, and attached to the northwest corner of the 

existing north parking garage. The public garage footprint is 

approximately 126,000 square feet, able to hold roughly 

450 parking spaces on each level with Level 1 dedicated to 

rental car operation. 

For passenger convenience, an elevated pedestrian bridge is 

provided, linking Level 2 of the public garage to the second level 

security screening checkpoint. A surface lot (approximately 

45,000 square feet), adjacent to the new garage, is needed to 

supplement the rental car ready/return spaces in the garage. 

New terminal access roadways and dual terminal curbsides - 

with an inner curb to serve private vehicles and an outer curb 

dedicated to commercial vehicles – are provided to address 

some of the operational and safety concerns that were 

discussed in the Existing Conditions section of this report. 

Considerations addressed include, limiting to two decision 

points at intersections, creating a more defined channelization 

from toll booths and merges on Cowles Drive, and providing 

appropriate distances between decision points. 

Figure 56 

Terminal Alternative 4 – 3D Massing Overview 


Figure 57 

Terminal Alternative 4 – Full Build Scenario (18 Gates) 



70 





A west deicing pad able to accommodate two narrowbody 

aircraft, parked side-by-side, as well as additional apron to 

park 2 RON positions on the far northeast corner and 5 RON 

positions north of Runway 31are also needed as a part of 

this terminal alternative. 


Terminal Alternative 4 will be constructed in two phases – 

Phases 1 and 2, as shown on Figure 58. 

Phase 0 requires relocation of Signature Flight Support, 

currently located north of the existing terminal building, into 

the Iowa Air National Guard (IANG) site that’s still under 

negotiations to return to the Airport. The Airport plans to 

convert this approximately 18 acres IANG site, immediately 

west of the existing north general aviation quadrant, into a 

new and consolidated Fixed Based Operator / General 

Aviation facility. Once Signature Flight Support vacates the 

east quadrant, demolition of the existing hangars and access 

roadways should occur. Construction of the first part of the 

new roadway system should then begin under this phase, 

which ties into the existing curbsides. 

Phase 1 is the first construction phase that will be built in 

two sub-phases: Phases 1A and 1B. The first part of the 

terminal processor, including the entire check-in/outbound 

baggage makeup area and a portion of the baggage 

claim/inbound baggage makeup area with an 8-gate linear 

concourse on the far northeast corner of the site will be 

built under Phase 1A. This allows construction to happen 

simultaneously while the Airport remain in operation at the 

existing terminal. Additional apron space to accommodate 2 

narrowbody remain overnight (RON) parking positions, a 

taxilane with the associated west deicing pad to park two 

side-by-side narrowbody aircraft should also be provided. A 

temporary link from the existing check-in lobby to the new 

processor is shown. Upon completion of Phase 1A, when 

the new 8-gate concourse begins operation, demolition of 

the existing 7-gate Concourse C should commence. For a 

short duration, the Airport will need to operate out of two 

separate facilities – 4 gates out of the remaining existing 

terminal and 8 gates out of the new terminal building on the 

northeast end. 

Phase 1B will include constructing the second part of the 

new terminal processor, a 6-gate concourse and the 

associated apron area when demolition of Concourse C is 

complete. Remainder of the new terminal access roadways, 

curbsides, Air Operations Area (AOA) perimeter fences will 

also be constructed in this phase. First part of the new 4- 

level parking garage at a footprint of approximately 72,500 

square feet (260 spaces per level) with rental car 

ready/return on Level 1 and public parking on Levels 2-4 will 

be required to meet 3.0 MAP demands. Directly adjacent 

to the garage is a customer service building with an elevated 

pedestrian bridge that links back to the second level security 

screening checkpoint at the new terminal building. 

Expansion of the economy parking lot to 400 spaces 

(approximately 112,000 square feet) and construction of a 

small surface lot southwest of the new garage to 

supplement RAC ready/return spaces in the garage are also 

needed. Remainder of the existing terminal and concourse 

can be demolished at the end of Phase 1B. 

Phase 2 will require construction of a new concourse extension 

to accommodate 4 additional aircraft gates for a total of 18 

gates to meet 4.0 MAP requirements. It will also require 

expanding the new 4-level garage by 190 spaces per level, at a 

footprint of approximately 53,600 square feet. Level 1 remains 

for RAC ready/return and Levels 2-4 are used for public parking. 

Economy Lot #4 will be converted entirely to RAC Quick Turn 

Around (QTA), staging, and storage. Construction of a 1,500 

space remote surface lot (approximately 420,000 square feet) 

for public parking is also needed in this phase. 


The costs to build Terminal Alternative 4 are shown in Table 24. 

As this is a conceptual plan, there are generous contingencies 

(calculated based on a percentage of the construction cost 

estimates) build into the soft costs. At this initial stage of plan 

development, the cost to build Terminal Alternative 4 to 

accommodate 14 gates is approximately $363 million, with 

another $53 million to add four gates in Phase 2. 

Table 24 

Terminal Alternative 4 – Rough Order of Magnitude Cost Summary 


Source: Foth Infrastructure & Environment; and CONNICO, December 2013 

71 




Terminal Alternative 4 - phasing 

Figure 58 

Terminal Alternative 4 - Phasing Plans 


Phase 0: 

1. Relocate 

“Signature” FBO 

to Iowa Air 

National Guard 

(IANG) site 


buildings and 

access roads as 

shown dashed 

3. Build first part of 

new roadways 

PHASE 0 

Phase 1b: 

1. Build remainder of 

new terminal 

processor, 6 gate 

concourse and 

apron 

2. Construct 

remainder of new 

roadways 


new 4-level garage 

structure with RAC 

on Level 1, parking 

on Levels 2 to 4 

4. Expand economy 

parking lot to 400 

spaces (112,000 sf) 

5. Demolish 

remainder of 

existing concourse 

and terminal at the 

end of this phase 

PHASE 1B (14 GATES) 

Phase 1a: 


new terminal 

processor, 8 gate 

concourse and 

apron for 2 RON 

positions 

2. Build temporary 

link from existing 

ticketing lobby to 

new processor 


deicing pad and 

taxilane for 2 

side-by-side 

narrowbody 

aircraft 


Concourse C at 

end of this phase. 

PHASE 1A (8 GATES) 

Phase 2: 


concourse 

expansion and 

apron for 4 

additional gates 

and 5 RON 

positions 

2. Build garage 

expansion 

3. Convert all of Lot 

#4 to RAC 

storage/QTA 

4. Construct 1,500 

remote surface 

public parking 

spaces (420,000 sf) 


72 




Evaluations matrix and selection of preferred terminal alternative 

Selection of Preferred Terminal Alternative 

Terminal Alternative 1 was selected as the preferred 

terminal alternative by the Terminal Area Concept Plan 

Advisory Committee. 

Figure 59 

Terminal Alternative Evaluations Matrix 


During Workshop #3, the two terminal alternatives were 

presented by the planning team. In addition, an evaluation 

matrix, shown in Figure 59, was also presented and 

explained. The evaluation matrix uses “stop light” chart 

graphics to describe how the respective terminal 

alternatives are judged against established criteria. The 

matrix does not factor in the fact that some criteria may be 

more important than others. However, from the 

discussions that took place among the Advisory Committee 

members, two criteria were regarded as perhaps most 

important in making this decision – long range expansion 

capability and passenger experience. Terminal Alternative 

1 clearly has the ability to add more gates (needed beyond 

the planning timeframe) than Terminal Alternative 4. With 

regard to the passenger experience, the fact that Terminal 

Alternative 1 could be built while not disturbing existing 

passenger operations, was considered important. 

Criteria Alternative 1 

(South Cargo) 

Passenger Experience 

Flexibility 

Ease of Phasing 

Phasing Options 

Alternative 4 

(Existing Terminal) 

Best 

The financial feasibility of both terminal alternatives was 

also discussed during Workshop #3. At this initial 

conceptual stage, it would be challenging for the Airport to 

implement either Terminal Alternative 1 or 4. To make it 

viable financially, significant additional monies, outside of 

the typical funding scenarios, would need to be raised. 

The Financial Feasibility section of this report addresses 

that in more detail. 

Long-Range Expansion Capability 

Operational Efficiency 

Financial Feasibility 

Environmental 

Worst 

Compatibility with Airport Projects 

Impact to Stakeholders 

73 



PREFERRED ALTERNATIVES REFINEMENTS 

• Preferred Land Use Alternative Refinements 

• Preferred Terminal Alternative Refinements 

• Project Implementation Plan

Preferred Land Use Alternative 

Land use plan refinements 

This section of the technical report presents refinements to 

the land use plan and to the preferred terminal alternative, 

Terminal Alternative 1. It documents the evolution of the 

plans from rough concepts to more refined concepts. This 

is a key aspect of the overall project as each round of 

refinement yields a better, more efficient plan. The initial 

round of refinement on Terminal Alternative 1 yielded cost 

reductions in the $60-$70 million range. This is typical of 

such a planning process and it is reasonable to assume 

that as this plan moves from the conceptual stage to an 

even more refined planning and programming stage (prior 

to actual architectural and engineering design) additional 

efficiencies will be found. 

Preferred Land Use Alternative: 

Based on the selection of Terminal Alternative 1 as the 

preferred terminal alternative, Land Use Alternative 3 

becomes the preferred land use alternative, as shown on 

Figure 60. Based on discussions among Airport senior 

leadership, the Advisory Committee, and the planning 

team, the following refinements were made to the land 

use plan: 

• Combined General Aviation (T-hangars) and Iowa Air 

National Guard (IANG) land use designations on the 

northwest corner of the Airport to allow flexibility in 

land use to accommodate future IANG occupancy 

changes. 

• Identified the west quadrant of the Corporate General 

Aviation land use as areas currently under negotiations 

with IANG to return to the Airport. 

Figure 60 

Preferred Land Use Alternative 


75 




Figure 61 

Preferred Terminal Alternative – 3D Massing Overview 



76 




Terminal alternative refinements 

KEY POINTS 

• Several refinements 

were made to the layout 

of the concourse, rental 

counter and bag claim 

plans 

• Size of parking garage in 

Phase 1 reduced, with 

close-in surface parking 

added 

• Terminal roadways 

reconfigured to optimize 

automobile flow 

Terminal Alternative 1 was selected by the Terminal Advisory 

Committee as the preferred terminal alternative. Refinements 

were then incorporated into the preferred terminal alternative 

with the primary goals to reduce project cost and improve 

operational efficiencies. Refinements include: 

Airfield and Terminal - 

• Added a second deicing pad and aircraft apron for 3 RON 

positions to the east 

• Reduced concourse footprint by shortening concourse 

length and double-loading end gates 

• Reduced terminal footprint by eliminating in-terminal RAC 

counters and rotating baggage claim devices 90 degrees to 

decrease terminal depth 

• Extended pedestrian bridge connector from garage to upper 

level security screening checkpoint for passengers with no 

bags to check 

Parking and Roadways – 

• Relocated rental car counters from terminal to a 

separate customer service building adjacent to the 

garage where rental car ready/return is located to 

provide improved customer experience 

• Reduced garage size in Phase 1 and added close-in 

surface parking to provide “product” diversity 

• Removed “hold lot” and employee parking lots from 

South Cargo site 

• Reconfigured terminal roadways for more efficient 

flow 

As shown on Figures 62 and 63, the refined preferred 

terminal alternative indicates a linear concourse parallel 

to Runway 13-31 that is able to accommodate 18 aircraft 

gates to meet 4.0 MAP requirements. A two-level 

terminal building is centrally located to the concourse 

for passenger processing. 

On the ground level, passenger Check-in can be found to the 

east and Baggage Claim to the west of the terminal building. 

Security screening checkpoint is centrally located on the upper 

level with a direct link to the 4-level parking garage immediately 

southwest of the terminal building. 

The new parking garage is able to hold a total of 2,320 spaces 

(580 per level) with the entire first level dedicated to rental car 

operation. Footprint of the garage is approximately 173,000 

square feet with sloping floor ramps. A 5,200 square feet rental 

car customer service building is located just north of the new 

parking garage. Two surface lots are shown to the east and west 

of the parking garage, each to accommodate approximately 600 

uncovered parking spaces. The existing parking garage and 

surface lots will provide remote parking spaces via a shuttle 

route along the South Airport Frontage Road to transfer 

passengers to and from the new passenger terminal. 

Figure 62 

Preferred Terminal Alternative – 3D Massing Overview 


Figure 63 

Preferred Terminal Alternative – Full Build Scenario (18 Gates) 


77 




Phase 1 to provide capacity until 2042 

New terminal access roadways entering from SW 28 Street, 

directly off of Army Post Road, are provided with two 

terminal curbs - an inner curb to serve private vehicles and 

an outer curb for commercial vehicles. The terminal loop 

road avoids the Airport’s existing fuel farm facility in order 

to avoid expensive relocation cost. A separate utility road is 

shown west of the existing fuel farm to provide vehicular 

access to the airport fuel farm and maintenance support 

facilities located southwest of the new terminal complex. 


The preferred terminal alternative will require two main 

construction phases to implement – Phases 1 and 2, as 

shown on Figure 64. Phase 0 is a demolition and 

preparation phase. 

Phase 1 is the first construction phase that will be built in 

two sub-phases: Phases 1A and 1B. Intent is for the Airport 

to start operating out of the new passenger terminal at the 

completion of Phase 1A, while Phase 1B is under 

construction. Phase 1A requires construction of a new fulllength 

parallel taxiway southwest of Runway 13-31, the 

entire terminal processor and a portion of the concourse to 

accommodate 14 aircraft gates with 4 narrowbody remain 

overnight (RON) parking positions west of the new terminal 

building. This configuration takes full advantage of the 

existing cargo apron with new apron space needed to 

handle the west deicing pad to park two side-by-side 

narrowbody aircraft. New terminal access roadways, 

curbsides, Air Operations Area (AOA) perimeter fences, first 

phase of the new 4-level parking garage with rental car 

ready/return on Level 1, the customer service building with 

an elevated pedestrian bridge, and a small surface lot west 

of the new garage to hold 270 parking spaces are also 

required in Phase 1A. The shuttle route used to transfer 

passengers between the new passenger terminal to the 

existing parking garages for remote parking should also be 

in-place under this sub-phase. Phase 1B would require 

construction of a new apron for the east deicing pad to 

accommodate 2 additional side-by-side narrowbody aircraft, 

and new aircraft apron east of the new concourse to handle 

4 RON parking positions. 


Most of the facilities will need to be expanded in Phase 2 to 

meet 4.0 MAP passenger demand. A new hammerhead 

concourse, to the east on the second level, is required to 

handle 4 additional contact gates for a total of 18 aircraft 

gates needed by 4.0 MAP. Due to this demand, new apron is 

provided south of the east deicing pad to accommodate 3 

displaced narrowbody RON parking positions under this 

phase. The 4-level parking garage will be expanded to the 

east to accommodate an additional 600 parking spaces total, 

equivalent to 150 spaces on each level. A new 600 space 

surface lot is required to the east of the parking garage and 

an additional 330 spaces are required on the west surface lot. 

Additional terminal curb lengths, both inner and outer, are 

also required to meet passenger demand. 


Table 25 provides a summary of the order of magnitude cost 

estimates for the preferred development alternative. Through 

a series of refinements to the initial plan, the total cost of the 

program was reduced from the initial $520 million to $468 

million. The costs are broken down by civil projects, buildings, 

and enabling projects. Enabling projects are necessary to 

allow for the major terminal complex elements to be 

constructed. Phase 1 costs are the most important for this 

planning effort as they are the focus of the financial capacity 

analysis. Phase 2 will not need to be implemented until about 

2042. 

Table 25 

Preferred Terminal Alternative - Refined Order Of Magnitude Cost Summary 


78 




Terminal phasing plans 

Figure 64 

Preferred Terminal Alternative – Phasing Plans 


Footnote: 

1/ T-hangar demolition and relocation 

not included in the terminal project 

financial analysis or cost estimates 

Phase 0 work: 

1. Relocate “Signature” FBO 

to Iowa Air National 

Guard (IANG) site 

2. Relocate FedEx to IANG 

site 


buildings and access 

roads as shown dashed 

4. Build new fuel access 

road 

5. Relocate UPS to 

“Signature” site once 

new terminal is open for 

operation 

PHASE 0 

Phase 1A work: 

1. Construct new full-length 

taxiway 

2. Build new terminal and 

apron for 14 gates and 4 

remain overnight parking 

(RON) positions 

3. Construct west deicing 

pad to accommodate 2 

side-by-side narrowbody 

aircraft 

4. Construct new roadways, 

curbsides and AOA fence 

5. Build new 4-level parking 

garage with rental car 

ready/return on Level 1 

6. Build new RAC Customer 

Service Building and 

elevated pedestrian 

bridge 

7. Construct new surface 

parking lot 

PHASE 1A (14 GATES) 

Phase 1B work: 

1. Construct east 

deicing pad to 

accommodate 2 

side-by-side 

narrowbody aircraft 

2. Construct additional 

aircraft apron for 4 

remain overnight 

parking (RON) 

positions to the east 

PHASE 1B (14 GATES) 

Phase 2: 

1. Construct new apron 

for 3 remain 

overnight parking 

(RON) positions to 

the east 


hammerhead 

concourse to the 

east 

3. Build new garage 

expansion 


surface parking lots 

5. Extend terminal 

curbside 


79 



Project Implementation Plan 

Full project phasing 

Figure 65 

Preferred Terminal Alternative – Project Implementation Phasing 



80 



Project Implementation Plan 

Enabling projects will be key to Phase 1 development phasing 

Through extensive collaboration with Airport management 

and the Airport’s consulting engineers, a list of enabling 

projects was identified prior to implementation of the 

preferred terminal project. 

Project Implementation Phasing 

Figure 65 provides a list of these enabling projects and the 

various work required at each phase to implement this 

terminal program. The Airport’s successful reclamation of 

approximately 18 acres of land (including apron areas) 

currently leased to the Iowa Air National Guard (IANG) 

located adjacent to the existing north general aviation area 

is critical to the overall program schedule. Possession of 

this IANG parcel will enable both FedEx and Signature 

Flight Support to move into this area and make way for 

demolition and preparation of the south cargo site for the 

new passenger terminal and the existing Signature site to 

become the new air cargo facility. The old 18 acres IANG 

parcel will eventually become the new consolidated Fixed 

Based Operator (FBO) / General Aviation (GA) facility 

situated on the north quadrant of the Airport. 

Aside from the suggested terminal phasing mentioned in 

the previous section, Phase 1 will also include converting 

two existing surface parking lots (Lots #3 and #4) into 

employee parking and rental car stacking and storage. At 

the completion of Phase 1, and once the new south 

passenger terminal is in full operation, the existing 

terminal and concourse building will be demolished to 

provide expanded apron space to handle cargo operation. 

Existing parking garages and surface lots will remain and be 

used as remote parking facilities. 

Project Implementation Schedule 

The project implementation schedule, as shown on Figure 

66, indicates the south passenger terminal’s Phase 1 (14 

gates) target Date of Beneficial Occupancy (DBO) in 2024. 

This informs that airline and terminal tenant coordination 

and programming should start no later than the beginning 

of 2016. Some enabling tenant relocations, such as 

FedEx’s temporary move and Signature’s permanent move 

to the old IANG site, which will become the new FBO/GA 

facility, should also occur around this time. 

Terminal site preparation should begin around 2017 when 

affected tenants have been relocated to their respective 

homes. The new full-length taxiway should start at the 

beginning of 2020, and will take several phases to build as 

indicated on the schedule. Assuming the new terminal will 

take a little more than 2 years to design, this element should 

start at the beginning of 2019. Accounting for approximately 

9 months for general contractor’s bidding, negotiations, 

Figure 66 

Preferred Terminal Alternative – Project Implementation Schedule 


staging and coordination, and an estimated 2 years to 

construct, terminal construction should begin no later than 

early 2022 in order to meet the target DBO at the end of 2023. 

Construction of the apron, deicing pads and parking garage, 

rental car service building are independent projects; therefore, 

could occur concurrent to the terminal construction 

timeframe. Demolition of the existing terminal should begin in 

2024. 

81 



PRELIMINARY FINANCIAL CAPACITY ANALYSIS 

• Key Drivers 

• Industry Benchmarks 

• Preliminary Plan of Finance 

• Sensitivity Analyses and Financial Conclusions

Preliminary Financial Capacity Analysis 

Overview and Key Assumptions 

KEY POINTS 

• A comprehensive 

financial model was 

used to assess the 

reasonableness of the 

proposed terminal 

development program 

• Key financial drivers 

were developed jointly 

with the Airport 

This section of the technical report documents the 

preliminary financial capacity analyses conducted as 

part of the Terminal Area Concept Plan. Financial 

results were projected using a comprehensive 

financial planning model, and are considered high 

level preliminary results based on the conceptual 

nature of the Plan. The initial capacity analysis was 

conducted on two alternatives: Terminal Alternative 1 

and Terminal Alternative 4. Following the Advisory 

Committee’s selection of Terminal Alternative 1 as the 

preferred terminal alternative, and the refinement of 

the physical plan, a revised financial capacity analysis 

was conducted. Stress tests were also performed to 

test sensitivity to key variables. 

Key drivers 

Many factors (drivers) and assumptions went into the 

preparation of the preliminary financial capacity 

analysis. These key drivers are listed and discussed 

below. 

• Forecast Traffic Activity Levels. – Many of the 

sources of airport revenue are derived from activity 

projections. The most important of these is the 

number of passengers expected to use the airport. 

Passenger activity drives a number of key airport 

revenues, including terminal concessions, public 

parking, rental car, passenger facility charges 

(PFCs), as well as AIP grant funding levels. 

• Timing of Development – The Date of Beneficial 

Occupancy (or “DBO”) is projected to occur in 

2024. This is based on the implementation plan 

discussed in the previous section. Project costs, 

which were estimated in 2014 dollars, are 

escalated at 3% per year to the mid-point of 

construction to account for inflation, which is the 

reason project costs in this section are higher than 

those previously stated. 

• Project Costs 

– Projections of capital expenditures beyond the Authority’s 

current 2013 – 2017 Capital Improvement Program (“CIP”) 

were developed recognizing the time required to build the 

new terminal and need to maintain terminal operations and 

level of service. Improvements to the existing terminal are 

estimated at $5 million per year from 2016 through 2021; 

$4 million in 2018, $3 million in 2019, $2 million in 2020, and 

$1 million in 2021 

– Soft costs/contingency allowances applied to civil and 

vertical project costs 

– Escalation rate of 3.0% per year to midpoint of construction 

– 3.0 MAP program requirements at DBO 

– Post DBO, $2 million per year in capital expenditures net of 

grants, escalated at 3% per year from 2014 

• Grants 

– Federal Airport Improvement Program (AIP) 

entitlement/discretionary grants would fund 90% of the 

eligible costs of the new terminal taxiway, apron, and deicing 

facilities 

– AIP “entitlement” grants ($4 million per year) targeted to 

new terminal roadways beginning in 2019 

– TSA grant of $7 million for new terminal security 

infrastructure improvements 

– State vertical infrastructure grant for new Signature hangar 

of $2.5 million 

– Various levels of State and other non-AIP grants were 

assumed to meet feasibility targets 

• Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) Level 

– Current PFC level would remain at $4.50 (base case) 

– Sensitivity analyses included PFC levels of $6.00 and $8.50 

beginning in 2016, if authorized by Congress as part of the 

FAA reauthorization on October 1, 2015 

• Rental Car Customer Facility Charge (CFCs) 

– Amounts collected pre-DBO in excess of reimbursement for 

the Quick Turnaround (QTA) facility to be used for pay-asyou-go 

funding of program costs 

– Post DBO CFC revenues used to pay debt service on 

outstanding General Airport Revenue Bonds (GARBs) for 

debt related to rental car facilities (e.g., counters, readyreturn 

car parking 

• Plan of Finance 

– 30-year tax-exempt revenue bonds at 6.5% interest rate 

issued annually to minimize financing costs 

– Interest capitalized through DBO 

– Debt service reserve cash funded through bonds 

– PFC revenues leveraged on a direct off-set basis (which 

requires amendment to bond indenture) 

– Signature contributes $2.5 million to its new hangar 

• Airline Business Deal 

– Existing ratemaking approach. 

– Existing leasable space protocols, increase in rented 

exclusive use space 

– Amortization of existing terminal improvements expire at 

DBO and unamortized balance is not recovered 

(assuming 10 year amortization for pre-DBO 

improvements) 

• Operation & Maintenance (O&M) Expenses 

– Inflation of 3.5% per year over 2014 budgeted O&M 

expenses 

– O&M expense increase to reflect increase in gross 

terminal square footage 

– Increase in parking and rental car O&M expense to reflect 

(1) longer shuttle to economy parking (old garage) and 

additional patrons to shuttle to old garage and (2) O&M 

for new rental car customer service building 

– Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting services becomes 

Authority responsibility in 2015, resulting in increased 

O&M expenses of $1.2 million per year 

• Non-Airline Revenues 

– Terminal concession revenues increase with projected 

passenger growth and 2% per year inflation plus 15% 

boost in net terminal concession revenue per passenger 

at DBO 

– Rental car revenues increase with projected passenger 

growth and 2% per year inflation 

– Daily public parking rates increase $1 per day every three 

years beginning in 2018 

– Mesaba maintenance base rentals and one-third of UPS 

rentals for south site construction discontinued. 

– Other revenues increase by 1% per year 

83 




Industry Benchmarks to Gauge Reasonableness 

KEY POINTS 

• Industry benchmarks 

are used as a primary 

tool to assess the 

reasonableness of the 

proposed terminal 

development program 

• Recently completed and 

future capital programs 

at other airports are 

useful to understand 

and to provide context 

for evaluating industry 

airline cost per 

enplaned passenger 

data 

• Current levels of cost 

per enplaned passenger 

are not particularly 

relevant in terms of 

evaluating future 

investments 

Industry Benchmarks 

This element is focused on 

benchmark data related to the 

financing of capital programs at 

comparable large U.S. airports, with 

particular focus on comparable 

terminal development programs. 

Industry benchmarks are used heavily 

in this analysis because, on a 

preliminary basis, they represent 

strong tools for judging the 

reasonableness of the terminal 

development plan. Airline cost per 

enplaned passenger at airports 

(CPE)—the total amount paid by 

airlines in airport rents and fees 

divided by the total number of 

passengers enplaned at an airport—is 

an accepted industry metric used to 

evaluate the “reasonableness” or 

“affordability” of current airport 

operations and proposed future 

airport development. 

Following are key metrics that were calculated 

for this analysis, as well as an indication of 

recommended minimum/maximum levels. 

• Airline cost per enplaned passenger (CPE) 

– Comparisons with nearby airports with 

major terminal programs, as illustrated 

on Figure 67 

– Comparisons with peer airports (small 

and medium hub airports served by 

Southwest Airlines) shown on Figure 68 

• Airline CPE as a percent of fare revenue 

• Airline revenues as a percent of total airport 

revenues 

• Debt service coverage –airport revenues less 

operating expenses divided by 

annual debt service payments 

• Outstanding debt per enplaned passenger 

(DPE), as referenced on Figure 69 

• Liquidity or days cash on hand – unrestricted 

cash divided by annual operating expenses 

• Size of capital program 

Figure 67 

Airline CPE at Airports With Major Terminal Programs 

$17.00 

$16.00 

$15.00 

$14.00 

$13.00 

$12.00 

$11.00 

$10.00 

$9.00 

$8.00 

$7.00 

$6.00 

$5.00 

$4.00 

$3.00 

$2.00 

$1.00 

$0.00 

Figure 68 

2012 Airline CPE at Peer Airports With Similar Service 

75th Percentile 

($9.15) 


($7.67 Median) 


($6.33) 

Sources: Rating agency reports, FAA Form 5100-127, and Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports ("CAFRs").DSM 2025 CPE (in 2013$) with new terminal $200M Grant. 

$275 

$250 

$225 

$254 

Figure 69 

Debt per Enplaned Passenger - U.S. Small Hub Airports 

$200 

$175 

$150 

$198 

$183 

$175 

$154 

$149 

$125 

$100 

$75 

$50 

$43 

$25 

$24 

$16 

$- 

Sources: rating agency reports in 2012 and 2013. 

Estimated DSM* estimated after new after terminal new terminal (2025) (2025) with with $200 $200 million million non-AIP non-AIP grant. grant. 

84 




Preliminary Plan of Finance and Establishing Financial Targets 

KEY POINTS 

• The preliminary plan of 

finance, using key 

industry metrics as a 

guide, shows that the 

Airport must secure 

$200 million in non-AIP 

grants for the terminal 

development program to 

be affordable. 

Preliminary Plan of Finance 

Due to inflation of construction costs and the project schedule for 

the various components of the terminal development plan, the 

actual price tag for Phase 1 is $538 M (escalated from $420 M in 

2014 dollars). Following are recommendations for funding the 

proposed terminal development. The conceptual funding plan as 

illustrated on Figure 70 below shows the various sources of funds 

for this preliminary plan of finance. 

• Grants 

– Secure maximum AIP participation in the new terminal 

program for apron, taxiway, roadways 

– Secure state or other non-Federal grants to achieve financial 

affordability 

• PFCs 

– Amend bond indenture to maximize PFC leveraging via a 

direct off-set structure 

• Airline Business Deal 

– Engage airlines in the new terminal planning discussions 

early 

– Attempt to negotiate a new airline agreement with 

ratemaking that contemplates the new terminal 

Figure 70 

Conceptual Funding Plan 

Credit/Structuring Debt and Establishing Financial Targets 

Regarding the Authority’s credit rating, the debt should be 

structured to maintain “A” credit rating. Financial targets were 

established as follows: 

– Airline CPE of < $13.50 (in 2014$) 

– CPE as a percent of fare revenues < 6% 

– Liquidity/days cash on hand > 365 Days 

– Debt per enplaned passenger of < $165 

– Debt service coverage of no less than 1.65x 

– Airline revenue as a percent of total airport revenue < 45% 

Preliminary Financial Projections: 

Comparison of Projected Financial Metrics to Targets and Medians 

Table 26 below, shows the preliminary results of the financial capacity 

analysis, based on how the key financial metrics compare to target 

levels. The primary variable shown in the table is the amount of non- 

AIP grants ($50M, $165M or $200M) the Airport will need to secure. 

The preliminary conclusion is that the Airport will need to secure a 

minimum of $200 million in non-AIP grants to meet the key metrics to 

be considered reasonable. 

Table 26 

Financial Metric Comparison 

2012 Preferred Terminal Alternative - 2025 

Moody's Financial Amount of Non-AIP Grant 

Financial Metric DSM Median* Targets $50 M $165 M $200 M 

Cost per enplaned passenger $8.90 $6.73 $22.26 $17.94 $16.63 

CPE discounted to 2013 $ $8.90 $6.73 $13.50 $17.55 $14.15 $13.11 

CPE as percent of fare revenues 4.6% n.a, 6.0% 8.1% 6.5% 6.0% 

Debt per enplaned passenger $43 $65 $165 $250 $173 $149 

Debt service coverage** 2.09 1.67 1.65 1.11 1.45 1.66 

Airline revenues as percent of total revenues 35.6% 27% 45.0% 50.0% 44.6% 42.7% 

Notes: 

* Small hub airports from Moody's Investor Service, Median Report: US Airport Medians for FY 2012 , November 2013. 

** 2012 debt service coverage ratio excludes one-time amounts received for the UPS settlement. 

** Cannot be lower than 1.25 under bond rate covenant. 

85 




Sensitivity Analyses and Financial Conclusion 

KEY POINTS 

• The sensitivity analyses 

shows how much the 

non-AIP grant would 

need to increase to 

afford the new terminal 

under more conservative 

assumptions for key 

variables 

• Initial results show that a 

significant amount of 

grant funding will be 

needed to make the 

project affordable 

• Securing airline input 

and alignment is 

recommended for a 

successful program 

Stress Tests 

Various stress tests were conducted to determine the 

sensitivity of the plan of finance to certain variables. 

Scenarios analyzed include higher construction costs, slower 

traffic growth, higher bond interest rates, a higher PFC 

amount, and lower AIP grant amounts. 

Table 27 below shows how much the non-AIP grant would 

need to increase (decrease) over the minimum $200 million 

level to stay within the range of the financial targets under 

changes in assumptions to the key variables. The amounts in 

the table are not cumulative. 

Table 27 

Plan of Finance Sensitivity Analysis 

Financial conclusions 

• A significant amount of grant funding will be needed to 

make the new terminal affordable. 

• Deferring the implementation will not necessarily enhance 

affordability due to construction escalation. 

• Securing airline input and alignment is important for a 

successful program. 

* See previous page for financial targets. 

86

DSM Terminal-Area-Concept-Plan-Technical-Report - FINAL

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?