Recently there has been considerable debate regarding the future of the Toronto Island Airport. Without becoming entangled in it, this proposal simply assumes the scenario that the airport is not required or economically beneficial to the city of Toronto.

Anti-airport proposals have contended that the airport lands should be returned to some “natural” state and become part of Toronto Islands Parks. This proposal is fundamentally different in that it recognizes that the island park network of 600 acres is more than sufficient in size. In fact, at its current size, the park system already lacks sufficient money for upkeep and much needed improvements. Enlarging the park without additional funding would create further financial strain. The result would be a park system in much worse shape. The focus of this proposal is to improve the existing Toronto Island Parks.

Once the airport facility is dismantled, the airport island itself would be physically reconfigured. The current “Western Gap” would be back-filled, connecting the island to the mainland. A new channel would be dredged and seawalls constructed to create a new gap between the airport island’s southern shore and Hanlan’s Island’s north shore. This would maintain harbour operations.

The reclaimed island would then be subdivided into a variety of residential lots and sold at market prices. Assisted housing projects would also be located on the site. The new development would extend the small Bathurst Quay community. The expansion would provide the neighbourhood with additional residents, which would remedy the problem of the underused neighbourhood school and community center.

A substantial park is proposed for the east and west coasts of the island. The southern edge along the newly created gap would feature several residential waterfront properties.

Money generated by the real-estate development would augment the existing island public park operations budget and improve the island’s facilities.

1. since the island airport is obviously doomed, i recommend to everybody a helicopter ride. it is very cheap ($80) and is an unforgettable experience. you get an excellent view of everything and the trip is very romantic if you want a unique valetine’s day date!

   you can also learn to fly… check out the island airport before it’s too late

   Posted by kevin  on  12/20  at  10:38 PM

2. Why, pray tell, do so many of these Island Airport redevelopment proponents advocate an absolute tabula rasa approach? It isn’t like certain of the existing elements-most notably, the original 1939-40 terminal building-can’t be sympathetically incorporated and adapted, you know.

   Sure, Island Airport may be blight. However, it’s “blight” with a history, and one that isn’t so lethally stigmatized as its opponents claim…

   Posted by Adam Sobolak  on  12/21  at  09:34 AM

3. Your idea for turning the 200+ acre Airport Lands site into a condo/coop subdivision is fatally flawed for several reasons:

   1) The airport land is zoned public open space (G) and Council passed a resolution last spring that if the airport is closed (for instance for Expo 2015) then this designation will remain. It would be politically impossible to turn this area into a housing development because of the firestorm that would cause in the broader community.

   2) Toronto Island is the major regional park in the GTA, an area whose population is growing at roughly 1-million people every decade. On busy summer days the park is already operating at capacity. Whatever very limited additional residential is permitted on the Island should be used to strengthen the small community at the eastern end. The aging Island community would arguably benefit from a limited amount of coop rental accomodation to bring in some younger families; hence the proposed Flying Toad coop that was killed by the Harrisites.

   2) The existing Island park generates a profit from ferries and other infrastructure. The designs for the land that CommunityAIR and others have developed
   http://www.communityair.org/Solution_00.htm would be revenue positive through such ideas as: redeveloping the existing airport buildings for Granville Island style uses; green electrical generation; introduction of small hotels and other amenities; development of a destination public facility on the spectacular site at the eastern end of the main runway.

   3) There is hardly a need for more development land for residential uses on the central waterfront, given: East Bayfront, West Donlands, and the Portlands.

   4) CommunityAIR’s proposed design for the airport lands would enhance the ecology of the massively polluted site. By contrast, the environmental benefits of turning it over to a dense residential development and relocating the Western Gap are not evident. As well, your plan would likely disrupt the hydrology of Toronto Bay and would also adversely impact the operations of several sailing clubs, notably the IYC, National and Alexandra.

   I could go on, but the more important fight is getting the airport closed. As you probably know, the federal Liberals gave the Port Authority a $35-million financial bailout package last May, most of which is being used to finance a new airport expansion effort.

   Marc Brien
   Research Coordinator
   CommunityAIR

   Posted by Marc Brien  on  01/05  at  07:19 AM

<< Back to main