Tunnel, airport expansion a blight on our waterfront
TO: Tim Meisner, Director General, Marine Policy, Transport Canada
Dear Mr. Meisner
I strongly object to the proposed amendment to the May 2, 2005 regulation which prohibits the construction of a bridge or similar fixed link from the mainland to the Toronto Island's Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport.
As you know, prior to WWII the island property in question had been used for recreational purposes, for the enjoyment of all citizens of Toronto and visitors to the city. A small airfield was created for the training of Norwegan pilots as a part of the war effort. At that time, the surrounding waterfront was under-developed and used primarily for industrial purposes. A lot has changed in the past 60 years, especially in the last 2 decades.
A vibrant residential and recreational community has grown up along the city's waterfront with thousands of permanent residents, tens of thousands of annual visitors from the city at large and tourists from far and wide. The theme, vision and spirit of a "clean, green waterfront" has happily taken root in Toronto with billions invested in developing a unique strip, from Etobicoke to Scarborough, where people can live, work and play.
Sadly, there is one incompatible blight on this new, 21st century, waterfront landscape. The Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport. Re-naming it after a national hero does not change the fact that it simply does not fit with the vision embraced by the Toronto of the future. Not to forget the role it played in our history, but any move, or investment that encourages the expansion of a commercial airport on Toronto's waterfront will prove folly, both economically and socially. The reasons and arguments are well known and should not be allowed to be pushed aside by short-term, narrowly self-interested thinking of the few.
I thank you for the opportunity to submit my comments on this vital issue.
Sincerely
James M. Plaxton
Dear Mr. Meisner
I strongly object to the proposed amendment to the May 2, 2005 regulation which prohibits the construction of a bridge or similar fixed link from the mainland to the Toronto Island's Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport.
As you know, prior to WWII the island property in question had been used for recreational purposes, for the enjoyment of all citizens of Toronto and visitors to the city. A small airfield was created for the training of Norwegan pilots as a part of the war effort. At that time, the surrounding waterfront was under-developed and used primarily for industrial purposes. A lot has changed in the past 60 years, especially in the last 2 decades.
A vibrant residential and recreational community has grown up along the city's waterfront with thousands of permanent residents, tens of thousands of annual visitors from the city at large and tourists from far and wide. The theme, vision and spirit of a "clean, green waterfront" has happily taken root in Toronto with billions invested in developing a unique strip, from Etobicoke to Scarborough, where people can live, work and play.
Sadly, there is one incompatible blight on this new, 21st century, waterfront landscape. The Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport. Re-naming it after a national hero does not change the fact that it simply does not fit with the vision embraced by the Toronto of the future. Not to forget the role it played in our history, but any move, or investment that encourages the expansion of a commercial airport on Toronto's waterfront will prove folly, both economically and socially. The reasons and arguments are well known and should not be allowed to be pushed aside by short-term, narrowly self-interested thinking of the few.
I thank you for the opportunity to submit my comments on this vital issue.
Sincerely
James M. Plaxton
Comments