Many local activists and politicians have been pushing for the FAA to cancel this and pursue a a direct NYC Subway connection to the terminal similar to DCA.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/faa-delays-start-of-laguardia-airport-airtrain-11623961982

N train via Grand Central is the best option.

The N or W trains should be extended from either Astoria Blvd or Ditmars over the Grand Central Parkway to LGA. Cuomo's plans for the Airtrain to the 7 train never made any sense to most NYC residents.

You guys dont understand...but the OP should as he is very familiar with NYC.

This train was the path of least resistance.

The N will never be extended because it would require passing through residential neighborhoods that would tie it up in litigation for years.

This project routed the train over parkland and Citi Field to interfere with no one and avoid lawsuits.

It is a ridiculous route, but it avoids Pain-in-the-behind NYers and their litigation.

To advocate for anything other than this train route is to advocate for NO train...which is exactly what these advocates want.

The problem for AirTrain via the N or W would be needing to run at Grand Central Parkway grade level or with tunneling.(Runway 4). You can’t begin the descent until after 77 Street (and need to be at Grand Central Parkway grade level by 82 Street) and then one would likely have to reroute Astoria Boulevard’s westbound traffic as the westbound overpass over the Grand Central Parkway would likely have to be demolished or raised significantly to make room for a descending AirTrain.

It could be doable with a people mover system like AirTrain, but not otherwise. Also, the MTA wouldn’t want that competing with its M60 BRT service to LaGuardia, which I believe should run nonstop from 31 Street to the airport. Extending the subway there would require too much land condemnation, especially requiring demolition or an apartment complex in the 70s south of Ditmars Boulevard and between 31 and 33 Streets on Ditmars (the elevated would likely run on Ditmars and have to descend underground).

jfklganyc wrote:

You guys dont understand...but the OP should as he is very familiar with NYC.

This train was the path of least resistance.

The N will never be extended because it would require passing through residential neighborhoods that would tie it up in litigation for years.

This project routed the train over parkland and Citi Field to interfere with no one and avoid lawsuits.

It is a ridiculous route, but it avoids Pain-in-the-behind NYers and their litigation.

To advocate for anything other than this train route is to advocate for NO train...which is exactly what these advocates want.

You hit the nail on the head here. The only way to push forward with a project like this is to avoid any long drawn out court battles with Nimbys. Hence the convoluted route.

Edit: This local transit blog gives a brief history on the aborted N train extension to LGA that was proposed in the late 1990's.

https://secondavenuesagas.com/2014/02/0 ... laguardia/

The lack of transit to LGA has been a known problem for decades. In all those decades, a simple solution would have been to build a bus terminal at LGA. Then run express airport buses from LGA to major hubs in the five boroughs and the tri state area. While buses are not perfect, it's better than nothing.

Yes, I recognize LGA has a few bus lines but they are all problematic as they are local buses and they are not dedicated airport express routes.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

Also, the MTA wouldn’t want that competing with its M60 BRT service to LaGuardia,

The MTA also runs the subway though so why would this matter? It's also not a for-profit organization (even though they charge fares).

Why not extend the 7 line? While it runs past LGA , the land around the area in Willets Point and Downtown Flushing is more Industrial and Business than residential.

I honestly doubt that anything will come of any proposal though for better rail connections at LGA. NYC is full of NIMBYs, red tape, and bureaucratic mess. With the MTA under state control and the airport under control of the Port Authority they will never work together.

The subway will never connect to LGA. The best airtrain solution that could reasonably be built would be to run it all the way to Jamaica, but even that would have logistical issues of crossing the newly built van wick grand central merge and the LIRR trackage over the van wick.

The current plan isn’t perfect but it has the chance to actually be built in the next decade.

I think the study the Port Authority did was extremely biased as to provide Governor Cuomo with the plan he wanted. This is an opportunity to do an unbiased look and say what is possible.

If the NIMBY sentiment were so strong against the N Train via the Grand Central I don’t local politicians would be supporting the concept.

To show you the ridiculousness of NY, although not LGA, my father when he started working Idlewild/JFK in 1956 saw the developed plans for mass transit directly to the terminals area. 65 years later and NADA. Tells you all you need to know.

I didn't read the full WSJ article which is behind a paywall, but if the headlines are correct I'm amazed the Federal Aviation Administration are involved in this at all. Is ground transportation part of the FAA's remit?

aviatorcraig wrote:

I didn't read the full WSJ article which is behind a paywall, but if the headlines are correct I'm amazed the Federal Aviation Administration are involved in this at all. Is ground transportation part of the FAA's remit?

It is when you are using PFC’s to pay for it.

aemoreira1981 wrote:

Also, the MTA wouldn’t want that competing with its M60 BRT service to LaGuardia, which I believe should run nonstop from 31 Street to the airport.

I disagree - there will always be a need to run service to Harlem with connections to the upper 1/3 of Manhattan, with or without a theoretical N line expansion.

If anything, the MTA should evaluate adding the MTA SBS bus service to The Bronx (especially eastern and southern communities via the Whitestone) to provide a more direct route than the current out-of-the-way routing to the 125th St. Station in Harlem.

The only plus side of the Air Train option that no one talks about is the possibility to later add in the missing link between Willets Point and Jamaica station allowing the Air Train to then connect LGA and JFK. Under ideal conditions someone would be able to make a connection between the airports in as little as 60 minutes.

She is right about the N/Q train. It terminates nearby (but not very near) and could be extended.

Is it really so noisy to dig a tunnel underground? I see the 2nd ave subway caused some noise complaints. It seems to be a much bigger project than an LGA train would be.

jfklganyc wrote:

To advocate for anything other than this train route is to advocate for NO train...which is exactly what these advocates want.

I (and a lot of transit activists) actually think given the choice between the AirTrain on its proposed alignment and No Build, the city is actually better off with No Build. I'm hardly a NIMBY, I believe that transit expansion is very important and should be prioritized. It's just transit funds are limited and should be spent on actually useful projects instead (such as a N/W train extension....)

The problem is the current design goes in the wrong direction (away from the center of population/most users), and the travel time will actually be longer than current transit options to reach LGA. It have poor headway connectivity with the LIRR and 7 line at its terminal, making it very painful and time-consuming to access the airport using new train. Good luck getting your baggage on the 7 at peak times.

The current alignment was selected for political reasons and was probably the worst of the alternatives considered (worse than No Build). https://secondavenuesagas.com/2020/01/0 ... -airtrain/ https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2020/01/03/ ... -airtrain/ I can think of many more useful ways to spend $2 billion improving transit.

PHLspecial wrote:

So a train to downtown would be way more useful but again the NIMBYs are at work.

For now, the issue is more that the current design is Cuomo's pet project, and since it was introduced he's been putting on continual pressure to push it though. You're right that other options would run into substantial NIMBY headwinds though.

santi319 wrote:

She said extending the N/Q train from nearby Astoria to LaGuardia makes more sense, as does expanding bus service.

LCDFlight wrote:

She is right about the N/Q train. It terminates nearby (but not very near) and could be extended.

The Q has not gone to Astoria or Queens at all since 2016. It is the Second Avenue Subway now. The Astoria branch is now the N & W.

The most obvious routing to me would be to have the N & W split at Astoria Boulevard and have one of them run down the freeway to LGA while the other would continue to service Ditmars. But the freeway is down in a trench and there are a ton of street overpasses in that corridor that would have to be dealt with. But it still seems easier than digging underground past Ditmars and heading east to LGA that way.

BAINY3 wrote:

santi319 wrote:

She said extending the N/Q train from nearby Astoria to LaGuardia makes more sense, as does expanding bus service.

LCDFlight wrote:

She is right about the N/Q train. It terminates nearby (but not very near) and could be extended.

The Q has not gone to Astoria or Queens at all since 2016. It is the Second Avenue Subway now. The Astoria branch is now the N & W.

The most obvious routing to me would be to have the N & W split at Astoria Boulevard and have one of them run down the freeway to LGA while the other would continue to service Ditmars. But the freeway is down in a trench and there are a ton of street overpasses in that corridor that would have to be dealt with. But it still seems easier than digging underground past Ditmars and heading east to LGA that way.

As stated earlier it likely can’t be built over the grand central in the vicinity of the airport as it could displace the threshold for runway 4.

N757ST wrote:

The subway will never connect to LGA. The best airtrain solution that could reasonably be built would be to run it all the way to Jamaica, but even that would have logistical issues of crossing the newly built van wick grand central merge and the LIRR trackage over the van wick.

The current plan isn’t perfect but it has the chance to actually be built in the next decade.

I agree. I’m actually surprised the FAA didn’t step in earlier when the Ditmars Blvd homeowners filed a complaint about their foundations being affected by the terminal construction. At this point, the only way to get that Airtrain built is to condemn the nearby marina and send the train seaside around willets point to the 7 train and LIRR.

N757ST wrote:

As stated earlier it likely can’t be built over the grand central in the vicinity of the airport as it could displace the threshold for runway 4.

I'm envisioning a scenario where the train becomes grade-level east of 49th (similar to train-in-median situations in Chicago and DC). This is well before it gets anywhere near Runway 4.

When you look at the map of the planned route, it does seem to bypass most of the developed areas in Queens, but I’m not sure whether LaGuardia travelers will bite. The NYC subway is narrow compared to most and is not conducive to bringing anything much bigger than a rollaboard with you. And even that is pushing it if you have a large personal item with you. I would hope that they would make the 7 more useful by installing luggage racks in the train or taking seats out so people can stand more easily with their bags. Otherwise, it really will impact daily riders negatively, and people will continue to hop in cabs.

This is the problem with big cities. Once it gets to a certain point, building anything is almost impossible. There are lots of small towns with huge long runways and massive cities with tiny little runways that can never be extended.

I don´t know if just building a tunnel the whole way is a possible solution. It would be good if they could build a dedicated line going Manhattan-LGA-with no stops in between. The distance in a straight line is not far at all.

RL757PVD wrote:

The only plus side of the Air Train option that no one talks about is the possibility to later add in the missing link between Willets Point and Jamaica station allowing the Air Train to then connect LGA and JFK. Under ideal conditions someone would be able to make a connection between the airports in as little as 60 minutes.

No one is going to build a multi Billion rail line from LGA to JFK so a handful, and that’s what it would be, of DL passengers could connect. That’s why JFK has its own domestic flights. That’s like saying the DC Metro should go from DCA IAD, instead of into DC.

You’re investing in a rail connection to bring travelers to and from Manhattan and maybe downtown Brooklyn, LIC to LGA.

peterinlisbon wrote:

This is the problem with big cities. Once it gets to a certain point, building anything is almost impossible. There are lots of small towns with huge long runways and massive cities with tiny little runways that can never be extended.

I don´t know if just building a tunnel the whole way is a possible solution. It would be good if they could build a dedicated line going Manhattan-LGA-with no stops in between. The distance in a straight line is not far at all.

I also suspect dedicated airtrain is the way to get things feasibly approved.
As far as I understand, NYC subway is a Jurassic park in terms of technology. Astoria blvd station, from which people propose extending the service, was built in 1917, with cosmetic renovations since. MTA recently started a signal update project, replacing 70 year old (pre-transistor technology!) one.
https://new.mta.info/projects/culver-li ... ernization
https://new.mta.info/projects/culver-li ... on/details

I suspect there are multiple legacy arrangements that would prevent mating old lines with grandfathered tech and new lines.

Building new... there is not enough money in the world to build a new subway line in NYC. Last line opened was done at a cost of $1B/km (to visualize - cost of line construction is equal to value of $100 bills stacked to same length ). By the time any new design would get approved, price would increase multi-fold.
Price of now-reviewed line went up by a factor of 5 since 201 5

The best NYC subway line to connect to is the N train, the N train has 16 station stops in Manhattan from from Upper East side, Times Square, Union Square, World Trade Center, Financial District etc..

The 7 train has4-5 stops, all pretty much on the same
Street (42nd).

STT757 wrote:

You’re investing in a rail connection to bring travelers to and from Manhattan and maybe downtown Brooklyn, LIC to LGA.

Would that it were so. The problem is the current plan is to spend $2 billion for a train that goes in the wrong direction and is slower for those people than current options.

BAINY3 wrote:

N757ST wrote:

As stated earlier it likely can’t be built over the grand central in the vicinity of the airport as it could displace the threshold for runway 4.

I'm envisioning a scenario where the train becomes grade-level east of 49th (similar to train-in-median situations in Chicago and DC). This is well before it gets anywhere near Runway 4.

It would be easier if it was grade level. You can tie the tracks into the Jamaica Yard leads which over-fly the grand central. Create a new line from Manhattan via Queens Blvd express and also tap into Long Island City, Downtown Brooklyn via G train extension.

PHLspecial wrote:

BAINY3 wrote:

N757ST wrote:

As stated earlier it likely can’t be built over the grand central in the vicinity of the airport as it could displace the threshold for runway 4.

I'm envisioning a scenario where the train becomes grade-level east of 49th (similar to train-in-median situations in Chicago and DC). This is well before it gets anywhere near Runway 4.

I agree with this solution. It's okay that the Grand central turns from a 4-5 lane road into a 3 lane road where the train runs. Yes some of it will have to be two lanes but if you are taking people out of cars that would help.

I don’t think you realize the absolute pandemonium that would occur if you made the grand central into a 2 lane road. That’s a non starter.

According to wikipedia,

"In February 2021, Miami mayor Francis Suarez revealed that [Elon] Musk had proposed to dig a two-mile tunnel under the Miami River for $30 million, within a six-month timescale, compared with $1 billion over four years estimated by the local transit authority.[81]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Boring_Company

LCDFlight wrote:

According to wikipedia,

"In February 2021, Miami mayor Francis Suarez revealed that [Elon] Musk had proposed to dig a two-mile tunnel under the Miami River for $30 million, within a six-month timescale, compared with $1 billion over four years estimated by the local transit authority.[81]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Boring_Company

There is a lot of fine print - including tunnel size and quality, permits, so on...

What a great thread!

I've learned a lot from these well informed posts, and have 3 separate questions/points for this group.

1)

max999 wrote:

The lack of transit to LGA has been a known problem for decades. In all those decades, a simple solution would have been to build a bus terminal at LGA.

This is an intriguing idea. It raises a question for me: What happened to the Carey Limo scheduled bus service? Why was it stopped?

For decades there was a superb, depentable bus link from LGA to Midtown, across the street from Grand Central. Carey also operated hourly from LGA to JFK.

Later another company operated it, I thought sloppily.

Carey was more expensive than MTA, but it was clean, reliable, express, and baggage friendly.

Why was this service stopped? And if this kind of excellent bus link failed, to the highest-traffic destination, why would other new ones succeed?

2)

LCDFlight wrote:

Is it really so noisy to dig a tunnel underground?

The big issue I see is not noise, but that tunneling is fabulously expensive. Something like 10x (?) the cost of building above ground.

3)
Lastly, I recall reading about the politics of potential train options to EWR, where it would be relatively simple to extend Path all the way to the EWR terminal buildings. This would create a "single seat" ride from downtown NYC to the EWR terminals. But I recall that internal politics inside the Port Authority, which is a joint NY-NJ entity, were a big ostacle. The politics were essentially that "they couldn't make the train to EWR 'too good' because it was hard to copy that at JFK/LGA, and Port Authority would seem to favor EWR by giving them such an efficient option.

Path already runs from WTC to Newark Penn Station. There was right-of-way or usable tracks are in place from Newark Penn to the Newark Airport/Airtrain station, So the only missing link is somehow running Path over the monorail route.

usdcaguy wrote:

When you look at the map of the planned route, it does seem to bypass most of the developed areas in Queens, but I’m not sure whether LaGuardia travelers will bite. The NYC subway is narrow compared to most and is not conducive to bringing anything much bigger than a rollaboard with you. And even that is pushing it if you have a large personal item with you. I would hope that they would make the 7 more useful by installing luggage racks in the train or taking seats out so people can stand more easily with their bags. Otherwise, it really will impact daily riders negatively, and people will continue to hop in cabs.

It will easily beat the M60. Bag in the aisle or bag stealing a seat. Very nice lady confirmed I was at the stop for the A, cause, ya know, classic "mumble-mumble" everyone-knows-where-they're-going stop announcements. The M60 is likely more scenic, though. They should replace it with a gondola some day! (I'm joking, upthread transit advocate...)

ssteve wrote:

usdcaguy wrote:

When you look at the map of the planned route, it does seem to bypass most of the developed areas in Queens, but I’m not sure whether LaGuardia travelers will bite. The NYC subway is narrow compared to most and is not conducive to bringing anything much bigger than a rollaboard with you. And even that is pushing it if you have a large personal item with you. I would hope that they would make the 7 more useful by installing luggage racks in the train or taking seats out so people can stand more easily with their bags. Otherwise, it really will impact daily riders negatively, and people will continue to hop in cabs.

It will easily beat the M60. Bag in the aisle or bag stealing a seat. Very nice lady confirmed I was at the stop for the A, cause, ya know, classic "mumble-mumble" everyone-knows-where-they're-going stop announcements. The M60 is likely more scenic, though. They should replace it with a gondola some day! (I'm joking, upthread transit advocate...)

a gondola isnt a bad idea even though i know you are joking

jfklganyc wrote:

ssteve wrote:

usdcaguy wrote:

When you look at the map of the planned route, it does seem to bypass most of the developed areas in Queens, but I’m not sure whether LaGuardia travelers will bite. The NYC subway is narrow compared to most and is not conducive to bringing anything much bigger than a rollaboard with you. And even that is pushing it if you have a large personal item with you. I would hope that they would make the 7 more useful by installing luggage racks in the train or taking seats out so people can stand more easily with their bags. Otherwise, it really will impact daily riders negatively, and people will continue to hop in cabs.

It will easily beat the M60. Bag in the aisle or bag stealing a seat. Very nice lady confirmed I was at the stop for the A, cause, ya know, classic "mumble-mumble" everyone-knows-where-they're-going stop announcements. The M60 is likely more scenic, though. They should replace it with a gondola some day! (I'm joking, upthread transit advocate...)

a gondola isnt a bad idea even though i know you are joking

Like the Disney Skyliner, took the family in April and the Skyliner is actually a nice way to get between Epcot and Hollywood Studios.

jfklganyc wrote:

ssteve wrote:

usdcaguy wrote:

When you look at the map of the planned route, it does seem to bypass most of the developed areas in Queens, but I’m not sure whether LaGuardia travelers will bite. The NYC subway is narrow compared to most and is not conducive to bringing anything much bigger than a rollaboard with you. And even that is pushing it if you have a large personal item with you. I would hope that they would make the 7 more useful by installing luggage racks in the train or taking seats out so people can stand more easily with their bags. Otherwise, it really will impact daily riders negatively, and people will continue to hop in cabs.

It will easily beat the M60. Bag in the aisle or bag stealing a seat. Very nice lady confirmed I was at the stop for the A, cause, ya know, classic "mumble-mumble" everyone-knows-where-they're-going stop announcements. The M60 is likely more scenic, though. They should replace it with a gondola some day! (I'm joking, upthread transit advocate...)

a gondola isnt a bad idea even though i know you are joking

They're generally cheap, quiet, and efficient compared to other options. Some people find them to be an eyesore but I don't personally. The idea was floated here in GVA as urban transit (yes, seriously). Some of the latest models I've seen at Zermatt and Zinal are huge, almost all-window, comfortable, with plenty of place for bags. Hell the new one going up to Zermatt Glacier Paradise has 4 rows of HEATED seats!!

STT757 wrote:

jfklganyc wrote:

ssteve wrote:

It will easily beat the M60. Bag in the aisle or bag stealing a seat. Very nice lady confirmed I was at the stop for the A, cause, ya know, classic "mumble-mumble" everyone-knows-where-they're-going stop announcements. The M60 is likely more scenic, though. They should replace it with a gondola some day! (I'm joking, upthread transit advocate...)

a gondola isnt a bad idea even though i know you are joking

Like the Disney Skyliner, took the family in April and the Skyliner is actually a nice way to get between Epcot and Hollywood Studios.

That Gondola is the Monorail Expansion that never happened.

Cheap, easy, gets the job done. And hell, for most riders...fun

jfklganyc wrote:

STT757 wrote:

jfklganyc wrote:

a gondola isnt a bad idea even though i know you are joking

Like the Disney Skyliner, took the family in April and the Skyliner is actually a nice way to get between Epcot and Hollywood Studios.

That Gondola is the Monorail Expansion that never happened.

Cheap, easy, gets the job done. And hell, for most riders...fun

I love the Monorail, but the Skyliner is more fun. They need to figure out how to get it to Disney Springs. I’m sure it sucks getting stuck in one of Florida’s pop up storms.

N757ST wrote:

As stated earlier it likely can’t be built over the grand central in the vicinity of the airport as it could displace the threshold for runway 4.

That shouldn't be a huge issue. The new Crenshaw line at LAX does exactly that on the east end of runways 25R/L.

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9366603,-118.3785633,3a,75y,314.29h,98.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1-4qkJJi3Vp1z8tAk6718w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

N62NA wrote:

N757ST wrote:

As stated earlier it likely can’t be built over the grand central in the vicinity of the airport as it could displace the threshold for runway 4.

That shouldn't be a huge issue. The new Crenshaw line at LAX does exactly that on the east end of runways 25R/L.

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9366603,-118.3785633,3a,75y,314.29h,98.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1-4qkJJi3Vp1z8tAk6718w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Just run it through a trench in that area.

N62NA wrote:

N757ST wrote:

As stated earlier it likely can’t be built over the grand central in the vicinity of the airport as it could displace the threshold for runway 4.

That shouldn't be a huge issue. The new Crenshaw line at LAX does exactly that on the east end of runways 25R/L.

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9366603,-118.3785633,3a,75y,314.29h,98.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1-4qkJJi3Vp1z8tAk6718w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Not comparable. The threshold is already displaced on 25R and isn’t a factor on 25L. Plus, those runways are long, displacing 4 at LGA will lead to extensive operational issues, especially during 4 arrivals and 31 departures.

STT757 wrote:

N62NA wrote:

N757ST wrote:

As stated earlier it likely can’t be built over the grand central in the vicinity of the airport as it could displace the threshold for runway 4.

That shouldn't be a huge issue. The new Crenshaw line at LAX does exactly that on the east end of runways 25R/L.

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9366603,-118.3785633,3a,75y,314.29h,98.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1-4qkJJi3Vp1z8tAk6718w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Just run it through a trench in that area.

Exactly. Which is what they do (and then actually tunnel for a bit to clear the runways) for LAX 25R/L.

N757ST wrote:

N62NA wrote:

N757ST wrote:

As stated earlier it likely can’t be built over the grand central in the vicinity of the airport as it could displace the threshold for runway 4.

That shouldn't be a huge issue. The new Crenshaw line at LAX does exactly that on the east end of runways 25R/L.

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9366603,-118.3785633,3a,75y,314.29h,98.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1-4qkJJi3Vp1z8tAk6718w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Not comparable. The threshold is already displaced on 25R and isn’t a factor on 25L. Plus, those runways are long, displacing 4 at LGA will lead to extensive operational issues, especially during 4 arrivals and 31 departures.

Just tunnel under the Grand Central at that point for the remaining mile or so to the main terminal. Plenty of room between 23rd Ave and the Grand Central at that spot. This is not rocket science.

N62NA wrote:

STT757 wrote:

N62NA wrote:

That shouldn't be a huge issue. The new Crenshaw line at LAX does exactly that on the east end of runways 25R/L.

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9366603,-118.3785633,3a,75y,314.29h,98.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1-4qkJJi3Vp1z8tAk6718w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Just run it through a trench in that area.

Exactly. Which is what they do (and then actually tunnel for a bit to clear the runways) for LAX 25R/L.

N757ST wrote:

N62NA wrote:

That shouldn't be a huge issue. The new Crenshaw line at LAX does exactly that on the east end of runways 25R/L.

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9366603,-118.3785633,3a,75y,314.29h,98.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1-4qkJJi3Vp1z8tAk6718w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Not comparable. The threshold is already displaced on 25R and isn’t a factor on 25L. Plus, those runways are long, displacing 4 at LGA will lead to extensive operational issues, especially during 4 arrivals and 31 departures.

Just tunnel under the Grand Central at that point for the remaining mile or so to the main terminal. Plenty of room between 23rd Ave and the Grand Central at that spot. This is not rocket science.

They just cant do it in NY. The laws and regulations, the strong union rules make a project of this magnitude unworkable and impossible. The net result is a tunnel that will cost billions and you taking a cab from LGA 20 years from now

That is what is missing in this thread: people Misunderstand NY and its politics.

This train route is the best route because it is the only acceptable (no litigation), viable (cost effective) route possible.

It touches no houses. It is near nothing or no one, so there is little resistance. It runs over parkland, a marina, a highway, and a baseball stadium parking lot. All of which are in various states of decay. The project throws money at each of these things to make it more palatable.


This is a microcosm of why great things arent done in New York anymore. For great infrastructure projects in the US, you need to go to places like Florida, where a high speed rail is being built alongside 30 miles of the Route 528 to a huge new station at MCO. No fanfare, no endless studies, no litigation, no cost re estimates…they proposed it, they are building it, you will be riding it soon. End of story. Things like that no longer happen in NY State. it is just too hard

jfklganyc wrote:

They just cant do it in NY. The laws and regulations, the strong union rules make a project of this magnitude unworkable and impossible. The net result is a tunnel that will cost billions and you taking a cab from LGA 20 years from now

That is what is missing in this thread: people Misunderstand NY and its politics.

This train route is the best route because it is the only acceptable (no litigation), viable (cost effective) route possible.

It touches no houses. It is near nothing or no one, so there is little resistance. It runs over parkland, a marina, a highway, and a baseball stadium parking lot. All of which are in various states of decay. The project throws money at each of these things to make it more palatable.


This is a microcosm of why great things arent done in New York anymore. For great infrastructure projects in the US, you need to go to places like Florida, where a high speed rail is being built alongside 30 miles of the Route 528 to a huge new station at MCO. No fanfare, no endless studies, no litigation, no cost re estimates…they proposed it, they are building it, you will be riding it soon. End of story. Things like that no longer happen in NY State. it is just too hard

Oh, I know what I proposed can't be done in NY. Grew up in northern NJ and lived in NYC from 1986 - 2003, so I am very familiar with the problems - and the causes - up there.

For all the reasons you listed above, which I agree with, NY/NYC is a disaster. I really don't understand why people continue to live there if they don't absolutely have to.

Signed.. A happy resident of Florida since 2003.

jfklganyc wrote:

N62NA wrote:

STT757 wrote:

Just run it through a trench in that area.

Exactly. Which is what they do (and then actually tunnel for a bit to clear the runways) for LAX 25R/L.

N757ST wrote:

Not comparable. The threshold is already displaced on 25R and isn’t a factor on 25L. Plus, those runways are long, displacing 4 at LGA will lead to extensive operational issues, especially during 4 arrivals and 31 departures.

Just tunnel under the Grand Central at that point for the remaining mile or so to the main terminal. Plenty of room between 23rd Ave and the Grand Central at that spot. This is not rocket science.

They just cant do it in NY. The laws and regulations, the strong union rules make a project of this magnitude unworkable and impossible. The net result is a tunnel that will cost billions and you taking a cab from LGA 20 years from now

That is what is missing in this thread: people Misunderstand NY and its politics.

This train route is the best route because it is the only acceptable (no litigation), viable (cost effective) route possible.

It touches no houses. It is near nothing or no one, so there is little resistance. It runs over parkland, a marina, a highway, and a baseball stadium parking lot. All of which are in various states of decay. The project throws money at each of these things to make it more palatable.


This is a microcosm of why great things arent done in New York anymore. For great infrastructure projects in the US, you need to go to places like Florida, where a high speed rail is being built alongside 30 miles of the Route 528 to a huge new station at MCO. No fanfare, no endless studies, no litigation, no cost re estimates…they proposed it, they are building it, you will be riding it soon. End of story. Things like that no longer happen in NY State. it is just too hard

Wow easy saying citi field is in decay.

32andBelow wrote:

jfklganyc wrote:

N62NA wrote:

Exactly. Which is what they do (and then actually tunnel for a bit to clear the runways) for LAX 25R/L.



Just tunnel under the Grand Central at that point for the remaining mile or so to the main terminal. Plenty of room between 23rd Ave and the Grand Central at that spot. This is not rocket science.

They just cant do it in NY. The laws and regulations, the strong union rules make a project of this magnitude unworkable and impossible. The net result is a tunnel that will cost billions and you taking a cab from LGA 20 years from now

That is what is missing in this thread: people Misunderstand NY and its politics.

This train route is the best route because it is the only acceptable (no litigation), viable (cost effective) route possible.

It touches no houses. It is near nothing or no one, so there is little resistance. It runs over parkland, a marina, a highway, and a baseball stadium parking lot. All of which are in various states of decay. The project throws money at each of these things to make it more palatable.


This is a microcosm of why great things arent done in New York anymore. For great infrastructure projects in the US, you need to go to places like Florida, where a high speed rail is being built alongside 30 miles of the Route 528 to a huge new station at MCO. No fanfare, no endless studies, no litigation, no cost re estimates…they proposed it, they are building it, you will be riding it soon. End of story. Things like that no longer happen in NY State. it is just too hard

Wow easy saying citi field is in decay.

He said the parking lot is. I doubt the building is; I worked on it just a little over a decade ago.

jfklganyc wrote:

N62NA wrote:

STT757 wrote:

Just run it through a trench in that area.

Exactly. Which is what they do (and then actually tunnel for a bit to clear the runways) for LAX 25R/L.

N757ST wrote:

Not comparable. The threshold is already displaced on 25R and isn’t a factor on 25L. Plus, those runways are long, displacing 4 at LGA will lead to extensive operational issues, especially during 4 arrivals and 31 departures.

Just tunnel under the Grand Central at that point for the remaining mile or so to the main terminal. Plenty of room between 23rd Ave and the Grand Central at that spot. This is not rocket science.

They just cant do it in NY. The laws and regulations, the strong union rules make a project of this magnitude unworkable and impossible. The net result is a tunnel that will cost billions and you taking a cab from LGA 20 years from now

That is what is missing in this thread: people Misunderstand NY and its politics.

This train route is the best route because it is the only acceptable (no litigation), viable (cost effective) route possible.

It touches no houses. It is near nothing or no one, so there is little resistance. It runs over parkland, a marina, a highway, and a baseball stadium parking lot. All of which are in various states of decay. The project throws money at each of these things to make it more palatable.


This is a microcosm of why great things arent done in New York anymore. For great infrastructure projects in the US, you need to go to places like Florida, where a high speed rail is being built alongside 30 miles of the Route 528 to a huge new station at MCO. No fanfare, no endless studies, no litigation, no cost re estimates…they proposed it, they are building it, you will be riding it soon. End of story. Things like that no longer happen in NY State. it is just too hard

I take it you're referring to Brightline. There definitely was litigation involved. Brightline was sued by Martin County (lawsuit dropped in 2018) and Indian River County (lawsuit dropped in June 2021) here in FL. That IRC court battle lasted 7 years and only got settled earlier this month. NIMBY-ism is a problem that exists all over the US, essentially everywhere. I'm not sure why you feel it's a NY/NYC specific problem.

And Florida and great infrastructure...c'mon. Not even the most diehard Floridian would argue our infrastructure is great or anywhere near it.

https://www.wptv.com/news/region-indian ... whats-next

jfklganyc wrote:

N62NA wrote:

STT757 wrote:

Just run it through a trench in that area.

Exactly. Which is what they do (and then actually tunnel for a bit to clear the runways) for LAX 25R/L.

N757ST wrote:

Not comparable. The threshold is already displaced on 25R and isn’t a factor on 25L. Plus, those runways are long, displacing 4 at LGA will lead to extensive operational issues, especially during 4 arrivals and 31 departures.

Just tunnel under the Grand Central at that point for the remaining mile or so to the main terminal. Plenty of room between 23rd Ave and the Grand Central at that spot. This is not rocket science.

They just cant do it in NY. The laws and regulations, the strong union rules make a project of this magnitude unworkable and impossible. The net result is a tunnel that will cost billions and you taking a cab from LGA 20 years from now

That is what is missing in this thread: people Misunderstand NY and its politics.

This train route is the best route because it is the only acceptable (no litigation), viable (cost effective) route possible.

It touches no houses. It is near nothing or no one, so there is little resistance. It runs over parkland, a marina, a highway, and a baseball stadium parking lot. All of which are in various states of decay. The project throws money at each of these things to make it more palatable.


This is a microcosm of why great things arent done in New York anymore. For great infrastructure projects in the US, you need to go to places like Florida, where a high speed rail is being built alongside 30 miles of the Route 528 to a huge new station at MCO. No fanfare, no endless studies, no litigation, no cost re estimates…they proposed it, they are building it, you will be riding it soon. End of story. Things like that no longer happen in NY State. it is just too hard

And not to derail this thread (no pun intended), but there is even more opposition coming to Brightline. It's just mind-boggling to me that you think that project has run entirely smoothly. Residents of Hunter's Creek are proposing a fight:

https://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/or ... story.html

There also has been lots of fanfare, notable delays and the cost to complete the project has steadily risen through all of the setbacks. As someone who has been a fan and regular user of Brightline while it was operating pre-COVID, I myself wondered whether they would be able to actually get this done feasibly. This entire expansion will likely get done but it has been anything but smooth or easy.