The former Wyong Council and the current Central Coast Council have continued to spend rate payer money on the expansion of the airport at Warnervale when a 2013 feasibility study recommended the sale of the land.
The study, which has been kept confidential by both Wyong and Central Coast Councils since 2013, concluded that the sale of the airport land at Warnervale could fetch around $7.7 million, depending on market conditions. It also argued that the sale could result in an ongoing revenue stream back to Council through land rates. The 2013 feasibility study concluded that an upgrade of the Warnervale airport was not viable, as the costs were considered “prohibitive” and signifi cant effort would be required by Council to attract aviation-related businesses to the site. Since abandoning its plans to develop an airport at Kiar Ridge, the Wyong Council and the Central Coast Council, have pursued an expansion of the airport into a general aviation hub.
Since 2013, the former and current Council have spent at least $7 million at Warnervale airport, including on a runway upgrade without Ministerial permission, as is required by specifi c legislation, and on land acquisitions. At the same time, it has kept confidential the feasibility study which clearly showed the best course of action available to the Council was to sell the airport land and turn it into rateable industrial lots. Those lots would also generate employment as per the intent of its classification as a State Signifi cant Site and the objectives of creating the Wyong Employment Zone (WEZ).
Council’s current actions appear that it is intent on retaining the airport even though the NSW Government’s new Central Coast Regional Plan clearly makes the activation of WEZ a priority. The Council is also continuing to push the NSW Government to repeal the Warnervale Airport Restrictions Act. Council has gone to great lengths to keep the Warnervale Airport Development Opportunities Feasibility Study 2013 out of the public domain. On three occasions, Central Coast Council has paid a barrister to represent it in the NSW Civil and Administrative Claims Tribunal (NCAT) to block one rate payer’s attempts to access the document under the NSW Government Information (Public Access) Act.
Council holds copyright in the Feasibility Study and has not given consent for its reproduction. As a result, the NCAT, in granting Mr Laurie Eyes of Wyong Creek access to the document, did so “in a way that will protect against any infringement of copyright yet still provides …access to the information contained within the study”. Mr Eyes was required to attend the Wyong chamber of Central Coast Council where he could read the document and take notes in the presence of a Council employee. He could not have a copy of the study to take away, nor could he make copies of it or distribute it.
Mr Eyes was not prohibited from taking a companion with him to view the document, so the Wyong Regional Chronicle sent a representative to read through the document at the same time as Mr Eyes. The study reported on four options and concluded that two, “do nothing” or “upgrade the existing airport” were the least feasible in terms of their return on investment (ROI). A fourth option, to completely redevelop the current airport site in stages, was seen as having the highest ROI but also the highest risk to Council. That option involved the land ceasing to be used as an airport and being turned into either a small-lot industrial estate or a bulk-lot industrial estate.
The author of the study concluded that the creation and “surprise” sale of a 15 hectare super lot for the development of the Chinese Theme Park also detracted from any plans to redevelop the airport for industrial use. The study observed that the sale of the 15 hectare lot was contrary to the intent of the Wyong Employment Zone (WEZ) because it removed roads that linked the airport land to the west, leaving Jack Grant Ave as the only access point to the land. Four years later, the sale of that land to Australia China Theme Park has still not been finalised. The “do nothing” option would mean the airport would continue to be a financial liability to council until the land was sold or developed, the author of the feasibility study concluded.
The study referred to a group called Edwards Aviation, which stated that it would not land at Warnervale and had admitted the site had constraints, including diffi cult landing conditions when the weather was inclement. The feasibility study also discussed the Warnervale Airport Restrictions Act as being an impediment to any plans to expand the airport and argued that the Act would need to be challenged as it was specifi cally designed to prevent upgrades. According to the feasibility study, in 2013, the existing operations at the airport had already exceeded the limits applied by the Warnervale Airport Restrictions Act.
The study’s author suggested that Council could make the process of redevelopment easier by completing the subdivision of the land prior to selling it. The redevelopment option was based on leasing of lots by Council. So the study said further market research was needed before making a decision about the future of the Warnervale airport, including identifying potential tenants before deciding how to confi gure the lots if the highest-risk, highest ROI option was chosen.
Emails, Feb 10, 2017 Laurie Eyes, Wyong Creek Jackie Pearson, Journalist
This article first appeared in the Wyong Regional Chronicle Jan 13, 2017