HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #281  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2011, 10:01 AM
edluva edluva is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,134
we're obviously arguing taste here but how do you figure lax's expansion will look better than munich's new terminal 2? at this point, one can already see how much lighter (and much more more elegant) the superstructure of munich's terminal 2 appears, and actually is. i wonder how you'd compare it with berlin's brandenberg expansion then.

lax's new terminal, while highly welcomed, is still a goofy caricature in comparison - its beams encased in white drywall - faithful to the typical angeleno practice of disingenuously masking structural elements to create an "effect". Nowadays most good public architecture proudly displays structure in its aesthetics. For some reason, architects for angeleno projects approach design as though they were working in set design. They're more interested in selling you on a false image of the building (eg sculpting with stucco, plaster, gypboard, etc) rather than displaying the essence (eg. sculpting with structure) of the building itself.

it's a travesty in how much of a wasted opportunity it represents, but not a complete travesty. it's safe and predictable, like most of the architecture in this city.

although, to say our expansion is nicer than what existed is a waste of self-consolatory rhetoric

Last edited by edluva; Oct 13, 2011 at 10:29 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #282  
Old Posted Nov 14, 2011, 9:50 PM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is offline
Inveterate Angeleno
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 7,474
Massive photo update courtesy of Curbed LA! Much more at link!

Quote:








http://la.curbed.com/archives/2011/1...terminal_1.php
__________________
“To tell a story is inescapably to take a moral stance.”

— Jerome Bruner
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #283  
Old Posted Nov 14, 2011, 9:58 PM
202_Cyclist's Avatar
202_Cyclist 202_Cyclist is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 5,911
Westsidelife:
Quote:
Massive photo update courtesy of Curbed LA! Much more at link!
Good to see. Despite the constant griping by some on this thread, the Bradley West terminal will improve the passenger experience at LAX and, once again, this shows that investing in infrastructure creates good jobs.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #284  
Old Posted Nov 15, 2011, 6:51 AM
N830MH N830MH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 2,967
Quote:
Originally Posted by Westsidelife View Post
Here's the latest photo update on the progress of the Bradley West project:

http://www.lawa.org/uploadedFiles/LA...%209-21-11.pdf
Wow! Looking good!!! Keep it up the good work! You are almost done renovation the Bradley Terminal. I can't wait!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #285  
Old Posted Nov 15, 2011, 9:01 AM
edluva edluva is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by 202_Cyclist View Post
Westsidelife:


Good to see. Despite the constant griping by some on this thread, the Bradley West terminal will improve the passenger experience at LAX and, once again, this shows that investing in infrastructure creates good jobs.
true. even rick caruso (developer of the grove) could have improved the passenger experience at LAX. The bar is set that low.

but look at that - drywall about to go up!


source: www.avsforum.com

Last edited by edluva; Nov 15, 2011 at 9:11 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #286  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2011, 2:43 AM
LDVArch LDVArch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by edluva View Post
lax's new terminal, while highly welcomed, is still a goofy caricature in comparison - its beams encased in white drywall - faithful to the typical angeleno practice of disingenuously masking structural elements to create an "effect". Nowadays most good public architecture proudly displays structure in its aesthetics. For some reason, architects for angeleno projects approach design as though they were working in set design. They're more interested in selling you on a false image of the building (eg sculpting with stucco, plaster, gypboard, etc) rather than displaying the essence (eg. sculpting with structure) of the building itself.
The beams will NOT be encased in white drywall. They will be paneled for a very sleek appearance.

As to the display of structural elements, that began with the high modernists, but its postmodern use was pioneered by Philip Johnson in, get this, his Crystal Cathedral (in the Orange County suburb of Garden Grove). So much for your diatribe against the suburbanite culture of Los Angeles. Garden Grove also boasts a church designed by Richard Neutra. But I digress.

Back to the Crystal Cathedral, the structural system that Johnson pioneered for that suburban project, in his brilliant attempt to create a postmodern Gothic cathedral, was very influential. Later iterations of the idea include Foster's Hong Kong airport.

By now, such structural systems are sort of banal and commonplace. In some of their later iterations, by some of the best architects, they aren't even the most aesthetic or "sculptural" parts of the building. Take LHR T5 for instance. Knowing how banal those structural systems had become and they look very banal in the check-in lobby, Rogers made the void spaces spanned by the trusses that hold up the curtain wall the real revelation of that building. It is the void spaces, and not the trusses, that reveal that here form does not equal function. So much for your disdain of false images.

Quote:
Originally Posted by edluva View Post
it's a travesty in how much of a wasted opportunity it represents, but not a complete travesty. it's safe and predictable, like most of the architecture in this city.
It is not safe and predictable. I tried to explain some of the more interesting elements of the building above.

Last edited by LDVArch; Nov 22, 2011 at 3:06 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #287  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2011, 8:15 AM
edluva edluva is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,134
wow, you sound idiotic. phillip johnson building a large church in garden grove singlehandedly exonerates all the other "suburbanite culture" influenced crap that local developers spew across the entire expanse of the LA basin? sure, and phillip johnson is also an LA architect (sarcasm intended, folks)

and where did you learn to write? you sound like a thirteen year old. "suburbanite culture"?

regarding heathrow terminal 5, the way you write, i gather you see all spaces as voids absent their structural elements. if such things are so banal, why expose them in LAX to begin with? if they are so pointless aesthetically, why does fentress spend so much energy paneling structural elements to affect a "sleek appearance" as you so eloquently put it? Here's why, because you're wrong, and fentress really does care about "structural elements". Let me demystify fentress' intentions for you.

Well, for starters, fentress were inspired by ocean waves, and your attempt to ascribe roof shingles to them is probably purely out of your own imagination, because fentress said themselves, they were inspired by ocean waves.

finally, my simple point was, paneling is a false image. amidst all that sophistic garbage you spewed about the progressive banality of "structural elements" through time, you've pretty much backhandedly debunked your own assertion that LAX is a departure from that, since Fentress' efforts at paneling all those elements in LAX is the most aesthetically conscious acknowledgement of the impact of "structural elements" to their design.

p.s. please don't go into architectural writing. you're incoherent, and obviously don't understand half of what you're talking about.

Last edited by edluva; Nov 22, 2011 at 8:49 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #288  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2011, 5:33 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
Quote:
Originally Posted by edluva View Post
we're obviously arguing taste here but how do you figure lax's expansion will look better than munich's new terminal 2? at this point, one can already see how much lighter (and much more more elegant) the superstructure of munich's terminal 2 appears, and actually is. i wonder how you'd compare it with berlin's brandenberg expansion then.

lax's new terminal, while highly welcomed, is still a goofy caricature in comparison - its beams encased in white drywall - faithful to the typical angeleno practice of disingenuously masking structural elements to create an "effect". Nowadays most good public architecture proudly displays structure in its aesthetics. For some reason, architects for angeleno projects approach design as though they were working in set design. They're more interested in selling you on a false image of the building (eg sculpting with stucco, plaster, gypboard, etc) rather than displaying the essence (eg. sculpting with structure) of the building itself.

it's a travesty in how much of a wasted opportunity it represents, but not a complete travesty. it's safe and predictable, like most of the architecture in this city.

although, to say our expansion is nicer than what existed is a waste of self-consolatory rhetoric
Oh, ed, after you say something right about DT, you go back to criticism just for the sake of criticizing. Without wasting time, you do realize that you argue that LA should be new and innovative and do the same as most architects are doing? See any contradiction there?

And you criticize "morbidity" and then use "essence"? Is that an attempt to universalize Modernism or something from the Middle Ages? The essence of a building is whatever the architect damn well pleases it to be, and what the viewers intepret it to be. Or maybe you mean function? In that case, how can you criticize the vast majority of built LA (excluding the silliness of starchitects) since they were built to be functional without giving a damn what other cities had declared to be "proper" style? You should be screaming out the glory of LA: funtional without pretension!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #289  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2011, 6:01 PM
202_Cyclist's Avatar
202_Cyclist 202_Cyclist is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 5,911
Air France to deploy A380s on Dubai, Los Angeles routes

Air France to deploy A380s on Dubai, Los Angeles routes

11/8/2011
Flight Global

"Air France will operate Airbus A380 aircraft on its routes to Dubai, starting 5 December, and Los Angeles, starting 28 May 2012.

The carrier will serve the Paris Charles de Gaulle-Dubai route with daily flights using the A380, which will be redeployed from Tokyo for the winter season as a result of lower seasonal demand in Tokyo.."

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...routes-364466/

Here's Air France's website with more information about the LAX service:
http://www.airfrance.co.uk/GB/en/loc...ation/A380.htm
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #290  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2011, 7:18 PM
LDVArch LDVArch is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by edluva View Post
wow, you sound idiotic. phillip johnson building a large church in garden grove singlehandedly exonerates all the other "suburbanite culture" influenced crap that local developers spew across the entire expanse of the LA basin? sure, and phillip johnson is also an LA architect (sarcasm intended, folks)

and where did you learn to write? you sound like a thirteen year old. "suburbanite culture"?
Your argument in the City Compilation thread was that LA lacks the educated urbanites to make the right architectural choices. Yet, look at the choice some suburbanite made, in Garden Grove no less. After Johnson's glass house, there are very few masterpieces. Great architect, but he went commercial and kitschy too fast. See the AT&T Building and the Lipstick building. Still, somehow, the "suburbanite" hick who hired Johnson to build a church in Garden Grove got him to do some of his best work. Go figure.

As to my choice of words, that was on purpose. I wanted to reference your argument about educated "urbanites." As to where I learned to write, it seems that you missed the hint I dropped earlier. So, let me repeat it. Vincent Scully taught my modern architecture course. (Google his name.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by edluva View Post
Well, for starters, fentress were inspired by ocean waves, and your attempt to ascribe roof shingles to them is probably purely out of your own imagination, because fentress said themselves, they were inspired by ocean waves.

finally, my simple point was, paneling is a false image. amidst all that sophistic garbage you spewed about the progressive banality of "structural elements" through time, you've pretty much backhandedly debunked your own assertion that LAX is a departure from that, since Fentress' efforts at paneling all those elements in LAX is the most aesthetically conscious acknowledgement of the impact of "structural elements" to their design.

p.s. please don't go into architectural writing. you're incoherent, and obviously don't understand half of what you're talking about.
Architectural symbolism is not as neat and precise as you want to make it. Good architects make buildings that mean more than what they say they mean. For example, what does the LA Cathedral look like on the outside? A CA Mission church, a rock, a crystal (maybe even the Crystal Cathedral)? Did I miss something? What about the floating planes near the cross window? What about the color of the building itself? What about the concrete material? So, yes, the explicit reference of the exterior of TBIT West may be to ocean waves, but there are other possible associations as there were influences.

As to the rest, it is not as clear cut as you want to make it. Paneling or covering up structural elements is not categorically bad and the industrial/mechanical look or structural transparency is not categorically good. Plus, this debate is quite old by now and no architect really thinks that way anymore. Heck, Richard Meier panels his buildings and he is a formalist.

(In general, let me say your recourse to personal attacks on my writing does you no favors.)

Last edited by LDVArch; Nov 22, 2011 at 7:46 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #291  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2012, 3:28 PM
Steve2726's Avatar
Steve2726 Steve2726 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: L.A.
Posts: 482
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #292  
Old Posted Jan 9, 2012, 6:34 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
Quote:
Originally Posted by LDVArch View Post
The beams will NOT be encased in white drywall. They will be paneled for a very sleek appearance.

As to the display of structural elements, that began with the high modernists, but its postmodern use was pioneered by Philip Johnson in, get this, his Crystal Cathedral (in the Orange County suburb of Garden Grove). So much for your diatribe against the suburbanite culture of Los Angeles. Garden Grove also boasts a church designed by Richard Neutra. But I digress.

Back to the Crystal Cathedral, the structural system that Johnson pioneered for that suburban project, in his brilliant attempt to create a postmodern Gothic cathedral, was very influential. Later iterations of the idea include Foster's Hong Kong airport.

By now, such structural systems are sort of banal and commonplace. In some of their later iterations, by some of the best architects, they aren't even the most aesthetic or "sculptural" parts of the building. Take LHR T5 for instance. Knowing how banal those structural systems had become and they look very banal in the check-in lobby, Rogers made the void spaces spanned by the trusses that hold up the curtain wall the real revelation of that building. It is the void spaces, and not the trusses, that reveal that here form does not equal function. So much for your disdain of false images.



It is not safe and predictable. I tried to explain some of the more interesting elements of the building above.
Nice to read an intelligent post about architecture by someone who actually knows what he is talking about.

btw, the great majority of LA's architectural gems are low-rise, mostly Spanish and deco style. But the high-rise addicts ignore them and want to emlulate something from Dubai or Kuala Lumpur. Leadership from the bottom of the barrel.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #293  
Old Posted Mar 28, 2012, 3:27 PM
202_Cyclist's Avatar
202_Cyclist 202_Cyclist is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 5,911
Alaska Airlines unveils $238M Terminal 6 makeover at LAX (Daily Breeze)

Alaska Airlines unveils $238M Terminal 6 makeover at LAX

By Art Marroquin
Daily Breeze
03/28/2012

"Travelers planning to catch an Alaska Airlines flight out of Los Angeles International Airport can now get their tickets from banks of self-serve stations situated in a roomy terminal bathed in ice blue lights.


Alaska Airlines will show off a $238 million upgrade to LAX's Terminal 6 that was led by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and Alaska Airlines CEO Bill Ayer. Passengers disembark while others use the escalators to meet their gate. (Steve McCrank / Staff Photographer)

Walls accented with a soft wood paneling, larger baggage claim areas and additional security checkpoints are just some of the highlights of a $238 million makeover recently completed at LAX's Terminal 6.

Alaska Airlines, LAX and the Transportation Security Administration funded the project, marking the first makeover in more than three decades for Terminal 6...."

http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/ci_2...-6-makeover-at
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #294  
Old Posted Apr 10, 2012, 3:22 PM
202_Cyclist's Avatar
202_Cyclist 202_Cyclist is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 5,911
LAX's Bradley Terminal project cost heads skyward (LA Times)

LAX's Bradley Terminal project cost heads skyward
Officials say the modernization budget has grown from $1.4 billion to nearly $2 billion, mostly because of changes to the original plans.

By Dan Weikel
Los Angeles Times
April 10, 2012

"The cost of expanding a key terminal at the center of Los Angeles International Airport's modernization plan has increased from about $1.4 billion to almost $2 billion.

But airport officials say the overall $4.1-billion modernization program, as well as the now more-expensive Tom Bradley International Terminal, are still on schedule and within budget because of a built-in contingency fund and cost savings achieved on other projects in the revitalization effort.

"With regards to scheduling, all projects find it challenging to stay on schedule," said Deputy Airport Director Roger Johnson. "But every day we continue to make progress. At this point in time we are on schedule..."

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...,7355080.story
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #295  
Old Posted Aug 20, 2012, 4:24 PM
202_Cyclist's Avatar
202_Cyclist 202_Cyclist is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 5,911
LAX operations pump $40 billion into Southern California economy

LAX operations pump $40 billion into Southern California economy
Los Angeles International Airport supported more than 294,000 jobs in 2011 and added about $2.5 billion in taxes to the city, county and state, a report says.

By Dalina Castellanos
Los Angeles Times
August 20, 2012

"Los Angeles International Airport helped pump $39.7 billion into the Southern California economy last year, and that number is expected to grow in the next few years as the airport expands, according to a new report.

The report by the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp. found that LAX's operations in 2011 supported more than 294,000 jobs and pumped billions of dollars from new construction and airport payrolls, nearby LAX-related businesses and tourist spending into Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside and San Bernardino counties.

The operations added an estimated $2.5 billion in taxes to city, county and state coffers, according to the report for Los Angeles World Airports, the operator of LAX..."

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...22,print.story
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #296  
Old Posted Aug 20, 2012, 5:22 PM
jg6544 jg6544 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,113
After having my Saturday flight to Colorado Springs finally take off nearly an hour after scheduled departure time and then having my return flight arrive twenty minutes ahead of schedule and then have to park for forty minutes on the tarmac because there wasn't an open gate at the terminal, I'm convinced. LAX is an unmitigated disaster and really, there's no way to improve it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #297  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2012, 5:21 AM
aquablue aquablue is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,741
Quote:
Originally Posted by jg6544 View Post
After having my Saturday flight to Colorado Springs finally take off nearly an hour after scheduled departure time and then having my return flight arrive twenty minutes ahead of schedule and then have to park for forty minutes on the tarmac because there wasn't an open gate at the terminal, I'm convinced. LAX is an unmitigated disaster and really, there's no way to improve it.
Hmm.. There are always ways.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #298  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2012, 4:16 PM
pesto pesto is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,546
Quote:
Originally Posted by aquablue View Post
Hmm.. There are always ways.
No, no; he's right. An unmitigated disaster with no hope for improvement. If you can't even get His Holiness' flight from Colorado Springs right, what is there left?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #299  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2012, 11:24 PM
Ragnar Ragnar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by jg6544 View Post
After having my Saturday flight to Colorado Springs finally take off nearly an hour after scheduled departure time and then having my return flight arrive twenty minutes ahead of schedule and then have to park for forty minutes on the tarmac because there wasn't an open gate at the terminal, I'm convinced. LAX is an unmitigated disaster and really, there's no way to improve it.
So basically you are blaming the airport for an airline's f*^k up?

That's..... smart.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #300  
Old Posted Sep 5, 2012, 11:53 PM
philip's Avatar
philip philip is offline
The Picture Guy
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Posts: 1,008
The first gate at the New Tom Bradley International Terminal Building will become operational tomorrow 9/6.

http://www.lawa.org/uploadedFiles/LA...Newsletter.pdf
__________________
I am the picture guy---A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:14 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.