Brussels Airport (BRU) infrastructure: future

[flightlover]

The parking problem will be lightenend by the opening of discount parking 2 located opposite the Lufthansa Technics building @ BRUCargo.

However, as this is a parking lot with only a few hundreds of places, it will not be a solution.

[Established02]

The parking problem will be lightenend by the opening of discount parking 2 located opposite the Lufthansa Technics building @ BRUCargo.

As far as I can tell from a distance, this new discount parking has been ready for weeks now, but somehow it remains closed and weeds are popping up. We're mid-July now and it looks like the other discount parking is still able to cover the current demand for remote parking.

[Conti764]

I'd do something a la Schiphol... Build a connecting corridor from the terminal in between the entrance and exit roads of the airport and have four or five new parking buildings with some office buildings in between. They'd have to tear down the old (disused?) technics buildings and that hideous FP2 and reroute the exit road of the airport, but all of that is not such a big problem... Where now is FP2, they could build a new parking or a conference building or anything like that...

[Airbus A330]

Hello everybody,
Any idea when this new project will be revealed?

[shockcooling]

Maybe kind of a monorail train shuttle to get really fast to the of the terminal

Or a monorail driving around landside passing all parkings and maybe a remote dedicated kiss and ride and pick up zone. That would be awesome, because the current drop off zone at departure level is way too crowded and it should be only for high paying cars, vans and cabs, like many airports around the world. But it's typical for belgians to do as they wish and create a mess of it

[Boavida]

Something like this maybe?

They should integrate the 2 terminals with a new modern facade, preferably with some sort of roof covering a part of the road/parkings in front. There are many examples worldwide.

Like this:


I've done a quick photoshop (don't mind the details) to see how it would look like:



Wouldn't this be great? BRU almost looks like a real airport now!

[Conti764]

For people who want to know more about the trainstation, I have found this very interesting piece of information on the forum www.skyscrapercity.com, by user X38...

It's a folder about the 'new' trainstation back in the nineties.

[sn26567]

Very interesting document indeed. I was out of the country when this new track was built, and when I came back I thought that they had just covered the old track that was in open air: I had not realised they built en entirely new track...

[jan_olieslagers]

Many thanks, Conti764, very interesting read!

[Inquirer]

Is this It, atlantis?

http://www.tijd.be/ondernemen/luchtvaar ... 1436850341

KPMG to move to a brand new office, congress and hotel building set to be built next to the old terminal, currently itself being renovated for its direct competitor Deloitte.

IMHO, I can understand the logic behind the desire to move to the airport, but this also brings along a high risk of even more congestion on the already very cramped access road to the airport and even more parking space problems. All those non-aviation related projects inside the very small loop of roads around the airport risk becoming what Uplace is to the Ring (also a loop road designed too small in fact).

[sn26567]

I couldn't agree more, Inquirer. The first mistake was already made years ago, when the airport management moved its offices to the satellite, thus removing valuable space from purely aviation use to office use.

The Deloitte building in the former terminal is another big mistake. And now this? And why not the national football stadium at the location of the DHL buildings?

[Conti764]

Apart from turning the satelite in an office building, which I also consider a mistake, these projects bring in nice money which in turn can be invested in the airport again, also in aviation related projects...

[Boavida]

I don't consider new office buildings a 'prestige project' for the airport - at all. So I'm guessing it must be something else.

[Airbus A330]

Hello,

Here is the KPMG press release in French:
http://www.kpmg.com/be/en/issuesandinsi ... 15-fr.aspx

and in Dutch:
http://www.kpmg.com/BE/en/IssuesAndInsi ... 15-NL.aspx

[skumfiduse]

Apart from turning the satellite in an office building, which I also consider a mistake, these projects bring in nice money which in turn can be invested in the airport again, also in aviation related projects...

I fully agree with Conti764. At first sight, money spent on real estate projects (offices, parking lots etc) might sound unwise and odd. On the other hand, it helps to keep the accounts in balance.

Let's go a little up north to Stockholm Arlanda. SkyCity is the connection between domestic and international terminals. The area includes business facilities, an in-house Radisson Blu hotel, a very decent train station and much more. A brand new Clarion-hotel opened its doors in 2012.
New investments are on the way: SkyCity Office One promotes itself as "new offices within walking distance to the terminal".

Getting back to Brussels Airport: its accessibility has grown to a strong 'selling point' in comparison to an office in down-town Brussels I'd say. Yes, there is that Diabolo-fee but the daily traffic jams aren't cheap either.
From an international perspective, 'Passport', as the KMPG-building is named, might trigger new business: workers flying in to Brussels Airport from all over the world to meet and continuing their journey straight away. No risks of getting stuck in traffic or whatsoever.

I'd say, well done Brussels Airport... as this might be one of the elements to justify Pier A West.

[Established02]

The Dutch version. Nothing in English yet.

http://www.kpmg.com/BE/en/IssuesAndInsi ... 15-NL.aspx

[Conti764]

Hello,

Here is the KPMG press release (in French):
http://www.kpmg.com/be/en/issuesandinsi ... 15-fr.aspx

The same press release is on several Flemish newssites...

[sn26567]

Apart from turning the satellite in an office building, which I also consider a mistake, these projects bring in nice money which in turn can be invested in the airport again, also in aviation related projects...

No doubt that from KPMG's point of view their new building is ideally located, but it could as well have been erected anywhere between the airport and NATO, at a maximum distance of 2 km from the airport, saving precious airport ground for aviation-related activities.

I take an example of mismanagement of airport ground: if the satellite had still been operational, there would not have been a need to extend Pier A.

[Conti764]

Apart from turning the satellite in an office building, which I also consider a mistake, these projects bring in nice money which in turn can be invested in the airport again, also in aviation related projects...

I fully agree with Conti764. At first sight, money spent on real estate projects (offices, parking lots etc) might sound unwise and odd. On the other hand, it helps to keep the accounts in balance.

Let's go a little up north to Stockholm Arlanda. SkyCity is the connection between domestic and international terminals. The area includes business facilities, an in-house Radisson Blu hotel, a very decent train station and much more. A brand new Clarion-hotel opened its doors in 2012.
New investments are on the way: SkyCity Office One promotes itself as "new offices within walking distance to the terminal".

Getting back to Brussels Airport: its accessibility has grown to a strong 'selling point' in comparison to an office in down-town Brussels I'd say. Yes, there is that Diabolo-fee but the daily traffic jams aren't cheap either.
From an international perspective, 'Passport', as the KMPG-building is named, might trigger new business: workers flying in to Brussels Airport from all over the world to meet and continuing their journey straight away. No risks of getting stuck in traffic or whatsoever.

I'd say, well done Brussels Airport... as this might be one of the elements to justify Pier A West.

Maybe I'm a bit overly excited ( ) but I see several possible advantages of these projects...

If the introduction of Gateway and Passport and maybe other developments would mean more traffic passing through the BRU airportstation (and thus Diabolo) it might trigger the NMBS to lower the Diabolo tax since it is based on number of pax passing through the station, in turn resulting in, again, more traffic... The trainstation is prepared on an extension with two more tracks bringing it to 5 through tracks.

If they would refurbish the old trainstation they could make it the station of preference for people working for Deloitte and KPMG and others since it is much more conveniently located for these offices iso the current station which is more convenient for airport passengers (even more so if one day a new terminal will be build, the Diamond would become the central point of the airport)... It could even be a motivation for all parties to finally extend tramline 62 into the airport which then would arrive conveniently at the old pre-1998 platforms...

I hope they finally will tear down that old, ugly, smelly and plain hideous Front Park 2 and enlarge parkingspace with two or three more parking buildings, connected to the airport via a corridor a la Schiphol with other office buildings alongside this corridor and at the site of old FP2...

And for the aviation part, still most important for any airport, it could indeed be an incentive to speed up development of A-pier West. It could be a nice selling point for SN to install or upgrade corporate contracts with Deloitte, KPMG and other companies coming to the airport. All in all, in today's world, these kind of developments give any airport that bit of extra to motivate airlines to fly to it...

[Conti764]

Apart from turning the satellite in an office building, which I also consider a mistake, these projects bring in nice money which in turn can be invested in the airport again, also in aviation related projects...

No doubt that from KPMG's point of view their new building is ideally located, but it could as well have been erected anywhere between the airport and NATO, at a maximum distance of 2 km from the airport, saving precious airport ground for aviation-related activities.

I take an example of mismanagement of airport ground: if the satellite had still been operational, there would not have been a need to extend Pier A.

About your first sentence, I beg to differ ...

You can only use airport ground for aviation-related activities when it is bordering airside. When you have a look at it, it seems like the Deloitte and KPMG buildings are right at the border of airside, but if I see things correctly, the old C-pier still excists and I doubt this piece of history will be incorporated into both buildings. I might be wrong though... But even it is, nothing stops BRU from building a new (elevated) C-pier right in front of these buildings all up to a new 'finger south' with extra gates, if neccesary...

And besides this land, they still have A-pier West in the plans, they still have several old abandoned buildings (technics area) which could easily be torn down and replaced by a new terminal (will come one day) and possibly a new one sided pier which features gates only at current airside... A lot of expansion possible, without even changing plans of the old terminal...

Now, I agree with you that I'd rather had seen them preserve the satellite building for aviation activities, both for historic reasons, and operational. Although you never see any new satellite building being constructed for contactgates since it is not the most efficient way of handling todays planes...

But in no way keeping the satellite would mean A-pier West would not have to be constructed... It will never have the same capacity A-pier West will have, nor will it be able to accomodate widebodies like AP-W will do...

No matter how much I like the satellite and no matter how much nostalgea it has, it is an airport structure due to dissapear...