Toronto Eglinton Line 5 | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

[crs1026]

The unfortunate thing about this little drama - which Toronto walked right into, we had remarked in this forum that it was coming - is that we have poisoned the room for a constructive conversation about what the transit needs around the airport are and how to address them. There are huge numbers of jobs here but travel is auto-centric and transit has a huge opportunity to gain market share here.

We need to stop talking about this as an LRT to the Airport. Few travellers are going to schlepp their suitcases onto an LRT, any more than they are onto the 192 bus (many travellers do use 192, but the greater number who don't swear that the Cubs will win the World Series before they take a bus to the airport, and those who live along Eglinton probably feel the same way). What the LRT could be is a link to the Viscount hub which in turn could spawn useful connections to any number of places in that job-rich zone.

The ridership data is very poor at the moment, but that's because so many airport workers have chosen to live in other places where auto access to their work is easier. We need to keep in mind that people do move around. There is (for the moment) affordable housing along Eglinton from Keele over to about Dufferin, with intensification on the horizon. Ample reason to believe that if we provided good transit in the airport zone itself, a fast speedy link from further east (ie an LRT) would boost those numbers over a 5-to-10 year period. And, if we had that constructive conversation, we would be better able to quantify how much benefit Mississauga will get from that, and create more onus on CofM to pay part of the tab.

Annexing the airport is a really bad idea. Ottawa is looking to download air terminals, not support them. They would probably love to pass Pearson to Toronto - and let Toronto pay for it. Mississauga would likely do the same. Imagine what Toronto Council would do if they had that ball to juggle on top of their current disfunction. I bet Bonnie Crombie would love to have that last laugh on the matter.

- Paul

 

[Cobra]

Story in The Star, at this link.

Mississauga fumes over $470 million Toronto LRT funding assumption

Toronto wants its neighbour to pay a share of $470 million for LRT plan.



This can be easily solved. Toronto should annex Pearson Airport. The UPX is used by mostly Toronto visitors or residents to get to and from the airport. Most people going to Pearson Airport are from Toronto itself. So, Toronto should annex it, and then pay for the Crosstown LRT to reach it.

The day will come when they'll knock on our door for a subway... I think we'll pass Mississauga

 

[Cobra]

Annexing the airport is a really bad idea. Ottawa is looking to download air terminals, not support them. They would probably love to pass Pearson to Toronto - and let Toronto pay for it. Mississauga would likely do the same. I bet Bonnie Crombie would love to have that last laugh on the matter.

Ottawa is looking at privatizing the airports, not downloading them. Hypothetically, Toronto getting the Pearson lands means massive tax revenues

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Ottawa is looking at privatizing the airports, not downloading them. Hypothetically, Toronto getting the Pearson lands means massive tax revenues

Nope - the airport pay minimal taxes to the municipality - Hazel fought the GTAA and lost on that front due to federal legislation.

Not that annexation is happening, but what's worthwhile isn't the airport but the industries/firms around it. That's what generating the tax revenues.

AoD

 

[Cobra]

Nope - the airport pay minimal taxes to the municipality - Hazel fought the GTAA and lost on that front due to federal legislation.

Not that annexation is happening, but what's worthwhile isn't the airport but the industries/firms around it. That's what generating the tax revenues.

AoD

I didn't know. Thanks for the info.

I know when Montreal was 1 city-1 island and they were having the referendums to undo amalgamation, the mayor retaining Dorval and the airport lands was a huge victory according to him.

 

[Rainforest]

You have an interesting definition of "not that high".

Well, $470 million a lot of money for an ordinary person, but not that much compared to the cost of other transit projects currently on the table.

It'll benefit very few Torotonians. We've not had three separate ridership evaluations completed, and they've all shown incredibly minimal peak demand to/from the airport via Eglinton Line. I've yet to see a coherent case made for the extension to Pearson. Yes there are a lot of flights at Pearson, and yes there's a ton of people employed in the area, but it's yet to be shown in any study that it would translate to significant ridership originating at the airport. It feels like this airport extension is being pushed out of aspirational reasons ("it's the airport so obviously it needs rail rapid transit") than out of any genuine transportation demand. If GTAA wants to waste their money on this (and pay to operate it too), they're more than welcome, but the people of Toronto and Mississauga should not be stuck with the bill.

Frankly, I am a bit suspicious of such evaluations. Any ridership forecasts are sensitive to the input parameters that have to be chosen rather than calculated. If those input parameters are wrong, then the results will be off even though all calculations are correct.

Many cities whose size is comparable to Toronto found it useful to build a rail link to the airport; and in some cases, they run both express service and a more local service. It is hard for me to understand why Toronto should be so different.

 

[Rainforest]

This can be easily solved. Toronto should annex Pearson Airport. The UPX is used by mostly Toronto visitors or residents to get to and from the airport. Most people going to Pearson Airport are from Toronto itself. So, Toronto should annex it, and then pay for the Crosstown LRT to reach it.

That would be an interesting solution But, it does not really change the financial component; Toronto still has to pay for that LRT.

If anything, the Airport and a portion of LRT being located in Misssissauga makes it easier to beg the province to partly fund that portion.

 

[Hopkins123]

The same logic in getting York Region to fund 40% of TYSSE expenditures should be applied here. $470 million split between the City of Mississauga and GTAA sounds more than reasonable to me.

 

[Zach6668]

but i thought the company building the crosstown was not only building the crosstown but going to be maintaining it for 30 years as part of this P3. So how is it that Toronto is now paying operating costs are am i mixing up operating with maintenance?

Crosslinx will be providing maintenance for 30 years, yes. That is not the same as operating transit service, of course.

Maintenance of the structures and public areas deemed to be ECLRT responsibility will be provided by Crosslinx until the handover date in 30 years. (There are maps of demarcation being produced and negotiated that show which areas will be TTC responsibility (where existing TTC facilities exist), ECLRT responsibility and City responsibility in terms of maintenance of public spaces.)

I would have assumed that the Province would be paying for this since it is part of the original project agreement, but who knows. Crosslinx will get their money, but I'm sure the Province could ask or negotiate that the city contribute.

 

[Zach6668]

We need to stop talking about this as an LRT to the Airport. Few travellers are going to schlepp their suitcases onto an LRT, any more than they are onto the 192 bus (many travellers do use 192, but the greater number who don't swear that the Cubs will win the World Series before they take a bus to the airport, and those who live along Eglinton probably feel the same way). What the LRT could be is a link to the Viscount hub which in turn could spawn useful connections to any number of places in that job-rich zone.

- Paul

What kind of luggage do you people use that "schlepping" it onto a low-floor, fully accessible LRT is some kind of undue burden?

Millions of people travel to and from airports all over the world on public transit. I see people on buses, the subway, even streetcars with roller suitcases all of the time.

If the ECLRT is convenient, cheaper, and faster than driving a car or ordering a taxi or a limo, people will use it to get to the airport. I'm pretty sure it will be all of those things.

(Now, we can have a fair and honest discussion about how much ridership the airport itself will actually generate - that's a completely different story)

 

[Adjei]

Didn't Metrolinx say they wanted to use someone else to operate the eglinton lrt and the ttc and Toronto cried foul. I doubt they would pay paying to operate the line if it was someone else who was operating it. Now that they will be operating the line they are crying foul again at having to pay to operate the line. You can't win with these people.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Toronto probably would've been on the hook for OP expense regardless of the operator.

 

[crs1026]

What kind of luggage do you people use that "schlepping" it onto a low-floor, fully accessible LRT is some kind of undue burden?

Millions of people travel to and from airports all over the world on public transit. I see people on buses, the subway, even streetcars with roller suitcases all of the time.

I do lots of that... If I am lightly loaded, I take the 192. Heathrow to Russell Square by tube with a full-size suitcase is also doable, but takes work. When I am overseas I pick hotels that are anywhere up to a km from transit, assuming I can trundle the last mile on foot (Rolling suitcases on European cobblestones is hell after a few blocks, I would add).

However - in Toronto, if you live on a residential street that is two blocks from the bus stop that takes you to Line 2 that takes you to Kipling, it's another story. Especially in January. Even with a small carryon suitcase. That's me. Stairs, puddles, slush, salt, curbs, squeezing on crowded buses - yes, it's cumulatively unappealing.

LRT will attract a certain number of air travellers, but the number has to be discounted because not everyone lives within a short walk from the LRT.

- Paul

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Well, $470 million a lot of money for an ordinary person, but not that much compared to the cost of other transit projects currently on the table.



Frankly, I am a bit suspicious of such evaluations. Any ridership forecasts are sensitive to the input parameters that have to be chosen rather than calculated. If those input parameters are wrong, then the results will be off even though all calculations are correct.

Many cities whose size is comparable to Toronto found it useful to build a rail link to the airport; and in some cases, they run both express service and a more local service. It is hard for me to understand why Toronto should be so different.

When we have three groups of professionals evaluating a problem and coming to identical conclusions, I'm inclined to believe them.

Furthermore we know from other cities that airport rapid transit systems are amongst the most seldom used components of a rapid transit system. Airports aren't good at generating ridership.

 

[zenmeister]

I don't think the people on here who think it would be fair for Mississauga to pay for the LRT extension get it. No one in Mississauga lives on the proposed airport connection. This would literally not serve anyone in Mississauga. MiWay buses can still directly serve the airport, so, why would anyone want to hop off a MiWay bus at Gateway and pay the extra TTC fee to get on an LRT to get to the airport in that case? If the plan was to extend the crosstown to Square One, then yeah for sure I'd expect Mississauga to pitch in for that. The airport and surrounding area will be better served by connecting buses from the Gateway Terminal.