Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
LGA Central Terminal To Be Replaced  
User currently offlineRJpieces From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3520 times:

This is the first I've heard of this...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1159...or+Repairs&COLLECTION=wsjie/6month

Key points:
Rebuilding La Guardia's Central Terminal, which houses 14 airlines, will be one of the most complicated and most expensive airport projects in aviation history, and the effort will likely affect travelers all across the country.

Plans are being drawn to knock down old aircraft hangars on each side of the Central Terminal and build new, wider concourses. Concourses will be built one by one -- build a new Concourse A, move in and then tear down the old A to create space for the new Concourse B. Repeat as necessary. In all, it will take many years and cost more than $1 billion.

The new La Guardia terminal, if built, will have the same number of gates since the two runways at La Guardia can't handle any more takeoffs and landings, so there's little need for additional gates. But the concourses will be wider and modern, and they all may share a large, central security screening area. Airlines will be able to bring in larger planes and move them around without so many traffic jams in the alleys between concourses.

A $15 million study is under way on the feasibility of the grand plans. One alternative under review is whether to build five concourses instead of just replacing the existing four wings of the terminal. Another is whether the new terminal should be linked to the nearby US Airways terminal. And different funding options are being studied -- we will likely all be paying for this through "Passenger Facility Charges" added to airline tickets for departing LaGuardia passengers.

18 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5790 posts, RR: 47
Reply 1, posted (8 years 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3520 times:

My parayers have been answered!!! And they say there is no aviation god!!!


That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineN844AA From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1352 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (8 years 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3508 times:

From a traveler's perspective, I really don't see the need for this -- at least at the quoted cost. But then again, as far as I'm concerned, the only renovation LGA really needs is to get some bars into concourses other than A.


New airplanes, new employees, low fares, all touchy-feely ... all of them are losers. -Gordon Bethune
User currently offlineCommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11752 posts, RR: 62
Reply 3, posted (8 years 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3454 times:

Quoting RJpieces (Thread starter):
Plans are being drawn to knock down old aircraft hangars on each side of the Central Terminal and build new, wider concourses.

Is AA going to be giving up its three huge hangars and adjoining ramp space next to Concourse D?


User currently offlineComorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4900 posts, RR: 16
Reply 4, posted (8 years 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3454 times:

LGA is my favorite airport, I just hope that it doesn't end up looking like another box from the boonies. I love the architecture, especially the old Control Tower, and also the short walk to the gates.

All said, the place does need new eating and drinking facilities, and shorter waits at the carousel.


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16883 posts, RR: 51
Reply 5, posted (8 years 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3400 times:

It's in the Port Authority's capital plan, the project will be approved at the same time as a $1.2 Billion Dollar expansion and renovation EWR's Terminal A.


Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineAvatordon From United States of America, joined May 2006, 239 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (8 years 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3390 times:

The old control tower is, if approved, slated to be torn down and replaced with a new one.

User currently offlineRemymartin11 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 67 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (8 years 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3390 times:

What they need to do is also rebuild the runways so they don't intersect. One of the biggest design flaws of the airport. That and the almost inevitable "gate tow" to Delta Gate #1....just what you want after landing at 11:30PM from Atlanta, an hour late, taxiing for 20 minutes and then waiting for the highly motivated ground crew to unload your bags before 3am.

User currently offlineJFKLGANYC From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3537 posts, RR: 5
Reply 8, posted (8 years 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3329 times:

Never going to happen. Never!

The Port Authority has been talking about this for years. Study after study. Design after Design.

The Port Authority was also supposed to redo the JFK IAB for years. They let it decay to crap and then leased it out to Schipol USA to redevelop.

Early this week a plan was announed to finally replace the tower. Keep in mind that it was talked about for over 20 years. We will be using those crumbling fingers at LGA for at least another decade.

Just a suggestion to the PA, they should privatize the few remaining terminals they run. A few years ago, the PA board decided it would get out of the real estate business and concentrate on infrastructure it runs: airports, ports, bridges, tunnels. That was the motive behind the leasing of the JFK IAB and the World Trade Center for 99 years.

The PA was to get out of the terminal running/terminal building business and concentrate on roadways, parking garages, runways, utilities, etc. at the airports.

Every new terminal built at JFK or EWR over the past few years is the result of private investment backed by Port Authority financing. This is a smart move for the region.

EWR Term C- Continental investment

JFK Term 1- TOGA investment
JFK Term 4- JFKIAT (Schipol USA) investment
JFK Term 5- jetBlue investment
JFK Term 9- AA investment

The PA has rebuilt roadways and parking facilities. They also built AirTrain EWR and JFK.

If any of us want to see a new LGA CTB in the next 20 years, we should look towards a private entity to redevelop and run the terminal.

PJ


User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4520 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (8 years 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3287 times:

Quoting Avatordon (Reply 6):
The old control tower is, if approved, slated to be torn down and replaced with a new one.

No!!!!! I love that old control tower. Would be nice if they could keep it and turn it into an observation deck or something like that for the public.


User currently offlineJaws707 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 708 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (8 years 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3266 times:

I really like the Marine Air Terminal at LGA, but I do wish they would add some more windows to it. LGA is one of my favorite airports as well.

User currently offlineB6DC10 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (8 years 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3244 times:

It will break my heart to see that building go...it was there that I fell in love with aviation...

User currently offlineBigOrange From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 2371 posts, RR: 3
Reply 12, posted (8 years 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3164 times:

Quoting N62NA (Reply 9):
Would be nice if they could keep it and turn it into an observation deck or something like that for the public.

OK, you can stop dreaming now! This is the Port Authority we are talking about, second only to the BAA for being anti-enthusiast!


User currently offlineApodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4287 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (8 years 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3133 times:

Quoting JFKLGANYC (Reply 8):
The PA was to get out of the terminal running/terminal building business and concentrate on roadways, parking garages, runways, utilities, etc. at the airports.

Every new terminal built at JFK or EWR over the past few years is the result of private investment backed by Port Authority financing. This is a smart move for the region.

EWR Term C- Continental investment

JFK Term 1- TOGA investment
JFK Term 4- JFKIAT (Schipol USA) investment
JFK Term 5- jetBlue investment
JFK Term 9- AA investment

I totally disagree with this philosophy, and I think its one of the weaknesses of US Airports. One thing I think needs to happen at every airport in this country is for all gates and check in areas to become Cute terminals. I have been a fan of this concept for a long time, and right now, I believe only LAS, MIA, and HNL employ this concept among the major airports. You can't have cute terminals if the Airlines are controlling them. While I agree that the airlines should be pumping some money into renovating all these terminals, the airports themselves have to share some of the cost as well.

Why do I support Cute? Well, lets take a look at some of the problems at some airports that would not be an issue with cute in place.

1. Out in DEN, UA and F9 have been in a pissing contest for years over gates on the A concourse. F9 has the bulk of the flights there, the problem was UA bought gates to prevent growth from F9, until the recent deal. If these gates were cute gates, F9 could have used them, and even shared them with TED, much like in LAS where WN uses B gates during the day, and HP uses some C gates at night.

2. At ORD, JetBlue is unable to start service due to lack of gate space, and its very tough for US to consolidate their operations into one location. Obviously United Express is using most of the gates there and they should, but NW and CO do not need all the gates that they currently occupy. Again, if these are Cute gates, Jet blue can run a couple of flights from a relatively unused shared gate, plus US has an easier time as well. And if not there, on the L concourse with DL and Alaska.

3. LAX has a lot of realitively unused gates that is making it tough for people to expand there. Terminal 1 is near saturation, WN can't add flights there due to lack of gates, and US can't move because there is no place for them to move. If you have Cute, they can share gate space in 6 with other airlines there, since most of those gates are unused most of the time.

4. Due to various construction projects in BOS, airlines have had to move many many times. If you had cute, the moves would be a lot easier to accomplish since you don't move nearly as much equipment, and there might be a chance of Terminal A becoming a SkyTeam terminal.

These are some situations, but I am a firm supporter of Cute in all US airports and I will be writing more about this in the coming months.


User currently offlineTeneriffe77 From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 470 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (8 years 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3112 times:

I highly doubt that the runways at LGA would ever be moved due to one thing: Rickers Island. It sits right next to the airport and there's no way in hell the city would change that due to the huge number of inmates there and the lack of any place near the city to hold them. Also at some of the airports like ORD there's the problem of slots which prevent new carriers from moving in ( along with the gate space issue).

User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16883 posts, RR: 51
Reply 15, posted (8 years 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3101 times:

JFKLGANYC,

I don't share you opinion about the LGA CTB, I feel it's very close (within two years) of being approved. The project is now connected with the rebuilding of Terminal A at EWR, the same way CO's Global Gateway Project and AA's JFK terminal project were both approved at the same board meeting in 1999.

The Terminal A project is ready to go, the NJ commissioners wanted that project to be approved last year however the LGA is not fully developed yet. So they instead approved a $300 Million Dollar modernization of Terminal B at EWR.

When the LGA project (planning, design work) is complete both projects will move forward, I expect them two be approved no later than 2009.

The LGA Central Terminal Building project is estimated at $1 Billion, the EWR Terminal A project is estimated at $1.2 Billion. They are going to rebuild Terminal A at EWR as they did with Terminal C, new concourses, ticketing/baggage levels, parking garage etc.

Page 16 of the Port Authority's Capital plan details better the time line for both projects, note the numbers in bold have already been allocated and the numbers in grey are expected to be allocated at some point.

http://www.panynj.gov/AboutthePortAu...rRelations/pdf/strat_plan_0922.pdf



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineCOERJ From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 238 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (8 years 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3033 times:

This is definitely an apreciated project as that terminal is a filthy mess- in the AA concourse u must walk through security, then turn around and walk through a three foot halway to get to a gate, which is seperate from the security screening by a temporary wall. The terminal is very depressing, and is always packed.

Finally something good at LGA


User currently offlineN844AA From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1352 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (8 years 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3020 times:

Quoting COERJ (Reply 16):
in the AA concourse u must walk through security, then turn around and walk through a three foot halway to get to a gate, which is seperate from the security screening by a temporary wall. The terminal is very depressing, and is always packed.

That's only a single gate and I'm pretty sure that's exclusively for Eagle use. Point is, it doesn't affect very many of LGA's daily passengers.

I've said it already, but if PANYNJ wants to maximize bang and passenger satisfaction for its improvement buck, they need to put bars into B, C, and D.



New airplanes, new employees, low fares, all touchy-feely ... all of them are losers. -Gordon Bethune
User currently offlineRICguy From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 111 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (8 years 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3001 times:

I have never heard of the "Cute terminal" description? Does that have something to do with "Common Use Gates/Terminals"? Can you explain what that means? Sounds interesting though. Thanks!

Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Spirit Wants New FLL Int'l Terminal To Be Simple posted Fri Jul 7 2006 19:00:50 by MAH4546
Original MCO Terminal To Be Demolished posted Sat May 27 2006 05:26:55 by Phatfarmlines
Auckland Domestic Terminal To Be Given Major Upgra posted Thu Apr 20 2006 01:08:36 by TG992
AA's BOS Terminal To Be Overhauled... posted Fri Mar 31 2006 14:03:57 by BoeingBus
LHR Terminal 2 To Be Closed posted Mon Mar 27 2006 13:58:15 by Gkirk
Part Of Meigs Field Terminal To Be Bird Hospital posted Wed Mar 22 2006 20:57:04 by KarlB737
View Deck Of Terminal 1 To Be Closed At FRA... posted Fri Oct 14 2005 16:14:54 by A346
Soon The 757 Will Need To Be Replaced! posted Thu Oct 13 2005 00:46:14 by CV990
CDG Terminal To Be Demolished posted Fri Jun 25 2004 09:30:49 by Qantasclub
ZRH Terminal B To Be Closed ... posted Thu Mar 6 2003 11:19:32 by Swissgabe