Logan Airport Capital Projects

Brattle Loop said:
I mean, the interchange the T headhouse is under has been there in one form or another for decades. Presumably they figured it made sense to build the big nasty highway interchange over the railroad because there weren't any houses or buildings there that'd have to be knocked down. And it's not like the T was going to re-route the entire Blue Line when they rebuilt Airport Station.
Click to expand...
I’m thinking there wasn’t much foresight about a future state then. By the way they located the HVAC and power sheds around the Airport T stop and how little space was allocated for any sort of tram system it means we’re going to have to do a little property acquisition.
 
BeyondRevenue said:
I’m thinking there wasn’t much foresight about a future state then. By the way they located the HVAC and power sheds around the Airport T stop and how little space was allocated for any sort of tram system it means we’re going to have to do a little property acquisition.
Click to expand...

Well, yes, you could solve the "can't make a loop" problem with some property acquisition, that's absolutely true. Massport clearly didn't think it was worth the effort and expense, hence them not bothering to make it a loop, because, again, their goal was to improve movement across the airport campus, not specifically to improve travel times between the Airport T stop and Terminal A. I don't, personally, think they're necessarily wrong on making that call the way they did.
 
Brattle Loop said:
Well, yes, you could solve the "can't make a loop" problem with some property acquisition, that's absolutely true. Massport clearly didn't think it was worth the effort and expense, hence them not bothering to make it a loop, because, again, their goal was to improve movement across the airport campus, not specifically to improve travel times between the Airport T stop and Terminal A. I don't, personally, think they're necessarily wrong on making that call the way they did.
Click to expand...
Massport is especially wrong to accept our collective civic perma-poverty paradigm. They have independent budgets and operations and could have led this... but instead we get more damned band-aid busses.
I tire of interagency territorialism making true intermodal operations merely a dream. We need better.
If an automated airport tram arrived at the Airport T stop every 3 minutes or so, people would really opt for taking the T from State Street to Terminal A/E instead of waiting for an Uber. That nets us fewer tunnel traffic delays and less terminal traffic/delay. It would take the blue busses out of the equation altogether.
Rest assured we're not going to get anything modern until a generation of defeatists die off and somebody with a notion of how bond issues work actually takes a stab at this.
 
Brattle Loop said:
Well, yes, you could solve the "can't make a loop" problem with some property acquisition, that's absolutely true. Massport clearly didn't think it was worth the effort and expense, hence them not bothering to make it a loop, because, again, their goal was to improve movement across the airport campus, not specifically to improve travel times between the Airport T stop and Terminal A. I don't, personally, think they're necessarily wrong on making that call the way they did.
Click to expand...
Given the proposed location of the B stop I would not be surprised if the time it took to get to an A or B gate to be relatively similar from the Blue Line, especially A1-A11.
 
BeyondRevenue said:
Massport is especially wrong to accept our collective civic perma-poverty paradigm. They have independent budgets and operations and could have led this... but instead we get more damned band-aid busses.
I tire of interagency territorialism making true intermodal operations merely a dream. We need better.
If an automated airport tram arrived at the Airport T stop every 3 minutes or so, people would really opt for taking the T from State Street to Terminal A/E instead of waiting for an Uber. That nets us fewer tunnel traffic delays and less terminal traffic/delay. It would take the blue busses out of the equation altogether.
Rest assured we're not going to get anything modern until a generation of defeatists die off and somebody with a notion of how bond issues work actually takes a stab at this.
Click to expand...

What...are you talking about?

The people mover was Massport's idea, it was actively planned up until the pandemic came and messed everything up, and got shoved to the back burner. If they just let it die without revisiting the issue I'd be a.) surprised and b.) much more willing to be mad at them. There's no "interagency territorialism" on Massport making decisions of how to manage its airport on its property.
 
737900er said:
Instead they actively made it worse when they opened the added the Rental Car stop to the bus system, made the Rental Car stop the bus layover (more than once I've been told to change buses there).

Also... how I put this delicately. There seems to be a don't drive like a Masshole instruction that the drivers receive that makes the bus take even longer than it should -- there isn't the sense of urgency you get from the SL1 drivers.



The people mover is badly needed, but it would probably result in the opposite problem: getting to A from Airport would take a long time. At least it would make SL3 an actually useful way to get to the airport (and Red-Blue + Peoplemover would really decrease the issues with SL1)
Click to expand...

The lack of system redundancy is painfully obvious with weekend traffic at the airport with Sumner closed. The last two weekends have been an absolute zoo, with I-90 WB traffic backing up out of the highway and into the airport road loop. SL1 is an absolute joke with >60min wait + travel times to South Station. The reasonable solution might be to encourage users to take the blue line instead, but of course that is running at 10-min headways and the massport shuttle only runs at 10mph, and only comes every 5 mins or so. The result is a 40-min delay for anyone going west, south, or north up 93, no matter what mode you take. Might be time to reboot the water taxi?
 
BosDevelop said:
If it is presently 85% complete, why will take another year from now for occupancy?
Click to expand...

Because it's 85% in terms of money spent, or tasks complete. The outfitting and staff training that's left probably takes more time. They also have a new security checkpoint in this project and it's possible that TSA takes time to install all of the equipment that wouldn't count in Massport's project (same with new airport lounges). Just spitballing possibilities.
 
Summer 2023 could be July 1, 2023, which means 10 months out. There will also be airline clubs in the new space. I believe there is space for 3 clubs. I'd imagine whomever has claimed them will have some specific plans that will take a decent amount of time to build out. There was a user on here who worked on Lufthansa's new club that opened in the expansion space above E10-12 (same space as the new British Airways clubs and Emirates club). Maybe they can speak more to how this type of work happens.

Maybe paving the area around the gates, painting lines, installing ground lights and installing the jet bridges will take some time too.
 
Any word on the new lounge tenants? I’m guessing both AF and The Club are both keen to get out of the basement. Any new entrants like Amex?
 
johhn14 said:
Any word on the new lounge tenants? I’m guessing both AF and The Club are both keen to get out of the basement. Any new entrants like Amex?
Click to expand...

Delta was rumored to be interested. That would probably take care of AF and the rest of Sky Team. I can’t think of any other airlines that could justify their own space but Amex would be a nice addition.
 
kmp1284 said:
Delta was rumored to be interested. That would probably take care of AF and the rest of Sky Team. I can’t think of any other airlines that could justify their own space but Amex would be a nice addition.
Click to expand...

A sizable lounge for SkyTeam members would make sense. You have Delta, KLM, Virgin Atlantic, Korean Air, Air France, and ITA all serving Boston. Beyond that, Star is covered by the fairly new Lufthansa lounge. Oneworld is covered by the fairly new British Airways lounge.

I know AMEX made a run to put a Centurion Lounge in the B to C connector where Chase won out. Maybe they give E a shot? Boston is a clear hole in their lounge network that includes cities like Denver, Dallas, Charlotte, Houston, Seattle, Las Vegas, Phoenix, Miami, Los Angeles, New York - JFK, and San Francisco.
 
kmp1284 said:
Delta was rumored to be interested. That would probably take care of AF and the rest of Sky Team. I can’t think of any other airlines that could justify their own space but Amex would be a nice addition.
Click to expand...
mass88 said:
I know AMEX made a run to put a Centurion Lounge in the B to C connector where Chase won out. Maybe they give E a shot? Boston is a clear hole in their lounge network that includes cities like Denver, Dallas, Charlotte, Houston, Seattle, Las Vegas, Phoenix, Miami, Los Angeles, New York - JFK, and San Francisco.
Click to expand...

The centurion card allows access to delta lounges, so if delta builds one I don't think the centurion lounge would be necessary.

Would be nice to get a big priority pass lounge in E (AF lounge allows PP on a limited basis).

There's also capital one trying to get into the lounge game.
 
tysmith95 said:
The centurion card allows access to delta lounges, so if delta builds one I don't think the centurion lounge would be necessary.

Would be nice to get a big priority pass lounge in E (AF lounge allows PP on a limited basis).

There's also capital one trying to get into the lounge game.
Click to expand...
I know what you mean, but for clarity centurion card = Amex "Black" card and ≠ Amex Platinum, the far more common card with lounge access. (Including the sky clubs)

Admittedly, while Centurion lounges I find to be nicer than sky clubs, they're not typically at DL hubs as a consequence of that access... But as a not DL flyer I'd prefer the centurion!
 
On the airport topic... what do you all make of this?
...and we'll have to forgive his pronunciation of LaGuardia
 
BeyondRevenue said:
On the airport topic... what do you all make of this?
...and we'll have to forgive his pronunciation of LaGuardia
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what the agenda is of the producer of that video, but I think his thesis--"the US needs to privatize airports"--is a flawed one. While many airports in the US, to his point, have gone into debt and/or struggle to make ends meet, that's not the case for all of them. Pandemic notwithstanding, MassPort is publicly operated and has run a cash flow positive operation through 2019. According to their June 2022 powerpoint upthread, it seems again like Logan Airport is returning to its 2019 numbers and cash flow positivity. I'm also annoyed that the video didn't differentiate the investment already underway by States on their airports (like the multi-billion dollar investment NY State is making) from the 5-year outlook of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law investing in Airport infrastructure.

He was right about one thing: I don't like his video about our airports.
 
dshoost88 said:
I'm also annoyed that the video didn't differentiate the investment already underway by States on their airports (like the multi-billion dollar investment NY State is making) from the 5-year outlook of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law investing in Airport infrastructure.
Click to expand...
Yep. Kind of an oversight not to talk about how much cash is going/has gone in to LaGuardia recently. And he should have updated it after the last transportation booster bill was signed.
I do agree with him about boosting fuel taxes, but I really do not want every US airport to become a massive duty-free shop maze...with planes. I can picture Logan becoming a Gatwick (Gah!) -- but at least a train can drop you off at the terminal there.
I do have Singapore envy, though. It'd be cool if we could top the Logan parking structure with something as grand as that.
 
tysmith95 said:
The centurion card allows access to delta lounges, so if delta builds one I don't think the centurion lounge would be necessary.

Would be nice to get a big priority pass lounge in E (AF lounge allows PP on a limited basis).

There's also capital one trying to get into the lounge game.
Click to expand...

Look at Seattle/Tacoma. It's a Delta hub that has both an AMEX Centurion Lounge, and one of the largest Sky Clubs in the Delta system. They also happen to be located right next to each other. AMEX must find value in operating their own lounges even in the presence of others that have some shared access for certain cardholders.
 
Don’t you also need to be flying on Delta to get in? I don’t think you can flash your Amex and get into the Delta lounge if you’re flying BA or Emirates for example.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top