aklrno
Topic Author
Posts: 1162
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2010 11:18 pm

Latest Update On LAX Plans

Tue Dec 04, 2012 10:35 pm

Yesterday LA World Airports released the draft of the final plan for LAX improvements. The schedule is to have the final plan approved in about 6 months.

Key features: Runway 24L lengthened
24R relocated 260 feet north
Taxiway between 24L and 24R
Terminal 3 reconfigured (replaced?)
New TBIT terminal extended to the north, (the unbuilt TBIT west also extended north)
Terminal 1 shortened
New Terminal 0
New consolidated rental car building with people mover. No more buses!
Several streets realigned to allow for runway changes. Pray for In-n-Out!

Of course this is California. Let the lawsuits begin!
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Tue Dec 04, 2012 10:50 pm

What happened was the airport staff presented their recommendations from the SPAS (Specific Plan Amendment Study)

It now goes to the politicians.

Quoting aklrno (Thread starter):
Key features: Runway 24L lengthened
24R relocated 260 feet north
Taxiway between 24L and 24R

This is all to comply with FAA recommended spacing for Group 5 aircraft on the north airfield and provide adequate spacing similar to southside.

Quoting aklrno (Thread starter):
Terminal 3 reconfigured (replaced?)

Potentially. Adding it in the EIR just gives LAWA flexibility.

Quoting aklrno (Thread starter):
New TBIT terminal extended to the north, (the unbuilt TBIT west also extended north)

The dog leg being built on the new TBIT concourse would be straightend.

Quoting aklrno (Thread starter):
Terminal 1 shortened

The end gates shaved off to allow for taxiway spacing

Quoting aklrno (Thread starter):
New Terminal 0

Again it simply give LAWA flexibility. T-0 would really be part of T1 with a L shaped concourse attached to help make up for lost gates.

Quoting aklrno (Thread starter):
New consolidated rental car building with people mover. No more buses!

There still will be buses. The consolidated lot wont house every company.

Also a trains to connect the central terminal area would be up to MTA to build and fund. With loss of measure J in recent elections, who knows if/when that money would be available.

Quoting aklrno (Thread starter):
Several streets realigned to allow for runway changes. Pray for In-n-Out!

Yes the land In-n-Out sits on was always under threat, and with current plans it will become part of the redesigned Westchester Parkway road.

Quoting aklrno (Thread starter):
Of course this is California. Let the lawsuits begin!

Not just lawsuits, this will likely be a topic in upcoming municipal elections. Several council members and mayoral candidates oppose these for the impacts on adjacent communities.

Frankly I think much of it is simply wishful thinking that might be 10-20 years away at best.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
ldvaviation
Posts: 970
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 7:21 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 12:22 am

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 1):
Also a trains to connect the central terminal area would be up to MTA to build and fund. With loss of measure J in recent elections, who knows if/when that money would be available.

The money is there (from the first Measure J) to build the LAX station on the Crenshaw Light Rail Line.

Metro has been pushing LAWA to amend the MasterPlan to allow for construction of such a station and also a connector/station to the Green Line.
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 12:35 am

Quoting LDVAviation (Reply 2):
The money is there (from the first Measure J) to build the LAX station on the Crenshaw Light Rail Line.

Yes that's the station -- to be located at the intermodal and consolidated rental facility outside the airport. Measure R paid for that.

Question is how to get the line into the airport. That is the $$$ issue.

With measure J dead, future funding for all of MTA's shinny ideas is very questionable.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
PITrules
Posts: 2109
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2000 11:27 am

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 12:58 am

Quoting aklrno (Thread starter):
Key features: Runway 24L lengthened
24R relocated 260 feet north
Taxiway between 24L and 24R

Outstanding news, especially from a capacity and safety standpoint. So much for the notion there is not land available to the north for such a large move.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 1):

This is all to comply with FAA recommended spacing for Group 5 aircraft on the north airfield and provide adequate spacing similar to southside.

Are you sure this is not to accommodate Group 6 aircraft (A380/748)? The south side relocation was 50', this move of 260' on the north side should allow for unrestricted movement.
FLYi
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 1:20 am

Quoting PITrules (Reply 4):
So much for the notion there is not land available to the north for such a large move.

Well there isn't. You are pushing the airport boundary and roadways north into the local community.

Wait for the fire works.

Quoting PITrules (Reply 4):
Are you sure this is not to accommodate Group 6 aircraft (A380/748)? The south side relocation was 50', this move of 260' on the north side should allow for unrestricted movement.

Its for unfettered Cat-5 ops which are projected to represent about 10% of all airfield operations.

Cat-6 will continue to have some restrictions (as they do on the rebuilt southside)

The move of 260ft north includes building a parallel centerfield taxiway in between the two runways.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 1:29 am

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 1):
This is all to comply with FAA recommended spacing for Group 5 aircraft on the north airfield and provide adequate spacing similar to southside.

Unnecessary expense. Unless LAX sees over 40% Group 5 and higher movements, it's just ridiculous to go through the expense for this, not to mention the years of congestion getting to and from LAX to implement this at the ground level.

LAX has the luxury of 4 parallel runways and a near consistent wind direction year round (with an occasional 180 degree shift). Many airports around the world the size of LAX operate with fewer runways at all times. It's a matter of want, not need, to have all 4 runways capable of optimized operation of the largest aircraft.

Most LAX traffic is narrowbody. It works fine now. And that won't change. WN will still fly tons of 737s. US and UA and AA and DL will still fly tons of 737/A320/MD. Central American carriers will still fly narrowbodies. Hawaii flights are going more and more narrowbody. AS isn't going to buy Group 5 aircraft any time soon.

Quoting PITrules (Reply 4):
Outstanding news, especially from a capacity and safety standpoint. So much for the notion there is not land available to the north for such a large move.

There is always "room" unless there is water. It's a matter of who has to be moved to use that "room."

This is a stupid plan.

It won't increase capacity, because that is not allowed, and any agreement by the NIMBYs to this kind of plan would likely involved decreasing capacity further. It won't increase gate numbers (not allowed either, and wouldn't be under this plan). It's a huge expense and a decade long inconvenience to accommodate a handful of A380s and 77Xs (which don't even exist) and the occasional 748s on 4 runways rather than the south 2.

It also won't increase safety. Incursions will still happen because they happen now due to PILOT ERROR. More spacing will not prevent pilot error. Pilots who don't listen will still fail to listen.

Spend the money on restructuring the parking, auto loops, etc., not on moving runways and businesses.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
PITrules
Posts: 2109
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2000 11:27 am

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 3:10 am

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 5):

Well there isn't. You are pushing the airport boundary and roadways north into the local community.

Not true, the area known as "LAXnorthside" is owned by LAWA. There may be some need to realign roadways, but again this is on LAWA property.

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 6):

LAX has the luxury of 4 parallel runways and a near consistent wind direction year round (with an occasional 180 degree shift). Many airports around the world the size of LAX operate with fewer runways at all times. It's a matter of want, not need, to have all 4 runways capable of optimized operation of the largest aircraft.

Remember about 10-12 years ago, LAX was handling almost 800,000 operations per year (almost at capacity). Who's to say what direction the industry will make in the decades ahead? It is entirely conceivable LAX can and will reach those levels again in the future.

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 6):

There is always "room" unless there is water.

Even when there is water. Plenty of examples around the world, but that's another topic.

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 6):
It's a matter of who has to be moved to use that "room."

Again, no one needs to move for this. That's not to say LAWA won't offer to acquire and sound proof more homes. But that's part of an airport authorities neighborhood responsibility.

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 6):

It also won't increase safety. Incursions will still happen because they happen now due to PILOT ERROR. More spacing will not prevent pilot error. Pilots who don't listen will still fail to listen.

Simply not true. Putting a parallel taxiway between the runways brings the airport up to expected global standards. Pilot's can listen perfectly fine but that does not make 6R/24L the parallel taxiway that would otherwise be encountered when vacating the outer runway at almost any other airport in the world. Pilot's are human beings.. we make human mistakes. The common goal is to eliminate the threats that lead to human error.

It was done on the south side for good reason.
FLYi
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 4:26 am

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 6):
Unnecessary expense.

  

Quoting PITrules (Reply 7):
Not true, the area known as "LAXnorthside" is owned by LAWA. There may be some need to realign roadways, but again this is on LAWA property.

Public roadways such as Westchester Pkwy, Lincoln and Sepulveda are being realigned.

The buffer to the community including homes, school and church on the northside is being decreased.

The runway moves 260 feet to the north and so it unfortunately gets even more cozy with the neighborhood.

There will certainly be community impact, and outcry.

And two city council members are out with their opposition already.

Bonin said while he supports a plan that modernizes LAX, that plan should not include expanding the airport, nor should those plans impact neighbors.

“An irrefutable study has shown the north airfield to be safe, and the Draft Environmental Impact Report says that not moving the runways is the ‘environmentally superior’ alternative,” Bonin said, noting that LAWA’s plan for the runway that would include reconfiguring the north airfield is not justified and would “create more pollution, produce more noise and not do a thing to improve throughput or operational efficiency at LAX.”


and

The issue on the north side is multifold," said Rosendahl. "One is the noise. Second is the pollution. The third is how it impacts homes and businesses themselves." "Airport officials should curb expansion plans and instead pursue a process of regionalization, or spreading air traffic to other underutilized airports, such as LA/Ontario International Airport, which is run by the same authority as LAX."


Fun times - lets see what if anything gets approved by the politicians, and see what survives subsequent court challenges.

Quoting PITrules (Reply 7):
Remember about 10-12 years ago, LAX was handling almost 800,000 operations per year (almost at capacity). Who's to say what direction the industry will make in the decades ahead? It is entirely conceivable LAX can and will reach those levels again in the future.

I think this is unlikely.

Due things like court cap on the number of gates (153), and continue promise to raise operating cost to encourage flights away from LAX, the shift is to make better use of capacity with larger frames.

Unless US industry does a big 180 and RJs become the new rage regardless of cost, I think the shift to larger capacity is here to stay especially with the restrictions being placed on ops at LAX.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
QANTAS747-438
Posts: 1656
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2001 7:01 am

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 4:58 am

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 1):
Quoting aklrno (Thread starter):
Terminal 1 shortened

The end gates shaved off to allow for taxiway spacing

Huh? They're going to get rid of gates 12, 14, 13, and 11???

And where would the "L-shaped" Terminal 0 go? Into Park One?

[Edited 2012-12-04 21:01:54]
My posts/replies are strictly my opinion and not that of any company, organization, or Southwest Airlines.
 
timpdx
Posts: 575
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 1:54 am

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 5:15 am

I am fine with the realignment. Westchester pkwy is hardly used at all. The is in n out and a hideous squat office building (of course with a banner opposing the runway move). LAX is a huge huge jobs generator, moving a wings length north is not going to make a difference AT ALL in pollution or noise....and this as aircraft across the board are getting cleaner and quieter every day. The opposition to this is nuts and so small minded. (In case you wonder about me...lifelong Democrat and Urban Planning major) just wish people would wake up and see the mother of all assets (along with our huge port) that are sitting right here in our lap that other cities would kill to have the jobs and tax revenues of an LAX.

[Edited 2012-12-04 21:16:06]
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:35 am

A photo might help..



=
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
kaitak744
Posts: 2084
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 1:32 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 7:22 am

Is there a link to this presentation?

How is terminal 0 going to be built if there is the stupid gate cap limit? It is adding gates is it not?

And why on earth is T3 being rebuilt?
Yes, it is old, but Virgin America just remodeled it. They are an LCC, and it does the job. It does not need to be luxurious. That in my opinion is a waste of money.
 
aklrno
Topic Author
Posts: 1162
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2010 11:18 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:09 am

Quoting kaitak744 (Reply 12):
How is terminal 0 going to be built if there is the stupid gate cap limit? It is adding gates is it not?

Maybe it just to replace gates eliminated in other modifications, like chopping off the end of T1?

Quoting kaitak744 (Reply 12):
And why on earth is T3 being rebuilt?
Yes, it is old, but Virgin America just remodeled it. They are an LCC, and it does the job. It does not need to be luxurious. That in my opinion is a waste of money.

I think the VIrgin changes were just cosmetic. The underlying building is already about 50 years old, and will be about 60 years old by the time of the proposed replacement. It has changed the least of all the LAX terminals since they were built in the early 60's. There may be issues with the age of the building we don't know about. In particular, I'd be surprised if it meets current seismic standards. Newer buildings are also cheaper to operate.
 
Beardown91737
Posts: 796
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 10:56 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:44 am

Quoting PITrules (Reply 7):
Even when there is water. Plenty of examples around the world, but that's another topic

the water is over 1000 ft away, but the bigger problem is building a pier, or fill, to meet the 125 ft elevation of the field
135 hrs PIC (mostly PA-28) - not current. Landings at MDW, PIA, JAN.
 
cschleic
Posts: 1226
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 10:47 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 3:58 pm

Quoting aklrno (Reply 13):
Quoting kaitak744 (Reply 12):
And why on earth is T3 being rebuilt?
Yes, it is old, but Virgin America just remodeled it. They are an LCC, and it does the job. It does not need to be luxurious. That in my opinion is a waste of money.

At some point it has to be updated or replaced. Can't just keep saying "don't spend any money, can't spend any money, it's a waste of money..." What happens when it gets to be 75 years old, 100 years old? Eventually it would fall down. That's how we end up with unsafe or crumbling infrastructure. Short term thinking leads to long term problem. And it only costs more in the future. What if they hadn't spent the money to build them in the first place?
 
vikkyvik
Posts: 11761
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:58 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 4:52 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 1):
This is all to comply with FAA recommended spacing for Group 5 aircraft on the north airfield and provide adequate spacing similar to southside.
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 5):
Its for unfettered Cat-5 ops which are projected to represent about 10% of all airfield operations.

Cat-6 will continue to have some restrictions (as they do on the rebuilt southside)

The move of 260ft north includes building a parallel centerfield taxiway in between the two runways.

Moving 24R by 260 feet actually creates greater spacing than exists on the south side. 25R and L are now 800 feet apart. 24R and L would be about 1000 feet apart after this move.

If they just wanted to make the spacing equal the south side, they'd only need to move 24R by 100 feet, if memory serves.

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 6):
It's a huge expense and a decade long inconvenience to accommodate a handful of A380s and 77Xs (which don't even exist) and the occasional 748s on 4 runways rather than the south 2.

And A380s already use the north side.

Quoting Beardown91737 (Reply 14):
the water is over 1000 ft away, but the bigger problem is building a pier, or fill, to meet the 125 ft elevation of the field

They weren't talking about LAX, just generally. And the water at LAX is over a half mile away.

Of course, my greatest worry is what will happen to the In'n'Out park spotting area. 
I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
 
cschleic
Posts: 1226
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 10:47 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 4:54 pm

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 16):
Of course, my greatest worry is what will happen to the In'n'Out park spotting area.

Absolutely. We have to keep our priorities straight here, after all! That little park is a great area.
 
highflier92660
Posts: 540
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 2:16 am

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:26 pm

Isn't separation of the north runways the same plan that sent all the Westchester residents running to LAWA with lanterns and pitchforks?

An observation: a lengthened 24L would eliminate taxi time and congestion at 25R for a portion of airlines with the heaviest gross weight wide-body departures.

To posters in-the-loop like LAXintl: Any date when actual runway construction would start?
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:49 pm

Quoting kaitak744 (Reply 12):
How is terminal 0 going to be built if there is the stupid gate cap limit? It is adding gates is it not?

The airport plans no net gate count increases beyond the 153 count.

As an example when new TBIT finally comes into operation, LAWA has plan to decommission existing gates including demolishing 4 of the remote structures.

Its pretty well accepted that "modernization" is OK, but "expansion" is a no-no for both the community, and restricted per court decree anyhow.

So a terminal-0 option will not provide much more then simply replace the lost gates in T-1 and possibly add only 1 or 2 at most to the mix.

Quoting Highflier92660 (Reply 18):
Isn't separation of the north runways the same plan that sent all the Westchester residents running to LAWA with lanterns and pitchforks?

Yes its a rehash of the idea kicked around for the last almost 10-years, albeit a formal recommendation now.

Quoting Highflier92660 (Reply 18):
To posters in-the-loop like LAXintl: Any date when actual runway construction would start?

I would guess assuming no litigation and the project is approved fast by late 2014 maybe.

The airport is giving its board till mid-2013 to review and adopt the staff recommendation. Other parties will certainly weigh in such as the city council and new mayor (we have municipal elections in March).

It can take a long time to draw up plans and put the work out for bid even under the best of circumstances.
However this likely to be quite contentious so it could be drawn out affair.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
tp1040
Posts: 289
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2011 6:30 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 7:19 pm

They need to extend 7L and 7R to 18,000 feet so they can make alternating downwind landings with the ocean approach. While making 24L and 24R alternating departures over the ocean. Everybody in the basin would be happy.


I keed, I keed.
 
victrola
Posts: 715
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 5:31 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 7:21 pm

To hell with the people in Westchester who oppose this. LAX has been a major international airport since about 1960. How long have these people lived in their houses? There is simply no place close to L.A. that can absorb additional growth. The limit on gates is outrageous. I'm sick of flying into LAX and having to wait in a plane because there are no unavailable gates. LAX is a huge jobs generator and of vital importance to the economy of Los Angeles. We need to put the interests of the city as a whole over the selfish intersts of a few homeowners in Westchester.
 
Braniff747SP
Posts: 2565
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 4:56 am

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 7:36 pm

Everything sounds great, with the exception of the In N Out relocation bit. I'm sure it would be build somewhere else.

Quoting victrola (Reply 21):
To hell with the people in Westchester who oppose this. LAX has been a major international airport since about 1960. How long have these people lived in their houses? There is simply no place close to L.A. that can absorb additional growth. The limit on gates is outrageous. I'm sick of flying into LAX and having to wait in a plane because there are no unavailable gates. LAX is a huge jobs generator and of vital importance to the economy of Los Angeles. We need to put the interests of the city as a whole over the selfish intersts of a few homeowners in Westchester.

I fully agree; however, the local politicos are elected thanks to them and they won't budge.
The 747 will always be the TRUE queen of the skies!
 
n515cr
Posts: 843
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 1:49 am

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:03 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 11):

That for posting the picture. Questions below based purely on it:
1) How about the possibility of moving the proposed new 6L/24R west towards Pershing to avoid tearing up Lincoln? Is that even feasible or would clearing the dune be an issue?

2) I'm guessing that T-0 would force Park N Fly out?
 
User avatar
cosyr
Posts: 750
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2012 3:23 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:11 pm

Quoting aklrno (Thread starter):

Speaking of In-n-out, we are flying through LAX with a long wait. Is it possible to walk there or do you have to take a taxi? I was think via Skyway... We have a ton of time, enough that I considered Disneyland. I Don't want to miss In n out if it may go away there.
 
flashmeister
Posts: 2671
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2000 4:32 am

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:21 pm

Quoting cosyr (Reply 24):
Speaking of In-n-out, we are flying through LAX with a long wait. Is it possible to walk there or do you have to take a taxi?

I've walked there on a long layover, but it's a major pain in the butt. Just take a cab.
 
ldvaviation
Posts: 970
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 7:21 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:42 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 3):
With measure J dead, future funding for all of MTA's shinny ideas is very questionable.

It failed to pass by a little more than half a percentage point.

There is an effort now to have the legislature change the law so that a simple majority will be enough to pass such measures in the future. (Politically, in view of Democratic control of both houses, that would amount to convincing Gov. Brown that it makes sense.)

In the meantime, the 66+% of the vote that it got is enough to encourage its backers to reintroduce it when the time is right.
 
cschleic
Posts: 1226
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 10:47 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 9:37 pm

Quoting n515cr (Reply 23):
2) I'm guessing that T-0 would force Park N Fly out?

Didn't LAWA purchase that land recently specifically for potential future expansion?
 
PSA727LAX
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 7:26 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 9:45 pm

With all that LAX means to & brings to the table in/for LA those politicos & eco cowards who cry "pollution, noise, congestion/traffic: Whah! If the politicos want the extra flights to go to the other LAWA airports then make those other airports relevant! These flights/business are at LAX because THAT is where people & business want & need to be.

All this "group hug" business is just that; "Bullfeathers business"!

For those who cry about the noise, I ask; "When did you move into your home that is near LAX"? Since it is almost certain they moved in AFTER LAX was built, they knew the airport was there. They knew airplanes come & go from said airport. Airplanes make noise. Grow up!!!
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 9:56 pm

Quoting victrola (Reply 21):
There is simply no place close to L.A. that can absorb additional growth.

LA basin has lots of airport capacity. BUR, ONT and even SNA and LGB operate under capacity. Further afield SAN and SBA are there also.

There is plenty of concrete in the region besides LAX.

Quoting victrola (Reply 21):
We need to put the interests of the city as a whole over the selfish intersts of a few homeowners in Westchester.

If you really want to put the interest of the region as a whole first, then you should also not be supporting lumping everything into a little corner at LAX.

A regional approach to utilize other airports reduces the hugely negative impacts that LAX has on the area. You realize LAX is the regions 2nd largest air polluter (Port is #1). There tons of needless traffic from across the region that on a daily basis clogs are streets and arteries.

And its not just Westchester. Other cities such as El Segundo, Inglewood, and much of the Westside and South Bay get stuck dealing with negatives resulting from LAX having to be the regions one stop air transportation solution.

Hopefully with the significant increase in operating cost at LAX in the coming years, airlines and consumers might think twice about utilizing the airport when there are other options.

Quoting n515cr (Reply 23):
Is that even feasible or would clearing the dune be an issue?

I doubt it. I know the sandunes are part of a federal nature habitat so that probably makes things even more complex.

Quoting n515cr (Reply 23):
2) I'm guessing that T-0 would force Park N Fly out?

Yes Park One has known this for years. LAWA even purchase the Radisson hotel across the street a few years back.

Quoting flashmeister (Reply 25):
Just take a cab.

Please dont unless you want a very upest taxi driver on your hands. After waiting for hours in the holding lot they wont be happy to end up with your $10 fare.

Quoting LDVAviation (Reply 26):
It failed to pass by a little more than half a percentage point.

A loss is a loss. What they should have done is waited for the 10-year period of Prop-R to run, not come to the voters with open arms for more money merely 2-3 years later.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
airbazar
Posts: 6801
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:27 pm

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 16):
Moving 24R by 260 feet actually creates greater spacing than exists on the south side. 25R and L are now 800 feet apart. 24R and L would be about 1000 feet apart after this move.

If they just wanted to make the spacing equal the south side, they'd only need to move 24R by 100 feet, if memory serves.

I see a few issues with this: 1) If you're going to bother building an entire new runway, do it right and give it as much spacing as possible. The cost is the same. 2) If they were to move only 100ft they would be rebuilding on top of the existing runway which would take longer than building a new runway on "clear" land. And 3) By moving it 260ft they may be able to keep 6L/24R in operation for part of the construction period.
 
kaitak744
Posts: 2084
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 1:32 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:43 pm

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 19):
The airport plans no net gate count increases beyond the 153 count.

As an example when new TBIT finally comes into operation, LAWA has plan to decommission existing gates including demolishing 4 of the remote structures.

Its pretty well accepted that "modernization" is OK, but "expansion" is a no-no for both the community, and restricted per court decree anyhow.

So a terminal-0 option will not provide much more then simply replace the lost gates in T-1 and possibly add only 1 or 2 at most to the mix.

Upon adding it all up:

T1 15
T2 10
T3 12
T4 13
T5 13
T6 13
T7 11
T8 9
TBIT (new) 18
Eagle remote gates 10
Remote Gates 9

Total: 133 gates

That is 20 gates shy of the 153 count, even after the new TBIT. So, the airport can technically expand and add 20 more gates can it not?
 
User avatar
ADent
Posts: 920
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 12:11 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:50 pm

Quoting flashmeister (Reply 25):
Quoting cosyr (Reply 24):
Speaking of In-n-out, we are flying through LAX with a long wait. Is it possible to walk there or do you have to take a taxi?

I've walked there on a long layover, but it's a major pain in the butt. Just take a cab.

Isn't there a parking lot with free shuttle service near the In-n-Out?
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:56 pm

Quoting kaitak744 (Reply 31):
Remote Gates 9

I have an exact break down but not with me.

However the remotes are more like 20 gates at the moment.

The gate limit is the count that existed when the court settlement agreement was approved. Also remember the agreement calls for reduction 10 additional gates if LAX passes the 78.9mil annual enplanements.

Once the new TBIT opens, the gate count will be exceeded, so LAWA will raze much of the remote gates on the western side of the airport.

[Edited 2012-12-05 15:06:35]
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
flyingcat
Posts: 339
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 10:33 am

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 11:04 pm

Ironically the unions may be the best way to get this done as heavy construction work is right up their alley and they absolutely need projects like these for their members.


the flying public needs LAWA to keep moving forward, recent events in L.A. show the rend shifting against NIMBYs. Expo line to Santa Monica, Red Line to beverly hills. Sure local council members hold fast to their constitiuesnts but most of the city has now realized that the needs of the many far outweigh the needs of the few. Even the california supreme court has been flexible. Undoubted the economy has made all parties sensitive to turnig down projects beneficial to the economy.

I think that LAWA should move forward with the rental car center, transit link and terminal projects as a separate project from the runway separation.
 
diverdave
Posts: 445
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 1:00 am

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 11:35 pm

Quoting flashmeister (Reply 25):
I've walked there on a long layover, but it's a major pain in the butt. Just take a cab.
Quoting LAXintl (Reply 29):
Please don't unless you want a very upset taxi driver on your hands. After waiting for hours in the holding lot they won't be happy to end up with your $10 fare.

Boy, have you got that right. I used to live in Manhattan Beach and didn't dare to take a taxi from the airport to my home.

David
 
ldvaviation
Posts: 970
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 7:21 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 11:47 pm

Quoting flyingcaT (Reply 34):
I think that LAWA should move forward with the rental car center, transit link and terminal projects as a separate project from the runway separation.

From what I understand, there is no money behind any of these projects.

This is just long range planning at this stage, not that construction will stop at LAX after the completion of TBIT West. There is a whole list of projects under what LAWA is labeling Capital Budget #2.

The projects under Capital Budget #2 are going to be financed by a new bond issue and are already in various stages of design, request for proposal, and even construction.
 
aklrno
Topic Author
Posts: 1162
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2010 11:18 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Wed Dec 05, 2012 11:49 pm

Quoting ADent (Reply 32):
Quoting flashmeister (Reply 25):
Quoting cosyr (Reply 24):
Speaking of In-n-out, we are flying through LAX with a long wait. Is it possible to walk there or do you have to take a taxi?

I've walked there on a long layover, but it's a major pain in the butt. Just take a cab.

Isn't there a parking lot with free shuttle service near the In-n-Out?

We've covered this in other threads,but here it is again:

Don't take a taxi. He will probably try to poison your burger, and the jury would let him off.

Go to the parking shuttle boarding area and look for a bus to the Parking Spot, the one that has the "Sepulveda" sign in the window. The bus has big black spots all over it. In-n-Out is practically touching their building. Be sure to give the driver a nice tip. Same in reverse to get back.
 
kaitak744
Posts: 2084
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 1:32 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Thu Dec 06, 2012 2:10 am

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 33):
I have an exact break down but not with me.

However the remotes are more like 20 gates at the moment.

Well, if you count the stands with out the jetways as well, the total is 18 gates.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 33):
The gate limit is the count that existed when the court settlement agreement was approved. Also remember the agreement calls for reduction 10 additional gates if LAX passes the 78.9mil annual enplanements.

That is a downright stupid settlement. When does it expire?

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 33):
Once the new TBIT opens, the gate count will be exceeded, so LAWA will raze much of the remote gates on the western side of the airport.

How is that possible? If there are 18 remote gates (source: google earth), then the overall gate total is 142. Still well below the 155 gate limit.......
 
andahuailas
Posts: 118
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2004 10:32 am

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Thu Dec 06, 2012 2:23 am

Quoting PSA727LAX (Reply 28):

AMEN !!!!!!!
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Thu Dec 06, 2012 2:43 am

Quoting kaitak744 (Reply 38):
That is a downright stupid settlement. When does it expire?

Choice was either not to move a single shovel, or reach a broad agreement with the multiple litigants that managed to block virtually every airport project LAWA was interested in since 1994.

The 2005 settlement agreement was a huge coup for LAWA as it green lighted for almost half of its wish list of projects without the threat of further litigation from the parties.

Maybe to better understand where LAWA was at the time, it was being sued by everyone including El Segundo, Culver City, Inglewood, the school district, County of Los Angeles plus a host of civic and community groups in several courts on various grounds ranging from the Clean Air Act, EPA standards, to State and Federal regulations, to land use issue and on and on.

The agreement runs through December 31, 2020 or sooner if of all the approved LAX Master Plan Program projects are complete.

Quoting kaitak744 (Reply 38):
How is that possible?

The gate count at LAX at the time of the agreement drafting was 163, hence the magic number.

153 comes in as that is the gate count limit to be achieved by December 2015 dependent on enplanement counts.

You also need to add in hard stands - at remotes, RJ gates etc for your totals.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
Byrdluvs747
Posts: 2375
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 5:25 am

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Thu Dec 06, 2012 3:44 am

I don't know all the politics involved, but is it illegal for LAX to use their funds earned from fees to buy homes/properties close to the airport as they come up for sale?

Maybe even team up with business to eventually create a business park. It would take time, but with this economy more homes should come up for sale.
The 747: The hands who designed it were guided by god.
 
kaitak744
Posts: 2084
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2005 1:32 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Thu Dec 06, 2012 3:45 am

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 40):
You also need to add in hard stands - at remotes, RJ gates etc for your totals.

I see. Well, I counted everything shy of the stands at cargo hangars and maintenance hangars. I don't get 153.... perhaps you could tell me what I am missing?
 
n515cr
Posts: 843
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 1:49 am

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Thu Dec 06, 2012 4:59 am

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 29):
Quoting n515cr (Reply 23):
Is that even feasible or would clearing the dune be an issue?

I doubt it. I know the sandunes are part of a federal nature habitat so that probably makes things even more complex.

Should've been more clear...I was thinking more from the angle of aircraft physically clearing it during take off (probably only affects long-haul/freight flights) rather than dealing with environmentalists/agencies  

[Edited 2012-12-05 21:00:07]
 
n515cr
Posts: 843
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 1:49 am

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Thu Dec 06, 2012 5:02 am

Quoting ADent (Reply 32):
Isn't there a parking lot with free shuttle service near the In-n-Out?

The Parking Spot is next door to In-N-Out

Quoting diverdave (Reply 35):
Boy, have you got that right. I used to live in Manhattan Beach and didn't dare to take a taxi from the airport to my home.

True, but that doesn't stop me from taking a cab home after a week-long or longer trip...still cheaper than parking nearby 
 
FlyDeltaJets
Posts: 1631
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 4:24 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Thu Dec 06, 2012 6:23 am

Quoting flashmeister (Reply 25):
I've walked there on a long layover, but it's a major pain in the butt. Just take a cab.

As said earlier the Parking Spot SEPLUVEDA LOT Shuttle. The walk is not that bad from terminal 1. Just walk to the beginning of the terminal then make a left up the sidewalk will elevate over Sepluveda and then walk down the stairs. It's a 10 min walk from terminal 1 at tops.
The only valid opinions are those based in facts
 
ontime
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 1:56 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Thu Dec 06, 2012 8:27 am

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 33):
Once the new TBIT opens, the gate count will be exceeded, so LAWA will raze much of the remote gates on the western side of the airport.


I thought that the gate reduction provisions of the settlement did not apply if LAX is serving less than 75 million passengers per year. And I don't believe LAX is on track to serve anywhere near that number any time soon. Why would they demolish gates if not yet required by the settlement agreement?
 
aklrno
Topic Author
Posts: 1162
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2010 11:18 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Thu Dec 06, 2012 9:13 am

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 41):
I don't know all the politics involved, but is it illegal for LAX to use their funds earned from fees to buy homes/properties close to the airport as they come up for sale?

Maybe even team up with business to eventually create a business park. It would take time, but with this economy more homes should come up for sale.

They buy stuff all the time. As for businesses they often turn land into parking lots. They may own the land the rental car lots are on too.

I wonder if there is any restriction on the kinds of uses that are allowed for land just short of the threshold. Parking lots have few people in them at any time. When I was a teenager and worked near BUR an airplane (I think a constellation) crashed into our parking lot during the night while landing. I never felt really safe there afterwards. One of the engines ended up suspended over some guys desk on electrical conduits.
 
LAXintl
Posts: 20183
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Thu Dec 06, 2012 3:45 pm

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 41):

I don't know all the politics involved, but is it illegal for LAX to use their funds earned from fees to buy homes/properties close to the airport as they come up for sale?

Yes LAWA has been doing so for decades. That how they project to have the land to build proposed consolidated rental car facility. Its a very costly and slow process but it has been done.

Quoting kaitak744 (Reply 42):
I see. Well, I counted everything shy of the stands at cargo hangars and maintenance hangars. I don't get 153.... perhaps you could tell me what I am missing?

I don't have access to all my notes from the settlement, but the gate count number of 163 referenced in the agreement is what was present in 2004/2005, and under no circumstance could the airport exceed that. Hence the need to reduce gates when remodeled TBIT is complete.

Quoting Reply 46):
I thought that the gate reduction provisions of the settlement did not apply if LAX is serving less than 75 million passengers per year. And I don't believe LAX is on track to serve anywhere near that number any time soon. Why would they demolish gates if not yet required by the settlement agreement?

Yes the 153 would not be a restriction unless reaches 75 mil, but the 163 count will be exceeded with expanded TBIT so LAWA plans to raze much of the remote gate facilities to be in compliance. Also over time LAWA has closed other gates. For instance 39 at T-3 was withdrawn from service as well.

Quoting aklrno (Reply 47):
I wonder if there is any restriction on the kinds of uses that are allowed for land just short of the threshold.

Yes there are normal land use restrictions around airports - everything from height to RF signal restrictions, plus need for safety zones.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
AwysBSB
Posts: 450
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2005 2:58 am

RE: Latest Update On LAX Plans

Sun Dec 09, 2012 12:51 pm

Since terminals' concourses cannot be torn down, all LAX check-in and baggage claim areas should be gathered in two buildings, by following the terminal topology of Guangzhou Baiyun International Airport: