Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.

Governor Hochul seeks ‘alternatives’ to LaGuardia AirTrain


Recommended Posts

https://www.amny.com/transit/hochul-seeking-alternatives-to-laguardia-airtrain/

 

Quote

 

Hochul seeks ‘alternatives’ to LaGuardia AirTrain
By Kevin Duggan


Posted on October 4, 2021

Governor Kathy Hochul said Monday that she wants the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey to look at alternatives to the proposed $2.1 billion LaGuardia AirTrain — casting further doubt on the future of the pet project pushed by her disgraced predecessor Andrew Cuomo. 

“New Yorkers deserve world-class transportation to world-class airports. I have asked the Port Authority to thoroughly examine alternative mass transit solutions for reducing car traffic and increasing connectivity to LaGuardia Airport,” Hochul said in an Oct. 4 statement. “We must ensure that our transportation projects are bold, visionary, and serve the needs of New Yorkers. I remain committed to working expeditiously to rebuild our infrastructure for the 21st century and to create jobs – not just at LaGuardia, but at all of our airports and transit hubs across New York.”

The announcement comes after Hochul said last week she would “examine” the plans to build a 2.3-mile elevated rail line between the Queens airport and the Mets-Willets Point stations on the 7 line and the Long Island Rail Road. 

The project got the go-ahead from the Federal Aviation Administration back in July, following Cuomo’s resignation in August, a growing slate of local politicians and advocates have called on Hochul to postpone or derail the pricey people mover entirely.

The project has drawn criticism for not offering a one-seat ride from the airport to Manhattan, and for taking travelers headed to the island the wrong way east before they transfer. 

Other options that would have offered a one-seat ride, but which were dismissed during an environmental review, included extending the N/W subway line, building out better bus service, or launching ferry service. 

Environmentalist and neighborhood advocates took their concerns before the US Court of Appeals and sued the FAA and the Port Authority last month for failing to consider other possible transit options. 

The Port Authority’s executive director Rick Cotton maintained last Thursday during the bi-state agency’s monthly board meeting that the AirTrain was the best way forward due to it not cutting through any residential neighborhoods, but said officials would provide “whatever review Governor Hochul desires.”

Port Authority spokesman Thomas Topousis referred a request for comment back to Cotton’s statements from last week. 

 

 

My feeling: the AirTrain will probably cancelled, but there will probably be no Astoria line extension either.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, GojiMet86 said:

https://www.amny.com/transit/hochul-seeking-alternatives-to-laguardia-airtrain/

 

 

My feeling: the AirTrain will probably cancelled, but there will probably be no Astoria line extension either.

I like Ms. Hochul now, she said to #### with that airtrain.

Hopefully they consider extending the (N)/(W) (preferably via 20th Avenue), maybe a wild extension of the (G) (key word, WILD), or some sort of dedicated busway to LGA from Manhattan. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NBTA said:

I like Ms. Hochul now, she said to #### with that airtrain.

Hopefully they consider extending the (N)/(W) (preferably via 20th Avenue), maybe a wild extension of the (G) (key word, WILD), or some sort of dedicated busway to LGA from Manhattan. 

I'm all for an (N) / (W) extension to LaGuardia, I actually designed a plan that would have realigned the Astoria Line north of Astoria Blvd with the GCP. I was suppose to finish it but got caught up with real life.

In my plan, Astoria-Ditmars would be demolished, and Astoria Blvd would be moved back about 800 feet, then the line would curve towards the right following the GCP all the way to LGA. No NIMBY's, no problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

I'm all for an (N) / (W) extension to LaGuardia, I actually designed a plan that would have realigned the Astoria Line north of Astoria Blvd with the GCP. I was suppose to finish it but got caught up with real life.

In my plan, Astoria-Ditmars would be demolished, and Astoria Blvd would be moved back about 800 feet, then the line would curve towards the right following the GCP all the way to LGA. No NIMBY's, no problem.

 

Actually... The folks up there will want Ditmars to remain. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Gotham Bus Co. said:

 

Actually... The folks up there will want Ditmars to remain. 

 

So they'll cause a ruckus if you extend it, and cause a ruckus if you remove it...

You can't win!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do so many people want the (N) and (W) extended? Then the airport service is subject to the delays from coming across three borouhgs, and it's making those lines longer further making them prone to delays. And everyon know no one wants more of an el through a residential neighborhood.

The Grand Central proposal should just be left alone, as it goes to both the (7) and the LIRR, with space there for a platform for a dedicated service to the city, and the next stop would be Woodside with its connections. This is better than going the other way to Astoria Blvd as the parkway has many more overpasses from the streets going that way. People claim Willets Point is "going the wrong direction", but not that much; it's going more south than east, and would be fast and much shorter (as oppsed to a subway extension from the far west).

What I would also do is continue down GCP to Jamaica to connect with that hub, including JFK (which is probably the idea for the long run).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Eric B said:

Why do so many people want the (N) and (W) extended? Then the airport service is subject to the delays from coming across three borouhgs, and it's making those lines longer further making them prone to delays. And everyon know no one wants more of an el through a residential neighborhood.

The Grand Central proposal should just be left alone, as it goes to both the (7) and the LIRR, with space there for a platform for a dedicated service to the city, and the next stop would be Woodside with its connections. This is better than going the other way to Astoria Blvd as the parkway has many more overpasses from the streets going that way. People claim Willets Point is "going the wrong direction", but not that much; it's going more south than east, and would be fast and much shorter (as oppsed to a subway extension from the far west).

What I would also do is continue down GCP to Jamaica to connect with that hub, including JFK (which is probably the idea for the long run).

There are other proposals that have been overlooked because Cuomo wanted his pet project done his way. An LGA Airtrain would be fine, it's the fact that it's done all wrong. It's a waste of time, effort, and money all for nothing just to benefit a small margin of people.

Yes they're direct, but it's only going to the (7) and the Port Washington Branch that doesn't even connect to Jamaica at all. I'm not entirely sure how often the branch runs, but it's still a pretty void area to go to. Willets Point shouldn't be the place to build to, I'm all for an extension towards Jamaica, it should've been part of that proposal.

There are a lot more advantages to the (N)/(W) extension as what you said, it going across three boroughs. Yes, you are correct about making lines longer further making them prone to delays, but there are ways to improve them. De-interlining the service would help boost the service. It's better than trying to crowd Willets Point on the (7) because that line is already crowded as is and the (N)/(W) would be already directly at LGA making multiple stops in Queens. This would mean no cars would have to crowd one station because parking would be built dedicated for Willets Point which basically defeats the purpose of alleviating car crowding. You're basically moving cars from one area to another which literally solves nothing at all. Then you got the LGA being expensive, doesn't point towards Manhattan forcing people from Manhattan to ride the whole (7) line from Manhattan all the way to almost the last stop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Eric B said:

Why do so many people want the (N) and (W) extended? Then the airport service is subject to the delays from coming across three borouhgs, and it's making those lines longer further making them prone to delays. And everyon know no one wants more of an el through a residential neighborhood.

The Grand Central proposal should just be left alone, as it goes to both the (7) and the LIRR, with space there for a platform for a dedicated service to the city, and the next stop would be Woodside with its connections. This is better than going the other way to Astoria Blvd as the parkway has many more overpasses from the streets going that way. People claim Willets Point is "going the wrong direction", but not that much; it's going more south than east, and would be fast and much shorter (as oppsed to a subway extension from the far west).

What I would also do is continue down GCP to Jamaica to connect with that hub, including JFK (which is probably the idea for the long run).

The <7> is already overcrowded enough as is. Do we really need to cram airport-bound passengers - and their luggage - onto the <7>? Who’s to say they’ll take the less-crowded (7) local?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted what I would now do in SAS discussion since it would in this case involve having a branch of the SAS run to LGA.

  

2 minutes ago, Wallyhorse said:

Now that Gov. Hochul has ditched the LGA Air Train:

I suspect what should be done is instead of the AirTrain would be a portion of what perhaps would be "Phase 2A" of the SAS that can be the LGA branch, turning off from the main route at 116th Street (116th Street Station on 2nd Avenue can be just north of 116th to 119th Street to allow for this) and making a stop on 116th Street either from 1st-2nd Avenue (possibly with a transfer point between the two stations) or if it's deep enough between 1st and Pleasant Avenue (there actually is a major shopping center next to the FDR Drive from 116th-117th Streets whose patrons in many cases would use such a stop if it had an entrance at Pleasant Avenue), then continuing underground to Roosevelt Island with a stop at Ichan Stadium and a second stop on Roosevelt Island before going elevated to Queens and through mostly non-residential areas of northern Queens to LGA, stopping first at the long-term parking facility and then at the various terminals.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not use some of the Triboro RX ROW (or whatever it’s called) and have the Airtrain run out of Jackson Heights or Woodside?

Jackson Heights would probably be easy-peasy once you reconfigure the subway station. OTOH, Building out to Woodside would probably balloon the cost, even if the <7> and LIRR are over there and that’s where most of the “money” riders would come from.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, paulrivera said:

Why not use some of the Triboro RX ROW (or whatever it’s called) and have the Airtrain run out of Jackson Heights or Woodside?

Jackson Heights would probably be easy-peasy once you reconfigure the subway station. OTOH, Building out to Woodside would probably balloon the cost, even if the <7> and LIRR are over there and that’s where most of the “money” riders would come from.

You'd think they'd go for either of those options, but no. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It makes sense to extend or branch the W, since that is currently the shorter line compared to the N. 

I really think the MTA should work harder to educate communities (like Astoria) on how much nicer an elevated line can be with new construction techniques. A new elevated line built today can be dramatically quieter and prettier than the old ones we currently have. I wonder how much easier of a sell the extension would be if they also replaced the whole Astoria line with a new concrete viaduct, like SEPTA did a while back in West Philly. 

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and then the MTA would have a local example they could point to, to help convince other parts of the city that new elevated lines aren't going to destroy their communities. Since we sadly can't seem to build new underground lines for less than $2 billion / mile in this screwed-up city, elevated lines are going to need to be an option if the system is going to expand at all in our lifetimes. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/5/2021 at 10:55 PM, Vulturious said:

There are other proposals that have been overlooked because Cuomo wanted his pet project done his way. An LGA Airtrain would be fine, it's the fact that it's done all wrong. It's a waste of time, effort, and money all for nothing just to benefit a small margin of people.

Yes they're direct, but it's only going to the (7) and the Port Washington Branch that doesn't even connect to Jamaica at all. I'm not entirely sure how often the branch runs, but it's still a pretty void area to go to. Willets Point shouldn't be the place to build to, I'm all for an extension towards Jamaica, it should've been part of that proposal.

There are a lot more advantages to the (N)/(W) extension as what you said, it going across three boroughs. Yes, you are correct about making lines longer further making them prone to delays, but there are ways to improve them. De-interlining the service would help boost the service. It's better than trying to crowd Willets Point on the (7) because that line is already crowded as is and the (N)/(W) would be already directly at LGA making multiple stops in Queens. This would mean no cars would have to crowd one station because parking would be built dedicated for Willets Point which basically defeats the purpose of alleviating car crowding. You're basically moving cars from one area to another which literally solves nothing at all. Then you got the LGA being expensive, doesn't point towards Manhattan forcing people from Manhattan to ride the whole (7) line from Manhattan all the way to almost the last stop.

On 10/5/2021 at 11:42 PM, T to Dyre Avenue said:

The <7> is already overcrowded enough as is. Do we really need to cram airport-bound passengers - and their luggage - onto the <7>? Who’s to say they’ll take the less-crowded (7) local?

You would beef up Port Washington serice, and the (7) would, just be an additional option. It doesn't matter how often the whole line runs now; you would add the additional service to Willets Pt. (which as I mentioned has space for an extra platform to make a dedicated terminal. And I don't think 'deinterlining', which is the other thing I see everyone here pitching, would solve the problem as much as people think. It just makes the service pattern more rigid, but there will still be trains cutting in front of each other at places. And again, there's the issue of extending an elevated subway through a residential area). 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, rbrome said:

It makes sense to extend or branch the W, since that is currently the shorter line compared to the N. 

I really think the MTA should work harder to educate communities (like Astoria) on how much nicer an elevated line can be with new construction techniques. A new elevated line built today can be dramatically quieter and prettier than the old ones we currently have. I wonder how much easier of a sell the extension would be if they also replaced the whole Astoria line with a new concrete viaduct, like SEPTA did a while back in West Philly. 

Honestly, yes, they really should do this. Many communities all across NYC aren't educated or understand that we have created ways of making elevated lines "dramatically quieter and prettier than the old ones we currently have." The JFK AirTrain is a great example, same with the Babylon Branch along the LIRR because their elevated structures are concrete and isn't as noisy compared to the steel structures for obvious reasons. I think the LIRR Babylon Branch is a better example of a quieter elevated structure because of how many more cars the LIRR carries and how heavy they are compared to the JFK AirTrain. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Eric B said:

You would beef up Port Washington serice, and the (7) would, just be an additional option. It doesn't matter how often the whole line runs now; you would add the additional service to Willets Pt. (which as I mentioned has space for an extra platform to make a dedicated terminal. And I don't think 'deinterlining', which is the other thing I see everyone here pitching, would solve the problem as much as people think. It just makes the service pattern more rigid, but there will still be trains cutting in front of each other at places. And again, there's the issue of extending an elevated subway through a residential area). 

Not only does that fail to address the fare issue (in fact, the LIRR would exacerbate it) in addition to pointing the wrong way for most airport-seekers, but Willets Point is the middle of f*cking nowhere. I'd have an easier time accepting it if the proposal was to send it to Flushing, where there are actual people and businesses instead of parking lots and somewhat-sparsely-used sports facilities surrounded by a bunch of near-industrial auto shops and parkland. Even with potential redevelopment, it won't hold a candle to Flushing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Eric B said:

You would beef up Port Washington serice, and the (7) would, just be an additional option. It doesn't matter how often the whole line runs now; you would add the additional service to Willets Pt. (which as I mentioned has space for an extra platform to make a dedicated terminal. And I don't think 'deinterlining', which is the other thing I see everyone here pitching, would solve the problem as much as people think. It just makes the service pattern more rigid, but there will still be trains cutting in front of each other at places. And again, there's the issue of extending an elevated subway through a residential area). 

But deinterlining Broadway does solve the merging delays that plague it. That (N)(R)(W) merge at 34th causes ripple-effect delays (as does the Prince merge on weekends). There are ways to operate the line that don't require the (N) to be a hybrid local/express train in Manhattan. The (N) should be a full Broadway express and the (W) can be expanded to full-time service and be the sole Astoria service. And then it can be extended to LGA. 

Now you say there's an issue with extending a elevated subway through residential areas. For what, all of two blocks from Ditmars Blvd to the ConEd plant? Once you get past 20th Avenue, there are no more residences. The extension can run over the surface parking lots (is the "diminished quality of life" of cars something the MTA and PA should really be worried about?) until it gets onto 19th Ave. Then it can continue east on 19th toward Hazen St. 

And I wouldn't call 19th Avenue a residential area. Judging by the aerial of that area, it looks like anything but a residential area. It's mostly surface parking lots and distribution centers. How would a elevated (W) train on a concrete structure mess up the quality of life for said lots and distribution centers?

East of Hazen is the tricky part because now you're on airport property and the train has to avoid planes taking off and landing, so you have to go underground. But this should not be an impossible task. How did London, Chicago, Seattle, DC, Atlanta and even St. Louis and Cleveland figure it out?

On 10/5/2021 at 10:26 PM, Eric B said:

Why do so many people want the (N) and (W) extended? Then the airport service is subject to the delays from coming across three borouhgs, and it's making those lines longer further making them prone to delays. And everyon know no one wants more of an el through a residential neighborhood.

The Grand Central proposal should just be left alone, as it goes to both the (7) and the LIRR, with space there for a platform for a dedicated service to the city, and the next stop would be Woodside with its connections. This is better than going the other way to Astoria Blvd as the parkway has many more overpasses from the streets going that way. People claim Willets Point is "going the wrong direction", but not that much; it's going more south than east, and would be fast and much shorter (as oppsed to a subway extension from the far west).

What I would also do is continue down GCP to Jamaica to connect with that hub, including JFK (which is probably the idea for the long run).

I'd be much happier with the GCP proposal if it turned west at Roosevelt Ave and tied into the Flushing Line instead of east and dumping people outside Citi Field. I've suggested this in the past, only to get blowback over taking away (7) service from busy Main Street-Flushing. I definitely don't think taking away subway service from Flushing is the best idea. This is why I'm in favor of extending the Astoria Line. But I've taken the (7) line for many years (I switched to the QM20 express bus during the pandemic when my office in Supreme Court went to hybrid in-office/WFH) and I've noticed that it's only the <7> express trains that enter and leave crush-loaded. The (7) locals do not. In fact, they tend to have seats available until 90th St. And some of them enter and go out of service at Willets Point Blvd or 111th St. Maybe those particular trains are the ones that can be siphoned off to LGA. I'm just brainstorming here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
44 minutes ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

Now you say there's an issue with extending a elevated subway through residential areas. For what, all of two blocks from Ditmars Blvd to the ConEd plant? Once you get past 20th Avenue, there are no more residences. The extension can run over the surface parking lots (is the "diminished quality of life" of cars something the MTA and PA should really be worried about?) until it gets onto 19th Ave. Then it can continue east on 19th toward Hazen St. 

And I wouldn't call 19th Avenue a residential area. Judging by the aerial of that area, it looks like anything but a residential area. It's mostly surface parking lots and distribution centers. How would a elevated (W) train on a concrete structure mess up the quality of life for said lots and distribution centers?

 

If it runs from Ditmars to 19th Avenue, then the only residential area affected is 31st Street for two whole avenues. If is built the same way the Frankford Elevated was rebuilt over Market Street, then there would be only a single row of columns on 31st and no need to extend the existing elevated's style.

This section of Market Street from curb to curb is 61 feet.

31st Street from curb to curb is also 61 feet.

As you have pointed out, once it reaches 19th Avenue, it's all industry. The problem isn't that it can't be physically done. The problem are the Astoria NIMBYs.

 

eytg8de.png

looking-east-from-west-philadelphia-down

20130505_inq_townby05z-a.JPG

152-60th-Street-Station-Victor-Johnson-D

Edited by GojiMet86
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep:

Those Astoria NIMBYs, who IMO know they have children/grandchildren looking to sell those houses as soon as they die and such are already counting on big bucks from that they fear might not be there if an EL extension is built out of fear those "not their kind" will show up in droves and drive property values down and their not being able to "cash in" and be able to get tons of "bling."

BTW, that design you showed is very similar to what I would be using for a rebuilt 3rd Avenue EL in Manhattan, except that would likely be as I would do it as four-tracked, two-level line (except at Chatam Square for instance and with a few spots where it is three tracks across on one level to allow for switches and so forth).  Such a line would be very quiet in part because I would be building such to withstand a storm twice the strength of Sandy.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, GojiMet86 said:

 

If it runs from Ditmars to 19th Avenue, then the only residential area affected is 31st Street for two whole avenues. If is built the same way the Frankford Elevated was rebuilt over Market Street, then there would be only a single row of columns on 31st and no need to extend the existing elevated's style.

This section of Market Street from curb to curb is 61 feet.

31st Street from curb to curb is also 61 feet.

As you have pointed out, once it reaches 19th Avenue, it's all industry. The problem isn't that it can't be physically done. The problem are the Astoria NIMBYs.

 

 

For two whole lousy stinking blocks, the powers that be are going to let NIMBYs torpedo a far more useful subway alternative to LGA Airtrain? Man, this really goes to show you just how pathetically bad New York government agencies are at dealing with NIMBYs.

In Chicago, NIMBYs in Lakeview tried to stop the Belmont Flyover project, which will permit northbound Brown Line trains to cross over the Red and Purple line tracks without delaying them, unlike the current flat Belmont Junction (not so different from the flat junction at Broadway-Myrtle in Brooklyn that the (M) uses to turn off the Jamaica Ave el). The Lakeview NIMBYs sued the City of Chicago and the CTA. Eventually they lost and the project was allowed to go forward (and is going forward). And the CTA project required the physical taking of property, so the Chicago NIMBYs had a stronger case. All that would be done in Astoria is to extend the el three avenue blocks using the same type of concrete structure on the Market St el in West Philadelphia. No new stations would need to be built on 31st St and no property would need to be taken.

1 hour ago, Wallyhorse said:

Yep:

Those Astoria NIMBYs, who IMO know they have children/grandchildren looking to sell those houses as soon as they die and such are already counting on big bucks from that they fear might not be there if an EL extension is built out of fear those "not their kind" will show up in droves and drive property values down and their not being able to "cash in" and be able to get tons of "bling."
 

Oh please. I'd love to see the Astoria NIMBYs even try present that as their case to a Supreme Civil Court judge. What are they gonna say? “Undesirable people” are going to fly into LaGuardia Airport, get on a Manhattan-bound (W) train and get off at the Ditmars Blvd station, rob their houses, and then take the train back to the airport to fly home? 

Because anyone who lives locally who’d want to take the subway to commit a crime in Astoria on 31st St can already get off at Ditmars Blvd or one of the other five existing stations on 31st St. Though I’m pretty sure a getaway car with four tires will be their choice of escape. 

Edited by T to Dyre Avenue
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/5/2021 at 7:26 PM, Eric B said:

Why do so many people want the (N) and (W) extended? Then the airport service is subject to the delays from coming across three borouhgs, and it's making those lines longer further making them prone to delays. And everyon know no one wants more of an el through a residential neighborhood.

The Grand Central proposal should just be left alone, as it goes to both the (7) and the LIRR, with space there for a platform for a dedicated service to the city, and the next stop would be Woodside with its connections. This is better than going the other way to Astoria Blvd as the parkway has many more overpasses from the streets going that way. People claim Willets Point is "going the wrong direction", but not that much; it's going more south than east, and would be fast and much shorter (as oppsed to a subway extension from the far west).

What I would also do is continue down GCP to Jamaica to connect with that hub, including JFK (which is probably the idea for the long run).

three words: "one-seat-ride".

if you are a tired traveler with luggage, the last thing you want to do is run around to find elevators, etc. The N/W pretty much hit all the hotels and offices in Manhattan.

Not to mention, the GCP proposal takes you *in the wrong direction* into already congested trains. If the first stop on the N/W is LGA, you're guaranteed a seat.

And speaking of fantasy, there is no room for additional trains into Manhattan from Willets Point, so a platform for dedicated service would be empty. And LGA-JFK would be pretty much useless; no one actually exits security and re-enters it for a plane journey in any sort of reasonable numbers.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Lex said:

Not only does that fail to address the fare issue (in fact, the LIRR would exacerbate it) in addition to pointing the wrong way for most airport-seekers, but Willets Point is the middle of f*cking nowhere. I'd have an easier time accepting it if the proposal was to send it to Flushing, where there are actual people and businesses instead of parking lots and somewhat-sparsely-used sports facilities surrounded by a bunch of near-industrial auto shops and parkland. Even with potential redevelopment, it won't hold a candle to Flushing.

Howard Beach is in the middle of nowhere as well; it's a transfer point (since they don't plan to run the service all the way into the city). And it isn't totally in the middle of nowhere; it's next to a major attraction, CitiField, as well as the tennis arena, , etc. Everyone is going to those places, of course, but more air travelers might be going there than Flushing. It's not a local transit system we're talking about; that's what the (7) is for.

4 hours ago, T to Dyre Avenue said:

But deinterlining Broadway does solve the merging delays that plague it. That (N)(R)(W) merge at 34th causes ripple-effect delays (as does the Prince merge on weekends). There are ways to operate the line that don't require the (N) to be a hybrid local/express train in Manhattan. The (N) should be a full Broadway express and the (W) can be expanded to full-time service and be the sole Astoria service. And then it can be extended to LGA. 

Now you say there's an issue with extending a elevated subway through residential areas. For what, all of two blocks from Ditmars Blvd to the ConEd plant? Once you get past 20th Avenue, there are no more residences. The extension can run over the surface parking lots (is the "diminished quality of life" of cars something the MTA and PA should really be worried about?) until it gets onto 19th Ave. Then it can continue east on 19th toward Hazen St. 

And I wouldn't call 19th Avenue a residential area. Judging by the aerial of that area, it looks like anything but a residential area. It's mostly surface parking lots and distribution centers. How would a elevated (W) train on a concrete structure mess up the quality of life for said lots and distribution centers?

East of Hazen is the tricky part because now you're on airport property and the train has to avoid planes taking off and landing, so you have to go underground. But this should not be an impossible task. How did London, Chicago, Seattle, DC, Atlanta and even St. Louis and Cleveland figure it out?

I'd be much happier with the GCP proposal if it turned west at Roosevelt Ave and tied into the Flushing Line instead of east and dumping people outside Citi Field. I've suggested this in the past, only to get blowback over taking away (7) service from busy Main Street-Flushing. I definitely don't think taking away subway service from Flushing is the best idea. This is why I'm in favor of extending the Astoria Line. But I've taken the (7) line for many years (I switched to the QM20 express bus during the pandemic when my office in Supreme Court went to hybrid in-office/WFH) and I've noticed that it's only the <7> express trains that enter and leave crush-loaded. The (7) locals do not. In fact, they tend to have seats available until 90th St. And some of them enter and go out of service at Willets Point Blvd or 111th St. Maybe those particular trains are the ones that can be siphoned off to LGA. I'm just brainstorming here.

Astoria wats their local and express services, and not just one local. Taking the N away still won't do anything abou tall the other delays, and not just merging; that's probably the least problem.

Those are two long blocks, and els are outmoded in NYC (the ones that remain are 'grandfathered' in), so no one wants them expanded anywhere by even that much.

And I never said to take away (7) service to Flushing. I was referring to using spce on the Port Washington Branch, and not taking away service to Long Island, but adding a dedicated service from Willets Point to the city

2 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

three words: "one-seat-ride".

if you are a tired traveler with luggage, the last thing you want to do is run around to find elevators, etc. The N/W pretty much hit all the hotels and offices in Manhattan.

Not to mention, the GCP proposal takes you *in the wrong direction* into already congested trains. If the first stop on the N/W is LGA, you're guaranteed a seat.

And speaking of fantasy, there is no room for additional trains into Manhattan from Willets Point, so a platform for dedicated service would be empty. And LGA-JFK would be pretty much useless; no one actually exits security and re-enters it for a plane journey in any sort of reasonable numbers.

One seat ride with many stops, and the greater crowds of the subway (even if you do manage to get the first seats. And think rush hours, with all that luggage. It woukd be inconvenient to both travelers and regular commuters!) And I already mentioned that too much is being made of this "wrong direction". It's not as out of the way as you think. If you look at it, going across 19th Ave. to 31't is just as much going in the "wrong direction", as the grid is more tilted, so you're going north as well as west, and again, only to pick up a whole line of local stops. With GCP, you're going only slightly east, but also south, which is part of the right direction. And it's a fast, dedicated line with no stops that takes you right to the LIRR. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.