There’s an interesting angle that hasn’t come up this time round yet: they’ll have to change the law if they’re serious about this. The bridge was killed by the Paul Martin government by prohibiting construction of a bridge “or similar fixed link”. The only possible “similar” fixed link would be a tunnel. Is the Harper government so in bed with Porter that it would actually change the law to make this happen?

 The real barrier to increased traffic to the airport is the narrow two lane street that runs between a park on one side and a school, community centre and a daycare on the other. It’s already at or above capacity, with the present volume of traffic.

It is hard to believe that any private sector investor would jump at this. The combination of repeated and flagrant breaches of the tripartite agreement – that jeopardize the very existence of the airport if enforced - and shoddy internal governance at the TPA would  give any careful investor serious pause, we would think.

 Surely Porter ought to be paying for this proposed tunnel, as its demise – should that happen - or its move to Pearson, to follow the Air Ontario precedent, would otherwise leave the TPA holding the bag, as has already happened once with the Rochester ferry terminal.

 - Brian Iler