Hamilton International Airport - Page 7

raisethehammer · #**121** Posted **May 4, 2007, 9:53 PM**

we can expect it to go out of business if Pickering goes ahead.

SteelTown · #**122** Posted **May 4, 2007, 10:06 PM**

If they ever do allow a Pickering Airport a) it'll probably take 20 years to pass the whole process and b) bankrupt the GTAA

Hammer Town · #**123** Posted **May 5, 2007, 3:56 AM**

Pickering can go ahead with its new airport
Kevin Werner, Mountain

(May 4, 2007)
The federal Transportation Minister says growth patterns don't indicate holding back constructing the Pickering airport for the benefit of the Hamilton International Airport.

Lawrence Cannon refused to say this week during the launch of Hamilton International Airport's new airline flyglobespan at the Wartime Heritage Museum, the Conservative government will curtail the development of a new airport in Pickering.

"The studies have not indicated" that future economic and democratic growth is concentrating in the Golden Horseshoe and around the Hamilton area, he told reporters.

"(The Pickering option) is still there down the road," he said. "What we want to be able to do until we get there is to continue to develop and promote our policies and those polices obviously have positive steps and consequences."

He said once the demographic and economic studies "come to full fruition we will make the appropriate decision when the time comes."

For the last three years Hamilton officials and Hamilton International Airport representatives have been urging the federal government to quash the Pickering airport development and put more resources into the Hamilton Airport as the most viable secondary airport location in Southern Ontario.

They have pointed out that transportation, demographic and economic trends reveal a more viable airport in Hamilton.

The Ontario government in its "Places to Grow" document identifies Hamilton as a growth opportunity, city officials point out. It means funding will flow to develop the city's transportation options such as the airport.

Richard Koroscil, president and chief operating officer of TradePort International reiterated the airport's position that the federal government has to be made aware by the municipality that Hamilton International Airport is the most economically viable location compared to Pearson International Airport or to Pickering.

I dont this the pickering plan is viable at all unless they close Pearson which isn't going to happen. I see Pickering as another Mirabel. If they ever do build pickering it will be for far down the road that YHM should be established even more then it already is becoming.

As far as Terminal expasion at YHM I happened to be at the Press Confrence for FlyGlobespan and was actually able to ask Richard Koroscil a few questions as well as get a tour with a AIrport official of the terminal.

So Mr Koroscil mostly said its a build it as they come sort of this becuase they do want to announce a big terminal plan then have an airlines pull out or something similar Tehy look to ahve the Runway 24-06 and flight kitch as well as the fuel farm in place by 2012-2015

Well i was on the terminal tour it was just me so i kind of got the royal treatment. I was anything the public would see with out being a passenger except I go to go into the International arrivals area it just a very basic structure however he explained to me what it will look like once the finish the construction they are doing in there now they also had an artist rendition on the wall that looked quiet nice.

After they He went on to say that Hey plan to extand the departure lounge out more towards the ramp then enlarge the arrivals area for domestic and international. once they have done they will start to build up also in differant phases.

I think I have said all I can remember.

fastcarsfreedom · #**124** Posted **May 5, 2007, 5:14 AM**

Exactly why raisethehammer, do you think YHM will go out of business if Pickering Airport is built? This time I want you to seriously quantify it--I really respect much of what you have to say, but the truth is, on a group of issues--the airport included--you are consistently negative. You have your own website and the main Hamilton development blog nearly to yourself and to those who are like-minded--this airport thread is about the positive growth and development of YHM--with the pervasiveness of attitudes like yours it's frankly amazing the airport has come so far, so fast.

When you prove to me that the majority of passenger traffic at YHM is coming from the east side of Toronto--that is driving PAST YYZ to come here, then I will agree that Pickering will hurt YHM. Moreover, I will also be alarmed if the entire population of YHM's catchment area up and moves eastward--until such time I have faith that the airport will CONTINUE to succeed. Just two weeks ago our local paper The Windsor Star, ran a front page article on the boom in growth at YHM, in past months The Buffalo News has run a similar story. Given the wide array of flights and destinations available at YYZ, I'd frankly like to see someone prove to me what the hell will make Pickering so damn viable. From a passenger standpoint, Toronto City Centre is only marginal, and past attempts at running commuter service from Buttonville have failed.

raisethehammer · #**125** Posted **May 5, 2007, 4:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by fastcarsfreedom

Exactly why raisethehammer, do you think YHM will go out of business if Pickering Airport is built? This time I want you to seriously quantify it--I really respect much of what you have to say, but the truth is, on a group of issues--the airport included--you are consistently negative. You have your own website and the main Hamilton development blog nearly to yourself and to those who are like-minded--this airport thread is about the positive growth and development of YHM--with the pervasiveness of attitudes like yours it's frankly amazing the airport has come so far, so fast.

When you prove to me that the majority of passenger traffic at YHM is coming from the east side of Toronto--that is driving PAST YYZ to come here, then I will agree that Pickering will hurt YHM. Moreover, I will also be alarmed if the entire population of YHM's catchment area up and moves eastward--until such time I have faith that the airport will CONTINUE to succeed. Just two weeks ago our local paper The Windsor Star, ran a front page article on the boom in growth at YHM, in past months The Buffalo News has run a similar story. Given the wide array of flights and destinations available at YYZ, I'd frankly like to see someone prove to me what the hell will make Pickering so damn viable. From a passenger standpoint, Toronto City Centre is only marginal, and past attempts at running commuter service from Buttonville have failed.

Why would Pickering have a negative impact here??
Go ask the folks at YHM that have been leading the fight against it for years.

SteelTown · #**126** Posted **May 6, 2007, 12:34 AM**

Look at what I found during the forum meet.....

fastcarsfreedom · #**127** Posted **May 6, 2007, 1:26 AM**

Tradeport's main case for fighting Pickering has always been about steering more government dollars to YHM and environs, and not about a sudden shift in population eastward. Aside, given your past comments about the airport, it's amusing now to see you more or less quoting Tradeport on this issue.

raisethehammer · #**128** Posted **May 6, 2007, 8:09 PM**

I guess I should do this myself, but since I won't, please refresh my memory as to what I've ever said about YHM that is so rotten?
i'm skeptical about whether it can hold carriers (as many people are given the history), and I'm skeptical about the fact that the GTAA and Feds are more interested in the pickering option.
I'd love to be able to do all of my flying from here instead of toronto. If I ever posted comments wishing the airport would blow up and be gone I don't remember when.

BCTed · #**129** Posted **May 6, 2007, 9:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by raisethehammer

I guess I should do this myself, but since I won't, please refresh my memory as to what I've ever said about YHM that is so rotten?
i'm skeptical about whether it can hold carriers (as many people are given the history), and I'm skeptical about the fact that the GTAA and Feds are more interested in the pickering option.
I'd love to be able to do all of my flying from here instead of toronto. If I ever posted comments wishing the airport would blow up and be gone I don't remember when.

I will back you up on this one, raisethehammer. I am pretty certain that you have never posted comments wishing the airport would blow up and be gone.

raisethehammer · #**130** Posted **May 6, 2007, 11:22 PM**

lol...thanks.
i generally don't say much about the airport...the crazy aerotropolis thing was worthy of discussion, but I hope the passenger stuff at YHM grows and does fabulous.

fastcarsfreedom · #**131** Posted **May 7, 2007, 12:43 PM**

Actually, in saying that you don't hope the airport blows up I think you've said the most positive thing you've ever said. In the past, ever small step and success has been met with skepticism, doubt, and negativity. Your response that the airport will "go out of business" if Pickering is built is typical of your responses. Ugly terminal, too small, etc, I could go on. We've had these debates before--in the past, on other forums--at the very least I'd expect you to own up to your negative attitude about the airport. If I implied that you wanted the airport to disappear, I was incorrect in doing so--I've never believed that. I do however believe from your previous posts that you hold it's future in low regard--you've made that clear.

fastcarsfreedom · #**132** Posted **May 7, 2007, 12:55 PM**

May 11, 2006 in response to a discussion about airport terminal renovations/expansion...

that goofy little thing is what council wants to pin all our future job creation hopes on??? heaven help us.

the dude · #**133** Posted **May 7, 2007, 2:46 PM**

aerotropolis...don't start with that! i'm not so sure that's really the topic of discussion here. anyway, it's ok to wish the airport success without supporting that particular initiative.

fastcarsfreedom · #**134** Posted **May 8, 2007, 2:42 AM**

Given that I'm out of the loop somewhat on Aerotropolis--what was the major issue on that initiative in terms of opposition? This particular concept has been applied elsewhere with some success (Alliance Airport in Fort Worth Texas, for instance), and in my area, Wayne County (MI) is looking at an aerotroplis concept for the area immediately adjacent to Metropolitan Detroit Airport (granted, one of the busiest airports in the U.S.)--just curious--was it environmental--feeling that those lands in Glanbrook were better in pastoral use?

All acidity aside, I'm curious.

flar · #**135** Posted **May 8, 2007, 2:58 AM**

I think the opposition to the aerotropolis is based on 1)expands the urban boundary (sprawl), 2)thus necessitating municipal servicing to new land while brownfield sites and existing serviced land sit empty 3)uses up valuable farmland, 4)"peak oil" could mean the aerotropolis never reaches its potential.

The aerotropolis land is west of the airport, around the newly built Hwy 6 bypass. This existing bypass is designed to be twinned into an expressway complete with ramps and overpasses when demand warrants.

HAMRetrofit · #**136** Posted **May 8, 2007, 4:04 AM**

Why is Hamilton completely against creating employment areas close to its airport? This seams ridiculous most airports encourage this type of development to build a more sustainable client base. If you look into the Seaton plan it incorporates an entire planned community near the Pickering airport including employment land and green space.

I am very unclear on Hamilton's initiatives for intensification and job growth under the Places to Grow policy, which specifically indicates airports and the hinterlands surrounding them as places for future employment.

There is a big difference between urban sprawl and a comprehensive plan that outlines how the actual airport lands are going to grow in a sustainable manner. The brownfields are not a comprehensive growth strategy because their developed reuse will always be tied to port activity and will fail to address employment opportunities in new clusters.

LikeHamilton · #**137** Posted **May 8, 2007, 4:26 AM**

I spent the weekend in London and checked out their airport. It is surrounded by all kinds of new airport development of all type. Kitchener-Waterloo Airport just recently had 10,000 acres of land rezoned for development around it. Why can we not see that here? Most of the land around Hamilton Airport is owned by developers and leased back to the farmers.

flar · #**138** Posted **May 8, 2007, 4:12 PM**

London just upgraded Airport Rd. (now Veteran's Memorial Parkway) into a divided highway, which can be converted to a controlled access freeway someday. It's basically the same setup that Hamilton will have, a freeway spur off a major highway that leads to an airport surrounded by a vast industrial park. London already has theirs built, and even has a couple industries moved in.

The Hamilton Aerotropolis is the best chance for Hamilton to attract industry. I would like to see the brownfields redeveloped but the reality is that industry will only locate on nice fresh land beside major highways. There's not anything we can do about that. If we don't build the aerotropolis here, the industries will continue to locate in places like London. Even Brantford has two large new industrial parks along the 403 that are doing quite well.

SteelTown · #**139** Posted **May 8, 2007, 4:26 PM**

Take a look at Pittsburgh all their industries on the riverfront are gone and now companies relocated on green space. The East Harbourfront days of being an industrial park is dying, nothing can last forever.

The biggest issue facing Hamilton is jobs and yet we sit around keep debating and debating over and over with endless supply of studies on how to attract new jobs, yet the solution is quite simple thanks to the provincial government that built that new 403 bypass to the Airport. Prime land next to the Airport and 403 just sitting all alone.

SteelTown · #**140** Posted **May 8, 2007, 5:14 PM**

One of the first companies I could see locating at the Airport is laboratory equipment/supply companies such as VWR, Sigma, Invitrogen, Fisher, etc. Hamilton is growing into a research and medical city and so far all these supplies come from the GTA like Whitby, Oakville and Mississauga.

Most of these supplies get shipped to Hamilton Airport than to Whitby, Oakville, Mississauga and then finally back to Hamilton like McMaster.