ALW Airport Master Plan Update Planning Advisory Committee Meeting #2 February 11, 2016
Meeting Agenda 1. Introductions 2. Review of PAC #1 3. Study Progress 4. Passenger Demand 5. Activity Forecasts 6. Facility Preview Time Permitting
Introductions 1. Airport Staff 2. Project Team 3. Advisory Committee 4. Public in Attendance
Review of PAC #1 Inventory of Existing Facilities & SWOT Analysis Follow-Up Questions Is a turf runway possible? Possible, but at a cost and with a limited benefit. A turf runway requires maintenance and upkeep, which would reduce funds available for other projects. Is a GA terminal building eligible for FAA funding? Public areas are eligible. Lower priority than airfield safety improvements and pavements and have strict funding limits. What impact would runway centerline lights have on minimums? These, along with touchdown zone lights, allow for landing visibility minimums below ½ mile and takeoff minimums below 1,800 RVR.
SWOT Analysis Strengths: 1. Facilities and infrastructure 2. Available property for development 3. Local economy is growing 4. Airline passenger growth; increasing enplanements Weakness: 1. Responsiveness to aircraft fuel availability 2. Airline competition, single destination offered 3. Airport needs to become more financially selfsufficient (also a threat) Opportunities: 1. Attract aviation oriented businesses, offer more retail in Business Park 2. Get Los Angeles/Central California airline service 3. College Flight Program; train pilots, perhaps other aviation curriculums Threats: 1. Port is perceived competition with private sector investment and pricing 2. Airport needs to become more financially selfsufficient 3. Lack of private investment into new hangar development
Study Progress What do we have? Inventory Forecasts* What demand do we expect? Can we meet expected demand? Facility Requirements Alternatives What do we need to change to meet demand? How do we pay for these changes? Capital Improvement Plan Airport Layout Plan* What will these changes look like? Stakeholder Coordination & Public Outreach * Denotes FAA-approved Element PAC Public
Passenger Demand Analysis Trina Froehlich, Senior Air Service Consultant
Methodology and Catchment Area Purpose: To support the Master Plan enplanement forecast Study timeframe: YE 1Q 2015 Data used: ARC tickets: 20,880 Adjustments made for Allegiant & Southwest Catchment area: Geographic area where the population would most likely use the airport 10 zip codes Population = 74,813
True Market Estimate ORIGINATING AIRPORT USE RANK AIRPORT PAX % Domestic 1 ALW 72,765 39 2 PSC 66,335 35 3 SEA 23,085 12 4 PDX 17,272 9 5 GEG 10,170 5 Subtotal 189,626 100 International 1 PSC 4,205 39 2 SEA 2,851 26 3 ALW 2,217 20 4 PDX 1,324 12 5 GEG 352 3 Subtotal 10,950 100 Domestic and international 1 ALW 74,982 38 2 PSC 70,539 35 3 SEA 25,936 13 4 PDX 18,597 9 5 GEG 10,522 5 Total 200,576 100 Overall retention of 38% of true market estimate Pasco (PSC) is the largest diverting airport with 35% Seattle (SEA) and Portland (PDX) had 22% combined Overall true market size 200,576 annual passengers 275 Passenger Daily Each Way (PDEW)
Airport Use by Community % AIRPORT USE TRUE COMMUNITY ALW PSC SEA PDX GEG MARKET PAX Walla Walla 43 33 14 7 3 157,870 College Place 44 34 8 11 4 16,958 Milton Freewater 32 48 3 12 4 10,423 Dayton 28 52 10 1 9 5,855 Waitsburg 43 36 9 2 10 2,802 Athena 28 35 17 19 1 2,221 Touchet 24 65 2 5 4 1,620 Prescott 36 48 9 2 4 1,270 Weston 44 43 4 5 3 803 Dixie 42 54 0 0 4 755 Total 37 35 13 9 5 200,576 Walla Walla community had the highest number of passengers 79% of the true market Retained 43% of passengers, higher than the average
Top 25 Domestic Markets ORIGIN AIRPORT % TOTAL RANK DESTINATION ALW PSC SEA PDX GEG PAX PDEW 1 Seattle, WA 92 6 0 0 2 30,305 41.5 2 Las Vegas, NV 28 62 4 3 3 9,811 13.4 3 Sacramento, CA 35 28 8 30 0 8,144 11.2 4 Los Angeles, CA 51 31 10 8 1 7,918 10.8 5 San Francisco, CA 24 53 14 9 0 7,734 10.6 6 Portland, OR 20 76 0 0 4 6,659 9.1 7 San Diego, CA 36 25 18 21 0 6,267 8.6 8 Phoenix, AZ (PHX) 40 34 9 10 7 6,032 8.3 9 Orange County, CA 47 23 22 4 4 5,840 8.0 10 Denver, CO 17 38 10 7 28 5,638 7.7 11 Oakland, CA 32 17 9 13 29 4,795 6.6 12 Boston, MA 23 38 15 19 4 3,957 5.4 13 San Jose, CA 32 34 21 12 1 3,705 5.1 14 Anchorage, AK 42 9 40 4 4 3,699 5.1 15 Washington, DC (DCA) 20 43 22 11 4 3,597 4.9 16 Ontario, CA 35 33 13 11 9 3,240 4.4 17 Chicago, IL (ORD) 48 19 14 13 7 3,216 4.4 18 Newark, NJ 35 37 18 7 3 2,999 4.1 19 Kansas City, MO 20 34 17 13 17 2,771 3.8 20 Orlando, FL (MCO) 19 55 14 8 4 2,743 3.8 21 Minneapolis, MN 20 61 10 3 6 2,548 3.5 22 Burbank, CA 44 38 8 7 3 2,515 3.4 23 Phoenix, AZ (AZA) 0 100 0 0 0 2,467 3.4 24 Honolulu, HI 31 17 15 28 9 2,149 2.9 25 Reno, NV 29 33 9 24 4 1,807 2.5 Top 25 domestic 44 32 10 8 5 140,555 192.5 Total domestic 39 35 12 9 5 189,626 259.8 Seattle is top destination airport Could be skewed with interline tickets 30,305 annual passengers or 41.5 PDEW California markets make up 5 of the top 10 markets
Top 15 International Markets 4 of the top 5 markets are to Mexico largely leisure related Due to small sample sizes, the top international markets will likely vary significantly from year to year ORIGIN AIRPORT % PASSENGERS RANK DESTINATION PSC SEA ALW PDX GEG TOTAL PDEW 1 Guadalajara, Mexico 60 3 20 12 5 1,151 1.6 2 San Jose del Cabo, Mexico 60 11 20 8 1 811 1.1 3 Edmonton, Canada 34 29 22 12 3 637 0.9 4 Cancun, Mexico 34 13 20 24 9 469 0.6 5 Puerto Vallarta, Mexico 37 15 20 14 13 437 0.6 6 Vancouver, Canada 20 5 60 14 0 408 0.6 7 Paris-De Gaulle, France 20 40 30 11 0 362 0.5 8 Manila, Philippines 19 59 20 1 1 315 0.4 9 Amsterdam, Netherlands 34 28 20 18 1 287 0.4 10 Victoria, Canada 34 29 22 12 3 285 0.4 11 London, UK (LHR) 23 24 44 4 5 267 0.4 12 Beijing, China 10 67 20 3 0 247 0.3 13 Mexico City, Mexico 61 13 20 5 1 237 0.3 14 Toronto, Canada 55 15 21 9 0 229 0.3 15 Mazatlan, Mexico 34 29 22 12 3 188 0.3 Top 15 International 40 21 25 11 3 6,330 8.7 Total International 39 26 20 12 3 10,950 15.0
Geographic Distribution of Passengers 40% 25% 3% 4% 5% 6% 6% 2% Largest region is the West region followed by the Northwest region together they comprise 65% of total Only 5% is international travel 38% to Mexico 20% to Europe 4% 18% to Canada
Airlines Used by Diverting Passengers WN 9% G4 6% UA 20% AA 6% F9 Other 2% 4% DL 23% AS 30% Alaska obtains largest share of diverting passengers with 30% followed by Delta with 23% At PSC, 31% Delta, 26% United, 26% Alaska, 11% Allegiant At SEA, 42% Alaska, 17% Delta, 11% United, 11% Southwest and 10% American Helps in discussions with airlines on new or additional service
Average Domestic Fares: YE 1Q 2015 AVERAGE ONE-WAY FARE ALW RANK DESTINATION ALW PSC SEA PDX GEG MAX DIFF. 1 Seattle, WA $82 $100 - $106 $100 ($18) 2 Las Vegas, NV $123 $90 $128 $113 $148 $33 3 Sacramento, CA $157 $170 $119 $109 $159 $48 4 Los Angeles, CA $131 $119 $130 $140 $145 $12 5 San Francisco, CA $157 $153 $121 $118 $147 $39 6 Portland, OR $143 - - - $98 $45 7 San Diego, CA $168 $166 $123 $109 $154 $58 8 Phoenix, AZ (PHX) $155 $153 $153 $144 $151 $11 9 Orange County, CA $131 $143 $143 $141 $140 ($9) 10 Denver, CO $182 $243 $139 $136 $133 $49 11 Oakland, CA $126 $157 $108 $108 $153 $18 12 Boston, MA $250 $287 $230 $231 $252 $20 13 San Jose, CA $148 $176 $111 $113 $149 $37 14 Anchorage, AK $229 $252 $222 $232 $241 $7 15 Washington, DC (DCA) $309 $339 $261 $242 $274 $67 16 Ontario, CA $124 $150 $130 $132 $163 ($6) 17 Chicago, IL (ORD) $266 $297 $227 $229 $228 $39 18 Newark, NJ $254 $286 $251 $257 $271 $3 19 Kansas City, MO $215 $249 $177 $177 $184 $38 20 Orlando, FL (MCO) $227 $255 $211 $221 $227 $16 21 Minneapolis, MN $199 $261 $183 $226 $228 $16 22 Burbank, CA $151 $146 $136 $133 $169 $17 23 Phoenix, AZ (AZA) - $75 - - - - 24 Honolulu, HI $299 $278 $255 $234 $279 $65 25 Reno, NV $172 $168 $127 $117 $162 $55 Average domestic fare $150 $196 $181 $173 $173 ($23) Source: Diio Mi; Note: Year Ended March 31, 2015; Fares do not include taxes or Passenger Facility Charges Alaska s lower fare structure provides competitive fares in most ALW markets ALW had highest fare in 6 of top 25 markets Service availability is likely a primary cause of diversion to alternate airports
Average Domestic Fare Trend $220 One-Way Average Fare $200 $180 $160 $140 $120 $100 ALW PSC SEA PDX GEG 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year Ended March 31 ALW fares have not increased at the same rate over the last 10 years as the alternate airports. Source: Diio Mi
Situation Analysis: Existing Air Service Opportunities Continue focusing on improving Alaska s SEA service Increase of over 20% in load factor in the last five years Additional frequency or PDX service will be considered with continued improvement Potential for PenAir service Growing codeshare relationship and operations in PDX with Alaska Service potentially challenging with PDX true market size of 9.1 PDEW and similar connections as SEA SkyWest operating pro-rate under Alaska codeshare
Situation Analysis: New Air Service Opportunities Issue: close proximity to PSC PSC captures 35% of catchment area 52 miles airport-to-airport Alaska, Allegiant, Delta and United provide service at PSC PSC has service markets within reasonable operating distance of ALW Airlines rarely offer duplicative service to airports within 60 miles of each other Other airlines American Airlines unlikely due to long stage lengths to hubs (LAX/PHX) in the near term Airlines like Frontier, JetBlue, Spirit and Southwest operate large aircraft in large markets SEA AS 6x DL 3x PDX AS 1x SFO UA 1-2x LAX G4 2x weekly (seasonal) PSC Nonstop Air Service LAS G4 2x weekly SLC DL 3x AZA G4 2x weekly DEN UA 2x MSP DL 1-2x
Situation Analysis: Delta Air Lines (DL) PSC has DL service to SLC, MSP and SEA SEA/SLC is first option before MSP service would be offered All domestic airports with SEA service (except AK/HI) have SLC service DL rarely serves airports within close proximity Few examples other than major metro areas at less than 75 miles JAC-IDA-PIH and SUN-TWF (short stage length) CDC-SGU (SkyWest headquarters) BTM-HLN-BZN and GTF-HLN (difficult drives) Source: Diio Mi July 2016; As of January 27, 2016; stage lengths of 1,000 miles or less
Situation Analysis: United Airlines (UA) PSC has UA service to DEN and SFO UA reducing smaller regional jets and becoming more mainline DEN Difficult to be profitable with CRJ200 due to long stage length (812 miles) Primarily only large metro and mountain/ski markets with dual service within 75 miles SFO even fewer airports within 75 miles and other WA markets yet to have the service (PSC/SEA only) Source: Diio Mi July 2016; As of January 27, 2016; stage lengths of 1,000 miles or less
Situation Analysis: Allegiant (G4) Less than daily service to G4 s leisure markets unlikely with PSC service Only 5 market pairs within 75 miles of each other to LAS Only 3 market pairs within 75 miles of each other to AZA Switch from PSC to ALW due to PSC costs? Precedent set at other airports (GRB- ATW, LNK-GRI, MCO-SFB) ALW population in line with other markets served by G4 Many threats to get costs in line but rarely does G4 move airports Rank by 50-mile population Origin G4 Flights YE 8/16 Onboards YE 10/15 Population 50 miles 100 miles 12 GRI 286 59,508 186,766 740,233 13 GJT 120 213,526 199,571 366,743 14 FAR 465 429,880 277,882 629,010 15 LRD 160 101,718 290,101 493,547 16 IDA 255 149,436 293,971 383,679 ALW 0 40,649 297,741 742,729 17 MFR 262 359,109 322,406 583,094 18 FSD 607 481,524 327,318 820,892 19 BGR 307 242,939 330,284 801,810 20 PSC 266 333,713 462,741 901,327 21 BTV 98 576,421 505,949 5,783,460 Source: Diio Mi As of January 27, 2016
Questions and Comments Thank you!
Aviation Activity Forecasts Mitch Hooper, Project Manager
Aviation Activity Forecasts Forecasts: Define future facility, service, and property needs Are formally reviewed by FAA and must be reasonable Consider local and national trends PAC Questions: Do inputs and outputs seem reasonable? Did we miss anything? What contingencies should be planned for?
Aviation Activity Forecasts 20 Year Projection of: Enplanements Ticketed passengers Operations Takeoffs and Landings Based Aircraft Aircraft that are stored at ALW
Passenger Enplanements An enplanement is: The act of a passenger boarding a scheduled or charter flight with more than nine seats. Primary Influence Passenger terminal and parking requirements Viability of terminal businesses (restaurant, car rental, etc.) Traffic to and from the airport Airline profitability on ALW routes Secondary Influence Aircraft size and flight frequency Runway and taxiway dimensions and setbacks
Passenger Enplanements Rank Enplanements Factor r 1 City Lodging Tax 0.94 2 Local Earnings 0.92 3 GRP 0.91 4 GDP 0.90 5 Employment 0.89 5.1% average growth over past 10 years Tourism and economic growth are drivers Universities are stable source of demand
Passenger Enplanement Forecasts Local-focus Gross Regional Product, 10 Year Trend, & Tourism methodologies National-focus Gross Domestic Product and FAA Aerospace methodologies Key Considerations Tourism s impact on future activity Sustainability of 10-year growth rate Retention and growth of true market New routes at ALW and nearby airports
Passenger Enplanement Forecasts Growth between 1.7% and 3.7% Tourism Forecast is recommended (2.7%)
Aircraft Operations An operation is: A take off or landing of an aircraft. Operations can be local and itinerant. Primary Influence Capacity of runway and taxiway system Determination of design aircraft Design of pavement dimensions (length, width, and thickness) Safety setbacks from aircraft movement areas Aircraft noise exposure Secondary Influence Viability of FBO and fuel sales operations Cost/benefit analyses for airport investment projects
Aircraft Operations Factor 2.3% average decline over past 10 years Recreational demand down, other GA segments stable Airlines using larger aircraft, flying less often Rank Air Carrier Ops. 1 GRP 0.77 2 Population 0.76 3 Employment 0.71 4 Hotel Rooms Available 0.70 5 Nat'l Jet Fleet 0.70 Rank Air Taxi Ops. Factor 1 Nat'l Local GA Ops. 0.98 2 Nat'l Itinerant GA Ops. 0.97 3 Nat'l Air Taxi Ops. 0.93 4 Nat'l Air Carrier Ops. 0.89 5 GA Hours Flown 0.88 r r
Aircraft Operations Forecasts Year Enplanements Operations Air Carrier Commuter Total Air Carrier Commuter Total 2005 0 24,369 24,369 0 2,006 2,006 2010 0 30,677 30,677 1,501 804 2,305 2015 0 40,245 40,245 1,376 872 2,248 CAGR ('05-'15) N/A 5.1% 5.1% N/A -8.0% 1.1% 2020 0 50,000 50,000 1,680 912 2,592 2025 0 54,000 54,000 1,860 970 2,830 2030 0 61,000 61,000 2,000 1,040 3,040 2035 0 69,000 69,000 2,280 1,130 3,410 CAGR ('15-'35) N/A 2.7% 2.7% 2.6% N/A 2.1% Drop in commuter operations from 2005 to 2010 caused by Alaska swtiching to a larger aircraft. CAGR: Compound Annual Growth Rate Commercial Operations 2.1% growth over next 20 years Airline trends to continue into future Part 135 (business jets) grow fastest Year Cargo Operations 2015 560 2020 600 2025 600 2030 600 2035 600 CAGR 0.3% CAGR: Compound Annual Growth Rate Year Part 135 Operations 2015 312 2020 370 2025 440 2030 530 2035 630 CAGR 3.6% CAGR: Compound Annual Growth Rate
Aircraft Operations Forecasts Itinerant GA Year TAF Forecast 2015 11,596 11,596 2020 11,102 11,800 2025 11,302 11,900 2030 11,510 12,200 2035 11,723 12,400 CAGR 0.1% 0.3% CAGR: Compound Annual Growth Rate Local GA Year Total Training Other 2015 13,123 13,123 11,811 1,312 2020 13,554 20,500 18,450 2,050 2025 13,629 20,600 18,540 2,060 2030 13,704 20,900 18,810 2,090 2035 13,779 21,100 18,990 2,110 CAGR 0.2% 2.4% CAGR: Compound Annual Growth Rate Forecast Itinerant GA 0.3% average growth over next 20 years Local GA 2.4% average growth over next 20 years Training and business segments lead growth TAF
Aircraft Operations Forecasts Total Operations 1.6% average growth over next 20 years Flight training and itinerant GA major drivers Air carrier will grow to meet passenger demand
Based Aircraft A based aircraft is: an aircraft that is primarily stored at ALW Primary Influence Mix and capacity of T-hangars and box hangars Parking aprons and tie downs Determination of design aircraft Local operations counts Secondary Influence Viability of FBO and fuel sales operations Itinerant operations counts
Based Aircraft Single Engine Piston Multi-engine Piston Turbo Prop Jet Helicopter Light Sport
Based Aircraft Rank Based Aircraft Factor r 1 Nat'l Multi-Engine Fleet 0.87 2 Nat'l Single-Engine Fleet 0.86 3 Nat'l Air Taxi Ops. 0.85 4 Nat'l Itinerant GA Ops. 0.83 5 Nat'l Local GA Ops. 0.79 3.4% average decline over past 10 years Decline similar to national GA fleet Single engine piston most common type
Based Aircraft Forecasts Year SEP MEP Turbo Prop Jet Other Forecast TAF* 2015 84 6 1 0 4 95 95 0 0% 2020 81 6 1 1 5 94 99 5-5% 2025 79 6 1 1 7 94 103 9-9% 2030 76 6 1 1 9 93 107 14-15% 2035 74 6 1 2 11 94 111 17-19% CAGR -0.6% 0.0% 0.0% N/A 5.2% -0.1% 0.8% SEP = Single Engine Piston, MEP = Multi-Engine Piston, Other = Experimental and Light Sport 2015 TAF has been adjusted to match actual based aircraft levels. CAGR: Compound Annual Growth Rate 0.1% average decline over next 20 years Single engine retirements, not replaced 1:1 Growth in jet, experimental, and light sport Difference
Forecast Summary Category 2015 2035 CAGR ENPLANEMENTS 40,245 69,000 2.7% TOTAL OPERATIONS 26,894 37,180 1.6% Itinerant Operations 13,771 16,080 0.8% Air Carrier 1,246 2,280 3.1% Commuter/Air Taxi 872 1,300 2.0% Military 57 100 2.9% General Aviation (GA) 11,596 12,400 0.3% Local GA Operations 13,123 21,100 2.4% Training 11,811 18,990 2.4% Other 1,312 2,110 2.4% BASED AIRCRAFT 95 94-0.1% Single-Engine Piston 84 74-0.6% Multi-Engine Piston 6 6 0.0% Turbo Prop 1 1 0.0% Jet 0 2 N/A Helicopter 0 0 N/A Light Sport / Experimental 4 11 5.2% CAGR: Compound Annual Growth Rate Aviation activity expected to grow at ALW Enplanements driven by local economy and tourism Operations driven by itinerant GA and flight training Based aircraft growth markets include jet, light sport / experimental
Questions and Comments Thank you!
Project Roadmap What do we have? Inventory Forecasts* What demand do we expect? Can we meet expected demand? Facility Requirements Alternatives What do we need to change to meet demand? How do we pay for these changes? Capital Improvement Plan Airport Layout Plan* What will these changes look like? Stakeholder Coordination & Public Outreach * Denotes FAA-approved Element PAC Public
Documents to be reviewed at PAC 3 Final Aviation Activity Forecasts Draft Facility Requirements and Alternatives Runway Disposition Aircraft parking and storage Passenger and GA Terminals Property Development