[Peetwo]

A word of advice Minister; Mandarins; and their Minions - 

Via AMROBA Newsletter: 




...L&Ks KC 

Addendum to K's post (above): 

Extract from AMROBA's latest newsletter:

Volume 18 Issue 6 (June 2021).pdf Size: 297.08 KB  Downloads: 1

1. Airports Act Review – Minister’s responsibility

When government made the decision to privatise aerodromes, to shift the cost of running aerodromes from government to private operators, nobody understood the effect it would have on aviation in Australia. How many of these leased aerodromes will exist in 100 years is now debateable as civil aviation is being restricted in favour of non-aviation businesses operating on these airports.

Unlike USA legislation, the operators (Property Developers) can freely remove aviation businesses and replace with non-aviation businesses simply by developing non-aviation commercial development within a comprehensive master plan submitted to the Minister for approval.

California has a bigger aviation community than Australia and it has professional airport legislative requirement specifying airport land use. The new leaders, Minister and Secretary, should read and model Australia’s aerodrome land use on California’s State Aeronautics Act and adapt their “Airport Land Use Planning Handbook” to properly control aerodrome development and compatible planning in the vicinity of each existing and new public use aerodrome. The Handbook states:

“Aviation is a vital link in the local, national, and global transportation system. Air cargo, consisting mainly of high-value, time-sensitive documents and goods, plays a significant role in the vitality of the state’s economy. In today’s international and technology-oriented economy, businesses use the speed and reliability of air service to achieve operating efficiency. California’s airports are critical for providing services such as business travel, tourism, emergency response, fire suppression, and law enforcement. Airports, airlines, and businesses that support airports provide direct and indirect jobs and income throughout the State. The vital role that airports play in economic development and as a means of passenger and cargo transportation cannot be understated.

Incompatible development near an airport can lead to a politically contentious relationship between an airport and the communities around it, resulting in complaints and demands for restrictions on airport operations, ultimately threatening the airport’s ability to operate efficiently and serve its function in the local economy.”

The last sentence says it all.

Current Australian, Minister-approved, aerodrome master development plans will lead to a “political contentious relationship between the aerodrome and the communities around it ultimately threatening the aerodrome’s ability to operate efficiently and serve its function”

In Australia, government development policy for our Metro airports is the exact opposite to California’s airport land use requirements.

The desired outcome or result of airport land use compatibility planning is to “minimize the public’s exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards” while providing for the “orderly expansion of airports”

“3.4.2 General Aviation Airports

The characteristics of general aviation airports and their environs vary widely. They range from very busy “reliever” airports in metropolitan areas to minimally used facilities in rural locations. The extent of compatibility issues and the availability of data from which to create an ALUCP also run the full gamut.

For an average general aviation airport, noise, safety, airspace protection, and overflight compatibility concerns are all important issues to be addressed in ALUCPs. Moreover, because many general aviation airports are located on the fringes of urban areas, both the threat of new incompatible development and the opportunity for ALUCs to help preserve compatible land uses are great. Available activity level, noise impact, and other data needed for compatibility planning is not normally as extensive as for air carrier airports. Essential information often must be gathered from a variety of sources ranging from airport master plans to interviews with airport staff and others familiar with operation of the airport. Obtaining data on the locations of principal flight routes can be particularly difficult, yet of key importance at moderately busy facilities. Again, planning for the distant future is highly important.”

Long Term Policy

The simple question to government (Minister & Secretary) is: Why do you allow aerodrome master development plans that will be negative to aviation expansion?

While having an airport environs totally devoid of development may be ideal from a land use compatibility perspective, it seldom is a realistic objective. For one, existing development already makes such sterility impossible to achieve at most airports. Moreover, even in sparsely populated areas, trade-offs generally must be made between an ideal degree of land use compatibility and the community needs for land use development.

This is accepted by the aviation industry but the current trade-off is destroying the aviation industry future growth by enabling non-aviation growth that is incompatible with aviation businesses today and into the future.

Urgent Action.

The Secretary must develop a strategy for Minister approval for achieving noise compatibility in the vicinity of an airport by preventing or limiting development of land uses that are particularly sensitive to noise. Common land use strategies are ones that either involve few people (especially people engaged in noise-sensitive activities) or generate significant noise levels themselves (such as other transportation facilities or some industrial uses).

The Airport Act does not contain these standards and is deficient when compared with the California Handbook. No wonder aviation can grow in a more highly populated nation that is very environmentally strong.

Without doubt, the overseeing bodies, pricing controls and monopoly powers are supposedly oversighted by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC). But who provides the oversight of development of these airports?

The Productivity Commission raised an issue with the current monitoring arrangements that have been described as being an example of ‘light-handed’ regulation, as compared with traditional ‘heavy-handed’ regulation.

Under this “light-handed” approach, smart property developer airport operators managing these aerodromes have utilised loop holes to implement their master plans.

Hmm...remember this?

Coming to an airport near you...

MTF...P2