Author Topic: AirTrain to connect LGA to 7 train (Read 10994 times)

NYC Peromyscus · « **Reply #45 on:** May 07, 2018, 07:23:04 AM »

Quote from: Jeffsayyes on May 07, 2018, 03:26:58 AM

Quote from: hagsrus on May 05, 2018, 07:37:02 PM
How do you get to the Promenade on foot (after Willets Point - is 111th Street better?) I've walked to the lake but always seem to draw a blank, and the maps confuse me. It all looks like major highways!

I have walked from Willets Point stop, straight up. It would be great to do a cleanup there. Also, isn't it a superfund site? It's on my list of things to do to ask Koo's office about this? Wouldn't it be amazingly reprehensible if they cancelled the superfund bc of the airtrain?

Willets Point is not a Superfund site. The only superfund sites in NYC are Newtown Creek, Gowanus Canal, and a radioactive site in Ridgewood (the last of which I believe has already been remediated).

PalestraJon · « **Reply #46 on:** May 07, 2018, 10:53:47 AM »

The connection via the GCP should be via Astoria Blvd, not Willets Pt. 2.5 miles along the median with virtually no homes in the way. And there's already a busy highway---it's ridiculous to go way out beyond the airport when a much closer route is possible with minimum disruption to anyone's lives

Shelby2 · « **Reply #47 on:** June 25, 2018, 08:21:37 AM »

https://ny.curbed.com/2018/6/20/17480896/laguardia-airtrain-port-authority-queens-construction

Port Authority could use eminent domain to build LaGuardia AirTrain:

New legislation intends to give the Port Authority more options for where to put the AirTrain

Article from Curbed.com, June 20, 2018

dssjh · « **Reply #48 on:** June 25, 2018, 10:09:10 AM »

eminent domain is a terrible thing.

and if it's used for this, it can easily be used to expand LGA.

ShinjukuBaby · « **Reply #49 on:** June 25, 2018, 10:12:05 AM »

This is such a dumb route for this train. I strain to think of who might take this train. Maybe people coming on LIRR from Long Island or something?

The only way it would make sense is if they extended it all the way to connect with the JFK Airtrain at Jamaica.

Jeffsayyes · « **Reply #50 on:** June 25, 2018, 05:36:37 PM »

I am very disappointed by this. They really gave up on our waterfront and any rehabilitation of the bay and Flushing Creek. Sad sad work.

lmaniace · « **Reply #51 on:** June 25, 2018, 10:34:27 PM »

Quote from: Jeffsayyes on June 25, 2018, 05:36:37 PM

I am very disappointed by this. They really gave up on our waterfront and any rehabilitation of the bay and Flushing Creek. Sad sad work.

It's only Queens. We don't need waterfront amenities the way they do in Manhattan and Brooklyn.
This is part of Andrew Cuomo's presidential election campaign as the "liberal who can get things built," even though this will primarily speed ballplayers from CitiField and the National Tennis Center to LGA. It probably won't be faster than the Q70 bus for the rest of us, but it will cost a whole hell of a lot more to build and operate.

JK resident · « **Reply #52 on:** June 26, 2018, 08:27:35 AM »

The only connection that really makes sense would be to extend the N line from Ditmars. This area could use a stop along the way. The problem is NIMBY and the Port Authority can’t use money to extend the MTA line. It has to be a separate fare. Now we are going to spend billions to create an eyesore that nobody will use. The free bus is much better.

dssjh · « **Reply #53 on:** June 26, 2018, 08:49:23 AM »

extending the N is the ideal solution, of course. and, yes, NIMBY is one of the reasons it won't happen. then again, many of us use NIMBY when filing complaints with the Port Authority about other issues at LGA, so ....

abcdefghijk · « **Reply #54 on:** June 26, 2018, 11:02:37 AM »

There wouldn't be NIMBY issues if the N subway to LGA or even a train from Willets Point to LGA were to be built underground.

Like a SUBway should be. Like NYC managed to do fine in the 1910's to 1930's.

Other developed cities around the world manage to build underground. Just saying.

homeowner · « **Reply #55 on:** June 26, 2018, 11:25:04 AM »

I remember the Delta water shuttle from Wall Street to the Marine Air Terminal. I can only imagine the misery of commuters during the US Open and Met games combined with luggage schlepping travelers on the 7.

dssjh · « **Reply #56 on:** June 26, 2018, 01:01:39 PM »

there'd be fewer issues, for sure. but using the N proposal would definitely generate some. can you imagine having blasting, drilling and construction going on under your home (or even a block away) for years on end?

the willet's point one, less problematic, but it really does seem counter-intiutive to take people so far out of the way to get to a destination.

Quote from: abcdefghijk on June 26, 2018, 11:02:37 AM

There wouldn't be NIMBY issues if the N subway to LGA or even a train from Willets Point to LGA were to be built underground.

Like a SUBway should be. Like NYC managed to do fine in the 1910's to 1930's.

Other developed cities around the world manage to build underground. Just saying.

JK resident · « **Reply #57 on:** June 26, 2018, 07:10:02 PM »

At Ditmars the train would have to travel above ground till it gets to the power plants along the water then it could go underground or stay above ground in a concrete conduit. The new conduit is much more quiet and cheaper to build than a tunnel. You could run it near the water and it wouldn’t disrupt many people. If done underground a TBM would make quick work of the soft clay dirt but because it is so near the water it may be impossible. If you add one or two train stops along the way you could up zone the area to allow bigger buildings. This could even help the whole idea of closing Rikers if the the idea would be to build housing. It is at these times that I wish we had Robert Moses back.

abcdefghijk · « **Reply #58 on:** June 27, 2018, 12:38:35 PM »

Quote from: dssjh on June 26, 2018, 01:01:39 PM

there'd be fewer issues, for sure. but using the N proposal would definitely generate some. can you imagine having blasting, drilling and construction going on under your home (or even a block away) for years on end?

the willet's point one, less problematic, but it really does seem counter-intiutive to take people so far out of the way to get to a destination.

Quote from: abcdefghijk on June 26, 2018, 11:02:37 AM
There wouldn't be NIMBY issues if the N subway to LGA or even a train from Willets Point to LGA were to be built underground.

Like a SUBway should be. Like NYC managed to do fine in the 1910's to 1930's.

Other developed cities around the world manage to build underground. Just saying.

JK resident · « **Reply #59 on:** October 01, 2018, 10:49:23 AM »

I hope someone puts an end to this boondoggle of an Airtrain

http://queenscrap.blogspot.com/2018/10/environmentalists-are-concerned-about.html

Jackson Heights Life

News:

Author Topic: AirTrain to connect LGA to 7 train (Read 10994 times)

NYC Peromyscus

Re: There's a good chance that LGA AirTrain isn't happening

PalestraJon

Re: There's a good chance that LGA AirTrain isn't happening

Shelby2

Re: AirTrain to connect LGA to 7 train

dssjh

Re: AirTrain to connect LGA to 7 train

ShinjukuBaby

Re: AirTrain to connect LGA to 7 train

Jeffsayyes

Re: AirTrain to connect LGA to 7 train

lmaniace

Re: AirTrain to connect LGA to 7 train

JK resident

Re: AirTrain to connect LGA to 7 train

dssjh

Re: AirTrain to connect LGA to 7 train

abcdefghijk

Re: AirTrain to connect LGA to 7 train

homeowner

Re: AirTrain to connect LGA to 7 train

dssjh

Re: AirTrain to connect LGA to 7 train

JK resident

Re: AirTrain to connect LGA to 7 train

abcdefghijk

Re: AirTrain to connect LGA to 7 train

JK resident

Airtrain to LGA just stinks