5 'The Unexplored Optio0n -AQUAPORT -.Pot, One of the best solutions to the Toronto Airport problem han been put forward by a Toronto-based f irm of archi- tecte, Crang and Boake. Work- ing with an American group of airport engineers, Animann & Whitney, as well as a nuinber of other advisers, such as Dr. Alex Murray, Department of Environiental Studios at York University, they propose a fifteen year plan which starts by altering Malton to make it work until 1.985. The major problem at Malton is the handling of passengers, baggage and automobile traffic rather than runway congestion, and it is their plan to move the air terminal from the air- craft apron and put it downtown as part of the Metro centre plan. This downtown terminal would link with the airport by a rapid transit system. Inte- gration of the major transpor- tation systems such as go trains, buses, etc. will elim- inate the traffic congestion, parking and passenger problema at Malton. Air passen-irs will say their farewells t. friends downtown and thon board the rapid transit system for a quick ride to the airport. A proposod stolport floating two miles off Toronto Island would handle short haul and civilian aircraft further ex- tending the life of Malton. Thon when required, a larger aquaport floating 10 miles off Toronto and linked by a simple submarine tube rapid transit system to the downtown terminal would be built to replace Malton as an international airport when the neod arises. The benefits of this system bocome quickly obvious as the ontire noise zone is located over water and fot over rosi- dential aroas. This floating airport is as yet an untried concept, however, a $4JêOO0000 study by a group of American super corporations, Boing, Litton, etc., on the New York off-shore airport Point 'X' by Barry Conn Hughes Ifv been asked to contribute to this brochure, as a reaident of Pickering wht a magazine writer by trade. You know what magazine writers are like -- they know a little bit about a lot of things but fot much about anything in particular except, perhaps, writing. On an assignments however, we do usually get the timo and the opportunity to make a protty intensive study ôf' the subjhect at hand. We %féla P P % % a %A 04C%ý ý6 % a ýý ýAVI0A-T--K. M4f Crang and Boake proj oct that A ITO botween 10 and 20 floating FACI Ty aquaports will be functioning in thoe1U.S. within the next fiftoen years and possibly 50 around the world. 4 The aquaport when viewed on a map becomes obviously the hub of a wheel, the rim being the heavily populated areas &round the periphery of the lake. It is easily seen that with a littie more rapid transit or perhaps surface watercraft,all the populated areas are within easy reach of the new airport and a great deal of the land consuming freeways, which are nocessary for a land based airport can be forgotten. Another point that comes up at this time is that if large airports do becomo obsolete which seems probable as VTOL and STOL aircraft are perfected the aquaport can bo converted, dismantled or sunk without a trace. A joint Canada, U.S. venture similar to the St. Lawrence Soaway, putting the Aquaport centrally located could serve Toronto, Buffalo and Rochester and the cost to Canada would b. drastically reduced. At this point it appears, how- over, that this plan, for some roason is not even being lookod at by the government,let alane being considered. The gover- ment dlaims that they elimina- ted the ides three years ago, before Crang and Boako even put their proposal together. Crang and Boake are so con- vinced of the feasibility and the overail benefits of their concept that they are propared to finance, through private interens, a detailed engin- eering and ecological feasi- bility study if the government would make a commitment to ro- ceive the study. The Ontario Government news- paper supplement says Malton has "no space left for growthl". Where are the facts to support this statement? Won't the now terminal opening there iake a difference? Wouldnft a new downtown checkin terminal ease the load? Couldn't a new run- way be built, at the cost of removing a f 8W dozen homes there, already bodevilled by noise? Do we know how accurate the estimates are for the future growth of traffic at Malton? Some earlier growth estimates, apparently hav e been wrong. What would be the cost of expanding Malton comparod to starting from scratch in Pickering? We haven't been told. In fact, we haven't even been told if such a study has been made. Next, I search diligently, through the supplement for the facta that will answer the ob- vious question: "If this is a democracy, why didn't Govern- monts ask us, and our locally elected representatives, if we wanted an airport in Picker- ing?" The supplement says the resuit of that would have been wild spoculation in land. prices. Well, now, why didn't they freeze ail speculation in the final six areas under consid- eration for a couple of months during which we could be con-' sulted? There are--literally scores of bodies with the power- to expropriate private property in Ontario. Surely 4 see POINT X page 6 our Governments are powerful enough to freeze land specula- tion for a while in a goo>d cause. My next question concerned the supplement itself.Why did the Ontario Government- spend my tax dollars on 65,000 copies of a supplement promoting an airport manyof us in Pickering don't want? I' phoned Hal Tonnant, who heads the team of Ontario Government information officers touting the airport. Ho said ho didn't know how much the supplement cost (my, my, the fact famine is spreading> and anyway it was only intended to teli the people what the Government was doing.