Santa Monica Airport dying a slow death

This is not a new fight and Santa Monica does not have clear title to the land. Right now as the deed of grant reads if they want to get rid of the airport, they have to give the land back to the Federal Government. So far they have not been dealing with a cooperative FAA or federal government on the matter.
 
Do you actually think the FAA would exercise the 1948 agreement in taking back the land from the City? Doubt it.... They will work it all out by moving the decimal point around a bit and call it square. SMO is having aggonal respirations.
 
Unit74 said:
Do you actually think the FAA would exercise the 1948 agreement in taking back the land from the City? Doubt it.... They will work it all out by moving the decimal point around a bit and call it square. SMO is having aggonal respirations.
Click to expand...

There is more bribe...errr lobbying money available from people who want to maintain that convient as hell airport that allows them a 5 minute drive in their Ferarri between their mansion and their jet. That is why SMO didn't close 20 years ago. Like I said, this is not a new issue, and nothing has really changed.
 
Why isn't the FAA telling them that they'll take back the land if they close the airport?
 
The airport would be self supporting with the leases, etc...



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
dans2992 said:
Why isn't the FAA telling them that they'll take back the land if they close the airport?
Click to expand...

Firstly, there is nothing in perpetuity with the feds. Imagine if you were this close to title of lands to which the feds have claim. Let the auction begin. The reserve is higher than you can imagine.

Of course, it would help your cause greatly if you were in the position to, say make it difficult to other bidders. Say, if you were on the city council.
 
Last edited:
The AOPA rep makes a good point:

There are several community groups that want the land to be converted to recreational open space. That is unlikely to happen, noted Morrison, because the city needs the tax revenue that the businesses at the airport bring in.

“The city council’s action is a reckless de facto tax increase on the city’s residents,” he continued. “It will shutter small businesses, eliminate jobs and hurt families all because a vocal minority in the community do not appreciate the value the airport brings to the city and the region.”
Click to expand...

The city's stated intent to turn portions of the airport into "parkland" panders to the greenies and makes it sound as if their quest to close the airport is a noble cause. No one can argue with "parkland". :rolleyes2:
 
Well, it actually brings up a good point, local airports SHOULD provide local recreational opportunities. If you can incorporate the two, GA prospers. Mixed recreational/social opportunity is what GA needs to grow, and no better place to look than the local community for that growth.
 
Last edited:
3393RP said:
The AOPA rep makes a good point:







The city's stated intent to turn portions of the airport into "parkland" panders to the greenies and makes it sound as if their quest to close the airport is a noble cause. No one can argue with "parkland". :rolleyes2:
Click to expand...


They have beaches for that. Except for baseball/softball fields, parks in coastal California communities are a waste.
 
Henning said:
There is more bribe...errr lobbying money available from people who want to maintain that convient as hell airport that allows them a 5 minute drive in their Ferarri between their mansion and their jet. That is why SMO didn't close 20 years ago. Like I said, this is not a new issue, and nothing has really changed.
Click to expand...

Excellent point. The 1 percent haven't pulled enough strings yet
 
Zeldman said:
Because the FAA can't afford it?
Click to expand...

Wouldn't the land just go back to the Federal Gov and then they would do something with it... like a long term lease for some other development...

Seem to remember a major federal building in D.C. being taken over Donald Trump, he doesn't own it, but has a pretty airtight lease... that would secure his investment etc... for years to come..
 
Everskyward said:
Yup. Every time I go to Santa Monica the ramp is overflowing with high dollar airplanes.
Click to expand...

Probably less than many other airports though. SMO just isn't big enough for the super nice stuff.
 
I shouldn't so much say not big enough, as its a combo of many things. The approach into smo is not not great, ramp space is weak, the noise restrictions can be a show stopper, in addition to a runway less than 6,000.
 
Kritchlow said:
I shouldn't so much say not big enough, as its a combo of many things. The approach into smo is not not great, ramp space is weak, the noise restrictions can be a show stopper, in addition to a runway less than 6,000.
Click to expand...
But it's still well-used so that tells you something.
 
StinkBug said:
For the kinda people landing Jets at SMO the cost of rent is less important than the length of the drive from their kingdom.
Click to expand...

I thought that too..... the drive from Malibu to OXR/CMA is about the same...

We're seeing more and more limos and big jets..
 
Everskyward said:
But it's still well-used so that tells you something.
Click to expand...
Yup. Sure is.

On a side note, I think that's kind of a dangerous airport. The lack of delineation between the taxiway and runway is mind blowing. I've been there many times and I'm still tempted to just taxi onto the runway thinking it's the taxiway.
I wonder how often they have runway incursions??
 
Datadriver said:
Excellent point. The 1 percent haven't pulled enough strings yet
Click to expand...

Problem is, it's also one percenters who want the airport property to develop. They want the land for expensive buildings.

Powerful interests involved here.
 
Some of the smarter airport haters are starting to realize that the Santa Monica politicians talk about turning it into a green zone or park is as hollow as their brains. It's never gonna happen. Far too juicy for the politicians who are getting their pockets lined by salivating developers. Between the choice of having malls and condos built in its place, and constant traffic jams in already congested area, some are starting to se that aircraft are the lesser of two evils. Then again, there are enough NIMBY's that just want their property values to go up so they can cash out, for this to probably be a lost cause in the long run.

The whole thing is very sad and there will be no happy ending, I fear. And once it's gone, it's gone forever. Ain't no airports being built in this world.
 
Henning said:
Well, it actually brings up a good point, local airports SHOULD provide local recreational opportunities. If you can incorporate the two, GA prospers. Mixed recreational/social opportunity is what GA needs to grow, and no better place to look than the local community for that growth.
Click to expand...

Like golf courses off both ends of the runway.

There really is a reason golf courses are often found near final. People don't want to live there and there is a height restriction. Sounds like a perfect place for a golf course to me... and I bet Harrison Ford would agree.
 
One of the nicest airports in Germany was turned into a recreational area: Berlin-Tempelhof. The whole area looks still like at the time, the airport was closed - more or less because the airport was closed in 2008. Today people BBQ between runway and taxiway or inlineskate or run on the runway...:( The airport was directly in the heart of Berlin and you were in the city center in 10 minutes which was perfect for business travel.

Just before Tempelhof was closed they had huge campaigns saying things like 'no airport for the rich people' in different variations... :mad: Well, smaller aviation businesses were pushed to that the soon to be opened Berlin-Brandenburg International airport (remember, that was back in 2008) with high landing fees for GA - I found information that fees are at around 60 EUR per day / night for a Mooney + around 30 EUR for handling...:yikes: Berlin-Brandenburg International is still not opened yet and I think they talk about opening is planned for 2017... :mad2:
 
Skywalker said:
One of the nicest airports in Germany was turned into a recreational area: Berlin-Tempelhof. The whole area looks still like at the time, the airport was closed - more or less because the airport was closed in 2008. Today people BBQ between runway and taxiway or inlineskate or run on the runway...:( The airport was directly in the heart of Berlin and you were in the city center in 10 minutes which was perfect for business travel.

Just before Tempelhof was closed they had huge campaigns saying things lik :mad2:
Click to expand...


can you say Meigs.........:dunno::dunno:
 
ateamer said:
They have beaches for that. Except for baseball/softball fields, parks in coastal California communities are a waste.
Click to expand...

Well that's just it, there's plenty of land to spare to put in some base ball and soccer fields.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top