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

nfitz said:
No, the previous announcement was simply that Metrolinx would take over responsibility for the EA process, and that the EA would be restarted from scratch under the new rules that have been developed since the second EA attempt went dormant in 2006.

This new announcement gave details about design, schedule, and announced open house dates.

The announcement that they will do 5 new grade-separated vehicle crossings, plus an additional pedestrian crossing, trench the tracks through Weston, add in local stations on the airport service, and add Eglinton and Woodbine GO stations, renovate Dundas West, is all new. This is a significant announcement. Also new was the announcement that they hope to start construction this fall.
Click to expand...


I think you misunderstood....I agree that the Metrolinx announcement was significant....it was the Premier coming out in the Star today saying "I am going ahead with this project" that I questioned....seems like nothing new there!
 
I see the trench or tunnel through Weston wasn't so farfetched after all. I have a feeling that Metrolinx consulted with the Weston Coalition on this project. This is just the kind of project that's an effective stimulus for the economy - construction started within the year, and it's a needed project not only for the airport, but for Brampton and other cities on the line as well. My only beef is that the trains going to the airport are still going to be private only, and likely more expensive than GO. GO should be serving the airport as well.
 
MisterF said:
I see the trench or tunnel through Weston wasn't so farfetched after all. I have a feeling that Metrolinx consulted with the Weston Coalition on this project. This is just the kind of project that's an effective stimulus for the economy - construction started within the year, and it's a needed project not only for the airport, but for Brampton and other cities on the line as well. My only beef is that the trains going to the airport are still going to be private only, and likely more expensive than GO. GO should be serving the airport as well.
Click to expand...

I have two problems with GO to the airport:

1. All rides on GO are subsidized, this of course can be overcome by charging a surcharge for going into the airport thereby removing the subsidy (unless you work at the airport). If you can pay for a plane ticket, you can pay for the full cost of transit to get you there.

2. (this is the big one for me)... The express train to the airport should be run like an extension to the airport (aka Hong Kong Station). I should be able to go to the station and checkin, hand them the checked luggage and then go to the airport. This is not really do-able if there it is not limited access.

Problems I have with Blue 22 is that the rolling stock seems like discarded antiques....
 
The unwashed can always ride the bus. We will still have the absurd situation that we'd be unique amongst "world class cities" to have only a super-premium private rail link to the airport, and not also a subsidized public rail alternative to downtown. (I also guess that Los Angeles is not "world class" by Metrolinx's standards).

I have a one-seat ride to Terminal 1 where I am as well (though I hope to move). Brampton has added an express bus from Bramalea City Centre, and I would bet YRT would extend the Martin Grove bus there one day as well. The GO bus service to YYZ isn't bad from Mississauga and Richmond Hill, though the requirement to pay the GO fare (plus the local transit fare) makes it steeper than it should be.

Why does the airport have to have a different standard so that there's no subsidies for this one and only destination? Not only those who "can buy a plane ticket" but also employees, meeters and greeters, and perhaps those who work near the airport as well. Also considering the increasing range of transit connections there, couldn't it also be a transit node for people not necessarily flying, but perhaps headed to Bramalea City Centre, Malton or Airport Corporate Centre?

Name me three airports where the rail links do not require a subsidy. I can name only two - HKG and LHR. LHR also has a subsidized rail link, though.
 
Last edited:
from the RTP

BIG MOVE #2
High-order transit connectivity to the Pearson Airport district from all directions.

1.2 Establish high-order transit connectivity to the Pearson Airport district from all directions, including a multi-purpose, fast transit link to downtown Toronto (see Section 5.0 for more details)

5.2 The First 15 Years
PEARSON AIRPORT AND UNION STATION

With well over half a million combined jobs within less than four kilometres of these two hubs, and tens of thousands of travellers passing through them every day, Pearson Airport and Union Station are the two most significant mobility hubs in the GTHA.

Access to Union Station will be significantly enhanced with improvements to the rail network. Improvements at Union Station will ensure that it has the capacity to handle the additional trains and increased passenger flows.

Transit access to the Pearson Airport district will be provided from all directions: from the east along the Eglinton corridor; from the north via the Finch transit corridor; from the west via theHighway 403 Transitway and via the Queen Street/Highway 427 corridor; and from the south via Highway 427 from Kipling Station.

The RTP will also connect these two critical hubs to one another with new rail service.
 
cacruden said:
I have two problems with GO to the airport:

1. All rides on GO are subsidized, this of course can be overcome by charging a surcharge for going into the airport thereby removing the subsidy (unless you work at the airport). If you can pay for a plane ticket, you can pay for the full cost of transit to get you there.
Click to expand...

Is that true? I think I heard/read that, system wide, GO Transit recovers 90% of their operating cost from the fare box.

Whenever I see one of those late night or weekend outbound trains on the Lakeshore line they are mostly empty....so those must be recovering very little of their operating cost from the farebox....

....so, if those two statements are true....there must be some GO Trains that are actually operating in a positive cash flow situation to offset the negative situation on the nearly empty trains (btw....this is not a cry to kill the nearly empty trains....just an attempt to dispute that all rides on GO are subsidized.

2. (this is the big one for me)... The express train to the airport should be run like an extension to the airport (aka Hong Kong Station). I should be able to go to the station and checkin, hand them the checked luggage and then go to the airport. This is not really do-able if there it is not limited access.

Problems I have with Blue 22 is that the rolling stock seems like discarded antiques....
Click to expand...


I think this ability to check your bags at Union and travel carefree for the balance of your trip was part of the original Blue 22 proposal and is often overlooked when people talk about the $20 fee. As a fairly frequent business traveller I can tell you that if there was check-in at Union, a speedy, reasonably comfortable direct trip that was not subject to the variances that traffic causes (ie. a trip of predictable length).....I would view $20 as a steal!!!
 
well, taxi costs was more than $20. It costs $24 here from Central Etobicoke, I can ony limagine from downtown. and transit is very insufficient to the airport. So, the price is actualy qute reasonable.
 
well, taxi costs was more than $20. It costs $24 here from Central Etobicoke, I can ony limagine from downtown. and transit is very insufficient to the airport. So, the price is actualy qute reasonable.

For me, I would say not. I go to the airport a lot, and I generally take the TTC, so I pay the price of a token. If someone is going to the airport alone, then the price of the train is less than half that of a cab (presuming the price doesn't rise exponentially, like the ETR). However, a cab takes you door to door, while someone taking the train needs to get to Union Station (either by subway or by cab). Either of those options make paying $20 for a fare much less reasonable, in my opinion.

And if you are more than one person, then really, who would pay the $20 each when a cab wouldn't be that much more.

A prediction - if it proceeds as planned, with a PPP, prices will start at more than $20, and then the service won't be profitable, and it will need to be taken over by the TTC or GO or Metrolinx or whoever is making decisions about transit in Toronto right now.

Having said that, the most recent plan strikes me as better than before.
 
cacruden said:
I have two problems with GO to the airport:

1. All rides on GO are subsidized, this of course can be overcome by charging a surcharge for going into the airport thereby removing the subsidy (unless you work at the airport). If you can pay for a plane ticket, you can pay for the full cost of transit to get you there.
Click to expand...

subsidy shumbsidy. alot of things are subsidized. you think roads are free? sidewalks? alot of things are subsidized & in some way funded by taxpayers.
 
jks said:
well, taxi costs was more than $20. It costs $24 here from Central Etobicoke, I can ony limagine from downtown. and transit is very insufficient to the airport. So, the price is actualy qute reasonable.
Click to expand...

From downtown I've been charged from 45 to 55 depending on traffic.
 
Rolling stock, the operator, schedules can all be easily changed in the future. The good news here is that this rail corridor will be getting a much needed upgrade. I do not remember hearing recently that the project WILL use the original rolling stock or operator. There is only mention that the idea of blue22 will be used.
 
Archivist said:
Public transit is not meant to be operated as a social service. What in hell are you talking about? What are you saying? I'm not sure if you mean that ironically, but I have to say it stands out for its ridiculousness.
Click to expand...
No, I mean it in all seriousness. Transportation is just a business like anything else, it should be run on viability not social concerns (that is welfare's department). It is an unfair burden on rail transit to have the government tell private companies that they need to fulfill social criteria x or y. We don't make cabs drive through poor areas to pick people up...

FYI - 'Public Transit' doesn't mean operated by the people for the people, it means the public has access to the service. Airlines and cabs are public transit, but their first concern is to maximize profit. No surprise then that while the modal share of transit keeps declining (or at best, stops declining), these have been seeing relatively 'good times.'
 
I think even if the airport express train fare at $45-55, it would still be a steal and I'd take it. It beats being in a taxi and having the unpredictability of traffic. same with the airport express bus. It beats TTC (i mean, who would take TTC to the airport really.. it's uncomfortable and a hassle and it's so indirect and long), and it beats all modes of transportation by travel-time... sometimes business trips are so hectic and timing is so tight. Anyone traveling from downtown to airport with a piece of luggage would also appreciate traveling light from Union with virtually guaranteed time. Added with first-time visitors and business people looking for convenient and sure-fire way of going from airport to downtown, it makes all the sense in the world to charge higher prices for the premium 'service' and 'benefit'.

In cost-benefit, I think a ticket price in the $20s doesn't make sense in maximizing revenue. The airport train service gives benefits of MUCH higher than $20-30 to the target rider.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top