[Woodbridge_Heights]

No one is talking about the Island airport closing though. The current expansion under discussion is to increase traffic 5x, not to prevent its closure.

My response was to a user who had explicitly expressed their opinion that Billy Bishop should close, and was made within that context.

 

[TorFuture]

From global competitiveness, quality of life, and environmental standpoints, expanding Billy Bishop any farther beyond its current footprint is a huge mistake. Toronto's Habourfront has been making slow but sure improvements through the addition of parks, squares, the realignment of pathways and the streetcar right of way, and careful development. It still doesn't hold a candle to Millenium Park, Navy Pier, and Michigan Ave. in Chicago, its closest competitor. We do have a major park on the scale of Central Park in New York that a lot of Torontonians forget, Toronto Island, the only car free island park in any major city. Extending the runway, whether it's 300 metres (already planned to meet safety requirements for prop planes) or almost a kilometre (required for jets) will destroy the beach experience along Hanlon's, add noise and pollution along the western waterfront and Ontario Place, and reduce water space along our inner harbour and west of the Western Gap for sailing and water sports. Basically, we will be damaging Toronto's crown jewels, Toronto Island and Harbourfront.

The entire reason why Toronto was so suitable for settlement was geographical: the Don, Rouge, Humber, and Toronto Island (at the time a peninsula ending at Gibraltar Point). We've just spent well over a billion dollars restoring the mouth of the Don River and now we want to uglify the western waterfront and Toronto Island with increased noise, pollution, and an expanded concrete plane parking lot/runway? We already have UpExpress to get people to Pearson Intl. Airport. We already have Billy Bishop for flights to cities in eastern North America. We're building high speed rail to Montreal and Quebec City. Pearson is undergoing expansion. The federal government must stop this dumb provincial plan. Doug Ford should be thinking longer term about what is missing from Toronto and what most people value about cities, both tourists and residents. I can't believe that this isn't obvious, even from strictly a business investment POV. The City should also fight this tooth and nail.

 

[nfitz]

Are you basing this on anything other than the CEO of the port authority and what he told the globe?

And why not?

Better than the lying nimbys who have been caught out multiple times now ... with their fake images of runways being extened into the inner harbour. The government, despite a lack of transparency, has been more straight than the Nimbys have been.

If there was any substance to their whining, they wouldn't be making stuff up and scaremongering.

Their lies only push away potential supporters.

 

[lenaitch]

From global competitiveness, quality of life, and environmental standpoints, expanding Billy Bishop any farther beyond its current footprint is a huge mistake. Toronto's Habourfront has been making slow but sure improvements through the addition of parks, squares, the realignment of pathways and the streetcar right of way, and careful development. It still doesn't hold a candle to Millenium Park, Navy Pier, and Michigan Ave. in Chicago, its closest competitor. We do have a major park on the scale of Central Park in New York that a lot of Torontonians forget, Toronto Island, the only car free island park in any major city. Extending the runway, whether it's 300 metres (already planned to meet safety requirements for prop planes) or almost a kilometre (required for jets) will destroy the beach experience along Hanlon's, add noise and pollution along the western waterfront and Ontario Place, and reduce water space along our inner harbour and west of the Western Gap for sailing and water sports. Basically, we will be damaging Toronto's crown jewels, Toronto Island and Harbourfront.

The entire reason why Toronto was so suitable for settlement was geographical: the Don, Rouge, Humber, and Toronto Island (at the time a peninsula ending at Gibraltar Point). We've just spent well over a billion dollars restoring the mouth of the Don River and now we want to uglify the western waterfront and Toronto Island with increased noise, pollution, and an expanded concrete plane parking lot/runway? We already have UpExpress to get people to Pearson Intl. Airport. We already have Billy Bishop for flights to cities in eastern North America. We're building high speed rail to Montreal and Quebec City. Pearson is undergoing expansion. The federal government must stop this dumb provincial plan. Doug Ford should be thinking longer term about what is missing from Toronto and what most people value about cities, both tourists and residents. I can't believe that this isn't obvious, even from strictly a business investment POV. The City should also fight this tooth and nail.

How does an expanded airport impact global competitiveness?

 

[Ward8]

Oh no not the shoe box units in the sky. Those poor 60 story developments so the inner suburbs can keep the single family homes . Portland should be livable meaning 12 story midrise homes and townhomes not massive skyscrapers with shadow canyons.

This is an aesthetic chauvinism. Just because tall buildings are not to your taste does not mean that others don't like living in them, nor does it mean that a 12 story building will respond to the needs of a growing population.

 

[Ward8]

And why not?

Better than the lying nimbys who have been caught out multiple times now ... with their fake images of runways being extened into the inner harbour. The government, despite a lack of transparency, has been more straight than the Nimbys have been.

If there was any substance to their whining, they wouldn't be making stuff up and scaremongering.

Their lies only push away potential supporters.

As I've stated in this thread. The person who gains the most from saying something is usually not considered a definitive source. At least that's a rule of thumb in journalism.

The way you're talking about people as 'lying Nimbys' for speculating about runway configurations is frankly not constructive. Some of the people making images are not even anti expansion. That's a natural thing for people to do in a forum like this.

 

[ear2ear]

And why not?

Better than the lying nimbys who have been caught out multiple times now ... with their fake images of runways being extened into the inner harbour. The government, despite a lack of transparency, has been more straight than the Nimbys have been.

If there was any substance to their whining, they wouldn't be making stuff up and scaremongering.

Their lies only push away potential supporters.

"Despite a lack of transparency" is a terrible qualifier. In should be completely disqualifying until the government is transparent with their justifications and due diligence on impacts. We've bestowed upon them immense power and purse in order to act in our collective best interests with the agreement that they will absolutely be forthright in their actions. Skepticism should be our default until convincing evidence is presented. A government that makes decrees before making cases deserves the fullest of pushbacks until they show their work.

I give for more grace and leeway to private citizen activist and advocates, even those partial to unhelpful pejoratives.

 

[picard102]

The person who gains the most from saying something is usually not considered a definitive source. At least that's a rule of thumb in journalism.

So then the anti-airport people then would the least definitive source?

 

[nfitz]

As I've stated in this thread. The person who gains the most from saying something is usually not considered a definitive source. At least that's a rule of thumb in journalism.

I'm not sure what journalism has to do with anything. Are you implying that they WILL be extending the runway further into the inner harbour - the latest images I saw looked to me to be shorter than what was approved years ago (certainly no longer). Do you have sources?

The way you're talking about people as 'lying Nimbys' for speculating about runway configurations is frankly not constructive. Some of the people making images are not even anti expansion. That's a natural thing for people to do in a forum like this.

I wasn't particularly thinking of anyone in this forum. Please assume good faith. But there are those out there being totally non-constructive - and only hurting possibilities of having proper consultation and dialogue.

Today I heard someone even claim they will be quintupling capacity! Some of these folks will lie about anything.

And there was all that fake news about reducing the planned building heights (I'd not live in a 40-story tower ... or whatever the current limit is; but that's a different discussion).

Is the government lying and misleading. Probably not and possibly. We all know this. Are the Nimbys lying and misleading - 100%.

"Despite a lack of transparency" is a terrible qualifier. In should be completely disqualifying until the government is transparent with their justifications and due diligence on impacts. We've bestowed upon them immense power and purse in order to act in our collective best interests with the agreement that they will absolutely be forthright in their actions. Skepticism should be our default until convincing evidence is presented. A government that makes decrees before making cases deserves the fullest of pushbacks until they show their work.

One hundred percent that I don't like the way this is being done.

But it's hard to blame the government as it's clear that those who oppose this will result to extreme lies and deception, rather than having proper discussions. If they went into a court challenge with such pathetically false arguments, they'd have costs awarded against them.

 

[txlseries4]

Hm I wonder where people are getting the idea that the government will expropriate the island and that jets would limit the housing that could be built...

March 10 Doug Ford: "I don't want to be rude folks, there are 260 squatters on the island that are paying $1 a year for 99 years. Wouldn't everyone in this room, wouldn't all those hard working nurses that bust their back off want a dollar a year for their own little personal island that no one touches. Folks, game's over. No more dollar a year. I guess it's a contract, I guess you're getting you're getting a dollar a year. But guess what, we aren't going to worry about the 1 percenters who affect the 99 percent of the rest of population, we're going to move forward with the island airport with cooperation with the federal government and I know Mayor Chow wants to expand it. She may disagree with the jets but those jets are coming in one way or another"

March 23

Edit: I'm not suggesting Ford is saying that's the plan or what will happen, but this isn't the way someone talks when those things aren't happening. Why say anything about the residents if you have no plans to expropriate their homes? Why accuse the city of purposely building tall towers to "block the runway" if there are no concerns about that in the first place? His bombastic rhetoric and the lack of details has sowed anxiety and confusion, and that is leading to all this speculation. Sometimes he says something a little crazy, passes the legislation to do it, and then actually follows through for realsies. People don't know whether to believe him and I don't blame people for believing what he says.

 

[Ward8]

So then the anti-airport people then would the least definitive source?

You wouldn't trust a tobacco CEO if he told you cigarettes were heathy. The same principal applies here. There is an incentive structure in place to bend the truth. There are billions riding on this and good PR is important.

I'm not sure what journalism has to do with anything.

See above. The inverse of this is also a general principle. People who say things counter to their own self interest are generally more reliable sources. It would be irresponsible to take the port authority at face value without seeing the concrete plans.

 

[rdaner]

Thank God an expanded airport on landfill south of the Island isn’t being considered as this current situation is much, much better. Thanks Boomers!

 

[picard102]

You wouldn't trust a tobacco CEO if he told you cigarettes were heathy. The same principal applies here. There is an incentive structure in place to bend the truth. There are billions riding on this and good PR is important.

This would make the ant-jets crowd scientists then in this comparison? The anti crowd has just as much to gain personally from obstructing progress.

 

[Ward8]

This would make the ant-jets crowd scientists then in this comparison? The anti crowd has just as much to gain personally from obstructing progress.

I'm not really sure I follow you, but it applies to anyone in any situation. Anyone is the tobacco guy, that is the extent of the analogy.

 

[afransen]

I'm not sure what journalism has to do with anything. Are you implying that they WILL be extending the runway further into the inner harbour - the latest images I saw looked to me to be shorter than what was approved years ago (certainly no longer). Do you have sources?

I wasn't particularly thinking of anyone in this forum. Please assume good faith. But there are those out there being totally non-constructive - and only hurting possibilities of having proper consultation and dialogue.

Today I heard someone even claim they will be quintupling capacity! Some of these folks will lie about anything.

And there was all that fake news about reducing the planned building heights (I'd not live in a 40-story tower ... or whatever the current limit is; but that's a different discussion).

Is the government lying and misleading. Probably not and possibly. We all know this. Are the Nimbys lying and misleading - 100%.

One hundred percent that I don't like the way this is being done.

But it's hard to blame the government as it's clear that those who oppose this will result to extreme lies and deception, rather than having proper discussions. If they went into a court challenge with such pathetically false arguments, they'd have costs awarded against them.

Is this Canada or the PRC? Should people with concerns just keep their mouths shut until the dredges start digging fill for the extension?

The onus is on the government to be transparent with their plans and consult with stakeholders.