[rbt]

The key date is 2033 but what’s to stop Tory, Ford and Polievre signing an extension in 2026, especially given Tory’s aggressive caucus building? Any city land ownership that might facilitate post Tory anti airport activism that wouldn’t easily transfer could be dealt with by a Queens Park bully bill

That could happen BUT with Porter moving much of their operations to YYZ over the next few years who would lobby for it?

I wouldn't be surprised if a renewed agreement scaled down the airport operations with Waterfront Toronto leading a redesign of the space; perhaps leaving only an ORNG heliport.

 

[SubHuman]

That could happen BUT with Porter moving much of their operations to YYZ over the next few years who would lobby for it?

I wouldn't be surprised if a renewed agreement scaled down the airport operations with Waterfront Toronto leading a redesign of the space; perhaps leaving only an ORNG heliport.

The hybrid-electric planes recently ordered by Air Canada would seem to be well-suited for use at YTZ, although even if they work as well as hoped it would take three of them to carry the same number of people as a Q400, and also likely be limited to just 25 passengers to be able to get as far as Montreal (in hybrid mode with alleged 800 km range).

 

[rbt]

The hybrid-electric planes recently ordered by Air Canada would seem to be well-suited for use at YTZ, although even if they work as well as hoped it would take three of them to carry the same number of passengers as a Q400, and also likely be limited just 25 of them to get as far as Montreal.

Those have a range of 200km. They'll get deployed for short routes with obstructions that make driving more difficult, like Halifax to Charlottetown, St. John's to Gander, Vancouver to Victoria/Seattle/Nanaimo/Commox, etc.

Toronto is fairly flat with many fairly direct alternative modes of transit. Very few will pay $600 for a round trip between YTZ and St. Catharines.

 

[afransen]

A hybrid with only 200 km of range? Franky, I expect 200 km to be well-within the capability of BEV aircraft in the not too distant future..

 

[innsertnamehere]

A hybrid with only 200 km of range? Franky, I expect 200 km to be well-within the capability of BEV aircraft in the not too distant future..

It’s 200km BEV range and 400km hybrid range / 800km with 25 passengers instead of 30.

Ultimately they are too small for busier routes but will be good for shorter connecting flights like @rbt mentioned. The only such flight which really happens right now out of YYZ is Toronto-London which would be suitable, maybe Toronto-Rochester.

 

[afransen]

I think it would be more popular for Vancouver-Victoria.

I imagine that when BEV aircraft eventually 'take off' they will have a pretty favourable cost profile vs fossil fuel powered aircraft.

 

[just east of the creek]

I passed through BB last night, I know it’s a long weekend and all, but the place was absolutely packed with people coming, going,meeting, waiting for the shuttle and thanking their lucky stars they were not at Pearson. Say what you like,but that airport has fans - business or pleasure, it makes flying much more pleasurable. Maybe they should just twin the runways and add a terminal stretching over the Western Passage, add some dining, retail, possibly a casino, giant hot tubs and steam rooms, and a water slice, and you would have an all,purpose destination!

 

[Northern Light]

I passed through BB last night, I know it’s a long weekend and all, but the place was absolutely packed with people coming, going,meeting, waiting for the shuttle and thanking their lucky stars they were not at Pearson. Say what you like,but that airport has fans - business or pleasure, it makes flying much more pleasurable. Maybe they should just twin the runways and add a terminal stretching over the Western Passage, add some dining, retail, possibly a casino, giant hot tubs and steam rooms, and a water slice, and you would have an all,purpose destination!

What a vile thought.

 

[just east of the creek]

What a vile thought.

The water slide was just a bit too much? I believe my thinking was influenced by the Beijing Water World park, which is quite an extravaganza of .excess.

As for the airport itself, I understand the opposition to its existence to an extent, I am not completely sold on adding small jets, but I use the airport with regularity, and in conjunction with Porter, the airport offers excellent access and service. The airport is an asset to the city that perhaps, may be underutilized in terms of the services offered.

 

[nfitz]

As for the airport itself, I understand the opposition to its existence to an extent, I am not completely sold on adding small jets, but I use the airport with regularity, and in conjunction with Porter, the airport offers excellent access and service. The airport is an asset to the city that perhaps, may be underutilized in terms of the services offered.

Agreed. There's talk of making it park - but it's already surrounded by an inordinate amount of park land on all sides. The only reason I can see of getting rid of the airport, is if one wanted to make it some kind of large commercial and residential centre, close to downtown, and surrounded by parkland.

 

[Towered]

Agreed. There's talk of making it park - but it's already surrounded by an inordinate amount of park land on all sides. The only reason I can see of getting rid of the airport, is if one wanted to make it some kind of large commercial and residential centre, close to downtown, and surrounded by parkland.

What's wrong with increasing the size of the existing park?

 

[afransen]

Agreed. There's talk of making it park - but it's already surrounded by an inordinate amount of park land on all sides. The only reason I can see of getting rid of the airport, is if one wanted to make it some kind of large commercial and residential centre, close to downtown, and surrounded by parkland.

A bit of a crazy idea, but I could imagine a low-rise low car neighbourhood, maybe with some canals, with a bit of inspiration from inner Amsterdam. Then a park on the east side of the island facing downtown. Could add reclaimed land on the west side of the airport where the lake isn't too deep. Maybe space for 40-50k residents.

 

[Towered]

A bit of a crazy idea, but I could imagine a low-rise low car neighbourhood, maybe with some canals, with a bit of inspiration from inner Amsterdam. Then a park on the east side of the island facing downtown. Could add reclaimed land on the west side of the airport where the lake isn't too deep. Maybe space for 40-50k residents.

I really don't think introducing a new residential neighbourhood on the Island is a good idea. That would be a hot potato that nobody would want to touch.

 

[70Challenger]

If Chicago could turn its waterfront airport into a park there's no reason Toronto can't either

 

[nfitz]

What's wrong with increasing the size of the existing park?

In my mind it's already very large, and if anything under-utilized. I'd be all in favour of adding some kind of pedestrian or transit connection from the foot of Bathurst to the existing park for those on the north side of the channel (ironically part of Rob Ford's platform) - though they are already well-served by Little Norway Park, Stadium Road Park, Coronation Park (which is very large), and the Toronto Music Garden, all closer to the residential area, than the airport. Heck, Garrison Common isn't far either.

Toronto certainly needs more parks in many areas - but I don't think this is one of these.

I'm not suggesting any private cars.

If Chicago could turn its waterfront airport into a park there's no reason Toronto can't either

A surprising amount got turned into parking lots!

Chicago has a much worse deficit in the amount of parkland. Also, it's very much smaller. I'd have no problem if in the development of the airport lands, that an area of land as big as the old Chicago airport be turned to parkland - heck, probably should be more as you'd almost want to attach that much land east of Hanlan's Point Beach.