In 1983, the predecessor to the Toronto Port Authority (TPA), the Toronto Harbour Commission, the federal government represented by Transport Canada signed the Tripartite Agreement.  The Agreement laid down the conditions under which the airport could be operated.  These conditions included that the airport be operated for general aviation and limited commercial STOL service.

In 1988, the federal government, concerned over the future of the waterfront, struck the Crombie Commission to study the area.  The final report, released in 1992, recommended that the airport continue to be used for general aviation and limited commercial STOL use.

In 2005, a feasibility report prepared for Porter Airlines investors envisioned several scenarios that would eliminate general aviation, including flight schools, in order to maintain 167 Dash 8 take-offs and landings a day.  It is only now dawning on residents with each new announcement of expanded Porter service that the limited STOL service isn’t very limited at all.  Furthermore, the feds are either ignoring or dragging their feet on the one factor, the Noise Exposure Forecast, that can limit commercial STOL service.

It appears that if we went D. Garwood’s route of embracing modern technology, the feds and the TPA, who have already breached several covenants of the Agreement, could ignore other provisions.  A recent column in the Star called for jets at the island airport and it was reported that a TPA official told a spring meeting of a harbour users group that lengthening a runway was under consideration.  Both jets and runway lengthening are prohibited under the Agreement.

D. Garwood presents no evidence that Toronto is now considered a quaint backwater.  Absent that evidence (presumably a Pollara Survey was taken), we will regard it as an opinion.  Nonetheless, D. Garwood seems to place a great deal of faith in the port authority by trusting that it will provide the city with an efficient (an average Porter load is 40%) air transport system that is not a noise polluter (The Q400 noise profile exceeds two of the three measures allowed by the Agreement).

If the TPA’s decision-making past is anything to go by, remember the $8 million terminal for the fast ferry to Rochester and the $5 million ferry that needs to be replaced because it can’t handle the winds and currents in the Western Gap, D. Garwood’s faith does not appear to be well-placed.

Bob Kotyk