Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 42

Thread: LaGuardia Airport Demolition & Reconstruction Announced (2016-2021)

  1. #16
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    2,097

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GordonGecko View Post
    People want an air train to Astoria at the very least, which they could do by building entirely above the Grand Central like they did above Van Wyck.
    Quote Originally Posted by ASchwarz View Post
    That would probably be impossible. NIMBYs would fight an elevated segment, so you would have to build full subway to Astoria, which would cost megabillions. And Astoria doesn't have LIRR like Willets Point. Airtrain is supposed to feed subway and suburban rail. Astoria also doesn't have sufficient subway capacity.
    There would be no NIMBY issue here because as I mentioned you only have to run the air train over the already blighted Grand Central Parkway and straight to and above the existing Astoria Blvd N/Q subway station. Nothing would pass through any residential area that doesn't already. There is precedence for such a line (Van Wyck to JFK).

    But now that I think of it, what makes most sense is the branching off of the N or Q line over the Grand Central and then feeding into Laguardia. The other letter train could continue on to Ditmars. At laGuardia the subway could platform next to the a closed circuit air train for travelling between terminals

  2. #17

    Default

    A tempting idea, but it eventually boils down to accessibility. There is nothing of particular interest at Astoria Boulevard to value directing Airtrain service there, which is why it was suggested to just extend the N past Astoria-Ditmars to LaGuardia back in the day. Willets Point is more feasible granted the area is in the initial stages of major retail and residential development, and it offers more transit opportunities, one of which eventually connects to the N at Queensboro Plaza.

    Since the Q will eventually run on a new trunk up Second Avenue, and the W was nixed earlier in the 2010's, there would be no service to Astoria-Ditmars if they branched the N off over the Grand Central Parkway towards LaGuardia, and both Astoria Boulevard and Astoria-Ditmars would have to be abandoned (the former sits directly over the GCP).

    Considering it took decades to complete only one phase of the Second Avenue Subway, and over a decade to complete the East Side Access, digging subway (most likely tunnel boring because cut and cover causes the most NIMBY noise these days) would blow budgets out of proportion. Neither the MTA or the Port Authority have been very reliable when it comes to delays and cost overruns.

  3. #18
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    2,097

    Default

    I don't disagree that there would be major obstacles but the reason 2nd ave is so bogged down is because it's a subterranean line that has to deal will a million different complications that aren't there with an elevated line.

  4. #19

    Default

    For God's sake, another Air Train? Why? Why? The current one is beyond useless. Why not just extend the subway a few blocks? Either line will do. Just pick the one with the fewer logistical hurdles and get it done already. If we aren't going to have a one-seat ride to Midtown, then we should just save the money.

  5. #20
    Forum Veteran TREPYE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    2,196

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BStyles View Post
    A tempting idea, but it eventually boils down to accessibility. There is nothing of particular interest at Astoria Boulevard to value directing Airtrain service there, which is why it was suggested to just extend the N past Astoria-Ditmars to LaGuardia back in the day. Willets Point is more feasible granted the area is in the initial stages of major retail and residential development, and it offers more transit opportunities, one of which eventually connects to the N at Queensboro Plaza.
    The other thing to factor into the Willets Point connection (that I had not considered) is that there is a LIRR station there that could link up Long Islanders. In fact, they should do away with the AirTrain fare and have it as an all-inclusive LIRR stop from Penn Station. Makes more sense than to overshoots LGA by 2 miles with a slow-ass 7 train.

  6. #21
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    2,097

    Default

    The A train splits to Rockaway or Lefferts, could do the same for the N once the Q is routed to the UES. But word is the W is going to come back so that could be the branch-off line

  7. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BStyles View Post
    There is literally no space to build new runways. LaGuardia was built in a time when the surrounding areas were in its infancy. It's now jam-packed in between a bustling neighborhood and a prison.
    Yes there is. Build a landfill on the west end of the airport, filling in the old seaplane basin and running out to the line of the Rikers bridge. Replace the Rikers bridge with either a bridge from the Bronx (near the prison barge, which seems somehow appropriate), or build a tunnel to Rikers in the landfill. Keep enough space between the landfill and Rikers to create an appropriate moat. A smaller landfill on the eastern end. That gives you the length.

    If you build that landfill, then take out all the old terminals. You can build two parallel runways 1,000' apart, one 9,000' the other 10,000'

    The new terminal would go were the southern end of the 4-22 runway is now (think along the GCP)

    Secondly, NIMBY's are nixing any plans to extend the N past Astoria-Ditmars, which is a shame since it is a very good idea. The proposed AirTrain LaGuardia connection to Willets Point connects commuters to the 7 (which eventually connects them to the N and midtown) and the future retail/residential neighborhood, and the Long Island Railroad.
    They don't want to crush the neighborhood north of the Ditmars station. That's why I'd split off at Astoria Blvd, and go over the GCP. That would be more direct, and generate less opposition.

  8. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BPC View Post
    For God's sake, another Air Train? Why? Why? The current one is beyond useless.
    No, it isn't. Whenever I go to JFK, I take it. Why pay through the nose for a cab or black car?


    Why not just extend the subway a few blocks? Either line will do. Just pick the one with the fewer logistical hurdles and get it done already. If we aren't going to have a one-seat ride to Midtown, then we should just save the money.
    I agree with this. But I'd do it a little differently, as I posed before.
    Last edited by BBMW; August 4th, 2015 at 06:22 PM.

  9. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BBMW View Post
    Yes there is. Build a landfill on the west end of the airport, filling in the old seaplane basin and running out to the line of the Rikers bridge. Replace the Rikers bridge with either a bridge from the Bronx (near the prison barge, which seems somehow appropriate), or build a tunnel to Rikers in the landfill. Keep enough space between the landfill and Rikers to create an appropriate moat. A smaller landfill on the eastern end. That gives you the length.

    If you build that landfill, then take out all the old terminals. You can build two parallel runways 1,000' apart, one 9,000' the other 10,000'

    The new terminal would go were the southern end of the 4-22 runway is now (think along the GCP)

    .

    That would be great but they would probably have to shut down the airport completely for 5-6 years to do it. No way anybody's going to go for that.

  10. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GordonGecko View Post
    There would be no NIMBY issue here because as I mentioned you only have to run the air train over the already blighted Grand Central Parkway and straight to and above the existing Astoria Blvd N/Q subway station.
    They already tried this, under Giuliani, and NIMBYs went crazy. There won't be any elevated subway extensions in Astoria. If you want it you have to go underground. Not remotely worth it.

    The Airtrain proposal is fine. It does the job, connecting to subway and LIRR, and operating as an airport circulator. It works well at JFK and gets high ridership. No, it isn't ideal but it's the best realistic option.

  11. #26
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    2,097

    Default

    Revisiting an N train extension to Laguardia

    2/6/2014





    Note this little outtake:

    "Never mind the fact that going to Laguardia via Willets Point is a time-consuming and circuitous routing that wouldn’t attract many passengers."

  12. #27

    Default

    If Cuomo made and issue of it, raising it to be a regional issue, he could squash the NIMBYs

    Quote Originally Posted by ASchwarz View Post
    They already tried this, under Giuliani, and NIMBYs went crazy. There won't be any elevated subway extensions in Astoria. If you want it you have to go underground. Not remotely worth it.

    The Airtrain proposal is fine. It does the job, connecting to subway and LIRR, and operating as an airport circulator. It works well at JFK and gets high ridership. No, it isn't ideal but it's the best realistic option.

  13. #28

    Default

    They said the same things about Howard Beach, and Jamaica Center.

    Also, you cannot squash a NIMBY. You can only pay them off. Otherwise Barclays Center would not have been built.

  14. #29

    Default

    No. It could be staged, with the airport remaining open. There might be some capacity constraints at points.

    Stages:

    1) Build new landfills - Should not effect operations.

    2) Build new terminal ground side and as much air side as possible on new western landfill without affecting 4-22 runway. When complete move terminal operations there. The new terminal at this point may not have as many gates as the old terminal. This may constrain operation, but will be remedied later.

    3) Demolish all old terminals

    4) Build New 10,000' 13-31 runway (13R-31L) and associated taxiways.

    5) When 13R-31L complete, temporarily shut down old 13-31 runway (now 13L-31R) and extend to 9,000'

    6) When work on 13L-31R is complete, decommission 4-22 Runway

    7) Build rest of terminal complex (likely a remote concourse) on land formerly occupied by 4-22.

    Done.

    Quote Originally Posted by uakoops View Post
    That would be great but they would probably have to shut down the airport completely for 5-6 years to do it. No way anybody's going to go for that.
    Last edited by BBMW; August 5th, 2015 at 05:52 PM.

  15. #30

    Default

    Yes you can. It just takes political will. Look what happened with NYU and the village. Construction is about to start.

    Some concessions can be made. As I said, the original fight was over driving the N train further north up 31st street, through the middle of the neighborhood. My design wouldn't do that. It would have minimal effect on the neighborhood. It would be over the median of the highway.


    Quote Originally Posted by BStyles View Post
    They said the same things about Howard Beach, and Jamaica Center.

    Also, you cannot squash a NIMBY. You can only pay them off. Otherwise Barclays Center would not have been built.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

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