LAX Terminal Construction and Landside Access Modernization Program
 

It's not much consolation for anyone traveling over the next week, but LAX is moving on a massive overhaul of its ground transportation/arrival/departure situation that'll bring the airport, if not into the Twenty-First Century, at least into the late Twentieth.

http://la.curbed.com/archives/2014/1...ation.php#more

Page not found :confused::(

For some reason, Flyertalk will not link to the article. You can google the article headline, and find it there.

Try clicking this link. Flyertalk removed the four-letter word embedded in the site's URL.

Here is all you need to know:

1. The plan had already cleared an earlier stage of feasibility study. The LAWA Board voted to move onto environmental impact review (EIR) process, which is more detailed reviews.

2. $4 billion budget includes the APM, a new intermodal transit facility (ITF) for drop offs and transfers to buses, a new light rail station at 96th street, and a consolidated rental car center (CONRAC).

3. Most of the parking in CTA will be relocated to near the ITF. This will make room for the new central terminal area (CTA) check-in facility - think of it as another TBIT with T3 serving as the north wing, and T4/T5 serving as the south wing. I'm not sure if the $4 billion includes the cost of CTA check-in facility but it is integral to the APM plan during the initial feasibility study.


http://cdn.cstatic.net/images/gridfs...14.12_lax6.jpg

You can go directly to the LAWA site for more info: http://www.connectinglax.com/

Is this an "alternative" to driving up to the curb of the terminals? Or will everyone be required to use the central facility?

If it's the latter, it'll be nice to eliminate the overwhelming number of buses and shuttles. However, it'll still have numerous private vehicles, no?

What will happen to the hotel and parking lot shuttle buses?

Major LAX Improvements Approved
 

As the linked article says, "There will be two big ITF [Intermodal Transportation Facility] areas for pick-ups, drop-offs, parking, shuttle service, and even check-in, eating, and shopping...." The people-mover will get you from your terminal to these areas.

The central check-in facility is envisioned just like TBIT check-in now... So not everyone will be required to use it... only if you are flying with the airlines that uses it.

As for private vehicles, LAWA is going out of its way to accomondate private vehicles so you can still drive in and be stuck in traffic. Although the idea is that you can drop off at ITF and not have to drive in the circle of hell so if everything is constructed as envisioned, I'm not sure why anyone would want to drive in the circle voluntarily.

Does LAWA already own all of the real estate required to build this? I haven't spent a lot of time driving around that area, but aren't there residential neighborhoods there?

LAWA has been slowly buying up the properties as they go on sale. It's close to 90% owned by LAWA now. The area where CONRAC is planned is a ghost town now - you can see it when you are on final approach at LAX. Or check out Google Maps: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9491.../data=!3m1!1e3

The ITF is located on LAWA land currently being used as bus depot and Parking Lot B and C, and land currently leased out to private parking operators.

There will be some private properties that will need to be acquired but not that much.

I suppose it's better than nothing. I have shown my disgust for LAX O/D travel, and I appreciate them trying anything and any little thing could help.

Having said that, I am not convinced that it will be a dramatic improvement, unless they have a direct train line from the airport proper/terminal to downtown (say). Otherwise, it will probably something like an EWR AirTrain redux, or worse (at least, you can make one transfer to Manhattan at EWR or JFK). If you have luggage, why would you want to make 2 or more transfers?

Or they can just charging the private cars entering/exiting the airport (for those not using the ITF), or something, if they are REALLY serious about the congestion.

Do also note that once you're on the people mover, it's going to end up on the top of the parking garages...then you'll have to take a moving walkway or walk to the terminal.

Being born and raised in L.A. and knowing L.A. politics, this will never be built... Watch for it to get tossed around for many years to come. Then they'll come up with another plan after all the lawsuits...and if anyone knows California, the lawyers will have their say first.

Don't be optimistic. A consolidated car rental facility, which we have been paying $10 a rental for many years...is all I expect.

As for LAX, personally I think it's great as it is NOW. I get in and out faster from T1 than any other major airport in America...and I don't have to walk for miles in the terminal. Learn how to get in and out of LAX...I know how to...and I live 10 miles away. Rarely ever takes me more than 15 minutes to get home.

:rolleyes: It could happen... even the bullet train is getting built. Not sure what is more messed up, El Lay or Sacramento. ;)

Well, then please share your wisdom. I lived less that 10 miles away for quite some time, and it never ceased being a pain in the butt, especially with all of the buses weaving in and out of traffic.

If you know the secondary roads and shortcuts, it's not bad. And I'd rather be picked up/dropped off curbside rather than schlepping onto a people-mover, then hop on a moving walkway to get to the terminal.

So hopefully this ITF gets built, so everyone else will use and open up traffic :D

Current thinking among city planners is that it's generally not worth the money to build main line rail transit all the way to the airport. Although we air travellers have a bias in that we think transportation to/from the airport is very important, current thinking is that this is really a minor issue that can be handled with a light rail spur. Yes, it is a bit inconvenient for air travellers but by far the transit system should be designed for people going about their daily business -- going to work, shopping, etc. That's by far the larger number of users.

That's why just about all rail transit to airports nowadays is not on the main line, but a spur, with the notable exception of BART to SFO.

The bullet train is a much bigger boondoggle than this. It won't ever connect Los Angeles and San Francisco IF it ever really gets built (and most likely will end up being the San Joaquin train to nowhere). It's just a pick-pocketing politicians dream come true (and some crumbs for the union bosses)...

How many decades have they been talking about just connecting the slow moving Green Line to LAX? Welcome to Los Angeles...

Simplicity works best in L.A...building on former rail lines...like the vast majority of the light rail lines...

The bullet train is already being build and it will connect to LA and SF because both regional rail network are being electrified.

Green line is a lot of things but it is definitely now slow moving :o It has its own right of way and is one of the fastest metro line in the US.

It's because it connects Nowhere to Nowhere... with nobody in between :D

Which is also not true :p

Green line averages 42,000 boardings on a weekday so it's definitely not "nobody"

Green line connects to several extremely heavily used N-S bus lines on Hawthrone Blvd (40 & 740), Crenshaw Blvd (210 & 710), Vermont Ave (204 & 754), and Long Beach Blvd (60 & 760). Not to mention the Blue line and Silver line, which combined has over 100,000 average weekday boardings.

So yea... nowhere to nowhere with nobody... ;)

As you point out, a large number of users, probably invisible to most people on FT.

The problem is that "everyone" thinks it's "nobody" because "everyone" drives. LA is a huge place with a huge population and a large amount of that population doesn't have the means to own a vehicle. So, they take public transportation - primarily in the form of buses. Something that "everyone" wouldn't dare think of doing.

So much snobbery involved in public transportation planning. :td:

And just imagine if the Green Line had actually connected the populated parts of the South Bay, LAX, and the Norwalk Metrolink station.

The fact is that, the way the Green Line is set up now could have just as easily been accomplished by a bus line. Eliminate Green Line service, and it would have little effect on the system.

So, is the Green Line actually raising ridership... or are the riders using the Green Line just because it just happens to be there?

(And don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of public transportation and even voted for the high speed rail measure. Even with that feather in my hat, I still feel the Green Line was a complete waste... maybe not complete, more like a 95% waste).

Population density in the green line service area is pretty high. It just so happens the area is ahem... very brown... so people just think there is "nothing" there. Connecting it to the "more populated" parts of South Bay would still leave the Eastern portion of the Green line in more populated area, by far. Connecting to Metrolink station in Norwalk would have been nice and should still be a goal but the connection to Blue line is much more important. Rail line is not necessary about the terminals, it is about the places it serves along the way. Green line is a relatively speaking, a very high performing rail line given that it is almost entirely in the middle of a freeway... but nonetheless, it plays an important role in the grid providing a fast east-west cross town ride in the south LA county.

And of course people are using the Green line because it is there... what kind of question is that? :confused: If you are saying people will change their commute method if there is no Green line, for sure... if there is no 405 freeway, people will change how they commute too.

I'm not sure how you can replace the Green line with a bus line... assuming average 100 boarding per bus, you'll need 420 extra bus a day to provide the same capacity. If you eliminate the Green line, basically you will add 42,000 cars to the 105 and 91 freeway... see how that works out :D

Will the taxis and cars be banned from the ring road? I can see having to go the the intermodal stop to pick up a cab, but it seems like dropoff could still happen at the terminals.

The Daily Breeze:

LAX access is going to get worse before it gets better
 

There's an article in the LA Times about the mess at LAX this holiday season. The short summary is that while there are a lot of plans to try to relieve things, it's going to get worse before it gets better, because loads will continue to increase and construction will disrupt things.

I flew out a couple days before the "official" start of the holiday season, on a Sunday night redeye, and getting into the airport was already a mess. I took the flyaway bus, which is usually pretty good about avoiding congestion - they don't have any stops between union station and the airport so they can take any route they want.

Apparently the first traffic light entering the airport had gone out earlier in the day and it caused backups all the way to the 105. Traffic was backed up for about a mile on the 105 at the Sepulveda north exit (google was suggesting to take the south exit and do a U turn), so it took about 40 minutes to get from 1 mile before the Sepulveda ramp to Terminal 1. If I hadn't gotten off the bus and walked across the top of the U I probably would have missed my flight. I could have walked from the 105 faster than the bus.

Later in the week was worse, with rain cancelling and delaying a lot of flights (and no doubt making traffic worse) and a couple incidents with unattended packages.

Some of the fixes that they're planning will help inside the U, like having all buses and transit drop off at Lot C and have a train, but access to there is still limited by the Sepulveda tunnel and traffic on Century. The layout of surface streets makes it difficult to get to the transit center without either going through the tunnel or spending at least a short time on Century. It seems like some sort of transit hub south of the tunnel (or east of the 405) with a dedicated train to the airport could make a big difference in the traffic load trying to get off at Sepulveda, which is probably going to continue to get worse, even with all the changes.

You linked a wrong article.

I tried finding it online, but couldn't.

Here's one from the Daily Breeze:

I believe this is the LA times article that chrisl137 was attempting to link to.

Thanks. I saw it in the print edition a couple of hours after I posted the link to the Daily Breeze article.

Here's an excerpt:

yep. also just fixed in my post.

Avis shuttle bus took 35 minutes last night from Terminal 1 to the lot. It's hard to imagine a worse airport traffic design than what LAX has now.

You probably could have walked it faster. I've given up on catching the lot C bus from T 6/7/8 - they don't come very often and they tend to fill up before they get to the end of the loop and just fly by in the left lane. It's a pretty easy walk if you don't have a lot of luggage. The car rental lots are only 1000-1500 feet farther. You could also walk across to T7 and get a shuttle there- it's a short walk and then you don't have to wait through loop traffic.

I'm still amazed that people try to do curbside pickup/dropoff in the loop. It's enough of a nightmare often enough that I'd rather have people find their way out of the airport and do an off airport pickup.

I still cannot understand why the original Green Line plan did not include an LAX station. That would have opened up a way for thousands of passengers every day to get in/out of the congested area. Drop-offs and pick-ups for so many people could have been spread out among Green Line stations.

Blame the old Soviet Union.

Well they can say that and you can believe it if you like. But I recall the main reason the Green Line didn't run right to the airport was good old graft paid by taxi and limo companies.
Guess they didn't foresee Uber.

The article discusses that theory as well as the one that airport officials blocked the Green Line's entry into the terminal area for fear of losing parking revenue.

Personally, I agree with former Los Angeles City Councilmember Ruth Galanter who said that she used to believe in conspiracy theories until she discovered incompetence.

I also don't see why they didn't link all four lines at a single point, like Union Station. To get from the San Gabriel Valley to LAX (assuming Green goes to LAX) on the train, you have to take Gold to Red to Blue to Green, and people I know who've done it say it's about 2 hours. I can drive from home in about an hour, and take the Gold line to the Flyaway in a little more than that. In principle the Flyaway is a good substitute for taking the train all the way, but if it's constrained to overloaded roads then it stops being as useful. I've been on it when drivers have taken alternate routes, but this last time I was close to walking through the Sepulveda tunnel.

Because voters in LA County killed it when they banned subway construction, thus orphaned the Gold line from the Blue line. It was supposed to be one continuous line from Pasadena to Long Beach but ended up being two different lines with missing Downtown LA section. We are just now getting that fixed with the regional connector schedule to open in 2020.

They are building an underground connection in downtown right now that will eventually directly connect the Gold Line to the Blue and Expo lines, allowing through trains.

Yes, the "Regional Connector", as the previous poster mentioned.

That ban on subway construction was repealed a few years ago, thankfully.