design contest no: 15738 masterplanbetterairport.kefairport.is/wp-content/uploads/... · passenger...
TRANSCRIPT
DESIGN CONTEST NO: 15738
MASTERPLANKEFLAVIK INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
ID: 89046
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
890462
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
89046 3
TABLE OF CONTENT
- MASTERPLAN- LAND-USE PLAN- TERMINAL PLAN- ENVIROMENTAL PLAN- MASTERPLAN PROCESS AND METHODOLOGY- PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION & TIMESCHEDULE
050616263034
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
890464
PROPOSAL: 89046Kefl avik International Airport with airport city, from north
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
89046 5
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
The proposed masterplan seeks to form a robust and fl exible framework that will ensure a long lasting and meaningful future development of the airport until 2040.
Based on our analyzes and the competition material, we suggest a development that optimizes the use of the existing facilities, runways, building mass etc. while minimizing the operational disturbances during con-struction. In this way, it is ensured that the project is in accordance with the goals of Isavia.
The airport’s role as a hub between two continents is unique and sets standards and requirements to the future development. Increasing traffi c, peak de-mands and future changes needs to be adhered to by a scheme that is open for alternative developments and fl exible for unforeseen needs.
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
890466
LAND- USE PLAN
FUEL STORAGE
GSE GSE
ATC TOWERCOMPLEX
PROTECTED LANDSIDE
Àsbrù
GR OUN
HANGAR
WORKSHOP
FACILITY MANAGEMENT
VEHICLE STORAGE & MAINTENANCE
ICELANDIC COAST GUARDGA
D HANDLING
MILITARY AREA
R E LOCATE DF UE L F ACILITY
P P
DE-ICEWEST
DE-ICEEAST
ICELANDAIRHANGAR
GP29
LLZ29
GP11
GP20R
GP20L
GP20L
LLZ02R
CATERING
CARGO
LLZ02L
LLZ20R
LLZ11
GP02R
20R
1
29
20L
1
02L
02R
LLZ20L
REMOTE STANDS
REMOTE STANDS
LEGEND
PROTECTED LANDSIDEBUILDINGSAIRPORT CITY
RAIL
AIRPORT BOUNDARYAIRSIDE/LANDSIDE BORDER
LAND-USE PLAN
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
89046 7
LAND USE DEVELOPMENT
Terminal area
The suitability of the existing Terminal area has been analyzed with regard to location, access, potential for long term development, fl exibility, cost and operations during construction work. It has been found to be very suitable for future development. It has been deemed unnecessary to study the implications of an entirely new Terminal location.
Access roads
The Reykjanesbraut is maintained as the main ac-cess road for the Passenger Terminal. In addition, it is proposed to establish a supplementary access route branching off earlier, for instance at Àsbrù, for service vehicles, goods and waste transportation. The road will need to be upgraded concerning standard. This route may also be used as an alternative route for ac-cessing the Terminal, in case of incidents at the main access.
Rail connection
A reservation for the rail line to the airport is proposed at the south-west side of Reykjanesbraut. The line will go into a cut towards the north side of the extended Terminal. The rail station is proposed on a level below the lower traffi c forecourt, between the Terminal and the traffi c forecourt. Passengers are bridged over the station. The line is planned to be double tracked with-in the airport area.
In the event of the Terminal and rail are constructed at diff erent stages, adequate measures should be taken to secure the construction of the rail.
Traffi c forecourt
The traffi c forecourt is recommended construct-ed with two levels, with the upper level on a bridge construction. The upper level will be for departing passengers, while the lower level will be for arriving passengers. For Terminals reaching 8-10 MPPA in a foreseeable future, a vertical split of Landside traffi c of departures and arrivals is recommended. This is to avoid having long distances of by-passing and cross-ing of other vehicles. To avoid vehicular and pedestri-an confl icts it is important to establish crosswalks and the two level forecourt provides less complications in that respect.
Construction of a new 2-level forecourt along the north façade will incur the least operational con-straints to the existing Terminal during construction. Extending or copying the present forecourt layout on the eastern and western side of the Terminal, is not recommended. This is due to operational constraints during construction and it will in the future reduce the expandability of the Terminal.
UTILITY VEHICLES
DIAGRAM 1: The main traffi c infrastructure to the competition area.
LAND-USE PLAN
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
8 89046
ZONING PLAN
GP29
LLZ29
GP11
GP20R
GP20L
GP20L
LLZ02R
LLZ02L
LLZ20R
LLZ11
GP02R
20R
1
29
20L
1
02L
02R
LLZ20L
PROTECTED LANDSIDE
REMOTE
FUEL STORAGE
STANDS
REMOTE STANDS
GR OUND HANDLING
opt. marsmars
MILITARY AREA
DE-ICE
ICELANDAIRHANGAR
WESTDE-ICE
EAST
ATC TOWERCOMPLEX
R E LOCATE DFUE L FACILITY
P
GSE GSE
P
CATERING
CARGO
WORKSHOP
HANGAR
PASSENGER TERMINALAIRPORT PARK
SHORT/MEDIUM TIME PARKING
PROTECTED LANDSIDE
STAFF PARKINGRAIL LINK
AIRPORT CITY
AIRPORT BOUNDARY
LONG TERM PARKING
AIRSIDE/LANDSIDE BORDER
LEGEND
AIRCRAFT STANDSREMOTE STANDSAIRCRAFT MAINTANANCEAIRPORT RESCUE AND FIRE FIGHTINGCATERINGCARGO HANDLING
FUEL STORAGEAIR TRAFFIC CONTROLGROUND HANDLING WORKSHOPFACILITY MANAGEMENTVEHICLE STORAGE & MAINTENANCEICELANDIC COAST GUARDGA
LAND-USE PLAN
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
89046 9
Generally, private cars should be restricted to short drop-off stops at departures level of the traffi c fore-court. Arrivals pick-up and short term parking for departures is recommended routed to parts of the parking area to the north of the Terminal, in order to reduce the traffi c on the forecourt.
Taxis and busses enter the traffi c forecourt on the appropriate level, and circulation from one level to the other is served by a loop road.
Parking
The short- and medium-time parking is recommend-ed located inside the traffi c loop. This can be on ground parking or multistory car parks.
Long-term parking and staff parking will be located east of the traffi c loop.
The number of parking spaces can be provided ac-cording to requirements up to 2040, and beyond.
A dedicated area in the multistory car park will be for rental cars, and related facilities.
Airport city
The area west and north of the access road is rec-ommended to be reserved for business purposes. This may be airport related businesses such as hotels, offi ces for operators at the airport, or businesses that will benefi t from the close proximity to the airport , such as a conference center, exhibition center, busi-nesses relying on overseas connections or tourist and leisure adventure center.
The airport city can be a future revenue-generating project for the benefi t of the airport and the Reykjavik region.
Cargo, ground handling and catering
Future developments of cargo handling, base for ground handling and catering are proposed to be relocated to the east side of the runway 02/20. This gives short transport distances to the Terminal while freeing ample space around the Terminal and its access route for future development of passenger traffi c related activity and business development. Equipment parking for ground handling is additionally proposed north of the north apron.
Future catering and cargo facilities are proposed lo-cated along TWY N-3.
Aircraft maintenance
The existing Icelandair hangar is proposed to continue its operation at the existing site, for as long as needed.
DIAGRAM 2: Drawing showing the existing runways and taxiways toghether with purposed new runways and taxiways.
- new runways and taxiways- existing runways and taxiways- non active existing runways and taxiways
LAND-USE PLAN
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
8904610
GP29
LLZ29
GP11
GP20R
GP20L
GP20L
LLZ02R
LLZ02L
LLZ20R
LLZ11
GP02R
20R
1
29
20L
1
02L
02R
LLZ20L
HANGAR
PROTECTED LANDSIDE
REMOTE
FUEL STORAGE
STANDS
REMOTE STANDS
GR OUND HANDLING
opt. marsmars
MILITARY AREA
DE-ICE
ICELANDAIRHANGAR
WESTDE-ICE
EAST
ATC TOWERCOMPLEX
R E LOCATE DFUE L FACILITY
P
GSE GSE
P
CATERING
CARGO
WORKSHOP
RUNWAY AND TAXIWAY PLAN
LEGEND
PROTECTED LANDSIDE
AIRPORT BOUNDARYAIRSIDE/LANDSIDE BORDER
LAND-USE PLAN
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
89046 11
Future development of aircraft maintenance is pro-posed to be relocated to the apron east where there is more space for development and a better Land-side connection. This will require construction of new building facilities.
It is appreciated that existing facilities at the east apron and the ground handling area need upgrading, if re-used, but there is adequate space for new devel-opments in the area.
AIRFIELD
Runways
A future runway parallel to RWY 02/20 (designated as 02L/20R) is proposed west of the Terminal at a sepa-ration of around 2.000 m to the existing RWY provid-ing the ability to perform independent parallel oper-ations. The new RWY is proposed as a Code 4E RWY with a length around 3.000 m subject to Icelandair’s fl eet plan for new wide-body aircraft. For planning purpose the geometric layout shall allow for Code F aircraft.
The primary mode of operation of the parallel RWY system is proposed as segregated mode and the staggering shall be optimized in order to minimize taxi times and fuel consumption during taxiing. One option for improving this will be to claim further land at the north end of the new RWY. This could be either as an acquisition or as a land swap. The additional land should then allow for a location of the new RWY 500 – 1 000 m further to the north compared to a new RWY fully inside the existing land lot.
In addition to rectangular exits provided by the cross-ing of RWY 11/29 and existing TWYs K-3, exits are proposed at both ends. Further two RETs are pro-posed for landings on 20R around 1.750 m and 2.250 m from the threshold.
In order to reduce the RWY occupancy time and ex-pand the capacity of the existing RWY 02/20 (in the future designated 02R/20L) it is proposed to con-struct one or two RETs around 1 750 m and 2 250 m from threshold 02. Alternatively the TWY K-1 may serve the purpose for the 2 250 m RET.
Further exits will be discussed with the stakeholders during the Masterplan process e.g. RETs for landings in direction 20 on the existing RWY until the new RWY is operational or for landings in direction 02 on the new RWY.
Taxiways
The new RWY is proposed served by a new full-length parallel taxiway on the eastern side of the runway. The existing and the new runway will be linked east-west with the passenger Terminal area and the existing maintenance area by two parallel taxiways. The exist-
1000 M
DIAGRAM 3: Drawing showing a optinal position of a new runway to the vest of the terminal.
LAND-USE PLAN
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
8904612LAND-USE PLAN
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
89046 13
ing TWY N4 and TWY N5 will be included as part of the taxiway link.
From the east-west taxiway link two TWYs will con-nect to the aprons on the west side of the passenger Terminal and two TWYs will connect to the aprons on the east side of the passenger Terminal.
Existing TWY S3 and G-2 will be replaced by a new taxiway linking directly to the southern extremity of the new runway in order to minimize confl icts with the new ILS equipment for the runway.
Apron
The proposed apron layout has the capacity of 12 Code E stands and 20 Code C stands as estimated by Leigh Fisher for 2040. The provided layout has the ability to serve all the required stands as contact stands fi tted with air bridges. In addition to the 2040 requirement remote aircraft positions are proposed for further capacity if needed.
10 Code C stands are proposed on the north side of the north pier distributed on the east and west wing. The east wing stands are served by an aircraft stand taxilane around the east end of the north pier; while the west wing stands are served by an aircraft stand taxilane around the west end of the north pier.
9 Code E stands are proposed on the south side of the north pier. Space will be available for one addition-al Code E stand if the option to move the connector between north pier and south pier underground is chosen.
Between the stands on the north pier and the south pier a full Code E taxiway is proposed to cater for a situation where the connector is moved underground and a drive through option on the taxiway appears.
A maximum of 15 aircraft can be parked around the south pier when the two proposed MARS serve Code C aircraft (13 Code C + 2 Code E). If the two MARS serve Code E aircraft the apron holds 9 Code C and 4 Code E aircraft.
De-icing/anti-icing
For environmental and operational reasons it is rec-ommended to move the de-icing/anti-icing away from the apron areas. With a new parallel RWY in op-eration it is proposed to have two de-icing platforms available; one close to TWY E-4 and one in the area where TWY K-3 crosses the parallel TWY for the new runway.
By operating on designated de-icing/anti-icing plat-forms collection and recycling of fl uid run off will be achievable. Further operational benefi ts in terms of of reduced stand occupation time, shorter taxi distances from application to take-off and improved effi ciency
DIAGRAM 4: Drawing showing the buildings that are proposed demolished in the late stages of the masterplan.
- demolished buildings
LAND-USE PLAN
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
8904614
FUEL STORAGE
GSE GSE
ATC TOWERCOMPLEX
GR OUNWORKSHOP
FACILITY MANAGEM
VEHICLE STORAGE & MAIN
ICELANDIC COAST GUARDGA
D HAND
DTY
P P
DE-ICEWEST
DE-ICEEAST
ICELANDAIRHANGAR
GP29GP11
GP20R
GP20L
GP20L
LLZ02R
CATERING
CARGO
LLZ02L
LLZ20R
20R
129
20L
1
02L
REMOTE STANDS
REMOTE STANDS
LAND-USE PLAN, TERMINAL PLAN
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
89046 15
of the equipment will be obtained.
The eastern de-icing platform will be used for take off s from the existing RWY 02/20 and RWY 29. The western de-icing platform will be used for take off s from the new RWY and RWY 11.
Airfi eld Fire & Rescue station
The existing location of the airfi eld fi re and rescue station in the eastern part of the airport will not be able to satisfy the required response times for the new runway. During development of the Masterplan a number of options to meet ICAO requirements will be analyzed including a new central main station and a satellite station in addition to the existing station. The analysis will include considerations regarding fi nal lo-cation of the new RWY ends, existing and new equip-ment, short and long term CAPEX and OPEX costs.
ATC Tower
The existing ATC Tower in the east area will not be able to meet ICAO/FAA visibility requirements regarding the new runway. In order to provide suffi cient visibility of all six RWY ends, the taxiway system and the aprons it is proposed to locate a new ATC tower close to the midline between the two parallel RWYs and around 400 m south of RWY 11/29. At this location it is ex-pected that an eye level of the controllers in the VCR around 45 m above ground will meet the ICAO visibil-ity requirements regarding the RWYs. The new ATC tower is expected to have a total height of around 50 m above ground level. Task division between approach control, ground control and apron control, direct vis-ibility of aprons vs CCTV is considered as part of the Masterplan process.
Fuel supply
The issue of fuel supply has not been investigated in detail at this point; however the military fuel facility currently located just north of the western end of TWY S-3 is expected for safety reasons to require relocation. It is not normal practice to locate fuel stor-age facilities closer than 400 m from a runway center line including approach and departure surfaces. A new location has been proposed around 1.000 m south-west of the existing location.
The existing civil fuel storage facility will also be locat-ed closer to the new runway than 400 m. A detailed safety study will be undertaken during the master plan stage to determine the optimal future location for the civil fuel storage facility.
New Cargo facilities
A new Air Cargo Facility is proposed in the northeast area adjacent to the existing TWY N-3. The layout in-cludes an aircraft parking area for simultaneous park-ing of up to 3 Code E aircraft, a building footprint for an 80 m deep Cargo Terminal and a 80 m deep Landside vehicle loading, circulation and lineup area. The Cargo Terminal building will be situated on the Airside/Land-side border.
The layout is proposed for a staged construction. A Cargo Terminal building having a length of 225 m pro-vides a footprint of 18 000 m² and is expected to have an annual capacity of around 90.000 tons of cargo as indicated for the High case scenario of Leigh Fisher forecast.
The Landside vehicle circulation will have access di-rectly from the primary road network without mixing cargo trucks with the passenger traffi c in the passen-ger Terminal area.
Aircraft Maintenance
Aircraft Maintenance is usually provided by airlines or third party providers. It is expected that maintenance requiring hangar facilities in a foreseeable future will be performed in KEF for Icelandair’s fl eet and probably one or two other carriers with aircraft based in KEF. For competitive reasons and due to the relatively high cost of labor in Iceland, it is not expected that aircraft maintenance in KEF will develop beyond maintenance of aircraft based in KEF.
Two hangars for up to 3 Code E aircraft (or 6 Code C aircraft), an aircraft parking area, a taxiway and work-shops are expected to require a land area of around 12.000 m² e.g. 300 x 400 m².
The northern part of the East Apron has approximate-ly this size and is found to have an excellent location regarding Airside and Landside access. Further it is expected to be feasible and benefi cial from an eco-nomic and environmental point of view to reuse parts of the existing East Apron.
A Landside staff parking area of say 5 000 m² (app. 200 parking spaces) will be needed and access can be provided directly from the primary road network with-out mixing maintenance related road traffi c with the passenger traffi c in the passenger Terminal area.
LAND-USE PLAN
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
8904616TERMINAL PLAN
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
89046 17
PASSENGER TERMINAL DEVELOPMENT
Existing north building
The existing Terminal has been developed in multi-ple phases during the last three decades. The north building and south building have two main passenger levels. The connection between the two parts has one passenger level.
The Terminal has approximately 61 000m² fl oor area, including the ongoing construction, a relative large area compared to the yearly passenger through-put, but not suffi cient to meet the forecasted traffi c peaks. The Terminal already operates on the limit of its capacity.
The signifi cant traffi c pattern of Kefl avik must be acknowledged, giving high peak numbers, shifts be-tween Schengen and non-Schengen traffi c, requiring highly fl exible solutions.
Proposed development
The Terminal plan proposal is based on easy orienta-tion, intuitive way fi nding, and minimum of direction- and level-changes.
Future development of the Terminal is proposed with an expansion of the north building to the north, a new north pier, an extension of the south building to be-come a south pier, and an option for development of the connection between the north and south build-ings.
A number of options have been considered, but the recommendation is to make effi cient use of the re-sources and qualities represented by the existing building, by expanding the fl oor areas and slightly re-organizing the logistics. Expansion of the existing Terminal within an operational airport has been found feasible and the proposed lay out will provide a solu-tion with limited operational constraints during con-struction.
The expansion of the north building to the north will be constructed as a Landside building site, which greatly simplifi es the building process. The area is today a sculptural park with water, but also including some traffi c forecourt functions, which needs to be replaced.
The expansion will contain two main fl oors for passen-gers and have a possibility for a secondary mezzanine. The ground fl oor contains a new baggage reclaim hall, customs various services and a Landside arriv-als hall. The fi rst fl oor will have all future check-in and bag-drop facilities and the central security check. The connection to the Landside is based on a double level traffi c forecourt, with departures on the top level and arrivals at the ground level. This eliminates one verti-cal movement for departing passengers and provides
a longer curbside for drop-off and pick-up.
The expansion can be designed with a light connec-tion to the existing Terminal, respecting the archi-tectural qualities, and minimizing the need of re-con-struction of the existing building. The light connection between the new and existing buildings is proposed to be used as a transition zone, giving the possibility of increasing the fl oor to fl oor height in the new part, to accommodate for technical infrastructure and bag-gage conveyed from check-in in the new to the sort-ing in the existing building.
The new part is recommended with a clear zoning of functions, enabling future expansion towards east and west, securing future needs of changed modes of check-in. security control and increased traffi c vol-umes beyond 2040.
Re-modelling of existing north building
After construction of the new expansion, check-in, baggage reclaim and security will be removed from the existing building. The space left empty will provide expansion possibilities for commercial activities and baggage handling.
The expansion area for commercial areas and BHS is suffi cient to serve the requirements beyond 8MPPA. This gives the needed fl exibility of unforeseen future requirements in a not easily expandable area.
Maximizing the commercial area in the central area close to the north pier with its many gates, will help generating commercial revenue.
The strategy is to maximize the Commercial area, both on the departures level and on the arrivals level, with fl ow-through shopping areas in the main passen-ger fl ow.
The 1987 Terminal will construction-wise remain unchanged, while the south expansion completed in 2007 will be subject to re-fi tting of new vertical move-ments, border-control and improved transfer facilities. The roof will need to be raised and a new fl oor fi tted in.
TERMINAL PLAN
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
8904618
TERMINAL PLANLEVEL 1 / GROUND LEVEL
NON SCHENGEN
ARRIVAL HALL
CUSTOM / SERVICE AREA
BAGGAGE CLAIM
DUTY FREE ON ARRIVALBAGGAGE HANDLING
AERA GNILDNAHAERA GNILDNAH
PIER SOUTH - NON SCHENGEN
BUS LOUNGES
BUS LOUNGEARRIVAL NON-SCHENGEN
SECURITY ARRIVAL NON-SCHENGEN
BUS LOUNGE
TERMINAL PLAN
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
89046 19
New north pier
Development of the north pier will be a balance be-tween minimizing investments and maximizing fl exi-bility.
The presented pier proposal is based on maximizing opportunities, now, and in the future.
The north pier is proposed connected to the east and west side of the 2007 north building extension. This leaves operational aircraft parking largely undisturbed during construction periods and adequate spacing for future push-back and maneuvering of code E aircraft between the north pier and the south pier, and space for snow removal.
The north pier is proposed with two passenger levels. The main option is to have Schengen departing and arriving on the fi rst fl oor, and non-Schengen depart-ing and arriving (secure OSS) passengers on second fl oor. This gives a fl exible solution for status change of aircraft between Schengen and non-Schengen (se-cure) fl ights to be handled at the same gates, without towing (option A).
An optional solution will be possible, with the second fl oor only in the central part of the Pier. This will reduce the required fl oor area with approximately 10 000m² in the 2040 phase, but gives reduced fl exibility, by having closed waiting areas at gates, which frequently changes in status, serving alternately Schengen and non-Schengen fl ights (option B).
Another option is possible, with full fl oors for Schen-gen (departures and arrivals) and non-Schengen (de-partures) and a mezzanine for arriving non-Schengen, allowing for handling both secure and non-secure fl ights at Pier north. This requires approximately 10 000m² additional fl oor areas, and more complex ver-tical solutions. This option has not been developed further, but is possible (option C).
All above mentioned options are found feasible within the proposed pier footprint.
Connection between the north building and the south building
The existing connection corridor mix arriving and departing Schengen and non-Schengen passen-gers, and also have gate lounges. Arriving unclean passengers are security checked before entering the connecting corridor to the north building. This is an operationally costly and gives a less passenger friendly process.
There are several options for dealing with the require-ment of the separation of clean and unclean passen-gers, either keeping the existing solution for the south building, accepting the additional security screening, or separating arriving and departing passengers by constructing a new corridor besides or on top of the existing. In these last options, the arriving unclean passengers will descend to the ground fl oor before reaching the north pier.
E
C
REM
OT
E STAN
DS
NEW
REM
OT
E ST
AN
DS
C
C
C
C
EE
DD
D
D
D
DD
D
EE
EE
E
EE
E
BUSS
LOUNGE
C
2025
E
EE
E
C
C
C
C C C C
C
REM
OT
E STAN
DS
NEW
REM
OT
E ST
AN
DS
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
E E E E E
EE
E
BUSS
LOUNGE
2015: AIRCRAFT STANDS
2025: AIRCRAFT STANDS
TERMINAL PLAN
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
8904620
TERMINAL PLANLEVEL 2
CHECK-IN HALL
CENTRAL SECURITYSERVICE AREA
SAGA LOUNGE
COMMERCIAL AREA + F&B
PIER NORTH - SCHENGEN
NON SCHENGEN BORDER CONTROL
PIER SOUTH - SCHENGEN
PIER NORTH - SCHENGEN
TERMINAL PLAN
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
89046 21
Alternatively, the existing corridor could at a later stage be removed, allowing for a through-taxiway all the way between the Piers north pier and the south pier. The above ground passenger corridor would be replaced by a culvert below apron which contains separated compartments for clean and unclean pas-sengers. This last option depends on the possibilities of constructing below ground while airport is in opera-tion, and has not been developed further.
Since the gates in the corridor connection are pro-posed replaced with new gates in the north and south pier, more space is provided for the two-directional fl ow of passengers.
Extending the south building
The south building is in two levels, with a fl exibility to serve both Schengen and non-Schengen passengers. In addition, there is a newly constructed security con-trol in the basement of the bus lounge.
It is proposed to extend the two fl oors to the east and to the west, making a south pier, organized with Schengen passengers (departures and arrivals) on fi rst fl oor and non-Schengen on the ground fl oor.
East and west extensions can be constructed sepa-rately, when required.
Future Domestic fl ights
In the event of the closure of the Reykjavik City Air-port, our strategy is to investigate the possibility of integrating domestic traffi c within the main Terminal. This is the best way of making use of existing facilities. Domestic traffi c may be regarded as a part of the Schengen traffi c, or, if Customs regulations prevent this, integrate a separate corridor bypassing the Duty Free area, into a separate area in the north pier and the bus lounge can be established.
Facility requirements
Numbers of main facilities are calculated according to the Peak Hour Passengers (PHP) derived from the Leigh Fisher forecast:
E
E
C C C C C C C C C C
E E E E E E E E
EC
C CE / MARS
C C
C C CC
OPT. MARS
C C
2040
2040: AIRCRAFT STANDS
YEAR 2025 2040
Departing passengers total 2950 3500Departing passengers Schengen 2500 3050 Departing passengers non-Schengen 2150 2600Departing passengers O/D 1400 1550Departing passengers transfer 1700 2250
Arriving passengeres total 2650 3050 Arriving passengeres Schengen 2300 2700Arriving passengeres non-Schengen 2250 2650Arriving passengeres O/D 1450 1500 Arriving passengeres transfer 1700 2250
TERMINAL PLAN
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
8904622
TERMINAL PLANLEVEL 3
N (OSS)EGNEHCS NON REIPN (OSS)EGNEHCS NON REIP
BORDER CONTROL
TERMINAL PLAN
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
89046 23
The facility planning is proposed based on IATA’s Level of Service (LoS) C (optimum) for the year of complet-ed construction plus additional fi ve years ahead. The IATA LoS C will be adjusted to adapt to specifi c local requirements at Kefl avik airport.
It is noted that due to the specifi c nature of traffi c at Kefl avik airport e.g. the very high peak numbers with critical transfer times and as well the opportunity of having Duty free sales at arrival, the sizing of facilities based on passenger fl ows and peaks must be studied very carefully. It is essential for the airport to maintain a good level of service and to avoid problematic bot-tlenecks at check points and lack of facilities at critical processes such as baggage reclaim.
Personnel
Facilities for personnel will be planned for separately, in addition to the passenger facilities. Arriving and de-parting personnel either use private cars to a separate parking within walking distance from the Terminal, public transport, or shuttles, using the same entranc-es as passengers, and pass through a separate securi-ty lane adjacent to the central security facility.
Personnel using other access points, closer to their work-sites, will continue using these.
Changing rooms, restrooms and other facilities for personnel needs to be developed further.
Goods and waste management
Goods and waste handling for the Terminal is pro-posed located at the eastern side of the Terminal. Transportation should branch of the access road as early as possible, avoiding mixing passenger traffi c and service vehicles.
The access road for goods is proposed combined with the road to the future Cargo center east of the Termi-nal.
A
B1B2 C2C1
D1 E1
DEPARTURES ARRIVAL
Table showing our preliminary rough calculations of require-ments of number of check-in and bag-drop positions, se-curity lanes, border controls and lengths of reclaim belts
DIAGRAM 5 : Drawing showing the possible phasing elements.
YEAR 2025 2040
Check-in positions 35 39Security lanes 7 8Border Control departures 12 15Border control arrivals 13 15Length of baggage reclaim 290 m 300 m
TERMINAL PLAN
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
8904624
CHECK- IN
SECURITY CHECK
SAGA LOUNGE BOARDING
BOARDING
BOARDING PASSPORT CONTROL / NON SCHENGEN
INFORMATION
VERTICAL TRANSPORTATION
DEPARTING PASSENGERS
DEPARTING PASSENGERS
BAGGAGE DROP
COMMERCIAL AREA + F&B
CUSTOM
BAGGAGE CLAIM
DUTY FREE ON ARRIVAL
VERTICAL TRANSPORTATION
BORDER CONTROL
ARRIVING PASSENGERS
FLOW DEPARTURES
FLOW ARRIVALS
TERMINAL PLAN
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
89046 25
PIER SECTION / OPTION A
non Schengen (OSS)dep. & arr.
Schengendep. & arr.
NSdep.
Schengendep./arr.
NSarr.
loungeschanging
modes
loungeschanging modes
NSarr.
Schengen dep. / arr.
non Schengen departures
vert
ical
circ
ulat
ion
vert
ical
circ
ulat
ion
vert
ical
circ
ulat
ion
vert
ical
circ
ulat
ion
NS arr.
NS arr.
PIER SECTION / OPTION B
PIER SECTION / OPTION C
TERMINAL PLAN
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
8904626ENVIROMENTAL PLAN
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
89046 27
ENVIROMENTAL PLAN
Introduction
Kefl avik Airport is vital for both Iceland’s economy as a whole and for the economic and social growth of the local communities in the municipalities of Reykjanesbær, Gardur and Sandgerdi. However, the airport activities at Kefl avik Airport will inevitably also have some adverse eff ects on the local environment including aircraft noise, the air quality, production of waste and other impacts, some of which also have a direct fi nancial implication in the operation phase. Minimizing these and other impacts is essential for Kefl avik airport to ensure a sus-tainable operation and development of the airport and to strike the right balance between economic and social growth of the airport and the environmental impacts.
The Environmental Plan will constitute one of the three main categories for the Masterplan for Kefl avik Airport 2015 – 2040. The objective of the Environmental Plan for Kefl avik Airport is to:
› Set the strategy for a sustainable development of the future expansion and operations of Kefl avik Airport
› Create a clear framework to guide the environmental policy and management of the Airport
› Identify the key environmental issues that will infl uence the growth and development of the Airport
› Set short, medium and long-term targets and actions that will form part of the environmental programme
› Identify ways to integrate environmental issues into the Masterplan 2015-2040 thereby limiting the eff ect of the issues.
The Environmental Plan will look ahead as far as to 2040 and set the framework for controlling the environmen-tal impacts for the period. We recommend using the ISO14001 as management tool for continuously priori-tising the eff ort to work with the most important areas. Thus, we will design appropriate criteria and processes to build into the ISO-14001 system. As a result, new rele-vant targets and focus areas will be appointed, initiatives implemented and evaluated annually or bi-annually.
Sustainability throughout the masterplan
Our starting point for this proposal is that the leading principle for the development of Kefl avik Airport is to develop and grow the business in a well-managed and sustainable manner thereby optimising the economic and social benefi ts of the airport. We address sustain-ability as a parameter to support and develop the busi-ness whilst limiting the negative impacts on the environ-ment. We will anchor the Environmental Plan for Kefl avik Airport in focus on good utilization of natural resources, minimization of waste, increasing recycling and reutilizing leftover materials and waste in local industries, reduction of emissions and noise.
The Environmental Plan will be prepared in close corpo-ration with the development of the Terminal Plan and the Land Use Plan to ensure a sustainable design through-out future development. The leading principles for the development plan include:
› Reuse and redevelopment of as much of the existing structures as possible thereby saving both money, material and energy. This includes reuse of the existing Terminal, runways and taxiways to the extent possible, as suggested in our land use plan.
› Constructions that are fl exible and reusable as part of the core design principles. Thereby, we will create an infrastructure portfolio that easily, cheaply and quickly can be adapted to fi t the needs in an ever faster changing business - and doing so with a low environmental impact.
› Placing of new structures like the third runway in the less environmental sensitive locations
› Location of other facilities like cargo, catering and ground handling as close to the Terminal as possible to minimise transport, CO2 emission etc.
› Provide a green look to the airport whenever possible to contribute to promote Iceland as a clean and uncontaminated country.
The main environmental impact identifi ed in this process is air pollution, fuel storage, use of de-icing substances, sewage systems, waste management, noise and elec-tricity. The Environmental Plan will deal specifi cally with these issues.
The Environmental Plan and key environmental issues
The main environmental issues for Kefl avik Airport will comprise at least the following issues included in the Environmental Plan:
› Noise from air traffi c and ground activities
› Air quality
› Waste management and resource recovery
› Water resources and water management
› Climate change and energy management
The key environmental issues
The key environmental issues for the Kefl avik Airport de-velopment will be assessed based on existing data both as baseline and reference points for the current situation and with prediction of future situations related to the development plan for Kefl avik Airport. The objective is to integrate the environment in the development plan for the airport thereby harvesting the business opportuni-ties in a progressive approach to sustainability and limit the negative impact in a simple and inexpensive way. For each of the environmental issues, we will conduct:
› A short description of the existing environmental situation (baseline)
ENVIROMENTAL PLAN
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
8904628
› An outlook for future environmental situations related to the airport development 2015-2040 with emphasis on short and medium term issues
› A short survey of business opportunities based on the sustainability mind-set
› A specifi c objective for the particular environmental issues
› An outline of integrated environmental management in the development plans with targets and actions for the period 2015 – 2040.
The Environmental Plan will also benefi t from the posi-tive impacts from the possible construction of a railway between the airport and Reykjavik.
The Environmental Plan will, in a clear and understand-able way, set the environmental goal for Kefl avik Airport thereby bringing together the interest of the various stakeholders and business entities at the airport into an agreeable common environmental objective.
Noise The objective with the noise planning is to se-cure an acceptable level of noise from the airport both during operation and during construction as part of fu-ture development of the airport.
Noise:
The noise contour maps for the Environmental Plan 2015 – 2040 will be calculated using the latest traffi c fi gures, representing the existing environment base-line (with reference to previous noise maps provided by Linuhönnun). Noise contour maps will be produces for selected reference years in the new Masterplan based on the latest traffi c forecast, and for both air and ground traffi c noise.
The traffi c forecast for the period 2015 – 2040 indicates that an additional runway will be needed in the end of the period. We will propose a future runway parallel to RWY 02/20 west of the Terminal at a distance of around 2000 m from the existing RWY, providing the possibility to perform independent parallel operations. The new RWY is proposed as a Code 4E RWY with a length of around 3.000 m, subject to Icelandair’s fl eet plan for new wide-body aircrafts. Our noise contour maps will take this new runway into consideration and will verify that the location of the new runway west of the existing airport will have the least impact on Kefl avik’s community.
The total noise during a given period depends on the noise emitted by individual aircrafts and the total number of aircraft landings and departures. For Kefl avik Airport, the years chosen for noise mapping in the Environmen-tal Masterplan must refl ect not only the location of a possible new runway, but also the expected changes in aircraft types. On February 13, 2013 Icelandair Group announced that the company had fi nalized an order with Boeing for sixteen new Boeing 737 MAX planes, and purchase rights for eight additional 737s had also been signed. The aircraft will be delivered in 2018-2021. The noise calculation for the future situation will take this expected change of the fl eet into account, and the year for the noise calculation will be chosen accordingly.
The total of up to 6 noise contour maps for various air traffi c situations will be presented in the Environmental Plan. The noise contour maps will be prepared for the existing situation. 2020, 2025, 2030, 2035 and 2040 are subject to changes according the above-described events. Other noise issue to be considered in the En-vironmental Plan includes noise from taxiing aircrafts, ground support vehicles, construction noise and traffi c noise to and from the airport.
Air quality
The objective of the air quality planning is to reduce the emission from air traffi c, ground handling, land traffi c or other activities in order to improve the air quality both in the airport and in the local environment and the com-munities. One way of obtaining reduced emission is by designing the ground layout so that it limits the travel distance within the airport as we have proposed in our plan by placing cargo, catering and ground handling close to the Terminal. This will minimize the CO2 footprint and limit fuel emission.
Unless air quality data can be obtained specifi cally for Kefl avik Airport, the current impact on air quality will be assessed based on the existing fl ight movements and air traffi c and with special reference to the local communi-ties. The expected development of the air quality will be assessed following the development in the airport ac-tivities 2015 – 2040. The study will lead to a recommen-dation regarding a stepwise reduction of the employee exposure to air pollution. A possible mitigation measure is the use of material with NOX and VOC reducing ca-pabilities using a catalytic process. Such material is cur-rently being tested at Copenhagen Airport where the reactive material is painted on top of tiles outside the Terminal building.
Waste/resources
The objective of the waste planning is to minimize the amount of waste generated and maximize the reuse of resources in the waste streams. The principle of reusing materials, building elements and existing structures will also be applied to the extent possible in refurbishment and expansion of Terminals and buildings. We have sub-stantial experience in mapping and matching un-utilized waste streams and bi-products between companies on a commercial basis. We propose to examine such oppor-tunities, which are both economically and environmental benefi cial.
The waste at Kefl avik Airport refl ects the waste generat-ed in the changing world outside Iceland. There are more packaging on food and greater reliance on disposable products. However, the waste fl ow at Kefl avik Airport not only includes organic waste, but also hazardous waste and liquid waste. The waste fl ow will be assessed from existing data or estimated from stakeholder meetings with Kefl avik Airport’s environmental management and other major waste generating stakeholders. This in-cludes the expected development in waste handling due to the development of the airport activities 2015 – 2040.
In Iceland, the main concern is the organic waste with potential greenhouse gas emissions and the land used for landfi lling. Icelandic law no: 55/2003 requires that the
ENVIROMENTAL PLAN
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
89046 29
landfi lling of organic waste must be reduced consider-ably before 2020. Though the recycling rates have been increasing signifi cantly in the last years, the majority of all waste in Iceland is still landfi lled. The goal is to change this to meet the EU-legislation on waste. With this in mind, the cost of handling non-recyclable waste can easily match the increasing cost of operating Kefl avik Airport
Water
Water With the large freshwater resources available in Iceland, water saving is of minor importance, however, the recent incident with groundwater contamination in Vogar with E. Coli indicates that the issue with ground-water should be consider in the Environmental Plan for 2015 – 2040. Furthermore, there is an energy-side to the use of water, as it has to be pumped and handled before, during and after use. Thus, there is a fi nancial incentive to minimize the use of water as well as a cli-mate change eff ect of energy use (see below). A guiding principle for the Environmental Plan for 2015-2040 is to integrate design for water savings and, not least, to pre-vent water contamination.
For airports around the world, the most signifi cant sources for groundwater contamination are run-off from de-icing/anti-icing, handling and storage of oil, or chem-icals from fi re drill training locations. We recommend to move the de-icing/anti-icing away from the apron areas. With a new parallel RWY in operation, we propose to have two de-icing platforms available; one close to TWY E-4 and one in the area where TWY K-3 crosses the parallel TWY for the new runway.
Another potential risk for groundwater and soil is the fuel handling and storage. A military fuel facility currently located just north of the western end of TWY S-3 is ex-pected, for safety reasons, to require a relocation. A new location has been proposed around 1,000 m south-west of the existing location. In the master plan phase a relo-cation of the existing civil fuel facility will be analysed. The Environmental Plan will put the possible future location into an environmental situation and stipulate possible mitigation measures.
Energy/Climate change
The climate strategy for Iceland sets forth a long-term vision for the reduction of net emissions of greenhouse gases by 50-75% before 2050, using 1990 emission fi gures as a baseline. Airports are facing special challeng-es with the large consumption of jet fuel, and although Iceland has access to considerable renewable energy sources, it will still be possible to limit the emission of greenhouse gasses from the airport activities. The en-vironmental plan will therefore have specifi c focus on integrating low energy solutions and low carbon technol-ogies for heating and lightening the ground facilities and for local transportation; e.g. thermal energy, heat pumps, wind energy, and electric vehicles. We have substantial experience in these matters in our team. We propose a dialog about using international sustainable certifi cation schemes like BREEAM, LEED or DGNB for the Terminals and, potentially, the area as a whole.
The Environmental Plan will include an estimate of the
carbon emissions generated by the operations including those from passengers and staff travelling to and from the airport, aircrafts operations on ground and the ener-gy required to operate the Terminals and runways. Ways of minimizing the CO₂ emission include an optimization of the airport operations and the source of energy. Geo-thermal energy is generally cheaply available and shall be considered for heating purposes and/or even heating up apron areas as a way of reducing CO2 footprint or limit use of de-icing. Biodegradable waste is also a po-tential source of greenhouse gases, so we propose that the Masterplan ensures a proper handling of this waste stream as well. A masterplan with eff ective operations will not only be economically attractive, but will also con-tribute to a more sustainable airport.
Methodology
The preparation of the Environmental Plan will include:
1 Site inspection
2 Desk study and review of available documents including the ISO-14001 system
3 Drafting the basic environmental issues, objectives and targets
4 Meetings with stakeholders
5 Defi ning the basic environmental issues, objectives and targets
6 Coordination of and including the issues into Terminal Plan and Land Use Plan
7 Development of separate Environmental Plan.
The environmental legislative framework and respon-sibilities associated with the Masterplan will be spec-ifi ed both in related to Icelandic environmental legis-lation, international agreements and environmental management of the Airport.
ENVIROMENTAL PLAN
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
8904630MASTERPLAN PROCESS AND METHODOLOGY
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
89046 31
MASTER PLAN GROUP
LAND-USE PLAN GROUP
TERMINAL PLAN GROUP
ENVIROMENTAL PLAN GROUP
DIAGRAM 6: Diagram showing the principal timeschedule
Below is listed the proposed stakeholders for each group. Some of the stakeholders will be placed in two to three groups as their fi eld of expertise and interest overlap the diff erent plans. The groups will be formed on the basis of our experience from working with air-port masterplanning and the information provided in the competition documents. The fi nal formation of the diff erent groups will be worked out with Isavia at the fi rst workshop/Kick off .
The groups will work simultaneously through the de-sign period in accordance with the time schedule. By keeping the focus within the diff erent plan-groups, the effi ciency and understanding within each group will ensure qualifi ed input to the Masterplan.
The Masterplan consultant will participate actively in all groups, with his professional knowledge, setting up proposals for discussion, and proposals for solutions, and fi nally putting together the Masterplan report.
All groups shall be headed by the Isavia project leader to ensure that the process operates according to the Client’s scope and guidelines.
The Master plan-group will be responsible for gath-ering inputs from the other groups and co-ordinating and implementing these into the Master plan. This group will be responsible for puting together the over-all costs (CAPEX) of the Master Plan. The Master plan-group is responsible for all mapping and implementa-tion of input from external stakeholders such as local municipalities, environmental authorities etc.
Below is an indicative list of the stakeholders that we have identifi ed as important stakeholders within the Masterplan group:
- Isavia – managing director
- Isavia – project management
- Aviation authorities (Flugmálastjórn Íslands)
- Transportation authorities (Samgöngustofa - innanríkisráðuneytið)
- Enviromental authorities (Umhverfi sstofnun - umhverfi sráðuneytið)
- Planning authorities (Skipulagsnefnd Kefl avíkurfl ugvallar)
- Municipal authorities (Reykjanesbær, Sandgerðisbær , Sveitarfélagið Garður, Sveitarfélagið Vogar og Grindavíkurbær)
The Land-Use Plan involves all areas of the mas-ter plan-area except the terminal area. This include runway and taxiway confi guration, support facilities, ground services, connection to military areas, coast guard facilities, cargo, landside access, curb side facil-
MASTERPLAN PROCESS AND METHODOLOGY
Long lasting and successful projects are only obtained if all stakeholders are being involved in the process, from early stages to the fi nalization and implementa-tion of the project. We believe that the key to success and a long lasting Masterplan for Kefl avik Airport is to involve the right stakeholders at the right time.
The Masterplan for Kefl avik Airport holds a Terminal plan, a Land-use plan and an Environmental plan. The diff erent plans involve a number of stakeholders, each representing their focus, goals and area of expertise within the masterplan process.
Our goals for the stakeholder process and involve-ment are:
- to ensure input from all important stakeholders at the right time in the process
- to ensure that stakeholders understand and agree on the decisions made in the planning process and to avoid set-backs in the planning process
- to ensure an open and understanding dialog between Isavia, stakeholders and the consultants
- to ensure a good and long lasting relationship between all stakeholders.
- to ensure a joint ownership of the chosen solutions
In order to stream-line the process we suggest that the Masterplan process is split up into 4 parallel work groups; Masterplan-, a Land-use plan-, a Terminal plan- and the Environmental plan-group. This will se-cure that each group will be able to focus on their main issues and go in depth within their fi eld of expertise while the leadership team maintains focus on a holistic solution.
MASTERPLAN PROCESS AND METHODOLOGY
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
8904632
STEERING COMMITTIEISAVIA + VITAL STAKEHOLDERS
PROJECT MANAGEMENTPROJECT MANAGER FOR THE MASTERPLAN
MASTER PLAN GROUPPROJECT MANAGER + CONSULTANTS
LAND-USEPLAN GROUP
PROJECT MANAGER + CONSULTANTS+ STAKEHOLDERS
TERMINALPLAN GROUP
PROJECT MANAGER + CONSULTANTS
+ STAKEHOLDERS
ENVIROMENTALPLAN GROUP
PROJECT MANAGER + CONSULTANTS
+ STAKEHOLDERS
COST ESTIMATION
PROJECT MANAGER + CONSULTANTS
PROJECT ORGANISATION PLAN: Showing the main groups which will be part of the masterplan design process.
MASTERPLAN PROCESS AND METHODOLOGY
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
89046 33
- Isavia – Terminal director
- Enviromental authorities (Umhverfi sstofnun)
- Ministry of Enviroment and Natural Resources (Umhverfi sráðuneytið)
Other stakeholders
Along with the stakeholders identifi ed above the fol-lowing agencies will be consulted during the planning process as stipulated in law and regulations – either on particular issues, as necessary, or a draft Masterplan when it is ready for review.
- Iceland’s electricity transmission system (Landsnet)
- Icelandic Meteorological Offi ce (Veðurstofa Íslands)
- Suðurnes Health Authorities (Heilbrigðiseftirlit Suðurnesja)
- The Cultural Heritage Agency of Iceland (Minjastofnun Íslands)
- The Icelandic Road and Coastal Administration (IRCA) (Vegagerðin)
- The Planning Agency (Skipulagsstofnun)
The fi nal selection of stakeholders and their involve-ment in the planning process is to be decided by Isavia at the start of the Masterplan process.
Description of project implementation, time-sched-ule and cost estimate.
The project implementation and time-schedule is based on the timeline/dates given in the competition documents.
The stakeholder consultancy process is formed to ensure a lean and meaningful process within the given timeframe.
ities, car parking etc. This group will also handle tech-nical infrastructure such as power supply, water supply, drainage, storm water handling, ATC, ILS, airside light-ing, fuel supply heating and cooling, etc.
Below is an indicative list of the stakeholders that we have identifi ed as important stakeholders within the Land-Use plan group:
- Isavia (technical director)
- Isavia – project management
- Isavia – operational directors(Airport and ATM)
- Airlines (Icelandair, WOW etc.)
- Cargo handlers
- Ground handlers
- Catering handlers
- Aircraft services
- Taxis, coaches and rental cars
- Aviation authorities
- Parking
- Coast guard
- Security area - NATO
The Terminal-plan involves the Terminal and the air-craft parking confi guration etc.
Below is an indicative list of the stakeholders that we have identifi ed as the main stakeholders within the Terminal plan group:
- Isavia / Flugstod Leifs Eirikssonar – Terminal directors
- Isavia – project management
- Isavia Facility management
- Airlines (Icelandair, WOW, Easyjet etc.)
- Handlers (user representatives)
- Customs & Police
- Commercial operators / Commercial director / Duty Free
The Environmental plan involves sustainability, energy, water, noise and air issues across all sectors.
These are the stakeholders that we have identifi ed as important stakeholders within the Terminal plan group:
- Isavia – project management
- Isavia – Technical director
MASTERPLAN PROCESS AND METHODOLOGY
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
8904634
CLIENT REPRESENTATIVE
PROJECT LEADERMASTER PLAN GROUP- PLANNING
- REPORTS - CONTROL- Q&A SYSTEM- IT-SYSTEM
MASTERPLAN
- HOLISTIC DESIGN- MP DRAWIGS- MP REPORTS- VISUALISATIONS- SIMULATIONS
LAND-USE PLAN
- FUNCTIONAL ZONES- AIRSIDE RW/TW- AIRSIDE ROADS + IF- LANDSIDE + IF
TERMINALPLAN
- TERMINAL FUNCTIONALITY- BHS- LOGISTICS- COMMERCE- APRON DESIGN- OTHER BUILDINGS
ENVIROMENTALPLAN- ENERGY- CO2- MATERIALS- CERTIFICATION- ENVIROMENTAL PLAN
- COST ESTIMATION
CONSULTAN ORGANISATION PLAN: Plan showing the consultan group organisation in the masterplan design process.
PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION & TIME-SCHEDULE
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
89046 35
PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
The timeline is formed in accordance with the pro-posed 4 working groups; a Master plan-group, a Land-Use plan group, a Terminal plan group and an Environmental plan group. We suggest a parallel Mas-ter plan process, where these groups work simultane-ously. Some persons will participate in more than one group, and this requires co-ordination to avoid clashes and minimizing travel.
We suggest that a Steering committee is formed with buyer (Isavia) representatives, which will follow the project until the completion of the Master plan docu-ment.
The Project leader from Isavia group is responsible for managing the process and shall lead all groups to en-sure that the works is corresponding with the frame-work and the goals of Isavia.
The Master plan group presents the work for the Steering committee on meetings during the process (see time-schedule).
The Master plan group will at the start of the process, together with the Steering committee, develop a design framework that will be part of the base for the process.
The Master plan group is responsible for preparation of the fi nal document, integrating the diff erent input, analyses, concepts together into one fi nal master plan document that can be a long lasting work-tool for Is-avia.
Time Schedule
The time-schedule is based on the dates given in the competition brief. The Master plan group will be co-ordinating the design work, forming the general framework whom the other groups will follow. The Master plan group will collect input from the other groups and other relevant Stakeholders and is re-sponsible for fi nalizing the master plan document.
We suggest that the Master plan group will start be-fore other groups, forming the framework, a more exact/precise time-schedule and the guidelines and the design-work, together with Isavia. At the end of the design process we suggest that the design groups will hand in their fi nal inputs 3-4 weeks before the deadline. The Master plan group will after that be able to fi nalize the Master plan document, sewing the dif-ferent inputs together.
A draft Final Master plan shall be delivered 29th May in order to give Isavia the possibility to correct the development and give input to the Master plan group. The content of the draft Masterplan aims to cover all relevant topics, suggesting possible solutions, without giving the fi nal conclusion.
Kick-off
One of the most valuable things in a design process is to have a joint vision/framework for the work ahead. We suggest that a kick-off meeting with selected persons representing the diff erent stakeholders and design groups.
PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION & TIME-SCHEDULE
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
8904636
FEB
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
MARCH APRIL
EASTER
A: KICK OFF / DEBRIEFING - Form a detailed workplan
A: KICK OFF / DEBRIEFING
B: IMPLEMENTATION - DESIGN
C: FINALIZATION
A: KICK OFF / DEBRIEFING
B: IMPLEMENTATION - DESIGN
C: FINALIZATION
A: KICK OFF / DEBRIEFING - Form a detailed workplan
COST ESTIMATE
KICK OFF
DESIGN MEETING - MASTERPLAN- stakeholders feedback/input
STEERING COMMITTEE - feedback/input
DESIGN MEETING - LAND-USE PLAN- stakeholders feedback/input
DESIGN MEETING - TERMINAL PLAN- stakeholders feedback/input
DESIGN MEETING - ENVIROMENTAL PLAN- stakeholders feedback/input
B: IMPLEMENTATION - DESIGN
C: FINALIZATION
B: IMPLEMENTATION - DESIGN
- Water plan
C: FINALIZATION
MA
STER
PLA
NLA
ND
-USE
PLA
NT
ERM
INA
L P
LAN
CO
STEN
VIR
OM
ENTA
LPLA
NM
E E
T I
N G
S
TIME SCHEDULE: The timeschedule shows the proposed process, deadlines, stakeholder input and meeting series.
PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION & TIME-SCHEDULE
KEFLAVIK MASTERPLAN
89046 37
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37
MAI JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER
NATIONAL SOMMER HOLIDAYS
OFFICE SOMMER HOLIDAYS
DRAFT FINAL25 MAI
FINAL MASTERPLAN25 MAI
PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION & TIME-SCHEDULE