[TOareaFan]

Why should we? I know London Heathrow and Vienna for example have express trains from the airport that go to the downtown areas of the two respective cities and while their services are pricey, they're targeting a business audience anyway who have meetings or conferences to attend in the downtown areas and are at a time constraint. Other travellers have regular train services that might not be as fast but are an affordable option, and besides not everyone is heading to Union so GO service from the airport could offer more connections and the UPX as it is now could go to Union with no stops.

I guess one difference is that the UP stops at every station that the regular GO service does ....so the UP is not really that more "rapid" than regular GO service would be.

Of course it misses the obvious problem that the regular GO service with regular GO trains can never actually go into the airport so there is that problem.

Rather than cancel UP if there was regular GO service in that corridor would it not be a more logical reaction to return UP to a more premium pricing level? Want a train to get you near the airport....we got GO for that and it is fairly cheap.....want a train to get your right into the airport and provide door to door service...we got UP and it ain't so cheap.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

There might be something seriously wrong. The question is the dog leg from the existing Kitchener line. The distance between the existing Kitchener line and the potential Airport hub will be between 3-4km. Is it worth the massive investment to reroute that line into a hub at Pearson and add travel time to the trip for downtown bound passengers?

The same question applies to the Eglinton line.

3 - 4 kms adds, what, minutes to travel time??? I mean honestly this will cause downtown bound passengers to switch to driving? Ideally the end plan is to have a station at the Pearson hub be the border between GO's Toronto RER service and the regional network. RER trains would run between union and pearson, while regional trains coming from the 905 would likely run express from pearson to union (with perhaps a stop at bloor) and so their travel times might likely be improved.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

There might be something seriously wrong. The question is the dog leg from the existing Kitchener line. The distance between the existing Kitchener line and the potential Airport hub will be between 3-4km. Is it worth the massive investment to reroute that line into a hub at Pearson and add travel time to the trip for downtown bound passengers?

The same question applies to the Eglinton line.

3 - 4 kms adds, what, minutes to travel time??? I mean honestly this will cause downtown bound passengers to switch to driving? Ideally the end plan is to have a station at the Pearson hub be the border between GO's Toronto RER service and the regional network. RER trains would run between union and pearson, while regional trains coming from the 905 would likely run express from pearson to union (with perhaps a stop at bloor) and so their travel times might likely be improved.

Yes, the added trip time can cause people to switch to driving, as we've seen with Lawrence East GO Station. The question is whether or not there is enough demand on that corridor, and at a hypothetical Pearson GO Station, to sufficiently offset the negative impacts of the longer driving time. And of course, the UPX already exists serving the exact same corridor (between Pearson and Downtown). Would the UPX be operating while Kitcher RER is also serving Pearson? Is there enough demand to warrant both services? Should UPX be rolled into the Kitchener service? All questions that need to be answered.

As for Eglinton, I've always been skeptical that there is enough demand on the Eglinton corridor to warrant a direct link to Pearson. The numbers in the Transit City EA were not impressive. We'll see if newer modelling has more favourable results. My preferred solution for now is a BRT solution running from Pearson, south to the Eglinton Line and Line 2.

 

[TOareaFan]

3 - 4 kms adds, what, minutes to travel time??? I mean honestly this will cause downtown bound passengers to switch to driving? Ideally the end plan is to have a station at the Pearson hub be the border between GO's Toronto RER service and the regional network. RER trains would run between union and pearson, while regional trains coming from the 905 would likely run express from pearson to union (with perhaps a stop at bloor) and so their travel times might likely be improved.

Wait, what? Wasn't the RER supposed to go to at least Bramalea and some were trying to get it to Mt. Pleasant? Now it is shifting to Pearson? Is there a link to support/justify/explain that?

 

[jaybe]

3 - 4 kms adds, what, minutes to travel time??? I mean honestly this will cause downtown bound passengers to switch to driving? Ideally the end plan is to have a station at the Pearson hub be the border between GO's Toronto RER service and the regional network. RER trains would run between union and pearson, while regional trains coming from the 905 would likely run express from pearson to union (with perhaps a stop at bloor) and so their travel times might likely be improved.

Yes, a minor delay like a 3km+ dogleg may cause commuters to drive. The short delay to commuters was the reason provided in Metrolinx' analysis on why the RER station at Lawrence in Scarborough should not be built. The bigger question is the cost. Look at a map of the area. Redirecting the Kitchener line into a airport hub would be a significant undertaking and would be much longer than 3km (a direct dog leg from the existing rail line would not be built). This project is many billions of dollars.

I'm not saying don't build the hub. I am asking if an analysis of alternatives from an impartial party is being conducted.

 

[Voltz]

I think the Pearson Transit hub should be along the railway corridor, with a shuttle of some kind to to the Terminals that should maintain most of their current check in facilities.

Mainly because it would have to be difficult to divert the corridor to the Terminals, where would it go? North of the Terminals it could go along Airport Road, but to the East it would have be elevated over the 409. And it just can't be worthwhile to tear down all three of the parking garages, maybe T3. but the other two are not old, and they would not get that much gate space on at T1, plus what would they do with the massive baggage claim and check in halls there?

 

[jys]

I think the Pearson Transit hub should be along the railway corridor, with a shuttle of some kind to to the Terminals that should maintain most of their current check in facilities.

Exactly what I was thinking. Have a northern hub at Malton GO(connects to train services) and use Renforth Gateway as the southern hub(connects to rapid transit services along Eglinton). Connect the two up with a rapid transit service be it an extension of the Crosstown LRT or a separate service. Keep the UPX as it is. This way, (GO) train services would not be slowed and going to the airport would be just as quick and easy as having a Union Station West at Pearson. If anything we might as well make Malton GO the Union Station West.
Building elevated tracks into the airport would both be expensive and slow train services significantly as trains would have to slow down to a crawl for the turn into Pearson.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

As for Eglinton, I've always been skeptical that there is enough demand on the Eglinton corridor to warrant a direct link to Pearson. The numbers in the Transit City EA were not impressive. We'll see if newer modelling has more favourable results. My preferred solution for now is a BRT solution running from Pearson, south to the Eglinton Line and Line 2.

As I mentioned in my last post, I'm skeptical that there is enough demand on the Eglinton corridor to warrant a direct LRT connection to Pearson. There's also been talk (from GTAA and City of Toronto) about connecting the FWLRT to Pearson, but 2031 peak point demand for that is expected to be only 900 pphpd, at a cost of $500 Million. Thus, unless we see evidence to the contrary, I don't believe LRT to Pearson is warranted.

However, a BRT solution might work for the corridor. What I propose is essentially a rehash of the 1980s Etobicoke RT proposal, just with different vehicles. This would be a rapid transit line connecting Kipling Station (Line 2), to Eglinton Line, Pearson Airport and Finch West LRT (including Humber College and Woodbine).

It would start at Kipling Station (Line 2), run up a hydro corridor on fully-exclusive bus-only roads to Eglinton, where it would connect with the ECLRT at Martin Grove. It would then travel west, adjacent to Eglinton Avenue on a bus-exclusive road, and then north adjacent to Renforth and Silver Dart, again on a bus-exclusive road.

From Pearson, it would travel east on Dixon Road, and then north on Highway 27, terminating at Humber College and Finch LRT, still on its own BRT lanes.

Between Bloor and Eglinton, the BRT would travel at highway speeds. Assuming reasonable travel speeds of 70 km/h between Pearson and Kipling Station (considering dwell and time at stoplights), travel times on that segment would be just 9 minutes. Between Pearson and Finch, travel speeds would be slower; assuming 60 km/h for that segment, would be 8 minutes. Both travel times are obviously enormous improvements from today (it presently takes 20 minutes to travel between Kipling Station and Pearson).

To improve reduce the necessary right-of-way widths and to improve speed and rider comfort, we might even adopt the German O-Bahn technology, which runs busses on guideways (the buses can still street-run where guideways are not available).

The BRT should reasonably be able to accommodate 4,000 pphpd, which should be more than enough capacity for the corridor.

O-Bahn:

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Wait, what? Wasn't the RER supposed to go to at least Bramalea and some were trying to get it to Mt. Pleasant? Now it is shifting to Pearson? Is there a link to support/justify/explain that?

Note my caveat "ideally". I didn't refer to the RER plan while making my post.

 

[TOareaFan]

Note my caveat "ideally". I didn't refer to the RER plan while making my post.

you think it is ideal that ReR stop short of a city with 3 train stations that will, by then, be close to 3/4 of a million people? I will be long gone from Brampton into retirement by then.....so I can say, objectively, that this cannot be the "ideal" in any transportation network.

My fear when I first heard this "Union West" stuff seems to be coming through. The reason the GTHA/Southern Ontario leads the world in coming up with transportation plans but trails most of the world in actual transportation infrastructure is because we suffer from a severe case of TADD (Transportation Attention Deficit Disorder).....we barely get close to implementing one plan when someone flashes a shiny new one around and we all fall over ourselves to implement that....then the whole shampoo/rinse/repeat cycle starts again.

 

[treplow]

I'm guessing it will end up as something like Newark's airport rail station, where the LINK train is extended to a station on the Kitchener corridor servicing frequent regional and intercity trains.

 

[rbt]

My fear when I first heard this "Union West" stuff seems to be coming through.

The fun part is Murray, the person who dropped the idea into the press (before GTAA appeared interested), isn't even a Minister anymore.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

you think it is ideal that ReR stop short of a city with 3 train stations that will, by then, be close to 3/4 of a million people? I will be long gone from Brampton into retirement by then.....so I can say, objectively, that this cannot be the "ideal" in any transportation network.

My fear when I first heard this "Union West" stuff seems to be coming through. The reason the GTHA/Southern Ontario leads the world in coming up with transportation plans but trails most of the world in actual transportation infrastructure is because we suffer from a severe case of TADD (Transportation Attention Deficit Disorder).....we barely get close to implementing one plan when someone flashes a shiny new one around and we all fall over ourselves to implement that....then the whole shampoo/rinse/repeat cycle starts again.

I think that what might happen would be that one RER train would head south from Pearson to Union, one RER train would head NW from Pearson to Brampton/Bramalea, and one RER train runs the whole route Brampton/Bramalea to Union, potentially skipping stops in Toronto that are already served by the Pearson/Union RER train.

 

[TOareaFan]

I think that what might happen would be that one RER train would head south from Pearson to Union, one RER train would head NW from Pearson to Brampton/Bramalea, and one RER train runs the whole route Brampton/Bramalea to Union, potentially skipping stops in Toronto that are already served by the Pearson/Union RER train.

scrapping the plan that we have been working on for how many years? and that plan will hold until we get close to implementation and someone shines a new plan?

We've had so many plans they are starting to contradict each other....we are spending >$3B so people in Scarborough don't have to transfer.....but now we are taking the (not so) old ReR plan and injecting a few more billion in cost so that people west of Pearson on this GO line do/might have to transfer?

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

In preparation for the Master Plan (still not up) a good read is the AIF (2016) and the Q2 MD&A (up to June 2017)

https://www.torontopearson.com/uploadedFiles/GTAA/Content/Financial_Information/AIF_2016.pdf
https://www.torontopearson.com/uplo...nsedInterimFinancialStatements_June302017.pdf

Interesting to note that they purchased some office buildings in the first 1/2 of 2017 worth around $160m. They rent these to 3rd parties. However you have to wonder what the long-term plan is for these buildings.

Where are these office buildings located?

AoD

Mystery solved. The office buildings purchased were revealed in a recent Avison Young report, they are the Airway Centre buildings. This IMO is prime land that is just filled with surface parking. There is so much potential, for example. A redevelopment that consolidates the offices into something that better addresses the street and/or becomes part of the Transit Hub, or becomes the Transit Hub proper.

I don't know what plans GTAA has for this parcel though.

Link.
https://avisonyoung.uberflip.com/i/...oareatransitnodesoftomorrownov7-17final/5?m4=

**EDIT**
For comparison 18 York, the PwC tower is 650 000 Sq feet. Now I wouldn't expect them to put a 26 storey office in an area where the tallest building is what? 15 Storeys?