PDA

View Full Version : CYTZ news-Toronto votes to cancel airport bridge plans


skidcanuck
4th Dec 2003, 09:24
Council votes to cancel airport bridge
City politicians 'chose a future for our waterfront,' says mayor


CURTIS RUSH
STAFF REPORTER THESTAR.COM

The Toronto island airport bridge is apparently dead. City council voted 32-12 tonight, after a daylong debate, to ask the federal government to cancel the project. A proposal to defer the vote on the controversial link failed to win sufficient support among councillors.
"I think this was a highly significant decision for Toronto," Mayor David Miller told Toronto One TV after the vote. "It chose a future for our waterfront."

Miller noted prime-minister-to-be Paul Martin has made it "very clear" he will support the city's decision.

The vote is a victory for the newly elected mayor who campaigned on a pledge to kill the bridge at the first meeting of council. It's also a reversal of council's decision in June to go ahead with the construction of the bridge designed to pave the way for a new startup airline with expanded flights at the small airport.

"I've done exactly what I said I'd do," Miller told reporters after the vote.

Several councillors warned that reversing the decision would put the city on the hook for expensive lawsuits. In fact, the port authority, Regional Airlines Holdings Inc. (REGCO) and businesses that operate out of the island airport have already threatened to sue the city for more than $1 billion.

After much rancorous debate this morning, councillors began arguing that public hearings should be held on whether to kill the bridge while others argued to go ahead today with the vote.

The motion came after much heated debate about whether Miller should try to rush through his decision to kill the island bridge.

Miller was reminded that he swept to victory with the promise for open government, and it was suggested that he shouldn't be trying to push through this decision only one day after officially becoming mayor.

Howard Moscoe was one of the councillors arguing against the deferral, saying that "this is an odious tactic to back us into a liability situation."

Councillor Olivia Chow supported a move to go right to the vote, saying that such a deferral would amount to "a waste of more money."

Throughout the long day, the council chamber was packed with both supporters and opponents of the bridge. At times, the chamber was overflowing with residents wearing T-shirts and buttons proclaiming their differing positions - "Build the Bridge" and "Clean, Green Waterfront" - cheering and booing at the same time so that Miller had to warn them to be quiet.

Turnout was so high that access to the chamber had to be restricted, with some people forced to watch the proceedings on closed-circuit television in the rotunda. Security was tighter than usual with police officers called in as reinforcements in case the debate got rowdy.

Earlier in the day, Miller faced intense grilling at the special council meeting called to debate the issue. Councillors challenged the new mayor's stance in a question-and-answer session that grew heated at times, with many of the mayor's council opponents accusing him of dodging their questions.

Miller emphasized that it is his vision that the waterfront should be for the people and not planes.

When asked about the threat of lawsuits, he said it was his understanding that "there is no real risk of liability to the city if we request the federal government to act" and ask the Toronto Port Authority, a federal agency, to amend the current contract.

Miller showed sympathy to the workers who would lose jobs if the bridge didn't go ahead.

"They should fight for their jobs," he said in reference to the CAW representatives in attendance. "But we have to look at the overall public interest."

On the economic impact of a city decision to kill the bridge, Miller said that jobs would be lost but that more jobs would be created in the long term with the revitalization of the waterfront.

With 14 new councillors elected on Nov. 10, many of the new members didn't have the chance to study or debate the issue previously, but Miller rejected further discussion on the issue.

"We just had a large public consultation on Nov. 10 (the election)," he said.

"It was debated throughout the election," he said. "My mandate (on his key election platform to kill the bridge) was clear and I have an obligation."

Miller said he has talked to Paul Martin, who becomes prime minister Dec. 12, as well as to federal Transport Minister David Collenette, and maintained he is confident "they will respect the wishes of the people of Toronto."


with files from Star staff

604guy
4th Dec 2003, 10:20
And Toronto still can't figure out why they never got the Olympics. I think you sort of have to be open for business. Good grief what a bunch! What does Toronto do to get these guys, last one was Mel and now this. I have decided that they really do enjoy in some perverse way being the object of ridicule by the rest of the country.

pigboat
4th Dec 2003, 10:38
The TZ aviation community had better start printing t-shirts with "Remember Meigs" on 'em.

Flying Bagel
4th Dec 2003, 17:55
I think the problem with the Toronto government isn't the fact that it is trying to eliminate the island airport altogether. In fact, I would support a revitalized waterfront in Toronto, as currently it is seemingly dead.

But the government has had a history of going with 'the status quo'. Anytime a big project has come their way, they've always seem to just faint and wilt away. So the bitter aspect of all this is that there will be no fixed link (thus probably the possible closure of the airport) and no revitalized waterfront either.

******s.

skidcanuck
5th Dec 2003, 11:17
If they so desperately want the Island Airport land (and all the contaminated soil underneath), then maybe the Leslie Spit would be a good place to put a 6,000' runway with a logical ILS one can actually use.

A direct road access could be easily put in place, and approaches would be over water well removed from the :mad: bleeding heart leftists. The Leslie Spit now is nothing but a breeding ground for seagulls.

pigboat
6th Dec 2003, 03:41
Ahh but skiddy, the very people you describe see seagulls in the same light as Richard Bach and not as the ferkin flying rats they really are. :D ;)

Chuck Ellsworth
6th Dec 2003, 04:45
Skidcanuck:

What has contaminated the soil under the airport?

MarkD
10th Dec 2003, 05:05
all this "we want the island for the people of Toronto" crap. The 747-400 I flew into Pearson right by Yonge and Eglinton probably burned more fuel in that approach than all of TZ's movements that day!

I couldn't be ars@d going to the Island for recreation on the ferry - shortest route in the world, whereas with a bridge it could be integrated with TTC etc. TZ loses $1m p.a. - Port Authority can't keep that up surely.

City made a settlement and broke it. Unfortunately Paul Martin doesn't want to p!ss off the Liberal golden goose (T.O.) and is leaning on the PA not to restart the lawsuit.

If you want to see why Toronto can't win the Olympics, look how much the Toronto bid wants you to pay for tickets to the minor world hockey champs if it gets them.

m&v
11th Dec 2003, 09:13
Ergo,I assume now that the Deluce people won't proceed with the 'new' airline??
or have I got the wrong picture???
Cheers......:confused:

rotornut
12th Dec 2003, 20:01
The Globe & Mail
Airline businessman issues legal threat over bridge

By Katherine Harding
Friday, December 12, 2003 - Page A19

Robert Deluce, the businessman who plans to start a regional airline at the island airport, warned city officials yesterday that he plans to sue over council's recent decision to scrap the 122-metre fixed link.

"The papers, including the statement of claim, are currently being drafted," said Mr. Deluce, president of Regional Airlines Holdings Inc. He claims his business plan was developed on the strict condition that the bridge would be built. Mr. Deluce would also not rule out suing the Toronto Port Authority and the federal government.

Mayor David Miller was angered by yesterday's legal threat.

"I think it's about time that Mr. Deluce stopped threatening the people of the city of Toronto," he said, adding that: "The city has clearly made its decision and the federal government supports it."

rotornut
8th Jan 2004, 18:48
The Globe & Mail

Island bridge sparks $505-million suit

Businessman who planned airline service calls council's reversal 'breach of contract'

By KATHERINE HARDING
With reports from John Barber

UPDATED AT 6:39 AM EST Thursday, Jan. 8, 2004

Serious allegations that Toronto Mayor David Miller "abused his powers" for "improper purposes" during his successful crusade last fall to kill a proposed bridge to the island airport were included in a $505-million lawsuit filed yesterday against the city by a private businessman.

"It's with regret that we are actually moving to this course of action," said Robert Deluce, president and chief executive officer of Regional Airlines Holdings Inc., or REGCO. His company, which planned to operate a new airline at the struggling downtown airport on the strict condition that the 122-metre bridge was built, has been threatening since October to sue the city for a host of reasons, including "breach of contract," if it changed its mind about the project.

"We will be pursuing this matter vigorously until we have a resolution," Mr. Deluce said, adding that his company has a "strong claim." He said his company had already sunk a lot of money into the airline, which plans to fly about 900,000 passengers a year. Last April, he signed a letter of understanding with Bombardier for 10 firm orders for its Q400 turboprop plane, with an option for 15 more. The order is estimated to be worth about $500-million.

He said his plan was dashed last month, when city council voted to reverse a decision made last June to support construction of the $22-million bridge project and to ask the Toronto Port Authority, a federal agency, to do the same.

The federal government said it would respect the wishes of Toronto's new council but the Toronto Port Authority, which operates the small, money-losing airport, is still negotiating its final decision with the mayor's office while construction has been put on hold.

Substantial changes at the airport, including constructing a bridge, are subject to an agreement made in 1983 that includes the city, the federal government and the former Toronto Harbour Commission (now the Toronto Port Authority).

Mr. Deluce said he wouldn't rule out suing "additional parties," including the federal government, in the future, "depending on the results of some ongoing discussions."

Mr. Deluce's 17-page statement of claim also alleges that Mr. Miller, who campaigned during last fall's mayoral race on a promise to axe the bridge, "abused his powers" by threatening councillors, having Toronto Fire Services and Toronto Hydro "interfere with the construction of the fixed link," and even by lobbying the federal government to "withhold certain permits" that the port authority needed to proceed with the bridge.

The port authority is still missing one key federal permit that it needs to build over the waterway that separates the city from the 64-year-old airport.

The statement of claim also stated that just days before the Nov. 10 election, either Mr. Miller or his aide, Peter Donolo, a former press aide to prime minister Jean Chrétien, "induced" Air Canada to send a damaging letter to the port authority requesting that it allow jets at the island airport. The controversial letter was first obtained by The Globe and Mail, and Mr. Deluce said at the time that it was written to kill public support for the bridge.

Mr. Miller dismissed Mr. Deluce's massive lawsuit and his allegations as "frivolous."

"It's outrageous. It shows that this private businessperson is trying to hold the city of Toronto to ransom," he said during a news conference outside his office. "The claim for $500-million for an airline that only exists on paper is patently absurd."

Mr. Miller added that suggestions he has abused his powers are "really not worthy of a response."

"I have absolutely no idea what they are talking about," he said.

When reached for comment, Mr. Donolo and representatives of Toronto Fire Services and Toronto Hydro all denied Mr. Deluce's allegations that they were involved with any type of plan by Mr. Miller to stop the bridge to the airport.

"I don't have a clue where they pulled this one from," said Bill Stewart, Toronto's fire chief. "We haven't been involved, nor have we had any direct discussions with the mayor's office over the fixed link."

Toronto municipal lawyer Barnet Kussner thinks that REGCO "is going to have a tough time" proving its case. The reason, he said, is that municipalities are exempt from a law that binds private corporations to honour undertakings given by representatives, called the indoor management rule.

"The case law makes it clear that the rule does not apply to municipal corporations," he said.

Businesses who want to deal with municipalities are obliged to make their own efforts to "give effect to a contract," regardless of what any municipal politician may say or do.

But there are limits to that, Mr. Kussner added, which could lead to some damages being assessed against the city.

Councillor Denzil Minnan-Wong said he's disappointed -- but not surprised -- that the city has been sued. "This is David Miller's lawsuit," he told reporters. "He, in fact, promised the taxpayers of Toronto and council that we wouldn't be on the hook for this."

During the election, Mr. Miller mused that it wouldn't cost more than a toonie to cancel the bridge. Yesterday, he wouldn't speculate about how much a legal battle could end up costing the city.

Rosbif
9th Jan 2004, 05:27
It's been the same for years over there and will never change. I was in the tower there one morning (no I'm not atc) at about 7 in the morning and the phone rings. I think the caller's name was Mary, but I'm not sure (7 years ago). She wants to register her complaint about the noise. Thanks very much says the controller, call logged.
Funny thing is that at the time it was WOXOF, and the closest airplane was leaving Pearson !
That is what you are up against.
I would personally like to take an unhushed Diesel 8 over her house to show her some real noise !!
Incidentally, a study conducted years ago at the Island showed that the kids at the newly built school there made more noise than a citation (voyageur medevac) leaving at the same time as measured at the posh new apartments there.
Cheers

rotornut
10th Jan 2004, 19:14
Right on, Rosbif. It was the same way when I worked at YTZ a few years ago. Only in those days it was City Express that used to get the noise complaints. By the way, do you know Monty in the tower? I believe he's still there.

Rosbif
12th Jan 2004, 21:48
Don't know him. -- and a dash 7 makes even less noise. It could take off from Mary's back yard and she wouldn't hear it :ok:

MarkD
16th Jan 2004, 06:38
AC uses a Dash 8-100 which has a short takeoff/landing. At only 4,000 ft CYTZ is not v. long. Deluce was proposing using Q400s which seem to be quite close if not beyond the ISA limits (especially at an airport in a city which sees 30+ C in summer. Extension out of the question as greenies would go ballistic.

Any thoughts on Q400 ops at TZ?