H
Hydrogen
Guest
The aircraft shown with the article is a B737, which is significantly larger and more powerful than a Q400, so the weather issue must have been relatively significant.
Toronto Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport | ?m | ?s | Ports Toronto | Arup
Admiral Beez
Superstar
Sorry, that was a bit snippy.
B
Bigchew
Guest
The London City Airport is 13KM away from the downtown London core. So, this is not an adequate comparison. Heck, Pearson is 18KM from Toronto's downtown core! If it were proposed that a commercial airline such as Porter operate within 500 meteres to 1KM of Hyde Park for example, I think many in London would consider that crazy. That is what we have in Toronto! And let's take another city like Chicago. We all know what they did with their waterfront airstrip don't we? And anyone who has ever been to Chicago's waterfront who has just a tiny bit of objectivity will know that their waterfront is about 100 times better than Toronto's. When Porter expands to 20 planes, it will be 200 times better!
I do live on Toronto's harbourfront and think that the idea of Porter operating there is crazy. I will be moving out of the area though so I am not saying this because I live here. I believe that Toronto's waterfront should be place for all those folks that can't afford a cottage (or even their own primary residence for that matter.) The waterfront should be a place for those people to go to on a sunny weekend day to get some peace and solitude and escape the hustle and bustle of the big city. You know....the same reason that wealthier folks buy cottages in Muskoka and other places. There are lots of places we can put an airport but let's not spoil the waterfront with one.
Again, I am currently a resident of the harbourfront but I am planning to move away shortly. As a current resident, my view is that my immediate neighbourhood (i.e. the central waterfront) does not belong to the residents of the waterfront or the Island community. It belongs to the residents of Toronto as a whole. And we should listen to their concerns if any, not the concerns of residents of the harbourfront or Toronto Islands. And I make this prediction (which many of you will disagree with): If you could actually simulate what it will be like on the Toronto waterfront with 20+ Poter planes operating out of the Island Airport so that all Torontonians could see what it would be like and then we had a vote by those same Torontonians as to whether the Island Airport should exist (along with Porter) more than half would vote against it.
One last thing: Porter is incredibly well managed and will get to the point where it will operate 20 planes. There is a maximum number of movements that can happen on the Island Airport currently. But that maximum number has increased over the years. I will make this prediction....if/when Porter expands to 20 planes, the number of movements allowed will contunue increase over time. I wouldn't surprise me in the least if we get to the point where one day there could be a flight every minute or two.
Chuck
Senior Member
I say bring it on. Porter is a fantastic airline, and in my opinion a very welcome addition to the downtown area. As a car free resident of central Toronto, I am pleased to be able to get to an airport either by transit or for a $15 cab ride, rather than asking friends or family to drive me to Pearson. Porter itself is quick, hassle free, and rather luxurious compared to traditional airlines. I've only flown on Porter once, to New York, and was happy to see that both flights had completely sold out.
dowlingm
Senior Member
According to Google Earth, from One Canada Square (not the eastern most Canary Wharf tower) to the end of runway 10/28 is 4.4km (2.6km to the Millennium Dome). LCY is so close to that district and the number of high-end firms so substantial that BA are launching a service to JFK using Airbus A318s with short field modifications and 32 seats. (Westbound there will be a stop at Shannon to clear US Customs)
kEiThZ
Superstar
The London City Airport is 13KM away from the downtown London core. So, this is not an adequate comparison. Heck, Pearson is 18KM from Toronto's downtown core! If it were proposed that a commercial airline such as Porter operate within 500 meteres to 1KM of Hyde Park for example, I think many in London would consider that crazy. That is what we have in Toronto! And let's take another city like Chicago. We all know what they did with their waterfront airstrip don't we? And anyone who has ever been to Chicago's waterfront who has just a tiny bit of objectivity will know that their waterfront is about 100 times better than Toronto's. When Porter expands to 20 planes, it will be 200 times better!
The approach for London City makes aircraft descend and depart directly over central London, which makes the impact that much more noticeable. If you have walked along the Thames, you can notice the aircraft. Additionally, I wouldn't call the docklands the boonies. There are tons of residents and tons of other activity in the Docklands, around that airport. The density in the docklands is probably on par with our central waterfront. And it should be noted that LCY handles nearly 3 million passengers a year while only the most YTZ has ever handled is about 400 000. Yet the residents in that area seem to take it just fine, and LCY is an airport that is scheduled for growth.
As for Chicago, personally, I would rather not have the mayor violate our federal air regulations and put lives in jeopardy.... But I would argue that Chicago's waterfront is a combination of many factors, a big one is investment and a dedication to building public spaces. All I see along our waterfront as some half-assed public spaces (harbourfront centre, the islands) etc. The mayor yaps a lot about the airport, but I have yet to see him invest in what's there. When everything else is done, then we can talk about pulling a chicago.
If you want peace and quiet, get out of the city. I am fairly sure you knew the airport was there before you bought your place. Somehow, the planes didnt seem to bother you when you were inspecting the condo then. A city's waterfront should be vibrant and filled with life. Instead we have built a wall of condos that provides waterfront views for a few, and nothing for the rest of the public. You are right that the waterfont should be a place everyone can go to. Somehow, I don't see the mayor working on that. Instead, I see him using the airport as a whipping boy for his failures. And I see him privatizing the waterfront by turning it over to condo developers piecemeal.
I will support closing down the airport, when I have seen some real waterfront development in terms of public spaces and when I see the island residents get the boot. They have hit the jackpot using public lands. To me, they are real the predators of the Toronto islands.
Yes, and I am also sure the residents in Mississauga and Rexdale would tell you where to put that data. We live in a big city, air traffic is part of that existence. When people stop flying, we won't need airports. Till then, guess what, we are stuck with them. The island airport reduces the impact over several communities from reduced traffic at Pearson, and takes thousands of travelers off our roads.
You are arguing for the dislocation of air traffic away from your part of town. What you want is for somebody else in the city to suffer in your place. That kind of NIMBYism will not benefit anyone.
If you ask the residents of Toronto, most would support the airport. Somehow, the only people I hear complaining are the handful of NIMBYs who live right near the airport. I haven't heard of someone from Scarborough, or Etobicoke or North York campaigning against the airport.
20 aircraft will not yield a flight every minute or two. Assuming that each aircraft does 3 trips to its destination per day (and that's generous), that would equal about 120 movements per day. Given that the airport allows operation between 0600 - 2200, that means 1 movement every 8 mins, of which only half are departures. So that's one aircraft taking off every 16 mins....hardly the disaster you are painting here.
The rules haven't changed. Porter will be no different that its various predecessors. Somehow, it didn't seem to bother residents then and it won't bother anyone in the future either. People like you will move on to sell to high powered business people and other jet setters that will love access to the airport. And the rules won't change. Transport Canada, designed those rules for a reason, and many are applied evenly, at other airports throughout the GTA (ie noise abatement procedures). What's more, I doubt the airport could handle additional traffic beyond what Porter has planned.
Automation Gallery
Superstar
Right-on
nfitz
Superstar
???? The tourist core perhaps - it's quite close to where all the skyscrapers are; 12 minutes to Poplar - and there is also direct service on the DLR to the City - 22 minutes to Bank.
kEiThZ
Superstar
Exactly. Anything to distort the truth with these folks...
Anybody who has been to London knows that you can clearly see the planes shooting the approaches over the Thames, right over downtown. And that's right over things like Big Ben, the London Eye, etc. Heck, even one of the Heathrow patterns circles downtown. What's more, tons of people live and work near LCY, something which opponents of the island forget to mention. They love bringing up Chicago, well, why not talk about Washington Reagan, NY LaGuardia or NY JFK. Somehow, I don't think a few planes whizzing around stopped any of those cities from developing their waterfronts. What about the old Hong Kong airport? Didn't stop them from growing their city vertically along the approach path.
Only in Toronto, would we ever consider built transportation infrastructure a bad thing and dream of pulling a "Chicago". Instead of seeing the airport as conveniently located, built infrastructure, with a client who runs a squeaky clean environmentally friendly operation, we would rather force our governments to relocated the whole thing at hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars, just so someone can "get some peace and solitude and escape the hustle and bustle of the big city.." Apparently nobody told these folks that airports are part of big city life, and you move downtown for the action, not peace and quiet.
In London, they consider all that part of the urban lifestyle. The LCY is viewed as an asset to docklands residents and business. In Toronto, the NIMBYs want it relocated as far as possible. Let the residents of Mississauga and Rexdale suffer from the extra noise and emissions, as long as I don't get disturbed by the barely audible drone of a departing aircraft, it's all good. Plus its a lot easier to complain about the planes, then b---h about the streetcar, cause that would make me look like a real snob.
I'll start believing their case, when waterfront residents stop flying completely to any destination served by Porter. Since you don't like Porter, you can't possibly justify taking Air Canada/Westjet, driving/cabbing to Pearson, sitting in a jet on the ramp for 20 mins, and then using at least 20 per cent more fuel to get to your destination. It boggles the mind, that when someone starts up the most environmentally friendly airline in the country, uses aircraft built in Toronto, hires staff in Toronto, and exclusively serves the residents and city of Toronto, that some ingrates would try and stab them in the back.
k.w.l.
New Member
I agree with most of what you've said, but here you're just plain wrong. Our waterfront is vibrant and full of life, from Bay to Bathurst at least. There is plenty of public space between the "wall of condos" and the water, and it is well used by residents and visitors alike. Go fight the crowds down there on a weekend and see if you still think it's not full of life.
You hit the nail on the head here. The worst offender in my mind, is our local MP. She claims to be environmentally conscious, yet she takes every opportunity she can to speak out against the island airport, and meanwhile shuttles up to Pearson a couple times a month to get back and forth between here and Ottawa. Gotta love the hypocrisy there.
Dan416
Senior Member
You know, I've heard a lot of people talk about Porter and they had very positive things to say about it. A friend took a Porter flight to New York, $200 (after taxes and fees). Pretty decent fare I think. And it's centrally located. I think all the fus about the airport is about nothing.
urbandreamer
recession proof
I think they should build a bridge to the island airport. Watching the ferry take off to the island a few weeks ago, it struck me there's a way Porter could get around the ferry bottleneck: get big barge, stick it between the island and the quay! Duh, problem solved.
B
Bigchew
Guest
Holy Moly...I got the crap kicked out of me on the internet!
You made many assumptions about me and my views and situation that were not correct but I understand because in many ways I do sound like the people on the Islands and waterfront that are against the airport. One incorrect assumption....I am not moving out because of Porter or the Island Airport...really and truly. I would like a house and not a condo...that is why I am moving. Porter will actually be a benefit for me where I am moving. But the way I try to think is that just because something will benefit ME, doesn't automatically make it the right thing.
And relax...Porter has already won! You've got what you wanted! And don't worry about me. I'm moving to a great waterfront community fairly close to downtown. No airports there! And again, as a frequent traveler, I can potentially benefit from Porter.
And I do indeed see your logic on the environment. Having a cleaner air overall in the GTA and other surrounding communities is more important than having a Toronto waterfront that is quieter. (not to mention the fact that if Toronto's waterfront is quieter, then someone else's neighbourhood will be noisier.)
So onward and forward with Porter and I humbly admit that I could be wrong about my concerns- you guys are a very intelligent group and thus I have hope that all will be OK. Perhaps the urban waterfront (i.e. harbourfront) should be expected to have lots of action and stimuli and noise and for anyone that does not like it, they can move to the Beach or Port Credit or the Humber Shores. Afterall, who am I to tell people that they should not take a shorter route to an airport such as the TCCA when I can find great waterfront communities to live in that have only one main difference with Toronto's Harbourfront- the travel time to downtown.
You made many assumptions about me and my views and situation that were not correct but I understand because in many ways I do sound like the people on the Islands and waterfront that are against the airport. One incorrect assumption....I am not moving out because of Porter or the Island Airport...really and truly. I would like a house and not a condo...that is why I am moving. Porter will actually be a benefit for me where I am moving. But the way I try to think is that just because something will benefit ME, doesn't automatically make it the right thing.
And relax...Porter has already won! You've got what you wanted! And don't worry about me. I'm moving to a great waterfront community fairly close to downtown. No airports there! And again, as a frequent traveler, I can potentially benefit from Porter.
And I do indeed see your logic on the environment. Having a cleaner air overall in the GTA and other surrounding communities is more important than having a Toronto waterfront that is quieter. (not to mention the fact that if Toronto's waterfront is quieter, then someone else's neighbourhood will be noisier.)
So onward and forward with Porter and I humbly admit that I could be wrong about my concerns- you guys are a very intelligent group and thus I have hope that all will be OK. Perhaps the urban waterfront (i.e. harbourfront) should be expected to have lots of action and stimuli and noise and for anyone that does not like it, they can move to the Beach or Port Credit or the Humber Shores. Afterall, who am I to tell people that they should not take a shorter route to an airport such as the TCCA when I can find great waterfront communities to live in that have only one main difference with Toronto's Harbourfront- the travel time to downtown.
xtremesniper
Active Member
I'm a bit late to the party here, but I just wanted to add my first experience of this noise from the airport.
I was at the Harbourfront Centre just last Saturday and all of a sudden we heard this very loud noise coming from the lake. It was dark out so we couldn't see anything, but it was very loud.
After a few minutes of the noise, I remembered hearing about complaints regarding the airport. I realized these sounds were coming from the airport. It basically lasted upwards of 5 or 6 minutes before quieting down, then coming back for another few minutes.
I was at the Harbourfront Centre just last Saturday and all of a sudden we heard this very loud noise coming from the lake. It was dark out so we couldn't see anything, but it was very loud.
After a few minutes of the noise, I remembered hearing about complaints regarding the airport. I realized these sounds were coming from the airport. It basically lasted upwards of 5 or 6 minutes before quieting down, then coming back for another few minutes.
Automation Gallery
Superstar
You sure it was not a motor boat.