(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "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. 

T he Recom mend ed Q'Hare Developme nt 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 ' 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 
( a ctual) 



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 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. 

SC ENARIO 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 





3,357 




CARGO 





6,858 




ALL 


18,493 


24,075 


2000 


TERMINAL 


48,060 


22,858 




HANGER 





5,521 




CARGO 





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 





169 




CARGO 


5,103 





3,042 




ALL 


17,913 


24,651 


3,380 


2000 


TERMINAL 


17,008 


63,814 


797 




HANGER 


4,108 





800 




CARGO 


7,669 





14,796 




ALL 


28,785 


63,814 


16,393 



Zavattero, Milillo 



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



AL TERNATIVE 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. 

AL TERNATIVE 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!. r NDLNC 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: * 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-