FROM THE BOSPHORUS: STRAIGHT
Transport Minister Binali Yıldırım may have justifiable reasons for his apparently final decision to begin construction of a third Istanbul airport on the European side, about 60 kilometers from the existing Atatürk Airport. When we learn these reasons, we too may be convinced.
At the moment, this decision we reported Tuesday strikes us as poorly thought out, inadequately discussed before the public and premature. Perish the thought that this decision might have as much to do with $5 billion in construction contracts as it does with air passenger congestion. Such a thought has never crossed our minds. So let’s just discuss the more technical merits of the issue.
One thing is certain. This is that the capacity of Istanbul’s existing two airports is nearing its limits. Just eight years ago, domestic passengers transiting through Istanbul were fewer than 9 million. Last year, they numbered more than 41 million. Add in international traffic. Tally the projected growth in both categories which is more than 10 percent annually for the foreseeable future. Yes, we have a problem.
We certainly support the growth of a healthy aviation sector. More international visitors are good for many reasons, not just economic ones. We share in the pride of many at the dramatic growth and success of our national carrier, Turkish Airlines.
But is this really intelligent transport infrastructure planning?
It’s worth pondering the decision of British authorities earlier this year to cancel a planned third runway at the world’s busiest air traffic hub, Heathrow. They are doing so in favor of a new high-speed rail link between London and Scotland.
The lack of room to expand the capacity of Atatürk Airport can certainly be blamed on bad planning. But there’s not much that can realistically be done now about the skyscrapers, the residences or the water treatment plant that have been allowed to block the logical growth path of that facility. Just look at GoogleEarth. But a gaze at the same web-based service clearly illustrates this is not the case with Sabiha Gökçen. What is lacking is some means to get to that airport other than the frequently-crowded expressway. $5 billion would do a lot of resolve that.
While at GoogleEarth, take at look at the under-used Çorlu-Tekirdağ airport. Just 30 kilometers distant from the proposed new site in Silivri, it too could be made easily serviceable with an intelligent rail link.
If feasible, either of these alternatives would make far more sense that the sprawl-inducing, farmland-consuming, speculation-generating choice of Silivri. Perhaps they are not feasible. But Minister Yıldırım has not methodically and thoughtfully asked his ministry to ask these questions.
We just did. We think the traveling public, the citizens of the mega-city of Istanbul and all the taxpayers of Turkey deserve a well-reasoned answer.