4 ms·
IIRC some lake users (especially sailors and paddlers) had “real” objections to it on the basis that it would create less usable lake easily accessible from dow
by paulgb 4y ago
IIRC some lake users (especially sailors and paddlers) had “real” objections to it on the basis that it would create less usable lake easily accessible from downtown. Granted, it's a much smaller group than would benefit from the airport.
(I count myself in that group, but I was mildly pro-expansion on the basis of having less reasons to go to Pearson.)
- tekknik 4y agoSo we just have hearsay? Having worked around jets, and having been into performance cars, this sounds ridiculous. A jet engine clocks in at around 160dB. A typical performance exhaust system is less, 100-120dB. Someone should produce this report as it sounds fake.
- Scoundreller 4y agoPg. 16: https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/9936-porter-cs100-aircraft-noise-assessment.pdf https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/9936-porte... It was a study of impact on the nearest-by populated area (queens quay), so motor vehicles are a lot closer than the aircraft: https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/9936-porter-cs100-aircraft-noise-assessment.pdf https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/9936-porte... Nobody cares about noise at the airport itself.
- tekknik 4y agoWhat a silly idea for a study. Of course sounds closer are going to be louder. Where I live there’s an airport near an island with very expensive houses. They certainly care much more about the very loud jet engine than they do about a guy with a cut off exhaust and a v8