Airports pitch sites as all-purpose transport hubs

[Second_in_pie]

I agree with you AnarchoSocialist. In fact, I'd say that rerouting the Georgetown corridor under Pearson is an even better task than the rail corridor through downtown. Also, even doing that there would still need to be some sort of link with Northern Toronto. Depending on how the routing goes for Georgetown, I wonder if such a link, if it's subway or Go, could be incorporated in with a Georgetown rerouting as it goes down the hydro corridor from finch.

Your statements that the density along Eglinton are bizarre and completely without basis. This is your point, and I've refuted it. If your going to go all Petruchio on us, what else can we do? Yes that is the sun I see in the darkness.

nfitz, you're doing it again. You don't actually have an argument so you just go off on a tangent. You just have to take a quick glance at the density along Eglinton and Bloor to see that they're quite similar, most definitely to a degree of one being no more than 2x as dense as the other (at the very, very most.) So then how is Eglinton's lowest possible peak ridership still 1/4 of that of Bloor west of Jane?

 

[kettal]

Also, are you trying to say that Eglinton wouldn't have similar ridership patterns to Bloor where one person could walk in at Martin Grove but get off at Jane? That's just silly.

You still don't get it. Of course somebody can go from Martingrove to Jane, but that would be ONE trip. In your methodology, it would count as TWO trips. That's the problem.

 

[Second_in_pie]

Okay then. So assuming that every single person getting on at Martin Grove gets off at Jane, where did the other half of Bloor's peak ridership go? And this still is without actual peak numbers. These numbers are dividing the overall ridership by 20 hours in a day.

 

[kettal]

You're on a wild goose chase here. You're not going to get anything near accurate by using the station counts.

 

[dunkalunk]

I'd personally rather see a major station at Woodbine and the 407 with a system like the Newark Airtrain connecting the Woodbine station to the airport and moving on to the Eglinton-Renforth area. I don't see the purpose of diverting a very straight corridor with grand potential for high speed operation to an airport which will see a lot of its demand fall off after true HSR service to Ottawa and Montreal.

 

[Second_in_pie]

You're on a wild goose chase here. You're not going to get anything near accurate by using the station counts.

Then what would be a more accurate analysis? How else could one refute the asinine 2k pphpd peak that's "forecasted" for Eglinotn West?

 

[kettal]

Start with the Eglinton bus ridership numbers and reasonable growth on top of that; look into past studies such as Network 2011.

 

[AnarchoSocialist]

I'd personally rather see a major station at Woodbine and the 407 with a system like the Newark Airtrain connecting the Woodbine station to the airport and moving on to the Eglinton-Renforth area. I don't see the purpose of diverting a very straight corridor with grand potential for high speed operation to an airport which will see a lot of its demand fall off after true HSR service to Ottawa and Montreal.

HSR is not going to be barreling though at full speed through that part of the corridor. The amount of time lost is marginal, if any is lost once you consider the time and distance it takes for a stop...whether its a stop at Woodbine or right at Pearson. And yes Pearson will see some of its demand drop with HSR, but, the airport is a huge international hub and serves a lot of locations so demand is not likely to fall that much. And if your an airport that is going to see ridership decline some with the starting of an HSR network, it only makes sense that you also make the most of it, and becoming a major HSR stop and transportation hub would be a huge benefit to the airport.

The Newark Airtrain works fine in the absence of on site transit. But its still a kind of lame and just a cheap way of marginally improving access. If Pearson wasn't getting Blue 22 then it might make sense as a short term solution. But Blue 22 will make it easier for people to get from Pearson to downtown, so having two short term solutions doesn't make a lot of sense. The reason I gave a 10 - 15 year timeline for a real stop at Pearson is because its not cheap, and it is a project that requires a lot of though, consideration and planning. Its good that something is at least being done at the moment, but anything beyond that needs to be big, bold, and done right the first time.

 

[nfitz]

You just have to take a quick glance at the density along Eglinton and Bloor to see that they're quite similar, most definitely to a degree of one being no more than 2x as dense as the other (at the very, very most.) So then how is Eglinton's lowest possible peak ridership still 1/4 of that of Bloor west of Jane?

How can you say something that is so ultimately wrong? You only have to look at them to see that they are not quite similar, and are actually quite different. This is quite apparent both on the streets, and from the density maps.

The density is lower, the current ridership is lower, the future ridership is lower.

Why are you trying to tell us something that is so clearly not true.

 

[EnviroTO]

As in, if there was no such thing as peak hour, there would need to be 50 hours in a day to have 2k pphpd on Eglinton west of Jane.

Sorry. Still makes no sense. This is like saying "if there was no such thing as top speed you would need to drive 5 hours to go 200km/h". That is a completely illogical statement just as yours is.

 

[dunkalunk]

The Newark Airtrain works fine in the absence of on site transit. But its still a kind of lame and just a cheap way of marginally improving access. If Pearson wasn't getting Blue 22 then it might make sense as a short term solution. But Blue 22 will make it easier for people to get from Pearson to downtown, so having two short term solutions doesn't make a lot of sense. The reason I gave a 10 - 15 year timeline for a real stop at Pearson is because its not cheap, and it is a project that requires a lot of though, consideration and planning. Its good that something is at least being done at the moment, but anything beyond that needs to be big, bold, and done right the first time.

Wouldn't the current routing for a heavy rail airport spur pretty much preclude any heavy rail through routing to Pearson in the mid-term?

 

[AnarchoSocialist]

Wouldn't the current routing for a heavy rail airport spur pretty much preclude any heavy rail through routing to Pearson in the mid-term?

No.

The whole Georgetown corridor/Blue 22 project is pegged at around $500 million. Most of that money is going towards the Georgetown corridor and thus any many spent on the corridor will/would benefit GO even if there was not a spur line going in. I don't know if that includes the cost of rolling stock, but either way, that is a cost that doesn't matter since the vehicles could be used for Union-Pearson service after a through line is a built (or moved to elsewhere on the GO network).

The only part of the project that would become redundant (and thus money 'wasted' for lack of a better word), is the spur line and station at Pearson. But the right-of-way has already been set aside so basically all that needs to be done is put down some tracks, build a station, and it's good to go. Of all the money that is being spent, maybe $40 million ($50 million on the higher end) is going towards 'short-term' Union-Pearson service upgrades. Over a 10 or 15 year period, and given the importance and value of the airport service, thats more than a reasonable amount to spend until a proper line and service can be installed.

If the whole $500 million investment were to become redundant after a new line to Pearson opened then that would be a much different story...

 

[nfitz]

Wouldn't the current routing for a heavy rail airport spur pretty much preclude any heavy rail through routing to Pearson in the mid-term?

Heavy rail routing was already precluded to the new railway station at Terminal 1, because it is suspended in the air at the same location as the existing Terminal 1 station, and wouldn't allow for typical GO trains ... it's only designed for short trains of self-propelled cars. It was partially constructed years ago, while they were putting in the existing station.

 

[dunkalunk]

No.

The whole Georgetown corridor/Blue 22 project is pegged at around $500 million. Most of that money is going towards the Georgetown corridor and thus any many spent on the corridor will/would benefit GO even if there was not a spur line going in. I don't know if that includes the cost of rolling stock, but either way, that is a cost that doesn't matter since the vehicles could be used for Union-Pearson service after a through line is a built (or moved to elsewhere on the GO network).

The only part of the project that would become redundant (and thus money 'wasted' for lack of a better word), is the spur line and station at Pearson. But the right-of-way has already been set aside so basically all that needs to be done is put down some tracks, build a station, and it's good to go. Of all the money that is being spent, maybe $40 million ($50 million on the higher end) is going towards 'short-term' Union-Pearson service upgrades. Over a 10 or 15 year period, and given the importance and value of the airport service, thats more than a reasonable amount to spend until a proper line and service can be installed.

If the whole $500 million investment were to become redundant after a new line to Pearson opened then that would be a much different story...

For clarification, I was only referring to the rail spur from Pearson to Woodbine. Regardless, $40 million 'wasted' for lack of a better word is still $40 million wasted ($50 on the high end).

I suppose the line could be re-used as an extension of the Eglinton LRT, but that would still require the construction of centenary and the reconfiguration of platforms (Transit City is being built to standard gauge, so this is no issue).

 

[nfitz]

I suppose the line could be re-used as an extension of the Eglinton LRT, but that would still require the construction of centenary ...

Do you really think it will take that long? I'm not sure I can wait until the year 2115 for the Eglinton LRT to get to the airport

Seriously though ... that alignment doesn't work for Eglinton ... it's way to far north. Maybe the Finch LRT ...

But as far as I know, there's enough space for more than 2 tracks along there ... bringing GO into the airport is going to require some creative tunnelling ... it's more likely that they'd simply construct a station at the end of that spur, and there'd be a shuttle along the spur to an above-ground platform at T1.