LOS ANGELES | LAX Modernization Plan

[Illithid Dude]

Originally Posted by edluva

confirms my earlier doubts about the underwhelming design. it already looks outdated and completely lacking in grace. like it was designed in 1989 for a 1995 completion. about as modern looking as our convention center. los angeles is stuck in the 80s and early 90s. 4 billion dollars and this is what they come up with?

well i'm at least thankful lax is catching up at all. what a disappointment

I rather like, but I suppose that kind of stuff is subjective.

[Troubadour]

"We want to change LAX into L.A. wow," Fentress said. <---- Lamest statement ever. But I'm always in favor of infrastructure improvement. I just hope they don't crap out if they can't sell the bonds - just raise taxes. Make it happen, dammit. BTW, shouldn't this be in a construction thread under General Development now that it's actually being built?

[jg6544]

This is all well-and-good, but is any thought being given to getting TO the airport or PARKING once you get there?

[Quixote]

Here's a comprehensive photo update on the progress of the Bradley West project and the Terminal 6 renovation:

http://www.lawa.org/uploadedFiles/LA...206_7_2011.pdf

Also worth checking out are the newsletters that have been released through the months:

http://www.lawa.org/laxdev/Newsletter.aspx

[Illithid Dude]

Originally Posted by Westsidelife

Here's a comprehensive photo update on the progress of the Bradley West project and the Terminal 6 renovation:

http://www.lawa.org/uploadedFiles/LA...206_7_2011.pdf

Also worth checking out are the newsletters that have been released through the months:

http://www.lawa.org/laxdev/Newsletter.aspx

Wow, not actully that bad. It's sort of sad, but I am always surprised when L.A. gets something right. This looks right. The designs are all nice, modern, and attractive, if a little safe and clinical. Moreover, I think the fact that they would go out of their way and overhaul not only the international terminal, but the domestic ones, is really great.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

what confirmed your doubts? the article? the SF Airport head said that this redesign will take away any advantage SFO had on LAX.

what dont you like about the style of the new terminal?

[edluva]

Originally Posted by LosAngelesSportsFan

what confirmed your doubts? the article? the SF Airport head said that this redesign will take away any advantage SFO had on LAX.

what dont you like about the style of the new terminal?

i voiced my doubts about old renderings awhile back. the construction pics confirm it's headed in that direction. what don't i like? complete lack of imagination vs terminal projects in other cities around the world. this is not going to appear "light and airy" the way fentress is portraying it. probably what i dislike most is that it's supremely underwhelming for a 4 billion dollar project. more lost potential, something this city seems exceptionally well at doing.

just take a look at construction updates westsidelife posted - intermittent gatehouses as brutally imposing rectangular blocks completely out of scale and context vs the themed concourse. the concourse itself looks busy with imposing columns and innumerable beams. you can already tell from the proportion and height of columns, the number of beams, the width of skylights, this is not going to look light. the most unfornunate fact is terminal 6 ticketing is turning out quite faithful to the 80sesque renderings. heavy white rectangular beams supported by round white columns. goofy proportions overall if you ask me. and like i said, vintage late 80s. richard meier would have done leagues better if you wanted a clinical yet airy looking terminal dressed in white.

the good thing is it's relatively safe. painfully boring, but safe.

[LDVArch]

Originally Posted by edluva

i voiced my doubts about old renderings awhile back. the construction pics confirm it's headed in that direction. what don't i like? complete lack of imagination vs terminal projects in other cities around the world.

Complete lack of imagination, really?

Here is what I see. The roofline is very imaginative. The architect claims it was inspired by the Pacific Ocean, but I also see the forms of Walt Disney Hall, a little of Bruce Goff's Japanese Pavilion at LACMA, and above all the Spanish tile roofs that are synonymous with Los Angeles.

Inside, the space will be articulated by levels that bisect each other, ribbed vaulting in the great hall and elsewhere, and a lightwell between the old and new sections of the core. The total effect will be somewhat gothic, yet culturally-specific given that the inspiration for the interior articulations could have been the general form of the LAX theme building.

As to how it compares to other significant terminals, it is too early too tell. But it is off to a good start with a distinctive roofline. Here that roofline defines the interior spaces more than the roofline at the Hong Kong airport. I think that is a good thing. It is also what I like more about Barajas T4.

Overall, then, I do not share your doubts.

[edluva]

Originally Posted by LDVArch

Complete lack of imagination, really?

Here is what I see. The roofline is very imaginative. The architect claims it was inspired by the Pacific Ocean, but I also see the forms of Walt Disney Hall, a little of Bruce Goff's Japanese Pavilion at LACMA, and above all the Spanish tile roofs that are synonymous with Los Angeles.

Inside, the space will be articulated by levels that bisect each other, ribbed vaulting in the great hall and elsewhere, and a lightwell between the old and new sections of the core. The total effect will be somewhat gothic, yet culturally-specific given that the inspiration for the interior articulations could have been the general form of the LAX theme building.

As to how it compares to other significant terminals, it is too early too tell. But it is off to a good start with a distinctive roofline. Here that roofline defines the interior spaces more than the roofline at the Hong Kong airport. I think that is a good thing. It is also what I like more about Barajas T4.

Overall, then, I do not share your doubts.

gothic? calatrava's bce place with its vaulted arches counts as "somewhat gothic". your assertion that bradley expansion combines somewhat gothic with culturally specific to googie is stretching it imho. with gridded window frames, perpendicular angles, and angular beams throughout, the only consistent "motif" that echos the thoroughly curvilinear theme building in these renderings is the color white and slanted windows. and inspiration from spanish tile roof *shingles* you mean? i highly doubt that. spanish clay tile shingles are about as emblematic of los angeles as crabgrass and california stucco (sarcasm intended). that would be like saying the fortress-like aloofness of mayne's caltrans hq is inspired by the emblematic detachment of LA's drive thrus lol

i tend to side with the architects own assertion that the roofline was inspired by something as blatantly prosaic as "ocean waves" (whoaaa! what a concept, los angeles and ocean waaaaves? duuude! these guys like, totally deserve a pritzker!) like wow- let's echo ocean waves by making the roof have waves like an ocean... only you know, make the waves out of steel cladding to add mystique so as not to fully give it away. how's that for the subtlety of imagination?!

i agree that at least the roofline defines interior spaces here (contrast that with pretty much every tin foil structure designed by master deceptionist gehry where interior spaces could care less). barajas is much more interesting and innovative from a purely structural standpoint than this, and much more daring. what we're getting is what the public works equivalent of a model home. attractive only by virtue of being clean and new. throw in token embellishments (like, ocean waves!) and call it "art" to the uninitiated. i'm not buyin it.

yea, i guess we disagree

[LDVArch]

Originally Posted by edluva

gothic? your assertion that bradley expansion combines somewhat gothic with culturally specific to googie is stretching it imho.

spanish clay tile shingles are about as emblematic of los angeles as crabgrass and california stucco (sarcasm intended).

i tend to side with the architects own assertion that the roofline was inspired by something as blatantly prosaic as "ocean waves" (whoaaa! what a concept, los angeles and ocean waaaaves? duuude! these guys like, totally deserve a pritzker!)

barajas is much more interesting and innovative from a purely structural standpoint than this, and much more daring. what we're getting is what the public works equivalent of a model home.

yea, i guess we disagree

If you look at the theme building as a pure form and not as representative of a style, what you have are ribs forming a vault. I won't take credit for this idea. I heard it in Vincent Scully's Introduction to Modern Architecture class.

A main element of the re-imagined entrance to Disney's CA Adventure will be buildings with spanish tile roofs. The entrance was inspired by 1920-1930's LA. I'd say that is as emblematic as it gets.

If Foster could win a Pritzker in part for designing an airport whose roofline was supposed to be culturally-specific by resembling a bird in flight and/or a calligraphic flourish, then you can't really discount an airport building on the basis of its prosaic symbolism alone.

Speaking of model or tract homes, you might want to do a little research before lavishing Barajas with such praise. The roof is prefabricated, modular construction. There could be nothing truly daring about the roof because that is where the architect decided to economize.

[djlx2]

Originally Posted by edluva

the good thing is it's relatively safe. painfully boring, but safe.

Using restraint in buildings sometimes helps keep attention on the building itself. It's about using angles and compositions to convey a sense of what the building itself is. This isn't an easy task for any architect. People tend to gravitate toward structures they find it easy to walk around in, in any cluttered city, especially one like L.A. You want to focus on the lines of architecture in order to find the context. And the context of any terminal is: just transport. From one city to another. That's the reason why L.A.X. was built.

[JRinSoCal]

Is the people mover still in the works?

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Oops, wrong thread

[JDRCRASH]

Last week I picked someone up at the airport. I have to say, one of the terminal waiting areas I went inside was so dark i often looked at the digital screens. They really need more light in there.

[northbay]

i think it is a little too early to be judging in depth the quality of the architecture. there's not much to go on yet. however, based on what i have seen thus far, i would say this looks about as a good as any other terminal design in any other city. it certainly seems parts of it are 'airy'.

i have a soft spot for som's sfo international terminal. i know i'm biased but for me, no terminal is better.

[Steve2726]

Ed raises some valid points, in particular regarding the hulking concrete gate houses, those are a disaster. (I imagine they are dictated by new security issues following Sept. 11, it's a shame they aren't glass tho.) But his reputation for disliking everything hurts his credibility, especially considering he's never set foot inside the building. For the rest of us, as Northbay said, it's too early to pass judgement on the interior openness and everything else.

I think it's important to note that this is only phase one and is budgeted at ~$1.5 Billion, not the $4 Billion number that Ed mentioned earlier, altho the subsequent phases are planned to look similar architecturally.

[LDVArch]

Originally Posted by Steve2726

Ed raises some valid points, in particular regarding the hulking concrete gate houses, those are a disaster. (I imagine they are dictated by new security issues following Sept. 11, it's a shame they aren't glass tho.)

You have to see them in person. They are not nearly as imposing as they look. And, one side of them will be covered in glass.

Don't see what security issues might have been involved? From my understanding, it was a solution to the need for jetways at two levels.

[Steve2726]

I've seen them from Westchester Pkwy as well as from inside planes on the tarmac and they seem quite imposing to me fwiw.

Here's a new video flythru-

http://www.lawa.org/uploadedFiles/LA...20Non%20HD.wmv

[LDVArch]

Originally Posted by Steve2726

I've seen them from Westchester Pkwy as well as from inside planes on the tarmac and they seem quite imposing to me fwiw.

Here's a new video flythru-

http://www.lawa.org/uploadedFiles/LA...20Non%20HD.wmv

I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.

As to the flythru, take note of how the secured corridors leading to customs were fashioned as bridges cutting over the gate level. This is a much better design solution than what you have, for instance, at Foster's CLK. There you take an escalator to a very long, institutional underground corridor. Here, the arrival is as dramatic as the departure.

Take note as well of the rather unique ceiling of those bridges. That's actually an art installation. Both the south and north corridors will have the same canopy. The art installation is by local, but world-renowned artist Pae White.

Further along the path that arriving passengers will take there will be a very large Welcome Wall, made up of LED screens. Various concepts have been discussed for that --- Hollywood celebrities waving "hello" to arriving passengers or the LA Symphony playing.

There's also supposed to be another art installation in the general vicinity --- a work by Ball-Nogues Studio. You may be familiar with their amazing work. They did that installation with the steel orbs for the parking lot at the Santa Monica Place. This installation will hang in one of the light wells that will join the new core with the old core and that will house vertical circulation to the immigration and customs level.

Here is a preview of it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dorv8I9irIo.

One more thing about those bridges. They've become quite trendy in airport architecture. Rogers uses them all over Barajas T4 to span lightwells, created for the purpose of bringing light down to the lower levels, including baggage claim. In that context, they can become quite maddening because you are required to traverse them just to remain on the same level and despite that the arrival corridor (in sections) remains quite dark and institutional.

At LAX, their purpose is also to bring light to levels which would not normally have light, the arrivals level. But, at LAX, they become a level all onto themselves. I also like the idea that they make a vague reference to our primary mode of transportation in LA, the freeways with their overpasses. Fentress even found a way to work this motif back into the old core building. But, more on that, when design details of the T4 connector are confirmed.

[202_Cyclist]

I was looking at the LA World Airports website and it looks like there is very good progress on the Bradley West Terminal project. This is going to be a great facility when completed.

http://www.earthcam.com/clients/lax/...cam1&page=pano