|
|
|
Pickering Airport (Transport Canada/GTAA, Proposed)
- Thread starter wyliepoon
- Start date
Northern Light
Superstar
Regrettably, I think, they want to continue to hold the residual 9,000 or so acres of land.
I'd like to see the highest performing agricultural sections remain that; but what a great opportunity to add another, perhaps 4,500 acres to Rouge Park that could be restored as forests and wetlands.
An addition of that size, roughly 20km2 would lift the park remarkably close to the size required for true wilderness. Albeit with more intrusions by roads.
I'd like to see the highest performing agricultural sections remain that; but what a great opportunity to add another, perhaps 4,500 acres to Rouge Park that could be restored as forests and wetlands.
An addition of that size, roughly 20km2 would lift the park remarkably close to the size required for true wilderness. Albeit with more intrusions by roads.
Last edited:
11th
Senior Member
^ Of course they want to hold on to the land.
2038 (I know it says "at least" in the report) is less than 18 years away, which in terms of infrastructure construction in this country, is short amount of time.
2038 (I know it says "at least" in the report) is less than 18 years away, which in terms of infrastructure construction in this country, is short amount of time.
micheal_can
Senior Member
Why not leave the land as it is until this is built, if ever? It is not harming anyone by leaving it as farmland.
lenaitch
Senior Member
Given the propensity for municipalities to fall victim to re-zoning pressures and the potential for the current provincial government to alter land use policies, it's probably a good idea to leave the land in federal hands and lease it out to area farmers for the foreseeable future, regardless of it's ultimate future fate.
micheal_can
Senior Member
Now that the airport won't be going ahead, yet, let's focus on how we can utilize the ones we have so that Pearson's congestion can be reduced.
MarkBrooks
Active Member
Great news, the KPMG report has been released and it reaffirms the need for Pickering airport.
Transport Canada / Federal Government has reaffirmed the need for a new airport in Pickering. althought I am disappointed by the lack of an immediate RFP , I am encouraged by accurately projected demand an Capacit. The attempt to set an expectation level with a set of assumption on a 2036 timeline is a political move. delay the airport now relies on everything from rail to springing loose extra capacity at city center, oshawa and Pearson. Ultimately this is a setup for further announcements on these projects or a earlier start date of Pickering. As it is, it looks like a 2024 to 2028 start.
I am reviewing the complete report and will be pushing for answers to the questions raised by the assumptions behind the 2036 timeline.
Of specific interest is the reference to high speed rail ( which was canceled ), the union west transit hub, and implied infrastructure improvements at other airports, such Billy Bishop and Oshawa. It implies a number of decisions to come on rail, and airport infrastructure.
My questions include, When can we expect a reversal to the decision to block the runway extension at Billy Bishop? The extension is needed to enable Porter to upgrade its fleet of turboprop aircraft to quieter more fuel efficient A220 jets. Can the federal government strike a deal with the city of Oshawa to extend its airport runway and to take the business jet traffic turned away by congestion at Pearson?
We should all look forward to the follow on announcements on the Federal Governments plans to fulfill these stated assumptions. Ultimately we will look forward to a new airport in Pickering as soon as possible.
Transport Canada / Federal Government has reaffirmed the need for a new airport in Pickering. althought I am disappointed by the lack of an immediate RFP , I am encouraged by accurately projected demand an Capacit. The attempt to set an expectation level with a set of assumption on a 2036 timeline is a political move. delay the airport now relies on everything from rail to springing loose extra capacity at city center, oshawa and Pearson. Ultimately this is a setup for further announcements on these projects or a earlier start date of Pickering. As it is, it looks like a 2024 to 2028 start.
I am reviewing the complete report and will be pushing for answers to the questions raised by the assumptions behind the 2036 timeline.
Of specific interest is the reference to high speed rail ( which was canceled ), the union west transit hub, and implied infrastructure improvements at other airports, such Billy Bishop and Oshawa. It implies a number of decisions to come on rail, and airport infrastructure.
My questions include, When can we expect a reversal to the decision to block the runway extension at Billy Bishop? The extension is needed to enable Porter to upgrade its fleet of turboprop aircraft to quieter more fuel efficient A220 jets. Can the federal government strike a deal with the city of Oshawa to extend its airport runway and to take the business jet traffic turned away by congestion at Pearson?
We should all look forward to the follow on announcements on the Federal Governments plans to fulfill these stated assumptions. Ultimately we will look forward to a new airport in Pickering as soon as possible.
MarkBrooks
Active Member
You will n
the report does not say 2038, it says 2036 about 200 times, 2038 once in an unrelated part. For reason best know only to a liberal MP, the 2038 date came about as a political move as it is the expiry of the land leases reissued to a choosen few in 2018. Jennifer OConnel, a Liberal MP is the source of that date. I can only assume that the project start will now be delayed to 2028 for that reason, assuming a 10 year build out, you get to 2038
the report does not say 2038, it says 2036 about 200 times, 2038 once in an unrelated part. For reason best know only to a liberal MP, the 2038 date came about as a political move as it is the expiry of the land leases reissued to a choosen few in 2018. Jennifer OConnel, a Liberal MP is the source of that date. I can only assume that the project start will now be delayed to 2028 for that reason, assuming a 10 year build out, you get to 2038
MarkBrooks
Active Member
You will note that this is a press release from Jennifer O’Connell, a Liberal MP. For reasons best know only to Her she has misquoted the KPMG report. the Max capacity date used in the report under a moderate growth forecast is 2036. 2038 is never mentioned but it does sync with the 10 year land leases given to a chosen few in 2018. The MP also tweeted out the details of that lease in 2018.
micheal_can
Senior Member
But... you still think this is still going ahead. The response to the report was "We aren't doing it".
So, why not work on getting the other southern Ontario airports up to where they can handle the demand for more flights.
MarkBrooks
Active Member
I support the Recommendation of the KPMG report and recommendations as listed. Starting immediately with a small industrial (uncontrolled GA/BA Airport and adding passenger service before max system capacity (latest 2036).
There are several option listed , I have included the smallest option for reference for those that do not have time to read a 490 page report.
Opening 2026-2028.
There are several option listed , I have included the smallest option for reference for those that do not have time to read a 490 page report.
Opening 2026-2028.
micheal_can
Senior Member
What is blacked out? Who is going to foot the bill for an airport not needed.
MarkBrooks
Active Member
It is called free enterprise, it is the economic system on which Canada and the Global economy runs. At the heart of that economy is Aviation, so no worries on finding investors.
The likelihood of this airport being funded entirely by private investment is about the same as Mexico paying for Trump's border wall...
MarkBrooks
Active Member
There has already been one completely privately funded proposal, an industrial airport back in 2011. I still have the business case, it was a solid 8% return. at the time transport decided a bigger airport was the way forward. All we need is an RFP, and we get to findout.