Toronto Union Pearson Express | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | MMM Group Limited

High speed link to Pearson International Airport?

Everyone: A high speed link to YYZ from Downtown is what Toronto needs-compared to a slower LRT link-a good idea.

I have been neglecting this topic and I would like to mention that the NYC JFK Express brochure posted by 299-BCC dates from around 1979 or so-I can tell by the fares collected-50 cents(the NYC Subway fare then) and then the three dollar fare on board. Those trains had police officers always assigned to ride them and became a prime way for Howard Beach commuters to ride to Manhattan-using JFK Express multi-ride tickets. You would transfer to a shuttle bus there at HB-where one leg of the JFK Airtrain goes today. Because of the two-seat ride and due to the ridership primarily just a fraction of Airport commuters this service was discontinued in the mid 80s.

ST mentions Baltimore-BWI is directly served by the Central Light Rail Line-MTA MD sells a Daypass that is about the same price as two full fares with transfer- a really good deal if you ask me.

HD mentions the Airtrain connection to the LIRR at Jamaica-the ride averages 20 minutes to PSNY and runs frequently-minimum half hourly and at busier times quite a bit more frequent then that. There are peak and off-peak LIRR fares-with the 3/1 fare increase they are:peak Hour to NYP:$7.25(arriving NYP between 6 and 10am weekdays) Off Peak$5.25 at all other times. On Saturday and Sunday you can use a special one way fare called City Ticket and ride for $3.25. One other thing-If you purchase your ticket on board the train a five dollar penalty is added to the fare from Jamaica-Ticket machines and a ticket office downstairs is always available.

To go to Newark Airport NJT and some Amtrak trains do stop there-you must purchase an EWR ticket to enter the AirTrain there. PATH in my opinion extended from Newark Penn Station would have probably been a much better option offering a one-less-seat ride.

I am all for airport rail links-they are better then driving in many ways. LI MIKE
 
Long Island Mike said:
Everyone: A high speed link to YYZ from Downtown is what Toronto needs-compared to a slower LRT link-a good idea.
Click to expand...

Hopefully we can accomodate both. Eglinton Crosstown would service more than just Pearson which is why I prefer it but if you can find a large enough substantial niche market willing to pay $22 a head per one way, more power to you. The TTC could test the viability of Blue 22 or similar service first by offering an extended version or separate branch of the 192 via the QEW to Toronto Union Station. That way there'd be factual statistics pretaining to how many passengers would actually ride a premium YYZ-CBD route.
 
DENTROBATE54 said:
Hopefully we can accomodate both. Eglinton Crosstown would service more than just Pearson which is why I prefer it but if you can find a large enough substantial niche market willing to pay $22 a head per one way, more power to you. The TTC could test the viability of Blue 22 or similar service first by offering an extended version or separate branch of the 192 via the QEW to Toronto Union Station. That way there'd be factual statistics pretaining to how many passengers would actually ride a premium YYZ-CBD route.
Click to expand...

It already exists. http://www.torontoairportexpress.com/

And it takes people and their luggage directly to their hotel, unlike a rail link.
 
Yes, and it's absolutely miserable. Unbelievably slow, packed, and with a really tacky 'welcome to Toronto' tourism video to boot. It also does an incredibly circuitous route around the central city while still managing to skip a number of major hotels, and completely ignores Yorkville, which is where much of the hotel density is (and will continue to be).

So in other words, maybe not the best test case for B22.

Then again, count me among those who think Blue 22 is not the greatest idea, or at least not as the sole heavy rail service into the city. If we can't get the ideal--integration of Pearson into the regional GO/Via network, like Schiphol or Gatwick (or indeed Newark and BWI), I would at least like to see a Heathrow Express/Connect arrangement, with a cheaper local train making half a dozen stops in the city.
 
How much air travel infrastructure do we need?

nicetommy said:
Feds back high-speed train to Pearson

Lack of transit link between Toronto airport, downtown embarrassing: Cannon

Dec 07, 2007 05:24 PM
THE CANADIAN PRESS

It's an embarrassment that Canada's busiest airport still isn't linked to Toronto's downtown core by public transit, and getting it done should be a priority, federal Transport Minister Lawrence Cannon said today.

In a speech to the Toronto Board of Trade, Cannon called it unbelievable that a world-class city like Toronto doesn't have the transit infrastructure that's so common in big cities around the world.

"It's an embarrassment, I do believe that, and I hope the government of Ontario will see fit to change their mind on that," Cannon later said in an interview.

The provincial government has allowed an environmental assessment to get bogged down for two years now and has dragged its heels on a project that could reduce gridlock, he said.

He said the province should do whatever it takes to get the important project launched, and could pursue a public-private partnership like the $2-billion Canada Line rail-based rapid transit service linking downtown Vancouver to its airport and beyond to Richmond, B.C.

Cannon's Ontario counterpart, Jim Bradley, said he wants to build the rail link, but it hasn't been the province's highest priority. He questioned whether Cannon should be telling the province what it should build, and when.

"I try not to suggest what the federal government's No. 1 priority should be and I think provinces are best able to determine what their priorities are," Bradley said.

"It's always nice that when a federal minister comes to town to make those kinds of pronouncements that he comes with a cheque as well."

Metrolinx, an organization that was tasked by the Ontario government to help map the province's transit future, is recommending that the airport project be launched.

Chairman Rob MacIsaac said the project is outside the scope of Metrolinx's mandate since there's already been a lot of discussions and planning, but he hopes it will go ahead as soon as possible.

"Metrolinx does recognize that having a rail link in the region is an important link for this city region going forward. ... In our view, this is an important project and it ought to proceed expeditiously."

Even though the project has been talked about for years, it's not overly surprising that it still hasn't been built, MacIsaac said.

"City building is never tidy. There's always lots of different viewpoints and concerns that have to be taken into account, so it's not something you can build always exactly according to the schedule you might like to."

A spokeswoman for Ontario's Ministry of the Environment said the government is committed to the project but is currently reviewing community concerns about whether a health and safety risk is posed by high-speed trains going through residential areas.
Click to expand...

Given that the era of cheap oil is likely soon coming to a close, which will affect the affordability of air travel for the masses due to rising fuel costs, the scope of the Toronto airport itself may come to be seen as an embarrassment.

Does it make sense to invest even more in infrastructure for this type of travel?
 
That's a good question. But I don't mind Pearson expansion because after all, it is already an airport, and demand will remain high enough as fuel is only one part of the cost of flying. But I also oppose Pickering, which will create a regional-to-international airport on good farmland.

Better to expand and improve Pearson by far.
 
allabootmatt said:
Then again, count me among those who think Blue 22 is not the greatest idea, or at least not as the sole heavy rail service into the city. If we can't get the ideal--integration of Pearson into the regional GO/Via network, like Schiphol or Gatwick (or indeed Newark and BWI), I would at least like to see a Heathrow Express/Connect arrangement, with a cheaper local train making half a dozen stops in the city.
Click to expand...

Does anyone know the distance between Malton GO Station and Viscount PART Monorail Station?

I mention this because what better way to link mass transit to the airport than to utilize the existing infrastructure already available. It appears to be the least intrusive way to link Pearson to the CBD without disrupting service to the Georgetown Line/CN freight cars and would prevent a NIMBY uprising in Weston. Malton is the least used of all the Georgetown stops so why siphon off even more customers to a S-Bahn when the monorail can be extended to the station.

Not everyone riding GO or another limited stop line solely wants YYZ-CBD but everyone riding the monorail does want the airport. If GO frequency was bumped up to 3 trips per hour then only 28 mins (Union to Malton) plus the duration of the monorail trip would separate the end-destinations. Plus as a bonus Brampton, Georgetown, Guelph gets all-day frequent service. Short of a direct subway link, this isn't too bad an idea.
 
The Viscount station isn't Monorail. There are two rails not one. It's a cable-car. And the only extension that it's been designed to handle is a couple of hundred metres to a second T1 station. The CN tracks are about 1 km away, and the existing GO station is about 3 km - in the wrong direction.
 
nfitz said:
The Viscount station isn't Monorail. There are two rails not one. It's a cable-car. And the only extension that it's been designed to handle is a couple of hundred metres to a second T1 station. The CN tracks are about 1 km away, and the existing GO station is about 3 km - in the wrong direction.
Click to expand...

Although I did read on the GTAA's web site that the tracks/trains were designed to accomodate a different type of technology (non cable car) so in the future they could exapnd it. I believe it would be a similar technology that is used by the Sky Train in B.C..
 
Those tracks could never handle anything as big as a SkyTrain/ScarboroughRT vehicle. Any new technology on those tracks would have to have the same dimensions as the current trains to to fit alongside the station platforms. The only change would be in fitting motors into the undercarriage.

Anyway, if space has been left at the T1 APM station for a heavy rail station for a spur line coming off the GO tracks, then it makes the most sense to connect up the airport that way. It means no extended downtime for the APM to change over to a new motive technology required by an extension to its line. A heavy rail spur line could handle either Blue 22 as it is currently proposed, or a GO Train branch line which others (like me) would prefer.

42
 
I was looking at an aerial of the area and I still think a GO Pearson station is possible and the best option. There is an old (unused?) spur line that come off the main line and continues SE back towards the intersection of NW Dr and Zavay way/Goreway, and a short ways into the industrial buildings.

If GO were to switch to electrified engines (or dual power, diesel/electric) and a tunnel could be built at some point under American dr or Airway dr. A station could either be built at the Viscount parking lot (connection to the people mover) or even built under T1. Which if I'm not mistaken had a provision for just such a thing in it's original design. Malton GO could be relocated to Pearson, allowing for redevelopment of that corner for a hotel/convention centre expansion/etc. Which could go in conjunction with the other proposal for redevelopment that GTAA released a while back.

Ideally it would have to be double tracked and the switch converted for bidirectional switching. To allow trains to head both east and west from Pearson. For as I see it the greatest benefit of this plan would not only be pearson/union runs but also from other areas of the region where passengers would be able to catch a train from the airport to say Guelph/London/etc.
 
nfitz said:
The Viscount station isn't Monorail. There are two rails not one. It's a cable-car. And the only extension that it's been designed to handle is a couple of hundred metres to a second T1 station. The CN tracks are about 1 km away, and the existing GO station is about 3 km - in the wrong direction.
Click to expand...

It's a monorail because it's one-directional, hence one = mono. Malton GO might be farther west from Toronto but it's alot closer to the airport than Etobicoke North GO, the only other existing station within range. Malton is also the least used Georgetown GO stop so an extension of the monorail to there would actually boost ridership patronage at that stop without taxing the whole commuter line overall.

At 28 mins + a non-stop high-speed monorail shuttle, this plan exceeds the 192 service handedly and without having to stand with heavy luggage on a cramped 80 km/h bus down the highway.

Adding another stop at Hwy 27 or even worse diverting the commuter line harms more than it benefits. People getting out at Woodbine Racetrack thinking they've made it to the show will be shocked that the main entrace, spectator box seats, the casino and accomodations are a good kilometre north. People wanting Brampton/Georgetown/Guelph now have an extra 10 mins to subsist through. Even airport personnel would be nowhere near their work areas with what is sure to be a Downsview-esque Kiss 'n' Ride pick-up/drop-off nightmare.

My point is, if it ain't broke, why mess with it? The monorail's relatively new and expandable. The rail corridor... not so much. Furthermore just looking at a map, the monorail could easily route adjacent to Airport Road right onto the GO property (satelite photos also reveal a clear path of undeveloped roadside or backlot properties that the monorail can soar overhead of).
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top