After 50 years in a holding pattern, Pickering airport hopes soar with a new federal study

Supporters and opponents see a new federal study as the sign that a final decision is in the works on the much-debated plan.

Thestar.com
May 3, 2023
Noor Javed

For 50 years, the lands in north Pickering have sat in limbo, waiting for a decision on whether or not an airport will be built.

In that time, the municipalities around the airport -- Pickering, Markham, Whitby, Stouffville -- have been largely built out, thousands of acres of excess federal lands originally expropriated for the airport have been used to create Rouge National Urban Park, the Greenbelt was created, and parts of the nearby Duffins Rouge Agricultural Preserve were added -- and then removed -- from protection.

Traffic at Pearson airport, meanwhile, has grown to 35.6 million passengers in 2022, putting a strain on an already congested airport system that has struggled to deal with long lines, flight disruptions and missing luggage.

Both sides of Pickering airport debate optimistic
Residents and local politicians -- on both sides of the Pickering airport debate -- are optimistic that a new federal study announced in April to “analyze current and future airport supply and demand” in southern Ontario will finally bring an end to the divisive decades-long saga of what to do with the land. They say it’s time Ottawa decided on the future of the 8,700 acres that sit in the epicentre of a region facing immense development pressure.

“There is one thing in common regardless of what side of the argument you are on ... everyone is tired of waiting and just wants to know one way or the other what’s going to happen to those lands,” said Pickering Coun. Mara Nagy.

Detractors of any proposed airport point to the boondoggle of Montreal’s Mirabel Airport as a reason not to have one in Pickering. Mirabel was built in 1975 to serve as that city’s main airport, but its location was seen as unfavourable for travellers, and passenger travel out of the airport ceased in 2004.

Those who support the Pickering airport say it’s needed to fill an anticipated demand for air travel and trade in a booming region like the GTHA. Pickering has built its city around the idea that an airport -- and the lucrative industry around it -- was a done deal.

Pickering airport reports come to differing conclusions
Over the years, reports have led to differing conclusions on what to do with the land, with most finding that eventually an airport would be necessary in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area.

In 2016, a study commissioned by the federal government found that a new airport was not expected to be required in southern Ontario prior to 2036. That study found that increases in capacity of existing airports in the region would be enough to handle projected traffic demand for the next 20 years.

But according to the lobby group Southern Ontario Airport Network, by 2030 regional air travel demand is likely to outpace the current capacity of the region’s airports, which include Toronto Pearson but also Billy Bishop, and smaller airports in Oshawa, Simcoe and Peterborough, as well as Kingston, Waterloo and Hamilton.

The two opposing positions came to a head last week at a heated Pickering council meeting where councillors approved Nagy’s motion to pull the city’s support for the airport in a 6-1 vote, saying there was no real business case for it. That vote reversed the pro-airport stance of the previous council.

But that same day, Durham Region’s chair, John Henry, and Pickering Mayor Kevin Ashe -- the only one who didn’t vote in support of Nagy’s motion, put out a news release lauding the new study and talking about future possibilities if the airport gets a nod.

“If the analysis identifies the need for an airport in Pickering, it will attract investment in aviation and aerospace; provide a hub for international businesses; strengthen Canada’s advanced manufacturing and aviation sectors; and create thousands of jobs, close to home in Durham,” according to the news release.

Population growth in the region sparks federal study
The federal government said the reason for the latest study is the rapid population growth expected in southern Ontario. Ottawa needs “to assess the requirement for additional airport capacity in the region” with a new study, said Nadine Ramadan, press secretary for federal Transportation Minister Omar Alghabra, in a statement.

“We’ve been clear that we have no intention of building an airport on the Pickering lands in the near term. This study could lead to the conclusion that an airport on the Lands is not needed in the long term either,” said Ramadan, who didn’t have a timeline for how long the study will take.

“We need to make a final decision on the future of the Pickering Lands, and this study will help us do that.”

Local groups say the government’s latest statement seems different than the many reports and studies that have come before. But how that message from Ottawa was received seems to differ depending on which side you’re on.

Pickering councillor says Ottawa’s statement ‘quite clear’
Nagy said in her view, the federal statement was “quite clear,” as it lays out that there is no airport in the short term and Ottawa is exploring uses for the land in the long term.

“Up until now, the wording and intent has always been a ‘when’ (an airport would be built) and not an ‘if.’” said Nagy. “And for the first time we are looking at an ‘if’ and not a ‘when.’”

But Mark Brooks, a commercial pilot and flight instructor and a member of Friends of Pickering Airport, which is part of the Buttonville Flying Club, said the study is the expected next step in seeing an airport finally come to fruition.

He said Ottawa’s move also comes just as Durham Region is on the cusp of seeing its growth plan approved for the next 30 years -- written with the expectation that an airport is coming.

“The airport is not dead,” said Brooks. “The opposite, in fact, is true.”

Pearson airport’s capacity woes boosts Pickering airport idea
Brooks said Pearson is facing capacity issues, and an airport dedicated to industrial, passenger and cargo capability would take the pressure off that airport -- and be a huge economic boon for Pickering.

“You are never going to see this assembly of land ever again,” he said, adding that it would be closer to the size of Ottawa airport than another Pearson.

Mary Delaney, chair of citizens group Land Over Landings, said that in addition to the new study, an announcement last month from the federal environmental minister about a study of development projects that could impact the Rouge Park will have to include a future airport.

“When you combine these two statements together ... it’s clear the government has no intention of building in the near future, and hints strongly that this capacity study will come back with confirmation that there is plenty of capacity already,” said Delaney. “We have been reading the official line, and between the lines, for decades and we have never seen a clearer line than this.”

Delaney, who joined the fight against the airport in the 1970s, said the main concern has always been around the protection of farmland and watersheds. But she said stopping the airport has become even more urgent in the face of a climate crisis.

Final decision on Pickering airport lies with Ottawa
The official position of both Durham and Pickering are only symbolic, as the final decision lies with the federal government. Yet, their positions could influence the consultation process that follows the study, said Jennifer O’Connell, Liberal MP for Pickering-Uxbridge.

“Our government has been clear that they would not build an airport unless there was community support ... which has now been lost ... or if there was a strong business case,” said O’Connell. “There hasn’t ever been a case made for capacity needs in the past 50 years to even get to a business case.”

O’Connell said she believes the more economically viable and environmentally friendly solution is to build out existing airports.

“I think the question of ‘if we do need capacity in the future, where can we go?’ this study will actually answer that. And I’m hopeful it’s going to say, ‘You don’t need Pickering.’”