Public Investment in Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport (YTZ)

[PAXUNK]

Congratulations to Bombardier for a successful first flight of the C-Series.
We would all like to see Canadian carriers using the new planes.

But does the success of the C-Series really depend on Porter alone. And from YTZ only?
Presumably the C-Series could fly from many other Canadian airports without further public investment.

Porter seems to be asking for a significant public investment to extend the YTZ runway; an investment that would benefit mainly Porter and Bombardier.
What is the business case for this public investment?
How much would all the improvements cost?
How would the public investment be recovered and over how many years?
What increase in aircraft traffic is assumed and what would be the mix of this traffic?

I am sure that local residents would like to know the magnitude of the increase in aircraft traffic that will be required to recover the public investment through user fees.

[photofly]

I'm not sure most local residents give a care. 98% of the noise complaints at CYTZ come from the same six people.

[NeverBlue]

beautiful

you can't attract industry if you don't have the facilities to accomodate.

...it's called "Infrastructure"

[Valhalla]

Porter seems to be asking for a significant public investment to extend the YTZ runway; an investment that would benefit mainly Porter and Bombardier.

Are they?? The proposed runway extension is not being funded with taxpayer money. According to the Port Authority, who is responsible for infrastructure at the YTZ, private money only is being raised to pay for this expansion. The cost will be recouped over time through passenger airport improvement fees. And before you assume that the Port Authority is subsidized by federal taxpayer money, it's been a profitable federal entity for the last few years because of the large increase in passengers at YTZ. So in other words, the taxpayer stands to benefit from this project if it goes as planned.

The lengthened runway will not necessarily allow more airplanes access to the airport, but it will allow bigger airplanes. Therefore, more passengers per slot, and more money for the Port Authority to pay for their infrastructure investment.

[PAXUNK]

That is excellent news if indeed no public money will be required to finance the runway extension. But will public money be put at risk?
I suppose that the Port Authority will issue a bond to raise the funds. Does the Province insure that bond in order to get a lower interest rate?
In any case, the interest on the bond must be recovered from user fees.
I would still like to see the assumptions on increased traffic that would result in sufficient additional income to pay the interest.
And the corresponding assumptions as to the number and type of airplane movements.

[RatherBeFlying]

I seriously doubt extending the runway to the east will get past the Toronto voting public. That would interfere with a lot of boating traffic in the bay to say nothing of riling the condo owners.

Perhaps an extension into the lake will work -- plus EMAS at both ends so the pax don't get wet when there's an overrun.

[Colonel Sanders]

98% of the noise complaints at CYTZ come from the same six people

So true. Meanwhile, in Oz:

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/wa ... aft-noise/

Figures from air traffic regulator Airservices Australia show Kevin McNamara made more than 21,000 complaints - 40 per cent of the total - about aircraft noise in Perth in the past four years.

He said yesterday his record was 800 complaints in a day and he often complained 50 times about a single flight

The important thing to remember is that these cranks
are more important than everyone else, because they
make a lot of noise.

[photofly]

That would interfere with a lot of boating traffic in the bay to say nothing of riling the condo owners.

Yes, that's a very important consideration.

It's fascinating that in general boat owners are seen as a worthy and respectable bunch, but aircraft owners who are massively more affected by developments at CYTZ are just a bunch of rich playboys who should be put to hard labour and whose toys should be taken away from them for the benefit of the poor.

[photofly]

98% of the noise complaints at CYTZ come from the same six people

So true.

I didn't make it up. The figures come from the Toronto Port Authority.

[PAXUNK]

I would hope that the decision would not be based on the opinion of six people!
But if there is an economic case to be made for the expansion, I haven't seen it yet.
Cost estimates, realistic assumptions of increased traffic and passengers, and revenue required for full recovery of costs.
Also, who bears the cost if revenue estimates do not materialize.

[rigpiggy]

98% of the noise complaints at CYTZ come from the same six people

So true. Meanwhile, in Oz:

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/wa ... aft-noise/

Figures from air traffic regulator Airservices Australia show Kevin McNamara made more than 21,000 complaints - 40 per cent of the total - about aircraft noise in Perth in the past four years.

He said yesterday his record was 800 complaints in a day and he often complained 50 times about a single flight

The important thing to remember is that these cranks
are more important than everyone else, because they
make a lot of noise.

but the regulators can point to the "stats" and put in a "curfew", and then charge violators..........

Just another cash grab. if YTZ was smart they would do things like in the states, buy the property around them, and either tear it down, or resell with a restrictive covenant re noise complaints

[Valhalla]

But if there is an economic case to be made for the expansion, I haven't seen it yet.
Cost estimates, realistic assumptions of increased traffic and passengers, and revenue required for full recovery of costs.
Also, who bears the cost if revenue estimates do not materialize.

Here's the initial report from the 3rd party economic consultants that the city of Toronto have hired to study the economic case of the expansion:

http://www.toronto.ca/bbtca_review/pdf/ ... impact.pdf

[JDW]

But if there is an economic case to be made for the expansion, I haven't seen it yet.

Really?
Not the construction jobs, or increased passenger traffic into the downtown core? Not the expansion of staffing at porter and in ancillary services? Not the manufacturing jobs going to bombardier or the taxes and airport fees going to the tpa and the ontario gov? Nope, I dont see any economic case there.....

Oh, and if it all unravels and isnt as profitable as expected, its private sector money!
Now please, what is the ECONOMIC case against this expansion? Because so far all I have heard from opponents is NIMBY-ism and uninformed attacks

[Colonel Sanders]

I would hope that the decision would not be based on the opinion of six people!

You might be surprised. If there is one person complaining,
that can shut something down completely. It's a result of
the incredible power of political correctness.

A good example is Dire Strait's "Money for Nothing" song, which
was played for decades on the radio in Canada. Then recently,
one person complained about one word in the song, and our
wise government decided to ban it.

I am not making this up. It's decisions like this, that justify
their high salaries, generous benefits, and fat pensions.

The same kind of overpaid and underworked idiots are in charge
of the Island airport. If one person complains about the airport,
well, better shut it down.

Your overpaid and underworked government in action:

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/ ... a-20110114

[GQ4]

There is really no effect on boating traffic under the proposed changes over what is in place now:
http://porterplans.com/Content/images/i ... erview.gif
http://porterplans.com/Content/images/i ... erview.gif

[PAXUNK]

Here's the initial report from the 3rd party economic consultants that the city of Toronto have hired to study the economic case of the expansion:

http://www.toronto.ca/bbtca_review/pdf/ ... impact.pdf

Many thanks, Valhalla, for link to the initial report.
I will go away and study it!

[PAXUNK]

But if there is an economic case to be made for the expansion, I haven't seen it yet.

Oh, and if it all unravels and isnt as profitable as expected, its private sector money!

I am delighted to learn that the investment would be entirely private money, and I trust that if the hoped-for revenue fails to materialize, there are no public guarantees involved.

[Driving Rain]

http://read.thestar.com/?origref=https% ... -expansion

[Krimson]

I've never understood it, no matter where you go or what you do, you will have some six people complaining about anything.

Why do they let everything bother them so much and choose to be such a pain in the arse?

[tenaciousleigh]

To comment on a statement from the original poster, I know Swiss is planning to replace their fleet of RJ100s with the C Series. I don't think Porter is the be all end all for Bombardier