TPA has flagrantly ignored restrictions to protect community
Re: "The airport was here before the homes"
True - but not an argument to let the airport stay.
In the 1980s, planners with the City and the federal government (through Harbourfront, a federal agency)decided to zone much of our downtown waterfront for intensive residential use. Their rationale - the proceeds from sale of land for those residences would fund Harbourfront's cultural and recreational activities.
That planning process included an essential commitment from the (then) Harbour Commission that any use of the Island Airport for commercial passenger service would be restricted to short take off and landing (STOL) aircraft.
Other restrictions, including a prohibition of aircraft genrating excessive noise, and noise constraints tighter than many other airports NEF Contour limits) were also put into place at that time - all for the protection of residents in that housing.
What the Toronto Port Authority has done is flagrantly and blatantly ignore those restrictions - Porter's Q400 is not STOL and by definition generates excessive noise.
Whether the NEF contour limit is complied with is something the TPA admitted to the Globe yesterday it hasn't a clue - nor does it seem to care.
The reason - if they actually honoured the constraints, there wouldn't be a noise problem because Porter would be operating out of Pearson, and we'd get on with a productive discussion as to the best new use for that 215-acre parcel currently occupied by the airport. Without Porter, it ceases to have any chance of financial viability.
Brian Iler, chair
CommunityAIR
True - but not an argument to let the airport stay.
In the 1980s, planners with the City and the federal government (through Harbourfront, a federal agency)decided to zone much of our downtown waterfront for intensive residential use. Their rationale - the proceeds from sale of land for those residences would fund Harbourfront's cultural and recreational activities.
That planning process included an essential commitment from the (then) Harbour Commission that any use of the Island Airport for commercial passenger service would be restricted to short take off and landing (STOL) aircraft.
Other restrictions, including a prohibition of aircraft genrating excessive noise, and noise constraints tighter than many other airports NEF Contour limits) were also put into place at that time - all for the protection of residents in that housing.
What the Toronto Port Authority has done is flagrantly and blatantly ignore those restrictions - Porter's Q400 is not STOL and by definition generates excessive noise.
Whether the NEF contour limit is complied with is something the TPA admitted to the Globe yesterday it hasn't a clue - nor does it seem to care.
The reason - if they actually honoured the constraints, there wouldn't be a noise problem because Porter would be operating out of Pearson, and we'd get on with a productive discussion as to the best new use for that 215-acre parcel currently occupied by the airport. Without Porter, it ceases to have any chance of financial viability.
Brian Iler, chair
CommunityAIR
Comments