I was ok with the jets until I realized it would require lengthening the airstrip inside the harbour. This would further block water access as the restricted area would also be extended even further into the harbour affecting the ferry routes and other uses including recreation. I am ok with the airport, but I will always be opposed to infilling the harbour. Besides loud cars, the streetcars can make god awful screeching with their trucks going around rail corners. ORNGE air ambulances are bloody noisy too, but I’ll never complain about them.
Only sorta. They would have been able to keep the existing lengths of the no-boating buoys by building out the runway, but also adding emergency runway arrest systems. IE: longer runway but compressed overrun safety area. Yes, less water, but you can’t use it anyway.
The runway would have to be widened a bit and the buoys would have to be too, but that’s less of an impact on marine navigation.
(I count myself in that group, but I was mildly pro-expansion on the basis of having less reasons to go to Pearson.)
Someone should produce this report as it sounds fake.
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-porte...
Nobody cares about noise at the airport itself.
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
The Cseries was to be up to 1db louder than q400s, but people may find jet noise less annoying than a warbling turboprop. This study predated the actual flight tests as I understand it.
https://www.easa.europa.eu/downloads/20962/en
It looks like they were ~3db off the mark for lateral, but were quieter than the Q400 on approach.