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

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Even if Pearson goes through with the plans as shown in the renderings, (they are still working on initial design work as we speak so things may change) we are talking about the final buildout being complete 20 to 30 years from now.

At the moment Pearson has adequate gate and runway capacity, it is the terminals where space is constrained, made worse by the GTAA's insistence to turn every possible sq ft into a food court/shopping centre. The end of hammerhead F feels quite congested especially if there are multiple large flights departing at the same time.

 

[Bureaucromancer]

Maybe a good stimulus project? But its not ready for construction . .

As much as I'm not someone to yell and scream about investing in aviation infrastructure... That would be a genuinely bad stimulus project compared to funding HFR and using it to shift regional travel out of Pearson freeing capacity for the international travel that makes air travel a genuine economic boon.

For that matter, if the goal is stimulus and we MUST support short haul aviation there'd be more job creation and long term benefit in Pickering IMO. At least that gets us a long term piece of infrastructure that the GTAA isn't quite capable of doing on it's own when it actually becomes necessary.

 

[anb]

Wouldn’t it make sense for the link train to just extend to serve Renforth first for Miway to get a proper connection to the airport? As for now, only the miway 7, 100 and ttc 52 serves the airport directly, while the 107 and 24 serve Viscount station. It would be amazing if we got more miway routes to serve the airport

 

[Coolstar]

Wouldn’t it make sense for the link train to just extend to serve Renforth first for Miway to get a proper connection to the airport? As for now, only the miway 7, 100 and ttc 52 serves the airport directly, while the 107 and 24 serve Viscount station. It would be amazing if we got more miway routes to serve the airport

Welcome to the thread! In my personal opinion, I think the Transit Hub is a better idea than extending the LINK train to Malton or Renforth or Woodbine because if the GTAA wants more people to use transit to help get them to the airport, then we should the have the connecting transit located right at the airport. Carrying luggage to the main airport station but then having to transfer onto the LINK train to get to the main terminals could potentially result in people less likely to use it. Though there are some disadvantages like removing the LINK train based on initial designs and using a long-looking bridge to get to the gates. Though there would be sort of a new terminal next to the main transit hub that'll handle things like check-in and security.

If or when things go wrong with the transit hub, a good idea I've seen is that we split the transit hub into two and extend the LINK both directions to Renforth and Malton and upgrade it so that LRT and Miway services connect at Renforth and enable the Eglinton Crosstown to be extended to Downtown Mississauga once the Transitway requires an upgrade and have Regional and Intercity rail services connect at Malton. The upgraded LINK service could be like the Airtrain at JFK airport. I have been slowly leaning towards this option but let's see once more designs and reports are out for the Transit Hub.

 

[anb]

Welcome to the thread! In my personal opinion, I think the Transit Hub is a better idea than extending the LINK train to Malton or Renforth or Woodbine because if the GTAA wants more people to use transit to help get them to the airport, then we should the have the connecting transit located right at the airport. Carrying luggage to the main airport station but then having to transfer onto the LINK train to get to the main terminals could potentially result in people less likely to use it. Though there are some disadvantages like removing the LINK train based on initial designs and using a long-looking bridge to get to the gates. Though there would be sort of a new terminal next to the main transit hub that'll handle things like check-in and security.

If or when things go wrong with the transit hub, a good idea I've seen is that we split the transit hub into two and extend the LINK both directions to Renforth and Malton and upgrade it so that LRT and Miway services connect at Renforth and enable the Eglinton Crosstown to be extended to Downtown Mississauga and Regional and Intercity rail services connect at Malton. The upgraded LINK service could be like the Airtrain at JFK airport. I have been slowly leaning towards this option but let's see once more designs and reports for the Transit Hub.

Thank you! I think if they would do the link train approach as i suggested, they can just make the train interior a similar design to the current UP express, so people can have somewhere to put their luggage in. The transit hub is a great concept and i would like to see that happen. I heard that metrolinx wants both the crosstown lrt and finch lrt to go to the airport, which how amazing that sounds, feels like a bit much. The link train can help to connect both lines and i just feel like it would be better. Finch line ending at woodbine, and crosstown ending at renforth, while the link connects the two ends and the airport. This can also help relieve congestion and overcrowding at the airport hub

 

[Coolstar]

I asked the GTAA a month or two ago if COVID-19 would impact progress on the transit hub. This is what they had to say.

"COVID-19 has foundationally impacted the aviation, travel and tourism sector – a structural shift unlike anything we have seen in our lifetime. Given the uncertainty brought about by COVID-19, we will be revisiting our medium- and long-term plans over the next several quarters as we begin to understand the speed with which recovery takes place."

I also got a little curious and asked if there were updated designs but planning is still ongoing.

''The renderings that you mention are from 2017 when we initially presented a concept for a regional transit hub that connects with local and regional services, as well as rapid transit lines. At this time, there are no new renderings to share as planning is ongoing and we’re adapting to COVID-19 recovery"

 

[gweed123]

I asked the GTAA a month or two ago if COVID-19 would impact progress on the transit hub. This is what they had to say.

"COVID-19 has foundationally impacted the aviation, travel and tourism sector – a structural shift unlike anything we have seen in our lifetime. Given the uncertainty brought about by COVID-19, we will be revisiting our medium- and long-term plans over the next several quarters as we begin to understand the speed with which recovery takes place."

I also got a little curious and asked if there were updated designs but planning is still ongoing.

''The renderings that you mention are from 2017 when we initially presented a concept for a regional transit hub that connects with local and regional services, as well as rapid transit lines. At this time, there are no new renderings to share as planning is ongoing and we’re adapting to COVID-19 recovery"

I wonder if COVID will actually speed the construction of this terminal up a bit. With air travel looking like it's going to be in a funk for potentially years to come, it may give the GTAA a reason to shift their focus (and dollars) from air-side expansions to projects like the Transit Hub. The transit hub doesn't increase the overall passenger capacity of the airport, but it's infrastructure that would be great to have when demand does pick up again.

 

[rbt]

I wonder if COVID will actually speed the construction of this terminal up a bit. With air travel looking like it's going to be in a funk for potentially years to come, it may give the GTAA a reason to shift their focus (and dollars) from air-side expansions to projects like the Transit Hub.

Neither Air Canada or WestJet will approve of any unnecessary spending; I expect airport capital projects to be dead for a while.

 

[gweed123]

Neither Air Canada or WestJet will approve of any unnecessary spending; I expect airport capital projects to be dead for a while.

Is it really up to them though? As long as their rates don't go up, would they really care what the GTAA is spending its money on? And it's not like Air Canada is going to pick up and move to Hamilton out of protest.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Is it really up to them though? As long as their rates don't go up, would they really care what the GTAA is spending its money on? And it's not like Air Canada is going to pick up and move to Hamilton out of protest.

The alternative to raising rates is to issue bonds on the financial markets (provided they believe they have or can generate the cash flows to cover the bond obligations). Interest rates are still quite low historically. However will there be interest in the bond market for an airport given that air travel may be suffering a down turn for the next 2- 5 yrs.

Much as I agree that a time where passenger numbers are down is a perfect opportunity to accelerate capital projects I don't think it will happen at pearson because of 1) disinterest in additional cash expenditures given heavily reduced cash flows and 2) Lack of truly shovel ready projects to be pushed up.

 

[rbt]

Is it really up to them though? As long as their rates don't go up, would they really care what the GTAA is spending its money on? And it's not like Air Canada is going to pick up and move to Hamilton out of protest.

Technically it's not up to them. Realistically, the #1 and #2 customers of GTAA, who are currently trying to fight off bankruptcy, have a lot of sway.

Also, Air Canada could quite easily pickup 50% of their international operations (especially today) and move them to O'Hare or JFK under the United or Lufthansa brand (leasing AC aircraft). The trans-atlantic joint venture + flat-fee deal at Pearson encouraged those airlines to move US connections traffic to Pearson but Canadian connections could be shuffled south just as easily. Air Canada isn't just Air Canada or stuck using Canadian airports as an international hub. AC wouldn't move out of Pearson, but they might go from 5 per day to London to 2 per day (far fewer connections at Pearson). The last overbuild resulting in most expensive landing fees in the world did not benefit the airlines much (nor did they have flexibility to avoid them); Gate 193/Pier G expansion shows pretty clearly Airline thoughts on future overbuilding.

WestJet and Delta have trans-border joint venture; so Minneapolis would be an alternative hub for that portion of traffic.

AC does not have a trans-border joint venture with United yet, but they've been exploring one for quite a while. If that was put into place, AC could move 1/3rd of Pearson operations south without risking profit.


All of that is to say that I expect the Pearson transportation hub to be delayed until airlines can make reasonable traffic projections again, rather than accelerated. Though, if government decided to kick in for a majority of the cost, they wouldn't turn it down.

 

[kEiThZ]

I wonder if COVID will actually speed the construction of this terminal up a bit. With air travel looking like it's going to be in a funk for potentially years to come, it may give the GTAA a reason to shift their focus (and dollars) from air-side expansions to projects like the Transit Hub. The transit hub doesn't increase the overall passenger capacity of the airport, but it's infrastructure that would be great to have when demand does pick up again.

The problem is financing. Who is going to pay for this? Commercial development would also be limited by the lack of higher yielding air travelers transiting through.

 

[Mcurtis]

Would there be any stomach in Mississauga to either create a development fee for new construction that goes towards transit oriented projects like this? or create a specific development fee for this area that does the same thing? Some type of municipal funding that could allow the development of this project. I would imagine that Mississauga would have a lot to gain by Pearson being more efficient as an operation.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Would there be any stomach in Mississauga to either create a development fee for new construction that goes towards transit oriented projects like this? or create a specific development fee for this area that does the same thing? Some type of municipal funding that could allow the development of this project. I would imagine that Mississauga would have a lot to gain by Pearson being more efficient as an operation.

In fact IIRC Mississauga isn't exactly friendly with the GTAA. There are some disagreements on land use issues suuroinding the airport.

 

[Tim MacDonald]

Would there be any stomach in Mississauga to either create a development fee for new construction that goes towards transit oriented projects like this? or create a specific development fee for this area that does the same thing? Some type of municipal funding that could allow the development of this project. I would imagine that Mississauga would have a lot to gain by Pearson being more efficient as an operation.

Absolutely not.