1. Airport Rental Car Facility Planning Trends
Prepared for of Portland

2. Agenda I. Rental car industry trends Financial impact
Historical rental car companies
Trends
II. Typical rental car operations and examples
III. Case study: Portland International Airport
Existing facilities
Quick Turn-Around (QTA) site selection and design
Consolidated Rental Car Center (ConRAC) site selection and planning

3. Rental Car Industry Trends

4. Rental Cars: Importance of Revenues
Large Hubs
Airlines are typically the largest operating revenue source (61%)
Parking (18%) and rental car revenues (9%) are typically the top two sources of non-airline revenues
Rental car revenues typically require the least over-sight by Airport staff
Food and beverage (1.7%) and merchandise (1.8%) contribute much lower shares of total airport operating revenues, but require the most amount of over-sight by Airport staff
Source: averages for large hub airports available to LeighFisher, April 2014

5. Rental Car History

6. Rental Car Companies and Brand Affiliation
Hertz Companies
Enterprise Holdings
Various Independents
Avis Budget Group
Innovative Recent Entries

7. Company-owned CarSharing Peer-to-peer CarSharing
CarSharing Model
Key policy questions
Allow new entrants at time of re-bid, or before?
Membership fee
What is a brand vs. a service? (Affects decisions about car-sharing and its location)
Access to any vehicle using key fob, access car, or phone application
Auditing of privilege fees and CFCs from car-sharing customers
Short term (hourly) rentals

8. Rental Car Planning and Design Trends
‘Customer Facility Charge’ (CFC) – 1994 acceptance provides the financial means for replacement of RAC facilities
Ownership of rental companies - 3 companies own 90% of national market
Impact of CFC on airport and rental car revenues
Sufficient data is available now to identify that a CFC can reduce gross revenues to the companies and concession fees to the airport
Market-specific elasticity (i.e., regions with multiple airports and pricing competition may be more sensitive to overall cost of rental)
Establish CFC level based on business arrangements that balance investments and O&M costs among all stakeholders (i.e., customers, companies, and airport)
Trend toward remote consolidated facilities is slowing
O&M costs of shuttle service
Level-of-service considerations
Competition from other modes (select markets)
Companies may pay more for less space to have close-in facilities
Consolidated operations seem best in multi-terminal environments

9. Operations and Examples

10. Typical Airport Rental Car Operation

11. Examples of RAC Facilities at Large Hubs (PHX and SFO)
Maintenance & Storage
Fuel
Stacking
Stacking
Staging
Fuel
Fuel
Staging
Wash
Ready/Return Garage
Staging
Ready/Return Garage
Phoenix Sky Harbor
9.8 million O&D enplanements
Ready/Return: 4,622 stalls (three levels)
QTA & Storage: 75 acres
Total Site Footprint: 120 acres
San Francisco
17.2 million O&D enplanements
Ready/Return: 2,861 stalls (four levels)
QTA: 11 acres
Total Site Footprint: 22 acres (36 acres off-site)

12. Examples of ConRACs at Large Hubs (DFW and IAH)
Dallas / Fort Worth
13.9 million O&D enplane.
Ready/Return: 4,146 stalls (two levels)
QTA & Storage Site: 90 ac.
Total Site Footprint: 125 ac.
Staging
Stacking
Staging
Ready/Return Garage
Maintenance &Storage
Staging
Wash
Houston Intercontinental
9.8 million O&D enplane.
Ready/Return: 3,800 stalls (two levels)
QTA & Storage Site: 91 ac.
Total Site Footprint: 190 ac.
Maint. &
Storage
Stacking
Fuel
Ready/Return Garage

13. Examples of RAC Facilities at Large Hubs (DEN)
Existing
Proposed

14. Case Study:
Portland International Airport

15. Existing Facilities - circa 2013
Long-term Storage and Maintenance in remote service sites
Ready/Return Garage
Levels 1 and 2
Stacking
Fuel
Wash
Staging
Mid-Term Storage
High-level summary of the master plan requirements:
Airfield capacity is good until PAL33, where increasing delays will lead to unacceptable levels of service during the peak hour
Terminal capacity is needed sooner, especially for international service
Roadway capacity, specifically terminal curbsides, will be operating at an unacceptable level of service, on a routine basis in the peak hour.
Mid-Term Storage

16. QTA – Alternative Sites

17. QTA – Project Definition

18. QTA – Schematic Design
16 Wash Bays
54 Fueling Positions
170 Queuing Positions

19. QTA – Rendering

20. ConRAC – Site Development Alternatives
Alternative 1 - Close-in RAC Garage
Alternative 2 - Close-in P1 Expansion
Alternative 3 - Mid-loop RAC Garage
Alternative 4 - East-loop RAC Garage

21. ConRAC - Phase 1 Construct ConRAC Garage (DBO - 2021)
High-level summary of the master plan requirements:
Airfield capacity is good until PAL33, where increasing delays will lead to unacceptable levels of service during the peak hour
Terminal capacity is needed sooner, especially for international service
Roadway capacity, specifically terminal curbsides, will be operating at an unacceptable level of service, on a routine basis in the peak hour.
Actions
(listed in order of construction)
Enabling projects: (a) demolish existing QTA ramp, (b) construct connector between P2 Level 2 and the helix ramps, (c) relocate public parking exit ramps, (d) relocate parking plaza office building,
Construct new ConRAC garage with a footprint of approximately 251,000 ft2 that includes:
1-level 30,000 ft2 customer service lobby
3-level ready/return garage with 724,000 ft2
Levels 4-7 (2,400 stalls) used for public parking

22. ConRAC – Phase 1 Enabling Projects
Demolish QTA Ramp
Construct P2 Level 2 Connector
High-level summary of the master plan requirements:
Airfield capacity is good until PAL33, where increasing delays will lead to unacceptable levels of service during the peak hour
Terminal capacity is needed sooner, especially for international service
Roadway capacity, specifically terminal curbsides, will be operating at an unacceptable level of service, on a routine basis in the peak hour.
Relocate Exit Ramps
Relocate Exit Plaza Offices

23. ConRAC – Rendering

24. ConRAC – Phase 1 Project Costs
$ Estimate 1
Rental Car Lobby Access (via P2 tunnel)
Demolish existing stair core and add new core from P2 Basement to Level 1
Add 2 elevators
Add 2 escalators
Add 2 moving sidewalks in existing tunnel
$ ,477,000 2
P2 – Connector bridge between Level 2 and existing Helix
$ ,000 3
Ready-Return Garage and Customer Service Building
7-level Garage – Levels 1-2 for RAC ready/return, Level 3 mixed-use, and Levels 4-7 for Public Parking (1,460,000 ft2)
1 entry helix ramp for Levels 1-3
1 exit helix ramp for Levels 1-7
2 scissor ramps (speed ramps) – connecting Levels 1-3 to the QTA
1-level Customer Service Building (30,000 ft2)
$ ,140,000 4
Demolish and Re-Align Roads
Demolish and re-align Roads/Ramps from Existing Garage Helix Ramp
Demolish road/ramp between P1 Level 1 and the QTA
Demolish Left Turn Lane at QTA; Add Landscaping
$ ,843,000 5
Demolish and Relocate Existing Parking Plaza Office Building
$ ,753,000
Phase 1 – Total Estimated Project Cost
$ ,456,000
Source: Connico Incorporated, April 2015

25. ConRAC - Phase 2 Construct P1 Expansion (DBO - 2032)
High-level summary of the master plan requirements:
Airfield capacity is good until PAL33, where increasing delays will lead to unacceptable levels of service during the peak hour
Terminal capacity is needed sooner, especially for international service
Roadway capacity, specifically terminal curbsides, will be operating at an unacceptable level of service, on a routine basis in the peak hour.
Actions
(listed in order of construction)
Expand P1 by three bays to the south, adding 1,810 spaces. Designate former QTA site as surface parking, 190 spaces.
Expand employee parking lot by 110 spaces (590 total spaces provided)
Add taxi/limo curbside within P1 (Level 1 or Level 3), reducing parking capacity by 100 stalls

26. ConRAC - Phase 2 Project Costs
$ Estimate 1
Existing Parking Garage
Expand existing parking garage (7 levels – add 1,810 Spaces / 482,190 ft2)
$ ,093,000 2
Employee Parking Lot Expansion
Expand Existing Employee Parking Lot (28,000 ft2)
$ ,043,000
Phase 2 – Total Estimated Project Cost
$ ,136,000
Notes: The demolition of the existing QTA facility and the infill of surface parking on the site is not included in the cost estimate above. The approximate cost of the QTA demolition project is approximately $1.7 million.
The conversion of a portion of P1 from parking to a taxi/limo curbside is not included in the cost estimate
Source: Connico Incorporated, April 2015