Toronto Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport | ?m | ?s | Ports Toronto | Arup

rdaner said:
The update also mentioned that a few possible scenarios for what would happen to the land the airport currently sits on involve a large regional park and/or a park with residential development. Granville Island and Distillery were also mentioned. I will just mention that I think something Toronto could use is a new, large provincial library on the waterfront similar to what Copenhagen has on it's harbour. Ports Toronto was supposed to provide an update on what it is doing but pulled out at the last minute. 🤔
Click to expand...

Is there a link to this update?
 
cplchanb said:
Or make investments to this airport and its runway and make it like London city airport by the thames. Don't forget Burtonsville airport is closing soon and all those corporate and small private aircraft will need a place to go. Hamilton is too far from the city center and it's probably too busy for the tiny planes.
Click to expand...

There's nowhere to store any material number of additional planes at Billy Bishop, and there won't be. Whatever its future, it will not be replacing Buttonville in any sense.
 
turini2 said:
It's a wonderful place - I guess I didn't clarify my point well enough.
You can't visit the islands for just five minutes - it's best to make an afternoon/day of it. Somewhere closer to where people live, and you can come/go as you please.

I guess that's why replacing the airport with an expanded Toronto Islands is so attractive to me - because it would improve the year round access so much!
Click to expand...
On one hand I think the airport is still an asset despite its detractors- on the other hand, all truly great cities have a large urban park near their downtown cores- like El Retiro in Madrid or City Park in Budapest (and let’s not get started about London or New York)- parks that also host cultural institutions. The airport lands may very much offer the potential for such a programme without excessive infrastructure (rail deck) and can re-activate some of the less exciting parts of the western waterfront around the Western Channel.

Likewise, I hardly think that a fixed connection from the airport lands would diminish the feeling of the islands- if anything, there is an unique potential for a transition from a programme-heavy urban park to a wild one like at Prater Park in Vienna due to the sheer distance along Hanlan's Point.

The last thing I want to see is a Downsview Park situation where the final result is a diminished park eaten away by urban development. The city will need to be very careful about the future transfer of the lands, with many potential vultures circling above.
 
Last edited:
cplchanb said:
Or make investments to this airport and its runway and make it like London city airport by the thames. Don't forget Burtonsville airport is closing soon and all those corporate and small private aircraft will need a place to go. Hamilton is too far from the city center and it's probably too busy for the tiny planes.
Click to expand...
As an airport primarily used by business executives and forced on locals that didn't want it there, London City Airport is not something to aspire to.
It also restricts the quantity and height of development nearby, is very loud (it has jets, unlike Porter) and polluting (the local area has some of the worst air quality in London)
(London City is owned by Alberta and Ontario pension funds ... I'd much rather the land was housing!)

Basically it comes down to - what are the priorities we have as a city? I'd much rather culture, greenspace and development - given UP to Pearson, and hopefully HFR at Union too.
 
Screenshot 2023-11-08 at 4.55.03 PM.png
Screenshot 2023-11-08 at 4.55.09 PM.png
 
AlexBozikovic said:
It’s a small thing, but the analogy between Billy Bishop and London City Airport as “centre city” airports is bogus.

LCY is 11 km from London Bridge. On a Toronto map, that’s equivalent to a location past High Park. And it does not border one of London’s most important and beloved parks.
Click to expand...
There are many points of contradiction always in this argument - the airport that has become what we know as Billy Bishop opened in 1939, London City in the late 1980’s. The geographic size (km sq) of London is about three times the size of Toronto.

I have used BB on more than a few occasions, and the advantages of location, airline, routes, and ease of use has me sold on its value a long time ago. Flying in from Chicago, catching the shuttle to Union and then a GO train home reminds me always about what a Pearson Hub could be, if we ever get there.

BB is not a replacement for Buttonville. But there are other airports located in the region that can or could handle this type of traffic - Burlington, Markham, Brampton, Oshawa.

I also appreciate the argument about BB’s potential utility as valuable parkland and I think I could buy into that , with the successful operational completion of Higher Speed, Higher Frequency rail to both Montreal and Ottawa. There have been some great ideas floated for this space, and if this option ever comes to fruition, let’s please agree that another Doug Ford Spa will not be the ‘world class’ build that we get, whether we like it or not,
 
The plot of land YTZ sits on was formerly an amusement park similar to that of early Cedar Point in Sandusky, OH, which is currently home to many of the most popular high-intensity roller coasters in the world.

Perhaps it can be converted into an amusement park that can rival that of Six Flags Canada's Wonderland, especially given the news that Wonderland's parent company Cedar Fair merged with Six Flags with the merged company being called Six Flags.

This new amusement park can have what Six Flags Canada's Wonderland currently doesn't have: an Intamin roller coaster and an RMC roller coaster.

Centreville can be for families with young children, while this new amusement park would be for thrill-seekers with many high-intensity roller coasters. It would provide much-needed competition given that there are not many amusement parks within a reasonable drive from Toronto that have multiple high-intensity rollers without the need to cross an international border aside from Canada's Wonderland. Cedar Point happens to be the next nearest amusement park aside from Canada's Wonderland to have multiple high-intensity roller coasters.
 
Johnny Au said:
The plot of land YTZ sits on was formerly an amusement park similar to that of early Cedar Point in Sandusky, OH, which is currently home to many of the most popular high-intensity roller coasters in the world.

Perhaps it can be converted into an amusement park that can rival that of Six Flags Canada's Wonderland, especially given the news that Wonderland's parent company Cedar Fair merged with Six Flags with the merged company being called Six Flags.

This new amusement park can have what Six Flags Canada's Wonderland currently doesn't have: an Intamin roller coaster and an RMC roller coaster.

Centreville can be for families with young children, while this new amusement park would be for thrill-seekers with many high-intensity roller coasters. It would provide much-needed competition given that there are not many amusement parks within a reasonable drive from Toronto that have multiple high-intensity rollers without the need to cross an international border aside from Canada's Wonderland. Cedar Point happens to be the next nearest amusement park aside from Canada's Wonderland to have multiple high-intensity roller coasters.
Click to expand...
On one hand I can see the appeal of your suggestion as it would be a convenient alternative to having to endure nightmarish traffic to trek to CW all the way up in Vaughan (which itself is an incredibly unappealing city), but I'm not sure the island should have a massive, cheesy attraction like that. I'd be much more interested in something more sophisticated, like a dense cultural district with a variety of offerings.

Toronto doesn't do enough high brow stuff.
 
I wonder what kind of loads Connect plan to get out of Billy Bishop, particularly in summer. ATR are marketing a STOL 42 but do not list a 72 equivalent.
 
The future of aviation, one hopes, will include increased hybrid and even electric propulsion. Many of these aircraft feature STOL and even VTOL, as well as significantly reduced noise pollution. It would be shortsighted to increase the runways for jets, when a better course for the airport would be to tread water until electric technologies make it a better waterfront neighbour.
 
robmausser said:
I thought Connect was using q400s
Click to expand...
Seems like that might be just to "get it off the ground" as it were
www.flightglobal.com

Connect Airlines plots expansion with up to 100 hydrogen-powered ATR 72s

Proposed US start-up carrier Connect Airlines is ordering 75 converted ATR 72-600 turboprops, which will be fitted with hydrogen-fuelled powertrains. The firm agreement with Universal Hydrogen also covers an additional 25 converted aircraft. Universal Hydrogen was founded by former Airbus chief...
www.flightglobal.com www.flightglobal.com
 
dowlingm said:
Seems like that might be just to "get it off the ground" as it were
www.flightglobal.com

Connect Airlines plots expansion with up to 100 hydrogen-powered ATR 72s

Proposed US start-up carrier Connect Airlines is ordering 75 converted ATR 72-600 turboprops, which will be fitted with hydrogen-fuelled powertrains. The firm agreement with Universal Hydrogen also covers an additional 25 converted aircraft. Universal Hydrogen was founded by former Airbus chief...
www.flightglobal.com www.flightglobal.com
Click to expand...
Man, so long as they are the sole customer, that's going to be expensive getting their hydrogen FBO off the ground in all the places they need it. I imagine getting hydrogen through downtown and onto the island will not be without controversy.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top