What to do with the smaller grass runway 09-27 in need of repair at the Muskoka Airport has been a contentious issue—with some of the smaller recreational aircraft pilots adamantly opposing its closure, citing safety concerns, and putting into question the board as well as airport staff for recommending that the runway be closed.
The issue, coupled with the vision of commercially developing the airport lands to generate more income and employment, as stated in the revised Muskoka Airport Master Plan passed by District council on Jan 29, 2021, has been a heated one.
Up until 2020, the airport had two runways—its main runway 18-36 for larger aircraft which spans about 6,000 feet, and the smaller grass runway 09-27 which spans about 2,200 feet. The latter has been the topic of much debate and was ‘temporarily’ closed in 2000 pending approval from the federal aviation agency to continue operating despite it not being in compliance with federal aviation and safety standards.
The request was denied and whether to build a new grass runway or rehabilitate 09-27, which some pilots have argued is situated in the best location due to prevailing winds in case they’re unable to land on runway 18-36, has been an ongoing debate. The fact that, according to staff, Transport Canada does not require the airport to have an alternate crosswind runway like 09-27, has further exacerbated the issue with some councillors arguing that catering to a small group of users seemed to be hijacking the airport’s future prosperity and the potential for job creation, particularly as some of the airport lands are undevelopable due to environmental constraints.
Council has also heard that runway 18-36 accounts for more than 98 per cent of aircraft movements.
“I can say as the CEO for the airport, I’ve been here for three years dealing with this,” Len O’Connor told District councillors at their March 21 meeting. “We’re just hoping that council can actually make a decision on this today. It’s been going on not just for the last three years but for many years prior to my arrival in Muskoka and we would like to move forward with our plan, with the Airport Master Plan that’s been approved by council to grow and develop this airport in Muskoka.”
With the help of information provided by consultants Tetra Tech, the board, and District staff, in a recorded vote, council finally arrived at a majority consensus and agreed to close runway 09-27 and replace it with a new grass runway, 12-30, at an estimated cost of one million dollars (to be funded from the airport’s capital reserve) and focus on commercial land development in the southeast and southwest areas of the airport.
Don’t miss out on Doppler!
Sign up here to receive our email digest with links to our most recent stories.
Local news in your inbox so you don’t miss anything!
Click here to support local news
Over a period of many years massive amounts of money have been spent trying to close runway 09-27.
The airport has never been given a chance -especially since the District received it as a gift from the feds.
That money and wise management would have been a boon for the Airport and our future economy had it been spent on runway 09-27.
The misinformation is horrendous…all paid for by taxpayer dollars. Not at all cheap…not cheap in money alone.
The CEO, Board of Airport Governors and “consultants” are in reality mere salesmen paid with taxpayer dollars to present a particular and very partial point of view.. Runway 09-27 is not replaceable. Runway 12-30 does not suit airport topography …and is dangerous by location and direction.
Funny how people can be lead astray…..just by credentialism…and hammering them with a false narrative. Most people have no idea whatsoever as to what is going on. Council seems to lack vision….not surprisingly because most know nothing whatsoever about aviation and airports..
This is a sickening farce with outsiders being brought in to promote an antisocial plan. Councilors (most of them) disregard their own aviation citizens…preferring instead to believe outsiders..
Close that runway 09-27 and Muskoka will not recover from what will be the biggest mistake in its entire history. Shame on most of our District Councilors..
We want 09-27 for larger aircraft (jets etc.). It serves the false narrative to portray pilots and long existing airport businesses as a bunch of self-serving, idiots. That portrayal is disgraceful and incorrect.
My understanding is Porter Airlines came to Muskoka only because it was -BOTH DIRECLY AND INDIRECTLY-subsidized using taxpayers’ dollars. They did not come here to lose money. I understand the contract was to last until just before the next municipal election. Thus politicians might look really good for the election. Things are not always what they appear to be.
Runway 12-30 is a ploy to sooth the consciences of Councilors as they succumb to misinformation
.
Global warming (climate change) constitute HELL coming our way.. The winds will blow from the west as is normal with prevailing winds here. This is one of the very worst places in the world for attempting to forecast weather, and the terrible storms will still tend to come to us from Georgian Bay. Canada’s Chief Climatologist advised against closing runway 09-27. He was -and is-absolutely correct.
Most people are in for a very big surprise and it will not be pleasant.
Most politicians do not want to hear this and there is no pleasure gained in telling them they are absolutely wrong in supporting the closure of the east-west runway 09-27.
In my opinion (after a lifetime involved with aviation) the Muskoka Airport Master Plan 2020 comments concerning runway 09-27 are not worth a single hoot in aa empty rain barrel on a cold winter’s night.
How many politicians have the courage and honesty to admit they are making errors? I believe they hired their own “experts” and paid them to tell councilors what to do, – while forgetting those consultants were hired to justify the means…any means…. that gets key officials the only narrative they want to hear.
Airports and politicians do not belong together!
“Sheer stupidity” is an understatement.
“The sheer stupidity of the District’s decision to permanently close runway 09/27 despite consistent, overwhelming opposition from many qualified and credible sources is shocking.”
“Pilots, aviation experts respond to closure of Muskoka Airport’s grass runway”
Note that the entire range of pilots from small aircraft to airliners are objecting to the District’s decision.
Also objecting are those that are not pilots but very familiar with airports and aviation.
Even the latest consultant “said it is possible to make the hangar smaller and move it to the west side of the airport to preserve 09-27 — but this is not the airport’s desire.”
Why is the District ignoring pilots and the latest consultant and going with those that have presented false information?
Council has been misled by the current airport management to make a very serious mistake and eliminate the bright future and usability of the airport and drastically reduce safety for all aircraft.
“Muskoka Airport decision mind-boggling, says reader”
“The sheer stupidity of the District’s decision to permanently close runway 09/27 despite consistent, overwhelming opposition from many qualified and credible sources is shocking.”
District Council has been misled into making a serious mistake for all of Muskoka.
It is documented that Transport Canada, the Transportation Safety Board, Cessna (aircraft manufacturer) and local pilots have all thoroughly debunked the false information presented to council from the current airport management.
Local pilots have, very patiently, provided council with correct, documented information.
3 accidents have occurred so far as a result of closing the grass runway and the grass area beside the paved runway pilots also use.
Clearly the closures were a mistake that needs to be corrected. The next accident could involve loss of life.
Details of the 3 accidents from the pilots involved were presented to councillors.
The facts conflict with the accident descriptions from airport management presented to councillors.
The facts also totally conflict with details from airport management presented to councillors regarding an earlier fatal accident.
The grass runway was called a “key asset” that should be maintained by an earlier consultant. An earlier Council agreed and voted to protect it. Not eliminate it.
Council has been misled by the current airport managment to make a very serious mistake and eliminate the bright future and usability of the airport and drastically reduce safety for all aircraft.
The alternate million dollar grass runway is the wrong direction, shorter and narrower and cannot be greatly extended to become the main runway at the airport in the future.
It is vastly inferior to the existing grass runway by all measures.
Anyone with aviation competence knows the main runway at an airport should be aligned with the wind.
The map provided being too small to read in any meaningful way, I can only assume that a runway oriented at 12-30 must better fit the topography of the airport and thus be cheaper to build than to extend the 09-27 runway. From a pilot/wind perspective the 09-27 would most likely be preferred but 12-30 would be a not bad second choice from this perspective.
A significant airport with only one runway is not very viable as the wind is no respecter of political viewpoints and must be accommodated to maintain viable usage in more wind conditions and thus increase overall usage.
As Garth Elliot points out in his letter to the Forester of this week the benefits of an airport are not limited to “on airport” properties but extend to a considerable area surrounding it. As an example, although Porter’s service is at present not much of a financial driver, it is a start and as Ontario grows it may be that some day we shall be able to take flights to further parts of Canada and internationally to places like the Caribbean and most of the USA rather than Porter’s limit of Toronto. If this came to be then air travel would be easier for a lot of people as it would not be necessary to brave the congestion and cost of Pearson airport. Also, all industries in the area would benefit from faster freight service by air direct from Muskoka. For all these reasons it is important to maintain the ability to construct one of the two secondary runways and then to actually construct it as soon as we can afford it. If we build infrastructure that blocks the construction of a good cross wind runway then I fear Muskoka airport will enter a gradual decline into irrelevance.
Trying to justify the airport based merely on the costs/benefits of the immediate airport tenants is an inaccurate and short sighted approach. We should remember that airports are like many things in the industrialized world and need to reach a sort of “critical mass” before they really start to produce visible results.
This airport appears to be a money pit for the enjoyment and benefit to very few tax payers.