That Was The Week That Was 25-29 April
Airport Architecture – How Hard Can it Be?
When I grow up, I think that I would like to be an architect that specialises in airports. There are a number of reasons for that – first, the really complicated part, like baggage systems, fire systems and security etc you can outsource to experts in those fields – there will be some under-utilised experts hanging around Berlin’s new airport soon – and secondly, because, once that stuff is nicely off your desk, all you have to do is design a huge hall with a secure wall separating the air and land sides.
This allows you all sorts of liberties and you can really go for broke on which style of huge hall you want. You can go Gaudian, and have tree-like trunks and branches (T5 in Heathrow) by way of example, or you can go completely soulless utilitarian (Tom Bradley at LAX perhaps). Any variation between these two works just fine.
But the important thing is, you do not have to be sensible, or helpful, or least of all, original. Why is that the most modern airport terminals are about a decade old in their understanding? Yes, getting permission to build a new airport terminal can be a hugely time consuming but do you have to be locked into the design suggested at the very start of that process? Why? Surely you can change the design, within reason, to reflect changes in the technology etc between the start of the planning process and the opening of the facility…
An example of the building being left behind by the changes in the ways we travel is T5 in LHR. It has a huge hall expecting passengers and luggage to queue to check-in. On-line checking in was a future dream with the terminal was designed. But security was clearly not a big deal, as there is not much space for that.
Another part of being an airport architect is that the more you can make your new terminal look like it was designed in the 90s the better, frankly. In the 90s, it was so, so trendy to have the arriving passengers walk along above the heads of the passenger waiting to board. T2 at LHR did that, Gatwick South Terminal did that. CDG in Paris is doing it today. Vancouver did that. I am sure that there are many more in similar style.
Another terrible idea that we keep, because we keep all of them, and never think them through, is that if there is a need to bus passengers, make them walk as far as possible before then putting them on a bus. Is there a passenger on earth that likes the bus transfer part? How much more annoying it then is to make them walk huge distances before putting them on a bus? That was a feature of the old T4 in LHR. The only thing funnier is to drive them past their ultimate destination on arrival – the customs hall, usually – and then make them walk back! No passenger on earth wants to be bussed anywhere, but at least, you tell yourself, you are getting in nice and close to the arrivals hall. So, when you do not, that is pretty funny, you have to admit. Welcome to Pier B in Brussels.
And now there is a new contender for most annoying terminal. Step forward the new Geneva terminal. All of the worst bits, rolled into one new piece of building. Oh, and the travelators do not work, which is good for the planet, but an interesting decision for exhausted passengers late at night. To be fair, it seems to be a deliberate attack on non-Schengen European flights. Schengen flights are fine, long-haul international flights are fine, but if you arrive from a non-Schengen short-haul destination, bring comfy shoes.