iaro report 21.15 airport rail links in the planning stage report 21.15... · heathrow airport...
TRANSCRIPT
1
IARO report 21.15
Airport Rail Links in the Planning Stage
The EuroCAREX cargo rail express network includes plans for links to several airports.
2
IARO Report 21.15: Airport Rail Links in the Planning Stage
Published by:
International Air Rail Organisation
Suite 3, Charter House,
26 Claremont Road,
Surbiton KT6 4QZ
UK
Telephone +44 (0)20 8390 0000
Fax +44 (0)870 762 0434
Website www.iaro.com
Email [email protected]
ISBN tba
© International Air Rail Organisation 2015
£250 to non-members
IARO's mission is to spread world class best practice and good practical ideas among airport
rail links world-wide.
3
Contents
Chapter Page
1 Introduction 4
2 Planned Air-Rail Links 5
3 Western Rail Access to Heathrow 8
4 Glasgow Tram-Train Link 12
5 US Case Studies 16
6 Conclusions and Learning Points 24
IARO's Air/Rail conferences and workshops 26
4
1. Introduction
This report looks at airport rail links in the planning stage, and is largely based on an IARO
workshop held at Heathrow Airport, London, UK, in November 2014. Using examples of
airport rail links in which IARO members have been involved, it seeks to answer the following
questions:
• Can we forecast air-rail link patronage?
• Why do some plans succeed, and others fail?
• Should we plan in-house or use consultants?
• How do we get stakeholders involved?
• Who pays and how do we negotiate between stakeholders?
• What opportunities are there for IARO members?
The examples discussed at the workshop were the Western Rail Access to Heathrow
(WRAtH) project, the Glasgow Airport TramTrain Link, plus a number of projects in the USA.
The report begins with an overview of the numbers and types of air-rail link at various stages
of planning, design or construction. It then describes the case studies and concludes with
some key learning points.
The contributions from all participants at the IARO workshop is acknowledged, in particular
from: Andrew Sharp, IARO Policy Advisor; Simon Earles, Head of Surface Access at Heathrow
Airport; Ross Nimmo, Planning Manager at Glasgow Airport; Malcolm Parsons of Network
Rail; and Matthew Coogan of the New England Transportation Institute.
5
2. Planned Air-Rail Links
There are around 300 air-rail links of various types in operation around the world, and
around 600 in various stages of planning, design or construction. The 600 can be divided by
region and type as follows.
Type/
Region1
High
speed
Airport
Express
Regional Suburban
/metro
Light Rail Cargo
Africa
4 0 5 7 7 1
Australia/
New Zealand
3 0 4 5 7 2
Europe
28 3 60 48 58 14
Far East2
9 4 20 33 9 0
India/
Pakistan
0 1 4 15 3 1
Middle East3
7 0 7 13 7 5
North
America
24 4 40 29 58 24
Russia4
1 1 1 13 5 3
South
America
4 3 0 13 8 0
Total
planned
80
(13%)
16
(3%)
141
(23%)
176
(28%)
162
(26%)
50
(8%)
Total in
operation
19
(6%)
21
(7%)
92
(29%)
128
(40%)
37
(12%)
20
(6%)
Some trends can be noted from the totals.
• A significant growth in high speed rail links is planned in virtually every region.
• Relatively few airport expresses are planned. This type of link has been built at a
number of large airports and has been successful in raising standards and attracting
premium air passengers, but there are a number of countries where the concept has
not been developed despite there being many large airports with rail links - for example
in the USA, Germany, Switzerland, and the Netherlands.
1 The regions have been selected for convenience and do not imply any political affiliation.
2 Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Mongolia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, South
Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, Vietnam
3 Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates
4 Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Russia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan
6
• Large numbers of regional and suburban/metro links are planned, similar in proportion
to the existing links of these types. The definition of these types may well overlap, so
care should be taken when looking at the numbers.
• The largest planned growth is in suburban/metro and light rail links. This huge growth is
planned for all regions, but new light rail links are planned particularly in North
America.
• A growth in the number of cargo links is planned, particularly in North America.
Some points can also be noted for each of the regions.
African region
• The number of air passengers in the region is low, representing only 3.5% of world
revenue passenger km.
• Four high speed links are planned, significant as there are no current high speed lines in
the region, three of which are related to Egypt's plans for a high speed line.
• No airport expresses are planned.
• The number of regional, suburban/metro and light rail links is in line with the worldwide
trend. Light rail is of interest as there are only limited light rail systems in operation in
the region. Three light rail projects are in North Africa and three in Nigeria.
Australia/New Zealand
• The new high speed lines planned for the west coast of Australia (Brisbane-Canberra-
Sydney-Melbourne) are controversial, with debate including whether they should serve
airports.
• The planning of Sydney's second airport has been a long-running saga, but it is now to
be at Badgery's Creek, 50 km from the city centre, and is planned to be served by new
spurs from two suburban lines.
Europe
• Many extensions to Europe's high speed rail networks are planned.
• Two of the three airport expresses planned are additional links at larger airports (Paris
CDG and Berlin).
• Very large numbers of regional, suburban/metro and light rail projects are planned
across all countries, particularly in Western Europe.
• Cargo links are already developed in this region and there are several more planned.
Some are used for building materials or aviation fuel, others are being trialled for air
cargo, for example at Leipzig-Halle and Frankfurt but there ambitious plans for the
EuroCAREX network.
Far East
• Growth in high speed links in this region is dominated by developments in China.
• Currently this is the region with the highest proportion of airport expresses, and four
more are planned
• There are not many existing light rail links in this region, and only a few planned.
• No cargo links are planned.
7
India/Pakistan
• A new airport express was planned for Bangalore Kempegowda Airport, which opened
in 2008 and is 40 km from the city centre. Initially a PPP, it has now changed and is likely
to be a public sector metro link.
• The largest number of planned links in this region are suburban/metro types, as many
of the cities have existing systems which can be extended.
Middle East
• Very significant growth is planned, from the existing two links to 39.
• High speed rail is being developed extensively, for example the GCC (Gulf Co-operation
Council) Railway project which covers seven countries, with a number of the lines
potentially serving airports.
• There are no plans for airport expresses, but the Dubai metro is an example of a very
high quality service.
• A significant number of cargo links are planned, associated with a number of new
freight railways.
North America
• Very large numbers of new links are planned if all types, including new airport expresses
at Montreal, Chicago and Orlando.
• A large number of high speed links are planned, albeit many of these are long term
aspirations.
• A very large number of regional. suburban/metro and, in particular, light rail links are
planned. Many of these have good prospects for implementation as they are extensions
of existing networks.
• Cargo links are planned in association with the cargo aerotropolis concept, for example
at Hunstville Alabama, with a co-located airport, rail freight terminal and processing
facilities. Other plans are being developed in Fort Worth, Texas, Columbus, Ohio and
Louisville, Kentucky and a number of other airports in the US.
Russian region
• There are relatively few new links planned.
• The possible new airport express is at St Petersburg, but the plans are very uncertain.
• The largest number of planned links are suburban/metro.
South America
• Three airport links are proposed for the Sao Paulo high speed line.
• Airport expresses are planned in Buenos Aires and Sao Paulo.
8
3. Western Rail Access to Heathrow
Heathrow Airport contends that it is already the best connected airport in the UK, with 4
Heathrow Express, 2 Heathrow Connect and 12 Piccadilly Line trains per hour providing
5,000 seats and serving 7 stations at the Airport, complementing its road access.
From 2019, Crossrail will connect Heathrow with London's main business centres. Crossrail's
4 trains per hour will replace Heathrow Connect with longer and more frequent trains. The
Piccadilly Line is to be upgraded with new trains and signalling to a higher frequency and
with more capacity.
High Speed 2 (HS2), phase 1 of which is planned for completion in 2026, will include an
interchange with Crossrail and Heathrow Express at Old Oak Common in West London,
transforming connections to the Midlands, the North and Scotland.
At the time of publication of this report, the UK Airports Commission is considering three
options for additional runway capacity. Two of these options are at Heathrow and the third
is at Gatwick. Current and future rail access is a critical element of the assessment of the
options. The Airports Commission will publish their final report later in 2015 and the
Government will then decide on future action. Heathrow Airport's proposals to the Airports
Commission include a rail strategy based on the existing services plus planned upgrades and
new links, including Crossrail, the Piccadilly Line, HS2, Western Rail Access to Heathrow
(WRAtH) and Southern Rail Access. In turn the rail strategy is part of an overall surface
access strategy which aims to deliver a 58.2% public transport mode share, amounting to
48.8 million passengers in 2040. 10.7% (9.0m) would use the Piccadilly Line and 30.0%
(25.3m) would use the rail links. There would also be a significant increase in staff use of
public transport which, together with other measures, would mean that daily road traffic in
2040 would be no greater than 2013.
Southern Rail Access is also being planned, albeit the plans are at an earlier stage than
WRAtH. Following the Airports Commission's Interim Report of December 2013, the
Government commissioned Network Rail to study the market and engineering options and
report in June 2015. There is a long history of previous plans for a southern link, beginning
with the studies in the 1960s of a first rail link when powers were obtained to build a link
from the south, but were not used while, instead, the Piccadilly Line was extended to the
Airport. An southern route was also an option for a main line link considered in the 1980s,
but was rejected in favour of the route which became the Heathrow Express. A southern link
was also considered during the public inquiry into Terminal 5, but not taken forward,
although safeguarding was included in the Heathrow Express infrastructure. A southern link
on a different route was then taken forward as the Airtrack project, but the combination of
the withdrawal of government funds and the unsolved problem of increasing delays at level
crossings led to the abandonment of that project. The southern rail link therefore has a long
history of failed plans and, in summary, the lessons to be learned include:
• The early plans were promoted by local authorities and were not supported by the
airport or the rail industry.
• Plans for the early versions of the southern rail link were designed for a four terminal
airport and were therefore inappropriate for a five terminal layout.
9
• The Airtrack project was led by the airport but neither the rail industry nor the local
authorities were fully supportive.
• The overall lesson is therefore that all stakeholders must be engaged and supportive.
Following the demise of the Airtrack project, the local authorities to the west of the airport,
together with business representatives in the area, came together to consider the need for
improved rail access. At the same time Network Rail were considering options for the Great
Western Main Line as part of their Route Utilisation Strategies and the Government were
considering how to better utilise existing airport capacity as part of the development of an
Airports Policy Framework. This led to a government statement in July 2012 that provisional
funding of up to £500 million (subject to further business case work and agreement with the
aviation industry) would be included in the 2014-2019 rail expenditure plans.
Western Rail Access will connect Heathrow to the West and Wales, as shown below.
Having been given the provisional funding, Network Rail then began the necessary studies to
develop a business case and options. The objectives of the project are:
• Direct services to Slough and Reading
• Good connectivity to the Thames Valley and other regions via interchange opportunities
at Reading
• Improved public transport access for airport staff
• Longer term opportunities for through long distance services
10
As well as these objectives, the project will reduce congestion at Paddington station, make
greater use of the recent investment at Reading, provide improved customer experience and
reduced journey time, reduce road congestion and improve air quality.
Four route options were considered, and the preferred route provides the greatest line
speed, the shortest route, least journey time, shortest programme and lowest cost. It will
run mostly in tunnel from Terminal 5 to Langley, where it joins the Great Western Main Line.
The programme is for outline design to be completed in 2015, following which detail design
will be undertaken. However, between 2015 and 2017, it is necessary to go through the
Development Consent Order process before construction can begin. The Development
Consent Order is the UK process required for major projects and sets out a timescale by
which certain activities must take place, as follows:
• Pre-application - consultation with local communities
• Acceptance - the Planning Inspectorate has 28 days to decide if the application is OK
• Pre-examination - interested parties register and a timetable is set
• Examination - an inquiry must be completed within 6 months
• Decision - a recommendation must be made within 3 months and the Government
must decide within a further 3 months
• Post- decision - an opportunity for legal challenge
For the WRAtH project, consultation has been taking place with stakeholders and other
interested parties and the feedback is being used to shape the final application. Consultation
takes place with local authorities, technical and environmental bodies, the local community
and partners in the rail industry. There are informal meetings, the formal consultation
requires notices to be sent and posted and there will be further engagement during the
inquiry.
Following from the lessons noted above from the previous Southern Rail Access projects, the
following points can be noted from the WRAtH project:
11
• The project was initiated by the local authorities and businesses, so they are able to
claim a degree of ownership, although they must also look after the interests of the
people adversely affected (eg. by property acquisition or potential environmental
impacts).
• The project was given an early commitment by government to funding and a place in
the overall transport strategy
• The project was aligned with the airport's surface access strategy to meet current
demands for access to the airport and growing demand for rail travel across the UK.
There remains, of course, a key negotiation to come between the airport and the
Government on the contribution from the aviation industry to the funding. The UK
Government has a policy of seeking funding from an airport for a rail link 'to the extent that
it benefits'. Airlines, which have the backing of international agreements, are very reluctant
to fund infrastructure beyond the airport boundary, which they see as the responsibility of
the state. Heathrow Airport has already invested a significant amount in the totality of the
rail infrastructure (amounting to £1 billion), of which £50 million is for a station box beneath
Terminal 5 which may be used for the WRAtH project. However, there are precedents for
the calculation of the benefit, the most recent being for a contribution to the Crossrail
project.
This example is of a UK airport rail link project and the lessons may not be applicable around
the world. Nevertheless, it is suggested that some issues are universal and can be
summarised as follows:
• The interests of all the parties need to be aligned (airport, rail operator, local
community, local government, central government)
• Central government support for funding is essential
• Planning must include regular and meaningful consultation
These learning points will be taken forward to the conclusions of this report.
12
4. Glasgow Airport Rail Link
Introduction
Glasgow Airport serves populations of 2.9 million people within 1 hour and 4.4 million
people within 2 hours travel time. The airport opened in 1966 and served 7.6 million
passengers in 2013, on over 30 airlines serving 110 destinations with 82,000 aircraft
movements. There were 15,000 tonnes of cargo and mail. 4,500 staff are employed at the
airport and the economic benefit is £196 million per year in terms of Gross Value Added.
Glasgow is the largest airport in Scotland in terms of GVA, exports and jobs.
50% of passengers are international, 50% domestic. 70% are travelling for leisure purposes,
30% on business. 30% are inbound (visitors) and 70% are outbound (residents). Glasgow is a
global brand, with recent events including the Commonwealth Games (2014), The Ryder Cup
at Gleneagles (2014) and the MTV Europe Music Awards (2014). There has been significant
investment in conference, sporting and music venues and the City Deal will include £1.1
billion in infrastructure investment. The airport's 2011 Master Plan describes the long term
strategy.
Currently, the airport has direct access to the M8 motorway, although this is subject to
unreliable journey times, and the main public transport to the city centre, 8 miles (13km), is
a shuttle bus. There is a main line rail station just over a mile away (2km) but only a local bus
connection to the station. In 2013, 13.9% of air passengers used public transport.
Previous Rail Link Plans
Various studies going back to 1990 have considered the possibility of a rail link to Glasgow
Airport. Following a major study commissioned by the Scottish Government in 2003, which
considered rail links at both Glasgow and Edinburgh Airports, the Glasgow Airport Rail Link
(GARL) project was taken forward and received Scottish Parliamentary Approval in 2007.
GARL was proposed as a heavy rail spur from the existing main line. A number of routes
were studied and the proposed scheme included a new spur passing through an industrial
area, across playing fields and into the airport. This route was controversial, as the impact on
the playing fields, extensively used by the community, was a matter of some concern. Also,
the location of the station at the airport was on the far side of a multi storey car park,
requiring rail passengers to walk further than those arriving by road.
13
In addition to the spur, it was proposed to add a new track along an existing rail route, and a
new platform at Glasgow Central Station. A promotional video was produced which
demonstrates some of the advantages and features of the project:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=fKVkopLI2hs
The project was initially led by Strathclyde Passenger Transport, a branch of the regional
government which ran transport services in Glasgow and the surrounding areas. However,
with re-organisation in 2006, a new national agency, Transport Scotland, was set up which
took over the project in 2008. Transport Scotland is now responsible for Scotrail, the
franchise which operates the regional train services.
After the 2007 Scottish Parliamentary elections, the Scottish National Party (SNP) led a
minority government, replacing the previous Labour administration. Although some
progress was made with the design of GARL, it was subjected to a review in 2009 because
the Scottish Government was concerned about public spending. The economic downturn
which began in 2007 had resulted in passenger numbers declining at the airport, from just
under 9 million in 2006 to 7.4 million in 2013. The cost of the project was £170 million. At
around the same time, the Edinburgh Tram project, which included a link to that airport, was
suffering delays and cost overruns. The airport spur was cancelled, although the additional
track and platform at Glasgow Central Station was retained, and has been completed.
Some of the lessons from this previous proposal are as follows:
• The project did not have buy in from all political parties such that, following a change of
government, it was vulnerable to review
• The impact of the Edinburgh Tram cost overrun was not appreciated
• There were outstanding concerns from the community about the impact on the playing
fields which reduced the level of local support
• The airport was not fully engaged in the planning and design and this may have
contributed to a sub-optimal station location.
14
• It is possible that the project evolved from an earlier solution and therefore was not
able to demonstrate value for money compared with alternatives.
Current Tram Train Proposals
Following the cancellation of GARL, a Strategic Transport Network Study was carried out in
2011, which set out objectives. Glasgow Airport, Glasgow City Council and Renfrewshire
Council then jointly commissioned a Strategic Transport Appraisal Study, which reported in
20145. These strategic studies were evidence-based and objective led, and have considered
a wide range of alternatives and packages, including short term, low cost options, improved
bus services, managed motorways, personal rapid transit (PRT), tram-train and heavy rail
options.
The Strategic Transport Appraisal Study does not recommend any particular option, but it
forecasts public transport shares for 2037 scenarios between 11 and 16% (from a baseline of
10%), with tram-train and heavy rail at the upper end of the forecasts. Capital costs of the
options would be between £3 and £11 million for the short term and improved bus
packages, around £72 million for a PRT option, £92 million for tram-train and £207 million
for heavy rail. Benefit to cost ratios and performance against objectives were established.
The overall conclusions from the study are that some of the short term quick win proposals
are worth pursuing, but that in the longer term a rail link provides the best public transport
mode share, which would be even higher if more inbound visitors use the airport. The tram-
train option would provide a similar mode share as heavy rail, at a significantly lower capital
cost. The tram-train would provide a train every 15 minutes and a journey time of 16
minutes (the same as was planned for the previous GARL project) using five vehicles and
would attract 1.4 million passengers. The benefit to cost ratio would be between 2.26 and
4.68, well above the threshold for this type of expenditure.
Light rail (trams) and heavy rail are well understood technologies world wide, but tram-train
systems have only had limited experience, and none are yet operational in the UK. A tram-
train is a tram vehicle which is capable of operating on both street tramways and heavy rail
networks. They are differentiated from other tramway systems through being equipped with
technology to interface with heavy rail systems, relating to signalling, power supply, control
and communications.
5 http://www.glasgowairport.com/media/37884/ga-exec-summary_final.pdf
15
Within the UK, the 'City Deal' agreement has allocated significant funding to the Glasgow
and Clyde Valley infrastructure fund, including £144 million for the Glasgow Airport Tram
Train Links. Governance and project groups are being established and the airport is updating
its transport strategy.
The next steps will be to establish a programme, look at route and station options, consider
vehicle design and track signalling. One key point about tram technology is that its vertical
and horizontal alignment can be much tighter than heavy rail, such that it can avoid sensitive
areas and potentially the airport station can be located much closer to the terminal than the
previous proposal. Where the tram-train uses the existing heavy rail infrastructure, it will be
necessary to ensure that there is sufficient capacity remaining on the additional line and
platform created by the previous project.
It is also necessary to prepare a full business case, a consent strategy, a
procurement/construction strategy and an operating model.
It is clear that many of the lessons from the previous GARL project have been applied to the
current tram-train proposal, but in summary these can be described as:
• Beginning with clear objectives rather than a solution
• Being prepared to consider a wide range of options
• Ensuring that all stakeholders are fully supportive
There is some way to go with the new project, and there are other lessons which will need
to be applied, including:
• Ensuring that the local community is fully involved in considering the route
• Ensuring that all political parties are supportive
• Ensuring that the business case recognises the value to all parties of the proposal
• Creating a realistic budget and programme that will take account of the risks of the
introduction of new (to the UK) technology.
16
5. US Case Studies
Introduction
Although the United States is the world's largest air transport market, the number of air-rail
links is relatively few compared with other countries. IARO's report on worldwide air-rail
links (No. 17.13) describes 17 airports with existing rail links and two more then under
construction. IARO's database shows 157 airports with either existing or planned links, and
this larger number includes a number of projects which have not progressed to
implementation. Nevertheless, there are a number of major air-rail link schemes which are
being progressed and some of these can be used as case studies to look at the way US air-
rail link planning is done. This chapter looks at the following airports:
• Chicago O'Hare
• Miami
• New York JFK and Newark
• Orlando
• San Diego
• San Francisco
Chicago O'Hare
As shown on the diagram below, Chicago O'Hare is well served by the Chicago Transit
Authority's (CTA) Blue Line which terminates at the centre of the terminals, from which the
landside Airport Transit System links to the more distant terminals. There is also a Metra
North Central commuter rail station which is connected to the Transit System by a shuttle
bus.
17
A modernisation plan for the airport has been implemented over a number of years, which
essentially replaces all the cross-runway configurations with parallel runways. Most of the
airport is shown on the Google Maps image below. Replacing the northwest-southeast
runways with east-west runways enables the construction of facilities to the west of the
existing terminal complex, to be known as the Western Campus. Plans for the Western
Campus, and associated rail links, have been made and withdrawn and the long term
situation is not yet clear. However, the airport is safeguarding for road and rail links for this
area, including both high speed rail and a Blue Line extension6.
In the short and medium term, the potential exists for better connections from the existing
terminals to the Metra rail station. Two options are being considered. The first is a short
extension to the Airport Transit System to the existing Metra Station. While straightforward,
this would connect only with the infrequent services from Chicago to the north. The second
option is to create a new high quality shuttle between the airport and Union Station, from
where long distance trains radiate our in four directions, including potentially high speed
services. Such a shuttle would, of course, also provide an enhanced service connecting the
airport with downtown.
Chicago O'Hare Airport would thus appear to have options for the short, medium and longer
term, each of which could provide benefit. While there might be some concern that short
term measures might negate the need for longer term improvements, the airport is so large
6 See
http://www.flychicago.com/OHare/EN/AboutUs/ModernizationProgram/programdetails.aspx
CTA Blue Line
Metra
Station
Potential
Western
Campus area
18
that, even if eventually all of these links are developed, the potential for their use remains
good. The key lesson is perhaps that it is worth safeguarding for the longer term (or
avoiding actions which preclude later solutions) even if there are short term measures which
can provide improved services.
Miami
The Miami Intermodal Center is a US$2 billion project which brings together intercity rail,
commuter rail, rapid transit, rental car and other facilities at a location some 1.2 miles (1.9
km) from the centre of the airport. It is connected by a people mover (MIA Mover) to a
central location between the terminals
This development illustrates one of the key dilemmas about rail access at large airports -
how to get to all parts of the airport from a single central station. The MIA Mover is not a
particularly long transit ride, but the airport end is located such that passengers still have to
walk several hundred feet (metres) to the check in area or from the arrivals area and then, in
the airport airside areas, the distances to the gates are very large. This could have been
overcome if the airport people mover system had a number of stops around the terminals,
or avoided if the station was located centrally in the airport.
New York JFK and Newark
In the 1980s, the operator of JFK Airport, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey
(PANYNJ), planned to rationalise the nine terminals and create a new central facility which
would also be the transportation centre. However, the challenge of getting baggage to
arriving passengers was never fully resolved and the plan reverted to a reduced number of
separate terminals. This required a transit system to connect the terminals, which became
the JFK Airtrain.
19
At around the same time, the city and the PANYNJ were considering how to improve access
to the airport, and having looked at options including a 'one seat ride', decided to utilise and
extend the Airtrain concept to link to two rail stations, as well as remote car parking and
rental car areas. One rail station is at Jamaica, served by the Long Island Rail Road and the
Subway lines J and Z, and the other station is Howard Beach, on the A line Subway. The
combination of the relatively long journey time and the need for interchange means that rail
only attracts 8% of air passengers.
Newark Airtrain is a similar concept, although Newark Liberty Airport has only three
terminals and the distance to the rail station is shorter than at JFK. The main service from
the station is by New Jersey Transit but there are also long distance Amtrak trains.
The PANYNJ also operates the PATH (Port Authority Trans Hudson) line which is similar to
the New York Subway (which does not cross into New Jersey). Currently PATH runs from
Newark Penn Station (about 2 miles (3 km) from the airport) to Manhattan. PANYNJ is
studying options for extending PATH to the airport, for which the two main options are to
extend it to the existing Airport Station, or to extend it to the terminals, the latter of which
would give a one seat ride to Manhattan, but would be much more expensive to construct.
In addition to the local and regional services provided by the existing facilities, there have
been a number of studies of long distance, potentially high speed, rail to the New York
airports. The potential for long distance rail to replace short haul flights from the airports is
limited, for three reasons. First, the two airports have a relatively high proportion of long
haul flights (compared with other airports in the region) which would not be replaced.
Second, these long haul flights require short haul flights to enable connections, as
connections using rail as less attractive. Third, the existing long distance rail service in the
North East Corridor has been operating for some years and, although not truly high speed,
has already developed a significant penetration of the market. Nevertheless, a study by the
20
Regional Plan Association for the PANYNJ7 suggested that high speed rail could play a part in
easing congestion at the airports. This study considered a wide range of options for the
region's airports including reconfiguring them. One particular reconfiguration option for
Newark, as shown below, was to construct a third parallel runway in the location of what is
currently part of the terminal. In turn, this would require the rebuilding of much of the
terminal area closer to the existing rail station. The RPA report recommended that that the
proposed PATH extension should be compatible with the proposed three-parallel-runway
design.
New York's airports and public transport systems are all within the public sector, as is
common in the US, but there are differences in emphasis between the organisations and it is
not always possible to fully co-ordinate plans. The value of an organisation like the Regional
Plan Association, as a neutral but expert observer, is very helpful. However, perhaps the key
lesson is that, even if complete co-ordination is not possible at any particular time, it is
always worth seeking to safeguard for future options, or avoid precluding them.
7 Zupan, J, R. Barone and M. Lee, Regional Plan Association. 2011. “Upgrading to World
Class: The Future of the New York Region’s Airports,” New York.
21
Orlando
Orlando Airport is not currently served by rail, but there are plans for major new airport and
rail facilities, which are being co-ordinated by the respective project teams. However, not all
the new facilities are likely to be available at the same time, so there are short and medium
term plans, aligned with the long term concept.
The long term plan include a major new terminal complex to the south of the existing
terminals. This is unlikely to be required for some time as the existing terminals are being
improved and capacity increased there.
However, an intermodal terminal (see below) is to be built in this southern area which will
eventually serve the new terminal complex.
In the meantime, it will serve as a regional transportation hub with an Airport Automated
People Mover, the Sunrail regional service and the All Aboard Florida long distance link to
Miami and Fort Lauderdale. It will also include additional car parking.
In this case, the decision has been made to create a completely new transportation centre,
rather than try to fit it into the existing terminal area or to link an existing station to the
airport.
Initially, this is not the best solution for airport access, so it is being envisaged as a regional
transportation centre.
However, in the long term, if and when the south terminal complex is developed, it will turn
out to be a clear long sighted decision to locate the transport centre in what will be the
heart of the airport terminal complex.
22
San Diego
San Diego Airport's central location is advantageous in terms of accessibility but is inevitably
constrained by surrounding development (see below). The current terminal area is on the
south side where expansion is constrained by an environmentally sensitive waterside area.
Major freeways, local light rail (called the Trolley) and regional rail routes pass along the
north side of the airport, although the area available for development is not sufficient for all
the airport terminal facilities. The California High Speed Rail (CHSR) project, the first phase of
which is now under construction, could also be routed along this north side corridor, if it is
extended to Southern California.
A number of studies by the airport, city and regional agencies have been considering the
unique opportunity and are formulating a plan which requires careful phasing over a long
time period to ensure that the airport remains operational. After a first phase of extending
the existing terminal facilities, the second to fourth phases will enable significant growth
together with a radical change to the access arrangements, including by rail.
Phase 2 will see the building of a new Intermodal Transit Center (ITC) on the north side
connected to the highways, regional rail and Trolley lines and would include car parking and
a consolidated rental car center. The ITC would initially be connected to the existing terminal
areas on the south side by a landside bus transit. Phase 3 would include new landside
terminal facilities (ticketing, check in and baggage reclaim) in the ITC and the replacement of
the bus transit by an automated people mover to the first stage of new airside concourses
on the south side. Phase 4 would be the final stage when all landside facilities and access
would be located on the north side in the ITC, with the south side fully built out with airside
concourses. The later phases are not yet confirmed and alternative layouts, including
retaining landside road access to the south side, are also being considered.
This dramatic concept to rebuild the terminals shows how a medium sized airport can
enable long term growth and significant access improvements even in a highly constrained
site. It requires significant co-ordination by a number of agencies but seems to provide wins
for all the stakeholders and is therefore making progress.
Existing passenger terminals
Freeway, transit and rail corridor
23
San Francisco
At the other end of the CHSR route is San Francisco and there is a dilemma here as to how to
serve the airport. It is currently served by a spur from the BART (see below). Trains from the
city centre terminate at the airport station which is next to a parking garage and is some
distances from the domestic terminals (although the SFO Airtrain automated people mover
links the station with the terminals). Another BART line terminates at Millbrae, south of the
airport, although in the evenings and at weekends the services are combined. As well as
being a terminus on the BART system, Millbrae is also an interchange for Caltrains services
to San Jose. The CHSR route will also follow this alignment and CHSR could also stop at
Millbrae.
The dilemma arises because a direct BART service from Millbrae to the airport does not
currently operate on weekdays during the day and, in any event the airport BART station still
requires use of the SFO Airtrain to access some terminals. Using the Caltrains or future CHSR
trains therefore requires a long connection with two or three changes to and from the
terminals which will not be attractive to air passengers. This situation has resulted from the
earlier decision to build the BART airport spur, rather than as a through line, and the
decision to route the CHSR along an existing right of way. While the proposed arrangement
makes the best of the situation, it is unlikely to result in any significant use of Caltrains or
CHSR by air passengers.
Existing BART spur
Millbrae Station
Existing BART
airport station
24
6. Conclusions and learning Points
Introduction
The IARO workshop which brought together experts to discuss the case studies described in
this report was one of a number of similar workshops and studies into various aspects of air
rail link planning, design and operation. A list of previous and planned conferences and
workshops is at the end of this report. A key output from these studies and event is the
learning points that arise, as much from the 'failures' (by which is meant projects that do not
get implemented or which do not attract as many passengers as forecast) as from the
successes. IARO is unique in being able to identify these learning points.
There are potentially around 600 air-rail links in various stages of planning or design, or
which may be still in the early concept stage. of these, most are regional, suburban/metro or
light rail, plus a significant number of high speed rail links. This is a huge potential market
compared with the 300 links currently in operation, but not all will be implemented.
Summary of case studies
The particular case studies discussed in this report were as follows:
• Western Rail Access to Heathrow (WRAtH), London, UK: This is a current project
planned for implementation in the next 5-10 years, which followed a previous
unsuccessful plan for a south western link to Heathrow (Airtrack).
• Airport Tram-Train Link, Glasgow, UK: This is a plan in its early stages which followed
the cancellation of a previous project (the Glasgow Airport Rail Link, GARL) which was
cancelled for financial reasons.
• O'Hare Airport Modernisation Plan, Chicago, USA: This is a plan to redevelop most of
the runways at one of the world's largest airports and which seeks to safeguard for
longer term rail access improvements, while also making short term improvements.
• Miami Intermodal Center, Miami, USA: This is an attempt to provide a focal point for
many access requirements which has resulted in some long transfer distances.
• JFK and Newark Airtrain, New York and New Jersey, USA. This is an operating system of
people movers which serves a number of functions and where there are opportunities
to make a significant improvement in rail access as Newark Airport is reconfigured.
• Orlando Intermodal Terminal, Orlando, USA. As the airport expands, a long term
strategy to provide an intermodal terminal for the whole airport is being implemented
in stages, with the first stage acting as a regional transportation center.
• San Diego, USA: A long term plan to reconfigure the airport includes opportunities to
dramatically improve rail access.
• San Francisco Airport high speed rail access options, San Francisco, USA. The California
High Speed Rail network is now being built and is likely to serve a station near the
airport, where there are limited options for serving the airport.
25
Learning points
There are a number of common themes in the above studies, which are also found in other
experiences by IARO members. In particular:
• There are always several agencies or stakeholders involved in an air-rail link project, and
it is necessary to align their objectives to achieve the best solution. This may mean
some compromises have to be made, so the solution may not always be the best for the
airport or the air passenger, but at least it will be implemented.
• Option analysis should be wide ranging and evidence-led.
• Stakeholder involvement means regular and meaningful consultation.
• Financial considerations are a key factor. If the project does not have a good business
case, it may not go ahead, as the investors (either public or private) may wish use their
funds elsewhere. Commitment by the funders (public or private) is essential before
significant progress can be made.
• Larger airports can plan for more than one type of rail link.
• Locations for rail access corridors and stations are difficult to identify in fully developed
areas, but it is sometimes possible to reconfigure the airport to the mutual benefit of
both the airport layout and improved rail access.
• People mover systems can provide excellent links between terminals and to and from
rail stations, but requiring passengers to make changes and walk long distances deters
passenger use.
• Creating a long term plan with safeguarding for future rail access will be worthwhile
even if the benefits seem a long way off.
• There may be interim solutions for improving rail access which will provide benefits
without compromising a longer term improvement and will enable the rail access
market to build a sound base.
26
IARO’s Air/Rail conferences and workshops
Copies of the published reports of the earlier workshops and other research reports are
available price £250 (free to IARO members). See www.iaro.com/publications.htm. Papers
presented at more recent workshops are available on CD-ROM at the same price.
Workshops are very focused, dealing in detail with a restricted number of key issues, and
complement the regular Air Rail Conferences. Workshops and conferences (with site visits)
have been held as follows.
1993 - Zürich
1994 - Paris
1996 - London (Heathrow Express, Stansted Express)
1997 - Oslo (Airport Express Train)
1998 - Hong Kong (Airport Express Line)
- Frankfurt (with the AIRail station and the Cargo Sprinter)
1999 - Workshop 1: Berlin (the Schönefeld link)
- Copenhagen (the Øresund Link)
2000 - Workshop 2: Milan (Malpensa Express)
- Paris (plans for CDG Express)
- Washington (Baltimore-Washington International Airport)
2001 - Zürich airport: Air rail links - improving the partnership
- Workshop 3: Madrid (and its airport rail links)
- London Heathrow (Heathrow Express)
2002 - Workshop 4: Amsterdam, for railways serving airports but not as their main job -
“Help - there’s an airport on my railway”.
- New York (the Airtrain projects)
2003 - Workshop 5: Barcelona. Today’s design and funding issues for airport railways
- Frankfurt (The AIRail project)
- Workshop 6: Newark. Practical air rail intermodality
2004 - Workshop 7: Oslo. Leisure passengers – a market for airport railways.
2004 - Brussels (Thalys:Air France code-share)
2005 - Chicago (Chicago’s future in an era of successful air-rail intermodality)
- Shanghai study tour
- Workshop 8: Edinburgh. Security on airport railways.
2006 - Workshop 9: Baltimore (BWI). Security on airport railways.
- Regional meeting 1: Stockholm
- Workshop 10: Marketing and ticketing innovations (e-air-rail) Düsseldorf
- Regional meeting 2: Kuala Lumpur
2007 - Los Angeles: Air/Rail East/West
- Baltimore: The seamless journey
- Vienna (Wien): Communications
2008 - October - London Gatwick. One-day conference on ticketing
2009 - June - Hamburg, with site visit to the new S-Bahn
- October - Vancouver: light rail to airports
2010 - October - Lyon, with a site visit to the LesLYS express tram to the city
- November/December - Far East study tour (with AREMA)
2011 - October - Venice
2012 - September - Berlin
2013 - July - Birmingham (high speed rail)
27
- September - Gatwick (Branding)
2014 - April - Dallas, Texas, (Airport stations)
- June - Brussels (EU matters)
- September - Stockholm (Which type of air rail link?)
- November - London (Planning air rail links)
Planned workshops and conferences
2015 - April - Manchester (Airport City rail links)
- June - Milan (Extending rail links at expanding airports)
- tba - North America
Details are available from IARO, or on www.iaro.com: you can sign up for details of future
events in different parts of the world on www.iaro.com/events.htm
Future plans are, of course, subject to change.