(This is a letter to the editor of the Globe and Mail, by Brian Iler, written in response to Amy Verner's article "Putting Porter to the Test," that appeared in the paper on Saturday, April 5.  The letter, unfortunately, was not published.)

Yes, the island airport's often convenient for those who live or work downtown, and choose short-haul flights over more climate-friendly alternatives.

What it costs the many for a few to save some travel time, though, is rather huge.

Is that conveniece worth inflicting vastly increasing levels of pollution, noise, and traffic upon hundreds of thousands of waterfront residents, workers, visitors and recreational users?  

We have such potential for a waterfront we can all be proud of and enjoy.  The site currently occupied by the island airport could be the centrepiece for our city's waterfront development.  In truth, it's the most desirable site in the city for a truly spectacular and creative development in balance with more natural habitat - 215 acres with Lake ONtario on one side, and our inner harbour on the other, at the core of our city.

Instead, the federal government's Port Authority has given Porter Airlines a virtual monopoly of those 215 acres - and $20 million of taxpayer money - for a commercial use that conflicts with every other development on the waterfront.

There are many higher-priority uses for that money, and far perferable uses for that site.

Brian Iler,
Chair, CommunityAIR