Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 115

Thread: Modernizing at LaGuardia: $1 billion makeover

  1. #31

    Default

    You disagree, fine...no need to basically call me an idiot while you are at it.... sheesh. Going through my points like that shows me you have an agenda against me or anyone who attacks NYC. Its rather nasty to attack me in the manner of which you have just done. I am actually interested in seeing NYC succeed, but you think otherwise.

    Wetlands are not difficult to understand, I know enough about it, but you don't seem to understand that keeping LGA active has worse health effects than any potential bay removal would.

    I told you, NYC has planned itself into a bind with near sighted vision. Can't you at least accept that Stewart is not an option? Come on, see the light.

    Seeing that you will not discuss this civily, but intend rather to sift through my points whilst making acusatory comments, I hereby cease dicussing the issue with you as it has become clearly pointless to continue. You will not agree to disagree, but rather prefer to attack my character and intellect as well... you have just ended an interesting argument with you childish attacks. We will see in the futuer who is right about Newburgh -- I can guarantee you that you will never see it as NYC's 4th airport and you will never see the maglev/HSR line -- the future will tell all, and as soon a the economy is back, and planes are streaming in, a proper proposal of expansion will occur as leaders notice their city falling behind London, Tokyo, Dubai, Shanghai and the long list of cities that are rising. NY has played itself out of the mega airline-hub game and all the benefits that could go along. Chicago and Atlanta at least have an idea about how to deal with airport expansion. NYC is behind the times as it has become complacent.
    Last edited by futurecity; November 24th, 2008 at 09:37 PM.

  2. #32

    Default

    Again you've retreated into a baseless they're calling me an idiot refrain.

    I said your idea is ridiculous, and to repeat from another thread, whether or not you're an idiot is your own business. I respond to what's posted.

    Can't you at least accept that Stewart is not an option? Come on, see the light.
    Even if I believe otherwise? At no time have I asked you to change your opinion.

    There's another thread for Stewart. This thread is about the modernization of LGA, which you said should be closed. Whether or not Stewart is expanded, or JFK is expanded, doesn't change my opinion that closing LGA is an absurd idea.

  3. #33

    Default

    Ok, go ahead, modernize the damn podunk little postage stamp sized airport... It might look nice, but what a freaken waste of money when the real need is to increase capacity.. LGA is the worst possible place to feed more cash, IMO. NY should be following the trend of placing airports OUTSIDE of large cities fed by HSR, not force feeding air traffic into a congested region.... but still Stewart won't work in that regard as there was never any concrete proposal for real HSR and likley will never be. Therefore my point that JFK/EWR were the only options left otherwise face stagnation. Lest you forget that JFK is slot constrained now and airlines don't like to be pioneers to base focus points at small inaccessible airfields.

    Ok, I accept you like the Stewart Idea. However, tell me how the hell it will work? I don't see it, NY state is large-rail-project shy, and their little train spur won't cut it. Their idea I think is to cover the northern metro areas -- but airlines won't grow a base there just for that segment of the population, it never works like that. You'll get some service, but no movement of service from the big 3 to release capacity and free up space. Of course, it won't work and the ROW is too slow as of now... Chicken and egg situation -- no traffic there as of now and until you see millions of pax, you won't see the investment in any real rail up there.

    There should be a large gathering and brain storming session and some real thinking about the future here, no short term path up jobs. NY needs an aviation comittee independent of the PA. Its future depends on it. I feel that we'll end up with a) an expanded JFK/EWR or b) a new airport located somewhere in rural NJ.
    Last edited by futurecity; November 24th, 2008 at 11:19 PM.

  4. #34

    Default

    I've already been advised that I'm spinning my wheels.
    Yo Zip- this works fairly well:

    This message is hidden because futurecity is on your ignore list.

    (unless whole posts are re quoted line by line).

  5. #35
    Random Personality
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Woodside, Queens
    Posts
    950

    Default

    I don't see how closing LaGuardia would solve any problems. Especially since our airport condition is not optimal.

    Closing LaGuardia now would amount to tearing down the third avenue elevated rail because they are going to build the 2nd avenue subway. See how well that worked.

  6. #36

    Default

    Closing LGA won't solve the capacity solution, you are correct -- however, i never said just close LGA now. I said if the capacity was found somwhere else (read my posts) then it not needed. It is a 1.5 runway airport at most, it is in a location that causes noise and pollution blight over queens, brooklyn and LI, it is hemmed in and there is no further expansion possibilities. I am talking quality of life here, that is all -- think of that land as a waterfront park, retail, cafes, etc...

    Maybe the people on this board do not agree, but I can tell you that Brooklyn/Queens residents might think differently.

    London is looking at building an artifical island to replace LHR someday -- what interesting ideas has NY propsed to replace increase capacity and replace airport blight? It bought a podunk airport in a podunk little town 60 miles out of manhattan, that is all I will say.

  7. #37
    Crabby airline hostess - stache's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Nairobi Hilton
    Posts
    8,511

    Default

    I'm thinking of the quality of my life if I have to schlep to JFK or Newark every time I want to go to Florida.

  8. #38
    Chief Antagonist Ninjahedge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Rutherford
    Posts
    12,773

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by futurecity View Post
    Closing LGA won't solve the capacity solution, you are correct -- however, i never said just close LGA now.
    All zip is saying is that you are being too hypothetical. If we could find a better spot that would not damage the ecological balance, that would not fly over neighborhoods on takeoff and approach AND was still close enough to the city then yes, we could close LGA. The thing is, if that was available, they would have built there by now.

    The airports have been too crowded and some (I forget which) have been forced to reduce their schedules to help reduce backup. Eliminating one in the foreseeable future is fantasy.

    I said if the capacity was found somewhere else (read my posts) then it not needed.
    You mean if we found the solution to our problem it would not be a problem anymore? I think you need to work on specifics....

    It is a 1.5 runway airport at most, it is in a location that causes noise and pollution blight over queens, Brooklyn and LI, it is hemmed in and there is no further expansion possibilities. I am talking quality of life here, that is all -- think of that land as a waterfront park, retail, cafés, etc...
    There are other regions that can be converted into what you are suggesting, Red Bank being a large area that is currently undergoing that transformation. Saying that that can happen everywhere is a bit shallow.

    The problem is, you can't convert what you NEED. Find a way to satisfy the need and you will reduce its importance. You shoot down the idea that high-speed rail will be a feasible solution but yet think we can just fit an extra 25 million (Wiki - 2007) people into other airports or tell them that they really do not need to fly in order to turn a large parcel of land into large and pretty tax burdens.

    It is not good that planes have to land and take off there, but the point of air traffic is to get people in and out. If you have no other way of doing so, the area that is serviced by this can suffer economically because of it.

    Maybe the people on this board do not agree, but I can tell you that Brooklyn/Queens residents might think differently.
    Depends on how close they live to the airport and how much they use it.

    That was a cheap blanket statement...

    London is looking at building an artificial island to replace LHR someday -- what interesting ideas has NY propsed to replace increase capacity and replace airport blight? It bought a podunk airport in a podunk little town 60 miles out of manhattan, that is all I will say.
    Are you willing to donate $$? Building an island in the Atlantic takes a bit more than even a billion US $.

    Given we are now in a recession with a huge debt, building an island in a busy shipping corridor to accommodate additional air traffic is not exactly the most economical or feasible solution.

    And phrased as some sort of rejoinder to this discussion it does not lend any credibility to your stance.

    Look, you are allowed to post whatever you want here, within reason that is. But just realize that if you try to talk seriously about any NYC subject, you have people like Zip that will do the research to find SPECIFICS to contradict your claims and statements.

    Don't feel affronted by that. Do the research and come up with more than what you think the people of Queens would feel.......

  9. #39
    Chief Antagonist Ninjahedge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Rutherford
    Posts
    12,773

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stache View Post
    I'm thinking of the quality of my life if I have to schlep to JFK or Newark every time I want to go to Florida.
    You must not live in the area of Queens or Brooklyn he means.

    We can't ask you how you feel!

  10. #40
    Crabby airline hostess - stache's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Nairobi Hilton
    Posts
    8,511

    Default I know.

    I keep forgetting it's all about him lol.

  11. #41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ninjahedge View Post
    All zip is saying is that you are being too hypothetical. If we could find a better spot that would not damage the ecological balance, that would not fly over neighborhoods on takeoff and approach AND was still close enough to the city then yes, we could close LGA. The thing is, if that was available, they would have built there by now.

    I'm talking about future vision here -- of course if it were easy it would have been done by now, but do you really want to live with old mistakes for eternity without planning to correct them for the good of the people? Seems odd to me, rather defeatist.

    The airports have been too crowded and some (I forget which) have been forced to reduce their schedules to help reduce backup. Eliminating one in the foreseeable future is fantasy.

    This is why I propose thinking about the long term future of the airports in the region-- and the plan should be to close it in 10 years or so when it is no longer needed due to expansion elsewhere, I never ever said close it now or soon, ok?.


    You mean if we found the solution to our problem it would not be a problem anymore? I think you need to work on specifics....

    What?

    There are other regions that can be converted into what you are suggesting, Red Bank being a large area that is currently undergoing that transformation. Saying that that can happen everywhere is a bit shallow.

    The problem is, you can't convert what you NEED. Find a way to satisfy the need and you will reduce its importance. You shoot down the idea that high-speed rail will be a feasible solution but yet think we can just fit an extra 25 million (Wiki - 2007) people into other airports or tell them that they really do not need to fly in order to turn a large parcel of land into large and pretty tax burdens.

    Are you babbling? Your argument makes no sense here, I don't think you have have expressed yourself clearly.

    How can you compare RedBank to a piece of land adjacent to manhattan, right on the waterfront in a high density area? Ludacrous. The land that LGA sits on could be prime land for a massive urban development similar to the railyards on the West Side. That land in 10+ years will be scarce and extremely valuable as manhattan runs out of developable space. I said it before, if the capactity were found elswhere (new airport/expaded EWR/JFK) it could be freed up for a more valuable investment.

    I never said I opposed HSR to anywhere -- didn't you read my posts PROPERLY? I said, I didn't see any intention of the PA or anyone to bring HSR to stewart, there just isn't the will there. Of course I support NEC HSR.

    It is not good that planes have to land and take off there, but the point of air traffic is to get people in and out. If you have no other way of doing so, the area that is serviced by this can suffer economically because of it.

    You have not read my posts properly. I never said just close LGA soon. I said it would be better to plan for a future without LGA when additional expansion could cover its loss and more.

    Depends on how close they live to the airport and how much they use it.

    That was a cheap blanket statement...

    No, it isn't a cheap statement -- for the good of people's health and well being, whether they actually are aware of what the airport is doing to their bodies or not, it would help their quality of life, and the life of Brooklyites/LI if that polluting source was removed whether they like it or not. Convenience of travel does not trump health and well being, and Queens isn't exactly an amazing hub of commerce due to LGA, is it? So I doubt LGA's departure would decimate the area.

    Are you willing to donate $$? Building an island in the Atlantic takes a bit more than even a billion US $.

    You are acusing me of childish thinking, then you ask me a question like that? Haha.

    Given we are now in a recession with a huge debt, building an island in a busy shipping corridor to accommodate additional air traffic is not exactly the most economical or feasible solution.

    What? This is the time to invest in the economy, the government needs to spend money, as we need to stimulate it. Even though I don't see this happening, at least other cities talk about big ideas, whilst NY doesn't.

    And phrased as some sort of rejoinder to this discussion it does not lend any credibility to your stance.

    I see, to you this is all an intellectural excercise in discussion/arguments...nothing more.

    Look, you are allowed to post whatever you want here, within reason that is. But just realize that if you try to talk seriously about any NYC subject, you have people like Zip that will do the research to find SPECIFICS to contradict your claims and statements.

    Don't feel affronted by that. Do the research and come up with more than what you think the people of Queens would feel.......
    Patronizing bull -- Do you think I care or feel affronted, what a joke. I'm not upset if peole like you don't agree with me, If you think so I'm sorry to dissapoint you.

    I am talking seriously about NYC, if you didn't notice. Actually, your arguments seem all inchoherent and you are just fighting for a away to refute my claims whilst not knowing what you are talking about. I presume you are acting 'with the pack metality here'. You really take the cake mister.

    So you want me to do polls in Queens or something? Zipp has no specifics that mattered anyway, I don't know what you are talking about. None of you can tell me exactly why it would be a good idea to keep LGA if the capacity was found elsewhere. I stand by my argument, but I see that you hae no real vision for a better and brighter future for all NYers. You guys don't understand anything about true hub airports, conglomeration of airlines into a single airport, and the benefits that can bring. NY will never reap the benefits of a true major airline transfer hub due to short sighted planning and the fact that they have 3 disjointed airports which they refuse to reconfigure or search for a new airport location.

    Maybe you should look at true hubs and the massive economic benefits they bring to their cities.... but NY has planned itself out this opportunity due to old fashioned thinking. Not once have they planned on a new green-field site with proper HSR rail, or planned on relocating traffic, etc... they are not serious about aviation as an economic growth engine, they are gun-shy. They will not make a large investment so they will not reap any rewards.
    Last edited by futurecity; November 25th, 2008 at 12:55 PM.

  12. #42

    Default

    Now we get the bold-font post. Won't be long before it's all CAPS.

    Tank must be near empty - running on bluster.

  13. #43

    Default

    Using bold to distinguish my text from his...forgot to turn it off after the quote section... Fixed! I am relaxed as can be matey boy You are the one looking to start something, eh?

  14. #44

    Default

    Re-read your last post, and think again who's trying to start something.

    Still waiting to hear about the airport-insiders, or is that another made up story.

  15. #45
    Chief Antagonist Ninjahedge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Rutherford
    Posts
    12,773

    Default

    Hmm, glanced at your response.

    Childish for saying that it costs a lot to build an island?

    http://www.dailycommercialnews.com/article/20050517800

    And google Dubai if you would like.

    I love the way you do not answer a question by calling it childish and think that the government has SO much money it can throw away that much to just build an island because people, which you have not sited in any solid way, "might" want it that way.

    BTW:

    How can you compare RedBank to a piece of land adjacent to manhattan, right on the waterfront in a high density area?


    Proves your ignorance.

    Red bank IS a piece of land, adjacent to Manhattan, right on the waterfront, with high density areas. Google it for yourself.

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. LaGuardia Link Low Priority
    By Kris in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: January 26th, 2015, 01:04 PM
  2. 60 Wall Street sold for half a billion dollars
    By Edward in forum New York Real Estate
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: February 6th, 2012, 12:28 PM
  3. Mayor Offers $13.1 Billion Schools Plan
    By Kris in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: September 23rd, 2011, 09:32 PM
  4. Mayor unveils $11 billion plan for Lower Manhattan
    By JMGarcia in forum New York City Guide For New Yorkers
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: December 20th, 2006, 09:41 PM
  5. Official Puts Cost of Rebuilding Ground Zero at $10 Billion
    By Kris in forum New York Skyscrapers and Architecture
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: May 23rd, 2003, 05:45 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Google+ - Facebook - Twitter - Meetup

Edward's photos on Flickr - Wired New York on Flickr - In Queens - In Red Hook - Bryant Park - SQL Backup Software