HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum.

Since 1999, SkyscraperPage.com's forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web.  The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics.  SkyscraperPage.com also features unique skyscraper diagrams, a database of construction activity, and publishes popular skyscraper posters.

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2008, 12:41 AM
edluva's Avatar
edluva edluva is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,044
^agreed about the bridge. way out of scale.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2008, 9:01 AM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is online now
#GoDodgers
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,639
I added more photos to post #5.
__________________
"I'm an LA guy, can't help it." -- Tiger Woods
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2008, 6:32 PM
BrandonJXN's Avatar
BrandonJXN BrandonJXN is offline
Go Deep
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,198
The bridge needs to be worked on. Though I'm sure that this will be modified a bit but overall I like it.
__________________
Casual
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Nov 27, 2008, 6:25 AM
Stratosphere's Avatar
Stratosphere Stratosphere is offline
Try to reach this high!
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Posts: 1,068
The obtrusive bridges ruin this beautiful design. Why can't these new terminals be connected with underground people movers?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Nov 27, 2008, 7:38 AM
Buckeye Native 001 Buckeye Native 001 is offline
Pathetic little twerp
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: People's Republic of Flagstaff
Posts: 28,466
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stratosphere View Post
Why can't these new terminals be connected with underground people movers?
Unstable foundation maybe?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Nov 27, 2008, 9:20 AM
edluva's Avatar
edluva edluva is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,044
and/or cost?

the more i look at this proposal the more those bridges seem to be out of proportion and lacking of subtlety
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2008, 3:56 AM
StethJeff's Avatar
StethJeff StethJeff is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,697
I think that the bridges create a strong lasting impression. If they're able to further the design elements of the theme building in any way at LAX, I'm all for it.

Overall though, I must say that I'm pleasantly surprised by those renderings. I'm used to shrugging my shoulders and saying, "well, at least it's infill," for most LA projects (Park Fifth, Nokia Theater, Madame Tussaud's). But this one is simply awesome! It's nice having that feeling once again.

If the LAX expansion can even come close to those images, at least part of our airport will have aesthetics that can compete with a Schipol or Suvarnabhumi.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Nov 29, 2008, 7:55 AM
BrighamYen's Avatar
BrighamYen BrighamYen is offline
I ♥ DTLA
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: L.A.
Posts: 6,492
When is this thing supposed to start construction again?
__________________
DTLA RISING | With Brigham Yen
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2008, 5:30 PM
John F's Avatar
John F John F is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,329
OK, the model shows the international terminal being rebuilt... What about the domestic terminals?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2008, 7:59 PM
BrandonJXN's Avatar
BrandonJXN BrandonJXN is offline
Go Deep
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by StethJeff View Post
I think that the bridges create a strong lasting impression. If they're able to further the design elements of the theme building in any way at LAX, I'm all for it.

Overall though, I must say that I'm pleasantly surprised by those renderings. I'm used to shrugging my shoulders and saying, "well, at least it's infill," for most LA projects (Park Fifth, Nokia Theater, Madame Tussaud's). But this one is simply awesome! It's nice having that feeling once again.

If the LAX expansion can even come close to those images, at least part of our airport will have aesthetics that can compete with a Schipol or Suvarnabhumi.
I said on SSC that I would love to see LAX compete with Changi Airport in Singapore which has ranked pretty high on a lot of 'world's best' airports lists.
__________________
Casual
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2008, 9:05 PM
WonderlandPark's Avatar
WonderlandPark WonderlandPark is online now
Pacific Wonderland
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Bi-Situational, Portland & L.A.
Posts: 4,080
Bridge has to be big, the tail of the A380 has to fit under it. It has to be two levels because of circulation of arriving passengers (to customs) and departing passengers. I don't know how you build it "smaller." The design should be altered to make it more light in appearance, IMO.
__________________
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away"

travel, architecture & photos of the textured world at http://www.pixelmap.com
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2008, 10:58 PM
10023's Avatar
10023 10023 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London
Posts: 11,160
Good luck getting this completed by 2013 (not a chance), but the plans look good. LAX isn't such a pleasure right now (though nothing is as bad as O'Hare).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2009, 8:19 AM
Stratosphere's Avatar
Stratosphere Stratosphere is offline
Try to reach this high!
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Los Angeles, USA
Posts: 1,068
Something like this would look better than the current arch design, I think.



Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2009, 6:05 PM
plinko's Avatar
plinko plinko is offline
them bones
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Santa Barbara adjacent
Posts: 6,626
^Well yeah, but this is essentially a public works project. So while it would be lovely to get a Calatrava or Rogers or Foster, Fentress isn't a terrible alternative.

I agree the bridge needs a little work (I like the Theme Building-esque concept), and I actually quite like the concourse roofs. The middle building? Meh...sometimes a theme can get a little overcooked.

There will be lots of value engineering with this (hopefully they don't VE the bridge in favor of some stupid Dulles type transfer system), but if LAX gets something that nearly looks like this concept, I'm alright with that.

And Stratosphere...underground (while ideal) is WAY too expensive..the shoring alone (due to the relative elevation to the ocean) is probably more expensive than a bridge.
__________________
Even if you are 1 in a million, there are still 7,000 people just like you...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Jan 16, 2009, 8:26 PM
dimondpark's Avatar
dimondpark dimondpark is offline
FiveTen Represent!?!
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Stinson Beach, CA
Posts: 6,016
that's hot.
__________________


"It's raining game in Northern California"

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2009, 11:13 AM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is online now
#GoDodgers
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,639
I wish they would do something about the exterior of the current TBIT. It looks like a prison.

Regarding the rail connection, does anybody know if the Green Line is to be extended to Aviation/Century (where it would meet up with the people mover) or to the airport itself? I prefer the latter.

Overall, I'm pretty content with what I see. I yearn for the day when we can greet passengers in an airport like this and transport them to a vibrant and revitalized DTLA via the LAX Express.
__________________
"I'm an LA guy, can't help it." -- Tiger Woods
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2009, 3:19 PM
J_Taylor's Avatar
J_Taylor J_Taylor is offline
S.F. needs more Neon.
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: El Cerrito,PRK
Posts: 667
I like it, and think the bridge is just fine the way it is.
__________________
Jay Taylor
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2009, 11:43 PM
jamesinclair jamesinclair is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 724
The bridge will allow for some fantastic pictures
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2009, 6:59 AM
Quixote's Avatar
Quixote Quixote is online now
#GoDodgers
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,639
LAX Chief Says Bring Trains to Airport

By Art Marroquin, Staff Writer
January 16, 2009

The head of Los Angeles International Airport said she supports efforts to extend the Metro Green Line but remained frustrated that the train won't directly connect with airline terminals.

"The plans for bringing it into the airport sound better than they are because they don't actually bring the Green Line into the central terminal area," Gina Marie Lindsey, executive director of LAX, said Thursday during a luncheon hosted by the Los Angeles Current Affairs Forum.

For now, the Green Line ends about two miles from LAX, forcing commuters to take a brief bus ride to the airport.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority's plan calls for extending the Green Line to nearby Manchester Square. From there, travelers would board a people mover to gain access to the airport terminals.

"That's fine, because it certainly gets you a lot closer to the airport, and that's a good thing, but you still need to get off the Green Line and onto some other conveyance to get into the central terminal area," she said. "We're in support of it, but let's understand it's not as perfect as if we did this from scratch."

MTA spokesman Rick Jager did not return repeated phone calls seeking comment about Lindsey's statements.

The Green Line opened in 1995 at a cost of $700 million, running 20 miles from Norwalk to Redondo Beach, but bypassing LAX by about two miles.

Initial plans called for extending the Green Line to LAX as soon as 2015, but a revised report from the MTA notes that the project won't be completed until sometime from 2018 to 2022 at an estimated cost of $400 million.

LAX officials said the airport's current layout would make it difficult to extend the Green Line directly into the central terminal area. Lindsey lamented that her predecessors should have had the foresight to allow for better access to public transportation. Most large cities have rail lines that directly connect to their airports.

"As a general rule, I think mass transit as a connection to major airports is an absolute must," she said. "If you were building an airport today, you would want a rail line to make it efficient."
__________________
"I'm an LA guy, can't help it." -- Tiger Woods
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2009, 10:21 AM
edluva's Avatar
edluva edluva is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 6,044
^the green line isn't exactly an "efficient" way to get to LAX, even with a direct connection to terminals. i know we'll take what we can get, but it's still a shitty option. good for one of green line's original premises though - airport workers
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 9:18 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.