|
|
| Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) (1334638) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 4 of 7 |
||
|
| (1334982) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jan 22 09:11:13 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. And where is the capacity on the #7 line? |
|
|
| (1334983) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jan 22 09:12:39 2015, in response to 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. But wasn't that off Ditmars Blvd? |
|
|
| (1334986) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by fset on Thu Jan 22 09:55:50 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 14:45:09 2015. I used to live off Ditmars @ 37 Street, and I agree that there will never be any subway near or above Ditmars Blvd (which is the size of a regular Avenue -- as a matter of fact, it used to be called Ditmars Avenue). There is more capacity at Astoria Blvd stop, which is 2-platform. Perhaps a new AirTrain line could follow Astoria Blvd South and end at the south end of Astoria Blvd-Hoyt Ave. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1334987) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by MorningsideHeightsM100 on Thu Jan 22 10:10:50 2015, in response to 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. M60 does use artics normally. Low-floor. |
|
|
| (1334990) | |
Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Thu Jan 22 10:50:35 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've been reading this thread about the LaGuardia AirTrain proposal, as well as the one on NYC Transit Forums and Ben Kabak's and Yonah Freemark's articles. I've got to say, I'm not convinced the Governor's proposal to connect to the already-overburdened 7 at Willets Point is the right one. If you're carrying at least one suitcase, you're not going to want to cram yourself and it onto an overcrowded 7 train. At least the A has larger, wider cars, so hauling a big suitcase on that train on your way to Kennedy Airport isn't so bad. But the 7 is a completely different story with its tiny, narrow cars that are standing room-only often from start to finish.To be honest, I like the Jackson Heights routing shown in the map from Yonah Freemark's blog post. At Roosevelt Ave/74th St, you have five subway lines, not just one. It does help that there's an unused station platform in the station mezzanine, where the train can terminate. It will probably cost more because it will need to go underground to get there, but isn't it better to have a choice of five routes to get to Midtown, rather than just one already-overburdened line plus one LIRR branch that runs much less frequently than any of the subway lines in Queens? |
|
|
| (1335000) | |
Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Thu Jan 22 12:36:01 2015, in response to Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Thu Jan 22 10:50:35 2015. Just a few thoughts.The real political facts on the ground is simple. a) There is a real NIMBY response from Queens residents. It was there with the cancellation and de-funding by Queens Politicians and neighborhood folk for the Queens Super-Express segment. It was plain with the responses to Mayor G's plans to extend the N-train from Astoria to the LGA. There's evidence with the QueensWay proposal concerning the development of a park versus transit usage. Didn't Queens residents complain about the building the JFK Air-Train? Yes - They Did! The NIMBY response is REAL. b) There is the effort at creating at Willets Points a hotel - shopping center - convention - complex. Translation - MONEY. The plans for converting the Willets Point area has been in the works for the last few years - it is really not a surprise to anybody actually watching what's going on. c) Some of the rhetoric is appalling! Too many here describe the #7 train as if it were some over-crowded little row-boat pulled by two guys working the oars and then describe the N or Q trains as if they were Queen Mary sized luxury liners able to carry multiple millions! That has got to stop! d) There have been complaints that the MTA and the Port Authority simply can not build anything these days - on time - on budget - with the fewest hassles! On this forum and others there are hundreds of complaints about the Fulton Transit Center, South Ferry Re-Build, World Trade Center - PATH station, extending the PATH to Newark Airport, and on and on! Do I really need to mention the Second Avenue Subway? Or the opening of the #7 extension to the Jacob Javits Center? e) The real politic is simple - Gov. Cuomo picked the route with the least amount of NIMBY reaction, picked a location that would benefit his developer friends, that would be simpler to build in light of the other options (that have been discussed both for/against on forums like this for months), that could be built quickly but not by the MTA, and lastly solves a problem that many said needed to be solved - that still could be done with in his terms of office. Follow The MONEY! Mike |
|
|
| (1335002) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu Jan 22 12:48:04 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jan 22 09:11:13 2015. Where did he say there was any???????? |
|
|
| (1335004) | |
Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Thu Jan 22 12:52:04 2015, in response to Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video, posted by Michael549 on Thu Jan 22 12:36:01 2015. well said. too bad real politik regularly gives us options of lersser value to the actual riders. But, the bottom line is that actual public benefit is the by-product stepchild of the transfer of tax revenues to the bribing classes. |
|
|
| (1335006) | |
Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Thu Jan 22 13:01:10 2015, in response to 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. Referring to:"Connecting to the 7, or any other IRT subway line, however, would be a defective choice." I just have to say it! This rhetoric is appalling! Too many here describe the #7 train as if it were some over-crowded little row-boat pulled by two guys working the oars and then describe the N or Q trains as if they were Queen Mary sized luxury liners able to carry multiple millions! That has got to stop! Somehow the #7 train is fine, just fine for delivering millions to baseball games, tennis games, and the like - just fine for commuters. But somehow for helping to take folks to the airport - it is "defective"? (Please note the angry sarcasm!) The IRT lines for decades have carried about half or more of all of the subway riders in NYC for decades! But somehow for airport riders such a task is a disgrace or defective? (Again, Please note the angry sarcasm!) Multiple messages here and elsewhere have talked about the problems of extending the N-train to LGA, or the multiple disruptions of extending the IND lines to the airport. No matter, the evidence somebody here will bring up a topic or suggestion that has already been beaten down. There are times when the practical build-able solution is preferred above the "best of all worlds & solves every problem" solution. Unlike Robert Moses, these days we just can not bull-doze whole neighborhoods to build stuff, and have everyone accept it for a "higher purpose", no questions asked. One basic reason is simple - there's no funding. Think about from where this money is coming from! -------------- Please Note that the funds that provide for the building of the Air-Train is not for the building of a subway or elevated train route, but for the building of a "connector" to mass transit systems. If folks here want to find the billions to extend the subway to the LGA, and spend the huge political capital for the NIMBY objections go right ahead! Right now the MTA can not even find the funding for half of its needed capital budget on items that have already been decided upon as worthy. The funds for the Air-Train comes out of fees that airplane riders pay - and is meant to directly benefit airport users, and can not be used for general transit. Those with the money get to dictate the terms. Mike |
|
|
| (1335007) | |
Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu Jan 22 13:03:12 2015, in response to Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Thu Jan 22 10:50:35 2015. as well as the one on NYC Transit ForumsThere's your first mistake. I've got to say, I'm not convinced the Governor's proposal to connect to the already-overburdened 7 at Willets Point is the right one.LOL, what tipped you off? Was there a single intelligent person in any of those forums that supported the Gov's plan as the "right one"? If you're carrying at least one suitcase, you're not going to want to cram yourself and it onto an overcrowded 7 train.So then take the LIRR. Problem solved! |
|
|
| (1335012) | |
Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video |
|
|
Posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Thu Jan 22 13:15:11 2015, in response to Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video, posted by Michael549 on Thu Jan 22 13:01:10 2015. "Too many here describe the #7 train as if it were some over-crowded little row-boat pulled by two guys working the oars and then describe the N or Q trains as if they were Queen Mary sized luxury liners able to carry multiple millions! "Nonsense. No one here said or implied anything like that. They just stated the facts, IRT cars are smaller than BMT/IND trains. You're analogy is way over the top. "Somehow the #7 train is fine, just fine for delivering millions to baseball games, tennis games, and the like - just fine for commuters. But somehow for helping to take folks to the airport - it is "defective"? (Please note the angry sarcasm!)" No argument here with that. But there is no denying that airport travelers travel with a shitload of baggage whereas commuters, baseball & tennis patrons do not, hence the need for bigger cars. There must be a reason that Artrain equiptment was not built to IRT specs |
|
|
| (1335032) | |
USE THE MONEY FOR THE RBB |
|
|
Posted by Union Tpke on Thu Jan 22 15:41:14 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. People like Joe Addobo are supportive of the RB reactivation, but they don't support the plan because the MTA isn't interested. Why isn't the MTA intereste? Becasue they can't even fund their own capital plan. Why can't they do that? Because Cuomo doesn't give the MTA the funding it deserved and by vetoing the lockbox bill. If Cuomo gave the MTA the money to fund is capital plan, the MTA would have money for the RB Line or other improvements. Also, instad of throwing money at the line to TA, which Stephen Bauman said would be around 140th in ridership, the money could be thrown at the Rockaway Beach Line. The line would be able to be completed with this money, reviving communities, and providing cross queens transportation that is needed. |
|
|
| (1335033) | |
Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Thu Jan 22 15:49:25 2015, in response to USE THE MONEY FOR THE RBB, posted by Union Tpke on Thu Jan 22 15:41:14 2015. What money?Airtrain would not be funded by the MTA. It's got nothing to do with the MTA. |
|
|
| (1335035) | |
Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video |
|
|
Posted by Union Tpke on Thu Jan 22 15:55:18 2015, in response to Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video, posted by Olog-hai on Thu Jan 22 15:49:25 2015. stilll |
|
|
| (1335036) | |
Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video |
|
|
Posted by Union Tpke on Thu Jan 22 15:55:51 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. LOGIN Capital New York CITY HALL ALBANY MEDIA POLICY CAPITAL PROSearch T F T F 7-to-LaGuardia plan prompts transit-advocate uproar A rendering of the AirTrain. (Governor's office) Tweet Share on Facebook Share on Tumblr By Dana Rubinstein 5:41 a.m. | Jan. 22, 2015 follow this reporter On Tuesday, Governor Andrew Cuomo declared LaGuardia Airport’s lack of rail access “inexcusable” and promised to fix the problem by building a train to the plane by way of Willets Point. By Wednesday, the transportation-nerd backlash was intense. “If you’re going to build transit, you have to have more criteria than just avoiding public opposition, and I think that’s why this route was chosen,” said Jon Orcutt, the former policy director at the New York City transportation department. “As proposed, the project would do next to nothing to improve access to the airport,” wrote Yonah Freemark, a well-regarded transportation blogger, on the Transport Politic. MORE ON CAPITAL North Cove Marina license awarded to Cuomo allies Capital Politics Digest: Jan. 22, 2015 Bharara: Silver sought to ‘monetize’ public office ADVERTISEMENT “Cuomo’s proposal is something of a mess from a transit planning perspective,” wrote Second Avenue Sagas blogger Benjamin Kabak. Some critiques were less harsh in tone, but only marginally less damning. “We should have something more like the Heathrow Express, where you pay $25 one way to get on a real train where you have a seat and a luggage rack and you go to central London,” said Nicole Gelinas, a transit- and infrastructure-focused fellow at the Manhattan Institute, who added that she thinks the governor's proposal "would be better than nothing and people would use it.” “I applaud the governor for at the very least taking this on as an important issue and putting forth an actionable idea,” said David Giles, research director at the Center for an Urban Future. “I do think it would be a mistake to spend a half billion or more on AirTrain without seriously studying the alternatives.” So what is the governor’s proposal? There are only bare bones so far. It would be an elevated train to LaGuardia Airport much like the AirTrain that connects subway riders to JFK Airport. Cuomo says it would be 1.5 miles long. (Freemark questions how accurate that number is). It would run along Grand Central Parkway and, by Cuomo's estimation, cost roughly $450 million. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which Cuomo jointly controls with New Jersey governor Chris Christie, and the M.T.A., which Cuomo effectively controls on his own, would build it together. It’s not clear which authority would foot the bill or how, exactly, either authority could afford it. (The governor's press office didn't answer that question, though a spokeswoman did say the project would be subject to an environmental impact study.) Politicians have longed for rail access to LaGuardia since at least Mario Cuomo’s time. “Gov. Mario Cuomo tried to advance a one-seat ride elevated ‘monorail’ plan that would have provided a grand tour of Queens— beginning at the old Alexander's dept store at 59th St. and Lex. crossing the Queensboro Bridge past Queens Plaza, then continuing to LGA, then on to Willets Point and on to Jamaica and JFK Airport, with a spur to Howard Beach,” said former New York City Transit executive George Haikalis in an email. “Gov. Pataki trimmed this to the Jamaica-JFK and Howard Beach-JFK segments, that are today's AirTrain.” He called the younger Cuomo’s rendition of the older Cuomo’s plan “costly and circuitous.” It’s the circuitous part, and the sense that Cuomo is privileging airport-using business travelers over regular New York transit users, that’s irking transit people. In order for riders to get from Manhattan to LaGuardia via this still-aspirational AirTrain, they would either have to take the 7 train past LaGuardia Airport to Willets Point and then backtrack by way of the AirTrain, or travel along the infrequent Port Washington branch of the Long Island Rail Road to the same stop. "The 7 is well-connected, but you have to go to the end of the line and you pass LaGuardia to get there,” said Orcutt. “And the Long Island Rail Road is pretty negligible, because it’s not to the main line so it doesn’t connect Long Island to the airport at all.” And then there's the question of crowding on the 7 train. In 2001, when the M.T.A. was considering extending the N train through Astoria—a plan that is pleasingly direct and politically difficult—M.T.A. planning director Bill Wheeler was asked why the 7 train couldn't simply be extended to LaGuardia instead. "Wheeler said that the high capacity of passengers the 7 Train has each day, unlike the N Train, makes branching service off from that line a more difficult and less viable option," according to an article in the Queens Chronicle. When Capital asked the M.T.A. what had changed since then, M.T.A. spokesman Adam Lisberg pointing to signaling improvements coming to the 7 line. "We’re installing CBTC on the 7, which will be up and running by 2017 and will increase capacity along the entire line," he emailed. "The Governor's Office consulted the MTA and the Port Authority and determined the 7 line was the less expensive option and we the least intrusive to neighborhoods," added Beth DeFalco, a Cuomo spokeswoman, when asked to comment on the backlash. Or, put another way, it beats having nothing. “Of course they have better options,” said Steve Sigmund, a former Port Authority executive who's now executive director of Global Gateway Alliance, a group that supports improvements to New York's airports. “The N train would be a one-seat ride. It would be great, it would be preferable to having a two-seat ride. But those better options have never happened. They’re probably not going to happen. They encounter lots of community opposition. This one encounters a lot less. In the category of not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, this is a significant improvement to what’s there now.” http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/albany/2015/01/8560609/7-laguardia-plan-prompts-transit-advocate-uproar?top-featured-1 |
|
|
| (1335038) | |
Re: USE THE MONEY FOR THE RBB |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jan 22 15:58:23 2015, in response to USE THE MONEY FOR THE RBB, posted by Union Tpke on Thu Jan 22 15:41:14 2015. Also, instad of throwing money at the line to TA, which Stephen Bauman said would be around 140th in ridership, the money could be thrown at the Rockaway Beach Line.Evidently, you have not seen my estimates for a revived RBB ridership. |
|
|
| (1335039) | |
Re: Case Against LGA Link |
|
|
Posted by localacrosstheplatform on Thu Jan 22 16:02:56 2015, in response to Re: Case Against LGA Link, posted by Stephen Bauman on Wed Jan 21 09:26:23 2015. Snake oil salesman?The name's Lanley, Lyle Lanley and I come before you folks with an idea, maybe the greatest... ... nah, it's more of a Shelbyville idea. |
|
|
| (1335058) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Thu Jan 22 17:11:52 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by fset on Thu Jan 22 09:55:50 2015. Yes, I grew up in that area and my Mom still lives near there. Again, there is problem with any transit along the GCP in getting past the Hell Gate Bridge approach at 43rd St. |
|
|
| (1335059) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Thu Jan 22 17:12:22 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jan 22 09:12:39 2015. Yes, running due north on 31st St. |
|
|
| (1335062) | |
Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Thu Jan 22 17:15:56 2015, in response to Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video, posted by Michael549 on Thu Jan 22 12:36:01 2015. Excellent post. |
|
|
| (1335063) | |
Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Thu Jan 22 17:19:28 2015, in response to Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video, posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Thu Jan 22 13:15:11 2015. Airtrain is built to B Div. specs for 2 reasons:1. That car size is the defacto default for modern transit systems. 2. PANYNJ has stated in writing that B Div. size allows for possible future connection to the A train. |
|
|
| (1335064) | |
Re: USE THE MONEY FOR THE RBB |
|
|
Posted by Union Tpke on Thu Jan 22 18:30:01 2015, in response to Re: USE THE MONEY FOR THE RBB, posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jan 22 15:58:23 2015. still this serves a community that needs transportation. |
|
|
| (1335073) | |
Re: USE THE MONEY FOR THE RBB |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Jan 22 19:35:51 2015, in response to Re: USE THE MONEY FOR THE RBB, posted by Union Tpke on Thu Jan 22 18:30:01 2015. Stephen is basing too much of analysis on proximity to other stations, forgetting that people avoid the system altogether in the RBB service area, and chose live elsewhere, because they will not tolerate either the IND-Fulton Street line schlep nor the J train schlep. |
|
|
| (1335074) | |
Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu Jan 22 19:37:12 2015, in response to Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video, posted by Michael549 on Thu Jan 22 12:36:01 2015. The 7 train comments are not exactly rhetoric. That train is packed, almost always. Go ride it. The N is far less crowded. Your joke is actually a pretty accurate comparison between the two. Also, the 7 train local is a long ride to Willets Pt. |
|
|
| (1335077) | |
Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Jan 22 19:39:29 2015, in response to Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video, posted by italianstallion on Thu Jan 22 17:19:28 2015. It was also off the shelf cars similar to what is in Scarborough (Toronto) and Vancouver.But they went with the linear induction 3rd and 4th rail, so not all that compatible with the B Division unless they redo it somehow. |
|
|
| (1335078) | |
Re: For LaGuardia, an AirTrain that will save almost no one any time |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu Jan 22 19:39:37 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. I think they botched travel time comparisons via Jackson Hts. No way the Q70 is quicker to Boro Hall or Fulton St than a subway to Jackson Hts would be. |
|
|
| (1335086) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by N6 Limited on Thu Jan 22 20:18:50 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jan 22 09:11:13 2015. Lets not pretend that the 7 is absolutely full 24/7 like you all do for the QB Express. |
|
|
| (1335097) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jan 22 20:53:55 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by BrooklynBus on Thu Jan 22 09:11:13 2015. That's a non-sequitur. I was comparing relative loading on the Astoria Line before and after a proposed spur to LGA. The Flushing Line never entered into the discussion.However, to satisfy your idee fixe: The Flushing Line currently operates a max of 28 tph; 11 car trains; each with a service level capacity of 110. The Astoria Line currently operates 20 tph; 10 car trains; each with service level capacity of 145. The Flushing Line operates an hourly service level capacity of 33,800 passengers. The Astoria Line operates an hourly service level capacity of 29,000. |
|
|
| (1335099) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu Jan 22 20:55:30 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by r33/r36 mainline on Tue Jan 20 16:07:01 2015. Ahem....does anyone want to be the one to tell him? Okay, I will. Port is back at 30 mins...been back, for a while now. And I agree that most travelers who are nonethewiser or not budget conscious will just grab the LIRR |
|
|
| (1335100) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu Jan 22 20:58:33 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. I love it, but the problem is NYP capacity. There is none. Even with ESA, they'll eventually max the two out because they're being stupid and severing FBA (although a rumor has it that peak service will still thru-operate). If the capacity issue can be solved, I like it. |
|
|
| (1335101) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu Jan 22 21:00:00 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by Fisk Ave Jim on Tue Jan 20 21:25:45 2015. So what do we do with the northern terminal of the N? Some N trains to LGA and some to Ditmars? If Ditmars congestion is a problem, then that could be a possibility. |
|
|
| (1335102) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by merrick1 on Thu Jan 22 21:04:26 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by italianstallion on Thu Jan 22 17:11:52 2015. The flyover for a junction with the existing el would require a high structure. Maybe they could just climb up some more and go over the Hell Gate Bridge approach. |
|
|
| (1335103) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu Jan 22 21:08:49 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jan 22 20:53:55 2015. And what's the ridership of the 7 line W of Willets Pt and E of Willets Pt? From experience, the reality is that the 7 can't handle airports travelers. The N is a better option as far as that is concerned. The argument as to how airport passengers reach it, well, that's something else |
|
|
| (1335107) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu Jan 22 21:18:26 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. Who's to say a station couldn't be built on the spur in the area of the current Astoria Blvd station? 35th St is close enough that it ought to capture a good chunk of those riders. Also, if congestion at Ditmars is a problem, this could relieve that. It doesn't have to be a 50/50 split of the line either:15 Ditmars/5 LGA: 4 min headways @ Ditmars, 15 min headways @ LGA 12 Ditmars/8 LGA: 5 min headways @ Ditmars, 7.5 min headways @ LGA |
|
|
| (1335110) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu Jan 22 21:26:16 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by Jackson Park B Train on Tue Jan 20 12:45:12 2015. How much traffic is there between JFK and LGA? I like the idea of connecting the two systems and having an LIRR connection at JFK. Perhaps a thru-running route Jamaica-Willets Pt-LGA-Jackson Hts could work? |
|
|
| (1335113) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jan 22 21:31:49 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu Jan 22 21:08:49 2015. The ridership east of Willets Pt is pretty easy to estimate. The annual Main St turnstile count is 19 million. Estimating ridership west of Willets Pt is trickier because of the transfer stations. Maximum loading occurs between Woodside and Queensboro Plaza. Significant numbers of passengers transfer to the BMT at QBP.However, the Flushing Line is hardly maxed out at 28 tph. They used to operate 36 tph and still could, if they had sufficient rolling stock and managerial skill. They lack the managerial skill and when CBTC is implemented will lack sufficient rolling stock. OTOH, the Astoria Line is maxed out at 20 tph. It has to merge with trains from the 11th St cutoff. |
|
|
| (1335114) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu Jan 22 21:37:26 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. Just saying, I've suggested the city strong-arm the LIRR into boosting service out of Bayside and full time city ticket for all the stations between there and NYP as an alternative to trying to extend a subway out that way. Unfortunately, west end capacity might be an issue during peak times. Also, they're going to have to start making Willets Pt a full time stop anyway once the area is redeveloped. No way the 7 is handling the influx. |
|
|
| (1335115) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jan 22 21:37:38 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu Jan 22 21:18:26 2015. Before proposing spur lines over the Grand Central Parkway, why don't you resolve the problem of clearing Amtrak? |
|
|
| (1335116) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu Jan 22 21:41:02 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 15:42:17 2015. IAWTP, unfortunately, someone was dumb enough to fall for it. Corona at least would have made a little more sense since there's no transit to the south of it. |
|
|
| (1335117) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu Jan 22 21:46:05 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by Elkeeper on Tue Jan 20 20:48:40 2015. Non-starter. QB express tracks are maxed out. |
|
|
| (1335118) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jan 22 21:48:32 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu Jan 22 21:26:16 2015. having an LIRR connection at JFK. Perhaps a thru-running route Jamaica-Willets Pt-LGA-Jackson Hts could work?Before expending energy on designing such a route, why don't you ask who would use it? According to the PANYNJ, 1.7% of passenger trips in/out of LGA originated/terminated in Nassau. The figure for Suffolk is 1.5%. Giving these passengers cab fare would be cheaper. |
|
|
| (1335119) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu Jan 22 21:52:31 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 18:20:00 2015. It's gotta dive underground at some point (otherwise it obstructs the approach to whatever runway has planes almost landing on the GCP). Why not dive under the parkway before it gets there? Looks like you could do one track on either side of the highway, but you might have to get ride of the 37th St overpass. |
|
|
| (1335120) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu Jan 22 22:01:59 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by Stephen Bauman on Tue Jan 20 18:09:32 2015. Only ways I see are1. Cut Astoria el back 2 stops and dive underground N of 30th St and have it run underground to Ditmars. That way, line is already underground by the GCP and can run under GCP (but at that point, you might as well just run the whole damn thing underground from Ditmars) 2. Eliminate 37th St overpass and dive underground between exit 45 and Steinway St. |
|
|
| (1335121) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu Jan 22 22:04:17 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by The Silence on Tue Jan 20 14:35:13 2015. Doesn't matter that Willets Pt itself is a low usage station; It's on a high usage line. Express service is peak direction only. The only saving grace for Willets Pt is if LIRR runs full time service to Willets Pt at decreased headways. Jackson Hts has the same problem with capacity. 7 and QB expresses are maxed out so adding airport travelers to the mix is a dangerous idea |
|
|
| (1335122) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by TerrapIN StatiON on Thu Jan 22 22:06:10 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu Jan 22 20:55:30 2015. lol! |
|
|
| (1335125) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jan 22 22:28:55 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu Jan 22 22:01:59 2015. you might as well just run the whole damn thing underground from DitmarsAre you aware that 20th Ave borders a level 2 flood zone? Also, all of LGA is within a levl 1 flood zone. Eliminate 37th St overpass and dive underground between exit 45 and Steinway St. All of LGA is within a level 1 flood zone. How will you avoid it? |
|
|
| (1335126) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu Jan 22 22:52:21 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. Some options I'll throw into the mix after reading this entire thread:1. Ferry from Marine Air Terminal to 34th St, Pier 11, and Jersey City. You could also maybe add a stop at either Fulton Ferry Terminal or Atlantic Av in Brooklyn 2. Cut Astoria El back to Astoria Blvd and dive underground before reaching Ditmars and make the LGA extension from Ditmars underground 3. Branch off the Astoria El just before Astoria Blvd and eliminate the 37th St overpass so the tracks can dive underground before reaching the Hell Gate approach, and have a station before the underground section to ease the blow of less service to riders at Astoria Blvd. Run it with a 12tph Ditmars and 8tph LGA. I think there might be just enough space to run one track onto either side of the el just south of Astoria Blvd to make the actual connection. 4. Airtrain running Jamaica-Willets Pt-LGA-Astoria Blvd. You get your easy access to Manhattan via N, and excellent LIRR access at Jamaica. PW branch and fastest LIRR access to NYP/GCT can be reached with LIRR making Willets Pt a full time stop with boosted service, which works well in conjunction with my proposal to run full time city ticket service on reduced headways W of Bayside as an alternative to trying to extend a subway out that way. Also, you get access to downtown Brooklyn via LIRR from Jamaica. 5. Airtrain running Jamaica-Willets Pt-LGA-Jackson Hts. Same LIRR comments as option #4. Just not sure of how the line would get from the BQE to 74th St (Would a Broadway El for those 2 blocks actually get approved?). The other issue is that both the QB express trains and 7 trains are packed in like sardines with track capacity maxed out. I know we've argued about the reality of time savings of express vs local out of 74th St, but the reality is that even if it's only minimal time savings, people will see express or count the stops on the map and try to cram onto the express services. Not good. The flip side of that argument is that the Q70 is already sending people there, but an airtrain would certainly intensify the numbers. The benefit also is that it provides one hell of coverage options throughout the city. 6. LIRR branch off the PW line just west of Willets Pt at the GCP right into the terminals. Provides speedy one seat access to 2 midtown terminals (and if they build Sunnyside station, access to Queensboro Plaza area). The problem here is west end terminal capacity during rush hour and just how frequent service could be (this wouldn't be nearly as much a problem if LIRR wasn't cutting off FBA). In Stockholm, the Arlanda Express I believe operates every 20 mins, although that airport has about 84% of the usage that LGA has and it is backed up by a local train. It's slightly less efficient for LI travelers to go to Woodside than Jamaica, and it probably adds to a downtown Brooklyn travel time, and has less coverage throughout Manhattan, but it's probably more appropriate for the majority. Also, if the powers that be could ever get their shit together and act like big boys, we might even be able to have an LGA-Sunnyside-NYP-Newark-EWR Rail Station service. 7. Keep the current method of Q70, M60, Q48, NYC Airporter, and perhaps a new bus to Jamaica. Q70 has made this a real option 1 is a decent, inexpensive, quick to implement option, but sucks for midtown and downtown Brooklyn access. 2 is insanely expensive, so let's just say no. 3 is so-so depending on how busy that 37th St overpass really is and if branching tracks can actually fit on either side of the el just south of Astoria Blvd. 4 is a standalone option that is similar to what we've done with our other 2 airports in that we basically just extend the airport out to the train station. We often bitch about not having a one seat ride to the airport, but how many terminals are actually a one seat ride? Even at Zurich airport, you still have to get on a tram after the train station to some of the terminals. 5 is just as good as 4, but with the negative of dumping everyone onto already overcrowded services and the benefit of providing connections that cover a far larger swath of the city than any other option. 6 is geared almost exclusively towards folks heading into Manhattan, but is the fastest one seat ride option and not as insanely expensive as some of the other options, but has a capacity issue on the western end. I love Option 5 because it provides the absolute best connectivity of any option, but the truth is that the crowding at 74th is something to be concerned with, so with that being said, I think 4 is the best option. 6 would also be great, especially if it could be tied in with service to EWR rail station. I wonder, of the travelers using LGA, what percentage are headed to LI vs Manhattan vs Queens vs Brooklyn vs elsewhere (NJ, BX, SI, Westchester, CT, etc). If they could do 1, 4/5, 6, and keep the Q48 and M60, I think I'd wet myself. |
|
|
| (1335127) | |
Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Thu Jan 22 23:09:01 2015, in response to Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video, posted by Joe V on Thu Jan 22 19:39:29 2015. They would clearly need new 3rd rail. But the station platforms and clearances between tracks are meant to fit B Div cars. |
|
|
| (1335128) | |
Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Thu Jan 22 23:11:46 2015, in response to Re: Air Train Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport; video, posted by NIMBYkiller on Thu Jan 22 19:37:12 2015. They would need to run express service in that direction all day except in the AM rush. And they should run LIRR PW service at least every 30 minutes, or a shuttle from Penn to there every 30 minutes. |
|
|
| (1335130) | |
Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years) |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Thu Jan 22 23:15:45 2015, in response to Re: AirTrain Proposed To Connect (7) Line With LaGuardia Airport ($450 Million, 5 years), posted by Stephen Bauman on Thu Jan 22 21:31:49 2015. Rolling stock can be added at the time. |
|
|
|
Page 4 of 7 |
||
