Toronto Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport | ?m | ?s | Ports Toronto | Arup

Automation Gallery said:
Heated of course.
Click to expand...

And protected against the elements, summer and winter.

Oh yes, and high enough so as not to obstruct boats passing underneath.

And, of course, well designed so as not to be an eye-sore, perhaps even an award winner.

And a moving sidewalk also for those carrying heavy luggage or less than 100 percent mobile.

And proper access and egress from the bridge - multiple large elevators or escalators with redundancy provisions.



Personally then I'd be happy with a pedestrian bridge also.
 
EnviroTO said:
No, but if it is built to handle vehicles with public money it will be hard to deny people access to it. A streetcar tunnel would keep private vehicles out but I don't think a bridge ever could. What would they do? Create a security checkpoint to see if vehicles have proper documentation to go to the island? It just wouldn't be inviting.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't be hard at all. Security checkpoint? How about a "No unauthorized vehicles allowed" sign? You could put a rising arm like at the entrance to a parking lot. Heck, put a gate with a security access code.

You know that one or two of the existing ferries carry vehicles, right? But yet they still manage to keep private vehicles off the island. And they keep private vehicles out of most of Rouge Park, out of Tommy Thompson Park, and other parks. The roads on the island are too narrow for regular auto traffic, and there's no parking on the island.

Pedestrian bridges exist, pedestrian streets exist, and parks without cars exist... it isn't rocket science. Don't assume the worst.
 
sjc said:
A bus running between the park and the ferry dock/tunnel entrance would not significantly impact flight operations. It shouldn't take more than a few seconds to cross the runway.

As well, a bus service would not mean "easy vehicle access to the island". It would not cause "traffic jams".

The point about the lack of funds is a good one. It would require outside financing (either private financing recovered through passenger fees or government financing).
Click to expand...

Having worked at Pearson I know that it's not as simple as just crossing the runway. It must be coordinated with Ground/Air traffic control as it affects how landings/takeoffs are stacked in the airspace. Having a public bus cross a runway every 30 mins or so be a challenge not to mention the issue of a potential breakdown on the runway. Now the Island airport isn't as busy as Pearson so this may not be as big an issue but it still is an operational issue that the airport can do without, especially if they plan on ramping up traffic there.

I know it's been done elsewhere where public throughfares cross airport runways, but just take a look at the type of measures taken to prevent any incursions.
 
The distances are much shorter at the Island than at Pearson and much fewer takeoffs and landings, but your point is taken. How far out must the next incoming plane be before you can allow someone to drive across the runway?

The TPA has said that they plan to use the excavated material from the construction of the tunnel to build a ring road. I don't know whether it will go out around the ends of the runway, though.
 
Woodbridge_Heights said:
I know it's been done elsewhere where public throughfares cross airport runways, but just take a look at the type of measures taken to prevent any incursions.
Click to expand...

A great example is the airport at Gibraltar. The only road out of the territory crosses the runway at grade, but it's sometimes closed for more than 50% of the day during the heavy tourist season.

Gibraltar_Airport_panorama.jpg


Note the plane has been 'shopped into the photo multiple times. Beyond that the photo is accurate.
 
RedRocket191 said:
Note the plane has been 'shopped into the photo multiple times. Beyond that the photo is accurate.
Click to expand...

It wasn't 'shopped. It is a composite of several images stitched together.

(Sorry. I know I'm being pedantic, but 'sopping suggests that the photo was altered when that was not the case.)
 
sjc said:
The distances are much shorter at the Island than at Pearson and much fewer takeoffs and landings, but your point is taken. How far out must the next incoming plane be before you can allow someone to drive across the runway?

The TPA has said that they plan to use the excavated material from the construction of the tunnel to build a ring road. I don't know whether it will go out around the ends of the runway, though.
Click to expand...

I was a ground worker not in air traffic so I don't know what the specifics were. What I did know was that anytime a ground vehicle wanted to cross a runway or taxiway we'd have to radio into the tower and request clearance to cross, and once clearance was granted it was "book it across as quickly and safely as possible" then radio back that we were clear.
 
Woodbridge_Heights said:
I was a ground worker not in air traffic so I don't know what the specifics were. What I did know was that anytime a ground vehicle wanted to cross a runway or taxiway we'd have to radio into the tower and request clearance to cross, and once clearance was granted it was "book it across as quickly and safely as possible" then radio back that we were clear.
Click to expand...

Correct. You can't dawdle across an active runway. And it's not just how far the plane is out. It's highly unlikely that the tower would give anybody permission to cross with an aircraft on final. Pilots tend to have heart attacks when they see obstacles on the runway.
 
RedRocket191 said:
A great example is the airport at Gibraltar. The only road out of the territory crosses the runway at grade, but it's sometimes closed for more than 50% of the day during the heavy tourist season.
Click to expand...

Gibraltar is unique. For one, they don't have an alternative. We do...the ferry. There's no way Transport Canada or the Island's airport authority would approve routine runway incursions just so somebody can have a short cut.
It would impact operations, pose a safety risk and all for what? Save a few folks a few minutes and they can save on the ferry costs...which patrons seem ready to pay for?
 
EnviroTO said:
No, but if it is built to handle vehicles with public money it will be hard to deny people access to it.
Click to expand...

Except it's not the public's money in the same sense that public infrastructure is paid for by taxes. The airport authority would fund this through airport improvement fees. As such they get to own and determine who gets to use it and who gets entry and how much they can charge.

And since it's part of the infrastructure of an airport under the national airports system they can also deem it vital to security and/or operations to prohibit non-authorized vehicular traffic. Just because it's a bridge to the Island does not make it special. Airports all over this country have access roads that you can't drive on. Just because this one is suspended a few feet above water, does not make it special.

Now if the city was interested in pitching in, maybe they could work something out....
 
kEiThZ said:
Except it's not the public's money in the same sense that public infrastructure is paid for by taxes. The airport authority would fund this through airport improvement fees. As such they get to own and determine who gets to use it and who gets entry and how much they can charge.
Click to expand...

I'm talking about a road to the island parks, not to the airport. With the runway there is it easy to justify a security checkpoint and block passage to the island and making it uninviting makes sense since it is not the gateway to the islands it is the gateway to a secured area. The current arrangement where special exemptions allow delivery trucks to cross the runway for special events is fine. Everything else can take the ferry. I'm not against the bridge to the airport.... I'm against a bridge to the island parks, and against the idea that an airport makes a great addition to a public waterfront. If there is going to be an airport there you might as well build a bridge to it, just don't let people drive into the island parks and put in a legal clause that the bridge must be destroyed if the airport closes.
 
I'm sorry I still don't understand why you're against a bridge to the island parks (as opposed to the airport). I'd much rather walk across a bridge or take a streetcar across a bridge than the ferry. Or at least have the choice.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top