For this discussion on Airport Planning I’ve considered the three closest airports to our studio, being; North Shore Aerodrome, RNZAF Base Auckland Whenuapai, and possibly Auckland International Airport. Today I will concentrate on RNZAF Base Auckland Whenuapai as its location and operations have been a contentious topic for decades now, with local residents petitioning for its closure.
Many people who rely on the Airforce base argue that the airfield was there first, since 1937 in fact, but the various guises of Auckland Council permitted housing development around the base for the last 50 years or so, so who is right? You could argue that both sides of the debate have valid arguments, but I feel we can argue that there is a greater need for residential property in this prime Auckland location than ripping up greenfield sites for new housing, or hosting an Airforce base in a densely populated residential area. The New Zealand Government and others have put developing greenfield sites on the table, so, can we at least explore the possibility of moving the RNZAF fixed wing operations to other less disruptive airbases in New Zealand?
As a former private pilot I used to love flying, so I’m trying to sit on the fence, but the topic of poor airport planning, mismanagement and disruption has popped up so many times over the years, particularly the poor public transport options to Auckland Airport and the disruption and inconvenience caused to the North Shore by RNZAF Base Auckland Whenuapai aircraft.
If I put my property hat back on, I see a great opportunity for a non-greenbelt residential development that, if planned properly, would provide several thousand new homes on Whenuapai’s 280-hectares site. The sale of the land to developers could go back into Auckland Transport’s budget to enable them to plan and enable much better transport infrastructure, as well as giving them the additional finances to start properly maintaining our public land which Auckland Transport, aka Auckland Council, is seriously underachieving in this regard.
A long time ago, Defence Minister Mark Burton announced the NZDF would “consolidate” its Whenuapai operations to Ohakea (near Palmerston North) within the next five years, effectively all but closing Whenuapai, but that never happened, much to the dismay of the locals, well, the ones not employed by the NZDF that is.
I understand the airbase has a few old costly to maintain Boeing 757s, of which possibly only one is operational. I believe it’s used for state visits by our ministers, one such trip recently to China used it. But do our ministers really think this sends a good message to other countries and New Zealand taxpayers that a small dignitary needs such a large aging and expensively maintained aircraft to travel from point A to point B? Wouldn’t it be cheaper and less of a burden on our taxpayers’ vastly overspent budget to charter a jet if First or Business class services on commercial airlines aren’t deemed suitable?
I believe the C130’s that seemingly blast over New Zealand’s North Shore several times a day offer training facilities for their pilots, but again, the touch and go circuits they do could just as easily be relocated to other bases where less residential, business, and habitat disruption is caused, giving much relief to New Zealand’s biggest city.
I am a strong advocate for using high-performing, sustainable, and healthy materials in our builds, but there is a serious health concern for people living near airports. These concerns include exhaust fumes from low-flying aircraft causing respiratory problems, including asthma, lung cancer, and other respiratory illnesses. The noise disruption to local residents and businesses is also significant, with additional concerns over the loss of income resulting from very noisy aircraft operations during the day. This could be reduced if the airbase operations team chose to plan circuits over the sea as opposed to over North Shore. For example, our recording studio has been disrupted more times than I care to remember whilst recording interviews. The aircraft fly so low that my desk vibrates. Our studio is a good 20 minutes drive to the base, so I’m not entirely sure what justification the defence force has for these less than helpful circuits over land when the sea is literally seconds away east and west.
Anyway, back to the topic at hand, why didn’t our council planners have the foresight to realize that the North Shore would become a highly probable densely populated residential area? Afterall it’s literally 5 minutes drive from Auckland’s CBD?
I think Auckland International Airport is possibly one of a few, if not the only main international airport in the OECD that doesn’t have a passenger rail (lite or heavy) connection from the airport to the city. That seems crazy in this day and age.
Our planners must realize that we are using our buildings differently now. We are working from home, we are squeezing more properties into less space. There’s little or no escape from noise. Privacy and a peaceful environment is now a luxury, as is parking your cars in your own garage and having your own trees and ample lawn for your children to kick a ball around on.
The general populous still don’t know enough about the health hazards in their own neighbourhoods. Most developers build houses now, not communities, and our council planners seem none the wiser. We have to drive to the shops, doctors, school, work, movies… When was the last time you saw a new development that has treelined roads and good path lighting? How often do you see residents walking on the footpath?
I don’t feel the debate over the future of the airbase is going to go away, with concerns over the impact on health, business and residential disruption seemingly ignored by the airbase and council. Like many other countries, New Zealand has had many opportunities to plan better infrastructure, build better communities, and implement better housing standards, but I feel has sadly missed the great opportunities presented to them. When we have 53% of our houses officially classified as unhealthy to live in then I believe our government and councils are failing us. I know I’m not going to win any friends saying this but we can’t just say that’s ok and sit on our hands. Let’s collaborate and see if there’s solutions everyone can be happy with.
“First come, first served” isn’t a good synonym because times, habits, and places change, and we need to adapt and adopt better solutions, and attitudes. We need to stop dwelling on the past and properly plan for a better future, for us, and our planet.
