|
|
| Re: Case Against LGA Link (1334638) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 3 of 7 |
||
|
| (1334861) | |
Re: Case Against LGA Link |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Jan 21 13:10:55 2015, in response to Re: Case Against LGA Link, posted by pragmatist on Wed Jan 21 13:04:00 2015. true BRT and SBS are not the same thing.That's one of BRT's advantages. Whenever any BRT installation fails to perform up to its billing, the proponents can declare that the installations wasn't "true BRT." |
|
|
| (1334864) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Wed Jan 21 13:17:54 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by italianstallion on Tue Jan 20 23:55:06 2015. My proposed route, between St Michael's Cemetery and the BQE eastern spur, is well east of Steinway/44th Sts. Considering commercial and residential areas, it would be one least disruptive routes to build, only tunneling under a few blocks of 68th St and Northern Blvd. |
|
|
| (1334865) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Wed Jan 21 13:22:25 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by Elkeeper on Wed Jan 21 13:17:54 2015. You could also tie-in a route from Queens to have express service from Jamaica. That would probably involve using the longer 69th St, for both routes to the airport. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1334870) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Union Tpke on Wed Jan 21 13:35:59 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by BrooklynBus on Tue Jan 20 17:25:21 2015. t's time to extend the N train to LaGuardiaTwenty years ago, Astoria leaders blocked a plan to extend the elevated train line that serves their neighborhood. The proposal would have run the trains a few blocks north past their current terminus at Ditmars Boulevard, then east to LaGuardia Airport. In addition to the value of getting airport travelers out of cars and taxis, the line would have served new stops in areas of northern Astoria and Woodside that currently have no subway service. It would also have made better use of the Astoria Line, where trains were often fairly empty just a few stops outside of Midtown. In a move that baffled me at the time, "the community," meaning the people with political power in the neighborhood, came out strongly against the plan. Ben Kabak has a good summary with links, but the gist seems to be that they didn't like the idea of an el, and they didn't like the disruption caused by constructing a subway. This came up in Ben's blog and podcast again recently because the MTA is set to inaugurate the M60 Select Bus Service, and a business group called the Global Gateway Alliance released an open letter calling for "true Bus Rapid Transit" between the airport and the Ditmars Boulevard terminus of the Astoria Line. Ben was baffled by several assertions in the letter (a regular feature of this story is the bafflement of transit advocates at the bizarre reactions of city elites to what seems like a very straightforward case for a subway extension), most of all the blithe dismissal of rail by noting it was "shelved due to community opposition." The train was indeed shelved due to community opposition, as everyone reminds us, but what they fail to note is that the "community leaders" are all gone. Read through the list of politicians who came out against the plan. Denis Butler and Walter McCaffrey are dead. Peter Vallone, Senior is retired, and so is George Onorato, and Vallone Junior has been term-limited out. John Sabini was hustled off to the Racing Authority after a DUI conviction in 2007. Not only are these windshield-perspective politicians gone, but their replacements are much less wedded to the idea that cars are the future. Senator Michael Gianaris and his protégée Assemblymember Aravella Simotas are disappointing in some ways, but they've kept their car activism pretty low-key, as has Senator José Peralta. City Council members Jimmy Van Bramer and Costa Constantinides are both progressive on transit issues. Van Bramer, who represents me, has supported congestion pricing and the Midtown Tunnel Bus. Constantinides lost a bit of cred by coming out way too early in support of another term for Jimmy Vacca as head of the Transportation Committee, but has been a strong supporter of livable streets issues overall. I believe that Van Bramer is a member of Transportation Alternatives, and I know Constantinides has been not just a member but an active supporter, marching with them at public events. They may keep their One Less Car T-shirts in the bottom of their drawers, but they definitely do not see cars as the only way to prosperity for their constituents. Community Board 1 may still be led by trolls who think parking is Astoria's number one issue, but they'll be gone soon as well. More importantly, the voters and donors in that area care more about trains than parking today. Another baffling element of the 1990s opposition to the extension was that it seemed like the objections could all have been overcome with some thought, but the "community leaders" weren't interested. The line could have been run entirely over the Grand Central "Parkway," or put underground as far south as Astoria Boulevard. A solid proposal that addresses those objections, especially if it has the backing of business leaders like the Global Gateway Alliance, should be able to win over Gianaris, Simotas and Constantinides, and eventually the rest of Astoria. It's not 1999, people, and we shouldn't be acting like it is. http://capntransit.blogspot.com/2014/05/its-time-to-extend-n-train-to-laguardia.html |
|
|
| (1334872) | |
For LaGuardia, an AirTrain that will save almost no one any time |
|
|
Posted by Union Tpke on Wed Jan 21 13:36:45 2015, in response to Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video, posted by gOlD_12tH on Tue Jan 20 11:59:31 2015. For LaGuardia, an AirTrain that will save almost no one any timeYonah Freemark January 21st, 2015 | 21 Comments » New York City’s LaGuardia Airport is its rail-inaccessible stepchild. A proposal to spend half a billion dollars on a new transit link there, however, may do little for most of the region. LaGuardia Airport is the New York City airport closest to the nation’s largest business district in Midtown Manhattan. Getting there, however, is inconvenient and slow for people who rely on transit and expensive — and often also slow — for those who receive rides in cabs or shuttles. In other words, the experience of reaching the airport leaves something to be desired. The New York region’s two other major airports — Newark and J.F.K. — each have dedicated AirTrain services that connect to adjacent commuter rail (and Subway services, in the case of J.F.K.). These lines were built by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey in the 1990s and 2000s to improve transit access to these airports, leaving only LaGuardia without a rail link of its own. This week, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo stepped in, claiming to have solved the problem. His “Opportunity Agenda” for 2015, which includes a number of worthwhile projects such as Penn Station Access for Metro-North commuter trains, includes an AirTrain line to LaGuardia. As proposed, the project would do next to nothing to improve access to the airport. In fact, compared to existing transit services, most riders using the AirTrain would spend more time traveling to LaGuardia than they do now. There is no hope that this AirTrain will “solve” the access to LaGuardia problem. Governor Cuomo’s AirTrain, at least according to his press releases, would be built by the Port Authority and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority and cost $450 million. Though funding for the project has not yet been identified, it could come from “existing sources,” though it is unclear what exactly that means. As the map at the top of this article shows, Governor Cuomo’s proposed AirTrain would extend from LaGuardia Airport south along the Grand Central Parkway and then turn off to the east (the line in red). A terminus would be constructed south of the 7 Subway station at Mets-Willets Point and about 600 feet north of the Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) station there. Though materials announcing the project suggested the route would be 1.5 miles long, my estimate suggests it would be about 2.3 miles. The project’s “AirTrain” name suggests it would provide services using relatively short trains operating on an independent guideway. The bizarre rendering included in the governor’s presentation, pictured below, suggests that the project would feature an elevated guideway and train cars that appear to have been lifted from the LIRR. One can only assume that this image was photoshopped by someone who is not familiar with transportation technology. The governor’s proposed route has not been studied in-depth; indeed, if the project’s sponsors expect to receive federal matching funds, it will have to undergo an alternative analysis that considers different routes and technologies. But the project’s relatively low cost (compared to the $10 billion LIRR East Side Access project, it’s peanuts) suggests that it could be funded purely with local or state dollars, which would not require that sort of review. Yet the route clearly has been informed by past attempts to create rail links between the existing rail transit system and LaGuardia. Between 1998 and 2003, the City of New York and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority studied and attempted to fund an extension of the N Subway line from Astoria in western Queens to the airport. That roughly 2.9-mile expansion (shown in blue in the map above) was opposed vigorously by community groups that did not want to see an elevated train in their backyards. Most Queens politicians took up the opposition, and the tight budgetary environment post-9/11 provided an excuse to kill the project. Governor Cuomo’s project would not have any of the negative community effects the proposal from fifteen years ago had. Its elevated tracks would be hidden behind a much more noisy and already-existing highway. Moreover, its terminus station at Mets-Willets Point would be surrounded by parking lots and sports facilities. These attempts to shape a project that does nothing to disturb existing communities, however, has produced a proposal that would be worthless in terms of time savings for people traveling from the airport in almost all directions. As the following chart demonstrates, transit travel times from LaGuardia to destinations throughout New York City — from Grand Central in Midtown Manhattan to Borough Hall in downtown Brooklyn to Jamaica in central Queens to Yankee Stadium in the Bronx — would be longer for passengers using the AirTrain than for passengers using existing transit services already offered by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.* This finding suggests that for most people in the Bronx, Manhattan, Queens, Brooklyn, and Long Island, AirTrain services will not be beneficial from a time perspective. Given the fact that the AirTrain services would likely be automated, therefore reducing labor costs, it may be reasonable to assume that existing transit services to the airport would be eliminated to save costs. In other words, people may be forced to switch into the new, slower rail option. For people coming from Flushing or Port Washington, directly to the east of the Mets-Willets Point station, travel times would be lower with the AirTrain service. Similarly, people coming from Penn Station and using the LIRR to get to Mets-Willets Point would have a slightly shorter commute to the airport with the AirTrain. However, it is worth emphasizing that LIRR service to this station only occurs on game days; LIRR has not indicated it would provide additional service for the AirTrain, and even if it did, trains would likely only come every half-hour during off-peak periods, suggesting that for most travelers from Penn Station, existing transit services to LaGuardia are faster than the AirTrain would be. It’s hard to imagine how the state can justify spending half a billion dollars on a transit project that will increase travel times for most people. The truth is that the City and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority have significantly improved bus service to LaGuardia over the past few years, introducing an improved limited-stop service from Woodside and Jackson Heights in 2013 and an improved M60 bus from Manhattan in 2014. These services are still slower than they ought to be, but, when combined with the subways they link to, they’re faster than the AirTrain would be, primarily because Mets-Willets point is not only too far east from the center of the region’s population but also because it is not a major interchange point. How effective would other potential routes to LaGuardia be for reducing travel times for passengers? The following chart compares travel times from LaGuardia to the same destinations throughout the city, but this time between not only existing transit services and the governor’s AirTrain proposal, but also the proposal to extend the N train from Astoria from fifteen years back (in blue) and an alternative–a rail route connecting Jackson Heights and the Airport via the Grand Central Parkway and the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway (in orange, and on map above as well). The alternative rail route to Jackson Heights could terminate near the Subway station at Broadway and Roosevelt in central Queens, where the 7, E, F, R, and M trains stop, or it could continue, likely at a very high expense, 2,000 feet to the Woodside stop on the LIRR. This route would be about 2.9 miles (or 3.3 miles with the LIRR connection). This comparison suggests that, in almost every case, existing transit services offer travel times that are either significantly faster or similar to travel times that would be provided even by the N train extension or a new route from Jackson Heights. From Penn Station or Jamaica, an AirTrain connection to the LIRR at Woodside would provide considerable time savings, but in most other cases, existing services are just as effective. In other words, the governor’s proposal and reasonable alternatives would do little to improve transit to LaGuardia. Very expensive alternatives, such as an express subway from Grand Central, would save significant time, but those are far more expensive than anyone in office appears willing to commit to at the moment. This suggests that perhaps a rail link to the airport — while a popular idea — may not be particularly effective in actually saving people time. If the AirTrain were built as the governor is proposing, it would likely do little to cut down on congestion at the airport. It is worth nothing that both Newark and J.F.K., despite their rail services, remain overwhelmed with vehicles waiting to pick up or drop off passengers. But even if the AirTrain to LaGuardia were magically very effective at reducing travel times, it should not be the New York region’s transit priority. The second phase of the Second Avenue Subway, which would extend from 96th Street to 125th Street the line that is currently under construction, is expected to attract 100,000 riders a day. Yet it lacks committed funding sources. Extended Subway lines in the outer boroughs, such as a Nostrand Avenue Subway or the Triboro-RX, are completely off the political radar, despite the fact that they would serve hundreds of thousands of people daily, reduce travel times significantly, and do plenty to improve quality of life in poor and working class neighborhoods. Instead we’re talking about building a train to the airport. The fact is that the governor of New York State, like most people in elected office, doesn’t take transit much and certainly isn’t reliant on it; to put matters bluntly, in a transit-oriented city like New York, he’s a member of the economic and social elite. This elite is unprepared to take advantage (or, in many cases, even know about) bus services that exist, and can only envision taking a train in one circumstance: When traveling to and from the airport. For him, a train to the airport is a must, even if it doesn’t actually improve transportation objectives and even if it isn’t the top priority compared to other options in a constrained spending environment. * The charts in this article assume the following: Average AirTrain or Subway speeds of 20 mph. Transfer times between existing services and AirTrain of 5 minutes, with the exception of travelers from Jackson Heights Subway services (10 minutes) and travelers from the Mets-Willets Points Long Island Rail Road station (10 minutes), because of longer walking times. http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2015/01/21/for-laguardia-an-airtrain-that-will-save-almost-no-one-any-time/ |
|
|
| (1334873) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Wed Jan 21 13:38:56 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Jan 21 13:04:17 2015. They can do with fewer than 20 tph out of Ditmars, as long as the route to LGA serves the other stops on the Astoria line. |
|
|
| (1334877) | |
Re: For LaGuardia, an AirTrain that will save almost no one any time |
|
|
Posted by The Silence on Wed Jan 21 13:46:50 2015, in response to For LaGuardia, an AirTrain that will save almost no one any time, posted by Union Tpke on Wed Jan 21 13:36:45 2015. One can only assume that this image was photoshopped by someone who is not familiar with transportation technology.One can only assume that this sentence was written by someone who is not familiar with graphic design, namely how that's not photoshopped. I would have loved to see what the author of this would have thought about Airtrain JFK twenty years ago. |
|
|
| (1334878) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Union Tpke on Wed Jan 21 13:48:12 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by Elkeeper on Wed Jan 21 13:17:54 2015. If it were tied up to the QB Express, how does it fit with signal system constraints.Also, which trunk line? |
|
|
| (1334880) | |
Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Wed Jan 21 13:50:56 2015, in response to Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video, posted by Joe V on Tue Jan 20 20:01:11 2015. No sharper a turn than the one on Metro-North from the Harlem to the Hudson line south of Yankee Stadium. |
|
|
| (1334882) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Union Tpke on Wed Jan 21 13:56:02 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by Elkeeper on Wed Jan 21 13:17:54 2015. |
|
|
| (1334883) | |
Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video |
|
|
Posted by The Silence on Wed Jan 21 13:56:08 2015, in response to Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video, posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Jan 21 09:15:23 2015. I just love how you present perfectly good reasons to establish MORE transportation services as reason why we should not. Can anyone say "Closeted NIMBY"?The Q48 runs on a freaking 20 minute headway in the middle of the day, and you think that's enough? And for the record, Jamaica Ave is a rather good comparisons because it's narrower, has more traffic than Roosevelt does and yet plays host to more bus routes. |
|
|
| (1334884) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Union Tpke on Wed Jan 21 13:56:08 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by Elkeeper on Wed Jan 21 13:17:54 2015. |
|
|
| (1334886) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by ntrainride on Wed Jan 21 13:58:04 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by shiznit1987 on Wed Jan 21 11:35:26 2015. ...down the road, will also stop at elmhurst. |
|
|
| (1334887) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Union Tpke on Wed Jan 21 13:59:02 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by Union Tpke on Wed Jan 21 13:56:08 2015. Phase 2 |
|
|
| (1334888) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Union Tpke on Wed Jan 21 13:59:09 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by Union Tpke on Wed Jan 21 13:56:08 2015. Phase 2 |
|
|
| (1334890) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Jan 21 14:05:02 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by Union Tpke on Wed Jan 21 13:35:59 2015. the line would have served new stops in areas of northern Astoria and Woodside that currently have no subway service.No new stops were proposed for the N extension. There was no benefit for the Astoria community. There was downside in the form of more noise. N.B. the TA has done nothing to address the noise issue in the intervening years. |
|
|
| (1334891) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Wed Jan 21 14:05:27 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by Union Tpke on Wed Jan 21 13:56:08 2015. My plan does not go any farther than between The IND express tracks and LGA. Tied in to the express tracks in both directions. That way, riders from Jamaica/Airtrain and transfers from the #7 at 74th/Roosvelt, could also use the route. Delete the section between LGA and Main St. I never said it would run to Main St. |
|
|
| (1334892) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Wed Jan 21 14:14:10 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Jan 21 14:05:02 2015. If no new stops, that was a mistake. Several areas along that proposal could have used a new stop.Not sure how you eliminate noise from an el. |
|
|
| (1334893) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Jan 21 14:16:40 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by italianstallion on Wed Jan 21 13:38:56 2015. They can do with fewer than 20 tph out of Ditmars, as long as the route to LGA serves the other stops on the Astoria line.39th Av, 36th Av, Bway and 30th Ave account for 12.5 million passengers annually. Astoria and Ditmars Blvds account for 9.4 million passengers. LGA would draw 4.0 million passengers. |
|
|
| (1334894) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by ntrainride on Wed Jan 21 14:17:43 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by MainR3664 on Tue Jan 20 14:28:45 2015. like. |
|
|
| (1334895) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Wed Jan 21 14:26:23 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by italianstallion on Wed Jan 21 14:14:10 2015. Unless you put it partially underground and extend it to LGA. If it turned onto Ditmars Blvd from 31st St, you would need at least one stop at Steinway St. |
|
|
| (1334896) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Wed Jan 21 14:27:14 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by ntrainride on Wed Jan 21 14:17:43 2015. I'd go for that option, also! |
|
|
| (1334897) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Union Tpke on Wed Jan 21 14:28:57 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by Union Tpke on Wed Jan 21 13:59:09 2015. |
|
|
| (1334898) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Union Tpke on Wed Jan 21 14:30:11 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by Elkeeper on Wed Jan 21 14:26:23 2015. put stops in at steinway and hazen and 82nd before the airport |
|
|
| (1334899) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Union Tpke on Wed Jan 21 14:30:45 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by Elkeeper on Wed Jan 21 14:05:27 2015. I know but I support the extension to Main St |
|
|
| (1334900) | |
Re: Case Against LGA Link |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Jan 21 14:41:59 2015, in response to Re: Case Against LGA Link, posted by The silence on Wed Jan 21 08:24:02 2015. Most of the area around Willets point is flat,All of it lies within a Level 1 flood plain. |
|
|
| (1334901) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Wed Jan 21 14:45:09 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by Elkeeper on Wed Jan 21 14:26:23 2015. No way there will ever be a subway under Ditmars through Astoria. I know that nabe extremely well. |
|
|
| (1334902) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Wed Jan 21 14:46:01 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Jan 21 14:16:40 2015. Doesn't answer my point. |
|
|
| (1334903) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Wed Jan 21 14:48:47 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by MainR3664 on Tue Jan 20 14:28:45 2015. You can also use the branch off the 7 into the Corona yard, loop to the south and east sides of the yard (with a station on the south side to connect with LIRR), and then loop to the north and west around the periphery of the yard and continue to LAG on the proposed Airtrain alignment -- also a one-seat ride. |
|
|
| (1334904) | |
Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Jan 21 14:51:10 2015, in response to Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video, posted by The Silence on Wed Jan 21 13:56:08 2015. The Q48 runs on a freaking 20 minute headway in the middle of the day, and you think that's enough?I've used the Q48 to/from LGA, when my company did not insist on providing a limo. Most of the passengers resided on Ditmars Blvd. I was usually the only passenger going to LGA. The driver was usually annoyed. He would have preferred bypassing the main terminal and have gone directly to Marine Terminal. |
|
|
| (1334906) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Jan 21 15:00:18 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by italianstallion on Wed Jan 21 14:46:01 2015. Connect the dots.Let's assume 1/2 the trains go to Astoria. Currently you have 12.5 + 9.4 = 21.9 million passengers for 100% of the trains. That gives a crowded index of 21.9/1 = 21.9. The proposal would have 12.5/2 + 9.4 = 15.65 passengers for 50% of the trains. That gives a crowded index of 15.65/.5 = 31.3. The trains going to Astoria and Ditmars Blvds would be 50% more crowded than before. |
|
|
| (1334909) | |
Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video |
|
|
Posted by mack c-49 on Wed Jan 21 15:39:43 2015, in response to Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video, posted by gOlD_12tH on Tue Jan 20 11:59:31 2015. A rail link to LGA is greatly needed. Connecting to the 7, or any other IRT subway line, however, would be a defective choice. IRT subway cars are too narrow and congested to accomodate additional passengers with luggage heading for the airport! Commuting with luggage to JFK on the A, E, or J is harrowing enough on those relatively spacious cars. Any rail connection to LGA needs to hook into a BMT or IND line, and preferably one that provides an express connection to Manhattan. The 7 train stops far too many times between Manhattan and where the rail link would connect. Every station on a train crowded with luggage-toting passengers would be torturous on the 7. The IND line in Queens is the obvious choice if convenience is the object in connecting the subway to LGA. If convenience is not the object, then the great expense of this project will not be warranted. I would love to see LGA have a rail link to the subway and LIRR, but I think doing this through the 7 would be a terrible mistake. |
|
|
| (1334910) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by shiznit1987 on Wed Jan 21 15:42:17 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by ntrainride on Wed Jan 21 13:58:04 2015. uuugh...The Elmhurst proposal is such a waste of money...don't remind me. |
|
|
| (1334911) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by shiznit1987 on Wed Jan 21 15:43:28 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by Terrapin Station on Wed Jan 21 12:37:48 2015. While I agree that dumping airport passengers on the 7 will be a hot mess, the powers that be could alter the plans to bring the terminus closer to the LIRR rather than the 7. |
|
|
| (1334912) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Dan Lawrence on Wed Jan 21 15:49:17 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by Union Tpke on Wed Jan 21 13:59:02 2015. Nothing below New York? Like Baltimore? |
|
|
| (1334913) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 21 15:55:08 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by shiznit1987 on Wed Jan 21 15:43:28 2015. And what will that prove? Unless the LIRR will be providing subway like serv8ce on the Port Washington line, it will either make the line inconvenient and people will just avoid it, or it will make it inconvenient and you will have people shlepping to the 7 train anyway. |
|
|
| (1334916) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Wed Jan 21 16:21:49 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by Union Tpke on Wed Jan 21 14:30:45 2015. And I support your right to support the extension to Main Street! |
|
|
| (1334920) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Wed Jan 21 17:02:31 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by MainR3664 on Tue Jan 20 14:28:45 2015. The scumbag Port Authority wants 100% control over access to their airports. They won't work with the MTA. |
|
|
| (1334921) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by shiznit1987 on Wed Jan 21 17:27:15 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Wed Jan 21 15:55:08 2015. off-peak frequencies are already every 30 minutes, and I'm sure with a couple extra trainsets can be bumped up to every 15 mins if need be.Honestly, if you ask me, a far better plan would be for a light rail running down 125st, then over the RFK bridge, along the GC to the airport. It'll connect to all the major Mahhattan trunk lines except Broadway and also be a major transportation boost for Manhattan itself. |
|
|
| (1334925) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Wed Jan 21 18:39:35 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Jan 21 15:00:18 2015. I've ridden those trains many times. By the time the trains get to Astoria Blvd., they are much less than 1/4 full. |
|
|
| (1334926) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Wed Jan 21 18:49:16 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by italianstallion on Wed Jan 21 14:14:10 2015. The Philly Market-Frankford el is actually a ballast filled conduit for each trackway. |
|
|
| (1334930) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by dkupf on Wed Jan 21 19:52:21 2015, in response to AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by gOlD_12tH on Tue Jan 20 12:04:12 2015. The NIMBY's in Astoria scuttled the Airport extension; the MTA returned the rest of the money to the State government. |
|
|
| (1334934) | |
Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video |
|
|
Posted by G1Ravage on Wed Jan 21 20:38:18 2015, in response to Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video, posted by gOlD_12tH on Tue Jan 20 11:59:31 2015. I see this as benefitting nothing more than the redevelopment of the Iron Triangle and western Flushing into a hotel/shopping/convention center district. A direct rail link to LaGuardia Airport from the Mets - Willets Point stations would make the area appealing to tourists and some business travelers who already stay in Queens. |
|
|
| (1334937) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by TerrapIN StatiON on Wed Jan 21 20:54:13 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by italianstallion on Wed Jan 21 18:39:35 2015. But what matters is the peak loading point. |
|
|
| (1334950) | |
Re: Case Against LGA Link |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Wed Jan 21 23:12:09 2015, in response to Re: Case Against LGA Link, posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Jan 21 13:10:55 2015. B(og)us RT is a shuck on its face. In the few specialisd cases wheres it actually performs well, rail would still be better. |
|
|
| (1334952) | |
Re: Case Against LGA Link |
|
|
Posted by pragmatist on Wed Jan 21 23:18:22 2015, in response to Re: Case Against LGA Link, posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Jan 21 13:10:55 2015. BRT is a scam, it is something put out there when politicians don't have the courage to fight for light rail or subway/commuter rail. SBS is just something to make everyone feel good about lousy bus service on a crowded street. Even if a real BRT section lived up to its plan, it would still be second rate compared to rail. |
|
|
| (1334953) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Wed Jan 21 23:22:47 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by TerrapIN StatiON on Wed Jan 21 20:54:13 2015. There would be no change to service south of Astoria Blvd. Astoria and Ditmars Blvds. do not need all the current service. |
|
|
| (1334954) | |
Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Wed Jan 21 23:23:16 2015, in response to Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video, posted by G1Ravage on Wed Jan 21 20:38:18 2015. True. |
|
|
| (1334970) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu Jan 22 08:28:50 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by italianstallion on Wed Jan 21 23:22:47 2015. But you're adding AIRPORT traffic. And again, it matters how crowded the trains are at the PEAK LOADING POINT, not at the end of the line. |
|
|
| (1334980) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Thu Jan 22 09:06:06 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by shiznit1987 on Wed Jan 21 17:27:15 2015. Well, they already have the M60 bus running that route. It was recently converted to SBS, with dedicated lanes on 125th St., which did speed it up some. It's usually too crowded for everyone to get a seat, maybe they should use articulated buses? We're not going to see light rail in NYC, SBS is as close as we're likely to get. |
|
|
|
Page 3 of 7 |
||
