LAX Expands!

[phattonez]

http://cbs2.com/topstories/local_story_057184847.html

The Tom Bradley International Terminal at Los Angeles International Airport will undergo a $723.5 million makeover -- the largest single construction project in the city's history, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa announced Monday.

"Tom Bradley International Terminal is one of the most used terminals in the country and the world, and it is only fitting that we keep it modern and up-to-date," Villaraigosa said.

"This renovation project is absolutely critical to the development of this airport and the satisfaction, convenience and safety of our passengers."

The project will add 45,000 square feet of space to the 1 million-square-foot terminal. It will also add a $140 million in-line baggage screening system, two executive lounges, new elevators and escalators, a paging system and moving walkways and a new security system.

"Los Angeles International Airport is the gateway to our city," Los Angeles City Councilman Bill Rosendahl said. "It is important that we provide a safer, greener, more modern and efficient airport for our traveling public. These renovations do just that."

The Tom Bradley International Terminal was built in 1984, the same year Los Angeles hosted the Summer Olympic Games. The terminal's renovations are expected to be completed by 2010.

"Once completed, the new Tom Bradley International Terminal will boost LAX up the ranks as the number one airport in the world," Villaraigosa said. "This will be a world-class facility and a leader in technological advancements."

The project will be funded through airline reimbursements, airport fees and federal grants.



Sounds good to me.

[MattMKL]

Vuurry nice. I like.

[Elsongs]

I'm sure there will be new gates built to accept the Airbus A380 and future super-jumbo jets. Anyone have pics of a model or artist's rendering?

[Westsidelife]

What about the rest of LAX? Overall, LAX is such a dated and crappy airport.

[phattonez]

The rest of it? Right now it just seems like a dream.

[godblessbotox]

compared to the detroit airport lax as nice as they get

[Westsidelife]

The Detroit airport is nowhere near as significant as LAX.

[Skyblade]

I'm definitely looking forward to the renovation of TBIT. It just feels so uninspiring after passing security and seriously lacks decent amenities airside (unless you're a premium class passenger or airline alliance top tier elite member). I also can't wait 'til they finish the new lounges so the temporary First Class lounge in the upper mezzanine can clear out...I want my view of taxiways S and Q back!

Originally Posted by godblessbotox

compared to the detroit airport lax as nice as they get

I dunno about that when you compare it to the McNamara Terminal/Northwest World Gateway. It definitely is far from shitty:









However, if you just been flying out of the 1950's vintage Smith terminal, then I definitely agree with you there.



But no need to worry about entering it's nostalgic interiors forever, it's going to be replaced by the North Terminal:

[godblessbotox]

yah but its a millions times shittier in condition

[Westsidelife]

But you're missing the point. The point is that LAX is a major international airport. It should not be in the condition that it is in. We're comparing our airport with Detroit? Unfortunately, we can't say that Paris CDG is crappier.

[klamedia]

So thank the homeowners in El Segundo! LAX was to be updated and expanded a decade ago. This cohesive band of 88 cities in one county one for all and all for one just doesn't work anymore.
Some of you act as if no one has thought about any of this before that perhaps you're the one who is going to finally enlighten the rest of us on the obvious; same goes for mass transit and affordable housing. Yes, we do have many o' incompetent politcian but many are quite competent and capable. All of this shit has been discussed and proposed before, in fact Hahn Jr. wanted to do this while he was in office. The little shithole cities that surround LAX opposed airport expansion with their last breath. They complained about the additional traffic that it would cause as well as the noise. But the traffic mitigation issue only comes up because of the lack of efficient rail in and out of the airport. Which is only a problem because the construction of modern day rail was hobbled back in the 50's when it was first seriously proposed but subsequently opposed by the rich homeowners namely in Hancock Park and Beverly Hills. I mean JFK still does not have a one seat ride to the airport like Chicago or SF which finally got access, it only has a people mover that then will take you to the Howard Beach stop on the A. La Guardia doesn't have access to rail either and probably never will. I'm saying that to say that airport politics are on a whole 'nother level due to its entanglement in cross strata city, county, state and federal muck. And extending the Green Line to the airport was part of the original airport expansion plan that has since been shot down and reassessed.
So just stating that the airport needs to be expanded because it's crappy is something that we all know. The next step is finding out how to get around the constituents in El Segundo to expand the airport. But good luck because AV has already said that the original grand airport expansion won't happen but higher traffic to the regions satellite airports will.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Originally Posted by klamedia

So thank the homeowners in El Segundo! LAX was to be updated and expanded a decade ago. This cohesive band of 88 cities in one county one for all and all for one just doesn't work anymore.
Some of you act as if no one has thought about any of this before that perhaps you're the one who is going to finally enlighten the rest of us on the obvious; same goes for mass transit and affordable housing. Yes, we do have many o' incompetent politcian but many are quite competent and capable. All of this shit has been discussed and proposed before, in fact Hahn Jr. wanted to do this while he was in office. The little shithole cities that surround LAX opposed airport expansion with their last breath. They complained about the additional traffic that it would cause as well as the noise. But the traffic mitigation issue only comes up because of the lack of efficient rail in and out of the airport. Which is only a problem because the construction of modern day rail was hobbled back in the 50's when it was first seriously proposed but subsequently opposed by the rich homeowners namely in Hancock Park and Beverly Hills. I mean JFK still does not have a one seat ride to the airport like Chicago or SF which finally got access, it only has a people mover that then will take you to the Howard Beach stop on the A. La Guardia doesn't have access to rail either and probably never will. I'm saying that to say that airport politics are on a whole 'nother level due to its entanglement in cross strata city, county, state and federal muck. And extending the Green Line to the airport was part of the original airport expansion plan that has since been shot down and reassessed.
So just stating that the airport needs to be expanded because it's crappy is something that we all know. The next step is finding out how to get around the constituents in El Segundo to expand the airport. But good luck because AV has already said that the original grand airport expansion won't happen but higher traffic to the regions satellite airports will.

exactly! damn Nimbys ruin everything, and they cost us billions of dollars. These airport changes have been floated around since Riordan was in his first term in office, 10 years ag or more. We could have been done and enjoying a new people mover and updated terminals already. I dont get it, people move right by a damn airport and complain. fucking idiots.

[phattonez]

I think he doesn't want to deal with those people there, and with the history, who can blame him?

Let's just look at this chain of ignorance:
We can't extend the Green Line because parking lot attendants will lose money.
Residents don't want an expansion because it would increase traffic.
The Green Line extension would relieve traffic at a newly expanded airport.

Someone has to give way for anything to happen, either the residents or cab and parking lot owners. Doesn't that make you depressed to know that it will never happen?

[klamedia]

It doesn't mean that it won't ever happen. It just means that you don't believe it will never happen because in LA many people have developed a learned helplessness in the face of ass-backward NIMBY's. Actually their is a councilman(forget his name over there) that is pushing for the Green Line up through Lincoln, sorry that I forgot his name......wait, Rosenthal? Yes, Bill Rosendahl is pushing for this so please stop acting like the whole city is in despair.http://www.lacity.org/council/cd11/

[phattonez]

Then it's a good thing that this isn't SSP. Seeing it fail for 20 years and then having no politician actively seeking it isn't too encouraging. At least the Green Line extension has some support.

What can I say, bureaucracy annoys me a lot.

[klamedia]

Originally Posted by phattonez

Then it's a good thing that this isn't SSP. Seeing it fail for 20 years and then having no politician actively seeking it isn't too encouraging. At least the Green Line extension has some support.

What can I say, bureaucracy annoys me a lot.

That's not true. Did you go to the link up above.
LAX expansion has been talked about incessantly, their really has never been a time when the airport has not been in the news. No one ever forgot LAX whether you have been pro expansion or opposing it.

[klamedia]

Speak of the devil!
This perpetual LA negativism has got to stop. I ran upon this article while ironically perusing SSP:

Proposal to extend subway to Los Angeles airport
Sunday, February 25, 2007

Printable Version Email This Article
(02-25) 13:09 PST Los Angeles (AP) --


A new government agency would be responsible for extending the subway to the Los Angeles International Airport under a bill introduced in the state Legislature.


The light-rail Metro Green Line currently stops about a mile away from LAX, where passengers have to board a free shuttle to the airport terminal.


The bill introduced last week by Assemblyman Ted Lieu, D-Torrance, would create a new agency to oversee the planning, funding and construction of a subway extension into LAX.


"We should be doing anything we can to encourage people to get out of their cars," Lieu said.


Lieu is a member of the Green Line Coalition, a group of elected officials who is lobbying to expand the light-rail line to the airport.


Under the bill, the agency's board of directors would be appointed by the Legislature. The agency would also be responsible for securing local, state and federal funding for the project.


If the bill is passed by the Legislature, the new agency likely won't operate until 2009, Lieu said.


___


Information from: Daily Breeze,


www.dailybreeze.com

So no, we're not the first ones to think about this.

[klamedia]

Yet another! I found all of these articles within 30 minutes while you sat around complaining that nothing was being done and that the Green Line extension had been forgotten.

LA Council member Moves to Create Westside “Rail Network”By Lookout Staff

February 23 -- Los Angeles Council member Bill Rosendahl called on his colleagues this week to get on board a coordinated "rail network" for the Westside that could help alleviate Santa Monica's traffic woes.

Rosendahl -- who has presented an ambitious transportation agenda since his election two years ago -- introduced a motion Wednesday that would explore creating a coordinated Westside "rail network" by linking east-west mass transit lines.

"When it comes to mass transit and fighting gridlock, we cannot think piecemeal," Rosendahl said."We need a coordinated, comprehensive long-range strategy."

The study -- funded with $200,000 in traffic fees paid by Westside development projects -- would look at where and how to connect the eventual Purple Line subway to the sea, the Exposition Light Rail line and the eventual Green Line extension into LAX.

Among the possibilities that will be studied would be adding a north-south rail line or merging the routes of two of the east-west lines, Rosendahl said.

“The study will also look at how best to link people with activity and employment centers as well as residential and recreational areas,” Rosendahl said.

A connected rail system with a “tremendous capacity to move people,” he said, is a "common-sense approach" to alleviating traffic gridlock on Westside streets and freeways.

Rosendahl's motion specifically requests the council to authorize and instruct the Department of Transportation to add a comprehensive Westside Los Angeles rail corridor and connectivity analysis to DOT's West LA Traffic Study.

In addition, the council would authorize the transportation department to apply for grant funding from other agencies such as SCAG, SCAQMD, Caltrans and Metro. They money would help prepare a comprehensive plan, including environmental and technical studies, for transportation improvements within the West LA Traffic study area.

"The current state of our traffic gridlock requires a detailed and comprehensive analysis of our transportation infrastructure," Rosendahl said. "I want to ensure that the Department of Transportation is well-equipped to provide such a study."

Rosendahl’s motion comes two months after he unveiled an “anti-gridlock plan” that included short-term and long-term projects to relieve congestion and promote mass transit on the Westside. The expenditures, all on the Westside, total more than $11 million dollars and require formal council approval.

Rosendahl's motion, one of many within his spending proposal, was referred to the City's Transportation Committee.


__________________

[phattonez]

Originally Posted by klamedia

Yet another! I found all of these articles within 30 minutes while you sat around complaining that nothing was being done and that the Green Line extension had been forgotten.

When I wrote that nothing would ever happen, I meant with LAX, not the Green Line, I guess I should have made that clear. It Green Line extension looks very possible now that more and more politicians are supporting it.

[Westsidelife]

Additional gates promised at LAX
As an upgrade of the Bradley terminal begins, the vow is aimed at stemming flight losses.
By Jennifer Oldham, Times Staff Writer
February 27, 2007

Responding to revelations that airlines are increasingly taking lucrative international flights to cities with newer facilities, Los Angeles officials on Monday announced they will build more parking spots for aircraft on the back of LAX's aging international terminal.

Under pressure from airlines, who have threatened to take additional flights elsewhere, lawmakers agreed to resurrect the project, which would install 11 new gates on the west side of the facility. The work, which will be separate from the remodeling project that got underway Monday at the Tom Bradley International Terminal, is expected to take years.

At a groundbreaking ceremony for the $723.5-million modernization of the overcrowded Bradley terminal, lawmakers emphasized they will not concede Los Angeles International Airport's standing as the premier U.S. gateway to the Pacific Rim.

"Let the games begin," Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said, as weary travelers pushed overloaded luggage trolleys behind him. "When we're finished with this modernization project, this is going to be a world-class facility."

But airlines contend the project is too little, too late. When it's completed in three years, the remodel will not add any space to the 1-million-square-foot Bradley building, leaving it half the size of San Francisco's gleaming new international terminal. Northern California officials are using that facility to lure carriers away from LAX.

The Times reported last week that LAX, over the last six years, has lost 12% of the seats on its weekly international departures, while other major U.S. gateways posted gains in service to foreign destinations. Carriers cited LAX's outdated terminals for the reduction, as well as the introduction of more fuel-efficient aircraft that allow them to bypass the facility.

Industry watchers also said that a recent decision by aircraft manufacturer Airbus to fly its highly anticipated A380 super-jumbo jet on its first U.S. test flight next month to New York instead of Los Angeles, as company officials had promised, was due to LAX's inability to provide more than two terminal parking spots for the plane.

On Monday, however, officials appeared to be near a deal to bring the 555-seat aircraft to LAX, after Airport Commission President Alan Rothenberg and Qantas Airways sent strongly worded letters to Airbus in Toulouse, France, demanding that it reconsider its decision.

"We're discussing the possibility for an Airbus A380 to land at LAX on the same day it lands in New York," said Ian Gregor, a spokesman for the Federal Aviation Administration, which must approve plans by the manufacturer to land the jumbo jet in the U.S.

Meanwhile, at the Bradley terminal, officials vowed to limit inconveniences for 10 million travelers a year who will continue to fly on 34 airlines that offer service at the building as workers undertake the largest single project in the city's history.

Up to 400 workers will be on the site at a time, installing new paging, air conditioning and electrical systems, elevators and escalators. They also will incorporate truck-sized explosives-detection machines into the building's underground baggage system, freeing up room in ticket lobbies for passengers.

As the project is underway, airlines plan to push city leaders to stick by their promises. They include Councilwoman Janice Hahn, chairwoman of the council's Trade, Commerce & Tourism committee, who said Monday that she would lobby for new gates at the Bradley terminal.

"The mayor understands the need to be competitive with other gateway cities," said Frank Clark, executive director of the nonprofit organization that represents airlines operating at the Bradley terminal. "Our hope is that this is the impetus that causes the delay to be broken."

For years, carriers have asked for the gates — which Los Angeles is allowed to build under an agreement with airport-area residents — and they were surprised to learn recently that the city had not yet moved forward.

According to existing plans, the new parking spots for aircraft at the Bradley terminal would replace the remote gates near sand dunes on LAX's western edge. Airlines do not like to use remote gates because of the inconvenience to passengers.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
jennifer.oldham@latimes.com