They’re working with airports to get space closer to gates — or, in some cases, occupying entire holding rooms at gates — to cater to travelers who are reluctant to wander too far from where they board.

To do it, they’re squeezing the size of gates, converting unused ones into food or snack areas and building smaller kitchens in gate restaurants that can function without a lot of equipment.

“The comfort level of individuals who fly is maybe to move only (about) 250 feet from their gates. They want a line of sight (to their gates),” says Bill Hooper, an airport architect at Gensler, an architecture firm. “People want to stay in proximity to their gates.”

Airports are driving the trend as much as restaurant operators. Airports no longer see themselves as just a place of transit as more of their revenue now comes from non-aviation sources such as parking, retail shops and food sales. And with airlines seeking more financial subsidies and rent discounts in exchange for air service, airport authorities are forced to think creatively about adding sources of income beyond their airline tenants.

This shift has emboldened airport concessionaires to propose ideas that may have been previously unthinkable, such as using boarding gates as restaurants. That airlines no longer serve food on many flights has only added to the urgency to beef up food sales.

To read the full story: USA Today Travel

Passenger-rights advocates won a major victory Monday when the Transportation Department announced a rule to let passengers stuck inside stranded planes disembark after three hours.

The rule, which will take effect in late April and applies only to domestic flights, prohibits airlines from letting an aircraft remain on an airport tarmac for more than three hours without deplaning passengers.

Exceptions are allowed for safety or security, or when air-traffic controllers notify a pilot in command that returning to a passenger terminal would disrupt airport operations.

The rule came as a pleasant surprise to consumer advocates who had grown frustrated that a bill in Congress to help stuck passengers was stalled.

“We will comply with the new rule even though we believe it will lead to unintended consequences — more canceled flights and greater passenger inconvenience,” says James May, the association’s president and CEO. “The requirement of having planes return to the gates within a three-hour window or face significant fines is inconsistent with our goal of completing as many flights as possible.”

Last month, the Transportation Department for the first time fined airlines for leaving passengers stuck on a tarmac.

Continental Airlines and its regional airline partner, ExpressJet, were fined $100,000 for keeping passengers on a plane overnight at the Rochester, Minn., airport in August. Mesaba Airlines, which handled ground operations for the flight, was fined $75,000.

Other provisions of the rule:

•It requires airlines to provide adequate food and water and operating restrooms for passengers delayed for two hours, as well as any necessary medical attention.

• It prohibits airlines from scheduling chronically delayed flights.

•It requires that airlines designate an employee to monitor the effects of flight delays and cancellations, give consumers information on where to file complaints and respond “in a timely and substantive fashion” to complaints.

•It requires airlines to display flight delay information on their websites for all domestic flights.

•It prohibits airlines from retroactively applying changes to their contracts of carriage — the conditions passengers agree to when buying tickets — that “could have a significant negative impact” on consumers who have already bought tickets.

“Airline passengers have rights, and these new rules will require airlines to live up to their obligation to treat their customers fairly,” says Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood.

The new rules are supported by business-travel groups and passengers who have experienced lengthy tarmac delays.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/travel/2009-12-21-tarmac-strandings-limit-3-hours_N.htm

Tiny airport sleeping rooms — similar to the cubicles that Asian travelers use to catch a snooze in between flights — have arrived in America.

Atlanta, the world’s largest airport, opened five Minute Suites this month where tired passengers can doze for $30 an hour. The rooms — 7 feet by 8 feet, or about the size of two office cubicles put together — are equipped with a daybed sofa, pillows (with disposable covers), fresh blankets, a small desk, Internet access and a flat-screen 32-inch monitor with DirecTV and flight information. They have systems to mask noise.

San Francisco International plans to follow suit. It’s hired a California company to design 14 rooms of about 90 square feet for its international terminal. The rooms will have similar amenities.

“We view amenities and services as the new frontier,” says Cheryl Nashir, associate deputy director at San Francisco International.

It’s a frontier long settled in Asia and parts of Europe. Tiny nap rooms bundled with shower, spa and other freshen-up services have been available for international travelers for years.

They haven’t caught on in the USA until now because layovers are shorter and Americans view airports as a point of transit to hurry through.

Some companies see the U.S. market as now ready for similar rooms. Among them:

•Minute Suites. Its rooms at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta’s B Concourse have drawn 160 customers in the first two weeks, exceeding expectations, says Daniel Solomon of Minute Suites. Customers who stay beyond the first hour pay $7.50 for each additional 15 minutes.

Solomon says Atlanta wants to possibly add more at its E Concourse, and the company has had discussions with Philadelphia, Denver, New York JFK and Dallas/Fort Worth.

•Unique Retreat. The company won the San Francisco International contract in October and is designing rooms that will open next year at the airport’s International Terminal Boarding Area G. Its 14 rooms will have curved walls and no corners, “which gives you a sense of more space,” say Ron Baltruzak of the company based in Irvine, Calif. Each room will be equipped with a day bed, desk, a 32-inch TV and Wi-Fi. The company will offer movie rentals and business center services.

•Edo Traveler Suites. A Canadian company is launching next year and seeks to develop rooms at Canadian and U.S. airports, says spokeswoman Thamarah Mathurin. Edo plans rooms that also would have a private toilet and shower.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/travel/2009-12-10-travelminirooms10_ST_N.htm

Citing escalating construction costs, airports have been lobbying Congress to raise the cap on the “passenger facility charge” that fliers pay as part of their airline tickets.

The charge – now at $4.50 for each leg of the trip, up to $18 per round trip – funds the building of runways, terminals and gates.

Airports would like to see the charge increased to $7.50 and indexed to the inflationary cost of construction.

A bill in the House to reauthorize the Federal Aviation Administration proposes an increase to $7 a leg. A Senate committee has voted to keep the cap at $4.50.

“All we’re trying to do is keep up with inflation,” says Todd Hauptli of the American Association of Airport Executives. He argues that the purchasing power of the facility charge has fallen by about 50% since 2000.

Airlines, which act as the collectors on the facility charge, oppose an increase.

They’re already under fire from consumers for charging extra fees for services.

Increasing the cap to $7 “would impose an additional and unwarranted $2 billion-per-year tax increase on commercial passengers,” James May, CEO of the Air Transport Association, the trade group representing most airlines, wrote to Congress earlier this year. “With airport revenue eclipsing record levels … the imposition of an increased PFC tax is not only unwarranted, but will also further reduce demand for travel.”

Since Congress approved the facility charge in 1992, U.S. airports have raised more than $27.5 billion.

Airports have to apply for approval to the FAA for each project that will be funded by facility charge funds.

They also use their own revenue from bonds and FAA grants to fund construction.

John Meenan of the airline association says the airports too often have used the money for projects they shouldn’t and that the FAA has been too lax in approving them.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/travel/2009-11-30-airwar30_ST_N.htm