Gadling

With all do respect to the gentlemen that published this, fighting to retain this space as an airfield is, perhaps, the most forward thinking approach possible. Let's take a quick trip around the world to review the state of other city airports.

CHICAGO'S MIDWAY AIRPORT - In many respects, this airport shares a similar history with Tempelhof. It was, at one point, the busiest airport in North America. Tempelhof was, for a time, also the busiest airport in Europe. It is located in a densely populated area of Chicago and has undergone many financing hurdles over the years. Ultimately, the forward thinking city of Chicago renovated this airport, which is signicantly smaller than Tempelhof, and re-established it as a domestic hub for low cost carriers. It handles aircraft as large as Boeing 757's on runways that are SMALLER THAN TEMPELHOF's. This airport serves a vital need to an income segment that cannot be serviced by the much larger O'hare International Airport as fees and taxes there are prohibitvely expensive for many people. Chicago has found ways to finance Midway by leasing it to private funds. The airport continues to be one of the busiest airports in the country. All of this in a city that has roughly 1,000,000 fewer inhabitants than Berlin and a network of 3 airports to service its population.

WASHINGTON DC'S RAEGAN NATIONAL AIRPORT - Washington DC, like Berlin, is a capital city and also has 3 airports that support its traveling population. Washington is one of the most secure cities in the world and has bustling city airport less than 15 miles from the Capital and the White House. This airport is also SMALLERTHAN TEMPELHOF and only has SHORTER RUNWAYS. Yet, DCA has a full daily schedule and services mid-sized aircraft that fly across the entire nation despite having two other airports to compete with. Much like the previous example, the federal government granted funding to expand and renovate DCA rather than attempt to shut it down. This city had the forethought to see a potential future infrastructure need and the growth to come. There actions have been rewarded with a city that has experienced continuous population and industry growth over the last ten years. It is also worth noting that Washington is a city of LESS THAN ONE MILLION PEOPLE and, in that respect, is significantly smaller than Berlin. Here is a city with two large, international airports that still very much relies on its inner city airport for economic vitality. Strange then that Berlin feels that closing Tempelhof is a sound strategy for viability. What Berlin really is doing is trying to cut costs by eliminating future resources for short term gain.

NEW YORK CITY'S LAGUARDIA AIRPORT (LGA) - This airport is also smaller than Tempelhof and boasts runways that are either smaller or of roughly the same size as Tempelhof's. Do I even need to go into it a third time? New York is huge and also has three airports all of which operate at close to full capacity. Laguardia has been and continues to be renovated. It is clear that the government of New York recognizes the economic vehicle that this airport serves for the city of New York. It should be blatently obvious how incompetent the government of Berlin is.

I could continue with Sao Paolo, London, Bangkok, etc. But, I think you get the idea.

Again, this catastrophy has nothing to do with looking towards the future. This is a tragic example of fiscal responsibility and a scramble for short term fixes at the expense of jobs and viable infrastructure.

WHY THIS MATTERS AND WHY IT IS A BLUNDER:

BUDGET CONSTRAINTS - Berlin has undergone a massive facelift operation that has left the city in a massive hole. This is on top of what any city with a balanced budget would identify as fiscal irresponsibility. Tempelhof is the unfortunate victim of a need to cut costs quickly and completely dismisses the reality of the underutilized ASSET that the property, as an airport, serves. Klaus Wowereit and the CDU have done nothing to make Berlin financially sound. They have done little to promote job growth and closing a massive complex that employs hundreds of people only futher exacerbates the situation. Now what do you have? A shuttered massive complex that costs TWICE AS MUCH to maintain and secure now than it did when it was up and running.

ECONOMIC VIABILITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE - If you subscribe to a socialist model and government intervention to create jobs and growth, then there is no excuse for you not speaking out against the closure of this airport. As is being demostrated in the United States right now, in times of economic downturn, of which Berlin has been a party for decades now, government sponsored construction and development programs are vital to quality of life in the present and future. Tempelhof was a JOB CENTER. No revitalized airport has ever served as anything other than a source of jobs not only for the companies involved in its operation but also the business that a convenient inner city airport can bring in. I fly constantly and I know that I find it a lot more convenient to fly into a city where I'm a 10 minutes train ride from downtown than city's that require buses and $40 cabs and long train rides. Sure. You can say that Tempelhof was dead and barely employed anyway. But, Tempelhof also hasn't been touched since it was opened up again for commercial use. Putting up a new departure/arrival board is not what I call modernizing an airport. Ofcourse it looks half empty if no investment is put into making it a relevent 21st century hub.

SAFETY - Let's not even go there. Air travel is incredibly safe these days and almost no one living any where near the airport complained about its noise or the risk of accident. This is a political issue that has no basis in reality.

HISTORICAL AND GRANDIOSE - Come on, people. This is the last remnant of what birthed modern day commercial aviation. Sure. You can say that the casual terminal and the easy access to aircraft is impratical. But, in a very real sense, it was anything but impracitcal. This is precisely the kind of small adjustment to the pain of modern day travel that companies look for. They use these niche aspects of travel to diversify. Like it or not, that old beast of an airport had real modern day appeal. Any marketing expert or airline insider would support this claim.

BETTER LAND USE? - So, I have herd proposals from a Hollywood-like study set to the new Central Park of Europe. When did Berlin decide that it wanted to become Hamburg, LA or New York City. I thought Berlin wanted to be Berlin? One of the greenest cities in the world hardly needs another huge park. Berlin needs jobs. Berlin needs viable assets that create regular work and funnel people into the city. A park is going to do that? Movie sets are going to do that when you already have a well established Entertainment industry in Hamburg? Holding conferences on the property or the occassional concert is really going to re-vitalize Berlin? The last time that I checked, Berlin has countless spaces in the city that could use the redevelopment a lot more than Tempelhof. This is a political pipe dream with no real objective to benefit the people of Berlin.

REFERENDUM - Binding or not, the referendum was misrepresentative to begin with. I am not going to jump into conspiracy theories about votes counted. Although, I think we all know that a bit of voter fraud happens regardless of place or time. Even in the United States, the supposed bastion or Democracy and fair play, observers are stationed at most polling places to ensure that voters are not turned away or intimidated and that tallying is done properly. This referendum required a majority of Berlin's population to vote on this inorder for it to be valid. First of all, let us keep this in perspective. Whether the people of Berlin truly wanted to keep this airport or not, most people in any city do not vote for their city officials let alone an old airport in the middle of town. Requiring a majority is an absurd concept. This rings especially true when you consider the fact that, of those who did cast a vote, the majority were in favor of keeping the airport. Correct me if I am wrong but when did we ever scrap an election simply because the majority of constituents did not come out to vote? Are we not going to count this years national elections in Germany if we do not convince atleast 60% of Germans to come out and vote? That is absolutely rediculous. Anyone who claims that Berlin voted against preserving this airport is presenting a baseless claim. Furthermore, it should be noted that a MAJORITY of residence in west Berlin (ie. Neukoelln, Tempelhof, etc.) voted to keep Tempelhof Airport open.

Closing a potentially viable infrastructure assets in a large, world city is NOT forwarding thinking. It is the road kill of a runaway city administration looking for ways to cut costs rather than improve revenue streams for long term budget health. But, atleast we can thank the CDU and Wowereit for a few Berlin success stories. We have the new Potsdamer Platz Sony Center and a giant hole where a palace is supposedly to be built. Hmmm…..yes. I feel very confident in this admiinstration. VOTE OUT THE CDU AND KLAUS WOWEREIT IN 2009. BERLIN NEEDS JOBS, BERLIN NEEDS GROWTH, BERLIN NEEDS PEOPLE THINK ABOUT THE FUTURE OF A CITY MEANT TO BE A STRONG PRESENCE ON THE WORLD STAGE.

Reply