PANYNJ issues preliminary engineering RFP for LaGuardia AirTrain

[bobtehpanda]

4 hours ago, CenSin said:

It’s a problem on paper.

If by paper, you mean a legally binding contract, then sure. It's just like how federal money for ARC had to be refunded because of 'paper'.

Unless the State of New York is going to buy out the AirTrain, the airlines have the agency to sue, and they probably will.

[Deucey]

15 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

More importantly, who is actually going to transfer between two airports? No city in the world does this, because you have to get through visa/customs/baggage, lug your shit to the other airport, and do it in reverse.

Back when Southwest was actually a low-fare carrier, you'd save hundreds going to Europe flying from California to Dallas Love Field then cabbing it to DFW to hop on Delta or American (and predecessors) to complete your trip.

Kinda works the same now with flying to Orange County, Burbank or Long Beach then schlepping to LAX. Dunno if it was ever a thing with JFK and LGA, but if it is, having a spur from the mainline past TSA at both ends for transfers, or having TSA and bag check at station exits (like some airports do at roadside, like Kansas City)  could make it worthwhile to connect LGA/JFK. (Of course, it's passenger friendly, but not necessarily economical for airlines.)

[CenSin]

2 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

If by paper, you mean a legally binding contract, then sure. It's just like how federal money for ARC had to be refunded because of 'paper'.

Unless the State of New York is going to buy out the AirTrain, the airlines have the agency to sue, and they probably will.

It’s pretty disingenuous to imply that contracts have the same stopping force as a physical barrier to transforming transit. Legal problems could all go away in the right political environment. The AirTrain right-of-way was even built specifically for the eventual accommodation of “regular” trains. When do you think that provision would ever be utilized?

https://www.governor.ny.gov/sites/governor.ny.gov/files/atoms/files/TransformingJFK.pdf

[Gotham Bus Co.]

On 6/1/2018 at 11:16 AM, N6 Limited said:

It probably would have had a LaGuardia stop where they could transfer for the train that goes to all the terminals.

It would have had four LaGuardia stops, one at each terminal.

[bobtehpanda]

5 hours ago, CenSin said:

It’s pretty disingenuous to imply that contracts have the same stopping force as a physical barrier to transforming transit. Legal problems could all go away in the right political environment. The AirTrain right-of-way was even built specifically for the eventual accommodation of “regular” trains. When do you think that provision would ever be utilized?

https://www.governor.ny.gov/sites/governor.ny.gov/files/atoms/files/TransformingJFK.pdf

It was pretty much planned from the start to do so, because the LIRR to WTC was a project that just would not die until Spitzer pulled the plug in 2007. At some point they were talking about designing a LIRR-AirTrain hybrid vehicle, which would have been interesting if it even worked. And the trains in question were supposed to be HK-style airport-only expresses, with just stops at the Manhattan terminal and the airport, so it would not have fallen afoul of the rules surrounding those fees.

"The right political environment" is Wallyhorse level deflection of unpleasant realities, particularly when the cases in question affect private entities. The SEC successfully prosecuted the Port's violation of its bond statements when it funded Pulsaki Skyway renovations. The airlines have sued the Port Authority over auctioning landing slots. They have sued Chicago for actually using the fees to improve the airport there; they would almost certainly sue and hold up the use of the AirTrain for anything other than airport-related travel. And unlike some of those less frivolous 

Contract law is the bedrock of the English legal system. Even Robert Moses followed contract law; he was just very good at writing contracts heavily in his favor, which is part of the reason why it took so damn long to remove him. This isn't some third world despotic country where you can just lose your assets at a snap of the fingers.

[N6 Limited]

20 hours ago, CenSin said:

It’s pretty disingenuous to imply that contracts have the same stopping force as a physical barrier to transforming transit. Legal problems could all go away in the right political environment. The AirTrain right-of-way was even built specifically for the eventual accommodation of “regular” trains. When do you think that provision would ever be utilized?

https://www.governor.ny.gov/sites/governor.ny.gov/files/atoms/files/TransformingJFK.pdf

Ooh, they're finally going to widen the Van Wyck Expressway 

 

Didn't they just redo the Jamaica Station when the Airtrain was built? Now it's "old an outdated" lol. I like the plans/renderings though.

[Deucey]

5 hours ago, N6 Limited said:

Ooh, they're finally going to widen the Van Wyck Expressway 

I used to drive the Van Wyck when I first moved out here and it was under construction. Wasn't that a widening?

[N6 Limited]

4 hours ago, Deucey said:

I used to drive the Van Wyck when I first moved out here and it was under construction. Wasn't that a widening?

So they just widened the section between Main Street/Queens Blvd and the Grand Central Parkway, but now they want to widen the rest from Queens Blvd down to the Belt Parkway.

Quick story, While they were building the Airtrain it was clearly obvious that 4 lanes could fit under the overpasses from the way they were doing lane shifts, etc, but they couldn't sneak the extra lanes in there without "environmental studies" etc, so when they finished it went back to 3 lanes with paved shoulders. Now that it's "official". they're probably going to reorganize the entrance exit ramps, new retaining walls, etc.