Comments on: The Airport-Transit Connection

By: Thunda

Thunda — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 02:23:07 +0000

Philadelphia’s R1 Airport Train is a pretty good example to cite. First, it’s a short spur off a previously existing line that was lying fallow, so there was comparatively little new construction (rail buffs can correct me, but I think this was the original mid-19th C line btwn Phila and Baltimore that was replaced by the Northeast Corridor). The stations at the airport are relatively close to the check-in counters, so there’s little walking. The trains run every 30 mins and stop at the U Penn/Hospital area, 30th St Station for Amtrak, two stations in the middle of downtown, Temple, Wayne Junction, and (if the train is through-running) several northern suburbs.

By: Ted King

Ted King — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 04:04:13 +0000

The surcharge ($4 in 2010) on the BART fare has made the airport something of a NOGO zone for non-fliers. Why would a local visit the airport ? Well supposedly the exhibits in the terminal building are there for the non-traveling public as well as those flying in and out. Also, the airport’s post office (north of the terminals, just before the car rental center) has the latest hours (recently reduced) of any P.O. on the peninsula.

Another problem is that the Samtrans service (routes 292 and KX) does NOT connect with the BART station. I have on occasion transferred from one to the other and there wasn’t any signage that helped me make the connection. If you don’t have an idea that a transfer is possible you won’t even try even though such a transfer would be useful. And the four dollar surcharge makes it worse.

The other group that gets shafted are pedestrians. There is limited access from the north (San Bruno / South S.F.). But on my last couple of runs through on the 292 I didn’t see any new sidewalks on the south side (Millbrae / Burlingame) – just bare shoulders.

By: Matt

Matt — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 23:19:28 +0000

Regarding the transit connection at MSP airport… Most travelers have to walk quite a distance from the Lindbergh/Terminal 1 station to get to a tram stop, to travel under all the parking ramps, then walk quite a distance and up to get to ticketing. Then, after getting through security, travelers often have to take a tram in the sterile area to get down the mile long concourses (especially towards the A or B concourses) to their gate. Not really a big deal, and the convenienece of transit makes it worth the hassle. Although for the savvy traveler heading to A/B/G gates without checked baggage, there’s a small security checkpoint in the skyway above the transit hub.

With the Humphrey/Terminal 2 station, people are exposed to our horrible weather walking through a parking ramp to get to the terminal. This is supposed to change when the Humphrey Terminal is significantly expanded sometime before 2015.

By: EngineerScotty

EngineerScotty — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 17:42:40 +0000

A few other comments:

1) It would be nice if this blog had a “recent comments” feature; so comments on older posts, such as this one, aren’t lost to the proverbial bit bucket. :)

2) One issue with serving airport trips is the issue of luggage–passengers with big suitcases are a minor inconvenience to other passengers, especially if the airport service is provided by a line that goes elsewhere, too.

Portland’s MAX red line is probably a good example of a well-done airport connection. You get a one-seat connection from downtown; the red-only portions of the line also support a few other communities (such as Parkrose, located east of PDX), and its multiplex with the blue line between Gateway and downtown increases effective service frequency on a rather busy stretch. Oh, and the airport stop is a short walk (and on the same elvel as) baggage claim, the ticket counter is up one level.

By: Nathanael Nerode

Nathanael Nerode — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 00:46:16 +0000

To be fair, Chicago’s connection to O’Hare on the Blue Line is an example of a fast, “good” connection which is closer to checkin than the parking is. The connection to Midway is far worse.

I believe there was a lot of corner-cutting to trim capital costs on the Midway El; there’s one insane multiple-curve corner which was done solely to avoid acquiring air rights they didn’t already own! The extra bridging required to actually get to the terminal would have cost quite a lot IIRC. There was also talk of a further southern extension, which would have required bridging back *out* and repeating the cost.

Similar issues are probably why Seattle is setting up a relatively poor connection to Sea-Tac airport on its new light rail line (again, one where you have to walk through the parking garages, although they’re planning to build a nice passageway).

Have you seen Minneapolis-St. Paul? That’s an example of a pretty nice connection, closer than the parking garages. They spent a bundle on it. (As a side effect, they use the light rail as the airport shuttle between the main terminal and the Humphrey Terminal, which was probably a major selling point to the airport.)

By: The Overhead Wire

The Overhead Wire — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 03:40:43 +0000

I have to say that BART does people a disservice by telling people they need to get into a people mover up the escalator. If you just start walking when you get off the train, it’s just as fast, if not a relaxing stroll, to get to the other terminals. I always walk and have always beat people I recognized on the train. It’s an education issue there.