An analysis of ground access to Chicago-O'Hare International Airport

IMMff

AN ANALYSIS OF GROUND ACCESS TO CHICAGO-0 ' HARE
INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT

By

David A. Zavattero and Michael T. Milillo

Chicago Area Transportation Study

300 West Adams Street

Chicago. Illinois 60606

TRANSPORTATION LIBRARY

MOV 1998
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY

Chicago Area Transportation Study

300 west adams street Chicago, Illinois 60606

This paper is prepared to document and promote the exchange of
technical information and procedures. It represents the opinions and
conclusions of the staff and does not represent the policy views of
either the Policy or Work Program Committees of the Chicago Area
Transportation Study. This report was prepared in part with financial
assistance of the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration. Urban Mass Transportation Administration and the
Illinois Department of Transportation. It does not reflect the review
or approval of these agencies.

i|||!

■«,

122 318 422

AN ANALYSIS OF GROUND ACCESS TO CHICAGO-0 ' HARE
INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT

3y

David A. Zavattero and Michael T. Milillo

Chicago Area Transportation Study

300 West Adams Street

Chicago, Illinois 60606

Paper prepared for presentation at the

63rd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board,

January 1984, Washington. D.C.

03372.03
August 1983
50660

Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2012 with funding from
CARLI: Consortium of Academic and Research Libraries in Illinois

http://www.archive.org/details/analysisofgroundOOzava

An Analysis of Ground Transportation to Chicago-O' Hare International Airport

David A. Zavattero and Michael T. Milillo
Chicago Area Transportation Study

ABSTRACT

This paper describes a comprehensive analysis of regional access to
Chicago-O' Hare International Airport. This analysis was based on the
conventional urban transportation planning process and was conducted as part
of the development of a new master plan for O'Hare. The performance of the
existing ground transportation system serving the airport was assessed against
both base and forecast access demand. Four alternative access configurations
designed to remedy identified deficiencies were evaluated. A recommended
ground access system was incorporated into the master plan.

An Analysis of Ground Transportation to Chicago-O' Hare International Airport

David A. Zavattero and Michael T. Milillo
Chicago Area Transportation Study

Introduction

Chicago-O' Hare International Airport connects Chicago and its hinterland
to the rest of the country and the world. It is the world's busiest airport
and a significant resource for Chicago's economy. O'Hare airport opened in
1959 and quickly replaced Midway as Chicago's major airport. O'Hare was one
of the first airports designed for the jet age. By 1961 O'Hare was handling
nearly 10 million passengers. Its system of seven runways and its central
core of three terminals, more than 95 gates, and over 10,000 parking spaces
was well designed to handle a large volume of traffic and it grew rapidly.

By 1978, O'Hare' s peak traffic year, the airport was serving over 49
million passengers annually, more than double its original design capacity.
The efficiency of the original design allowed the airport to accommodate the
amazing growth since opening day. A summary of the level and mix of activity
at O'Hare from 1974 to 1981 is given in Table 1 (1). Between 1962 and 1978
aviation traffic at O'Hare grew at an annual rate of 8.5% (2). An important
point about O'Hare is its' high level of transfer traffic. Chicago has
developed over time as a major aviation transfer hub and approximately half of
the traffic at O'Hare is connecting.

Since 1978, however, traffic has declined at O'Hare as it has at most
other airports in the United States. This decline is largely attributable to
the economic recession. The long term prospects for the aviation industry are
good. The Federal Aviation Administration as recently as 1981 was still
projecting a long term growth rate at O'Hare of nearly 4% per year between
1980 and 1992 (3) .

O'Hare* s growth reflects the growth in commercial aviation since the
1950* s, the locational advantages of Chicago as a major hub in the U.S.

Zavattero, Milillo page 2.

aviation system, the enormous population and industrial base of the Chicago
region, and the high level of accessibility provided to the airport by major
ground transportation facilities. But in order for O'Hare to continue to
provide the aviation services needed to support and promote economic
development it must be dramatically redesigned to function efficiently in a
new environment.

The O'Hare Airport Master Plan and the Access Study

The City of Chicago began preparation of a new master plan for O'Hare
airport in 1974 ( 1) , ( 4) , ( 5) . The plan focused on the three major constraints
limiting O'Hare' s capacity to accomodate anticipated future aviation demand.
These constraints were identified as: 1) the number and size of gates, 2) the
amount of terminal space, and 3) the ground access and traffic circulation
systems supporting the airport. Each of these subsystems is now operating at
or near capacity. A key objective of the master plan was to design an airport
that could accomodate an anticipated 1995 demand of over 90 million passengers
or nearly twice O'Hare' s peak traffic load.

The master planning process introduced a variety of concepts to improve
O'Hare' s capacity, efficiency, and performance. Proposals for additional
terminal and gate facilities ranged from expansion of the existing central
core to construction of a system of satellite concourses and gates. Proposed
ground access improvements included widening of the present entrance roadway,
new western and/or northwestern access points, remote parking lots, and an
airport people mover system.

This paper concentrates exclusively on the question of ground access to
this major aviation facility. More specifically, the capacity of the highway

Zavattero, Milillo page 3.

system serving O'Hare to handle present and future ground traffic is
examined. Four alternative highway access proposals advanced in the master
plan (6) , (_7_) , (8) are also evaluated.

Obviously airside and landside facility development on the field itself
will have important implications for regional ground access to O'Hare. The
access analysis was structured to consider these interactions and was closely
coordinated with other aspects of the master plan. The analysis was conducted
by the Chicago Area Transportation Study (CATS).

The O'Hare access study was organized as a conventional urban
transportation planning process. It involved the major steps of problem
definition, inventories, modeling, and development and evaluation of
alternatives. Both existing and future access conditions were examined.
Present bottlenecks and congestion problems were identified. The year 1975
was taken as the base and 2000 as the forecast period for the analysis. The
base year analysis and the deficiency analysis of the future demand on
existing facilities was used to develop a set of design concepts for future
access systems. These concepts were then operationalized as highway
networks. Estimated future demand was loaded onto the alternative future
networks to determine their relative performance characteristics. This
information was used in the master plan process to define desireable features
of the recommended access system.

The Airport Access Problem

Airport planners have tended to ignore the access question by
concentrating their analysis on the field itself. Where access is considered

Zavattero, Milillo page 4.

it is usually done by looking at the circulation of traffic within the
confines of the airport property. While this is an important consideration
the larger question of regional access to the airport must also be taken into
account .

Airport access, particularly around close in airports like O'Hare, has
been identified as a potential threat to aviation growth and an important
constraint on the advantages of air travel. Forecasts of access conditions at
major U.S. airports (9) indicate that the situation will worsen unless
corrective actions are taken. These actions may range from lower cost traffic
management improvements to large scale investments in new facilities (10),
(11). Obviously, the appropriate type of solution and level of investment
depends on the problems surrounding the specific airport.

The advantage of air travel in faster line haul times can be
significantly reduced if the trip to the airport encounters heavy congestion
and delay. Continued growth in air travel assumes that the airport access
problem will be addressed and solved in the next decade. Cities
such as Chicago and Washington have invested heavily in providing high speed
transit links between their airport and central business district. Lower cost
transportation systems management solutions have also been suggested
including: traffic operations improvements such as s ignalization ,
channelization, and reversible lanes; preferential treatment of high occupancy
vehicles such as freeway diamond lanes and park-and-ride facilities; and
reducing vehicle use through carpoooling and pricing (1_2) . The O'Hare access
study focused on the longer term, more capital intensive solutions to major
highway deficiencies. Following the development of an appropriate capital

Zavattero, Milillo page 5.

program a variety of these transportation system management strategies will be
assessed to obtain the most efficient use of the access system serving O'Hare.

Existing Ground Access to O'Hare

O'Hare is located approximately 17 miles from the Chicago Loop. The
airport lies on over 6,900 acres and is served by a number of major ground
transportation facilities as shown in Figure 1. Those ground access
facilities within a three mile radius of the airport are shown in Figure 2.

The major access route to O'Hare from the east is the Kennedy Expressway
(interstate route 1-90). This is an eight lane, limited access highway
providing direct auto access to the CBD. The Eisenhower Expressway (1-290) is
also an eight lane, limited access highway providing additional access from
the CBD via the Tri-State Tollway. The Tri-State Tollway (1-294) is a limited
access toll facility providing access to O'Hare from the north and south.
Access from the northwest is provided by the Northwest Tollway (1-90) which
intersects with the Tri-State and the Kennedy just northeast of the airport.
Southwest access is provided by the East-West Tollway (111-5) a six lane,
limited access toll highway connecting with the Tri-State Tollway.

Mannheim Road (US-12 and US-45) is a four lane divided arterial providing
secondary north-south access on the eastern side of the field. York. Road is a
two to four lane north-south arterial running along the western side of
O'Hare. Touhy Avenue and Higgins Road are the main arterials providing
east-west access to the north of the airport. Irving Park Road is a divided
four lane arterial on the airport's southern boundary.

Zavattero, Milillo page 6.

The principal entrance to the airport for all passengers and visitors and
for the majority of employees is Illinois 594 which intersects with the
Kennedy Expressway about 1 1/2 miles east and with the Tri-State about 1/4
miles east of the airport. This main entrance roadway is a limited access
facility varying from four to six lanes and is the only direct access to the
terminal and gate complex. The terminals are served by a two-level loop
roadway with three lanes on each level. The upper level is used for
departures and the lower level for arrivals.

In addition to providing direct access to the terminals the airport
entrance roadway (111-594) provides access to the parking garage and lots.
The parking facilities at O'Hare consist of a multi-level garage with an
adjacent ground level lot in the central core and a remote annex lot for
longer term parking located off Old Mannheim Road. A shuttle bus service
carries passengers and employees from the remote lot to the terminals.

O'Hare's hanger and aircraft maintenance facilities are located in the
northwest corner of the field and are accessible via Mount Prospect Road and
Touhy Avenue. The large cargo complex is located in the southeastern corner
and can be accessed either by Old Mannheim Road or Lawrence Avenue.

Of course, these highway facilities are also used by the public and
private bus operators serving O'Hare. The extension of the Chicago Transit
Authority rapid transit line to O'Hare will begin service within the next year
providing a high-speed transit link to the Chicago Loop. In addition a large
number of passengers arrive and depart O'Hare via taxis or rental cars.
Several private bus and limousine companies provide scheduled, direct bus
service to the airport from the Chicago Loop and several suburban locations.

Zavattero, Milillo page 7.

The CATS Year 2000 Transportation System Development Plan (1_3) recommends
two major additions to the highway system which will affect airport access.
The proposed Elgin-O'Hare Expressway would add substantial western access
capacity. And, the Illinois 53 extension south to 1-80 would divert some
non-airport traffic from the Tri-State thereby improving flow along this
facility.

Alternative Future Aviation Scenarios

A key step in developing the master plan concepts including access
alternatives was the estimation of future air passenger demand at O'Hare. The
measure of air passenger activity used for this purpose is annual
enplanements . The relationship between these enplanements and the previously
reported annual total passengers is shown schematically in Figure 3. Total
passengers include originating, enplaning connecting, deplaning connecting,
terminating, and through passengers. Traffic at O'Hare is split roughly
equally between originating and terminating passengers. Approximately 48% of
all traffic at O'Hare is connecting, that is passengers switching planes to
get to their ultimate destinations. Through passengers, like connecting
passengers, are those for whom O'Hare is also only an intermediate stop. But,
unlike connecting passengers, through passengers remain aboard the same
aircraft as their flight continues. Only the originating and terminating
passengers will utilize the ground access system in getting to or from
O'Hare. The other categories of passengers are not likely to leave the
airfield and therefore were not considered in the access analysis.

Zavattero, Milillo page 8.

The air travel demand forecasts developed for the entire Chicago hub as
part of the master planning process are summarized in Table 2 and described in
detail in (1). These forecast enplanements are consistent with the national
aviation demand forecasts and represent the Chicago hub's long term market
share of about 10% of total U.S. enplanements.

Master plan concepts were developed for O'Hare based on four alternative
scenarios for accomodating these levels of aviation demand in the Chicago
hub. These scenarios represent different assumptions about the share of
traffic that might be handled by Midway airport and are summarized in
Table 3. Midway is the only other air carrier category airport in the Chicago
hub. It was felt to be unrealistic to assume the existance of any new, third
major airport in the region. In each case the underlying premise was that
Chicago should make all practical effort to maintain its traditional share of
the national aviation market. In other words, each of the four scenarios
described in Table 3 are based on satisfying all of the forecast aviation
demand either at O'Hare or at a revitalized Midway airport. Of course, it was
recognized that because of its size and its limited runway length Midway could
only be considered feasible for locally originating or destined short-haul air
trips.

The access study is based on scenario 1. It was assumed that O'Hare
would continue to function as the primary air carrier airport in the Chicago
hub with Midway acting mainly as a general aviation reliever. Having
established the level of aviation activity in the base and forecast periods it
was necessary to develop estimates of on airport employment. Nearly 25,000
persons were employed at O'Hare in 1975. Based on future air traffic levels,

Zavattero, Milillo page 9.

total employment at O'Hare in the year 2000 was expected to be nearly 39,000.
The enplaned passenger and employment forecasts used in the access study are
given in Table 4.

The Access Study Methodology

The enplaned passenger and employment measures of airport activity next
had to be converted into average daily trips to and from O'Hare. This was
accomplished with the conventional urban transportation demand models used by
CATS (14). (11.) and involving the sequence of trip generation, mode choice,
and trip distribution. The end result of this process was a set of triptables
quantifing the trip frequency, mode, and destination decisions of many
individuals. Separate triptables were prepared for work., passenger and
visitor, and truck trips to and from O'Hare. These triptables were loaded
onto either existing or alternative future highway networks.

For the purposes of the access analysis the traffic on the ground
transportation facilities around O'Hare was divided into airport and
non-airport related traffic. For most of these facilities the majority of
traffic will not be directly tied to the airport. Only those facilities on or
immediately surrounding the field will have a preponderance of airport
traffic. The ground access study assumes that this non-airport traffic is
independent of the specific airport development scenario at O'Hare.
Therefore, the non-airport related trips were taken from the 1975 and 2000
triptables previously developed for the Year 2000 Plan. This meant that
available triptables could be used. Trips with either origin or destination
at O'Hare were reestimated and the Year 2000 triptables were modified
accordingly.

Zavattero, Milillo page 10.

The airport was divided into three major functional areas for the access
study. These areas are: the terminal complex; the hanger area; and the cargo
area. Figure 2 shows the locations of each functional area. Airport related
trips are further defined as being either employee or passenger and visitor
traffic. Obviously, the type of use and access needs of each functional area
are different. The terminal zone attracts all of the passenger and visitor
trips and more than half of the employee trips. The cargo zone attracts some
employee trips and most of the truck trips. The hanger zone attracts about
25% of the employee trips and the remainder of the truck, trips. The magnitude
of traffic to each of these locations is directly related to airport
development and activity.

The trip generation procedure used to estimate daily person trips
produced by and attracted to O'Hare was straightforward. The typical weekday
was taken as the appropriate time frame for the access study. Daily work
trips were estimated by applying an assumed absentee rate to airport
employment. Daily passenger trips to the airport were based on enplanements .
Average daily enplanements were calculated from the annual numbers. Half of
the daily enplanements were assumed to be connecting passengers who would not
use the access system. Therefore originating daily enplanements were
estimated by multiplying the total daily enplanements by one half. The O'Hare
passenger survey data indicated that the typical passenger was accompanied to
the airport by 0.85 visitors (1J3) . Thus, total passenger and visitor daily
person trips were estimated as 1.85 times daily originating enplanements. The
total daily person trips for the base and forecast years resulting from these
assumptions are given in Table 5.

Zavattero, Milillo page 11.

Following the trip generation calculation a combined mode choice and trip
distribution was performed based on the O'Hare passenger survey data. Arrival
mode and ground trip origin location by zip code was available from the
survey. Mode splits were seen to vary significantly by location. The survey
modes were redefined into three categories for this analysis. The auto .mode
was taken as auto driver, auto passenger, and rental car. Taxi was defined to
include suburban limosines and hotel courtesy vehicles. The public transit
mode included airport, charter, and public bus as well as rapid transit. The
taxi mode was assumed to be available only for passenger and visitor trips
since the survey indicated very little use of this mode by employees.

The regionwide average mode split percentages are also given in Table 5.
The modal shares for each analysis zone varied by geographic location of the
trip. For the year 2000 the mode split shown in Table 5 was adjusted to
account for the opening of the CTA rapid transit extension to O'Hare. This
adjustment was based on the mode choice results for the Year 2000 Plan
alternative which included this new transit service. An additional 6,000
employee trips were estimated to shift to the new O'Hare rail transit service.

The trip distribution patterns for passengers and employees are summarized
in Figures 4 and 5 respectively. These figures show the percentage of O'Hare
trips associated with each of the approximately 130 townships in the region
from the survey data. Trip ends were allocated to the smaller CATS traffic
zones within each township based on the zone's share of the township's
population. This method was used for all townships except the CBD and the
area immediately surrounding O'Hare. The allocation for these special cases
was performed on the basis of the zone's share of hotel rooms since these
areas attract primarily business travelers.

Zavattero, Milillo page 12.

The triptables were then aggregated from the 1,814 traffic zones to 459
O'Hare study zones. The O'Hare study zones were structured to include the
greatest zonal and network, detail in the four townships nearest the airport.
This is the immediate area of concern and the expense of network, assignment
can be substantially reduced through this windowing procedure.

Finally, vehicle occupancy factors of 1.21 persons per auto for work, trips
and 1.54 persons per auto for non-work, trips were applied to the estimated
person trips to obtain daily vehicle trips (1_7) . Truck, trips were taken from
available Year 2000 Plan triptables. The results of the travel demand process
are summarized in Table 6 which gives employee, passenger and visitor, and
truck, trips for each functional area for both the base and forecast years.

Capacity Deficiency Analysis of the Existing Highway System and
Development of Alternatives

The demand for access to O'Hare as well as all demand for non-airport
related travel for both the base and forecast years are contained in the
appropriate triptables. The capacity of the existing highway system serving
O'Hare to accomodate this demand was evaluated in the network, assignment phase
of the access study. The trip demands were loaded on to the existing highway
network.. Assignments were performed for 1975 and for the year 2000. The
resulting route choices are based on minimum travel times and costs and are a
function of the network, being tested. The associated average daily link
volumes were then compared with the link's capacity. Capacity was defined at
level of service "E" representing somewhat congested conditions and speeds
below posted limits.

Zavattero, Milillo page 13.

Figure 6 shows the capacity deficiencies for the highways in the vicinity
of O'Hare when 1975 demands are loaded onto the existing system. No severe
congestion problems were indicated. There were some minor capacity problems
on segments of Mannheim Road and Lee Street.

When year 2000 demands were loaded on the existing system, however,
several significant problems developed on the facilities immediately adjacent
to the airport as seen in Figure 7. By the year 2000 traffic congestion on
the airport entrance roadway and on sections of Mannheim Road will reach
unnacceptable levels. In addition, parts of Irving Park. Road, York. Road,
Touhy Avenue, Lee Street, and Higgins Road also show capacity deficiencies.
These are unnacceptable conditions and indicate that the existing highway
system serving O'Hare will not function satisfactorily under anticipated
future traffic levels.

As the initial step in the development of future alternative networks for
testing a series of hypothetical directional links were coded into the
existing highway network to allow access to each airport functional area from
any direction. These links were used to determine the directional
distribution of access trips to O'Hare assuming the airport could be entered
from any direction. This exercise confirmed the fact that a significant share
of future trips to O'Hare desire access to O'Hare from northern and western
locations where access currently is most difficult. This result partly
explains the deficiencies observed for 2000 trips on the existing system since
some of this north and west oriented traffic must circle the field to get to
the single entrance roadway.

Four alternative networks proposed by the O'Hare access study advisory
committee are summarized in Table 7. Each alternative was designed to provide

Zavattero, Milillo page 14.

improved access from the north and west where much of the future traffic
growth was forecast. Some improvements on the eastern side of the airport
were needed to remove bottlenecks there. Alternative A included widening of
the Kennedy Expressway west of the Tri-State as well as widening of Mannheim
Road. These improvements correct identified deficiencies on the existing
system and were also incorporated into Alternatives B and C. Alternative A
provides direct access to O'Hare from the Northwest Tollway by means of a full
interchange at Lee Street and an exclusive on-airport roadway. The present
partial interchange at Lee Street only allows exit of west bound traffic from
or entrance of east bound traffic to the tollway making its use for airport
access infeasible. The northwestern access roadway would lead to a remote
parking lot served by a high speed people mover system.

The people mover system is an integral element of all the alternatives.
Such a system is required to allow access to O'Hare other than that provided
by the present airport entrance roadway. This system is envisioned to operate
with 4 to 5 minute headways providing a quick, convenient, and secure link
from the remote parking locations to the central core complex. For the
purposes of the access analysis it was assumed that the time to get to the
gates from both the central and remote parking locations was comparable. This
assumption meant that whatever time advantage the central garage had because
of its proximity to the terminals was lost due to the congestion of the
internal circulation roadway.

Direct western access was provided in Alternative B via a remote western
parking lot accessible from York Road and connected to the central core
complex by people mover. Alternative B also included the extension of

Zavattero, Milillo page 15.

Thorndale Avenue to Irving Park Road to circumvent the York/Irving Park
intersection bottleneck. Finally, the cargo area was split in each of the
western access alternatives with half its activity shifted to a new cargo
center located in the southwest corner of the field. The cargo center would
be accessible by the Thorndale Avenue extension in Alternatives B and C,

Alternative C was similar to B with the addition of a full interchange at
the Northwest Tollway and York Road. Some capacity improvements along York
Road were also included in Alternative C. Alternative D also provided direct
western access with a remote parking lot and people mover. However, the
arterial access supplied to this western lot in Alternatives B and C was
replaced by a limited access expressway. The Elgin-O'Hare Expressway is
recommended in the Year 2000 Plan as a four to six lane facility running from
Elgin in Kane county to Irving Park Road just south of the airport. As in
Alternatives B and C, Alternative D assumed half the cargo activity would be
relocated to the southwestern corner of the field with access to the
Elgin-O'Hare Expressway.

Evaluation of the Alternatives

The same capacity deficiency technique applied in the analysis of the
existing system was used to evaluate each alternative. The year 2000 demand
was loaded on to Alternative networks A, B, C, and D and the results are shown
in summary form in Figures 8, 9, 10, and 11 respectively .

As seen in Figure 8 the additional access provided by the Northwest
Tollway/Lee Street interchange and the remote northeastern parking/people
mover combination is sufficiently attractive to eliminate the congestion on

Zavattero, Milillo page 16.

the airport entrance roadway observed under year 2000 conditions on the
existing system. However, this alternative does introduce capacity problems
along Lee Street as it feeds the on-airport roadway serving the northeast lot.

The results for Alternative B shown in Figure 9 also indicate that
provision of a second airport access choice, in this case the western
lot/people mover combination, can indeed eliminate the need for the very
costly expansion of the current airport entrance roadway. In addition, by
moving significant airport access traffic to the western side of the airport
the congestion on nearly all of the eastern arterials can be greatly reduced.
But, with only arterial access provided to the remote western lot in
Alternative B the traffic conditions along York. Road, Irving Park Road, and
Thorndale Avenue are likely to deteriorate. Because of the tunneling required
to construct the western people mover link this is a high capital cost
option.

The addition of a York Road/Northwest Tollway interchange and limited
capacity expansion along York Road in Alternative C does not significantly
improve the traffic flow on these west-side arterials as shown in Figure 10.
Much of this western arterial congestion is due to the attractive nature of
direct western access to O'Hare. Some part of it can also be attributed to
the large volume of truck traffic shifted to this area with the relocated
cargo facilities.

Finally, the capacity deficiency map for Alternative D given in Figure 11
indicates that the proposed Elgin-O'Hare Expressway will reduce much of this
western-side arterial congestion. Alternative D includes a direct connection
from the expressway to the remote western parking lot. Under this alternative

Zavattero, Milillo page 17.

western ground access service characteristics are of comparable quality as
that provided by the Kennedy Expressway and the entrance roadway on the east
side of O'Hare.

The Recommended Q'Hare Development Program

The O'Hare master planning process involved inventory and analysis of the
existing facilities, determination of the economic impact of the airport,
forecasts of future aviation demand, and development and evaluation of a
series of airfield concepts (1) , (4) , (5.) . The analysis of the ground access
study was used in combination with studies of the airside and landside systems
to evaluate these airport concepts.

These studies lead to the preparation of a recommended O'Hare development
program (6), (7), (8). The development program was divided into three phases.
The first phase is to be constructed by 1985. An environmental assessment
( 18) was prepared for Phase I and the FAA has issued a finding of no
significant impact (19). The City of Chicago has agreed with the surrounding
municipalities to pursue noise reduction strategies including establishment of
a noise complaint and monitoring office (20) and implementation of Phase I is
underway.

Figure 12 summarizes the recommended 1990 O'Hare development program
resulting from the master plan process. The compact central core concept
which provides aircraft access from all runways into a distribution center is
preserved in the plan. The cargo facilities and the ground access system are
reorganized to obtain added capacity. A new Terminal 1 on the site of the
present international terminal and a new concourse L in Terminal 3 will supply

Zavattero, Milillo page 18.

an additional 30 gates. New international and commuter terminal facilities
are planned on the present cargo site. These new terminals would be connected
to the central core by a people mover. This people mover will follow the
terminal roadway connecting all the terminal buildings and facilitating
passenger movements between terminals. The cargo facilities would be
completely relocated to the southwest corner of the airport in a new "cargo
c i ty" .

The recommended ground access system reflects the findings of the access
study concerning the need for north and northwest access to the airport. The
plan calls for construction of a new interchange with the Northwest Tollway at
Wolf Road. This partial interchange would consist of ramps providing outbound
entrance to and inbound exit from the tollway onto an exclusive on-airport
roadway leading to a remote northeastern parking lot. The international and
commuter terminal people mover line would extend to the northeast lot
providing access from the lot to the central core. The access system of the
recommended plan is similar to the tested Alternative A and is expected to
function much like that alternative. This plan obviously can not provide the
same service for western and southwestern oriented trips as would direct
western access. But it does represent an improvement over the exclusively
eastern access provided by the present system and a compromise in terms of the
cost of rebuilding O'Hare's access system.

Another feature of the plan is the exclusive loop roadway serving the new
international and commuter terminals. This new roadway will allow segregation
of the domestic and international ground traffic and should eliminate the need
for all traffic to circle the complete terminal complex roadway thereby
reducing congestion.

Zavattero, Milillo page 19.

While the recommended plan does not exactly duplicate any of the
alternatives examined in the access study it does respond to the major
findings of the analysis. The recommended plan represents a compromise
between cost and performance which should function efficiently in the next
decade as O'Hare seeks to continue and expand its role as a major aviation hub
of the nation.

Zavattero, Milillo

REFERENCES

(1) Landrum and Brown, Chicago-O' Hare International Airport Master Plan
Study, Volume 3, Aviation Demand Forecasts, Chicago Department of
Aviation, November 1979.

(2) City of Chicago, "Chicago-O* Hare International Airport Operational
Statistics", Department of Aviation, Monthly.

(3) Federal Aviation Administration, Terminal Area Forecasts: FY1981 to 1992,
U.S. Department of Transportation, February 1981.

(4) Landrum and Brown, Chicago-O' Hare International Airport Master Plan
Study, Volume 8, Economic Impact Study, Chicago Department of Aviation,
August 1979.

(5) Landrum and Brown, Chicago-O' Hare International Airport Master Plan
Study, Volume 9, Landside Facility Requirements, Chicago Department of
Aviation, April 1980.

(6) O'Hare Associates, O'Hare Development Program, Chicago Department of
Aviation and Chicago Department of Public Works, December 1982.

(7) O'Hare Associates, O'Hare Development Program: Mid Term Report, Chicago
Department of Aviation and Chicago Department of Public Works, December
1981.

(8) O'Hare Associates, O'Hare Development Program: Mid Term

Report: Supplement D Passenger Flow Data, Chicago Department of Aviation
and Chicago Department of Public Works, December 1981.

(9) Ellis, W. , N. Booker, and I. Fellstein, Forecast of Landside Airport
Access Traffic at 211 Major U.S. Airports to 1990, Verve Research
Corporation, Federal Aviation Administration, February, 1976.

(10) Gorstein, M. , et. al . , Airport Ground Access, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Transportation Systems Center, Cambridge, MA, October
1978.

(11) Gorstein, M. , Airport Ground Access Planning Guide, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Transportation Systems Center, Cambridge, MA., July 1980.

(12) Goldberg, A., "Airport Ground Access: Traffic Management Concepts,"
Airport Services Management, June 1978.

(13) Chicago Area Transportation Study, Year 2000 Transportation System
Development Plan, September 1980.

(14) Chicago Area Transportation Study, Travel Forecasting Process, April 1979.

Zavattero, Milillo

(15) Urban Mass Transportation Administration and Federal Highway
Administration, Urban Transportation Planning System, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Washington D.C., December 1980.

(16) City of Chicago, O'Hare Inflight, Employee, and Flight Crew Survey -
19 77 , Department of Aviation, June 1978.

(17) CATS, "Summary of Travel Characteristics", September 1980.

(18) Landrum and Brown, Chicago-0' Hare International Airport Master Plan
Study, Volume 15, Environmental Assessment Phase I Development Projects,
Chicago Department of Aviation, October 1981.

(19) Federal Aviation Administration, Chicago O'Hare International Airport
Phase I Development Program: Finding of No Significant Impact, U.S.
Department of Transportation, July 1982.

(20) Burke, Ralph and Associates, O'Hare International Airport Master Plan,
Aviation Forecast Review, Noise Analyses Review, Noise Monitoring
Program, Suburban O'Hare Commission, June 1981.

(21) Voorhees, Alan M. and Associates, A Study of a Ground Access System for
O'Hare International Airport, Volume 1, Evaluation of CBD-O'Hare
Alternatives , Chicago Department of Public Works, August 1973.

(22) Voorhees, Alan M. and Associates, A Study of a Ground Access System for
O'Hare International Airport, Volume 2, Recommended Access Alternatives,
Chicago Department of Public Works, December 1973.

Zavattero, Milillo

TABLE 1: CHICAGO 0 ' HARE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT OPERATIONAL STATISTICS

TOTAL PASSENGERS 37,893,449 49,151,449 47,842,510 43,653,167 37,992,151

TOTAL OPERATIONS 694,674 760,606 735,245 724,155 645,614

SCHEDULED DOMESTIC

Passengers 35,268,132 46,134,709 44,488,298 40,253,540 34,651,878

Operations 583,626 656,220 614,382 612,512 542,441

SCHEDULED INTERNATIONAL

Passengers 1,995,330 2,680,408 2,791,844 2,776,332 2,742,058

Operations 25,824 28,265 28,210 27,330 25,340

NON- SCHEDULED ALL

Passengers 629,987 675,256 526,760 449,841 403,123

Operations 85,224 91,986 92,653 83,756 77,430

FREIGHT (tons)

Mail

165,605

183

,291

166,973

181,145

183

,095

Other

719,224

745

,611

692,532

670,328

643

,359

GROUND ACTIVITY

Parked cars

3,949,837

4,890

,205

4,394,694

3,829,433

3,459

,014

ENERGY

Aircraft fuel

(1000 gal.)

760,403

817

,369

784,621

743,434

632

,253

Zavattero, Milillo

TABLE 2: ENPLANED PASSENGER FORECASTS FOR THE
CHICAGO AIR CARRIER HUB

Enplaned passengers (1,000* s)
1974 1980 1985 1990 1995
( actual)

SCHEDULED DOMESTIC 16,183 20,810 27,327 34,423 42,604

SCHED INTERNATIONAL 996 1,430 1,956 2,613 3,399

NON SCHED ALL 425 707 1,081 1,523 2,057

TOTAL 17,604 22,947 30,364 38,559 48,060

Zavattero, Milillo

TABLE 3: CHICAGO HUB AIR CARRIER DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS

SCENARIO 0 DO NOTHING

1. Some aviation demand unsatisfied.

2. No expansion at either O'Hare or Midway.

3. Some traffic shifts to other hubs.

SCENARIO I O'HARE DEVELOPMENT

1. O'Hare development to meet unconstrained
demand.

2. Midway remains general aviation reliever.

SCENARIO 2 O'HARE AND MIDWAY DEVELOPMENT

1. Unconstrained development at O'Hare.

2. Some improvements at Midway.

3. Midway attracts up to 29% of short haul,
local 0/D traffic.

SCENARIO 3 REVITALIZED MIDWAY

1. Major expansion at Midway.

2. Midway attracts over 40% of short haul,
local 0/D traffic.

3. Constrained development at O'Hare.

Zavattero, Milillo

TABLE 4: O'HARE AIRPORT ACCESS STUDY BASE AND FORECAST
ANNUAL ENPLANED PASSENGERS AND ON FIELD EMPLOYMENT

Airport

Enplaned

Year

Area

Passengers
(1,000' s)

Employment

1975

TERMINAL

18,493

13,859

HANGER

0

3,357

CARGO

0

6,858

ALL

18,493

24,075

2000

TERMINAL

48,060

22,858

HANGER

0

5,521

CARGO

0

10,307

ALL

48,060

38,687

Zavattero, Milillo

TABLE 5: O'HARE AIRPORT ACCESS STUDY
BASE AND FORECAST DAILY PERSON TRIPS

Year

Trip
Type

Airport
Area

Daily

Person

Trips

% Auto

Mode Split
% Public

% Taxi

1975

EMPLOYEE

TERMINAL
HANGER
CARGO
TOTAL WORK

12,564
2,563
5,960

21,087

93.8
98.2
93.8

6.2
1.8
6.2

PASSENGER
& VISITOR

TERMINAL

50,391

70.3

10.2

19.5

2000

EMPLOYEE

TERMINAL
HANGER
CARGO
ALL AREAS

20,747
4,474
9,062

34,283

95.6
99.1
95.7

4.4
0.9
4.3

PASSENGER
& VISITOR

TERMINAL

106,198

71.4

9.5

18.9

Zavattero, Milillo

TABLE 6: O'HARE AIRPORT ACCESS STUDY BASE AND FORECAST
DAILY AIRPORT VEHICLE TRIPS

Passenger

Airport

Employee

& Visitor

Truck

Year

Area

Trips

Trips

Trips

1975

TERMINAL

10,312

24,651

169

HANGER

2,498

0

169

CARGO

5,103

0

3,042

ALL

17,913

24,651

3,380

2000

TERMINAL

17,008

63,814

797

HANGER

4,108

0

800

CARGO

7,669

0

14,796

ALL

28,785

63,814

16,393

Zavattero, Milillo

TABLE 7: O'HARE ACCESS STUDY ALTERNATIVE TEST HIGHWAY NETWORKS

ALTERNATIVE A

1. Add lanes to Kennedy Expressway west of Tri-State.

2. Add lanes to Mannheim Road.

3. Full Lee Street/Northwest Tollway interchange.

4. Parallel airport feeder roadway south of Higgins Road.

5. Remote northeast parking lot with people mover.

6. Cargo area remains in present location.

ALTERNATIVE B

1. Alternative A improvements.

2. Thorndale Avenue arterial extension east to Irving
Park Road.

3. Remote western parking lot with people mover.

4. Cargo area split, half of activity relocated to
southwest corner with access to Thorndale Avenue.

ALTERNATIVE C

1. Alternative A improvements.

2. Alternative B improvements.

3. Full York Road/Northwest Tollway interchange.

4. York Road improvements.

5. Cargo area split, half of activity relocated to
southwest corner with access to Thorndale Avenue.

ALTERNATIVE D

1. Elgin-O'Hare expressway.

2. Full York Road/Northwest Tollway interchange.

3. York Road and Irving Park Road improvements.

4. Remote western parking lot with people mover
and direct connection to Elgin- O'Hare.

5. Cargo area split, half of activity relocated to
southwest corner with access to Elgin-O'Hare.

Zavattero, Milillo

figure 1.

FIGURE L: LOCATION OF O'HARE AIRPORT IN CHICAGO SM

Zavattero, Milillo

Figure 2.

FIGURE 2: O'HARE AIRPORT 3UPRC!.rNDLNC HIGHWAY FACILITIES

•QH j"IOM

iDSdSOSd "iW

AV aNV"IS38Wi

Zavattero, Milillo

FIGURE 3: AVIATION PASSENGER DEFINITIONS

ENPLANEMENT

DEPLANEMENT

4

L \

f

ORIGINATING

CONNECTING
(change planes)

TERMINATING

THROUGH
(same plane)

02420

Zavattero, Milillo

FIGURE 4: 0 * HARE PASSENGER TRIP DISTRIBUTION PATTERN

M

jxi ■

.oz

j?

.02 p-

,v.

',/f/:

;/7

.2Y

!fr$yt

J9

\M\

J5

.a&7

f^H

.n-

: JS-

<:&■'

M03

:

'M

Mmm'm^i

,07 \M :$f P? MM[MlU2

^M & r uo mx p/ m /?/ m

,\ ■

.#'

M-

m U3M

{.iff

M

j.afe

■MM

■[.02

.0%

■r'

\-;i

.01

189

M

Zavattero, Milillo

Figure 5.

FIGURE 5: O'HARE EMPLOYEE TRIP DISTRIBUTION PATTERN

\-M.

M

./f a&

.it. .¥?;

1/ W\-l$$fr

1 ±

.15

\P

\33 ' .%: W

\':^-

w$&

'■•&l y',-w£

M2

-

iM

jf^^ttS®.

H\\

M

tMm'Mffimw

rJ

#J

^'sim^SI^1^

r39 1

JF

.%Mmm-&&2v

J

/ §#!!

.2^ -it tmn "&* w

J^^ tt^tfp-8

^^f^' ftlTffii

78

312 RI3 Sl4

Zavattero, Milillo

FIGURE 6: O'HARE ACCESS CAPACITY DEFICIENCY 1975 ON EXISTING

iilill

Zavattero, Milillo

FIGURE 7: O'HARE ACCESS CAPACITY DEFICIENCY 2000 ON EXISTING

Zavattero, Milillo

Figure 3.

FIGURE 8: O'HARE ACCESS CAPACITY DEFICIENCY 2000 ON ALTERNATIVE A

Zavattero, Milillo

Figure 9.

FIGURE 9: O'HARE ACCESS CAPACITY DEFICIENCY 2000 ON ALTERNATIVE B

Zavattero, Milillo

Figure 10.

FIGURE 10: O'HARE ACCESS CAPACITY DEFICIENCY 2000 ON ALTERNATIVE C

Zavattero, Milillo

F LOURE 11: O'HARE \CCKSS CAPACITY DEFICIENCY 7000 ON \LTERNATLVli D

Zavattero, Milillo

igure 12.

FLGURE L2: O'HARE AIRPORT 1990 DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

^^^i^Wmm mmmmSm^ ikz-