Looking back out the side window of the plane this morning after a right turn on departure, I catch a quick glimpse of that controversial parcel of land, its 144 acres coming alive with the aircraft that call City Centre home. In recent months the future of the Muni has once again been called into question. Many are of the opinion that the airport should be closed, and the land made available for development while some make claims that access to northern communities and the medevac flights that service them are of greater importance than whatever development could potentially sprout from the land currently being occupied by the field. Being a pilot based out of the city, my opinion on the matter is undoubtedly quite biased in favor of keeping the airport open. It would be easy, as a pilot, to argue that the airport should remain open for no other reason than for a love of aircraft and the airports that they serve. Unfortunately sentiments such as these cannot be assigned a price tag as easily as the value of the land the airport rests upon.
The City Centre Airport is deeply routed in the history of Canadian aviation, and aside from the practical reasons for its continued existence, its historical significance is, to put it lightly, without peer. The Edmonton City Centre Airport first came into being in 1926 after the Edmonton and Northern Alberta Aero Club received a $400 grant to transform an area of farmland into the air harbour it would be designated as later that year. In 1929, after the City Council approved spending 35'000 on the then three year old airfield, Jimmy Bell's air harbour, as it had been known, was renamed after former Edmonton mayor, Keith Alexander Blatchford, and became Canada's first licensed airfield. Under it's new title, Blatchford Field saw many of western Canada's early aviation pioneers lift off of its sod runways and turn northbound for the uncharted territory which lie in wait. Among them, Wop May, whose aviation related endeavours included instructing, a tour as part of the RAF during WWI, and in 1928 amid much media attention, completion of an emergency flight to Fort Vermilion to deliver inoculations to the town, after a man who had fallen ill was discovered to have diphtheria. Over the course of the next 35 years, the airport would become a cornerstone of commercial and military aviation, not only in the Edmonton region, but for North America as a whole. In 1939, Blatchford field became the Royal Canadian Air Force flight training centre, while 4 years later the North American record was set when 860 aircraft passed through the the #2 Air Observer School, as the field had then come to be known.
As the 1950's ushered in an era of larger aircraft which would require longer runways, the search began for a site for a new field able to accommodate the new generation of aircraft which would serve the Edmonton region in the decades to come. In 1963, The Edmonton International Airport was completed, and with that completion, the City Centre airport was slated to close. Fortunately, political opposition saved the field, and over the course of the next 45 years, the airport would change names three times, and operate under several political mandates. In a 1995 referendum, 77 percent of Edmonton citizens voted in favor of consolidating scheduled air traffic to the International Airport, while the City Centre Airport would be kept open to serve general aviation and corporate traffic. By 1996, the consolidation process had been completed, and the City Airport settled into the role it would play until the present time. Under the results of this 1995 referendum, the City of Edmonton entered into a lease with Edmonton Airports on March 25, 1996 to have EA manage the City Centre Airport for a period of 56 years to 2052. In 2008, the City Airport once again fell under political scrutiny as the City Council and Executive Committee requested and heard several reports which "outlined the challenges and opportunities associated with the ECCA (Edmonton City Centre Airport) lands". The review of the Airport looked at the issue through various assessments ranging from economic and land impact, to historical impact. The results from these assessments are scheduled to be heard by the Executive Committee this June.
Those in favor of closing the City airport cite reasons that primarily centre around further development of the land around the airport. Not only would the land the airport currently occupies be available, but areas which are under a height restriction due to their proximity to approach paths could potentially see upward growth. NAIT, an airport neighbour to the east is reported to be currently operating at maximum capacity at its City Centre location, and could develop westward if the airport were to close. However, NAIT has obtained a 61 hectare site that could see development of a south campus south east of the Ellerslie/Hwy 2 Intersection. Perhaps due to a lack of funding, or a lack of students to fill such a facility, NAIT has yet to put forth plans to develop this south site. In a report released by the City in May 2008, four examples were given of projects that experienced constraints due to their proximity to approach paths, including expansion at the Royal Alexandra Hospital, The AMA building, and Aurora Development projects north of 105 Ave and west of 101 St. In each of these cases it was not a matter of projects that were proposed but were not permitted to pass due to approach path restrictions, but rather had to be changed to meet the demands of the area which they occupied. One would be hard pressed to find a building in the Edmonton area, or any urban area for that matter, that has not been affected in some way by zoning restrictions, just as the four examples given in the City report were.
Ultimately, many of the above arguments can and will be argued as valid reasons both for closing and keeping the airport open. Whichever way the decision finally does go, it will likely remain, until it's end, a battle of those who stand to gain, versus those who stand to lose. It is the unfortunate nature of decisions such as these, as with most decisions, that the height of the prospective gains, and depths of the losses will only be realised after that decision has been made.
Well said, Josh. Even if the airport is closed, the development of the land will likely fail. Even if they do succeed in developing it, it will be something lame like more condos and strip malls in this city. That's the last thing we need.
ReplyDelete--Adam