LAX is wrapping up a multi-billion approval to “improve access to and egress from the airport.” Will they spend billions and get the same results as the billions spent on the 405 widening, which is no improvement?
If someone wanted to design the least imaginative, most confusing, and dubiously effective access program, the proposed concept would be it:
The proposal creates two Intermodal Transportation Facilities (ITF) which will have
--parking
--baggage check-in
--meet and greet areas
The ITF to the right contains car rental facilities and a metro train station which does not provide direct service to LAX
The ITFs will be connected to the Central Terminal Area by a people mover. If someone parks in the ITF and takes the people mover this will make for two long walks before reaching security.
50% of people who fly from LAX arrive by car. Which facility will they use, ITF or Central Terminal Area?
The ITF and people mover provide alternative access but will people use it instead of just driving to the Central Terminal Area?
Will the ITF really reduce traffic?
Will the train connection provide a decent alternative to driving?
Rental car drivers will use the ITF and most buses and shuttles in the Central Terminal Area are likely to be forced to use it but I doubt all will be eliminated; buses for plane crews? Flyaway? Tour groups? Shared-ride vans? How much will traffic really be reduced?
And was the traffic concept of induced demand--where increasing capacity induces more traffic--considered? Look no further than the 405 widening to see this idea at work.
The world's seventh busiest airport deserves better thinking.
I am also disturbed by the proposal because it provides no role for LAX's long-standing symbol, the iconic Theme Building. Instead the people mover ignores its relevance, skirts around it, provides no access, and pushes it aside.
There is lots of room for improvement in the proposal: clear design, reroute the people mover, open space, and direct train service. Detailed in Part 2.
