HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 3AAirport Master Plan
City Council –January 25, 2024
Item 3A - Page 1
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Agenda
30 Minute Presentation
Process and Schedule
Refined Terminal Alternatives 1A and 3
Airport Commission and Staff Recommendation
Next Steps
Item 3A - Page 2
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Item 3A - Page 3
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Item 3A - Page 4
What and Why?
Item 3A - Page 5
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
What is an Airport Master Plan?
Decision-Making Tool to Guide Orderly Development of Future Airport Facilities
Management and Operating Policies
Layout of Airport Facilities
Identifies Space for Future Airport Development
FAA Tool for Planning and Programming Purposes
Airport Layout Plan (ALP)
Airport Capital Improvement Plan (ACIP)
Provides Input Related to CEQA and NEPA
Provides Input to City/County Land Use Planning and Regional Transportation Planning
Item 3A - Page 6
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
What a Master Plan is NOT
Not a Business Plan
Not a Marketing Plan
Not a Noise Study
A Master Plan is a Physical Development Plan for PSP that
Reserves Space for Potentially Needed Facilities
Item 3A - Page 7
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Why?
Passenger growth
Passenger level of service
Industry changes and planning considerations
FAA Recommendation
Fleet mix and emerging technologies
Parking/rental cars/TNCs
International flights
FBO/general aviation
Item 3A - Page 8
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Passenger Growth
Item 3A - Page 9
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Enplanement Forecasts
Item 3A - Page 10
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Summary of PSP Gate Requirements
Existing PAL 1 PAL 2 PAL 3 PAL 4
Million Annual Passengers 3.0 MAP 4.0 MAP 4.8 MAP 5.6 MAP 6.5 MAP
# of Gates 18 21-23 22-24 25-28 30-32
Year according to high-growth forecasts 2026-2027 2032-2033 2037-2038 2042-2043
Year according to baseline forecasts 2030-2032 2035-2036 2041-2042 Beyond 20
Yrs.
Source: Mead & Hunt, 2023
Item 3A - Page 11
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN Source: Mead & Hunt, 2023
Summary of PSP Terminal Requirements
Terminal Requirements
Existing 2023 PAL 1 PAL 2 PAL 3 PAL 4
Annual Enplanements 1,500,618 1,500,618 1,980,000 2,330,000 2,725,000 3,157,000
Total Peak Hour Enplanements 1,589 1,589 1,727 1,748 2,008 2,163
Total Peak Hour Deplanements 1,638 1,638 1,773 1,908 2,224 2,567
Check-In Hall 15,200 18,800 21,300 21,800 24,000 25,800
Outbound Baggage Screening and Baggage Make-up 35,200 51,800 51,800 51,800 52,400 62,100
Number of Security Screening Checkpoint Lanes 6 7 7 7 8 10
Security Screening Checkpoint 13,600 18,900 18,900 18,900 21,600 27,000
Gates 18 20 23 24 27 32
Departure Lounge 29,300 71,200 82,400 85,900 96,600 114,800
Federal Inspection Services Facility -18,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000
Baggage Claim and Inbound Baggage Handling 14,100 28,800 38,200 38,200 38,400 47,800
Pre-Secure Concessions 7,700 4,700 6,100 7,100 8,200 9,500
Post-Secure Concessions 16,400 18,000 23,600 27,700 32,200 37,500
Circulation 85,300 103,100 125,300 132,400 145,600 168,200
Building Systems & Utilities 38,900 49,700 58,100 61,300 67,100 78,300
TOTAL AREA 300,200 437,900 512,000 539,500 591,300 689,600
Item 3A - Page 12
Terminal Planning
Item 3A - Page 13
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Item 3A - Page 14
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Item 3A - Page 15
Initial Terminal Alternative Concepts and Open House
Item 3A - Page 16
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Initial Alternatives
Item 3A - Page 17
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Open House Attendance
More than 160 people attended the September 19 Public Open House.
The most common means of learning about the event were
Palm Springs Post
Word of Mouth
Desert Sun
Facebook
City Email
LinkedIn
Item 3A - Page 18
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Online Participation
From September 19 –September 27:
373 views of the Public Involvement webpage
Display boards downloaded 402 times
912 total site users; 875 had never visited the site before
Item 3A - Page 19
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Alternatives Comment Period
From September 19 –September 27:
More than 525 people engaged with the alternatives information,
either in person or online
42 total survey participants
Only 8% of participants felt strongly enough to provide feedback.
Item 3A - Page 20
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Q5: Please rank the alternatives in order of your preference, with 1 being your most preferred alternative:
Answered: 33 Skipped: 9
Item 3A - Page 21
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Initial Terminal Alternative Screening Criteria Alt. 1A Alt. 1B Alt. 2 Alt. 3
Passenger Experience +o +-
Maintains "PSP Experience" (outdoor space, "front door" access etc.)+++o
Enhance the "charm" and ease of use of the current terminal +o o -
Maximizes outdoor space +-+-
Minimizes walking distances -o +o
Stakeholder Relations o o o -
Minimizes community impacts / enhance service to the community.+o o o
Minimizes user and tenant impacts / enhance user and tenant facilities o o o -
Socially and politically feasible o o o -
Sustainability and Environmental Factors +++o
Maximizes reuse of existing facilities ++o -
Supports PSP resiliency (extreme heat / climate change, earthquakes, etc.)+o ++
Supports efficient land use / maximizes use of developable space ++++
Avoids impacts to and enhances the use of the original Wexler terminal building +++o
Accommodates/enhances connections with other modes of transit (bus, rail, etc.)o o o -
Allows for closure or repurposing of areas during non-peak seasons ++++
Supports efficient use and management of resources (energy, waste, and water)+o +o
Financial Factors +++o
Promotes long-term financial viability of the Airport ++++
Limits order of magnitude costs ++o -
Enhances revenue potential (concessions, parking, etc.)++++
Minimizes ongoing operations and maintenance costs o o ++
Implementation +o -o
Ability to phase +o -o
Flexibility +-o +
Minimizes impact to stakeholders and operations during construction ++-o
Operational Performance +++o
Accommodates terminal airside program requirements (gates, etc.)++++
Accommodates terminal landside program requirements ++++
Ability to accommodate growth beyond the planning horizon +o +-
Ability to incorporate future technological changes ++++
Strength of the Alternative +
Neither a Strength nor a Weakness of the Alternative o
Weakness of the Alternative -
`
`
`
`
Alt 1A
Alt 1B
Alt 2
Alt 3
Item 3A - Page 22
Refined Terminal Alternative Concepts
Item 3A - Page 23
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Refined Alternatives 1A and 3
Alternative 1A –Renovate and Expand
Signficant expansion of Wexler building with two new concourse located
north and south
Alternative 3 –Replace
New terminal facilities to the south and eventually repurpose the Wexler
building
Item 3A - Page 24
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Alternative 1A – Full Build ROM Cost ≈ $2.2B Total
Item 3A - Page 25
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Alternative 1A – Phase 1 Phase ROM Cost ≈ $900M
Item 3A - Page 26
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Alternative 1A – Phase 2 Phase ROM Cost ≈ $1.1B ($2B Total)
Item 3A - Page 27
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Alternative 1A – Phase 3 Phase ROM Cost ≈ $100M ($2.1B Total)
Item 3A - Page 28
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Alternative 1A – Phase 4 Phase ROM Cost ≈ $100M ($2.2B Total)
Item 3A - Page 29
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Advantages of 1A
Lower total and Phase 1 costs and likely lower costs to be passed to airlines.
Maintains existing character of PSP by preserving major elements and minimizing walk
distances.
Conveniently locates CONRAC immediately adjacent to the baggage claim.
Conveniently locates FIS near the existing baggage claim.
Eases construction phasing with multiple and separate and modern concourses.
Estimated timeframe from end of Master Plan to ribbon cutting is 3.5 to 5 years.
Provides PSP opportunities for stopping points during construction of the four program
phases in the event of an economic downturn or unforeseen demand reduction.
Item 3A - Page 30
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Disadvantages of 1A
Long term walking distance increases for south concours that would likely require
moving walkways.
Requires significant renovation of existing spaces including Wexler headhouse and
Bono concourse and associated energy efficiently impacts.
Operational challenges during construction include likely having to shuttle rental car
passengers.
Operational challenges could also include shuttling passenger from hold rooms to
remote aircraft hard stands.
Item 3A - Page 31
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Alternative 3 – Full Build ROM Cost ≈ $2.8B Total
Item 3A - Page 32
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Alternative 3 – Phase 1 Phase ROM Cost ≈ $2.2B
Item 3A - Page 33
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Alternative 3 – Phase 2 Phase ROM Cost ≈ $400M ($2.6B Total)
Item 3A - Page 34
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Alternative 3 – Phase 3 Phase ROM Cost ≈ $100M ($2.7B Total)
Item 3A - Page 35
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Alternative 3 – Phase 4 Phase ROM Cost ≈ $100M ($2.8B Total)
Item 3A - Page 36
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Advantages of 3
Creates brand new terminal and vehicle parking facilities.
New terminal systems would likely be more energy efficient and reduce annual
operations and maintenance costs.
Minimizes terminal phasing disruptions to existing operations during construction.
Provides a larger landside area for the CONRAC.
Maintains historic Wexler terminal and allows the community to determine a future
non-terminal related use for this important facility.
Item 3A - Page 37
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Disadvantages of 3
Higher costs, particularly in Phase 1 that would need to be passed on to airlines.
Phase 1 only results in a net gate increase of 2 from 18 currently to 20 total gates.
Minimal landside vehicle parking space is available given the need to relocate Kirk
Douglas Way.
Gating operations on the RJ concourse would likely be reduced to three parking
positions during construction—placing gate demand in a larger deficit.
Disrupts the connection to downtown Palm Springs via Tahquitz Canyon Way.
Requires a longer timeline from end of Master Plan to ribbon cutting.
Once construction of Phase 1 begins, the Airport is committed to the significant
investment of the overall program.
Operational challenges during construction include likely having to shuttle public
parking passengers.
Item 3A - Page 38
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
CONRAC Options for 1A
Item 3A - Page 39
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Alternatives Summary
Item 3A - Page 40
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Estimated Phase 1 Schedule –1A vs 3
Item 3A - Page 41
Airport Commission and Staff Recommendation
Item 3A - Page 42
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Alternative 1A – Full Build ROM Cost ≈ $2.2B Total
Item 3A - Page 43
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Alternative 1A
“Northeast View”
Source: Gensler 2023
Item 3A - Page 44
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Alternative 1A
“Southwest View”
Source: Gensler 2023
Item 3A - Page 45
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Alternative 1A
“Tahquitz View”
Source: Gensler 2023
Item 3A - Page 46
AIRPORT MASTER PLAN
Next Steps
Conceptual Development Plan (CDP) and Financial
Implementation Analysis
March Working Group Meeting, Draft Report and Open
House
FAA review and California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) Process
City Council Adoption in 2025
Item 3A - Page 47
Questions
Item 3A - Page 48