As for the tunnel, I could care less if Porter builds and pays for it but not using $38M "stimulus" money.
While I don't really like the idea of "stimulus" spending (spending borrowed money to build projects you wouldn't have otherwise funded that won't likely start until after the recession is over), I think this project is as good as any of the projects they are funding and better than most from the point of view of a Torontonian.
This project will benefit the hundreds of thousands of people each year that use the airport, probably half of them Toronto residents. The other half are visitors to Toronto, who are now beginning their visit in downtown Toronto and might start spending their money there. Isn't it better for Toronto that I give $25 to a Toronto cab to get home rather than $70 to a Mississauga cab? The $45 difference ($90 for a return trip) will almost certainly get spent near my home or office in Toronto. (NOTE: I usually use a Toronto cab to get to Pearson, and a Mississauga cab to get back, so the loss to Toronto is only $45. I believe many people use Mississauga cabs in both directions and few use Toronto cabs both ways -- I can call a Toronto cab at Pearson but it takes forever and is complicated).
Porter will be able to expand more quickly (or not have their planned expansion delayed) because they will be able to handle higher volumes. The ferry is starting to get very crowded lately and I can see people getting left behind on really busy days before too long. (The situation will improve when the new ferry arrives).
While it is possible that Porter will expand at the same speed regardless of the existence of the bridge (their schedule more dependent on airplane delivery than anything else), I doubt their original business plan included the high oil prices last year or the recession of this year.
Every airplane that Porter orders keeps jobs in Toronto in Downsview building the airplanes, and whatever related support jobs there are in neighbouring companies. Those Q400 workers have watched their coworkers on the jet side get laid off in the last year.
Porter employs 750 people and plans to have 1000 by next year. As much as half of those live in Toronto, and pay taxes and spend their pay in Toronto. Supporting Porter supports Toronto.
If the money is going to get spent anyways, I'd just as soon see it come to Toronto as see it go somewhere else.
I have often wondered if we would still be discussing this if the original plan was for a pedistrian bridge only. So passengers would still arrive by car on the mainland and then walk across a bridge (probably a covered one like SkyWalk) to the airport.
Two basic problems with a pedestrian bridge:
- it would be pretty long walk for people with luggage, even if it is flat. It won't be flat because it has to go high enough to get over the ships that use the channel. I suppose they could make a lift bridge -- has anyone ever made a pedestrian lift bridge?
- there would still need to be a ferry for vehicles. While you could move the car parking to the mainland, there will still need to be utility vehicles of various types (Do they get fuel deliveries by truck?). No reason they couldn't do both (the tunnel wasn't going to make the ferry go away), but you now have twice the obstructions (ferry and bridge) in the channel and haven't really solved anything.