Before the last federal election, members of the former Liberal cabinet unexpectedly announced plans to cancel Pickering Airport. This move went against studies sponsored by Transport Canada and came amid growing calls for new aviation infrastructure to foster economic growth. If not in Pickering—on land already zoned for an airport—where will the necessary aviation facilities be built?
The attempt to halt the development of Pickering Airport is surprising, especially as there is increasing need for an additional airport and industrial land in the region. Private investors are willing to finance the project, which may lead to 60,000 new jobs and add $12 billion to the economy every year. Many of these positions would be in advanced manufacturing attracted by the airport within a new industrial park connected to the airport. For context, all of Ontario’s ring of fire mining initiatives are projected to generate about 70,000 jobs across the entire province.
Following the election, when parliament was reconvened, no order in council was issued and no motion was introduced in parliament. The previously announced cancellation of Pickering Airport may have been campaign rhetoric. It is yet to be determined whether an alternative solution or location for the airport has been identified as being more beneficial.
Markham airport, privately owned and established in 1965 by two former Polish Airforce pilots, has been considered as an alternative to Pickering. It has had various managers over the years, most recently Allan Rubin. I discussed the future of the airport with Al many times when I worked at the airport as a flight instructor for Canadian Flyers International College. In particular, why he turned away proposals from private investors, including the college, who wanted to construct hangars and other permanent buildings at the airport.
Al first told me how Markham Airport’s fate became linked to Pickering Airport. In 1972, the Canadian federal government annexed half of Markham Airport’s land for the planned Pickering Airport, halting private investment and requiring its closure once Pickering opened. When Pickering’s development was delayed, the government leased the land back to Markham Airport.
After part of the Pickering airport property was transferred to form Rouge National Urban Park (RNUP) in 2015, a distinct area lined up with the Markham Airport runway was set aside. This land is still managed by Transport Canada and leased to Markham Airport. There’s a possibility that this lease could be expanded and merged with nearby private holdings, making the airport comparable in size to New York’s Teterboro Airport. Even greater space is available, considering that most RNUP lands west of the Havelock rail line are leased to private entities and could be transferred to the airport.
The Pickering Airport Site Zoning Regulations (PASZR) is a federal law that limits both airspace use and land development near the area set aside for Pickering Airport. Because it’s so close to Pickering, these regulations have affected how Markham airport can grow. If the PASZR were cancelled, how quickly could Markham airport expand, and what might its future development entail? Is it possible for this small airport to increase its capacity enough to make up for losing Pickering Airport? Could Markham airport spur an industrial park east of the rail line and open global travel and trade for Durham and York regions?
Markham Airport and the surrounding land is currently owned by the Thomson Corporation. The Thomson family has considerable real estate holdings and wealth, estimated to be around $70 billion.
David Thomson, the right Honourable Lord Thomson of Fleet Street, founded the real-estate development company, Osmington Capital Partners. He is the chairman of Thomson Reuters and the Globe and Mail newspaper.
David has shown enthusiasm for aviation and collecting aircraft with a connection to the Canadian Air, Land and Sea Museum at Markham airport. The Thomsons have a strong reputation both as business leaders and as generous patrons of the arts. With the PASZR no longer in place and Markham airport already properly zoned, an expansion could be completed quickly.
Al sometimes shared ideas for expanding Markham airport if Pickering airport was cancelled. At his request, I informed the general aviation community about Markham’s potential. One of the plans featured a 4500 ft runway with private hangars for training, general aviation, cargo, and small jets. I found Al’s proposed facility interesting because it fit onto the airports existing footprint. It could serve general aviation, flight training, light jets, air ambulances, and, most notably, “just-in-time” cargo operations. This represents a vital connection for the region’s economic growth—aviation infrastructure that can support emerging regional cargo drones. However, the facility would not be equipped to handle larger jet traffic, hub operations for long-haul domestic and international flights, or heavy lift cargo activities.
Sadly, Al passed away during the Covid epidemic in 2020.
The principal difference between Markham and Pickering airports lies in their respective physical dimensions. Markham airport does not possess adequate land to accommodate a substantial industrial park or the multiple long runways necessary for supporting international flights to destinations such as Europe and Asia. Furthermore, expansion at Markham airport is complicated by its proximity to the communities of Markham and Stouffville, which would experience greater exposure to noise than with the originally planned Pickering Airport. Establishing a Markham Airport Site Zoning Regulation (MASZR) could be recommended to facilitate integration with the development strategies of these adjacent communities.
By the 2030s, Markham Airport may undergo expansion driven by private investment aimed at capitalizing on emerging aviation technologies. This anticipated growth includes accommodating projected demand for large air cargo drones and other regional aviation opportunities. In my assessment, an expanded Markham Airport could potentially handle at least 10% of the forecasted traffic projected for Pickering Airport.
Markham Airport could expand if Pickering Airport is cancelled, as it faces less opposition from current stakeholders. Groups like Air Canada and the Greater Toronto Airport Authority bond holders have historically resisted new aviation projects due to competitive and profit concerns, but Markham’s smaller size likely avoids these issues.
The choice to discontinue the Pickering Airport project in favor of advancing the development of Markham Airport may provide political advantages for the present government. This approach avoids requiring federal approval for new aviation infrastructure that has faced opposition in the past.
Al Rubins dream of expanding Markham Airport may soon be cleared for takeoff if Pickering Airport is cancelled. Â Is his dream an effective strategy for achieving economic prosperity? Was the old guy yelling at “the government” to get out of the way not crazy after all?
References
Pickering Lands-Transport Canada
Billionaire owners mum on Markham Airport
Derelict military aircraft are sitting in a field just outside Toronto
Airport expansion OK’d in official plans, operator insists
Allan Aubrey Rubin – Steeles Memorial Chapel
Related Posts:
Why do Advanced Industries Locate Near Airports? – Friends of Pickering Airport
What is Pickering Airport’s Employment Zone? – Friends of Pickering Airport
Development plan with new Airport Wins vote 20 to 6 at Durham Region – Friends of Pickering Airport
Can Canada overcome a provincial mindset to build new airports? – Friends of Pickering Airport
Southern Ontario Airport Capacity Study has Vanished! – Friends of Pickering Airport
The Real History of Pickering Airport – Friends of Pickering Airport
Overcoming the Scarcity for Profit Corporate mindset – Friends of Pickering Airport