Large airports with two sets of runways with good separation between them like LAX allows for the interesting theoretical scenarios, like the two runways to the north doing takeoff/landings to the east and the southern runways doing takeoff/landings to the west. That's only doable with light winds, but offer interesting advantages for fuel savings. An aircraft coming in from the pacific can save some 60 miles of flying landing directly from the ocean, at the same time an aircraft coming from the east can have the same savings landing the other way. Have departures immediately turn away landing traffic on the other side.
I just noticed landings from the ocean and takeoffs into the ocean, probably purely noise abatement, as its 6AM right now (very light traffic in/out of LAX).
Takeoffs are always noisy, but landings don't have to be. The standard 3 degree approaches are quite inflexible due to the way ILS works, but with RNAV/GPS/SBAS its entirely possible to have 3-4 degree variable approaches that ensure idle thrust all the way to landing (modern aircraft can precisely calculate the right speed/altitude to glide all the way to the runway). Hopefully the FAA will pursue this after SatNav is fully implemented starting 2020 (with ADS-B mandatory which requires an GPS+SBAS receiver, meaning there is a big incentive for ALL airlines and biz jets to have LPV approach capability, the ILS equivalent for GPS).
This would also lead to some fuel savings. The less time spent in lower altitudes usually means fuel and time savings.