andomano
Active Member
Run a streetcar to the island.
Wouldn't that require a bridge?
Run a streetcar to the island.
The article seems to say porter thinks they can double their passenger numbers. Well, this remains to be seen if they can or not. It would be better to "wait and see" than jump in and build something that might prove to be a waste. I've passed by porter area before and they don't seem too busy. Maybe not many flights at the time. But anyhow, unless the number of passengers do double, I don't see the value in it.
I still think stimulus money can be better spent elsewhere that needs more immediate change.
^ They could. It's entirely feasible. But as long as any tunnel or bridge is seen to benefit Porter it won't happen.
Could they not some way some how build another pedestrian tunnel under the City Centre Airport runway and connect to Hanlans Point foot/bike paths.
What's the basis for this assumption. Anyone I've talked who lives around there has been neutral to positive about the airport. There's always going to a be a few Nimbys on any issue ... but where are the numbers to show that there isn't community support?To begin with, clearly the airport is not popular amongst the downtown community.
OR you could envision a new sustainable community, car-free, near downtown, similar to the existing Islands community but denser, with a retail hub for tourists, who can then stroll to and island beach. Could be a model community and yet highly profitable for taxpayers. As opposed to the airport which is a sinkhole for money and hack patronage appointed boards and staff.
Thats not really grounded in reality. Most studies on HSR concluded that there was only minimal amount of traffic that would be diverted from air travel, even under optimistic conditions (like assuming air travel rates would remain unchanged). Q400's would likely be able to beat an HSR on travel costs. For the amount of money the private sector alone was expected to contribute to HSR, you could buy about 1,500 Q400's, and they turn an operating profit at about 40-50% occupancy. So, nobody really expects HSR to poach air travel. Even in Europe, discount air travel ridership growths have far outstripped HSR ridership gains.I totally agree with you. Once the Quebec-Windsor corridor gets High Speed Rail, Porter's main services will be rendered totally obsolete. Basically all other trips will make more sense to just go by Pearson, and nobody will choose porter once Blue22's up and running
I totally agree with you. Once the Quebec-Windsor corridor gets High Speed Rail, Porter's main services will be rendered totally obsolete. Basically all other trips will make more sense to just go by Pearson, and nobody will choose porter once Blue22's up and running.Either option or something else?? But either way much better than the airport.
What I've noticed is that some in the immediate area oppose it. (I lived there but supported it.)What's the basis for this assumption. Anyone I've talked who lives around there has been neutral to positive about the airport. There's always going to a be a few Nimbys on any issue ... but where are the numbers to show that there isn't community support?
And I think that houses would be the best thing to do with that airport land if it shuts down. Of course, I'm the person that things high rises on the Leslie Spit would be just awesome