Logan Airport Capital Projects

kmp1284 said:
They could use more Logan Express locations and need to do a better job of marketing it. Once you’ve used Logan Express, you never want to go back to the hassle of driving in and paying $40/day.
Click to expand...
They also need to make it painless for families on vacation.
 
RandomWalk said:
They also need to make it painless for families on vacation.
Click to expand...

Is that really a big issue or more of a perception? Not having traveled with kids probably since I was one I can’t make an informed comment on that but it doesn’t seem like Logan Express would be overwhelming for families.
 
kmp1284 said:
They could use more Logan Express locations and need to do a better job of marketing it. Once you’ve used Logan Express, you never want to go back to the hassle of driving in and paying $40/day.
Click to expand...
They also need to extend parts of the service later or better yet, run at least some minimal level of round the clock service.

While from an objective viewpoint it does probably still pencil out to use Logan Express most of the time even if you have to pay a cab/rideshare to get back, it feels absolutely awful to be at the end of a long trip, get hit with a delayed flight, arrive tired, annoyed and hours late, and then find out that you've also missed the last bus and have one final unplanned kick in the wallet to end your trip.

The last outbound is currently 1:15AM and then there's nothing till 6:30/7AM. Which is early enough that there's both a significant chunk of scheduled/on-time flights that can't expect to use it (esp with baggage times + the like factored in), and early enough that there's a lot more flights where "common" delays of 1-2hrs will easily push you past that time window.
 
Logan Express runs inbound trips at 2:15am, 3:00am, 3:30am, 4:00am, 4:30am, 5:00am, and 5:30am. Do these busses deadhead back to their suburban origins after each trip?
 
As a family of 5, we used off airport parking till we started using Logan Express - Havent gone back, but we also try not to book itenaries that would come in too late. It does work for families.

Locations on 495 would be good too, maybe one in Lowell? Have taken the Boston Express from Tewksbury, there are quite a few people that use that to get to the airport. The frequencies are much lower though.
 
stick n move said:
Thats an insane turn around. From worst to first. When I was actuve duty and travelling a lot that place was hell on earth. Havent seen it post upgrade, but thats a huge change. I remember the super low crappy stained drop ceiling panels, plywood dividers for walls, and at one point going to a different part of the terminal we had to walk outside between plywood dividers. True 3rd world country shit.
Click to expand...
LaGuardia now is REALLY NICE. I used it almost every week for approx 10 years leading up to the pandemic (so had a LOT of exposure to the 'old' LGA) and it was an utter dump. I have probably only been to the 'new' LGA 6-7 times since it opened ... but man is it nice.
 
Looks like it's official, Centurion lounge coming to Terminal C

thriftytraveler.com

Boston Will Get the Newest Amex Centurion Lounge

A huge, two-story American Express Centurion Lounge with a rooftop bar is coming to Boston ... but it won't open until sometime in 2027.
thriftytraveler.com thriftytraveler.com

The article references and includes renderings from Massport, but I can't see today's meeting minutes up on their site yet. The images below are supposedly from that presentation. Great to have another high quality lounge coming soon! Looks like there will be outdoor space as well.

1737055733507.png


1737055836352.png


Stlin said:
They're building 2 new lounge spaces in C; the announced JetBlue space would fit the C25 shell, while the other C10 space doesn't yet have an announced tenant - it's this space that would potentially become a Amex Centurion. View attachment 58729View attachment 58730
Click to expand...
 
Great freakin news, and it’s about damn time! Love the outdoor terrace!!
 
themissinglink said:
www.bostonglobe.com

Construction to start on new $450 million parking garage at Logan Airport’s Terminal E - The Boston Globe

With travel hitting a record high last year, Massport is moving ahead with a new garage that will add some 5,000 parking spaces to the airport.
www.bostonglobe.com www.bostonglobe.com
Click to expand...
Adding the cost for necessary roadway upgrades, etc., the project will end up costing $800 million. What would it cost to build an APM? I get that the parking garage generates a revenue stream which will pay for it and then some, but should MassPort really be chasing profit or should they perhaps have a mission focused on efficient movement of people?
 
HenryAlan said:
What would it cost to build an APM?
Click to expand...
Unclear, I don't think there's ever been a full study done. $800m would likely be on the lower side given that the Terminal B garage would need to be rebuilt and also that the whole airport is a spaghetti mess.
 
737900er said:
I wonder what the cost difference would be in having their own APM vs. connecting it to the Urban Ring.
Click to expand...
The Urban Ring wouldn't replace the APM, it would at best replicate the bus shuttles and Silver Line unless you're planning to make the whole Urban Ring an automated people mover elevated above the street (and that has a route that just runs loops of the Airport).
 
Equilibria said:
The Urban Ring wouldn't replace the APM, it would at best replicate the bus shuttles and Silver Line unless you're planning to make the whole Urban Ring an automated people mover elevated above the street (and that has a route that just runs loops of the Airport).
Click to expand...
My understanding is that in the past few years the rules were changed to allow airport fees/funding to go to mass transit projects, whereas previously they could only be spent on self-contained APMs. With that being the case now, wouldn’t it make sense to built the people mover as a REM-style automated light metro, and extend it along the SL route through Everett/Chelsea to Sullivan as the first leg of the Urban Ring?
 
Badusername said:
My understanding is that in the past few years the rules were changed to allow airport fees/funding to go to mass transit projects, whereas previously they could only be spent on self-contained APMs. With that being the case now, wouldn’t it make sense to built the people mover as a REM-style automated light metro, and extend it along the SL route through Everett/Chelsea to Sullivan as the first leg of the Urban Ring?
Click to expand...
Even assuming that those rules were changed to allow this (I don't think they were as a professional in this industry, but it's too early in the morning to go look it up) and that the current form somehow survives in the Trump regime, I don't think a regional system of any kind can substitute for an airport people mover. If you go to airports that have these systems, the headway is like 60 seconds. The vehicles are tiny and the trains are short. They're just different from more regional (or even local) transit because they're optimized for their purpose.

I can think of a couple of examples of airport people moving being done by real transit - Minneapolis and Saint Louis might be the only ones in the US, while Heathrow and maybe a couple others could be found internationally. In all of these cases, though, the transit is intended to provide multipoint access from the city to the airport, not to circulate people on the airport itself (though you can use it that way). Far more common is a single point of transfer between the APM and the transit system, like you see at (among many others) JFK, Newark, Miami, O'Hare, Atlanta, DFW, Phoenix, SFO, and soon at LAX. To use SFO as an example: BART trains to the City from SFO run at minimum every 20 minutes (by line) but the APM upstairs is running more than every 2 minutes.
 
Equilibria said:
Even assuming that those rules were changed to allow this (I don't think they were as a professional in this industry, but it's too early in the morning to go look it up) and that the current form somehow survives in the Trump regime, I don't think a regional system of any kind can substitute for an airport people mover. If you go to airports that have these systems, the headway is like 60 seconds. The vehicles are tiny and the trains are short. They're just different from more regional (or even local) transit because they're optimized for their purpose.

I can think of a couple of examples of airport people moving being done by real transit - Minneapolis and Saint Louis might be the only ones in the US, while Heathrow and maybe a couple others could be found internationally. In all of these cases, though, the transit is intended to provide multipoint access from the city to the airport, not to circulate people on the airport itself (though you can use it that way). Far more common is a single point of transfer between the APM and the transit system, like you see at (among many others) JFK, Newark, Miami, O'Hare, Atlanta, DFW, Phoenix, SFO, and soon at LAX. To use SFO as an example: BART trains to the City from SFO run at minimum every 20 minutes (by line) but the APM upstairs is running more than every 2 minutes.
Click to expand...
But then there is the uniqueness of PHL, which has 3 stops for regional rail, an airside shuttle that only does A-F and C-F, and no landside terminal shuttle other than an economy parking one that happens to also stop at all terminals.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top