A proposal to restrict developments near airports threatens to further complicate the planning process and could stunt the growth of our capital cities, Urban Taskforce chief executive, Aaron Gadiel said.
The National Aviation Policy, "Flight Path to the Future", released by the federal government yesterday, proposes nationwide rules covering what can and cannot be built around airport sites. It looks at "prohibiting developments incompatible with aviation use on federal airport sites" and "making sure nearby developments are compatible with airports' core activities and long term planning".
Under the proposal, houses, aged care facilities and hospitals that surround an airport would be banned.
More "logical" developments, such as airport hotels, commercial offices and freight handling facilities, would also face new restrictions and a more complicated planning and approval process, Gadiel told Architecture & Design.
"Anyone looking to do those sort of developments, if this proposal goes ahead, will have to deal with three levels of land use planning - the local council, the state government and the federal government".
Gadiel believes that more red tape is simply going to complicate and confuse the planning system. "What they're doing [the federal government] is an overlay on top of land use planning already carried out by the state," Gadiel said.
Under the proposal, all non-aeronautical developments will require the airport to complete a development plan, analysing the possible effects on the surrounding community. All building applications will also have to be publicly exhibited.
These restrictions could have a serious impact on Australia’s capital cities, Gadiel said. The upside to having an airport in your community, he said, is the jobs and economic activity that come with developments such as airport hotels and commercial offices. "If there are sweeping planning rules that either prohibit or make approval difficult for that kind of development, then the benefits of having an airport located in your community will evaporate. It'll only be a cost."
"It would be awful if the red tape deprives local communities of the upside of having an airport in their area," he said.
Gadiel also believes that Sydney could lose its status as "Australia's preeminent city" if developers don't give up on Badgerys Creek as a potential site for the city's second airport and start looking elsewhere.
