PANYNJ issues preliminary engineering RFP for LaGuardia AirTrain

[Union Tpke]

I still don't think that airtrain to 125th is a good idea. Last year, the airport handled 29,786,769 passengers. As NYC is hands down the largest O&D market in the country, we can assume that about 80% of those people were either originating or terminating at the airport. That gives us 65,286 daily passengers originating or terminating at the airport. I get that there is a need for airtrain at LGA, but I think spending many billions of dollars on a line whose maximum possible number of passengers is puny compared to a real subway line is not that good of an idea. 

 

One other thought I had was this: what if you linked the 2 airtrains? Then you'd have a cross-queens line, connecting with the , , , , and trains, along with all the branches of the LIRR and 2 airports. If possible, it could be extended, and you could pick up the and . Maybe the PANYNJ could be convinced to allow free transfers to/from the subway if riders are both originating and terminating at subway transfer stops and not at the airports. 

 

The original plan was to have an Airtrain from JFK to LGA. I don't know where the stops would have been.

No need for all that. Just build a busway via the new LGA terminals from 82nd St to Northern Blvd.

 

 

Really, this could even be LRT if you wanted.

 

This would be a great use of BRT. That route is amazing! How much do you think it would cost for the upgrades?

[N6 Limited]

No need for all that. Just build a busway via the new LGA terminals from 82nd St to Northern Blvd.

 

 

Really, this could even be LRT if you wanted.

Extend it down to Jamaica Airtrain Terminal

[Union Tpke]

Extend it down to Jamaica Airtrain Terminal

 

This is BRT. You would need to have bus lanes on the Van Wyck. I am not sure if that would work. It would be great to have BRT via the Van Wyck.

No need for all that. Just build a busway via the new LGA terminals from 82nd St to Northern Blvd.

 

 

Really, this could even be LRT if you wanted.

I sent you a PM, but I will ask you again. Can I have the base map for your subway plan? Whenever I try to screenshot Google Maps and stitch the images together, it doesn't work. Thank you. Nice map!

[RR503]

No need for all that. Just build a busway via the new LGA terminals from 82nd St to Northern Blvd.

 

 

Really, this could even be LRT if you wanted.

+100 on this idea. Simple, cheap, elegant. J'aime beaucoup.

[bobtehpanda]

This is BRT. You would need to have bus lanes on the Van Wyck. I am not sure if that would work. It would be great to have BRT via the Van Wyck.

I sent you a PM, but I will ask you again. Can I have the base map for your subway plan? Whenever I try to screenshot Google Maps and stitch the images together, it doesn't work. Thank you. Nice map!

 

I literally stitch them together each time. I don't save anything.

Extend it down to Jamaica Airtrain Terminal

 

Too long and unnecessary.

[Union Tpke]

I literally stitch them together each time. I don't save anything.

 

Too long and unnecessary.

 

Oh, really. Which program do you use to stitch the map together?

[CenSin]

Oh, really. Which program do you use to stitch the map together?

It’s so simple, it could be done in Microsoft Paint. It takes a lot of work though to align the pixels.

[Union Tpke]

It’s so simple, it could be done in Microsoft Paint. It takes a lot of work though to align the pixels.

 

I want a free program. Do you know any?

[CenSin]

I want a free program. Do you know any?

GIMP

[GojiMet86]

I use Inkscape.

[CenSin]

I use Inkscape.

That’s only good for editing and creating vectors. Screenshots of Google Maps needs to be aligned to the pixel when stitched.

 

I use vector maps and Adobe Illustrator.

[SubwayGuy]

May I ask exactly which job sector would most likely live in Flushing and work on the Upper East Side? That sounds like a very niche market to me...

 

Chinese restaurants :lol: :lol: :lol:

[SubwayGuy]

I still don't think that airtrain to 125th is a good idea. Last year, the airport handled 29,786,769 passengers. As NYC is hands down the largest O&D market in the country, we can assume that about 80% of those people were either originating or terminating at the airport. That gives us 65,286 daily passengers originating or terminating at the airport. I get that there is a need for airtrain at LGA, but I think spending many billions of dollars on a line whose maximum possible number of passengers is puny compared to a real subway line is not that good of an idea. 

 

One other thought I had was this: what if you linked the 2 airtrains? Then you'd have a cross-queens line, connecting with the , , , , and trains, along with all the branches of the LIRR and 2 airports. If possible, it could be extended, and you could pick up the and . Maybe the PANYNJ could be convinced to allow free transfers to/from the subway if riders are both originating and terminating at subway transfer stops and not at the airports. 

 

That wouldn't be bad, but I don't like the transfer idea. You want to avoid all the craziness that currently comes with the territory with the subway - people jostling to fit, etc. JFK AirTrain has a much more relaxed pace about it, partly because of the higher fare, and that's a good thing. You're not going to get extension into Astoria, which is why I proposed the 125th St. option that bypasses it in favor of going through an industrial area. Astoria residents neither want a line running through their neighborhood, nor do they want their already tight parking made worse by park 'n riders, nor do they want more taxis or people passing through. 125th is already a major hub like that, however, and also much more accessible by subway with little parking available, which reduces the viability of park 'n ride as a disruptive force.

 

I agree that new subway lines should take priority - but we are just talking about studies. Studies should be launched for several projects at once, and when the benefits become clear of each alternative, greenlight and fund the projects with the greatest benefits first. Our trains, buses, and streets are extremely crowded...the number of cabs and taxis is just obscene and perhaps a 125th St. LGA AirTrain will reduce them in number a bit, I don't know. Is the benefit greater there than extending SAS up 3rd Avenue in the Bronx to Fordham University? I don't know. But there should be a number of studies done, and they should consider more than just the cheapest option, which is what the Willets point "DespairTrain" stub is.

[collagedchen300]

Sure....that would be an excellent idea, but they'll just argue that the M60 already does what you're proposing, so keep the M60.

Also, there is an existing Q48 bus between Flushing Main Street and LaGuardia Airport, where subway station is. My

mind of LaGuardia Air-train proposal is crossed too.

Probably, extend the Astoria bound trains too. Then there's no need to waste your time for the LGA Airtrain.

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bobtehpanda]

I agree that new subway lines should take priority - but we are just talking about studies. Studies should be launched for several projects at once, and when the benefits become clear of each alternative, greenlight and fund the projects with the greatest benefits first. Our trains, buses, and streets are extremely crowded...the number of cabs and taxis is just obscene and perhaps a 125th St. LGA AirTrain will reduce them in number a bit, I don't know. Is the benefit greater there than extending SAS up 3rd Avenue in the Bronx to Fordham University? I don't know. But there should be a number of studies done, and they should consider more than just the cheapest option, which is what the Willets point "DespairTrain" stub is.

 

Really, the major problem with all this is that New York's planning is so siloed. Port does its own thing, MTA does its own thing (which is to say, nothing), DOT looks one corridor at a time, etc.

 

What really should be done is to have a general, multi-stakeholder conversation about the overall network we want to be creating, and then individual corridor studies to refine our options. But that would require a grownup conversation from politicians, something increasingly rare these days.

[Deucey]

Really, the major problem with all this is that New York's planning is so siloed. Port does its own thing, MTA does its own thing (which is to say, nothing), DOT looks one corridor at a time, etc.

 

What really should be done is to have a general, multi-stakeholder conversation about the overall network we want to be creating, and then individual corridor studies to refine our options. But that would require a grownup conversation from politicians, something increasingly rare these days.

I'll take it a step further toward bigger government: a transportation improvement and construction district.

 

Sort of like how LA uses construction authorities to build it's train and bus way network, it'd be a region wide NYS/NYC department that is solely focused on research and building. This org identifies an N train to LGA is the best method, it builds it, does the eminent domain and stakeholder compensation, and transfers the new infrastructure to PANYNJ or MTA either by lease, sale or gift, along with bonds for it as well.

 

My view is that MTA is too big to move quickly and decisively. And that inertia is what makes projects so underwhelming and over budget. Take that out of the MTA Board's hands, and we may get a Triboro Rx, a full 2nd Av subway, CBTC and a balanced budget MTA in our lifetimes.

[Around the Horn]

We need something like Transport for London over here

[bobtehpanda]

I'll take it a step further toward bigger government: a transportation improvement and construction district.

 

Sort of like how LA uses construction authorities to build it's train and bus way network, it'd be a region wide NYS/NYC department that is solely focused on research and building. This org identifies an N train to LGA is the best method, it builds it, does the eminent domain and stakeholder compensation, and transfers the new infrastructure to PANYNJ or MTA either by lease, sale or gift, along with bonds for it as well.

 

My view is that MTA is too big to move quickly and decisively. And that inertia is what makes projects so underwhelming and over budget. Take that out of the MTA Board's hands, and we may get a Triboro Rx, a full 2nd Av subway, CBTC and a balanced budget MTA in our lifetimes.

 

You're thinking of DDC, which is also bad at delivering projects.

[Italianstallion]

No need for all that. Just build a busway via the new LGA terminals from 82nd St to Northern Blvd.

 

 

 

Really, this could even be LRT if you wanted.

 

Really, you're going to have LRT take 2 lanes off the Triboro Bridge?

[bobtehpanda]

Really, you're going to have LRT take 2 lanes off the Triboro Bridge?

 

I prefer the M60 as is just using a dedicated busway, but a certain person who likes whingeing on about how "politics" will make playing musical chairs with the subway would probably not be very happy with just an airport bus.

 

Decisions about transport technology should be made on a corridor-by-corridor technical analysis, not out of some technological fetish, since a busway with the same amount of grade separation as an equivalent LRT has almost identical performance characteristics.

[SubwayGuy]

I'll take it a step further toward bigger government: a transportation improvement and construction district.

 

Sort of like how LA uses construction authorities to build it's train and bus way network, it'd be a region wide NYS/NYC department that is solely focused on research and building. This org identifies an N train to LGA is the best method, it builds it, does the eminent domain and stakeholder compensation, and transfers the new infrastructure to PANYNJ or MTA either by lease, sale or gift, along with bonds for it as well.

 

My view is that MTA is too big to move quickly and decisively. And that inertia is what makes projects so underwhelming and over budget. Take that out of the MTA Board's hands, and we may get a Triboro Rx, a full 2nd Av subway, CBTC and a balanced budget MTA in our lifetimes.

 

The problem with this is any construction agency will just be like the MTA. A supposedly "independent" state/city department that both entities can underfund while bitching about the results it generates...a political football that can be blamed for all problems caused by politicians. Just another unnecessary layer of bureaucracy. It will be made to issue bonds for the profit of Wall Street at taxpayer expense, and relatively little will still be built...you'll just have a legalized "finance arm" that operates much in the same way as MTA....which might actually be more inefficient without definite working knowledge of the types of infrastructure for subways / els.

 

Rent is out of control in NYC because of the rollback of rent regulation, which historically has been the best way to ensure people stayed in the apartments of good landlords (who in turn were glad to have good tenants, and the rent was guaranteed to not go up so much, if at all). This forced bad landlords to become unprofitable and sell, or change their ways. There are so many bad landlords in NYC. These buildings generally rent for below market because the landlord knows they are horrible, and tries to entice people into the building. There is so much apartment hopping it's ridiculous. Rent deregulation has created an incentive where scumbag landlords can purchase a building with rent regulated units, harass tenants or provide substandard living, then when the tenants move out rent increases are allowed that eventually cause the apartment to come out of regulation. Many are illegally failing to disclose regulated apartments. Oh, but that's illegal. Except that takes tenants actually figuring out what is going on and acting collectively to fight back - very difficult when people are moving out constantly.

 

None of these loopholes would exist if rent regulation wasn't being phased out.

 

Couple that with the construction of all these luxury buildings that force working people and the poor to "play the lotto" for affordable housing (which is demeaning as hell...a handout is not "affordable housing"), and you have a perfect mix for the skyrocketing rents in NYC.

 

I say all this because a construction authority or anyone acting under eminent domain can NEVER make a person whole through financial compensation without significantly overpaying the market value of the property. You have people living in rent regulated apartments who cannot afford an equal apartment somewhere else. Someone paying $600/month in rent for a large rent-controlled one-bedroom in a safe neighborhood cannot just take a one time payout and go on to paying $2,250/month somewhere else. You would need to pay that person's moving expenses + at least $1,650/month (and that amount goes up every time their new rent does) for the rest of their life. The city and state literally cannot afford that. Which tells you that "the rent is too damn high." But everyone thinks they can invest in real estate, so now you have private homes being repurchased as "rentals." Renting is for the birds. Why pay someone else's mortgage for them, and not even get the tax breaks to show for it?

[SubwayGuy]

I prefer the M60 as is just using a dedicated busway, but a certain person who likes whingeing on about how "politics" will make playing musical chairs with the subway would probably not be very happy with just an airport bus.

 

Decisions about transport technology should be made on a corridor-by-corridor technical analysis, not out of some technological fetish, since a busway with the same amount of grade separation as an equivalent LRT has almost identical performance characteristics.

 

If you're going to build a dedicated right of way for higher speed operation, you might as well build a train (note I didn't say "subway" because part can be underground, part can be elevated). It would have higher speed operation, you could build with platform screen doors, and go ZPTO like JFK AirTrain does.

 

Electricity is cheaper than gas, buses break down more frequently and require more maintenance, and you need refueling breaks which means the buses have to rotate throughout the day which decreases your efficiency. Rail has higher capital costs, but significantly lower operating costs.

[BreeddekalbL]

yes build the and extension who cares what those damn nimbys say tell them in a very blunt matter to buzz off

[bobtehpanda]

If you're going to build a dedicated right of way for higher speed operation, you might as well build a train (note I didn't say "subway" because part can be underground, part can be elevated). It would have higher speed operation, you could build with platform screen doors, and go ZPTO like JFK AirTrain does.

 

Electricity is cheaper than gas, buses break down more frequently and require more maintenance, and you need refueling breaks which means the buses have to rotate throughout the day which decreases your efficiency. Rail has higher capital costs, but significantly lower operating costs.

 

I'm proposing only a limited right of way entirely within the airport grounds. Building it anywhere else is problematic due to existing infrastructure constraints; the runway to the west blocks anything elevated, the GCP is already very wide without a lot of space around it, not to mention the lack of any cross-river infrastructure. An open-access busway has the advantage of being flexible, since it can theoretically carry more than just the M60 without any additional infrastructure laying. Ottawa and Seattle are examples of cities that went BRT first, LRT later, because they didn't have the money or will to do it all rail upfront.

 

Really, if you were to do a full rail line, I would suggest a line across 86 St and not 125th, with stops at 86/3rd for the Lex and 2nd Av, 86/CPW, and 96/Broadway.

[SubwayGuy]

I'm proposing only a limited right of way entirely within the airport grounds. Building it anywhere else is problematic due to existing infrastructure constraints; the runway to the west blocks anything elevated, the GCP is already very wide without a lot of space around it, not to mention the lack of any cross-river infrastructure. An open-access busway has the advantage of being flexible, since it can theoretically carry more than just the M60 without any additional infrastructure laying. Ottawa and Seattle are examples of cities that went BRT first, LRT later, because they didn't have the money or will to do it all rail upfront.

 

Really, if you were to do a full rail line, I would suggest a line across 86 St and not 125th, with stops at 86/3rd for the Lex and 2nd Av, 86/CPW, and 96/Broadway.

 

From an engineering standpoint, that would be extremely expensive. You'd have to tunnel underneath Central Park which would get all sorts of parks and preservation people in a tizzy, then go at least 3 levels below ground at CPW (to get under the IND), then make somewhat tighter radius turns while climbing up beneath plenty of high rise buildings to get to 96th. The cost of this alone would be significantly higher than just the 125th St. piece and the entire rest of the line.

 

I do agree with you about the bus route, if the compromise is a half measure, a dedicated busway for BRT (NOT the M60, however, this must be faster and have significantly fewer stops) is a better option than a stub rail line to WPT only.