I REPLY to the comments of Mrs. Betty Stibbard (Glen Innes Examiner, Thursday, January 15) in relation to the removal of trees on Glen Innes Regional Airport and surrounds.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The former operators of the airport, Glen Innes Severn Council and now Australia Asia Flight Training are required to have an Obstacle Survey carried out on the airport annually to ensure that no trees are presenting an obstacle that could impinge on the safe operation of aircraft at the airport.
The required survey was conducted by approved CASA surveyors in 2013 which highlighted a very large number of trees that were creating obstacles in the path of safe operations at the ends of both runways.
These were initially removed in mid-2014 and the airport was again re-surveyed in November 2014 which highlighted additional trees that needed to be removed to make the airport compliant.
The meeting of these standards has nothing to do with the development of the airport by AAFT. If the airport is to continue to be licenced, it must meet stringent safety standards not only related to obstacles.
The number of trees to be removed is unrelated to the lengthening of runways. In fact when the 10/28 runway is sealed the length will be reduced. The runway approach needs to be offset back from Emmaville Road to improve safety.
The trees are being left in piles to allow them to dry out so that suitable timber/ foliage can be mulched to be used in the landscaping of the Academy and airport estate. It was a Development Consent Condition of the Joint Regional Planning Panel, upon Council’s recommendation, that extensive landscaping plans be prepared and implemented during construction. Only unsuitable trees will be burnt.
These landscaping plans are currently with Council along with all of the other plans and engineering specifications to allow the Construction Certificate for the Academy to be issued in due course.
We can assure Mrs Stibbard that not one tree has been removed that was not identified by the surveyor as breaching the safety zones set down in Part 139 of the Airport Operational requirements of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.
In the architects design of the Academy the poplar “shield” is maintained around the Academy and buildings have been sited to minimize any trees on the site having to be removed.
Mrs Stibbard we sympathize with your views but safety must always take precedence when obstacles are identified by experts and require removal to comply with the safety rules.
Neil M Hansford, Director,
Australia Asia Flight Training Pty Ltd