Mississauga Pearson Transit Hub | ?m | ?s | GTAA

This paragraph from the summary report caught my eye:

Air travellers at Pearson Airport using transit to access the airport are also excluded from the ridership model (given they currently form a very low proportion). Given the modest number of air travellers originating from the Finch corridor and the low transit share, even with LRT, such travellers are not expected to have a material impact on the case for the LRT extension.
​
Guess the number of people using UPX and the 192 Airport Rocket (which serves the southern half of Toronto) wasn't taken into consideration for the northern half of Toronto.
 
W. K. Lis said:
​
Guess the number of people using UPX and the 192 Airport Rocket (which serves the southern half of Toronto) wasn't taken into consideration for the northern half of Toronto.
Click to expand...

I think they got it right. Few using Line 2 + 192 are going to ride up to Finch West to transfer to LRT. I wonder if there ought to be a 192.5 from Mt Dennis when Crosstown opens.

Finch LRT might attract more air travellers if it ever is extended to Yonge, but there isn't much along Finch west of Dufferin either residentially or commercially to feed air travel.

- Paul
 
Last edited:
crs1026 said:
I think they got it right. Few using Line 2 + 192 are going to ride up to Finch West to transfer to LRT. I wonder if there ought to be a 192.5 from Mt Dennis when Crosstown opens.

Finch LRT might attract more air travellers if it ever is extended to Yonge, but there isn't much along Finch west of Dufferin either residentially or commercially to feed air travel.

- Paul
Click to expand...

If the Finch West LRT is extended south-west to Pearson Airport, they must also extend the LRT east to Yonge & Finch.
 
crs1026 said:
The ridership, not surprisingly, is projected to be employment related as opposed to air travellers.

I wonder if the GTAA has analysed the impact of using the proposed transit hub as a transfer point for employment ridership as well as air travellers. Nothing wrong with having the hub serve both, but that puts a whole lot more people through it. And it would demand access and capacity for all the local bus routes, which is a different proposition than just linking to regional transit like RER or HxR or UPE....as well as LRT.

- Paul
Click to expand...

My understanding is that is their intention...its a way to convince the other agencies to build to their terminal - it will become a connection point for all riders.
 
Article from the Globe, behind paywall:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/new...son-airport-transit-hub-plan/article35687467/

Not much that is particularly new, other than hints that the new intermodal station will basically serve as a terminal expansion/passenger processor - presumably linked to satellite concourses elsewhere?

Presentations from the public consultations:

https://www.torontopearson.com/conversations/#

upload_2017-7-14_9-6-53.png


And I think the linkage to the existing terminals has changed a bit as well:

upload_2017-7-14_9-8-21.png


https://www.torontopearson.com/uplo...ence_Panel/20170706_Oakville_Presentation.pdf

AoD
 

Attachments

  • upload_2017-7-14_9-6-53.png
    upload_2017-7-14_9-6-53.png
    629.7 KB · Views: 751
  • upload_2017-7-14_9-8-21.png
    upload_2017-7-14_9-8-21.png
    695.9 KB · Views: 833
Last edited:
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Article from the Globe, behind paywall:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/new...son-airport-transit-hub-plan/article35687467/

Not much that is particularly new, other than hints that the new intermodal station will basically serve as a terminal expansion/passenger processor - presumably linked to satellite concourses elsewhere?

Presentations from the public consultations:

https://www.torontopearson.com/conversations/#

View attachment 114940

And I think the linkage to the existing terminals has changed a bit as well:

View attachment 114941

https://www.torontopearson.com/uplo...ence_Panel/20170706_Oakville_Presentation.pdf

AoD
Click to expand...

Pier G is still on the books and, IMHO, is sorely needed so that the airport can separate transborder (read US) traffic from the rest of the airport. Which will reduce the use of swing gates. I'm not sure how the intermodal terminal will work really. Will passengers do security screening at the intermodal terminal or at each terminal (terminal 1, 3). I would hope that most of the passenger processing would continue to happen at the existing terminals rather than moving this function to the intermodal terminal.

At the last CENAC meeting they hinted at a new master plan being released by the end of the year. I would be very curious to see how the intend to get all this to work together.
 
Last edited:
Woodbridge_Heights said:
Pier G is still on the books and, IMHO, is sorely needed so that the airport can separate transborder (read US) traffic from the rest of the airport. Which will reduce the use of swing gates. I'm not sure how the intermodal terminal will work really. Will passengers do security screening at the intermodal terminal or at each terminal (terminal 1, 3). I would hope that most of the passenger processing would continue to happen at the existing terminals rather than moving this function to the intermodal terminal.

At the last CENAC meeting the hinted at a new master plan being released by the end of the year. I would be very curious to see how the intend to get all this to work together.
Click to expand...

You can sort of tell from the second posted slide that G and H is still there - and there is some sort of linear mid-field concourse proposed. If they are getting ride of all curbside access to T1 and T3 and use that space for additional gates, then it stands to reason that all the processing will be moved.

AoD
 
[...]
The most expensive aspect is a contribution to a high-speed rail line that would run from Union Station to the airport and on to Guelph, Kitchener-Waterloo, London, and possibly as far as Windsor.

The provincial Ontario government is currently conducting an environmental assessment of the high-speed rail proposal.

A provincial study by former federal transport minister David Collenette released in May indicated that a Toronto-Windsor high-speed rail line alone could cost about $21-billion when socalled “soft” costs are included, such as design work, overhead and contingencies.

The Collenette report said that if only capital costs are measured, a high-speed rail line could be built from Toronto to London for $4-billion.

Extending the line to Windsor would cost an additional $3.4billion.

Janet De Silva, president and chief executive officer of the Toronto Region Board of Trade and a strong advocate of the Pearson transit hub plan, said talks are progressing quickly among municipal, provincial and federal leaders and potential private investors, such as pension funds.

“The momentum around the project is tremendous,” she said in an interview.
[...]
Click to expand...

I would have dismissed this as recently as a few days ago as wishful thinking, many parts of it are, but *aspects* are ripe for the picking. And again, something I've dismissed up until a few days ago is one of those: Rail projects, in this case the HSR.

Ms De Silva goes on to detail:
[...]
Ms. De Silva, who previously led Sun Life Financial’s operations in China, said her organization and others need to persuade Canadians of the benefits of private infrastructure investment through options such as the Canada Infrastructure Bank that bring in private investors to projects that tend to have some form of user fee attached.

“One of the pieces that’s going to have to be dealt with, is helping public opinion understand that everything can’t be socalled free,” she said.

“I’ve lived in Asia for 15 years. There just seems to be more cultural acceptance that country assets can be sold so that the capital can be redeployed for other things.

“Here in Canada, there still seems to be a mindset that we need to continue to hold everything for a rainy day. But the challenge is we simply have insufficient revenues to take care of all the needs.”

The GTAA has hired Deloitte to reach out to potential private investors, including Canadian pension funds.

The source said direct meetings between the GTAA and pension funds are likely to take place soon.
[...]
Click to expand...
Very interesting, but I don't think the rail investment will be HSR per-se, not to dismiss it, but more lucrative rail investments are likely.

Cynical? Read here:
https://www.letsgomoose.ca/wp-conte...onsortiaNA-MooseConsortium_2017-07-01bPDF.pdf
 
Starting in 2018, miWay will start running route 100 from Sq One City Centre Terminal to Terminal 1 every 15 minutes and long over due.

How 100 is to go west of Sq One is still up in the air as it was first plan to start at Winston Churchill station, then change to from South Common Mall and now starting at Sq One.

As for HSR, that decades down the road until you have tracks that will handle 250 km plus trains. The best you will see is about 160-180 km at this time in various locations.

Its also amassing that the airport change it vision of not allowing steel wheel transit and transit itself to allowing it in the last 10 years.
 
kEiThZ said:
Didn't realize the hub was actually funded. Thought it was conceptual.
Click to expand...

It sadly isn't funded yet. This is simply an RFP to find a company to design it, and once a design is set there will be a better understanding of a final price-tag. But this is great progress none the less!
 
kEiThZ said:
Didn't realize the hub was actually funded. Thought it was conceptual.
Click to expand...

It's just a concept design study. GTAA has enough money for that. It's not an indication they have funding for an actual construction project.

Baby steps.....

- Paul

PS - I do think this is one project that isn't just going to get studied. I'd bet they are on the road to making this happen.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top