SmartTrack (Proposed)

[wopchop]

Heavy rail along Eglinton to Renforth Gateway is idiotic. I get that ridership is low, even for LRT, but if you really want to connect the Airport Corporate Centre with rail, then you'd be better off with a LRT. You could even have it go farther into the business park area, to solve the problem that CDL.TO mentions above, and still come out being substantially cheaper than a heavy rail link.

 

[Edward Skira]

Great graphic and great post CDL.TO!

 

[andrewpmk]

Sigh, that is the unfortunate truth when it comes to serving transit to business parks.

If SmartTrack is built it will almost certainly take Alignment 2A or 2B in the study, going south from the Kitchener line and stopping at Pearson Airport and Airport Corporate Centre, and replacing the UP Express. To get to the western part of Airport Corporate Centre you will have to transfer to the Mississauga Transitway.

 

[Tuscani01]

Heavy rail along Eglinton to Renforth Gateway is idiotic. I get that ridership is low, even for LRT, but if you really want to connect the Airport Corporate Centre with rail, then you'd be better off with a LRT. You could even have it go farther into the business park area, to solve the problem that CDL.TO mentions above, and still come out being substantially cheaper than a heavy rail link.

There's already a line further into the business park community under construction though. Renforth Gateway is going to become a transit hub. Its no different than suggesting that Union Station serves downtown. Renforth will serve the ACC in the same way, as it will provide several different means of transit to get you where you need to go from there.

 

[CDL.TO]

But how much of downtown's employment is within walking distance of Union Station? Quite a bit, which is why this is very different circumstance than Union.

I agree that the value of Renforth Gateway is that it will serve as a hub. The ACC is almost incidental. My issue is that the planning docs talk about "serving" the ACC rather than talking about maximising the benefit of the hub.

 

[wopchop]

There's already a line further into the business park community under construction though. Renforth Gateway is going to become a transit hub. Its no different than suggesting that Union Station serves downtown. Renforth will serve the ACC in the same way, as it will provide several different means of transit to get you where you need to go from there.

Right. I'm not suggesting that it is a good idea, or supporting such a plan. I'm just saying that if the intention is to connect ACC with rail, it would be cheaper than a heavy rail link, and still provide far more benefits.

ETA:

And off-topic; while the transitway is great and all, the stations along Eglinton are still 1.0 - 2.0km walk from the 401-side of the ACC, depending where you would be going.

 

[Tuscani01]

But how much of downtown's employment is within walking distance of Union Station? Quite a bit, which is why this is very different circumstance than Union.

I agree that the value of Renforth Gateway is that it will serve as a hub. The ACC is almost incidental. My issue is that the planning docs talk about "serving" the ACC rather than talking about maximising the benefit of the hub.

Fair enough. They should definitely be talking up the importance of serving the hub.

 

[CDL.TO]

The maps don't even show the Transitway, which is a pretty key piece of infrastructure.

And off-topic; while the transitway is great and all, the stations along Eglinton are still 1.0 - 1.5km walk from the 401-side of the ACC.

Exactly. The ACC is pretty much the exact opposite of pedestrian-oriented. There's a lot of jobs, but there's even more surface parking.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

How are bus services at the ACC? I figure that a lot of the pedestrian issues could be eliminated with improved bus services. SmartTrack's ACC station could act as a hub for these bus routes.

 

[gweed123]

How are bus services at the ACC? I figure that a lot of the pedestrian issues could be eliminated with improved bus services. SmartTrack's ACC station could act as a hub for these bus routes.

A "circulator" bus during peak periods running every 5 mins or so could theoretically serve the area pretty well. If you had one station at either end of the ACC, you could run a bus from one station, up to near the 401, across, then back down to the other station, and then reverse. Yes, being within walking distance of a station is good, but as long as there's a convenient way to undertake that last 1km of the trip, it should be fine.

Having said that, I don't necessarily support a SmartTrack line to ACC. I would prefer it be LRT running in the Transitway corridor.

 

[jcam]

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/transportation/2015/06/14/should-pearson-be-the-union-station-of-the-west-gta.html
“In a bid to help coax even more travellers and commuters out of their cars, the GTAA is considering building its own multi-modal transit hub on airport property.”

 

[gweed123]

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/transportation/2015/06/14/should-pearson-be-the-union-station-of-the-west-gta.html
“In a bid to help coax even more travellers and commuters out of their cars, the GTAA is considering building its own multi-modal transit hub on airport property.”

It is certainly an interesting problem. I think a far less expensive solution would be as follows:

1) Create two new transit hubs for Pearson (Pearson South Hub and Pearson North Hub). South Hub would be today's Renforth Gateway, and would have connections to the Mississauga Transitway, Eglinton LRT, and various GO bus routes. North Hub would be today's Malton GO station, and would have connections to VIA, various GO RER services, and a future extension of the FWLRT.

2) Upgrade the People Mover to Mark III ICTS, and extend it to the North and South Hubs. It would then have 5 stations total: North Hub, Viscount, Terminal 3, Terminal 1, South Hub. An optional station could be added at International Drive, which has some hotel redevelopment potential.

This option would be far less expensive than building a new massive hub AT Pearson, which would likely include substantial tunnelling and a massive new structure.

 

[crs1026]

The transit hub study is a good thing - at present the BT Miway and TTC routes in the area are not well connected. BT Miway and TTC have traditionally treated Malton as the edge of their respective earths, instead of a place people need to travel across seamlessly.

The idea to extend UPX south to the Renforth hub to connect with transit on Eglinton is interesting, but there is little value in a through rail route that goes all the way around the north side before coming south. I would either extend the Finch LRT from the Airport down to Renforth (we do agree that Finch LRT needs to go to the Airport, right?) , or just provide a bus link similar to the Boston Silver Line (which is a FREE service). Tunnelling under the airport runways is doubly expensive, I'm told, for safety reasons. Here's a case where a bus link on existing roadways (with maybe some bus lanes added) might be the cheapest option and just as good.

Location of the stops on Eglinton in all scenarios is just stupid, and is another argument for LRT. Scarlett, Royal York, Islington, Kipling, and Martin Grove all need stops. Making heavy rail stop in all those places is inefficient. LRT would be perfect. I could even find myself supporting elevating it, to avoid all those stoplights en route.

We discussed earlier that Jane is a heavy-ridership bus route. Should it not be better connected to ST (and/or RER?) Is making a detour over to Mount Dennis a good routing? Neither Weston nor Mount Dennis really tie Jane in well.

We have to keep a slightly open mind about some of these no-brainer study scenarios. Anyone who has done this kind of comparative analysis knows you are wise to throw in a few clunkers. Proves you have been open to all alternatives and lets you can deal with vocal supporters of such dumb ideas . If you didn't study them up front, it's more painful to backtrack and add them - and if you then shoot down the added scenario, you will be accused of just blowing it off. The study may be doing us a favour by definitively shooting them down before some councillor becomes vocally wedded to one of them. #LetsnotrepeattheScarborodebate

- Paul

 

[ehlow]

The idea to extend UPX south to the Renforth hub to connect with transit on Eglinton is interesting, but there is little value in a through rail route that goes all the way around the north side before coming south. I would either extend the Finch LRT from the Airport down to Renforth (we do agree that Finch LRT needs to go to the Airport, right?) , or just provide a bus link similar to the Boston Silver Line (which is a FREE service). Tunnelling under the airport runways is doubly expensive, I'm told, for safety reasons. Here's a case where a bus link on existing roadways (with maybe some bus lanes added) might be the cheapest option and just as good.

Or the Blue line bus in Boston, which in 2 minutes gets you from the airport to the blue subway line.

We should do bus connectors to the airport even if we're building rail there, as a stopgap solution. It's convenient (use luggage racks like Porter shuttle or 192 airport bus), it works, and can be done quickly. I mean bus connections from places like Finch LRT west terminal at Humber and Eglinton LRT west terminal at Mt Dennis to Pearson (the latter also connects the Eg LRT to Renforth & Mississauga transitway).

 

[mdrejhon]

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/tra...son-be-the-union-station-of-the-west-gta.html
“In a bid to help coax even more travellers and commuters out of their cars, the GTAA is considering building its own multi-modal transit hub on airport property.”

It is certainly an interesting problem. I think a far less expensive solution would be as follows:
1) Create two new transit hubs [snip...]
2) Upgrade the People Mover to Mark III ICTS [snip...]

The transit hub study is a good thing - at present the BT Miway and TTC routes in the area are not well connected. BT Miway and TTC have traditionally treated Malton as the edge of their respective earths, instead of a place people need to travel across seamlessly.

Let me predict: I think ultimately, they will jiggle plans around and make the Pearson North Hub is Woodbine Racetrack Station. Instead of "GO Woodbine Racetrack", the station name is now obviously "Pearson Hub". It will serve every single train that runs over Canada's busiest railroad corridor. LINK peoplemover becomes upgraded to be faster and more frequent and running over UPX spur.

There are many other ideas, all of us are brainstorming. But this is an explosive new concept -- a 2nd Union station of sorts for Toronto. Paris has six major Union-station-sized stations, we only have one. So our city size can support a 2nd Union station. That's too much topic for one thread!

The 2nd Union station is a gigantic proposal that I feel totally deserves its own separate thread, so I've created a new thread, replying to all of your posts. I suspect forum admins may agree, considering the massive magnitude of a 2nd Union station. And I see the writing on the wall, thanks to Ontario's high speed EA containing a pearson stop for high speed trains.

New topic thread:
Pearson Rail Hub (2nd Union Station for Toronto)

Why don't we discuss our "Union Station II" ideas over there?