Governor Hochul seeks ‘alternatives’ to LaGuardia AirTrain

[Via Garibaldi 8]

5 hours ago, BreeddekalbL said:

 

And besides if a new "el" were built wouldnt they be concrete like the airtrain jfk?

 

4 hours ago, IAlam said:

New elevated rail lines aren't as loud as the previous el lines we have built, If you go to other cities like Philly or Seattle you can see they're much quieter. 

Sure, but I'd put money on it that most people living in such environments moved to them willingly, knowing what they were getting into and perhaps were looking for a deal to boot.  Even if they aren't loud, they are still there, so property values are not going to be as attractive.  People want to be NEAR public transit. Being near it and having it right outside their door are two very different things. lol  I remember my first apartment overseas over ten years ago...  I had the option of living in Downtown Florence (Italy) near to everything on a very central but noisy street, OR I could live on a nice quiet street in a more exclusive area.  Price was roughly the same at about $1,800 - 2,000 a month when you consider the exchange rate and the cost for water and utilities.  Which do you think I chose?

3 hours ago, Lex said:

In that case, what are we waiting for?

I honestly question how much of an impact that would really have, as the increased connectivity -- especially with modern construction methods -- would, at worst, only slightly reduce property values. If noise is really that much of a concern, use Sapporo as a reference point.

At some point, we'll really need to get over this aversion to setting up elevated lines, and I say this as someone who doesn't exactly like heights.

For hell to freeze over. lol The only people that think this is the "cool" thing to do are "urbanists" that have nothing to lose. The types I see on social media posting non-stop about making every area of the City "dense" while they are shacked up living with five roommates (lol), or people that just think it's "cool" to have some new rail line to fan or whatever, BUT none of these people would have to deal with any of the ramifications of such projects, so of course they want it built - it doesn't impact them.  Funny how that works...

Realistically speaking, if your biggest asset is what you're living in that you paid money out to live in, you are not interested in losing money on that investment.  That's just the truth, and if you have no problem losing money on it living in what is now the most expensive City in the US, you probably need your head examined. 

I've never heard of anybody that owns real estate here say oh yeah I want a rail line on my block that decreases my property value.

2 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

 

That's not the reason why the extension was rejected.

An LGA runway directly ends at the GCP. If you have ever driven in the area you'll notice very stubby streetlamps. Indeed, if you look at that neighborhood on Google Maps, there is a whole-ass clear zone where there are no buildings that are legally allowed to be built. Nothing can be in the general path of that runway and taller than those streetlamps. So you can't really build an elevated line from the west.

There's also a 90 year old storm and wastewater pipe that is apparently critical for serving hundreds of thousands of people in Queens that is also underground in this location, so it's not easy to build a tunnel either.

Here's the report: https://www.panynj.gov/content/dam/port-authority/press-room/press-kits/lga-mass-transit/2023-03-13-Full-Report%2bExecutive-Summary.pdf

Yes, logistics were the main reason, but my comments were in response to people saying that hadn't the NIMBYs left Astoria or whatever.  

[bobtehpanda]

While the AirTrain is dead (at least for now, the airports lobby is pretty powerful and LGA is like the darling airport of business travelers), one interesting thing to note is that this probably means the optimal route to LGA might actually be a surface light rail extension of the IBX via Junction Blvd/94th, jogging over on Northern.