On December 21, 2021, Walker Consultants announced the appointment of three new company principals!

Diego Romero, Ph.D., PE, SE (Chicago), has been promoted to Principal. Diego is the Director of Building Envelope, Forensics, and Restoration with extensive experience in concrete durability, project management, and evaluation and repair design of structures built with concrete, steel, wood, and masonry. Diego’s research background allows him to effectively determine the root cause of an issue and provide creative and cost-effective repairs using the latest repair techniques and materials. Diego was also awarded ICRI’s Top 40 under 40 award for his involvement in the repair industry.

 

 

Kathryn Stairs, PE (Philadelphia), has been promoted to Principal. Kathryn is the Director of Operations and plays an integral part in providing quality assurance to Walker’s clients. A member of the Walker team since 2002, Kathryn’s engineering experience spans managing new design of precast and cast-in-place parking structures, deep and shallow foundation design, and lateral analysis and restoration of parking structures and buildings. Her construction administration experience includes contract administration, construction observation, and project closeout procedures.

 

 

Marc Stonier, PE, SE (Boston), has been promoted to Principal. Marc is the Director of Design and started his career at Walker during his Co-op program with Northeastern University and joined the team as a Structural Engineer in 2008. Throughout his 14 years with Walker, Marc has been involved in the structural design of parking as well as the restoration of structures. Marc is involved in managing and overseeing the production of studies, consulting, and new design projects. His background in parking consulting, structural design, project management, and engineering services allows him to plan and phase projects accurately, monitor the project progress, and participate in all areas of project development.

 

---

Walker Consultants provides planning, design, engineering, forensics, restoration and consulting for the built environment. Our experts have been advancing industry standards since we began in 1965. We are a 100% employee-owned company that takes pride in the value we provide our clients through integrity, honesty, and excellence.

Walker’s Cape Cod Five Cents Savings Bank Parking Garage is featured in the Facility Spotlight section of the November issue of the National Parking Association’s Parking Magazine. Sarah Morkos, Project Architect in our Boston office, shares the landscape-integrated design, natural light, and simple wayfinding of the parking structure in the article.

Read “Massachusetts’ Cape Cod Adds 1st Parking Garage” on page 35 of Parking‘s November issue.

 

 

 

On January 6, Walker Consultants announced the appointment of five new company officers. Walker currently has 31 officers based throughout the company’s 22 nationwide locations providing multi-discipline engineering, restoration, and consulting services. Congratulations to the following leaders for their contributions to the team and success!

 

Al Bustamante, PE (Houston) has been promoted to Senior Vice President. Al is the National Director of Forensic Restoration and is responsible for coordinating the firm’s activities in the evaluation, testing, and design repairs of a variety of structural, architectural, and material distress related projects. His experience includes nondestructive testing of concrete structures, computer modeling and analysis of steel and masonry structures, design of repairs for steel structures, and building envelope assessments, and investigation and repair of parking structures.

 

Todd Lohman, PE (Indianapolis) has been promoted to Senior Vice President. Todd is the Managing Principal for Walker’s Indianapolis office of Walker Consultants and the Managing Director of firm’s Southeast Region. He has project experience in both precast and post-tensioned concrete design and has been involved in the durability design and maintenance recommendations on a wide range of facility types. Todd is responsible for parking consulting, design, and restoration for mixed-use, airport, university, and hospital parking projects.

 

Dave Ryan, PE (Chicago) has been promoted to Senior Vice President. Dave is Managing Director of the Central Region for Walker. Dave oversees Walker’s Chicago, Michigan, and Minneapolis offices and is responsible for overall project planning, budgeting, scheduling, quality assurance and the overall delivery process meeting Walker’s goals and client needs. Dave has experience in all aspects of Walker services including new design, restoration, parking consulting, studies, master planning and car park management systems.

 

Art Stadig, PE (Boston) has been promoted to Senior Vice President. Art Stadig is the Managing Director for Walker’s Northeast Region and Managing Principal for Walker’s Boston office. He is an expert in parking design, parking consulting and master planning and has helped clients throughout the nation optimize their parking possibilities. Art joined Walker Consultants in 1985 after several years of experience with other design firms.

 

Anurag Jain, PhD, PE (Los Angeles) has been promoted to Vice President. Dr. Jain has over 20 years of experience designing, analyzing and investigating structures for extreme loads. His expertise is in the area of earthquake and wind engineering and structural dynamics. He has completed numerous investigations for damage caused by extreme winds, earthquakes, fire, ground movement, construction-induced vibrations, construction defects, design omissions and corrosion. Dr. Jain also uses computer modeling to determine the cause of structural failures.

WALKER CONSULTANTS’ Board of Directors recently named three new Managing Directors to its senior management team.

 

Art Stadig, PE,  Managing Principal of the Boston office, and a thirty-four-year employee, Art has held positions in five of WALKER’s offices.  Art will now lead the firm’s newly created Northeast Region to include Boston, New York City, Philadelphia and Washington, DC.

 

 

 

 

Todd Lohman, PE has been with WALKER since 1998 and oversees the Indianapolis office.  He will now lead the Southeast Region (Indianapolis, Charlotte, Atlanta and Tampa) for the firm.

 

 

 

 

David Ryan, PE currently oversees the firm’s two Chicago area offices.  He began his career with WALKER in 1998 as an entry level structural engineer.  As Managing Director of the Central Region, he will now lead the Chicago, Ann Arbor, Kalamazoo, and Minneapolis offices.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) recently issued a report on the startling extent of worldwide climate change.¹ It presents serious challenges, but also opportunities for innovation. Construction activities contribute to greenhouse gas emissions, and building industry professionals are positioned to help mitigate the causes of climate change. Manufactured wood products such as cross-laminated timber (CLT) and glued-laminated lumber (glulam) can be used effectively to render parking garage construction more sustainable.

 

RENDERINGS BY: H3D  |  CLIENT: City of Springfield, Oregon  |  ARCHITECT: SRG Partnership, Inc.  |  Structural Engineer:  KPFF

 

Typical parking garages are built of steel and reinforced concrete, leading to high embodied carbon profiles. Manufacturing and transporting reinforced concrete and steel members produces greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change.

In contrast to steel and reinforced concrete, engineered lumber building materials sequester carbon, and their fabrication and transport produce a significantly lower magnitude of greenhouse gas emissions. The carbon emissions offset by using sawn lumber and manufactured wood products in a single building project could counter the effects of hundreds of cars from the road or power a home for hundreds of years.²

Engineered wood such as CLT and glulam rival typical building materials for strength while removing carbon from the atmosphere and reducing greenhouse gas emissions during the construction process. Their engineering properties are appropriate for parking structures with spans and ceiling heights, competitive with typical concrete or hybrid concrete-steel parking deck systems.

 

The Carbon Footprint

Concrete is the product of cement mixed with water, sand, gravel, and other admixtures. Cement is manufactured and is the primary contributor to the embodied carbon of concrete. The cement production industry contributes to 5 percent of global CO2 emissions. Burning fossil fuels accounts for 40 percent of CO2 emissions from cement production when numerous natural materials are heated in a kiln at approximately 2700 degrees.³  A chemical process results during which the cement ingredient calcium carbonate undergoes calcination, generating CO2 and accounting for 50 to 60 percent of CO2 emitted from cement production. The Environmental Protection Agency and the Portland Cement Association have found that approximately one ton of CO2 is emitted in the production of each ton of Portland cement.⁴  Consideration should also be given to the embodied carbon of the mining and shipping of raw materials, concrete placement, and transportation of precast members—all processes that currently require the burning of fossil fuels.

Steel, for its part, is a highly recycled material. Likeconcrete, however, steel manufacture produces considerable greenhouse gas emissions. According to the American Iron and Steel Institute, 69 percent of steel in North America is recycled annually, and 95 percent of the water required for steel production is recycled.⁵

Nonetheless, steel requires extreme heat for production; blast furnace emissions prevail as the main source of greenhouse gas emissions of steel production worldwide.⁶ Like concrete, the steel industry contributes about 5 percent of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. Nearly two tons of CO2 are emitted in the production of a single ton of steel. A primary component of steel is the production of iron, which accounts for 90 percent of the steel industry’s greenhouse gas emissions.⁷ As with concrete, consideration should be given to the embodied carbon of the mining of iron ore necessary for steel production and of the transportation energy (emissions from fossil fuel burning) inherent in shipping steel to fabricators and construction sites.

 

Alternative Garage Construction

Parking garages benefit from diverse structural systems but largely experience a lack of variety in building materials. However they are popularly constructed, garages are normally reinforced concrete or steel, endowing them with an unfortunate carbon footprint and high embodied energy profile. As engineers, architects, constructors, developers, and governments imagine ways to transform the built environment to mitigate climate change, they should consider alternative materials and building methods for parking garages.

 

Figure 1: Superimposed Load vs. Span for CLT Layups

 

Engineered wood such as CLT and glulam presents the opportunity to greatly diminish a parking structure’s embodied carbon emissions. The spans achieved with CLT and glulam beam floor-framing systems are competitive with typical hybrid steel and prestressed concrete garage systems. These wood products by their nature sequester carbon, and their wood is sourced from sustainable forestry. These characteristics can offset or negate the carbon footprint of wood-built garages, and constructing garages from wood could serve as part of a CO2 removal effort to mitigate climate change.

Wood sequesters carbon as it grows—trees absorb CO2 and release oxygen. Younger trees more aggressively store CO2, and the rate of storage decreases as trees age, culminating in the release of stored CO2 when mature trees die and decay. In the U.S., forests annually add new wood from young trees at twice the rate as the loss of wood from trees dying naturally. This results in a net carbon storage versus release. The IPCC has indicated that sustainable management of forest populations that increases new stocks while producing a yield of timber for building, energy, etc., can markedly mitigate the effects of climate change. A good use for this timber yield is construction materials. Because 50 percent of the dry weight of wood consists of carbon, building with wood stores carbon that would otherwise be released into the atmosphere.

Wood stores enough carbon to offset the greenhouse gas emissions of its production, transport, and installation. Manufacturing wood products takes significantly less energy than steel and concrete, and little of this energy derives from combustion of fossil fuels.⁸

As standardized, manufactured products, engineered lumber members such as CLT decks and glulam beams offer the benefits of economical installation and connection detailing.

 

Using Wood in Construction

CLT floor decks and glulam beams are essentially modular. Like precast concrete members, they are fabricated according to specific project geometry and delivered o the job site ready for installation. They can be hoisted via crane into place in a single piece. This decreases field labor time and materials and provides for efficient construction scheduling.

Figure 2: Total Load vs. Span for Glulam Beams

 

CLT decks and glulam beams can be fabricated to accommodate anticipated connection hardware. CLT panels can be manufactured with internal spines in the layups for panel-to-panel connections, or manufactured with setbacks along their span length to install mounted metal tube-and-screw panel-to-panel connections. The fabricator can include a slit down the length of CLT panels for installation of connector plates and brackets in the field, where the pieces are assembled without the need for laborious sawing or grinding.⁹

Glulam beams offer a similar benefit. Slits and setbacks in the cross-sections of member ends can accommodate concealed plate connections, and precored holes can provide for sunken bolts. The engineer must adhere to code-prescribed geometrical constraints, such as notch depth, bearing length, bolt spacing, and fastener edge distances, but these limitations do not preclude adequate yet elegant connections.¹⁰

 

 

 

Case Study: Springfield, Ore.

The city of Springfield, Ore., retained architecture firm SRG Partnership, Inc. to design a CLT parking structure. Its design contains 360 parking spots, occupied interior space on the ground level, and solar panel canopies on the roof. The 200,000-plus square-foot structure consists of five-layer CLT floor decks spanning between post-tensioned glulam beams supported on glulam columns. A curtain wall consisting of a stainless steel wire fabric protects the glulam columns at the perimeter from damage from wind-driven rain. The screens are strategically placed in response to research that identified the direction and magnitude of rain events at the site. The lateral system is a post-tensioned seven-layer CLT shear wall with performance capacity verified by a seismic shake-table test at the University of California at San Diego, and a sprinkler system provides fire-proofing.

Typical structural bays are 30 feet wide by 60 feet long with 10-foot-wide by 30-foot-long CLT panels spanning between glulam beams spaced at 15 feet on center. This provides CLT panels with intermediate midspan support. Designers incorporated laminated veneer lumber (LVL) for the top and bottom layers of the glulam beams and a post-tensioning system to improve their structural strength and minimize beam depth. This configuration allows for 60-foot beam spans to maximize garage space. The construction schedule is expected to be shorter, and less shoring is expected to be required for the CLT-glulam system than for steel or concrete systems.

Although building officials were appropriately concerned whether a wood parking garage would satisfy code requirements, they were cooperative from the start of the design process. The novelty presented a challenge to building officials tasked with permitting new structural systems requiring testing and review, and a fire marshal was concerned about combustible cars within a wooden superstructure.

Officials required the building to incorporate a sprinkler system for fire protection and continued to work closely with the design team to address other related concerns.

In garages with concrete decks, inadequate weatherproofing can lead to damage from deicing salts, water intrusion from tires and leaking drains, and freeze-thaw cycles. Engineered wood could rot from excessive moisture exposure, leading to section loss from water damage or insect infestations. Research performed at the TallWood Design Institute in Oregon recommended an asphalt topping over a moisture barrier to weatherproof the CLT panels. Of course, adding asphalt detracts from the sustainability profile of the structure and increase its carbon footprint. As of this writing, the authors are not aware of competitive weatherproofing methods of CLT or glulam materials that avoid supplementary toppings such as concrete or asphalt.

 

Structural Capacity

In 2018, APA-The Engineered Wood Association published “Standard for Performance-Rated Cross-Laminated Timber.” The guide, known as PRG 320, describes the structural load-path characteristics of CLT and defines mechanical and geometrical properties for use in design. A few definitions:

■ Layup is an arrangement of layers in the CLT panel according to wood grade, number of layers, orientation (parallel and perpendicular to span direction), and thickness per layer.

■ Grade of lumber refers to the kind of wood and whether the material is visually graded or machine stress-rated (mechanically graded).

 

 

The performance criteria presented in PRG 320 were used to determine superimposed (live load) loading capacity of seven different CLT layups and three total panel thicknesses per layup for a total of 21 different CLT panel members. The layups are denoted E1, E2, E3, E4, V1, V2, and V3. The E-series layups contain mechanically graded layers parallel to the span direction and visually graded layers perpendicular to the span direction. The V-series layups contain visually graded layers in each direction. These grades and layups define the current industry standard, and they are found in available CLT panel products from manufacturers such as Nordic Structures (the Nordic X-Lam is E1 layup) and SmartLam (SL-V4 is V4 layup). Figure 1 shows superimposed loading capacity versus span length for the 21 CLT members. Depending on the member properties and span length, either moment, shear, or deflection will control, and this is reflected in the figure. Maximum deflection under combined dead and live load was taken as L/240.

Like CLT, glulam is composed of layers of mechanically or visually graded wood adhered into a single monolithic member, except the layers are all oriented parallel to the span. Manufacturers generally have freedom to design glulam beam sections using combinations of wood layers—for example, the glulam beams in the SRG wood parking structure where LVL strips form the top and bottom cords, with sawn lumber in between. Glulam capacity depends on the mechanical properties of the wood layers and on the geometry of the section profile. Figure 2 shows total allowable loading capacity versus span length for visually graded southern pine glulam beams of different widths and all 35¾ inches deep. The figure shows controlling values for moment, shear, or deflection. Maximum deflection under combined dead and live load was taken as L/240.

Glulam beams spanning 60 feet are spaced at 12 feet on center, with simply supported 6⅞ inch-deep CLT decks spanning between them. Including the weight of the CLT, glulam beam, miscellaneous dead load, and garage live load of 40psf, and using the heaviest glulam beam evaluated in this article—the 14-inch-wide by 35¾-inch-deep size—the beam is overloaded by 63 pounds per linear foot (lb/ft). Refining the actual clear span based on the width of supporting members may provide a span length reduction to 58 ft, resulting in a beam that works with 43 lb/ft additional capacity beyond the loading demand. Alternatively, the glulam beam could be designed to have stronger top and bottom cord engineered lumber with sawn lumber in the middle, or the beam could be post-tensioned. Although it appears some design intervention is needed to provide the glulam beam with additional capacity, this scenario shows the feasibility of the engineered lumber system.

Spacing 60 feet glulam beams at 10 feet allows use of the 4⅛-inch-deep CLT panels, thereby relieving the system of dead load. The beam is again evaluated under self weight, CLT weight, a miscellaneous dead load, and garage live load. The 12-inch-wide beam works with 56 lb/ft additional capacity, and the 14-inch-wide beam works with 170 lb/ft additional capacity.

Spacing the glulam beams two feet closer together prevents the need for external post-tensioning.

 

Wood and Parking Structures

Sourced appropriately, wooden building materials can contribute to the storage (and removal from the atmosphere) of greenhouse gas emissions. The net embodied carbon of wood structures—from collection of raw building material through construction and over the service life of the materials—is negative. This is also a function of the lower energy necessary to refine, transport, and install manufactured wood.

The IPCC report suggests that revolutionizing global energy production alone is not sufficient to limit or reverse the effects of climate change. Rather, in concert with such efforts, CO2 removal methods must be implemented. Construction on a wide scale with engineered lumber such as CLT and glulam can simultaneously deliver demanded building projects while sequestering carbon. Expansion of forest growth, sustainable harvesting of wood for building, and large-scale wood-sourced urban development can become a powerful—and practical—tool in the mitigation of climate change.

As engineered lumber manufacturers establish fabrication facilities, design professionals would be wise to prepare for the emergence of these new building materials. As demonstrated above, engineered wood can be adapted for parking garages. Carbon dioxide removal, low greenhouse gas emissions, greater construction efficiency, shorter installation time, and material flexibility are all benefits of engineered wood like CLT and glulam.

Design professionals can anticipate the coming market demand now by performing feasibility studies, forming working groups within firms, and communicating with trusted vendors across the building industry.
When an owner is contemplating a vertical or horizontal addition to a parking facility or a new parking structure, discuss designing it in wood.

The IPCC report suggests that revolutionizing global energy production alone is not sufficient to limit or reverse the effects of climate change. Rather, in concert with such efforts, CO2 removal methods must be implemented. Construction on a wide scale with engineered lumber such as CLT and glulam can simultaneously deliver demanded building projects while sequestering carbon. Expansion of forest growth, sustainable harvesting of wood for building, and large-scale wood-sourced urban development can become a powerful—and practical—tool in the mitigation of climate change.

As engineered lumber manufacturers establish fabrication facilities, design professionals would be wise to prepare for the emergence of these new building materials. As demonstrated above, engineered wood can be adapted for parking garages. Carbon dioxide removal, low greenhouse gas emissions, greater construction efficiency, shorter installation time, and material flexibility are all benefits of engineered wood like CLT and glulam.

Design professionals can anticipate the coming market demand now by performing feasibility studies, forming working groups within firms, and communicating with trusted vendors across the building industry.
When an owner is contemplating a vertical or horizontal addition to a parking facility or a new parking structure, discuss designing it in wood.

 

*This article was originally published in the December 2018 issue of the Parking Professional. 

 

 

---

 

JONATHAN C. ELLOWITZ, PE is Restoration Project Engineer I with Walker Consultants and a Parksmart Advisor. He can be reached at jellowitz@walkerconsultants.com.

PAUL WESSEL is director, market development, with the USGBC. He can be reached at pwessel@usgbc.org.

 

---

 

Endnotes

1. IPCC Report October 8, 2018.
2. Think Wood, “Evaluation the Carbon Footprint of Wood Buildings: Reducing Greenhouse Gases with High-Performance Structures,” AWC.org.
3. Rubenstein, Emissions from the Cement Industry, May 9, 2012: https://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2012/05/09/emissions-from-the-cement-industry.
4. National Ready Mixed Concrete Association (NRMCA): www.nrmca.org/greenconcrete/concrete percent20co2 percent20fact percent20sheet percent20june percent202008.pdf.
5. American Iron and Steel Institute: www.steel.org/~/media/Files/AISI/Fact percent20Sheets/50_Fun_Facts_About_Steel.pdf.
6. Carbon Trust: www.carbontrust.com/media/38362/ctc791-international-carbon-flows-steel.pdf.
7. Kundak, Lazic, and Crnko CO2 Emissions in the Steel Industry, Metalurgija 48 (2009)  3, 193     -197:webcache.googleusercontent.com/searchq=cache:bg8XqACJNkAJ:https://hrcak.srce.hr/file/56088+&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us.
8. Think Wood, “Evaluation the Carbon Footprint of Wood Buildings: Reducing Greenhouse Gases with High-Performance Structures,” AWC.org.
9. Mohammad, M., “Connections in CLT Assemblies,” FPInnovations, September 8–9, 2011; www.woodstructuressymposium.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Mohammad_CLT_Connections.pdf.
10. www.structuraltimber.co.uk/assets/InformationCentre/eb9.pdf.

 

Airport Parking in the Age Of Uber

Ridership of transportation network companies (TNCs) like Uber and Lyft is increasing, and that’s posing new challenges when it comes to airport parking. TNC use at some large airports is in the range of 15 percent to 20 percent of all passengers to and from the airport. As patrons choose TNCs to travel to and from airports, demand for parking and other ground transportation options is falling, resulting in lower airport revenue. The problem is, parking is a significant source of revenue for airports—for many it’s the second most important revenue source after gate fees—so falling parking demand can hit an airport’s bottom line hard.

So, how can airports respond in this Age of Uber? The impacts on parking are not uniform across parking products, and range widely between different airports. However, modeling parking finances can help airports find the right fee to charge for TNC trips to help recover lost revenue.

Demand and revenue impacts

The potential impact of TNCs on airport parking are more complicated than simply assuming there’s a uniform decrease in parking demand across the airport parking system. Airport parking demand increases with rising originating enplanements, which in some cases is going up at 3 percent to 5 percent annually. So, while the per passenger parking demand is going down because of TNC use, the number of passengers is growing. This leads to mixed financial results for airports based on several factors, including parking fee changes. In some cases, revenues are flat as enplanements are increasing. Each airport experiences different changes and every situation requires specific solutions. For example, a TNC modeling study at one southern airport found that total parking demand in 2015 dropped by 3-5 percent, compared to 2014, because of TNC trips. This displacement was predominantly affecting longer-term parking of three to four or more days in duration.

Conversely, a survey for another southern airport found that TNC trips increased by 600 percent (on a per enplanement basis) from 2014 to 2016. Meanwhile, the total parking transactions per enplanement decreased by 11 percent from 2014 to 2016. In this second case, long-term and remote parking grew, while short-term parking clearly declined. One potential reason for this difference is that patrons could be using TNCs (which never park) rather than being picked-up or dropped-off with a personal vehicle (which occupy short- term parking). The drastically different findings from these two engagements demonstrate the complicated nature of TNCs’ influence on parking demand within airports.

 

TNCs are also impacting airport car rental revenues and taxi utilization fees, which are also declining as many passengers forgo a taxi ride for a TNC ride. For example, Las Vegas’ McCarran International Airport experienced a doubling of TNC pick-ups and drop-offs from a year ago, but saw taxi pickups decline by 13 percent. Los Angeles International Airport, on the other hand, began charging for TNC rides in 2016, which added nearly $9 million in revenue, while rental car revenue on a per enplanement basis fell by nearly 12 percent in the same year.

TNCs are causing revenue losses through declines in parking and other ground transportation demand, which left unaddressed, may continue to decline as TNC ridership grows. In light of these issues, virtually all major airports have begun charging a fee to TNC rides, similar to fees charged to taxi rides, either to or from the airport, or for both directions, using geo-fencing technology. Additionally, airports frequently charge a one-time or annual fee to the TNCs, similar to that of airlines, car rental, and taxi company fees. However, revenues generated from per-trip fees to riders tend to dwarf these one-time fees, which are currently relatively low.

Despite the increased use of TNCs, not all airports have experienced parking revenue loss. The stability of total parking revenue at these airports may be attributed to a combination of increasing originating enplanements and/or increased parking fees; many airports increased parking fees to offset a decline in demand. However, this approach could reach a threshold where the cost of a TNC trip is low enough relative to the cost of parking that patrons choose to use TNCs at even higher volumes, assuming today’s TNC trip prices don’t increase significantly.

Airports continue to monitor the parking revenue situation and must continually monitor their parking products to keep up. As time passes, airports will increasingly need to consider parking technology to make the parking experience more convenient and pleasant or institute parking loyalty programs offering discounted parking, reserved parking, special deals with terminal vendors, and other perks. These offerings appeal to travelers who might otherwise turn to TNCs by making the parking experience more convenient and rewarding.

Changing times

Transportation networking companies already play an important role at America’s airports, and that role will continue to grow. As most airport executives have already discovered, TNCs can have a significant impact on the bottom line, particularly when it comes to parking revenues. On the positive side, TNC use may forestall or eliminate the need to expand parking at some airports. It is essential for airport executives to make parking planning an essential element of their airport’s operations, and that should include constantly evaluating the airport’s parking planning to assure that it accommodates current transportation trends and can adapt to foreseeable changes in the transportation industry. The shared economy, as illustrated by the rise of TNCs is always evolving and airports’ parking planning must also constantly evolve to keep up with the growth of TNCs and the transportation trends that are likely to arrive in the future.

As printed in the August/September 2018 issue of Airport Business.

---

 

Art Stadig, P.E. is Vice President and Director of Aviation Services for Walker Consulting, the world’s leading parking design and consulting firm. He can be reached at astadig@walkerconsultants.com.