Quote:
Originally Posted by OrdoSeclorum
I don't know. I was just in several Charles De Gaulle terminals this week--several only a few years old--and the most important thing is how they flow and work logisitically. The Calatrava design looked impressive, but I don't know if it would work as well. Can you get from gate to gate easily? Can you move freely while still not feeling like you're sitting in a cavern? Can you see where you need to go without having to look at signs constantly and still not feel like you are sitting in a cavern.
|
I think this thread is overestimating the sort of changes being proposed. It sounds like they're going to the community to ask about what they want for passenger facilities and indoor decor, not a wholesale redesign of the building. Which is perfectly reasonable. They've got 10 years to adapt to changing tastes.
Although architects liked the look of the Foster design, I heard from my brother who works in airport operations and from some other sources that the Gang proposal was far superior from the airport operations point of view.
https://mobile.twitter.com/JGMA_arch...87750993616898
Small, hard-to-find, airside connections between terminals, orphaned gates, and concourse gates too far from amenities, a theater for passengers instead of a flexible ground space for airfield and baggage equipment, and so on.
There were fundamental design flaws in the Foster proposal, whereas the suggested fixes to the Gang proposal were easy. Get rid of the plants and trees (bugs, rats and maintenance nightmares), questionable skylight, improve the concessions and possibly change the aesthetics.