crs1026 said:
Thank you. This fills in a whole lot of gaps for me.

By "the real driver", you mean the airport reconfiguration, right? So as usual the public pitch is the opposite of what is stated....just like a "Right to Work" state is one where workers have fewest rights. We build a billion dollar air terminal to house the terminating travel interface, then we put some bus stops outside and call it a "transit hub". And send the bill to government, conveniently overlooking that airports are supposed to be financing their own operation without subsidy.

I'm OK with Pearson working to be a major international air hub for North America - that means Toronto travellers get the greatest number of direct flights to the greatest number of destinations. But there has to be transparency around the impact on the Toronto air traveller. If the new configuration makes their departure cheaper (lower user fee) or more convenient (faster onboarding and customs clearance), then sell it on that basis. If the impacts are otherwise - longer walk to the gate, the existing parking garage is demolished, etc - that has to be on the table.

Also, if this is going to charge a billion dollars or more to the public purse - then presumably we have the opportunity to mull over whether a true HSR between Windsor and Quebec City could pull enough regional air travellers out of Pearson to cover its costs - and could we achieve that for less public investment than a Pearson makeover. And if we remove that many travellers, will the current air terminals suffice.

Meanwhile, Miway, BT, and TTC are pressured to put together a service plan for the employment area around the airport that doesn't cost a fortune....and we run a free shuttle bus from T1 and T3 to the Malton GO station to connect with RER and HSR. And LRT happens, but without a billion dollar stop at the Airport.


- Paul
Click to expand...
I don't think the airport is being disingenuous in their plans, but I do think they started with the global hub and worked back from there. If it's executed well the transit plans are complementary to the global hub concept and they will drive employment in the airport business district. And there is certainly merit to public funding of transit connectivity.

What we need to ensure is that public funding achieves public goals, and doesn't get watered down in the process to the point that only the GTAA's objectives are met.
 
jje1000 said:
I would also imagine that though not shown in this plan, a new (undeground?) shuttle system would be implemented to replace the LINK train. It would be insanity to imagine funneling everyone to the gates by foot.
Click to expand...
Honestly, why bother dismantling and duplicating the few pieces of transit infrastructure that have been built? No reason why YYZ can't become a regional transit hub while still keeping the drive-up format of terminals 1 and 3.
 
animatronic said:
There's no visible parking so I assume there are a few floors underneath everything - does looks like that from a few of the renderings
Click to expand...

I'd argue that although the passengers coming INTO the airport would be funnelled to the new processing center, the 409 termination makes me think that the arriving passengers may stay put. Why move the baggage processing and carousels from the existing T1 or T3? Even if the spaces above are turned over to gates, the space below can remain the same. the pickups would just be under the apron. Whether thats a security issue, i dunno.
 
jje1000 said:
I would imagine that the majority (if not all) of the new transit lines into the hub would be funded by public dollars- hence the reason why the GTAA is getting this organized and asking governments to move this along.

I would also imagine that though not shown in this plan, a new (undeground?) shuttle system would be implemented to replace the LINK train. It would be insanity to imagine funneling everyone to the gates by foot.
Click to expand...

Yuck. I really don't like the shuttles from the gates to the baggage. Another choke point for pedestrian flow (plus all the stairs/escalators up and down). Plus the added time to get to your gate. Pearson is competing against Porter for regional traffic and they have to be careful not to create a permanent disadvantage.

Right now I all I have to do at Pearson is get out of the taxi, walk for about 2 minutes, go down 1 flight of stairs, go through the small security checkpoint and then my gate is a 3-4 minute walk. With priority screening I can get to my gate in 15 minutes max.

New design....fight through an arrivals area, security, 4 flights of escalators down, wait for a shuttle system, get off shuttle system, 4 flights of escalators up, walk through a huge duty free mall that I have to avoid the window shoppers (where arrivals is currently) and then get to my gate. Guessing 30+ minutes plus wait time at security.

Sorry...revised new process for me. Switch to Porter even though I'm closer to Pearson.
 
animatronic said:
I don't think the airport is being disingenuous in their plans, but I do think they started with the global hub and worked back from there. If it's executed well the transit plans are complementary to the global hub concept and they will drive employment in the airport business district. And there is certainly merit to public funding of transit connectivity.

What we need to ensure is that public funding achieves public goals, and doesn't get watered down in the process to the point that only the GTAA's objectives are met.
Click to expand...

Perhaps not disingenuous, but certainly setting the stage to extract excessive amounts from government that may not be justified. We need to be sure that public funding only is extended to things that the public has paid for elsewhere.

As a reference point, some other transit mobility hubs are pretty modest investments,

Mississauga City Center - $6.5M (1997)
Bramalea Transit Terminal - $7.5M (2009)
Brampton Gateway Terminal (Shoppers World) - $10.1M (2011)
Kipling Terminal - $30M+ (?) -

If GTAA is looking for funding that's in this ballpark, fine. I suspect however that the cost of whatever emerges at Pearson will be far higher, because substantial new roadways will have to be built to bring the transit to one location. GTAA intends to develop the surrounding area. The cost of the roads ought to be paid for from development charges, not as a "transit mobility hub" project. That's GTAA's nickle.

GTAA's proposal is some years away. Transit in the airport area is so bad that we can't wait for that. Why we don't just hurry up and develop the existing Viscount site as a transit hub. If a new airport terminal springs up next door, that's great....but GTAA and not the public purse should be on the hook when that happens.

- Paul
 
Last edited:
urbanfan89 said:
Honestly, why bother dismantling and duplicating the few pieces of transit infrastructure that have been built? No reason why YYZ can't become a regional transit hub while still keeping the drive-up format of terminals 1 and 3.
Click to expand...

Exactly why I think the diagram is an example of "what can be" rather than "what we think it will be", we being the GTAA. It simply makes no sense to me to tear down the parking garages and passenger processing building just to add 20 odd gates to the other side of the terminal. Especially when the same number of gates can be added with a new pier and the complexities with having aircraft travel under the bridge between T1 and T3 (what happens when the next biggest jet is built and is taller than the bridge?).

I think the simpler solution would be to keep the multi modal transit hub at this new structure as illustrated, rebuild and re-purpose the Link train to be a people mover taking passengers from the multi modal hub into the airport and leave the existing passenger processing facilities in place. Join the two terminals into one mega terminals, add a post security shuttle/link and bingo bango your done. Then you can focus on creating a shopping centre/office for the new sructure.
 
crs1026 said:
HFR/HSR will need nice easy curves, too.
Click to expand...

HSR would need a nice easy curve BUT HSR equipment running at lower speeds typically doesn't.

That said, I don't see much here other than a shortened UPX spur and LRT integration.
 
Last edited:
Not sure why we can't just tear down the existing parking garage for a hub if necessary (given HSR access looks like it would have been underground anyways) - the "central processor" of T1 is already sized for Pier G, and can be extended for Pier H. If you want more gates, you can always build a satellite terminal infield (perhaps it would be better just to dump all the US transborder flights there), and transit can be handled by people mover within the terminal.

AoD
 
Etobicoke North Ward Two has some GTAA property and the proposed Pearson Transit Hub will have some spillover influence on the ward. However, haven't heard anything from Councillor Michael Ford about the project. Must be meeting with the family before he can make a comment.
 
W. K. Lis said:
Etobicoke North Ward Two has some GTAA property and the proposed Pearson Transit Hub will have some spillover influence on the ward. However, haven't heard anything from Councillor Michael Ford about the project. Must be meeting with the family before he can make a comment.
Click to expand...
Well, his aunt is a bit occupied today...
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Not sure why we can't just tear down the existing parking garage for a hub if necessary (given HSR access looks like it would have been underground anyways) - the "central processor" of T1 is already sized for Pier G, and can be extended for Pier H. If you want more gates, you can always build a satellite terminal infield (perhaps it would be better just to dump all the US transborder flights there), and transit can be handled by people mover within the terminal.

AoD
Click to expand...

There is also a strange parking lot just west of T1. They can add 2 more domestic gates by eliminating this abnormality (with very little cost).
 
From the link in the tweet:

The proposed transit centre would be Pearson's version of Toronto’s Union Station and would connect the Eglinton Crosstown LRT, Mississauga’s Bus Rapid Transit line, Finch West LRT and Regional Express Rail on the Kitchener line.

Estimated to cost $500 million, the project would need hefty contributions from surrounding municipalities, including Mississauga.
Click to expand...
http://www.mississauga.com/news-sto...y-of-proposed-transit-hub-at-pearson-airport/

500 million does sound unusually low- I think that this project will cost upwards of at least a billion or two if this is done.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top