|
AIRPORT ISSUES |
|
AIRCRAFT NEED SEPARATION FROM HOMES
Kim Flesser questions whether the Brisbane airport's planned new parallel runway is in the right location...and why the airport corporation is a law unto itself.
Anyone who’s been watching the recent air-crash investigation programs knows only too well that aircraft can fall out of the sky and hit the ground hard.
Modern passenger jets are extremely safe, but never-the-less, if airports can be designed to reduce the proximity of aircraft to residential homes, surely it’s prudent to do so.
Sydney’s busy international airport has no problems operating its main parallel runways with a separation distance of 1,076 metres. The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) recommended standard for safe separation of simultaneous arrival and departure runways is 1,525 metres. The Brisbane Airport Corporation (BAC) argues that building their new runway with 2,000 metres separation provides even safer aircraft operations.
Well try telling that to the residents of Banyo, Nudgee Beach, Northgate and Nundah! The closest homes from the new runway will be just 1,500m away...not the 6.4km being claimed by the BAC.
Irrespective of any issues regarding safety, the residents in these areas will clearly suffer increased noise from jet aircraft accelerating during lift-off and tyres screeching during landings.
Try telling the residents of Hendra, Doomben, Hamilton and Ascot, that the new flight paths over their homes won’t decrease safety levels and increase overhead jet aircraft noise.
For some people, an even greater worry will be how much property values will drop with the new runway and flight paths. In a really short period of time, the value of some mortgages could exceed the value of the property.
When the Federal Government sold off the Brisbane Airport in 1997, the package contained a massive 2,700ha of land. The BAC has found that property development and non-aviation activities are much more profitable than running airports. Their growing commercial activities such as warehousing, discount shopping, car-parking and planned hotel developments provide a better return than trying to squeeze money from cut-throat airline operators.
It’s fair to question whether the BAC’s plan for the 2,000 metres runway separation is more to do with freeing up property development space, than their claims of it enhancing aircraft safety.
How convenient it is, that the greater separation allows presently undevelopable fish breeding mangrove and wetlands to be flattened. 200ha of natural habitat could be saved from the bulldozers if BAC stuck to the ICAO parallel runway separation distance.
Something else that’s environmentally ‘inconvenient’, is the issue that Al Gore and Sir Nicholas Stern have recently brought to much public attention...rising sea levels from global warming. The Brisbane City Council recently undertook a storm surge mapping survey to understand how a deep low pressure system with very strong winds, a king tide and just a 300mm global warming sea level rise would affect Brisbane. When you look at the projected inundation of the airport on the map, it’s pretty scary stuff. If you add a decent downpour of rain, combined with a couple hundred thousand square metres of new tarmac replacing the Kedron Brook flood-plain, the upstream flooding prospects for people in those same suburbs getting the new flight paths, will have something else to worry about!
In the end, there needs to be a balance between ensuring the airport continues to boost our local economy, that the greatest possible buffer to residential homes is provided and that any environmental disturbance be minimised.
I believe all can be substantially achieved by moving the proposed runway 475m to the East.
It will be up to the Federal Minister for Transport to approve the BAC’s plan for the runway. But those people who share my view that it should be located further to the East, should be aware of what we’re up against.
When BAC paid $1.3 billion for the 99 year lease for the airport, they weren’t just paying for runways, terminals and land. What they also bought was the protection of the ‘Crown of the Commonwealth’. This is a very, very valuable commodity for a private corporation...it makes them a law unto themselves. They are 'untouchable' from all State and Local Government environmental and land use laws.
Under the Federal Act, property development and runway approval is at the sole discretion of the Minister. Since the airport privatisations, this position has always been held by a National Party member. But these major city airports are all in Labor heartland. The operations of Brisbane’s airport affects the electorates of Labor members Wayne Swan and Kevin Rudd. Let’s face it, there wouldn’t be a lot of motivation for a rural based National Party Minister to worry themselves too much over aircraft noise and land use in Labor electorates in our major cities.
In fact over the 10 years since the privatisations began, not a single development plan presented by an airport corporation has been knocked back by the Minister. Their plans seem absolutely impervious to challenge; no matter how strongly local people or authorities complain.
The BAC absolutely loves this protection of the Commonwealth to insulate it from local planning and environmental regulations. This is particularly incongruous when at the same time; they want to enjoy all the financial benefits of being a corporation law company in our free-market economy.
In the long term, the question of governance of privatised airports needs to be looked at to ensure local authorities and local people have a greater say on airport land use and environmental matters.
In the short term, we should do whatever we can to reduce the chance of any air-crash investigation show focusing on a residential area of Brisbane. Moving the proposed runway 475 metres further to the East will help.
Kim Flesser is the Councillor for Northgate Ward on the Brisbane City Council. He is a member of the Australian Mayoral Aviation Council and sits on the Brisbane Airport Consultative Committee.
|
|
COMMUNITY NEWS Kim Flesser COUNCILLOR FOR NORTHGATE WARD |
