LaGuardia Airport is the closest of New York City’s commercial airports to Manhattan, but it might be the hardest to reach. With congested street and highway access throughout the day, and no connection to the subway, the airport’s proximity disguises an inefficient setup. This dilemma compounds an already dismal situation for the busy airfield. LaGuardia is often ranked as the most delay-prone airport in America, and has been famously compared to a “third-world airport.” Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s administration is backing a proposal to improve the airport’s connectivity by building an “AirTrain” system. One problem: it would be inefficient and costly - with the latest estimates ranging around $1.5 billion.
AirTrain is shorthand for an automated people mover common in large airports. These systems connect terminals to each other and to airport services, including nearby transit stations. The proposed AirTrain LaGuardia would link the airport’s three terminals to the Willets Point area (home of the Mets stadium), where passengers could transfer to the Long Island Rail Road. Station renderings suggest that express trains will be added to the Port Washington Line, allowing passengers to access Midtown quickly.
Urbanist commentators, including Yonah Freemark, have pointed out numerous flaws in the proposal. To reach Manhattan via the AirTrain, passengers would have to backtrack. Running express service on the Port Washington Line would require taking scarce slots that could be used to move more commuters. The best way to access LGA would in fact be to resurrect some form of the Giuliani-era proposal to extend the N train.
Unfortunately, given the MTA’s current circumstances, such a project is not the highest priority. The existing subway system is faced with a disastrous state of under repair. Ridership is consistently dropping. Important extensions – such as the completion of the Second Avenue Subway– face staggering construction costs. Improved airport access must be lower cost than them.
Is there such a solution? Happily, there is, and it could help buses move more quickly through Manhattan.
Instead of building a fixed rail link, the MTA or a private partner could run an express coach service between LaGuardia and a terminal in Manhattan (the East Side would likely be the best location.) On its own, this is not a novel idea. There’s already a semi-rapid bus connecting the airport’s terminals with busy subway stations, and a private service runs to LaGuardia from Grand Central. However, rather than dropping passengers off at the terminals to go through check in and security, the best solution would allow passengers to check their bags and possibly clear security at a Manhattan terminal. Passengers would disembark at the “airside” (post-security) section of terminals.
The viability of such an option would depend on its speed. If it contends with the same traffic jams that private autos and taxis get caught up in, the gains from early check-in would be lost. Establishing HOV 5+ lanes, which this bus would use, on the Grand Central Parkway would keep trips fast. These lanes could also serve to benefit existing express bus routes.
Politicians tend to exaggerate the value of airport connectors. Rail extensions need to serve the highest-demand corridors. Instead of spending scarce tax dollars on airport access, New York needs to make better use of its existing infrastructure first.
Ethan Finlan is a Market Urbanism Report fellow who specializes in research and content. He’s written for various magazines on transportation and how it interacts with land use and housing debates. Originally from San Diego, he is now based in metro Boston.
A podcast on Market Urbanism, or the cross between free-market policies and urban issues. We discuss how a liberalized urban approach would lead to more housing, faster transport, improved public services, and better quality of life. Tap to listen.
Market Urbanism Report is sponsored by Panoramic Interests, a progressive developer in San Francisco. Panoramic, which is owned by Patrick Kennedy, specializes in 160 sqft micro-units (called MicroPads) that are built using modular construction materials. Panoramic has long touted these units as a cost-effective way to house San Francisco’s growing homeless population. But Panoramic also builds larger units of between 440-690 sqft. To learn more about Panoramic’s micro-unit model, read MUR’s coverage on the firm in its America’s Progressive Developers series. Or visit Panoramic’s website.
Market Urbanism Report is a media company that advances free-market city policy. We aim for a liberalized approach that produces cheaper housing, faster transport and better quality-of-life.