The northbound sides of East Way and West Way are probably the least used pieces of pavement at LAX. They're useful for airport personnel but I can't imagine they get a lot of passenger traffic.

I use that sidewalk when arriving on AS or AA and walking to the Hyatt LAX SFO.

That's one long walk. ;)

.4 miles to LAX-IT from T6/T7 plus an additional .2 to HR SFO; I'm usually faster than the shuttle. For an AA flight to/from Terminal B it's about a mile. Feels good after being on the plane and nice to get the exercise before getting on the plane.

The flaggers on the route for the last year or so see you coming and get traffic stopped so there is no slow down until you get to the crossings for T2/T1. Most of the traffic in that area is FAA, TSA, airport, construction, and lost people.

Now I see the wink thanks to Craig6z. Subtle.

Maybe there is a Star Trek transporter at the Hyatt LAX, that I haven't come across. Otherwise per Google maps it is an 137 hour walk to the HR in Burlingame. ;)

Oops.

L.A. Metro tweeted this out today as the approved service plan for the C and K light-rail lines after the LAX people mover opens in 2024.

https://i.imgur.com/Kdn5UEq.jpg

These are the two direct Metro website links, without a Twitter interface, for the two extensions in the planning stages.

C Line south to Torrance:

https://www.metro.net/projects/green-line-extension/

K Line north to Wilshire Blvd and then Hollywood:

https://www.metro.net/projects/kline...ern-extension/

Glad they're considering this and all, but:

This is just a massive boondoggle. BART to SFO has never met projected passenger loads, and it (a) better serves densely populated areas with airport bound passengers (downtown SF, Oakland, and Berkeley), and (b) goes right into the terminal, as opposed to requiring transfer to a people mover. I just don't see where the passenger traffic is going to come from.

California's intent to curb use of ICE vehicles.

David

Moderator's Note:
 

Folks,

Plese do not cross over into OMNI/PR territory.

TWA884
Moderator

I think LAX and the regional planners need to take the long view on this and build such transportation infrastructure now. Poor planning in previous decades is why ground transportation in/out of LAX is among the worst of any major airport in the world right now. It's amazing how long it can take to get through the horseshoe these days.

If you use LAWA buses that can use the LAWA fast lanes it's remarkably quick to get through the horseshoe. Those also improve the other lanes by encouraging people to take the buses. Getting into the horseshoe from the last couple miles out can also be an amazing exercise in frustration, even in the buses, because they have to share lanes with regular traffic. Splitting that traffic among the multiple people-mover stops will hopefully improve the last couple miles in, too. It's an enormous number of people to stuff in and out through a small channel every day.

It was a big bummer when they shot down the idea of the centralized pick-up/drop-off area that would then require everyone to take the people mover to each terminal.
Once the people mover is open, I'm hoping to never have to drive through the horseshoe again - I'll just drop-off/pick-up people at a remote people mover station

Now- just as with the buses, the People Mover has similar problems.

Now, if you want to use the LAWA buses, best pick up and drop off is at Terminal 1. Worst is at Terminal 7.

In the future, Terminal 9 will be best for drop off our of the People Mover and TBiT will be worst. For pick up leaving LAX, TBIT will be best and Terminal 9 will be worst.

LAWA and you can't win.

David

I am not sure that I understand the point that you are trying to make.

There will be three APM stations in the central terminal area.

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...0b6159018.jpeg

There is a better version of this plan here, which I been unable able to upload; it is to scale and has a legend.

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...8194cc8eb.jpeg

And if the trains are all filling up at TBIT/West Station, you'll probably be able to get on a westbound train at 1/7/East Station and just have an extra minute or two ride to the end before your train turns around.

But it will be the equivalent of about 4 full sized buses every two minutes, which is higher capacity than I've ever seen in my waiting around for pickup at T6/7.

Success!

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...615a90263.jpeg

Better to build in and up the mass transit infrastructure sooner than later unless expecting a catastrophic drop in population and traffic at LAX. Even if airlines are eventually going to upgauge for their flight movements at/around LAX, that’s going to likely mean worse traffic at times for those trying to get to and from the airport. It’s not going to get any cheaper to do big projects later in such a large population center.

They're really trying to get it all done in time for 2028 so that getting into/out of/around LA during the olympics just sucks like normal LA rather than being an unfathomable nightmare.

These are exciting developments. I look forward to watching this thread over the next five years.

It was a gamechanger when BART opened at SFO in 2003. I look forward to the same ease of public transit connections when visiting SoCal.

The almost unfathomable incompetence with LA airport management ignoring the need for upgrades over so many years, decades, then trying to slam a band-aid project through just because of the Olympics, and lacking any innovative ideas, flies to Miami to take the blueprints for their multi-modal shared facility and high speed people mover system, to copy an almost identical implementation in LA.

They needed an over-cap built across all the terminal buildings to link them by the people mover, and have the cars setup so carry-on baggage customers could check in online, go to the multi-model center to do a kiosk check-in, clear security and board a secure airside car to their terminal assignment, while those needing to check bags or agent services would take the unsecure train cars and go downstairs to the counters for service. The now fully connected terminals could then use flex gate assignments to spread flights around the terminals and better utilize the gate space currently available before building more terminals.

Yes, that would have taken more innovation, more time, more money spent, but with better results, more longevity for the airport, better resource utilization and the putting off future upgrade which may never be needed for decades to come.

But LAWA was so busy trying to put ONT out of business, they didn't have time for more innovative project design until their "oh no, the Olympics are coming and our airport is a total hole" wake-up moment.

We get the airport management we deserve. LA airport management — like so many other things in the area and across the country when it comes to infrastructure, urban planning and development plans in general — is plagued by short-sightedness and going for band-aids that are too little and too late while the resources go toward suffering the public’s continuing love affair for getting around by car. But as I do a poor job of walking my talk on this in California — as with my repeated (albeit sporadic) use of cars to get to and from SFO even after the BART station opened at the airport — I would be surprised if this development with LAX will move the dial much for me in driving me off from driving in cars in general in the area.

The LAX horseshoe roadway problem isn't too many regular cars, but the volume of commercial vehicles from hotels, car rental companies, tour buses, LAWA buses, limo/taxi etc. I'm not sure when most of these vehicles are forced out of the loops the private traffic will overwhelm the loop.

That would have essentially required completely rebuilding 8 or 9 terminal cores (depending on if you wanted to include T8) - all the concrete you see supporting the people mover guideway would have to drop down through the terminals or be doubled in front of and behind to let the supports span them and would have been far more disruptive for far longer. If you really want to consolidate things, the best thing to do once the people mover is done would probably be to knock down all the CTA parking, build a new consolidated headhouse underneath the people mover, and then make the airside alleys longer inward. No more horseshoe. But good luck with getting rid of that many parking spaces. And you'd probably need to add a couple more people movers going to points farther out where you can gather people to ship them into the airport.

I don't know how much time you spend at LAX these days, but why would you want a kiosk to check in if you're just with a carry on? I haven't used a kiosk in years at any airport. I check in on my phone before I get to the airport and prefer that there are 8 separate security checkpoints - it's rare for me to take longer than 5 minutes from the curb to airside (if it's even that long). Kiosks are for people who need to print bag tags. It's usually faster for me to park in the Economy lot and take the bus that gets to use the LAWA lanes than it is to park in the CTA because CTA traffic is so bad. Once the people mover is running, the timing should be even more predictable and reliably faster on average than parking in the CTA.

As a passenger I don't particularly want flex gate assignments, and I suspect the airlines don't, either. Knowing which terminal I'm going into makes all my preflight planning easier, and terminals being tied to airlines also limits how far you can get moved in a gate change. It also makes baggage transfers easier and faster for the airlines. Flex gates would also increase airside ground traffic significantly.

The personal cars are as much of a problem as the commercial vehicles - the commercial vehicles are on average going to be more space efficient (passengers per square foot of pavement occupied) than personal vehicles that typically only carry one or two passengers who are coming into or leaving the airport. The LAWA buses are one of the most space efficient/high thorughput things going at LAX. They're generally large, rarely empty, and they don't have to fight traffic with personal vehicles once they're in the horseshoe. Dedicating those lanes and eliminating the crisscross traffic of personal vehicles and buses continually crossing multiple lanes and each other is one of the best things LAWA has done in the 25 years I've been using LAX.

These are also professional, experienced drivers who are really not at all thinking about other drivers on the road. Granted, private drivers could certainly be problematic also, but when the Avis bus pulls across two lanes to let people out, then gets up and helps them with their luggage, all the while blocking two lanes, I see that getting these out will help tremendously.

And don't get me started on the bus with the air brakes shooting out their compressed air every 15 seconds . . .

I wouldn't call those shuttle drivers professional - many of them shouldn't be allowed to drive a bicycle, let alone a large public bus. I actually fell once on one of those buses due to the erratic driving and braking by the driver.

As to the air brakes, that's something I won't miss either - nor sucking on the diesel fumes in the enclosed arrival space while watching 15 Avis/Budget/Hertz/etc buses drive by until one National/Enterprise bus showed up :rolleyes:

I certainly won't claim to be an architect, but I pictured the tracks being supported by an archway over the road/garages that then joined the roof support of the terminal buildings and was also capable of providing additional support to the new stations that would have sat over a spot between each of the terminals instead of over the garage structure. The stations would have been split into airside/landside so the same trains would have airside and landside cars to move people between the terminals, thus allowing flexible gate assignments. Had they started the project 10 years earlier, as they should have given the modernization and capacity increases needed by the airport, it wouldn't have been such a disruptive issue, and would have already been finished.

Also, instead of trying to destroy ONT, they could have leveraged ONT/BUR/LGB to shift some of the domestic O/D air traffic away from LAX to reduce capacity needs during the construction phase and incentivize some of the traffic to alternate airports.

But, of course it's LAWA we're dealing with, so <shoulder shrug>

There haven't been any diesel buses in LAX in about 15 years.

Traffic congestion in the horseshoe is always going to be there during peak times. That's just how traffic works. If you remove the buses, the road capacity will be filled up immediately by other vehicles. If we want free flowing traffic in the CTA all the time, the only way do ensure that is to implement congestion charge. The bus lane is a huge improvement. You can now reliably exit the horseshoe in less than 10 minutes even during the worst traffic hours.

The APM offers an alternative to driving (or riding the bus) into the CTA so that's going to help a lot with those of us that do not want to experience the congestion inside the horseshoe. Rental car experience in particular will be dramatically improved. Instead of waiting for a bus that have unpredictable arrive due to traffic, and then riding up to 30 minutes to get to the rental lot, it will be a max 2 min wait for APM, follow up 7 minutes ride to the consolidated rental car center.

But many more people like to experience the congestion... there is an irrational preference to be dropped off and picked up right in front of the terminal.

I grew up in the land of "why park in a space that is available right away that will mean an extra 30 second walk to the store entrance when you can circle around the lot for 10 minutes to get a closer space?" Totally normal Angeleno behavior

As to the "loop," I've dissuaded family members from coming to LAX when I've got a connection that might otherwise permit a pleasant visit for a couple of hours. APM may change that game.

I don't have numbers, but as someone who flies out of BUR regularly, I feel BUR is at capacity. It cannot take any more traffic (air or land) during peak times, and it is physically and socially impossible for Burbank to do anything about it due to the neighbors. The Burbank experience is pretty bad in my opinion. Many think I am nuts, but I prefer LAX. More seating, more concessions (none of this Guy Fieri BS everywhere), TSA can be quicker during busy times, and fewer ground crew shenanigans. LAX T1 has fewer gates than all of BUR and has so many more places to get a snack or a drink.

This makes me sad. So many good memories of T2, flying on Hawaiian and Pan Am before that. Nothing but bad memories flying out of the dump known as (the old) T3, even I did love JetBlue and Virgin America. Since the new T3 seems smaller in footprint, it would have made more sense to name the whole thing T2, or T2/3. I digress.

So, I just did a trip LAX<->SFO by myself, which meant I could spend some time walking around. It feels like LAX, particularly T1-3, has "grown up." It definitely feels more efficient and more modern than it ever has. Gone are the days where each terminal is its own little world.

I used the Economy Parking structure because I was last minute. Surprisingly, it was almost at capacity. I hope there are plans for another one. If you prebook, the gate opens for you automatically, which is neat, and there are signs and lights indicating full aisles and where spaces are available. Exiting is a bit silly though. It doesn't scan your license plate like when entering. You have to then scan the prepaid QR code to exit. Several of us couldn't figure it out until the employee helped us. There is a cute robot that wanders each aisle to track vehicles. Access is quick from La Tijera Ave which helps avoid the traffic on Century. The shuttle ride between the structure and Skyway feels so long though. I look forward to the people mover.

T1 hasn't really changed, and I loved how much seating there was, and it was pretty quiet compared to BUR at 7am. Walking towards T2 is the new checkpoint between T1 and T2, and a somewhat annoying group of employees that are essentially asking you what you are doing. Their goal is to get Delta customers into the proper lines to take the shuttle to TBIT, but they seemed to double as security where I didn't feel comfortable saying "I am just walking to T3."

T2 made me a bit sad. The old security foyer had a nice architecture and that's either gone, or is strictly landside now. The concourse itself remains the same. It looks like the FIS corridors are still there, so I hope it starts operating again. At 10pm, it was a complete mad house compared to T1.

Then was the long walk to T3. Another checkpoint on the left before turning right. It feels like the gate 30/31 area is from the old terminal and was quite underwhelming. Surprisingly, the end of the concourse feels the same as the old T3! Terribly cramped, and even the ceiling looks similar. Again, it was a complete mad house at 10pm. Aside from the Delta Sky Club which looks really nice, T3 was kind of disappointing. It was nice not seeing the old bazaar of random concession stands, the weird smoking garden area and rusted NOAA sign, and the old food court.

It's convenient that everything is on the north side is connected, but the construction lacks character. It's very sterile and white, white and more white. It looks like much of it is temporary as stores and restaurants take up leases. I hope over time it reflects more of an LA vibe. It could also use moving walkways, at least for people connecting flights between T2 and T3.

The number of checkpoints and exits feels efficient. There were a few weird things introduced though. In T1, just to the right of the main exit under Urtth Cafe, there is a second exit, with shut doors, that is manned by a TSA agent. This never used to be there and seems pointless. One woman went through the doors, but the others were shooed towards the main exit. The T1/T2 corridor also has this bizarre exit that goes up a long ramp, almost to a third level. I am not sure what that's about.

Security seems tighter than it used to be. There are tons of contractors around asking people questions about where they are going, and the ominous PA about "Closed to the public 24 hours a day... everyone else must exit."

It wouldn't surprise me, when all is said and done, that T0,1,2,3 are renamed "Terminal 1" or "North Terminal" with concourses A, B, C and D, but I suppose that would cause a lot of confusion with roadways, and baggage claims.

That's a nice summary of how things have changed over the past few years. I think I've only been in the Delta terminal once since it was "finished" and it struck me as temporary and not very appealing. I usually fly out of the south complex.

FWIW, the Economy Lot usually does read your plate and open the gate on the way out - I usually pull up to an empty one and am out the gate while the cars that got to the others before me are still fumbling for tickets and credit cards. And agreed that the people mover has the potential to be a vast improvement. The station at the Economy Lot looks like it's finally nearly finished. The interior floors were nearly full when I arrived to park thursday afternoon, so my car is on the roof getting rinsed off by the tropical depression. I've been impressed that the status indicator system for the individual spots seems to still be working reliably this long after the lot opened.

That's consistent with my experience. I can recall only one time when the exit gate did not open when I approached it and I had to find the email with the QR code in order for the gate to open.

I’ll be more excited when the economy lot starts actually enforcing the EV parking spots and either tows or heavily fines non EV cars parked there. I think a $500 fine automatically added to the parking charge at check out should do the trick.

Question is, will EVs have to actually pay for a fill up, or just be parked in the spot? Will there be a minimum amount of kWh that will need to be added to legitimately use a spot?

It's way more expensive than charging at home for me, so while I'll take the EV spot if it's cheaper, I really don't want to fill up there.

The spots are for parking an EV - giving EV owners rightly deserved priority over non-EVs, and the convenience of charging if needed. I don't believe there is currently a published requirement that anyone needs to charge to park in the spot - but there should be a fine for any non EV that takes an EV spot since those spots are reserved separately when booking online.