Final Technical Report Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport June 2012 PhxMesa Gateway Airport In Association with: Jacobs Consultancy DWL Architects & Planners, Inc. Elliott D. Pollack & Company Final Technical Report Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport June 2012 PhxMesa Gateway Airport In Association with: Jacobs Consultancy DWL Architects & Planners, Inc. Elliott D. Pollack & Company PhxMesa Gateway Airport In Association with: Jacobs Consultancy DWL Architects & Planners, Inc. Elliott D. Pollack & Company Technical Report Technical Report Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Final Draft: May 2012 PhxMesa Gateway Airport In Association with: Jacobs Consultancy/LeightFisher, Inc. DWL Architects & Planners, Inc. Elliott D. Pollack & Company Putting the pieces together Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Table of Contents Section 1: Executive Summary������������������������������������������������������������ 1-1 1.1 Introduction������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 1-1 1.2 Purpose and Need��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 1-1 1.3 Study Process����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 1-2 1.4 Findings������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 1-3 Section 2: Project Description������������������������������������������������������������� 2-1 2.1 Introduction������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 2-1 2.2 Study Background���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 2-1 2.3 Project Goals & Objectives���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 2-1 2.4 Previous Planning Efforts and Concepts�������������������������������������������������������������������� 2-3 2.5 Planning Approach�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 2-5 2.6 Stakeholder Involvement������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 2-5 Section 3: Existing Conditions������������������������������������������������������������ 3-1 3.1 Introduction������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 3-1 3.2 Airport Site Description��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 3-1 3.2.2 Passenger Terminal Area...................................................................................................... 3-1 3.2.3 Airfield Components.......................................................................................................... 3-12 3.2.4 Local and Regional Infrastructure....................................................................................... 3-15 3.2.5 Environmental Overview.................................................................................................... 3-30 3.2.6 Properties and Leaseholds.................................................................................................. 3-30 3.2.7 On-Airport Land Use.......................................................................................................... 3-30 3.2.8 Aircraft Fuel Farm.............................................................................................................. 3-34 3.3 Local Land Use and Zoning������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 3-35 Section 4: Activity Forecast Review���������������������������������������������������� 4-1 4.1 Introduction������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 4-1 4.2 Previous Forecasting Efforts�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 4-1 4.3 National FAA Forecasts��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 4-7 4.4 Forecast Factors And Drivers������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 4-9 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Table of Contents i-ii Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Section 5: Facility Programming��������������������������������������������������������� 5-1 5.1 Introduction������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 5-1 5.2 Planning Parameters������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 5-1 5.2.1 Planning Factors & Assumptions........................................................................................... 5-1 5.2.2 Codes And Regulations........................................................................................................ 5-2 5.2.3 Demand Triggers................................................................................................................. 5-2 5.3 Facility Requirements������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 5-3 5.3.1 Passenger Terminal Facilities................................................................................................. 5-3 Planning Horizons........................................................................................................................ 5-3 Peaking Characteristics.................................................................................................................. 5-4 Program Development.................................................................................................................. 5-5 5.3.2 Airfield Components............................................................................................................ 5-9 Aircraft Fleet Mix........................................................................................................................... 5-9 Annual service Volume.................................................................................................................. 5-9 Airport Reference Code (ARC)........................................................................................................ 5-9 Runways ................................................................................................................................... 5-10 Taxiways .................................................................................................................................... 5-10 5.3.3 Local And Regional Infrastructure ...................................................................................... 5-11 Section 6: Market Analysis����������������������������������������������������������������� 6-1 6.1 Greater Phoenix Economy Overview������������������������������������������������������������������������ 6-1 6.1.1 The Current State of the Economy........................................................................................ 6-2 6.1.2 Employment Mix and Diversity............................................................................................. 6-5 6.1.3 Greater Phoenix Housing Market History.............................................................................. 6-7 6.1.4 Long Term Forecasts for Greater Phoenix............................................................................. 6-8 6.1.5 Drivers of Employment Growth.......................................................................................... 6-11 6.1.6 Summary........................................................................................................................... 6-12 6.2 Greater Phoenix Commercial Real Estate Market����������������������������������������������������� 6-13 6.2.1 Retail Market Overview...................................................................................................... 6-14 6.2.2 Office Market Overview..................................................................................................... 6-18 6.2.3 Industrial Market Overview................................................................................................ 6-23 6.2.4 Greater Phoenix Hotel Market............................................................................................ 6-29 6.2.5 Summary and Conclusions................................................................................................. 6-37 6.3 Mesa Growth Forecast������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 6-38 6.4 Airport Land Use/Employment Analysis������������������������������������������������������������������ 6-45 6.4.1 Employment Trends on Airport Property............................................................................. 6-45 6.4.2 Employment Composition Near Example Airports............................................................... 6-45 6.4.3 Findings and Conclusions Related to Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Plan... 6-56 6.5 Highest and Best Use Analysis�������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 6-58 6.5.1 Background...................................................................................................................... 6-58 6.5.2 Analysis............................................................................................................................. 6-62 6.5.3 Recommendations............................................................................................................. 6-63 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Table of Contents i-iii Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Section 7: Alternatives Development�������������������������������������������������� 7-1 7.1 Introduction������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 7-1 7.2 Northeast Area Development Objectives ������������������������������������������������������������������ 7-1 7.3 Level 1 “Bubble Diagram” Schemes ������������������������������������������������������������������������� 7-2 7.3.1 Description of Schemes ....................................................................................................... 7-2 7.3.2 Evaluation Process ............................................................................................................ 7-21 7.3.3 Preferred Schemes ............................................................................................................ 7-22 7.4 Level 2 Concept Alternatives ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 7-23 7.4.1 Description of Illustrative Concepts .................................................................................... 7-24 7.4.2 Concept Consolidation ..................................................................................................... 7-33 7.5 Preferred Development Alternative������������������������������������������������������������������������� 7-36 7.5.1 Description of Alternative .................................................................................................. 7-36 7.5.2 Alternative Refinement ...................................................................................................... 7-41 7.6 Alternative Refinement������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 7-55 7.6.1 Airfield Modifications.......................................................................................................... 7-56 7.6.2 Terminal & Concourse Facilities ......................................................................................... 7-57 7.6.3 Roadway Network & Modeling.......................................................................................... 7-59 7.6.4 Support Facilities ............................................................................................................... 7-90 Section 8: Implementation Plan���������������������������������������������������������� 8-1 8.1 Introduction ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ 8-1 8.2 Program Phasing Plans �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 8-1 8.2.1 Phase I – 1.5 Million Enplanements...................................................................................... 8-1 8.2.2 Phase II – 2.2 Million Enplanements..................................................................................... 8-3 8.2.3 Phase III – 5 Million Enplanements........................................................................................ 8-5 8.2.4 Phase IV – 10 Million Enplanements..................................................................................... 8-7 8.3 Capital Costs ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 8-10 8.3.1 Cost Estimating Approach ................................................................................................. 8-10 8.3.2 Commercial Development Factors ..................................................................................... 8-10 8.4 Financial Feasibility Analysis ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 8-11 8.4.1 Key Assumptions ............................................................................................................... 8-11 8.4.2 Project Costs...................................................................................................................... 8-11 8.4.3 Sources of Funding ........................................................................................................... 8-13 8.4.4 Uses of Funding ............................................................................................................... 8-14 8.4.5 Scenarios........................................................................................................................... 8-14 8.4.6 Debt Service Requirement.................................................................................................. 8-15 8.4.7 Cost of Operations and Maintenance................................................................................. 8-15 8.4.8 Future Revenues................................................................................................................ 8-15 8.4.9 Summary and Recommendations....................................................................................... 8-17 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Table of Contents i-iv Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Section 9: Economic and Fiscal Impact of Commercial Land Uses��������� 9-1 9.1 Economic and Fiscal Impact Analysis ����������������������������������������������������������������������� 9-1 9.2 Economic Impacts ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 9-1 9.3 Fiscal Impacts ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 9-2 Appendices����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� A-1 Appendix A - Stakeholder Meeting Materials Meeting 1 Notes�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� A-2 Meeting 2 Notes������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ A-40 Meeting 3 Notes������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ A-76 Meeting 4 Notes���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� A-104 Appendix B - Economic and Fiscal Impact of Commercial Land Uses ...........................A-128 Appendix C - Preliminary Typical Sections .................................................................. A-152 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Table of Contents i-v Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report List of Exhibits Exhibit 3-1: Airport Vicinity Map.................................................................................................... 3-2 Exhibit 3-2: Existing Passenger Terminal Facilities........................................................................... 3-3 Exhibit 3-3: Existing Parking Facilities........................................................................................... 3-10 Exhibit 3-4: Existing Airfield Facilities............................................................................................ 3-13 Exhibit 3-5: Terminal Area Map.................................................................................................... 3-16 Exhibit 3-6: PMGA-NADP Study Area Map.................................................................................... 3-17 Exhibit 3-7: Existing Transit Network............................................................................................ 3-19 Exhibit 3-8: Existing Railroads...................................................................................................... 3-20 Exhibit 3-9: Water Services.......................................................................................................... 3-22 Exhibit 3-10: Wastewater Facilities............................................................................................... 3-23 Exhibit 3-11: Drainage Features.................................................................................................. 3-24 Exhibit 3-12: Power Lines And Substation Facilities....................................................................... 3-26 Exhibit 3-13: Southwest Gas Facilities.......................................................................................... 3-27 Exhibit 3-14: City Of Mesa Fiber Optic Network Facilities.............................................................. 3-29 Exhibit 3-15: Leasehold Map....................................................................................................... 3-31 Exhibit 3-16: On-Airport Land Use............................................................................................... 3-36 Exhibit 3-17: Existing Off-Airport Land Use................................................................................... 3-37 Exhibit 3-18: Traffic Pattern and Airspace Map............................................................................. 3-38 Exhibit 3-19: Future Off-Airport Land Use.................................................................................... 3-40 Exhibit 3-20: Foreign Trade Zone Map......................................................................................... 3-42 Exhibit 4-1: Mesa Gateway Service Area........................................................................................ 4-2 Exhibit 4-2: Passenger Enplanement Forecast................................................................................ 4-5 Exhibit 5-1: Future Transit Network.............................................................................................. 5-13 Exhibit 5-2: Commuter Rail Strategic Plan.................................................................................... 5-14 Exhibit 5-3: High Capacity Transit Network.................................................................................. 5-15 Exhibit 5-4: Future Transit Concepts............................................................................................. 5-16 Exhibit 6-1: Flow of a Region’s Economy....................................................................................... 6-7 Exhibit 6-2: Industrial Building Space - Maricopa County.............................................................. 6-27 Exhibit 6-3: Employment Concentration 2005 - Maricopa County................................................ 6-28 Exhibit 6-4: Hotel Locations - Mesa & Gilbert Region.................................................................... 6-34 Exhibit 6-5: John Wayne Airport.................................................................................................. 6-47 Exhibit 6-6: San Bernardino International Airport......................................................................... 6-49 Exhibit 6-7: San Bernardino International Airport Tenants............................................................. 6-50 Exhibit 6-8: Ontario International Airport..................................................................................... 6-52 Exhibit 6-9: Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport....................................................................... 6-54 Exhibit 6-10: Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport Master Plan.................................................. 6-55 Exhibit 6-11: Close-Up of Northwest Quadrant Land Use Plan..................................................... 6-56 Exhibit 6-12: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Property.................................................................. 6-58 Exhibit 6-13: Former GM Proving Grounds.................................................................................. 6-59 Exhibit 6-14: Mesa Proving Grounds............................................................................................ 6-60 Exhibit 6-15: Pacific Proving Site.................................................................................................. 6-61 Exhibit 7-1: Bubble Diagram: Scheme 1........................................................................................ 7-4 Exhibit 7-2: Bubble Diagram: Scheme 2........................................................................................ 7-6 Exhibit 7-3: Bubble Diagram: Scheme 3........................................................................................ 7-8 Exhibit 7-4: Bubble Diagram: Scheme 4...................................................................................... 7-10 Exhibit 7-5: Bubble Diagram: Scheme 5...................................................................................... 7-12 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Table of Contents i-vi Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Exhibit 7-6: Bubble Diagram: Scheme 6...................................................................................... 7-14 Exhibit 7-7: Bubble Diagram: Scheme 7...................................................................................... 7-16 Exhibit 7-8: Bubble Diagram: Scheme 8...................................................................................... 7-18 Exhibit 7-9: Bubble Diagram: Scheme 9...................................................................................... 7-20 Exhibit 7-10: Illustrative Concept 1.............................................................................................. 7-26 Exhibit 7-11: Illustrative Concept 2.............................................................................................. 7-28 Exhibit 7-12: Illustrative Concept 3.............................................................................................. 7-31 Exhibit 7-13: Terminal Building Concept Consolidation................................................................ 7-34 Exhibit 7-14: Preferred Development Alternative.......................................................................... 7-38 Exhibit 7-15: Conceptual Land Use Plan...................................................................................... 7-39 Exhibit 7-16: Terminal Development 5 Million Annual Passengers................................................. 7-42 Exhibit 7-17: Terminal Development 10 Million Annual Passengers............................................... 7-42 Exhibit 7-18: Preliminary Water Distribution Plan.......................................................................... 7-48 Exhibit 7-19: Preliminary Wastewater Collection System............................................................... 7-50 Exhibit 7-20: Drainage Features.................................................................................................. 7-52 Exhibit 7-21: Preliminary Dry Utility Plan...................................................................................... 7-54 Exhibit 7-22: Refined Development Alternative............................................................................ 7-58 Exhibit 7-23: New TAZ Structure.................................................................................................. 7-60 Exhibit 7-24: Roadway Functional Classification........................................................................... 7-63 Exhibit 7-25: Roadways Number Of Lanes................................................................................... 7-64 Exhibit 7-26: Alternative B Roadway Functional Classification....................................................... 7-66 Exhibit 7-27: Alternative B Roadways Number of Lanes................................................................ 7-67 Exhibit 7-28: 2030 Alternative A Traffic Volumes And LOS............................................................ 7-68 Exhibit 7-29: 2030 Alternative B Traffic Volumes And LOS............................................................ 7-69 Exhibit 7-30: 2050 Alternative A Traffic Volumes And LOS............................................................ 7-70 Exhibit 7-31: 2050 Alternative B Traffic Volumes And LOS............................................................ 7-71 Exhibit 7-32: Study Area.............................................................................................................. 7-72 Exhibit 7-33: Alternative A Study Intersections.............................................................................. 7-73 Exhibit 7-34: Alternative B Study Intersections.............................................................................. 7-74 Exhibit 7-35: Alternative A - 2030/2050 Peak Hour Traffic, LOS and Lane Configurations.............. 7-80 Exhibit 7-36: Alternative A-2030/2050 Peak Hour Traffic, LOS and Lane Configurations................ 7-81 Exhibit 7-37: Alternative A (Flyover) -2050 Peak Hour Traffic, LOS and Lane Configurations.......... 7-82 Exhibit 7-38: Alternative B-2030/2050 Peak Hour Traffic, LOS and Lane Configurations................ 7-83 Exhibit 8-1: NADP Phase I.............................................................................................................. 8-2 Exhibit 8-2: NADP Phase II............................................................................................................. 8-4 Exhibit 8-3: NADP Phase III............................................................................................................ 8-6 Exhibit 8-4: NADP Phase IV........................................................................................................... 8-9 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Table of Contents i-vii Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report List of Tables Table 3-1: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Airside Facilities........................................................... 3-14 Table 4-1: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Socioeconomic Forecasts............................................... 4-3 Table 4-2: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Passenger Enplanement Forecast................................... 4-4 Table 4-3: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Airline Fleet Mix and Operations.................................... 4-6 Table 5-1: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Commercial Airlines Demand Triggers............................ 5-3 Table 5-2: Gross Terminal Facilities by Planning Horizon................................................................. 5-3 Table 5-3: Target Enplanement Milestones by Planning Horizon..................................................... 5-4 Table 5-4: Initial East Side Terminal Program - Design Characteristics............................................... 5-5 Table 5-5: Program Summary for the Northeast Terminal................................................................ 5-7 Table 5-6: NADP Northeast Terminal Program................................................................................ 5-7 Table 5-7: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Aircraft Fleet Mix by Design Group................................. 5-9 Table 5-8: Planned and Programmed Roadway Improvements..................................................... 5-11 Table 6-1: Greater Phoenix Population Growth.............................................................................. 6-1 Table 6-2: Greater Phoenix & U.S. Non-Farm Employment Percent Change Year-Over-Year............. 6-2 Table 6-3: Greater Phoenix Employment Annual Percentage Change 1971-2010........................... 6-3 Table 6-4: Phoenix-Mesa Employment March 2010 vs. March 2009............................................... 6-3 Table 6-5: Greater Phoenix Population Annual Percentage Change 1976-2009, 2010 Forecast...... 6-4 Table 6-6: Comparison of Greater Phoenix and U.S. Employment Percent Distribution.................... 6-6 Table 6-7: Greater Phoenix Economic Forecast.............................................................................. 6-9 Table 6-8: Greater Phoenix Wage & Salary Employment Forecast 2009-2019............................... 6-10 Table 6-9: Comp. of Greater Phoenix & U.S. Employment Current Employment vs. 2018 Forecast.6-11 Table 6-10: U.S. Commercial Mortgage Maturities 1980-2020...................................................... 6-13 Table 6-11: Total Retail Inventory Per Person Metro Phoenix......................................................... 6-14 Table 6-12: Historic Vacancy Rate for Retail Properties Greater Phoenix 1993-2010 Q1................. 6-15 Table 6-13: Components of Retail Sub-Market Greater Phoenix 2009............................................ 6-16 Table 6-14: Components of Retail Sub-Market Greater Phoenix 2009............................................ 6-16 Table 6-15: No. of Transactions and Avg. Price Per SF for Shopping Centers Maricopa County...... 6-17 Table 6-16: Office Space by Major City 2009................................................................................ 6-18 Table 6-17: Office Building Square Feet Per Capita 2009.............................................................. 6-19 Table 6-18: Transactions and Price Per SF for Office Buildings Maricopa County............................ 6-19 Table 6-19: Construction of Administrative Office Space Greater Phoenix 1980-2008.................... 6-20 Table 6-20: Speculative Office Market Maricopa County............................................................... 6-21 Table 6-21: Speculative Office Vacancy Rates vs. Change in Inventory Greater Phoenix................ 6-21 Table 6-22: Mesa - Gilbert Office Market Activity........................................................................... 6-23 Table 6-23: Industrial Building Space by City Q4 2009................................................................. 6-24 Table 6-24: Industrial Inventory by Type Maricopa County Q4 2009............................................. 6-25 Table 6-25: Industrial Buildings Square Feet Per Capita 2009........................................................ 6-25 Table 6-26: Vacancy Rates for Industrial Buildings Greater Phoenix............................................... 6-26 Table 6-27: Transactions and Price Per SF for Industrial Buildings Maricopa County....................... 6-26 Table 6-28: Mesa - Gilbert Industrial Market Activity...................................................................... 6-29 Table 6-29: Greater Phoenix Supply of Hotel Rooms..................................................................... 6-30 Table 6-30: Annual Hotel Occupancy Rates - Greater Phoenix...................................................... 6-30 Table 6-31: Average Daily Room Rates - Greater Phoenix.............................................................. 6-31 Table 6-32: Revenues Per Available Hotel Room - Greater Phoenix................................................ 6-32 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Table of Contents i-viii Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Table 6-33: Town of Gilbert Hotel Inventory................................................................................. 6-32 Table 6-34: City of Mesa Hotel Inventory...................................................................................... 6-33 Table 6-35: Average Occupancy - Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler Area..................................................... 6-35 Table 6-36: Average Daily Room Rates - Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler Area............................................. 6-35 Table 6-37: Revenue Per Available Room - Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler Area......................................... 6-36 Table 6-38: Comparative Performance - Greater Phoenix & Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler Hotel Markets.. 6-36 Table 6-39: MAG Forecast - Maricopa County.............................................................................. 6-38 Table 6-40: Forecasted Jobs to Population Ratio - Selected Cities.................................................. 6-39 Table 6-41: Projected Employment Capture Rates - Maricopa County........................................... 6-40 Table 6-42: Projected Industrial Employment Capture Rates - Maricopa County............................ 6-41 Table 6-43: Projected Office Employment Capture Rates - Maricopa County................................. 6-41 Table 6-44: Forecasted SE Valley Capture of Maricopa County Pop. & Employment Growth......... 6-42 Table 6-45: Forecasted SE Valley Capture of Maricopa County Office & Ind. Employment Growth.6-43 Table 6-46: Mesa & Mesa Gateway Area (MGA) Population Growth Forecast................................ 6-44 Table 6-47: Mesa & Mesa Gateway Area (MGA) Employment Growth Forecast............................. 6-44 Table 6-48: Estimated Employment by Type - John Wayne Airport................................................ 6-48 Table 6-49: Estimated Employment by Type - San Bernardino International Airport....................... 6-51 Table 6-50: Estimated Employment by Type - Ontario International Airport................................... 6-53 Table 7-1: Evaluation Matrix........................................................................................................ 7-22 Table 7-2: Automobile Parking Requirements by Concept............................................................. 7-32 Table 7-3: Phased Automobile Parking Requirements................................................................... 7-40 Table 7-4: Preliminary Water Demands........................................................................................ 7-47 Table 7-5: Preliminary Water Collection Rates............................................................................... 7-49 Table 7-6: Sewer Line Capacities.................................................................................................. 7-49 Table 7-7: Land Use To Employment Conversion Factors.............................................................. 7-61 Table 7-8: 2030 Airport Property Socioeconomic Data................................................................. 7-61 Table 7-9: 2050 Airport Property Socioeconomic Data................................................................. 7-62 Table 7-10: Los And V/C Ratio Equivalencies................................................................................ 7-65 Table 7-11: Level of Service Criteria Signalized Intersections.......................................................... 7-75 Table 7-12: Hawes Road and Ray Road – Conventional Intersection - Year 2030........................... 7-77 Table 7-13: Hawes Road and Ray Road – Conventional Intersection - Year 2050........................... 7-77 Table 7-14: Level of Service Summary - Alternative A - Year 2030.................................................. 7-84 Table 7-15: Level of Service Summary - Alternative A - Year 2050.................................................. 7-85 Table 7-16: Level of Service Summary - Alternative A - Flyover - Year 2050.................................... 7-86 Table 7-17: Level of Service Summary - Alternative B - Year 2030.................................................. 7-87 Table 7-18: Level of Service Summary - Alternative B - Year 2050.................................................. 7-88 Table 8-1: Project Phase Costs..................................................................................................... 8-12 Table 8-2: Project Costs and Phasing........................................................................................... 8-18 Table 8-3: Project Funding Sources.............................................................................................. 8-19 Table 8-4: Sources and Uses of Funds.......................................................................................... 8-20 Table 8-5: Estimated Plan of Financing........................................................................................ 8-21 Table 8-6: Debt Services Requirements......................................................................................... 8-22 Table 8-7: Application and Use of PFC Revenues.......................................................................... 8-23 Table 8-8: Application and Use of Municipal Sponsor Funding (In Thousands).............................. 8-24 Table 8-9: Cost of Operation and Maintenance............................................................................ 8-25 Table 8-10: Revenues.................................................................................................................. 8-26 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Table of Contents i-ix Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Table 8-11: Forecast Airline Revenue Requirements...................................................................... 8-27 Table 8-12: Forecast Parking Revenue Requirements.................................................................... 8-28 Table 8-13: Forecast Commercial Revenue Requirements............................................................. 8-29 Table 8-14: Forecast FBO/GA and Other Revenue Requirements.................................................. 8-30 Table 8-15: Scenario 1 - Forecast Net Revenue and Debt Service Coverage ................................. 8-31 Table 8-15: Scenario 2 - Forecast Net Revenue and Debt Service Coverage.................................. 8-32 Table 9-1: Economic Impact.......................................................................................................... 9-2 Table 9-2: Fiscal Impact Summary.................................................................................................. 9-3 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Table of Contents i-x Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Section 1: Executive Summary 1.1 Introduction Over the past 15 years, the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport (PMGA) has been in a continual planning and development program, responding to the dynamic air travel market in the Phoenix metropolitan area. In February 2010, the City of Mesa (City) and the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Authority (Authority) formed a partnership to contract for professional services associated with the study of the Northeast Development Area at the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport, formerly known as Williams Air Force Base. The City and PMGA Authority desired a study to develop a phased, revenue generating land use and ground transportation plan for an approximate 660 acre parcel, with an adjoining 31 acre privately-owned parcel, both located in the Northeast Area of the Airport. In doing so, the co-sponsors of the study, contracted with Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. in association with DWL Architects & Planners, Inc., Elliott D. Pollack & Company, and Jacobs Consultancy to conduct a technical study, inclusive of regular stakeholder involvement, which would ideally map out a financially feasible plan of development that would keep pace with anticipated aeronautical growth, while being augmented and ultimately supported in part by on-airport, non-aeronautical commercial development. This report presents the analysis, findings, and recommendations in support of those objectives. 1.2 Purpose and Need Following the methodical and collaborative preparation of “The Mesa Gateway Strategic Development Plan” in December 2008, it has been clear to area leadership that the focal point of the Mesa Gateway area is the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport. Its 3,020 acre footprint is equivalent to some of the most complex airports operating in the United States. However, unlike many of these facilities, PMGA is already equipped with many of the infrastructure assets of larger airports, but without the existing constraints and pre-existing circumstances that often impact the strategic development of airports, such as limited land, adjacent incompatible development, latent aviation demand, and a robust surrounding surface access network. In all cases, PMGA has the assets it needs to achieve its own success – the availability of unconstrained land and the lack of physical constraints. That said, the future opportunities of the PMGA are a key asset to the Mesa Gateway area. In support of this, the region was established as the second major airport serving the greater Phoenix metropolitan area, with the intent that it would complement rather than compete with Sky Harbor International Airport. As aviation demand and the corresponding airport capacities keep pace in the future, there is a vision that ancillary operating and development potential both on and off-airport could illustrate a means to become an integral part of the communities that will occupy the Mesa Gateway area and the region. Better articulated, the stated vision is: “Mesa Gateway will be an internationally recognized destination for those looking for a sustainable place in which to live, work, learn and recreate. It will provide industries with an economically efficient business climate and its workforce and residents with access to the global resources desired of a knowledge-based economy.” Therefore, stemming from a recently completed Airport Master Plan in 2009, the PMGA was equipped with a holistic roadmap to provide the basic facility needs necessary to accommodate upwards of almost 10 million annually enplaned commercial passengers per year. This plan provided an overview of potential demand, the aeronautical capacities required to satisfy that demand and a timely development program of new or expanded facilities. Another valuable product of the Master Plan was the identification of the airport envelope, thereby not only reserving sufficient land area for aeronautical and non-aeronautical needs, but also bracketing land areas needed to protect the valuable airspace and operating environs far into the future to secure its optimal role. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Executive Summary 1-1 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The City’s role in airport development, is that of providing supporting infrastructure, protecting the assets from encroachment and incompatible land uses, and promoting a robust business development environment. As stated in The Mesa 2008 Strategic Development Plan, the City is committed to realizing the role of the Airport by taking the steps necessary to ensure that the Airport thrives. These steps include: • • • Establishing the “aviation envelope” that will support the regional interests of airport and airline users. Unless specific lands are absolutely essential for uninterrupted regional airport operations, they should be considered for development. Promote compatible land uses. A wide range of commercial, recreational, and residential uses can occupy land in close proximity to the Airport and its active airspace. Transfer the focal point of the passenger and commercial experience to the east side of the property, where a new passenger terminal should be developed as a regional landmark. 1.3 Study Process As indicated, the study process was initiated in early February 2010 and was scoped to provide findings and recommendations in a relatively short timeframe. The technical approach employed for the NADP aimed to validate previous forecast projections, develop programmatic needs for the airside, terminal and landside components (specifically the surrounding street plan that highlights connections to/from the Airport infrastructure), evaluate development alternatives in a top-down and iterative manner, specify revenue-generating opportunities, and identify a feasible phasing plan for future investment and development. An integral element of the study process was a comprehensive stakeholder involvement effort that integrated the City, regional leadership, State agencies, Phoenix Sky Harbor representatives, the airlines, and many of the adjacent land owners/developers. Over the course of the study, four discrete stakeholder meetings were orchestrated to engage the membership, to seek their input, and to develop a plan that had large scale buy-in (see Appendix A for a summary of each meeting). Due to conceptual refinement issues surrounding surface access both on and off-airport property, detailed analysis was required to carefully understand future demand growth and its possible impact on infrastructure timing and configurations. As a result, the overall study process of approximately 12 months was expanded to an 18-month schedule. Once conceptual refinement was complete, and a phased capital program was developed, a financial feasibility analysis was conducted to determine any shortfall in funding and the need to possibly be more prudent with development timing. Following modifications in timing and an assessment of the future real estate market in the Mesa Gateway area, a validated capital program and operating objectives were recommended. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 1-2 Executive Summary With an approved and functional master plan, the PMGA will ensure its continued and vital link to the national air transportation system for the community, while encouraging existing public and private investments in its facilities. Ultimately, the underlying premise of the Northeast Area Development Plan (NADP) is to secure early and steady private sector investment to generate revenue to sustain the development of the infrastructure in support of aviation uses in the short, mid and long-term. Successful airport development will be sensitive to industry changes, and the PMGA Authority and the City will remain constantly vigilant to determine how best to phase development in order to generate revenue and minimize unnecessary capital expenditures. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The NADP study is the culmination of approximately 18 months of collaboration on a plan that: meets the long-range aviation needs of the region, works harmoniously with the surrounding communities, provides the Airport with a diversity of revenue, and achieves these objectives in a financially feasible manner. Recognizing that the vast majority of improvements are largely contingent upon future commercial passenger demand at the PMGA, the forecast of air travel in the Phoenix metropolitan area is expected to continue a trend of solid growth. This is further bolstered by the anticipated regional growth east of the downtown Phoenix area, which prior to the national economy passing into a recession, was on pace to be one of the Nation’s strongest markets. As the study team developed bubble diagrams of the 660+ acres and its connectivity to the region, the question continued to arise, as to how large of a terminal complex to plan for, with emphasis that the aeronautical elements be protected long-term, prior to siting and configuring any commercial development property. The Master Plan completed in 2009 carried a “high” enplanement scenario to approximately five (5) million annual enplaned passengers (MAEP), but through detailed discussion with the owner and stakeholders, it was strongly felt that the ultimate growth scenario could likely eclipse the 5 MAEP mark, and as such there was agreement that an upper threshold of 10 MAEP was more appropriate for sizing facilities, determining demand and bracketing aeronautical land use areas. The Jacobs team initially validated the aviation forecasts and the programming assumptions carried forward in the recent Master Plan. A noted area of refinement to the programming came in the way of terminal square footage required by the end of the 20-year planning horizon. The recommended square footage was increased by approximately 115,000 square feet, and was largely attributed to airline operational space, including outbound and inbound baggage handling areas. Virtually all elements of the airfield were carried forward from the Master Plan Airport Layout Plan set, while surrounding development proposals were included in the analysis of the proposed roadway network and land uses. Following an initial development of nine (9) unique “bubble-diagram” concepts with the stakeholder committee, it was screened to three (3) “illustrative” schemes that were narrowed to one “preferred” alternative for further refinement. Section 7 describes this iterative process in a concise manner, and specifically Subsection 7.6 addresses the refinement process, whereby a “refined” concept was finalized and ultimately carried into the implementation phase of the study. Section 8 presents the implementation plan for the “refined” concept through approximately three phases of work taking place over the ensuing 20-year period, with a final ultimate phase evolving well beyond the 20-year planning horizon. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Executive Summary 1-3 1.4 Findings Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Section 2: Project Description 2.1 Introduction This section outlines the Project background, goals, objectives and stakeholder involvement crucial to the development of the Phoenix Mesa Gateway Airport Authority’s Northeast Area Development Plan (NADP). A thorough understanding of the study’s purpose and background provides a solid foundation from which the study team can create a plan that meets the goals and objectives of the stakeholders. In addition, an understanding of previous planning efforts, including local and regional plans that affect the NADP, ensures a planning effort that is compatible with and supportive of the local area’s vision for growth. 2.2 Study Background The Phoenix Mesa Gateway Airport (PMGA) is recognized as a major economic engine for the City of Mesa and the entire Phoenix region. The Airport has evolved from a former military base to a flourishing civil aviation facility. Prior to 2007, PMGA had experienced only limited commercial air service, with annual enplanement totals never exceeding 6,400. By the end of 2009, annual enplanement totals equaled 287,807 as Allegiant Airlines increased operational activity at the Airport and continues to add capacity and destinations due to the success it has experienced at the PMGA. The current PMGA Master Plan identifies the final capacity of the existing West Terminal facility as 850,000 annual enplanements to be served by 10 total gates at ultimate build out. The Master Plan forecast indicates that this level of activity will likely be reached by the year 2017; however, recent growth rates at PMGA indicate that the existing terminal area’s capacity could be reached as early as 2014. As a result, the PMGA Authority has commissioned the Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. team to study, analyze and provide a phased land use plan for the development of a commercial terminal area on the northeast side of PMGA. The NADP study will: assess current conditions at the Airport; review recent master plan forecasts balanced against changing trends; validate previous programming of relevant airport elements and update as needed; evaluate the existing as well as proposed street system serving the airport environs; conduct extensive alternatives analyses aimed toward refinement of a preferred concept; and define a financially feasible implementation strategy for the 20-year build-out of the recommended concept. 2.3 Project Goals & Objectives The NADP goals drove development alternatives and served as the ultimate criteria for the selection of the recommended development alternative and other major decisions throughout the NADP process. In addition, action-oriented and attainable objectives are outlined in order to represent the policy and planning guidelines for identifying and evaluating the development alternatives by more clearly defining the future needs of various Airport stakeholders. The specific goals and objectives outlined in this section are divided among four distinct categories as follows: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Project Description 2-1 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report • • • • • • • • • Provide balanced travel routes focused on primary services for: internal trips, through travel, specific trips to the Airport, and amenities Ensure easy access w/ multiple layers of transportation access and modes Multi-modal system establishment, that is pedestrian and bicycle friendly Penetrate SR-24 corridor (no negative impacts on regional freeway system) Provide suitable Ray Road / Ellsworth Road area employment center connections to the Airport Adequately serve surrounding private properties Easy / clear / communicative wayfinding and branding Prioritized plan for infrastructure Long-range utility planning Economic Development • • • • • • • • • Proactive economic development efforts to maximize opportunities – both Airport and private Boundary-less growth that is flexible between Airport / community Quality, well-rounded destination development with convention facilities, hotels, multi-story offices, national attractions, and light industry Urban center - airport oriented employment villages that are pedestrian friendly Premier / diverse job center for east valley with high wage strategy High visibility with provisions for branding, special features & markers, corporate amenities Sustainable concepts built into development (energy, e.g. Biofuel, solar) Industry leading site design and construction techniques encouraged for new development Discourages residential development in proximity of the Airport Aviation / Airport Related • • • • • • • Support and advance the vision for the Airport Preserve the ultimate Airport capacity Appropriate non-aeronautical land uses that embrace aviation growth goals Keep diverse travel profile in mind - leisure primary and business secondary Integrated parking solutions that maximize revenue and accommodate peak periods Sound implementation plan supporting staged growth Pursue myriad funding sources, including Public/Private Partnership (PPP) Lifestyle Oriented • • • • • • • Clear, strong identity – a positive Sense of Place & Community Stress free, comfortable, non-intimidating, fun place to come Livable community that is a vibrant, active hub of activity Development that places value on green space and water features Ensure that collaboration between communities & Airport continues Remain cognizant of aviation noise impacts on community ASU plans integrated into region and business development plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Project Description 2-2 Surface Infrastructure (Transportation/Utilities) Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report City of Mesa – Mesa Gateway Strategic Development Plan1 The Gateway Strategic Development Plan notes that the City of Mesa is committed to realizing the role of the Airport by taking the steps necessary to ensure the Airport thrives. In order to accomplish this goal the plan identifies the following steps: • • • Establishing the “aviation envelope” that will support the regional interests of airport and airline users. Unless specific lands are absolutely essential for uninterrupted regional airport operations, they should be considered for development. Promote compatible land uses. A wide range of commercial, recreational, and residential uses can occupy land in close proximity to the Airport and its active airspace. Transfer the focal point of the passenger and commercial experience to the east side of the property, where a new passenger terminal should be developed as a regional landmark. Airport Master Plan2 The PMGA Authority updated its Airport Master Plan in 2008. The intent of the update was to address the continuously evolving nature of PMGA from a military airfield to a public commercial service airport. The Master Plan forecast indicates that enplanements at PMGA are projected to reach 2.2 million within 20 years and potentially 5 million enplanements at some point beyond that. As a result, development of the east side of the Airport with a replacement passenger terminal is recommended. The Master Plan and in turn, the associated Airport Layout Plan, show that the east side of the Airport is reserved for passenger terminal complex expansion. In addition, those areas on the east side that are not reserved for direct aviation related activities are planned for commercial development. The plan also indicates that the commercial development should be compatible and complementary to the aviation nature of the facility such as hotels, a convention center, restaurants, and shops. The Airport Master Plan update includes the following projects relative to the NADP within the final capital improvement plan: Short Term • • • Completion of east side parallel Taxiway C East side terminal complex planning studies Acquisition of 31 acres on the east side Intermediate Term • • • • • Initial construction of the east side terminal building East side aircraft ramp East side fuel farm and other support facilities East side road construction Extension of Runway 12L-30R approximately 1,000 feet to the northwest Long Term • • • Expansion of the east side terminal building East side ARFF facilities East side parking garage 1.City of Mesa, “Mesa Gateway Strategic Development Plan”, December 8, 2008 2.Coffman and Associates, Inc., “Airport Master Plan for Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport”, December, 2008 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Project Description 2-3 2.4 Previous Planning Efforts and Concepts Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The Phoenix-Mesa Gateway West Terminal Expansion Study was an attempt to determine the maximum capacity of the existing west terminal site based on total enplanements forecast in the Draft Airport Master Plan. This study attempted to determine what facilities would be required for construction immediately and how much should be constructed at the west terminal site. The objective of this study was to identify the existing conditions, review the established forecasts, analyze the existing capacity, develop and analyze alternatives and refine a preferred alternative. The study concluded that the limiting factors for the capacity of the West Terminal site include automobile parking, curb frontage, terminal building square footage, number of gates/aircraft parking, usable apron, baggage operations and the orientation of Sossaman Road. In addition, the study noted that PMGA has targeted a low-cost market, which translates to operating with less building square footage than a full service facility. The study assumed that until the move to the East Terminal, the capacity of the terminal building will likely be less than the building is operating under. Parking Supply and Demand Analysis4 The PMGA Authority completed a parking supply/demand analysis in 2008, in order to respond to changing conditions at the Airport, including the initiation of passenger air service by Allegiant Air in October 2007. The Study provided alternatives to meet the 850,000 annual enplanement level, which has been identified as the capacity of the west side terminal area. These alternatives included: • • • • Constructing one or more parking structures; Horizontally expanding a previously constructed parking structure; Constructing or expanding a remote parking lot with shuttle service; and, Encouraging the use of alternative modes of transportation. Regional Transit Plan Planning for the Central Mesa corridor began Spring 2007 with an Alternatives Analysis. The Alternatives Analysis gathered technical data and community input to help determine which route and transit technology would best serve Mesa. Eight transit options were evaluated. The result of the analysis determined that the preferred option was an approximately three-mile extension of light rail from the current end-of-line, running east on Main Street through downtown Mesa to Mesa Drive. In August 2010, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) approved the Central Mesa Light Rail Extension into Project Development which marks the first step in receiving federal project approval and ultimately federal funds to build the 3.1-mile extension on Main Street from Sycamore to Mesa Drive. The extension is scheduled to open in 2016. Additionally, a currently unfunded Phase II of the extension would bring the line to Gilbert Road. State Route 24 Study State Route (SR)-24 conceptually begins at Loop 202 (Santan Freeway) near the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport and heads east towards Pinal County as part of the Regional Transportation Plan approved by Maricopa County voters in 2004. The recommended development plan and alignment of SR-24 brings the road near the northeastern-most point of PMGA. This location, timing of the improvements, and access to/from the SR-24 will be considered throughout the NADP analysis. 3.DWL Architects, “Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport, West Terminal Expansion Study”, September, 2008 4.Carl Walker, Inc., “Parking Supply and Demand Analysis”, April 2008 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Project Description 2-4 West Terminal Expansion Study3 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Planning and development for aeronautical and non-aeronautical related uses should be balanced and ideally synergized to promote timely and efficient development. The outcome of this process is a formalized plan that meets the multi-faceted needs of both onairport and off-airport development. The NADP supports Mesa’s long-range Gateway Strategic Plan, demonstrating a commitment to growth and development to meet future needs of the region. The NADP provides both a short and long-term roadmap for on-going capacity expansion, investment planning, revenue generation, financial diversification, and customer service improvements at PMGA. The NADP consists of three major phases: 1. 2. 3. Confirmation of programming from previous planning analyses; Alternatives development; and Phasing and implementation plan. The Jacobs team fostered an interactive process that ensured the goals and objectives for the study were achieved and that a consensus-building effort was formulated through the planning process. This consensus-building process helped to ensure the timely implementation of the study’s recommendations. 2.6 Stakeholder Involvement The fundamental aspect of any planning project is stakeholder involvement. The final preferred development plan and process should reflect the input of a broad range of airport stakeholders. The Jacobs team and the PMGA Authority jointly identified a list of stakeholders for this study effort. Stakeholders who provided input included representatives from: • • • • • • • Airport Management City of Mesa City of Phoenix Allegiant Air Salt River Project Airport Tenants Landowners and Developers of Adjacent Properties The stakeholders gathered with the consultant team throughout regular intervals in the Project. Stakeholder workshops and committee meetings were used to identify, refine and evaluate a range of alternatives for accommodating the facility requirements. These meetings included: Identification of Project Vision/Goals & Objectives; presentation and input on Project alternatives, and the presentation and input on the proposed Project implementation. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Project Description 2-5 2.5 Planning Approach Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Section 3: Existing Conditions 3.1 Introduction This section and the subsequent two sections of the Study will assess current conditions at the Airport, review recent master plan forecasts balanced against changing trends, and validate previous programming of relevant airport elements and update as needed. This section and the subsequent two sections are intended to confirm and update, as needed, the existing conditions and aviation activity projections, to validate and expand upon the programmatic requirements for the various components envisioned for the northeast area, and to establish design guidance to be utilized in subsequent concept and preliminary design activities. The future design evolution sequence will utilize this document as the basis for methodology, approach, and desired intent. Major elements reviewed here include the airfield, terminal and concourse, landside access, public transportation, on and off-airport land use, and supporting utilities infrastructure. 3.2 Airport Site Description Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport is located approximately 25 miles southeast of the City of Phoenix. PMGA is positioned on approximately 3,020 acres in the southeast portion of the City of Mesa, Arizona, in the southeast portion of Maricopa County. PMGA is located completely within the City of Mesa, immediately adjacent to the Town of Gilbert to the west, Town of Queen Creek to the south; and majority of the City of Mesa to the east and north, as shown in Exhibit 3-1: Airport Vicinity Map. The terrain in the immediate vicinity of the Airport is mostly flat, undeveloped terrain, particularly to the east and south. PGMA is bordered by Sossaman Road on the west, East Pecos Road to the south, South Ellsworth Road to the east and 202 Loop - Santan Freeway - to the north. 3.2.2 Passenger Terminal Area The West Passenger Terminal Area is approximately mid-field, bordered on the east by the Middle Apron and on the west by South Sossaman Road, a four-lane urban arterial road. The West Passenger Terminal Area has airport-owned leasible land and buildings north and south of the area as well as Arizona State Polytechnic University, Chandler-Gilbert Community College and other commercial and governmental business activity property to the west. The landside approach to the West Passenger Terminal Area is directly off South Sossaman Road via the access roadway, which provides connection to the terminal departure and arrival curbs, long term parking and rental car return. The West Passenger Terminal Area consists of several existing buildings including the Passenger Terminal, the Terminal Annex, the West Terminal Expansion – Phase 1 and Hangar 24. (reference Exhibit 3-2: Existing Passenger Terminal Facilities) Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Existing Conditions 3-1 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report INSET Broadway Rd Apache Junction Southern Ave Superstition Freeway 60 Baseline Rd Guadalupe Rd Gilbert Loop 202 Mesa Elliot Rd Warner Rd Pinal County Santan Freeway Ray Rd PHOENIX-MESA GATEWAY AIRPORT Greenfield Rd Williams Field Rd Pecos Rd 17 51 Phoenix Glendale SCOTTSDALE AIRPORT Paradise Valley Ironwood Dr Queen Creek Idaho Rd Chandler Heights Rd Maricopa County Loop 101 Meridian Rd Hawes Rd Power Rd Ocotillo Rd Higley Rd Lindsay Rd PHOENIX DEER VALLEY AIRPORT Val Vista Dr Queen Creek Rd Ellsworth Rd Peoria Sossaman Rd Germann Rd Scottsdale Loop 101 51 Loop 202 10 Loop 202 n Mesa Falcon Field 17 PHOENIX SKY HARBOR INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT Apache Junction 10 60 PHOENIX-MESA GATEWAY AIRPORT (see inset) Gilbert Chandler Loop 101 Loop 202 Gila River Indian Community 10 LLoop oop 202 Chandler Municipal Airport Queen Creek Exhibit 1A Phoenix-Mesa GatewayMAP Airport AIRPORT VICINITY 3-2 Existing Conditions 07MP03-1A-5/9/07 Exhibit 3-1: Airport Vicinity Map Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Exhibit 3-2: Existing Passenger Terminal Facilities Existing Conditions 3-3 Passenger Terminal (6033-1 S. Sossaman Rd.) Passenger Terminal Ticketing (6033-1 S. Sossaman Rd.) Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum DRAFT Passenger Terminal Checkpoint (6033-1 S. Sossaman Rd.) Passenger Terminal (6033 South Sossaman Road) 4 Passenger Terminal Courtyard (6033-2 S. Sossaman Rd.) Terminal Annex (6035 South Sossaman Road) Passenger Terminal Arrivals Curb (6033-2 S. Sossaman Rd.) Passenger Terminal Baggage Claim (6033-2 S. Sossaman Rd.) Terminal Annex (6033-3 S. Sossaman Rd.) Hangar 24 (6033-4 S. Sossaman Rd.) Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport West Terminal Expansion (6001 South Sossaman Road) Scheduled Completion November 2010 Hangar 24 (6045 South Sossaman Road) Northeast Area Area Development Plan – TechnicalPlan Memorandum Northeast Development - Technical Report 5 DRAFT 3.2.2.1 Terminal Building & Concourse The terminal buildings consist of the following: Passenger Terminal, Terminal Annex, TheWest Terminal Buildings consist of the following: Terminal, Annex, West Terminal Terminal Expansion – Phase 1 and Passenger Hangar 24. These Terminal four buildings combined together–along an Hangar outdoor24. courtyard to create the combined passengertogether and support for Expansion Phasewith 1 and These four buildings along facilities with an outdoor commercial air service. courtyard create the passenger and support facilities for commercial air service. Source: DWL Architects and Planners, Inc., 2010. Passenger Terminal Passenger Terminal passenger terminal building originally constructed in as 1968 as of part the former TheThe passenger terminal building was was originally constructed in 1968 part theofformer Williams Williams Air Force Base. It was remodeled into a passenger terminal building in 1998. Gateway Air Force Base. It was remodeled into a passenger terminal building in 1998. Subsequent Subsequent remodels have taken place in 2000 and 2008. Along with the West Terminal remodels have taken place in 2000 and 2008. Along with the Phase 1 West Terminal Expansion Expansion - Phase I project, another remodel was completed in November 2010. In the project, another remodel scheduled completiongrowth in November 2010. In the 1 remodel, Phase 1 remodel, to is allow for theforcontinued and expansion, thePhase ticketing area, to allow for the continued growth and expansion, the Ticketing Area, Airline Ticketing Offices, Explosive airline ticketing offices, explosive detection system area, and the security checkpoint are Detection System Area, the Security Checkpoint arebaggage being expanded andrental modified, while relocating being expanded andand modified, while relocating claim and car counters to Baggage Claim and Rental Car Counters to the West Terminal Expansion Building. the West Terminal Expansion building. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport May 16, 2011 Existing Conditions 3-4 3.2.2.1 Terminal Building & Concourse Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report t Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum DRAFT 6 6 Entrance to Passenger Terminal 6 3-5 Existing Conditions ast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum T Entrance to Passenger Terminal Entrance to Passenger Terminal Entrance to Passenger Entrance toTerminal Passenger Terminal Arrivals Lobby Arrivals Lobby Ticketing Arrivals Lobby Ticketing The buildings are single story with at-grade passenge mobile stairs and ramps for the boarding operation. Ticketing Ticketing The buildings are single story with at-grade passenger loading into the aircraft. The airlines provide mobile loading stairs and ramps for The the airlines boarding operation. Ticketing The buildings are single story with at-grade passenger into the aircraft. provide The buildings at-grade passenger loading into the aircraft. The airlines provide mobile stairs are and single ramps story for thewith boarding operation. mobile stairs and ramps for the boarding operation. The buildings are single story with at-grade passenger loading into the aircraft. The airlines provide mobile stairs and ramps for the boarding operation. Ramp Operations May 16, 2011 Ramp Operations Ramp Operations Ramp Operations May 16, 2011 May 16, 2011 Ramp Operations Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report rea Development Plan – Technical Memorandum 7 Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum DRAFT 7 3-6 Outdoor Courtyard Existing Conditions Outdoor Courtyard afterCourtyard the security screening checkpoint, between the passenger terminal and Outdoor Located after the securityLocated screening checkpoint, between the passenger terminal and terminal annex is terminal annex asecurity landscaped outdoor spacebetween that provides a place for passenger Located after isthe checkpoint, the passenger terminal and terminal annex is a landscaped outdoor space that provides a place for screening passenger transitioning from provides building toa building. transitioning from building to building. The courtyard place forfrom enplaning a landscaped outdoor space that provides a place for passenger transitioning building to building. The courtyard provides place for enplaning passengers to enjoy and the Arizona climate and for children passengers toPlan enjoy the Arizona climate for children to play while waiting for their 7 Northeast aArea Development – Technical Memorandum The courtyard provides a place for enplaning passengers to enjoy the Arizona climate and for children DRAFT to play while waiting for their flight. flight. to play while waiting for their flight. Outdoor As part of theCourtyard West Terminal Expansion – Phasewill 1 project, the courtyard was expanded As part of the West Terminal Expansion – West Phase 1 project, the courtyard be expanded to connect AsLocated partthe ofafter the Terminal Expansion – Phase 1Expansion. project, the courtyard willterminal be provides expanded the security screening checkpoint, between the passenger terminal and annex isto connect to connect existing courtyard to West Terminal The expansion the existing courtyard to West Terminal Expansion. The expansion will provide passengers with thea landscaped existing courtyard to West Terminal Expansion. The expansion willbuilding provide passengers with outdoorlandscape space that provides aand place for passenger from to building. passengers with shaded gardens connection to transitioning the new building’s concession shaded landscape gardens and connection to the new building’s concession spaces. The courtyard provides a place enplaning passengers tobuilding’s enjoy the concession Arizona climate and for children shaded landscape gardens andforconnection to the new spaces. spaces. to play while waiting for their flight. As part of the West Terminal Expansion – Phase 1 project, the courtyard will be expanded to connect the existing courtyard to West Terminal Expansion. The expansion will provide passengers with shaded landscape gardens and connection to the new building’s concession spaces. Courtyard Courtyard Courtyard Terminal Annex Courtyard Terminal Annex The 9,557 square foot modular terminal annex building was constructed in 2008 to accommodate the Terminal Annex The 9,557 square foot modular terminal building constructed in building 2008 to accommodate the in 2008 ofannex Allegiant Airlineswas and help alleviate over-crowding of the passenger terminal Terminal Annex The expansion 9,557 square foot modular terminal annex the was constructed to building. expansion of Allegiant Airlines and help alleviate the over-crowding of the passenger terminal building. The terminal annex has four gates, associated seating areas for each gate, and concessions The 9,557 square foot modular terminal annex building was constructed in 2008 to accommodate accommodate the expansion of Allegiant Airlines and help alleviate the over-crowdingthespaces for thepassenger waiting passengers. The terminal annex has four gates, associated seating areas for each gate, and concessions spaces forterminalseating expansion ofterminal Allegiant Airlines and help alleviate theannex over-crowding of the passenger building. of the building. The terminal has four gates, associated The terminal annex has four gates, associated seating areas for each gate, and concessions spaces for the waiting passengers. areas for each gate, and concessions spaces for the waiting passengers. the waiting passengers. Entrance to Terminal AnnextotoTerminal Entrance Terminal Annex Entrance Annex Entrance to Terminal Annex Holdroom Holdroom Holdroom Holdroom Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Retail Concession West Terminal Expansion – Phase 1 The West Terminal Project Expansion project Report includes a new 25,000 square foot8 building tha schedule for completion in November 2010. The proposed construction project is considered Phas of the West Terminal build out. The expansion will provide additional capacity for the Phoenix-M 3-7 Gateway Airport including two additional aircraft gates (for a total of six gates), associated boar areas, retail and food/beverage concessions. The new building will also contain the arrival lo baggage claim and rental car for the airport. Existing Conditions Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Northeast Area Development PlanMemorandum - Technical DRAFT Retail Concession Retail Concession West Expansion – Phase WestTerminal Terminal Expansion – Phase 1 1 The West Terminal Project Expansion project includes a anew 25,000 square footfoot building that is The West Terminal Project Expansion project included new 25,000 square building schedule for completion in November 2010. The proposed construction project is considered Phase and was completed in November 2010. The construction project was considered Phase 1 of 1 the West Terminal build out.The The expansionprovides will provide additional capacity capacity for theofWest Terminal build out. expansion additional forthe thePhoenix-Mesa PhoenixGateway Airport including two additional aircraft gates (for a total of six gates), associated boarding Mesa Gateway Airport including two additional aircraft gates (for a total of six gates), areas, retail and food/beverage concessions. The new building will also contain the arrival lobby, associated boarding areas, retail and food/beverage concessions. The new building also baggage claim and rental car for the airport. contains the arrival lobby, baggage claim and rental car for the Airport. Conceptual Rendering Conceptual Interior Rendering Conceptual Rendering Conceptual Interior Rendering May 16, 2011 May 16, 2011 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 9 Hangar Hangar24 24 Hangar2424was wasoriginally originally constructed as as partpart of the former Williams GatewayAir Air Force Force Base. Hangar constructed of the former Williams Currently,the the 12,256 12,256 square square foot serves as airline operations, maintenance and provisions Currently, foothangar hangar serves as airline operations, maintenance and storage. storage. provisions Exterior Exterior Interior Interior 3.2.2.2 Curbfront Areas 3.2.2.2 Curbfront Areas The West Terminal curb front is accessed from South Sossaman Road. The single level roadway, Thewhen West Terminal curbfront2010, is accessed from South Sossaman Road. The single completed in November will have two through lanes and a single lane for pickup and level droproadway has two through lanes and a single lane for pickup and drop-off adjacent to the off adjacent to the terminal for a total of three lanes. The primary curbfront, which will measure terminal for a total three lanes. The primary curbfront, measures approximately approximately 715 of feet, is for departures and arrivals, with thewhich departures curb occupying the first 715roadway feet and is for departures and arrivals, with the departures curb occupying segment adjacent to the Passenger Terminal Building and the arrivals curb occupyingthe the first next roadway the passenger the arrivals segmentsegment adjacent toadjacent the West to Terminal Expansion –terminal Phase 1. building, In addition towhile the primary curb therecurb is a occupies the outer next segment adjacent to the West Expansion – Phase In addition to secondary curb, measuring approximately 175Terminal feet, which provides staging for 1. taxis and shuttles. the The primary curb there is a secondary outer curb, measuring approximately 175 feet, which resulting total curbfront area is estimated to be approximately 890 linear feet. The curb frontage is provides staging for taxis and shuttles. The resulting total curbfront area is estimated to be illustrated in the figure which follows. approximately 890 linear feet. May 16, 2011 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 3-8 Existing Conditions Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum DRAFT Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum DRAFT 10 Existing Conditions 3-9 Source: DWL Architects and Planners, Inc., 2010. 3.2.2.3 Public Parking Facilities 3.2.2.3 Public Parking Facilities Vehicle parking the passenger area includes public, employee, rental car Vehicle parking for thefor passenger terminalterminal area includes public, employee, and rental and car ready/return ready/return spaces. Exhibit 3-3: Existing Parking Facilities, identifies existing on-airport spaces. Exhibit 3-3: Existing Parking Facilities, identifies existing on-airport auto parking facilities auto parking associated with the commercial passenger associated with thefacilities commercial passenger operations. Currently, both free operations. short-term andCurrently, pay public both free short-term and pay public parking exists in the terminal area. The free parking parking exists in the terminal area. The free parking consists of approximately 90 short-term spaces consists of approximately 90 short-term spaces east of Sossaman Road and west of the east of Sossaman Road and west of the terminal building along with a 180-space cell phone lot west of terminal building along with a 180-space cell phone lot west of Sossaman Road and south Sossaman Road and south of the terminal building. Combined these represent approximately 270 of the terminal building. Combined, these represent approximately 270 temporary, free temporary, free vehiclePublic spaces. pay near parking the terminal building constitutes approximately vehicle spaces. payPublic parking thenear terminal building constitutes approximately 2,458 vehicle spaces, and isand located in threeindistinct Westlots. of Sossaman is a 180 space 2,458 vehicle spaces, is located three lots. distinct West of Road Sossaman Road is alot that 180 has space approximately 86 spaces allocated for employee parking, with the remaining 94 spaces serving lot that has approximately 86 spaces allocated for employee parking, with the longremaining term public94 patrons. south the terminal building, there is a south dedicated public pay lot spacesImmediately serving long termofpublic patrons. Immediately of the terminal of 814 spaces, and this is complimented by another public pay overflow lot positioned in a fenced building, there is a dedicated public pay lot of 814 spaces, and this is complimentedapron by areaanother immediately east the terminal that is sized accommodate approximately 1,550 public payofoverflow lot positioned in atofenced apron area immediately eastvehicles. of the terminal that sized tobuilding accommodate approximately 1,550 vehicles. north of the Directly north of theisterminal are 60 spaces which are reserved for rentalDirectly car ready/return. terminal building are 60 spaces which are reserved for rental car ready/return. Additional auto parking is provided at PGMA for airport tenants and other on airport operations not Additional auto passenger parking isterminal. provided at PGMA for parking airportareas tenants on-airport related to commercial These additional will and not beother addressed in this operations not related to the commercial passenger terminal. These additional parking analysis. areas will not be addressed in this analysis. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 11 3-10 Existing Conditions Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum DRAFT Exhibit 3-3: Existing Parking Facilities Source: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Authority, 2010. Exhibit 3-3: Existing Parking Facilities 3.2.2.4 Rental Car Operations 3.2.2.4 Rental Carpassenger Operationsaccess to the rental car area is one of the goals at PMGA. The easy Convenient access begins with the rental car counters within the arrival lobby of the West Terminal Expansion – Phaseaccess 1 building. continue to the rental Convenient passenger to rentalThe cararriving is one ofpassengers the goals atwould Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport.car The lotbegins in front terminal building. departing passengers would drop-off easyready access with of thethe rental car counters within The the arrival lobby of the West Terminal Expansion their 1party along thearriving curb and proceedwould to thecontinue rental car return lotCar justReady northlot ofjust theinaccess – Phase Building. The passengers to the Rental front of roadway, within walking distance of the terminal. the Terminal. The departing passenger would drop-off their party along the curb and proceed to the Rental Car Return Lot just north of the access roadway, within walking distance to the terminal. There are approximately 150 spaces located in the rental car ready lot and 12 lanes for the rental car return. The rental car lots are part of the ongoing construction, with the final There are approximately 150 spaces located the rental car ready lot and 12 lanes for the rental car configuration opened November 2010. return. The rental car lots are part of the ongoing construction, with the final configuration in place November 2010. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum DRAFT 12 Existing Conditions 3-11 Source: DWL Architects and Planners, Inc., 2010. 3.2.2.5 3.2.2.5 AirlineAirline SupportSupport Facilities Facilities Support facilities are provided in various locations throughout the West Passenger Terminal Area. airline ticketing officesthroughout (ATO) arethe located in the passenger Support Facilities are The provided in various locations West Passenger Terminalterminal, Area. The with the majority the ticket the West Terminal Expansion Airline Ticketing Officeslocated (ATO) behind are located in thecounters. PassengerWithin Terminal, with the majority behind the Phase 1 building a bagTerminal serviceExpansion office (BSO) adjacent to baggage claim area.Office Located ticket– counters. Within theisWest – Phase 1 building is a Bag Service (BSO) with direct airside access is the Airline Operations building or termed the “line shack” by adjacent to baggage claim area. Located with direct airside access is the Airline Operation building or airport staff. Maintenance facilities, provisions storage and additional airline operations termed the “line shack” by airport staff. Maintenance facilities, provisions storage and additional airline offices are located in Hangar 24. operation offices are located in Hangar 24. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum DRAFT 13 Existing Conditions 3-12 Source: DWL Architects and Planners, Inc., 2010. 3.2.33.2.3 Airfield Components Airfield Components The PMGA airfield consists of three parallel runways oriented from northwest to southeast with a Theseries PMGAofairfield consists of threeThe parallel runways oriented fromarenorthwest to in southeast with a section series of associated taxiways. existing airfield facilities discussed the following associated taxiways. The existing airfieldAirfield facilitiesFacilities. are discussed in the following section and shown in Exhibit and shown in Exhibit 3-4: Existing 3-4: Existing Airfield Facilities. Runways Runways Runway 12R-30L is the longest of the three measuring 10,401 feet long by 150 feet wide. The Runway 12R-30L is thepavement longest of has the three measuring 10,401 feet long by 150single feet wide. The concrete runway concrete runway a strength rating at 55,000 pounds wheel loading (SWG), pavement beendual strength rated at 55,000 pounds single wheel loading (SWG), 95,000 pounds wheel 95,000 has pounds wheel loading (DWG), 185,000 dual tandem wheel loading (DTG), anddual 550,000 loading (DWG), 185,000 dual tandem wheel loading (DTG), and 550,000 pounds double dual tandem (DDTG). pounds double dual tandem (DDTG). Both ends of the runway provide 1,000-foot long paved Bothoverrun ends ofareas. the runway provide has 1,000-foot longinstrument paved overrun areas. This runway hastechnology. available instrument This runway available approaches utilizing GPS approaches utilizing GPS technology. Runway 12C-30C measures 10,201 feet long by 150 feet wide with pavement strength ratings equal Runway 12C-30C measures 10,201 above. feet longThe by 150 feet wide with pavement strength equal to Runway to Runway 12R-30L discussed runway was reconstructed in 2005, ratings with the center 5,700 feet constructed of asphalt, while was the remaining portions constructed of concrete. ends 12R-30L discussed above. The runway reconstructed in 2005,are with the center 5,700 feet of isBoth constructed of the runway a 1,000-foot overrun. Runway 12C-30C therunway most sophisticated of asphalt, while thehave remaining portionspaved are constructed of concrete. Both provides ends of the have 1,000-foot instrument offered provides at the Airport, an instrument landing system (ILS)atapproach paved overruns. approach Runway 12C-30C the mostwith sophisticated instrument approach offered the airport, 30C.landing Severalsystem other non-precision areother available to both instrument runway withtoanRunway instrument (ILS) approachinstrument to Runwayapproaches 30C. Several no-precision ends. are available to both runway ends. approaches Runway 12L-30R is 9,301 feet long by 150 feet wide and is constructed entirely of concrete. This Runway 12L-30R is 9,301 feet long and 150 feet wide and is constructed entirely of concrete. This runway was runway was reconstructed in 1999 and provides the greatest strength ratings of the three with reconstructed in 2006 and provides the greatest strength ratings of the three with 75,000 pounds SWG, 210,000 75,000 pounds SWG, 210,000 DWG, 590,000 pounds DTG, and 850,000 pounds DDTG. Currently, DWG, 590,000 pounds DTG, and 850,000 pounds DDTG. Currently, this runway only accommodates visual this runway only accommodates visual approaches, although is intended to serve as the primary approaches, althoughrunway. is intended to serve12L-30R as the primary heavy aircraft paved runway.overrun Runway 12L-30R provides 400heavy aircraft Runway provides 400-foot areas beyond each footrunway paved overrun areas beyond eachare runway end. with All three runways equipped with 35 foot wide paved end. All three runways equipped 35 foot wide are paved shoulders. shoulders. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport May 16, 2011 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Exhibit 3-4: Existing Airfield Facilities Ray Road Paved Overrun AIRPORT PROPERTY LINE Localizer REIL Power Road H G Holding Apron F A ss COURSE am an 0' Airport Surveillance Radar L Wind Cone Ho us eR oa PA C d IFI CR 0 AIL RO AD Pecos Road 1,500 Glide Slope Antenna Wind Cone PAPI REIL P LEGEND Holding Apron N UN ION AWOS PAPI Segmented Circle and Lighted Wind Cone Holding Apron ten ' 00 5 1, West Lighting Vault Rit ) 0' 15 80 Transmitter Antenna 0' 00 1, 0' A GROUNDS X Willie VORTAC ) ATCT & Airport Beacon 0' 15 Alpha Apron 'X 01 ,4 10 K MOTORS PROVING ) 0' 15 K Storage Bunkers ' 01 ,3 (9 V X 1' 20 0, (1 (closed) R 30 L12 ay nw Ru 0' 45 L( 30 r Ap C 30 C12 ay nw Ru on GENERAL R12 ay nw Ru Middle Apron B Helipad Wind Cone th J Wind Indicator H u So East Lighting Vault PAPI Ro Williams Field Road C Wind Cone 63 ad WILLIAMS CAMPUS 0' 45 PAPI n ro Ap So rth No GOLF G Wind Cone Ellsworth Road Firing Range (closed) TOKA STICKS Existing Conditions 07MP03-1F-6/18/08 3-13 P Paved Overrun Airport Property Line Runway Safety Area (RSA) Object Free Area (OFA) Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) MALSR (inoperable) AWOS - Automated Weather Observation System REIL - Runway End Identification Lights MALSR - Medium Intensity Approach Lighting System with Runway Alignment Indicator Lights 3,000 SCALE IN FEET NORTH Photo Date: April 2007 Exhibit 1F EXISTING AIRFIELD FACILITIES Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum DRAFT 15 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Table X-X Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Airside Facilities Table 3-1: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Airside Facilities Runway Lighting Runway Marking Approach Aids Instrument Approach Aids SWG DWG DTWG DDTW RUNWAY - 12R-30L D-V 10,401 150 CONCRETE 75,000 210,000 590,000 850,000 HIRL PRECISION REIL, PAPI-4L 55,000 95,000 185,000 550,000 HIRL PRECISION PAPI-4L MALSR(30C) 55,000 95,000 185,000 550,000 MIRL PRECISION N/A VISUAL ONLY VOR/DME or TACAN 30C RNAV GPS RWY 12C & 30C ILS RWY 30C RNAV GPS RWY 12R & 30L Weather and Navigational Aids Automated Weather Observation System (AWOS) Lighted Wind Cone Rotating Beacon Airport Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) Airport Surveillance Radar (ASR-8) Segmented Circle Localizer and Glideslope Antennas Source: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Master Plan 2009 Taxiways Taxiways addition toPMGA three airfield runways, PMGA airfield also includes a series taxiways, of parallel and connector In addition toIn three runways, also includes a series of parallel and connector which facilitates the taxiways, which facilitate the ease of aircraft movement on the airfield. Taxiways A and B provide ease of aircraft movement on the airfield. Taxiways A and B provide primary access between the airfield and west side the taxiway, airfield as and side apron Taxiway A iswith not aavoid full between parallel apron area. primary Taxiway Aaccess is not between a full parallel it iswest separated into twoarea. disjointed sections, taxiway, as it is separated into two disjointed sections, with a void between Taxiways H and The Taxiways H and V. The previous Master Plan recommended constructing the missing section of Taxiway A.V. The previous Master Plan recommended constructing the missing section of Taxiway A. The northern northern section of Taxiway A extends from Taxiway G to Taxiway H and is offset 612 feet from Runway 12R-30L, of Taxiway TaxiwayA A extendssouth fromfrom Taxiway GV totoTaxiway and offset 612 feet fromfeet. Runway centerline to section centerline. continues Taxiway Taxiway H P at an is offset distance of 787.5 Both 12R-30L, centerline to centerline. Taxiway A continues south from Taxiway V to Taxiway P at an sections of Taxiway A are 75 feet wide. Taxiway B is 75 feet wide and offset 450 feet from Runway 12R-30L centerline. offset distance of 787.5 feet. Both sections of Taxiway A are 75 feet wide. Taxiway B is 75 feet wide and offset 450 feet from Runway 12R-30L centerline. Taxiway G is oriented from east to west, intersecting with all three Runway 12 ends. The segment from Taxiway B to Runway 12C is 150 feet wide. The portion from Runway 12C to Runway 12L is 75 feet wide. Taxiway H is 100 feet wide Taxiway G is oriented from east to west, intersecting with all three Runway 12 ends. The segment and extends from from Runway 12R-30L to the north apron. Taxiway V is 100 feet wide and extends from the center portion of Taxiway B to Runway 12C is 150 feet wide. The portion from Runway 12C to Runway 12L is Runway 12R-30L to the middle apron.HTaxiway K extends Taxiway Afrom to Runway 12L-30R. Thistotaxiway is 150 feet 75 feet wide. Taxiway is 100 feet wide from and extends Runway 12R-30L the north apron. wide except for that portion between Runway 12C-30L and Runway 12L-30R which is 100 feet wide. Taxiway L is 75 feet Taxiway V is 100 feet wide and extends from the center portion of Runway 12R-30L to the middle wide extending from Taxiway A toKRunway apron. Taxiway extends12R-30L. from Taxiway A to Runway 12L-30R. This taxiway is 150 feet wide except for that portion between Runway 12C-30L and Runway 12L-30R which is 100 feet wide. Taxiway N provides access from A to the Runway 30L threshold. This taxiway is 225 feet wide and has a hold Taxiway L is 75 feetTaxiway wide extending from Taxiway A to Runway 12R-30L. apron. Taxiway P extends from Taxiway A to the Runway 30C and Runway 30R thresholds. Taxiway P has a hold apron prior to the Runway 30NC provides threshold access and is 75 feetTaxiway wide. Taxiway C isRunway the eastside partial parallel that is 2,200isfeet Taxiway from A to the 30L threshold. This taxiway 225long feet and offset 450 feet and from has Runway 12L-30R J provides acute-angled access from Runway 12L-30R to wide a hold apron.centerline. Taxiway Taxiway P extends from Taxiway A to the Runway 30C and Runway Taxiway C. Taxiway W is located on theP eastern portion of the middle This30taxiway is 75 feet T 30R thresholds. Taxiway has a hold apron prior to theapron. Runway C threshold andwide. is 75 Taxiway feet wide. traverses theTaxiway southeastCportion the south apronparallel and is also wide. is the of eastside partial that75isfeet 2,200 feet long and offset 450 feet from the Runway 12L-30R centerline. Taxiway J provides acute-angled access from Runway 12L-30R to Taxiway C. Taxiway W is located on the eastern portion of the middle apron. This taxiway is 75 feet wide. Taxiway T traverses the southeast portion of2011 the south apron and is also 75 feet wide. May 16, Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Existing Conditions Runway Category Runway Length Runway Width Pavement Type Pavement Strength 3-14 Runway Data Table RUNWAY - 12L-30R RUNWAY - 12C-30C D-V D-V 9,301 10,201 150 150 CONCRETE CONCRETE & ASPHALT Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The main aircraft parking apron at PMGA totals approximately 233,000 square yards of concrete pavement and is divided in three sections as shown in Exhibit 3-5: Terminal Area Map. The north apron is approximately 89,000 square yards and primarily serves as a tie-down location for locally based aircraft. The middle apron is approximately 90,000 square yards and primarily serves the commercial passenger terminal area, and U.S. government functions. When commercial passenger aircraft are on the ramp, a restricted area of approximately 12,000 square yards is in effect, which encompasses the immediate ramp area fronting the terminal building and the hangar to the south. The south apron is approximately 54,000 square yards and primarily serves existing industrial and commercial tenants, as well as several corporate aviation hangars. 3.2.4 Local and Regional Infrastructure There have been several strategic planning efforts in this dynamic growing region. The following studies were reviewed and referenced to document the existing transportation infrastructure in the study area including data related to off-airport roadways, transit, bicycle and pedestrian networks, and regional connectivity: • • • Mesa Proving Grounds Master Transportation Plan, DMJM Harris/AECOM, September 2008 Superstition Vistas Scenario Report, September 2009 Mesa Gateway Strategic Development Plan, HDR, January 2009 3.2.4.1 Regional Roadway Network The study area for the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Study (PGMA-NADP) is bound by Warner Road to the north, Power Road to the west, Germann Road to the south and Ellsworth/Signal Butte Roads to the east. Refer to Exhibit 3-6: PGMANADP Study Area Map. The major roadways that currently border the study area include Warner Road, Ray Road, Sossaman Road, Pecos Road, Germann Road, Hawes Road, Williams Field Road, Power Road, Ellsworth Road and L202 Santan Freeway. L202 Santan Freeway provides regional access to the study area with traffic interchanges (TIs) located at Power Road, Elliot Road and Hawes Road close to the site. All of these TI ramp intersections are built out to their ultimate configuration. The segment of L202 adjacent to the study area has seven (7) travel lanes: three (3) northbound travel lanes and four (4) southbound travel lanes. Warner Road is a two-lane east-west roadway and serves as the north boundary of the study area. It currently has one (1) lane in each direction with a posted speed limit of 45 mph. It extends between Sossaman Road and Ellsworth Roads and does not connect to Power Road to the west. Ray Road is a east-west arterial and has 3 lanes in the eastbound direction and 2 lanes in the westbound direction between Recker Road and Power Road. The posted speed limit is 45 mph. East of Power Road it becomes a 4 lane arterial with two lanes in each direction and extends to Ellsworth Road further to the east. The new section of Ray Road from Sossaman Road to Ellsworth Road has one (1) travel lane in each direction with new traffic signals at the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Existing Conditions 3-15 Aircraft Parking Apron Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 3-16 Existing Conditions Exhibit 3-5: Terminal Area Map North Apron Middle Apron South Apron intersections of Ray Road with Sossaman Road and Ellsworth Road. Recently constructed Hawes Road provides access from L202 directly to Ray Road. Sossaman Road is a north-south arterial (parkway), with 2 lanes in each direction, connecting Ray Road to Pecos Road. The posted speed limit is 35 mph. South of Pecos Road, Sossaman Road is a two-lane roadway. The intersections with Tahoe Avenue and Texas Avenue are signalized. Ellsworth Road borders the study area to the east and is a north-south major arterial. The roadway has recently been constructed to provide two (2) lanes in each direction with a raised center median and a bike lane on the eastern side of the road. The posted speed on Ellsworth Road is 45 mph. Signal Butte Road borders the study area to the east and serves as a north-south major arterial. It currently has one (1) lane in each direction along with a center turn lane. The posted speed limit is 35 mph. Williams Field Road is an east-west major arterial and consists of one (1) lane of traffic in each direction with a posted speed limit of 45 mph. Pecos Road is an east-west arterial with (1) one lane in each direction. The posted speed limit is 45 mph. The intersection with Power Road is signalized. The intersections with Sossaman Road and Ellsworth Road are signalized. Pecos Road currently ends at Ellsworth Road at the west end and is signalized. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Development - Technical Report Northeast Area Area Development Plan – TechnicalPlan Memorandum 18 DRAFT 3-17 Existing Conditions Exhibit 3-6: PMGA-NADP Study Area Map Germann Road an Map east-west arterial with (3) three lanes in each direction between Power Exhibit 3-6: PMGA-NADP Study is Area Road and 187th Street. East of 187th Street it has (1) one lane in each direction all the way to Ellsworth speedarterial limit is(parkway), 45 mph between Power Road direction, and Ellsworth RoadRay SossamanRoad. RoadThe is aposted north-south with 2 lanes in each connecting except from 188th Street to Rittenhouse Road where the posted speed limit is 35 mph. Theis a Road to Pecos Road. The posted speed limit is 35 mph. South of Pecos Road, Sossaman Road intersections with Power Road, Rittenhouse Road, and Ellsworth Road are signalized. two-lane roadway. The intersections with Tahoe Avenue and Texas Avenue are signalized. Hawes Road, which was recently constructed, extends south of L202 to Ray Road. This new Elliot Road is an east-west major arterial which serves as the north boundary of the development. It section of Hawes Road has one (1) travel lane in each direction. currently has one (1) lane in each direction with a posted speed limit of 45 mph. The intersections with the L202 ramps, and Signal Roads are (2) signalized. Power Road is aEllsworth north-south majorButte arterial with two lanes in each direction between Warner Road and Williams Field Road. South of Williams Field Road to Pecos Road the Ellsworthbecomes Road borders thelane development to the west and isofaPecos north-south major roadway roadway (1) one in each direction. South Road it has arterial. (3) threeThe lanes in has recently been constructed twoin(2)the lanes in each direction with raised center median the southbound direction, and to (2)provide two lanes northbound direction to aRittenhouse Road. and aofbike lane on theRoad eastern sideare of the posted speed on Ellsworth is 45 mph.limit South Rittenhouse there (3) road. threeThe lanes in each direction. The Road posted speed is 45 mph. The intersections with Warner Road, the L202 Ramps, Orchid Lane, Ray Road, Galveston Street, Williams Road, PecostoRoad, Rittenhouse Germann Road are It Signal Butte Road borders Field the development the east and servesRoad, as a and north-south major arterial. signalized. currently has one (1) lane in each direction along with a center turn lane. The posted speed limit is 35 mph. Williams Field Road is an east-west major arterial and consists of one (1) lane of traffic in each direction with a posted speed limit of 45 mph. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The Airport, which sits on over 3,000 acres, is strategically located near the southeastern edge of Maricopa County, and approximately six miles northwest of neighboring Pinal County. Following the closure of Williams Air Force Base in 1991, the PMGA, which has been considered a reliever facility for Sky Harbor International Airport and as an aerospace center focused on research and education in metropolitan Phoenix. The towns of Queen Creek to the south and Gilbert to the west are immediately adjacent. The Airport’s airside operations are centered on three parallel facilities that run northwest to southeast. Landside operations are diverse, with a 23,700 square foot passenger terminal and associated amenities, aircraft storage hangars, fuel farms, cargo facilities, aviation training facilities, and a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) repair station. 3.2.4.3 Public Transportation The Regional Transportation Plan identifies a moderate expansion of the regional transit network within the study area. Existing Transit Service Based on the 2007 Existing Transportation Conditions Memorandum documented as part of the Mesa Gateway Strategic Development Plan, the following documents the transit network within the PMGA-NADP study area. The existing public transit services operating within the study area include a limited number of Valley Metro bus routes and an intercampus shuttle that operates between Arizona State University’s (ASU) Tempe campus and the Polytechnic campus which is located west of the current airport passenger terminal. As of January 2011, the Valley Metro bus system also extends service to the airport passenger terminal facilities. Valley Metro bus service is limited to the western portion of the Mesa Gateway Transportation Planning Study Area. Service is limited to five local bus routes and one express route. All of the routes with the exception of one serve the Superstition Springs Mall located near Power Road and US 60. The only route that does not serve the mall is Route 156 (Williams Field Road/ Chandler Boulevard). This route was extended to serve the ASU Polytechnic Campus in July 2007. The route primarily operates on Williams Field Road/Chandler Boulevard between the ASU Polytechnic campus and Desert Foothills Parkway in Phoenix. Destinations served by Route 156 include Gilbert Mercy Hospital, Chandler-Gilbert Community College, Chandler Regional Hospital, and Chandler Fashion Mall. Service is provided between ASU’s Tempe campus and Polytechnic campus through the university’s intercampus shuttle. The shuttle provides non-stop express service between both campuses with one exception stop at the Gilbert Gateway Towne Center located near Power Road and Ray Road. The existing transit network in the study area is illustrated by Exhibit 3-7: Existing Transit Network. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Existing Conditions 3-18 3.2.4.2 Airport Roadways Community College, Chandler Regional Hospital, and Chandler Fashion Mall. Service is provided between ASU’s Tempe campus and Polytechnic campus through the university’s intercampus shuttle. The shuttle provides non-stop express service between both campuses with one exception stop at the Gilbert Gateway Towne Center located near Power Road and Ray Road. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The existing transit network in the study area is illustrated by Exhibit 3-7: Existing Transit Network. 3-19 Existing Conditions Exhibit 3-7: Existing Transit Network Source: Mesa Gateway Strategic Development Plan, October 2007 Exhibit 3-7: Existing TransitRailroads Network Existing The Union Pacific Railroad is located close to the study area. Currently, Union Pacific Railroad Existing Railroads runs six to eight trains per day in the corridor near the study area (reference Exhibit 3-8: Existing The Union Pacific Railroad is locatedofclose to the study area. Currently, Uniona commuter Pacific Railroad runs six Railroads). Maricopa Association Governments (MAG) is conducting rail study to eight trains per day in this corridor (reference Exhibit 3-8: Existing Railroads). Maricopa to study the feasibility of implementing passenger rail service between outlying suburbs and Association of Governments (MAG) is conducting a commuter rail study to study the feasibility of central Phoenix. implementing passenger rail service between outlying suburbs and central Phoenix. May 16, 2011 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 3-20 8: Existing Railroads Existing Conditions Exhibit 3-8: Existing Railroads Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The City of Mesa’s Transportation Plan incorporates the Bicycle Plan as an important multimodal element of its transportation network. Bicycles are allowed on all roadways within Mesa with the exception of the freeways. Bicycle destinations include schools, parks, shopping centers, and some employment sites. Bike lanes in the City of Mesa are of two types: either as a painted shoulder, or a shared lane with parking. Bike lanes are typically 6 feet in width or 12 feet in width if shared with parked cars. The existing bike paths are along the Crosscut Canal (2 miles) and the RWCD Canal (2 miles). Recent Improvements (2009) • • • • • • • • • • Ellsworth Rd: Baseline Rd to Guadalupe Rd (1 mile of bike lanes) Gilbert Rd: Main St to Brown Rd (1 mile of bike lanes) Mesa Dr: McKellips Rd to University Dr (2 miles of bike lanes) Sossaman Rd: US-60 to Baseline Rd (0.5 mile of bike lanes) Sossaman Rd: Power Rd to Velocity Way(2.5 miles of bike lanes) Southern Ave: Stapley Dr to Harris Ave (0.5 miles of bike lanes) University Dr: Dobson Rd to Alma School Rd (1 mile of bike lanes) University Dr: Robson to Mesa Dr (0.8 mile of bike lanes) University Dr: Hall to Gilbert Rd (0.4 mile of bike lanes) Val Vista Rd: Hampton Ave to Baseline Rd (0.75 mile of bike lanes) Existing Pedestrian Facilities Pedestrian travel in the City of Mesa typically occurs on sidewalks adjacent to a city street. The current City of Mesa Design Guidelines require four-foot sidewalks on residential streets and six-foot sidewalks on collector and arterial streets, including the sidewalk on Main Street and Country Club Drive. Many trip destinations are located along arterial streets where sidewalks typically abut the curb. Some areas have sidewalks that are separated from the curb, which provides a more attractive walking experience than areas where the sidewalk abuts the curb. 3.2.4.4 Site Utilities – Airport Area This section will provide an overview of existing utility infrastructure in the Mesa Gateway area in support of development for the PMGA NADP. This overview includes a discussion of municipal utility services and features, namely: water, wastewater, drainage, electric, gas, and fiber optic lines. It is important that utility infrastructure is considered as part of the strategic planning process to ensure sufficient support is in place or planned for proposed land use for the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway area. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Existing Conditions 3-21 Existing Bicycle Facilities Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Aside from a very small area south of the PMGA, which is served by Queen Creek private water company, the City of Mesa is the designated municipal provider of water service for the study area. The Mesa Gateway area falls into the region designated as “Off Project” which refers to land outside of the boundaries which can be served by the Salt River Project (SRP). This zone receives an average of 45 million gallons of water per day (MGD) from the Central Arizona Project (CAP) Canal through the City’s Brown Road CAP water treatment plant. In addition, groundwater supplies from wells supplement the CAP water. In the last 10 years, the “Off Project” area demand has more than doubled. The Airport area is within the Falcon Field Pressure Zone. There is an existing 16pinch water line running north-south along Sossaman Road which supplies the airport with two 12-inch lines. New 20-inch and 24-inch water lines are being installed along the north boundary of the Northeast Area Development Technical Memorandum 23 Airport.Plan See –Exhibit 3-9 for the water services map. DRAFT Exhibit 3-9: Water Services Exhibit 3-9: Water Services Wastewater The City of Mesa is the provider for wastewater collection and treatment for the incorporated area of the City which includes the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport. The City has three reclaimed wastewater facilities to treat and provide for a variety of reuse opportunities. These include the Northwest Water Reclamation Plant (NWWRP), Southeast Water Reclamation Plant (SERWP), and the Greenfield Water Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Reclamation Plant (GWRP). The Greenfield Water Reclamation Plant serves the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway area and is located within 3-22 Existing Conditions Water Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The City of Mesa is the provider for wastewater collection and treatment for the incorporated area of the city which includes the PMGA. The city has three reclaimed wastewater facilities to treat and provide for a variety of reuse opportunities. These include the Northwest Water Reclamation Plant (NWWRP), Southeast Water Reclamation Plant (SEWRP), and the Greenfield Water Reclamation Plant (GWRP). The GWRP serves the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway area and is located within the Town of Gilbert on the west side of Greenfield Road between Germann Road and Queen Creek Road. This facility was recently completed and is jointly owned by the City of Mesa and the Towns of Gilbert and Queen Creek. Mesa’s current ownership is 4 MGD. The ultimate capacity of this plant is projected to be 52 MGD, with Mesa’s ownership set at 24 MGD. Mesa’s reclaimed water from this plant is delivered to the Gila River Indian Community in exchange for CAP water. The existing (and proposed) collection system serving the Mesa Gateway Area is shown in Exhibit 3-10. Northeast Area Development – Technical Memorandum With thePlan recent completion of the GWRP, the entire area south of Elliot Road, including the 24 DRAFT PMGA flows south and west to the plant. The Airport is served by a 12-inch line in Sossaman Road that flows north near the new Ray Road Alignment where it connects to the new 30-inch line, then be south in athat 54-inch line along Power Road Road and ultimately to theby GWRP. It should noted the sewer line west of Power is jointly owned Mesa and the Town of Queen Creek, with Mesa owning nearly half of the total capacity. Exhibit 3-10: Wastewater Facilities Exhibit 3-10: Wastewater Facilities Drainage Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport The City storm drainage in the study area has been addressed in the East Mesa Area Drainage Master Plan, 1998. This plan was prepared for the Flood Control District of Maricopa County (FCDMC), who partners with the City to address drainage and flood control issues. 3-23 Existing Conditions Wastewater Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The city storm drainage in the study area has been addressed in the East Mesa Area Drainage Master Plan, 1998. This plan was prepared for the Flood Control District of Maricopa County (FCDMC), who partners with the city to address drainage and flood control issues. Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum DRAFT Exhibit 3-11: Drainage Features 26 Exhibit 3-11: Drainage Features One of the main items is to understand the location, nature and timing of development in the area, so that the appropriate facilities can be provided in a timely manner. It is also important that SRP be provided with information regarding densities and the nature, phasing and timing of areas that are planned for greater densities. High density loads, such as large industrial customers and mid to highrise buildings greater than 3 stories in height, may require additional electrical infrastructure. Finally, SRP plans to further explore their role regarding the concepts of sustainability and energy efficiency that will be considered in the development of this plan. Recent revision to the SRP system include Substation F will actually move further south along Williams Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Field Road Alignment. Existing Conditions 3-24 Drainage Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Key drainage features are highlighted on the Drainage Features graphic accompanying this section. (see Exhibit 3-11) Discussion of key features (existing and proposed) in the Project area follows: • • • • • • • Sossaman Road Channel: receives channelized flows from US 60 and conveys them south along Sossaman Road and west along Guadalupe Road to the East Maricopa Floodway. Elliot Channel: receives flows from north and east and conveys them along Elliot Road to the L202 drainage system, thence west to the East Maricopa Floodway. Powerline Floodway: conveys flows from east of the Mesa Proving Grounds, west along the Williams Field Road alignment to the East Maricopa Floodway. Pecos Road/Ellsworth Channels: flows west from the Pinal County line along Pecos Road, thence north along Ellsworth Road to the Powerline Floodway Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport North and South Perimeter Channels: convey flows from the east around the Airport and into the Powerline Floodway and Rittenhouse Channels, respectively. East Maricopa Floodway: runs north-south along approximately the Power Road alignment, receives flows from the north and east including via the Sossaman Road, Elliot Road, Elliot Channels, and the Powerline Floodway and then conveys them to the Rittenhouse Channel at the southwest corner of the Project area. Rittenhouse Channel: the major regional floodway in the area - runs northwest southeast along the extreme southwest corner of the Mesa Gateway area, receiving flows from the East Maricopa Floodway and other smaller channels including Rittenhouse Channel Extension along Queen Creek Road at the study area southern boundary. Basins: strategically located to moderate flows in several areas including along Elliot Road, Siphon Draw, and the extreme east end of the Pecos Road channel. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 3-25 Existing Conditions Storm flows in the Project area generally flow from northeast to southwest. The Superstition Freeway (US 60), CAP canal, East Maricopa Floodway, and Rittenhouse Channel form major drainage boundaries to the north, east, west, and south, respectively. Runoff is concentrated upstream of the CAP canal and discharged over the canal in over-chutes. The Superstition Freeway has a system of collector channels and detention basins that collect runoff and discharge the detained flows under the freeway. A system of channels and basins is used to capture, store, and convey flows within the Project area. The Mesa Proving Grounds and the PMGA occupy a substantial portion of the Mesa Gateway area and include significant drainage features. The Proving Grounds present a four-mile long barrier to runoff. Runoff reaching this area is diverted either around the north and south property boundaries, or through the site in the Powerline Floodway. The PMGA handles off-site flows similarly; perimeter channels divert flows around the north and south boundaries to the East Maricopa Floodway. Sheet flow, ponding, and some flooding is still common in undeveloped portions of the study area, the result of the extremely flat topography. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 3-26 Existing Conditions Electric SRP is the certified provider for electric power to the study area. Their facilities include generation plants, substations, and transmission and distribution lines. Electrical power is generated at the recently expanded 1,200 megawatt (MW) Santan Generating Station, located south of Warner Road on Val Vista Road in Gilbert. Power is transmitted via the Browning Power Receiving Station north of Elliott and Signal Butte Roads with scheduled additions of Dinosaur substation on Germann Road at the CAP canal and Moody substation south of Pecos and Recker Roads. SRP currently serves the study area from five distribution substations. There are existing substations located adjacent to the study area with four more currently planned. Additional facilities can be built to meet the demand of build out within the PhoenixMesa Gateway area. SRP also has the capability of expanding facilities to accommodate growth in this area. A public process is generally necessary for right-or-way/easement acquisition particularly if new facilities are proposed in the area of existing transmission lines. The location of existing and planned major power lines and substations are shown on the map. (reference Exhibit 3-12) Establishment of large industrial loads and data centers over approximately 10 MW require new lines and substations. SRP typically works with developers and the City to adequately prepare for anticipated electrical demand for projects such as the Mesa Proving Grounds and the PMGA area. SRP’s proposed Morong-McPherson 69 kilovolt (kV) line and increased transformer capacity in surrounding substations will continue to provide reliable electricity in Mesa. Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum DRAFT Exhibit 3-12: Power Lines And Substation Facilities Exhibit 3-12: Power Lines And Substation Facilities Natural Gas 27 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 3-27 Existing Conditions One of the main items is to understand the location, nature and timing of development in the area, so that the appropriate facilities can be provided in a timely manner. It is also important that SRP be provided with information regarding densities and the nature, phasing and timing of areas that are planned for greater densities. High density loads, such as large industrial customers and mid to high-rise buildings greater than 3 stories in height, may require additional electrical infrastructure. Finally, SRP plans to further explore their role regarding the concepts of sustainability and energy efficiency that will be considered in the development of this study. Recent revision to the SRP system include Substation F will actually move further south along Williams Field Road Alignment. Natural Gas Southwest (SW) Gas is the natural gas provider for the majority of the Mesa Gateway area. The only area not served by SW Gas is within the L202 area, which is served by the City of Mesa. Currently, the study area is surrounded by both low and high pressure distribution lines. The high pressure line runs along Signal Butte Road in the northeast part of the area and turns west on Elliot Road. At Ellsworth Road, the line runs from Guadalupe on the, past the PhoenixMesa Gateway area to Germann Road. This line continues east and west along Germann Road beyond the west boundary of the study area and east to Crismon Road. An additional high pressure line also runs along Pecos Road from Ellsworth Road east of Signal Butte Road. (see Exhibit 3-13) With regard to future growth and development, SW Gas has the capability to accommodate Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum future needs within the study area without any interruptions to service. DRAFT 28 Exhibit 3-13: Southwest Gas Facilities Exhibit 3-13: Southwest Gas Facilities Fiber Optic Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Construction of the E-streets East Mesa Loop began in 2001 to build a professionally engineered carrier class conduit/vault system for both commercial and government uses. The designed loop contains a unique conduit bank design, large operational vaults at every major street crossing, access manholes to eliminate the need to cut the street and independent test points for the utility locators to access without exposing the fiber infrastructure. The goal of the Loop is two fold: to further develop the broadband markets in three of Mesa’s growing employment centers and to meet the city’s needs. Additional conduit extensions (laterals) along Elliot and Ellsworth Roads reach into Falcon Field, PMGA, and the Arizona Health and Technology Park, with the goal of providing conduit to deploy fiber optic connectivity quickly for commercial needs. To date, a majority of the E-Streets East Mesa Loop has been constructed. The backbone route consists of over 36-miles of 12 two-inch conduits with access points at every major street crossing. 100 percent of the conduit system is buried, lowering chances of network interruptions. See Exhibit 3-14 for City of Mesa Fiber Optic Network. Although there is currently no fiber in place, the 12 conduits have been identified for the type of user to which they are available. As the city uses this infrastructure to meet municipal needs, private companies also can purchase conduits and access to vaults to deploy fiber optic connectivity quickly for commercial needs. The city offers this unique opportunity for commercial entities to acquire conduits at a cost that covers the city’s expenses of installing the infrastructure. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Existing Conditions 3-28 Fiber Optic Northeast Development Plan Memorandum - Technical Report Northeast AreaArea Development Plan – Technical DRAFT 3-29 Existing Conditions Exhibit 3-14: City Of Mesa Fiber Optic Network Facilities Exhibit 3-14: City Of Mesa Fiber Optic Network Facilities 3.2.5 Environmental Overview (to be provided at a later date) 3.2.6 Properties and Leaseholds PMGA has several national and international aviation tenants with business interests on the airport. leaseholds and on airport operations provide a significant portion of the Airport’s annual revenue and jobs f local economy. Some of the larger tenants at PGMA include – Arizona State University, Boeing, Ce Chandler-Gilbert Community College, Embraer, L-3, U.S. Customs & Border Patrol, U.S. Forest Service U.S. Marshalls. Exhibit 3-15: Leasehold Map, identifies existing leaseholds PMGA Airport in November 2006. Phoenix-Mesaon Gateway 3.2.7 On-Airport Land Use Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report PMGA has several national and international aviation tenants with business interests on the airport. The leaseholds and on airport operations provide a significant portion of the Airport’s annual revenue and jobs for the local economy. Some of the larger tenants at PGMA include – Arizona State University, Boeing, Cessna, Chandler-Gilbert Community College, Embraer, L-3, U.S. Customs & Border Patrol, U.S. Forest Service, and U.S. Marshalls. Exhibit 3-15: Leasehold Map, identifies existing leaseholds on PMGA in November 2006. 3.2.6 On-Airport Land Use The focus of this study is the planned development of the northeast area, this section will detail the existing land uses and operational areas of the Airport. Commercial service functions at PMGA must be adequately accommodated prior to development of additional general aviation facilities. PMGA is fortunate to have extensive land reserves and can likely accommodate both commercial operations as well as the needs of local and transient general aviation users. The PMGA Authority has been proactive in ensuring that activity at the Airport is appropriately separated and that adjacent land uses are compatible. The major activity centers of the Airport, such as the general aviation ramp and the commercial passenger terminal building area, are distinct and separate from each other. The existing development has followed recommended strategies to ensure the long term efficiency of the Airport. Exhibit 3-16: On-Airport Land Use presents existing land uses for airport property. The north ramp on the west side of the airfield has long been identified for general aviation purposes. The PMGA Authority owned fixed base operator (FBO) is located in this area, as are aircraft tie-downs, and both Arizona State University and Chandler- Gilbert Community College have their flight schools in this area. A hangar complex with 37 T-hangar units and 34 box hangars was constructed in 2008. In addition, both Cessna and Embraer have recently constructed business jet service centers in this location. The south ramp has been used for aircraft maintenance operations and corporate aviation. The middle ramp serves a limited general aviation function, accommodating the U.S. Marshals Service operations and the hangar immediately south of the administration building. The current passenger terminal area occupies the southern portion of the middle apron. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Existing Conditions 3-30 3.2.5 Properties and Leaseholds Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report AIRPORT LOT MAP North Aviation Area Exhibit 3-15: Leasehold Map - North Aviation Area (January 2012) January 2012 Existing Conditions 3-31 2 10 11 12 13 17 14 18 20D 15 21A 16 20B 21B 22 23 24 25 26A 26B 27 28 31A 31B Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report AIRPORT LOT MAP Central Aviation Area Exhibit 3-15: Leasehold Map - Central Aviation Area (January 2012) (Continued) January 2012 Existing Conditions 3-32 12 13 17 14 18 20D 15 21A 16 21B 20B 22 23 24 25 26A 26B 31A 27 28 31B 32 29 30 33 52 50F 53 51 34 60-2 35A 55 50E 60-3 35B 56A 36 37 49 50C 50A 48 111 47 110 46 38 57 42 39 43 59B 109 45 112 64 113 108 107 42A 58 60-4 50D 50B 56B 59A 60-1 50G 54 41 104 105 106 103 102 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report AIRPORT LOT MAPS South Aviation & Industrial Area 2012 Exhibit 3-15: Leasehold Map - South Aviation Area (January 2012) January (Continued) Existing Conditions 3-33 26B 31A 27 28 31B 32 29 30 33 52 50F 53 51 34 50E 60-3 35B 49 50C 56B 110 46 38 57 42 39 AD O R 59B AY YW OCIT VEL 42A AN AM SS SO 58 43 41 104 105 109 45 112 64 113 108 107 106 D SE PO O PR 103 111 E IV R D 48 47 50B 60-4 IR C 50A 50D D IN W N W O D 36 37 AY W XI TA 56A 59A 60-2 35A 55 60-1 50G 54 T EN NM IG AL R O AP -V L AI TR 102 101 T D SE EN L M N IG AL AY W XI A -T PO O PR Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The aviation fuel farm, which was constructed in 2006, is located to the south of the south apron. There are six 25,000-gallon Jet A aboveground fuel tanks and one 12,000-gallon Avgas tank. The fuel farm is enclosed with a seven-foot high masonry wall and chain link fence with three strands of barbed wire. A key card is required to access to the fuel farm. The terminal area ramp is not equipped with a hydrant fueling system. Therefore, PGMA utilizes fuel delivery vehicles to transport fuel from the fuel farm to awaiting aircraft on the ramp. There are five Jet A fuel trucks, two of which have a capacity of 5,000 gallons, two have a capacity of 10,000 gallons, and the last one has a capacity of 3,000 gallons. PGMA uses two 1,500-gallon and one 1,200-gallon Avgas fuel trucks. There is no self-serve fuel available at the Airport. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Existing Conditions 3-34 3.2.7 Aircraft Fuel Farm Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Current and planned land uses in the vicinity of the Airport can have a significant impact on airport operations and growth. This section identifies baseline information relating to both existing and future land uses in the vicinity of PMGA. Generalized existing land uses that surround the Airport are presented on Exhibit 3-17: Existing Off-Airport Land Use. To the south in Mesa, agricultural land uses are prominent on both sides of Pecos Road. Slightly further south is some residential development. The former General Motors (GM) proving grounds are to the east, which has been purchased by private developers who currently working with the City of Mesa planning officials for planning approval for mixed-use development. The area to the immediate west of the Airport is reserved for educational purposes. Arizona State University Polytechnic and Chandler-Gilbert Community College occupy the majority of this property. West of Power Road is the Town of Gilbert, which is home to residential and agricultural uses. To the north is predominantly undeveloped land in the City of Mesa and Maricopa County. The development pressure on the agricultural or vacant lands surrounding the Airport is significant. Arizona Revised Statute (ARS) 28-8486, Public Airport Disclosure, requires public airport owners to publish a map depicting the “territory in the vicinity of the airport.” This area is defined as the traffic pattern airspace and property that experiences a 60 day-night noise level (DNL) or higher in counties with a population of more than 500,000, and 65 DNL or higher in counties with less than 500,000 residents. The DNL is calculated for a 20-year forecast condition. ARS 28-8486 requires the State Real Estate Office to prepare a disclosure map in conjunction with the airport owner that is recorded with the county. The PMGA public disclosure boundary is depicted on Exhibit 3-18: Traffic Pattern and Airspace Map. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Existing Conditions 3-35 3.3 Local Land Use and Zoning Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 3-36 Existing Conditions 07MP03-4G-11/26/07 Exhibit 3-16: On-Airport Land Use Ellsworth Road Ray Road Power Road TOKA STICKS GOLF So ss COURSE am an Runway Safety Area (RSA) X ) 0' 15 'X 01 ,4 10 ) 0' 15 L( 30 0' 15 ) WILLIAMS CAMPUS LEGEND Airport Property Line ' 01 ,3 (9 Williams Field Road X 1' 20 0, (1 R12 ay nw Ru C 30 C12 ay nw Ru ad R 30 L12 ay nw Ru Ro Object Free Area (OFA) Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) Airfield Environment Airport Businesses and Corporate Aviation Aviation and Non-Aviation Business Expansion Commercial Operations FAA and Airport Operations General Aviation Rit ten UN Ho ION P e R ACIF IC oa d RA us 0 ILR OA D Pecos Road 1,500 3,000 SCALE IN FEET NORTH Photo Date: April 2007 Exhibit 4G GENERALIZED LAND USE Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 07MP03-1B-06/05/07 LEGEND Residential Public/Educational TOWN OF GILBERT General Motors Proving Ground Industrial/Commercial Agriculture Open Space/Desert Scrub Airport Property Warner Rd. y (Loo Santan Freewa SOURCES: City of Mesa General Plan, Town of Gilbert General Plan, Town of Queen Creek General Plan. ) 02 p2 Mesa Airport Overlay Zoning MARICOPA COUNTY CITY OF MESA Gilbert Overflight District Gila River Indian Community Property Queen Creek Airport Overlay District Ray Rd. Williams Field WILLIAMS CAMPUS Pecos Rd. U. P. R ail ro a d CITY OF MESA Power Rd. Ri tte nh ou se Rd . Ellsworth Rd. NORTH German R Rd. d. d. NOT TO SCALE TOWN OF QUEEN CREEK Photo Source: Todd Photographics, March 2005 Exhibit 1B EXISTING LAND USE Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Existing Conditions 3-37 Exhibit 3-17: Existing Off-Airport Land Use Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 3-38 Existing Conditions 07MP03-1C-6/05/07 Exhibit 3-18: Traffic Pattern and Airspace Map NORTH Notes: 1. This map has been prepared in accordance with the Arizona Revised Statutes, Section 28-8486, relating to Public Disclosure. 2. Traffic Pattern Airspace Boundaries have been established in accordance with the guidelines provided in the FAA Order 7400.2D. 3. One Nautical mile = 6,076 feet or 1.1508 statute miles. Legend: TRAFFIC PATTERN AIRSPACE 65 NOISE CONTOURS - DAY/NIGHT LEVEL Electronic USGS Map base Edited and Published by Sylvan Ascent Inc. Map base used by permission (license agreement) of Sylvan Ascent Inc. Transportation and Hydrography Source data from U.S. Census Bureau Coordinate System: Arizona central......202 Exhibit 1C TRAFFIC PATTERN AIRSPACE MAP Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The City of Mesa has also applied an Airport Overlay District to many areas surrounding the Airport. These areas are identified on the previously presented Exhibit 3-17: Existing Off-Airport Land Use. The Airport Overlay District was created to promote public health and safety in the vicinity of the Airport by minimizing exposure to crash hazards and high noise levels that may be generated by airfield operations. It is intended to encourage future development which is compatible with the continued operation of the airfield. The Queen Creek General Plan recognizes the recommended land use planning scenario from the 1999 Airport Noise Compatibility Program. The land within the planning area is zoned for compatible uses, which would include light and heavy industrial development and some commercial development. There are a number of methods by which governmental entities can ensure that land uses in and around airports are developed in a compatible manner. The objective of enforcing land use restrictions is to protect designated areas for the maintenance of operationally safe and obstruction-free airport activity. In addition, the impact of aircraft noise on the public can be reduced. Land use zoning is the most common land use control. Zoning is the exercise of the jurisdictional powers granted to the state and local governments to designate permitted land uses on each parcel. Typically, zoning is developed through local ordinances and is often included in comprehensive plans. The primary advantage of zoning is that it can promote compatibility with the Airport while leaving the land in private ownership. Zoning is subject to change; therefore, any potential alterations to the zoning code near the Airport should be monitored closely for compatibility. The PMGA Area office was created in 2001 by the Mesa City Council. This office has responsibility for economic development and marketing within the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway area. The area is defined on the north by Guadalupe Road, on the east by Meridian Road, on the south by Queen Creek Road, and to the west by Higley Road. This organization undertook a formal study of the area and produced the Urban Land Institute Advisory Services Panel Report in late 2006. Exhibit 3-19: Future Off-Airport Land Use presents the recommended future land use of the area. This map represents material combined from the general plans of the City of Mesa, and Towns of Gilbert and Queen Creek. Height restrictions are necessary to insure that objects will not impair flight safety or decrease the operational capability of the Airport. Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 77, Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace, defines a series of imaginary surfaces surrounding airports. The imaginary surfaces consist of the approach zone, conical zones, transitional zones, and horizontal zones. Objects such as trees, towers, buildings, or roads, which penetrate any of these surfaces, are considered by the FAA to be an obstruction to air navigation. Currently, the City of Mesa and Towns of Gilbert and Queen Creek apply height restrictions within the vicinity of the Airport as a part of their zoning. Height restrictions can be accomplished through height and hazard zoning, avigation easements, or fee simple acquisition. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 3-39 Existing Conditions In addition, the Town of Gilbert has implemented the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Overlay Zoning District into their development code. The purpose of the overlay zoning is to designate those areas that may be impacted by noise generated from airport activity. Further zoning regulations within this area are defined by three Overflight Areas. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Foreign Trade Zones (FTZ) are designated areas intended to promote international trade and offer companies and importers a way to gain a financial edge in the global marketplace through reduction, deferral, or elimination of U.S. Customs duties. An onsite U.S. Customs Office provides additional advantages to businesses conducting international trade. Located on PMGA is Mesa’s General-Purpose Foreign Trade Zone No. 221 (FTZ), which offers aviation related industrial operations the advantage of airport or near-airport locations. Non-aviation related businesses involved in importing foreign or domestic goods can also take advantage of the benefits through a subzone designation. 07MP03-1D-5/22/07 Exhibit 3-19: Future Off-Airport Land Use LEGEND Former GM Proving Grounds Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Single Family Low Single Family Medium Single Family High Multi Family Commercial Low Commercial High Industrial Office Hotel Educational / Religious Public Medical Cemetery Other Employment Transportation Airport Active Open Space Golf Course Passive Open Space Agriculture Business Park Mixed Use Planned Development Water Existing Freeways Planned Freeways Railroad Route County Boundary Study Area ASU-Polytech Municipal Planning Area Property Owners Sources: Maricopa Association of Governments: Williams Gateway Area General Plan Land Use (2006) NORTH NOT TO SCALE While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of this information, the Maricopa Association of Governments makes no warranty, expressed or implied, as to its accuracy and expressly disclaims liability for the accuracy thereof. Exhibit 1D FUTURE LAND USE Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Existing Conditions 3-40 Foreign Trade Zone Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Military Reuse Zone The Arizona State Legislature established the Military Reuse Zone Program (MRZ) in 1992. The intent of the legislation was to lessen the negative economic impact of military base closures. This program offers aviation companies a significant financial edge in the global marketplace. There are three primary benefits to developing businesses within the MRZ: 1. Transaction Privilege Tax Exemptions: Exemption from transaction privilege tax on contracts for certain types of construction; 2. Tax Credits: Arizona income/premium tax credits for up to five years for each net new job created, totaling up to $7,500 per non-dislocated employee and up to $10,000 per dislocated employee; and 3. Property Reclassifications: Both real and personal property can be reclassified from class one (25 percent assessment ratio) to class six (5 percent assessment ratio), which may result in property tax savings of up to 80 percent for a period of five years. The MRZ designation for the PMGA was renewed in 2006. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 3-41 Existing Conditions The boundaries of the FTZ approximate the existing airport property, excluding the runway and taxiway system, as well as the runway protection zones and various FAA designated safety areas. Approximately 1,411 acres of airport property are available for FTZ development. The benefits to operating a business in a foreign trade zone are primarily the reduction or elimination of the payment of U.S. Customs duties or excise taxes on goods imported into the United States. At a minimum, a U.S. importer could store a shipment in the foreign trade zone and gradually import only what is needed, at the time it is needed, and thereby improve a company’s cash flow by spreading the import duty payment over a longer period of time. The FTZ is presented on Exhibit 3-20: Foreign Trade Zone Map. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 3-42 07MP03-1P-06/06/07 Existing Conditions Exhibit 3-20: Foreign Trade Zone Map AIRPORT PROPERTY LINE NORTH Photo Date: April 2007 LEGEND 1,411 Acres In Zone 1,609 Acres Excluded 606.6 Acres to be Added To Zone Exhibit 1P FOREIGN TRADE ZONE MODIFICATIONS Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 4.1 Introduction Aviation activity forecasts provide input for the assessment of airport facility requirements, evaluation of airport development alternatives, and the formulation of information needed to assess the type and timing of new airport facilities. Utilizing short-, intermediate-, and long-range forecasting horizons, these projections also aid in the evaluation of potential environmental impacts to the environs on and surrounding the Airport resulting from the proposed airport improvements, financial impacts and other analyses used in the preparation of the NADP study. This section will review previous forecasting efforts, FAA forecasts, and forecast factors and drivers. The turbulent global economy that took hold in the latter part of 2008 put a squeeze on air travel demand through 2009, although falling oil prices offset some of the decline in demand, allowing U.S. carriers to be profitable in 2009. To navigate the volatile operating environment, carriers have increased revenues per customer (through increased fares and/or additional fees) while driving down operating costs by implementing capacity cutbacks (by reducing flights and/or gauge of aircraft, delaying deliveries of newer aircraft, and/or grounding older less fuel-efficenty aircraft). Over the long term, the FAA projects a competitive and profitable industry characterized by increasing demand for air travel and airfares growing more slowly than inflation. 4.2 Previous Forecasting Efforts The forecast presented in this study will focus on commercial passenger service for PMGA. Forecasts for future All-Cargo and General Aviation activity levels are available in the 2009 Master Plan. Information presented in this section includes identification of the Airport Service Area, in addition to Socio-Economic and Commercial Service Forecasts. Airport Service Area The 2009 Master Plan identified the Airport Service Area as a 60-mile radius around PMGA. Exhibit 4-1: Mesa Gateway Service Area presents an approximate commercial service area, which encompasses most of Pinal County and Maricopa County and the entire metropolitan Phoenix area. The construction of the Gateway Freeway - State Route 24 (planned by 2015) may extend the service area beyond Pinal County to the east. The exhibit also provides a visual representation of the population growth forecast by MAG between the year 2000 and 2050. Large portions of both Pinal and Maricopa Counties are forecast to become populated over this term. Also evident are the growth of Globe, Arizona to the east and the northern reaches of the Tucson metropolitan area. The flying public considers many factors when choosing an originating airport. The availability of flights, variety of destinations, and level of service offered by carriers at PMGA are major considerations. The two largest commercial service airports that may have an influence on the commercial airline service area for PMGA are Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport (PHX), a 28-mile drive to the northwest; and the Tucson International Airport (TUS), a 120-mile drive to the southeast. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 4-1 Activity Forecast Review Section 4: Activity Forecast Review Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 07MP03-2D-8/22/07 2000 Yavapai County Gila County Maricopa County PHOENIX SKY HARBOR INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT WILLIAMS GATEWAY AIRPORT le Mi 60 Ra Pinal County di us Pima County 2050 TUCSON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT Yavapai County Gila County Maricopa County PHOENIX SKY HARBOR INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT WILLIAMS GATEWAY AIRPORT le Mi 60 Ra Pinal County di us Pima County TUCSON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT Source: Maricopa Association of Governments. Exhibit 2D Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport POPULATION GROWTH AND AIRPORT SERVICE AREA Activity Forecast Review 4-2 Exhibit 4-1: Mesa Gateway Service Area Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Socio-Economic Forecast The socioeconomic conditions provide an important baseline for preparing aviation demand forecasts. Local socioeconomic variables such as population, employment, and income are indicators for understanding the dynamics of the community and, in particular, the trends in aviation growth. The following projections are a summary of analysis presented in the 2009 PMGA Master Plan. Socioeconomic data discussed in the Master Plan was compiled from three primary sources. The population and employment forecasts for the metropolitan planning areas are from the Maricopa Association of Governments – 2007 Draft Socioeconomic Projections. The employment and per capital personal income figures for both Pinal and Maricopa County are from Woods and Poole Economics 2006. Population figures for Pinal County are obtained from the August 2006, Pinal County Small Area Transportation Study. Population In 2007, the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) published updated socioeconomic forecasts. The MAG forecasts present population, employment, and other statistical measures based on a defined Metropolitan Planning Area (MPA). The MPA is the municipal boundary plus estimated additional area that may be annexed within the long term planning timeframe. Table 4-1 Socioeconomic Forecasts, summarizes historical and forecast population estimates for the municipalities surrounding the Airport. Both Mesa and Chandler have had a history of significant growth, particularly through the 1990s, but that growth is forecast to be tempered somewhat, averaging 0.8 percent annually through 2027. Both Gilbert and Queen Creek are forecast to have very strong population average annual growth rates of 2.2 and 5.4 percent, respectively. The total commercial service area surrounding the Airport, which includes Maricopa and Pinal Counties, is forecast to add nearly 4.2 million people over the next 20 years. Pinal County alone is forecast to grow from 275,000 in 2006, to 2.4 million in 2027. Maricopa County is forecast to add nearly 2.1 million people over the next 20 years. The total service area is forecast to grow at an average annual rate of 3.4 percent or more than 103 percent. Table 4-1: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Socioeconomic Forecasts 2000 Historical City of Mesa (MPA) Population 441,800 Employment 17,200 Town of Gilbert (MPA) Population 119,200 Employment 35,000 Town of Queen Creek (MPA) Population 7,400 Employment 1,700 City of Chandler (MPA) Population 185,300 Employment 71,000 Approximate Commercial Service Area 3,251,876 Population 1,611,983 Employment Forecast 2006 2012 2017 2027 2006 to 2027 492,657 182,799 527,974 228,477 551,243 256,674 579,047 296,447 0.77% 2.33% 185,996 60,668 230,143 88,062 263,515 105,727 295,877 125,450 2.24% 3.52% 22,197 4,791 37,951 11,403 48,143 17,299 67,214 30,626 5.42% 9.24% 241,614 93,789 268,591 135,383 277,503 155,018 283,551 175,062 0.77% 3.02% 4,057,404 1,946,069 4,913,076 2,373,797 5,758,792 2,773,416 8,250,192 3,856,445 3.44% 3.31% Source: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Master Plan 2009 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Activity Forecast Review 4-3 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Historical and forecast employment data for the commercial and general aviation service areas is also presented in Table 4-1 Socioeconomic Forecasts. Between 2006 and 2027, employment for the commercial service area, which includes all of Maricopa and Pinal Counties, is forecast to grow 3.3 percent annually. Employment in Pinal County alone is forecast to grow 13.3 percent annually and Maricopa County is forecast to grow 2.5 percent annually. Together, more than 1.9 million jobs are forecast to be created between 2006 and 2027. The general aviation service area, which includes Mesa, Gilbert, Queen Creek and Chandler, is forecast to see employment grow by 2.93 percent annually. This represents the addition of more than 285,000 jobs in the immediate vicinity of the Airport. These forecasts anticipate the East Valley area to be a very strong employment growth center over the next 20 years. Infrastructure improvements, such as the construction of the Santan Freeway and numerous arterial roads, are making the East Valley very attractive to business. Economic development data shows that the area is becoming a high-tech corridor with companies such as Intel and Microchip Technology making significant investments in East Valley operations. Commercial Service Enplanements Prior to 2007, PMGA had experienced only limited commercial air service, as annual enplanement totals never exceeding 6,400. By the end of 2009, annual enplanement totals equaled 287,807 as Allegiant Airlines increased operational activity at PMGA. The methodology employed in the 2009 Master Plan to produce the preferred enplanement forecast, was based upon a market share analysis for metropolitan areas in the US served by multiple commercial service airports. In each case, the international airport and the metropolitan airport is the dominant airport and the regional airport assumes a complementary role accommodating anywhere from 2% to 25% of local enplanements. Three future growth scenarios were produced using various market share ratios identified in the market share analysis. Table 4-2 Passenger Enplanement Forecast details the three enplanement scenarios for PMGA. Table 4-2: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Passenger Enplanement Forecast Year 2012 2017 2027 PHX Enplanemants 23,438,534 26,527,805 33,981,694 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Enplanements 1.0% 2.0% 4.0% Scenario I 234,385 530,556 1,359,268 2% 4% 9% Scenario II 468,771 1,140,696 3,058,352 Scenario III 4% 937,541 8% 2,042,641 15% 5,097,254 Source: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Master Plan 2009 Scenario I reflects PMGA capturing a small portion of the local enplanement market, similar to Orlando Sanford International (five percent) or St. Petersburg International (four percent). The second scenario represents PMGA capturing approximately nine percent of the region’s enplanements, similar to Burbank or Ontario, California. The third scenario considers the potential for PMGA to capture approximately 15 percent of the regional enplanements, similar to Providence, RI (12 percent) or Chicago-Midway (19 percent). Exhibit 4-2: Passenger Enplanement Forecast compares the three scenarios graphically. In October 2007, Allegiant Air began twice-weekly service to 13 destinations from PMGA. Considering usage of 150-seat MD-83 aircraft and a boarding load factor of 70 percent, 142,000 enplanements were anticipated. In 2008, annual passenger enplanements at PMGA totaled 177,649. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Activity Forecast Review 4-4 Employment Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 4-5 Activity Forecast Review 07MP03-2E-8/29/07 Exhibit 4-2: Passenger Enplanement Forecast 12 11 10 PASSENGER ENPLANEMENTS (in millions) 9 8 7 LEGEND Scenario 1 (up to 4% of PHX Forecast) Scenario 2 (up to 9% of PHX Forecast) Scenario 3 (up to 15% of PHX Forecast) 1998 Master Plan (MAG) Planning Forecast Forecast Envelope Anticipated Current Year Enplanements by Allegiant Air 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 2005 2010 2012 2015 2017 2020 2025 2027 YEARS Exhibit 2E PASSENGER ENPLANEMENT Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport FORECAST Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum DRAFT 44 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Table 4.3 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Airline Fleet Mix and Operations Fleet Mix By Seating Range >200(B-767) 161-200 (B-737-800, B-757) 135-160 (MD-80, Airbus 320) 105-134 (B-737, MD-80) 75-104 (EMB 190, CRJ-900) 60-79 (CRJ-700) 40-59 (CRJ-200) 0-39 (Dornier 328) Total Average Seats Per Departure Passanger Load Factor Enplanements Per Departure Annual Enplanements Annual Departures Annual Air Carrier Opperations Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Annual Aircraft Fleet 2012 2017 2027 High Range 2% 3% 4% 10% 2% 3% 4% 10% 35% 38% 40% 40% 15% 18% 22% 20% 15% 16% 18% 15% 15% 11% 8% 5% 8% 5% 2% 0% 8% 6% 2% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100% 105.8 113.5 121.8 136.8 70% 72% 75% 77% 74.1 81.7 91.4 105.3 350,000 850,000 2,200,000 5,000,000 4,725 10,403 24,083 47,467 9,449 20,806 48,166 94,934 Activity Forecast Review 4-6 Table 4-3: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Airline Fleet Mix and Operations Source: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Master Plan 2009 Determining the fleet mix ofMix commercial aircraft that may utilize Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport requires an understanding Airline Fleet & Operations of the trends in aircraft utilization by airlines airline and overall national aircraft fleet. use of is regional jets has grown The type of aircraft in the commercial fleet that could potentially serveThe the Airport an important significantly over the past 10 years as the mainline carriers have shed some of their routes to the regional carriers while component of airport planning. Not only is the commercial airline fleet mix helpful in determining consolidating their hubof and spoke systems. Initially, the 35 Airport, and 50-seat jet made the greatest impact in the the number commercial airline operations at the but itregional is also helpful in defining many of the key In parameters usedthe in smaller airport regional planning,jets such as:been critical aircraft the Airport regional market. recent years, have phased forserving higher capacity and(used more for fuel efficient pavement ramp and terminal complex layout), maximum stage length 70 to 90-seat regionaldesign, jets. Due togeometry recent economic pressures, mainline carriers have transferred lowcapabilities yield routes, served (which affects runway length evaluations). Table 4.3 Airline Aircraft Fleet Mix and Operations by inefficient narrow body aircraft, to regional airline partners operating the 70 to 90-seat regional jet. presents the commercial aircraft fleet mix and operations forecast for PMGA. Allegiant Determining Air has offered charter aircraft operations fromutilize Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport to of Reno and the fleetscheduled mix of commercial that may PMGA requires an understanding Laughlin/Bullhead, 2003.utilization In 2007, by Allegiant established PMGA as fleet. one ofThe five airports. the trendssince in aircraft airlines formally and the overall national aircraft usefocus of regional jetsThe other has grown over the pastOrlando 10 yearsSanford, as the mainline carriers have shed their routesAllegiant’s focus airports are St.significantly Petersburg-Clearwater, Las Vegas McCarran, andsome Fort ofLauderdale. to the regional whileDouglas consolidating hub and systems. theEach 35 and aircraft fleet includes fivecarriers McDonnell MD-81their aircraft, five spoke MD-82s, and 16Initially, MD-83s. of 50-seat these aircraft is regional jets made the greatest impact in the regional market. In recent years, the smaller regional jets routes, configured with 150 seats. Allegiant Air also operates three MD-87 aircraft, primarily on St. Petersburg-Clearwater have been phased out for higher capacity and more fuel efficient 70 to 90-seat regional jets. Due to configuredrecent for 130 seats. economic pressures, mainline carriers have transferred low yield routes, served by inefficient narrow body aircraft, to regional airline partners operating the 70 to 90-seat regional jet. As shown in the table above, by 2012 the average number of available seats per departure is estimated at 105.8. By 2027, seats per departure projected to increase to 121.8. This from is related to the change in Laughlin/Bullhead, size of aircraft in the national Allegiant Air hasare offered scheduled charter operations PMGA to Reno and since 2003. In 2007, Allegiant formally established PMGA as one of five focus airports. otherjets. focus aircraft fleet, as airlines increase capacity and regional carriers retiring older and smaller 50-seat The regional airports are St. Petersburg-Clearwater, Orlando Sanford, Las Vegas McCarran, and Fort Lauderdale. aircraft fleet includes five McDonnell Douglas MD-81 aircraft, five MD-82s, and 16 MD-83s. Over the Allegiant’s course of the planning period, the average number of seats available per departure is expected to increase, Each of these aircraft is configured with 150 seats. Allegiant Air also operates three MD-87 aircraft, consistentprimarily with national trends. Passenger load routes, factors,configured the percentage of seats. available seats occupied, is also expected to on St. Petersburg-Clearwater for 130 increase. As shown in the table above, by 2012 the average number of available seats per departure is estimated By 2027, Enplaned at & 105.8. Deplaned Belly seats Cargoper departure are projected to increase to 121.8. This is related to the change in size of aircraft in the aircraft fleet, as airlines capacity and regional carriers retire older Air freight is handled by both national passenger airlines (belly freight)increase and all-cargo airlines. The Cargo Forecast section of this and smaller 50-seat regional jets. study will only focus on “belly freight” carried on passenger aircraft. Air mail is now handled primarily by a contract carrier (currently FedEx through 2012) for the United States Postal Service, as air mail on passenger airlines is restricted to packages of 16 ounces or less. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Enplaned & Deplaned Belly Cargo Air freight is handled by both passenger airlines (belly freight) and all-cargo airlines. The Cargo Forecast section of this study will only focus on “belly freight” carried on passenger aircraft. Air mail is now handled primarily by a contract carrier (currently FedEx through 2012) for the United States Postal Service, as air mail on passenger airlines is restricted to packages of 16 ounces or less. Security restrictions since September 11, 2001, have affected all freight carried in the bellies of passenger airlines. The mail restriction, in addition to the “known shipper” requirements for carrying cargo on passenger airlines, has given the all-cargo airlines a competitive advantage, at least in the short term. Many airlines rely on cargo to generate incremental revenue. As restrictions on air freight are refined over time, airlines are likely to become competitive in air freight again. The 2009 Master Plan forecast identified an overall growth rate for all enplaned and deplaned cargo, However, the Master Plan did not forecast individual growth rates or future annual totals for each cargo element: all cargo, integrated carriers and belly freight. Airports with commuter or charter-only service generally have only minor belly freight volumes. Annual belly freight totals are closely tied to annual commercial aircraft operations. The planning forecast for future enplanements assumes PMGA captures a 4% market share of Phoenix-Sky Harbor annual totals with additional airlines initiating commercial service operations. Applying the same logic to capturing belly freight market share from PHX, PMGA would assume a 4 percent share of PHX belly freight. Year 2010 annual totals for belly freight were approximately 37,350 U.S. tons. 4.3 National FAA Forecasts The FAA prepares an annual forecast for aviation activity each fiscal year. The following section summarizes information presented in the FAA Aerospace Forecasts, FY 2010-2030 and published March 9, 2010. 2009 Summary: Economic Activity And Air Travel • • • • • U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) decreased 2.8 percent; world GDP fell 2.3 percent. Domestic mainline air carriers’ yields decreased 8.6 percent while international air carriers’ yields fell 12.9 percent. In real terms (adjusted for inflation), domestic yields decreased 8.4 percent and international yields decreased 12.6 percent. Domestic enplanements on mainline and regional air carriers fell from 681.3 million in 2008 to 631.3 million (-7.3 percent) in 2009. Domestic mainline carrier enplanements dropped 8.5 percent while domestic regional carrier enplanements fell 3.4 percent. International enplanements on mainline and regional air carriers decreased from 77.8 million in 2008 to 72.7 million (-6.6 percent) in 2009. Mainline carrier international enplanements were down 5.6 percent while regional enplanements fell 27.2 percent. U.S. commercial air carriers (including passenger and cargo) reported an operating profit of $755 million in 2009, compared to an operating loss of $2.0 billion in 2008. Operating revenues decreased 16.1 percent in 2009, while operating expenses decreased 17.4 percent. In 2009 total landings and takeoffs at combined FAA and contract towers were down 10.4 percent from 2008. Air carrier activity decreased by 6.9 percent while commuter/air taxi activity decreased by 13.8 percent. General aviation activity dropped 11.7 percent while military aircraft activity rose 2.2 percent. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 4-7 Activity Forecast Review Over the course of the planning period, the average number of seats available per departure is expected to increase, consistent with national trends. Passenger load factors, the percentage of available seats occupied, is also expected to increase. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Aviation Activity Forecasts - Mainline Air Carrier and Regional Carriers • Total mainline air carrier and regional enplanements are forecast to increase from 704.0 million in 2009 to 1.21 billion in 2030, an average annual rate of 2.6 percent. Domestic enplanements are projected to increase 0.4 percent in 2010 and then grow an average of 2.5 percent per year during the remaining 20-year forecast period. International enplanements are forecast to increase 0.9 percent in 2010 and then grow an average of 4.1 percent per year for the rest of the forecast period. Total system enplanements are expected to reach one billion in 2023. Mainline Air Carriers • • U.S. mainline carrier domestic enplanements are forecast to decrease 0.9 percent in 2010. For the remaining 20 years of the forecast period, enplanements grow at an average annual rate of 2.4 percent, reaching 760.9 million in 2030. U.S. mainline air carrier passenger jet fleet increases from 3,666 aircraft in 2009 to 5,342 aircraft in 2030, an average annual increase of 1.8 percent. The fleet is projected to shrink by 0.5 percent in 2010 (17 aircraft), with most of the decrease attributed to the grounding of less fuel-efficient aircraft during a period of reduced demand. Regional Carriers • • • Regional carrier enplanements are forecast to increase 4.6 percent to 163.4 million in 2010, and grow 2.9 percent a year thereafter, reaching 289.3 million in 2030. The regional carrier passenger aircraft fleet increases from 2,612 aircraft in 2009 to 3,401 aircraft in 2030, an average annual increase of 1.3 percent. The fleet is projected to shrink by 4.3 percent in 2010 (113 aircraft). Regional jets increase from 1,710 aircraft in 2009 to 2,441 aircraft in 2030, an annual increase of 1.7 percent. All of the increase is attributed to jet aircraft in the 70-90-seat category. Cargo • • Total air cargo Registered Ton Miles (RTMs) (freight/express and mail) increase from 30.8 billion in 2009 to 86.6 billion in 2030 – up an average of 5.0 percent a year; domestic RTMs increase 2.1 percent a year; international RTMs increase 6.3 percent a year. The cargo fleet increases from 854 aircraft in 2009 to 1,531 aircraft in 2030, an average increase of 2.8 percent a year. General Aviation • • • • The general aviation fleet increases from 229,149 aircraft in 2009 to 278,723 in 2030, growing an average of 0.9 percent a year. Fixed-wing turbine aircraft grow at a rate of 3.1 percent per year, fixed-wing piston aircraft grow at a rate of 0.1 percent per year, and rotorcraft grow at a rate of 2.8 percent per year. General aviation hours flown are forecast to increase from 23.3 million in 2009 to 38.9 million in 2030, an average annual growth rate of 2.5 percent a year. Fixed-wing turbine aircraft hours flown grow at a rate of 4.6 percent per year, fixed-wing piston aircraft hours flown grow at a rate of 1.0 percent per year, and rotorcraft hours flown grow at a rate of 3.0 percent per year. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Activity Forecast Review 4-8 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Commercial aviation hit a period of decline during 2008. Unpredictable jet fuel prices and a softening global economy hurt the industry. After posting net profits in 2007, for the first time since the 9/11 terror attacks, the U.S. industry posted a net loss in 2008, with a return to profitability in 2009. The 2010 forecast for commercial aviation calls for a moderate growth in activity in the near term, with increasing viability over the long term. The most significant factor preventing recovery to prior forecast levels is the state of the economy, both domestic and worldwide. In the U.S., the National Bureau of Economic Research reports the U.S. economy has been in recession since December 2007, with economists speculating this may be the deepest recession since the end of World War II. The downturn in the economy has also dampened the near-term prospects for the general aviation industry; however, industry indicators are showing signs of improvement. The average size of domestic aircraft is expected to decline by 0.7 seats in FY 2009 to 120.1 seats. Average seats per aircraft for mainline carriers are projected to fall by 0.8 seats as network carriers continue to reconfigure their domestic fleets. While demand for 70-90 seat aircraft continues to increase, we expect the number of 50 seat regional jets in service to fall, increasing the average regional aircraft size in 2010. Longer term, the FAA projects growth in business aviation demand, driven by a growing U.S. and world economy. As the fleet grows, the number of general aviation hours flown is projected to increase an average of 1.8 percent a year through 2025. 4.4 Forecast Factors And Drivers A series of outside factors not completely within PMGA’s control will ultimately affect aviation demand and operational activity at the Airport. These issues are briefly outlined below: Additional Airlines Initiating Service at PMGA • • • • • For PMGA to make a transition from aviation demand scenario I to either scenario II or III, multiple carriers would need to provide daily service, and at least one low-cost carrier would likely have to initiate service. If future demand/capacity and delay became a major economic issue for airlines operating at PHX, an airline may choose to transfer service to PMGA. A carrier not currently serving the region may want to initiate service to PMGA in order to establish a presence in the market. New low-cost carrier enters the market in the future looking to compete with the established low-cost carriers utilizing PHX. In the end, without the presence of mainline carriers or a major low-cost carrier, enplanement levels along the lines of those currently experienced by St. Petersburg (Clearwater) may be expected. Global, National and Local Economic Downturn • The most significant factor influencing recovery of the aviation industry is the state of the economy, global, domestic and local. Economic conditions will continue to affect the number of passengers enplaning at the Airport. -- The national recession has resulted in a negative economic situation. National trends indicate retail sales, consumer spending, and consumer confidence have dropped over the last two years. In early 2010, the national economy is showing signs of emerging from the depths of the recession. -- The local economy has been one of the hardest hit regions in the U.S. and economic recovery in the local area will likely occur at a slower rate than the national average. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Activity Forecast Review 4-9 Summary Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report • Historically, the state of the U.S. economy and levels of real disposable income correlate closely with airline passenger traffic nationwide. Sustained future growth in domestic airline passenger traffic will depend largely on the ability of the nation to sustain economic growth and also on moderately priced oil. Local Population Growth Population in the Phoenix-Mesa Metropolitan Area is projected to double by 2027: • • • • As the population grows to projected levels – mobility will be reduced on local and regional roadways – accessibility to the Airport for local residents will likely be reduced. Travel time to PHX will increase to people in the newly developed areas. A relative time savings will likely be realized for travelers using PMGA. Real or perceived congestion at PHX, which will increase delays, travel inconveniences and reduce the overall passenger experience. Airline Economic Viability • • The airline industry has been adversely affected be the national recession and collectively reduced capacity by nearly 10% and resulted in a slow return to profitability. Shift in aircraft gauge as average seats per departure are forecast to increase as smaller regional jets are replaced in the national fleet by 70 to 90-seat regional jets. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 4-10 Activity Forecast Review • Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Section 5: Facility Programming 5.1 Introduction This section identifies the programming requirements associated with the airside, terminal/concourse, landside, and surrounding surface transportation elements for the PMGA, through the planning period (2030). Relationships between demand and capacity with regard to airport as well as transportation related facilities are often complex. Numerous issues affect how efficiently a certain level of activity (demand) can be accommodated within a specific system or facility. Furthermore, acceptable levels of service or convenience vary by user, facility, and airport. The purpose of this section is to explore the relationships between demand and capacity in the context of various airport systems, and to provide general assessments of the ability of existing facilities to meet future demand. These assessments are then translated into specific facility requirements at the Airport through the planning period. A comparison and validation of the assumptions and programmatic needs represented in the 2008 Airport Master Plan will be outlined. Note that due to the more detailed nature of this study, some variances may exist in programming requirements due in large part to more detailed information available at the time of analysis. 5.2 Planning Parameters 5.2.1 Planning Factors & Assumptions • • • • • • • • • • • The West Terminal final capacity will be designed and constructed to accommodate the intermediate term, 850,000 enplanements – with 10 gates – per the Master Plan. The Northeast Terminal Area will not be developed until new airlines initiate service. Allegiant Airlines will add approximately 100,000 enplanements annually. The Master Plan assumes that 850,000 enplanements will be reached in 2017. With the rapid growth that has occurred in the last 2 years, by adding 100,000 enplanements annually, PMGA will exceed the intermediate term activity level by 2014. Allegiant Airlines is in the process of transforming a portion of their fleet from MD-80s to Boeing 757s. The NADP terminal gate layout should be designed to meet aircraft design standards for Group III with accommodations for Group IV parking positions where feasible. Sufficient acreage will be preserved in the terminal area to ultimately accommodate 10-million annual enplanements. Reserve space in the northeast development area for a Customs & Border Protection (CBP) Federal Inspection Services (FIS) to support future international air service. The NADP terminal building will be programmed at a Level of Service “C”. An aircraft hydrant fueling system should not be considered for the NADP until after the high range enplanement demand – 5-million – is exceeded. Airport Reference Code will remain D-V. Considering the aging population of the U.S., and assuming the average age of the typical passenger at PMGA is likely to be consistent with or older than the national average – facilities will be programmed for a passenger mix that has reduced mobility. Some terminal building elements that could be impacted by these considerations include: -- Larger restrooms -- Bag claim devices which are configured to make it easier to collect baggage -- Minimized slope of a jet bridge -- Minimized unassisted walk distances Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Facility Programming 5-1 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport is regulated by the City of Mesa Building Safety Department and the Airport’s own Design Review Committee (DRC). The DRC reviews all projects, with the exception of airport terminal buildings, for compliance to the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Design Guidelines. • Mesa Building Code, Ordinance 4635 (effective date February 4, 2007) - Based upon the 2006 International Building Code (IBC) • Mesa Existing Building Code, Ordinance 4641 (effective date February 4, 2007) -- Option A – Based upon the 2006 International Building Code (IBC) – Chapter 34 -- Option B – Based upon the 2006 International Existing Building Code (IEBC) • Mesa Mechanical Code, Ordinance 4639 (effective date February 4, 2007) - Based upon the 2006 International Mechanical Code (IMC) • Mesa Plumbing Code, Ordinance 4638 (effective date was February 4, 2007) - Based upon the 2006 International Plumbing Code (IPC) • Mesa Electrical Code, Ordinance 4637 (effective date February 4, 2007) - Based upon the 2005 National Electrical Code (NEC) • Mesa Fuel Gas Code, Ordinance 4640 (effective date February 4, 2007) - Based upon the 2006 International Fuel and Gas Code (IFGC) • Mesa Fire Code, Ordinance 4789 (effective date February 4, 2008) - Based upon the 2006 International Fire Code (IFC) • Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG) - 1994 Department of Justice Final Rule 5.2.3 Demand Triggers Facility improvements identified in this analysis are recommended to be implemented based upon future airport activity levels, or “demand triggers”, and not tied to an arbitrary calendar year. It is important to keep in mind that the actual activity at PMGA may be higher or lower than the annualized forecast. Planning according to demand triggers, will allow the NADP to accommodate unexpected shifts, or changes in demand. It is important to plan for these milestones so that airport officials can respond to unexpected changes in a timely fashion. As a result, these triggers provide flexibility, while potentially extending this plan’s useful life if aviation trends slow over the period. Table 5-1 Commercial Airlines Demand Triggers presents the planning horizon milestones for each activity demand category. Planning efforts typically project a 20-year horizon of activity, it will be important to reserve space for critical airport functions if a high range forecast materializes at PMGA. The high range forecast for passenger enplanements is 5-million, as shown in the table which follows. By identifying this high range forecast, appropriate space for a new terminal building, cargo facilities, parking, rental cars, and other airport elements, can be reserved. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Facility Programming 5-2 5.2.2 Codes And Regulations Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Table 5-1: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Table 5.1 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Commercial Airlines Demand Triggers Commercial DemandTriggers Triggers CommercialAirlines Airlines Demand Planning Horizon Planning Horizon 3 3 2 2 Short Term Short Term 350,000 350,000 9,449 9,449 17 17 9 9 Intermediate Intermediate Term Term 850,000 850,000 20,806 20,806 34 34 12 12 Opening Day Opening Day Northeast Northeast Terminal Terminal 1,500,000 1,500,000 34,486 34,486 57 57 15 15 Long Long Term Term 2,200,000 2,200,000 48,166 48,166 80 80 18 18 Beyond Long Beyond Long Term Term 3,600,000 3,600,000 71,550 71,550 119 119 18 18 High High Range Range 5,000,000 5,000,000 94,934 94,934 158 158 17 17 2 2 0 0 2 2 5 5 1 1 6 6 7 7 3 3 10 10 9 9 5 5 14 14 10 10 8 8 18 18 16 16 8 8 24 24 22 22 8 8 30 30 Existing Existing Annual Enplanements Annual Enplanements Air Carrier Operations Air Carrier Operations Daily Departures Daily Departures Peak Hour Flights Peak Hour Flights Gate Requirements Gate Requirements Commercial Commercial Regional Regional Total Gates Total Gates Source: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Master Plan 2009 Source: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Master Plan 2009 5.3 Facility Requirements 5.3 Facility 5.3 Facility Requirements Requirements Passenger Terminal Facilities 5.3.15.3.1 Passenger Terminal Facilities 5.3.1 Passenger Terminal Facilities Planning Horizons Planning Horizons Planning Horizons As part of this subsection, the Master Plan’s program is to be validated for the East Terminal. For We have been tasked to validate that Master Plan’s program for the East Terminal. were For purposes of this study’s purposes of this to study’s program assessment, the following documents reviewed: We have been tasked validate that Master Plan’s program for the East Terminal. For purposes of this study’s program assessment, we reviewed the following documents: program assessment, we reviewed the following documents: • • • • • Airport Master Plan for Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport, dated December 15, 2008. Airport Master Plan forExpansion Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport, dated December2008. 15, .2008. • West Terminal Planning Study, dated September Airport Master Plan for Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport, dated December 15, .2008. West Terminal Expansion Planning Study, dated September .2008. West Terminal Expansion Planning Study, dated September .2008. The goals for this study include creating a program for the initial build-out of the Northeast Our goals for this study include the creating a program for the initial of the East Terminal the Terminal and validating Master Plan’s program forbuild-out the established Long Term and and validating High Range Our goals for this study include creating a program for the initial build-out of the East Terminal and validating the planning horizons. Master Plan’s program for the established Long Term and High Range planning horizons. Master Plan’s program for the established Long Term and High Range planning horizons. Airport Master (AMP) its program The The Airport Master Plan Plan (AMP) has developed developed it’s program by by translating translating the the forecast forecast aviation aviation demand demand The established Airport Master Planthe (AMP) hasPlan developed it’s levels program by translating themilestones. forecast aviation demand Master for several of planning The planning established withinwithin the master plan for several levels of planning horizon horizon milestones. The planning horizons established within the master plan for term, several levels of planning horizon milestones. The planning horizons horizons current, short intermediate term, long term and high range. include Current,include Short Term, Intermediate Term, Long Term and High Range. include Current, Short Term, Intermediate Term, Long Term and High Range. Table GrossHorizon Terminal Facilities by Planning Horizon Table 5-2: Gross Terminal Facilities by 5.2 Planning Table 5.2 Gross Terminal Facilities by Planning Horizon AMP Planning Horizon AMP Enplanements AMP Planning Horizon AMP Enplanements Current (2008) 142,000 Current (2008) 142,000 Short Term (2012) 350,000 Short Term (2012) 350,000 Intermediate Term (2017) 850,000 Intermediate Term (2017) 850,000 Long Term (2027) 2,200,000 Long Term (2027) 2,200,000 High Range 5,000,000 High Range 5,000,000 Data provided from PMGA Airport Master Plan dated 12.05.2008 Data provided from PMGA Airport Master Plan dated 12.05.2008 AMP Gross Terminal Building Space (s.f.) AMP Gross Terminal Building Space (s.f.) 48,662 48,662 113,530 113,530 200,383 200,383 294,866 294,866 598,593 598,593 The airport has maintained and provided actual passenger counts since 2003. The actual 2008 enplanements The airport has maintained and provided actual passenger counts since 2003. The actual 2008 enplanements totaled 177,649 which corresponds to the Current AMP planning horizon. The actual 2009 enplanements totaled totaled 177,649 which corresponds to the Current AMP planning horizon. The actual 2009 enplanements totaled 287,807. With the continual increase in activity from Allegiant Airways, it is likelyPhoenix-Mesa that the Short Term planning Airport 287,807. With the continual increase in activity from Allegiant Airways, it is likely that the Short Gateway Term planning horizon will be reached in 2010, two years early. horizon will be reached in 2010, two years early. The West Terminal Expansion Planning Study was tasked to determine the maximum capacity of the site so that 5-3 Facility Programming The West Terminal final capacity will be designed and constructed to accommodate the intermediate term demand of 850,000 enplanements – with 10 gates. Long term enplanement demand is 2.2-million, the Northeast Terminal will need to be operational long before passenger demand reaches this level. The opening day capacity of Northeast Terminal will accommodate 1.5-million enplanements with 14 gates. The HighPlan Range forecast of 5-million enplanements will require 12 additional gates and increase Northeast Area Development – Technical Memorandum 50 Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum 50 DRAFT the total gates to 30. Purely from a cost and phasing standpoint, it would be prudent to increase the DRAFT number of gates incrementally, by adding the 12 gates in two 6-gate phases to meet demand between the long term and high range activity level.Table 5.1 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The West Terminal Expansion Planning Study determined the maximum capacity of the site so that Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum 51 the future Northeast Terminal site can develop with initial planning parameters. Due to several DRAFT limiting factors of the West Terminal site such as terminal building footprint, Sossaman Road capacity and curb frontage, maximumwhich capacity is 850,000 enplanements, recommended maximum capacitytheis recommended 850,000 enplanements, corresponds to the Master which Plan’s corresponds to the Master Plan’s intermediate term. Intermediate Term. With the West Terminal site reaching a capacity of the intermediate term planning horizon, the With the West Terminal site reaching a capacity of the Intermediate Term Planning Horizon, the next milestone next milestone for the Airport is the long term at 2,200,000 annual enplanements. The initial for the airport is the Long Term at 2,200,000 enplanements. The initial East Terminal program should fall Northeast Terminal program should fall between these two milestones at a recommended 1,500,000 between these two milestones at a recommended 1,500,000 enplanements. enplanements. For the of this of study, program planning horizon milestones as shownare in the below. We Forpurposes the purposes this the study, the program planning horizonare milestones as table shown in Table continue to show The the West Term program in this document for comparison 5-3 below. West Terminal Terminalsite’s site’sIntermediate intermediate term program is shown in this document and for interpolation of theand 1,500,000 enplanement comparison interpolation of themilestone. 1,500,000 enplanement milestone. Table 5-3: Target Enplanement Milestones by Enplanement Planning Horizon Table 5.3 Target Milestones by Planning Horizon Planning Horizon Intermediate Term * Initial East Terminal Build-out Long Term * High Range * *Data provided from PMGA Airport Master Plan dated 12.05.2008 Enplanements 850,000 1,500,000 2,200,000 5,000,000 Peaking Characteristics Peaking Characteristics program will provide a totalarea gross of the building square feet to accommodate the The The program will provide a total gross of area the building in squareinfeet to accommodate the necessary necessary functions of a passenger terminal. The program has been separated into the following functions of a passenger terminal. The program has been separated into the following functional areas: functional areas: • • • • • • • • • • • Ticketing/Check-in • Ticketing/Check-in Airlines Operations • Airlines Operations Gate Facilities • Gate Facilities Baggage ClaimClaim • Baggage Rental Car Counters • Rental Car Counters • Concessions Concessions • Public Waiting Public Waiting Lobby Lobby • TSA Security TSA Security Area Area • Restrooms Restrooms • Administration Offices/Conference Administration Offices/Conference • Explosive Detection Systems (EDS) Outbound Screening EDS Outbound Screening The facilities needs are related to several design peaking characteristics, such as the Design Hour The Enplanements, facilities needs Design are related several design and peaking characteristics, such as the Design Hour HourtoTotal Passengers, the Design Hour Deplanements. These have Enplanements, Design Hour Total Passengers, and the Design Hour Deplanements. These have been been developed in the Master Plan and are directly related to airline flight schedules, aircraft type developed in the MasterInPlan andtoare directly the related to airline schedules, aircraft Terminal type and load factors.the In and load factors. order establish program forflight the initial Northeast Build-out orderyearly to establish the program for the Initial East Terminal Build-out the yearly enplanements and the design enplanements and the design peaking characteristics are a direct interpolation from the peaking characteristics are a direct interpolation from the Master Plan, as follows. Master Plan, as shown in Table 5-4.. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 5-4 Facility Programming The Airport has maintained and provided actual passenger counts since 2003. The actual 2008 enplanements totaled 177,649 which corresponds to the current AMP planning horizon. The actual 2009 enplanements totaled 287,807. With the continual increase in activity from Allegiant Airlines, the short term planning horizon was reached in 2010 totalling 401,385, two years early. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Airline Enplanements Annual Enplanements Peak Month Design Day Design Hour Total Passengers Design Hour Deplanements Design Hour Immediate Term* 850,000 98,044 3,268 719 1,222 611 Initial Northeast Terminal Buildout 1,500,000 173,019 5,767 923 1,569 784 Long Term* High Range* 2,200,000 253,761 8,459 1,015 1,726 863 5,000,000 576,730 19,224 2,307 3,922 1,961 *Data from AMP dated 12.05.2008, Table 3B During the review of the Master Plan’s Table 3B and the associated written text on pages 3-3 through 3-5 some inconsistencies were discovered as follows: • • • Intermediate Term Design Hour: According to the AMP text on page 3-4, the intermediate horizon shall be 24 percent of the day’s enplanements. In order to achieve the 719 value in Table 3B, a 22 percent factor is utilized. Long Term Design Hour: According to the AMP text on page 3-4, the long term horizon shall be 16 percent of the day’s enplanements. In order to achieve the 1,015 value in Table 3B, a 12 percent factor is utilized. Total Passengers Design Hour: According to the AMP text on page 3-4, the total passengers design hour should be 180 percent of the enplanements design hour. In order to match Table 3B, a 170 percent factor was utilized. For the Initial Northeast Terminal Build-out, the peak month is approximately 11.5 percent of the annual enplanements, matching the AMP formula. The design day equals the peak month divided by the number of days, using an average of 30. The design hour is 16 percent of the design day. The total passengers design hour is 170 percent of the enplanements design hour. The deplanements design hour is 85 percent of the enplanements design hour. Program Development On the Northeast Terminal Program spreadsheet, for the intermediate term, long term and high range there a two values shown for each program element. The first column represents the values directly from the AMP and the second column represents updated values for this document. The following functional areas required updates as follows: • • • Ticketing/Check-in: With an initial review of the AMP programmed area, the values appear high. With the various new ticketing check-in systems, such as the two-step process using kiosks, a lower value is recommended. The ticketing/check-in area is calculated for 16 square feet per agent position. Airline Operations: With an initial review of the established program the values appear low considering this area includes space for the outbound baggage make-up function. As recommended for the AMP, the Airline Ops/Makeup area is calculated for ten feet times the peak hour enplanement plus 1000 square feet for each airline. This formula was provided separately, as it is not in the AMP text. Gate Facilities: During the West Terminal Study the gate facilities were analyzed for actual aircraft types knowing that in the short term and possibly through the intermediate term, Allegiant Airlines would be utilizing these gates for 150-seat MD83 aircraft. However, for the Initial Northeast Terminal build-out, it is unknown whether Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Facility Programming 5-5 Table 5-4: Initial East Side Terminal Program - Design Characteristics Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report • • • • • • The Program Summary for the Northeast Terminal is provided in Table 5-5 with the Gross Terminal Building Space broken down into public and non-public. The full program is provided on the following page (reference Table 5-6: NADP Northeast Terminal Program). Much of the difference between the Master Plan’s program and this document can be attributed to increased areas required for the security screening checkpoint, the EDS outbound baggage screening, and the baggage claim functions. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 5-6 Facility Programming Allegiant would occupy the Northeast Terminal. The potential for the West Terminal to remain operational with a new Northeast Terminal is possible. The current AMP values are calculated for 22 square feet per peak hour occupant, derived for a mix of aircraft types, including a large percentage of small commuter aircraft. By comparing the actual gate facilities needed for an Allegiant Airlines type operation to the current master plan program the square footage is approximately 30 percent lower. It is recommended that gate facilities be re-evaluated once the fleet mix is better determined. In general, approximately 2,000 square feet per gate is the average for aircraft ranging from 90 seats to 230 seats. This would allow more passenger waiting area for the larger Boeing 757 balanced by less for the smaller Airbus 319. Baggage Claim: As recommended for the AMP the claim lobby area shall be 18 square feet for peak hour passengers plus total visitors, thus a factor of 0.3 for visitors was utilized. Concessions: The current AMP values for the food and beverage function appear high, and conversely the gift shop (commonly termed retail) appears low. The updated formula provides for 13 square feet per peak hour enplanement for food and beverage. Retail is 8.75 square feet per peak hour enplanement. Once the Airport grows to the high range and beyond, the Airport should consider consolidated commissary space for all food and beverage providers and concessions storage. Public Lobby: According the AMP text found on page 3-30 this area should provide eight square feet for peak hour passengers plus visitors, which is estimated at 0.3 visitors per peak hour passenger. The updated program utilizes this formula, however the value does not match the AMP. TSA Security Area: With the invariable equipment improvements and changing procedures for security screening checkpoints the required area is difficult to foresee. From recent checkpoint projects, it is recommended to divide the space into the actual security components as noted below. Screening area and queue area: The security screening area provides for an average of 1,500 square feet per checkpoint lane. The queue area is calculated for six square feet per peak hour enplanement plus 0.3 times peak hour enplanements, for others requiring screening. EDS Outbound Screening: The Master Plan does not provide dedicated program area for this function. With requirements of outbound baggage screening, it is recommended that this be developed in the updated program for an inline, fully automated screening system. The formula is based on recent EDS outbound screening systems at Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport, Terminal 2. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Table 5-5: Program Summary for the Northeast Terminal Program Summary AMP Program Exhibit 3E DWL generated Program DWL generated Program Total Public Space (s.f.) Total Non-Public Space (s.f.) 175,036 25,349 171,139 45,805 229,459 60,289 Gross Terminal Building Space (s.f.) 200,385 216,944 289,748 Long Term 2,200,000 Enplanements AMP Program Exhibit 3E 5-7 High Range 5,000,000 Enplanements DWL generated Program AMP Program Exhibit 3E DWL generated Program 266,967 70,659 527,480 71,115 570,175 143,004 337,625 598,595 713,179 257,773 37,093 294,865 Table 5-6: NADP Northeast Terminal Program Northeast Area Development Planning (NADP) Northest Terminal Program East Terminal Program Updated by DWL: 03.24.2010 Intermediate Term 850,000 ENPLANEMENTS AMP Program Exhibit 3E ANNUAL ENPLANEMENTS DESIGN HOUR ENPLANEMENTS DESIGN HOUR TOTAL PAX DESIGN HOUR DEPLANEMENTS TERMINAL BUILDING REQUIREMENTS Ticketing/Check-in Public Non-Public DWL generated Program DWL generated Program AMP Program Exhibit 3E DWL generated Program 850,000 719 1,222 611 850,000 719 1,222 611 1,500,000 923 1,569 784 2,200,000 1,015 1,726 863 2,200,000 1,015 1,726 863 5,000,000 2,307 3,922 1,961 5,000,000 2,307 3,922 1,961 7 503 42 336 8,388 7 503 31 252 6,291 9 646 40 323 8,074 11 711 59 474 11,842 11 711 44 355 8,882 16 1,615 135 1,077 26,915 16 1,615 101 807 20,186 8,388 6,291 8,074 11,842 8,882 26,915 20,186 3,355 8,500 2,516 14,190 3,230 18,228 4,737 12,500 3,553 21,150 10,766 20,040 8,074 39,069 11,855 16,706 21,457 17,237 24,703 30,806 47,143 11,855 16,706 21,457 17,237 24,703 30,806 47,143 10 719 15,818 10 719 19,730 14 923 27,622 18 1,015 22,330 18 1,015 35,514 30 2,307 50,752 30 2,307 59,190 15,818 19,730 27,622 22,330 35,514 50,752 59,190 367 611 3,666 25,263 28,929 367 611 3,667 28,601 32,268 471 784 4,706 36,708 41,414 518 863 5,178 35,042 40,220 518 863 5,177 40,378 45,555 1,177 1,961 11,766 40,820 52,586 1,177 1,569 11,765 91,769 103,535 28,929 32,268 41,414 40,220 45,555 52,586 103,535 138 2,757 827 3,584 138 2,757 827 3,584 168 3,368 1,010 4,379 182 3,645 1,094 4,739 182 3,645 1,094 4,739 376 7,521 2,256 9,777 376 7,521 2,256 9,777 3,584 3,584 4,379 4,739 4,739 9,777 9,777 28,070 3,509 31,579 9,527 6,291 15,818 12,227 8,074 20,301 38,935 4,867 43,802 13,449 8,882 22,331 88,493 11,062 99,555 30,567 20,186 50,752 31,579 15,818 20,301 43,802 22,331 99,555 50,752 11,228 2,416 10,424 2,288 13,378 2,937 15,574 3,289 14,716 3,230 35,397 7,474 33,445 7,342 Public Gates (no.) Peak Occupants Holdroom area (s.f.) GATE FACILITIES (S.F.) Baggage Claim Public BAGGAGE CLAIM (S.F.) Rental Car Counters Public RENTAL CAR COUNTERS (S.F.) Concessions (s.f.) Public CONCESSIONS (S.F.) Public Waiting Lobby (s.f.) Public Public Pax Claiming Bags (no.) Claim Display (l.f.) Claim Display Floor Area (s.f.) Claim Lobby Area (s.f.) Total Bag Claim Area (s.f.) Public Counter Frontage (l.f.) Counter Office Area (s.f.) Counter Queue Area (s.f.) Total Rental Car Area (s.f.) Public Food and Beverage Gift shop Total Concessions Public Public Lobby/Seating Greeting Lobby Total Public Waiting Lobby PUBLIC WAITING LOBBY (S.F.) TSA Security Area Public TSA SECURITY AREA (S.F.) Restrooms (s.f.) Public RESTROOMS (S.F.) Administration Offices/Conf. (s.f.) Public Public Stations (no.) Security Queuing Area (s.f.) Security Screening Area (s.f.) Public Men's/Womens's Public Office, Conference ADMINISTRATION OFFICES/CONF. (S.F.) EDS Outbound Screening DWL generated Program Non-Public Subtotal Airlines Operations EDS - Outbound Passengers No. of bags/hour No. of bags/minute No.of Explosive Detection Machines (EDS) EDS Machines (s.f.) Conveyors (s.f.) No. of Trace Stations (ETD) Trace Stations (s.f.) AMP Program Exhibit 3E High Range 5,000,000 ENPLANEMENTS Public Counter Area Airline Ops/Makeup AIRLINE OPERATIONS (S.F.) Gate Facilities Long Term 2,200,000 ENPLANEMENTS Public/ Non-Public Arilines (no.) Pax/Half Hr. Peak (no.) Agent Positions (no.) Counter Frontage (l.f.) Ticket Lobby Queue (s.f.) TICKETING/CHECK-IN (S.F.) Airlines Operations (s.f.) 1,500,000 ENPLANEMENTS Public 13,644 12,712 16,315 18,863 17,946 42,871 40,786 13,644 12,712 16,315 18,863 17,946 42,871 40,786 2.00 8,421 0 4.11 5,608 6,163 5.27 7,198 7,909 3.00 11,681 0 5.80 7,917 8,700 6.00 26,548 0 13.18 17,994 19,774 8,421 11,771 15,107 11,681 16,618 26,548 37,768 4,210 4,210 6,118 5,840 5,840 13,274 13,274 4,210 4,210 6,118 5,840 5,840 13,274 13,274 8,510 8,510 15,010 22,010 22,010 50,010 50,010 8,510 8,510 15,010 22,010 22,010 50,010 50,010 719 647 11 3.00 1,200 7,500 6.00 1,650 923 830 14 4.00 1,600 10,000 8.00 2,200 Non-Public 1,015 914 15 5.00 2,000 12,500 8.00 2,200 2,307 2,076 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 35 10.00 4,000 25,000 19.00 5,225 Facility Programming Initial Northeast Terminal Build-out 1,500,000 Enplanements Immediate Term 850,000 Enplanements Gift shop Total Concessions Public 6,291 15,818 8,074 20,301 4,867 43,802 8,882 22,331 11,062 99,555 20,186 50,752 15,818 20,301 43,802 22,331 99,555 50,752 11,228 2,416 10,424 2,288 13,378 2,937 15,574 3,289 14,716 3,230 35,397 7,474 33,445 7,342 Public Public Lobby/Seating Greeting Lobby Total Public Waiting Lobby PUBLIC WAITING LOBBY (S.F.) TSA Security Area 3,509 31,579 31,579 Public 13,644 12,712 16,315 18,863 17,946 42,871 40,786 13,644 12,712 16,315 18,863 17,946 42,871 40,786 8,421 0 5,608 6,163 5.27 7,198 7,909 3.00 11,681 0 5.80 7,917 8,700 6.00 26,548 0 13.18 17,994 19,774 8,421 11,771 15,107 11,681 16,618 26,548 37,768 4,210 4,210 6,118 5,840 5,840 13,274 13,274 4,210 4,210 6,118 5,840 5,840 13,274 13,274 Public Northeast Area Development Plan 2.00 - Technical Report Stations (no.) 4.11 Security Queuing Area (s.f.) Security Screening Area (s.f.) TSA SECURITY AREA (S.F.) Restrooms (s.f.) Public Public Men's/Womens's Table 5-6: NADP Northeast Terminal Program (Continued) RESTROOMS (S.F.) Public Northeast AreaOffices/Conf. Development Public Administration (s.f.)Planning (NADP) Northest Terminal Program Office,Terminal Conference East Program Updated by DWL: 03.24.2010 ADMINISTRATION OFFICES/CONF. (S.F.) EDS Outbound Screening ANNUAL ENPLANEMENTS Public Non-Public EDS - Outbound Passengers DESIGN HOUR ENPLANEMENTS No. of bags/hour DESIGN HOUR TOTAL PAX No. of bags/minute No.of Explosive Detection Machines (EDS) DESIGN HOUR DEPLANEMENTS EDS Machines (s.f.) Conveyors (s.f.) No. of Trace Stations (ETD) TERMINAL REQUIREMENTS Trace Stations BUILDING (s.f.) Ticketing/Check-in No. of Search Stations (Level 3) Search Stations (s.f.) (Level 3) Arilines (no.) Breakroom Pax/Half Hr.(s.f.) Peak (no.) Support Space (s.f.) Agent Positions (no.) Counter Frontage (l.f.) Ticket Lobby Queue (s.f.) EDS OUTBOUND SCREENING TICKETING/CHECK-IN (S.F.) Sub-total Square (s.f.) Footage Airlines Operations Counter HVAC Area Airline Ops/Makeup Circulation Non-Public Public Non-Public Public Holdroom area (s.f.) GATE FACILITIES (S.F.) SITE REQUIREMENTS DWL generated Program 15,010 AMP Program Exhibit 3E 22,010 DWL generated Program 22,010 AMP Program Exhibit 3E 50,010 DWL generated Program 50,010 850,000 719 1,222 611 850,000 719 719 647 1,222 11 3.00 611 1,500,000 923 923 830 1,569 14 4.00 784 2,200,000 1,015 1,726 863 2,200,000 1,015 1,015 914 1,726 15 5.00 863 5,000,000 2,307 3,922 1,961 5,000,000 2,307 2,307 2,076 3,922 35 10.00 1,961 7 503 42 336 8,388 Public Total Public Waiting Lobby PUBLIC WAITING LOBBY (S.F.) TSA Security Area Public TSA SECURITY AREA (S.F.) Restrooms (s.f.) Public Public Stations (no.) Security Queuing Area (s.f.) Security Screening Area (s.f.) Public Men's/Womens's Public 8,074 195,117 3,230 19,512 18,228 75,120 11,842 198,563 4,737 19,856 12,500 76,447 8,882 227,357 3,553 22,736 21,150 87,533 26,915 403,095 10,766 40,309 20,040 155,191 20,186 480,255 8,074 48,026 39,069 184,898 200,385 11,855 11,855 216,944 16,706 16,706 289,748 21,457 21,457 294,865 17,237 17,237 337,625 24,703 24,703 598,595 30,806 30,806 713,179 47,143 175,036 10 25,349 719 171,139 10 45,805 719 229,459 14 60,289 923 257,773 18 37,093 1,015 266,967 18 70,659 1,015 527,480 30 71,115 2,307 570,175 30 143,004 2,307 15,818 19,730 27,622 22,330 35,514 50,752 59,190 Sub-total Square Footage HVAC Circulation Gross Terminal Building Space (s.f.) TOTAL PUBLIC SPACE (s.f.) TOTAL NON - PUBLIC SPACE (s.f.) SITE REQUIREMENTS GATES 19,730 10 367 611 647 3,667 755 28,601 1402 32,268 32,268 138 2,7572 827 3,584 27,622 14 471 784 830 4,706 969 36,708 1799 41,414 41,414 168 3,3683 1,010 4,379 22,330 18 518 863 914 5,178 1066 35,042 1979 40,220 40,220 182 3,6453 1,094 4,739 35,514 18 518 863 914 5,177 1066 40,378 1979 45,555 45,555 182 3,6453 1,094 4,739 50,752 30 1,177 1,961 1661 11,766 1938 40,820 3599 52,586 52,586 376 7,5216 2,256 9,777 47,143 59,190 30 1,177 1,569 1661 11,765 1938 91,769 3599 103,535 103,535 376 7,5216 2,256 9,777 3,584 4,379 4,739 4,739 9,777 9,777 9,527 6,291 15,818 12,227 8,074 20,301 38,935 4,867 43,802 13,449 8,882 22,331 88,493 11,062 99,555 30,567 20,186 50,752 31,579 15,818 20,301 43,802 22,331 99,555 50,752 11,228 2,416 10,424 2,288 13,378 2,937 15,574 3,289 14,716 3,230 35,397 7,474 33,445 7,342 13,644 12,712 16,315 18,863 17,946 42,871 40,786 13,644 12,712 16,315 18,863 17,946 42,871 40,786 2.00 8,421 0 4.11 5,608 6,163 5.27 7,198 7,909 3.00 11,681 0 5.80 7,917 8,700 6.00 26,548 0 13.18 17,994 19,774 8,421 11,771 15,107 11,681 16,618 26,548 37,768 4,210 4,210 6,118 5,840 5,840 13,274 13,274 4,210 4,210 6,118 5,840 5,840 13,274 13,274 8,510 8,510 15,010 22,010 22,010 50,010 50,010 Public 8,510 8,510 15,010 22,010 22,010 50,010 50,010 719 647 11 3.00 1,200 7,500 6.00 1,650 3 825 315 3,000 923 830 14 4.00 1,600 10,000 8.00 2,200 4 1,100 420 4,000 Non-Public EDS - Outbound Passengers No. of bags/hour No. of bags/minute No.of Explosive Detection Machines (EDS) EDS Machines (s.f.) Conveyors (s.f.) No. of Trace Stations (ETD) Trace Stations (s.f.) No. of Search Stations (Level 3) Search Stations (s.f.) (Level 3) Breakroom (s.f.) Support Space (s.f.) EDS OUTBOUND SCREENING 16 1,615 135 1,077 26,915 4,000 25,000 19.00 5,225 10 2,613 16 998 1,615 10,000 101 807 20,186 47,835 Public Office, Conference ADMINISTRATION OFFICES/CONF. (S.F.) EDS Outbound Screening 11 711 59 474 11,842 2,000 12,500 8.00 2,200 4 1,100 11 420 711 5,000 44 355 8,882 23,220 Public Public Lobby/Seating Greeting Lobby RESTROOMS (S.F.) Administration Offices/Conf. (s.f.) 1,600 10,000 8.00 2,200 4 1,100 9 420 646 4,000 40 323 8,074 19,320 6,291 146,091 2,516 14,609 14,190 56,245 Public Baggage GATES Claim 10 Pax Claiming Bags (no.)CURB (pg.3-37) 367 TERMINAL FRONTAGE Claim Display (l.f.) 611 Enplane Curb (FT) 647 Claim Display 3,666 Deplance CurbFloor (FT) Area (s.f.) 755 Claim Lobby Area (s.f.) 25,263 TERMINAL CURB (LF) 1402 Total Bag Claim Area (s.f.) 28,929 *inner curb can hold upto 300 cars outer curb can hold 600 cars BAGGAGE CLAIM (S.F.) Public 28,929 *with growth median curb lane is included for additional curb length Public Rental Car Counters AIRPORT TERMINAL ACCESS ROADWAY (pg. 3-35) Counter AND Frontage (l.f.) 138 Counter OfficeTHROUGH Area (s.f.) 2,7572 TERMINAL LANES Counter Queue Area (s.f.) 827 Total Rental Car Area (s.f.) 3,584 * Blue text indicates data derived from DWL modified formulas. COUNTERS 3,584 *RENTAL Black text CAR indicates data derived (S.F.) from Master Plan Exihibit 3E Public *Concessions Red text indicates data derived from Master Plan text, howeverPublic is not consistant with Exhibit 3E (s.f.) Food and Beverage 28,070 Gift shop 3,509 Total Concessions 31,579 CONCESSIONS (S.F.) Public Waiting Lobby (s.f.) 1,200 7,500 6.00 1,650 3 825 7 315 503 3,000 31 252 6,291 14,490 8,388 134,939 3,355 13,494 8,500 51,952 15,818 Public High Range 50,010 5,000,000 50,010 ENPLANEMENTS DWL generated Program 8,510 Public Non-Public 1,500,000 15,010 ENPLANEMENTS Long Term 22,010 2,200,000 22,010 ENPLANEMENTS AMP Program Exhibit 3E 8,510 Public/ Non-Public Subtotal Airlines Operations Gross Terminal Building AIRLINE OPERATIONS (S.F.) Space (s.f.) Gate Facilities TOTAL PUBLIC SPACE (s.f.) Gates (no.) TOTAL NON - PUBLIC SPACE (s.f.) Peak Occupants Intermediate Term 8,510 8,510 850,000 ENPLANEMENTS 1,015 914 15 5.00 2,000 12,500 8.00 2,200 4 1,100 420 5,000 2,307 2,076 35 10.00 4,000 25,000 19.00 5,225 10 2,613 998 10,000 14,490 19,320 134,939 13,494 51,952 146,091 14,609 56,245 195,117 19,512 75,120 198,563 19,856 76,447 227,357 22,736 87,533 403,095 40,309 155,191 480,255 48,026 184,898 200,385 216,944 289,748 294,865 337,625 598,595 713,179 175,036 25,349 171,139 45,805 229,459 60,289 257,773 37,093 266,967 70,659 527,480 71,115 570,175 143,004 Non-Public 10 10 14 23,220 47,835 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 18 18 30 30 5-8 Facility Programming CONCESSIONS (S.F.) Public Waiting Lobby (s.f.) Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum DRAFT 55 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 5.3.2 Airfield Components capacity begins to diminish. This is due to the larger separation distances that must be maintained between aircraft of different speedsTable and sizes. 5.6 Descriptions of the classifications and the percentage mix for each planning Phoenix-Mesa horizon are presented in Table 5-7 Aircraft Fleet Mix by Design Group. Gateway Airport Aircraft Fleet Mix by Design Group Table 5-7: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Aircraft Fleet Mix by Design Group Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Annual Aircraft Fleet Planning Horzion Class A & B Class C Class D Current 91.0% 6.4% 2.6% Short Term 88.0% 9.3% 2.7% Intermediate Term 85.1% 12.3% 2.7% Long Term 80,4% 17.0% 2.6% High Range 71.8% 23.9% 4.3% Class A: Small single-engine aircraftwith gross weight of 12,500 lbs or less Class B: Small twin-engine aircraft with gross weight of 12,500 lbs or less. Class C: Large aircraft with gross weight of 12,500 lbs up to 300,000 lbs. Class D: Large aircraft with gross weight over 300,000 lbs. Source: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Master Plan 2009 Annual service Volume The 2009 Master Annual Plan provided a Volume detailed discussion on the Annual Service Volume (AVS) for all aircraft Service operations – air carrier, air cargo and general aviation – through the planning period. Prudent development The 2009 Master Plan provided a detailed discussion on the Annual Service Volume (AVS) for guidelines recommend that planning consideration be given when capacity levels of 60% have been reached. all aircraft operations – air carrier, air cargo and general aviation – through the planning period. Further, implementation efforts to enhance capacity should be initiated at the 80% level. Findings from the ASV Prudent development guidelines recommend that planning consideration be given when capacity analysis are summarized below. levels of 60 percent have been reached. Further, implementation efforts to enhance capacity should be initiated at the 80 percent level. Findings from the ASV analysis are summarized below. Annual operations at PMGA, are forecast to exceed 67 percent of the ASV by the end of the short term planning period – Annual approximately the first 5 years.are Byforecast the endtoofexceed the long-term planning operations areterm operations at PMGA, 67 percent of theperiod, ASV byannual the end of the short projectedplanning to reach 95 percent of the ASV. The plan analyzed multiple solutions increase the ASV. period – approximately themaster first five years. By the end of the longtoterm planning period, The Master Plan operations recommended taxiway improvements aircraft to master exit runway and multiple limit annual aremultiple projected to reach 95 percenttoofallow the ASV. The planearlier analyzed runway crossings. on optimally exit taxiways, could provide amultiple minimumtaxiway increaseimprovements of 25 percent to solutions Analysis to increase the ASV.located The Master Plan recommended in the ASV. allow aircraft to exit runway earlier and limit runway crossings. Analysis on optimally located exit taxiways, could provide a minimum increase of 25 percent in the ASV. Airport Reference Code (ARC) The current criticalAirport aircraft for the airport, based(ARC) on a single aircraft or combination of aircraft of a single design Reference Code group exceeding 500 annual operations, is the MD-80 The 2009 Master Plan recommended, the of a The current critical aircraft for the Airport, (ARC basedC-III). on a single aircraft or combination of aircraft airport continue to meet the FAA separation and safety area requirements for ARC D-V, as established in single design group exceeding 500 annual operations, is the MD-80 (ARC C-III). The 2009 Master previous Plan planning analysis. The future critical aircraft is projected to be represented by wide-body commercial recommended, the Airport continue to meet the FAA separation and safety area requirements aircraft such as theD-V, B-747 B-767. Therefore, all airfield elements should be meet the requirements for ARC asorestablished in previous planning analysis. Theplanned future to critical aircraft is projected for ARC D-V. While larger aircraft (A-380, B-747-800, Antonov-225) are not anticipated to qualify as the critical all to be represented by wide-body commercial aircraft such as the B-747 or B-767. Therefore, aircraft atairfield Phoenix-Mesa Gateway The to 2009 master Plan provides for additional recommendations for (Aelements shouldAirport. be planned meet the requirements ARC D-V. Larger aircraft 380, B-747-800, Antonov-225) arestandards not anticipated qualify physical airfield improvements where design differ fromtoARC D-V.as the critical aircraft at PMGA. The 2009 Master Plan provides additional recommendations for physical airfield improvements where design standards differ from ARC D-V. May 16, 2011 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 5-9 Facility Programming Aircraft Fleet Mix Aircraft mix fleet refers to the Components speed, size, and flight characteristics of aircraft operating at the airport. As the mix 5.3.2 Airfield of aircraft operating at an airport increases to include larger aircraft, airfield capacity begins to diminish. This is Aircraft Fleet Mix due to the larger separation distances that must be maintained between aircraft of different speeds and sizes. Aircraft mix refers thepercentage speed, size, flight characteristics of presented aircraft operating at the Descriptions of thefleet classifications andtothe mix and for each planning horizon are in Table 5.6 Airport. As the mix of aircraft operating at an airport increases to include larger aircraft, airfield Aircraft Fleet Mix by Design Group. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report According to wind data summarized in 2009 PMGA Master Plan, the existing parallel runway alignment provides greater than 95 percent wind coverage for all crosswind conditions. Therefore, no additional runway orientations were recommended. The analysis showed, all regional and narrow-body aircraft are able to operate unrestricted except for the Boeing 757-200 and the Boeing 737-800. These aircraft may have to take on less than a full load of fuel or fewer passengers and cargo weight in order to utilize the longest runway on the hottest days. The majority of the year, these aircraft will not be weight restricted. Wide-body aircraft are more likely to be weightrestricted under these same meteorological conditions. The Master Plan recommended a planned extension to Runway 12L-30R from its existing length of 9,301 feet to an ultimate length of 12,500 feet. Runway 12L-30R is the eastern most runway on the airfield and closest to the future Northeast Terminal Area. Any potential extension will ultimately have to be justified by the needs of operators, likely long haul cargo operators, at the Airport. Taxiways Taxiways are primarily constructed to facilitate aircraft movements to and from the runway system. Parallel taxiways greatly enhance airfield capacity and are essential to aircraft movement on the ground. Some taxiways are necessary simply to provide access to apron and terminal areas, while others are designed to facilitate the movement of aircraft to and from the runways. As activity increases, additional taxiways become necessary to provide safe and efficient use of the airfield. The 2009 Master Plan recommended a series of midfield and parallel taxiway improvements. The recommended taxiway improvements directly related to the Northeast Terminal Area would require the extension of partial parallel Taxiway C to the east side of Runway 12L-30R. Additionally, a second parallel taxiway is recommend between Taxiway C and the future air carrier apron. The future parallel taxiways will include exit taxiways, and access taxiways connecting the airfield to the future commercial apron. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Facility Programming 5-10 Runways Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 5.3.3.1 Regional Roadway Network Numerous roadway improvements are planned to accommodate the growth in this fastgrowing region and are included in the MAG Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and the City of Mesa’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP). They are documented in Table 5-8: Planned and Programmed Roadway Improvements. Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum 58 DRAFT Table 5-8: Planned and Programmed Roadway Improvements Power Road Power Road Power Road Ray Road Pecos Road Guadalupe Road Hawes Road Baseline Road Meridian Road Crismon Road Germann Road Signal Butte Road Southern Avenue Elliot Road Ray Road Ellsworth Road Germann Road Baseline Road Galveston Road Pecos Road Sossaman Road Ellsworth Road Power Road Southern Avenue Power Road Baseline Road Southern Avenue Sossaman Road Southern Avenue Sossaman Road Power Road Sossaman Road Baseline Road Sossaman Road Galveston Road Pecos Road Germann Road Ellsworth Road Meridian Road Meridian Road Ray Road Meridian Road Germann Road Germann Road Signal Butte Road Pecos Road Meridian Road Meridian Road Meridian Road Germann Road Meridian Road Improve to 6 lanes Improve to 6 lanes Improve to 6 lanes Improve to 6 lanes Improve to 6 lanes Improve to 6 lanes Improve to 6 lanes Improve to 6 lanes Improve to 6 lanes Improve to 6 lanes Improve to 4 lanes Improve to 6 lanes Improve to 6 lanes Improve to 6 lanes Improve to 6 lanes Improve to 6 lanes New 6 lanes PROJECT LENGTH (centerline miles) 4.5 2.0 0.6 2.5 3.0 6.0 1.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 2.0 8.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 7.0 5.0 Pecos Road Power Road Ellsworth Road Improve to 6 lanes 3.0 - Rittenhouse Road Pecos Road Power Road Widen/Re-align 1.0 - Sossaman Road Baseline Road Warner Rod Improve to 4 lanes 3.0 - Sossaman Road Pecos Road Germann Road Improve to 4 lanes 0.6 - Warner Road Power Road Sossaman Road New 6 lanes 1.0 - William Field Road Ellsworth Road 222nd Street Improve to 6 lanes 0.5 - William Field Road 222nd Street Meridian Road Improve to 6 lanes 2.5 - Roadway From To Description Prop. 400 Year Programmed for Final Construction 2010 2008 2024 2010 2014 2015 2024 2022 2019 2025 2021 2021 2021 2025 2025 - Notes MCDOT/Mesa partnership Gilbert/Mesa partnership City of Mesa CIP #05-040/#06-039 City of Mesa CIP #04-847 Meridian Road DCR MCDOT Corridor Study MCDOT Corridor Study City of Mesa Transportation Plan City of Mesa General Plan, Queen Creek SATS Queen Creek SATS City of Mesa Transportation/General Plan City of Mesa Transportation/General Plan City of Mesa Transportation/General Plan City of Mesa Transportation/General Plan City of Mesa Transportation/General Plan May 16, 2011 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Facility Programming 5-11 5.3.3 Local And Regional Infrastructure Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The RTP identifies a moderate expansion of the regional transit network within the study area. New local routes are planned to operate on Power Road, Main Street (via Power Road) and Ray Road, with the Ray Road route currently being planned to directly serve the ASU Polytechnic campus. In addition to the three new local routes, regional transit funding is programmed for service improvements on three existing local routes: Route 45-Broadway Road, Route 61-Southern Avenue, and Route 108-Elliot Road. New Route 184 offers 30-minute service to the passenger terminal each weekday between 4:30 a.m. and 9:30 p.m. and weekend service between 5 a.m. and 9 p.m. Two express routes are planned to provide service to the ASU Polytechnic campus: the Santan Express and Chandler Boulevard dedicated arterial Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). The Santan Express will provide two-way peak period service between the Polytechnic campus and regional destinations such as downtown Chandler, Chandler Fashion Mall and the Phoenix central business district (CBD)/State Capitol area. Chandler Boulevard dedicated arterial BRT route is planned to compliment the existing local fixed route bus service by providing reduced transit travel time through limited stop operations and other time-saving enhancements. In addition, express bus service is also planned in the U.S. 60 corridor with four new routes. The Superstition Springs Express and Superstition Springs Freeway connector originate at Superstition Springs Center (SSC). The freeway connector route will provide express service between SSC and Arizona Mills Mall in Tempe. The “express” route is planned to connect east Mesa with downtown Phoenix and will replace the existing Route 533. The Apache Junction Express is planned to operate the same pattern as the Superstition Springs Express, but originates at U.S. 60 and Signal Butte Road before stopping at SSC on its way to downtown Phoenix. Finally, the Main Street dedicated arterial BRT began operations in fiscal year 2009, connecting SSC with the Mesa end of line light rail station located at Main Street and Sycamore. The RTP includes an expansion of the regional transit network into the study area; however, the Plan does not identify any additional transit service west of Sossaman Road. The future transit network in the study area is illustrated by Exhibit 5-1: Future Transit Network. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Facility Programming 5-12 5.3.3.2 Future Transit Service Superstition Springs Express, but originates at US 60 and Signal Butte Road before stopping at SSC on its way to downtown Phoenix. Finally, the Main Street dedicated Arterial BRT will begin operations in fiscal year 2009, connecting SSC with the Mesa end of line light rail station located at Main Street and Sycamore. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report of the regional transit network into the study The Regional Transportation Plan includes an expansion area; however, the plan does not identify any additional transit service west of Sossaman Road. The future transit network in the study area is illustrated by Exhibit 5-1: Future Transit Network. 5-13 Facility Programming Exhibit 5-1: Future Transit Network Exhibit 5-1: Future Transit Network May 16, 2011 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum DRAFT 59 MAG and the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) completed a joint study to outline a Commuter StrategicofPlan for Maricopa and northern counties. study MAG and the Arizona Rail Department Transportation (ADOT) completedPinal a joint study toThis outline a was accepted in March 2008. The study area was divided into five geographic zones. The Mesa Commuter Rail Strategic Plan for Maricopa and northern Pinal counties. This study was accepted in Gateway area is study included what is termed thegeographic “Southeastzones. Sub-Area”, referGateway to Exhibit March 2008. The areainwas divided into five The Mesa area5-2: is Commuter Rail Strategic Plan. The MAG High Capacity Transit Network is shown on Exhibit included in what is termed the “Southeast Sub-Area”, refer to Exhibit 5-2: Commuter Rail Strategic 5-3: High Capacity Transit Network, which indicates potential for future commuter rail and Plan. The MAG High Capacity Transit Network is shown on Exhibit 5-3: High Capacity Transit Light Rail Transit (LRT)/BRT west of the Mesa Gateway study area. Exhibit 5-4 shows future Network, which indicates potential for future commuter rail and Light Rail Transit (LRT)/BRT west of transit concepts in the study area. the Mesa Gateway study area. Exhibit 5-4 shows future transit concepts in the study area. Exhibit 5-2: Commuter Rail Strategic Plan Source: Maricopa Association of Governments 5.3.3.4 Future Bicycle Facilities Exhibit 5-2: Commuter Rail Strategic Plan Based on City of Mesa’s Transportation Plan, the following are the proposed bicycle routes in the vicinity the study area: 5.3.3.4 FutureofBicycle Facilities • onAlma Road: University Plan, Drivethe to Southern Avenue Based City School of Mesa’s Transportation following are the proposed bicycle routes in the • Baseline Road: Loop 202 (San Tan Freeway) to Springwood vicinity of the study area: • • • • • • • • • Broadway Road: Power Road to Hawes Road Road: U.S. 60 to Baseline Road Ave •Crismon Alma School Rd: University Dr to Southern Dobson Road: Guadalupe Road to South City Limits • Baseline Rd: Loop 202 (San Tan Freeway) to Springwood Greenfield Road: Southern Avenue to Baseline Road •Guadalupe BroadwayRoad: Rd: Power RdRoad to Hawes Rd Hawes to Ellsworth Road •Mountain CrismonRoad: Rd: US-60 Baseline Rd Road ElliottoRoad to Ray •Power Dobson Rd: Guadalupe Rd to South City Limits Road: Adobe to University Drive •Southern Greenfield Rd: Southern AveAvenue to Baseline Rd Road Avenue: Clearview to Hawes Sossaman Road: Hampton Avenue to U.S. • Guadalupe Rd: Hawes Rd to Ellsworth Rd 60 • Mountain Rd: Elliot Rd to Ray Rd Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Facility Programming 5-14 5.3.3.3 Future High Capacity Transit 5.3.3.3 Future High Capacity Transit Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum DRAFT 60 • Power Rd: Plan Adobe -toTechnical University Dr Report Northeast Area Development • Southern Ave: Clearview Ave to Hawes Rd • Sossaman Rd: Hampton Ave to US-60 Coordination with the City of Mesa, ADOT, and Maricopa County Department of Transportation Coordination withidentified the City ofseveral Mesa, ADOT, and MCDOT identified several otherdirectly current and future (MCDOT) has other current and has future studies that will influence studies that will directly influence the findings and recommendations the PGMA-NADP study. These the findings and recommendations of the PGMA-NADP study.ofThese studies are summarized studies are summarized in this section. in this section. ADOTSR SR-24 (WilliamsGateway Gateway Freeway) ADOT 802 (Williams Freeway) SR-24 conceptually begins at Loop (Santan Freeway) the PMGA and heads east SR 802 conceptually begins at Loop 202202 (Santan Freeway) near near the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport towards Pinal County as part of the RTP approved by Maricopa County voters in 2004. Once and heads east towards Pinal County as part of the Regional Transportation Plan approved by in Pinal County, the route continues andCounty, southeast and could join east withand either U.S. 60and or Maricopa County voters in 2004. Once ineast Pinal the route continues southeast SR-79. could join with either US 60 or SR 79. Exhibit 5-3: High Capacity Transit Network Source: Maricopa Association of Governments Exhibit 5-3: High Capacity Transit Network May 16, 2011 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Facility Programming 5-15 5.3.3.5 On-Going and Future Studies 5.3.3.5 On-Going and Future Studies - UPDATE Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report In Fall 2009, ADOT and FHWA announced a separation of the SR-24 Study: • • • SR-24, Loop 202 to Ironwood Road (Maricopa County): Study of the portion of SR-24 from Loop 202 to Ironwood Road is advancing, including final design for the first mile of roadway from Loop 202 to Ellsworth Road. Construction will begin in early 2012. SR-24 (Pinal County): The portion of SR-24 that continues east into Pinal County has been suspended until another regional study, North-South Freeway (U.S. 60 to I-10), advances. The first section of SR 24, from Loop 202 to Ellsworth, is set to begin construction in early 2012. Successful completion of these studies results in the selection of an alternative and environmental clearances that allow ADOT to move on to detailed design and construction. ADOT and the Northeast Area Development Technical FHWA,Plan as –joint leadMemorandum agencies, have initiated the Corridor Study for the proposed SR-24 61 in DRAFT Maricopa and Pinal Counties. Exhibit 5-4: Future Transit Concepts Source: Mesa Gateway Strategic Plan Exhibit 5-4: Future Transit Concepts In fall 2009, ADOT and FHWA announced a separation of the SR 802 Study: • Phoenix-Mesa Gateway SR 802, Loop 202 to Ironwood Road (Maricopa County): Study of the portion of SRAirport 802 from Loop 202 to Ironwood Road is advancing, including final design for the first mile of roadway from Loop 202 to Ellsworth Road. Facility Programming 5-16 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report MCDOT Elliot Road Access Control and Corridor Improvement Study In partnership with Pinal County, MCDOT began a corridor study on Elliot Road between Power Road and Ironwood Road in Pinal County. This study will make recommendations on the future alignment and cross-section of this east-west arterial that borders the General Motors Proving Grounds to the north. MCDOT Meridian Road Design Concept Report The MCDOT, in coordination with the Town of Queen Creek and Pinal County, is currently in the process of conducting a Design Concept Report and Environmental Assessment of Meridian Road between Empire Boulevard and Germann Road. This segment includes a proposed bridge crossing of Queen Creek Wash and a grade-separated interchange at the intersection of Meridian Road with Combs Road, Riggs Road, Rittenhouse Road and the Union Pacific Railroad. MCDOT Signal Butte Road Corridor Improvement Study This corridor study on Signal Butte Road between Rittenhouse Road and U.S. 60 was completed in December 2009. It addresses long term transportation needs of the 10.5 mile corridor and passes through portions of the City of Mesa, Town of Queen Creek and unincorporated areas of Maricopa County. ADOT/FHWA North-South Corridor Study The purpose of this study is to identify a transportation corridor to connect the U.S. 60 with I-10 in order to provide access to a rapidly growing portion of Pinal County and improve regional mobility. The study began in 2010 and is scheduled for completion in 2013. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Facility Programming 5-17 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Section 6: Market Analysis 1 6-1 6.1 Greater Phoenix Economy Overview SECTION 6 - MARKET DRIVEN LAND USE Historically, over the last 60 years, the State of Arizona and its largest metropolitan area, Greater have had robust population, 6.1 Phoenix, Greater Phoenix Economy Overviewemployment, and personal income growth, among the highest in the nation. Greater Phoenix has grown by more than one million persons over each of the last two decades. growth real estate development and price Historically, over the This last 60 years,has the been State accompanied of Arizona and by its significant largest metropolitan area, Greater Phoenix, have had appreciation for residential and commercial real estate, supported by local job creation and population robust population, employment, and personal income growth, among the highest in the nation. Greater Phoenix has inflows. grown by more than one million persons over each of the last two decades. This growth has been accompanied by significant real estate development and price appreciation for residential and commercial real estate, supported by local The factors that underlie Arizona’s economy drive significant population in-migration, which in turn job creation and population inflows. will drive the recovery in single family home demand and pricing. The employment mix of Greater Phoenix is well diversified and, in many respects, is very similar to the economy of the U.S. It is over- The factors that underlie Arizona’s economy drive activities significantemployment population in-migration, in turn of willrapid drive growth. the recovery represented in construction and financial because ofwhich its history in single family home demand and pricing. The employment mix of Greater Phoenix is well diversified and, in many While the region is slightly under-represented in durable goods manufacturing compared to the U.S., respects, is very similar to the economy of the U.S. It is over-represented in construction and financial activities its primary manufacturing products in aerospace and computer and electronic components position employment because of itsWhile historyGreater of rapidPhoenix growth. has While thehard region under-represented in durable goods it for future growth. been hit is byslightly the current recession, barring global manufacturing compared to the U.S., its primary manufacturing products in aerospace and computer and electronic economic disruptions, the worst of the economic cycle appears to have occurred in 2009 with job losses components position it forand future growth.beginning While Greater Phoenix has been hard hit by the current recession, barring moderating in 2010 recovery in 2011. global economic disruptions, the worst of the economic cycle appears to have occurred in 2009 with job losses Greaterin Phoenix seen beginning dramaticinpopulation growth since 1950. In the 1990s, the region grew by moderating 2010 andhas recovery 2011. more than one million persons. Between 2000 and 2009, another 1.1 million persons have been added to the population. Greater Phoenix has seen dramatic population growth since 1950. In the 1990s, the region grew by more than 1 million persons. Between 2000 and 2009, another 1.1 million persons have been added to the population. Table 6-1: Greater Phoenix Population Growth Greater Phoenix Population Growth Change in Population Compounded Annual Growth Rate Year Population 1950 374,961 1960 726,183 351,222 6.8% 1970 1,039,807 313,624 3.7% 1980 1,600,083 560,276 4.4% 1990 2,238,498 638,415 3.4% 2000 3,251,876 1,013,378 3.8% 2009 4,379,634 1,127,758 3.4% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; AZ Dept of Commerce Since 1950, Greater Phoenix has outpaced the nation in terms of growth by a factor of ten. Only the State of Nevada can also Since boast similar population growth figures. Nevada’s is terms primarily on by gambling andoftourism and does 1950, Greater Phoenix has outpaced theeconomy nation in ofbased growth a factor ten. Only the not of Nevada canofalso boast population growth figures. Nevada’s economy is primarily haveState the dynamic potential Arizona to similar create higher paying jobs. based on gambling and tourism and does not have the dynamic potential of Arizona to create higher paying 6.1.1jobs.The Current State of the Economy The State of Arizona has been in a recession since at least the end of 2007, consistent with national and global trends. Unfortunately, during the current recession, Greater Phoenix is experiencing a downturn thatAirport is more Phoenix-Mesa Gateway severe than normal. This is due in part to recent overbuilding in both the single family and commercial real Market Analysis Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The State of Arizona has been in a recession since at least the end of 2007, consistent with national and global trends. Unfortunately, during the current recession, Greater Phoenix is experiencing a Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use downturn that is more severe than normal. This is due in part to recent overbuilding in both the DRAFT single family and commercial real estate sectors. Housing downturns have happened before but not to this extent, especially within the single family market. 2 estate sectors. Housing downturns have happened before but not to this extent, especially within the single family market. Greater Phoenix historically outperforms the nation as a whole in times of expansion and recession. This time is different. Primarily due to the significant job losses associated with the real estate Greater Phoenix historically outperforms nation as whole in times of expansion and recession. time is and construction industries, the local the economy is aperforming more poorly when compared This to the different.as Primarily to is thea significant losses associated the realeconomic estate andfundamentals, construction industries, nation a whole.due This transitoryjob occurrence. Due towith its sound job growth Greater is Phoenix is expected to exceed of the to U.S. theas economy the the localineconomy performing more poorly when that compared theonce nation a whole.stabilizes This is aintransitory next few years, likely by a significant degree. occurrence. Due to its sound economic fundamentals, job growth in Greater Phoenix is expected to exceed that of the U.S. once the economy stabilizes in the next few years, likely by a significant degree. Table 6-2: Greater Phoenix & U.S. Non-Farm Employment Percent Change Year-Over-Year Greater Phoenix & U.S. Non-Farm Employment Percent Change Year-Over-Year Source: BLS & ADOC 12.0% 10.0% 8.0% 6.0% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% -2.0% -4.0% -6.0% -8.0% Ja n8 Ja 1 n8 Ja 2 n83 Ja n8 Ja 4 n85 Ja n8 Ja 6 n87 Ja n8 Ja 8 n89 Ja n9 Ja 0 n9 Ja 1 n92 Ja n9 Ja 3 n9 Ja 4 n9 Ja 5 n96 Ja n9 Ja 7 n98 Ja n9 Ja 9 n0 Ja 0 n01 Ja n0 Ja 2 n0 Ja 3 n0 Ja 4 n05 Ja n0 Ja 6 n0 Ja 7 n08 Ja n0 Ja 9 n10 -10.0% U.S. Greater Phoenix In 2009, job losses occurred in nearly all employment categories. As of the first quarter of 2010, In 2009, job Phoenix losses occurred in nearly all stagnant. employmentOver categories. the first quarterhas of 2010, the Greater the Greater economy remains the last As twoofyears, Phoenix lost 220,000 Phoenix economy remains stagnant. Over the last two years, Phoenix has lost 220,000 jobs, or about one in jobs, or about one in every 8.5 jobs that existed three years ago. This is an unprecedented decline. every an 8.5employment jobs that existed threeofyears ago. This is an unprecedented decline. After an7.9 employment After decline 2.5 percent in 2008, Greater Phoenix lost another percent ofdecline jobs of 2.5% in 2008, Greater Phoenix another 7.9%jobs of jobs 2009.lost Through 2010, another in 2009. Through March 2010, lost another 27,800 haveinbeen and aMarch total annual decline27,800 of 3.7 jobs have beenorlost and jobs, a totalisannual decline of 3.7%, or 64,000 jobs, is expected by forecasters at the University percent, 64,000 expected by forecasters at the University of Arizona (see following chart of Arizona (see forecast). following chart the 2010 forecast). would mark the firstGreater time in history thathas Greater Phoenix for the 2010 Thisforwould mark the firstThis time in history that Phoenix lost jobs has lost jobsin three years in a row. three years a row. The declineininemployment employment in Greater Phoenix is largely to the of demise of the localmarket housing The decline in Greater Phoenix is largely tied to tied the demise the local housing and the market and the associated ripple effects throughout many related industries. However, even if the associated ripple effects throughout many related industries. However, even if the excesses of the recent excesses of theboom recenthad housing market boom had that not itoccurred to the degreewould that still it did, the local housing market not occurred to the degree did, the local economy be affected by the economy would still be affected by the national economic downturn. Theoccurred overbuilding and Phoenix related and national economic downturn. The overbuilding and related financial turmoil that in Greater many other communities across the nation turned a potentially mild downturn into a severe recession. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Market Analysis 6-2 6.1.1 The Current State of the Economy Northeast Area Plan - Technical Report Northeast Area Development PlanDevelopment – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT 3 Table 6-3: Greater Phoenix Employment Annual Percentage Change 1971-2010 Greater Phoenix Employment Annual Percentage Change 1971 - 2010* Source: AZ Dept. of Commerce, University of Arizona Forecasting Project Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT 15.0% 3 13.3% 11.9% 11.1% 11.2% Greater Phoenix Employment 9.3% Annual Percentage Change 1971 - 2010* 7.3% 10.4% 10.0% Market Analysis 6-3 8.7% Source: AZ Dept. of Commerce, University of Arizona Forecasting Project 5.7% 5.0% 15.0% 13.3% 4.9% 11.9% 11.1% 3.8% 0.0% 5.7% -5.0% 4.9% 1.1% 3.8% 4.8% 4.9% -0.3% 5.4% 5.4% 4.6% 3.5% -0.1% -0.3% 6.2% 5.4% 3.9% 3.5% 1.1% 0.0% -0.1% 2.5%2.2% -3.7% 1.6% 1.5% 1.2% 7.3% 7.2% 6.6% 5.9% 5.8% 3.7% 3.0% 3.9% 3.5% 2.5%2.2% 9.3% -0.1% 6.2% 5.4% 5.4% 5.4% 4.6% 11.2% 3.5% 8.7% 5.0% 4.9% 4.8% 3.7% 3.0%10.4% 10.0% 7.2% 6.6% 5.9% 5.8% 1.2% 1.5% -2.5% 1.6% -3.7% -0.1% -2.5% -3.7% -3.7% -7.9% 19 71 19 72 19 73 19 74 19 75 19 76 19 77 19 78 19 79 19 80 19 81 19 82 19 83 19 84 19 85 19 86 19 87 19 88 19 89 19 90 19 91 19 92 19 93 19 94 19 95 19 96 19 97 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 02 20 03 20 04 20 05 20 06 20 07 20 08 20 0 20 9 10 * -10.0% -5.0% -7.9% -10.0% 19 71 19 72 19 73 19 74 19 75 19 76 19 77 19 78 19 79 19 80 19 81 19 82 19 83 19 84 19 85 19 86 19 87 19 88 19 89 19 90 19 91 19 92 19 93 19 94 19 95 19 96 19 97 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 02 20 03 20 04 20 05 20 06 20 07 20 08 20 0 20 9 10 * * 2010 Forecast from University of Arizona * 2010 Forecast fromthat University of Arizonain Greater Phoenix and many other communities across the nation financial turmoil occurred turned a potentially mild downturn into a severe recession. According to the Arizona Department of Commerce, the hardest hit sectors as of March 2010 were construction, mining, manufacturing and information, though most allthe sectors declined health and educational services According thethe Arizona Department of Commerce, hardest hit sectors as of March were construction, Accordingtoto Arizona Department of Commerce, the hardest hitexcept sectors as of2010 March 2010 were mining, manufacturing and information, though most all sectors declined except health and educational services construction, mining, manufacturing and information, though most all sectors declined except and wholesale trade. Because it makes up a large portion of the economy, more professional services jobs were and wholesale trade. Because it makes up a large portion the economy, more up professional servicesofjobs health and educational services wholesale trade.of Because it makes a large portion thewere lost in the first three months of 2010 than inand any other sector. lost in the first three months of 2010 than in any other sector. Table 6-4: Phoenix-Mesa Employment March 2010 vs. March 2009 Phoenix-Mesa MSAEmployment Employment Phoenix-Mesa MSA March 2010 March 2009 2009 March 2010 vsvsMarch Sectors in Decline % Change Sectors in Decline % Change Natural Resources and Mining -13.1% Construction -21.1% Natural Resources and Mining -13.1% -9.0% Construction Manufacturing -21.1% Retail Trade -1.6% ManufacturingTransp., Warehousing, and Utilities -9.0% -5.5% Retail Trade Information -1.6% -8.4% Financial Activities -4.9% Transp., Warehousing, and Utilities -5.5% -5.2% Information Professional and Business Services -8.4% Leisure and Hospitality -3.1% Financial Activities -4.9% Other Services -5.7% Professional and Business Services -5.2% Government -3.1% Leisure and Hospitality -3.1% Source: Arizona Department of Commerce, Research Administration Other Services -5.7% Government -3.1% Growing Sectors % Change % Change 0.9% 9.6% 0.9% 1.6% 9.6% Growing Sectors Wholesale Trade EducationalTrade Services Wholesale Health Care Services and Social Assistance Educational Health Care and Social Assistance 1.6% The educational services and health care and social assistance industries Phoenix-Mesa in Greater Phoenix are two of the Gateway Airport with national trends and the aging of the population. These two sectors grew by 86,600 jobs between 2000 and 2009, more than any other industry category. At the start of this decade, the sectors accounted for 8.7% of all employment. By 2009, that percentage had increased major growth sectors of theResearch local economy, consistent Source: Arizona Department of Commerce, Administration Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 6-4 Market Analysis economy, more professional services jobs were lost in the first three months of 2010 than in any other sector. The educational services and health care and social assistance industries in Greater Phoenix are two of the major growth sectors of the local economy, consistent with national trends and the aging of –the population. These two sectors grewLand by 86,600 Northeast Area Development Plan Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Use jobs between 2000 and 2009, more than any other industry category. At the start of this decade, the sectors accounted for 8.7% of all DRAFT employment. By 2009, that percentage had increased to 13.5 percent. 4 The current The weakcurrent national has seriously affected manymany parts of ofthetheGreater weakeconomy national economy has seriously affected parts Greater Phoenix Phoenix economy, economy, including tourism and retirement housing, as well as the region’s manufacturing base of including tourism and retirement housing, as well as the region’s manufacturing base of semiconductors and semiconductors and aerospace. Household net worth declined nationally due to the fall in housing aerospace. prices Household net worth declined nationally due to the fall in housing prices and the stock market, and the stock market, which is still more than 30 percent off its peak. This led to fewer people which is still more than its peak. This to fewer retiring and madetoitGreater more difficult retiring and30% madeoff it more difficult forled people to sellpeople houses elsewhere to move Phoenix.for people to As a result, population flows to the region slowed dramatically by any measure. Net residential sell houses elsewhere to move to Greater Phoenix. As a result, population flows to the region slowed utility hookups by APS and SRP, school enrollment and estimates by the Arizona Department of dramatically by any measure. Net residential utility hookups by APS and SRP, school enrollment and estimates Commerce all show very little, if any population growth. Based on current estimates, population by the Arizona Department of Commerce show little, if any population Based growth dropped from 3.1 percent inall 2007 to 0.9very percent in 2009. This means thatgrowth. a market that had on current an increase of more than 130,000 residents per year in theinearly years of this decade to that had an estimates, population growth dropped from 3.1% in 2007 to 0.9% 2009. This means thatdropped a market essentially a level of births over deaths in 2009. By 2011 or 2012, net migration should once again increase of more than 130,000 residents per year in the early years of this decade dropped to essentially a level return to the long term average of comprising two-thirds of annual population growth. of births over deaths in 2009. By 2011 or 2012, net migration should once again return to the long term average of comprising two-thirds of annual population growth. Table 6-5: Greater Phoenix Population Annual Percentage Change 1976-2009, 2010 Forecast Greater Phoenix Population Annual Percentage Change 1976-2009, 2010 Forecast Sources: AZ Dept. of Commerce, University of Arizona 6.0% 5.1% 5.0% 4.7% 4.3% 4.2% 4.0% 3.7% 3.0% 4.4% 4.2% 3.9% 3.7% 3.5% 3.1% 3.0% Recessions 5.0% 4.9% 3.4% 3.1% 4.2%4.2% 4.1% 3.8%3.7% 3.4% 3.3% 3.2% 3.2% 3.4% 2.9% 2.9% 3.2% 2.8% 2.5% 2.1% 2.0% 1.4% 1.6% 0.9% 1.0% 19 76 19 77 19 78 19 79 19 80 19 81 19 82 19 83 19 84 19 85 19 86 19 87 19 88 19 89 19 90 19 91 19 92 19 93 19 94 19 95 19 96 19 97 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 02 20 03 20 04 20 05 20 06 20 07 20 08 20 09 20 10 0.0% 6.1.2 Employment Mix and Diversity Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Over the last 60 years, the economic base of the Greater Phoenix area has diversified from mining and farming Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Over the last 60 years, the economic base of the Greater Phoenix area has diversified from mining and farming into a well-rounded modern economy. Explosive growth occurred in the last 20 years as people moved from the “snowbelt” and “rustbelt” states in the northeast to the “sunbelt” states in the south, the southwest, and Southern California. Major corporations followed as well. The attraction of these primary industries also created demand for local market industries such as retail and wholesale trade. Over-regulation of businesses and financial mismanagement in California further induced growth into Arizona and Greater Phoenix especially. The diversity of the employment mix is the primary reason why one sector alone has not caused the Greater Phoenix economy as a whole to deteriorate as rapidly as other areas of the U.S. during recessions. The recession of 2007-08, however, is much different and the one exception to the statement above. The employment mix of Greater Phoenix is well diversified and mirrors that of the United States in many respects. It is over-represented in construction and financial activities employment when compared to the U.S. as a whole. This is due to the rapid population and employment growth the area experienced and the resulting demand for housing. It is under-represented in manufacturing, but its manufacturing mix is much more concentrated in high technology than that of the United States. This is a positive in the long run because the high technology manufacturing sectors are in an earlier stage of their life cycle than most manufacturing industries and usually produce high value added goods. However, growth in chip manufacturers has been anemic domestically as companies have moved employment overseas. The following chart compares the percent distribution of employment of Greater Phoenix to that of the U.S. economy. The last column of the chart represents the ratio of the percentages of the two columns to the right. A value over 1.0 indicates the Greater Phoenix economy is more heavily represented in that industry than the U.S.; a value under 1.0 indicates under-representation in the industry. As noted previously, construction is over-represented in the Greater Phoenix employment mix while manufacturing is under-represented (although durable goods manufacturing is nearly equal to the U.S.). Financial activities and professional services are over-represented by a significant degree, largely due to the explosive growth of Greater Phoenix. Education and health services are under-represented, but as noted previously, this sector has grown rapidly during the last ten years. Greater Phoenix has much less government employment than the nation overall. Manufacturing is considered a “base” industry by economists. Base industries are important to an economy because they produce higher multiplier effects than jobs in other sectors. Base industries in an economy are ones where goods are produced and then exported out of the area, thus bringing money from outside the region into the local economy. One exception is tourism, which is a base industry, but which produces no tangible goods. However, the industry brings out-of-region dollars to be spent in the local economy. Base industries support local market industries such as retail and local business services. Without base industries, local economies would not function. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Market Analysis 6-5 6.1.2 Employment Mix and Diversity Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT Table 6-6: Comparison of Greater Phoenix and U.S. Employment Percent Distribution 6 Market Analysis 6-6 Comparison of Greater Phoenix and U.S. Employment Percent Distribution Industry Total Nonfarm Employment Total Private Employment March 2010 Greater Phoenix 100.0% 85.7% U.S. 100.0% 82.2% Ratio of Greater Phoenix to U.S. 1.00 1.04 Goods Producing Industries Natural Resources and Mining Construction Manufacturing Durable Goods Non-Durable Goods Total Goods Producing 0.2% 4.9% 6.4% 5.0% 1.4% 11.5% 0.5% 4.1% 8.9% 5.5% 3.4% 13.5% 0.32 1.21 0.72 0.92 0.41 0.85 Service-Providing Industries Trade, Transportation, and Utilities Utilities Wholesale Trade Retail Trade Transportation and Warehousing Information Financial Activities Professional and Business Services Educational and Health Services Educational Services Health Care and Social Assistance Leisure and Hospitality Other Services Government Federal Government State and Local Government Total Service-Providing 21.0% 0.5% 5.1% 12.3% 3.1% 1.6% 8.0% 15.9% 13.5% 2.4% 11.1% 10.3% 3.9% 14.3% 1.3% 12.9% 88.5% 18.9% 0.4% 4.3% 11.0% 3.2% 2.1% 5.9% 12.7% 15.2% 2.5% 12.6% 9.8% 4.1% 17.8% 2.2% 15.5% 86.2% 1.11 1.17 1.19 1.12 0.97 0.76 1.36 1.25 0.89 0.94 0.88 1.05 0.96 0.80 0.60 0.83 1.03 Sources: University of Arizona Forecasting Project Q1 2010, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Arizona’s manufacturing industry is concentrated in Greater Phoenix. According to the Arizona Arizona's manufacturing industry is concentrated in Greateras Phoenix. According to theofArizona Department Department of Commerce, Research Administration, of the third quarter 2009 (the latest of Commerce, Research as of the third quarter of 2009 (the latesthas establishment data available) the establishment data Administration, available) the Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale MSA 3,486 manufacturing Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale MSA has 3,486 manufacturing firms employing 111,403 or 74.0% of the state's firms employing 111,403 or 74.0 percent of the state’s total manufacturing employment. Major total manufacturing employment. Major manufacturers located in the Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale MSA manufacturers located in the Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale MSA include, in addition to include, those in addition to those mentioned previously, Freeport-McMoRan, IBM, Freescale, and General Dynamics. Each of mentioned previously, Freeport-McMoRan, IBM, Freescale, and General Dynamics. Each of these these firms participates in high technology manufacturing as part of their core business. firms participates in high technology manufacturing as part of their core business. Manufacturing employment in Greater Phoenix declineddeclined from 2007 to 2009 the largest of 12.1% Manufacturing employment in Greater Phoenix from 2007with to 2009 with decline the largest occurringofin 12.1 2009.percent For the occurring 1st Quarterinof 2009. 2010, preliminary estimates show manufacturing retracting by another decline For the 1st Quarter of 2010, preliminary estimates show manufacturing retracting another percenttocompared the in First ofthrough 2009. the 9.0% compared to the First Quarter by of 2009. This9.0 compares declines of to 11.4% 2009Quarter and 6.6% This compares to declines 11.4 percent in 2009 andquarter 6.6 percent the 1st Quarter of Economic 2010 1st Quarter of 2010 for U.S.ofmanufacturing. The fourth 2009 through Greater Phoenix Blue Chip for U.S. manufacturing. fourth quarter 2009 will Greater Blue Economic Forecast suggests that jobThe losses in manufacturing end inPhoenix 2010 with anChip overall increase Forecast of 0.2%. By suggests that losses inofmanufacturing will Project end in suggests 2010 with anmanufacturing overall increase of 0.2 percent. comparison, thejob University Arizona Forecasting that will rebound with a 2.0% By comparison, the University increase in employment in 2010. of Arizona Forecasting Project suggests that manufacturing will rebound with a 2.0 percent increase in employment in 2010. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 7 Flow of a Region's Economy Base Industries Manufacturing, Tourism, Export-Related Business Services, Etc. Spending By Base Industries Local Market Industries Retail, Construction, Local Business Services, Banks, Local Government Source: Elliott D. Pollack & Co. 6.1.3 Greater Phoenix Housing Market History 6.1.3 Greater Phoenix Housing Market History A discussion of the Greater Phoenix economy would not be complete without a summary of the Ahousing discussion of the Greater Phoenix economy would not be complete without a summary of the housing market. market. Historically, the incremental demand for single family homes due to population Historically, the incremental for single 35,000 family to homes due to units population growth in Greater Phoenix is growth in Greater Phoenix demand is approximately 40,000 new annually. From 1998 through approximately 35,000 to 40,000 new units annually. From 1998 through 2002, new home permits in the Greater 2002, new home permits in Greater Phoenix averaged approximately 36,200 per year. During Phoenix averaged approximately 36,200 year. number During the 2003 climbed through 2006, the average four years from 2003 through 2006, theper average of four newyears homefrom permits to 51,600 per number of new home permits climbed to 51,600 year with a the peak in 2005 ofthat overduring 61,000 that units.four Thisyear implies year with a peak in 2005 of over 61,000 units.per This implies possibility the possibility that during yearmore period,homes between 55,000 75,000the more were built beyond the period, between 55,000 that andfour 75,000 were builtand beyond truehomes underlying demand, true underlying demand, based onpopulation historic andgrowth. projectedInpopulation growth. In our opinion, the additional based on historic and projected our opinion, the additional homebuilding homebuilding wasspeculative based on speculative buying the expectation of virtually guaranteed capital activity was activity based on buying with the with expectation of virtually guaranteed capital appreciation withwith the the salesale of houses to buyers who previously would have beenhave unable to unable get mortgages appreciationcoupled coupled of houses to buyers who previously would been to get mortgages based on their credit profiles. based on their credit profiles. By 2007, 2007, itit was was apparent apparentthat thatthe thesources sourcesof of demand which driven the boom, particularly By demand which had had driven the boom, particularly speculative speculative investment and sub-prime buyers, were unsustainable. For example, Greater Phoenix investment and sub-prime buyers, were unsustainable. For example, Greater Phoenix had gone from being the had gone from being affordable 2003 to one least affordable most affordable marketthe in most the West in 2003market to oneinofthe theWest leastinaffordable by of thethe beginning of 2007. byLocal the beginning 2007. income not keep up inwith prices,less reaching a point in in income levels didofnot keepLocal up with home levels prices,did reaching a point late home 2006 where than 27% of homes late 2006 where less than 27 percent of homes in the metro area were affordable to families making the metro area were affordable to families making the median income. Comparatively, at the end of 2003, nearly the median income. Comparatively, at the income. end of 2003, percent homes were affordable 74% of homes were affordable at the median As anearly result, 74 new home of permits dropped dramatically to at the median income. As a result, new home permits dropped dramatically to 30,029 in 2007, 30,029 in 2007, 14,375 in 2008, 8,487 in 2009 and 2,438 for the first quarter of 2010. 14,375 in 2008, 8,487 in 2009 and 2,438 for the first quarter of 2010. Despite the dramatic decrease in new building activity, a significant surplus of single family homes had Despite the dramatic decrease in new building activity, a significant surplus of single family homes accumulated exacerbatedbyby significantdefaults, defaults,foreclosures foreclosures and and repossessions. repossessions. Distressed Distressed owners owners put had been exacerbated significant properties on the market in increasing numbers resulting in declining prices and further foreclosures. Mortgage put properties on the market in increasing numbers resulting in declining prices and further lenders experienced significant liquidity problems,significant adding to the inventory of properties for sale butinventory also reducing foreclosures. Mortgage lenders experienced liquidity problems, adding to the the ability of potential to obtain mortgage financing even at what were lower, more attractive prices. of properties for salebuyers but also reducing the ability of potential buyers to now obtain mortgage financing Knowledgeable industry were also aware that Knowledgeable behind the explicitindustry inventoryparticipants of for-sale properties even at what were nowparticipants lower, more attractive prices. were there was an additional layer of shadow inventory of additional distressed owners and properties that lenders Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport May 18, 2011 6-7 Market Analysis Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT Exhibit 6-1: Flow of a Region’s Economy Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The status of the Greater Phoenix economy and housing market is summarized in the following points. • • • • • The current recession is the deepest Greater Phoenix has experienced since the Great Depression and the recession’s effects locally are far worse than in many other areas of the country. There has been no recovery in employment thus far, more than nine quarters after the start of the recession in December 2007. Greater Phoenix has not experienced such a loss of employment nor such a long recovery in its short history. There is a significant oversupply of single family homes in the market, perhaps as many as 80,000 to 90,000 units according to ASU. Until population flows to Greater Phoenix begin again, the oversupply of housing units will place downward pressure on prices and likely limit the construction of new homes. Investors are a significant force in the single family housing market. While the volume of home sales is impressive, the homes purchased by investors will eventually come back on the market for sale. In other words, the surplus of homes is not being absorbed by traditional homebuyers and will remain until population flows increase. Mortgage delinquencies and foreclosures have not subsided. More than 7,000 homeowners each month are being served with notices of trustee sales. The number of homes in the foreclosure process is currently approaching 50,000. 6.1.4 Long Term Forecasts for Greater Phoenix The primary source of forecasting estimates for this section of the report is the University of Arizona Forecasting Project within the Economic and Business Research Center. Long term forecasts are for the next 10 years. All forecasts are updated quarterly to current conditions. The forecasts cited in this report were prepared in the First Quarter 2010. In spite of the current economic conditions, Greater Phoenix is expected to bounce back over the next few years in population and employment growth. From the bottom of the cycle in 2010 through 2019, Greater Phoenix is expected to grow by more than 1.2 million persons accompanied by the construction of 377,000 housing units. By 2012, in-migration is expected to return to historic levels of 90,000 persons per year. By 2019, Greater Phoenix is expected to have a population of 5.6 million compared to an estimated population of 4.4 million in 2010. Likewise job growth is expected to turn positive in 2011 and by 2014 the region is expected to return to its peak level of employment experienced in 2007. Between 2010 and 2019, employment is expected to grow by more than 660,000 jobs across all sectors. So while the short term forecast is dismal and still uncertain, the mid to long term outlook is very positive. (Note: The employment estimates for 2009 and 2010 in the following tables differ slightly from actual employment figures presented in Sub-Section 6.2.3. This difference is due to the release of “preliminary” employment estimates available at the time forecasts are prepared, but which are subject to revision at later dates. Forecasts by the University of Arizona are typically made from the most recent and best information available at the end of each quarter.) Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 6-8 Market Analysis also aware that behind the explicit inventory of for-sale properties there was an additional layer of shadow inventory of additional distressed owners and properties that lenders were not bothering to even put on the market. Currently, this overhang is estimated at as much as 46,000 units that are in the foreclosure process. Assuming no new building, it would take approximately 1.5 years to absorb the excess inventory of foreclosed single family homes. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT Table 6-7: Greater Phoenix Economic Forecast 9 Year 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2010-2019 Change Single Family 26,404 12,657 8,657 13,320 28,060 36,359 39,568 38,023 36,861 35,085 34,585 34,798 35,473 Building Permits Multi-Family 10,868 5,876 702 733 999 3,516 5,979 6,634 7,028 7,412 8,123 8,906 9,905 318,812 58,502 Employment Jobs % Change 1,914,833 1,867,908 -2.5% 1,718,975 -8.0% 1,655,271 -3.7% 1,676,458 1.3% 1,763,015 5.2% 1,880,184 6.6% 1,979,504 5.3% 2,063,185 4.2% 2,128,525 3.2% 2,189,409 2.9% 2,251,424 2.8% 2,319,174 3.0% Total 37,272 18,533 9,359 14,052 29,060 39,875 45,547 44,657 43,890 42,497 42,708 43,704 45,378 377,314 663,903 Population Persons % Change 4,165,921 4,281,899 2.8% 4,321,377 0.9% 4,388,536 1.6% 4,498,130 2.5% 4,629,525 2.9% 4,774,531 3.1% 4,917,504 3.0% 5,058,694 2.9% 5,196,579 2.7% 5,334,970 2.7% 5,475,724 2.6% 5,620,347 2.6% 40.1% 1,231,811 28.1% Source: University of Arizona Forecasting Project Q1 2010 Employment Forecast Greater Phoenix Back to Peak in 2014 Source: University of Arizona Forecasting Project Q1 2010 2200 2,063 1,980 2000 1,915 1,788 Jobs (In Thousands) 1800 1,884 1,880 1,868 1600 1,578 1,598 1,596 2001 2002 1,763 1,719 1,684 1,655 1,620 1,676 1400 1200 1000 2000 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 The composition of employment in Greater Phoenix is expected to change over time and become less manufacturing-oriented and more service-based. This similarfrom trend (Note: The employment estimates for 2009 and 2010 in thetransformation following tablesfollows differ aslightly actual for the overall U.S. economy. The following table compares Greater Phoenix’s 2009 employment employment figures presented in Sub-Section 2.3. This difference is due to the release of “preliminary” compositionestimates and the 2018 employment from University of Arizona Forecasting Project employment available at the timeforecast forecasts arethe prepared, but which are subject to revision at later to similar data for the U.S. (2018 is the only available long term forecast from the Bureau of Labor dates. Forecasts by the University of Arizona are typically made from the most recent and best information Statistics). Theend lastofcolumn of the chart represents the ratio of the percentages of the two columns available at the each quarter.) to the right. A value over 1.0 indicates the Greater Phoenix economy is more heavily represented in that industry than the U.S.; a value under 1.0 indicates under-representation in the industry. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport May 18, 2011 Market Analysis 6-9 Greater Phoenix Economic Forecast 2010 - 2019 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 1 Table 6-8: Greater Phoenix Wage & Salary Employment Forecast 2009-2019 6-10 Wage & Salary Employment Forecast 2009 - 2019 Greater Phoenix Annual Average Employment and Percent Change in Employment Industry Natural Resources and Mining Construction Manufacturing Durable Goods Non-Durable Goods Trade, Transportation, and Utilities Wholesale Trade Retail Trade Transp., Warehousing, and Utilities Information Financial Activities Professional and Business Services Educational and Health Services Educational Services Health Care and Social Assistance Leisure and Hospitality Other Services Government Total Nonfarm 2009 3.0 98.6 112.2 89.6 22.6 354.6 84.8 207.9 62.0 30.4 138.8 276.6 223.5 37.2 186.3 174.5 69.5 237.2 1,719.0 2010 2.7 72.1 114.4 92.1 22.3 342.7 77.2 204.3 61.2 28.3 140.0 255.9 225.9 36.2 189.7 172.1 72.4 228.9 1,655.3 2011 2.8 66.3 117.2 94.2 23.0 347.8 77.6 206.5 63.7 30.5 144.2 252.6 233.7 38.5 195.3 178.1 76.2 226.9 1,676.5 Annual Average Employment (Thousands) 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 3.0 3.1 3.1 3.2 3.2 78.9 106.7 123.2 131.5 129.1 121.1 125.1 126.5 127.1 127.0 97.2 100.7 101.7 102.0 101.7 23.9 24.4 24.8 25.1 25.3 365.0 382.0 400.1 417.1 432.6 81.4 86.5 91.0 95.9 100.3 214.2 222.7 233.1 242.3 250.4 69.4 72.8 76.0 79.0 81.8 31.4 31.6 31.6 32.0 32.3 150.3 158.3 167.7 175.8 182.8 269.3 298.6 323.5 344.9 363.2 244.9 256.2 267.4 278.2 288.8 41.0 43.8 46.7 49.1 51.6 204.0 212.4 220.7 229.0 237.2 186.5 194.9 202.1 208.8 215.4 80.5 83.6 86.7 89.8 92.8 232.1 240.1 247.6 254.9 261.4 1,763.0 1,880.2 1,979.5 2,063.2 2,128.5 2017 3.2 128.0 127.3 101.7 25.6 446.8 104.4 257.8 84.6 32.8 189.0 377.1 299.7 54.3 245.5 221.9 95.8 267.9 2,189.4 2018 3.1 126.5 127.9 102.0 25.9 461.4 108.4 265.6 87.4 33.0 195.4 391.2 310.6 56.7 253.9 228.7 98.9 274.9 2,251.4 2019 2.9 128.0 127.7 101.7 26.0 477.2 112.7 274.3 90.1 33.1 202.3 405.7 321.8 59.3 262.5 236.0 102.1 282.4 2,319.2 2010-2019 Change 0.3 55.9 13.3 9.6 3.7 134.5 35.5 70.0 29.0 4.8 62.3 149.8 95.9 23.2 72.8 63.9 29.7 53.5 663.9 Industry Natural Resources and Mining Construction Manufacturing Durable Goods Non-Durable Goods Trade, Transportation, and Utilities Wholesale Trade Retail Trade Transp., Warehousing, and Utilities Information Financial Activities Professional and Business Services Educational and Health Services Educational Services Health Care and Social Assistance Leisure and Hospitality Other Services Government Total Nonfarm 2009 -22.8% -29.3% -13.8% -13.5% -14.4% -7.5% -4.7% -8.5% -7.7% -3.6% -5.7% -10.9% 2.3% 4.4% 2.0% -5.7% -5.3% -3.4% -8.0% 2010 -11.2% -26.9% 2.0% 2.8% -1.3% -3.4% -8.9% -1.7% -1.4% -7.0% 0.8% -7.5% 1.1% -2.7% 1.8% -1.4% 4.2% -3.5% -3.7% 2011 5.7% -8.0% 2.4% 2.3% 2.9% 1.5% 0.5% 1.1% 4.2% 7.8% 3.0% -1.3% 3.5% 6.3% 2.9% 3.5% 5.3% -0.9% 1.3% Annual Percent Change in Employment Forecast 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 5.1% 3.1% 1.8% 1.7% 0.6% 18.9% 35.3% 15.5% 6.7% -1.8% 3.4% 3.2% 1.1% 0.5% -0.1% 3.2% 3.5% 1.0% 0.3% -0.3% 4.1% 2.1% 1.5% 1.4% 0.8% 4.9% 4.7% 4.7% 4.3% 3.7% 4.8% 6.3% 5.3% 5.3% 4.6% 3.7% 4.0% 4.6% 4.0% 3.4% 9.0% 4.9% 4.4% 3.9% 3.6% 3.2% 0.5% 0.1% 1.1% 1.0% 4.2% 5.3% 5.9% 4.8% 4.0% 6.6% 10.9% 8.3% 6.6% 5.3% 4.8% 4.6% 4.4% 4.0% 3.8% 6.6% 6.8% 6.7% 5.2% 5.1% 4.4% 4.1% 3.9% 3.8% 3.6% 4.7% 4.5% 3.7% 3.3% 3.1% 5.6% 3.9% 3.7% 3.5% 3.3% 2.3% 3.4% 3.1% 2.9% 2.5% 5.2% 6.6% 5.3% 4.2% 3.2% 2017 -1.8% -0.9% 0.2% 0.0% 1.1% 3.3% 4.0% 3.0% 3.4% 1.6% 3.4% 3.8% 3.8% 5.1% 3.5% 3.0% 3.3% 2.5% 2.9% 2018 -3.0% -1.2% 0.4% 0.3% 1.0% 3.3% 3.8% 3.0% 3.3% 0.6% 3.4% 3.7% 3.6% 4.5% 3.4% 3.1% 3.2% 2.6% 2.8% 2019 -3.6% 1.2% -0.1% -0.3% 0.5% 3.4% 4.1% 3.3% 3.1% 0.4% 3.5% 3.7% 3.6% 4.6% 3.4% 3.2% 3.2% 2.7% 3.0% 2010-2019 Change 9.5% 77.6% 11.6% 10.4% 16.5% 39.2% 46.0% 34.3% 47.4% 17.1% 44.5% 58.6% 42.5% 64.0% 38.4% 37.1% 41.0% 23.4% 40.1% Sources: University of Arizona Forecasting Project Q1 2010 May 18, 2011 Overall, manufacturing employment in Greater Phoenix is expected to decrease from 6.4 percent of all jobs to 5.7 percent by 2018. A similar decline in manufacturing is expected for the U.S. as well. Total goods producing employment is expected to fall slightly in Greater Phoenix and increase slightly in the U.S. However, virtually all of that growth is expected to be in the construction industry. The shift to more service-providing employment in Greater Phoenix is expected to mirror that of the U.S. Trade, transportation and utilities, leisure and hospitality, and government are expected to fall slightly as a percentage of total employment while all other categories will increase. In general, both the Greater Phoenix and U.S. economies are forecasted to become more service-oriented with most growth occurring in financial activities, professional and business services, and educational and health services. Greater Phoenix’s economy will essentially mirror that of the U.S., although the manufacturing sector, one of the most important sources of wealth of the region, will decline over time. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Market Analysis Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT only available long term forecast from the Bureau of Labor Statistics). The last column of the chart represents the ratio of the percentages of the two columns to the right. A value over 1.0 indicates the Greater Phoenix economy is more heavily represented in that industry than the U.S.; a value under 1.0 indicates underrepresentation in the industry. Table 6-9: Comp. of Greater Phoenix & U.S. Employment Current Employment vs. 2018 Forecast Comparison of Greater Phoenix and U.S. Employment Current Employment Vs. 2018 Forecast Percent Distribution 2009 2018 Forecast Greater Phoenix 100.0% 85.7% U.S. 100.0% 82.2% Ratio Greater Phx to U.S. 1.00 1.04 Goods Producing Industries Natural Resources and Mining Construction Manufacturing Durable Goods Non-Durable Goods Total Goods Producing 0.2% 4.9% 6.4% 5.0% 1.4% 11.5% 0.5% 4.1% 8.9% 5.5% 3.4% 13.5% 0.32 1.21 0.72 0.92 0.41 0.85 0.1% 5.6% 5.7% 4.5% 1.1% 11.4% 0.4% 5.6% 8.0% n/a n/a 14.0% 0.34 1.00 0.71 n/a n/a 0.81 Service-Providing Industries Trade, Transportation, and Utilities Utilities Wholesale Trade Retail Trade Transportation and Warehousing Information Financial Activities Professional and Business Services Educational and Health Services Educational Services Health Care and Social Assistance Leisure and Hospitality Other Services Government Federal Government State and Local Government Total Service-Providing 21.0% 0.5% 5.1% 12.3% 3.1% 1.6% 8.0% 15.9% 13.5% 2.4% 11.1% 10.3% 3.9% 14.3% 1.3% 12.9% 88.5% 18.9% 0.4% 4.3% 11.0% 3.2% 2.1% 5.9% 12.7% 15.2% 2.5% 12.6% 9.8% 4.1% 17.8% 2.2% 15.5% 86.2% 1.11 1.17 1.19 1.12 0.97 0.76 1.36 1.25 0.89 0.94 0.88 1.05 0.96 0.80 0.60 0.83 1.03 20.5% 0.4% 4.8% 11.8% 3.4% 1.5% 8.7% 17.4% 13.8% 2.5% 11.3% 10.2% 4.4% 12.2% 1.1% 11.1% 88.6% 18.2% 0.3% 4.1% 10.5% 3.2% 2.0% 5.7% 14.4% 15.5% 2.5% 13.0% 9.6% 4.7% 15.9% 1.9% 14.0% 86.0% 1.13 1.34 1.18 1.12 1.06 0.72 1.52 1.21 0.89 1.00 0.87 1.06 0.94 0.77 0.57 0.80 1.03 Industry Total Nonfarm Employment Total Private Employment Greater Phoenix 100.0% 87.8% U.S. 100.0% 84.1% Ratio Greater Phx to U.S. 1.00 1.04 Sources: University of Arizona Forecasting Project Q1 2010, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics The shift to more service-providing employment in Greater Phoenix is expected to mirror that of the U.S. Trade, 6.1.5 Drivers Employment Growth transportation and of utilities, leisure and hospitality, and government are expected to fall slightly as a percentage of total employment while all other categories will increase. In general, both the Greatergrowth Phoenixtoand The driving forces that will bring substantial employment and personal income the U.S. economies are forecasted to become more service-oriented with most growth occurring in financial activities, region in the future are focused around several industries that have a strong presence in the professional and business services, and educational and health Greater Phoenix’s Greater Phoenix area or that are emerging as industries thatservices. are a strong match to the economy Greater will essentiallyenvironment mirror that ofand theitsU.S., although The the manufacturing sector, one of Council the mostand important sources of Phoenix workforce. Greater Phoenix Economic the Arizona Department of Commerce have identified wealth of the region, will decline over time. a number of “target” industries that are currently present in the region and could be expanded or whose workforce requirements are well-suited to Greater Phoenix’s assets. Those industries include: • Construction: The University of Arizona forecasts that construction will grow by nearly 56,000 jobs through 2019. May 18, 2011 • Advanced Business and Financial Services: This category includes investment banking, data and call centers, credit, mortgage processing and sales and similar businesses. Greater Phoenix’s lack of natural disasters, a growing workforce, steady climate, telecommunications infrastructure, and ease of access to other markets across the country make it an ideal location for companies in this industry. • Aerospace: One of Greater Phoenix’s strengths is its aerospace industry, founded in many Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Market Analysis NortheastOverall, Area manufacturing Development Plan -inTechnical Report employment Greater Phoenix is expected to decrease from 6.4% of all jobs to 5.7% by 2018. A similar decline in manufacturing is expected for the U.S. as well. Total goods producing employment is expected to fall slightly in Greater Phoenix and increase slightly in the U.S. However, virtually all of that growth is expected to be in the construction industry. 6-11 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report • Bioscience: This is an emerging industry in Greater Phoenix that is primarily involved in medical research and medical devices. Medical research companies include The Mayo Clinic and Hospital (5,080 employees), Barrow Neurological Institute (140 employees) and the Translational Genomics Research Institute (TGen) (275 employees). Medical device companies include W.L. Gore & Associates, Bard Peripheral Vascular and Metronics. • Healthcare: Rapid population growth creates demand for healthcare services. The Greater Phoenix area has more than 80 licensed hospitals and 8,000 beds. The healthcare industry is forecasted to grow by 38 percent by 2019 and 73,000 jobs. • High Tech: This category generally encompasses the computer and electronic products industry. Companies currently located in the region include Intel (10,000 employees), Microchip (1,500 employees), Freescale Semiconductor (1,450 employees), Texas Instruments (1,000 employees) and STMicroelectronics (900 employees). This industry is expected to have modest, but positive growth through 2019. • Solar: The solar industry is an emerging but natural fit for Greater Phoenix. Some of the larger companies that have located in the region include First Solar, Kyocera Solar and Stirling Energy Systems. The industry is building upon Greater Phoenix’s concentration of semiconductor workforce. • Tourism: The tourism industry is expected to continue to be a major component of the economy. The above industries represent the primary drivers of employment growth in Greater Phoenix for the foreseeable future. In the emerging industries of bioscience and solar, there is significant competition and, even if there is substantial growth in these industries, they will likely provide only limited economic benefits. However, Greater Phoenix’s existing base of assets in construction, aerospace, advanced business systems, healthcare, high tech and tourism should assure a healthy and diverse economy for the future. 6.1.6 Summary During this recession period, Greater Phoenix has been hit by a perfect storm of events, causing a harsh downturn that is worse than in many other parts of the country. The severe national recession coupled with a collapse in the local residential and commercial real estate markets has caused exceptional declines in employment and real estate values. Based on current conditions and trends in the economy, there is still much uncertainty in the housing market, although all indicators point to recovery beginning in 2011. The fundamentals which have allowed Greater Phoenix to thrive and outpace the nation over the past several decades remain in place. Over the long term, Greater Phoenix will return to relative normality, creating jobs and growing at a rate well above that of the nation as a whole. There has been no change in the region’s aesthetic attractiveness and no change in important tax laws. The recent declines in housing prices have again made the metro area one of the most affordable in the West. It is difficult to predict with any certainty the timing of the recovery in the local economy. However, the underlying fundamentals in the Greater Phoenix economy suggest that the recovery and subsequent expansion of the economy should follow historical patterns and outpace the rest of the country as it has consistently for more than fifty years. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 6-12 Market Analysis respects due to the near-perfect flying weather and its long history with military air bases. The region is ranked as the tenth largest aerospace and defense market in the U.S. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The commercial real estate market in Greater Phoenix, comprised of the retail, office, and industrial sectors, has been seriously affected by the current recession and housing market collapse. The impact on the market has come from (1) the loss of consumer confidence and a corresponding decline in retail spending and (2) the loss of jobs in virtually all sectors of the economy which has led to rising vacancy rates in office and industrial properties. Compounding the situation is a looming financing crisis that will likely affect the commercial real estate markets over the next several years. Record growth in the mortgage market during the last decade has created unprecedented volumes of maturing commercial mortgages. According to Foresight Analytics, from 2010 to 2015, the commercial real estate market will have upwards of $200 billion in maturing debt each year just as values are starting to decline dramatically. As a result, property owners will need to inject equity into their properties or possibly face foreclosure. The combination of slow economic growth and falling property values will place stress on the commercial markets over the next five years. ortheast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use RAFT Market Analysis 6-13 6.2 Greater Phoenix Commercial Real Estate Market 4 The Table 6-10: U.S. Commercial Mortgage Maturities 1980-2020 U.S. Commercial Mortgage Maturities* 1980 - 2020 Source: Foresight Analytics * Retail, Office, Industrial Properties $250.0 $225.9$226.5 $218.9 $197.2 $200.0 $199.4 $198.0 $183.7 $177.3 $177.9 $166.4 $150.0 $ Billions $134.0 $118.3 $101.9 $100.0 $88.1 $79.6 $79.4 $78.5 $73.1 $67.1 $65.3 $60.0 $58.3 $50.0 $87.1 $76.7 $62.7 $53.6 $48.4 $46.7 $44.6 $43.7 $48.3 $39.2 $34.2 $30.0 $26.6 $23.9 $21.2 $18.9 $17.6 $44.8 $34.2 20 20 20 18 20 16 20 14 20 12 20 10 20 08 20 06 20 04 20 02 20 00 19 98 19 96 19 94 19 92 19 90 19 88 19 86 19 84 19 82 19 80 $0.0 following sections provide of an the overview the Metro Phoenix commercial realmarkets. estate markets. he following sections provide an overview MetroofPhoenix commercial real estate 6.2.1 Retail Market Overview At the end of 2009, the retail sector of the real estate market was comprised of approximately 149.2 million Gateway Airport square feet of building space according to Kammrath and Associates. Phoenix-Mesa Retail centers have experienced significant growth since 1990, increasing by 154% from a base of 58.7 million square feet. At the same time, Maricopa County’s population has increased by approximately 95% or 2.1 million people since 1990. Over that Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 6-14 At the end of 2009, the retail sector of the real estate market was comprised of approximately 149.2 million square feet of building space according to Kammrath and Associates. Retail centers have experienced significant growth since 1990, increasing by 154 percent from a base of 58.7 million square feet. At the same time, Maricopa County’s population has increased by approximately 95 percent or 2.1 million people since 1990. Over that time frame, the per capita inventory of retail space increased from 26.1 square feet per person in 1990 to 34.1 square feet per person in 2009. Since 1990, the retail inventory has grown at a compounded rate of 5.0 percent annually, well in excess of the annual population growth rate of 3.6 percent. Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT Market Analysis 6.2.1 Retail Market Overview 5 Table 6-11: Total Retail Inventory Per Person Metro Phoenix Total Retail Inventory Per Person Metro Phoenix Source:Kammrath & Associates 36.0 34.0 Square Feet Per Person 32.0 30.0 28.0 26.0 24.0 22.0 19 86 19 87 19 88 19 89 19 90 19 91 19 92 19 93 19 94 19 95 19 96 19 97 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 02 20 03 20 04 20 05 20 06 20 07 20 08 20 09 20.0 Vacancy rates in in the theretail retail sector sectorhave haveincreased increasedover overthe thepast past year a result of current the current recession. Vacancy rates year as aasresult of the recession. Numerousretailers retailershave haveclosed closedtheir their doors, declared bankruptcy or announced selective Numerous doors, declared bankruptcy or announced selective store store closings. closings. to According to CB Ellis,rate the for vacancy for Greater Phoenix at 7.5 percent According CB Richard Ellis,Richard the vacancy Greaterrate Phoenix stood at 7.5% atstood the end of 2008. At the at the ofthe 2008. At therate endhad of 2009, the vacancy hadlevel increased to 11.4 percent. levelquarter has of end of end 2009, vacancy increased to 11.4%.rate That has risen slightly throughThat the first risen to slightly quarter of parts 2010 of toGreater 11.9 percent throughout the region. Some parts 2010 11.9% through throughoutthe thefirst region. Some Phoenix were experiencing vacancy rates as high of Greater Phoenix were experiencing vacancy rates as high as 14.5 percent. There are currently as 14.5%. There are currently 639,100 square feet of retail space still under construction. 639,100 square feet of retail space still under construction. Historic Vacancy Rate for Retail Properties Greater Phoenix 1993 - 2010 Q1 Source: CB Richard Ellis 14.0% 12.0% 10.0% 11.4% 11.1% 9.8% 8.7% 8.0% 7.9% Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 7.5% 7.3% 6.6% 6.3% 6.0% 11.9% 5.5% 7.5% 7.4% 6.1% 6.1% Vacancy rates in the retail sector have increased over the past year as a result of the current recession. Numerous retailers have closed their doors, declared bankruptcy or announced selective store closings. According to CB Richard Ellis, the vacancy rate for Greater Phoenix stood at 7.5% at the end of 2008. At the Northeastend Area Development Plan Technical Report of 2009, the vacancy rate had -increased to 11.4%. That level has risen slightly through the first quarter of 2010 to 11.9% throughout the region. Some parts of Greater Phoenix were experiencing vacancy rates as high as 14.5%. There are currently 639,100 square feet of retail space still under construction. 6-15 Market Analysis Table 6-12: Historic Vacancy Rate for Retail Properties Greater Phoenix 1993-2010 Q1 Historic Vacancy Rate for Retail Properties Greater Phoenix 1993 - 2010 Q1 Source: CB Richard Ellis 14.0% 12.0% 11.4% 11.1% 11.9% 9.8% 10.0% 8.7% 7.9% 8.0% 7.5% 7.3% 6.0% 5.5% 7.5% 7.4% 6.6% 6.3% 6.1% 6.1% 5.3% 5.3% 5.1% 2005 2006 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2007 2008 2009 2010 Q1 Retail centers are generally classified into four categories. May 18, 2011 • Strip/specialty centers are smaller retail centers that do not have an anchor store. • Neighborhood centers are anchored by a grocer and possibly a drug store, and provide for the daily shopping needs of the population. Neighborhood centers contain about 40 percent of all the retail square footage in the metro area, although community/power centers have increased in importance over the last eight years. • Community centers are anchored by at least one large discount store along with associated smaller shop space. Power centers, comprised of several discount anchor stores, are included in this category. • Regional malls contain two or more full line department stores typically with an enclosed shopping concourse. The Maricopa County retail market is divided by type in the following table as of year-end 2009. Neighborhood centers contain most of the square footage followed by community centers. The square feet per capita for regional malls has declined in recent years as older centers have been repositioned in the marketplace. For instance, Chris-Town Mall, now known as the Spectrum Mall, was converted from a conventional mall to a discount power center with tenants such as Wal-Mart and Costco. Paradise Valley Mall is currently undergoing a similar transition. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport ƒ Regional malls contain two or more full line department stores typically with an enclosed shopping concourse. The Maricopa County retail market is divided by type in the following table as of year-end 2009. Neighborhood centers contain most of the square footage followed by community centers. The square feet per capita for Northeastregional Area malls Development has declined inPlan recent- Technical years as olderReport centers have been repositioned in the marketplace. For instance, Chris-Town Mall, now known as the Spectrum Mall, was converted from a conventional mall to a discount power center with tenants such as Wal-Mart and Costco. Paradise Valley Mall is currently undergoing 6-16 a similar transition. Market Analysis Table 6-13: Components of Retail Sub-Market Greater Phoenix 2009 Components of Retail Sub-Market Greater Phoenix 2009 Percent of Total SF 11.2% 38.2% 39.1% 11.5% 100.0% Total SF 16,738,312 56,943,785 58,298,472 17,214,276 149,194,845 Type of center Regional Community Neighborhood Strip/Specialty Totals Total SF Per Capita 3.8 13.0 13.3 3.9 34.1 Source: Kammrath & Associates The average square feet of retail space per person currently stands at 34.1. However, wide differences in the The average feetbetween of retaildifferent space parts per person currently stands at end, 34.1.theHowever, wide amount of retail square space exist of the metro area. At the high northeast part of the differences in the amount of retail space exist between different parts of the metro area. At thefeet Valley has near 52 square feet per person while the Central part of the region only has about 30.7 square high end, the northeast part exist of thebecause Valley has near 52 square person while the Central part per person. These differences of the income levels feet of theper residents, the density of development, of the region only has about 30.7 square feet per person. These differences exist because of the and the out-of-town tourist trade, much of which is currently captured by Scottsdale and Phoenix. The Northeast income levels of the residents, the density of development, and the out-of-town tourist trade, much region, encompassing Northeast Phoenix, Fountain Hills and Scottsdale, has 52% more retail space per capita of which is currently by Scottsdale and encompasses Phoenix. Themost Northeast region, encompassing than the metro average.captured The Central Region, which of the City of Phoenix, is the only Northeast Phoenix, Fountain Hills and Scottsdale, has 52 percent more retail space per capitatothan heavily populated region that lags the Greater Phoenix average. The Southeast Valley could continue improve the metro average. The Central Region, which encompasses most of the City of Phoenix, is the or expand its per capita retail inventory over time. Household incomes in parts of the Southeast Valley are well only heavily populated region that lags the Greater Phoenix average. The Southeast Valley could above the County average which will attract more retail uses. However, significant increases in the retail continue to improve or expand its per capita retail inventory over time. Household incomes in parts of the Southeast Valley are well above the County average which will attract more retail uses. However, significant increases in the retail inventory will likely require an intensification of Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Landin Use residential development to offset the low density found Southeast Valley suburbs. DRAFT 7 May 18, 2011 Price per square foot data is also displayed below. The effects of the current recession are evident inventory willboth likelyvolume requireofantransactions intensification residentialsales development in terms of andofdepressed prices. to offset the low density found in Southeast Valley suburbs. Table 6-14: Components of Retail Sub-Market Greater Phoenix 2009 Retail Square Feet per Capita by Region Greater Phoenix 2009 Region Central Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Totals Regional 3.99 6.90 3.95 5.45 3.82 Community 10.26 18.90 16.74 17.38 20.78 13.00 Neighborhood 13.16 20.70 16.77 16.58 10.01 13.31 Specialty 3.33 5.33 3.71 6.24 4.43 3.93 Total 30.74 51.82 41.18 45.65 35.22 34.07 Source: Kammrath & Associates Price per square foot data is also displayed below. The effects of the current recession are evident in terms of both volume of transactions and depressed sales prices. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Number of Transactions and Average Price Per Square Foot for Shopping Centers Northeast Northwest Southeast Southwest Totals 6.90 3.95 5.45 3.82 18.90 16.74 17.38 20.78 13.00 20.70 16.77 16.58 10.01 13.31 5.33 3.71 6.24 4.43 3.93 51.82 41.18 45.65 35.22 34.07 Source:Development Kammrath & Associates Northeast Area Plan - Technical Report Price per square foot data is also displayed below. The effects of the current recession are evident in terms of both volume of transactions and depressed sales prices. 6-17 Market Analysis Table 6-15: No. of Transactions and Avg. Price Per SF for Shopping Centers Maricopa County Number of Transactions and Average Price Per Square Foot for Shopping Centers Maricopa County Source: Kammrath & Associates $200 250 $180 $160 Price/ SF $140 $120 $80 $40 $29 $113 150 $102 $96 $96 $100 $60 200 $147 $144 $140 $137 $71 $57 $50 $58 $61 $67 $78 $80 $71 $59 $51 $60 $56 $83 100 $65 $54 $33 $33 No. of Transactions $180 50 $20 0 19 8 19 2 83 19 8 19 4 8 19 5 86 19 8 19 7 8 19 8 89 19 9 19 0 91 19 9 19 2 9 19 3 94 19 9 19 5 96 19 9 19 7 9 19 8 99 20 0 20 0 01 20 0 20 2 0 20 3 0 20 4 05 20 0 20 6 0 20 7 0 20 8 09 $0 Price/ SF No. of Transactions Greater Phoenix Retail Market Summary Greater Retail Market Summary The retail Phoenix market is under severe stress at the current time. The spending of consumers during the housing boomretail caused manyisretailers to expand theiratoperations, newThe markets and over-build relative to normal The market under severe stress the currententer time. spending of consumers during the housing boom caused many retailers to expand operations, enter new markets and over- have demand. In Greater Phoenix, a number of retailers havetheir left the market and numerous shopping centers build relative for to normal In Greater Phoenix, of retailers have left inthe been delayed the time demand. being. Large expanses of emptya number retail space are now available allmarket parts of the and numerous shoppingflows centers the timerises, being. expanses of empty region. When population beginhave againbeen and delayed consumerfor confidence theLarge retail market in Greater Phoenix retail space are now available in all parts of the region. When population flows begin again and will recover. consumer confidence rises, the retail market in Greater Phoenix will recover. Currently, approximately 17.7 million square feet of retail space is vacant in Greater Phoenix. A reasonable market vacancy rate for retail space is 7.0 percent or based on today’s inventory, approximately 10.4 million square feet. Therefore, 7.3 million square feet of vacant space must be absorbed before the market returns to equilibrium. May 18, 2011However, another 600,000 square feet of space was under construction at the end of the first quarter of 2010. Together, approximately 7.9 million square feet must be absorbed in the market. Based on observation of the Greater Phoenix retail market, it is our opinion that the region has too much retail relative to the population. Much of this excess retail space was built since 2000 as a result of the housing boom. Greater Phoenix is known as a growth market among retailers and most national chains want to be in the market to capitalize on that growth. However, as a result of the current recession and housing downturn, numerous retail chains have left the region over the last few years. In our opinion, a stabilized ratio of retail space per capita in Greater Phoenix is 30 square feet. Based on current forecasts of population growth from the University of Arizona Forecasting Project of 130,000 to 140,000 persons per year starting in 2012, demand for retail space would be approximately four million square feet per year. Therefore, the current excess supply of retail Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 6-18 Market Analysis space could be absorbed in two years under normal economic conditions. However, given the current uncertainty in the market and slow population growth forecasted for the next two years, the scaled-back expansion plans of retail chains, the lack of available credit to build shopping centers, and the time required by retailers to gear up for expansion, this firm estimates recovery of the retail sector is likely four to five years into the future. 6.2.2 Office Market Overview Throughout Maricopa County, the office market is comprised of approximately 133.0 million square feet of space. Office buildings are categorized into two types of uses: administrative and medical. Administrative buildings total approximately 116.3 million square feet of space while medical office buildings total 16.7 million square feet. As shown on the table below, 80 percent of all office space is found within three cities: Phoenix, Scottsdale, and Tempe. Approximately 96.4 percent of all space is found in the eight cities shown on the following table. Administrative office buildings are concentrated in central locations such as Downtown Phoenix, the Central Avenue corridor (in Phoenix), Camelback Road (in Phoenix), the 44th St./Gateway area (in Phoenix), and several locations Scottsdale. Northeast in Area Development Plan –inTechnical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT Table 6-16: Office Space by Major City 2009 9 Office Space By Major City 2009 Medical City Chandler % of City Total Gilbert % of City Total Glendale % of City Total Mesa % of City Total Peoria % of City Total Phoenix % of City Total Scottsdale % of City Total Tempe % of City Total Maricopa County Total % of County Total Administrative Square Feet 636,497 12.4% 1,096,553 33.6% 1,067,582 28.5% Market Share 3.8% 2,258,067 26.5% 455,855 38.3% 6,193,076 8.7% 2,717,911 11.8% 599,024 4.9% 16,744,082 12.6% Total Square Feet 4,486,068 87.6% 2,162,612 66.4% 2,677,072 71.5% Market Share 3.9% Square Feet 5,122,565 Market Share 3.9% 1.9% 3,259,165 2.5% 2.3% 3,744,654 2.8% 13.5% 6,271,651 73.5% 5.4% 8,529,718 6.4% 2.7% 735,823 61.7% 64,858,472 91.3% 20,231,599 88.2% 11,640,311 95.1% 116,158,948 87.4% 0.6% 1,191,678 0.9% 55.8% 71,051,548 53.5% 17.4% 22,949,510 17.3% 10.0% 12,239,335 9.2% 6.5% 6.4% 37.0% 16.2% 3.6% 132,903,030 Sources: Kammrath & Associates, Elliott D. Pollack & Co. While administrative office buildings are highly concentrated by location, medical office buildings are more dispersed (see table below). Since medical services need to be near patients, medical office space is related to While office buildings highly concentrated location, the sizeadministrative of the population. For instance,are across Maricopa County,by there are 4.2medical square office feet ofbuildings medical office are more dispersed (see table below). Since medical services need to be near patients, medicalis the space for every person. The inventory of office space for most cities hovers around that figure. Scottsdale office space is related to the size of the population. For instance, across Maricopa County, there only community with a high level of medical office space on a per capita basis. are 4.2 square feet of medical office space for every person. The inventory of office space for most cities hovers around that figure. Scottsdale is the only community with a high level of medical office space on a per capita basis. Office Building Square Feet Per Capita 2009 City Chandler Gilbert Glendale Administrative Office 18.4 10.1 10.8 Medical Office 2.6 5.1 4.3 Phoenix-Mesa Total Gateway Airport 21.0 15.2 15.1 12.6% % of County Total 87.4% Sources: Kammrath & Associates, Elliott D. Pollack & Co. Market Analysis While administrative office buildings are highly concentrated by location, medical office buildings are more dispersed table below). Since medical services need to be near patients, medical office space is related to Northeast Area(see Development Plan - Technical Report the size of the population. For instance, across Maricopa County, there are 4.2 square feet of medical office space for every person. The inventory of office space for most cities hovers around that figure. Scottsdale is the only community with a high level of medical office space on a per capita basis. 6-19 Table 6-17: Office Building Square Feet Per Capita 2009 Office Building Square Feet Per Capita 2009 City Chandler Gilbert Glendale Mesa Peoria Phoenix Scottsdale Tempe Maricopa County Administrative Office 18.4 10.1 10.8 13.6 4.7 41.5 83.5 67.4 29.1 Medical Office 2.6 5.1 4.3 4.9 2.9 4.0 11.2 3.5 4.2 Total 21.0 15.2 15.1 18.6 7.7 45.5 94.7 70.9 33.3 Source: AZ Dept. of Commerce, Kammrath Associates; Elliott D. Pollack & Co. The number of sales and price per square foot paid for office buildings has fallen dramatically with the recent The number of sales and per square foot paidpaid for just office buildings has fallen dramatically with Current areprice nearly 50% of the prices one Northeast Arearecession. Development Plan –prices Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Useyear ago and the number of transactions the recent recession. Current prices are nearly 50 percent of the prices paid just one year ago and DRAFT has dwindled to just a few. 10 Table 6-18: Transactions and Price Per SF for Office Buildings Maricopa County Transactions and Price Per SF for Office Buildings Maricopa County Source: Kammrath & Associates May 18, 2011 400 $197 $200 350 $206 300 $174 $157 250 Price/SF $150 $104 $100 $97 $98 $100 $91 $85 $115 $111 $110 200 $115 $102 150 $69 $65 $71 $57 $55 $50 $100 $97 $109 No. of Sales $250 100 $34 $37 50 0 19 85 19 86 19 87 19 88 19 89 19 90 19 91 19 92 19 93 19 94 19 95 19 96 19 97 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 02 20 03 20 04 20 05 20 06 20 07 20 08 20 09 $0 Price/SF No. of Building Sales Since 1980, an average of 3.33 million square feet of administrative office space has been constructed annually in Greater Phoenix. Due to the change in tax laws in the late 1980s, very little inventory was constructed between 1991 and 1997. In 1997, construction started again in earnest,Phoenix-Mesa reaching overGateway 6 millionAirport square feet in 2000. However, shortly thereafter, vacancy rates rose to more than 18%, reducing demand and development activity. From 1997 to 2007, an average of 4.4 million square feet has been constructed annually. $97 $98 $100 $91 $85 $69 $65 $57 $55 $50 $111 $110 $109 $100 $97 $102 No. Pr $104 $100 150 $71 100 $34 $37 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 50 0 19 85 19 86 19 87 19 88 19 89 19 90 19 91 19 92 19 93 19 94 19 95 19 96 19 97 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 02 20 03 20 04 20 05 20 06 20 07 20 08 20 09 $0 Market Analysis 6-20 Price/SFto just a few. No. of Building Sales the number of transactions has dwindled Since 1980, an average of 3.33 million square feet of administrative office space has been constructed annually in Greater Phoenix. Due to the change in tax laws in the late 1980s, very little inventory Sinceconstructed 1980, an average of 3.33 squareIn feet of administrative space has in been constructed annually was between 1991million and 1997. 1997, constructionoffice started again earnest, reaching in Greater Phoenix. change in tax shortly laws in thereafter, the late 1980s, veryrates little rose inventory wasthan constructed over 6 million squareDue feettointhe 2000. However, vacancy to more 18 between reducing 1991 and demand 1997. In and 1997,development construction started again in earnest, reaching over 6 million feet in percent, activity. From 1997 to 2007, an average of 4.4square million 2000. However, shortly thereafter, annually. vacancy rates rose to more than 18%, reducing demand and development square feet has been constructed activity. From 1997 to 2007, an average of 4.4 million square feet has been constructed annually. Table 6-19: Construction of Administrative Office Space Greater Phoenix 1980-2008 Construction of Administrative Office Space Greater Phoenix 1980 - 2008 Source: Kammrath & Associates, Elliott D. Pollack & Co. 8.00 7.66 Square Feet (in millions) 7.00 6.52 6.00 5.33 4.79 5.00 5.15 4.90 4.74 4.24 4.00 3.80 3.00 4.93 4.16 Annual Average 3.33 3.23 3.02 5.14 4.78 3.63 3.27 3.12 2.80 2.60 2.59 2.15 2.00 1.24 1.19 0.77 1.00 0.210.140.33 0.24 08 20 06 07 20 05 20 04 20 03 20 02 20 01 20 20 99 00 20 19 97 98 19 96 19 95 19 19 93 94 19 92 19 91 19 90 19 89 19 88 19 19 86 87 19 19 84 85 19 83 19 19 81 82 19 19 19 80 0.00 Speculative Office Market 2011 The speculative office market is comprisedMay of18, buildings that are constructed with the purpose of leasing to tenants. Most of the major commercial brokerage companies focus on this section of the market, which at the end of March 2010 comprised 75.8 million square feet of building space according to CB Richard Ellis. This represents approximately 65.2 percent of the 116.3 million square foot administrative office market in Metro Phoenix. CB Richard Ellis tracks all office buildings in its survey that are larger than 20,000 square feet. The speculative office market over the years has been extremely cyclical with periods of exceptionally high vacancy rates followed by periods of virtually no construction activity. In the late 1980’s and early 1990’s, the office market reached historic high vacancy rates due to overbuilding that occurred. This was a result of tax laws that were enacted during the Reagan Administration but were then rescinded in 1986. In the early 1990s virtually no construction activity occurred until vacancy rates reached 9.5 percent in 1996. Construction activity continued until 2003 when vacancy rates, once again, reached the 18 percent level. Speculative office space grew vigorously throughout the real estate boom while vacancy rates remained low, until early 2008. Since then, vacancy rates have once again reached extremely high levels due to overbuilding and depressed demand for office Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport At of of thethe firstfirst quarter of 2010, rates forrates speculative office space stoodspace at 25.6% across Greater Atthe theend end quarter of vacancy 2010, vacancy for speculative office stood at 25.6 percent while across1,429,553 Greater Phoenix while 1,429,553 squareduring feet of space wasThe added during period. Phoenix square feet of space was added that period. recent smallthat increases in the The recent small increases in the inventory of office space in Metro Phoenix have also been partly inventory of office space in Metro Phoenix have also been partly due to condominium conversions over the past due years to condominium conversions over thesupply. past fewBetween years that have the available supply. few that have reduced the available 2002 andreduced 2006, 6.6 million square feet of Between 2002 and 2006, 6.6 million square feet of speculative office space was created. However, the 3.5 speculative office space was created. However, the inventory of speculative office only increased by about inventory of speculative only increased about 3.5 million over thatoffice timeframe million square feet over office that timeframe due tobythe conversion of square existingfeet speculative space to condominiums. Table 6-20: Speculative Office Market Maricopa County Speculative Office Market Maricopa County Total Sq Ft 52,456,482 57,480,257 59,785,848 60,092,425 61,732,827 61,740,814 64,061,166 68,966,490 72,369,136 74,167,551 75,831,104 Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Q1 Percentage Vacant 9.9% 16.0% 18.8% 18.4% 16.4% 12.6% 11.1% 13.9% 19.1% 24.5% 25.6% Vacant Sq Ft 5,175,821 9,205,697 11,253,248 11,046,424 10,104,966 7,792,933 7,138,025 9,569,149 13,822,505 18,171,050 19,412,763 Under Construction 4,041,586 1,895,294 409,935 1,027,579 821,936 2,947,134 4,079,365 4,566,534 3,084,663 1,429,553 - Completions Net Absorption 2,618,765 3,068,284 4,460,813 1,535,151 2,282,876 707,037 417,500 1,245,156 1,385,444 2,222,880 857,885 3,119,293 2,201,353 3,111,075 3,829,834 1,500,704 3,300,000 (603,112) 1,798,415 (667,329) 1,663,553 456,246 Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use Source: Elliott D. Pollack & Company; CB Richard Ellis DRAFT 12 Table 6-21: Speculative Office Vacancy Rates vs. Change in Inventory Greater Phoenix Spec Office Vacancy Rates vs. Change in Inventory Greater Phoenix Source: Elliott D. Pollack & Co; CB Richard Ellis 6.00 30.0% 25.0% 4.00 20.0% 3.40 2.75May 18, 2011 3.00 2.40 2.56 2.32 2.31 2.14 2.00 15.0% 1.80 1.62 1.66 10.0% 1.00 5.0% 20 20 09 10 Q 1 7 8 20 0 6 20 0 5 20 0 4 20 0 3 20 0 2 Change in Inventory (millions) 20 0 20 0 0 1 20 0 9 20 0 8 19 9 7 19 9 6 19 9 5 19 9 19 9 3 4 19 9 2 19 9 19 9 -1.00 0.01 0.00 1 0.00 0.33 0.13 -0.24 -0.03 -0.07 -0.13 19 9 Millions of Square Feet 4.91 Percent Vacant 5.02 5.00 0.0% Vacancy Rate Greater Phoenix Office Market Summary Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Given the extent of overbuilding in the speculative office sector, correction in the market is not anticipated until 2015. In the first quarter of 2010, 19.4 million square feet were vacant according to CB Richard Ellis. A normalized vacancy rate is difficult to determine because the Greater Phoenix market consistently carries a high Market Analysis The speculative office market over the years has been extremely cyclical with periods of exceptionally high vacancy rates followed by periods of virtually no construction activity. In the late 1980’s and early 1990’s, the office market reached historic high vacancy rates due to overbuilding that occurred. This was a result of tax laws that were enacted during the Reagan Administration but were then rescinded in 1986. In the early 1990s construction activity until vacancy rates reached 9.5% in 1996. Construction activity Northeastvirtually Area no Development Planoccurred - Technical Report continued until 2003 when vacancy rates, once again, reached the 18% level. Speculative office space grew vigorously throughout the real estate boom while vacancy rates remained low, until early 2008. Since then, vacancy rates have once again reached extremely high levels due to overbuilding and depressed demand for 6-21 office throughout Greater Phoenix. It shouldbe benoted noted that that while thethe metro area have hadhad virtually spacespace throughout Greater Phoenix. It should whileparts partsofof metro area have no construction over the pastover five the years, other such as the Camelback Corridor and North Scottsdale virtually no construction past fiveareas years, other areas such as the Camelback Corridor andhave experienced most ofhave the speculative office construction activity. office construction activity. North Scottsdale experienced most of the speculative Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Greater Phoenix Office Market Summary Given the extent of overbuilding in the speculative office sector, correction in the market is not anticipated until 2015. In the first quarter of 2010, 19.4 million square feet were vacant according to CB Richard Ellis. A normalized vacancy rate is difficult to determine because the Greater Phoenix market consistently carries a high rate. However, assuming that an 11 percent rate is “normal”, the market would need to absorb 11 million square feet to reach that level without any additional construction activity. From 1997 (when the market recovered from the recession of early 1990s) to 2007 (prior to the current negative absorption), the market absorbed on average 1.9 million square feet of space. At this rate, recovery of the office market to an 11 percent vacancy rate would require 5.8 years. The loss of additional jobs in 2010 will put further pressure on the market and a slow recovery may delay a quick return to moderate vacancy rates. No additional construction of office buildings are anticipated for four years until employment growth returns in earnest to the region. Mesa-Gilbert Office Market Since the Town of Gilbert is directly adjacent to the Mesa Gateway Study Area, the following table was developed for the Mesa-Gilbert office market. The table shows construction activity in those two cities since 1980 as well as the total inventory of office space available. Since 1980, the Mesa-Gilbert area has accounted for approximately 9.5 percent of office construction activity in Maricopa County or approximately 345,500 square feet of construction per year. Since 1980, 10.4 million square feet of office space has been constructed in the Mesa-Gilbert area compared to 109.3 million square feet in all of Maricopa County. The average annual construction in office space in the County was just over 3.6 million square feet. Since 2000, the Mesa-Gilbert area has averaged over 615,000 square feet of office space construction per year. Therefore, the share of the market found in Mesa and Gilbert has been continually increasing. At the end of 2009, Mesa and Gilbert had an inventory of approximately 11.8 million square feet of office space representing 8.9 percent of the total county inventory. As noted on the table, Mesa-Gilbert’s percentage of the county inventory has been increasing over the years to the point where it now currently stands. However, the combined population of Mesa and Gilbert represent approximately 16.9 percent of the County’s population. Therefore, the area is underrepresented in terms of its proportionate share of the office market based on population. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 6-22 Market Analysis due to the conversion of existing speculative office space to condominiums. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT Table 6-22: Mesa - Gilbert Office Market Activity 13 Mesa - Gilbert Office Market Activity 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total Average Annual Construction Maricopa Mesa-Gilbert County 84050 4245518 57739 1496055 301552 6025720 368813 3127027 359433 5488614 303931 8175633 816029 5276842 373837 4002988 320825 3734338 137679 4428520 13956 2363865 5368 1297965 76532 406026 66072 620055 229636 479156 93035 1025467 76414 494804 104832 4631915 119674 5327507 304535 5392550 774344 6794251 265616 5192665 480364 3616542 292298 3447752 579943 3671972 797131 5576625 969496 4153076 1657182 6027253 333964 2784802 0 10976 10,364,280 109,316,479 345,476 3,643,883 % of Total 2.0% 3.9% 5.0% 11.8% 6.5% 3.7% 15.5% 9.3% 8.6% 3.1% 0.6% 0.4% 18.8% 10.7% 47.9% 9.1% 15.4% 2.3% 2.2% 5.6% 11.4% 5.1% 13.3% 8.5% 15.8% 14.3% 23.3% 27.5% 12.0% 0.0% 9.5% Mesa-Gilbert 1,573,726 1,631,465 1,933,017 2,301,830 2,661,263 2,965,194 3,781,223 4,155,060 4,475,885 4,613,564 4,627,520 4,632,888 4,709,420 4,775,492 5,005,128 5,098,163 5,174,577 5,279,409 5,399,083 5,703,618 6,477,962 6,743,578 7,223,942 7,516,240 8,096,183 8,893,314 9,862,810 11,519,992 11,853,956 11,853,956 Inventory Maricopa County 27,964,612 29,460,667 35,486,387 38,613,414 44,102,028 52,277,661 57,554,503 61,557,491 65,291,829 69,720,349 72,084,214 73,382,179 73,788,205 74,408,260 74,887,416 75,912,883 76,407,687 81,039,602 86,367,109 91,759,659 98,553,910 103,746,575 107,363,117 110,810,869 114,482,841 120,059,466 124,212,542 130,239,795 133,024,597 133,035,573 % of Total 5.6% 5.5% 5.4% 6.0% 6.0% 5.7% 6.6% 6.7% 6.9% 6.6% 6.4% 6.3% 6.4% 6.4% 6.7% 6.7% 6.8% 6.5% 6.3% 6.2% 6.6% 6.5% 6.7% 6.8% 7.1% 7.4% 7.9% 8.8% 8.9% 8.9% Sources: Kammrath & Associates, Elliott D. Pollack & Co. At the end of 2009, Mesa and Gilbert had an inventory of approximately 11.8 million square feet of office space representing 8.9% of theMarket total county inventory. As noted on the table, Mesa-Gilbert’s percentage of the county 6.2.3 Industrial Overview inventory has been increasing over the to the where it now currently stands. However, the combined The industrial sector is the largest years segment ofpoint the commercial real estate market. The firm uses population of Mesa and Gilbert represent approximately 16.9% of the County’s population. Therefore, the area a number of different sources to track the industrial market, but the most detailed information isisunderrepresented in terms of its proportionate share of the office market based on population. provided by Kammrath and Associates which primarily depends upon the County Assessor’s records for their database. The data used in this analysis is primarily derived from the Kammrath 6.2.3 Industrial Market Overview and Associates 2009 fourth quarter database. It includes all buildings larger than 10,000 square feet in size. Due to time delays in placing newly developed property on the Assessor’s tax rolls, the Kammrath Associates database typically behind market construction activity. The industrialand sector is the largest segment of thelags commercial real estate market. The firm uses a number of different sources to track the industrial market, but the most detailed information is provided by Kammrath and Throughout Metro Phoenix, the upon industrial market is comprised million Associates which primarily depends the County Assessor’s recordsofforapproximately their database. 263.3 The data used in square feetisofprimarily space (buildings than 10,000 square feet in fourth size). quarter Industrial buildings are all this analysis derived fromgreater the Kammrath and Associates 2009 database. It includes categorized into four types of uses by Kammrath and Associates: Assembly or Manufacturing, buildings larger than 10,000 square feet in size. Due to time delays in placing newly developed property on the Multi-Tenant (Industrial Park), and Office/Warehouse, andtypically Warehouse/Distribution. As of the activity. latest Assessor’s tax rolls, the Kammrath Associates database lags behind market construction data available through fourth quarter 2009, Assembly or Manufacturing buildings totaled about Throughout Metro Phoenix, the industrial market is comprised of approximately 263.3 million square feet of Gateway space (buildings greater than 10,000 square feet in size). Industrial buildingsPhoenix-Mesa are categorized into fourAirport types of Market Analysis 6-23 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report As shown on the above table, 71.9 percent of all industrial space is found within three cities: Phoenix, Tempe, and Chandler. Phoenix accounts for more than half of the inventory and the City of Tempe about 13 percent. About 87.5 percent of the industrial inventory is found within the seven largest cities in Maricopa County. Phoenix also holds a market share of 41.3 percent of all assembly manufacturing space inLand theUseregion, followed by Chandler, which hosts two large Intel Northeast Area Development Planor – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven 1 DRAFT Table 6-23: Industrial Building Space by City Q4 2009 Industrial Building Space by City Q4 2009 Chandler % of City Total Manufacturing Industrial Park Office Warehouse Warehouse/ Distribution Total Square Feet Market Share Square Feet Market Share Square Feet Market Share Square Feet Market Share Square Feet Market Share 11,990,953 20.4% 1,855,095 4.8% 2,860,337 10.3% 6,017,965 4.3% 22,724,350 8.6% 52.8% 8.2% 12.6% 26.5% Gilbert % of City Total 935,528 15.4% 1.6% 1,452,607 23.9% 3.8% 1,221,661 20.1% 4.4% 2,473,676 40.7% 1.8% 6,083,472 2.3% Glendale % of City Total 1,540,191 16.2% 2.6% 1,102,699 11.6% 2.9% 427,028 4.5% 1.5% 6,464,758 67.8% 4.7% 9,534,676 3.6% Mesa % of City Total 3,452,877 24.5% 5.9% 3,857,124 27.3% 10.1% 1,198,054 8.5% 4.3% 5,607,147 39.7% 4.0% 14,115,202 5.4% Phoenix % of City Total 24,287,649 18.2% 41.3% 15,665,878 11.8% 40.9% 11,036,991 8.3% 39.8% 82,136,884 61.7% 59.3% 133,127,402 50.6% Scottsdale % of City Total 2,293,776 20.5% 3.9% 4,912,673 43.9% 12.8% 3,068,383 27.4% 11.1% 908,216 8.1% 0.7% 11,183,048 4.2% Tempe % of City Total 6,946,819 20.7% 11.8% 7,036,341 21.0% 18.4% 6,920,640 20.7% 25.0% 12,594,711 37.6% 9.1% 33,498,511 12.7% Remainder of County % of Total 7,328,706 22.2% 2,393,664 7.2% 1,003,442 3.0% 22,317,889 67.5% 33,043,701 12.5% 58,776,499 22.3% 38,276,081 14.5% 27,736,536 10.5% 138,521,246 52.6% 263,310,362 Maricopa County Total Percent of Total Source: Kammrath & Associates, Elliott D. Pollack & Co. plants and other assorted high tech companies. The entire industrial inventory of Maricopa County by square feet is shown in the following table by type of building. The City of Phoenix accounts for 50.6 percent of the industrial space in the County. Industrial square footage per capita for the largest cities in the Valley is represented on the following table. The inventory of total industrial space on a per capita basis is highly concentrated within the cities of Phoenix, Chandler, and Tempe. These communities all exceed the County average of 65.4 square feet of industrial space per person. This table reflects July 2009, as these are the newest May 18, 2011 available population estimates. Between 1990 and the 4th Quarter of 2009, the industrial market in Maricopa County increased by over 121 million square feet while absorbing approximately 10,252 acres. These figures do not take into account buildings smaller than 10,000 square feet in size. Smaller industrial buildings typically do not absorb a significant amount of acreage throughout the County. Based on an analysis of County tax records, in recent years, buildings smaller than 10,000 square feet account for only 6 percent of total construction activity (in square feet). On average, the County has experienced construction of almost 6.1 million square feet of space annually. There has only been 500,000 square feet of industrial space added during 2009, the lowest level since 1953. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 6-24 Market Analysis 58.8 million square feet of space (or 22.3 percent of total space) and Multi-Tenant buildings totaled 38.3 million square feet (or 14.5 percent of total). In addition, there were another 27.7 million square feet of Office/Warehouse buildings (10.5% of total) and 138.5 million square feet of Warehouse/ Distribution buildings (52.6 percent of total). Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT 1 Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT 1 entireDevelopment industrial inventory of Maricopa CountyReport by square feet is shown in the following table by type of NortheastThe Area Plan - Technical building. The City of Phoenix accounts for 50.6% of the industrial space in the County. The entire industrial inventory of Maricopa County by square feet is shown in the following table by type of building. The City of Phoenix accounts for 50.6% of the industrial space in the County. Industrial Inventory by Type Maricopa County Industrial Inventory Q4 2009 by Type City Avondale Buckeye CityChandler County Avondale El Mirage Buckeye Fountain Hills Chandler Gilbert County Glendale El Mirage Goodyear Fountain Hills Guadalupe Gilbert Mesa Glendale Peoria Goodyear Phoenix Queen Creek Guadalupe MesaScottsdale Sun City Peoria Surprise Phoenix Tempe Queen Creek Tolleson Scottsdale Total Manufacturing 116,512 474,131 11,990,953 Manufacturing 1,388,407 116,512 345,787 474,131 11,990,953 935,528 1,388,407 1,540,191 345,787 2,547,816 - 935,528 3,432,427 1,540,191 323,339 2,547,816 24,287,649 - 2,293,776 3,432,427 323,339 127,924 24,287,649 6,946,819 2,025,240 2,293,776 58,776,499 Maricopa County Square Feet by Building Type Q4 2009 Industrial Park Office Warehouse 743,318 -Square Feet by Building - Type 1,855,095 2,860,337 Industrial Park Office Warehouse 31,600 30,497 743,318 - -107,145 92,056 1,855,095 2,860,337 1,452,607 1,221,661 31,600 30,497 1,102,699 427,028 309,305 44,293 107,145 92,056 1,452,607 1,221,661 3,857,124 1,198,054 1,102,699 427,028 791,977 531,327 309,305 44,293 15,665,878 11,036,991 13,187 16,010 4,912,673 3,068,383 3,857,124 1,198,054 55,140 791,977 531,327 24,462 15,665,878 11,036,991 7,036,341 6,920,640 13,187 16,010 397,132 4,912,673 3,068,383 38,276,081 27,736,536 Sun City Surprise 127,924 Source: Kammrath & Associates, Elliott D. Pollack & Co. Tempe 6,946,819 7,036,341 Tolleson 2,025,240 397,132 Industrial square footage per capita for38,276,081 the largest Total 58,776,499 55,140 24,462 6,920,640 the Valley is 27,736,536 Warehouse Grand Total 306,966 1,166,796 1,925,541 2,399,672 6,017,965 Warehouse 22,724,350 Grand Total 1,774,415 3,224,919 306,966 1,166,796 516,045 861,832 1,925,541 2,399,672 37,649 236,850 6,017,965 22,724,350 2,473,676 6,083,472 1,774,415 3,224,919 6,464,758 9,534,676 516,045 861,832 2,968,413 5,869,827 37,649 236,850 107,104 107,104 2,473,676 6,083,472 5,607,147 14,094,752 6,464,758 9,534,676 1,979,938 3,626,581 2,968,413 133,127,402 5,869,827 82,136,884 87,455 116,652 107,104 107,104 908,216 11,183,048 5,607,147 14,094,752 10,469 65,609 1,979,938 3,626,581 536,171 688,557 82,136,884 133,127,402 12,594,711 33,498,511 87,455 116,652 12,067,723 14,490,095 908,216 11,183,048 138,521,246 263,310,362 10,469 536,171 12,594,711 12,067,723 represented on the 138,521,246 Market Analysis 6-25 Table 6-24: Industrial Inventory by Type Maricopa County Q4 2009 65,609 688,557 33,498,511 14,490,095 following table. 263,310,362 cities in The inventory of total industrial space on a per capita basis is highly concentrated within the cities of Phoenix, Source: Kammrath & Associates, Elliott D. Pollack & Co. Chandler, and Tempe. These communities all exceed the County average of 65.4 square feet of industrial space per person. This table reflects July 2009, as these are the newest available population estimates. Industrial footage perSquare capita Feet for the cities Table 6-25:square Industrial Buildings Per largest Capita 2009 in the Valley is represented on the following table. The inventory of total industrial space on a per capita basis is highly concentrated within the cities of Phoenix, Industrial Buildings Chandler, and Tempe. These communities all exceed the County average of 65.4 square feet of industrial space per person. This table reflectsSquare July 2009,Feet as these the newest available population estimates. Per are Capita 2009 Industrial BuildingsSF/Capita City Chandler Square Feet Per Capita 92.7 Gilbert 28.0 2009 Glendale 38.3 Mesa 30.6 City SF/Capita Phoenix 84.5 Chandler 92.7 Scottsdale 45.9 Gilbert 28.0 Tempe 191.6 Glendale 38.3 Maricopa County 65.4 Mesa 30.6 Source: Kammrath & Associates, Elliott D. Pollack & Company.84.5 Phoenix Scottsdale 45.9 Between 1990 and the 4thTempe Quarter of 2009, the industrial market in Maricopa 191.6 County increased by over 121 Due tosquare different methods, the following data acres. prepared by CB Richard differs million feetcollection whileMaricopa absorbing approximately 10,252 These figures do Ellis not take intofrom account County 65.4 the data prepared by 10,000 Kammrath andfeet Associates. However, the trend is the same. the a buildings smaller than square in size. Smaller industrial buildings typicallyAlthough do not absorb Greater Phoenix industrial market has rarely experienced vacancy rates higher than 10 percent, the Source: Kammrath & Associates, Elliott D. Pollack & Company. vacancy rates for 2008 and 2009 reached 12.5 percent and 16.1 percent, respectively, levels not seen since the early 1990s. Vacancies inched upward to 16.4 percent in the first quarter of 2010. Between 1990 and the 4th Quarter of 2009, the industrial market in Maricopa County increased by over 121 May 18, 2011 million square feet while absorbing approximately 10,252 acres. These figures do not take into account Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport buildings smaller than 10,000 square feet in size. Smaller industrial buildings typically do not absorb a feet). On average, the County has experienced construction of almost 6.1 million square feet of space annually. There has only been 500,000 square feet of industrial space added during 2009, the lowest level since 1953. Table 6-26: Vacancy Rates for Industrial Buildings Greater Phoenix Vacancy Rates for Industrial Buildings Greater Phoenix Source: CB Richard Ellis 18.00% 16.1% 16.00% 14.00% 16.4% 14.8% 14.0% 13.6% 12.5% 12.00% 10.8% 9.8% 10.00% 8.00% 7.4% 8.1% 7.0% 7.1% 6.6% 10.3% 9.7% 8.5% 6.7% 5.7% 6.00% 8.4% 7.4% 5.6% 4.00% 2.00% 0.00% 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Q1 Transactions in the industrial market have also slowed dramatically and prices have fallen by approximately Transactions in the industrial market have also slowed dramatically and prices have fallen by 20%. High vacancy rates and High limitedvacancy absorption of space will continue to trouble sector the economic approximately 20 percent. rates and limited absorption of the space willuntil continue to recovery is underway. Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use 3 DRAFT Table 6-27: Transactions and Price Per SF for Industrial Buildings Maricopa County Transactions and Price Per SF for Industrial Buildings Maricopa County Source: Kammrath & Associates $100 400 $91 $90 350 $81 $74 Price/SF $60 $55 $50 $43 $37 $40 $30 $20 300 $69 $70 $27 $30 $35 $45 $40 $44 $46 $51 $49 $51 $47 $52 $56 $38 $37 $26 $23 $24 $22 $26 250 200 150 $30 Transactions $80 100 May 18, 2011 50 $10 $0 19 82 19 83 19 84 19 85 19 86 19 87 19 88 19 89 19 90 19 91 19 92 19 93 19 94 19 95 19 96 19 97 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 02 20 03 20 04 20 05 20 06 20 07 20 08 20 09 0 Price/SF Transactions The preferred location for industrial development in Greater Phoenix is near aPhoenix-Mesa freeway. SuchGateway sites are preferred Airport by industrial developers as well as companies that may be expanding in or relocating to Greater Phoenix. The presence of I-10 is a significant asset that has and will continue to attract businesses to the area near Sky Harbor International Airport. 6-26 Market Analysis Due to different collection methods, the following data prepared by CB Richard Ellis differs from the data prepared by Kammrath and Associates. However, the trend is the same. Although the Greater Phoenix Northeastindustrial Area Development Plan - Technical Report market has rarely experienced vacancy rates higher than 10%, the vacancy rates for 2008 and 2009 reached 12.5% and 16.1%, respectively, levels not seen since the early 1990s. Vacancies inched upward to 16.4% in the first quarter of 2010. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The preferred location for industrial development in Greater Phoenix is near a freeway. Such sites are preferred by industrial developers as well as companies that may be expanding in or relocating to Greater Phoenix. The presence of I-10 is a significant asset that has and will continue to attract businesses to the area near Sky Harbor International Airport. The following map shows the location of all industrial buildings in central Maricopa County. Most industrial areas are found along existing freeways or major transportation routes that existed prior to the construction of the freeway system. One of the heaviest concentrations of industrial uses is found south of Sky Harbor International Airport in Phoenix and Tempe. The subsequent map shows employment density for central Maricopa County. The densest concentrations of employment are in central Phoenix, including the area surrounding Sky Harbor International Airport, north Tempe and south Scottsdale. These areas will continue to attract employers because of the high capacity transportation network that is in place to serve businesses. Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use 1 DRAFT Exhibit 6-2: Industrial Building Space - Maricopa County May 18, 2011 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Market Analysis 6-27 trouble the sector until the economic recovery is underway. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT 1 Exhibit 6-3: Employment Concentration 2005 - Maricopa County Market Analysis 6-28 Greater Phoenix Industrial MarketMay Summary 18, 2011 In our opinion, little construction activity is anticipated for the next three to four years given the current status of the market. The 16 percent market vacancy rate is something that has not been witnessed in the market since 1986. Today the industrial market has 44.4 million square feet of vacant space. A normalized vacancy rate would be 7 percent or 18.9 million square feet of space. This means that 25.5 million square feet must be absorbed before the market fully recovers. From 1992 to 2007, the market absorbed an average of 6.5 million square feet annually. At this historic rate, the market will need four years to recover. Mesa-Gilbert Industrial Market Historic industrial construction activity within the Mesa-Gilbert area is shown on the following table. Since 1980, Mesa-Gilbert has accounted for approximately 18 million square feet of the 192 million square feet constructed in Maricopa County. This represents approximately 9.4 percent of construction activity. Over the last 30 years, an annual average of 6.4 million square feet of industrial space has been constructed in the County with 600,400 square feet constructed annually on average in the Mesa-Gilbert area. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report DRAFT Table 6-28: Mesa - Gilbert Industrial Market Activity Mesa - Gilbert Industrial Market Activity 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total Average Annual Mesa-Gilbert 479,140 440,050 1,697,250 182,040 339,304 1,047,654 914,473 1,091,943 623,190 87,068 0 338,100 650,888 202,271 64,664 366,442 606,940 1,000,709 592,735 461,282 709,154 280,272 355,363 660,491 461,559 1,169,059 785,686 1,344,443 1,059,176 0 18,011,346 600,378 Construction Maricopa County 10,397,960 8,193,933 6,779,057 4,931,013 4,091,607 10,381,205 7,166,225 7,804,999 7,443,561 3,251,556 3,433,208 4,461,997 2,113,880 3,972,066 3,478,499 5,606,444 11,064,957 8,564,075 8,104,299 8,500,334 8,276,502 7,473,191 3,268,137 2,918,813 3,944,902 6,654,411 8,786,329 12,373,344 8,208,331 522,258 192,167,093 6,405,570 % of Total 4.6% 5.4% 25.0% 3.7% 8.3% 10.1% 12.8% 14.0% 8.4% 2.7% 0.0% 7.6% 30.8% 5.1% 1.9% 6.5% 5.5% 11.7% 7.3% 5.4% 8.6% 3.8% 10.9% 22.6% 11.7% 17.6% 8.9% 10.9% 12.9% 0.0% 9.4% Mesa-Gilbert 2,646,018 3,086,068 4,783,318 4,965,358 5,304,662 6,352,316 7,266,789 8,358,732 8,981,922 9,068,990 9,068,990 9,407,090 10,057,978 10,260,249 10,324,913 10,691,355 11,298,295 12,299,004 12,891,739 13,353,021 14,062,175 14,342,447 14,697,810 15,358,301 15,819,860 16,988,919 17,774,605 19,119,048 20,178,224 20,178,224 Inventory Maricopa County 81,429,123 89,623,056 96,402,113 101,333,126 105,424,733 115,805,938 122,972,163 130,777,162 138,220,723 141,472,279 144,905,487 149,367,484 151,481,364 155,453,430 158,931,929 164,538,373 175,603,330 184,167,405 192,271,704 200,772,038 209,048,540 216,521,731 219,789,868 222,708,681 226,653,583 233,307,994 242,094,323 254,467,667 262,675,998 263,198,256 % of Total 3.2% 3.4% 5.0% 4.9% 5.0% 5.5% 5.9% 6.4% 6.5% 6.4% 6.3% 6.3% 6.6% 6.6% 6.5% 6.5% 6.4% 6.7% 6.7% 6.7% 6.7% 6.6% 6.7% 6.9% 7.0% 7.3% 7.3% 7.5% 7.7% 7.7% Sources: Kammrath & Associates, Elliott D. Pollack & Co. 6.2.4 Phoenix 6.2.4 Greater Greater Phoenix HotelHotel MarketMarket Greater Phoenix is one of the most popular tourist destinations in the country. It has also developed into a significant economic the southwest part of the U.S., whichIt makes a destination Greater Phoenix is one of thecenter most in popular tourist destinations in the country. has alsoit developed into a forsignificant businesseconomic travelers as well. According to the Arizona Department of Tourism, the number of center in the southwest part of the U.S., which makes it a destination for business travelers hotel rooms in Greater Phoenix initially peaked in 2003, with an estimated total of just over 55,000 as well. According to the Arizona Department of Tourism, the number of hotel rooms in Greater Phoenix initially rooms. number dropped in total 2004ofwith the closure of some older resorts, but in was stable peakedThat in 2003, with an estimated just over 55,000 rooms. That number dropped 2004 with at the around 53,000 rooms through 2007. In 2008, the region experienced an influx of approximately closure of some older resorts, but was stable at around 53,000 rooms through 2007. In 2008, the region 2,500 rooms, an including the 1,000 room Sheraton PhoenixtheDowntown hotel experienced influx of approximately 2,500 rooms, including 1,000 room Hotel. SheratonAdditional Phoenix Downtown completions in 2009 and through the first two months of 2010 have increased the total supply to Hotel. Additional hotel completions in 2009 and through the first two months of 2010 have increased the total just over 60,000 rooms. supply to just over 60,000 rooms. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 6-29 Market Analysis Today, Mesa-Gilbert accounts for 20.2 million square feet of industrial space representing 7.7 percent of the 263.2 million square feet in Maricopa County. As noted on the chart, Mesa-Gilbert’s share of the industrial market has steadily risen over the years from less than 3.5 percent in 1980 to a 7.7 percent share in 2009. However, as noted in the office market section of this report, Mesa and Gilbert account for approximately 16.9% of the County’s population in 2009. Therefore, the area Northeast Area – Technical / Market Driven Land relative Use 2 has notDevelopment received Plan its fair share Memorandum of industrial development to its population. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 3 3 Greater Phoenix Supply of Hotel Rooms Source: Arizona Department of Tourism Greater Phoenix Supply of Hotel Rooms 70,000 Source: Arizona Department of Tourism * Estimate based on YTD data * Estimate based on YTD data 70,000 60,000 58,526 49,873 50,685 60,000 50,000 45,719 50,000 40,000 36,919 36,790 37,164 38,756 49,873 50,685 41,261 53,425 53,425 53,425 53,425 55,068 55,068 53,425 53,260 52,485 52,610 53,425 53,260 52,485 52,610 60,070 55,117 58,526 60,070 55,117 45,719 40,000 36,919 36,790 37,164 38,756 30,000 41,261 30,000 20,000 20,000 10,000 10,000 20 09 2 00 20 9 10 2 0 YT 1 D 0Y TD 20 08 20 08 20 07 20 04 20 04 20 07 20 03 20 03 20 06 20 02 20 02 20 06 20 01 20 01 20 05 20 00 20 00 20 05 19 99 19 99 19 98 19 98 19 97 19 97 19 96 19 96 19 95 19 95 19 94 19 93 0 19 94 19 93 0 The occupancy Phoenix hadhad been steadily rebounding after aafter trough that occurred in 2001 and The occupancyrate rateininMetro Metro Phoenix been steadily rebounding a trough that occurred in 2001 and 2002. In 2006, the occupancy rate in Greater Phoenix was 68.2 percent, an increase 2002. In 2006, the rate in Greater Phoenix 68.2%, an increase of that moreoccurred than 10% fromofand 2002. The occupancy rateoccupancy in Metro Phoenix had been steadilywas rebounding after a trough in 2001 more than 10 percent from 2002. Occupancy dipped slightly during 2007 and has continued to fall Occupancy dippedthe slightly duringrate 2007 has Phoenix continued to 68.2%, fall through 2009. This decline befrom attributed 2002. In 2006, occupancy in and Greater was an increase of more thancan 10% 2002. to through 2009. Thisslightly decline can beisattributed the extended national only now theOccupancy extended national recession that only has nowcontinued intoearly stages of recovery. For firstthat twoisbe months of 2010, dipped during 2007 and to fall through 2009. recession Thisthe decline can attributed to in early stages of recovery. For the first two months of 2010, the occupancy rate of 61.1 percent is thetheoccupancy of 61.1% is slightly of the occupancy rate for For the first two two months of 2009. extended rate national recession that isahead only now in 59.0% early stages of recovery. the first months of 2010, slightly ahead of percent occupancy rate for the first two months of 2009. the occupancy ratethe of 59.0 61.1% is slightly ahead of the 59.0% occupancy rate for the first two months of 2009. Table 6-30: Annual Hotel Occupancy Rates - Greater Phoenix Annual Hotel Occupancy Rates AnnualGreater Hotel Occupancy Phoenix Rates Source: Arizona Department of Tourism Greater Phoenix 75.0% 75.0% 70.0% * Estimate based on YTD data through February 2010. * Estimate based on YTD data through February 2010. Source: Arizona Department of Tourism 70.8% 70.0%67.4% 67.4% 71.7% 70.8% 70.9% 71.7% 70.9%68.9% 68.9% 64.5% 64.5% 62.0% 62.5% 62.0% 62.5% % Occupied % Occupied 65.0% 65.0% 60.0% 60.0% 63.7% 63.7% 68.2% 67.0% 68.2% 66.9% 67.0% 66.9% 59.7% 58.2% 57.7% 59.7% 58.2% 57.7% 59.4% 59.4% 55.0% 55.0% 61.1% 61.1% 52.4% 52.4% 50.0% 50.0% 45.0% 45.0% 20 2007 07 20 2008 08 20 2009 20 09 2100 Y 10T D YT* D * 20 200 60 6 202 005 05 202 0040 4 202 0030 3 202 0020 2 2020 0101 2020 0000 1919 9999 19199 98 8 1 19 99 97 7 19 19 93 93 19 19 94 94 19 19 95 95 19 19 9 96 6 40.0% 40.0% Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 6-30 Market Analysis Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT Table 6-29: Greater Phoenix Supply ofMemorandum Hotel Rooms Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 4 Over the most recent years when a surge in occupancy and demand occurred, room rates also rose. Average daily room rates had previously peaked in 1997 at almost $105 per night. For the Over the most recent years when a surge in occupancy and demand occurred, room rates also rose. Average next five years, rates declined to a low of $93.50 in 2002. In 2005, room rates almost rose back up daily room rates had previously peaked in 1997 at almost $105 per night. For the next five years, rates declined to peak levels. Rates then continued to rise rapidly in 2006, 2007 and 2008 pushing average daily to a low of $93.50 in 2002. In 2005, room rates almost rose back up to peak levels. Rates then continued to rise rates to their highest level in history. However, declining room demand forced hoteliers last year rapidly 2006, 2007 and 2008 pushing to their highest history. However, to offerinsignificantly reduced prices toaverage inducedaily hotelrates stays. While roomlevel ratesinhave increased fordeclining the room demand forced hoteliers last year to offer significantly reduced prices to induce hotel stays. While room first two months of 2010, they are reflective of the high season and are not considered comparable rates haveaverages. increased for the first two months of 2010, they are reflective of the high season and are not to yearly considered comparable to yearly averages. Table 6-31: Average Daily Room Rates - Greater Phoenix Average Daily Room Rates Greater Phoenix *Estimate based on YTD data through February 2010. Source: Arizona Department of Tourism $130.00 $124.93 $120.54 $120.00 $117.80 $112.55 $110.00 $104.72$104.34 $102.25 $100.79 $100.14 $100.00 $98.81 $93.48 $94.12 $92.31 $90.00 $105.72 $102.69 $95.93 $84.60 $80.00 $77.03 $70.00 $60.00 TD * 20 09 20 10 Y 20 08 20 07 20 06 20 05 20 04 20 03 20 02 20 01 20 00 19 99 19 98 19 97 19 96 19 95 19 94 19 93 $50.00 Revenue per available room or RevPAR is an indicator of hotel performance most used by hotel operators. This Revenue available room RevPAR is anperformance. indicator of The hotel performance most used by calculationper combines room ratesorwith occupancy calculation is made by taking totalhotel revenue operators. This calculation combines room rates with occupancy performance. The calculation for a given time period and dividing it by total available room nights. More simply, the occupancy percentage is is made by total revenue a given period total available room multiplied by taking the average daily roomforrate. Thus,time it will alwaysand be dividing less than itthebypublished room rate due to nights. More simply, the occupancy percentage is multiplied by the average daily room rate. Thus, vacancies. As the chart below indicates, RevPAR varies widely from year to year. In recessions, RevPAR is it will always be less than the published room rate due to vacancies. As the chart below indicates, typically affected by falling occupancy rates as well as falling room rates. In Greater Phoenix, RevPar held up RevPAR varies widely from year to year. In recessions, RevPAR is typically affected by falling fairly well through 2008, then declined precipitously in 2009 by 25%. While RevPAR increased for the first two occupancy rates as well as falling room rates. In Greater Phoenix, RevPar held up fairly well months of2008, 2010,then as noted previously, the figuresinrepresent high season in theRevPAR Greater increased Phoenix hotel through declined precipitously 2009 by the 25 percent. While for market. the first two months of 2010, as noted previously, the figures represent the high season in the Greater Phoenix hotel market. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 6-31 Market Analysis Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT TableArea 6-32: Revenues Plan Per Available Room - /Greater Phoenix Northeast Development – TechnicalHotel Memorandum Market Driven Land Use 56-32 Revenue Per Available Hotel Room Greater Phoenix Arizona Department of Tourism RevenueSource: Per Available Hotel Room Greater Phoenix $85.00 *Estimate based on YTD data through February 2010. *Estimate based on YTD data $80.60 through February 2010. Source: Arizona Department of Tourism $80.00 $85.00 $76.75 $80.60$74.15 $75.00 $80.00 $70.98 $70.00 $75.00 $66.19 $65.00 $70.00 $72.16 $70.98 $68.79 $67.34 $72.16 $71.96 $76.75 $74.15 $71.96 $63.34 $62.95 $67.34 $59.93 $66.19 $60.00 $65.00 $61.11 $63.34 $62.95$57.53 $56.18 $53.94 $59.93 $55.00 $60.00 $51.92 $50.00 $55.00 Market Analysis DRAFT 5 $57.53 $68.79 $55.36 $61.11 $56.18 $55.36 $53.94 $51.92 $45.00 $50.00 TD * 20 09 TD * 20 10 Y 20 09 20 08 20 07 20 06 20 05 20 04 20 03 20 02 20 01 20 00 19 99 19 98 19 97 19 96 19 95 19 94 19 93 $40.00 20 10 Y 20 08 20 07 20 06 20 05 20 04 20 03 20 02 20 01 20 00 19 99 19 98 19 97 19 96 19 95 19 94 19 93 $40.00 $45.00 Mesa/Gilbert Hotel Market Mesa/Gilbert Hotel Market There are 64 hotels that have been identified within the City of Mesa and Town of Gilbert. All but There are 64 hotels that have been identified within the City of Mesa and Town of Gilbert. All but four hotels are four hotels are located within the City of Mesa. There are a total of 5,646 rooms within these hotels Mesa/Gilbert Market located within Hotel the City of Mesa. There are a total of 5,646 rooms within these hotels (5,163 rooms in Mesa and (5,163 rooms in Mesa and 483 rooms in Gilbert). This inventory comprises about 9.4 percent of the There are 64 hotels that have been identified within the9.4% City of the Mesa and Town of60,000 Gilbert.hotel All but fourinhotels are 483 rooms in Gilbert). This inventory comprises about approximately rooms Greater approximately 60,000 hotel rooms in Greater Phoenix. A detailed inventory of hotels in the Mesa/ located within the of Mesa. There total of 5,646region roomsiswithin these hotels (5,163tables. rooms in Mesa and Phoenix. A detailed inventory of the hotels inare theaMesa/Gilbert included in the following Gilbert region is City included in following tables. 483 rooms in Gilbert). This inventory comprises about 9.4% of the approximately 60,000 hotel rooms in Greater Phoenix. A detailed inventory Town of hotelsofin Gilbert the Mesa/Gilbert is included in the following tables. Hotel region Inventory Table 6-33: Town of Gilbert Hotel Inventory Name Town Extended Stay Hotels InTown Suites Extended Stay Name Upper/Mid Scale Hotels Extended Hotels Hyatt Place Stay Gilbert InTown Suites Extended Stay Hampton Inn & Suites Gilbert 1/ Upper/Mid Hotels Legado HotelScale Hyatt Place Gilbert Hampton Inn & Suites Gilbert GRAND TOTAL Gilbert Hotels Legado Hotel1/ _______________ Address of Gilbert Hotel Inventory Rooms 2350 West Obispo Avenue, Gilbert, AZ 85233 Address 3275 South Market Street, Gilbert, AZ 85297 2350South West Market ObispoStreet, Avenue, Gilbert, 85233 3265 Gilbert, AZAZ 85297 1800 S. San Tan Village Parkway, Gilbert, AZ 85296 3275 South Market Street, Gilbert, AZ 85297 3265 South Market Street, Gilbert, AZ 85297 1800 S. San Tan Village Parkway, Gilbert, AZ 85296 1/ Opening soon GRAND TOTAL Gilbert Hotels _______________ Source: Mesa Convention and Visitors Bureau; Elliott D. Pollack & Co. 1/ Opening soon 139 Rooms 127 139 96 121 127 96 483 121 483 Source: Mesa Convention and Visitors Bureau; Elliott D. Pollack & Co. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport May 18, 2011 6 DRAFT Table 6-34: City of Mesa Hotel Inventory City of Mesa Hotel Inventory Name Budget Hotels American Executive Inn Budget Inn Budget Suites Circle RB Lodge Citrus Inn Clarion Inn Mesa Colonade Motel Days Hotel Mesa Country Club Days Inn And Suites Mesa Days Inn Mesa East El Rancho Motel Fountain Motel Frontier Motel Hiway Host Motel Holiday Motel Kiva Lodge Lost Dutchman Lodge Mesa Oasis Inn & Motel Miles Hotel Motel 6 Mesa North Motel 6 Mesa South Motel 6 Phoenix Mesa - Main St Plainsman Motel Quality Inn & Suites Mesa Regency Inn Sleep Inn Mesa Starlight Motel Sunland Motel Trails West Motel Travaleers Travelodge Suites Mesa Travelodge Suites Phoenix Mesa Tri City Inn Westernaire Motel Extended Stay Hotels Extended Stay Mesa Homestead Stay America Suites of America Upper/Mid Scale Hotels Arizona Golf Resort Best Western Dobson Ranch Inn and Resort Best Western Legacy Inn Best Western Mesa Inn Best Western Mezona Inn Best Western Superstition Springs Inn Comfort Inn & Suites Mesa Downtown Country Inn & Suites Courtyard Phoenix Mesa Fairfield Inn Phoenix Mesa Hampton Inn Phoenix-Mesa Hilton Phoenix East/Mesa Holiday Inn Hotel & Suites Phoenix-Mesa/Chandler Hyatt Place Phoenix Mesa La Quinta Inn La Quinta Mesa Marriott Phoenix Mesa Residence Inn Phoenix Mesa Saguaro Lake Ranch Super 8 Mesa/Phoenix Power and Main Super 8 Phoenix/Mesa/Gilbert Road Westgate Painted Mountain Resort Windemere Hotel and Conference Center Address Rooms 1554 West Main Street, Mesa, AZ 85201 106 S. Country Club Dr., Mesa, AZ 537 S. Country Club Dr., Mesa, AZ 6547 E. Main St., Mesa, AZ 524 W. Main St., Mesa, AZ 951 W Main St, Mesa, AZ 85201 5440 E Main. St., Mesa, AZ 333 W Juanita Ave, Mesa, AZ 85210 1750 East Main Street, Mesa, AZ 85203 5531 E Main St, Mesa, AZ 85205 719 E. Main St., Mesa, AZ 6240 E. Main St., Mesa, AZ 1307 E. Main St., Mesa, AZ 1260 W. Main St., Mesa, AZ 6444 E. Main St., Mesa, AZ 668 W. Main St., Mesa, AZ 560 S. Country Club Dr., Mesa, AZ 2150 W. Main St. Mesa, AZ 5911 E. Main St. Mesa, AZ 336 W Hampton Ave, Mesa, AZ 85210 1511 S Country Club Dr, Mesa, AZ 85210 630 W Main St, Mesa, AZ 85201 1338 W. Main St., Mesa, AZ 1410 S Country Club Drive, Mesa, AZ 85210 1302 W. Main St., Mesa, AZ 6347 E Southern Ave, Mesa, AZ 85206 2710 E. Main St., Mesa, AZ 2602 E. Main St., Mesa, AZ 6502 E. Main St., Mesa, AZ 836 W. Main St., Mesa, AZ 22 South Country Club Drive, Mesa, AZ 85210 4244 East Main Street, Mesa, AZ 85205 1504 W. Main St., Mesa, AZ 5414 E. Main St., Mesa, AZ 37 16 32 16 17 96 70 121 59 61 24 34 23 14 10 17 54 18 85 161 91 103 14 120 34 84 42 25 28 28 38 74 26 43 455 W. Baseline Rd., Mesa, AZ 85210 1920 W. Isabella, Mesa, AZ 85202 825 W. Dobson Rd., Mesa, AZ 104 122 222 425 South Power Road, Mesa, AZ 85206-5296 1666 S Dobson Rd, Mesa, AZ 85202-5610 4470 South Power Road, Mesa, AZ 85212 1625 E Main St, Mesa, AZ 85203-9017 250 W Main St, Mesa, AZ 85201-7312 1342 S Power Rd, Mesa, AZ 85206-3704 651 E Main Street, Mesa, AZ 85203 6650 East Superstition Springs Boulevard, Mesa, AZ 85206 1221 South Westwood, Mesa, AZ 85210 1405 S Westwood, Mesa, AZ 85210 1563 S. Gilbert Rd., Mesa, AZ 85204 1011 West Holmes Avenue, Mesa, AZ 85210-4923 1600 S Country Club Drive, Mesa, AZ 85210 1422 West Bass Pro Drive, Mesa, AZ 85204 6530 East Superstition Springs Boulevard, Mesa, AZ 85206 902 West Grove Avenue, Mesa, AZ 85210-4930 200 North Centennial Way, Mesa, AZ 85201 941 W Grove Avenue, Mesa, AZ 85210 13020 Bush Hwy, Mesa, AZ 6733 E Main St, Mesa, AZ 85205-9037 1550 S. Gilbert Rd, Mesa, AZ 85204-6008 6302 East McKellips Road, Mesa, AZ 85215 5750 E Main Street, Mesa, AZ 85205 187 213 110 99 128 59 48 126 149 65 115 260 246 150 107 125 275 117 25 60 70 152 114 GRAND TOTAL Mesa Hotels 5,163 Source: Mesa Convention and Visitors Bureau; Elliott D. Pollack & Co. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport May 18, 2011 6-33 Market Analysis Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 7 As shown in the map on the following page, the hotels in the market area are mainly clustered As shown in the mapStreet on theinfollowing in the market area are mainly along Main along Main Mesa inpage, both the thehotels east and west portions of the cityclustered as well as along theStreet U.S. in Mesa60infreeway. both the east andclusters west portions the city as well astoalong theshopping U.S. 60 freeway. clusters are in These are inofclose proximity major centers These and transportation close proximity to Newly major shopping centers transportation corridors. Newly built hotels in locations with corridors. built hotels are and in locations with similar attributes. There is aare newly built Hyatt similar Place attributes. is a newly builtcenter Hyattjust Place center just and off ofa the Loop of 202 Red in theThere Riverview power offinofthe theRiverview Loop 202power Red Mountain handful hotels have recently Gilbert close to built San in Tan Village Mall off of LoopMall 202 off San Mountain andjust a handful of been hotelsbuilt haveinjust recently been Gilbert close to San Tanthe Village of Tan the Freeway. Loop 202 San Tan Freeway. Exhibit 6-4: Hotel Locations - Mesa & Gilbert Region The hotels in the Mesa/Gilbert region cater almost exclusively to business and budget travelers. The hotels in the Mesa/Gilbert region cater almost exclusively to business and budget travelers. With the With the Arizona Golf Resort, Westgate Painted Mountain Resort and the Legado Hotel in Gilbert ArizonaasGolf Resort, Westgate Mountain Resort the that Legado Hotel infor Gilbert the exceptions, the exceptions, nearlyPainted all of the hotels are fromand chains are known beingas inexpensive with nearly limited all of theamenities. hotels are from chains that are known for being inexpensive with limited amenities. The average The average hotel size in the region is 88 rooms. hotel size in the region is 88 rooms. The most reliable source for local hotel data is Smith Travel Research. Data obtained from the The most sourceand for Visitors local hotel data provides is Smith hotel Travelperformance Research. statistics Data obtained the Mesa, Mesa Mesareliable Convention Bureau for thefrom broader Gilbert and Chandler area.provides The average occupancy ofstatistics the hotels thebroader region has suffered Convention and Visitors Bureau hotel performance for inthe Mesa, Gilbertsince and thearea. onsetThe of the current recession theregion end of While to Chandler average occupancy of beginning the hotels inatthe has2007. suffered sinceperformance the onset of appears the current have improved in 2010, dataWhile is only through February doesn’t account for seasonality. In recession beginning at the end ofthe 2007. performance appears toand have improved this year, the data is only and 2008, Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler hotel market Greater Phoenix market. through2007 February and the doesn’t account for seasonality. In 2007outperformed and 2008, thethe Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler hotel the Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler marketHowever, has under the overall market 2009under and marketHowever, outperformed the Greater Phoenix market. theperformed Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler marketinhas 2010. performed the overall market in 2009 and 2010. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 6-34 Market Analysis Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use Northeast DRAFT Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT Table 6-35: Average Occupancy - Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler Area 8 8 Market Analysis 6-35 Average Occupancy Average Occupancy Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler Area Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler Area Source: Smith Travel Research Source: Smith Travel Research 80.0% 80.0% 70.0% 70.0% 67.1% 67.1% 59.4% 59.4% 60.0% 60.0% 57.7% 57.7% 48.9% 48.9% 50.0% 50.0% 40.0% 40.0% 30.0% 30.0% 20.0% 20.0% 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2007 2007 2008 2008 2009 2009 2010YTD 2010YTD Average room rates rates had had been been increasing steadilyuntil until2009 2009when whenthe theregion regionexperienced experienceda asharp sharpdrop. Average room increasing steadily Average room rates had been increasing steadily until 2009 when the region experienced a sharp drop. drop. Through February 2010, average rates were $100.96, which is 10.2 percent lower than through Through February 2010, average rates were $100.96, which is 10.2% lower than through the same period in Through February 2010, average rates were $100.96, which is 10.2% lower than through the same period in the same period in 2009, but much higher than the last few years’ annual averages. However, the 2009, but much higher than the last few years’ annual averages. However, the 2010 room rate estimate is for 2009, but much higher than the last few years’ annual averages. However, the 2010 room rate estimate is for 2010 room rate estimate is for the high season. the high season. the high season. Table 6-36: Average Daily Room Rates - Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler Area Average Daily Room Rates Average Daily Room Rates Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler Area Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler Source: Smith Travel Research Area Source: Smith Travel Research $110.00 $110.00 $100.00 $100.00 $95.19 $95.19 $100.96 $100.96 $98.57 $98.57 $90.00 $90.00 $83.34 $83.34 $80.00 $80.00 $70.00 $70.00 $60.00 $60.00 $50.00 $50.00 $40.00 $40.00 2007 2007 2008 2008 2009 2009 2010YTD 2010YTD Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport May 18, 2011 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 9 9 6-36 Similar to the overall Greater Phoenix hotel 30 market, RevPAR in after the Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler experienced a experienced a decline of approximately percent in 2009 an 8 percent decline area in 2008. decline of approximately 30% in 2009 after an 8% decline in 2008. to the overall Greater Room Phoenix hotel market, RevPARArea in the Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler area experienced a TableSimilar 6-37: Revenue Per Available - Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler decline of approximately 30% in 2009 after an 8% decline in 2008. Revenue Per Available Room Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler Area Revenue Source:Per SmithAvailable Travel ResearchRoom Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler Area $70.00 Source: Smith Travel Research $65.00 $70.00 $63.91 $60.00 $65.00 $63.91 $55.00 $60.00 $58.52 $58.29 $58.52 $58.29 $50.00 $55.00 $45.00 $50.00 $40.78 $40.00 $45.00 $40.78 $35.00 $40.00 $30.00 $35.00 $25.00 $30.00 $20.00 $25.00 2007 2008 2009 2010YTD 2007 2008 2009 2010YTD $20.00 The Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler market has historically under performed Greater Phoenix The hotelhotel market has historically under performed the Greaterthe Phoenix market in terms market in terms of average daily rates, but matched the overall market in occupancy levels. of average daily rates, but matched the overall market in occupancy levels. In general, typical room ratesIn in the general, typical roomarea rates in the Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler havePhoenix averaged 20 Phoenix percent market lower than The Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler hotel market has20% historically under performed the Greater in terms Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler have averaged lower than thearea Greater market. the Greater Phoenix of average daily rates, market. but matched the overall market in occupancy levels. In general, typical room rates in the Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler area have averaged 20% lower than the Greater Phoenix market. Table 6-38: Comparative Performance Comparative - Greater Phoenix Performance & Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler Hotel Markets Greater Phoenix & Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler Hotel Markets Comparative Performance Greater Phoenix & Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler Hotel Markets Greater Phoenix Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler Year Occupancy ADR 2007 66.9%Greater$120.54 Phoenix 2008 59.4% $124.93 Year Occupancy ADR 2009 52.4% $105.72 2007 66.9% $120.54 1/ 2008 59.4% $124.93 2010 61.1% $117.80 2009 52.4% $105.72 _______________ 1/ 2010 61.1% $117.80 1/ Through February 2010 _______________ RevPAR $80.60 $74.15 RevPAR $55.36 $80.60 $74.15 $71.96 $55.36 $71.96 Occupancy ADR 67.1% $95.19 Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler 59.4% $98.57 Occupancy ADR 48.9% $83.34 67.1% $95.19 59.4% $98.57 57.7% $100.96 48.9% $83.34 57.7% $100.96 RevPAR $63.91 $58.52 RevPAR $40.78 $63.91 $58.52 $58.29 $40.78 $58.29 Source: Smith Travel Research 1/ Through February 2010 Source: Smith Travel Research 6.2.5 Summary and Conclusions 6.2.5 Summary Conclusions The commercial realand estate market in Greater Phoenix is in uncharted territory. Faced with unprecedented high levels of vacancies, falling values and the possible need to refinance properties over the next several years, The commercial estate market in GreaterCredit Phoenix is in uncharted Faced unprecedented high significant fallout real in the market is expected. is limited and many territory. lenders are onlywith interested in the highest levels of vacancies, falling values and the possible need to refinance properties over the next several years, quality properties. Commercial properties that were purchased at the height of the market in 2005 through 2007 significant fallout the market expected. limited and many only interested in the highest will likely face theinmost distress,issince valuesCredit todayiswill not support the lenders levels ofare debt required to refinance. Due quality properties. Commercial properties that were purchased at the height of the market in 2005 throughwill 2007 to the over-building of commercial space in the last few years, few, if any, office or industrial buildings be Airport will likely face the most distress, since values today will not support the levels Phoenix-Mesa of debt requiredGateway to refinance. Due to the over-building of commercial space in the last few years, few, if any, office or industrial buildings will be Market Analysis Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT Similar to the overall Greater Phoenix hotel market, RevPAR in the Mesa-Gilbert-Chandler area Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The commercial real estate market in Greater Phoenix is in uncharted territory. Faced with unprecedented high levels of vacancies, falling values and the possible need to refinance properties over the next several years, significant fallout in the market is expected. Credit is limited and many lenders are only interested in the highest quality properties. Commercial properties that were purchased at the height of the market in 2005 through 2007 will likely face the most distress, since values today will not support the levels of debt required to refinance. Due to the over-building of commercial space in the last few years, few, if any, office or industrial buildings will be constructed in the next five years. The retail market faces similar challenges, but could return to historic vacancy levels sooner if retail spending continues to increase and population flows begin again as forecasted. Overall, the next four to five years will be challenging for commercial property owners and developers. In general, Mesa has historically had a weak industrial and office market, primarily because of its location towards the periphery of the urbanized area. Office uses in particular have been missing from the local real estate market. Office markets that develop outside of a central city core are dictated by many factors, including proximity to affluent residential areas and arterial and freeway access to support work commutes. This has not been present in the East Valley, but is beginning to take shape. As population grows in the East Valley and as commuting to other business districts becomes problematic, the natural evolution and demand for office/commercial properties nearby will grow. For the time being, developers still appear to prefer more central urban locations in Phoenix, Scottsdale and Tempe for office projects. In the industrial market, surface access infrastructure, which includes freeways and, to a lesser extent, rail, drives location-decisions for industrial developers. The lack of freeways leading out of Mesa to major metropolitan areas to the east has limited the development of a large warehousing market. Most of this activity is located on the west side of the Valley where there is good rail access and proximity to Southern California. However, the Southeast Valley is a center of semiconductor and aerospace manufacturing in Greater Phoenix. Chandler has captured a large share of this activity, however, aerospace manufacturing in north Mesa adjacent to Falcon Field accounts for the city’s primary employers. The assets of the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport offer significant opportunities to expand this economic base. Comparatively, Mesa has had a strong retail market and, until the growth of Chandler and Gilbert, was the dominant community in the area relative to retail sales. However, the construction of Chandler Fashion Center and the Gilbert San Tan Village mall has had a significant negative impact on City revenues. Additional competition has come from the Tempe Marketplace. No longer are residents of adjacent communities shopping in Mesa. As a result, major retail centers like Fiesta Mall have experienced declining sales and need to be repositioned in the market. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Market Analysis 6-37 6.2.5 Summary and Conclusions Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The MAG periodically provides population forecasts for Maricopa County and its incorporated cities. The overall county-wide forecast is consistent with long term DES projections. MAG forecasts the growth of individual cities based on historic growth trends, available vacant land, and other factors that influence the direction of growth. The following table shows the current 2007 forecast from MAG based on the 2005 U.S. Census. Overall, Maricopa County is expected to grow from approximately 3.68 million persons in 2005 to 6.14 million persons in 2030, an increase of nearly 67 percent over 25 years. The employment forecast shows that the County is expected to grow from 1.7 million jobs in 2005 to nearly 3.4 million jobs in 2030, representing a 93 percent increase. Consistent with expectations, some of the future population growth will continue to spill into adjacent Pinal County, but employment will Northeaststill Arealargely Development Plan – Technical Memorandum Market Driven Land Use 11 be contained within Maricopa /County. DRAFT Table 6-39: MAG Forecast - Maricopa County MAG Forecast Maricopa County Community Avondale Buckeye Carefree Cave Creek Chandler County Areas El Mirage Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation Fountain Hills Gila Bend Gila River Indian Community Gilbert Glendale Goodyear Guadalupe Litchfield Park Mesa Paradise Valley Peoria Phoenix Queen Creek SRPM Indian Community Scottsdale Surprise Tempe Tolleson Wickenburg Youngtown Grand Total Percent Increase From 2005 2005 70,160 32,735 3,654 4,845 236,073 80,661 31,935 824 24,347 2,118 2,742 178,708 257,891 47,520 5,555 6,787 486,296 14,136 141,441 1,510,177 19,879 6,822 234,515 93,356 165,740 6,491 9,606 6,011 3,681,025 POPULATION 2010 2020 83,856 105,989 74,906 218,591 4,418 5,816 5,781 7,815 265,107 282,991 87,434 107,441 34,819 38,620 839 1,037 27,166 33,331 2,575 3,950 2,790 2,941 218,009 285,819 279,807 315,055 71,354 174,521 5,790 5,982 8,587 10,305 518,944 565,693 14,790 15,224 172,793 236,154 1,695,549 1,990,450 34,506 55,529 7,087 7,308 249,341 269,266 146,890 268,359 177,771 191,881 7,748 9,646 11,022 13,311 6,820 7,275 4,216,499 5,230,300 2030 123,265 419,146 6,097 9,656 283,792 159,312 38,717 1,239 33,810 9,074 3,410 300,295 322,062 299,397 5,983 10,510 584,866 15,352 306,070 2,201,843 72,947 7,425 286,020 401,458 197,970 10,193 17,732 7,359 6,135,000 66.7% 2005 12,315 8,672 2,669 2,602 86,732 24,051 2,858 1,228 7,492 1,077 4,334 56,292 88,172 15,794 1,033 1,710 174,909 5,769 34,631 811,513 4,021 5,977 181,652 16,289 176,688 12,340 5,055 1,657 1,747,532 EMPLOYMENT 2010 2020 20,599 37,776 22,400 57,297 3,270 3,992 3,564 4,666 128,244 168,141 27,353 39,281 5,001 9,276 1,323 1,647 9,954 11,569 1,691 2,760 5,422 7,612 81,852 117,984 117,110 156,508 28,167 73,622 1,387 1,467 2,405 3,200 218,085 275,236 6,717 7,707 53,397 87,968 937,182 1,108,031 9,652 22,213 11,131 25,587 208,073 232,832 31,105 81,423 198,243 219,543 15,808 19,854 6,622 8,921 1,667 1,988 2,157,424 2,788,101 2030 53,083 147,851 4,329 6,066 178,116 70,428 11,528 1,959 11,573 6,824 14,448 128,792 171,498 130,336 1,481 4,280 306,030 8,734 117,861 1,246,527 35,145 49,905 252,015 147,703 235,616 22,314 12,316 2,042 3,378,800 93.3% Source: MAG 2007 The above table also shows that Mesa is expected to grow from 486,000 persons in 2005 to 585,000 persons in 2030. Its The above table also shows that Mesa is expected to grow from 486,000 persons in 2005 to 585,000 employment baseinis 2030. expected increase as well 175,000 to to 306,000 in 2030. persons Its to employment basefrom is expected increasejobs as well from 175,000 to 306,000 jobs in 2030. An important indicator of the health of a community is its jobs to population ratio. The current estimate of jobs per person in Maricopa County is approximately 0.50 or stated another way, one job for every two people. Those communities with jobs to population ratios above the county average tend to have stronger local economies. Fast growing communities on the periphery of the metro area typically have lower jobs to population ratios since job growth lags behind population growth. Over time, however, those communities will see jobs eventually follow residents to the peripheral areas, especially retail jobs. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Eventually, the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport (PMGA) area will serve as an employment hub for much of the far East Valley. Employees will reside in East Valley cities as well as in parts of Pinal County. In the future, this will result in a Market Analysis 6-38 6.3 Mesa Growth Forecast Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 6-39 Market Analysis An important indicator of the health of a community is its jobs to population ratio. The current estimate of jobs per person in Maricopa County is approximately 0.50 or stated another way, one job for every two people. Those communities with jobs to population ratios above the county average tend to have stronger local economies. Fast growing communities on the periphery of the metro area typically have lower jobs to population ratios since job growth lags behind population growth. Over time, however, those communities will see jobs eventually follow residents to the peripheral areas, especially retail jobs. Eventually, the PMGA area will serve as an employment hub for much of the far East Valley. Employees will reside in East Valley cities as well as in parts of Pinal County. In the future, this will result in a jobs to population ratio for Mesa in excess of the regional average (see below). The extent that this ratio increases over time will depend on the Mesa’s ability to capture jobs relative to other competing areas in Metro Phoenix, the extent that it is planned properly, and the extent that it develops a quality brand image. For some regional perspective, the following chart shows the forecast of jobs to population for the largest communities in Maricopa County. Three communities where large employment centers are located have high ratios, including Phoenix, Scottsdale and Tempe. In 2005, most other cities were much lower, in the 0.30 to 0.40 range; including Mesa which in 2005 had an estimated 0.38 jobs to population ratio. Based on MAG’s forecast, Mesa is expected to increase its ratio to approximately the county wide average by 2030. Other cities such as Glendale and Chandler are also expected to Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use 12 equal or exceed the county average. Tempe has the highest ratio among all communities, primarily DRAFT because it is landlocked and has little room for additional residential development. However, there are extensive employment opportunities in Tempe including the downtown area, Tempe Town Lake and and has south little room forwhere additional residential development. However, there are extensive employment opportunities in Tempe vacant employment land still exists. Tempe including the downtown area, Tempe Town Lake and south Tempe where vacant employment land still exists. Table 6-40: Forecasted Jobs to Population Ratio - Selected Cities Forecasted Jobs To Population Ratio Selected Cities Source: MAG 2007 1.40 1.28 1.22 1.18 1.20 1.11 Jobs to Population Ratio 1.00 0.84 0.78 0.80 0.63 0.60 0.60 Maricopa County 30 Year Average 0.53 0.49 0.49 0.40 0.37 0.410.43 0.38 0.32 0.57 0.55 0.56 0.89 0.87 0.58 0.43 0.36 0.20 Chandler Gilbert Mesa 2005 Phoenix 2010 2020 Scottsdale Tempe 2030 In order to give some scale to the Mesa employment ratio relative to the MaricopaPhoenix-Mesa County economy, in 2005 the city Gateway Airport accounted for approximately 13.2% of the population but only 10.0% of county jobs. By 2030, Mesa is expected to account for approximately 9.5% of the county’s population and 9.0% of county jobs. Therefore, even though Mesa will Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 6-40 Market Analysis In order to give some scale to the Mesa employment ratio relative to the Maricopa County economy, in 2005 the city accounted for approximately 13.2 percent of the population but only 10.0 percent of county jobs. By 2030, Mesa is expected to account for approximately 9.5 percent of the county’s population and 9.0 percent of county jobs. Therefore, even though Mesa will continue to grow, its proportion of the total county population will decrease. Likewise, its percentage of total county jobs will also decrease but become more consistent with its population base. The following three charts show the projected capture rates for total employment, industrial employment and office employment by the various cities in Maricopa County over the next 25 years. The chart shows that cities that are heavily populated today have declining capture rates while newly developing cities, such as Buckeye, Goodyear, Peoria, and Surprise, will have increasing capture rates. For the near future, Mesa is expected to capture approximately 10 percent of all employment in Maricopa County through 2010. Over the next decade, its capture rate declines slightly and then between 2020 and 2030, it is expected to decline to a 5 percent rate. Among the more heavily developed cities in Maricopa County, Mesa actually has one of the higher capture rates, excluding the City of Phoenix. The projected capture rates for industrial employment and office employment are shown on the following pages. The same pattern as described previously emerges from this data showing that the newly growing peripheral cities have higher capture rates towards the latter end of the forecast. Mesa is expected to have one of the higher capture rates of industrial in the 2010 to 2020 decade. Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Landemployment Use DRAFT Table 6-41: Projected Employment Capture Rates - Maricopa County Projected Employment Capture Rates Maricopa County Source: MAG 2007 35.0% 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% Buckeye Chandler Gilbert Glendale Goodyear 2005-2010 Mesa 2010-2020 Peoria Phoenix Scottsdale Surprise Tempe 2020-2030 Projected Industrial Employment Capture Rates Maricopa County Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Source: MAG 2007 40.0% 13 5.0% 0.0% Buckeye Chandler Gilbert Glendale Goodyear 2005-2010 Mesa Peoria 2010-2020 Phoenix Scottsdale Surprise Tempe 2020-2030 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Table 6-42: Projected Industrial Employment Capture Rates - Maricopa County 6-41 Market Analysis Projected Industrial Employment Capture Rates Maricopa County Source: MAG 2007 40.0% 35.0% 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% Buckeye Chandler Gilbert Glendale Goodyear Mesa Peoria Phoenix Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use 2005-2010 2010-2020 2020-2030 DRAFT Scottsdale Surprise Tempe Surprise Tempe 14 Table 6-43: Projected Office Employment Capture Rates - Maricopa County Projected Office Employment Capture Rates Maricopa County Source: MAG 2007 40.0% 35.0% May 18, 2011 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% Buckeye Chandler Gilbert Glendale Goodyear 2005-2010 Mesa 2010-2020 Peoria Phoenix Scottsdale 2020-2030 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport In terms of office employment, Mesa is also expected to have one of the higher capture rates among all the selected communities. In fact, Mesa’s capture rate increases over time, indicating that it could become a center of office Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Some additional analysis was conducted of the MAG projections for the Southeast Valley of Maricopa County. This area includes the communities of Tempe, Guadalupe, Mesa, Gilbert, and Chandler. The following chart shows the capture rates for population and employment for the Southeast Valley through 2030. The assumptions behind this forecast suggest that the Southeast Valley will begin to build out due to a shortage of vacant available land for residential development in the 2010 to 2020 decade. Again, this is for residential development in Maricopa County and not Pinal County. For instance, between 2005 and 2010, approximately 21 percent of the county’s population growth is expected to occur in the Southeast Valley. This declines to 14.5 percent in the next decade, followed by only a 4.5 percent increase in the 2020 to 2030 timeframe. Employment growth follows a similar pattern of decline. Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT 6-42 Market Analysis In terms of office employment, Mesa is also expected to have one of the higher capture rates among all the selected communities. In fact, Mesa’s capture rate increases over time, indicating that it could become a center of office employment beyond what has happened in the past. As will be noted in a later section, office development is one of the last real estate sectors to enter a newly growing area. For the most part, office development is found in major clusters throughout the Valley based on the availability of transportation and amenities for office workers. Today, some of the most important office clusters include 24th Street and Camelback in Phoenix, the Scottsdale Airpark in Scottsdale, downtown and midtown Phoenix, and Deer Valley near the I-17/101 interchange. 15 Table 6-44: Forecasted SE Valley Capture of Maricopa County Pop. & Employment Growth Forecasted Southeast Valley Capture of Maricopa County Population and Employment Growth 2005 - 2030 Source:MAG 2007 35.0% 32.2% 30.0% 24.5% 25.0% Employment 21.1% 20.0% 14.5% 15.0% 11.5% Population 10.0% 4.5% 5.0% 0.0% 2005-2010 2010-2020 Employment 2020-2030 Population However, in reviewing the population and employment projections, it appears that MAG may have underestimated the employment potential in the Southeast Valley and the amount of vacant land that is available in various areas, including Mesa Gateway Area, to continue to accommodate employment. In addition, there are many opportunities over the next 25 years for redevelopment of older parts of Tempe and Mesa that are today occupied by obsolete buildings. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway AirportThis could result in the intensification of employment in the older communities closer to the surrounding labor base rather than seeing job growth on the periphery of the metro area. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report However, in reviewing the population and employment projections, it appears that MAG may have underestimated the employment potential in the Southeast Valley and the amount of vacant land that is available in various areas, including Mesa Gateway Area, to continue to accommodate employment. In addition, there are many opportunities over the next 25 years for redevelopment of older parts of Tempe and Mesa that are today occupied by obsolete buildings. This could result in the intensification of employment in the older communities closer to the surrounding labor base rather than seeing job growth on the periphery of the metro area. The following chart shows the capture rate of the Southeast Valley for the county’s office and industrial employment over the next 25 years. The capture rate for industrial employment is expected to decline dramatically in 2020 to 2030 timeframe. Office employment is more stable through 2020, but then declines as well in the following decade. Once again, this forecast does not recognize the potential for redevelopment of older areas or for the Mesa Gateway Area to capture a large percentage of the employment growth. The MAG forecast instead assumes that communities such as Goodyear, Buckeye, and Surprise will capture a growing share of the office market. Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT Market Analysis 6-43 16 Table 6-45: Forecasted SE Valley Capture of Maricopa County Office & Ind. Employment Growth Forecasted Southeast Valley Capture of Maricopa County Office & Industrial Employment Growth 2005 - 2030 Source: MAG 2007 40.0% 35.3% 35.0% 36.0% 35.3% Office 32.0% 30.0% Industrial 25.5% 25.0% 20.0% 19.8% 15.0% 10.0% 2005-2010 2010-2020 Office Employment 2020-2030 Industrial Employment MAG Forecast For Mesa Gateway Area According to MAG, the area surrounding Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport (referred to in prior studies as the Mesa Gateway Area (MGA) will account for a large percentage of Mesa’s population and job growth, particularly in the decade between 2010 and 2020. The following tables show the overall Mesa population and employment forecast though 2030 compared to the forecast Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport for the Mesa Gateway Area. The data presented in the table represents the far southeast portion of Mesa south of Baseline Road. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report According to MAG, the area surrounding PMGA (referred to in prior studies as the Mesa Gateway Area (MGA) will account for a large percentage of Mesa’s population and job growth, particularly in the decade between 2010 and 2020. The following tables show the overall Mesa population and employment forecast though 2030 compared to the forecast for the Mesa Gateway Area. The data presented in the table represents the far southeast portion of Mesa south of Baseline Road. In 2005, Mesa had approximately 175,000 jobs. That job base is expected to grow to 306,000 jobs by 2030. For the Mesa Gateway Area, there were approximately 8,000 jobs in the area in 2005. By 2030, employment should increase to close to 56,000 jobs. In the next two decades, between 2010 and 2030, MAG forecasts that the Mesa Gateway Area will account for approximately 50 percent of all job growth in the City. However, as was noted on the table, between 2020 and 2030, MAG forecasts that the increase in jobs will decline relative to the prior decade. With the vast amount of employment land available around PMGA, it is questionable whether this decline would occur given PMGA’s location, Northeast Area Plan –– Technical Memorandum Driven 17 the airport asset, and infrastructure. Northeast Area Development Development Planprojected Technicaltransportation Memorandum // Market Market Driven Land Land Use Use 17 DRAFT DRAFT Table 6-46: Mesa & Mesa Gateway Area (MGA) Population Growth Forecast Mesa Mesa & & Mesa Mesa Gateway Gateway Area Area (MGA) (MGA) Population Population Growth Growth Forecast Forecast Mesa Mesa Population Population Forecast Forecast Increase Increase 2005 2005 486,296 486,296 2010 2010 518,944 518,944 32,648 32,648 2020 2020 565,693 565,693 46,749 46,749 2030 2030 584,866 584,866 19,173 19,173 38,350 38,350 44,846 44,846 6,496 6,496 64,816 64,816 19,970 19,970 77,003 77,003 12,187 12,187 WGA WGA Population Population Forecast Forecast Increase Increase WGA WGA as as % % of of Mesa Population Mesa Population Growth Growth 19.9% 19.9% 42.7% 42.7% 63.6% 63.6% Source: Source: MAG MAG 2007 2007 Table 6-47: Mesa & Mesa Gateway Area (MGA) Employment Growth Forecast Mesa Mesa & & Mesa Mesa Gateway Gateway Area Area (MGA) (MGA) Employment Employment Growth Growth Forecast Forecast Mesa Mesa Employment Employment Forecast Forecast Increase Increase 2005 2005 174,909 174,909 WGA WGA Employment Employment Forecast Forecast Increase Increase WGA WGA as as % % of of Mesa Employment Mesa Employment Growth Growth 8,042 8,042 2010 2010 218,085 218,085 43,176 43,176 2020 2020 275,236 275,236 57,151 57,151 2030 2030 306,030 306,030 30,794 30,794 12,008 12,008 3,966 3,966 39,553 39,553 27,545 27,545 55,721 55,721 16,168 16,168 9.2% 9.2% 48.2% 48.2% 52.5% 52.5% Source: Source: MAG MAG 2007 2007 6.4 6.4 Airport Airport Land Land Use/Employment Use/Employment Analysis Analysis Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport While While the the previous previous section section identified identified the the development development trends trends within within the the broader broader economic economic regions, regions, the the following following section section Market Analysis 6-44 MAG Forecast For Mesa Gateway Area Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report While the previous section identified the development trends within the broader economic regions, the following section focuses specifically on airport property development itself. There are a number of issues to consider when identifying the extent that a particular property could develop. First and foremost, as presented in prior sections, regional supply and demand conditions influence both development timing and density on a particular parcel of land. This is most relevant when considering short term development potential. Over the longer term, an area’s specific advantages and disadvantages come more into play. Second, as is the case with a unique use such as an airport, development patterns exhibited in other similar areas throughout the country provide some perspective into how and when an area might develop. Last, local efforts could result in the advancement or delay of market forces depending on the type of plan that is put in place. This last point is critical. When a development plan is also consistent with a region’s basic economic potential, efficiency is created and revenues are maximized. The following text examines each of these issues. 6.4.1 Employment Trends on Airport Property The economy as a whole remains very weak and a full recovery isn’t expected for the U.S. as a whole until 2013 or 2014, with Arizona potentially lagging behind the national recovery. Few new jobs will be created during the initial phases of the recovery which, combined with a significant excess supply of commercial real estate product in the Greater Phoenix area, will dampen demand for new construction. However, the economic fundamentals remain in place for both the State of Arizona and the Greater Phoenix economic region. Thus, over the longer term, as defined by the next two decades, new product will indeed be demanded as job growth and population inflows escalate. 6.4.2 Employment Composition Near Example Airports Dozens of airports throughout the country were examined in preparation of this analysis; three specific example airport properties are included as points of reference: • • • John Wayne Airport in Orange County, California, San Bernardino International Airport in San Bernardino, California (former Norton Air Force Base), and Ontario International Airport in Ontario, California. In addition, three economic regions surrounding each of the three above airports were analyzed for the composition of their employment base including: • • • The zip code containing the airport itself, The county within which the airport is located and The metropolitan statistical area within which the airport is located. The purpose of this comparison is to identify differences in the employment base of the area surrounding an airport (in this case the zip code data) to county-wide or MSA-wide employment trends. However, even zip code data may capture a broad area that does not accurately describe the circumstances directly on or surrounding an airport. Therefore, the results of the analysis may need to be supplemented by more detailed analysis of development activity directly on or adjacent to an airport. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Market Analysis 6-45 6.4 Airport Land Use/Employment Analysis Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report What this means is that the PMGA property does not necessarily have to fit into the traditional employment/business mix surrounding an airport of industrial and warehouse uses. However, the types of development that will occur near the Airport and within the broader economic region will indeed have an impact on the Airport no matter how well planned. It also suggests that the most viable employment uses in the short term will likely be derived from industrial or warehousing operations until the market surrounding PMGA becomes more mature and promotes higher value added uses. The key is to accommodate the aforementioned basic airport uses, but also try to enhance these uses by filling a niche use that the real estate market is not as likely to support. This niche use is what will ultimately differentiate the Airport from others. It will be difficult for any public entity, not just airport entities, to force a type of use that is not economically viable. While this still can occur, incentives or subsidies are required to redirect the desired types of development to a less than efficient location. Primary consideration should be first given to identifying the extent of revenue necessary to improve the airport property so it can achieve its full potential. Secondary consideration should be given to the exact composition of the surrounding area’s employment uses. If revenue from near term development is necessary to advance the Airport, then some lower value added uses should be considered. If a temporary lack of rent and tax revenue is not important to the development of the Airport from a revenue standpoint, then the plan can be more selective. John Wayne Airport –Employment Patterns The purpose of this analysis is to compare the composition of employment and businesses directly surrounding an airport to the broader economic region. This will identify whether the airport has attracted certain types of uses that are different from the economic characteristics of the immediate county or metro area and perhaps indicate the types of industries that may be efficient to pursue. John Wayne Airport in Orange County is located in one of the most affluent areas of Southern California, an area that at one time had the highest household income in the State. The Airport is located just north of Newport Beach and Laguna Beach at the confluence of three major freeways; the 405, 73 and 55. Orange County originally developed as an affluent suburban area with the major development being the Irvine Ranch. Because of the suburban atmosphere of the area, commercial and light industrial uses congregated around existing airports, in this case the John Wayne Airport and the El Toro Marine Corps Air Station to the east of John Wayne which is now closed. Therefore, to some extent, the uses surrounding John Wayne Airport reflect the fact that there were few other places for industrial uses to locate in the county. However, as the Airport grew in size and service, it became a center of business for the area attracting hotels, offices and some retail uses. The Airport proper itself does not have any major excess property that can be planned for private uses. Following is an aerial photo of the Airport and immediate surrounding uses. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 6-46 Market Analysis In most cases, land uses on or immediately adjacent to airports are driven by employment and land use patterns in the region surrounding the airport. These uses may include the traditional industrial and warehouse uses commonly associated with airports as well as office, retail, light industrial, mixed use and even residential in some cases. Most of these latter uses are in response to the character of the surrounding region and demand that is generated by residents and businesses within the region, not necessarily from the airport itself. Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport, is provided as an example of an airport in this analysis that is actively pursuing the planning and sale of land for non-traditional entertainment and retail uses on land owned by the Airport. Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT 20 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report John Wayne Airport Exhibit 6-5: John Wayne Airport Market Analysis 6-47 Based on U.S. Census data, employment surrounding John Wayne Airport is most heavily Based on U.S. Census data, employment surrounding John Wayne Airport is most heavily concentrated in concentrated in business services including professional, scientific, and technical services at 16.4 business services including professional, scientific, and technical services at 16.4% of all jobs, finance and percent of all jobs, finance and insurance at 15.4 percent and administrative and support and waste insurance at 15.4%and andremediation administrativeservices. and support waste management and have remediation services.in All these management All and these industry categories employment excess industry categories have employment in excess of the county and MSA employment levels. Two additional of the county and MSA employment levels. Two additional industry categories that show excess industry categories thatthe show excess nearrental the Airport are realand estate and rental and leasing and employment near Airport areemployment real estate and and leasing management of companies management of companies and enterprises. The excess employment sectors are highlighted in yellow onBy the and enterprises. The excess employment sectors are highlighted in yellow on the following table. following table. By comparison, health care and social assistance and retail trade employment are significantly comparison, health care and social assistance and retail trade employment are significantly lower in lower the surrounding area surrounding Airport comparedtotothe thecounty county and and MSA. MSA. Surprisingly, Surprisingly, accommodation and theinarea the the Airport compared accommodation foodand services which includes restaurants and bars areand under-represented in the area surrounding the food services which hotels, includes hotels, restaurants bars are under-represented in the area Airport compared the to the county compared and MSA. However, there are thanHowever, six hotels near airport and surrounding Airport to the county andmore MSA. theretheare moreterminal than six nearrestaurant the airport and However, and additional and retail uses. However, low andhotels additional andterminal retail uses. the lowrestaurant percentages in accommodation and foodthe services percentages accommodation andthe food employment the Airport reflect the factin employment nearinthe Airport may reflect factservices that Orange County hasnear an above averagemay employment base thatcategories Orange due County has an amusement above average base in these categories due to extensive these to extensive parkemployment and resort development. amusement park and resort development. A visual review of aerial photos around the Airport concluded that properties near the airport have an above average concentration of office space and a below average concentration of industrial space. Beyond the May 18, 2011 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT 21 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report business areas there is a high quantity of residential development, thus supplying the workers to support the broad base of commercial uses. Estimated Employment By Type John Wayne Airport 2007 Data Zip codes* 92612/92614 County MSA 54- Professional, Scientific & Technical Services 16.4% 8.3% 9.2% 31- Finance & Insurance 15.4% 7.5% 5.6% 44- Admin, Support, Waste Mgt, Remediation Services 11.9% 8.6% 7.6% 52- Manufacturing 10.6% 11.4% 11.7% 56- Wholesale trade 8.1% 7.7% 7.1% 42- Real Estate & Rental & Leasing 5.8% 3.2% 2.6% 23- Construction 5.4% 7.7% 5.1% 72- Management of Companies & Enterprises 5.2% 2.8% 2.2% 53- Accommodation & Food Services 4.5% 9.7% 9.1% 51- Information 3.8% 2.5% 4.7% 55- Health Care and Social Assistance 2.6% 9.0% 10.9% 62- Retail Trade 2.6% 11.2% 11.1% 61- Educational Services 2.0% 1.8% 2.7% 71- Arts, Entertainment & Recreation 0.9% 2.5% 2.1% 48- Transportation & Warehousing 0.6% 2.1% 3.6% 4.1% 100.0% 4.2% 100.0% 4.6% 100.0% Residual Grand Total *Airport is located in these zip code. Note: Totals may not equal sum of column due to rounding. Source: US Bureau of Census, USPS, Elliott D. Pollack & Co. A visual reviewInternational of aerial photos the Airport concluded that properties near the airport have San Bernardino Airportaround –Employment Patterns an above average concentration of office space and a belowofaverage concentration of industrial The San Bernardino International Airport is located just southeast downtown San Bernardino. The airport is space. Beyond the business areas there is a high quantity of residential development, thus supplying the former Norton Air Force Base that was listed for closure in 1989 and officially closed in 1994. There is no the workerspassenger to support the from broad of commercial uses. encompasses 2,100 acres of land, with much commercial travel thebase Airport today. The Airport excess property already developed or planned for private use. The City forged an agreement with Alliance San Bernardino International AirportProperties –Employment Patterns California, a subsidiary of Hillwood Investment (a Ross Perot Company) to master plan, market and The San Bernardino International Airport is located just southeast downtown San Bernardino. develop the excess property. To date, over 9 million square feet of spaceofhas been developed by Alliance and The Airport is the former Norton Air Force Base that was listed for closure in 1989 and officially 4,000 jobs created for a wide variety of tenants, most of whom use the property for warehousing and distribution. closed in 1994. There is no commercial passenger travel from the Airport today. The Airport Those tenants include: encompasses 2,100 acres of land, with much excess property already developed or planned for private use. The CityMarkets: forged 2.1 an million agreement ƒ Stater Brothers squarewith feet Alliance California, a subsidiary of Hillwood Investment Properties (a Ross Perot Company) to master ƒ Kohl’s west coast distribution center: 650,000 square feet plan, market and develop the excess property. To date, over nine million square feet of space has been developed by Alliance and 4,000 ƒ Mattel: 1.2 million square feet jobsƒcreated for a wide variety of tenants, most of whom use the property for warehousing and Pep Boys: 600,000 square feet distribution. Those tenants include: ƒ ƒ • ƒ• ƒ• ODN Logistics: 300,000 square feet Medline: 405,000 square feet Stater Brothers Markets: 2.1 million square feet Komar: 326,000 square feet Kohl’s west coast distribution center: 650,000 square feet PACTIV: 587,000 square feetfeet Mattel: 1.2 million square May 18, 2011 6-48 Market Analysis Table 6-48: Estimated Employment by Type - John Wayne Airport Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report • 22 Medline: 405,000 square feet ƒ • Kohler: 480,000 square feet feet Komar: 326,000 square • PACTIV: 587,000 square feet • photo Kohler: feet An aerial of the480,000 Airport square and surrounding environment is shown below. An aerial photo of theSan Airport and surrounding environment is shown below. Bernardino International Airport Exhibit 6-6: San Bernardino International Airport Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 6-49 Market Analysis Northeast Area Development Plan – 600,000 Technical square Memorandum • Pep Boys: feet / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT • ODN Logistics: 300,000 square feet Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use 23 DRAFT Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report San Bernardino International Airport Tenants 6-50 Market Analysis Exhibit 6-7: San Bernardino International Airport Tenants The Airport’s location is a prime determinant of the types of uses that have been developed on the TheAirport’s Airport’s available location isproperty. a prime determinant of the types of uses that have been developed on the Airport’s San Bernardino is located toward the far east end of the Los Angeles available property. San Bernardino is located toward thearea far east of the Los Angeles metrocorridors area known metro area known as the Inland Empire. The hasend extensive transportation andas the modes Inland Empire. The area has extensive transportation corridors and modes and has become one of the and has become one of the primary distribution centers for the entire L.A. region. The primary distribution for thebyentire L.A.freeways region. The Airport the itself10,is215, surrounded several freeways Airport itself iscenters surrounded several including and 210.by The Burlington including the 10, 215,Feand 210. The Burlington Northern Santa facility Fe Railway intermodal container Northern Santa Railway has an intermodal container just has twoan miles from the Airportfacility and justatwo milesswitching from the airport and a miles major to switching yardlocated seven midway miles to the west, located midway between the major yard seven the west, between the Airport and Ontario Airport and OntarioAirport. International Airport. In addition, Ontario International Airport provides passenger service for International In addition, Ontario International Airport provides passenger service for the the Inland Inland Empire additional passenger airport wouldwould not be not justified at San Bernardino. All these Empireregion. region.AnAn additional passenger airport be justified at San Bernardino. facilities support the development of distribution,oflogistics, manufacturing, maintenance andmaintenance other heavy All these facilities support the development distribution, logistics, manufacturing, and other heavy industrial use at the San Bernardino International Airport. The business andat industrial use at the San Bernardino International Airport. The business and employment conditions found employment conditions found at San Bernardino similarly apply to the west side of PMGA. San Bernardino similarly apply to the west side of PMGA. However, the Northeast Area of PMGA will be However, the Northeast Area of PMGA be responding to land and development planssite. that responding to land use and development plans will that are occurring to the east use on the GM Proving Grounds are occurring to the east on the GM Proving Grounds site. Analysis of employment data within the zip code surrounding the Airport reveals a different pattern of industries Analysis employment data within thesignificant zip coderetail surrounding the a different however. Theofemployment composition includes trade activity at Airport 19.5% of reveals all employment. This pattern of industries however. The employment composition includes significant retail compares to 15.6% for the metro area and 14.9% for the county. However, upon closer inspection, the ziptrade code at 19.5 percent of allofemployment. This compares to 15.6 as percent the metro area and for activity the Airport includes a variety retail centers situated along freeways well asforsome of downtown San 14.9 percent for the county. However, upon closer inspection, the zip code for the Airport includes Bernardino. In fact, transportation and warehousing, as well as manufacturing uses, are significantly a variety of retail centers situated along freeways as well as some of downtown San Bernardino. underrepresented within the zip code, but clearly those uses are located in nearby areas to the south and to the In fact, transportation and warehousing, as well as manufacturing uses, are significantly under westrepresented near the Ontario Airport. within the zip code, but clearly those uses are located in nearby areas to the south and to the west near the Ontario Airport. May 18, 2011 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT Table 6-49: Estimated Employment by Type - San Bernardino International Airport 24 Market Analysis 6-51 Estimated Employment By Type San Bernadino International Airport 2007 Data Zip Code 92408* County MSA 44- Retail Trade 19.5% 14.9% 15.6% 56- Admin, Support, Waste Mgt, Remediation Services 14.0% 9.4% 8.4% 72- Accommodation & Food Services 10.9% 9.4% 10.6% 62- Health Care and Social Assistance 8.0% 12.7% 11.6% 52- Finance & Insurance 6.9% 3.4% 3.0% 55- Management of Companies & Enterprises 6.7% 1.2% 1.1% 23- Construction 6.3% 7.8% 10.9% 54- Professional, Scientific & Technical Services 5.7% 3.0% 3.3% 31- Manufacturing 5.4% 11.5% 10.9% 48- Transportation & Warehousing 3.9% 7.9% 5.8% 42- Wholesale trade 3.9% 6.4% 5.5% 61- Educational Services 3.3% 2.1% 1.6% 71- Arts, Entertainment & Recreation 1.4% 1.8% 3.0% 51- Information 1.1% 1.9% 1.8% 53- Real Estate & Rental & Leasing 0.8% 1.6% 1.9% 2.1% 5.3% 5.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Residual Grand Total *Airport is located in this zip code. Note: Totals may not equal sum of column due to rounding. Source: US Bureau of Census, USPS, Elliott D. Pollack & Co. The conclusion on employment composition is that the San Bernardino area developed without a strong The conclusion on employment composition is that the San Bernardino area developed without presence of warehousing and distribution prior to the closure of Norton Air Force Base. Instead, retail and office a strong presence of warehousing and distribution prior to the closure of Norton Air Force Base. uses were the most predominant uses along the freeway corridors. In fact, employment data within the three zip Instead, retail and office uses were the most predominant uses along the freeway corridors. In codes that comprisedata most of San show that a very low level of of transportation and warehousing fact, employment within theBernardino three zip codes comprise most San Bernardino show a employment totaling only 2.8% of alland jobswarehousing compared to 7.9% for the County and 5.8% for the metroofarea. very low level of transportation employment totaling only 2.8 percent all jobs compared to 7.9 percent for the County and 5.8 percent for the metro area. San Bernardino International Airport is an excellent example of a facility that took advantage of its inherent assets, identified demand for certain typesisofan land uses andexample implemented a plan tothat develop excess property. San Bernardino International Airport excellent of a facility tookitsadvantage of This is important since the airport developed along traditional lines of warehousing and logistics despite its inherent assets, identified demand for certain types of land uses and implemented a plan to the broader region being over-weighted in consumer related businesses. develop its excess property. This is important since the Airport developed along traditional lines of warehousing and logistics despite the broader region being over-weighted in consumer related businesses. Ontario International Airport – Employment Patterns Similar to the San Bernardino International Airport, Ontario International Airport is located in the Inland Empire region of the Los Angeles metro area. The Airport is located between two freeways, I-10 and 60 with I-15 located just to the east. The Airport is owned and operated by the City of Los Angeles (within the Los Angeles World Airports division). It provides relief to congestion at L.A. International Airport, similar to the John Wayne, Burbank and Long Beach airports. However, as a result of airline consolidation and reduced flights by the major airlines, passenger traffic at Ontario declined 32% between 2007 and 2009. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Similar to the San Bernardino International Airport, Ontario International Airport is located in the Inland Empire region of the Los Angeles metro area. The Airport is located between two freeways, I-10 and 60 with I-15 located just to the east. The Airport is owned and operated by the City of Los (within the Los Angeles World Airports division). It provides relief to congestion at L.A. Northeast Area Angeles Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use 25 DRAFT International Airport, similar to the John Wayne, Burbank and Long Beach airports. However, as a result of airline consolidation and reduced flights by the major airlines, passenger traffic at Ontario declined 32 percent between 2007 and 2009. There is little excess property directly on the airport and what property there is has primarily been used for There is littlerental excess Airport and what property has primarily general aviation, carproperty facilities,directly parking on andthecargo handling. Aerial photos there of theisarea surroundingbeen the used for general aviation, rental car facilities, parking and cargo handling. Aerial photos of the Airport reveal a variety of warehousing and industrial land uses. However, the north side of the Airport along area surrounding the Airport reveal a variety of warehousing and industrial land uses. However, Interstate 10 has a variety of commercial uses that include hotels, mixed use, office buildings and retail uses the north side of the Airport along Interstate 10 has a variety of commercial uses that include including Ontario Mills, a regional mall. Many of these uses reflect demand created by residential use located hotels, mixed use, office buildings and retail uses including Ontario Mills, a regional mall. Many northofofthese the Airport and access afforded by I-10. However, the hotels near the airport terminal, numbering more uses reflect demand created by residential use located north of the Airport and access thanafforded ten, and office parksHowever, reflect the presence the Airport. by I-10. the hotelsof near the airport terminal, numbering more than ten, and office parks reflect the presence of the Airport. Ontario International Airport Exhibit 6-8: Ontario International Airport The zip code area surrounding the Airport is super-weighted in manufacturing (20.3%), transportation and warehousing (20.0%), and wholesale trade (16.6%). A Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) main rail line passes through the area south of the Airport and the BNSF transfer yard is just several miles to the east. The area has a disproportionately low level of retail, and accommodation and food services employment. This data may not fully capture hotel and restaurant employment since much of this development is relatively new. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport However, Ontario International Airport is a relevant example because the employment configuration at the airport and throughout the immediate region appears to be influenced by surrounding economic factors. However, the area appears to be slowly transitioning to service-oriented airport businesses near the terminal. 6-52 Market Analysis Ontario International Airport – Employment Patterns Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 6-53 The Ontario Airport has long been known as a reliever airport for LAX with a strong cargo handling operation. The pattern of land uses and businesses located immediately south and east of the Airport is consistent with the uses that are found at many airports. Conversely, the north side of the Airport shows patterns of commercial and residential land uses, and is consistent with areas near commercial passenger terminal complexes at other U.S. airports. Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT Table 6-50: Estimated Employment by Type - Ontario International Airport Market Analysis The zip code area surrounding the Airport is super-weighted in manufacturing (20.3 percent), transportation and warehousing (20.0 percent), and wholesale trade (16.6 percent). A Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) main rail line passes through the area south of the Airport and the BNSF transfer yard is just several miles to the east. The area has a disproportionately low level of retail, and accommodation and food services employment. This data may not fully capture hotel and restaurant employment since much of this development is relatively new. However, Ontario International Airport is a relevant example because the employment configuration at the Airport and throughout the immediate region appears to be influenced by surrounding economic factors. However, the area appears to be slowly transitioning to service-oriented airport businesses near the terminal. 26 Estimated Employment By Type Ontario International Airport 2007 Data Zip Code 91761* MSA County 31- Manufacturing 20.3% 10.9% 11.5% 48- Transportation & Warehousing 20.0% 5.8% 7.9% 42- Wholesale trade 16.6% 5.5% 6.4% 56- Admin, Support, Waste Mgt, Remediation Services 12.3% 8.4% 9.4% 44- Retail Trade 8.0% 15.6% 14.9% 23- Construction 5.3% 10.9% 7.8% 72- Accommodation & Food Services 3.4% 10.6% 9.4% 55- Management of Companies & Enterprises 2.3% 1.1% 1.2% 52- Finance & Insurance 2.2% 3.0% 3.4% 54- Professional, Scientific & Technical Services 1.8% 3.3% 3.0% 51- Information 1.7% 1.8% 1.9% 62- Health Care and Social Assistance 1.4% 11.6% 12.7% 53- Real Estate & Rental & Leasing 1.0% 1.9% 1.6% 61- Educational Services 0.4% 1.6% 2.1% 71- Arts, Entertainment & Recreation 0.2% 3.0% 1.8% 3.0% 100.0% 5.0% 100.0% 5.3% 100.0% Residual Grand Total *Airport is located in this zip code. Note: Totals may not equal sum of column due to rounding. Source: US Bureau of Census, USPS, Elliott D. Pollack & Co. The Ontario Airport has long been known as a reliever airport for LAX with a strong cargo handling operation. The pattern of land uses and businesses located immediately south and east Phoenix-Mesa of the Airport isGateway consistentAirport with the uses that are found at many airports. Conversely, the north side of the Airport shows patterns of commercial and residential land uses, and is consistent with areas near commercial passenger terminal complexes at other U.S. airports. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report This final example provided in this section is an often cited for the planning of non-traditional airport uses. In the case of Dallas-Fort Worth, the airport authority is planning for a sizeable retail and entertainment district on the far northern end of the airport property. A close inspection of the planning documents was completed along with interviews of management personnel at the Airport. However, this example may not be directly comparable to the PMGA situation. Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use 27 First, managers of the development process at the Airport indicated that while the plan does indicate DRAFT an aggressive land use pattern, they are going to fully respond to land use demand and activities occurring in theproperty area surrounding Airport. This indicates the desire follow the region’s Second, the airport is quite largethe and, while portions of the property are to dedicated to retail and economic direction and not force unusual types of development. Second, the airport property entertainment uses, even larger parcels are dedicated to traditional airport uses such as industrial and office. is quite large and, while portions of the property are dedicated to retail and entertainment uses, even larger parcels are dedicated to traditional airport uses such as industrial and office. Third, the Third, the area identified as viable for retail and entertainment uses is northwest of and separated from the area identified as viable for retail and entertainment uses is northwest of and separated from the Airport proper by a major freeway. From an economic perspective, it has little direct relationship to the Airport. In Airport proper by a major freeway. From an economic perspective, it has little direct relationship fact,to a number of resorts retail centers are located just north the Airport the Airport. In and fact,major a number of resorts and major retailofcenters areproperty. located just north of the Airport property. The following aerial photo shows the extent of vacant available land within the boundaries of the Dallas-Fort Worth Airport and theaerial proposed retail and entertainment on available its northwest side. The following photo shows the extent of area vacant land within the boundaries of the Dallas-Fort Worth Airport and the proposed retail and entertainment area on its northwest side. Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport Exhibit 6-9: Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport The Dallas-Fort Worth Airport is surrounded by major freeways and has a variety of excess land available for development. Those excess properties and their intended uses are shown on the plan below. The northwest quadrant of the plan proposes uses such as hospitality/entertainment and related uses, mixed use and freeway 6-54 Market Analysis Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport – Retail & Entertainment Planning Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport Master Plan Exhibit 6-10: Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport Master Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 6-55 Market Analysis The Dallas-Fort Worth Airport is surrounded by major freeways and has a variety of excess land available for development. Those excess properties and their intended uses are shown on the plan below. The northwest quadrant of the plan proposes uses such as hospitality/entertainment and uses, mixed use and freeway /commercial. These Northeast Area related Development Plan – Technical Memorandum Market Driven Land Useuses are in response to existing hospitality 28 and retail uses near the City of Grapevine and Grapevine Lake such as the Gaylord Texan Resort DRAFT and the Grapevine Mills Mall. These uses are supported by a large population living north of the Airport as well as extensive employment uses in the vicinity. Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 29 Close-Up of Northwest Quadrant Land Use Plan 6-56 Market Analysis Exhibit 6-11: Close-Up of Northwest Quadrant Land Use Plan In summary, the planners for the Dallas-Fort Worth Airport have responded to market influences In summary, the planners for the Dallas-Fort Worth Airport have responded to market influences in planning for in planning for the disposition and development of excess property. Most of the land around the the disposition and development of excess property. Most of the land around the Airport has been planned for Airport has been planned for airport compatible uses such as industrial and office. However, airport compatible such asdictate, industrial andhave office.incorporated However, where market dynamics dictate, where marketuses dynamics they entertainment and retail usesthey intohave the incorporated entertainment and retail uses into the plan. plan. 6.4.36.4.3 Findings and Conclusions Related to Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Plan Findings and Conclusions Related to Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Plan The report’s findings to this point identify a number of factors that must be considered in the Phoenix-Mesa This Airport section’s findings to this point identify a number of factors thatbelow mustinbe considered in the Gateway planning exercise for the Northeast Area. These are highlighted bullet point format. PMGA planning exercise for the Northeast Area. These are highlighted below in bullet point format. Any airport plan must be produced in recognition of the economic fundamentals of the surrounding 1. 1. 2. 3. region as well as the development potential of the immediately adjacent properties. Any airport plan must be produced in recognition of the economic fundamentals of the surrounding region as well as the development potential of the immediately adjacent Forcing economic activity that does not mesh well with these economic influences can be costly in properties. the form of business location inducements or incentives, if those are available from the PMGA. 2. Forcing economic activity that does not mesh well with these economic influences can be Similarly, toobusiness restricted location in terms of potential alternative uses could remainare vacant for an costly in land the that formis of inducements or incentives, if those available undesirable length of time. This will impact rent and tax collections that may be necessary for from the PMGA. other airport development efforts. May 18, 2011 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 3. Similarly, land that is too restricted in terms of potential alternative uses could remain vacant for an undesirable length of time. This will impact rent and tax collections that may be necessary for other airport development efforts. 4. Initial planning for the Northeast Area should consider airport uses such as commercial and light industrial, including office. The Airport should attempt to identify niche uses that may not be fully provided by the surrounding property owners. 5. Niche uses could include entertainment and retail development, but these are considered longer term initiatives, predicated upon terminal growth and residential market development. Light industrial uses are considered less risky in the short term. 6. Retail uses will likely be provided in the immediate areas outside the Airport and, thus, would be considered of higher risk in the airport plan. Much of the justification for these type uses will be driven by nearby residential demand and, to some extent, passenger terminal area growth and its related employment. 7. A flexible plan could indeed identify higher value added uses such as office, but does not need to exclude the more basic light industrial uses. 8. A hotel is a common use near airports but tends to require meeting space if it is large in scale. A hotel located directly on the airport property is a consideration for the plan. However, it would likely also need to capture business from non-airport sources to be successful. 9. Any office uses would need to have convenient access to make such a project viable. Office traffic would need to be separated from airport traffic. 10. The Airport itself is the primary use of the property and periphery development should be viewed as a means to maximize the development potential of the Airport though revenue generation. From this perspective an overly restrictive or optimistic development plan could actually impede the development of the core use of the property through reduced revenue flows. 11. Bottom line: The revenue needs of the Airport as it relates to physical improvements and keeping up with demand for services should be heavily weighted in this exercise. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Market Analysis 6-57 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 6.5.1 Background The property that is the subject of this analysis is an undeveloped 700-acre parcel located in the northeast portion of the PMGA in Mesa, Arizona. The site will have frontage along Ellsworth Road (approximately 1.25 miles in length) and will likely be adjacent to the planned SR-24 freeway stemming from the Loop 202 San Tan freeway and passing by the northeastern portion of the site. The site may also have some frontage along Ray Road as it extends eastward. The Airport’s border site’sMemorandum southwestern edge. Northeast Arearunways Development Plan – the Technical / Market Driven Land Use 31 DRAFT Exhibit 6-12: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Property To the west of the runways is the current commercial terminal, a number of businesses and employment uses, and educational facilities such as Arizona State University Polytechnic campus and the Williams campus of Chandler Gilbert Community College. The area directly north of the Airport is currently vacant. The land has been divided into several parcels held by Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport various owners. To the east is the former GM Proving Grounds which was sold to DMB Associates (north parcel 3,600 acres) 6-58 Market Analysis 6.5 Highest and Best Use Analysis Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The area directly north of the Airport is currently vacant. The land has been divided into several parcels held by various owners. To the east is the former GM Proving Grounds which was sold to DMB Associates (north parcel 3,600 acres) and Pacific Proving LLC (south parcel 1,700 acres). The DMB Mesa Proving Grounds site has been zoned and master planned for a variety of mixed uses with a likely 50-year build out potential that includes resort and business style hotels, regional and community retail development, Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use 32 employment centers and residential products of every type. The Pacific Proving site appears to DRAFT have received a general plan amendment for Mixed Use/Community, but has not formally rezoned the property. Former GM Proving Grounds Exhibit 6-13: Former GM Proving Grounds DMB Mesa Proving Grounds PMGA Pacific Proving The following plan for the DMB Mesa Proving Grounds has been approved by the City of Mesa. The project may include a Gaylord Entertainment Resort. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 6-59 Market Analysis To the west of the runways is the current commercial terminal, a number of businesses and employment uses, and educational facilities such as Arizona State University Polytechnic campus and the Williams campus of Chandler Gilbert Community College. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT 1 Exhibit 6-14: Mesa Proving Grounds 3.2.2 Passenger Terminal Area The West Passenger Terminal Area is approximately mid-field, bordered on the east by the Middle Apron and on the west by South Sossaman Road, a four-lane urban collector road. The Passenger Terminal Area has airport-owned leasible land and buildings north and south of the area as well as Arizona State University property to the west. The landside approach to the passenger terminal area is directly off South Sossaman Road via the access roadway, which provides connection to the terminal departure and arrival curbs, long term parking and rental car return. The passenger terminal area consists of several existing buildings including the Passenger Terminal, the Terminal Annex, the West Terminal Expansion – Phase 1 and Hangar 24. (reference Exhibit 3-2: Existing Passenger Terminal Facilities) Mesa Fire Station 15 (ARFF) is included below since it is planned for demolition in late summer 2010. Passenger terminal parking is proposed for the fire station site. 3.2.2.4 Rental Car Operations Convenient passenger access to rental car is one of the goals at Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport. The easy access begins with the rental car counters within the arrival lobby of the West Terminal Expansion – Phase 1 Building. The arriving passengers would continue to the Rental Car Ready lot just in front of the Terminal. The departing passenger would drop-off their party along the curb and proceed to the Rental Car Return Lot just north of the access roadway, within walking distance to the terminal. The concept plan for the Pacific ProvingMay site is shown on the next page based on the General Plan 18, 2011 Amendment to Mixed Use/Community. This land use designation permits a wide variety of uses including residential. Several design alternatives for the Northeast Area of the PMGA have been prepared as part of the planning process. Eventually the passenger terminal for the Airport will be relocated to the 700-acre Northeast Area, creating the opportunity for the development of additional uses on the property. The following alternative design demonstrates some of the constraints and opportunities related to the Northeast Area. A major issue is access to the Northeast Area from the proposed SR-24 freeway. SR-24 will limit access to the property while at the same time creating opportunities for development of surrounding land. A second issue is the limited amount of land available for nonairport uses given the land requirement for the terminal, parking, apron, traffic movements, airline belly cargo and maintenance facilities. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 6-60 Market Analysis The following plan for the DMB Mesa Proving Grounds has been approved by the City of Mesa. The project may include a Gaylord Entertainment Resort. Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum / Market Driven Land Use DRAFT 1 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The concept plan for the Pacific Proving site is shown below based on the General Plan Amendment to Mixed Use/Community. This land use designation permits a wide variety of uses including residential. 6-61 Market Analysis Exhibit 6-15: Pacific Proving Site May 18, 2011 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 6.5.2 Analysis Given the background of planned uses adjacent to PMGA and the Northeast Area, this section will analyze the most appropriate land use or uses for those parts of the Northeast Area not used for airport-related uses and which will bring the most value to PMGA. Following is a summary of conclusions developed from prior sections of this report. 1. The real estate market in Greater Phoenix is in a deep recession. Both the residential and commercial markets are in distress, compounding the impact of the national recession. In our opinion, the commercial real estate markets will likely require four to five years to recover and return to normal occupancy levels. The long term prospects of population and employment growth for Greater Phoenix are still very positive with limited improvement beginning in 2011. This timeframe for recovery should not impact the mid to long term plans of PMGA to relocate the passenger terminal to the Northeast Area. By the time the relocation occurs, the real estate market should be well into its next cycle. 2. Overall, the Mesa industrial and office market is weak compared to competitor cities. PMGA is still considered a peripheral location although residential growth has pushed up against borders. Growth east of PMGA is limited due to the lack of available land for development. Most of the land east of PMGA is within the Superstition Vistas area of the State Trust land holdings. PMGA’s future is largely tied to the long term development of Superstition Vistas and in the short term to the development of the former GM Proving Grounds. 3. The presence of the Loop 202 freeway is a major benefit to PMGA. The SR-24 is a similar asset that would improve the marketability of land in the Northeast Area. However, of greatest benefit would be the construction of the North-South freeway in Pinal County which would link Mesa directly to I-10 and Tucson. However, the timing of construction of such a facility is undetermined. 4. A review of land use patterns on and around airports in the U.S. reveals that the planning, marketing and development of airport property is a function of market demand in the surrounding region. Analysis of the two airports located in the Inland Empire of Southern California (Ontario and San Bernardino) demonstrates strong preference for manufacturing, distribution and logistics uses consistent with the assets of the region. However, with Ontario International Airport’s growing passenger service, a variety of hotel and office uses have been developed near the terminal. Businesses and land uses around the John Wayne Airport are more oriented toward professional and business services which are consistent with the economy of Orange County. Here, too, land uses near the Airport’s terminal include hotels and office uses. Land uses proposed for the Northeast Area of PMGA need to reflect the realities of the growing market and be flexible to fill deficiencies and known demand, Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 6-62 Market Analysis Preliminary information appears to indicate that access to the Northeast Area must come from the Hawes exit on the Loop 202 and from Ellsworth Road at the Williams Field Road alignment on the south. Direct access from the SR-24 to the Northeast Area is not possible. A third possible access point may be near the SR-24 and Ellsworth Road interchange, but that is unconfirmed. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The concept of the “Aerotropolis” should be employed in the planning and development of the entire Mesa Gateway Area. There is basically a clean slate from which to work, with few existing uses to disrupt the concept. The development of PMGA and Mesa Gateway is a long term prospect, but the elements are all there to create a successful employment center. Both DMB Mesa Proving Grounds and Pacific Proving are essential contributors to the Aerotropolis concept. 6. Following is an analysis of land use patterns and plans that will affect the planning and development of PMGA’s Northeast Area. • • • There is presently limited population in the surrounding area to support extensive retail development in the Mesa Gateway Area. Both DMB Mesa Proving Grounds and Pacific Proving have more than adequate amounts of planned retail uses that are supportable by their forecasted residential population. DMB’s Mesa Proving Grounds could become a standout development in the Southeast Valley and will likely capture more than its fair share of retail development. There are limited examples of retail and entertainment uses on airport property, especially in close proximity to a terminal and airport parking facilities. The key determining factor is often property availability, and the need to utilize airport owned property for aeronautical uses. Since this part of Mesa is primarily viewed as a future business and industry center, the most logical uses for the Northeast Area are office and light industrial. Justification for retail uses will be driven by timing of the passenger terminal complex and its sustained growth as well as demand generated from nearby residential areas. 6.5.3 Recommendations Following are recommendations related to proposed land uses for the Northeast Area. The recommendations are considered market-driven and are designed to maximize value and revenue to PMGA. 1. 2. 3. The primary use of the Northeast Area non-airport related property should be commercial (office) and light industrial. However, since the Southwest Area of PMGA is slated for conventional industrial uses, it is recommended that the Northeast Area be reserved for more up-scale one- to two-story commercial or light industrial and flex industrial buildings. These light industrial types of buildings have been successful in a variety of locations including the Scottsdale Airpark and Cotton Center in south Phoenix. These light industrial types of buildings provide for generally small companies who may do warehousing, logistics and manufacturing as well as office users such as call centers and professional and business services. Commercial office uses will likely produce less demand for land in the short term. However, long term as the Mesa Gateway Area matures and the SR-24 is constructed, office uses should be considered along the frontage of SR-24 and Ellsworth Road. These buildings, which could be four to six stories in height, depending on airspace height constraints, and would be oriented toward the general attributes of the overall Mesa Gateway Area and the airport commercial passenger terminal area. Hotels should be considered as a compatible use within the Northeast Area. A review of airport land use patterns show that hotels are a common use directly on airport property and adjacent to a commercial passenger terminal complex. However, some of the largest airports, including Phoenix Sky Harbor, do not have hotels on site, rather distributed offsite, but in close proximity. More than likely, surrounding landowners and developers may focus on this use for at least part of their development plans. However, a hotel oriented Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 6-63 Market Analysis 5. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 5. 6. 7. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 6-64 Market Analysis 4. toward SR-24 and Ellsworth Road would be able to serve both airport demand as well as demand generated from nearby employment centers off-airport. A small conference center could be an option for a hotel site as well. Ancillary retail uses within light industrial or office buildings should be permitted. These uses would primarily serve employees working in the area. Traffic for any non-aeronautical uses should be separated from airport traffic. Traffic circulation will be key to marketing property for sale or lease. The Northeast Area should be highly themed from a design and landscape perspective. A central architectural or landscape feature should be considered for the site. The Northeast Area should standout among the various other real estate projects that may be developed in the Proving Grounds property. The plan for the Northeast Area should be flexible to accommodate various types of uses as the area develops over time. Since the Mesa Gateway Area will develop over a period of decades, PMGA may wish to consider a plan that allows for the transition of buildings or sites from a low value added use, such as light industrial, to high value added uses such as office, retail, or other. The low value added buildings would be introduced in the early phases of the project. As those buildings reach the end of their useful life, they could be replaced with modern structures that would accommodate professional and business services. In this way, PMGA is producing revenues as early as possible, and allowing for increasing revenues in later years. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 7.1 Introduction This section describes the Alternatives Development process, which is the most substantial portion of the Northeast Area Development Plan analysis. This process includes the evaluation, screening, and refinement of alternatives to lead to the selection of a single recommended development alternative. Alternatives were created based on various configurations for the NADP terminal area. Each terminal area concept had multiple variations and has been organized into groups based upon similar characteristics. These alternatives developed a range of responses to each future programming requirement including ground transportation, aviation-related support areas, parking, terminal access roadway improvements, regional road access and non-aeronautical related commercial development. The alternatives development process is detailed in the following sub sections. 7.2 Northeast Area Development Objectives Several objectives were established for purposes of directing the plan and establishing continuity in the future development of the Phoenix Mesa Gateway Airport. These objectives take into account several categorical considerations relating to the needs of the airport, both in the short-term and the long-term, including safety, capital improvements, land use compatibility, financial and economic conditions, public interest and investment. While all are project oriented, some obviously represent more tangible activities than others; however, all are deemed important and appropriate to the future of the airport. The following objectives are intended to guide the preparation of this Northeast Area Development Plan (NADP) and direct the future expansion of PMGA: • • • • • • • • Plan the airport to be able to safely accommodate the forecast aircraft fleet with facilities properly sized to accommodate forecast demand Program facilities to be constructed when demand is realized (construction is to be driven by actual demand, not forecast demand) Enhance the self-sustaining capability of the airport and ensure the financial feasibility of future airport development Encourage the protection of existing public and private investment in land and facilities, and advocate the resolution of any potential land use conflicts, both on and off airport property Plan and develop the airport to be environmentally compatible with the community and minimize environmental impacts on both airport property and property adjacent to the airport Provide effective direction for the future development of PMGA through the preparation of a rational plan and adherence to the adopted development program Integrate the airport’s ground transportation access requirements with the area’s regional transportation goals Develop alternatives with a flexible design for the future terminal and airport parking facilities that preserves the site while accommodating the program for 5 million enplanements, and ultimately to 10 million enplanements Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 7-1 Alternatives Development Section 7: Alternatives Development Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The Level 1 “Bubble Diagram” schemes were derived from the charrette meeting held with project stakeholders on Thursday April 22, 2010. The nine (9) schemes evolved from three (3) stakeholder working groups at this meeting. The purpose of the charrette was for the Consultant Team to jointly develop options with airport staff and stakeholders, to determine viable land use alternatives for aviation and non-aviation related improvements on and off airport property, as well as to ensure that suitable access to the northeast terminal area from the regional and arterial transportation system is provided for future development. Bubble diagrams were developed based upon acreage requirements developed in the Facility Requirements analysis summarized in Section 5. 7.3.1 Description of Schemes As outlined previously, an approach based on required acreages, driven by aeronautical need, formed the foundation of the initial charrette process. During this initial alternatives development, the objective was to develop alternative “bubble diagram”, big-picture solutions that would facilitate bracketing of aeronautical properties, access corridors, non-aeronautical commercial properties, and any special set-aside land for functional areas such as open space, drainage retention, etc. The charrette process drew from the myriad stakeholder groups to derive ideas/desires and to generate workable holistic land use templates which marry aeronautical and non-aeronautical/ commercial functions. • • • • • • Local area roadways, intersection, and freeway access points. Locations for a variety of aeronautical revenue generating uses requiring varying parcel sizes. Locations for non-aeronautical revenue generating uses – office, retail, hotels, commercial, etc. Range of parcels sizes and recommendations for types of revenue generating uses for non-aeronautical related parcels. Locations for open spaces which may support community objectives for parks, natural or environmentally protected areas. Description of protected airspace areas as well as noise sensitive areas associated with the airport operations (depiction may not be required). The focus of the transportation requirements in the schemes was primarily on three major elements: regional access to the adjacent freeway system, local access to the City of Mesa arterial street system and internal circulation to support the land uses on the airport property. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-2 7.3 Level 1 “Bubble Diagram” Schemes Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Transportation Network From a regional perspective, in Scheme 1, the main access to the airport from L202 is via Hawes Road with additional access from the future SR-24 via Ellsworth Road and the realigned Williams Field Road. The access to the local arterial street system is proposed via major access points located at Hawes Road/Ray Road intersection, the Ellsworth Road/Internal Roadway (located south of SR-24/Ellsworth Road Traffic Interchange ramp), and the realigned Williams Field Road/Ellsworth Road intersection. The internal circulation within the airport is a one-way roadway circulating southbound in front of the terminal and circulating northbound east of the proposed airport parking area. All other internal roadways are proposed to be the standard two-way configuration serving the mixed-use, commercial and green space areas of the site. • • • The transportation network in Scheme 1 appears to be adequate to serve the terminal but provides only one access point to serve the non-aeronautical uses along Ellsworth Road. There is no separation for the roadways serving the commercial land-uses and the airport terminal. This scheme does not address the transit component. The airport, the mixed-use area to the northeast and the commercial development to the south would be better served by the provision of a transit facility on site. Aeronautical Uses Scheme 1 shows the terminal building, aircraft parking apron and auto parking centrally located on the site, with supporting aeronautical facilities located in the northern and southern corners of the property. Close proximity to the airside for all related facilities maximizes the operational efficiency. One airside parcel is identified for commercial development, this may not be the highest and best use for this property as it would be better suited to be reserved for aviation related development. Private Development Uses This scheme is created with a dual focus or concentration of land use groupings. The largest area is established for mixed-use development (retail, hotel and entertainment) with a wide band in the northwestern quadrant of the site, which is adjacent to SR-24. Commercial (office and employment) is the other land use concentration which is located in the southeast quadrant of the site adjacent to the proposed terminal with vehicular access from Ellsworth Road. A large green space amenity is located along the northern boundary adjacent to the Powerline Floodway Channel. This area will serve as flood/water retention during peak run-off events and also as passive recreation space for pedestrian walking and wildlife habitat. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-3 Scheme 1 RAFT 7-4 Proposed SR-24 Freeway May 19, 2011 Alternatives Development Exhibit 7-1: Bubble Diagram: Scheme 1 Exhibit 7-1 – Bubble Diagram: Scheme 1 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Transportation Network Scheme 2 has similar regional and local access as Scheme 1. The regional access to L202 and SR-24, and the main access to the local arterials via Ellsworth Road and realigned Williams Field Road are similar to Scheme 1. The internal circulation within the airport addresses the land-use configuration while maintaining the terminal/parking one-way pair roadway similar to Scheme 1. The internal circulation is facilitated by additional roadways serving the commercial and mixed-use land-uses including a perimeter roadway adjacent to the SR-24 and Ellsworth Channel. • • • The transportation network in Scheme 2 appears to be adequate to serve the terminal but provides only one access point to serve the non-aeronautical uses along Ellsworth Road. The roadway network right-of-way will occupy more of the development than Scheme 1 but provides greater individual access to the smaller parcels in Scheme 2. This scheme does not address the transit component. The land-use layout in this scheme is conducive to a centrally located transit facility to serve multiple land-uses, including the airport and the mixed-use/commercial area located to the northeast of the terminal. Aeronautical Uses Scheme 2 identifies the location of the terminal building, aircraft parking apron and auto parking centrally on the site, although provides a rather narrow terminal area and auto parking area that may not be sufficient to support ultimate aviation related demand. Large sites are reserved for supporting aeronautical facilities located in the northern and southern corners of the property. The entire airside is in close proximity to the airside for all related facilities maximizing the operational efficiency. Private Development Uses This scheme is created with a dual focus or concentration of land use groupings. The largest area is established for mixed-use development (retail, hotel and entertainment) with a wide band in the northwestern quadrant of the site, which is adjacent to SR-24. Commercial (office and employment) is the other land use concentration which is located in the southeast quadrant of the site adjacent to the proposed terminal with vehicular access from Ellsworth Road. A large green space amenity is located along the northern boundary adjacent to the Powerline Floodway Channel. This area will serve as flood/water retention during peak run-off events and also as passive recreation space for pedestrian walking and wildlife habitat. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-5 Scheme 2 RAFT 7-6 Proposed SR-24 Freeway May 19, 2011 Alternatives Development Exhibit 7-2: Bubble Diagram: Scheme 2 Exhibit 7-2 – Bubble Diagram: Scheme 2 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Transportation Network This scheme provided a totally unique concept from all the other concepts. The main access to the airport from the north and south is proposed from SR-24 via the future interchanges at Ellsworth Road and Williams Field Road. The access to the local arterial system is highly deficient with only one major access point at Ellsworth Road. Internal circulation is provided via a one-way configuration into and out of the aeronautical land use area in the northwest corner of the site. The internal roadways adjacent to the mixed-use and commercial land uses are proposed as two-way roadways. • • • This scheme overloads the Ellsworth Road north access to the site especially in the initial years causing potential problems with passengers accessing the airport. With the only major access coming from SR-24 at Ellsworth Road, there are potential problems with the ramp backing up from eastbound SR-24 traffic and poor level of service at the access to the airport. This scheme does not address the transit component. The site layout of the land-uses and the roadway network in this scheme does not complement a future transit facility due to the significant distances between the various land-uses. Aeronautical Uses Scheme 3 identifies the location of the terminal building, aircraft parking apron and auto parking as a deep development area on the northern side of the site. The overall depth of the site does not provide for high operational efficiencies for airlines and passengers. A significant site is reserved for supporting aeronautical facilities located along the southern portion of the airfield frontage. The airfield frontage provided for these facilities is much longer than needed. Private Development Uses The layout for private development in this scheme is unique due to the northeast placement of the aeronautical and terminal uses on site. Commercial (office and employment) land uses are located along the northeastern and eastern perimeters of the site taking advantage of access from SR-24 and Ellsworth Road. Mixed-use (retail, hotel and entertainment) development is woven into the pattern, sited between the aeronautical and commercial uses. A green park near the center of the site is the focus for mixed-use development. An additional smaller green park is located near the northern edge of the property and serves as flood/water retention during peak run-off events and also as passive recreation space for pedestrian walking and wildlife habitat. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-7 Scheme 3 RAFT 7-8 Proposed SR-24 Freeway May 19, 2011 Alternatives Development Exhibit 7-3: Bubble Diagram: Scheme 3 Exhibit 7-3 – Bubble Diagram: Scheme 3 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Transportation Network The regional access in Scheme 4 is limited to L202 via the Hawes Road interchange and the future SR-24 connection at Williams Field Road. The access to the local arterial street system on Ellsworth Road is enhanced by additional adequately spaced access points, as compared to Scheme 1. The internal circulation to the terminal and the aeronautical land use areas is via the one-way pair roadway similar to Scheme 1. The internal circulation to the commercial, mixed-use and green space is not adequately addressed in this scheme. • • • The transportation network in Scheme 4 appears to be adequate to serve the terminal but does not address the access to the mixed-use and commercial land uses located northeast of the terminal. The additional local access on Ellsworth Road provides better access to the mixed-use parcel located southeast of the terminal. This scheme does not address the transit component. Aeronautical Uses Scheme 4 shows the terminal building, aircraft parking apron and auto parking centrally located and very deep on the site, with supporting aeronautical facilities located in the northern and southern portions of the property. The support facilities reserve more acreage than needed for these functions. Close proximity to the airside for all related facilities maximizes the operational efficiency. The airfield frontage provided for these facilities is much longer than needed. Private Development Uses This scheme is created with a large green park running parallel to the terminal and having mixed-use and commercial development fronting on the amenity. The commercial (office and employment) uses are located generally to the north of the park and are adjacent to SR-24. Mixeduse (retail, hotel and entertainment) development anchors both the north and southern end of the long green park. These two areas of mixed-use are provided vehicular access from Hawes Road and Ellsworth Road respectively. The green park is the “central park” feature of the scheme and support economic development growth due to the physical “front door” relationship to adjacent development, i.e. the park is woven into the development circulation network and not just located behind development in lost spaces. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-9 Scheme 4 RAFT 7-10 Proposed SR-24 Freeway May 19, 2011 Alternatives Development Exhibit 7-4: Bubble Diagram: Scheme 4 Exhibit 7-4 – Bubble Diagram: Scheme 4 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Transportation Network Scheme 5 is similar to Scheme 4 in that its access is limited to L202 via the Hawes Road interchange and the future SR-24 connection at Williams Field Road. The access to the local arterial street system is also similar to Scheme 4. The internal circulation to the terminal and the aeronautical uses is via the one-way pair roadway similar to Scheme 1. The commercial and the mixed-use land use areas to the northeast are served by a two-way roadway, which provides better service to the commercial land-use and ties into the one-way pair adjacent to the terminal. • • • • • The transportation network in Scheme 5 appears to be adequate to serve the terminal. The parking does not appear to be adequate and is not well serviced by the internal roadway network. An additional right-in/right-out access from Ellsworth Road just south of the SR-24/ Ellsworth Traffic Interchange would help better serve the commercial area located in the northeast corner of the site. The additional access on Ellsworth Road (mid-way between SR-24 and the south access) provides better service to the mixed-use parcel located southeast of the terminal. This scheme does not address the transit component. Aeronautical Uses Scheme 5 locates the terminal building, aircraft parking apron and centrally on the site, with auto parking apparently undersized to support future demand. The supporting aeronautical facilities located in the northern and southern portions of the property. The support facilities are narrow but should be sufficient to meet the needs for these functions. Close proximity to the airside for all related facilities maximizes the operational efficiency. The airfield frontage provided for these facilities is slightly longer than needed. Private Development Uses This scheme is created with a unique relationship of aeronautical (parking support) and mixeduse development along with green park space is located within the ringed circulator road which provided direct access to the terminal. This scheme mixes the three (3) land uses together creating finer detailed pattern of development up near the terminal. Commercial (office and employment) uses are located along the northeaster quadrant adjacent to SR-24. Mixed-use (retail, hotel and entertainment) areas are located both to the northern and southern perimeters of the property with access provided by Hawes Road and Ellsworth Road. Green spaces are provided only with the smaller centrally located areas mentioned earlier. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-11 Scheme 5 RAFT 7-12 Proposed SR-24 Freeway May 19, 2011 Alternatives Development Exhibit 7-5: Bubble Diagram: Scheme 5 Exhibit 7-5 – Bubble Diagram: Scheme 5 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Transportation Network From a regional access perspective, Scheme 6 is similar to Scheme 4 in that its access is limited to L202 via the Hawes Road interchange and the future SR-24 connection at Williams Field Road. The access to the local arterial street system is enhanced in Scheme 6; there is an additional access to connect to the arterial street system on Ray Road, serving the mixed-use and commercial land uses. The internal circulation to the terminal and the aeronautical land use area is via the one-way pair roadway similar to Scheme 1. The internal circulation to the commercial and mixed-use land use areas to the northeast and northwest are served well by a two-way roadway, which ties into the one-way pair adjacent to the terminal and to the access points on Ellsworth Road and Ray Road. • • • • The transportation network in Scheme 6 appears to be adequate to serve the terminal. The additional access on Ray Road provides better access to the mixed-use and commercial parcels located northeast of the terminal. An additional right-in/right-out access from Ellsworth Road just south of the SR-24/ Ellsworth Traffic Interchange would help better serve the mixed-use/commercial area located in the northeast corner of the site. This scheme does not address the transit component. Aeronautical Uses Scheme 6 shows the terminal building, aircraft parking apron and auto parking centrally located and very deep on the site, with supporting aeronautical facilities located in the northern and southern portions of the property. The support facilities reserve more acreage than needed for these functions. The airfield frontage provided for these facilities is slightly longer than needed. Private Development Uses This scheme is created with mixed-use (retail, hotel and entertainment) areas located along the northeastern and eastern perimeters of the site. This provides good access and views from SR-24 and Ellsworth Road. Commercial (office and employment) uses are divided into four pods and located adjacent to aeronautical development. The green park spaces are also divided, and located in three (3) areas providing ”front door” relationships and flood/water retention during peak runoff events. This scheme includes the maximum number of vehicular access points from adjacent roadways including Hawes Road, Ellsworth Road and the connection from SR-24. The ability to maximize access provides benefits for maximizing economic development and growth. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-13 Scheme 6 RAFT 7-14 Proposed SR-24 Freeway May 19, 2011 Alternatives Development Exhibit 7-6: Bubble Diagram: Scheme 6 Exhibit 7-6 – Bubble Diagram: Scheme 6 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Transportation Network From a regional access perspective, Scheme 7 is similar to Scheme 1. The access to the local arterial system is similar to Scheme 1 providing major access at Ray Road and Ellsworth Road (to tie into future Williams Field Road). The internal circulation to the terminal and the aeronautical land use areas is via a single one-way roadway east of the terminal. The mixed-use and commercial parcels to the north and northeast areas are also only served by a northbound one-way roadway. • • • The transportation network in Scheme 7 does not appear adequate to serve the mixed-use and commercial parcels. The access to the arterial street network is limited. This scheme does not address the transit component. Aeronautical Uses Scheme 7 identifies the location of the terminal building, aircraft parking apron and auto parking development area covering half of the airfield frontage on the northern side of the site. The overall depth of the site is sufficient to provide operational efficiencies for airlines and passengers. However, a shift to the northern portion of the site does not balance taxi distances for aircraft performing both northern or southern operations. A significant site is reserved for supporting aeronautical facilities located along the southern portion of the airfield frontage. The airfield frontage and acreage provided for these facilities is much longer than needed. Private Development Uses This scheme is created with mixed-use (retail, hotel and entertainment) areas located along the northeastern and eastern perimeters of the site. This provides good access and views from SR-24 and Ellsworth Road. Internal development sites for commercial (office and employment) uses are flanked with “corner” parks along primary roadways. The green park space provides an attractive green edge, along area for flood/water retention during peak run-off events and also as passive recreation space for pedestrian walking and wildlife habitat. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-15 Scheme 7 RAFT 7-16 Proposed SR-24 Freeway May 19, 2011 Alternatives Development Exhibit 7-7: Bubble Diagram: Scheme 7 Exhibit 7-7 – Bubble Diagram: Scheme 7 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Transportation Network The regional access to L202 and SR-24, and the main access to the local arterials via Ellsworth Road and Williams Field Road are similar to Scheme 1. The internal circulation to the terminal and the aeronautical uses is via the one-way pair roadway similar to Scheme 1. The internal circulation to the commercial and the mixed-use land use areas to the northeast and northwest are served well by a two-way roadway which ties into the one-way pair adjacent to the terminal. • • • The transportation network in Scheme 8 appears to be adequate to serve the terminal. A secondary access on to Ellsworth Road and Ray Road would better serve the mixed-use and commercial parcels in this scheme. This scheme proposes a transit hub to be located adjacent to the terminal and can potentially serve all the land uses. Aeronautical Uses Scheme 8 shows the terminal building, aircraft parking apron and auto parking centrally located on the site, with supporting aeronautical facilities located in the northern and southern portions of the property. The support facilities reserve more acreage than needed for these functions with a large site being located on the southern corner. The airfield frontage provided for these facilities is much longer than needed. A transit hub is also identified near the parking area for the terminal building. Private Development Uses This scheme is created with attention to balance. There are close to equal amounts and distribution of mixed-use, commercial and park land uses across the property. This serves the user of the aeronautical and private development side well. Commercial (office and employment) uses are flanked along both sides of a central spine road running northeast to southwest. Mixed-use (retail, hotel and entertainment) areas are adjacent to the aeronautical edge at the terminal and parking support, along with the perimeter edges with access by Hawes and Ellsworth Road respectively. Green space amenities are located along at several locations, one adjacent to the Powerline Floodway Channel. This area will serve as flood/water retention during peak run-off events and also as passive recreation space for pedestrian walking and wildlife habitat. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-17 Scheme 8 RAFT 7-18 Proposed SR-24 Freeway May 19, 2011 Alternatives Development Exhibit 7-8: Bubble Diagram: Scheme 8 Exhibit 7-8 – Bubble Diagram: Scheme 8 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Transportation Network The regional access in Scheme 4 is limited to L202 via Hawes Road interchange and the future SR24 connection at Williams Field Road. The access to the local arterial system is similar to Scheme 1 providing major access at Ray Road and Ellsworth Road (to tie into realigned Williams Field). The internal circulation to the terminal is a short one-way segment serving the terminal and a twoway main roadway corridor providing access to the mixed-use and commercial parcels that are symmetrically located on the site • • • The transportation network in Scheme 9 appears to be adequate to serve the terminal and the other land uses on the site. A secondary access on to Ellsworth Road and Ray Road would provide better connectivity from the mixed-use and commercial parcels to the arterial street network. This scheme does not address the transit component. The airport, the mixed-use area to the northeast and the commercial development to the south would be better served by providing a transit facility on site. Aeronautical Uses Scheme 9 shows the terminal building, aircraft parking apron and auto parking centrally located on the site, the auto parking area is not large enough to support future demand. Supporting aeronautical facilities located in the northern and southern portions of the property and reserve more acreage than needed for these functions. The airfield frontage provided for these facilities is much longer than needed. Private Development Uses This scheme is also created with attention to balance. There are close to equal amounts and distribution of mixed-use, commercial and park land uses across the property, all connected with an arching roadway. Mixed-use (retail, hotel and entertainment) areas are adjacent to the central round-a-bout. Commercial (office and employment) and green park uses are flanked along both sides of an arching spine road. Green spaces are located at the major points of vehicular access along Ellsworth and Hawes Roads. This area will serve as flood/water retention during peak runoff events and also as passive entry feature for the development. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-19 Scheme 9 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Proposed SR-24 Freeway May 19, 2011 Exhibit 7-9 – Bubble Diagram: Scheme 9 Alternatives Development 7-20 Exhibit 7-9: Bubble Diagram: Scheme 9 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The nine concepts were evaluated and ranked on a scale of 1 to 5 with 5 being the highest possible score per individual element. The evaluation criteria focused upon five major categories: • • • • • Safety and Industry/FAA Design Standards Operational Efficiency Capacity Functionality & Flexibility Economic Development Each of the 5 major evaluation categories have specific sub-criteria which were assigned a ranking of 1 to 5. A total of 39 sub categories were evaluated for a maximum score of 195 points. Table 7-1 summarizes the evaluation process of all nine concepts and the sub criteria used to determine the highest ranking alternatives. None of the nine schemes received a perfect score. Scores ranged from a low of 121 to a high of 172. The three highest rated concepts were carried forward for further detailed development in the following section. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-21 7.3.2 Evaluation Process Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 23 DRAFT Scheme 1 Scheme 2 Scheme 3 Scheme 4 Scheme 5 Scheme 6 Scheme 7 Scheme 8 Scheme 9 Subtotals MAX 5 5 3 13 15 5 5 3 13 5 5 1 11 5 5 4 14 5 5 4 14 5 5 5 15 5 5 3 13 5 5 2 12 5 5 2 12 Subtotals MAX 5 4 5 5 5 5 5 4 5 4 4 51 55 4 3 5 5 5 5 5 4 5 5 5 51 3 3 2 2 2 1 3 2 3 3 3 27 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 3 5 3 4 48 5 4 5 5 3 4 5 5 5 4 3 48 5 5 5 5 5 4 5 5 5 3 4 51 5 3 2 2 3 3 5 4 5 3 4 39 4 4 5 5 5 4 5 4 5 5 5 51 5 5 5 5 2 2 5 3 5 5 4 46 Subtotals MAX 5 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 3 39 45 5 3 2 4 3 2 5 5 2 31 4 5 5 2 5 2 2 5 3 33 5 4 2 4 4 3 5 5 4 36 5 3 2 4 3 3 4 5 4 33 5 4 4 4 4 3 3 5 5 37 4 5 5 4 5 3 4 5 3 38 5 5 4 4 5 4 5 5 3 40 5 5 3 4 5 4 3 5 3 37 4 5 3 3 4 5 4 3 31 40 3 5 3 3 3 4 5 5 31 4 4 3 2 3 3 4 3 26 5 5 4 4 2 5 5 4 34 2 5 4 4 4 4 4 5 32 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 39 5 5 3 3 3 5 4 5 33 5 5 3 4 4 5 5 3 34 5 5 2 3 3 5 5 5 33 5 5 4 4 2 5 4 4 33 40 167 195 3 3 4 4 2 4 4 4 28 4 4 2 2 2 3 4 3 24 4 4 4 4 2 4 4 3 29 4 4 4 4 2 4 4 3 29 5 5 4 4 2 4 3 3 30 5 5 4 4 4 4 3 4 33 4 4 4 4 2 5 4 3 30 5 5 4 4 4 4 3 4 33 154 121 161 156 172 156 167 161 Evaluation Factors Safety & Standards - Protection of Part 77 imaginary surfaces - Provides additional parallel taxiway/airfield improvements (ARC D-V) - Adequate Spacing between interchanges / intersections Operational - Potential to support a multi-use trail network - Maximizes traffic accessibility to commercial development - Operationally efficient for the airlines - Functional Areas that operate efficiently - Vehicular Traffic is capable of being Separated - Ability to support an intuitive wayfinding system - Access Management to/from freeways - Clear and easy access to Ray & Ellsworth Road employment centers - Accommodates New Ray Road Alignment & Intersection W/Hawes Road - Potential for Transit Oriented Development (TOD) - Automobile parking within reasonable walking distances Capacity - Accommodates surface drainage adequately - Ability of Terminal Area to accommodate 10 MAP - Ability of automobile parking & RAC areas to accommodate 10 MAP - Incrementally Expandable Areas - Terminal area envelope capacity if maximized - Adequacy of aircraft parking positions and gates - Ability to support needed curb length and separation of traffic modes - Ability For Utilities To Support Full Development - Type of arterial connectors conducive to types of development Functionality & Flexibility - Flexibility to accommodate unforeseen trends/technologies/etc. - Access To SR 802/Loop 202 - Incorporates Access And Roadway Network Planning Efforts To Date (I.E. DMB Study) - Reduced Reliance On A Single 'Focal Point' For The Site's Main Access - Flexible roadway network - Ability to accommodate a multimodal transportation center or public transit hub - Compatibility for Bike/Pedestrian Access Between PMGA & Commercial Development - Use Of Green Space Subtotals MAX Economic Development - Visibility - Maximizes economic development potential - Aligns development potential with short & long term market projections - Capable of Establishing a sustainable development program - Creates an airport development pattern that works well with Mesa's future plans - Efficiency Of Land Use Schemes Relative To Potential Revenue - Provide mixed-use development opportunities near the terminal area - Provides an opportunity for diverse commercial land uses around the airport Subtotals MAX TOTAL MAX Source: Jacobs Analysis, 2010. 7.3.3 Preferred Schemes 7.3.3The Preferred Schemes three highest ranking schemes were Scheme 1, 6 and 8. Schemes 1 and 8 each accumulated a score of 167 with Scheme 6 totaling the highest score of 172. All three schemes scored highly on Safety The three highest ranking schemes were Efficiency, Scheme 1, 6and andFunctionality 8. Schemes 1&and 8 each accumulated a score of 167 & Standards, Operational Flexibility. These schemes were carried with Schemeforward 6 totalingtothethe highest score ofof172. All three schemes highlyand on Safety & Standards, next phase analysis to be furtherscored developed continued evaluation analysis. The preferred development alternativeThese was developed based uponforward one oftothese Schemes. Operational Efficiency, and Functionality & Flexibility. schemes were carried the next phase of analysis to be further developed and continued evaluation analysis. Eventually, the preferred development alternative will be developed based upon one of these Schemes. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-22 Table 7-1:7-10 Evaluation Matrix Matrix Exhibit - Evaluation Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The Level 2 concept alternatives are a continuation of the concept development process and were derived in large part from the previously described “bubble diagram” schemes presented and evaluated in Section 7.3. In a follow-up stakeholder meeting held on June 15, 2010, a review was conducted of: the Project visioning and goal setting exercise, the nine (9) developed schemes, their attributes, and the screening process employed. The visioning and goal setting had resulted in four key areas of focus for the Northeast Area Development Plan: Aviation/Airport-Related, Transportation and Utilities Infrastructure, Economic Development, and Overall Lifestyle considerations. These focus area drove much of the screening process. The three highest rated schemes were carried forward into a Level 2 conceptual development phase described in that meeting and presented in this subsection. Schemes 1, 6, and 8 were advanced as Concepts 1, 3, and 2, respectively. As the alternatives advanced into Level 2, they became referred to as “illustrative” concept alternatives. The “illustrative” concepts (1, 2, and 3) were also presented in the June meeting along with examples of development types, by land use. The “illustrative” concepts achieved a common set of criteria listed below: • • • • • • • • • • • • Compatible with FAA design standards for ARC D-V; Meet height restrictions for FAR Part 77 surfaces ; Support development of efficient airline operational areas; Terminal area, parking and rental car areas support 10 MAP; Passenger automobile parking proximate the terminal building; Incrementally expandable development areas; Proposed vehicular network accommodates projected traffic levels; Logical & efficient access to freeway system (Loop 202 / SR-24); Accommodates new Ray Road & Hawes Road alignments; Multi-use (Pedestrian or Bike) trail network easily incorporated; Transit Oriented Development (TOD) easily incorporated; and Utilities network expandable to support full development area. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-23 7.4 Level 2 Concept Alternatives Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Concept 1 Scheme 1 from the previous phase of the study was further developed and detailed into Concept 1. Transportation Network After review of the evaluation matrix and stakeholder comments, Concept 1 emerged from Scheme 1 with major aeronautical, airport parking, and a transit station as the major components. The major access to the Airport from L202 is via Hawes Road with additional access from the future SR24 via Ellsworth Road and realigned Williams Field Road. The arterial access for the commercial and mixed-use land use areas along Ellsworth Road was moved further south to provide greater separation from the SR-24/Ellsworth Traffic Interchange. In review of the evaluation matrix, Exhibit 7-1 criteria, an additional access was provided to Ray Road to maximize accessibility to the commercial development. The on-site roadway between Ray Road and Ellsworth Road (that parallels SR-24) separates the retail and the office uses. Connection to the airport terminal is provided by a one-way roadway pair from the north and by a one-way roadway east of the proposed airport parking to a southbound two-level one-way roadway serving the terminal arrivals and departures. The other internal roadways are two-way streets connecting to the adjacent arterial access points. • • • • The transportation network in Concept 1 appears to be adequate to serve the airport by providing access to both SR-24 and L202 and also the major access points to the arterial street system. The secondary access points on Ellsworth Road and Ray Road serve the retail and the office land uses better while maintaining separation from airport traffic. The land-use layout in this concept is conducive to a centrally located transit facility to serve multiple land-uses, including the airport and the mixed-use/commercial area located to the northeast of the terminal. The one-way couplet from the central core of the airport provides access directly to the airport. This concept however limits interior site circulation requirements internal to the land use. Aeronautical Uses Aeronautical support facilities are typical aviation related functions that are required for commercial aviation operations, which include belly cargo processing, central receiving facility and aviation fuel farm. Due to the determination of the highest and best use for developable land and the need to reserve space for future aviation and commercial development, these facilities have been located on the southeastern portion of the Northeast Development Area Concepts 1, 2 and 3. During initial development of the Schematic layouts, an area on the northwest portion of the site was also identified as a potential development area for these facilities. Upon further investigation, the prevailing drainage patterns flow through the area where these facilities would be located. As a result, it was determined that the area to the northwest would be better suited as a retention basin. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-24 7.4.1 Description of Illustrative Concepts Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report • • • Belly Cargo Facility which includes a 55,000 square foot building with secure airside access on one side for small ramp tugs and associated carts to transport cargo from the commercial aircraft and public access on the other side of the building for truck traffic Central Receiving Facility, a 40,000 square foot building which will serve as the single point of delivery for all concessions in the terminal area Aviation Fuel Farm 1,000,000 gallon capacity with flexibility to be expanded to meet future demand as needed Terminal Layout The 5 million enplanement level was established in the 2008 Airport Master Plan, as previously discussed in section 5.3. The three concepts also indicate an expanded terminal shown dashed, which would bring the capacity to the 10 million enplanement level. Although both the 5 million and the 10 million are beyond the twenty year planning term of the Master Plan, it is important to reserve space for critical airport functions. The footprint shown in each of the three concepts assumes the following: • • • • • • Two level main terminal and concourse (minimum) Two level vehicular roadway for separate arrivals and departures curbs Pier configuration for group 3 aircraft with dual taxilanes between concourses Larger aircraft would park on the concourse ends and outside concourses Approximately 800,000 square feet for 5 million enplanements Approximately 1.5 million square feet for 10 million enplanements Concept 1, Terminal Building with an estimated capacity of 5 million enplanements annually, includes a main processor and three concourses arranged in a pier configuration. The building is oriented slightly northwest of the center of the site so that development can begin closer to the infrastructure’s points of connection, anticipated to occur along Ray Road. The two additional concourses (shown dashed to the southeast) expand the capacity to 10 million enplanements. Private Development Uses The concept is developed with a center boulevard, aligned to the center of the future Transit Center at the Airport Terminal connecting the airport to the adjacent retail, hotel and office development to the north east. This center boulevard is one of the key identity elements of the concept. This boulevard has a wide median that is well landscaped and would include pedestrian walking trails and relaxation stations. The land use pattern follows a layout similar to concentric circles which start at the proposed Gateway Airport Terminal. Office and employment (multi story buildings supporting business and commerce) uses are planned in this concept on the ring farthest away from the terminal and adjacent to SR-24. The views from SR-24 will enhance the images and development potential for the office development. Retail, hotel and entertainment (single story development except for the hotels) land uses are located adjacent to the terminal and support parking areas. Primary vehicular access for this group of land uses comes from Hawes Road from the north and Ellsworth Road from the east. A large green space amenity is located along the northern boundary adjacent to the Powerline Floodway Channel. This area will serve as flood/water retention during peak runoff events and also as passive recreation space for pedestrians. The additional, green landscaped amenity for this concept is the center boulevard noted previously, that aligns northeast to southwest and bisect the study area into equal halves. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 7-25 Alternatives Development The development alternatives for aeronautical uses are the same for Concepts 1, 2 and 3. These facilities include the following development items: Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 7-26 Alternatives Development Exhibit 7-10: Illustrative Concept 1 -24 SR Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Scheme 8 from the previous phase of the study was further developed and detailed into Concept 2. Transportation Network Concept 2 was derived from Scheme 8 of the original nine (9) schemes. The major access to the airport from L202 via Hawes Road with additional access from the future SR-24 via Ellsworth Road and realigned Williams Field Road remained consistent in this concept as well as Concept 1. Changes incorporated from Scheme 6 to Concept 2 include the scheme to enlarge the green space in the northwest area and to provide a large roundabout around a multi-use attraction adjacent to the north end of the terminal. The connection of multi-use and office land use areas has been moved from Ellsworth Road to an internal roadway connection and a new intersection has been included on Ellsworth Road south of the realigned Williams Field Road. This new connection will serve the southern aeronautical and office land use areas between the Ellsworth Channel and the airport. • • • • • The transportation network in Concept 2 appears to be adequate to serve the airport by providing access to both SR-24 and L202. While the number of access points to the arterial street system remains the same as Concept 1, the second access point on Ellsworth Road has been moved south of the realigned Williams Field Road. The circulation around the multi-use facility at the northwest corner of the terminal provides a good transition connecting the one-way and two-way street network serving the retail land use. The internal roadway network provides a better separation of the airport, retail and office land uses. The land-use layout in this concept does not complement a central transit facility due to the layout of the office and mixed-use land use and their ability to access the transit The first access to the site is quite a distance from the SR-24/Ellsworth Road. This could be provided by a right-in and right-out scenario closer to the interchange. This would require a break between individual parcels. Aeronautical Uses The aeronautical uses described in the previous section for Concept 1 also apply to the Concept 2. The development alternatives for aeronautical uses are the same for Concepts 1, 2 and 3. These facilities include the following development items: • • • Belly Cargo Facility which includes a 55,000 square foot building with secure airside access on one side for small ramp tugs and associated carts to transport cargo from the commercial aircraft and public access on the other side of the building for truck traffic Central Receiving Facility, a 40,000 square foot building which will serve as the single point of delivery for all concessions in the terminal area Aviation Fuel Farm 1,000,000 gallon capacity with flexibility to be expanded to meet future demand as needed Terminal Building Concept 2, Terminal Building is essentially the same as Concept 1. The terminal, with an estimated capacity of 5 million enplanements annually, includes a main processor and three concourses arranged in a pier configuration. The building is oriented slightly northwest of the center of the site so that development can begin closer to the infrastructure’s points of connection, anticipated to occur along Ray Road. The two additional concourses (shown dashed to the southeast) expand the capacity to 10 million enplanements. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-27 Concept 2 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 7-28 Alternatives Development Exhibit 7-11: Illustrative Concept 2 -24 SR Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Scheme 6 from the previous phase of the study was further developed and detailed into Concept 3. Transportation Network Concept 3 was derived from Scheme 6 of the original nine (9) schemes. As with Concept 1 the roadway network has been improved to provide two access points along the City’s arterial system (i.e. on Ray Road and Ellsworth Road). The roadway connection to Ellsworth Road has been moved south away from the SR-24/Ellsworth Road interchange intersection and an additional connection has been added to Ray Road west of the SR-24 right-of-way. The connection from Ray Road toward the airport will intersect both the internal roadway network that serves the multi-use and office parcels and the one-way roadway that will lead to the airport terminal. Unlike Concept 1 the internal roadway connecting Ray Road and Ellsworth Road is a two-way roadway and connects directly to each end of the northbound one-way roadway east of the proposed airport parking area. This differs from the central corridor connection from the land uses north and east of the airport in Concept 1. • • • The transportation network in Concept 3 appears to adequately serve the airport, retail and office land uses by providing access to both SR-24 and L202. The major access points to the arterial street system are similar to Concept 1. The internal roadway network provides a better separation of the airport, retail and office land uses, which are symmetrical on the site layout. The land-use layout in this concept is conducive to a centrally located transit facility to serve multiple land-uses, including the airport and the retail/office areas. The transit station is centrally located to the site within the aeronautical area east of the terminal. Aeronautical Uses The aeronautical uses described in the previous sections for Concepts 1 and 2, also apply to Concept 3. The development alternatives for aeronautical uses are the same for Concepts 1, 2 and 3. These facilities include the following development items: • • • Belly Cargo Facility, which includes a 55,000 square foot building with secure airside access on one side for small ramp tugs and associated carts to transport cargo from the commercial aircraft and public access on the other side of the building for truck traffic Central Receiving Facility, a 40,000 square feet building which will serve as the single point of delivery for all concessions in the terminal area Aviation Fuel Farm 1,000,000 gallon capacity with flexibility to be expanded to meet future demand as needed Terminal Building The main terminal processor, shown at a 5 million enplanement level, is centered on the site. Growth would occur through the addition of a concourse to the northeast and one to the southeast. This terminal location offers the benefit of equal aircraft taxiing distance from the airfield, regardless of which runway was used for take-off or landing. Parking The parking capacity shown on the Concepts 1,2 and 3 can accommodate the 10 million enplanement level. The areas indicated for parking assume a mix of surface lots and garage. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-29 Concept 3 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 5 Million Enplanements • • • • • Public parking @ 150 spaces / 100,000 enp. = 7,500 spaces Employee parking @ 25 spaces / 100,000 enp. = 1,250 spaces Rental Car Parking @ 35 spaces / 100,000 enp. = 1,750 spaces Total = 10,500 spaces 10 Million Enplanements • • • • Public parking @ 150 spaces / 100,000 enp. = 15,000 spaces Employee parking @ 25 spaces / 100,000 enp. = 2,500 spaces Rental Car Parking @ 35 spaces / 100,000 enp. = 3,500 spaces Total = 21,000 spaces Each of the three concepts shows a slight variation of the parking solution with differences in location of the transit center, loop road configuration, access to the loop road as well as garage and surface lot footprints. The following tables in Table 7-2 describe the parking for each concept. • • • Concept 1 provides 16,720 auto parking spaces between a parking garage and series of surface parking lots. Concept 2 provides 24,965 auto parking spaces between two independent, 4-level, parking garages and auxiliary surface parking lot. Concept 3 provides 27,875 auto parking spaces in one large, 4-level, parking garage and auxiliary surface parking lot. Private Development Uses Concept 3 is developed with a center green linear park, aligned to the center of the future Transit Center at the Airport Terminal connecting the airport to the adjacent retail, hotel and office development to the north east. This center green linear park is one of the key identity elements of the concept. This park has a wide natural area that is well landscaped and would include pedestrian walking trails and relaxation stations. The land use pattern depicted for Concept 3 is similar to Concept 2 except for the aspect that this concept has a larger area of retail, hotel and entertainment oriented uses, due to the existence of nearby airport support functions, and parking areas, some of which are dedicated to a parking garage. This concept follows a layout similar to concentric circles which start at the proposed Gateway Airport Terminal. Office and employment (multi story buildings supporting business and commerce) uses are planned in this concept on the ring farthest away from the terminal and adjacent to SR-24. The views from SR-24 will enhance the images and development potential for the office development. Retail, hotel and entertainment (single story development except for the hotels) land uses are located adjacent to the terminal and support parking areas. Primary vehicular access for this group of land uses comes from Hawes Road from the north and Ellsworth Road from the east. A large green space amenity is located along the northern boundary adjacent to the Powerline Floodway Channel. This area will serve as flood/water retention during peak run-off events and also as passive recreation space for pedestrians. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 7-30 Alternatives Development The parking space requirement is taken from the Airport Master Plan calculation found on page 3-39 of the airport Master Plan. The following are the calculations as applicable to the 3 concepts: Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 7-31 Alternatives Development Exhibit 7-12: Illustrative Concept 3 -24 SR -24 SR Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Table 7-2: Automobile ParkingParking Requirements by Conceptby Concept Exhibit 7-14 – Automobile Requirements Private Development Uses: The concept is developed with a center green linear park, aligned to the center of the future Transit Center at the Airport Terminal connecting the airport to the adjacent retail, hotel and office development to the north east. This center green linear park is one of the key identity elements of the concept. This park has a wide natural area that is well landscaped and would include pedestrian walking trails and relaxation stations. The land use pattern for concept 3 is similar to concept 2 except for the aspect that this concept has a larger area of retail, hotel and entertainment uses due to the airport support parking area proposing for area in garage. This concept follows a layout similar to concentric circles which start at the proposed Gateway Airport Terminal. Office and employment (multi story buildings supporting business and commerce) uses are planned in this concept on the ring farthest away from the terminal and adjacent to SR 802. The views from SR 802 will enhance the images and development potential for the office development. Retail, hotel and entertainment (single story development except for the hotels) land uses are located adjacent to the terminal and support parking areas. Primary vehicular access for this group of land uses coming from Hawes Road from the north and Ellsworth Road from the east. A large green Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport space amenity is located along the northern boundary adjacent to the Powerline Floodway Channel. This area will serve as flood/water retention during peak run-off events and also as passive recreation space for pedestrians and wildlife habitat. 32 7-32 Alternatives Development Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report DRAFT Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Because a large group of stakeholders originally developed the previously described concepts, an analysis comparing the outcome with the established program was necessary. The following elements were reviewed during this analysis: Airfield • • • • There is a 450 foot distance between the Runway 12L-30R centerline and Taxiway C centerline, which meets FAA design criteria for Group V airports at an elevation greater than 1,345 feet but lower than 6,560 feet. The distance from the Taxiway C centerline to the Aircraft Parking Limit Line is 515 feet. A wing tip clearance analysis was performed on the proposed parallel taxiway system between Runway 12L-30R and the future terminal development area to validate the 515 foot distance. By combining the largest applicable wingtip clearance for airplane group and taxiway/lane design standards with the airplane width, or Taxiway Safety Area width, separation standards can be derived. The concept was to maintain airfield design standards for Group V aircraft near Runway 12L-30R to meet current airfield design criteria, then incrementally reduce the design group separation standards to Group IV and Group III closer to the terminal building. The taxiway design standards that were applied in the analysis includes the following: -- Taxiway C - Group V taxiway between Runway 12L-30R and parallel Group IV taxiway ◦◦ 75 feet wide ◦◦ Group V taxiway wingtip clearance = 53 feet ◦◦ Group V airplane = 214 feet wide ◦◦ Group IV airplane = 171 feet wide ◦◦ Separation = (214 / 2) + 53 + (171 / 2) = 245.5 feet -- Group IV Parallel Taxiway & Group III Taxilane ◦◦ Group IV parallel taxiway = 75 feet wide ◦◦ Group III parallel taxilane = 50 feet wide ◦◦ Group IV taxiway wingtip clearance = 44 feet ◦◦ Group IV airplane = 171 feet wide ◦◦ Group III airplane = 118 feet wide ◦◦ Separation = (171 / 2) + 44 + (118 / 2) = 188.5 feet -- Group III Taxilane & Apron Edge: ◦◦ Group III parallel taxilane = 50 feet wide ◦◦ Group III Separation = 81 feet ◦◦ Finally, distance from centerline of Parallel Taxiway C (closest to the runway) to the apron edge is: 245.5 + 188.5 + 81 = 515 feet This is adequate for the addition of one taxiway, one taxilane and one 24’ wide service road. All concepts have approximately 1,000 feet from the Aircraft Parking Limit Line to the face of the main terminal. The concourses’ varying lengths offer flexibility in their future design. For example, with 737-700 aircraft, an eight gate concourse could be 280’, a 10 gate concourse 500’, and a 12 gate concourse 620’ in building length. Using the 12 gate example, the 620 foot concourse along with 160’ of aircraft parking requires a total of 940’; well within the 1,000 feet reserved for (12) 737 aircraft on each concourse. Larger aircraft, such as 767 aircraft, may be accommodated on the ends. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-33 7.4.2 Concept Consolidation Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum DRAFT 34 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Exhibit 7-13: Building Concept Consolidation Exhibit 7-15 Terminal – Terminal Building Concept Consolidation Terminal: • • • • Alternatives Development • requires a total of 940’; well within the 1,000 feet reserved for (12) 737 aircraft on each concourse; larger aircraft, such as 767 aircraft, may be accommodated on the ends. The separation concourse centerline to concourse is approximately 1,000 feet. This is 7-34 • between The separation between concourse centerline centerline to concourse centerline is approximately acceptable to accommodate mostly group 3 toaircraft, such asmostly 737s, between concourses (reference Exhibit 1,000 feet. This is acceptable accommodate group 3 aircraft, such as 737s, between concourses (reference Exhibit 7-13). 7-15). Terminal • The footprint is approximately 375,000 sf. Assuming two levels, the overall terminal shown is 800,000 sf, which is acceptable the 5 million enplanement level. is 800,000 sf, The footprint is approximately 375,000 sf. Assuming twoforlevels, the overall terminal shown • The pier concourse form provides maximum compact plane parking. As shown on these which is acceptable for the 5 million enplanement level. schemes, space is adequate for 50 to 60 gates, depending on the aircraft mix. The pier concourse compact plane parking. As shown on these schemes, space is • Theform mainprovides terminal maximum processor depth shown is approximately 250 feet. The depth of the central passenger processing core should be validated in the study’s next stage. adequate for 50 to 60 gates, depending on the aircraft mix. Additional warranted, will afford more elements, such The main terminal processordepth, depthifshown is approximately 250flexibility feet. Thewith depthprogram of the central passenger as Security Screening Checkpoint, Explosive Detection Systems (EDS), and Baggage processing core Claim. should Additional be validatedbuilding in the study’s next stage. Additional depth, if warranted, will afford square footage will increase the cost of development, but more flexibility with program elements, suchefficiently. as Security Screening Checkpoint, Explosive Detection may be required to function • A dimension approximately 1,250’ is indicated Aircraft Parking Limit Lineofto the Systems (EDS), and BaggageofClaim. Additional building squarefrom footage will increase the cost edge of vehicular curb. development, but may be required to function efficiently. A dimension of approximately 1250’ is indicated from Aircraft Parking Limit Line to the edge of vehicular curb. Parking Layout: • • • After the 3 concepts were developed, it was recommended that the garage levels be limited to 4, due to cost and feasibility. Subsequent stages of the this study will limit the garage levels. The 3 concepts assumed approximately 350 sf per parking space. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport This study uses the parking counts developed in the 2009 Airport Master Plan. In the short term (West Terminal) the actual parking required with the current passenger service activity is higher than the master plan. We understand that the actual parking spaces are based upon a study by Carl Walker Associates, in Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report • • • • After the 3 concepts were developed, it was recommended that the garage levels be limited to 4, due to cost and feasibility. Subsequent stages of the this study will limit the garage levels. The 3 concepts assumed approximately 350 sf per parking space. This study uses the parking counts developed in the 2009 Airport Master Plan. In the short term (West Terminal) the actual parking required with the current passenger service activity is higher than the master plan. We understand that the actual parking spaces are based upon a study by Carl Walker Associates, in lieu of the master plan. A parking study based on Gateway’s parameters is recommended for any future East Terminal development. We assume the final design will be a mix of multi-level Garage and Surface parking. The requirement of area increases due to less efficiency for garages. For example if all parking for the public and employees at 5 million enplanements is surface parking then about 2.5 million square feet would be required. However, if this parking was accommodated in a 3 level garage, 3 million square feet would be necessary. (The footprint is 1 million square feet per level). Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-35 Parking Layout Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report As the alternatives development processed advanced through the execution of the study work tasks, input was received from the Airport Authority staff, the City of Mesa, and key stakeholders involved in the previous April and June presentations. As a result of the combined merits of the “illustrative” Concepts 1 and 3, Concept 3, with elements of Concept 1, was advanced as a “Preferred” development alternative, to be carried forward into further detailing and analysis. This development alternative was considered to reflect the aeronautical flexibility that the Airport requires to set the stage for long term growth, while also creating a commercial development campus that was centered about an axial circulation mall that aligned with the terminal complex. The concept also achieved diverse access to/ from the Airport and the commercial campus via the regional highway network as well as the local arterial streets (i.e., Ray Road and Ellsworth Road). This new “preferred” concept was further detailed with more exacting standards and recompiled into a CADD (computer-aided drafting and design) platform to better assess infrastructure layout, land area sizes, easement areas, and design criteria for the aeronautical components. Exhibit 7-14 presents this new “Preferred” Development Alternative, which better illustrates the airside geometries, the terminal complex, parking facilities, roadway network and commercial campus components. Additionally to add more definition to the commercial campus, the estimated land use types, and estimated parcel sizes, Exhibit 7-15 presents a subsequent revision of the commercial campus land uses and estimates the development square footage available for each land use. 7.5.1 Description of Alternative Transportation Network The preferred alternative is predominately based on Concept 3 with the addition of a central circulation element from Concept 1, and is illustrated in Exhibit 7-14. The roadway network has been improved to provide two access points along each of the City’s arterial system (i.e. on Ray Road and Ellsworth Road). The current Ray Road/Hawes Road intersection will remain at the current location and the extension of Hawes Road to the south will be the main entrance to the site from the north. The connection from Ray Road to the internal circulation roadway will be moved westward from the SR-24 right-of-way to accommodate adequate parcel width south of Ray Road. The first site access roadway south of the SR-24/Ellsworth Road interchange matches the existing Ellsworth Channel crossing location. This refined roadway system will provide the access and circulation envisioned for the project site. Aeronautical Uses During initial development of the Schematic layouts, an area in the northwest portion of the overall site was identified as a potential development area for aeronautical facilities. Upon further investigation, the prevailing drainage patterns flow through the area where aeronautical facilities would be located. As a result, it was determined that the area in the northwest corner of the overall site would be better suited as a retention basin, and as such was reflected in the preferred development alternative. The development alternatives for aeronautical uses are the same for Concepts 1, 2 and 3. These facilities include the following development items: • • • Belly Cargo Facility, which includes a 55,000 square foot building with secure airside access on one side for small ramp tugs and associated carts to transport cargo from the commercial aircraft and public access on the other side of the building for truck traffic Central Receiving Facility, a 40,000 square foot building which will serve as the single point of delivery for all concessions in the terminal area Aviation Fuel Farm 1,000,000 gallon capacity with flexibility to be expanded to meet future demand as needed Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 7-36 Alternatives Development 7.5 Preferred Development Alternative Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The terminal design in the preferred alternative is very similar in the three illustrative concepts. The program required for a five million enplanement level is represented with a three concourse pier configuration. The ten million enplanement level is represented in dashed lines with two additional concourses and an expansion to another concourse. The assumptions from the illustrative concept stage, including the two level building, two level roadway, aircraft parking and overall program area are still valid. The central location of the terminal complex from Concept 3 was preferred and implemented in the alternative. Along with the benefit of equal distance from both ends of the runways, another advantage was the additional length provided for the access roadway from Ray Road. This extra distance was viewed as beneficial when engineering roadway ramps to departure curb that access the upper level of the terminal. The main terminal processor has been adjusted in building depth to approximately 400 feet as recommended during the review process. The additional depth will allow greater flexibility in the future design for spaces such as the Security Screening Checkpoint, Explosive Detection Systems (EDS) and Baggage Claim. Because the security requirements for a time frame twenty years from now are unknown, it is prudent to preserve adequate space for the terminal processor with this study. With the additional depth of the terminal processor the loop road has been adjusted to the northeast. The curb frontage requirement according to the Airport Master Plan for the 5 million enplanement level is 1,661 linear feet for the departure curb and 1,939 linear for the arrival curb. These curb lengths are accommodated with the preferred alternative design. For the 10 million enplanement level these lengths are assumed to be doubled for purposes of this study, as the Master Plan does not address this enplanement level. These curb lengths will become challenging with a single sided terminal building, therefore with more detailed designs, a second curb for functions such as taxi and shuttle would be recommended. This would help limit the long walking distance for passengers along the curb. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-37 Terminal Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum Northeast DRAFTArea Development Plan - Technical Report 37 7-38 Alternatives Development Exhibit 7-14: Preferred Development Alternative GRAND CANYON DR. EET NG STR SILVER STREET MUSTA GOLDEN EAGLE CIR. Exhibit 7-16 - Preferred Development Alternatives Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 7-39 Alternatives Development Exhibit 7-15: Conceptual Land Use Plan LEGEND PO W ER LI N E FL O O DW AY OFFICE HOTEL / CONFERENCE CENTER MIXED - USE RETAIL OPEN SPACE ST 330,000 sf 330,000 sf R EE T T 671,000 sf MIXED - USE EE MIXED - USE R G 560,500 sf R N OFFICE OFFICE 335,600 sf RETAIL RETAIL EL LS LV E ST A ST OFFICE U SI M 249,500 sf 285,000 sf OFFICE GRAND CANYON DR. 1,171,000 sf ER W PO LI E N AY DW O O FL OFFICE 565,000 sf RETAIL 76,200 sf HOTEL / CONFERENCE CENTER W O R TH C HA NN EL RETAIL 76,200 sf HOTEL / CONFERENCE CENTER 765,000 sf 720,000 sf EL GOLDEN EAGLE CIR. OFFICE 1,400,000 sf OFFICE LS W O R TH C HA N 586,000 sf ER W PO LI E N AY DW O O L F NE L SURFACE PARKING 600,000 SF OPEN SPACE Conceptual Land Use Plan - Preferred Northeast Area Development Plan Study Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport September 29, 2010 Drawing name: J:\_Aviation Services\DEN_CAD\IWA\Road Alignment\Land Use_Concept.dwg Plotted on: May 09, 2012 - 12:49pm 0 150 300 600 1200 NOTE: This plan is diagrammatic only and is intended to show potential configuration. This plan is only conceptual and is not based upon a detailed survey of existing site conditions such as property limits, subsurface conditions, limits of trees, topography, utilities, easements, etc. May 09, 2012 May 09, 2012 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum DRAFT 38 Exhibit 7-17 – Phased Automobile Parking Requirements Table 7-3: Phased Automobile Parking Requirements Alternatives Development 7-40 Parking At the five million enplanement term there are four surface lots totaling 5,600 Patron spaces and a 3 level garage. The With the development of thePatron/Employee alternative, a refined parking program garage will accommodate 3,150 additional spaces and 1,750 Rentalwas Cardeveloped Spaces. and is presented in the table shown in Table 7-3. The parking is categorized into Patron & Employee parking and Rental Car Parking, area perlots space requirement of 440 sf and 540 sf, respectively. With At the ten million enplanement term,due two to of the the surface remain totaling 2,000 Patron spaces. The 3 level garage is the refinement of the program and the recommendation that garages be limited to 4 levels, the expanded to a 4 level garage for 3,750 Patron/Employee spaces and 3,500 Rental Car spaces. Two additional garage parking is better defined in the preferred alternative. are constructed; a 4 level, 9,050 space garage and a 2 level, 2,700 spaces garage. At the five million enplanement level there are four surface lots totaling 5,600 Patron spaces and a 7.5.2 Alternative Refinement 3 level garage. The garage will accommodate 3,150 additional Patron/Employee spaces and 1,750 Rental Car Spaces. To Be Provided at a Later Date Reference Exhibit 7-18 At the ten million enplanement level, two of the surface lots remain totaling 2,000 Patron spaces. The 3 level garage is expanded to a 4 level garage for 3,750 Patron/Employee spaces and 3,500 7.5.2.1 Aeronautical Demand Triggers Rental Car spaces. Two additional garage are constructed; a 4 level, 9,050 space garage and a 2 2,700 spaces garage.will be constructed in phases depending on demand realized over the next 20 It is anticipatedlevel, that the Airport Terminal years and beyond. With this study, four demand levels of annual enplanements have been established in the program; 1.5 million, 2.2 million, 5 million and 10 million. The preliminary enplanement level of 1.5 million is directly related to the capacity of the West Terminal, currently assumed to maximize at about 850,000 enplanements. (See previous Section 5 for additional information on planning horizons.) With the preliminary enplanement level of 1.5 million passengers, the program requires the first phase to be a portion of the main terminal processor and one concourse, approximately 300,000 square feet. The first phase may actually be larger than the program requires since all of the basic functions need to be established. These areas would need to accommodate growth to future phases and allow flexibility. The following diagrams (reference Exhibit 7-19 and Exhibit 720) represent potential phasing of the Terminal and Parking expansions for the 5 and 10 million enplanement term. The Terminal phases, graphically represented by color, correspond to the program. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 7.5.2.1 Aeronautical Demand Triggers It is anticipated that the airport terminal will be constructed in phases depending on demand realized over the next 20 years and beyond. With this study, four demand levels of annual enplanements have been established in the program: 1.5 million, 2.2 million, 5 million and 10 million. The preliminary enplanement level of 1.5 million is directly related to the capacity of the West Terminal with the current building expected to maximize at about 850,000 enplanements. (See previous Section 5 for additional information on planning horizons.) With the preliminary enplanement level of 1.5 million passengers, the program requires the first phase to be a portion of the main terminal processor and one concourse, approximately 300,000 square feet. The first phase may actually be larger than the program requires since all of the basic functions need to be established. These areas would need to accommodate growth to future phases and allow flexibility. The following diagrams (reference Exhibit 7-16 and Exhibit 7-17) represent potential phasing of the terminal and parking expansions for the 5 and 10 million enplanement levels. The terminal phases, graphically represented by color, correspond to the program. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-41 7.5.2 Alternative Refinement Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum DRAFT 40 Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum DRAFT Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 40 7-42 Alternatives Development Exhibit 7-16: Terminal Development 5 Million Annual Passengers Exhibit 7-19 Terminal Development 5 Million Annual Passengers Exhibit 7-17: Terminal Development 10 Million Annual Passengers Exhibit 7-19 Terminal Development 5 Million Annual Passengers Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Exhibit 7-20 Terminal Development 10 Million Annual Passengers Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 7.5.2.2 Critical Infrastructure Elements Surrounding Roadway Network Numerous roadway improvements are planned to accommodate the growth in this fastgrowing region and are included in the MAG Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and the City of Mesa’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The major roadways that currently border the study area include Ray Road, Hawes Road, Williams Field Road, Ellsworth Road and L202 Santan Freeway and SR-24 Gateway Freeway. These roadways will be part of the critical infrastructure needed to feed the Airport, its commercial development areas, and the surrounding development. The L202 Santan Freeway provides regional access to the Airport with a traffic interchange (TI) located at Hawes Road which provides access to the site from the north. This TI ramp intersection was built with the L202 Santan Freeway project. The segment of L202 Santan Freeway adjacent to the study area has seven (7) travel lanes: three (3) northbound travel lanes and four (4) southbound travel lanes. The SR-24 Gateway Freeway provides regional access to the study area with proposed TIs located at Ellsworth Road and Williams Field Road that will feed the site. The Ellsworth Road interchange will provide some relief to the Hawes Road interchange on the L202 Santan Freeway and the Williams Field Road TI will provide access to the site from southeast Maricopa County and northern Pinal County. The first segment of the SR-24 Gateway Freeway to be constructed will be from the L202 Santan Freeway to Ellsworth Road. This segment is currently scheduled for construction beginning in early 2012 and completion in 2014. The segment from Ellsworth Road to the east and the Williams Field Road TI is not currently programmed by ADOT. The segment of the SR-24 Gateway Freeway from the L202 Santan Freeway to Williams Field Road will have six (6) travel lanes: three (3) northbound travel lanes and three (3) southbound travel lanes Ray Road is an east-west roadway between Sossaman Road and Ellsworth Road and is part of the City of Mesa’s CIP program. This new section of Ray Road has one (1) travel lane in each direction with new traffic signals at the intersections of Ray Road with Sossaman Road and Ellsworth Road. The ultimate configuration for this road will be the City’s six-lane arterial street in accordance with Mesa’s Transportation Improvement Program. Ellsworth Road borders the development to the east and is a north-south arterial. The roadway has recently been constructed to provide two (2) lanes in each direction with a raised center median and a bike lane on the eastern side of the road. The ultimate configuration for this road will be the City’s six-lane arterial street in accordance with Mesa’s Transportation Improvement Program. The jurisdiction of the east side of Ellsworth Road belongs to Maricopa County. Hawes Road is recently completed from Ray Road to the L202 Santan Freeway TI. This new section of Hawes Road has one (1) travel lane in each direction and will have new traffic signals at the intersections of Ray Road. It is currently stop controlled. The ultimate configuration for Hawes Road and Ray Road will be the City’s six-lane arterial street in accordance with Mesa’s Transportation Improvement Program. The proposed intersection configuration with Ray Road will be an arterial to arterial configuration during the initial phases of the airport development. This configuration will be adequate for the 5 million enplanement level, approximate 2030 timeframe, but is proposed to be an urban diamond configuration to handle the full site build-out scenario as the Airport traffic grows beyond 5 million annual enplanements. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-43 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The new critical infrastructure that is needed for the success of the Airport and the surrounding development is as follows and was validated by the traffic modeling and analysis. The Hawes Road extension, south of Ray Road, is labeled Gateway Boulevard, and enters the airport property as the main access to the Airport from the north. South of the Gateway Boulevard/Ray Road intersection the roadway crosses the Flood Control District’s Powerline Floodway and enters the site as an arterial street. As the street approaches the airport proper the street splits into a one-way configuration with the southbound traffic becoming the access to the terminal for arrivals and departures and the northbound is the airport return to the north and the northern exit from the site. As the southbound Gateway Boulevard roadway approaches the terminal the two inside lanes will be utilized for the airport arrivals on the ground level of the two-story terminal. The airport departure traffic will utilize the outside third lane. This lane will be complimented with an additional lane as the roadway elevates and approaches the terminal building. These roadways from the north will be joined by the arrival and departure traffic from the east and south that have entered the site from Ellsworth Road, Williams Field Road or the internal site traffic wishing to utilize the airport services. The two level roadways in front of the terminal will each have four (4) lanes. South of the terminal these lanes will split with four (4) lanes (two from the arrival and two from the departure) continuing south toward the new Williams Field Road intersection and four (4) lanes (two from the arrival and two from the departure) returning to the north to complete the one-way circulation of the airport roadway. The four lanes from the terminal will join with the incoming three lanes of traffic from the realigned Williams Field Road/ Ellsworth Road intersection and proceed south thus completing Gateway Boulevard within the development area. As the southbound Gateway Boulevard roadway departs the terminal and joins northbound Gateway Boulevard from the Williams Field Road intersection the street will be designated Golden Eagle Circle. The transition from each of the two terminal arrival and departure lanes will be transitioned to one lane each and join the two transitioned northbound lanes of Gateway Boulevard from Williams Field Road. Golden Eagle Circle will have four (4) one-way northbound lanes until the intersection of Silver Street. At the intersection of Silver Street an additional right turn lane will be added for dual right turn lanes eastbound on Silver Street. Three through lanes on Golden Eagle Circle will continue north with an add lane north of Silver Street will produce a total of four (4) lanes between Silver Street and Mustang Street. An additional eastbound right turn lane will be added at the intersection of Golden Eagle Circle and Mustang Street. Golden Eagle Circle from this intersection will continue north with four lanes. As Golden Eagle Circle approaches the departure to the terminal the inside lane will be dedicated to the Airport for the airport arrival at-grade and elevated departure area. Three through lanes on Golden Eagle Circle will continue north for the continuation of Gateway Boulevard north to the Ray Road intersection. Silver Street is an internal site arterial street that extends from Ellsworth Road to Golden Eagle Circle. The arterial is one of the access points for the development on the site, with the other being Mustang Street. From the intersection of Ellsworth Road the six-lane arterial proceeds west to the main street of the development at Grand Canyon Drive. The focus of this intersection is to provide access to the commercial development along Grand Canyon Drive with secondary access to Golden Eagle Circle and the airport terminal, airport parking and the transit center. The street from Ellsworth Road to Grand Canyon Drive will be the City’s six-lane arterial section. The intersection of Grand Canyon Drive will have two through Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-44 On-Airport Roadway Network Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Grand Canyon Drive is an internal site arterial street that extends from Silver Street to Mustang Street. The arterial is the main thoroughfare for the commercial development on the site with minor access along Golden Eagle Circle. From the intersection of Silver Street the six-lane arterial proceeds north to the other main street of the on-site development at Mustang Street. The focus of Grand Canyon Drive is to provide access to the retail, hotel, office and employment along the corridor. The intersection with Mustang Street provides circulation to and from Ray Road and access to the arrivals at the Airport. Passengers leaving from this area will access Golden Eagle Circle from internal collector roadways and utilize the inside lane of Golden Eagle Circle to access the second level departure area at the Airport. The proposed T-intersection at Mustang Street may also provide an entrance for the retail and hotel developments to the area south of the Powerline Floodway. Mustang Street is an internal site arterial street that extends from Ray Road to Golden Eagle Circle. The arterial is the one of the two accesses for the development on the site, the other previously described being Silver Street. From the intersection of Ray Road the arterial proceeds south and west to the main street of the on-site commercial development at Grand Canyon Drive. The focus of this intersection is to provide access to the commercial development along Grand Canyon Drive with secondary access to Golden Eagle Circle and the airport terminal and airport parking. The street from Ray Road to Grand Canyon Drive will be a major collector street. At the intersection of Grand Canyon Drive two through lanes will continue west to Golden Eagle Circle. A dual left turn lane will accommodate the main movement to the commercial area. The continuation of Mustang Street roadway from Grand Canyon Drive to Golden Eagle Circle will have the two through lanes westbound. The intersection will be identical to that of the intersection at Golden Eagle Circle and Silver Street. The Mustang Street roadway eastbound from Golden Eagle Circle will have two lanes and will be widened for an exclusive right turn lane to provide right turns to Grand Canyon Drive. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 7-45 Alternatives Development lanes and will continue west to Golden Eagle Circle and the outside through lane and right turn will be needed to accommodate the main movement to the commercial area. Silver Street from Grand Canyon Drive to Golden Eagle Circle will have the two through lanes from the east and be merged with an exclusive lane from southbound Grand Canyon Drive to provide two westbound lanes. These two lanes on Silver Street will become free right turn lanes at the intersection of Golden Eagle Circle and Silver Street. The south approach to the Golden Eagle Circle and Silver Street will have two free right turn lanes proceeding east on Silver Street. Golden Eagle Circle will have three through lanes proceeding north on Golden Eagle Circle and the two free right turns from Silver Street will merge and become the fourth lane on Golden Eagle Circle to the north. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 7.5.2.3 Site Utilities – Airport Area This section provides a preliminary utility plan for the proposed Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan (NADP) study. Existing and proposed utility improvements in the surrounding area have been researched and reviewed, and a preferred land use concept, referred to as “Concept #3”, was identified (reference Exhibit 7-15). Based on available and relevant information, and the requirements of the development stakeholders, a preliminary utility plan has been developed. The NADP contains approximately 663 acres (+/-) and the land use categories developed will be used to calculate preliminary demands for the various utilities. Land uses for Concept #3 are as follows: • • • • • Open Space/Green Space: 38 acres Office: 81 acres Retail/Hotel: 171 acres Airport: 320 acres Northeast Right-of-Way (ROW): 53 acres This preliminary summary includes proposed municipal utility services and features to provide infrastructure systems for: water distribution, wastewater collection, design for drainage collection and conveyance, electric service, gas service, and communications (telephone, cable & fiber optic). Water The City of Mesa Capital Improvement Program (CIP) was reviewed, along with the 2004 Water Master Plan (with 2008 Program Update) and the DMB Mesa Proving Grounds Final Water Master Report in order to determine the potential “tie-in” locations for the proposed water distribution system as well to estimate sizes of the infrastructure water lines. The City of Mesa 2009 Engineering & Design Standards were utilized in order to estimate the preliminary demands for this site. A 20” water line is currently being constructed along Ray Road from Ellsworth Road to Hawes Road. A pressure reducing valve (PRV) is proposed along this alignment near the SR-24 Gateway Freeway alignment to connect the Falcon Field Pressure Zone system with the Desert Wells Zone system to the east. A 24” water line is under construction from Hawes Road west to Sossaman Road, where it connects to a 24” line which continues to the west to Power Road. There is an existing 16” line at this location which runs south to the existing Airport. A 20” water line is proposed along the Ellsworth Road alignment, within the Falcon Field Pressure Zone, from the 20” line along Ray Road into an existing 20” water line along Ellsworth Road which currently ends at Pecos Road at PRV 28. Per the City of Mesa CIP, a 24” water line will run to the east along Pecos Road alignment to well sites and the Falcon Field Pump Station. The preliminary water demands for the NADP are shown in Exhibit 7-18, Preliminary Water Demands. These demands were based upon The Central Arizona Project Canal usages in Table 7-4 from the City of Mesa Engineering & Design Standards. It is assumed that the open space area will be irrigated by potable water and the northeast ROW located north of the SR24 Gateway Freeway will not be part of this system. Also, the airport demand was based off an industrial land use. The values calculated herein are an engineering estimate and should not be used to create plans. These water demand values should be updated as any land use designations and area parameters are updated. Additional analyses should be performed at that time. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-46 were based upon The Central Arizona Project Canal usages in Table 3.1 from the City of Mesa Engineering & Design Standards. It is assumed that the open space area will be irrigated by potable water and the northeast ROW located north of the SR802 Gateway Freeway will not be part of this system. Also, the airport demand was based off an industrial land use. The values calculated herein are just an engineering estimate and should not be used to create plans. These water demand values should updated as any land use- designations area parameters are updated. Additional analyses Northeast AreabeDevelopment Plan Technicaland Report should be performed at that time. Land Use Category Open Space Office Retail/Hotel Airport Northeast ROW Total NADP Area: Area (acres) 38 81 171 320 53 663 Avg. Daily Use (gallons/acre) (by land use) 4400 1700 1700 1200 0 Total Avg.: Avg. Projected Demand (MGD) 0.17 0.14 0.29 0.38 0.00 0.98 Peaking Factor Falcon Field Pressure Zone 1.45 1.45 1.45 1.45 1.45 Total Peak: Max. Projected Demand (MGD) 0.24 0.20 0.42 0.56 0.00 1.42 The preliminary water utility plan for the NADP has been based on the existing and proposed The preliminary water utility plan for the NADP has been based on the existing and proposed infrastructure surrounding infrastructure surrounding the site, as well as the City of Mesa Engineering & Design Standards. the site, as well as the City of Mesa Engineering & Design Standards. It is proposed to have a 16” water line loop in It is proposed to have a 16” water line loop in Gateway Boulevard which will connect to the Gateway Boulevard 24” which will connect theRoad 24” water line intoRay and also theEllsworth 20” waterRoad. line in The Ellsworth Road. water line in to Ray and also theRoad 20” water linetoin remaining The remaining infrastructure loop is loop proposed to be a 12” water linewater whichline willwhich also connect to the Ray Road infrastructure is proposed to be a 12” will also connect to thewater Ray line Road and the Ellsworth Road water line. Water lines within the system will be a minimum of 8” in size, with 6” lines only being water line and the Ellsworth Road water line. Water lines within the system will be a minimum used for fire hydrantsofand building connections. Please noteused that for these are estimates basedconnections. on typical water line 8” in size, with 6” lines only being firesizes hydrants and building It should sizes per the City of be Mesa standards and a water model including fire flow analysis will determine final water line sizes. noted that these sizes are estimates based on typical water line sizes per the City of Mesa standards waterimprovements model including fireasflow water linelines sizes. Also, depending on the timing ofand theaoffsite as well the analysis phasing ofwill thedetermine NADP, 16”final and 12” water Also,fordepending on thedistribution. timing of the improvements as well as phasing of the NADP, may be interchangeable adequate water Fireoffsite flows will generally determine thethe final infrastructure sizing. 16” and 12” water lines may be interchangeable for adequate water distribution. Fire flows See Exhibit 7-22, Preliminary Water Distribution Plan. Wastewater: will generally determine the final infrastructure sizing. See Exhibit 7-18, Preliminary Water Distribution Plan. Wastewater The City of Mesa Capital Improvement Program (CIP) was reviewed, along with the 2009 Wastewater Master Plan and TheGrounds City of Master Mesa Capital Improvement Program (CIP) was reviewed, along with the 2009 the DMB Mesa Proving Wastewater Report (Revised May 7, 2010) in order to determine the potential Wastewater Master Plan and thesystem DMB as Mesa Grounds Report “tie-in” locations for the proposed wastewater collection well Proving to estimate the pipe Master sizes of Wastewater the infrastructure for (Revised 7, 2010) Design in order to determine the potential locations for the proposed the site. The City of Mesa 2009May Engineering Standards was utilized in order“tie-in” to estimate the preliminary demands wastewater collection system as well to estimate the pipe sizes of the infrastructure for the for this site and required pipe sizes. site. The City of Mesa 2009 Engineering Design Standards was utilized in order to estimate the preliminary demands for this site and required pipe sizes. The Greenfield Water Reclamation Plant serves the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway area and is located May 19, 2011 within the Town of Gilbert on the west side of Greenfield Road between Germann Road and Queen Creek Road. With the recent completion of the GWRP, the entire area south of Elliot, including the NADP is planned to flow southwest to the plant. A new 30” and 27” sewer line is currently under construction in the new Ray Road alignment and will be the connection point for the entire NADP area. The preliminary wastewater estimates are shown in Table 7-5. These were based upon Table 7-4 from the City of Mesa Engineering & Design Standards. It is assumed that the open space area will not generate wastewater and the northeast ROW located north of the SR-24 Gateway Freeway will not be part of this system. Also, the Airport demand was based off general industrial land use generation rates. The values calculated herein are an engineering estimate and should not be used to create plans. These water demand values should be updated as any land use designations and area parameters are updated. Additional analyses should be performed at that time. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-47 Table 7-21 7-4: Preliminary Water Demands Exhibit – Preliminary Water Demands Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum DRAFT 46 7-48 G AN ST Alternatives Development Exhibit 7-18: Preliminary Water Distribution Plan ET RE ST MU G R A N D C A N YO N G O LD EN EA D R . G LE C IR . SILVER STREET Exhibit 7-22 – Preliminary Water Distribution Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum DRAFT Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical DRAFT 47 47 Report Exhibit 7-23 – Preliminary Wastewater Collection Rates Avg. Daily Use Peak Population Population (gallons Peaking Flow Avg. Dailyper Use Avg. Flow Peak Population Population (gallons per Avg. Flow Peaking Flow Land Use Category Density (employees) employee-day) (MGD) Factor (MGD) Land UseSpace Category Density (employees) employee-day) (MGD) Factor (MGD) Open n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Open Space n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Office 23 1863 54 0.10 3 0.30 Office 23 1863 0.10 0.30 Retail/Hotel 15 2565 54 0.14 3 0.42 Retail/Hotel 2565 0.14 0.42 Airport 15 4800 54 0.26 3 0.78 AirportROW 15 4800 54 0.26 3 0.78 Northeast n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Northeast n/aPop.: n/a n/a Flow: n/a n/aPeak: n/a Total NADPROW Area: Tot. 9228 Tot. Avg 0.50 Total 1.49 663 Tot. Pop.: 9228 Tot. Avg Flow: 0.50 Total Peak: 1.49 Total NADP Area: The preliminary theonNADP has been based oninfrastructure the existing and The preliminary wastewater collectionwastewater plan for the collection NADP has plan been for based the existing and proposed proposed infrastructure surrounding the site, as well as the City of Mesa Engineering & Design The preliminary for theEngineering NADP has &been based on the existing and proposed surrounding the wastewater site, as well collection as the Cityplan of Mesa Design Standards. It is proposed to haveinfrastructure an 18” sewer Standards. It is proposed to have an 18” sewer main collect wastewater for the entire surrounding site, as well as the Citysite of and Mesa Engineering & Design is proposed 18”alignment sewer site main collect the wastewater for the entire which will connect to the Standards. existing 30”Itsewer line in to thehave Ray an Road and which will connect to the existing 30” sewer line in the Ray Road alignment at Hawes main collect wastewater for the entire site andshall which connectofto8”,the10”, existing 30”15” sewer the Ray Road alignment at Hawes Road. The remaining infrastructure bewill branches 12” and linesline as in necessary. Wastewater Road. The remaining infrastructure shall be branches of 8”, 10”, 12” and 15” lines as necessary. at Hawes Road. The remaining shall beofbranches of Please 8”, 10”, note 12” and lines as necessary. Wastewater collection lines within the systeminfrastructure shall be a minimum 8” in size. that15” these sizes are estimates based on Wastewater collection lines within the system shall be a minimum of 8” in size. It should be collection the system shall be a minimum ofand 8” ina size. Please note thatneeded these sizes are estimates based on the generallines landwithin use concepts at this preliminary point sewer model will be in the future studies to noted that these sizes are estimates based on the general land use concepts at this preliminary the general land use concepts at this preliminary point and a sewer model will be needed in the future studies to determine engineered sizes.model See Exhibit 7-24 for in the linefuture capacities basedtoon minimum slopes as required pointsewer and aline sewer will be needed studies determine engineered sewer determine sewer line sizes. See Exhibit 7-24 for sewer line capacities based on minimum slopes as required by the Cityengineered of Mesa. line sizes. See Table 7-6 for sewer line capacities based on minimum slopes as required by the by the City of Mesa. City of Mesa. Area Area (acres) (acres) 38 38 81 81 171 171 320 320 53 53 663 Exhibit 7-24 – Sewer Line Capacities Exhibit – Sewer Line Capacities Table 7-6:7-24 Sewer Line Capacities 8 8 0.0028 0.0028 0.50 10 10 0.0021 0.0021 0.79 12 12 0.0016 0.0016 1.12 0.50 225 225 0.32 0.32 0.25 0.79 353 353 0.51 0.51 0.39 0.25 1.27 1.27 0.19 0.19 0.013 0.013 Sewer Capacity @ Minimum Slope (Pipe flowing 2/3 full) Sewer Capacity @ Minimum Slope (Pipe flowing 2/3 full) 15 18 21 24 15 0.0012 0.0012 1.75 18 0.0010 0.0010 2.60 21 0.0008 0.0008 3.51 24 0.0007 0.0007 4.69 Diameter Diameter Minimum Slope (ft/ft) Minimum Slope (ft/ft) Q (cfs) 1.12 501 501 0.72 0.72 0.56 1.75 787 787 1.13 1.13 0.87 2.60 1,169 1,169 1.68 1.68 1.25 3.51 1,577 1,577 2.27 2.27 1.70 4.69 2,106 2,106 3.03 3.03 2.22 (cfs) QQ(gpm) Q (gpm) Q (MGPD) Q (MGPD) A (Area of Flow) 0.39 1.59 1.59 0.24 0.56 1.91 1.91 0.29 0.87 2.39 2.39 0.36 1.25 2.87 2.87 0.44 1.70 3.34 3.34 0.51 2.22 3.82 3.82 0.58 0.24 0.013 0.013 0.29 0.013 0.013 0.36 0.013 0.013 0.44 0.013 0.013 0.51 0.013 0.013 0.58 0.013 0.013 A (Area Perimeter) of Flow) P (Wetted PR (Wetted Perimeter) (Hydraulic Radius) R (Hydraulic Radius) n (Coefficient of Friction) n (Coefficient of Friction) Also, depending on the timing and phasing of the development of the NADP, alternate sewer routing should be Also, depending on thedepending timing construction andonphasing of the development the NADP, alternate sewer be considered to minimize phased costs. The development should be coordinated therouting City of should Mesasewer and Also, the timing and phasing of of the development of thewith NADP, alternate considered to minimize phased construction costs. The development should be coordinated with the City of Mesa and the surrounding routing developments, the DMB Mesa Proving Grounds in ordercosts. to assure that sewer line shouldincluding be considered to minimize phased construction The development should the surrounding developments, including DMB Mesa Proving Grounds in order to assure that sewer the lineDMB and be coordinated withare thethe City of Mesa the7-25. surrounding developments, including wastewater treatment facility capacities being met. See and Exhibit wastewater treatment capacities are being met. to Seeassure Exhibitthat 7-25. Mesafacility Proving Grounds in order sewer line and wastewater treatment facility capacities are being met. See Exhibit 7-19. May 19, 2011 May 19, 2011 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-49 Exhibit – Preliminary Collection Rates Table 7-5:7-23 Preliminary Water Wastewater Collection Rates Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum DRAFT 48 7-50 G AN ST Alternatives Development Exhibit 7-19: Preliminary Wastewater Collection System ET RE ST MU G R A N D C A N YO N G O D R . LD EN EA G LE C IR . SILVER STREET Exhibit 7-25 – Preliminary Wastewater Collection System Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The City storm drainage in the study area has been addressed in the East Mesa Area Drainage Master Plan, 1998. This plan was prepared for the Flood Control District of Maricopa County (FCDMC), who partners with the City to address drainage and flood control issues. Storm flows in the project area generally flow from northeast to southwest. The Superstition Freeway (US 60), CAP canal, East Maricopa Floodway, and Rittenhouse Channel form major drainage boundaries to the north, east, west, and south, respectively. Runoff is concentrated upstream of the CAP canal and discharged over the canal in over-chutes. The Superstition Freeway has a system of collector channels and detention basins that collect runoff and discharge the detained flows under the freeway. A system of channels and basins is used to capture, store, and convey flows within the project area. The Mesa Proving Grounds and the PhoenixMesa Gateway Airport occupy a substantial portion of the Mesa Gateway area and include significant drainage features. The Proving Grounds present a four-mile long barrier to runoff. Runoff reaching this area is diverted either around the north and south property boundaries, or through the site in the Powerline Floodway. The Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport handles offsite flows similarly; perimeter channels divert flows around the north and south boundaries to the East Maricopa Floodway. Sheet flow, ponding, and some flooding is still common in undeveloped portions of the study area, the result of the extremely flat topography. Key drainage features are highlighted on the Drainage Features graphic accompanying this section, see Exhibit 7-20. Discussion of key features (existing and proposed) in the project area follows: • • • • • • • • Sossaman Road Channel: receives channelized flows from us 60 and conveys them south along Sossaman Road and west along Guadalupe Road to the east Maricopa floodway. Elliot Channel: receives flows from north and east and conveys them along Elliot road to the L202 Santan Freeway drainage system, thence west to the east Maricopa floodway. Powerline floodway: conveys flows from east of the mesa proving grounds, west along the Williams Field Road alignment to the east Maricopa floodway. Pecos Road/Ellsworth channels: flows west from the Pinal county line along Pecos Road, thence north along Ellsworth Road to the Powerline floodway (Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport north and south perimeter channels: convey flows from the east around the Airport and into the Powerline floodway and Rittenhouse channels, respectively). East Maricopa floodway: runs north-south along approximately the Power Road alignment, receives flows from the north and east including via the Sossaman Road, Elliot Road, Elliot channels, and the Powerline floodway and then conveys them to the Rittenhouse channel at the southwest corner of the project area. Rittenhouse channel: the major regional floodway in the area - runs northwest southeast along the extreme southwest corner of the mesa gateway area, receiving flows from the east Maricopa floodway and other smaller channels including Rittenhouse channel extension along Queen Creek Road at the study area southern boundary. Basins: are strategically located to moderate flows in several areas including along Elliot Road, siphon draw, and the extreme east end of the Pecos Road channel. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-51 Drainage Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum DRAFT Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 50 7-52 Alternatives Development Exhibit 7-20: Drainage Features Exhibit 7-26 - Drainage Features Dry Utilities (Electric) Dry Utilities (Electric): SRP is the certified provider for electric power to the planning area. SRP currently serves the planning area from five distribution substations. A proposed sub-station will serve the NADP SRP is the certified provider for electric power to the planning area. SRP currently serves the planning area from five site which will be located near the intersection of Ellsworth Road and Gateway Boulevard. distribution substations. A proposed sub-station will serve the NADP site which will be located near the intersection of Infrastructure will be built to meet the demands of full build-out. SRP typically works with Ellsworth Road and Gateway Boulevard. Infrastructure will be built tofor meet thecoordinate demands ofanticipated full build-out. SRP typically developers and the city to adequately prepare and electrical demand works with developers and the city to adequately prepare for and coordinate anticipated electrical demand for projects for projects such as the Mesa Proving Grounds and the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport (PMGA) such as the Mesaarea. Proving Grounds andfeatures the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport (PMGA) These future are illustrated in Exhibit 7-21. area. These future features are illustrated in Exhibit 7-27. Dry Utilities (Natural Gas) Dry Utilities (Natural Gas): Southwest (SW) Gas is the natural gas provider for the majority of the Mesa Gateway area, including the NADP. Southwest Gas has installed extensive backbone infrastructure to serve Southwest (SW) Gas is the natural gas provider for the majority of the Mesa Gateway area, including the NADP. the future development needs for the entire Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport, DMB Mesa Southwest Gas has installed extensive backbone infrastructure to serve the future development needs for the entire Proving grounds and other surrounding future developments. Currently, there is a 10” high Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport, DMB Mesa Proving grounds and other surrounding future developments. Currently, there pressure gas line running north-south along Ellsworth Road for the entire boundary of the property line which will be the proposed supply line. These future features are illustrated in Exhibit 7-21. May 19, 2011 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report With regard to future growth and development, SW Gas has the capability to accommodate future needs within the planning area without any interruptions to service. Dry Utilities (Telephone, Cable & Fiber Optic) The NADP is within close proximity of services provided by both Cox Communication and Qwest for coaxial cable, telephone and fiber optics. The City of Mesa can serve the PhoenixMesa Gateway site with the required cable & fiber optic communication lines. Both Qwest and Cox can potentially provide telephone, cable and fiber optics to the remainder of the future development. Mesa currently established a backbone of fiber optic conduit has been constructed to build a professionally engineered carrier class conduit/vault system for both commercial and government uses. The backbone loop contains a unique conduit bank design, large operational vaults at every major street crossing along the line, access manholes to eliminate the need to cut the street and independent test points for the utility locators to access without exposing the fiber infrastructure. The backbone route of existing conduit consists of over 36-miles of 12 two-inch conduits with access points at every major street crossing. 100 percent of the conduit system is buried, lowering chances of network interruptions. Although there is currently no fiber in place, the 12 conduits have been identified for the type of user to which they are available. As the City uses this infrastructure to meet municipal needs, private companies also can purchase conduits and access to vaults to deploy fiber optic connectivity quickly for commercial needs. The City offers this unique opportunity for commercial entities to acquire conduits at a cost that covers the City’s expenses of installing the infrastructure. The goal of the Loop is to further develop the broadband markets in three of Mesa’s growing employment centers and to meet the City’s needs. Conduit extensions (laterals) reach into the existing Phoenix-Mesa Gateway airport and are provided along Ellsworth Road with the goal of providing conduit to deploy fiber optic connectivity quickly for commercial needs, see Exhibit 7-21. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 7-53 Alternatives Development In order to serve the NADP area, one tie in location should be adequate. A pressure reducing valve will be required to be installed along the existing 10” high pressure gas line in order to serve the development. The proposed reducing valve will be located near the intersection of Ellsworth Road and Williams Field Road. The site will likely be adequately served with a 6” low pressure plastic pipe, with of 2” to 4” laterals within the development. Gas lines which are 4” or less in size can be placed in joint trenches with other dry utilities. SRP will design this infrastructure based on final internal usages and needs. Internal airport service requirements will need to be coordinated in order to provide the proper gas line service. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Northeast Area Development Plan – Technical Memorandum DRAFT 52 7-54 G AN ST Alternatives Development Exhibit 7-21: Preliminary Dry Utility Plan ET RE ST MU G R A N D C A N YO N G O LD EN EA D R . G LE C IR . SILVER STREET Gateway Airport Exhibit 7-27 - Phoenix-Mesa Preliminary Dry Utility Plan May 19, 2011 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Following the selection and further detailing of the Preferred Concept, subsequent analysis and review of the concept was performed with the Airport Authority and the City of Mesa. Several iterations of refinement ensued to prepare an alternative suitable for developing a capital plan and testing its financial feasibility. The various refinements that took place, which are presented in the following subsections, involved: airfield adjustments to taxiway configurations and depth of stand for aircraft parking; subtle changes to the terminal and concourse footprints relative to the airfield and curb/parking areas; detailed analysis and refinements to roadway capacities, laneage, and intersection geometry; and orientation shifts for the multitude of support facilities (air cargo, fueling, aircraft maintenance, airport support functions, and vehicular parking placement). One of the key changes reflected in the revised concept was the treatment of Grand Canyon Drive, relative to its interaction with Mustang Street and Silver Street, and how these two streets feed the Airport. As shown in the revised concept, the desire was to ensure a strong linkage of Grand Canyon Drive with Ray Road to the west and Ellsworth Road to the east, in support of the commercial campus development, while hopefully minimizing the direct access from these arterials to the airport terminal roadway loop. As a result, a new “Refined” Development Alternative was generated and is illustrated in Exhibit 7-22. This new “refined” alternative was carried forward in the study for final analysis and refinement and formed the basis for the recommendation of development. Continued analysis was necessary to verify that essential capacities were in place to satisfy both the 20-year demand as well as the ultimate demand, approximately 5 and 10 million annual enplanements, respectively. The “refined” alternative was advanced in the study process to further develop a multi-phase sequencing plan of project construction and capital investment over 20-year period. This phased investment plan is outlined in Section 8 of this study. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-55 7.6 Alternative Refinement Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Key adjustments to the airfield portion of the preferred concept were directly related to the taxiway system provided along the northeast section of the existing airfield. The early preferred concept reflected a dual parallel taxiway system adjacent to Runway 12L-30R, while also providing lateral separation for a third apron edge taxilane that could be either partial or full length to complement terminal apron operations and other aircraft movements potentially arising from other aviation uses along the runway. Based on a review of this assumption and the constrained landside relative to existing drainage features, two alternative configurations were considered along with their impacts. The options relative to the taxiway configurations and terminal apron areas translate to an elimination of the apron edge taxilane. The preferred option will alter the island areas to make them fully usable paved apron area to provide maneuvering aircraft greater flexibility for power-in and pushback operations. In doing so, two scenarios develop, 1) provides more airfield to terminal depth allowing slightly more aircraft parking frontage, or 2) provides an ability to shift the entire terminal and landside complex toward the runways, thereby lessening the short-term impact on the Powerline Floodway. The impact operationally from eliminating this apron edge taxilane will be two-fold: there will be an operational capacity impact on taxiway flows during heavy pushback/ departure operations, and the Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) will need to execute full control over movements on this pavement, thereby increasing their workload. Both of these items were viewed as being negligible by the owner in the next 20+ years of operations. Remaining items to be considered during the refinement phase which have a direct impact on implementation, include: • • • • • All taxiway systems will include medium intensity taxiway lighting, required signage and standard paint markings All sections of pavement (including apron areas) will match existing Portland cement concrete section shown for Taxiway C -- P-501 PCCP - 17” -- P-304 CTB - 8” -- P-209 Agg. base - 6” -- P-152 subbase - 12” For the commercial apron areas under the concourse and bridge walkways, the same basic section will be utilized, except reduce the PCCP thickness to 10” Total concrete apron measures approximately 131,900 square yards of pavement at 17” PCCP and 13,200 square yards of pavement at 10” PCCP All commercial apron areas will include required paint markings, and all site grading and drainage infrastructure Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-56 7.6.1 Airfield Modifications Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Key areas of the terminal and concourses that changed during refinement were very limited. The areas that were modified slightly include the placement of the Central Utility Plant (CUP) supporting the complex and the placement of centralized concessions rotundas at decision points along the wayfinding path through the terminal and concourses. The preliminary location of the CUP had been illustrated as being adjacent to the curbfront, prior to the terminal building, and in close proximity to reduce piping and utility run costs. Although landscaping and streetscaping were planned, the proximity to the terminal entrance was viewed negatively. As a result the CUP was shifted east to a point adjacent to and east of the terminal building, south of and immediately adjacent to the curbfront. Similar landscaping and streetscaping would be employed at this location to obscure the mechanical nature of these facilities from the flying public. Concessions cores where planned in three predominant areas, the central terminal area, both preand post-security, and then at each node along the concourse connection corridors located to the east and west, coming online as sequenced expansions take place. Upon further analysis, locating concessions near gates which provides more centralized core areas to enhance customer accessibility and service, was viewed as a more ideal configuration. This slightly altered the footprint of each concourse at the midpoint of each concourse finger to provide for the concession courts. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-57 7.6.2 Terminal & Concourse Facilities Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Exhibit 7-22: Refined Development Alternative Alternatives Development 7-58 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Roadway access throughout the region is an integrated and complex network of interstates, freeways, and primary and secondary surface arterial streets. Historically, the Maricopa Association of Governments has worked to develop and maintain a robust computer simulation tool to assess the impacts of future development on system capacity. Additionally, the on-airport improvements shown in the preferred concept are at a greater level of detail, requiring a secondary set of simulation tools to assess capacities, laneage, intersection types, etc. to maintain peak hour volume flows and to ensure a safe movement environment for motorists, cyclists and pedestrians. As a part of the alternative refinement phase of this study, both the regional modeling tools and localized discrete modeling tools were employed to determine the correct roadway geometries required during the 20-year program as well as the ultimate build-out state. 7.6.3.1 Regional Traffic Modeling This subsection summarizes the results of the various traffic modeling and operational analysis conducted to identify the ideal alignment of Hawes Road and the configuration of two of the key intersections in the study, namely Hawes Rd/ Ray Rd and Ray Rd/ Grand Canyon Drive), in the 2030 horizon year. The summary presents the results of the traffic macro modeling and operational analysis for the various intersection alignments based on the year 2030 and 2050 volumes. Background The ability to provide adequate access to the Airport and the developments therein is essential to the economic vitality of the Airport. Hence the need to estimate future traffic to ensure that the current and planned transportation infrastructure will be sufficient to meet future travel demand. Traffic projections were developed using, as a base, the TransCAD travel demand model developed by HDR for the Mesa Gateway Strategic Development Plan (MGSDP) containing the Mesa Proving Grounds Master Transportation Plan socioeconomic and network data. The data represented the 2030 future conditions. This ensured the consistency of results between the two studies in the same area. Initial Technical Process and Analysis To ensure that the MGSDP model contained the latest possible information for this effort, we conducted the following tasks: • • • • Obtained 2030 MGSDP model with data from HDR Obtained future land use and roadway improvements data from City of Mesa for the area surrounding the airport, especially along Hawes Road Assumed two enplanements thresholds: 5 million and 10 million Obtained land use data from Jacobs Airport Development Team for the two enplanement thresholds The MGSDP model had two traffic analysis zones (TAZ) representing the entire airport property. This was not sufficient to conduct a meaningful analysis of the infrastructures operation in the airport. Hence, the TAZ structure was revised to reflect the internal potential roadway system and land uses, as shown in Exhibit 7-23. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-59 7.6.3 Roadway Network & Modeling Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 7-60 Alternatives Development Page 2 FIGURE 1. NEW TAZ STRUCTURE Exhibit 7-23: New TAZ Structure Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Two land use scenarios were developed for the entire airport property based on 5 and 10 million annual enplanements per year. For planning purpose, these enplanements were associated to the future years 2030 and 2050, respectively. The airport terminal is modeled as a special generator and the trips calculated manually based on its characteristics for the time period. The land use square footage by TAZ was used to calculate the model input data in the form of employees for each employment category. Table 7-7 contains the factors used in converting land use to employment by category. Table 1. Land Use To EmploymentTable Conversion 1. LandFactors Use To Employment Conversion Factors Table 7-7: Land Use To Employment Conversion Factors umptions: Category Conversion Factors Category Conversion Factors Retail Office Hotel Mixed Use 1 empl/1000 sfRetail 2 emp/1000 sfOffice 1.2 emp/roomHotel 2 emp/1000 sfMixed Use 1 empl/1000 sf 2 emp/1000 sf 1.2 emp/room 2 emp/1000 sf 2030 Assumptions: 2030 Assumptions Table 7-8 shows the of the 2030which number of by category for the airport hows the derivation of the 2030 ofthe employees byofcategory the airport property is assumed Tablenumber 2 shows derivation the derivation 2030fornumber of employees by category foremployees the airport property which is assumed % build out. The 2030 total of projected vehicular daily number trip generated bybuilt thevehicular airport is assumed to of beprojected 85% out. terminal The total number of projected to number be 85%property build out. which The 2030 total daily 2030 tripisgenerated by the airport terminal vehicular is 17,200. daily trips generated by the airport terminal is 17,200. Table 2. 2030 Airport Property Socioeconomic Table 2. 2030Data Airport Property Socioeconomic Data Table 7-8: 2030 Airport Property Socioeconomic Data Retail 6,000 76,200 243,500 137,500 Square Footage Square Footage Employees Employees Office Hotel(rooms) Mixed Use Retail Office Hotel Mixed Use TAZ Retail Office Hotel(rooms) Mixed Use Retail Office Hotel Mixed Use 736,000 78 2406,000 736,000 6 1472 288 0 240 6 1472 288 0 0 0 89 00 0 0 1,136,000 133 0 2272 1,136,000 00 2272 0 250 76 0 300 0 134 76,200 250 76 0 300 0 1,566,500 135 660,000 3133 660,000 1320 243,500 1,566,500 244 244 3133 1320 2,571,000 136 0 5142 2,571,000 00 5142 0 829,000 140 130 138 1658 156 0 137,500 829,000 130 138 1658 156 0 ly, the latest information regarding the developments planned for the area Hawes Road between Ray Additionally, the latest information regarding thealong developments planned the area along Hawes Road between Additionally, the latest information regarding thefordevelopments planned for the Ray area along the Airport was incorporated intoand thethe model input. These developments were assumed to be 100% build were assumed to be 100% build Road Airport was incorporated into the model input. These developments Hawes Road between Ray Road and the airport was incorporated into the model input. These 30. out by 2030. developments were assumed to be 100% built out by 2030. el data provided by HDR already contained latest by levels development proposed by the DMB for The model data the provided HDRofalready contained the latest levels of group development proposed by the DMB group for The data provided already contained the latest levels of development proposed Proofing Grounds. The development wasmodel assumed to beThe 100% buildby outHDR by 2030. the Mesa Proofing Grounds. development was assumed to be 100% build out by 2030. by the DMB group for the Mesa Proving Grounds. The development was assumed to be 100% built out by 2030. umptions: 2050 Assumptions: splays the 2050 assumptions and3 resulting employees by the airport property which Table displays number the 2050ofassumptions andcategory resultingfornumber of employees by category for the airport property which ed to be 100% build out. The 2050 total projected vehicular trip for the airport terminal is daily trip for the airport terminal is is assumed to number be 100%ofbuild out. The 2050 daily total number of projected vehicular to be 32,000. assumed to be 32,000. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-61 Land Use and Socioeconomic Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Table 7-9 displays the 2050 assumptions and resulting number of employees by category for the airport property which is assumed to be 100% built out. The 2050 total number of projected vehicular daily trip for the airport terminal is assumed to be 32,000. Table 3. 2050 Airport Property Socioeconomic Data Table 7-9: 2050 Airport Property Socioeconomic Data TAZ 78 89 133 134 135 136 140 Retail 6,000 Square Footage Office Hotel(room) Mixed Use Retail 736,000 240 1,136,000 152,400 483,500 1,566,500 2,571,000 137,500 829,000 500 660,000 130 Employees Office Hotel 6 0 0 152 484 0 138 1472 0 2272 0 3133 5142 1658 288 600 156 Mixed Use 0 0 0 0 1320 0 0 The model’s external trips were increased by 20% to account for the increase in travel from and to Pinal County and The model external trips were increased by 20% to account for the increase in travel from and surrounding Maricopa County. Additionally, the area south of the airport was increased by 20% from the projected to Pinal County and surrounding Maricopa County. Additionally, the area south of the Airport 2030 socioeconomic data, to account of potential future growth in locations with available developable land. was increased by 20% from the projected 2030 socioeconomic data, to account of potential future growth in locations with available developable land. Future Airport Roadway System: The airport internal Airport future roadway system is System comprised of a one-way loop road to provide access to the terminal Future Roadway from both Ray Road and Ellsworth Road. A series of major and minor arterials provide access to the commercial The airport internal future roadway system is comprised of a one-way loop road to provide development directly in front of the terminal area and on the remaining airport property. This configuration is referred access to the terminal from both Ray Road and Ellsworth Road. A series of major and minor to as Alternative A. Exhibits 2 and 3 depict Alternative A number of lanes and functional classification respectively. arterials provide access to the commercial development directly in front of the terminal area and on the remaining airport property. This configuration is referred to as Alternative A. Exhibits 7-24 and 7-25 depict Alternative A functional classification and number of lanes respectively. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-62 2050 Assumptions Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 7-63 Alternatives Development Page 5 FIGURE 2. ALTERNATIVE A ROADWAYS FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION Exhibit 7-24: Roadway Functional Classification Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 7-64 Alternatives Development Page 6 FIGURE 3. ALTERNATIVE A ROADWAYS NUMBER OF LANES Exhibit 7-25: Roadways Number Of Lanes Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report sis and Results: projection using the newly developed socioeconomic data and roadway network. After the first 2030 model run, it was noticed that: and generated by the airport projected commercial development was significant el travel patterns indicated a large • amount traffic turning left onbyRay from Hawes Road Theof demand generated theRoad airport projected commercial development was lly causing heavy delays on all legs of the intersection significant. • The model travel patterns indicated a large amount of traffic turning left on Ray Road ompted the formulation of a new alternative alignment for potentially Haws Road.causing After meeting with theon all legs of the intersection. from Hawes Road heavy delays otential alignments, Alternative B was developed. The primary objective of this alternative was These formulation of a new alternative alignments for Hawes Road. ng movements from Hawes Road to observations Ray Road andprompted to providethe a more direct connection to the After meeting with the City and discussing potential alignments, Alternative B was developed. rcels. Exhibits 4 and 5 depict Alternative B roadway functional classification and number of The primary objective of this alternative was to reduce the left turning movements from Hawes Road to Ray Road and to provide a more direct connection to the airport commercial parcels. Exhibits 7-26 and 7-27 depict Alternative B roadway functional classification and number of vels-of-service (LOS) analysislanes was respectively. conducted toAassess theplanning system performance. mid-link level-of-serviceTable (LOS)4 analysis was conducted to assess o capacity (V/C) ratio thresholds used in the evaluation. Exhibits 6 through 9 depict the 2030 the system performance. Table 7-10 contains the volume to capacity (V/C) ratio thresholds fic volumes and LOS for both alternatives. used in the evaluation. Exhibits 7-28 through 7-31 depict the 2030 and 2050 resulting traffic volumes and LOS for both alternatives. Table 4. Los And V/C Ratio Equivalencies Table 7-10: Los And V/C Ratio Equivalencies V/C Ratio LOS 0 ‐ 0.75 0.76 ‐ 0.89 0.90 ‐ 0.99 < 1.00 A‐ C D E F 2030 Findings • Ray Road, Ellsworth Road, Pecos Road, and Sossaman Road around the Airport perform mainly at LOS D and E with a small segment of Ellsworth Road at LOS F Ellsworth Road, Pecos Road, and Sossaman around theRoad airportforperform mainlyAatand LOS south ofRoad Williams Field Alternative B with a small segment at LOS F south of Williams Field Road for Alternative A and B • Hawes Road is LOS D and E north of Ray Road for Alternative A and B Road is LOS D and E north of Ray Road forfacilities Alternative and B property function at LOS A-C with the exception of Gateway • All on A airport in front of the new terminal in A, which shows LOS D ies on airport property function at LOS Blvd A-C with the exception of proposed Gateway Boulevard in Alternative front of • SR-24 performs at LOS D and E in the study area proposed terminal in Alternative A, which shows LOS D erforms at LOS D and E in the study area 2050 Findings • Ray Road, Ellsworth Road, Pecos Road, and Sossaman Road adjacent to the Airport perform at LOS E and F for Alternative A and B • Hawes is LOS F north Ray Rdatfor Alternative worth Road, Pecos Road, and Sossaman RoadRoad adjacent to the airportofperform LOS E and F A and B • Most facilities on airport property function at LOS A-C with the exception of A and B Gateway Blvd loop, which displays LOS D and E, and a portion of Grand Canyon LOS F north of Ray Road for Alternative A and B Drive in Alternative B which operates at LOS D n airport property function at LOS A-C theperforms exceptionatofLOS Gateway whicharea displays • with SR-24 E andBlvd F in loop, the study , and a portion of Airbus Blvd (subsequently renamed Hawker-Beechcraft Boulevard) in hich operated at LOS D The planning level analysis only identifies potential mobility concerns based on V/C ratio s at LOS E and F in the study area thresholds which are depended on the roadway capacity used in the analysis. This measure does not address the operation of a particular roadway. At first glance, the V/C could show a roadway is failing, the operational analysis nalysis only identifies potentialthat mobility concerns basedbut on when V/C ratio thresholds which areis performed, it could show that it is operating satisfactorily, if intersection improvements are made. Thus, a microsimulation way capacity used in the analysis. This measure does not address the operation of a particular analysisis failing, was performed to operational confirm oranalysis deny the planning level findings, and to assess ce, the v/c could show that a roadway but when the is performed, conclusions. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 7-65 Alternatives Development Demand Analysis Results vel demand model was used toTravel developed the 2030 and 2050and future traffic projection using the The modified HDR travel demand model was used onomic data and roadway network. After the first 2030 model run, it was noticed that:to develop the 2030 and 2050 future traffic Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 7-66 Alternatives Development Page 9 FIGURE 4. 2030 ALTERNATIVE B ROADWAYS FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION Exhibit 7-26: Alternative B Roadway Functional Classification Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 7-67 Alternatives Development Page 10 FIGURE 5. 2030 ALTERNATIVE B ROADWAYS NUMBER OF LANES Exhibit 7-27: Alternative B Roadways Number of Lanes Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 7-68 Alternatives Development Page 11 FIGURE 6. 2030 ALTERNATIVE A TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LOS Exhibit 7-28: 2030 Alternative A Traffic Volumes And LOS Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 7-69 Alternatives Development Page 12 FIGURE 7. 2030 ALTERNATIVE B TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LOS Exhibit 7-29: 2030 Alternative B Traffic Volumes And LOS Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 7-70 Alternatives Development Page 13 FIGURE 8. 2050 ALTERNATIVE A TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LOS Exhibit 7-30: 2050 Alternative A Traffic Volumes And LOS Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 7-71 Alternatives Development Page 14 FIGURE 9. 2050 ALTERNATIVE B TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LOS Exhibit 7-31: 2050 Alternative B Traffic Volumes And LOS Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report configurations, and efficient traffic control at intersections and quantified the operations in terms of Level-of-Service (LOS) based on Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodologies. This sub-section discusses the details of the operational analysis conducted for the proposed roadway infrastructure to discusses serve the the Phoenix-Mesa Airport in conducted the future for 2030 2050 This sub-section details of theGateway operational analysis theand proposed roadway infrastructure to serve the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport in the future 2030 and horizon years. 2050 horizon years. Study Area The study Study area forArea the traffic operational analysis is bordered by SR 202L to the northwest, future The study the traffic operational analysis is bordered by SRand 202LGateway to the northwest, future State Route 24 (SR area 24) for to the east, Williams Field Road to the south, Boulevard to the State Route 24 (SR 24) to the east, Williams Field Road to the south, and Gateway Boulevard to west. The study area for the operational analysis is shown in Exhibit 7-1: Study Area. the west. The study area for the operational analysis is shown in Exhibit 7-32: Study Area. A detailedAdescription of the roadway be found section Critical Infrastructure detailed description of thenetwork roadwaycan network caninbe found7.5.2.2 in section 7.5.2.2 Critical Elements under subsections “Surrounding Roadway Network” and “On-Airport Roadway Network” Infrastructure Elements under subsections “Surrounding Roadway Network” and “On-Airport Roadway Network”. Exhibit Area Exhibit7-1: 7-32:Study Study Area Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7.6.3.2 Traffic Operational Analysis The regional traffic modeling efforts described in the previous sub-section identified mobility 7-72 concerns based on the planning level analysis. The ability of the transportation infrastructure 7.6.3.2 Traffic Operational Analysis surrounding airporttraffic and on-airport to carry future regional and airport trafficidentified was measured using Thethe regional modeling efforts described in the previous sub-section mobility analytical concerns tools thatbased quantify operations for the optimal roadway Theinfrastructure design peakon the planning level analysis. The ability ofconfigurations. the transportation the Airport andusing on-airport to carry future regional and airport traffic was measured hour trafficsurrounding operation was modeled VISSIM micro-simulation software. The operational using analytical tools that quantify operations for the optimal roadway configurations. The analysis addresses the peak-hour traffic operations, optimal intersection configurations, and efficient design peak-hour traffic operation was modeled using VISSIM micro-simulation software. traffic control at intersections and quantified the operations in terms of Level-of-Service (LOS) The operational analysis addresses the peak-hour traffic operations, optimal intersection based on Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodologies. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The planning of the roadway network adjacent to and within the Airport was developed based on the following criteria: • • • • • • • • Easy access to and from SR 202L/SR 24 to and from Airport Adequate spacing between interchanges/intersections Functionality of roadways conducive to support development Maintaining connectivity to the existing roadway network in the area Access to adjacent future developments Flexible roadway network Ability of the roadway network to be multi-modal Access Management features The roadway network alternative was refined based on the regional and airport land-use modeling. In refining the roadway network alternatives, two land-use scenarios were evaluated using the modified MGSDP TransCAD regional model based on 5 and 10 million enplanements per year. These corresponded to future years 2030 and 2050, respectively, as described in the regional modeling in the previous sub-section. The two key roadway network alternatives that emerged from the regional traffic and land-use modeling are: Alternative A: Under this Alternative, Hawes Road extends from the TI at SR202L southerly, and ties into Gateway Boulevard at Ray Road. Also, Grand Canyon Drive intersects Ray Road at a ‘T’ intersection. The intersections evaluated under Alternative A are illustrated in Exhibit 7-33:Alternative Alternative AAStudy Exhibit 7-2: StudyIntersections. Intersections. Exhibit 7-33: Alternative A Study Intersections • Alternative B: This is similar to the configuration of Alternative A with the exception of Hawes Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Road tying into Grand Canyon Drive at Ray Road; and a connector roadway between Hawes Road and Gateway Boulevard. In this Alternative, the intersections of Ray Road & Hawes Road Connector, Ray Road & Hawes Road/ Grand Canyon Drive, and, Hawes Road & Hawes Road 7-73 Alternatives Development Roadway Network Alternatives Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Exhibit 7-3: Alternative B Study Intersections. Exhibit 7-34: Alternative B Study Intersections These alternatives were further refined to obtain the ideal intersection configurations and are These alternatives were further refined to obtain the ideal intersection configurations and are discussed in more detail the Traffic Analysis discussed in under more detail under the Traffic section. Analysis section. Traffic Analysis The traffic operational analysis was conducted using Synchro and VISSIM computer software. Synchro is a traffic analysis and optimization software application. It is a complete software package for modeling, optimizing, managing and simulating traffic systems. Synchro implements the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) 2003 method for determining intersection capacity and can also calculate delay and level-of-service per the Highway Capacity Manual criteria. VISSIM is microscopic driver behavior traffic simulation software, time step and behavior-based simulation model developed to model urban traffic and public transit operations. The program analyzes traffic operations under constraints such as lane configuration, traffic composition, traffic signals, transit stops, etc., thus making it a useful tool for the evaluation of various alternatives based on transportation engineering and planning measures of effectiveness (MOE’s) such as control delay, travel times, and queue lengths. This program is capable of implicitly modeling passenger vehicle, transit vehicles and pedestrians simultaneously and also offers great visualization from simple to complex traffic conditions to provide a realistic picture of the traffic operations. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Future Traffic Volumes Analysis of intersection operations was conducted for the 2030 and 2050 peak hours using the 7-74 Alternatives Development Alternative B: This is similar to the configuration of Alternative A with the exception of Hawes Road tying into Grand Canyon Drive at Ray Road; and a connector roadway between Hawes Road and Gateway Boulevard. In this Alternative, the intersections of Ray Road & Hawes Road Connector, Ray Road & Hawes Road/ Grand Canyon Drive, and, Hawes Road & Hawes Road Connector operate as “conventional” intersections. The intersections evaluated under Alternative B are illustrated in Exhibit 7-34: Alternative B Study Intersections. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The traffic operational analysis was conducted using Synchro and VISSIM computer software. Synchro is a traffic analysis and optimization software application. It is a complete software package for modeling, optimizing, managing and simulating traffic systems. Synchro implements the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) 2003 method for determining intersection capacity and can also calculate delay and level-of-service per the Highway Capacity Manual criteria. VISSIM is microscopic driver behavior traffic simulation software, time step and behavior-based simulation model developed to model urban traffic and public transit operations. The program analyzes traffic operations under constraints such as lane configuration, traffic composition, traffic signals, transit stops, etc., thus making it a useful tool for the evaluation of various alternatives based on transportation engineering and planning measures of effectiveness (MOE’s) such as control delay, travel times, and queue lengths. This program is capable of implicitly modeling passenger vehicles, transit vehicles and pedestrians simultaneously and also offers great visualization from simple to complex traffic conditions to provide a realistic picture of the traffic operations. Future Traffic Volumes Analysis of intersection operations was conducted for the 2030 and 2050 peak hours using the nationally accepted methodology set forth in the Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Design year peak-hour traffic volumes for the study area were obtained from the regional modified Research Board, 2000. MGSDP TransCAD travel demand model for years 2030 and 2050 developed for the airport as described in the previous The daily traffic volumes various turning movements Design section. year peak-hour traffic volumes for for the the study area were obtained from at thethe regional study intersectionsmodified were reduced to TransCAD peak-hour travel volumes by applying a 7.5% factor. The 2030 and for the MGSDP demand model for years K 2030 and 2050 developed airport as described in theinprevious daily7-6. traffic volumes for the various turning 2050 peak hour traffic volumes are shown Exhibit section. 7-4 andThe Exhibit movements at the study intersections were reduced to peak-hour volumes by applying a 7.5% K factor. The 2030 and 2050 peak hour traffic volumes are shown in Exhibit 7-35, Exhibit 7-36 Level-of-Service Criteria and Exhibit 7-37. Level-of-service (LOS) is a qualitative measure of the traffic operations at an intersection or on a roadway segment.Level-of-Service Level of service is ranked from LOS A, which signifies little or no congestion Criteria and is the highest Level-of-service rank, to LOS F,(LOS) which congestion jam conditions. LOS D isor on a is asignifies qualitative measure ofand the traffic traffic operations at an intersection typically considered adequate operation signalized and un-signalized innourban roadway segment. Level ofat service is ranked from LOS A, whichintersections signifies little or congestion locations. and is the highest rank, to LOS F, which signifies congestion and traffic jam conditions. LOS D is typically considered adequate operation at signalized and un-signalized intersections in urban locations. The criteria for level of service at signalized intersections are shown in Table 7-1. The criteria for level of service at signalized intersections are shown in Table 7-11. Table 7-1: Level of Service Criteria Table 7-11: Level of Service Criteria Signalized Intersections Signalized Intersections Level-of-Service Delay (LOS) A B C D E F < 10 seconds per vehicle > 10 and < 20 seconds/vehicle > 20 and < 35 seconds/vehicle > 35 and < 55 seconds/vehicle > 55 and < 80 seconds/vehicle > 80 seconds per vehicle Source: Highway Capacity Manual, 2000 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Operational Analysis Scenarios This section describes each of the roadway network scenarios that were analyzed for capacity and level-of-service, and presents a discussion of the results and conclusions: Alternatives Development 7-75 Traffic Analysis Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report This section describes each of the roadway network scenarios that were analyzed for capacity and level-of-service, and presents a discussion of the results and conclusions: Alternative A Roadway Network Under this Alternative, Hawes Road extends from the TI at SR202L southerly, and ties into Gateway Boulevard at Ray Road. Also, Grand Canyon Drive intersects Ray Road at a ‘T’ intersection. Based on the regional traffic and land-use modeling for the design year 2030 (refer to Section 7.6.3.1), Hawes Road north of Ray Road as well as Ray Road east and west of Hawes Road operate at LOS D. However, in the design year 2050, Hawes Road north of Ray Road and Ray Road east of Hawes Road operate at LOS E. As the intersection of Hawes Road and Ray Road is the primary access to the airport, preliminary analysis was conducted to evaluate the ideal configuration for this intersection. There were five (5) options of intersection configurations that were evaluated for the Hawes Road and Ray Road intersection. These are discussed in detail below: Option: Conventional Intersection Utilizing the Alternative A roadway network configuration, under this option, the intersection of Hawes Road and Ray Road was evaluated as a conventional 4-legged intersection. If configured as a conventional intersection, the lane configuration recommended to accommodate the future traffic conditions includes: (2) dual left turn lanes, (1) right turn lane, (3) through lanes for each of the approaches to the intersection. The westbound right turn lane will be channelized (free flow) into an exclusive lane on Hawes Road north of Ray Road. Hawes Road is projected to have three (3) through lanes in the southbound and northbound directions between Ray Road and SR 202L Traffic Interchange. As the intersections of Hawes Road and Ray Road, and Ray Road and Grand Canyon Drive are in close proximity to each other and provide major access to the airport and other land-uses on the airport property they were evaluated together under this option. This evaluation is based on the Ray Road and Grand Canyon Drive intersection modeled as a conventional ‘T’ intersection, with Grand Canyon Drive as the south leg of the intersection. By the year 2030 this intersection is anticipated to be signalized and the intersection configuration recommended to accommodate the future traffic conditions includes: two (2) right turn lanes and three (3) thru lanes in the eastbound direction of Ray Road; two (2) left turn lanes and three (3) thru lanes in the westbound direction of Ray Road; and two (2) right turn lanes and two (2) left turn lanes in the northbound direction for Grand Canyon Drive. The intersection of Hawes Road and Ray Road operates at a LOS D during the 2030 design year and a LOS E during the 2050 design year. The intersection of Ray Road and Grand Canyon Drive operates at LOS B during the 2030 design year and a LOS D during the 2050 design year. The summary of the delay and LOS for these intersections for year 2030 and 2050 are shown in Tables 7-12 and 7-13. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-76 Operational Analysis Scenarios lanes in the northbound direction for Grand Canyon Drive. The intersection of Hawes Road and Ray Road operates at a LOS D during the 2030 design year and a LOS E during the 2050 design year. The intersection of Ray Road and Grand Canyon Drive operates at LOS B during the 2030 design year and a LOS Northeast Area Development - Technical Report D during thePlan 2050 design year. The summary of the delay and LOS for these intersections for year 2030 and 2050 are shown in Tables 7-2 and 7-3. Table 7-2: Hawes Road and Ray Road – Conventional Intersection – Year 2030 Direction EB Avg. Delay (sec/ veh.) Intersection Name WB LOS Avg. Delay (sec/ veh.) NB LOS Avg. Delay (sec/ veh.) SB LOS Avg. Delay (sec/ veh.) TOTAL LOS Avg. Delay (sec/ veh.) LOS Ray Rd / Hawes Rd 41.0 D 44.6 D 43.9 D 40.0 D 42.3 D Ray Rd / Grand Canyon Dr. 14.2 B 13.3 B 19.9 B ‐ ‐ 15.2 B Table 7-3: Hawes Road and Ray Road – Conventional Intersection – Year 2050 Table 7-13: Hawes Road and Ray Road – Conventional Intersection - Year 2050 Direction EB Avg. Delay (sec/ veh.) Intersection Name WB LOS Avg. Delay (sec/ veh.) NB LOS Avg. Delay (sec/ veh.) SB LOS Avg. Delay (sec/ veh.) TOTAL LOS Avg. Delay (sec/ veh.) LOS Ray Rd / Hawes Rd 48.2 D 101.3 F 99.3 F 47.7 D 73.6 E Ray Rd / Grand Canyon Dr. 31.4 D 29.7 C 46.6 D ‐ ‐ 35.2 D While While this intersection works adequately as aasconventional 2030 this intersection works adequately a conventionalintersection intersectionbased based on on 2030 traffic traffic volumes it does not accommodate the anticipated future airport traffic projected volumes it does not accommodate the anticipated future airport traffic past the year 2030. conventional configuration at Hawes Road and Ray projected past The the year 2030. Theintersection conventional intersection configuration at Hawes Road will be unable to handle the heavy traffic volumes projected for the Airport pastfor the Road and Ray Road will be unable to handle the heavy traffic volumes projected year 2030. Therefore, in planning for the future regional and airport traffic to have easy the airport past the year 2030. Therefore, in planning for the future regional and accessairport to and traffic from the Airport, intersection were evaluated. to have easyadditional access to and from the configurations airport additional intersection configurations need to be evaluated. Option: Roundabout Utilizing the Alternative A roadway network configuration, under this option, a roundabout o Option: Roundabout configuration was considered for the intersection of Hawes Road and Ray Road. Based on Utilizing the Alternative A roadway network configuration, under this option, a the FHWA Guide indicates that multi-lane roundabouts (two- and three-lane entries) can roundabout configuration was considered for the intersection of Hawes Road and Ray be expected to handle a typical service volume between 25,000 and 55,000 vehicles per day. Road. Based on the FHWA Guide indicates that multi-lane roundabouts (two- and Based on the regional modeling data, the 2030 service volumes at the Hawes Road and Ray three-lane entries) can be expected to handle a typical service volume between 25,000 Road intersection are expected to be approximately 90,000 vehicles per day and the 2050 55,000are vehicles per day. on the regional modeling the 2030 service serviceand volumes expected to beBased approximately 107,000 vehiclesdata, per day. Because these volumes at the Hawes Road and Ray Road intersection are expected to be future volumes are too high to be serviced by a roundabout, this option was not evaluated approximately 90,000 vehicles per day and the 2050 service volumes are expected to any further. be approximately 107,000 vehicles per day. Because these future volumes are too high to be serviced by a roundabout, this option was not evaluated any further. o Option: Michigan-Lefts/Arizona Parkway Utilizing the Alternative A roadway network configuration, under this option, an intersection configuration was considered for the intersection of Hawes Road and Ray Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Road providing indirect left turns for traffic on Hawes Road and Ray Road similar to the “Michigan Lefts or Arizona Parkway” configuration. This configuration would make the intersection of Hawes Road and Ray Road a two-phase signal for the Alternatives Development 7-77 Table 7-12: Hawes Road and Ray Road – Conventional Intersection - Year 2030 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report It was discussed that this configuration would not be a feasible solution for the following reasons: --- -- Increase in right-of-way requirements: Both Hawes Road and Ray Road would need a 200-foot right-of-way along the entire stretch to provide for a 60-foot median and three through lanes in each direction. Multiple Traffic Signals: In addition to a traffic signal at the intersection of Hawes Road and Ray Road, there may be a necessity of signalizing the ‘left-turns’ on Hawes Road between the SR202L and Ray Road. Multiple signals along Hawes Road would then impede the traffic bound to the Airport. Indirect Access to Properties: The Michigan Lefts/Arizona Parkway configuration will provide indirect left –turn access to the parcels located on the east and west side of Hawes Road. Due to the reasons discussed above this option was not evaluated in further detail due to its impact on adjacent properties. Option: Single Point Urban Interchange (SPUI) (At-grade) Utilizing the Alternative A roadway network configuration, the intersection of Ray Road and Hawes Road was evaluated as an At-grade Single Point Urban Interchange (SPUI). The at-grade SPUI configuration will allow for future expansion with the addition of a flyover and grade separation from Ray Road to provide uninterrupted access to the Airport from the SR 202L freeway. An at-grade SPUI configuration provides greater capacity for the intersection of Ray Road and Hawes Road and operates at a LOS D for 2030 and 2050 traffic conditions. Option: Single Point Urban Interchange (SPUI) with Flyover Utilizing the Alternative A roadway network configuration in this option, the intersection of Hawes Road and Ray Road is grade-separated by providing a flyover from Hawes Road to connect to Gateway Boulevard over Ray Road, making this a standard SPUI. As the traffic volumes continue to increase beyond design year 2030, the flyover would become necessary to handle the high peak hour traffic volumes and provide uninterrupted access to the Airport from the SR 202L. The at-grade SPUI configuration, discussed in the previous option, will allow for future addition of the flyover. The option was analyzed with 2050 traffic volumes and the intersection of Ray Road and Hawes Road under this option operates at a LOS C. Based on the preliminary analysis, under Alternative A, the SPUI and the SPUI with Flyover options were selected to be modeled in detail using VISSIM software. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 7-78 Alternatives Development Option: Michigan-Lefts/Arizona Parkway Utilizing the Alternative A roadway network configuration, under this option, an intersection configuration was considered for the intersection of Hawes Road and Ray Road providing indirect left turns for traffic on Hawes Road and Ray Road similar to the “Michigan Lefts or Arizona Parkway” configuration. This configuration would make the intersection of Hawes Road and Ray Road a two-phase signal for the through movements while the left turns would be able to make the maneuver approximately 660 feet away from the intersection. Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report This is similar to the configuration of Alternative A with the exception of Hawes Road tying into Grand Canyon Drive at Ray Road; and a connector roadway between Hawes Road and Gateway Boulevard. In this Alternative, the intersections of Ray Road & Hawes Road Connector, Ray Road & Hawes Road/ Grand Canyon Drive, and Hawes Road & Hawes Road Connector operate as “conventional” intersections. Alternative B was modeled in detail using VISSIM software for 2030 and 2050 design years. Future Capacity and Level-of-Service – Summary of Findings A VISSIM microsimulation model was developed to model the traffic operations for 2030 and 2050 design year peak hour traffic conditions for Alternatives A and B. The results of the operational analysis are discussed below: Alternative A with At-grade SPUI at Hawes Road and Ray Road In the year 2030, all the off-airport intersections operate with LOS C or better except for the intersection of Hawes Road and Ray Road which operates at LOS D, during the design peak hour. All the on-airport intersections operate at LOS B or better. In the year 2050, all the off-airport intersections operate with a LOS C or better except for the intersections of Hawes Road and Ray Road, Williams Field Road and Ellsworth Road, and Ray Road and Ellsworth Road which operate at LOS D. All the on-airport intersections operate with LOS C or better. The lane configurations, peak-hour traffic volumes, and LOS for the operational analysis conducted for Alternative A, for future years 2030 and 2050, are shown on Exhibit 7-38. The detailed summary of the delay and LOS for each intersection evaluated under Alternative A, for future years 2030 and 2050, are shown in Tables 7-14 and 7-15. Alternative A with Flyover at Hawes Road and Ray Road In the year 2050, all the off-airport intersections operate with LOS C or better except for the intersection of Ray Road & Ellsworth Road which operates at LOS D. All the on-airport intersections operate at LOS C or better. The lane configurations, peak-hour traffic volumes, and LOS for the operational analysis conducted for Alternative A-Flyover, for future years 2030 and 2050, are show on Exhibit 7-35. The detailed summary of the delay and LOS for each intersection evaluated under Alternative A-Flyover, for future years 2030 and 2050, are shown in Table 7-16. Alternative B In the year 2030, all the off-airport intersections operate with LOS C or better except for the intersection of Ray Road & Ellsworth Road which operates at LOS D. All the on-airport intersections operate with LOS C or better. In the year 2050, all the off-airport intersections operate with LOS C or better except for the intersections of Williams Field Road & Ellsworth Road, and Ray Road & Ellsworth Road which operate at LOS D. All the on-site intersections operate with LOS C or better. The lane configurations, peak-hour traffic volumes, and LOS for the operational analysis conducted for Alternative B, for future years 2030 and 2050, are show on Exhibit 7-36. The detailed summary of the delay and LOS for each intersection evaluated under Alternative B, for future years 2030 and 2050, are shown in Tables 7-17 and 7-18. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-79 Alternative B Roadway Network Northeast Area Development Plan Peak - Technical Report Exhibit 7-4: Alternative A-2030/2050 Hour Traffic, LOS and Lane Configurations Exhibit 7-35: Alternative A - 2030/2050 Peak Hour Traffic, LOS and Lane Configurations Alternatives Development 7-80 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Exhibit 7-5: Alternative A (Flyover) -2050 Peak Hour Traffic, LOS and Lane Configurations Exhibit 7-36: Alternative A-2030/2050 Peak Hour Traffic, LOS and Lane Configurations Alternatives Development 7-81 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Exhibit 7-5: Alternative A (Flyover) -2050 Peak Hour Traffic, LOS and Lane Configurations Exhibit 7-37: Alternative A (Flyover) -2050 Peak Hour Traffic, LOS and Lane Configurations Alternatives Development 7-82 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Exhibit 7-6: Alternative B-2030/2050 Peak Hour Traffic, LOS and Lane Configurations Exhibit 7-38: Alternative B-2030/2050 Peak Hour Traffic, LOS and Lane Configurations Alternatives Development 7-83 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Table 7-14: Level of Service Summary - Alternative A - Year 2030 Table 1 Alternatives Development 7-84 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Table 7-15: Level of Service Summary - Alternative A - Year 2050 7-85 Alternatives Development Table 2 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Table 7-16: Level of Service Summary - Alternative A - Flyover - Year 2050 7-86 Alternatives Development Table 3 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Table 7-17: Level of Service Summary - Alternative B - Year 2030 Table 4 Alternatives Development 7-87 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Table 7-18: Level of Service Summary - Alternative B - Year 2050 Table 5 Alternatives Development 7-88 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The following are some of the considerations to be evaluated during the next phase of the planning process and may warrant further study beyond the scope of the Northeast Area Development Plan.. Ray Road & Hawes Road While this intersection works adequately as a conventional intersection based on 2030 traffic volumes the projected growth of the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport is anticipated to be 10 million enplanements by the year 2050. A conventional intersection at Hawes Road and Ray Road cannot accommodate the future airport traffic projected past the year 2030. An at-grade SPUI configuration at Hawes Road and Ray Road in 2030 provides flexibility for future expansion and is able to accommodate the addition of the flyover and grade separation from Ray Road to provide uninterrupted access to the Airport from both the SR 202L. A detailed analysis should be conducted closer to that stage of airport development to determine the ideal intersection configuration. However, adequate future right-of-way and/or setbacks should be provided and maintained to allow for the future expansion of the Ray Road and Hawes Road intersection to a potential SPUI. The additional right-ofway that will be necessary for the at-grade SPUI is about 7.5 acres including the right-ofway for the future Light Rail on the west side of Hawes Road. Future intersection on Hawes Road between Ray Road and SR 202L There is future development planned along either side of Hawes Road between Ray Road and SR 202L. To provide access for this development along Hawes Road a future intersection is desirable and may be necessary. This intersection can be a full access intersection initially. The location of this intersection depends on the configuration of the intersection at Ray Road and Hawes Road. If the intersection at Ray Road and Hawes Road is expanded to a SPUI, the future intersection providing access to the development along Hawes Road if located within 1100 feet from the center of the intersection of Hawes Road and Ray Road, and have to be modified to accommodate the future flyover ramps to the Airport. Detailed analysis should be conducted to determine what improvements should be made. Right-ofway and/or setbacks should be maintained to allow for expansion of the future intersection to accommodate the SPUI and flyover ramps. The location of the future intersection along Hawes Road between SR 202L and Ray Road, and its configuration and operation, needs to be balanced between serving the adjacent development and providing high capacity to and from the Airport. Future analysis is required to balance these interests. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-89 Future Evaluation Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The support facilities inherent in the preferred concept include air cargo (belly as well as all-freight), airport support, airline support (GSE, aircraft maintenance, etc.), fueling, ATCT, aircraft rescue and fire fighting facility (ARFF), and vehicular parking (garage and surface lots). To a large extent, those items presented in the preferred concept remain unchanged in the refined concept, with the exception of the size and orientation of the air cargo facilities and the fuel farm. Both of these land uses were slightly shifted in orientation to accommodate a more direct access roadway from the east to the back-of-house delivery points for the terminal complex. In making these subtle adjustments, the planned location for the SRP substation was shifted further south of Gateway Boulevard, off of Ellsworth to a point that would be more visually screenable. Specific fuel farm components include: • • • • • Three (3) 250,000 gallon tanks for a total capacity of 750,000 gallons Two (2) fuel truck unloading islands to receive fuel delivery Four (4) truck loading islands for aircraft fuel trucks Basic operations building and small testing lab for fuel receipt Hydrant system is not included The two items that were added to the overall concept include acreage preserved for airport and airline support, namely for aircraft maintenance bases in the future. These are viewed as very likely aeronautical demands at PMGA, and as such, adequate property should be reserved. Land areas along Runway 12L-30R, located both east and west of the terminal complex are reserved for these uses. The final remaining land area with direct airside accessibility in the far northwest corner of the study area, but limited development potential due to site constraints and landside accessibility, is designated as a stormwater detention basin. The final support facilities component that went through modest change was vehicular parking. Surface parking for employees as well as public long term and economy parking was added between Gateway Boulevard and the other airport/airline support areas. These lots would be provided with shuttle access due the proximity to the terminal facilities, but could function as overflow lots for vacation and high peak activity periods. The garage storage was capped at four levels per garage for aesthetic purposes to maintain visibility throughout the terminal and curbside areas. With the long-range introduction of mass transit access via a rail corridor along Golden Eagle Circle, the lower two levels of the garage in and around the transit station, shown in a dashed line and measuring approximately 430,000 square feet, would be dedicated as a ground transportation center, thereby shifting many of the curbside movements by commercial vehicles to this consolidated area, and hopefully improving curbside congestion.. These features would be connected to the terminal building and to the commercial development properties via an open air greenway corridor, complete with sidewalks, water features, moving sidewalks, canopies, and southwest landscaping. This corridor would be between 150 and 300 feet in width. Finally, inside the terminal loop road network, two long-term surface lots were added to the east and west to add additional critical parking in an effort to enable garage construction. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 7-90 7.6.4 Support Facilities Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Section 8: Implementation Plan 8.1 Introduction The implementation of the Northeast Area Development Plan (NADP) involves consideration of both phasing and funding of the proposed terminal, associated airfield, support/ancillary facilities, and ground access projects. This section provides a general overview of the sequencing of projects identified in the NADP and establishes preliminary cost estimates in 2010 dollars for the various phases and their associated projects. In addition, a discussion of the financial feasibility of the preferred development plan will identify funding sources in support of the airport’s capital improvement program. 8.2 Program Phasing Plans The phased development of the NADP is outlined in this section and is scheduled to occur as demand warrants. The phased approach was accomplished through the identification of activity levels that when reached, would require additional infrastructure in order to be accommodated. Each activity level is supported by a range of infrastructure improvements that are phased in order to maximize flexibility and cost effectiveness, while minimizing disruption to existing operations. These activity levels and their associated Phases are: • • • • Phase I – 1.5 million annual enplanements Phase II – 2.2 million annual enplanements Phase III – 5 million annual enplanements Phase IV – 10 million annual enplanements The phases detailed in this section are discussed and depicted separately; however, portions of each phase could occur simultaneously, depending on future operational requirements and aviation trends. Refinement of the phasing plan will occur throughout the design and construction process as demand warrants. 8.2.1 Phase I – 1.5 Million Enplanements Phase I of the NADP should be programmed to accommodate 1.5 million enplaned passengers. This phase will serve to establish operations on a previously undeveloped area of the airfield, therefore requiring some areas larger than what is programmed in the facility requirements section of this document in order to establish basic functions and support facilities. The major components of Phase I, depicted in Exhibit 8-1 include: • Airfield - In order to provide suitable airfield access for the proposed new air carrier terminal, Phase I encompasses the development of a full parallel Group V taxiway northeast of Runway 12L-30R, two Group IV access taxilanes and an apron edge taxilane. The development of these airfield assets, along with an apron capable of accommodating Group III and IV aircraft on a regular basis, will provide efficient airfield access capable of supporting the proposed air carrier operations. • Terminal Building – The development of an approximate 300,000 square-foot terminal building will be required in order to accommodate the forecast 1,500,000 annual enplanements at a level of service desired by the PMGA Authority. The terminal building will be located midfield of Runway 12L-30R and will be constructed as a pier terminal type concept. The building will include a ticketing/check-in area of approximately 8,000 square feet, an approximately 41,000 square-foot baggage claim area and 20,000 square feet of concessions space. In addition, the building will be constructed to support the following functional areas: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Implementation Plan 8-1 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 8-2 1.5 Million - Phase 1 Northeast Area Development Plan Study Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport October 2011 Drawing name: J:\_Aviation Services\DEN_CAD\IWA\Road Alignment\Base\phase-1a_08_24.dwg Plotted on: May 09, 2012 - 1:00pm Alternatives Development Exhibit 8-1: NADP Phase I LEGEND PHASE 1 AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS PHASE 1 OFF AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS OFFICE HOTEL / CONFERENCE CENTER GREEN SPACE RETAIL 65 DNL PLANNING SCENARIO CONTOUR 60 DNL PLANNING SCENARIO CONTOUR 60 DNL PLANNING SCENARIO BOUNDARY EXISTING FLOODWAY/CHANNEL 0 150 300 600 1200 NOTE: This plan is diagrammatic only and is intended to show potential configuration. This plan is only conceptual and is not based upon a detailed survey of existing site conditions such as property limits, subsurface conditions, limits of trees, topography, utilities, easements, etc. May 09, 2012 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Airline Operations – 21,457 total square footage Gate Facilities – 27,622 total square footage Rental Car Counters – 4,379 total square footage Public Waiting Lobby – 16,315 total square footage TSA Security Areas – 15,107 total square footage Restrooms – 6,118 total square footage Administrative Offices/Conference Rooms – 15,010 total square footage EDS Outbound Baggage Screening – 19,320 total square footage • Gates – This phase will include the development of 14 gates that will be oriented in order to accommodate 12 Group III aircraft and two Group IV aircraft. • Access Roadways/Terminal Curb – The proposed terminal building will be served by a departures curb that measures approximately 830 feet in length and an arrivals curb that measures 969 feet in length. The curb fronts will be accessed from the proposed Gateway Boulevard by three through lanes and the development of a loop road northeast of the proposed new terminal building. The loop road will be served by new roadway access from Ellsworth Road via Grand Canyon Drive and Ray Road/Hawes Road. This newly developed access will not only be crucial for the development of the proposed new terminal building, but also the trigger for further development of the planned office, retail and hotel space northeast of the planned terminal building. • Auto Parking – The relocation of the air carrier operations from the west side of the Airport to the east side will require the construction of 3,300 patron auto parking stalls, 550 employee parking stalls and 525 rental car ready/return spaces. These parking requirements will be served by the development of surface parking facilities that have the ability to be expanded vertically, located within a new loop road to be called Golden Eagle Circle and Gateway Boulevard. • Ancillary/Support Facilities – In order to provide a self-sufficient area northeast of the existing airfield, the development of support facilities is necessary during Phase I. It is recommended that the belly cargo facility be developed to process, sort and distribute cargo items in a timely fashion. In addition, it should be co-located with the central receiving facility. These facilities should be south of the proposed terminal building and easily accessible to the air carrier apron and terminal concessions. This phase should also accommodate a new ARFF and ATCT facility north of the proposed airport terminal. • Infrastructure Improvements – In order to provide a self sufficient terminal area, this phase will also require the establishment of relocated and expanded utilities (e.g., storm water collection and conveyance, water lines, electrical, gas, sanitary sewer system, etc.), service road segments and perimeter fencing. 8.2.2 Phase II – 2.2 Million Enplanements Phase II of the NADP is programmed to accommodate 2.2 million enplaned passengers annually. This phase encompasses additional terminal concourse development, airfield improvements and ground transportation access in order to maintain the level of service required by the PMGA Authority in accommodating a growing passenger base. Planning for this phase should begin once the Phase I components reach 60 percent of their capacity and construction should begin once 80 percent of the planned Phase I capacity is reached. The major components of Phase II, depicted in Exhibit 8-2, include: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 8-3 Implementation Plan - Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 8-4 2.2 Million - Phase 2 Northeast Area Development Plan Study Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport August 2011 Drawing name: J:\_Aviation Services\DEN_CAD\IWA\Road Alignment\Base\phase-2a_08_24.dwg Plotted on: May 09, 2012 - 2:41pm Alternatives Development Exhibit 8-2: NADP Phase II LEGEND PHASE 2 AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS PHASE 2 OFF AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS OFFICE HOTEL / CONFERENCE CENTER GREEN SPACE RETAIL 65 DNL PLANNING SCENARIO CONTOUR 60 DNL PLANNING SCENARIO CONTOUR 60 DNL PLANNING SCENARIO BOUNDARY EXISTING FLOODWAY/CHANNEL FUTURE FLOODWAY/CHANNEL. 0 150 300 600 1200 NOTE: This plan is diagrammatic only and is intended to show potential configuration. This plan is only conceptual and is not based upon a detailed survey of existing site conditions such as property limits, subsurface conditions, limits of trees, topography, utilities, easements, etc. May 09, 2012 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report • Airfield – This phase includes a 1,000-foot extension to the north of Runway 12L-30R, associated parallel taxiway improvements, as well as two additional high speed exit taxiways. Additional apron expansion will occur to the north to accommodate an expanded north concourse. • Terminal Building – The major terminal building improvements will include additional concourse development to the north providing an additional four gates and approximately 37,000 square feet of additional space on the secure side of the terminal building. The four new gates will require additional air carrier apron that will be served by the access taxilanes developed in Phase I. • Access Roadways/Terminal Curb – Minimal improvements to the departure and arrivals curb as well as curb access, will be required to accommodate this level of demand. However, an expansion of the terminal loop road to the south, as well as improved access to Ellsworth Road via an extension of Gateway Boulevard shall be completed in this phase. Additional access to Ray Road from Golden Eagle Circle via the development of Mustang Street and the northernmost section of Grand Canyon Drive should also occur in this phase. These developments will serve a dual-purpose of both improving terminal/private development access as well as setting the stage for future terminal area expansion. • Auto Parking – The increase in enplaned passengers will require additional surface parking areas to accommodate 7,500 patron and 1,250 employee auto parking stalls in addition to 1,750 rental car ready/return stalls. • Ancillary/Support Facilities – While the basic support functions should be established during Phase I, Phase II should include planning for improved airport/airline support areas. 8.2.3 Phase III – 5 Million Enplanements Phase III of the NADP is programmed to accommodate 5 million enplaned passengers. Planning for this phase should begin once the terminal area developed in Phases I and II reaches 60 percent of the designed capacity and construction should begin once 80 percent of the designed capacity is reached. This phase encompasses additional terminal concourse development north and south of the terminal building core, airfield access improvements and ground transportation access in order to maintain the level of service required by the PMGA Authority in accommodating a growing passenger base. The major components of Phase III, depicted in Exhibit 8-3, include: • Airfield – This phase does not require significant airfield improvements. However, airfield access improvements should be constructed in this phase in order to accommodate increased air carrier apron activity through the construction of an additional Group IV apron edge taxilane to the north of the Phase I and Phase II development. • Terminal Building – This phase requires improvements to the terminal building core that provides additional square footage for the following components: - Ticketing/Check-in Area – 20,186 total square footage Airline Operations Offices – 47,143 total square footage Baggage Claim – 103,535 total square footage Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Implementation Plan 8-5 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 8-6 5 Million - Phase 3 Northeast Area Development Plan Study Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport August 2011 Drawing name: J:\_Aviation Services\DEN_CAD\IWA\Road Alignment\Base\phase-3a_08_24.dwg Plotted on: May 09, 2012 - 2:49pm Alternatives Development Exhibit 8-3: NADP Phase III LEGEND PHASE 3 AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS PHASE 3 OFF AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS OFFICE HOTEL / CONFERENCE CENTER GREEN SPACE RETAIL 65 DNL PLANNING SCENARIO CONTOUR 60 DNL PLANNING SCENARIO CONTOUR 60 DNL PLANNING SCENARIO BOUNDARY EXISTING FLOODWAY 0 150 300 600 1200 NOTE: This plan is diagrammatic only and is intended to show potential configuration. This plan is only conceptual and is not based upon a detailed survey of existing site conditions such as property limits, subsurface conditions, limits of trees, topography, utilities, easements, etc. May 09, 2012 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Rental Car Counters – 9,777 total square footage Outbound Baggage Screening – 47,835 total square footage TSA Security Areas – 40,786 total square footage • Gates/Concourse – One new concourse will be constructed to the south of the terminal building core. This concourse will provide six new gates. In addition, six gates will be added as an extension of the northernmost concourse developed in Phases I and II. The additional concourse and gate areas will also be complemented with additional concession area square footage. • Access Roadways/Terminal Curb – At this demand level, the terminal curb will require major improvements including the development of a split-level dual curb on the arrivals curbfront and the extension of a departures curb front to approximately 1,940 linear feet. Access to the terminal area will be improved through improvements at the intersection of Gateway Boulevard and Ray Road. • Auto Parking – A significant increase in parking facilities will be required to handle the annual five million enplaned passenger demand level. The increased demand can be accommodated in this phase through the development of a four level parking garage to the north of the proposed new terminal building and an extension of the existing surface parking facilities within the loop road. The additional auto parking areas will provide 7,500 patron and 1,250 total employee parking stalls as well as 1,750 total rental car ready/return spaces. • Ancillary/Support Facilities – As was the case during the Phase II development, additional support facilities are required to sustain a growing passenger/airline level of activity. These include increased building areas for belly cargo as well as a larger receiving area to service the increased terminal concession space. • Private Development – It is expected that this level of activity will initiate demand for office, retail and hotel development. This should be enhanced through the development of Hawker-Beechcraft Boulevard that will run northwest to southwest and improve circulation among these areas by removing traffic from the terminal’s loop road. 8.2.4 Phase IV – 10 Million Enplanements Phase IV development allows for the ultimate build out of the northeast terminal area. Completion of this phase will allow PMGA to support 10 million annual enplanements while allowing for the highest and best use of available property and providing suitable infrastructure to provide a level of service desirable by the PMGA Authority. The construction of Phase IV would result in a 1.4 million square-foot terminal building with 60 gates among four concourses and dual-parallel taxiways serving the east side of the airfield. The major components of Phase IV, depicted in Exhibit 8-4, include: • Airfield – The level of activity planned for in Phase IV requires the development of a full length dual-parallel taxiway providing access to/from Runway 12L-30R, a portion of which will serve as an apron-edge taxiway. In addition, Group IV access taxilanes provide access to apron areas capable of accommodating Group III and IV aircraft. • Terminal Building – This level of activity will require significant improvements to the terminal building core accommodated through expansions to the north and south of the terminal building developed in Phases I through III. The following components will make up this core: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 8-7 Implementation Plan - Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report - Ticketing/Check-in Area – 40,371 total square footage Airline Operations Offices – 94,287 total square footage Baggage Claim – 207,069 total square footage Rental Car Counters – 18,774 total square footage Outbound Baggage Screening – 91,305 total square footage TSA Security Areas – 75,535 total square footage • Gates/Concourse – The ultimate build out allows for five concourses, two of which are to be completed in this final phase. These additional concourses will provide space for 12 additional gates each and a build out of the Phase III southernmost concourse, which will provide an additional six gates. • Access Roadways/Terminal Curb – At this demand level, a curb length of approximately 3,300 linear feet at the departures curb and 3,900 linear feet at the arrivals curb will be required. The construction of a split-level dual curb will be required on the departures level in order to serve functions such as taxi and shuttle operations. Limited access road improvements will be required. Space should be reserved in this phase adjacent to Golden Eagle Circle and the future commercial development, to allow for a light rail line and an associated station, which will handle a portion of the increased passenger movements. • Auto Parking – The 10 million annual enplaned passenger demand level requires a significant increase in auto parking facilities. The increased demand shall be accommodated through the development of a second four-level parking garage to the south of the parking garage developed in Phase III, as well as an extension of the existing surface parking facilities farther to the south. The additional auto parking areas will provide 15,000 patron and 2,500 employee parking stalls, while accommodating 3,500 rental/ready return spaces. • Ancillary/Support Facilities – Additional support facilities are required to sustain a growing passenger/airline level of activity. These will likely consist of general airport/ airline support functions that will require available space, depending on trends and operational requirements. • Private Development – It is anticipated that the 10 million annual enplaned passenger level would be a significant driver for office, retail and hotel development. Adequate infrastructure to support these areas was developed in previous phases, allowing for the PMGA Authority to take full advantage of opportunities presented it throughout the planning period. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Implementation Plan 8-8 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 8-9 10 Million - Phase 4 Northeast Area Development Plan Study Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport August 2011 Drawing name: J:\_Aviation Services\DEN_CAD\IWA\Road Alignment\Base\phase-4a_08_24.dwg Plotted on: May 09, 2012 - 1:24pm Alternatives Development Exhibit 8-4: NADP Phase IV LEGEND PHASE 4 AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS PHASE 4 OFF AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS OFFICE HOTEL / CONFERENCE CENTER GREEN SPACE RETAIL 65 DNL PLANNING SCENARIO CONTOUR 60 DNL PLANNING SCENARIO CONTOUR 60 DNL PLANNING SCENARIO BOUNDARY EXISTING FLOODWAY FUTURE LIGHT RAIL LINE 0 150 300 600 1200 NOTE: This plan is diagrammatic only and is intended to show potential configuration. This plan is only conceptual and is not based upon a detailed survey of existing site conditions such as property limits, subsurface conditions, limits of trees, topography, utilities, easements, etc. May 09, 2012 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The capital development program discussed in this subsection will be implemented in phases as previously discussed. This program will include the construction of a runway extension, associated taxiways, apron areas, terminal buildings, concourses, access roadways, auto parking and support infrastructure. The total anticipated development over the 20-year planning period is approximately $799.7 million as stated in Table 8-1 in 2010 dollars. Not included in the table are funds required for the full build-out of revenue-producing commercial development adjacent to the proposed new terminal area, some of which may be well beyond the 20-year planning horizon. Costs anticipated by the Airport for preparing the sites for long-term leasing are included in the total estimates. 8.3.1 Cost Estimating Approach All cost estimates were prepared utilizing unit costs current for 2010 dollars and based upon recent similar projects throughout the southwest United States. Estimates include various typical soft costs, which ranged from approximately 12-15 percent of the construction costs, based on the type and dollar volume of work anticipated. Additionally, based upon project type, dollar volume, and level of detail known at the current point in planning, project evolutionary contingency amounts ranging from 20-30 percent were included in each project total. Further to aid in preparing the financial feasibility analysis presented in Subsection 8.4, project implementation schedules were estimated in months for design, bid/award, and construction to develop estimated cash flow tables. For purposes of developing costs and identifying cash flow during each planning horizon, it was assumed that projects that are demand driven must be completed and in place by the end of the planning period based on the passenger activity level. 8.3.2 Commercial Development Factors As noted previously, parcels anticipated to be made available for non-aeronautical commercial development will require a commitment of resources by the PMGA Authority to enable them to be brought to market. Customary costs incurred by land owners when reviewed throughout the southwest United States and elsewhere, include the following: engineering fees, land surveys, legal reviews, various land and environmental permitting, marketing & promotional costs, and local and regional approval costs. Based on the analysis of over ten land development initiatives of master planned sites ranging from 400 to over 1500 acres, the estimated average of these costs on a per acre basis equated to approximately $6500. These costs were therefore applied to the approximate available acreages scheduled to be initiated for development in the associated planning horizon phases (Phase I, II and III). These costs appear in Table 8-1 and are termed “soft costs”. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Implementation Plan 8-10 8.3 Capital Costs Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report This subsection describes the financial plan prepared as a part of the NADP study. The financial plan is focused on the first three Phases of the NADP along with the Authority’s other ongoing, committed or planned projects during the planning period. Improvements recommended in Phase IV of the NADP were not included in this financial plan due to uncertainties regarding their actual implementation dates and future costs. This report reviews the PMGA Authority’s financial structure and existing financial position, considers the costs and funding of the NADP projects and presents a financial plan based on key funding assumptions, future bond financings, debt service, operating expenses and revenues through Fiscal Year (FY) 2034 (the forecast period). The financial plan was prepared to determine the financial feasibility of the development program being put forth for implementation through the forecast period. The financial plan specifically considers the effects of the capital program on Authority operations, including airline cost per enplaned passenger (CPE). 8.4.1 Key Assumptions The financial plan was developed using information and assumptions that provide a reasonable basis for analysis at a level of detail appropriate for long-term financial planning. Some of the assumptions used to develop project funding and estimated costs may not be realized, and unanticipated events and circumstances may occur. Some projects included in the NADP may be postponed or eliminated if the forecast aviation demand is not achieved, construction costs rise significantly, or if projected funding is not available. Similarly, projects may be undertaken earlier than indicated if demand dictates and funding is available. Therefore, the actual results will vary from those projected, and such variations could be material. This financial plan is preliminary in nature and is not intended to be used to support the sale of bonds or to obtain any other forms of financing. More detailed cost estimates and financial analysis will be required if and when the Authority decides to pursue the sale of bonds or other forms of financing. The details of the various assumptions are presented in the relevant sections of the financial plan. This financial plan uses baseline passenger forecasts developed by the Authority. Assumptions regarding passenger activity at the Airport are necessary because entitlement grants from the FAA’s Airport Improvement Program (AIP), certain non-airline revenues and certain expenses are related to changes in aviation activity. 8.4.2 Project Costs Cost estimates, which were prepared in 2010 dollars, were adjusted to include an inflationary increase of 3.0 percent per year through the anticipated year of project implementation. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Implementation Plan 8-11 8.4 Financial Feasibility Analysis Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Table 8-1: Project Phase Costs PROJECT NAME/DESCRIPTION TOTAL PHASE I PHASE II PHASE III COST 2012-2016 2017-2021 2022-2032 AIRFIELD & APRON AREAS Parallel Taxiway & Exits (RWY 12L-30R) & Apron Areas $68,790,600 $68,790,600 1000' Extension to RWY 12L-30R, Fuel Farm and Lighting $ 29,765,400 $29,765,400 Apron Area Expansion $ 10,951,900 $10,951,900 Airfield & Apron Lighting $ 402,500 $402,500 Apron Area Expansion & Apron Edge Taxiways $ 26,192,200 $26,192,200 Airfield & Apron Lighting $ 1,126,400 $1,126,400 Support Facilities Sitework & Infrastructure $ 1,589,900 Support Facilities Sitework & Infrastructure $ 753,100 Support Facilities Sitework & Infrastructure $ 1,157,800 Surface & Structured Parking $ 4,298,800 Surface & Structured Parking $ 1,412,400 Surface & Structured Parking $ 209,895,800 $ 2,823,700 SUPPORT FACILITIES $1,589,900 $753,100 $1,157,800 PARKING AREAS $4,298,800 $1,412,400 $209,895,800 ROADWAY, SITEWORK & INFRASTRUCTURE Hawes & Gateway (Offsite) $2,823,700 Right Of Way Acquisition $ 2,090,900 $2,090,900 Airport Loop (Gateway & Golden Eagle Cr) $ 30,859,200 $30,859,200 Ellsworth Connection (Grand Canyon Dr & Silver St) $ 4,757,500 $4,757,500 Airport Loop & Ellsworth Connection (Golden Eagle Cr & Gateway) $ 10,221,400 $10,221,400 Ray Connection (Mustang St & Grand Canyon Dr) $ 2,253,700 $2,253,700 Grand Canyon Dr (Offsite) $ 1,898,800 $1,898,800 Hawes & Ray SPUI (Offsite) $ 5,693,100 $5,693,100 Upper Level & Lower Level Expansion $ 47,825,000 $47,825,000 Grand Canyon Dr Connection $ 6,774,300 $6,774,300 Terminal and Concourses (incl. Central Plant Functions) $ 142,388,200 Concourse Expansion $ 20,672,900 New Concourse, Concourse Expansion and Terminal Expansion $ 162,183,600 Commercial Development Soft Costs $ 709,500 $709,500 Property Acquisition (Northeast 31 Acres) $ 232,500 $232,500 Commercial Development Soft Costs $ 866,300 Commercial Development Soft Costs $ 1,089,000 TOTALS $ 799,676,400 TERMINAL, CONCOURSES & CENTRAL PLANT $142,388,200 $20,672,900 $162,183,600 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AREAS $866,300 $1,089,000 $258,540,800 $79,198,400 $461,937,200 Source: Jacobs Engineering. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Implementation Plan AREA 8-12 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Several sources of potential funding were incorporated into the financial plan, including: • Federal Airport Improvement Program (AIP). Federal grants-in-aid under the AIP are provided in these types: - - AIP entitlement grants are annual amounts calculated based on the number of enplaned passengers and a legislated per-passenger formula. AIP discretionary grants are awarded at the discretion of the FAA based on its determination of priorities for projects at the Airport in relation to funding priorities for the national airport system. Military Airports Program (MAP) grants are awarded to civil sponsors on a military or former military airfield for the development of aviation facilities for the public. • Other Federal Grants. Certain projects may be eligible for funding from sources such as the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA). • Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT). State grants, administered by the ADOT, may be provided to the Airport for the funding of individual projects and to match the Authority’s contribution to the local share of AIP-funded projects. • Municipal Sponsors. The Authority is currently supported by Municipal Sponsors who have contributed to the funding of capital improvement projects as well as the day-to-day operations at the Airport. It is assumed that this sponsorship and support will continue in the future. • Passenger Facility Charges (PFCs). PFCs, which are derived by the imposition of charges on airline passengers, provide funding to certain eligible and approved projects. • Internal Funds. Internally-generated cash, to the extent permitted under any relevant airline agreements and/or bond covenants, is available. • Bond Proceeds. Proceeds from bonds supplement the above funding sources for future development projects. The amount of funding assumed from each of the above funding sources and the application of funding to future projects is described in the following sections. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Implementation Plan 8-13 8.4.3 Sources of Funding Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report This section describes the application of the funding sources to the applicable projects. Approach Since certain sources of funds, such as AIP grants and PFC revenues, have restrictions on how they can be used, aligning the sources of capital funds with the allowable and optimal uses is essential for maximizing financial capacity. In general, specific funding sources for projects were determined through the following process: • Project Eligibility. The assumed eligibility of projects for AIP grant funding, PFCs and other sources was identified through coordination between Jacobs Consultancy (LeighFisher), Jacobs Engineering, and the Authority. • Availability of Funds. The amount of funding available from AIP, ADOT, Municipal Sponsors, PFCs, and other sources was projected, taking into account key factors affecting future funding levels such as future AIP authorizations and future aviation activity at the Airport. • Timing of Projects. Each funding source was matched to its best use in the given year, taking into consideration reasonable debt coverage targets, retention of reasonable fund balances, and future funding needs. If the assumed funding is not available, it may become necessary to defer some projects until such funds become available or until the Authority determines a viable alternative funding source. With regard to initial project timing, this analysis assumes that the capacity of the current west terminal facilities will be augmented by the expansion of the west terminal in 2014. The capacity for this expanded terminal will be reached coincident with the opening of Phase I terminal facilities in late 2018. Table 8-2 presents the projects considered in this financial plan and their anticipated phasing. Table 8-3 presents the projects considered in this financial plan and their estimated funding sources. Table 8-4 presents the sources and uses of funding by year through FY2034. 8.4.5 Scenarios In order to allay concerns of the Authority regarding increases in airline cost per enplaned passenger (CPE), the following two scenarios were developed: • Scenario 1 – Unconstrained Revenue. Airline CPE is allowed to rise and fall as required for full cost recovery with no upper limit. • Scenario 2 – Capped CPE. To maintain the Airport’s competitive advantage, airline CPE is limited to $4.00 in current dollars. The resulting shortfall in revenues would require increased support from ADOT and Municipal Sponsors. The results of these scenarios are summarized on Tables 8-14 and 8-15, respectively, while Table 8-8 details their impact on ADOT and Municipal Sponsor contributions. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Implementation Plan 8-14 8.4.4 Uses of Funding Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The debt service requirement represents the scheduled annual principal and interest payments on the bonds to be issued by or on behalf of the Authority to finance the NADP. Requirements for debt service were based on the following assumptions: • The annual debt service requirement on future bonds was calculated assuming (1) the bonds are to be amortized over a 30-year period from the date of issuance; (2) level annual debt service for each issue; (3) a coupon rate of 6 percent and (4) a financing factor of 15 percent to cover various costs of issuance such as underwriter discounts and fees, bond council fees, rating fees, etc. The actual structure and sizing of future bonds will depend on municipal market conditions at the time of issuance. • All debt was assumed to be structured with level principal and interest in the aggregate over a 30-year period. As a result of future bond issuances, the annual debt service requirement is projected to increase significantly during the forecast period. Table 8-5 presents an estimated plan of financing and Table 8-6 summarizes forecast debt service requirements through FY2034. Table 8-7 details the application and use of PFC revenues, including those applied applied to PFCbacked debt. 8.4.7 Cost of Operations and Maintenance The costs of operations and maintenance were projected by analyzing the historical trend in expenses by line item and cost center, using the FY2011 budget as a base, taking into account management plans, facility development plans, inflation and other assumptions. Incremental increases in the costs of operations and maintenance were included as major facilities are placed into service. Table 8-9 presents historical and forecast costs of operations and maintenance. 8.4.8 Future Revenues Future revenues must be more than sufficient to provide for payment of the costs of operation and maintenance and the debt service requirement. Revenues are discussed under the headings of Airline and Non-Airline Revenues and are summarized in Table 8-10. Airline Revenues Revenues from airlines are collected primarily through landing fees and terminal rents. Parameters for eligible costs to be recovered through airline revenues will be determined by applying the provisions of airline agreements or, in the absence of airline agreements, federal policy. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Implementation Plan 8-15 8.4.6 Debt Service Requirement Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Airline costs per enplaned passenger (CPE) are commonly used as a summary measure of “affordability” of an airport and its proposed capital improvement program. Comparisons of airline costs per enplaned passenger among individual airports are difficult, as they can be calculated in various ways and the services provided at an airport in exchange for the airline payments vary greatly throughout the industry. Nonetheless, comparisons are frequently used to gauge the reasonableness of capital improvement programs. Table 8-11 shows passenger airline costs expressed on a per enplaned passenger basis. The forecasts were based on the assumption that the terms of existing and future airline agreements will allow for the recovery of a portion of the incremental costs incurred through the various phases of the NADP and that the airlines will make all payments required by such terms. Airline payments to airports (landing fees, apron fees, terminal rentals and other payments) represent a relatively small percentage of an airline’s overall cost structure. Nevertheless, airline payments at a given airport may affect airline decision-making regarding expanding service or continuing to provide service at that airport. It is important to note that for the Authority, the feasibility and affordability of the NADP are two very different concepts. While the program is financially feasible under certain assumptions, its affordability may be gauged by the willingness of airlines to accept the higher CPE associated with the cost of improvements. If this higher CPE proves detrimental to future airline service, the assumptions supporting the feasibility of the NADP will likely be adversely affected. Non-Airline Revenues The principal sources of non-airline revenues include parking fees, rental cars, concessions and various non-airline rents. Non-airline revenues were projected by analyzing the trend in revenue by line item and cost center and comparing those revenues to passenger activity. In order to best match historical trends, individual revenues were generally projected either by using revenue per enplaned passenger, inflation (3.0 percent), or a mixture of the two. Incremental non-airline revenues were assumed to cover a portion of the incremental costs incurred through the various phases of the NADP. Incremental costs associated with individual projects were assigned to related non-airline revenue sources (e.g. the costs associated with improvements to parking areas were assumed to be recovered through increased parking revenues to be gained through activity growth and/or rate adjustments). Tables 8-12, 8-13 and 8-14 present forecast revenues from parking, commercial and other nonairline sources, respectively. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Implementation Plan 8-16 Airline Cost per Enplaned Passenger Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The financial analysis indicates that, given the various assumptions described herein, including the funding assumptions for the current CIP and the NADP, the PMGA Authority would be able to sustain reasonable debt service coverage during the forecast period. With respect to Passenger Facility Charges, PFC collections during the forecast period are expected to exceed the cost of PFCfunded capital projects. Airport operating revenues during the forecast period are expected to meet or exceed expenditures on airport-funded capital projects. Finally, support from ADOT and Municipal Sponsors during the forecast period is expected to remain at relatively constant levels. It is important to note that reliance on revenues solely from Authority operations for NADP funding is not feasible. As such, it may be useful for the Authority to identify prerequisites to initiating certain improvements (e.g. securing an FAA funding commitment for airfield improvements may be an appropriate prerequisite to initiating NADP terminal improvements). It is also important to note that annual contributions from ADOT and Municipal Sponsors averaging $2.2 million and $4 million, respectively, could be required to successfully implement Phase I, with a peak year combined requirement of $15.2 million (see Exhibit 8-8 for detail). These contributions would be greater if assumed grant sources do not materialize. The results of this analysis suggest that the Authority could proceed with planning and evaluation of the NADP, including, but not limited to, the following steps: • • • • • • Explore FAA Letter of Intent (LOI) program for airfield/apron project funding. Engage current air carriers in discussions regarding facilities and long-term agreement(s). Determine long-term sponsor support parameters. Identify feasibility of alternative grant funding sources. Update financial plan by 2014. Determine tests and deadline for go/no-go decision. Changes in the assumptions could affect the conclusions presented herein. The Authority does, however, have the flexibility to adjust the timing of the projects, and to develop alternative financing plans, which would allow a similar development plan to progress under various changed assumptions. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Implementation Plan 8-17 8.4.9 Summary and Recommendations Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Group / Cost Center A. AERONAUTICAL PROJECTS Parallel Taxiway and Exits (12L-30R) and Apron Areas Runway Extension (12L-30R), Fuel Farm and Lighting Apron Area Expansion I Airfield and Apron Lighting I Apron Area Expansion II and Apron Edge Taxiways Airfield and Apron Lighting II Sitework and Infrastructure I (Belly Cargo, Fuel Farm, Substation, etc.) Terminal and Concourses Concourse Expansion New Concourse, Concourse Expansion and Terminal Expansion Subtotal Airfield Airfield Airfield Airfield Airfield Airfield Support Terminal Terminal Terminal B. NON-AERONAUTICAL PROJECTS Sitework and Infrastructure II Sitework and Infrastructure III Surface and Structured Parking I Surface and Structured Parking II Surface and Structured Parking III Right of Way Acquisition Airport Loop (Gateway & Golden Eagle Cir) Ellsworth Connection (Grand Canyon Dr & Silver St) Airport Loop and Ellsworth Connection (Golden Eagle Cir & Gateway) Ray Connection (Mustang St & Golden Eagle Cir) Upper Level and Lower Level Expansion Grand Canyon Dr Connection Commercial Development Soft Costs I Property Acquisition (NE 31 Acres) Commercial Development Soft Costs II Commercial Development Soft Costs III Subtotal Support Support Parking Parking Parking Roadway Roadway Roadway Roadway Roadway Roadway Roadway Commercial Commercial Commercial Commercial C. OFF-AIRPORT PROJECTS Hawes and Gateway (Offsite) Grand Canyon Dr (Offsite) Hawes & Ray SPUI (Offsite) Subtotal D. DEMAND-DRIVEN PROJECTS Various Other Airfield Projects (Through Phase I) Various Other Airfield Projects (Phase II) Various Other Airfield Projects (Phase III) Western Terminal Capacity Expansion Subtotal TOTAL ALL PROJECTS Airfield Support Parking Roadway Terminal Commercial Other TOTAL ALL PROJECTS Source: Estimated Total in 2010$ $ $ $ $ Roadway Roadway Roadway $ $ Other Other Other Other $ $ $ $ Estimated Total in Future$ Phase I 2014-2018 Phase II 2019-2023 Phase III 2024-2034 Budget 2012 68,790,600 $ 29,765,400 10,951,900 402,500 26,192,200 1,126,400 1,589,900 142,388,200 20,672,900 162,183,600 464,063,600 $ 84,042,645 $ 84,042,645 $ 40,390,415 15,759,424 588,518 47,765,130 2,086,875 2,005,810 2,005,810 173,958,072 173,958,072 29,760,643 290,978,916 687,336,448 $ 260,006,527 $ - $ 40,390,415 15,759,424 588,518 47,765,130 2,086,875 29,760,643 290,978,916 86,499,001 $ 340,830,921 $ 753,100 $ 1,157,800 4,298,800 $ 1,412,400 209,895,800 1,045,400 25,261,700 4,405,200 10,294,200 2,086,800 44,283,000 6,478,700 709,500 232,500 866,300 1,089,000 314,270,200 $ 1,007,680 $ 1,905,868 5,265,417 $ 2,065,688 411,500,212 1,176,607 31,370,244 5,395,738 14,195,636 2,963,152 88,244,497 10,987,802 898,773 269,531 1,164,235 1,722,076 580,133,156 $ - $ 5,265,417 1,176,607 31,370,244 5,395,738 898,773 269,531 44,376,311 $ 1,007,680 $ 1,905,868 2,065,688 411,500,212 14,195,636 2,963,152 88,244,497 10,987,802 1,164,235 1,722,076 21,396,390 $ 514,360,455 $ 2,614,600 $ 1,758,200 5,271,400 9,644,200 $ 3,018,680 $ 2,496,557 10,499,963 16,015,200 $ 3,018,680 $ 3,018,680 $ 35,000,000 25,000,000 50,000,000 7,000,000 117,000,000 $ $ $ $ 137,229,000 $ 3,500,800 215,607,000 103,499,200 325,244,700 2,897,300 117,000,000 904,978,000 $ 40,645,531 34,636,090 96,864,701 7,426,300 179,572,622 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 190,633,007 $ 84,042,645 $ 56,738,357 $ 49,852,005 4,919,358 2,005,810 1,007,680 1,905,868 418,831,317 5,265,417 2,065,688 411,500,212 170,348,875 40,961,269 19,655,345 109,732,262 494,697,632 173,958,072 29,760,643 290,978,916 4,054,615 1,168,305 1,164,235 1,722,076 179,572,622 37,303,696 34,636,090 96,864,701 1,463,057,426 $ 344,705,213 $ 145,028,038 $ 962,556,039 $ $ 34,636,090 34,636,090 10,499,963 10,499,963 $ 96,864,701 96,864,701 $ 29,877,396 7,426,300 37,303,696 - $ 2,496,557 2,496,557 $ $ $ $ $ Forecast 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 9,569,807 $ 19,808,516 29,378,324 $ 24,094,224 $ 49,872,062 73,966,286 $ 24,817,051 $ 274,262 51,368,224 76,459,536 $ 25,561,562 1,731,548 52,909,270 80,202,381 - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,176,607 1,176,607 $ - $ 269,531 269,531 $ - $ 718,819 3,619,173 736,730 5,074,722 $ - $ 4,546,598 13,670,478 4,659,008 22,876,084 $ 14,080,593 898,773 14,979,366 - $ - $ - $ - $ 411,936 $ 411,936 $ 2,606,744 $ 2,606,744 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - 5,304,500 $ 5,304,500 $ 5,463,635 $ 5,463,635 $ 5,627,544 $ 7,426,300 13,053,844 $ 5,796,370 $ 5,796,370 $ 5,970,261 $ 5,970,261 $ 6,149,369 $ 6,149,369 $ 6,333,850 6,333,850 - $ 5,304,500 5,304,500 $ - $ 5,463,635 5,463,635 $ - $ 1,588,543 13,053,844 14,642,387 $ 9,569,807 $ 2,606,744 19,808,516 269,531 5,796,370 38,050,969 $ 24,094,224 $ 24,817,051 $ 25,561,562 274,262 1,731,548 718,819 4,546,598 4,355,903 18,329,487 14,080,593 49,872,062 51,368,224 52,909,270 898,773 5,970,261 6,149,369 6,333,850 85,011,270 $ 105,484,990 $ 101,515,597 Jacobs Engineering and Jacobs Consultancy (LeighFisher). Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 8-18 Table 8-2: Project Costs and Phasing Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Group / Cost Center Phase A. AERONAUTICAL PROJECTS Parallel Taxiway and Exits (12L-30R) and Apron Areas Runway Extension (12L-30R), Fuel Farm and Lighting Apron Area Expansion I Airfield and Apron Lighting I Apron Area Expansion II and Apron Edge Taxiways Airfield and Apron Lighting II Sitework and Infrastructure I (Belly Cargo, Fuel Farm, Substation, etc.) Terminal and Concourses Concourse Expansion New Concourse, Concourse Expansion and Terminal Expansion Subtotal Airfield Airfield Airfield Airfield Airfield Airfield Support Terminal Terminal Terminal 1 2 2 2 3 3 1 1 2 3 B. NON-AERONAUTICAL PROJECTS Sitework and Infrastructure II Sitework and Infrastructure III Surface and Structured Parking I Surface and Structured Parking II Surface and Structured Parking III Right of Way Acquisition Airport Loop (Gateway & Golden Eagle Cir) Ellsworth Connection (Grand Canyon Dr & Silver St) Airport Loop and Ellsworth Connection (Golden Eagle Cir & Gateway) Ray Connection (Mustang St & Grand Canyon Dr) Upper Level and Lower Level Expansion Grand Canyon Dr Connection Commercial Development Soft Costs I Property Acquisition (NE 31 Acres) Commercial Development Soft Costs II Commercial Development Soft Costs III Subtotal Support Support Parking Parking Parking Roadway Roadway Roadway Roadway Roadway Roadway Roadway Commercial Commercial Commercial Commercial C. OFF-AIRPORT PROJECTS Hawes and Gateway (Offsite) Grand Canyon Dr (Offsite) Hawes & Ray SPUI (Offsite) Subtotal D. DEMAND-DRIVEN PROJECTS Various Other Airfield Projects (Through Phase I) Various Other Airfield Projects (2019-2023) Various Other Airfield Projects (2023-2034) Western Terminal Capacity Expansion Subtotal TOTAL ALL PROJECTS Federal AIP Other Federal State (ADOT) Municipal Sponsor PFC Paygo PFC Bonds PMGAA Aprt Bonds Paygo 84,042,645 40,390,415 15,759,424 588,518 47,765,130 2,086,875 2,005,810 173,958,072 29,760,643 290,978,916 687,336,448 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 10% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 7% 0% 10% 3% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 26% 80% 10% 0% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 90% 50% 5% 49% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 17% 15% 31% 1,007,680 1,905,868 5,265,417 2,065,688 411,500,212 1,176,607 31,370,244 5,395,738 14,195,636 2,963,152 88,244,497 10,987,802 898,773 269,531 1,164,235 1,722,076 580,133,156 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3,018,680 2,496,557 10,499,963 16,015,200 0% 0% 0% 95% 95% 95% 50% $ 40,645,531 34,636,090 96,864,701 7,426,300 179,572,622 $ 1,463,057,426 Total (Future$) $ $ 2 3 1 2 3 1 1 1 2 2 3 3 1 1 2 3 $ $ Roadway Roadway Roadway 1 2 3 $ $ Other Other Other Other 1 2 3 1 $ $ 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 45% 45% 45% 45% 45% 45% 45% 90% 90% 90% 90% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 100% 100% 100% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 10% 10% 10% 10% 0% 0% 0% 55% 55% 55% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 3% 3% 0% 3% 3% 3% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 10% 0% 0% 0% 40% PFC Paygo PFC Bonds PMGAA Aprt Bonds Paygo 2,101,066 $ 1,009,760 393,986 14,713 1,194,128 52,172 4,765,825 $ - $ 200,581 200,581 $ - $ 12,177,065 29,097,892 41,274,957 $ 2,101,066 $ 45,229,099 23,808,515 29,097,892 100,236,571 $ - $ 1,009,760 393,986 14,713 1,194,128 52,172 1,805,229 86,979,036 1,488,032 142,579,669 235,516,725 $ 29,572,872 4,464,096 90,203,464 124,240,433 - $ - $ - $ 529,473 14,116,610 2,428,082 6,388,036 1,333,418 39,710,023 4,944,511 69,450,154 $ - $ - $ - $ 529,473 14,116,610 2,428,082 6,388,036 1,333,418 39,710,023 4,944,511 808,896 242,578 1,047,811 1,549,868 73,099,308 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,007,680 $ 5,265,417 2,065,688 411,500,212 58,830 1,568,512 269,787 709,782 148,158 4,412,225 549,390 427,555,681 $ 1,905,868 58,830 1,568,512 269,787 709,782 148,158 4,412,225 549,390 89,877 26,953 116,423 172,208 10,028,013 - $ - $ 1,358,406 $ 1,123,451 4,724,983 7,206,840 $ - $ - $ 1,660,274 $ 1,373,106 5,774,980 8,808,360 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 38,613,254 $ 32,904,286 92,021,466 3,713,150 167,252,156 $ - $ - $ 1,016,138 $ 865,902 2,421,618 4,303,658 $ 1,016,138 $ 865,902 2,421,618 4,303,658 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 742,630 742,630 $ 2,970,520 2,970,520 $ 348,353,512 $ 76,656,994 $ 9,069,483 $ 86,411,907 $ 41,274,957 $ 100,236,571 $ 663,815,036 $ 137,238,966 $ $ $ 0% 0% 0% 0% Municipal Sponsor - $ - $ $ 45% 45% 45% State (ADOT) 79,840,512 $ 38,370,894 14,971,453 559,093 45,376,873 1,982,531 181,101,356 $ $ 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 45% 45% 45% 45% 45% 45% 45% 0% 0% 0% 0% Other Federal Federal AIP $ Source: Jacobs Engineering and Jacobs Consultancy (LeighFisher). Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 8-19 Table 8-3: Project Funding Sources Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Source / Detail TOTAL ALL FUNDING Federal AIP Other Federal State (ADOT) Municipal Sponsor PFC Paygo PFC Bonds Airport Bonds Paygo TOTAL ALL FUNDING [Table 8-3] [Table 8-3] [Table 8-8] [Table 8-8] [Table 8-7] [Table 8-7] [Table 8-6] [Table 8-10] Total $ $ 348,353,512 $ 76,656,994 9,069,483 86,411,907 41,274,957 100,236,571 663,815,036 137,238,966 1,463,057,426 $ Phase I 2014-2018 111,937,188 $ 18,432,571 2,848,001 20,733,429 12,177,065 47,330,165 96,689,442 34,557,352 344,705,213 $ Phase II 2019-2023 86,805,725 $ 8,844,905 2,284,361 11,008,274 23,808,515 6,837,799 5,438,459 145,028,038 $ Phase III 2024-2034 139,380,870 $ 49,379,518 3,667,918 54,401,000 29,097,892 29,097,892 560,287,796 97,243,155 962,556,039 $ Budget 2012 5,039,275 $ 132,613 132,613 5,304,500 $ Forecast 2013 5,190,453 $ 136,591 136,591 5,463,635 $ 2014 9,059,317 $ 714,844 140,689 896,727 801,460 3,029,350 14,642,387 $ 2015 14,597,869 $ 1,173,035 384,154 1,821,196 1,386,596 5,389,459 9,904,258 3,394,401 38,050,969 $ 2016 2017 2018 28,561,261 $ 29,418,099 $ 30,300,642 1,960,156 8,248,269 6,336,267 751,612 774,161 797,385 2,109,413 8,429,429 7,476,664 3,491,044 3,595,776 3,703,649 13,569,092 13,976,164 14,395,449 25,872,646 31,394,020 28,717,058 8,696,046 9,649,072 9,788,483 85,011,270 $ 105,484,990 $ 101,515,597 Source: Jacobs Engineering and Jacobs Consultancy (LeighFisher). Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 8-20 Table 8-4: Sources and Uses of Funds Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Funding PFC-Backed Bonds Imputed Annual Debt Service Rate Fin. Factor Amortization Period 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 $ - $ 5,389,459 13,569,092 13,976,164 14,395,449 2,747,427 10,374,920 10,686,167 3,313,275 8,342,106 8,592,370 8,850,141 - Cumulative Debt Service Funding Airport Bonds Imputed Annual Debt Service 6.00% 1.15 30 - $ 450,269 1,133,647 1,167,656 1,202,686 229,537 892,789 276,812 696,952 717,860 739,396 - Cumulative Debt Service Airfield Support Cumulative Revenue Bonds Debt Service by Group / Cost Center Parking Roadway Terminal Commercial Other Total Airline Module Requirements Parking Commercial Other Thirds Total 6.00% 1.15 30 450,269 1,583,916 2,751,572 3,954,258 3,954,258 3,954,258 4,183,795 4,183,795 5,076,584 5,076,584 5,076,584 5,076,584 5,076,584 5,353,396 6,050,348 6,768,208 7,507,604 7,507,604 7,507,604 7,507,604 TOTALS BY PHASE Phase I $ 47,330,165 Phase II 23,808,515 Phase III 29,097,892 Total $ 200,473,142 $ $ - $ 801,460 9,904,258 25,872,646 31,394,020 28,717,058 263,956 1,390,171 1,314,299 1,230,626 2,638,748 69,585 16,714,854 41,014,103 42,630,112 90,801,945 118,482,829 123,435,649 127,138,719 96,689,442 6,837,799 560,287,796 $ 1,327,630,073 - $ 66,959 827,464 2,161,562 2,622,853 2,399,202 22,053 116,144 109,805 102,814 220,457 5,814 1,396,463 3,426,574 3,561,586 7,586,162 9,898,796 10,312,585 10,621,963 66,959 894,423 3,055,985 5,678,838 8,078,040 8,100,093 8,216,236 8,326,041 8,428,855 8,649,313 8,649,313 8,649,313 8,649,313 8,655,126 10,051,589 13,478,164 17,039,750 24,625,912 34,524,707 44,837,293 55,459,256 $ $ $ - $ 9,734 46,497 88,479 102,844 118,507 118,507 118,507 118,507 118,507 118,507 130,018 174,089 222,631 222,631 222,631 222,631 - $ - $ 60,055 20,622 439,906 150,820 439,906 163,138 439,906 235,008 439,906 235,008 439,906 235,008 463,491 235,008 612,486 235,008 612,486 235,008 612,486 235,008 612,486 235,008 612,486 235,008 612,486 235,008 612,486 235,008 612,486 235,008 4,527,066 235,008 14,383,328 235,008 24,535,277 235,008 34,991,785 - $ 4,915 4,915 23,111 99,679 158,498 158,498 166,010 219,486 230,176 230,176 230,176 230,176 230,176 235,989 276,075 276,075 276,075 276,075 318,609 479,245 644,700 - $ 827,464 2,910,775 5,056,587 7,266,772 7,266,772 7,266,772 7,281,118 7,335,292 7,391,092 7,391,092 7,391,092 7,391,092 7,391,092 8,747,469 12,162,532 15,680,047 19,303,088 19,303,088 19,303,088 19,303,088 - $ 171,442 $ 939,866 $ 291,118 $ 16,061,598 $ 366,061 1,103,170 2,395,695 1,004,345 36,541,046 1,787,164 2,585,088 82,724,860 3,473,371 143,366,768 4,306,450 $ 7,719,401 $ 172,120,842 $ 9,537,669 $ 391,938,824 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 66,959 894,423 3,055,985 5,678,838 8,078,040 8,100,093 8,216,236 8,326,041 8,428,855 8,649,313 8,649,313 8,649,313 8,649,313 8,655,126 10,051,589 13,478,164 17,039,750 24,625,912 34,524,707 44,837,293 55,459,256 310,220 $ 17,774,244 310,220 41,720,537 682,483 234,619,734 2,605,846 $ 588,229,032 1,638 829,102 2,918,479 5,096,687 7,369,878 7,383,719 7,446,941 7,521,095 7,593,198 7,664,660 7,664,660 7,664,660 7,664,660 7,666,598 9,036,337 12,462,911 16,024,497 19,696,080 19,710,258 19,763,803 19,818,955 $ 1,638 1,638 67,758 480,006 543,012 547,118 573,578 591,404 618,552 767,548 767,548 767,548 767,548 769,485 782,847 782,847 782,847 4,697,427 14,567,867 24,773,361 35,285,021 1,638 1,638 7,704 40,100 103,106 107,212 133,673 151,498 155,061 155,061 155,061 155,061 155,061 156,999 170,361 170,361 170,361 170,361 184,539 238,084 293,236 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 62,044 1,638 1,638 7,704 40,100 103,106 107,212 133,673 151,498 155,061 155,061 155,061 155,061 155,061 156,999 170,361 170,361 170,361 170,361 184,539 238,084 293,236 16,215,785 $ 1,094,053 $ 154,187 $ 310,220 $ 154,187 37,609,612 3,098,200 702,505 310,220 702,505 147,173,418 84,744,346 2,019,486 682,483 2,019,486 $ 401,997,630 $ 177,873,199 $ 5,752,357 $ 2,605,846 $ 5,752,357 66,959 894,423 3,055,985 5,678,838 8,078,040 8,100,093 8,216,236 8,326,041 8,428,855 8,649,313 8,649,313 8,649,313 8,649,313 8,655,126 10,051,589 13,478,164 17,039,750 24,625,912 34,524,707 44,837,293 55,459,256 $ 17,774,244 41,720,537 234,619,734 $ 588,229,032 Source: Jacobs Engineering and Jacobs Consultancy (LeighFisher). Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 8-21 Table 8-5: Estimated Plan of Financing Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Phase I 2014-2018 Outstanding Debt ADOT Hangar Loan Allegiant Airlines Note /1 Total Outstanding Debt Service New Debt Airport Bonds (from Table 8-5) PFC-Backed (from Table 8-5) Member Government Loans /2 Total New Debt Service Less: PFCs Applied to Debt Service Aggregate Debt Service $ Historical 2010 1,076,939 1,076,939 $ $ $ 17,774,244 8,740,015 26,514,259 $ (8,740,015) $ 18,851,183 $ $ $ $ $ Estimated 2011 Budget 2012 Forecast 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2025 2030 2034 215,388 $ 552,748 768,136 $ 215,388 $ 697,182 912,570 $ 215,388 $ 552,748 768,136 $ 215,388 $ 215,388 $ 215,388 $ 215,388 $ 215,388 $ 215,388 $ 215,388 $ 215,388 $ 215,388 $ 215,388 $ 215,388 $ 215,388 $ 215,388 $ 215,388 $ - $ - $ - - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 66,959 $ 66,959 $ 894,423 $ 450,269 1,344,692 $ 3,055,985 $ 1,583,916 4,639,901 $ 5,678,838 $ 2,751,572 8,430,410 $ 8,078,040 $ 3,954,258 12,032,298 $ 8,649,313 $ 5,076,584 13,725,897 $ 17,039,750 $ 6,768,208 23,807,958 $ 55,459,256 7,507,604 62,966,860 - - - - (1,583,916) (2,751,572) (3,954,258) (5,076,584) (6,768,208) (7,507,604) 17,039,750 $ 55,459,256 768,136 $ 912,570 $ 768,136 $ 215,388 $ 282,347 $ (450,269) 1,109,810 $ 3,271,373 $ 5,894,225 $ 8,293,428 $ 8,864,700 $ Source: Historical provided by Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Authority and Forecast provided by Jacobs Consultancy (LeighFisher). Notes: 1. Debt service consists of $3.00 per enplaned passenger in principal payments and $1.00 per enplaned passenger in interest payments. 2. At the end of FY2010, PMGAA had $85,072,833 in outstanding principal including interest, which accrues annually at a 3% rate. The first of the loans is due June 30, 2020 or when PMGAA has sufficient funds for repayment. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 8-22 Table 8-6: Debt Services Requirements Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Phase I 2014-2018 Historical 2010 Estimated 2011 Budget 2012 Forecast 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2025 2030 2034 PFC Collections PFC rate per enplaned passenger Less: PFC airline collection fee Net PFC collection rate $ $ PFC-eligible passengers Enplaned passengers % PFC eligible Total PFC-eligible passengers 4.50 (0.11) 4.39 $ $ 3,949,356 93.4% 3,081,867 Total PFC Collections $ Less: PFCs Applied to Debt Service (from Table 8-5) PFC Leverage % 16,180,609 4.50 $ (0.11) 4.39 $ 342,047 101.4% 346,993 $ (8,740,015) 54.0% Net PFC Collections 4.50 $ (0.11) 4.39 $ 1,523,299 $ 0.0% 4.50 $ (0.11) 4.39 $ 4.50 $ (0.11) 4.39 $ 4.50 $ (0.11) 4.39 $ 4.50 $ (0.11) 4.39 $ 4.50 $ (0.11) 4.39 $ 4.50 $ (0.11) 4.39 $ 4.50 $ (0.11) 4.39 $ 430,844 101.4% 436,876 513,926 101.4% 521,121 579,141 98.0% 567,558 644,356 95.0% 612,138 710,000 93.0% 660,300 775,000 93.0% 720,750 840,000 93.0% 781,200 980,000 93.0% 911,400 1,905,529 $ 2,256,134 $ 2,491,580 $ 2,687,285 $ 2,898,717 $ 3,164,093 $ 3,429,468 $ 4,001,046 $ 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% (450,269) 15.5% (1,583,916) 50.1% (2,751,572) 80.2% (3,954,258) 98.8% 4.50 $ (0.11) 4.39 $ 4.50 $ (0.11) 4.39 $ 1,863,636 93.0% 1,733,182 2,318,182 93.0% 2,155,909 7,608,668 $ 9,464,441 $ (5,076,584) 66.7% (6,768,208) 71.5% 4.50 (0.11) 4.39 2,692,239 93.0% 2,503,782 10,991,605 (7,507,604) 68.3% $ 7,440,594 $ 1,523,299 $ 1,905,529 $ 2,256,134 $ 2,491,580 $ 2,687,285 $ 2,448,448 $ 1,580,177 $ 677,896 $ 46,788 $ 2,532,084 $ 2,696,233 $ 3,484,001 $ 5,304,025 $ - $ - $ 556,311 $ 2,812,445 $ 5,304,025 $ 7,991,310 $ 9,053,161 $ 7,142,294 $ 4,224,414 $ 10,659,887 $ 14,125,896 $ 7,491,064 $ $ $ 1,523,299 $ 1,523,299 $ 1,905,529 $ 1,905,529 $ 2,256,134 $ 2,256,134 $ 2,491,580 $ 2,491,580 $ 2,687,285 $ 2,687,285 $ 2,448,448 $ 2,448,448 $ 1,580,177 $ 1,580,177 $ 677,896 $ 677,896 $ 46,788 $ 46,788 $ 2,532,084 $ 2,532,084 $ 2,696,233 $ 2,696,233 $ 3,484,001 3,484,001 PFC Cash Flow PFC Fund beginning balance Deposits to PFC Fund Net PFC collections Interest earnings Total PFC Revenues PFC Funds Available [A] [B] $ 7,440,594 7,440,594 [A] + [B] $ 12,744,619 $ 1,523,299 $ 1,905,529 $ 2,812,445 $ 5,304,025 $ 7,991,310 $ 10,439,757 $ 10,633,338 $ 7,820,190 $ 4,271,202 $ 13,191,971 $ 16,822,129 $ 10,975,065 $ Use of PFC Funds Existing Applications /1 Pay-as-you-go Expenditures and Reimbursements (from Table 8-4) Airfield Support Parking Roadway Terminal Commercial Other Subtotal - $ (1,523,299) $ (1,349,218) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - (12,177,065) $ (12,177,065) $ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ (1,386,596) (1,386,596) $ - $ (3,491,044) (3,491,044) $ - $ (3,595,776) (3,595,776) $ - $ (3,703,649) (3,703,649) $ - $ - $ - $ (8,592,370) (8,592,370) $ - PFC Revenue Fund Ending Balance $ $ - $ 556,311 $ 2,812,445 $ 5,304,025 $ 7,991,310 $ 9,053,161 $ 7,142,294 $ 4,224,414 $ 567,553 $ 13,191,971 $ 8,229,760 $ 10,975,065 $ 567,553 Source: Historical provided by Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Authority and Forecast provided by Jacobs Consultancy (LeighFisher). Note: 1. Usage of existing PFC approvals is assumed to be balance of outstanding current approvals. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 8-23 Table 8-7: Application and Use of PFC Revenues Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Beginning Balance Year 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 $ State (ADOT) - $ 5,845 11,772 16,934 20,929 20,564 6,361 919 677 1,244 647 3,981 9,627 15,449 20,496 25,508 30,668 32,125 37,748 42,969 48,123 48,540 34,453 TOTALS BY PHASE Pre-Phase I Phase I Phase II Phase III Total $ Scenario 1 - Unconstrained Revenue Municipal Repayments Capital Sponsor Advances of Advances Projects PMGAA Support 2,200 $ 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 4,000 $ 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 - $ 9,000 - - $ (6,000) (3,000) - (265) (273) (1,037) (2,205) (2,861) (9,204) (8,274) (443) (2,633) (6,797) (2,866) (555) (378) (1,153) (1,188) (1,039) (4,744) (576) (979) (1,046) (5,783) (20,287) (20,896) (90) $ (3,704) (11,199) (12,368) - 4,400 $ 11,000 11,000 24,200 50,600 8,000 $ 20,000 20,000 44,000 92,000 - $ 9,000 9,000 - $ (9,000) (9,000) (538) $ (23,581) (13,293) (58,069) (95,481) (90) (27,271) (27,361) Ending Balance 5,845 11,772 16,934 20,929 20,564 6,361 919 677 1,244 647 3,981 9,627 15,449 20,496 25,508 30,668 32,125 37,748 42,969 48,123 48,540 34,453 19,758 Beginning Balance $ State (ADOT) Municipal Sponsor Scenario 2 - Capped CPE Repayments Advances of Advances Capital Projects PMGAA Support - $ 5,845 11,772 16,934 20,929 20,564 6,361 919 801 861 142 476 5,122 10,944 15,991 21,003 26,164 27,620 33,244 17,294 10,896 19,297 12,274 2,200 $ 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 4,000 $ 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 - $ 9,000 15,000 12,000 10,000 5,000 - $ (3,000) (2,000) (3,000) (1,000) - (265) $ (273) (1,037) (2,205) (2,861) (9,204) (8,274) (443) (2,633) (6,797) (2,866) (555) (378) (1,153) (1,188) (1,039) (4,744) (576) (979) (1,046) (5,783) (20,287) (20,896) (90) $ (3,704) (11,199) (12,368) (2,876) (1,506) (123) (21,170) (26,552) (4,016) (2,935) (1,535) TOTALS BY PHASE Pre-Phase I $ Phase I Phase II Phase III Total 4,400 $ 11,000 11,000 24,200 50,600 8,000 $ 20,000 20,000 44,000 92,000 - $ 9,000 42,000 51,000 - $ (9,000) (9,000) (538) $ (23,581) (13,293) (58,069) (95,481) (90) (27,271) (4,505) (56,209) (88,075) Ending Balance 5,845 11,772 16,934 20,929 20,564 6,361 919 801 861 142 476 5,122 10,944 15,991 21,003 26,164 27,620 33,244 17,294 10,896 19,297 12,274 1,044 Source: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Authority, Jacobs Engineering and Jacobs Consultancy (LeighFisher). Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 8-24 Table 8-8: Application and Use of Municipal Sponsor Funding (In Thousands) Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Table 8-9: Cost of Operation and Maintenance Repairs & Maintenance Building Equipment Grounds Pavements Total Personnel Salaries Benefits Reallocations Total Contractual Services Accounting Advertising Bank Service Charges Consultants Customs Fees Fire Janitorial Legal Police Postage & Shipping Temporary Help Other Contractual Services Total Other Communications & Utilities Supplies & Materials Insurance Miscellaneous Total Total Base O&M Plus: Cumulative Prior Incremental O&M Subtotal $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 1,098,693 1,554,316 803,750 1,342,038 4,798,797 29,329,026 12,070,655 (1,175,787) 40,223,894 160,182 1,028,333 618,057 365,116 914,169 5,650,347 468,878 518,120 1,963,184 64,645 12,549 1,389,258 13,152,835 3,230,434 3,560,516 1,785,657 2,527,228 11,103,835 69,279,361 878,531 70,157,892 Historical 2010 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Incremental O&M Increase Factor Incremental O&M Additions Less: Incremental O&M Reductions Net Additional Incremental O&M Estimated 2011 $ 873,365 873,365 Total Incremental O&M $ Total Operation & Maintenance Expenses $ $ Forecast 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2025 2030 2034 332,084 $ 469,798 242,937 405,636 1,450,455 $ 373,764 528,762 273,427 456,547 1,632,500 183,867 $ 260,116 134,508 224,591 803,082 $ 189,383 $ 267,919 138,543 231,329 827,174 $ 195,064 $ 275,957 142,700 238,269 851,989 $ 200,916 $ 284,235 146,981 245,417 877,549 $ 206,944 $ 292,762 151,390 252,779 903,875 $ 213,152 $ 301,545 155,932 260,362 930,992 $ 219,547 $ 310,592 160,610 268,173 958,921 $ 226,133 $ 319,909 165,428 276,219 987,689 $ 232,917 $ 329,507 170,391 284,505 1,017,320 $ 286,459 $ 405,252 209,559 349,905 1,251,175 $ 4,908,230 $ 2,020,031 (196,769) 6,731,493 $ 5,055,477 $ 2,080,632 (202,672) 6,933,437 $ 5,207,141 $ 2,143,051 (208,752) 7,141,441 $ 5,363,355 $ 2,207,343 (215,014) 7,355,684 $ 5,524,256 $ 2,273,563 (221,465) 7,576,354 $ 5,689,984 $ 2,341,770 (228,109) 7,803,645 $ 5,860,683 $ 2,412,023 (234,952) 8,037,754 $ 6,036,504 $ 2,484,384 (242,001) 8,278,887 $ 6,217,599 $ 2,558,915 (249,261) 8,527,253 $ 7,646,862 $ 3,147,143 (306,559) 10,487,446 $ 26,806 $ 172,092 103,432 61,102 152,987 945,589 78,467 86,708 328,540 10,818 2,100 232,493 2,201,135 $ 27,611 $ 177,255 106,535 62,935 157,576 973,957 80,821 89,309 338,396 11,143 2,163 239,468 2,267,169 $ 28,439 $ 182,573 109,731 64,823 162,304 1,003,175 83,246 91,988 348,548 11,477 2,228 246,652 2,335,184 $ 29,292 $ 188,050 113,023 66,768 167,173 1,033,271 85,743 94,748 359,005 11,821 2,295 254,052 2,405,239 $ 30,171 $ 193,691 116,414 68,771 172,188 1,064,269 88,315 97,590 369,775 12,176 2,364 261,673 2,477,397 $ 31,076 $ 199,502 119,906 70,834 177,354 1,096,197 90,965 100,518 380,868 12,541 2,434 269,523 2,551,719 $ 32,008 $ 205,487 123,503 72,959 182,674 1,129,083 93,694 103,533 392,294 12,918 2,508 277,609 2,628,270 $ 32,969 $ 211,652 127,208 75,148 188,154 1,162,955 96,504 106,639 404,063 13,305 2,583 285,937 2,707,118 $ 33,958 $ 218,001 131,025 77,403 193,799 1,197,844 99,400 109,839 416,185 13,704 2,660 294,515 2,788,332 $ 41,764 $ 268,114 161,144 95,195 238,348 1,473,197 122,249 135,088 511,855 16,855 3,272 362,217 3,429,296 $ 48,415 $ 310,818 186,810 110,358 276,311 1,707,839 141,720 156,604 593,380 19,539 3,793 419,909 3,975,494 $ 54,492 349,828 210,256 124,208 310,990 1,922,188 159,507 176,259 667,854 21,991 4,269 472,611 4,474,454 540,615 $ 595,855 298,831 422,933 1,858,233 $ 556,833 $ 613,730 307,796 435,621 1,913,980 $ 573,538 $ 632,142 317,029 448,690 1,971,400 $ 590,745 $ 651,106 326,540 462,150 2,030,542 $ 608,467 $ 670,640 336,337 476,015 2,091,458 $ 626,721 $ 690,759 346,427 490,295 2,154,202 $ 645,523 $ 711,481 356,819 505,004 2,218,828 $ 664,888 $ 732,826 367,524 520,154 2,285,393 $ 684,835 $ 754,811 378,550 535,759 2,353,954 $ 842,261 $ 928,322 465,568 658,916 2,895,067 $ 976,411 $ 1,076,180 539,721 763,864 3,356,176 $ 1,098,959 1,211,250 607,461 859,736 3,777,406 11,593,943 $ 11,593,943 $ 11,941,761 $ 11,941,761 $ 12,300,014 $ 12,300,014 $ 12,669,014 $ 12,669,014 $ 13,049,084 $ 13,049,084 $ 13,440,557 $ 13,440,557 $ 13,843,774 $ 13,843,774 $ 14,259,087 $ 285,182 14,544,269 $ 14,686,859 $ 593,349 15,280,209 $ 18,062,985 $ 5,066,181 23,129,166 $ 0.0% $ Budget 2012 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.5% 8,864,809 $ 9,977,421 3,648,401 4,106,308 (355,386) (399,990) 12,157,825 $ 13,683,739 20,939,950 $ 23,568,098 7,230,503 8,137,995 28,170,453 $ 31,706,092 0.0% 0.0% $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 276,875 $ 276,875 $ 290,885 $ 290,885 $ 305,604 $ 305,604 $ 578,229 $ 578,229 $ - $ - $ - 1,751,896 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 276,875 $ 576,067 $ 898,953 $ 5,644,410 $ 7,230,503 $ 8,137,995 71,031,257 $ 11,593,943 $ 11,941,761 $ 12,300,014 $ 12,669,014 $ 13,049,084 $ 13,440,557 $ 14,120,649 $ 14,835,154 $ 15,585,813 $ 23,707,395 $ 28,170,453 $ 31,706,092 Source: Historical provided by Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Authority and Forecast provided by Jacobs Consultancy (LeighFisher). Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 8-25 Phase I 2014-2018 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Table 8-10: Revenues Phase I 2014-2018 Airfield Landing Fees Passenger Airlines General Aviation Subtotal Aircraft Parking Fuel Flowage Fees Hangar / Land / Facility Leases Aeronautical Products and Services Sold Total Airfield Terminal Airline Revenues Concession Revenues Total Terminal Other Parking & Ground Transportation Rental Car Non-Aeronautical Lease Income Facility Land Subtotal Non-Aeronautical Services Sold Total Other Total Base Revenues Plus: Incremental Revenues (ex. Airline) Parking (from Table 8-12) Commercial (from Table 8-13) FBO/GA and Other (from Table 8-14) Subtotal Total Operating Revenues (excl. Incremental Airline) % Increase Non-Operating Revenues (Expenses) Operating Grant Income (Law Enforcement) Customer Facility Charges Interest Income Total Non-Operating Revenues (Expenses) Total Revenues (ex. Incremental Airline) SCENARIO 1 - UNCONSTRAINED REVENUE Total Revenues (ex. Incremental Airline) Plus: Incremental Airline (from Table 8-11) Grand Total Revenues OState/Municipal Sponsor Support Required SCENARIO 2 - CAPPED CPE Total Revenues (ex. Incremental Airline) Plus: Incremental Airline (from Table 8-11) Grand Total Revenues OState/Municipal Sponsor Support Required $ $ $ $ $ $ Historical 2010 4,042,551 981,017 5,023,568 1,401,015 3,825,488 11,503,719 26,358,380 48,112,169 $ 131,513 1,941,728 2,073,240 $ 12,615,247 5,167,308 $ $ $ $ Estimated 2011 Budget 2012 282,827 $ 164,174 447,001 $ 346,974 589,069 494,956 4,834,832 6,712,831 $ 466,626 $ 169,099 635,725 $ 321,733 603,072 1,716,565 4,747,126 8,024,221 $ 567,805 174,172 741,977 $ 229,847 627,600 2,042,396 4,679,726 8,321,546 $ 10,510 $ 59,614 70,124 $ 15,525 $ 214,932 230,457 $ 18,472 $ 318,555 337,027 $ 950,196 $ 551,040 1,632,654 $ 628,661 1,436,187 641,781 2,077,968 $ 107,364 3,686,568 $ 755,652 133,350 889,002 $ 91,345 3,241,661 $ Forecast 2013 2014 2015 626,103 683,676 741,041 179,397 184,779 190,322 805,500 $ 868,454 $ 931,363 $ 242,310 254,584 266,796 661,631 695,143 728,489 2,103,668 2,166,778 2,231,781 4,820,118 4,964,721 5,113,663 8,633,226 $ 8,949,681 $ 9,272,092 $ 20,368 $ 335,828 356,197 $ 22,241 $ 352,838 375,080 $ 2016 2017 2018 2025 2030 2034 797,480 196,032 993,512 $ 278,905 761,553 2,298,735 5,267,073 9,599,777 $ 853,625 966,730 1,654,954 2,022,851 2,330,965 201,913 207,970 255,777 296,516 333,731 1,055,538 $ 1,174,701 $ 1,910,731 $ 2,319,367 $ 2,664,697 291,028 309,703 426,435 503,189 570,813 794,656 845,646 1,164,385 1,373,962 1,558,612 2,367,697 2,438,728 2,999,328 3,477,043 3,913,442 5,425,085 5,587,838 6,872,335 7,966,920 8,966,839 9,934,004 $ 10,356,615 $ 13,373,214 $ 15,640,481 $ 17,674,403 24,108 $ 369,764 393,871 $ 25,944 $ 386,546 412,490 $ 27,770 $ 403,349 431,119 $ 31,450 $ 429,230 460,680 $ 53,839 $ 591,015 644,854 $ 65,808 $ 697,391 763,199 $ 75,831 791,115 866,946 1,909,497 $ 797,951 2,060,635 $ 2,208,937 $ 2,355,987 $ 856,875 914,062 970,184 2,500,584 $ 1,024,767 2,644,377 $ 1,078,499 2,905,362 $ 1,179,796 4,451,064 $ 1,765,933 5,303,869 $ 2,082,893 6,044,341 2,364,052 824,407 145,484 969,891 $ 124,572 3,801,911 $ 849,140 874,614 900,852 149,848 154,344 158,974 998,988 $ 1,028,957 $ 1,059,826 $ 131,327 137,979 144,597 4,047,824 $ 4,289,935 $ 4,530,595 $ 927,878 163,743 1,091,621 $ 151,160 4,768,131 $ 955,714 168,655 1,124,369 $ 157,731 5,004,977 $ 984,385 173,715 1,158,101 $ 167,852 5,411,111 $ 1,210,670 213,648 1,424,318 $ 231,118 7,872,433 $ 1,403,498 1,579,650 247,676 278,762 1,651,175 $ 1,858,411 272,717 309,368 9,310,653 $ 10,576,173 $ 4,643,443 819,431 5,462,874 759,319 24,004,749 $ $ 74,190,158 $ 10,469,523 $ 11,496,340 $ 12,460,484 $ 13,037,247 $ 13,614,696 $ 14,196,558 $ 14,780,399 $ 15,370,099 $ 16,228,406 $ 21,890,500 $ 25,714,333 $ 29,117,522 $ 1,889,923 729,452 825,749 3,445,123 77,635,280 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 3,473 $ 3,473 $ 160,616 $ 772,917 $ 949,445 $ 2,437,255 $ 2,912,360 $ 46,373,798 3,473 5,431 87,505 224,993 408,050 1,694,755 2,176,208 2,296,978 77,555 77,555 146,774 221,572 302,293 1,488,658 1,885,181 2,112,054 - $ - $ - $ - $ 84,500 $ 86,458 $ 394,895 $ 1,219,482 $ 1,659,788 $ 5,620,667 $ 6,973,749 $ 50,782,829 10,469,523 $ 11,496,340 $ 12,460,484 $ 13,037,247 $ 13,699,196 $ 14,283,016 $ 15,175,294 $ 16,589,581 $ 17,888,194 $ 27,511,168 $ 32,688,081 $ 79,900,351 38.04% 9.81% 8.39% 4.63% 5.08% 4.26% 6.25% 9.32% 7.83% 4.86% 3.00% 21.82% $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 704,058 2,963,675 760,382 4,428,115 $ 82,063,396 $ 10,990,335 $ 12,051,325 $ 13,170,172 $ 13,790,012 $ 14,494,574 $ 15,120,928 $ 16,055,385 $ 17,511,899 $ 18,880,610 $ 28,941,367 $ 34,389,817 $ 81,838,106 $ $ $ 82,063,396 5,271,002 87,334,398 10,990,335 $ 12,051,325 $ 13,170,172 $ 13,790,012 $ 14,494,574 $ 15,120,928 $ 16,055,385 $ 17,511,899 $ 18,880,610 $ 28,941,367 $ 34,389,817 $ 81,838,106 1,425 246,066 936,495 1,667,900 2,419,117 11,615,229 24,991,076 31,112,408 10,990,335 $ 12,051,325 $ 13,170,172 $ 13,790,012 $ 14,495,999 $ 15,366,994 $ 16,991,880 $ 19,179,799 $ 21,299,726 $ 40,556,596 $ 59,380,892 $ 112,950,514 $ 27,270,863 $ $ $ $ 82,063,396 5,271,002 87,334,398 $ 27,270,863 $ $ $ 113,602 $ 289,849 117,361 520,812 $ - $ 123,000 $ 327,985 104,000 554,985 $ 125,000 $ 449,688 135,000 709,688 $ - $ 90,010 $ 128,750 $ 484,965 139,050 752,765 $ - $ 132,613 $ 519,544 143,222 795,378 $ - $ 136,591 $ 553,802 147,518 837,911 $ - $ 140,689 $ 587,459 151,944 880,092 $ 144,909 $ 620,907 156,502 922,318 $ 149,257 $ 681,962 161,197 992,416 $ 3,704,215 $ 11,198,652 $ 12,367,996 $ 183,567 $ 1,048,381 198,252 1,430,200 $ - $ 212,804 $ 1,259,103 229,828 1,701,735 $ - $ 239,513 1,439,568 258,674 1,937,755 - 10,990,335 $ 12,051,325 $ 13,170,172 $ 13,790,012 $ 14,494,574 $ 15,120,928 $ 16,055,385 $ 17,511,899 $ 18,880,610 $ 28,941,367 $ 34,389,817 $ 81,838,106 1,425 246,066 936,495 1,667,900 2,419,117 8,812,024 13,194,350 17,656,825 10,990,335 $ 12,051,325 $ 13,170,172 $ 13,790,012 $ 14,495,999 $ 15,366,994 $ 16,991,880 $ 19,179,799 $ 21,299,726 $ 37,753,391 $ 47,584,167 $ 99,494,931 - - $ 90,010 $ - $ - $ - $ 3,704,215 $ 11,198,652 $ 12,367,996 $ - $ 21,170,268 $ 1,535,230 Source: Historical provided by Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Authority and Forecast provided by Jacobs Consultancy (LeighFisher). Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 8-26 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Table 8-11: Forecast Airline Revenue Requirements Phase I 2014-2018 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2025 2030 2034 1,654,954 $ 426,435 53,839 2,135,228 $ 2,022,851 $ 503,189 65,808 2,591,847 $ 2,330,965 570,813 75,831 2,977,610 Airline Requirements Base Revenues (from Table 8-10) Landing Fees Aircraft Parking Terminal Rentals Total Base Revenues SCENARIO 1 - UNCONSTRAINED REVENUE Incremental Revenues Debt Service Plus: Coverage Markup Subtotal Amortized Paygo Capital Projects Incremental O&M Recovery Share Total Incremental Revenues 1.00 25% Total Airline Requirements $ 4,042,551 1,401,015 131,513 $ 5,575,079 $ $ $ $ Source: Note: 567,805 $ 229,847 18,472 816,124 $ 626,103 $ 242,310 20,368 888,781 $ 683,676 $ 254,584 22,241 960,500 $ 741,041 $ 266,796 24,108 1,031,944 $ 797,480 $ 853,625 $ 966,730 $ 278,905 291,028 309,703 25,944 27,770 31,450 1,102,328 $ 1,172,423 $ 1,307,883 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,425 1,425 $ - $ - $ 246,066 246,066 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 867,276 1,523,883 2,194,378 69,219 144,017 224,738 936,495 $ 1,667,900 $ 2,419,117 $ 7,664,660 $ 16,024,497 $ 19,818,955 7,664,660 $ 16,024,497 $ 19,818,955 2,539,466 7,158,953 9,258,955 1,411,103 1,807,626 2,034,499 11,615,229 $ 24,991,076 $ 31,112,408 1,278,010 $ 2,038,823 $ 2,840,323 $ 3,726,999 $ 13,750,456 $ 27,582,923 $ 34,090,018 $ - $ - $ - $ $ 10,846,081 $ 640,311 $ 803,884 $ 816,124 $ 888,781 $ 961,925 $ 342,047 430,844 513,926 579,141 644,356 Airline Cost Per Enplaned Passenger (CPE) $ $ $ 466,626 $ 321,733 15,525 803,884 $ $ 4,833,028 437,974 $ 5,271,002 Enplaned Passengers SCENARIO 2 - CAPPED CPE Enplaned Passengers Max Airline CPE /1 Total Airline Requirements Less: Base Revenues Incremental Revenues 282,827 $ 346,974 10,510 640,311 $ 4.00 $ 10,846,081 (5,575,079) $ 5,271,002 710,000 775,000 3.38 $ 980,000 1.87 $ 1.87 $ 1.59 $ 1.53 $ 1.49 $ 1.80 $ $ 342,047 1.87 $ 640,311 $ (640,311) - $ 430,844 1.87 $ 803,884 $ (803,884) - $ 513,926 1.59 $ 816,124 $ (816,124) - $ 579,141 1.53 $ 888,781 $ (888,781) - $ 644,356 1.49 $ 961,925 $ (960,500) 1,425 $ 710,000 1.80 $ 1,278,010 $ (1,031,944) 246,066 $ 775,000 840,000 980,000 2.63 $ 3.38 $ 3.80 $ 2,038,823 $ 2,840,323 $ 3,726,999 $ (1,102,328) (1,172,423) (1,307,883) 936,495 $ 1,667,900 $ 2,419,117 $ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,425 $ 246,066 $ 936,495 $ 1,667,900 $ 2,419,117 $ $ $ 2.63 $ 840,000 3.80 $ 1,863,636 2,318,182 7.38 $ 11.90 $ 2,692,239 12.66 1,863,636 2,318,182 2,692,239 5.87 $ 6.81 $ 7.66 10,947,251 $ 15,786,197 $ 20,634,435 (2,135,228) (2,591,847) (2,977,610) 8,812,024 $ 13,194,350 $ 17,656,825 Jacobs Engineering and Jacobs Consultancy (LeighFisher). 1. Adjusted for inflation. Adjusted Incremental Revenues Inflation of CPE 4.00 4.00 4.12 4.12 4.24 4.24 4.37 4.37 4.50 4.50 4.64 4.64 4.78 4.78 11,615,229 $ 24,991,076 $ 31,112,408 5.87 5.87 6.81 6.81 7.66 7.66 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 8-27 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Table 8-12: Forecast Parking Revenue Requirements Phase I 2014-2018 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2025 2030 2034 Parking Requirements Base Revenues (from Table 8-10) $ 12,615,247 $ 1,909,497 $ 2,060,635 $ 2,208,937 $ 2,355,987 $ 2,500,584 $ 2,644,377 $ 2,905,362 $ 4,451,064 $ 5,303,869 $ 6,044,341 $ $ $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,638 $ 410 2,048 $ 1,425 3,473 $ 1,638 $ 410 2,048 $ 1,425 3,473 $ 67,758 $ 16,940 84,698 $ 6,699 69,219 160,616 $ 480,006 $ 120,002 600,008 $ 28,892 144,017 772,917 $ 543,012 $ 135,753 678,765 $ 45,941 224,738 949,445 $ 767,548 $ 191,887 959,434 $ 66,718 1,411,103 2,437,255 $ 782,847 $ 195,712 978,559 $ 126,175 1,807,626 2,912,360 $ 35,285,021 8,821,255 44,106,276 233,023 2,034,499 46,373,798 $ 1,909,497 $ 2,060,635 $ 2,212,410 $ 2,359,460 $ 2,661,199 $ 3,417,294 $ 3,854,807 $ 6,888,319 $ 8,216,229 $ 52,418,139 Requirement Per Day 5,228 5,642 6,057 6,460 7,286 9,356 10,554 18,859 22,495 143,513 Spaces 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 4,620 4,620 4,620 Assumed Occupancy Occupied Spaces 60% 1,200 70% 1,393 77% 1,532 82% 1,641 87% 1,731 90% 1,800 90% 1,800 62% 2,885 72% 3,321 80% 3,696 Incremental Revenues Debt Service Plus: Coverage Markup Subtotal Amortized Paygo Capital Projects Incremental O&M Recovery Share Total Incremental Revenues Total Parking Requirements Requirement Per Space Per Day /1 1.25 $ 25% $ 1,094,053 273,513 1,367,567 84,382 437,974 1,889,923 $ 14,505,170 $ $ 5.00 $ 5.15 $ 5.30 $ 5.46 $ 5.63 $ 5.80 $ 5.97 $ 7.34 $ 8.51 $ 38.83 Source: Jacobs Engineering and Jacobs Consultancy (LeighFisher). Note: 1. Assumes minimum requirement of $5.00 per occupied space per day (adjusted for inflation). Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 8-28 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Table 8-13: Forecast Commercial Revenue Requirements Phase I 2014-2018 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2025 2030 2034 Commercial Development Requirements Base Revenues (from Table 8-10) Incremental Revenues Debt Service Plus: Coverage Markup Subtotal Amortized Paygo Capital Projects Incremental O&M Recovery Share Total Incremental Revenues Total Commercial Requirements $ 819,431 $ 154,187 38,547 192,734 98,744 437,974 729,452 1.25 $ 25% $ 145,484 $ $ $ $ 1,548,883 Estimated Leasable Square Footage Cost per Square Foot $ - $ - $ - $ 149,848 - $ - $ - $ 154,344 1,638 $ 410 2,048 $ 1,425 3,473 $ 158,974 1,638 $ 410 2,048 $ 3,383 5,431 $ 163,743 7,704 $ 1,926 9,630 $ 8,657 69,219 87,505 $ 168,655 173,715 213,648 247,676 278,762 40,100 $ 10,025 50,126 $ 30,851 144,017 224,993 $ 103,106 $ 155,061 $ 25,777 38,765 128,883 $ 193,827 $ 54,429 89,826 224,738 1,411,103 408,050 $ 1,694,755 $ 170,361 $ 42,590 212,951 $ 155,631 262,479 1,807,626 2,034,499 2,176,208 $ 2,296,978 145,484 149,848 157,816 164,405 251,249 393,648 581,765 1,908,403 2,423,884 2,575,739 266,701 266,701 266,701 266,701 266,701 266,701 266,701 1,743,156 2,763,501 2,763,501 0.55 $ 0.56 $ 0.59 $ 0.62 $ 0.94 $ 1.48 $ 2.18 $ 1.09 $ 0.88 $ 0.93 Source: Jacobs Engineering and Jacobs Consultancy (LeighFisher). Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 8-29 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Table 8-14: Forecast FBO/GA and Other Revenue Requirements Phase I 2014-2018 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2025 2030 2034 FBO/GA and Other Revenue Requirements Base Revenues (from Table 8-10) Incremental Revenues Debt Service Plus: Coverage Markup Subtotal Amortized Paygo Capital Projects Incremental O&M Recovery Share Total Incremental Revenues Total FBO/GA and Other Revenue Requirements $ 60,755,479 $ 10,405,503 $ 10,826,764 $ $ $ 1.25 $ 25% $ 310,220 77,555 387,775 437,974 825,749 $ 61,581,228 11,251,415 $ 11,681,597 $ 12,116,072 $ 12,557,067 $ 13,149,329 $ 17,225,788 $ 20,162,787 $ 22,794,420 - $ - $ - $ 62,044 $ 15,511 77,555 $ 77,555 $ 62,044 $ 15,511 77,555 $ 77,555 $ 62,044 $ 15,511 77,555 $ 69,219 146,774 $ 62,044 $ 15,511 77,555 $ 144,017 221,572 $ 62,044 $ 15,511 77,555 $ 224,738 302,293 $ 62,044 $ 15,511 77,555 $ 1,411,103 1,488,658 $ 62,044 $ 15,511 77,555 $ 1,807,626 1,885,181 $ 62,044 15,511 77,555 2,034,499 2,112,054 $ 10,405,503 $ 10,826,764 $ 11,328,970 $ 11,759,152 $ 12,262,846 $ 12,778,638 $ 13,451,622 $ 18,714,446 $ 22,047,968 $ 24,906,473 $ $ - $ - $ - $ Source: Jacobs Engineering and Jacobs Consultancy (LeighFisher). Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 8-30 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Table 8-15: Scenario 1 - Forecast Net Revenue and Debt Service Coverage 2012 Enplaned Passengers % Growth 513,926 Revenues (ex. PFC Revenues) Base Operating Incremental Operating Non-Operating Subtotal % Growth $ 74,190,158 8,716,125 4,428,115 $ 87,334,398 Less: Operation and Maintenance Expenses Base Incremental Subtotal % Growth Net Revenues before Debt Service % Growth Debt Service ADOT Hangar Loan Allegiant Airlines Note GARB PFC-Backed Subtotal $ [A] Total State/Municipal Sponsor Support Required 840,000 8.4% 980,000 16.7% 2025 2030 2034 1,863,636 5.1% 2,318,182 4.1% 2,692,239 3.8% (18,062,985) $ (5,644,410) (23,707,395) $ 5.6% (20,939,950) $ (23,568,098) (7,230,503) (8,137,995) (28,170,453) $ (31,706,092) 3.0% 3.0% $ 16,303,141 $ 870,158 $ 1,120,998 $ 28.8% $ (1,076,939) (17,774,244) (8,740,015) $ (27,591,198) $ (215,388) $ (552,748) (768,136) $ (215,388) $ (215,388) $ $ $ 12,460,484 $ 13,037,247 $ 13,614,696 $ 14,196,558 $ 85,925 332,524 709,688 752,765 795,378 837,911 13,170,172 $ 13,790,012 $ 14,495,999 $ 15,366,994 $ 4.7% 5.1% 6.0% 775,000 9.2% 2018 $ (12,300,014) $ (12,669,014) $ (13,049,084) $ (13,440,557) $ (13,843,774) $ (14,259,087) $ (14,686,859) $ (276,875) (576,067) (898,953) $ (12,300,014) $ (12,669,014) $ (13,049,084) $ (13,440,557) $ (14,120,649) $ (14,835,154) $ (15,585,813) $ 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 5.1% 5.1% 5.1% 0.0% 0.0% 1,446,914 $ 29.1% 1,926,437 $ 33.1% (215,388) $ (215,388) $ (66,959) (894,423) (450,269) (282,347) $ (1,560,080) $ 0.0% 450,269 15.5% 5,713,914 $ 31.5% 16,849,201 $ 1.5% (215,388) $ (215,388) $ (215,388) $ (3,055,985) (5,678,838) (8,078,040) (1,583,916) (2,751,572) (3,954,258) (4,855,289) $ (8,645,797) $ (12,247,686) $ (215,388) $ (8,649,313) (5,076,584) (13,941,284) $ 1,583,916 50.1% 4,344,645 $ 51.3% 2,751,572 80.2% 3,954,258 98.8% 5,076,584 66.7% 31,210,440 $ 22.5% 6,768,208 71.5% (768,136) $ (215,388) $ $ (2,548,040) 8,893,990 $ 6,345,950 $ 102,023 $ 90,010 192,033 $ 905,610 $ 905,610 $ 1.25 5.20 5.12 1.74 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.90 $ 1.59 $ 1.53 $ 1.49 $ 1.80 $ 2.63 $ 3.38 $ 3.80 $ 7.38 $ 11.90 $ $ 5,391,972 $ - $ - $ 817,839 1,473,561 2,073,357 (8,696,046) (9,649,072) (9,788,483) 2,486,235 8,175,512 7,715,126 - $ - $ - $ 34,501,896 $ 7,984,502 (84,831) 42,401,567 $ 42,322,347 $ 14,170,691 (26,636,345) 29,856,693 $ 3,704,215 $ 11,198,652 $ 12,367,996 $ - $ - $ 9,834,529 6,345,950 (34,557,352) 18,376,873 $ - $ 8,736,886 $ 192,033 8,928,919 $ $ 27,270,863 $ 90,010 $ 1,164,568 $ 1,164,568 $ 816,627 $ 816,627 $ 8,928,919 $ 9,834,529 $ 7,969,746 $ 905,610 1,164,568 816,627 (3,029,350) (3,394,401) 9,834,529 $ 7,969,746 $ 5,391,972 $ - $ - $ - $ (3,271,372) $ (5,894,225) $ (8,293,427) $ (8,864,700) $ (400,141) $ (1,549,579) $ (2,579,513) $ 1,217,980 3,023,140 4,652,870 817,839 $ 1,473,561 $ 2,073,357 $ 7,984,502 $ 7,984,502 $ 81,244,422 20.1% - $ (17,039,750) (55,459,256) (6,768,208) (7,507,604) (23,807,958) $ (62,966,860) $ $ (282,347) $ (1,109,810) $ 2,871,231 $ 49.0% $ (18,851,183) $ [A] + [B] 710,000 10.2% 2017 $ (69,279,361) (1,751,896) $ (71,031,257) Cost per Enplaned Passenger [B] 644,356 11.3% 2016 25,714,333 $ 29,117,522 31,964,824 81,895,237 1,701,735 1,937,755 59,380,892 $ 112,950,514 12.4% 14.8% Debt Service Coverage (1.25x minimum) Surplus Fund Beginning Balance Deposits Less: Paygo Withdrawals Plus: State/Municipal Sponsor Contributions to Paygo Projects Ending Balance 579,141 12.7% 2015 21,890,500 $ 17,235,896 1,430,200 40,556,596 $ 3.9% 8,740,015 Aggregate Debt Service 2014 14,780,399 $ 15,370,099 $ 16,228,406 $ 1,331,390 2,887,382 4,078,905 880,092 922,318 992,416 16,991,880 $ 19,179,799 $ 21,299,726 $ 10.6% 12.9% 11.1% Less: PFCs Applied to Debt Service % Leveraged Net Revenues after Debt Service Plus: State/Municipal Sponsor Contributions to Debt Service Net Revenues after Debt Service and State/Municipal Sponsor Contributions 2013 7,507,604 68.3% (17,039,749) $ (55,459,255) 14,170,691 $ 14,170,691 $ 1.83 25,785,167 25,785,167 1.46 12.66 60,291,839 25,785,167 (1,980,399) 84,096,607 - Source: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Authority, Jacobs Engineering and Jacobs Consultancy (LeighFisher). Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 8-31 Phase I 2014-2018 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Table 8-15: Scenario 2 - Forecast Net Revenue and Debt Service Coverage 2012 Enplaned Passengers % Growth 513,926 Revenues (ex. PFC Revenues) Base Operating Incremental Operating Non-Operating Subtotal % Growth $ Net Revenues before Debt Service % Growth Debt Service ADOT Hangar Loan Allegiant Airlines Note GARB PFC-Backed Subtotal 74,190,158 8,716,125 4,428,115 87,334,398 1,863,636 5.1% 2,318,182 4.1% 2,692,239 3.8% 1,120,998 $ 28.8% $ (215,388) $ (552,748) (768,136) $ (215,388) $ (215,388) $ $ (18,851,181) $ 0.0% 0.0% 1,446,914 $ 29.1% 1,926,437 $ 33.1% (215,388) $ (215,388) $ (66,959) (894,423) (450,269) (282,347) $ (1,560,080) $ 0.0% 450,269 15.5% 5,713,914 $ 31.5% 14,045,996 $ 6.2% (215,388) $ (215,388) $ (215,388) $ (3,055,985) (5,678,838) (8,078,040) (1,583,916) (2,751,572) (3,954,258) (4,855,289) $ (8,645,797) $ (12,247,686) $ (215,388) $ (8,649,313) (5,076,584) (13,941,284) $ 1,583,916 50.1% 4,344,645 $ 51.3% 2,751,572 80.2% 3,954,258 98.8% 5,076,584 66.7% (20,939,950) $ (23,568,098) (7,230,503) (8,137,995) (28,170,453) $ (31,706,092) 3.0% 3.0% 19,413,714 $ 6.3% $ 102,023 $ 90,010 192,033 $ 905,610 $ 905,610 $ 1.25 5.20 5.12 1.74 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.58 1.25 1.25 $ 1.59 $ 1.53 $ 1.49 $ 1.80 $ 2.63 $ 3.38 $ 3.80 $ 5.87 $ 6.81 $ 7.66 9,834,529 6,345,950 (34,557,352) 18,376,873 $ - $ $ 8,736,886 $ 192,033 8,928,919 $ 5,391,972 $ - $ - $ 817,839 1,473,561 2,073,357 (8,696,046) (9,649,072) (9,788,483) 2,486,235 8,175,512 7,715,126 - $ - $ - $ 11,763,426 $ 5,181,297 (84,831) 16,859,891 $ 3,092,112 $ 4,259,935 (26,636,345) 19,284,298 - $ 17,408,681 13,864,814 (1,980,399) 29,293,096 $ $ 90,010 $ 3,704,215 $ 11,198,652 $ 12,367,996 $ - $ 21,170,268 $ 1,535,230 Cost per Enplaned Passenger $ 27,270,863 1,164,568 $ 1,164,568 $ 816,627 $ 816,627 $ 8,928,919 $ 9,834,529 $ 7,969,746 $ 905,610 1,164,568 816,627 (3,029,350) (3,394,401) 9,834,529 $ 7,969,746 $ 5,391,972 $ - $ - $ - $ (400,141) $ (1,549,579) $ (2,579,513) $ 1,217,980 3,023,140 4,652,870 817,839 $ 1,473,561 $ 2,073,357 $ 5,181,297 $ 5,181,297 $ 7,507,604 68.3% (215,388) $ 8,893,990 (8,864,700) $ 67,788,839 27.6% - $ (17,039,750) (55,459,256) (6,768,208) (7,507,604) (23,807,958) $ (62,966,860) 6,768,208 71.5% (3,271,372) $ (5,894,225) $ (8,293,427) $ 29,117,522 68,439,654 1,937,755 99,494,931 18.6% (768,136) $ $ (282,347) $ (1,109,810) $ 2,871,231 $ 49.0% 25,714,333 $ 20,168,099 1,701,735 47,584,167 $ 4.3% $ $ [A] + [B] 2034 870,158 $ Debt Service Coverage (1.25x minimum) Total State/Municipal Sponsor Support Required 980,000 16.7% 2030 $ 8,740,015 [B] 840,000 8.4% 2025 $ $ 12,460,484 $ 13,037,247 $ 13,614,696 $ 14,196,558 $ 85,925 332,524 709,688 752,765 795,378 837,911 13,170,172 $ 13,790,012 $ 14,495,999 $ 15,366,994 $ 4.7% 5.1% 6.0% 775,000 9.2% 2018 (18,062,985) $ (5,644,410) (23,707,395) $ 5.6% Less: PFCs Applied to Debt Service % Leveraged Surplus Fund Beginning Balance Deposits Less: Paygo Withdrawals Plus: State/Municipal Sponsor Contributions to Paygo Projects Ending Balance 710,000 10.2% 2017 $ (12,300,014) $ (12,669,014) $ (13,049,084) $ (13,440,557) $ (13,843,774) $ (14,259,087) $ (14,686,859) $ (276,875) (576,067) (898,953) $ (12,300,014) $ (12,669,014) $ (13,049,084) $ (13,440,557) $ (14,120,649) $ (14,835,154) $ (15,585,813) $ 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 5.1% 5.1% 5.1% (1,076,939) (17,774,244) (8,740,015) $ (27,591,198) [A] 644,356 11.3% 2016 $ (69,279,361) (1,751,896) $ (71,031,257) $ Aggregate Debt Service 579,141 12.7% 2015 21,890,500 $ 14,432,691 1,430,200 37,753,391 $ 5.8% 16,303,141 $ 2014 14,780,399 $ 15,370,099 $ 16,228,406 $ 1,331,390 2,887,382 4,078,905 880,092 922,318 992,416 16,991,880 $ 19,179,799 $ 21,299,726 $ 10.6% 12.9% 11.1% $ Less: Operation and Maintenance Expenses Base Incremental Subtotal % Growth Net Revenues after Debt Service Plus: State/Municipal Sponsor Contributions to Debt Service Net Revenues after Debt Service and State/Municipal Sponsor Contributions 2013 (17,039,749) $ (55,459,255) 2,373,965 $ 1,885,970 4,259,935 $ 12,329,584 1,535,230 13,864,814 Source: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Authority, Jacobs Engineering and Jacobs Consultancy (LeighFisher). Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Alternatives Development 8-32 Phase I 2014-2018 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report The commercial component of the NADP will be comprised of privately-owned retail, office, and hotel buildings that would be located on airport property under long term land lease agreements. The analysis prepared and presented in the Section assumes that 2,580,000 square feet of commercial space would be built on approximately 166 acres located in the northeast part of the Northeast Area. The economic and fiscal impact analysis is based on full build-out of the property. The information contained here is summary in nature, and the full study conducted by Elliott D. Pollack & Company may be found in the Appendices of this Technical Report. 9.1 Economic and Fiscal Impact Analysis This economic and fiscal impact study focused on the economic and fiscal impacts derived from (a) the construction of the project, and (b) ongoing operations at the property once completed. Economic impact analysis examines the regional implications of an activity in terms of three basic measures: output, earnings, and employment. Fiscal impact analysis evaluates the public revenues created by a particular activity. In a fiscal impact analysis, the primary revenue sources of a governing entity are analyzed to determine how the activity may financially affect them. A full description of the methodology and modeling inputs is included in the body of the study found in Appendix B. 9.2 Economic Impacts The anticipated direct economic impact from construction of the commercial uses proposed in Northeast Area Development Plan is based on an estimated $384.5 million of cost construction. The project would generate an estimated 3,287 direct person years of employment during the construction phase. Person years of employment are the aggregate of each construction job that is recreated year after year throughout the construction time period. To derive the respective annual averages, employment, wages, and economic output can be divided by the expected number of years it may take to complete the development. About $175.6 million in direct wages would be generated based on the total construction activity. Another estimated 2,694 indirect and induced jobs would be created in the local economy. Wages for these indirect and induced employees would be about $125.5 million. Altogether, the project would create approximately 5,982 person years of employment, $301.1 million in wages, and over $730.6 million in economic activity during the construction timeframe. The operations related to the commercial uses within the Northeast Area would have a notable impact on the local and regional economy. Roughly 8,265 direct jobs would be created at build-out. In total, approximately 12,459 permanent direct, indirect, and induced jobs would be created throughout Greater Phoenix as a result of the commercial uses within the Northeast Area Development Plan. That equates to over $467.7 million in annual wages and $1.032 billion in annual economic output. The majority of these jobs would be office related. The economic impacts noted above are stated at the regional, metro-wide level and will affect all of Greater Phoenix. While most of the impact will fall on the Southeast Valley, cities across the region will all benefit to some extent from the commercial uses in the Northeast Area Plan. Table 9-1, Economic Impact, presents these results in tabular form. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 9-1 Economic and Fiscal Impact of Commercial Land Uses Section 9: Economic and Fiscal Impact of Commercial Land Uses Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 9.3 Fiscal Impacts Construction of the commercial uses within the Northeast Area would also create significant tax revenues for the City of Mesa. Revenues have been defined in this analysis as either primary or secondary, depending on their source and how the dollars flow through the economy into City tax accounts. For instance, some revenues, such as construction sales taxes, are straightforward calculations based on the cost of construction. These revenues are described in this analysis as primary revenues and include construction sales taxes, use taxes, property taxes, and taxes on lease payments. Secondary revenues, on the other hand, flow from the wages of those direct, indirect and induced employees who are supported by the full project. Revenue projections are based on typical wages of the employees working on the project, their spending patterns, and estimates of where they might live. All values are stated in 2011 dollars. Primary revenues generated to the City would total nearly $4.5 million over the construction period. In addition, the City would benefit from the spending of construction workers within City limits. Sales tax collections on employee spending for the City were estimated at an additional $335,000 for the entire construction period. Other secondary revenues include residents’ property taxes and state shared revenues. In total, the City of Mesa would expect to collect nearly $5.5 million in tax revenue from the construction-related activity associated with the commercial uses. Additional fiscal benefits would accrue to the State of Arizona and Maricopa County. As the commercial uses are completed in Northeast Area, operations related to the office, retail and hotel uses will create tax revenue for the City of Mesa. Retail sales from stores throughout the site, as well as within the hotel, would generate approximately $1.3 million annually at build-out. Bed taxes from the hotel would contribute another $1.1 million annually. Property tax collections from the commercial properties, assuming an in-lieu tax is levied, would add another $266,000 annually. In total, nearly $5.8 million would be collected each year by the City. Table 9-2, Fiscal Impact Summary, shows the ongoing tax revenue that the City of Mesa would expect to collect based on the construction and operations of the commercial uses within the Northeast Development Area. In addition, the PMGA Authority would collect approximately $7,231,000 annually at build-out from developers who lease land for the commercial buildings. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Economic and Fiscal Impact of Commercial Land Uses 9-2 Table 9-1: Economic Impact Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report 9-3 Economic and Fiscal Impact of Commercial Land Uses Table 9-2: Fiscal Impact Summary Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices Appendices A-1 The following items are included in the Appendices: Appendix A - Stakeholder Meeting Materials • • • • Meeting 1 Notes - February 23, 2010 Meeting 2 Notes - April 22, 2010 Meeting 3 Notes - June 15, 2010 Meeting 4 Notes - January 25, 2011 Appendix B - Economic and Fiscal Impact of Commercial Land Uses - Prepared by Elliot D. Pollack & Company Appendix C - Preliminary Typical Sections Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-2 Meeting 1 Notes Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-3 FACT SHEET Northeast Area Development Plan Study Q. What is the Northeast Area Development Plan (NADP)? Q. What will be involved in conducting the NADP Study? A. The NADP is a study being undertaken to guide the future development of the northeast area of Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport to be in harmony with adjacent private sector land to create a multi-faceted, mixed-use community focused on air transportation. A. The Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Authority has retained a land use, airport and transportation planning and engineering consultant [Jacobs] to undertake the NADP Study. The Scope of Work in conducting this study includes: Q. What are the factors involved in the NADP? A. The NADP will specically focus on an approximate 600 acre parcel on the northeast property of Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport. The Development Plan will identify specic locations for aviation uses, such as the passenger terminal, airline support, belly freight, ARFF, fuel storage, parking, and locations for revenue generating uses such as rental cars, ofce space, hotels and retail. Q. Are there other considerations in preparing the NADP? A. The NADP will also plan for an integral, multimodal transportation system to serve all land uses, linking the Airport to the regional street and freeway system. Q. How is the NADP Study being funded? A. The Study is being jointly funded by the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Authority and the City of Mesa. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Walter Fix Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 480-988-7709 Mark Venti City of Mesa 480-644-4807 Michael Floyd Mark Wavering Jacobs 602-253-1200 3 3 3 3 3 Comprehensive Trafc, Transportation Forecasting and Modeling for Future Needs Land Use Study and Recommendations Assessment of Airport Acreage Needs Multimodal Transportation Network Planning Completion and/or review of existing Technical Studies for on-site drainage and utilities Q. What is the project schedule? A. The NADP Study has a 9-month schedule. At the completion of the project the Technical Documents that support the NADP will include: 3 3 3 3 3 3 Full Site Plan of the NADP boundaries Infrastructure Plan, including major utilities, drainage and roadway alignments Land Use Plan, with dened categories for aeronautical and non-aeronautical areas Development Phasing Plan Capital Development Summary Financial Feasibility Summary Q. What are the benefits of the project? A. Smart Growth. The NADP is a collaborative study with the Gateway Area Strategic Development Plan and other regional transportation and land use planning studies currently underway. The NADP will provide a strategy for phasing the development of the northeast Airport property that supports an increased employment base through aviation, institutional and recreational opportunities; and increased regional economic activity. [Study Area Shown on Reverse] Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-4 FACT SHEET Northeast Area Development Plan Study NADP STUDY AREA PHOENIX-MESA GATEWAY AIRPORT Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-5 KICK-OFF MEETING Northeast Area Development Plan Study AGENDA: I. Welcoming Remarks by Lynn F. Kusy, Executive Director, Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport II. Introductions of Participants a. Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport staff b. City of Mesa Staff c. Project Team Members d. Stakeholders III. Purpose of the Study IV. Application of Strategic Development Plan Vision a. Airport Development b. Supporting Infrastructure c. Complimenting Land Use Development V. Overarching Goals and Objectives VI. Next Steps VII. Meeting Wrap-Up CONTACT: The City of Mesa and the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Authority are jointly sponsoring this important project to study the future development of Airport land northeast of the runway complex. You are cordially invited to become a key participant in this process which will not only conceptualize Airport growth, but also surrounding roadway and public transit alignments, land use, and bicycle and pedestrian pathways. MEETING GOALS: • Review Purpose For The Study • Foster A Collaborative Framework • Outline Deliverables Of The Study • Provide An Overview Of Schedule And Milestones • Encourage Expression Of Diverse Ideas • Create A Unique Development Model Keeping With The © Google Airport City Principles Study Area (yellow) and Focus Parcel (red) for the • Convey A Sense Of Airport Development Plan Importance And Urgency If you will not be attending this Kick-off Meeting and want to participate in the process, please email or fax your comments, information, etc. to: The City of Mesa and the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Authority value your attendance and engaging participation at this and subsequent meetings. This meeting represents an important first step for both Team Members and Stakeholders to cast a successful partnership throughout the life of this project. Michael D. Floyd – Jacobs Senior Project Manager Michael.Floyd@jacobs.com 770.673.6688 (fax) WHAT TO BRING: WHEN: Tuesday February 23, 2010 8:30 AM - 12:30 PM Any static materials relevant to the project site, i.e. maps, diagrams, layouts, schematics CDs with project plans, and information that can be shared with participants. WHERE: Airport Administration Building Main Board Room Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 5835 South Sossaman Road Mesa, AZ 85212-6014 PLEASE RSVP By EMAIL TO: Meredith Burdett at mburdett@phxmesagateway.org by Friday, January 29, 2010 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-6 kick-OFF mEEtiNg Northeast Area Development Plan Study mEEtiNg #1 StuDy kick-OFF tuESDAy, FEBRuARy 23, 2010; 8:00Am – 12:00Pm AgENDA OPENiNg REmARkS AND iNtRODuctiONS (LyNN kuSy, PmgA ExEcutivE DiREctOR) • • • • 10 miN Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Authority City of Mesa Consultant Team Stakeholder Attendees PROjEct OvERviEW (micHAEL FLOyD, SR. PROjEct mANAgER) • • • • 15 miN Site Boundaries Scope Highlights Schedule & Major Milestones Deliverables BAckgROuND OF PROjEct 25 miN • Gateway Area Strategic Development Plan (Mesa staff) • Airport Master Plan (Walter Fix, PMGA Planning Manager) ASSOciAtED iNitiAtivES • • • • 30 miN Master Drainage Plan Study Arizona DOT Regional Transportation Plans Regional Mass Transit Plans Surrounding Development BREAk 15 miN viSiONiNg AND SWOt OvERviEW FOR tHE StuDy 1 HR & 45 miN • Visioning Discussion • SWOT Reviews SummARy / NExt StEPS 10 miN FiNAL QuEStiONS / cOmmENtS 10 miN WHERE: Airport Administration Building – Main Board Room Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 5835 South Sossaman Road • Mesa, AZ 85212-6014 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-7 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-8 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-9 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-10 Northeast Area Development Plan Kick-off Meeting February 23, 2010 Agenda Opening Remarks and Introductions Project Overview Background of Project Associated Initiatives Break Visioning and SWOT Overview Summary / Next Steps Final Questions / Comments Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Introductions Appendices A-11 • Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Authority • City of Mesa • Consultant Team • Stakeholder Attendees Northeast Area Development Plan Project Overview Site Boundaries Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-12 Scope Highlights Project Overview • Develop Phased Land Use Plan – – – – Define Aviation Envelope New Terminal Building location Protect off airport airspace Create sense of place in the airport environs – Promote the Airport as an urban amenity • Identify appropriate and timely investment • Improve operational efficiency • Enhance customer service Northeast Area Development Plan Project Overview Scope Highlights • Identify non-aviation related revenue generating opportunities – Specific Parcels Long Term • 630+/- acres Northeast Area Development Plan • 31 acres private Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Airport / Land Use Planning - Alternatives • Aviation Elements Project Overview – Terminal Area & Support Facilities (parking, roads, RAC, cargo, etc.) – Airspace Controls – Noise Compatibility • Non-Aviation Elements – Candidate Lists of Business Types – Determine Highest-and-Best Use – Refine Characteristics Matrix (required parcel sizes, employment, adjacencies, utility & transportation needs, ROI to airport/community, etc.) • Sequenced Charrette Process (Aviation Elements & Non-Aviation Elements) Northeast Area Development Plan Infrastructure Planning Project Overview • Roadway – Airport – Local – Regional • Utilities – Wet – Dry • Drainage Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Appendices A-13 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-14 Project Overview Linking the Airport to the Regional Transportation Systems • Work with the MAG model in preparing three base scenarios for short, mid and long range arterial network requirements – Williams Gateway Freeway Extension (802L) – New Ray Road Alignment – Williams Field Road Connections • Identify and evaluate most suitable / desirable connection to the airport • Transit Elements Northeast Area Development Plan Project Overview Utilities • Develop a preliminary utility plan for the requirements and prerequisites for the proposed development – Review/confirm existing information for future utility improvements • Develop conceptual utility design to support proposed development – Phasing to support the short, mid, long range plan • Water & Sewer Infrastructure • Drainage Infrastructure Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-15 Project Overview Schedule Northeast Area Development Plan Project Overview Comprehensive Deliverables • Multiple Technical Memoranda • Traffic Modeling (on & off-airport) • Technical Report & Plans – – – – – – Full Site Plan Infrastructure Plan Land Use Plan Phasing Plan Capital Development Summary (by funding source) Financial Feasibility Summary • Executive Summary • Financial Model Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Background of Project Appendices A-16 Gateway Area Strategic Development Plan Background of Project Northeast Area Development Plan Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Background of Project Appendices A-17 Background of Project Northeast Area Development Plan Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Background of Project Appendices A-18 Background of Project Northeast Area Development Plan Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Background of Project Appendices A-19 Background of Project Northeast Area Development Plan Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Background of Project Appendices A-20 Background of Project Northeast Area Development Plan Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Background of Project Appendices A-21 Background of Project Northeast Area Development Plan Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Background of Project Appendices A-22 Background of Project Northeast Area Development Plan Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-23 Background of Project Master Drainage Plan Study Northeast Area Development Plan Background of Project Master Drainage Plan Study Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-24 Background of Project Master Drainage Plan Study Associated Initiatives Northeast Area Development Plan Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Associated Initiatives Appendices A-25 Associated Initiatives Northeast Area Development Plan Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Associated Initiatives Appendices A-26 Associated Initiatives Northeast Area Development Plan Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Associated Initiatives Appendices A-27 Associated Initiatives Northeast Area Development Plan Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Associated Initiatives Appendices A-28 Northeast Area Development Plan Associated Initiatives Regional Mass Transit – Existing Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Associated Initiatives Regional Mass Transit – Future Plans Northeast Area Development Plan Associated Initiatives Regional Mass Transit – Next Steps Adoption into the Regional Transportation Plan Summer 2009 Environmental Assessment Summer 2009 – Fall 2010 Design 2010 – 2011 Pre-construction 2011 – 2013 Construction 2013 – 2015 Completion/Start-up 2016 Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Appendices A-29 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Associated Initiatives Appendices A-30 Surrounding Development Northeast Area Development Plan Associated Initiatives 802L Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report BREAK Appendices A-31 Northeast Area Development Plan Visioning and SWOT Overview Northeast Area Development Plan Visioning Discussion Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Visioning and SWOT Overview Vision: Mesa Gateway Area “ Mesa Gateway will be an internationally recognized destination for those looking for a sustainable place in which to live, work, learn and recreate. It will provide industries with an economically efficient business climate and its workforce and residents with access to the global resources desired of a knowledge-based economy.” Source: The Mesa Gateway Strategic Development Plan Summary Document, December 2008. Northeast Area Development Plan Visioning and SWOT Overview Appendices A-32 Goals: Mesa Gateway Area 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Capitalize on the expansion of the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Create a regional employment center with a mix of jobs, emphasizing the attraction of at least 100,000 high-wage, high value jobs Establish an intra- and inter-connected, multi-modal transportation system Become a model of sustainable development practices Plan for implementation Source: The Mesa Gateway Strategic Development Plan Summary Document, December 2008. Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Vision: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport With 2-5 million annual passenger, the Airport will be an attractive alternative to Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport. Operational levels will exceed 535,000 yearly, and freight movements be over 88 million pounds yearly. The Airport will continue to serve as a major flight training center, and support multiple aircraft maintenance and modification facilities, including another 25 additional privately developed buildings, of over 500,000 SF of hangar space, office space, and related facilities. Surrounding land will develop as aviation support, corporate offices, and manufacturing, attracted by the skilled workforce and the transportation opportunities of the area. Restaurants and hotels as well as retail and commercial development will be drawn to the area. The regional transportation system will provide customers with easy access to the Airport from all parts of the Phoenix-Mesa metropolitan area. Assuring compatible and supportive land use near the Airport will continue to be the Airport’s highest priority, while quality of service will be key to maintaining and expanding the reputation of the Airport as a world-class operation. Source: Various excerpts from Strategic Business Plan, FY 2009-2010, Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Authority, June 2009. Visioning and SWOT Overview Northeast Area Development Plan Goals: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Actively encourage those things that benefit the Airport Increase revenue, spend wisely, and reduce the operating deficit Expand commercial passenger service Establish cargo service Generate private investment, job growth, and economic activity Improve and expand facilities and services for general aviation Begin planning for the construction and financing of the east side terminal and related development Source: Strategic Business Plan, FY 2009-2010, Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Authority, June 2009. Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Appendices Visioning and SWOT Overview A-33 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Visioning and SWOT Overview Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport SWOT Analysis Strengths • Our SPIRIT Values • Community & member Government support • just plane easy® • Large and growing population base Opportunities • Capacity of the air field • Low cost operating environment • Room for growth of facilities Weaknesses • Market already has great air service • Terminal constrains growth • High capital investment required Threats • Residential encroachment • Airline stability • Operating expense exceeds revenue • Security Northeast Area Development Plan Summary / Next Steps Appendices A-34 • • • • • • Confirm East Side Facilities Programming Conduct Real Estate Market Analysis Define Transportation Requirements Determine Utility Capacities Conduct Conceptual Charrettes Next Stakeholder Meeting – Early April Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-35 QUESTIONS / COMMENTS Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-36 MEETING MINUTES TO: Distribution DATE: FROM: Michael D. Floyd, Senior Project Manager SUBJECT: Stakeholder Kick-of Meeting February 23, 2010 PROJECT NO: 3/19/2010 W7X87800 At 8:30am, on Tuesday, February 23, 2010 approximately 37 individuals representing myriad resources throughout the Mesa area, came together to kick-off the Northeast Area Development (NADP)study. The study is a jointly funded effort between the City of Mesa and the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport (PMGA) Authority, and is being conducted by a team of consultants led by Jacobs. Lynn Kusy, Executive Director of the PMGA provided opening remarks, outlining the purpose of the project and introducing key staff with the Airport and the City. Mr. Kusy noted that both the City Council and the PMGA Authority have given their approvals of the project, and that Walt Fix will serve as the sponsor’s Project Manager. The Jacobs consultant team introduced themselves, followed by each participant allowed a chance to greet the group and indicate who they represented. Michael Floyd, Jacobs Senior Project Manager, then furnished an overview of the project, highlighting the project boundaries, the general scope of services and schedule (9 months), and the major milestones and deliverables anticipated through completion. Next, Scot Rigby and John Wesley, both with the City of Mesa, shared their views relative to the importance of the project to the Airport, to the City of Mesa and to the surrounding communities. The critical nature of fiscal sustainability surrounding any development going forward was touched upon, along with the noted vision that over the next 20-30 years, the Gateway area is viewed as the epicenter of development. They were followed by Michael James, City of Mesa, who furnished the stakeholder group with a thorough overview of the previously conducted Mesa Gateway Strategic Development Plan, completed in 2008. Further, Mr. Fix, Planning Manager with PMGA, provided an equally thorough presentation on the recently completed Airport Master Plan Update, which reflects facilities growth through 2027 and provides for eastside growth to keep pace with the rapidly expanding enplanement levels. Both study presentations provided an excellent backdrop and vision for the NADP. Given the size of the Airport, the previously conducted macro level planning efforts, and both the proximity and influence of surrounding development and associated initiatives, several others in attendance were invited to speak to their on-going efforts/plans. Ken Snyder of Dibble Engineering (currently under contract with PMGA) addressed their recently initiated Master Drainage Plan for the Airport and how it specifically will relate to the northeast area properties. An overview was provided of their study area which highlighted existing conditions, a definition of work areas, and the planned integration of the drainage work with the NADP study. Next, Steve Wilcox with the Arizona DOT, furnished the group with a comprehensive review of the SR 802 on-going planning and design activities and spoke to how those improvements will support not only the Airport, but also the surrounding areas to the north and east along its corridor. Locations for proposed grade separated interchanges was also illustrated. The Jacobs personnel then provided a cursory overview of the areas initiatives with regard to public mass transit, specifically known plans and concepts for expanding the Mesa line to the east to a point approximately 15+/- miles west of the Airport. Finally, the flow was provided to the regional developers attending the meeting, in which discussion ensued Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report to brief the group on several initiatives in the area for mixed use development. Those that spoke included DMB, Park Properties, Grubb Ellis, and Kitchell Corporation. Following the break, Jacobs presented strategic plan excerpts on vision/mission statements along with key goals identified by the City in their Gateway Area Strategic Development Plan, and by PMGA in their recent Strategic Business Plan. These thoughts and desires by both groups, although largely overlapping, were unique and mission oriented. They provided a backdrop for the ensuing Visioning Session. The Visioning Session was organized into 3 teams of diverse representation, with the objective being to brainstorm in separate groups on the future vision of the Airport and to articulate in words and phrases, a description of what the future airport would look like, how it would operate, who it would serve, how it would dovetail into the community, and the role it would play in the region. In the information that follows, each team’s contributors are highlighted along with their separate thoughts. At the conclusion of the brainstorming session, each team’s spokesperson was provided a few minutes to present their team’s findings and ideas. These thoughts/ideas will help shape the development of future properties in the northeast area of the Airport. TEAM 1 Facilitator: Patrizia Gonella – Jacobs; Mike James - City of Mesa; Mark Venti - City of Mesa; Morgan Neville - Park Properties; Derek Rogers - Dibble Engineering; Casey Denny - PMGA Authority; Bob Trzepkowski - Salt River Project; Daniel Cleavenger - City of Mesa; and Sara Lenn - Allegiant Air. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Sense of community Balance of service area Boundary-less between airport & community Urban center (land use) Multiple layers of transportation access & modes Ray & Ellsworth area employment center connections to the Airport Provisions for branding (describe elements) Fun place to come Easy access – keep home feeling Keep balance & focus on primary service – provide access to amenities and options to use them Look at existing examples of development and determine what is good & bad Comfortable / non-intimidating Easy / clear / communicative way finding Balanced travel routes for: internal trips, through travel, and specific trips to the Airport Corporate amenities Appropriate airport land uses that complement the desired growth goals (to support the air service) Mixed use opportunities near the Airport Keep travel profile in mind - leisure primary & business secondary Focus on the opposite of stressful – (security concerns) Disperse passenger loading De-stress Penetrate SR 802 corridor Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport -2- Appendices A-37 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-38 TEAM 2 Facilitator: Mark Wavering - Jacobs; Alan Sanderson - City of Mesa; Jane Morris - City of Phoenix; Jim Rounds - Elliott D. Pollack & Company; Kent Dibble - Dibble Engineering; Jill Kusy Hegardt – DMB; Steve Wilcox – AECOM; Brent Moser - Grubb Ellis; and Kaye Bockmann - Salt River Project. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ASU Poly integrated into region and business development plan Collaboration between communities & Airport continues Maximize Opportunities – both Airport & private Flexibility for growth Good implementation plan that supports staged growth Concur with vision for Airport Premier job center for east valley Vibrant active hub of activity Diverse job opportunities Industry around the Airport Wide mix of land uses that may be in close proximity to the Airport High wage strategy Roadway does not constrain Airport needs and adequately serves surrounding private properties Multi-modal system establishment Determine the ultimate Airport capacity Adapt & change Clear, strong identity – a positive Sense of Place Special features & markers High visibility Priority Plan for infrastructure Proactive economic development efforts between Airport & private partners Sustainable concepts built into development (energy, e.g. Biofuel, solar) Long-range utility planning Don’t have to take a car to get into the Airport Destination uses – consider national attractions Livable community Waterfront District No negative impacts on regional freeway system TEAM 3 Facilitator: Walter Fix - PMGA Authority; Chris Andres - City of Phoenix; Kenneth Snyder - Dibble Engineering; Chris Banks - Salt River Project; John Wesley - City of Mesa; Shanthi Krishnan – Jacobs; Scot Rigby - City of Mesa; and Susan Demmitt - Beus Gilbert, PLLC Current issues – PMGA o Parking is an issue (especially holidays & spring rush) o How would parking be integrated? ƒ Parking vs. Transportation ƒ Parking – Revenue generator Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport o Developer Issues • -3- Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report • • • • • • • ƒ Access to parcels ƒ Off-airport developers Development Vision - Park Corp o Airport oriented employment villages o 10-story buildings o Not pedestrian oriented o Mixed-uses, office GM proving ground site – vision o Urban village o Multi-story employment o No residential o Convention facilities o Hotels City of Mesa concerns o Access & Transportation (mobility) o Connections –Airport to Ray / Ellsworth o Power / Sossaman – improved corridors o Elected officials support roads that encourage local activity o Residential development proximity to the Airport Other issues o Educational (ASU plans) o Noise (# of operations) o Show value proposition whether public or private developments o Quality of development is improving o Hotels / transient housing / high rise buildings / preferred apartments o Single family housing not preferred o Better site design & construction techniques encouraged for new development o Re-zone to prevent single family residential, and protect the Airport Vision o Well-rounded development (quality focus) o Sound transportation solutions o Public/Private Partnership (PPP) o Wayfinding / Branding Boundary-less growth On/Off Airport development (private vs. airport authority) Distribution: City of Mesa staff PMGA staff Jacobs consultant team Stakeholder list Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport -4- Appendices A-39 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-40 Meeting 2 Notes Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-41 DIAGRAMMING CHARRETTE Northeast Area Development Plan Study MEETING #2 BUBBLE DIAGRAMMING CHARRETTE THURSDAY, APRIL 22, 2010; 1:30 P.M. - 4:30 P.M. AGENDA OPENING REMARKS AND CHARRETTE OBJECTIVES (MICHAEL FLOYD, SR. PROJECT MANAGER) CHARRETTE BASELINE PRESENTATION (JACOBS TEAM) 5 MIN 20 MIN • Existing Airport Environs • Future Scenarios of Activity • Programming Framework MARKET ANALYSIS OVERVIEW (RICK MERRITT, ELLIOTT D. POLLACK & COMPANY) 15 MIN AEROTROPOLIS OVERVIEW (MICHAEL FLOYD) 10 MIN BREAK 15 MIN BREAKOUT SESSION PURPOSE (MICHAEL FLOYD) BUBBLE DIAGRAMMING SESSION (ALL) 5 MIN 1 HOUR 30 MIN BREAKOUT GROUP RECAP (GROUP REPRESENTATIVES) NEXT STEPS / FINAL QUESTIONS / COMMENTS 15 MIN 5 MIN WHERE: Airport Administration Building – Main Board Room Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 5835 South Sossaman Road • Mesa, AZ 85212-6014 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-42 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Northeast Area Development Plan Bubble-Diagramming Charrette April 22, 2010 Agenda Opening Remarks and Objectives Baseline Presentation Market Analysis Overview Aerotropolis Overview Break Bubble-Diagramming Session Recap by Breakout Groups Next Steps / Questions / Comments Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Appendices A-43 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Opening Remarks & Objectives Purpose of Charrette & Objectives • Create an intensive planning session where stakeholders, designers and others collaborate on a vision for development • Establish a forum for ideas that offers a unique advantage by giving the designers immediate feedback • Objectives: – All stakeholders develop a vested interest in the ultimate vision / project – Team works together to produce a set of finished documents that address all necessary aspects – Avoid the prolonged discussions that often delay conventional planning projects – More efficiently and cost-effectively product because the process is collaborative Northeast Area Development Plan Charrette Baseline Presentation Appendices A-44 Existing Airport Boundary Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices Charrette Baseline Presentation A-45 Early Study Area Charrette Baseline Presentation Northeast Area Development Plan Existing Airport Facilities Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Charrette Baseline Presentation Existing Terminal Area Elements Northeast Area Development Plan Charrette Baseline Presentation Appendices A-46 Existing Land Use Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices Charrette Baseline Presentation A-47 Future Land Use (2025) Charrette Baseline Presentation Northeast Area Development Plan Key Factors Impacting Growth • • • • Global, National and Local Economic Downturn Local Population Growth Airline Economic Viability Additional Airlines Initiating Service at PMGA Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Charrette Baseline Presentation Future Scenarios: Demand Triggers Demand Triggers Annual Enplanements Air Carrier Operations Daily Departures Peak Hour Flights Passanger Load Factor Enplanements Per Departure Annual Enplanements Peak Hour Enplanements Gate Requirements Commercial Regional Total Gates Short Term 350,000 9,449 17 9 70% 74 350,000 667 Intermediate Term 850,000 20,806 34 12 72% 82 850,000 980 5 1 6 7 3 10 Opening Day Northeast Long High Terminal Term Range 1,500,000 2,200,000 5,000,000 34,486 48,166 94,934 57 80 158 15 18 17 74% 75% 77% 87 91 105 1,500,000 2,200,000 5,000,000 1,298 1,644 1,791 9 5 14 Northeast Area Development Plan Charrette Baseline Presentation Appendices A-48 Programming: Elements Considered • • • • • • Taxiways & Aircraft Parking Apron Aircraft Gates Fuel Farm Belly Cargo Ground Service Equipment Central Receiving Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 10 8 18 22 8 30 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices Charrette Baseline Presentation A-49 Airfield Program: Taxiway Enhancements Charrette Baseline Presentation Northeast Area Development Plan Terminal Area: Fuel • Average Gallons/departure = 1,200 Gal • Provide 7 day storage reserve • Hydrant Fueling vs. Fuel Truck Year 2012 2017 2022 2027 Loong Range Fuel Farm Storage Requirements Average Day Departures 17 34 57 80 158 Gallons 150,000 300,000 500,000 700,000 1,300,000 Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Charrette Baseline Presentation Terminal Area: Belly Cargo • Limited airside access required • Convenient to Terminal Area • Optimum building size is 1.5 Sq/Ft per ton of belly cargo processed • Reserve 8 acres Belly Cargo Northeast Area Development Plan Charrette Baseline Presentation Appendices A-50 Terminal Area: Ground Service Equipment • Vary by Airline • Assume ¼ acre per gate pair +2 acres per 15 gates • Long Term Requirements 11.5 Acres Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices Charrette Baseline Presentation A-51 Terminal Area: Central Receiving Area Charrette Baseline Presentation Northeast Area Development Plan East Terminal Design Criteria Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Charrette Baseline Presentation East Terminal Concept Northeast Area Development Plan Charrette Baseline Presentation Appendices A-52 East Terminal Concept Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices Charrette Baseline Presentation A-53 Utility Providers/Authorities • Water – City of Mesa • Wastewater – City of Mesa • Drainage – City of Mesa/Flood Control District of Maricopa County (FCDMC) • Electric – Salt River Project (SRP) • Natural Gas – Southwest Gas • Fiber Optic – City of Mesa Charrette Baseline Presentation Northeast Area Development Plan Major Utilities in Proximity Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Charrette Baseline Presentation Drainage Northeast Area Development Plan Charrette Baseline Presentation Appendices A-54 Existing & Future Roadways Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Future Roadways • Ray Road (under construction, City of Mesa): – Between Sossaman & Ellsworth: 2-lane, east-west, 45 mph – Signals at Sossaman and Ellsworth • Hawes Road (under construction, City of Mesa): – Between Ray & SR202: 2-lane, north-south • SR802 (under design, ADOT/City of Mesa): – Between L202 to Ellsworth Road • Power Road (under design, City of Mesa/Town of Gilbert/MCDOT): – Between L202 to Pecos Road to be reconfigured Charrette Baseline Presentation Northeast Area Development Plan Future Transit Network • RTP identifies moderate expansion into the PGMA area • Express routes are planned to service the area Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Appendices Charrette Baseline Presentation A-55 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Charrette Baseline Presentation Future Transit Concepts Northeast Area Development Plan Charrette Baseline Presentation Appendices A-56 Existing Bicycle Facilities • Bike paths are typically 6’ in width or 12’ in width if shared with parked cars, per City of Mesa guidelines • Recent Improvements (2009) – – – – – – – – – – Ellsworth Rd: Baseline Rd to Guadalupe Rd (1 mile of bike lanes) Gilbert Rd: Main St to Brown Rd (1 mile of bike lanes) Mesa Dr: McKellips Rd to University Dr (2 miles of bike lanes) Sossaman Rd: US-60 to Baseline Rd (0.5 mile of bike lanes) Sossaman Rd: Power Rd to Velocity Way(2.5 miles of bike lanes) Southern Ave: Stapley Dr to Harris Ave (0.5 miles of bike lanes) University Dr: Dobson Rd to Alma School Rd (1 mile of bike lanes) University Dr: Robson to Mesa Dr (0.8 mile of bike lanes) University Dr: Hall to Gilbert Rd (0.4 mile of bike lanes) Val Vista Rd: Hampton Ave to Baseline Rd (0.75 mile of bike lanes) Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Future Bicycle Facilities • Based on City of Mesa’s Transportation Plan, the following are the proposed bicycle routes in the vicinity of the study area: – – – – – – – – – – – Alma School Rd: University Dr to Southern Ave Baseline Rd: Loop 202 (San Tan Freeway) to Springwood Broadway Rd: Power Rd to Hawes Rd Crismon Rd: US-60 to Baseline Rd Dobson Rd: Guadalupe Rd to South City Limits Greenfield Rd: Southern Ave to Baseline Rd Guadalupe Rd: Hawes Rd to Ellsworth Rd Mountain Rd: Elliot Rd to Ray Rd Power Rd: Adobe to University Dr Southern Ave: Clearview Ave to Hawes Rd Sossaman Rd: Hampton Ave to US-60 Charrette Baseline Presentation Northeast Area Development Plan Existing Pedestrian Facilities • Sidewalks are typically 6’ on arterials and collectors, and 4’ on residential streets, per City of Mesa guidelines Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Appendices Charrette Baseline Presentation A-57 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Charrette Baseline Presentation Aeronautical Acreage Set Aside Element Terminal Landside Airside Parking Roadways Rental Car Fuel Farm Belly Cargo GSE Subtotal Planning Factor Total Acres 24 63 13 13 10 8 8 4 143 39 190 Northeast Area Development Plan Market Analysis Overview Appendices A-58 Economic and Real Estate Analysis Elliott D. Pollack & Co. Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-59 Source: Department of Commerce, Research Administration 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% -2% -4% -6% -8% -10% 12.7% 11.0% 9.1% 10.3% 8.1% 5.5% 4.6% 5.0% 3.6% 2.5% 2.6% 2.2% 3.5% 3.1% 7.3% 6.6% 7.2% 5.4% 5.4% 4.9% 4.6% 3.5% 1.2% 1.2% 6.2% 5.4% 3.9% 1.5% 2.0% 1.6% -0.1% -0.4% -0.3% -3.5% -2.5% -2.0% *Non-agricultural wage & salary employment. Changed from SIC to NAICS reporting in 1990. ** 2010 & 2011 forecasts are from Elliott D. Pollack & Co. 11 09 20 07 20 05 20 03 20 01 20 99 20 97 19 95 19 93 19 91 19 89 19 87 19 85 19 83 19 81 19 79 19 77 19 75 -7.9% 19 19 Market Analysis Overview Phoenix-Mesa MSA Employment* Annual Percent Change 1975–2011** Recession Periods Market Analysis Overview Northeast Area Development Plan Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Market Analysis Overview Northeast Area Development Plan Commercial Markets Market Analysis Overview Appendices A-60 Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices Commercial1 Mortgage Maturities 1980–2020* Source: Foresight Analytics $250 $225.9 $226.5 $218.9 $197.2 $177.9 $200 $199.4 $198.0 $183.7 $177.3 $166.4 $150 $134.0 $118.3 $100 $50 $101.9 $76.7 $79.4 $78.5 $88.1 $73.1 $79.6 $65.3 $67.1 $53.6 $62.7 $60.0 $58.3 $44.6 $46.7 $39.2 $48.3 $48.4$43.7 $34.2 $23.9 $30.0 $21.2 $26.6 $17.6 $18.9 $87.1 $44.8 $34.2 $0 19 8 19 0 8 19 1 8 19 2 8 19 3 84 19 8 19 5 8 19 6 8 19 7 8 19 8 8 19 9 9 19 0 9 19 1 9 19 2 93 19 9 19 4 9 19 5 9 19 6 9 19 7 98 19 9 20 9 0 20 0 0 20 1 0 20 2 0 20 3 0 20 4 0 20 5 0 20 6 0 20 7 0 20 8 0 20 9 1 20 0 1 20 1 1 20 2 1 20 3 1 20 4 15 20 1 20 6 1 20 7 18 20 1 20 9 20 Market Analysis Overview A-61 1/ Includes mainly office, retail, industrial and hotels Note: Forecast is from Foresight Analytics Multi-Family Year-End Vacancy Rates Maricopa County 1986–2011* Source: ASU Realty Studies Recession Periods 18% 15% 14.1% 13.0% 13.4% 10.6% 10.1% 9% 6.1% 6.2% 6% 3% 12.7% 12.2% 12% 3.9% 4.1% 3.3% 2.8% 10.0% 9.5% 7.7% 6.9% 9.6% 9.4% 8.0% 6.1% 4.4% 8.2% 6.8% 5.1% 5.9% 4.8% 4.5% 4.5% 4.0%3.8% 11.2% 10.2% 8.5% 7.9% 5.3% 5.0% 0% 19 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 2099 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 11 Market Analysis Overview Northeast Area Development Plan *2009 -2011 are forecasts from the Greater Phoenix Blue Chip Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Source: CB Richard Ellis Recession Periods 35% 30% 26.4% 26.7% 25.4% 26.7% 25% 24.0% 25.6% 24.5% 23.9% 22.7% 22.8% 18.8% 18.3% 18.8% 20% 16.0% 14.8% 15% 12.6% 11.7% 9.5% 9.9% 10.0% 9.5% 9.2% 10% 19.1% 16.4% 13.9% 11.1% 5% 0% 19 86 19 87 19 8 19 8 89 19 90 19 91 19 92 19 93 19 94 19 95 19 96 19 97 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 02 20 03 20 04 20 05 20 0 20 6 07 20 08 20 09 20 1 20 0 11 Market Analysis Overview Office Space Year-End Vacancy Rates Maricopa County 1986–2011* *2010 -2011 are forecasts from CB Richard Ellis Northeast Area Development Plan Industrial Space Vacancy Rates Maricopa County 1980 – 2011* Source: CB Richard Ellis Recession Periods 20% 16.4% 15.2% 14.8% 14.6% 14.0% 13.2% 13.6% 12.8% 12.8% 11.1% 10.8% 15% 10% 9.4% 9.7% 8.4% 5% 16.4% 16.1% 15.2% 12.5% 10.3% 9.8% 9.7% 8.5% 8.4% 8.1% 7.4% 7.4% 7.1% 6.6% 7.0% 6.7% 5.7% 5.6% 0% 19 8 19 0 8 19 1 8 19 2 83 19 8 19 4 8 19 5 8 19 6 8 19 7 8 19 8 8 19 9 9 19 0 9 19 1 9 19 2 9 19 3 9 19 4 9 19 5 9 19 6 9 19 7 9 19 8 9 20 9 0 20 0 0 20 1 0 20 2 0 20 3 0 20 4 0 20 5 0 20 6 0 20 7 0 20 8 0 20 9 1 20 0 11 Market Analysis Overview Appendices A-62 * 2010 - 2011 are forecasts from CBRE Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Source: CB Richard Ellis** Recession Periods 20% 14.2% 13.1% 13.5% 12.7% 11.8% 15% 10.0% 10% 12.9% 12.3% 11.4% 11.1% 9.8% 8.7% 8.9% 7.9% 7.5% 6.6% 6.6% 6.3% 5.3% 5.5% 5% 7.4% 7.5% 7.3% 6.1% 6.2% 5.3% 5.1% 8 19 5 86 19 8 19 7 8 19 8 8 19 9 90 19 9 19 1 92 19 9 19 3 9 19 4 95 19 9 19 6 97 19 9 19 8 99 20 0 20 0 01 20 0 20 2 03 20 0 20 4 05 20 0 20 6 07 20 0 20 8 09 20 1 20 0 11 0% * 2010 -2011 are forecasts from CB Richard Ellis ** Data prior to 1992 is from Grubb & Ellis Market Analysis Overview Northeast Area Development Plan Back to Normal Vacancy? • Office = 2015+ • Industrial = 2015+ • Retail = 2015+ • Multi Family ??? Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Appendices Retail Vacancy Rates Maricopa County 1985–2011* 19 Market Analysis Overview A-63 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Market Analysis Overview Hotel Market Northeast Area Development Plan Market Analysis Overview Appendices A-64 Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Market Analysis Overview Mesa-Gilbert Hotel Market • Comprises 9.4% of Maricopa County Hotel rooms (approx. 5,646 rooms) • Most are located on/near the US60 freeway or Main St. in Mesa • Tend to locate near major shopping and recreation centers Market Analysis Overview Northeast Area Development Plan PMGA Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Appendices A-65 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Market Analysis Overview Airport Employment Analysis Northeast Area Development Plan San Bernardino International Airport Market Analysis Overview Appendices A-66 Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices Market Analysis Overview A-67 Alliance California at San Bernardino International Airport Northeast Area Development Plan Estimated Employment By Type Market Analysis Overview San Bernadino International Airport Airport Area MSA 44- Retail Trade 19.5% 15.6% 14.9% 56- Admin, Support, Waste Mgt, Remediation Services 14.0% 8.4% 9.4% 72- Accommodation & Food Services 10.9% 10.6% 9.4% 62- Health Care and Social Assistance 8.0% 11.6% 12.7% 52- Finance & Insurance 6.9% 3.0% 3.4% 55- Management of Companies & Enterprises 6.7% 1.1% 1.2% 23- Construction 6.3% 10.9% 7.8% 54- Professional, Scientific & Technical Services 5.7% 3.3% 3.0% 31- Manufacturing 5.4% 10.9% 11.5% 48- Transportation & Warehousing 3.9% 5.8% 7.9% 42- Wholesale trade 3.9% 5.5% 6.4% 61- Educational Services 3.3% 1.6% 2.1% 71- Arts, Entertainment & Recreation 1.4% 3.0% 1.8% 51- Information 1.1% 1.8% 1.9% 53- Real Estate & Rental & Leasing 0.8% 1.9% 1.6% 2.1% 5.0% 5.3% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Residual Grand Total County Note: Totals may not equal sum of column due to rounding. Source: US Bureau of Census, USPS, Elliott D. Pollack & Co. Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-68 Aerotropolis Overview Background / Philosophy • Conceptual origins may be traced to H. McKinley Conway’s 1977 book, “The Airport City and the Future Intermodal Transportation System” • Urban form comprising aviation-intensive businesses and related enterprises (out to 15 mi.) • Similar in form and function to a traditional metropolis, containing a central city core and its commuter-linked suburbs • Powerful engines of local economic development • Attract certain key business types: – – – – time-sensitive manufacturing, logistics; hotels, entertainment complexes; exhibition centers; and offices parks, and information technology complexes Northeast Area Development Plan Aerotropolis Overview Airport City & Aerotropolis Schematic Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-69 Aerotropolis Overview Airport City Examples • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Ron Reagan National & Dulles International Airports (D.C., US) North Carolina Global Transpark (North Carolina, US) Brisbane Airport (Brisbane, Australia) Beijing Capital International Airport (Beijing, China) Chicago O'Hare International Airport (Illinois, US) Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport (Texas, US) Incheon International Airport (Seoul, South Korea) Dubai World Central International Airport (Dubai, UAE) Memphis International Airport (Tennessee, US) Kuala Lumpur International Airport (Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia) Detroit-Metro Wayne Co. Airport/Willow Run Airport (Michigan, US) Chek Lap Kok International Airport (Hong Kong, China) Los Angeles-Ontario International Airport (California, US) Schiphol Airport (Amsterdam, The Netherlands) Changi Airport (Singapore) Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport (Georgia, US) Panama City-Bay County International Airport (Florida, US) Northeast Area Development Plan Aerotropolis Overview North Carolina Global Transpark Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-70 Aerotropolis Overview Dallas-Ft. Worth Int’l / Las Colinas Northeast Area Development Plan Aerotropolis Overview Incheon Int’l Airport / Fashion Island Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Aerotropolis Overview Willow Run / Detroit Metro Aerotropolis Northeast Area Development Plan Aerotropolis Overview Willow Run / Detroit Metro Aerotropolis Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Appendices A-71 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-72 Aerotropolis Overview Hartsfield-Jackson Atl Int’l / Ford Ctr. Northeast Area Development Plan Aerotropolis Overview Panama City / Bay Co. Int’l Airport Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report BREAK Appendices A-73 Northeast Area Development Plan Bubble-Diagramming Session Northeast Area Development Plan Purpose: encourage diverse cross-section of stakeholder input & ideas to be vetted for ultimate development • Break into 3 groups • Jacobs team member to facilitate each group • Designated Jacobs team member will be note taker • Group materials: (aerials w/controlling factors), tracing paper, markers, etc. • 5-min report out at wrap-up Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Breakout Group Recap Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Lynn Kusey John Cox Michael Floyd Rick Merritt Chris Andres Chris Scott Alan Sanderson Derek Rogers Chris Banks Morgan Neville Casey Denney Mark Wavering Sandy Kukla Shanthi Krishnan John Wesley Mark Venti Jane Morris Kenneth Snyder Tania Barks Ryan Cochran Walter Fix Keith O’Connor Rick Leisner Bill Cunningham Tamie Fisher Scot Rigby Mike James Gene Florez Steve Wilcox John Ballard • Group 1 – 5 minute report out • Group 2 – 5 minute report out • Group 3 – 5 minute report out Northeast Area Development Plan Next Steps / Questions Appendices A-74 • • • • • Finalize Real Estate Market Analysis Finalize Technical Memo #1 Refine Bubble Diagrams for Consistency Group Bubble Diagrams for Evaluation Evaluate Diagrams – Define evaluation factors – Narrow to 3 Strongest Diagrams – Begin refinement into concepts • Next Stakeholder Charrette – Mid June Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-75 QUESTIONS / COMMENTS Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-76 Meeting 3 Notes Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-77 kick-Off mEEtiNg Northeast Area Development Plan Study mEEtiNg #3 cONcEPtuAl REfiNEmENt Tuesday, June 15, 2010 • 1:00pm – 4:00pm AgENDA OPENiNg REmARkS AND iNtRODuctiONS 5 miN BuBBlE-DiAgRAm ScHEmES - REviEW 10 miN REviEW Of PROjEct viSiONiNg / gOAlS 5 miN BuBBlE-DiAgRAm ScHEmES - EvAluAtiON 35 miN • Evaluation Categories • Factors Considered • Summary of Findings SElEctiON Of PREfERRED ScHEmES 10 miN BREAk 15 miN AEROtROPOliS HigHligHtS & lESSONS lEARNED (Dr. John KasarDa, PhD) 35 miN mARkEt ANAlySiS OvERviEW (ricK Merritt, elliott D. PollacK & coMPany) 15 miN cONcEPt REfiNEmENt (Jacobs teaM) 45 miN • • • • Refinement Components / Factors Considered Concept Descriptions Commentary on Strengths / Weaknesses Group Interaction Objectives SummARy / NExt StEPS 5 miN WHERE: Airport Administration Building – Main Board Room Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 5835 South Sossaman Road • Mesa, AZ 85212-6014 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-78 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-79 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-80 Northeast Area Development Plan Stakeholder Meeting #3 Conceptual Refinement June 15, 2010 Agenda • • • • • • • • • Opening Remarks & Introductions Bubble Diagram Schemes - Review Project Visioning / Goals - Review Bubble Diagram Schemes - Evaluation Selection of Preferred Schemes Aerotropolis Highlights / Lessons Learned Market Analysis Overview Concept Refinement Next Steps Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices Opening Remarks & Introductions A-81 Meeting Objectives • Previously developed bubble diagram schemes – Review overarching vision & goals – Review screening factors & process – Summarize findings • Revisit Aerotropolis framework & local market conditions • Review advanced conceptual development – Factors considered – Strengths / weaknesses of concepts • Core Objectives: – Isolate & enhance discrete strengths of all concepts – Advance weaknesses toward opportunities of strength – Incorporate into a final preferred concept for further refinement & analysis Northeast Area Development Plan Bubble Diagram Schemes Original Stakeholder Schemes Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Bubble Diagram Schemes Original Stakeholder Schemes Northeast Area Development Plan Original Stakeholder Schemes Bubble Diagram Schemes Appendices A-82 Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-83 Bubble Diagram Schemes Original Stakeholder Schemes Northeast Area Development Plan Bubble Diagram Schemes Original Stakeholder Schemes Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Bubble Diagram Schemes Original Stakeholder Schemes Northeast Area Development Plan Original Stakeholder Schemes Bubble Diagram Schemes Appendices A-84 Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-85 Bubble Diagram Schemes Original Stakeholder Schemes Northeast Area Development Plan Bubble Diagram Schemes Original Stakeholder Schemes Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Project Visioning / Goals Aviation / Airport Related • Support / advance the vision for the Airport • Preserve ultimate Airport capacity • Non-aeronautical land uses that embrace aviation growth goals • Travel profile - leisure primary & business secondary • Integrated parking solutions that serve demand & maximize revenue • Sound implementation plan supporting staged growth • Pursue myriad funding sources, including Public/Private Partnership (PPP) Northeast Area Development Plan Infrastructure (Transportation/Utilities) Project Visioning / Goals Appendices A-86 • Balanced travel routes focused on primary services: – – – – Airport specific trips, internal trips, through travel, amenities • Easy access w/multiple layers of transportation access • Multi-modal system / pedestrian & bicycle friendly • Penetrate SR 802 corridor w/no negative impacts on freeway system • Connect Ray & Ellsworth employment centers to Airport • Adequately serve surrounding private properties • Easy / clear / communicative wayfinding & branding • Prioritized, long-range plan for infrastructure elements Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Project Visioning / Goals Economic Development • Maximize opportunities – both Airport & private • Boundary-less, flexible growth between Airport / community • Quality, well-rounded destination development (convention facilities, hotels, multi-story offices, national attractions, industry) • Urban center - Airport oriented employment villages • Premier, diverse job center with high wage strategy • High visibility - branding, special features & corporate amenities • Sustainable concepts built into development • Industry leading site design & construction techniques • Discourages residential development near the Airport Northeast Area Development Plan Project Visioning / Goals Lifestyle Oriented • Clear, strong identity – positive Sense of Place & community • Stress free, comfortable, non-intimidating, fun place • Livable community that is a vibrant, active hub of activity • Development that places value on green space and water features • Collaboration between communities & Airport • Remain cognizant of aviation noise impacts • ASU plans integrated into region and business development plan Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Appendices A-87 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Bubble Diagram Schemes Key Screening Factors • Safety & Standards – Airspace, airside separation standards – Roadway interchange & intersection spacing • Operational – Multi-use trail network, accessibility to commercial properties, promotes Transit Oriented Development – Airport and airline efficiencies, proximity of Airport parking – Separation of vehicular traffic, capable of access management – Accessibility to Ray / Ellsworth / Hawes, intuitive wayfinding • Capacity – – – – Aeronautical growth to 10MAP, maximized terminal area Incrementally expandable, adequacy of aircraft gates Long term Utilities & transportation infrastructure adequacy Ability to support curb rqmts, separation of traffic Northeast Area Development Plan Key Screening Factors (cont.) Bubble Diagram Schemes Appendices A-88 • Functionality / Flexibility – – – – – – Accommodation of unforeseen demand, trends, technologies Access to SR 802 & 202 Ability to mesh with access planning for large adjacent tracts Reduced reliance on “single focal point” for Airport access Ability to accommodate multi-modal aspects Incorporation of green space, sustainability • Economic Development – Creates Sense Of Place, highly visible – Maximized economic development – Provides diverse commercial land uses, mixed use opportunities near terminal area – Aligns development patterns with short & long term market potential Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-89 Scheme 1 Scheme 2 Scheme 3 Scheme 4 Scheme 5 Scheme 6 Scheme 7 Scheme 8 Scheme 9 Bubble Diagram Schemes Screening Results Summary Safety & Standards 13 13 11 14 14 15 13 12 12 Operational 51 51 27 48 48 51 39 51 46 Capacity 39 31 33 36 33 37 38 40 37 Functionality & Flexibility 31 31 26 34 32 39 33 34 33 Economic Development 33 28 24 29 29 30 33 30 33 167 154 121 161 156 172 156 167 161 Evaluation Factors TOTAL Source: Jacobs Analysis, 2010. Northeast Area Development Plan Concept Refinement Scheme 1 (Concept 1) Scheme 6 (Concept 3) Scheme 8 (Concept 2) Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report BREAK Appendices A-90 Northeast Area Development Plan Aerotropolis Highlights Northeast Area Development Plan Aerotropolis Highlights & Lessons Learned Dr. John Kasarda, PhD University of North Carolina, Kenan Institute of Private Enterprises Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices Market Analysis Overview A-91 Economic and Real Estate Analysis Danny Court Elliott D. Pollack & Co. Northeast Area Development Plan Aeronautical Development Types Concept Refinement (Terminal, Apron, Parking, etc.) Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-92 Aeronautical Development Types Concept Refinement (Cargo, Maintenance, Fuel, etc.) Northeast Area Development Plan Commercial Development Types Concept Refinement (Retail, Hotel, Entertainment, etc.) Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-93 Commercial Development Types Concept Refinement (Office and Employment) Northeast Area Development Plan Open Area Development Types Concept Refinement (Green Space and Water Retention) Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-94 Concept Refinement Preferred Schemes / Common Elements • • • • • • • • • • • • Compatible with FAA design standards for ARC D-V Meets height restrictions for FAR Part 77 surfaces Supports development of efficient airline operational areas Terminal area, parking and rental car areas support 10 MAP Passenger automobile parking proximate the terminal building Incrementally expandable development areas Proposed vehicular network accommodates projected traffic levels Logical & efficient access to freeway system (Loop 202 / SR-802) Accommodates new Ray Road & Hawes Road alignments Multi-use (Pedestrian or Bike) trail network easily incorporated Transit Oriented Development (TOD) easily incorporated Utilities network expandable to support full development area • Land Use inconsistent with current City of Mesa Land Use Plan Northeast Area Development Plan Concept Refinement Concept 1 Central boulevard focus Boulevard oriented toward transit station Pedestrian trail network follows boulevard course Maximum number of vehicular access points - 4 Roadway network creates development identity Terminal expands from north to south Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-95 Bubble Diagram Schemes Original Stakeholder Schemes Northeast Area Development Plan Bubble Diagram Schemes Original Stakeholder Schemes Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Concept Refinement Appendices A-96 GROUP INTERACTION & COMMENTS Northeast Area Development Plan • Incorporate Feedback Received To-Date Summary / Next Steps – City of Mesa, PMGA Authority, Stakeholder group • Prepare a Single Preferred Concept • Establish Level 2 Analysis (iterative) – – – – – Parcel Sizing & Defined Densities of Development On & Off-Airport Transportation Demand Modeling Economic Development Modeling Implementation Program (Costs, Phasing & Funding) Financial Feasibility • Final Refinement of Preferred Concept • Prepare Draft Technical Report • Stakeholder Meeting – Early October Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report MEETING MINUTES TO: Distribution DATE: FROM: Michael Floyd, Sandy Kukla, Keith O’Connor SUBJECT: Concept Refinement Meeting June 15, 2010 PROJECT NO: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 W7X87800 At 1:00pm, on Tuesday, June 15, 2010 the 3rd in a series of four stakeholder meetings was conducted for the Northeast Area Development Plan Study. Approximately 35 representatives were in attendance. The Jacobs consultant team providing presentations included Michael Floyd, Dr. John Kasarda (University of North Carolina – Kenan Institute), Danny Court (Elliott D. Pollack & Company), Rick Leisner and Mark Wavering. Michael Floyd, with Jacobs, led off by introducing the team, including new participants, and then outlining the agenda for the meeting. The meeting objectives were outlined prior to presenting a summary of the original bubble diagram schemes developed by the stakeholders in Meeting #2. There were nine schemes originally developed, three coming from each of the three breakout groups. Schemes 1 through 9 were portrayed with a standardized format, legend, color scheme, and access hierarchy. The following provides highlights of the schemes: ƒ ƒ ƒ Of Schemes 1, 2 & 3, originating from Group 1, Schemes 3 was noted as being a unique concept when compared to the others, wherein it represented opportunities for a pier arrangement, only deployed on a radial around a loop road system; access to the terminal area was limited to east (Williams Field Road) and could not be achieved to the north (Hawes Road) Schemes 4, 5 & 6 came from Group 2; Scheme 4 provides a Hotel concept at the center flanked by green space, with parking oriented on the perimeter; Scheme 6 articulated more access points, which is largely viewed as a positive by the Team Schemes 7, 8 & 9 came from Group 3; Scheme 7 although providing adequate access both east and west, isolating traffic and office land uses to core of the airport, thereby mixing traffic from commercial and airport uses, resulting is problematic flows and capacities; Scheme 8 provides for a centralized circulation pattern; while Scheme 9, another unique concept in terms of land use, provided good access to/from the freeway along with a central focal point for all on-airport circulation, which in concept looks intriguing, but would present significant traffic flow issues. Goal areas were reviewed from the initial stakeholder kick-off meeting. Jacobs repackaged the vision and goal statements into four key areas: Aviation / Airport Related, Infrastructure (Transportation/Utilities), Economic Development, and Lifestyle Oriented. It was noted that these vision and goal statements were incorporated into the bubble diagram screening process to aid in identifying the top schemes for further refinement. Key screening factors used for evaluating each of the nine schemes included: • • • Safety & Standards Operational Capacity Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Appendices A-97 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-98 • • Functionality/Flexibility Economic Development For each of the major categories and sub elements considered, a point system of 1-5 was utilized, with 5 being ideal and 1 being the worst. As a result of the consultant evaluations, the screening results revealed that Schemes 1, 6, and 8 were determined to be superior in overall layout, function, and ability to achieve the vision/goals. Moving forward, Schemes 1, 6, and 8 were renamed to Concept 1, 3 and 2, respectively. Next, the group was provided a presentation by Dr. John Kasarda. Highlights from his presentation are as follows: • • • • • • • • Transportation Infrastructure based development represents “The Fifth Wave” 9 Fifth Wave Drivers: Globalization, Speed, Agility, Connectivity, Tourism Infrastructure decisions should not be based on cycles, rather long range trends. Global air cargo could triple from 2009 to 2029. 9 This airport could grow if infrastructure is provided here. 9 Example of Dell computer – parts coming by air mostly from all over the globe, only keyboards arrive via truck. Airport City: much more than simply aviation infrastructure 9 Generator of employment 9 Multi-modal hub 9 Airside : shopping, upscale boutique, restaurants (higher end), leisure (spas, cinema, fitness), cultural (regional art, music, chapel) 9 Landside: Hotels and entertainment, office, etc., Free Trade Zone (FTZ) areas 9 Business Impact: non-aeronautical. (How do you generate revenues to continue to grow.) Many airports now achieve greater % of revenues from non-aeronautical. Chief reasons why being near an airport is critical to businesses: 9 Accessibility 9 Speed 9 Agility Aerotropolis: Gateway has an opportunity with DMB locating as an Airport “Edge City” Basic Airport City & Aerotropolis Schematic 9 Ring Road, Expressways, Office corridors, Airport edge city, convention, hotel/entertainment corridors, technology corridor 9 Separation of white collar and blue collar functions; avoid mixing the two, so keep clear separation 9 Commuter rail Inside the Fence / Outside the Fence examples 9 Amsterdam Schiphol Airport City – Aerotropolis Synergies 9 Theming (Branding) highlighted in the Memphis airport 9 HKIA Sky City Master Plan –development timed to the market; including areas of land banking; connectivity is key 9 Dulles Aerotropolis – defined access corridors 9 Fastest growing (driven by airport) – Las Vegas, San Bernardino, Dallas-Fort Worth 9 Las Colinas: Airport Edge City – east of Dallas Ft. Worth (RTKL Mixed use plan) Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport -2- Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report • • • • • • Key points 9 Airports are destinations - within 15 miles of airport 9 Investors and developers select strategic sites near airport 9 Airport management can foster further commercial development on airport property to reinforce revenue streams 9 Mesa’s public / private sector leaders can design a Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Aerotropolis 9 Need new model of airport, urban, business planning brought together 9 Close working relationship of Gateway airport, member governments and community Whether it is planned or not…..there will be an aerotropolis in Mesa; the question is will it be planned (organized, sustainable, grow intelligently) or spontaneous Challenges 9 Learn from past aerotropolis experiences 9 Prepare infrastructure plan , business plan, action plan guidelines 9 Make PMGA sustainable Attitude toward airport – nuisance or asset. Typically viewed as nuisance because usually not well planned. In Asia, airports are viewed as means to compete in the 21st century Planning assets: AZA potential and rapid area growth Key example: Mesa Proving grounds 9 5,000 acres adjacent to airport 9 Future Gateway Freeway corridor 9 Sell a lifestyle (trendsetting and architecturally distinctive bldg; social interaction; open space; green and sustainability – green may cost about 10% more, but there are other benefits such as political; and residential units attractive to young professionals as well as night life) 9 Final conclusions: Airport and proving grounds can anchor a 21st century Aerotropolis; airport management together with member governments and the development community have a chance to do something remarkable; and today’s meeting with Jacobs is important Next, the group was provided a presentation by Danny Court from Elliot Pollack. Highlights from his presentation are as follows: • • • • • Currently the area is overbuilt Elliott Pollack employed 3 approaches to Data Collection Airport employment examples: John Wayne Airport; Ontario; San Bernardino (noted higher concentration of employment at the airport zip code vs. surrounding city and county) Dallas Ft. Worth Airport – noted retail/entertainment use dedicated area; tremendous amount of airport land for commerce parks, and hospitality/entertainment; an extension of the development already happening in the area; Gaylord, Service Hotels, Freeway system, Golf course, retail mall; goal was to maximize the revenue; blend with current off-airport development (generates higher revenue than industrial); and No opportunity cost to plan for mixed-use. No loss to other industrial areas. Economic Development 9 Primarily marketing industrial with some office; Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport 9 Retail/entertainment on the periphery, if any -3- Appendices A-99 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-100 • • • • • • National Economic Incentives Environment – AZ is not competitive where TX OK KS, ME IA, MO AR LA MS AL GA, FL, KY, IN, IL are highly competitive in attracting business Labor intensive companies tend to prefer states w/ low-cost, skilled labor Capital Intensive Companies: prefer lower property tax Can AZ compete? Or can a smaller entity like Gateway be successful – difficult since AZ does not have incentives and inducement. But there may be potential for local incentives, such as land banking, industrial park support, infrastructure costs. Issues: risks in the short to medium term, industrial is viewed as less risky, moderate risk is office and most risky is retail entertainment; flexibility; retail on periphery; office requires very easy access to make it desirable – transportation is critical for success of office, hotel and retail/entertainment; hotels are common but would likely require convention space nearby; remain flexible with select industrial uses Finances 9 To what extent does the airport need the private sector to cover improvement costs. 9 Time value of money 9 Develop plan Michael Floyd then led into the final segment of the meeting, focusing on the refinement of Concepts 1-3. Image boards were presented for various development types based on each land use category to be shown on the concept plans – these are designed in the legend and in the upper right corner by colored square. The uses represented on the concepts include: • • • • • Aeronautical - Terminal, apron, parking, etc. Aeronautical - Cargo, Maintenance, Fuel Commercial Development Types- Retail, Hotel, Entertainment Commercial Development Types - Office and Entertainment Open Area Development Types – Green Space and Water Retention Of the three preferred schemes / concepts, Common Elements among each were highlighted. There was internal discussion concerning the demand levels expected for the airport and how this may impact the terminal curbside and levels of the terminal itself. A decision point may be necessary to determine whether the system reflects a single level or multilevel operation on opening day or at some point in the future. The following comments were made: • • • • Grade separate arrivals and departures – works well with jet bridges on airside. (Floyd) The challenge is opening day. Our recommendation is to design and plan for a split level operation for opening day. (Floyd) Access from the north off the 202 Loop remains a concern given the anticipated significant traffic volumes. (Floyd) Brian Davis, with Allegiant, commented that it is expensive for fuel to come here for their airline (6 cents/gal. more than PHX). With jet bridges and split level operations brings additional costs to the airline and Allegiant may not be interested in being here. Gateway is starting to look a lot like PHX in the plans, so Allegiant may need to consider other options to keep costs low (fuel, lease rates, etc.). Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport -4- Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report • Morgan Neville, Park Properties, asked why it is required to elevate over canal? Mark Wavering stated we are planning for future of traffic levels. Providing for right of way. Balance of opening-day to future levels. Jacobs will perform access modeling based on the total number of people (aviation and commercially driven). Large wall exhibits portraying the three concepts were displayed on the wall, each reflecting land use and building layouts, along with vehicular flows, intersections and grade separated roadway sections. Rick Leisner and Mark Wavering explained Concepts 1, 2 and 3. The following discussion ensued: • Gary King representing Kitchell, asked what the density of sf of buildings, noting that approx. 1.6 - 2 million sf of office space is planned for the Kitchell property. This led into a discussion concerning the intersection of Hawes and Ray Roads and the potential volumes. • Discussion of private development – Susan Demmitt, with Beus Gilbert, would like to see more private sector interface. The plans should show adjacent development plans – which are currently not shown. Agrees that the four access points to the freeways and surface streets are a positive, and further noted that they have not done trip generation studies themselves. Questioned whether the market can accommodate the DMB development and the airport development in this area? Noted that the City is urging the developer to plan for office buildings up to 10 stories. • Bike discussion by the group – noted that the bike/pedestrian pathways were mostly for employees of the both the private sector development and airport staff. • Transit station discussion: Mark Venti. w/City is in favor of transit station. • Michael Floyd clarified that the beige and purple land uses shown on the Airport property are all thought to be private investments, either as land leases, fee simple sale or other. Also noted that the traffic volumes just for the airport at 10 annual enplanements – equals a minimum of 55,000 passengers per day, average. Parking needs to be re-evaluated based on the 10 annual enplanement level. • John Kasarda clarified that this airport needs to satisfy both types of airlines – mainline/legacy and low cost. The provision of jet bridges is usually a carrier elective, so may be needed to attract other airlines. Vision and image of airport market demands coordination inside and outside the fence, but cautioned that you can’t completely count on a developer’s plan. Believed that office non-aviation uses usually not successful unless they have adequate access to rail/transit, supplemented by tremendous surface access. • Doug Drown, with PMGA, stated that he liked Concept 2 with access road to the south. This provides aeronautical area for access by trucks, fuel trucks, etc. • Morgan Neville, with Park Properties, asked about the blue area to the north in Concept 3 – asked if access would be from main line. Mark clarified there would definitely be other smaller access roads. • Mark Venti, with City, likes green corridor in Concept 3 – all together prefers this concept. Praised the Transit Oriented Development. Provides a transportation center similar to Tempe. • Michael Floyd clarified that the concepts are illustrative. There is a tremendous amount of apron area. He also clarified the reasons behind why the concepts are limited to the 700 acres of Airport property, noted that it is driven by the contract / scope of services with Mesa and the Airport. It was pointed out that a number of natural boundaries, properties boundaries, freeways and roadways (802, Ellsworth, Ray and the canals) are all limiting factors to consider. The Jacobs team is attempting to work with private groups off airport – that is why we have the Gateway Airport stakeholder meetings and will continue to have these interactions. HePhoenix-Mesa also pointed out that the -5- Appendices A-101 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-102 • • • • • • • concepts reflect only a few weeks of work, and that a few more months of planning lie ahead to get the plans in a more final form. Kelly Park, with Park Properties, stated that they have been hearing about the elevated roadway plan at Hawes and Ray for some time from the City. ADOT representative (Amille) and Steve Wilcox, with AECOM, confirmed that they are under design of the 202/802 interface. Amille stated that it is absolutely NOT possible to bring an airport exit off 802 near Ellsworth or to immediately southeast, due to physical constraints and safety. Steve Wilcox, stated a lot of local traffic will use the Ellsworth exit off of the 802, particularly the employees, deliveries etc. Gary King, with Kitchell, stated that the 3 concepts are all interesting. The big problem is traffic. Noted that already, with the development that they are aware of, the volumes approach 50,000 vehicles/day on Hawes Road; this excludes the Airport. Casey Denney, with PMGA, asked what the Hawes/Ray intersection looks like when it is elevated. Mark Wavering indicated that further study is needed, but it may be 2 lanes in and 2 lanes out, 3 and 3 on each end. Susan Demmitt asked how far this study will go as far as analyzing Hawes Road. Mark Wavering stated it is to establish right-of-way. Susan asked is there a difference between traffic coming into the airport versus departing and a particular need to have the flows be direct/quick. Michael Floyd stated there could be creative ways to exit the airport that provided for more flexibility. Brian Davis stated that today’s traveler is approx. 70% incoming people (non-locals). Scot Rigby, with the City, asked John Kasarda his ideas concerning how the City/Airport area can evolve? How do you keep the area moving forward but not hamstring the overall plan? John Kasarda stated this is dependent on the private investment community and the timing of necessary infrastructure. There are other ways to fund through other financial instruments, such as a Public-Private Partnership (PPP). The Airport could share the risk but also share the upside of successful developments. He encouraged the private sector to put money into the area, noting that international companies want to own land. The chief asset for PMGA is location, while the market will determine the density of structures. Preferred alternative needs to be flexible. To wrap up the meeting, Michael Floyd provided a summary of Next Steps, and assured all in attendance that the presentation, full size exhibits and minutes will be posted to the FTP site. The next stakeholder meeting will be scheduled in the 1st week of October 2010. Distribution: City of Mesa staff PMGA staff Jacobs consultant team Stakeholder list Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport -6- Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Surface Infrastructure (Transportation/Utilities) • Balanced travel routes focused on primary services, for: internal trips, through travel, specific trips to the Airport, and amenities • Easy access w/ multiple layers of transportation access & modes • Multi-modal system establishment, that is pedestrian and bicycle friendly • Penetrate SR 802 corridor (no negative impacts on regional freeway system) • Ray / Ellsworth area employment center connections to the Airport • Adequately serve surrounding private properties • Easy / clear / communicative wayfinding & Branding • Prioritized plan for infrastructure • Long-range utility planning Economic Development • Proactive economic development efforts to maximize opportunities – both Airport & private • Boundary-less growth that is flexible between airport / community • Quality, well-rounded destination development with convention facilities, hotels, multi-story offices, national attractions, industry • Urban center - Airport oriented employment villages that are pedestrian oriented • Premier / diverse job center for east valley with high wage strategy • High visibility w/ provisions for branding, special features & markers, corporate amenities • Sustainable concepts built into development (energy, e.g. Biofuel, solar) • Industry leading site design & construction techniques encouraged for new development • Discourages residential development in proximity to the Airport Aviation / Airport Related • Support and advance the vision for the Airport • Preserve the ultimate Airport capacity • Appropriate non-aeronautical land uses that embrace aviation growth goals • Keep diverse travel profile in mind - leisure primary & business secondary • Integrated parking solutions that maximize revenue and accommodate peak periods • Sound implementation plan supporting staged growth • Pursue myriad funding sources, including Public/Private Partnership (PPP) Lifestyle Oriented • Clear, strong identity – a positive Sense of Place & Community • Stress free, comfortable, non-intimidating, fun place to come • Livable community that is a vibrant, active hub of activity • Development that places value on green space and water features • Ensure that collaboration between communities & Airport continues • Remain cognizant of aviation noise impacts on community • ASU plans integrated into region and business development plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Appendices A-103 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-104 Meeting 4 Notes Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-105 Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-106 Northeast Area Development Plan Stakeholder Meeting #4 Preferred Concept January 25, 2011 Agenda • • • • • • • Opening Remarks Concept Refinement Review Roadway Modeling / Analysis Preferred On-Airport Concept Project Phasing & Costs Funding Eligibility Next Steps Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Opening Remarks Meeting Objectives • Review previous “illustrative” concepts & their common attributes • Review Land Use Types for project development • Review advanced preferred concept – Aeronautical functions – Non-aeronautical commercial uses – Surface Access network & analysis • Outline 20-yr and ultimate phasing plans along with supporting cost estimates by type & phase • Early description of funding source applicability Northeast Area Development Plan Concept Refinement Concept 1 Central boulevard focus Boulevard oriented toward transit station Pedestrian trail network follows boulevard course Maximum number of vehicular access points - 4 Roadway network creates development identity Terminal expands from north to south Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Appendices A-107 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-108 Concept Refinement Concept 2 Organized along access to grand circle; focus for transit station Pedestrian trail network centers on transit station Vehicular access best off northern roadways Roadway network creates development identity Terminal grows from north to south Maximum aeronautical acreage Northeast Area Development Plan Concept Refinement Concept 3 Organized along center trail network focused on transit center Maximized private development (reduced airport parking land) Terminal expands from center Minimal parking footprint - requires garages in earlier phases Maximum number of vehicular access points - 4 Maximum aeronautical acreage Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Concept Refinement Preferred Schemes / Common Elements • • • • • • • • • • • • Compatible with FAA design standards for ARC D-V Meets height restrictions for FAR Part 77 surfaces Supports development of efficient airline operational areas Terminal area, parking and rental car areas support 10 MAEP Passenger automobile parking proximate the terminal building Incrementally expandable development areas Proposed vehicular network accommodates projected traffic levels Logical & efficient access to freeway system (Loop 202 / SR-24) Accommodates new Ray Road & Hawes Road alignments Multi-use (Pedestrian or Bike) trail network easily incorporated Transit Oriented Development (TOD) easily incorporated Utilities network expandable to support full development area Northeast Area Development Plan Aeronautical Development Types Concept Refinement (Terminal, Apron, Parking, etc.) Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Appendices A-109 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-110 Aeronautical Development Types Concept Refinement (Cargo, Maintenance, Fuel, etc.) Northeast Area Development Plan Commercial Development Types Concept Refinement (Retail, Hotel, Entertainment, etc.) Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-111 Commercial Development Types Concept Refinement (Office and Employment) Northeast Area Development Plan Open Area Development Types Concept Refinement (Green Space and Water Retention) Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-112 Concept Refinement Preferred On-Airport Concept Northeast Area Development Plan Concept Refinement Preferred On-Airport Concept Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Roadway Modeling / Analysis Traffic Forecasting • Used, as base, the travel demand model from the Mesa Gateway Strategic Development Plan • Includes the Mesa Proving Grounds Master Transportation Plan land use data • Includes the latest development plans data for the commercial area along Hawes Road between Ray Road and L 202 • Two enplanement scenarios: 5 and 10 MAEP corresponding to the years 2030 and 2050 for modeling purposes Northeast Area Development Plan Roadway Modeling / Analysis Airport Traffic Analysis Zones Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Appendices A-113 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Roadway Modeling / Analysis Socioeconomic Data 2030 Employment TAZ 78 89 133 134 135 136 140 Employees Retail Office Hotel Mixed Use 6 1,472 288 0 0 0 0 0 2,272 0 76 0 300 0 244 3,133 1,320 0 5,142 0 138 1,658 156 0 2050 Employment TAZ 78 89 133 134 135 136 140 Employees Retail Office Hotel Mixed Use 6 1,472 288 0 0 0 0 0 2,272 0 152 0 600 0 484 3,133 1,320 0 5,142 0 138 1,658 156 0 • The airport is a special generator with approximately 17,000 daily trips in 2030 and 32,000 daily trips in 2050 Northeast Area Development Plan Roadway Network Alternative A Roadway Modeling / Analysis Appendices A-114 Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-115 Roadway Modeling / Analysis Roadway Network Alternative B Northeast Area Development Plan Roadway Modeling / Analysis 2030 Forecasted Daily Volumes & LOS Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Roadway Modeling / Analysis 2030 Forecasted Daily Volumes & LOS Northeast Area Development Plan 2050 Forecasted Daily Volumes & LOS Roadway Modeling / Analysis Appendices A-116 Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Roadway Modeling / Analysis 2050 Forecasted Daily Volumes & LOS Northeast Area Development Plan Roadway Modeling / Analysis Traffic Forecasting Findings • 2030 – Ray Road, Ellsworth Road, Pecos Road, and Sossaman Road perform mainly at LOS D and E for Alternatives A & B – Hawes Road is LOS D and E north of Ray Road for Alternatives A &B – All facilities on airport property function at LOS A-C with the exception of Gateway Boulevard in front of the new proposed terminal in Alternative A, which shows LOS D – SR 24 performs at LOS D and E in the study area • 2050 – Ray Road, Ellsworth Road, Pecos Road, and Sossaman Road perform mainly at LOS E and F for Alternatives A & B – Hawes Road is LOS F north of Ray Road for Alternatives A & B – Most facilities on airport property function at LOS A-C with the exception of Gateway Boulevard loop, which displays LOS D and E, and a portion of Airbus Boulevard in Alternative B which operated at LOS D – SR 24 performs at LOS E and F in the study area Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Appendices A-117 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Roadway Modeling / Analysis Roadway Network - Operations Analysis • Roadway network operations were modeled for year 2030 and 2050 – 2030 and 2050 Peak Hour – VISSIM Micro-simulation • Alternatives analysis – Alternative A: Hawes Road aligned w/Gateway Boulevard – Alternative B: Hawes Road aligned w/Airbus Boulevard Northeast Area Development Plan Roadway Modeling / Analysis Appendices A-118 Roadway Network - Operations Analysis Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Roadway Modeling / Analysis Roadway Network - Operations Analysis • 2030 operations – Alternative A – Alternative B • All intersections estimated to operate at LOS “D” or better Northeast Area Development Plan Roadway Modeling / Analysis Roadway Network - Operations Analysis Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Appendices A-119 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Roadway Modeling / Analysis Roadway Network - Operations Analysis • 2050 Operations – Alternative A – Alternative B • All intersections estimated to operate at LOS “D” or better Northeast Area Development Plan Curbside Analysis (on-going) Roadway Modeling / Analysis Appendices A-120 • 2030 conditions and volumes • 2-Level curbside roadway – Departures / Ticketing at upper level – Arrivals / Baggage Claim at lower level • Microscopic Simulation Modeling (VISSIM) • Work in progress – finalize curbside layout • Measure of effectiveness will be evaluated to determine curbside roadway requirements Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-121 Roadway Modeling / Analysis Curbside Analysis (on-going) Northeast Area Development Plan Project Phasing & Costs Phase I - 1.5 MAEP (5 years) Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Project Phasing & Costs Phase II – 2.2 MAEP (10 years) Northeast Area Development Plan Phase III - 5 MAEP (20 years) Project Phasing & Costs Appendices A-122 Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Project Phasing & Costs Ultimate - 10 MAEP (beyond 20 years) Northeast Area Development Plan Project Phasing & Costs Project Cost Estimates - By Phase Airfield, Support & Parking Elements Parallel Taxiway & Exits (RWY 12L-30R) & Apron Areas 1000' Extension to RWY 12L-30R, Fuel Farm and Lighting Support Facilities Sitework & Infrastructure Surface & Structured Parking PHASE I TOTAL PHASE II Apron Area Expansion Airfield & Apron Lighting Support Facilities Sitework & Infrastructure Surface & Structured Parking PHASE II TOTAL PHASE III Apron Area Expansion & Apron Edge Taxiways Airfield & Apron Lighting Support Facilities Sitework & Infrastructure Surface & Structured Parking PHASE III TOTAL PHASE IV Dual Parallel Taxiway & Exits (RWY 12L-30R) & Apron Areas Airfield & Apron Lighting Support Facilities Sitework & Infrastructure Surface & Structured Parking PHASE IV TOTAL $68,790,600 $29,765,400 $1,589,900 $4,298,800 $104,444,700 $10,951,900 $402,500 $753,100 $1,412,400 $13,520,000 $26,192,200 $1,126,400 $1,157,800 $209,895,800 $238,372,300 $78,438,900 $4,522,400 $1,730,900 $244,232,500 $328,924,700 AIRFIELD, SUPPORT & PARKING TOTAL $685,261,600 PHASE I * All estimates in 2010 dollars. Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Appendices A-123 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Project Phasing & Costs Project Cost Estimates - By Phase Roadway & Transit Elements Hawes & Gateway (Offsite) Right Of Way Acquisition Airport Loop (Gateway & Boeing) Ellsworth Connection (Airbus Blvd & Embraer Way) PHASE I TOTAL PHASE II Airport Loop & Ellsworth Connection (Boeing & Gateway) Ray Connection (Canadair & Airbus) Airbus (Offsite) PHASE II TOTAL PHASE III Hawes & Ray SPUI (Offsite) Upper Level & Lower Level Expansion Airbus Connection PHASE III TOTAL PHASE IV Hawes Overpass Light Rail Line Upper Level Expansion PHASE IV TOTAL $2,614,600 $1,045,400 $25,261,700 $4,405,200 $33,326,900 $10,294,200 $2,086,800 $1,758,200 $14,139,200 $5,271,400 $44,283,000 $6,478,700 $56,033,100 $6,900,900 $135,520,700 $28,591,500 $171,013,100 ROADWAY NETWORK TOTAL $274,512,300 PHASE I * All estimates in 2010 dollars. Northeast Area Development Plan Project Cost Estimates - By Phase Project Phasing & Costs Appendices A-124 Terminal Elements PHASE I Terminal and Concourses (incl. Central Plant Functions) PHASE II Concourse Expansion $142,388,200 $20,672,900 PHASE III New Concourse, Concourse Expansion and Terminal Expansion $162,183,600 PHASE IV 2 New Concourses, Terminal, Concourse & Central Plant Expansion $313,330,300 TERMINAL, CONCOURSE AREA & CENTRAL PLANT TOTAL * All estimates in 2010 dollars. Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport $638,575,000 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-125 Project Phasing & Costs Project Cost Estimates - By Phase Commercial Development Elements PHASE I Commercial Development Soft Costs * $709,500 PHASE II Commercial Development Soft Costs * $866,300 PHASE III Commercial Development Soft Costs * $1,089,000 PHASE IV Commercial Development Soft Costs * $376,200 Property Acquisition (N ortheast 31 Acres) $232,500 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT TOTAL $3,273,500 * Includes: engineering, surve ys, legal, permitting, marketi ng & promotion, and approvals * All estimates in 2010 dollars. Northeast Area Development Plan Project Phasing & Costs Program Costs - Cost Center & Phase COST CENTER PHASE I Airfield, Support & Parking Roadway & Transit $104,444,700 $33,326,900 Terminal $142,388,200 Commercial Development TOTALS BY PHASE $942,000 $281,101,800 PHASE II PHASE IV TOTAL $13,520,000 $238,372,300 $328,924,700 $685,261,700 $14,139,200 $56,033,100 $171,013,100 $274,512,300 $20,672,900 $162,183,600 $313,330,300 $638,575,000 $866,300 PHASE III $1,089,000 $376,200 $3,273,500 $49,198,400 $457,678,000 $813,644,300 $1,601,622,500 * All estimates in 2010 dollars. Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-126 Program Funding Eligibility Funding Eligibility COST CENTER Airfield, Support & Parking - Airfield - Support Facilities - Parking Facilities Federal 90% Roadway 50% Transit 80% Terminal ** 90% Commercial Development Type of Funding State 50% Local * Other * 10% 100% 100% 100% 100% 10% 20% 5% 5% 100% 10% 90% 90% R&E, Municipal Bonds, MAG Future Prop 500 Revenue Bonds, Private Investment Entitlements, Sustainable Discretionary, Development PFCs, MAP, Grants, HURF FTA grants, FHWA CMAQ * Percentages are mutually exclusive, only one category applies depending on nature of project ** Applicable to public spaces only Northeast Area Development Plan Summary / Next Steps • Incorporate Feedback Received – City of Mesa, PMGA Authority, Stakeholders • Finalize Implementation Program – Update Costs & Phasing – Determine Applicable Funding Sources & Amounts – Conduct Financial Feasibility Analysis • Prepare Draft Technical Report • Submit to City of Mesa & PMGA Authority for Comment • Address Comments & Finalize Technical Report • Prepare Executive Summary Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices Summary / Next Steps A-127 QUESTIONS / COMMENTS Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices A-128 Economic and Fiscal Impact of Commercial Land Uses Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Economic and Fiscal Impact of Commercial Land Uses Northeast Area Development Plan Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport DRAFT v1 Prepared for: Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Authority Prepared: August, 2011 Prepared by: Elliott D. Pollack & Company 7505 East 6th Avenue, Suite 100 Scottsdale, AZ 82521 DRAFT Economic and Fiscal Impact of Northeast Development Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary i 1.0 Introduction 1 2.0 Methodology & Assumptions 2.1 Project Assumptions 2.2 Economic Impact Methodology 2.3 Fiscal Impact Methodology 3 3 7 8 3.0 Impact of Construction 3.1 Economic Impact of Construction 3.2 Fiscal Impact of Construction 11 11 13 4.0 Impact at Build-Out 4.1 Economic Impact of Operations 4.2 Fiscal Impact of Operations 15 15 17 Elliott D. Pollack & Company www.arizonaeconomy.com TOC DRAFT Economic and Fiscal Impact of Northeast Development Plan Executive Summary Elliott D. Pollack and Company has been retained to perform an economic and fiscal impact study of the commercial land use component of the Northeast Area Development Plan for the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport. The commercial component of the Plan is comprised of privately-owned retail, office and hotel buildings that would be located on Airport property under land leases. This analysis assumes that 2,580,000 square feet of commercial space would be built on approximately 166 acres located in the northeast part of the Northeast Area. The economic and fiscal impact analysis is based on full build-out of the property. Economic and Fiscal Impact Analysis This economic and fiscal impact study focuses on the economic and fiscal impacts derived from (a) the construction of the project, and (b) ongoing operations at the property once completed. Economic impact analysis examines the regional implications of an activity in terms of three basic measures: output, earnings, and employment. Fiscal impact analysis evaluates the public revenues created by a particular activity. In a fiscal impact analysis, the primary revenue sources of a governing entity are analyzed to determine how the activity may financially affect them. A full description of the methodology and modeling inputs is included in the body of this report. Economic Impacts The direct economic impact from construction of the commercial uses proposed in Northeast Area Plan is based on an estimated $384.5 million of cost construction. The project would generate 3,287 direct person years of employment during the construction phase. Person years of employment are the aggregate of each construction job that is recreated year after year throughout the construction time period. To derive the respective annual averages, employment, wages, and economic output can be divided by the expected number of years it may take to complete the development. About $175.6 million in direct wages would be generated based on the total construction activity. Another 2,694 indirect and induced jobs would be created in the local economy. Wages for these indirect and induced employees would be about $125.5 million. Altogether, the project would create approximately 5,982 person years of employment, $301.1 million in wages, and over $730.6 million in economic activity during the construction timeframe. The operations related to the commercial uses within the Northeast Plan would have a notable impact on the local and regional economy. Roughly 8,265 direct jobs would be created at buildout. In total, approximately 12,459 permanent direct, indirect, and induced jobs would be created throughout Greater Phoenix as a result of the commercial uses within the Northeast Area Development Plan. That equates to over $467.7 million in annual wages and $1,031.7 million in annual economic output. The majority of these jobs would be office related. The economic impacts noted above are stated at the regional, metro-wide level and will affect all of Greater Phoenix. While most of the impact will fall on the Southeast Valley, cities across the region will all benefit to some extent from the commercial uses in the Northeast Area Plan. Elliott D. Pollack & Company www.arizonaeconomy.com i DRAFT Economic and Fiscal Impact of Northeast Development Plan Economic Impact Northeast Area Commercial Uses Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Greater Phoenix (2011 Dollars) Total Construction Impact Person Years of Impact Type Employment Total Wages Annual Operations Impact Economic Output Impact Type Jobs Annual Wages Economic Output Direct 3,287 $175,600,000 $384,500,000 Direct 8,265 $283,700,000 $523,100,000 Indirect 833 $46,300,000 $123,000,000 Indirect 1,313 $61,100,000 $162,700,000 Induced 1,861 $79,200,000 $223,100,000 Induced 2,882 $122,900,000 $345,900,000 $730,600,000 Annual at Buildout 12,459 Total 5,982 $301,100,000 Sources: Elliott D. Pollack & Company; IMPLAN $467,700,000 $1,031,700,000 Sources: Elliott D. Pollack & Company; IMPLAN Fiscal Impacts Construction of the commercial uses within the Northeast Area would also create significant tax revenues for the City of Mesa. Revenues have been defined in this analysis as either primary or secondary, depending on their source and how the dollars flow through the economy into City tax accounts. For instance, some revenues, such as construction sales taxes, are straightforward calculations based on the cost of construction. These revenues are described in this study as primary revenues and include construction sales taxes, use taxes, property taxes, and taxes on lease payments. Secondary revenues, on the other hand, flow from the wages of those direct, indirect and induced employees who are supported by the project. Revenue projections are based on typical wages of the employees working in the project, their spending patterns, and estimates of where they might live. All values in this report are stated in 2011 dollars. Primary revenues generated to the City would total nearly $4.5 million over the construction period. In addition, the City would benefit from the spending of construction workers within City limits. Sales tax collections on employee spending for the City were estimated at an additional $335,000 for the entire construction period. Other secondary revenues include residents’ property taxes and state shared revenues. In total, the City of Mesa would expect to collect nearly $5.5 million in tax revenue from the construction-related activity associated with the commercial uses. Additional fiscal benefits would accrue to the State of Arizona and Maricopa County. As the commercial uses are completed in Northeast Area, operations related to the office, retail and hotel uses will create tax revenue for the City of Mesa. Retail sales from stores as well as within the hotel would generate approximately $1.3 million annually at build-out. Bed taxes from the hotel would contribute another $1.1 million annually. Property tax collections from the commercial properties, assuming an in-lieu tax is levied, would add another $266,000 annually. In total, nearly $5.8 million would be collected each year by the City. The following table shows the ongoing tax revenue that the City of Mesa would expect to collect based on the construction and operations of the commercial uses within the Northeast Area. In addition, the Airport Authority would collect $7,231,000 annually at build-out from developers who lease land for the commercial buildings. Elliott D. Pollack & Company www.arizonaeconomy.com ii DRAFT Economic and Fiscal Impact of Northeast Development Plan Fiscal Impact Summary Northeast Area Commercial Uses Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport City of Mesa (2011 Dollars) Total Construction Impact Impact Type Primary Direct $4,525,000 Secondary $572,000 Annual Operations Impact Total $5,097,000 Impact Type Primary Direct $3,529,000 Secondary Total $1,638,000 $5,167,000 Indirect N/A $131,000 $131,000 Indirect N/A $190,000 $190,000 Induced N/A $259,000 $259,000 Induced N/A $401,000 $401,000 $962,000 $5,487,000 Total Revenues $2,229,000 $5,758,000 Total Revenues $4,525,000 Sources: Elliott D. Pollack & Company Elliott D. Pollack & Company www.arizonaeconomy.com $3,529,000 Sources: Elliott D. Pollack & Company iii DRAFT Economic and Fiscal Impact of Northeast Development Plan 1.0 Introduction Elliott D. Pollack and Company has been retained to perform an economic and fiscal impact study of the commercial land use component of the Northeast Area Development Plan for the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport. The commercial component of the Plan is comprised of privately-owned retail, office and hotel buildings that would be located on Airport property under land leases. The economic and fiscal impact portion of the study focuses on the economic and fiscal impacts of the following: 1. Construction of the commercial uses. 2. Impact from the operations of the commercial uses once construction is completed. Economic impact analysis examines the regional implications of an activity in terms of three basic measures: output, earnings, and job creation. Fiscal impact analysis evaluates the public revenues and costs created by a particular activity. In a fiscal impact analysis, the primary revenue sources of a city, county, or state government are analyzed to determine how the activity may financially affect them. This study prepared by Elliott D. Pollack and Company is subject to the following considerations and limiting conditions.  The reported economic and fiscal impact findings outlined in this report represent the considered judgment of Elliott D. Pollack and Company based on the assumptions, analyses, and methodologies described in the report.  Except as specifically stated to the contrary, this study will not give consideration to the following matters to the extent they exist: (i) matters of a legal nature, including issues of legal title and compliance with federal, state and local laws and ordinances; and (ii) environmental and engineering issues, and the costs associated with their correction. The user of this study will be responsible for making his/her own determination about the impact, if any, of these matters.  This study is intended to be read and used as a whole and not in parts.  This economic and fiscal impact study evaluates the potential “gross impacts” of the project on various governmental jurisdictions. The term “gross impacts” as used in this study refers to the total revenue, jobs and economic output that will be generated by the project.  This analysis does not consider the costs associated with providing services to the project. Such analysis is beyond the scope of this study. In addition, the analysis is based on the current tax structure and rates imposed by the affected municipalities. Changes in those rates would alter the findings of this study. All dollar amounts are Elliott D. Pollack & Company www.arizonaeconomy.com 1 DRAFT Economic and Fiscal Impact of Northeast Development Plan stated in 2011 dollars and, unless indicated, do not take into account the effects of inflation.  The analysis outlined in this study is based on currently available information and estimates and assumptions about long-term future trends. Such estimates and assumptions are subject to uncertainty and variation. Accordingly, we do not represent them as results that will be achieved. Some assumptions inevitably will not materialize and unanticipated events and circumstances may occur; therefore, the actual results achieved may vary materially from the forecasted results. The assumptions disclosed in this market study are those that are believed to be significant to the projections of future results. The following section will describe the assumptions and methodologies used to estimate the economic and fiscal impact of the commercial uses within the Northeast Area. Section 3.0 will describe the impact of construction on the local economy. Section 4.0 outlines the effect of the commercial land use operations on the City of Mesa at project completion. Elliott D. Pollack & Company www.arizonaeconomy.com 2 DRAFT Economic and Fiscal Impact of Northeast Development Plan 2.0 Methodology & Assumptions 2.1 Project Assumptions This analysis outlines the economic and fiscal impact of the commercial land use component of the Northeast Area Development Plan for the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport. The commercial component of the Plan is comprised of privately-owned retail, office and hotel buildings that would be located on Airport property under land leases. This analysis assumes that 2,580,000 square feet of commercial space would be built in the northeast part of the Northeast Area. The economic and fiscal impact analysis is based on full build-out of the property. The assumptions used to estimate the economic and fiscal impacts of the construction and operations of the commercial uses within the Northeast Area of Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport have been developed from a variety of sources. The most important source is the development plan that was prepared during the course of the study. Based on that plan, an estimated 166 acres are available for private development of uses that would support the Airport as well as provide services to the surrounding area. The concept plan for the property is shown on the following page. Elliott D. Pollack & Company www.arizonaeconomy.com 3 DRAFT Economic and Fiscal Impact of Northeast Development Plan Commercial Use Area Elliott D. Pollack & Company www.arizonaeconomy.com 4 DRAFT Economic and Fiscal Impact of Northeast Development Plan As initially conceived, the commercial land use area is comprised of four parts separated by roadways. Two areas on the far east and west sides of the site are designated for office space. A mixed use area composed of office and retail uses is in the northeastern portion of the site and two conference hotels with a total of 600 rooms are located just northeast of the parking garages. The assumptions for the construction of the buildings within the Northeast Area are shown on the following table. Overall, the floor area ratio (FAR) for the property is 0.36. Based on the available land, assumptions were made about the type of parking. Parking for the mixed use development is assumed to be in parking garages while the remaining sites will have surface parking. Project Construction Assumptions Northeast Area Commercial Uses Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Land Project Site Total Development Offices East Offices West Mixed Use Retail Office Hotel Area 166 2,580,000 840,000 420,000 900,000 300,000 600,000 420,000 Rent Land Value Annual Land Rent $10 per SF $1 per SF Construction Costs Offices Retail Hotel $154 per SF $87 per SF $120,000 per room Parking spaces Retail and Office demand Hotels Garages Cost per space Parking Lots Cost per space FF&E Hotel acres SF SF SF SF SF SF SF 1 1.5 3,600 $15,000 5,940 $1,500 space per 250 SF spaces per room spaces spaces % of Construction Cost 12% Source: Elliott D. Pollack and Company, RSMeans Construction Cost Estimator, Chain Store Age Construction Cost Survey Elliott D. Pollack & Company www.arizonaeconomy.com 5 DRAFT Economic and Fiscal Impact of Northeast Development Plan Several assumptions were also made regarding the operations of the commercial properties. For office and retail operations, the number of jobs was determined using estimates of square feet per employee. Hotel operations were based on the number of employees per room. All figures assume vacancy rates for the project that are consistent with a normalized regional market (6% for retail and 10% for office). The following table contains a summary of the primary assumptions of the study. It should be noted that while office employment is listed in the subsequent impact tables as jobs created within the commercial area, in actuality, office space only serves as a place where jobs can be situated. The businesses that occupy the office buildings are actually creating jobs. Project Operations Assumptions Northeast Area Commercial Uses Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Employees Offices 250 SF per employee Retail 800 SF per employee Hotel 0.75 employees per room Revenues Retail $250 per SF Hotel Number of Rooms 600 Occupancy Rate 70% Days of Operation 365 Average Nightly Rate $150 per room Food, Beverage, and other Taxable Sales 24% of room revenues Rent Retail Rent $22 per SF Vacancy Rate 6% Office Rent $25 per SF Vacancy Rate 10% Source: Elliott D. Pollack and Company Elliott D. Pollack & Company www.arizonaeconomy.com 6 DRAFT Economic and Fiscal Impact of Northeast Development Plan 2.2 Economic Impact Methodology Economic impact analysis examines the economic implications of an activity in terms of output, earnings, and employment. For this study, the analysis focuses on the jobs and corresponding output and wages that are created during construction as well as the jobs and output that are created through the operations of the complex and residential activity within the project. The different types of economic impacts are known as direct, indirect, and induced, according to the manner in which the impacts are generated. For instance, direct employment consists of permanent jobs held by the project employees. Indirect employment is those jobs created by businesses that provide goods and services essential to the operation or construction of the project. These businesses range from manufacturers (who make goods) to wholesalers (who deliver goods) to janitorial firms (who clean the buildings). Finally, the spending of the wages and salaries of the direct and indirect employees on items such as food, housing, transportation and medical services creates induced employment in all sectors of the economy, throughout the county. These secondary effects were captured in the analysis conducted in this study. Multipliers have been developed to estimate the indirect and induced impacts of various direct economic activities. The Minnesota IMPLAN Group developed the multipliers used in this study. The economic impact is categorized into three types of impacts: (1) Employment Impact – the total wage, salary and self employed jobs in a region. Jobs include both part time and full time workers, though the figure is expressed in full time equivalents. (2) Earnings Impact – the personal income, earnings or wages, of the direct, indirect and induced employees. Earnings include total wage and salary payments as well as benefits of health and life insurance, retirement payments and any other non-cash compensation. (3) Economic Output – the economic output relates to the gross receipts for goods or services generated by the project’s operations. Economic impacts are by their nature regional in character. The direct impact of job creation will be primarily concentrated in the City of Mesa, however much of the impact will be felt throughout all of Maricopa County. All dollar figures, unless otherwise stated, are expressed in 2011 dollars. Elliott D. Pollack & Company www.arizonaeconomy.com 7 DRAFT Economic and Fiscal Impact of Northeast Development Plan 2.3 Fiscal Impact Methodology Fiscal impact analysis quantifies the public revenues associated with a particular economic activity. The primary revenue sources of local, county, and state governments (i.e. taxes) are analyzed to determine how an activity may affect the various jurisdictions. This report will evaluate the impact of the commercial uses on the City of Mesa. In addition, the Airport Authority will also collect land rents from the lessee’s of the commercial property. The fiscal impact figures cited in this report have been generated from information provided by a variety of sources including the U.S. Bureau of the Census, the U.S. Department of Labor, the Internal Revenue Service, Maricopa County, the state of Arizona, the Arizona Tax Research Association, and the U.S. Consumer Expenditure Survey. Elliott D. Pollack and Company has relied upon current market averages for estimates of construction cost. Unless otherwise stated, all dollar values are expressed in 2011 dollars. Fiscal impacts are categorized by type in this study, similar to the economic impact analysis. The major sources of revenue generation for governmental entities are related to construction of the project and ongoing impact from the operations and resident spending. Construction impacts relate to the revenues generated from development of the project and include the state and local sales taxes levied on construction materials. In addition, the City of Mesa and other cities in the Southeast Valley will benefit from the spending of construction workers within City limits. Once the project is completed, the ongoing fiscal impacts of the commercial uses will create revenue for the City. For Mesa, revenues will be generated through sales tax, lease tax, property tax (if an in-lieu tax is imposed), and State shared revenue. The following is a description of the applicable revenue sources that will be considered for this analysis.  Construction Sales Tax The state, counties and cities in Arizona levy a sales tax on materials used in the construction of buildings or development of land improvements. That tax is calculated by state law under the assumption that 65% of the construction cost of the facility and its land improvements are related to construction materials with the remaining 35% devoted to labor. The sales tax rate is then applied to the 65% materials figure. The sales tax on construction materials is a one-time collection by the governmental entity. Construction sales tax is generated during any new building construction as well as from improvements. Mesa has a construction sales tax rate of 1.75%.  Use Tax The State and local cities charge a use tax that is assessed on items purchased outside the jurisdiction and brought in for storage, use or consumption. This tax rate will be applied Elliott D. Pollack & Company www.arizonaeconomy.com 8 DRAFT Economic and Fiscal Impact of Northeast Development Plan to the FF&E (furniture, fixture and equipment) estimate of the hotel projects. The use tax rate for City of Mesa is 1.75%. No exemptions are given for this tax category.  Sales Tax The state, counties, and incorporated cities and towns charge sales tax on retail goods and services. The sales tax rate for the City of Mesa is 1.75%. These tax rates are applied to the retail sales within the development.  Lease Tax The State, counties, and incorporated cities and towns typically charge a lease tax on commercial rents. The lease tax rate for the City of Mesa is 1.75%. These tax rates are applied to the taxable rent that is collected by the landlord for each rental property.  Property Taxes Property taxes are normally collected for commercial buildings. However, since the land is owned by the Airport Authority, a tax is not normally collected. For this project, however, it is assumed that the Airport Authority will levy an in-lieu tax that would essentially replicate the normal property tax. The in-lieu tax is shown as revenue to the City of Mesa. The taxable value for the commercial buildings was based on the construction costs and the commercial assessment rate of 20%. The City of Mesa property tax rate is currently 0.35 per $100 of assessed value.  State Shared Revenues Each county in Arizona receives a portion of State revenues from three different sources - state sales tax, state income tax, vehicle license tax (VLT) and highway user revenue fund (HURF) tax. The formulas for allocating these revenues are primarily based on population. State Income Tax The State of Arizona collects taxes on personal income. The tax rate used in the analysis averages about 1.6% for earnings. These percentages are based on the most recently available income tax data from the State and the projected wage levels of jobs created by the construction and operations impact. This tax is applied to the wages and earnings of direct, indirect and induced employment. Portions of this tax are redistributed through revenue sharing to cities and towns throughout Arizona based on population. HURF Taxes The State of Arizona collects specific taxes for the Highway User Revenue Fund (HURF). Both the registration fees and the motor vehicle fuel tax (gas tax) are considered in this analysis. The motor vehicle fuel tax is $0.18 per gallon and is calculated based on a vehicle traveling 12,000 miles per year at 15 miles per gallon. Registration fees average $66 per employee in the State of Arizona. These factors are applied to the projected direct, indirect and induced employee count. Portions of these taxes are distributed to counties and cities throughout Arizona based on a formula that includes population and the origin of gasoline sales. Elliott D. Pollack & Company www.arizonaeconomy.com 9 DRAFT Economic and Fiscal Impact of Northeast Development Plan Vehicle License Tax The vehicle license tax is a personal property tax placed on vehicles at the time of annual registration. This factor is applied to the projected direct, indirect and induced employee count. The average tax used in this analysis is $358 and portions of the total collections are distributed through the Highway User Revenue Fund. The remaining funds are shared between counties and cities in accordance with population based formulas. The above tax categories represent the largest sources of revenues that will be generated for the City of Mesa. This analysis considers gross tax collections and does not differentiate among dedicated purposes or uses of such gross tax collections. In addition to the tax revenues that accrue to the City of Mesa, the Airport Authority would also collect rents on land that is leased to developers of the commercial properties. In 2011 dollars, that land could be valued at $10 per square foot. The traditional investment return on land leases is 10% per year or $1.00 dollar per square foot. Elliott D. Pollack & Company www.arizonaeconomy.com 10 DRAFT Economic and Fiscal Impact of Northeast Development Plan 3.0 Impact of Construction This section of the report outlines the economic and fiscal impact of the construction of commercial buildings at full build-out. Construction phase impacts are generally short-term effects related to onsite and offsite construction employment and other supporting industries. The long-term consequences of a project are the operational phase impacts that are described in Section 4.0. The total construction cost of the commercial buildings in the Northeast Area is estimated at $384.5 million. The economic impacts are expressed over the entire duration of the construction. 3.1 Economic Impact of Construction The economic impact of the construction of the commercial buildings in the Northeast Area is outlined in the following table based on the $384.5 million cost. The project would generate 3,287 direct person years of employment during the construction phase. Person years of employment represent the total construction jobs created each year throughout the construction period. To derive the respective annual averages, employment, wages, and economic output can be divided by the expected number of years it may take to complete the development. For instance, if the project requires 15 years to complete, on average 399 construction jobs would be created each year. About $175.6 million in direct wages would be generated based on the total construction activity. Another 2,694 indirect and induced person years of employment would be created in the local economy. Wages for these indirect and induced employees would total about $125.5 million. Altogether, the project would create approximately 5,982 jobs during the construction timeframe, $301.1 million in wages and over $730 million in economic activity. These impacts would be extinguished when construction is completed. Economic Impact of Construction Northeast Area Commercial Uses Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Greater Phoenix (2011 Dollars) Impact Type Direct Person Years of Employment 3,287 Wages $175,600,000 Economic Output $384,500,000 Indirect 833 $46,300,000 $123,000,000 Induced 1,861 $79,200,000 $223,100,000 Total 5,982 $301,100,000 $730,600,000 _______________ 1/ The total may not equal the sum of the impacts due to rounding. All dollar figures are in constant dollars. Inflation has not been included in these figures. Source: Elliott D. Pollack & Company; IMPLAN Elliott D. Pollack & Company www.arizonaeconomy.com 11 DRAFT Economic and Fiscal Impact of Northeast Development Plan The following table shows the economic impact by land use. Economic Impact of Construction Northeast Area Commercial Uses Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Greater Phoenix Land use Impact Type (2011 Dollars) Person Years of Employment Wages Economic Output 1,106 280 626 2,012 $59,100,000 $15,600,000 $26,700,000 $101,400,000 $129,400,000 $41,400,000 $75,000,000 $245,800,000 553 140 313 1,006 $29,500,000 $7,800,000 $13,300,000 $50,600,000 $64,700,000 $20,700,000 $37,500,000 $122,900,000 223 57 126 406 $11,900,000 $3,100,000 $5,400,000 $20,400,000 $26,100,000 $8,300,000 $15,100,000 $49,500,000 790 200 447 1,437 $42,200,000 $11,100,000 $19,000,000 $72,300,000 $92,400,000 $29,600,000 $53,600,000 $175,600,000 616 156 348 1,120 $32,900,000 $8,700,000 $14,800,000 $56,400,000 $72,000,000 $23,000,000 $41,800,000 $136,800,000 3,287 833 1,861 5,982 $175,600,000 $46,300,000 $79,200,000 $301,100,000 $384,500,000 $123,000,000 $223,100,000 $730,600,000 Office East Direct Indirect Induced Total Office West Direct Indirect Induced Total Mixed Use Retail Direct Indirect Induced Total Office Direct Indirect Induced Total Hotels Direct Indirect Induced Total Total Project Direct Indirect Induced Total _______________ 1/ The total may not equal the sum of the impacts due to rounding. All dollar figures are in constant dollars. Inflation has not been included in these figures. Source: Elliott D. Pollack & Company; IMPLAN Elliott D. Pollack & Company www.arizonaeconomy.com 12 DRAFT Economic and Fiscal Impact of Northeast Development Plan 3.2 Fiscal Impact of Construction The construction of the commercial uses in the Northeast Area of the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport would create significant tax revenues for the City of Mesa as shown on the following table. Revenues have been defined in this analysis as either primary or secondary, depending on their source and how the dollars flow through the economy into City tax accounts. For instance, some revenues, such as construction sales taxes, are straightforward calculations based on the cost of construction. These revenues are described in this study as primary revenues and include retail sales taxes, property taxes and taxes on lease payments. Secondary revenues, on the other hand, flow from the wages of those direct, indirect and induced employees who are supported by the project. Revenue projections are based on typical wages of the employees working in the project, their spending patterns, and estimates of where they might live. These impacts cover the entire construction period, and are not annualized. Primary revenues generated to the City from the construction sales tax and FF&E sales tax would total $4.5 million over the construction period. In addition, the City would benefit from the spending of construction workers within City limits. Sales tax collections for the City were estimated at an additional $335,000 for the entire construction period. Other secondary revenues include property taxes and State shared revenues. In total, the City of Mesa would expect to collect nearly $5.5 million in tax revenue from the construction and construction-related activity. The following tables detail the fiscal impacts of construction for the Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport. Fiscal Impact of Construction Northeast Area Commercial Uses Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport City of Mesa (2011 Dollars) Primary Revenues Impact Type Direct Resident State Construction FF&E Spending Property Shared Sales Tax Sales Tax Sales Tax Tax Revenues Total Revenues $4,374,000 $151,000 $335,000 $52,000 $185,000 $5,097,000 N/A N/A $87,000 $13,000 $31,000 $131,000 Indirect Induced Total Revenues Secondary Revenues Employee N/A $4,374,000 N/A $151,000 $169,000 $30,000 $60,000 $259,000 $591,000 $95,000 $276,000 $5,487,000 _______________ 1/ The figures are intended only as a general guideline as to how the City could be impacted by the project. The above figures are based on the current economic structure and tax rates of the State of Arizona and City of Mesa. 2/ Numbers may not add up exactly due to rounding. Source: Elliott D. Pollack & Company; IMPLAN; Arizona Department of Revenue; Arizona Tax Research Association The following table shows the fiscal impact of the project by land use. Elliott D. Pollack & Company www.arizonaeconomy.com 13 DRAFT Economic and Fiscal Impact of Northeast Development Plan Fiscal Impact of Construction Northeast Area Commercial Uses Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport City of Mesa (2011 Dollars) Primary Revenues Land use Impact Type Secondary Revenues Employee Resident State Construction FF&E Spending Property Shared Sales Tax Sales Tax Sales Tax Tax Revenues Total Revenues $1,471,500 N/A N/A $1,471,500 $0 N/A N/A $0 $112,600 $29,100 $56,900 $198,600 $17,600 $4,500 $10,000 $32,100 $62,200 $10,500 $20,100 $92,800 $1,663,900 $44,100 $87,000 $1,795,000 $735,700 N/A N/A $735,700 $0 N/A N/A $0 $56,300 $14,600 $28,500 $99,400 $8,800 $2,200 $5,000 $16,000 $31,000 $5,200 $10,100 $46,300 $831,800 $22,000 $43,600 $897,400 $296,900 N/A N/A $296,900 $0 N/A N/A $0 $22,700 $5,900 $11,500 $40,100 $3,600 $900 $2,000 $6,500 $12,600 $2,100 $4,100 $18,800 $335,800 $8,900 $17,600 $362,300 $1,051,100 N/A N/A $1,051,100 $0 N/A N/A $0 $80,400 $20,800 $40,700 $141,900 $12,600 $3,200 $7,100 $22,900 $44,400 $7,500 $14,400 $66,300 $1,188,500 $31,500 $62,200 $1,282,200 $819,000 N/A N/A $819,000 $151,000 N/A N/A $151,000 $62,700 $16,200 $31,700 $110,600 $9,800 $2,500 $5,500 $17,800 $34,600 $5,800 $11,200 $51,600 $1,077,100 $24,500 $48,400 $999,000 $4,374,000 N/A N/A $4,374,000 $151,000 N/A N/A $151,000 $335,000 $87,000 $169,000 $591,000 $52,000 $13,000 $30,000 $95,000 $185,000 $31,000 $60,000 $276,000 $5,097,000 $131,000 $259,000 $5,487,000 Office East Direct Indirect Induced Total Revenues Office West Direct Indirect Induced Total Revenues Mixed Uses Retail Direct Indirect Induced Total Revenues Office Direct Indirect Induced Total Revenues Hotel Direct Indirect Induced Total Revenues Total Project Direct Indirect Induced Total Revenues _______________ 1/ The figures are intended only as a general guideline as to how the City could be impacted by the project. The above figures are based on the current economic structure and tax rates of the State of Arizona and City of Mesa. Source: Elliott D. Pollack & Company; IMPLAN; Arizona Department of Revenue; Arizona Tax Research Association Elliott D. Pollack & Company www.arizonaeconomy.com 14 DRAFT Economic and Fiscal Impact of Northeast Development Plan 4.0 Operations Impact at Build-Out Once construction is completed, the impact of the operations would begin to produce jobs and tax revenue. The buildings would generate property and rental taxes. The retail operations would result in sales tax revenue, and the hotel would generate bed tax revenue. The spending by employees would create secondary revenues in the form of sales tax. Secondary revenues also include property taxes for employees that live within the City. 4.1 Economic Impact of Operations The operations of the commercial uses within the Northeast Area would have an impact on the local and regional economies. An estimated 8,265 direct employees would be employed within the development. The majority of the jobs (7,440) would occupy the office buildings within the Area. Retail uses would create 375 jobs while the hotel would employ another 450. Taking into account the ripple effect of the regional multipliers, approximately 12,459 permanent direct, indirect, and induced jobs would be supported throughout Greater Phoenix as a result of the development of the commercial uses in the Northeast Area of the Airport. The following tables quantify the ongoing economic impact of the project at build out. Annual Economic Impact of Operations Northeast Area Commercial Uses Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Greater Phoenix (2011 Dollars) Impact Type Direct Annual Employment 8,265 Wages $283,700,000 Economic Output $523,100,000 Indirect 1,313 $61,100,000 $162,700,000 Induced Total 2,882 $122,900,000 $345,900,000 12,459 $467,700,000 $1,031,700,000 _______________ 1/ The total may not equal the sum of the impacts due to rounding. All dollar figures are in constant dollars. Inflation has not been included in these figures. Source: Elliott D. Pollack & Company; IMPLAN Elliott D. Pollack & Company www.arizonaeconomy.com 15 DRAFT Economic and Fiscal Impact of Northeast Development Plan Economic Impact of Operation Northeast Area Commercial Uses Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport Greater Phoenix (2011 Dollars) Land Use Impact Type Annual Employment Wages Economic Output 3,360 497 1,154 5,011 $115,200,000 $23,000,000 $49,200,000 $187,400,000 $202,900,000 $60,900,000 $138,600,000 $402,400,000 1,680 248 577 2,505 $57,600,000 $11,500,000 $24,600,000 $93,700,000 $101,400,000 $30,500,000 $69,300,000 $201,200,000 375 26 101 503 $10,800,000 $1,200,000 $4,300,000 $16,300,000 $19,700,000 $3,700,000 $12,100,000 $35,500,000 2,400 355 824 3,579 $82,300,000 $16,400,000 $35,200,000 $133,900,000 $144,900,000 $43,500,000 $99,000,000 $287,400,000 450 187 224 861 $17,800,000 $9,000,000 $9,600,000 $36,400,000 $54,200,000 $24,000,000 $26,900,000 $105,100,000 8,265 1,313 2,882 12,459 $283,700,000 $61,100,000 $122,900,000 $467,700,000 $523,100,000 $162,700,000 $345,900,000 $1,031,700,000 Offices East Direct Indirect Induced Total Offices West Direct Indirect Induced Total Mixed Use Retail Direct Indirect Induced Total Offices Direct Indirect Induced Total Hotel Direct Indirect Induced Total Total Project Direct Indirect Induced Total _______________ 1/ The total may not equal the sum of the impacts due to rounding. All dollar figures are in constant dollars. Inflation has not been included in these figures. Source: Elliott D. Pollack & Company; IMPLAN Elliott D. Pollack & Company www.arizonaeconomy.com 16 DRAFT Economic and Fiscal Impact of Northeast Development Plan 4.2 Fiscal Impact of Operations Once the commercial uses within the Northeast Area are completed, the operations of the retail, office and hotel uses would increase tax revenue for the City of Mesa. The commercial elements were examined to determine their impact on government tax collections. The following tables show the ongoing tax revenue that the City of Mesa would expect to collect based on the revenues generated by the complex itself as well as secondary revenue sources. Sales tax from the retail and hotel components would result in $1.3 million in tax collection. Bed tax from the hotel contributes another $1.1 million. Secondary revenues total $1.6 million for the project at build out. In total, nearly $5.8 million would be collected each year by the City. Annual Fiscal Impact of Operations at Build out Northeast Area Commercial Uses Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport City of Mesa (2011 Dollars) Primary Revenues Impact Type Sales Tax Secondary Revenues Employee Resident State Spending Property Shared Bed Tax Property Tax Sales Tax Tax Revenues Total Revenues $841,000 $1,092,000 Rental Tax $266,000 $683,000 $132,000 $823,000 $5,167,000 Indirect N/A N/A N/A N/A $125,000 $21,000 $44,000 $190,000 Induced N/A N/A N/A N/A $262,000 $46,000 $93,000 $401,000 $266,000 $1,070,000 $199,000 $960,000 $5,758,000 Direct Annual Revenues $1,330,000 $1,330,000 $841,000 $1,092,000 _______________ 1/ The figures are intended only as a general guideline as to how the City could be impacted by the project. The above figures are based on the current economic structure and tax rates of the State of Arizona and City of Mesa. 2/ Numbers may not add up exactly due to rounding. Source: Elliott D. Pollack & Company; IMPLAN; Arizona Department of Revenue; Arizona Tax Research Association Elliott D. Pollack & Company www.arizonaeconomy.com 17 DRAFT Economic and Fiscal Impact of Northeast Development Plan Fiscal Impact of Construction Northeast Area Commercial Uses Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport City of Mesa (2011 Dollars) Primary Revenues Land use Impact Type Secondary Revenues Employee Resident State Construction FF&E Spending Property Shared Sales Tax Sales Tax Sales Tax Tax Revenues Total Revenues $1,471,500 N/A N/A $1,471,500 $0 N/A N/A $0 $112,600 $29,100 $56,900 $198,600 $17,600 $4,500 $10,000 $32,100 $62,200 $10,500 $20,100 $92,800 $1,663,900 $44,100 $87,000 $1,795,000 $735,700 N/A N/A $735,700 $0 N/A N/A $0 $56,300 $14,600 $28,500 $99,400 $8,800 $2,200 $5,000 $16,000 $31,000 $5,200 $10,100 $46,300 $831,800 $22,000 $43,600 $897,400 $296,900 N/A N/A $296,900 $0 N/A N/A $0 $22,700 $5,900 $11,500 $40,100 $3,600 $900 $2,000 $6,500 $12,600 $2,100 $4,100 $18,800 $335,800 $8,900 $17,600 $362,300 $1,051,100 N/A N/A $1,051,100 $0 N/A N/A $0 $80,400 $20,800 $40,700 $141,900 $12,600 $3,200 $7,100 $22,900 $44,400 $7,500 $14,400 $66,300 $1,188,500 $31,500 $62,200 $1,282,200 $819,000 N/A N/A $819,000 $151,000 N/A N/A $151,000 $62,700 $16,200 $31,700 $110,600 $9,800 $2,500 $5,500 $17,800 $34,600 $5,800 $11,200 $51,600 $1,077,100 $24,500 $48,400 $999,000 $4,374,000 N/A N/A $4,374,000 $151,000 N/A N/A $151,000 $335,000 $87,000 $169,000 $591,000 $52,000 $13,000 $30,000 $95,000 $185,000 $31,000 $60,000 $276,000 $5,097,000 $131,000 $259,000 $5,487,000 Office East Direct Indirect Induced Total Revenues Office West Direct Indirect Induced Total Revenues Mixed Uses Retail Direct Indirect Induced Total Revenues Office Direct Indirect Induced Total Revenues Hotel Direct Indirect Induced Total Revenues Total Project Direct Indirect Induced Total Revenues _______________ 1/ The figures are intended only as a general guideline as to how the City could be impacted by the project. The above figures are based on the current economic structure and tax rates of the State of Arizona and City of Mesa. Source: Elliott D. Pollack & Company; IMPLAN; Arizona Department of Revenue; Arizona Tax Research Association While not shown on the tax revenue tables, the Airport Authority would collect $7,231,000 annually (in 2011 dollars) at build-out from developers who lease land for the commercial buildings. Elliott D. Pollack & Company www.arizonaeconomy.com 18 Northeast Area Development Plan - Technical Report Appendices 152 Preliminary Typical Sections Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport