Mirabel Airport
Terminal Capacity Study
Aéroports de Montréal
23 April 2014
©GoogleEarth Pro
2
Contents
Executive Summary
Introduction
Airside Capacity
Landside Capacity
Terminal Capacity
Future Airport Development
Conclusions
3
Executive Summary
Purpose of Study
It is currently costing Aéroports de Montréal (ADM) over $3 million
per year to maintain the Mirabel terminal building and many efforts
to find alternative uses have been unsuccessful.
The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether the existing Mirabel
terminal and annexes (aeroquay and parking structure) are still
suitable to accommodate current trends in passenger processing and
commercial facilities and can handle the level and mix of traffic of a
major Canadian international airport, or if they should be qualified
as obsolete for airport related activities.
This study is focused on airport capacity and planning issues. A
separate study is looking at the scope and costs related to the
building systems, current codes, security standards and other
technical issues.
Findings
It is clear from this analysis that the existing Mirabel terminal does
not have the capacity to handle the traffic levels of a major Canadian
international airport such as Montreal-Trudeau International Airport.
Airside: In its current configuration with only 24 gates (of which 18
are accessible by Passenger Transfer Vehicles (PTV’s), the apron
would require major expansion and reconfiguration to handle at least
50 additional gates, the majority of which should be accessible by
passenger boarding bridges.
Landside: The parking structure and surface lots would need to
more than double in size and there is limited space in the terminal
area which could necessitate shuttle bus operations.
Terminal: All of the terminal processing facilities and
concession areas would need significant expansion and/or
reconfiguration to handle a 3-sector traffic demand. For example,
to provide US Preclearance facilities alone would require a 50%
expansion of the Departures Level. The constraints of the existing
facility make it difficult - or very expensive - to achieve the
optimum layouts needed to provide a competitive level of service
for passengers and to maximize the commercial opportunities
required in a major Canadian international airport. This,
combined with the need to upgrade the major building systems,
would make it more economical to build new.
Long term development: Recent studies of Montreal-Trudeau
International Airport have demonstrated that it can continue to
handle traffic growth for many years to come, so the Mirabel
facility requirements at that time will be more extensive than
indicated above.
Conclusion
Based on the above, the existing terminal building and its
aeroquay and parking structure are not suitable to serve as a
major Canadian international airport and, therefore, from an
airport capacity and planning standpoint, these facilities can
be qualified as obsolete.
4
Introduction
The Mirabel terminal building was opened in 1975 and operated
as a primarily international facility until 1997 when international
flights were transferred back to Dorval (now Montreal-Trudeau
International Airport) and 2004 when it was finally closed for
charter traffic.
It is currently costing Aéroports de Montréal (ADM) over $3
million per year to maintain the terminal building and many
efforts to find alternative uses have been unsuccessful.
Arup has been mandated by ADM to evaluate whether the
existing Mirabel terminal and its annexes (aeroquay and parking
structure) are still adapted to respond to current trends in key
passenger processing activities and commercial facilities in order
to handle the current level and mix of traffic of a major Canadian
international airport, or if they should be qualified as obsolete for
airport related activities. The capacity of airside and landside
facilities will also be considered when performing this
evaluation.
A separate study is looking at the scope and costs related to the
building systems, current codes, security standards and other
technical issues.
5
Airside Capacity
The Mirabel design was based on a Passenger Transfer Vehicle
(PTV) type of operation similar to the one pioneered at
Washington-Dulles and, to a lesser extent, at several other
airports.
This type of operation has proven to be inefficient due to the long
boarding/de-boarding process, early check-in close out times,
longer connection times, high equipment and operational costs, as
well as from a passenger level of service standpoint.
Although many airports rely on a bussing operation to remote
stands to deal with peak traffic conditions, most airports strive to
serve the majority of their passengers on stands equipped with
passenger boarding bridges..*
There are only 24 gates in the YMX terminal area of which 6 on
the aeroquay had boarding bridges. Of the total, 18 have been
leased until 2032 for ICAR racing.
In addition, the apron is planned for a power-in/power-out
operation which eliminates the need for push-back manoeuvers,
but takes up a great deal of space. In order to accommodate the
current demand, the apron would need a major expansion and
re-configuration into a pier or satellite concept with a power-
in/push-back operation.
. * The 2004 IATA Airport Development Reference Manual
recommends that 90-95% of annual passengers be served via
passenger boarding bridges (PBBs).
No. of Gates YMX YUL 2016
Contact/Bridged 6* 62
Remote 18* 11-16**
Total 24* 73-78
* 18 gates are leased to ICAR
** Depending on aircraft size
©GoogleEarth
6
Landside Capacity
Terminal Curb
The existing terminal curb is about 350m long on three levels for
a total length of 1050m. Although this is a reasonable length
compared to other airports, the 3 level curb does require
additional level changes via moving ramps which may be
challenging for passengers with baggage.
Parking
YMX currently has a total of about 5,580 car parking spaces in
the terminal area, of which 2,410 are in structured parking and
others are surface parking for public as well as the hotel and
administration building.
By comparison, YUL has over 13,000 spaces including 5,553 in
the parking structure (including 500 rental car spaces).
It is not clear whether the existing YMX structure can be
expanded upwards or whether a new structure would have to be
built to the east. In any case, it is questionable whether it is
worth expanding parking in this area if the long term terminal
development should be located elsewhere on the site. (Refer to
Future Airport Development on page 12).
Landside Plan
Terminal Curb Length Comparison
Airport
2013
mppa
# of
Levels
Curb
Length (m) m/mppa Notes
Mirabel 14.1 3 1050 74.5 mppa based on YUL traffic
Montreal-Trudeau 14.1 2 1213 86.0
Toronto Terminal 1 22.0 3 1735 78.9 including the Service Level
Toronto Terminal 3 11.0 2 1580 143.6
Vancouver 18.0 2 1600 88.9
Calgary 14.3 2 1250 87.4 excluding the new Terminal
Edmonton 7.0 2 990 141.4
Ottawa 4.6 2 840 182.6
Parking Spaces YMX* YUL
Parking Structure
2,410 5,553
Surface Parking
3107* 7,447
Total Parking 5,580 13,000
* includes hotel & admin spaces
Car Parking
©GoogleEarth
7
Terminal Capacity – Area Summaries
Total Terminal Area
As indicated in the chart above, the total area of the YMX
terminal is less than 1/3 the size of YUL. The area per million
passengers per annum (mppa) is also far lower than benchmarks
for similar terminals. YMX was not designed for the level and
type of traffic currently serving YUL. For instance, it does not
include facilities for transborder passengers which requires
separate security, Customs Border Protection (CBP) facilities
and segregated holdrooms and outbound baggage devices.
In addition, YMX was planned with minimal domestic facilities
and has no segregation of arriving and departing international
passengers in the Aeroquay. One of the advantages of a PTV
type of terminal is its inherent space efficiency due to the lack
of long piers.
Although the terminal could be expanded, the scope of work to
reconfigure and upgrade it would be very extensive, and it is
likely to be more economical to build new. Any future
investment should take into consideration, the longer term
master plan for the airport. (Refer to page12).
Concession Area
The YMX concession area is very low compared with current
standards. Although it would be possible to provide additional area
on the mezzanine, it is only accessible from the non-secure zone.
Current standards are to have the majority of concession space on the
secure side and easily accessible to the passenger flow in order to
make them more convenient for passengers and able to generate
greater revenue. Duty Free space is particularly critical and YMX
has only 225m2 compared to 1,586m2 at YUL. There would be
significant costs and challenges to reconfigure the retail area to
achieve an appropriate post-security layout.
Facility YMX YUL
Total Area (m2) 84,600 281,749
m2/mppa 6,000 19,982
Facility YMX YUL
Concession Area 3,500 8,574
Concession Area/mppa 248 608
YMX Mezzanine
8
Terminal Capacity - Departures
Check-in Facilities
YMX has 35% fewer domestic/international counters than YUL
and no provision for transborder check-in. In addition, the
spacing between the check-in islands is 18m compared to over
25m at YUL and Toronto. This leaves inadequate room for
installation of self-service kiosks which are critical to current
check-in processes. Most of the counters are not fitted with
induction baggage belts which are now common in Canadian
airports for health and safety reasons. In any case, the check-in
area would have to be reconfigured to facilitate the latest
processes for self-service bag tagging and bag drop.
120 desks
Departures
Security Facilities
There are several critical deficiencies in the YMX security
facilities. First of all, the space provided for pre-board screening
is only wide enough for 9 lanes based on current CATSA
standards. In addition, the depth is only 12m compared to 20m at
YUL. To achieve the recommended depth, the security lanes
would have to extend into the already constrained holdroom. The
space for queuing is also very restricted.
A separate study should address issues of the primary security
line (such as the openings between the mezzanine and holdroom
area) and access control.
9 lanes
(assumed maximum no.)
Departures
572m
2
Facility YMX YUL
DOM/INT Check-in 120 187
TB Check-in 0 58
Facility YMX YUL
DOM/INT Security 9 22
TB Security 0 12
9
Terminal Capacity - Departures
Holdrooms
The YMX holdroom area is very small since it was only designed
to handle up to 18 international flights. In addition, there are
very few amenities such as concessions and airline lounges. This
implies that the original planning concept for YMX was for
passengers to circulate up to the mezzanine where they would
wait in the seating and concession area until shortly before their
flight is called. This was a time when the pre-board screening
process was at least four times faster than today.
The total international holdroom is about 2,600m2 of which only
1,500m2 is available for seating once an allowance for circulation
is deducted. In order to handle the current number of active
stands, as well as appropriate amenities, a significant expansion is
required.
Outbound Baggage Facilities
The existing YMX outbound baggage system consists of 7 x 40m
devices and 2 x 72m devices which are adequate for the check-in
counters they support. However this is less than half the capacity of
the YUL domestic/international system. In addition, the YUL has a
transborder system of chutes which - along with the sortation and
early bag storage area - is about 8,500m2.
In order to comply with current CATSA security standards, a new
3-Level Hold Baggage Screening system would have to be
installed. Since this area has a double height space, it should be
possible to install this system above the existing devices.
Facility YMX YUL Notes
DOM/INT O-B Baggage
5,700m2 10,740m2
YUL excl. sortation
TB O-B Baggage
n/a 6,200m2
YUL excl. sortation
10
Terminal Capacity - Departures
. Transborder Facilities
Transborder traffic represents a sizeable proportion of Montreal’s
total annual traffic and is important for connections to domestic
and international flights. The transborder facilities occupy a
significant area at YUL with approximately 13,000m2 on
Departures Level for 58 check-in counters, bag drop, 12 security
lanes and a CBP facility with 28 inspection counters (with a
capacity of 1400 pax/hr), plus 8,500m2 on Arrivals Level for
outbound baggage sortation and loading area.
There is currently no provision for transborder traffic at YMX, so
the Departures Level would have to be expanded by at least 50%
to match current YUL capacity, plus additional area for baggage
systems and segregated holdrooms..
YMX Site Plan showing extent of TB expansion
YUL Transborder Departures
©GoogleEarth
11
Terminal Capacity - Arrivals
Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA)
Although it would be possible to add additional Primary
counters, the queuing depth is only 15m compared to the
recommended 30m at YUL, YYZ and YVR. Similarly, for
Secondary counters, there is room for several more positions, but
again the queuing depth is inadequate.
In addition, CBSA will require considerably more support space
to meet the forecast demand. Therefore, significant
modifications and expansion of these facilities is required.
1 DOM 55m carousel
5 INT 55m carousels
2,875m2 Total Claim Area
Arrivals
Baggage Reclaim Facilities
As shown above, YMX has about 1/3 the baggage claim
presentation length as YUL and 20% of the claim area. In
addition, the length of the YMX carousels is adequate for Code C
and D aircraft, but is insufficient to handle the loads of current
Code E and F international aircraft. A major expansion would be
required to accommodate the additional and larger devices.
Facility YMX YUL
Primary Counters 17 26
Secondary Counters 14 36
17 Primary counters
14 Secondary counters
Arrivals
Facility YMX YUL
DOM Bag Claim Length
1 @ 55 = 55m
66 + 54 + 80 = 200m
TB/INT Bag Claim Length
5 @ 55 = 255m
4 @ 100 + 3 @ 90 = 670m
DOM Bag Claim Area
595m2
1,800m2
TB/INT Bag Claim Area 2,280m2 11,840m2
12
Terminal Capacity - Arrivals
Arrivals Hall Facilities
The Arrivals Concourse in YMX is quite narrow and restricts the
space for international greeters to two small areas which are a
fraction of the YUL area. The same issue applies to the domestic
greeters area.
The original design may have expected greeters to stay on the
mezzanine until they saw their passengers arriving in the bag
claim area. Current CBSA standards, however, restrict visibility
into their areas. Again, expansion is recommended.
Arrivals
Facility YMX YUL
INT Arrivals Hall
255m2
1050m2
DOM Arrivals Hall
70m2 300m2
13
Future Airport Development
Any significant investment in the existing terminal area must take
into consideration the potential long-term development of
Mirabel Airport.
Several recent studies have looked at how YMX can be
developed to maximize its capacity within the new boundaries.
The drawing below shows one possible layout.
In order to handle long-term demand, a 3 to 4 parallel runway
configuration is needed in the 06-24 direction. This will require
the eventual relocation of the existing facilities south of the A-50
for future runway development. There are a number of options
for accommodating the new terminal and support facilities
elsewhere on the site.
14
Conclusions
It is clear from this analysis that the existing YMX terminal does not
have the capacity to handle the traffic levels of a major Canadian
international airport such as YUL.
Airside: Expand & reconfigure apron to accommodate at least 50
additional gates with at least 90% accessible by boarding bridges.
Landside: More that double the number of structured and surface
parking spaces.
Terminal: All terminal processing facilities and concession areas
would need significant expansion/reconfiguration to handle a 3-
sector traffic demand. The constraints of the existing facility make it
difficult or very expensive to achieve the optimum layouts needed to
provide a competitive level of service and to maximize commercial
opportunities required in a major Canadian international airport.
This, combined with the need to upgrade the major building systems,
would make it more economical to build new.
Long-term Development: Recent studies have demonstrated that
YUL can continue to handle traffic growth for many years to come,
so the YMX facility requirements at that time will be more extensive
than indicated above. In addition, it is likely that the existing
terminal area will be needed for future runway development, so
substantial investment in this area is highly questionable.
Based on the above, the existing terminal building and its
aeroquay and structured parking are not suitable to serve a
major Canadian international airport and, therefore, from an
airport capacity and planning standpoint, these facilities can be
qualified as obsolete.
