Gothamist: Tunnel Vision

Jody

Tue, 11 May 2004 06:08:52 -0500

And really, last time I took a cab to JFK from Downtown Brooklyn it cost $45 (before tip) and due to particularly nasty Friday rush hour traffic, I got to the airport five minutes before my plane was due to board. Public transportation is hella more reliable.

Jody

Tue, 11 May 2004 06:05:39 -0500

"while I used to prefer LGA as the cost of getting there is less, nowadays, I will almost prefer JFK as it's the only aiport w/ cheap public transportation." You can take the M60 from Morningside Heights (Columbia) directly to the airport and it's a quick and free transfer from the subway. From Queens, you can take the Q33 straight to LGA from Jackson Heights. Not recommended if you have a lot of bags, but most travelers don't. Newark is easy and not much more expensive: subway to Penn Station, take New Jersey Transit a couple of stops to the EWR (Newark Airport) station, and the AirTrain is right there and as I recall it's free with your NJT ticket.

Scott

Wed, 05 May 2004 23:41:48 -0500

Even in the barrens of Connecticut, I fly out of JFK, because it's either that or Newark for international and JFK is closer.

rollins

Wed, 05 May 2004 13:49:23 -0500

You can save the five bucks by getting off the subway at Howard Beach and then walking into the parking lot where the shuttle buses used to be. Pretty soon a parking lot shuttle bus will come along and take you to the next AirTrain terminal, which doesn't charge to enter or exit. Take that, Port Authority.

PatGav

Wed, 05 May 2004 02:04:11 -0500

The city did get the Port Authority to make the JFK airtrain tracks the same gauge as the MTA system, with an eye towards compatibility.

Doctor Memory

Wed, 05 May 2004 00:49:18 -0500

Who uses JFK? Um, that would be anyone who ever flies to (a) the west coast, or (b) anywhere in Europe. I suspect there might be one or two of those people in this city. Not to mention: anyone flying into NYC from the west coast or europe or damn near anywhere else in the world. I hear we get a few of those as well. Yes, the Airtrain project was poorly conceived and badly managed. Yes, the pricetag for this project is way too high. But anyone who thinks that the status quo is anything less than an embarrassment is high. Philadelphia has faster and more convenient rail access to its airport than we do, nevermind London, SF, Singapore or Paris.

Cheng

Tue, 04 May 2004 14:41:56 -0500

Mayor Koch: Agreed, though the AirTrain isn't a monorail at JFK: it uses standard rails, though I don't know if the gauge is compatible with any other rail system in the city. Note that since it's automated, any track on the standard subway or LIRR systems will need to be "automated" in some way. Jenny: Who uses JFK? One word: JetBlue. We had to go to Sacramento this past weekend on short notice, and JetBlue doesn't increase its fares to astronomical levels as you get closer to the date of travel. Continental's emergency fares cost more than three times what JetBlue's standard fares were.

Jen

Tue, 04 May 2004 14:10:53 -0500

That's why we have comments - so you can point out of the errors of our ways. Good facts for me to digest, all. Thanks.

Mayor Koch

Tue, 04 May 2004 13:55:53 -0500

Gothamist is once again proving how little it knows. The AirTrain is nothing more than an overpriced monorail system. It's basically a huge pork-barrel project by Pataki to leave some "mark" on the city. It does provide a service, but at the cost it's not a bargain and it is highly questionable. Anyone remember "Take the train to the plane"? The special subway line that then unloaded passengers to special buses? There is no reason that system cannot be revived and slightly improved. But the idea of "reinventing the wheel" to build an extended monorail system in a city filled with subway tracks is quite insane and a very bad use of tax dollars.

jmc

Tue, 04 May 2004 13:55:32 -0500

who uses JFK, you ask? just about anybody who doesn't want to shell out 45 bucks for a taxi ride (before tips and tolls). while I used to prefer LGA as the cost of getting there is less, nowadays, I will almost prefer JFK as it's the only aiport w/ cheap public transportation. mark my word, those airport bus fares will surely increase down the road.

jenny

Tue, 04 May 2004 13:34:10 -0500

who uses JFK anyway and how often? Most of the flights from there are international and people getting on them are connecting from somewhere else. What we really need is a train to JFK instead of that crazy subway to long bus ride crap.

miss representation

Tue, 04 May 2004 12:02:18 -0500

Jen: actually, for the freight rail connector, it was hoped that most of the funds would be federal, and would come from the Transportation bill (well over $300 billion at this point). People often think of 'Transportation' as 'Highway' since that is what it ends up as, but that is where we get most our federal funds for any infrastucture (including the rail, bicycling improvements, and even subways, if the NY delegation had more clout). Some of the money is already in place, but the intention is to try and dredge Newark harbor to 45 feet, which is the new standard for super-container ships; Newark is 40, but Newport News is already 45. Brooklyn is over 50, and is thus the best suited deepwater port in the Northeast (and has much of the infrastructure in place). Port activity is still as huge issue for New York (relating to jobs, revenue, cost of good, and perhaps most crucially, waste disposal). If you want to spend that money on education, think of it this way: money saved in sanitation (a local expense) could be reallocated to education. And given the disproportionate effects waste disposal and transportation on low income neighborhoods, resulting quality of life gains (exhaust emissions) would also help education. Plus, no more trucks on Canal Street.

JK

Tue, 04 May 2004 11:41:27 -0500

If it takes the MTA over 18 months to build one staircase (B'way and 40th St.), and how many decades to debate the 2nd Ave. subway... I cannot even begin to imagine how long it would take for a JFK link. Transporters indeed.

Cheng

Tue, 04 May 2004 11:39:51 -0500

I just took the AirTrain/Subway back from JFK this morning. It's fine: taking the A-train during late rush hour gets you from JFK to Columbus Circle in an hour. Not sure about the times from Fulton Street: I was napping. Note that I don't see how we can get a "one-seat" ride to terminals at JFK: the AirTrain is basically like the automated tram at Newark, doing circuits from terminal to terminal. You WILL have to get up and schlepp your bags at some point to get to this tram, no matter how you get to the airport, whether by A, E or LIRR. Or, for that matter, with any sort of special train from the Financial District to JFK, you will have to get up, get off that train and get on the tram, unless it's some sort of low-capacity, high-expense automated train with its own station near Wall Street.

Jen

Tue, 04 May 2004 10:46:54 -0500

Okay, "cost-effective" in terms of relative options to getting to JFK (taxi, buses, shuttles). Taking the subway to the airport in a convenient manner is an option that NYers lack, versus cities like London, Hong Kong, Boston. I don't think the bus-train option to JFK is that great, I rather take the bus directly to Newark. The Bklyn-NY rail connector looks like a great idea, but I'd like those funds, which are probably earmarked for a public works projects along the lines of transportation, to go to education or social services.

miss representation

Tue, 04 May 2004 10:22:32 -0500

And $6 billion would get us the Bykln-NY rail connector, a far more valuable (and egalitarian, in terms of benefits, jobs, etc.) project.

richy rich

Tue, 04 May 2004 10:21:23 -0500

"Gothamist thinks this is a great idea - a convenient and cost-effective way for people to get to JFK." - this is not cost effective and i dont know how you or anyone could justify that as such. "Right now, the Air Train still requires passengers to transfer from a bus or subway." - From lower manhattan you you can take the E train to Jamaica or hop on a LIRR at Penn Station to Jamaica.

richy rich

Tue, 04 May 2004 10:15:27 -0500

Bruce Shaller has an excellent piece on this topic: http://gothamgazette.com/article/Transportation/20030120/16/189 My views --- 1: there already is a train to JFK. 2: this is an issue of social equity. there is no reason to support this project (which is designed to affect mainly the upper class/business persons) when there are projects which would be much cheaper and would provide a real benefit to disadvantaged people. (Example: better transit access to outer areas of the boroughs.) 3: the rich people are still going to take a cab.

Josh

Tue, 04 May 2004 09:59:03 -0500

Who cares? It's really not that hard to take the A train and then transfer to the Air Train. It takes a little more than an hour from downtown NYC to JFK and costs $7 total. My point is that I can think of better ways to spend $5-6 BILLION.