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

AnarchoSocialist said:
Edit: There is also the possibility that a main station could be built at T1 that would see GO/VIA/and Blue 22 service. Since GO and VIA are likely only going to want to make one stop at Pearson they would have little interest in a second station at T3. But Blue 22, as was in its original plan, would have an interest in such a station.
Click to expand...

I don't believe that is correct. I'm fairly certain Blue22 was/is only going to have a single station. The GTAA reserved some space for Blue22 and initially the plan was for the airport rail station to be at the Long Term Parking station area but was moved to connect directly with the T1 people mover station. You can see those two options in the older and newer GTAA master plan. The diversion option was laid out in an earlier study by URS if I recall correctly. It is probably on the Weston Community Coalition website somewhere.

I can't see GO/VIA making use of the station without the diversion or monorail/peoplemover option because the time required to switch train directions and in the case of VIA the need to ensure controls and both ends of the train.
 
What I don't understand is why they don't build the monorail/peoplemover to Malton station. When you consider the GTAA already determined a peoplemover is necessary to move people between terminals, when you consider at airports like Atlanta, Orlando, and Tampa require passengers to use a peoplemover to the gates, when you consider at DTW and DFW the peoplemover is taken as a convenient way to get around the airport, and finally consider that it is by far the cheapest option.... why isn't it getting done? Blue22 would be better for people going from Union to T1 but it isn't going to be significantly better and it would only be equally good for those going to T3 and is going to be worse for most people from other parts of the city. Why is a peoplemover not seen as a huge burden for those arriving at long term parking, those changing terminals, or at every other airport in the world that has one but is seen as a major burden for those arriving from downtown on a direct train when they must have already found a way to get to Union station and navigate it with their luggage?
 
Perhaps a full [real] light rail system should be considered to replace the People Mover, continuing on to the GO line, to Woodbine and Humber (and beyond?) and, in the south, perhaps all the way somewhere along the 427 to the Bloor line. I believe CDL made a good route map of this potential line a while back. Such a line would be far likelier to become a reality if entire wards and entities like Humber or Woodbine benefit in addition to the airport.
 
scarberiankhatru said:
Perhaps a full [real] light rail system should be considered to replace the People Mover, continuing on to the GO line, to Woodbine and Humber (and beyond?) and, in the south, perhaps all the way somewhere along the 427 to the Bloor line. I believe CDL made a good route map of this potential line a while back. Such a line would be far likelier to become a reality if entire wards and entities like Humber or Woodbine benefit in addition to the airport.
Click to expand...

I would see that as a greater obstacle to use though. People wouldn't use the DTW, DFW, and other airport monorail/peoplemover systems if they were seen as not being part of the airport and being something they need to pay for.
 
scarberiankhatru said:
Perhaps a full [real] light rail system should be considered to replace the People Mover, continuing on to the GO line, to Woodbine and Humber (and beyond?) and, in the south, perhaps all the way somewhere along the 427 to the Bloor line. I believe CDL made a good route map of this potential line a while back. Such a line would be far likelier to become a reality if entire wards and entities like Humber or Woodbine benefit in addition to the airport.
Click to expand...

Indeed I did. Replacing the peoplemover with a proper LRT branch seems unlikely (and when I think about an Etobicoke LRT concept these days I usually have it bypassing the airport), but it also makes a lot of sense for providing a convenient route to the airport from all over the city.

The great thing about this concept it that it could potentially be built with no tunnels or no on-street running, with it almost all on the surface in existing corridors.

Four GO lines, two subway lines, three college and university campuses, two hospitals, tourist draws, and an airport. I don't think it would be possible for such a line to be anything but a success.

etoblrt2mf1.jpg
 
Yeah, it's unlikely, but in a MoveOntario/Metrolinx era where every pet project imaginable is getting its chance in the spotlight, all it takes is one person convincing one politician that the project's worth doing and it could happen.

If it just went from the airport terminals to the GO line to Woodbine - this is the only stretch of the line that really matters (beyond Woodbine or south of the airport is genuine fantasy map territory - it could still be 100% free. Woodbine would surely love that kind of access to hordes of people enough to chip in to subsidize riders. Perhaps it could go free as far as Humber's north campus (there's really no way for it to be free south of the airport, too). Or maybe build a line like CDL's with fares, but have airport users/employees, Woodbine customers, and Humber students get on free. Or build the whole thing, collect fares at station exits, but don't collect any fares at the airport stations.
 
Darkstar416 said:
It shouldn't run as an express service for 905'ers either. An S-Bahn like system I think is what most on this forum would call for and a stop at Eglinton would fit that model.
Click to expand...

Way off topic, but I have to disagree with you. It should be an express *if* the underlying concept is to provide a viable alternative to driving into town from points beyond. If the concept is to provide a slower, more localized non-regional serivce, I would agree with you. But given the Transit City plan, there will be no shortage of 416 frequent stopping services.
 
CDL:

You list two tourist draws for your route, one is Woodbine, what's the other one? I will kick myself for not getting this...

Urbanfan:

Illustrating the people mover coming up to the GO line really shows the simplicity of that idea.
 
scarberiankhatru said:
If it just went from the airport terminals to the GO line to Woodbine - this is the only stretch of the line that really matters (beyond Woodbine or south of the airport is genuine fantasy map territory - it could still be 100% free. Woodbine would surely love that kind of access to hordes of people enough to chip in to subsidize riders. Perhaps it could go free as far as Humber's north campus (there's really no way for it to be free south of the airport, too). Or maybe build a line like CDL's with fares, but have airport users/employees, Woodbine customers, and Humber students get on free. Or build the whole thing, collect fares at station exits, but don't collect any fares at the airport stations.
Click to expand...

The idea is modelled on modern (real) LRT systems across North America, which generally means POP. All you do is not have any fare checks between the Airport and Woodbine (or wherever). This is exactly how it works in Minneapolis where their LRT system operates as the shuttle between their airport's terminals - and Minneapolis also happens to be the system that is pictured on that map. I'm sure the airport hotels could save thousands upon thousands of dollars a year as well with the stop at Carlingview.

Earlscourt_Lad said:
Way off topic, but I have to disagree with you. It should be an express *if* the underlying concept is to provide a viable alternative to driving into town from points beyond. If the concept is to provide a slower, more localized non-regional serivce, I would agree with you. But given the Transit City plan, there will be no shortage of 416 frequent stopping services.
Click to expand...

There's a massive difference between Transit City with its stops every 400m and traffic lights to contend with and a suburban rail system with stops every 3-5km. I'd say that the only real similarity is that they both run on rails. We should emulate successful systems in Europe, Asia, and Australia. It makes a lot of sense for a train from Brampton running every 20 minutes to make 5 or so stops in Toronto, and it makes a lot of sense for an hourly train from Kitchener to skip almost every stop in Toronto.

Earlscourt_Lad said:
CDL:

You list two tourist draws for your route, one is Woodbine, what's the other one? I will kick myself for not getting this...
Click to expand...

Actually I didn't say two tourist draws. Other destinations for tourists could include the Congress Centre and the hotel strip by the airport.
 
CDL.TO said:
The idea is modelled on modern (real) LRT systems across North America, which generally means POP. All you do is not have any fare checks between the Airport and Woodbine (or wherever). This is exactly how it works in Minneapolis where their LRT system operates as the shuttle between their airport's terminals - and Minneapolis also happens to be the system that is pictured on that map. I'm sure the airport hotels could save thousands upon thousands of dollars a year as well with the stop at Carlingview.
Click to expand...

I always forget about POP...you described the kind of 'don't pay at the airport' fare setup I was intending when I mentioned pay on exit but don't collect at all at the Pearson stations. I guess the fare free zone could be from the hotels to Woodbine.

The Hiawatha line was a pleasure to ride...busier than I expected it to be on a Saturday afternoon, too.
 
CDL.TO said:
Indeed I did. Replacing the peoplemover with a proper LRT branch seems unlikely (and when I think about an Etobicoke LRT concept these days I usually have it bypassing the airport), but it also makes a lot of sense for providing a convenient route to the airport from all over the city.

The great thing about this concept it that it could potentially be built with no tunnels or no on-street running, with it almost all on the surface in existing corridors.

Four GO lines, two subway lines, three college and university campuses, two hospitals, tourist draws, and an airport. I don't think it would be possible for such a line to be anything but a success.

etoblrt2mf1.jpg
Click to expand...

This is beautiful and elegant. I can't believe no one has thought of this before, or that I haven't thought of it. If Toronto wants to develop a transit network, rather than a random collection of routes, this is the way to do it. It could be interlined with the finch west lrt or it could just replace it. Woo! this actually excites me. Two humber campuses in one line!! And it easily solves the airport transportation problem without the ridiculous blue22. What's more, there are plenty of opportunities for intensification along that route, and the right mix of trip generators to make sure that the land actually gets intensified. I want to see tracks laid tomorrow morning!
 
The only thing I would change to CDL.TO's light rail proposal is to add a connection with the Eglinton rapid transit line, but otherwise, the route seems to make a lot of sense.

Additionally, perhaps baggage checking services could be provided at the airport parkway station to help streamline the process.

Aside: Urbanfan, In your google map you depicted the high speed rail line following a swath of land south of the 407. What exactly is that land?
 
In your google map you depicted the high speed rail line following a swath of land south of the 407. What exactly is that land?
Click to expand...
It's a hydro corridor, which would be shared with the 407 busway. There might be an issue with the voltage from the transmission towers, so they will need to string wires above the railway line to provide a ground.
 
dunkalunk said:
The only thing I would change to CDL.TO's light rail proposal is to add a connection with the Eglinton rapid transit line, but otherwise, the route seems to make a lot of sense.
Click to expand...

The connection would be made at Martin Grove. The Eglinton line just isn't pictured.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top