Helicopter Progress
Yesterday, Auckland Councillors voted against proceeding immediately with a draft plan to make private non-essential helipads a prohibited activity in residential areas. It would have disappointed Councillor Mike Lee and many others. He and the Waitemata, Waiheke and Aotea boards alongside their communities have been advocating for a prohibition for years.
And yet, the amendment that was carried would have disappointed those aspiring to acquire a private helipad in the city's suburbs as well.
It was the first time in years that councillors voted to develop a draft plan change in which private non-emergency helicopter landings and take offs are prohibited in targeted areas and non-complying everywhere else.
What is necessary it seems to get prohibited over the line is the word “targeted’. Prohibiting an activity requires precision. While a blanket ban may not get past the independent hearing commissioners (who may argue about the high bar that has to be met) prohibiting helicopter movements within a certain distance of another residence or an area of special ecological value might be supported and do, in practice, what Lee's notice of motion sought. Hopefully.
Staff would have preferred to keep the status as entirely non-complying so that people can at least apply for a consent. Why it is a good thing to encourage people to apply for consents they won’t get, or demand the community put their resources into fighting them was not explained. Knowing that you need a 200m buffer on each side of your helipad from other residents, public parks, coastal reserves or special ecological areas would focus the minds of the super rich to sites where they can have the most freedom with the least negative impact. That would actually seem helpful to everyone!
Councillors also directed staff to urgently request clarification from the Environment Court on the current activity status of private helipads and non-emergency helicopter take-offs and landings in residential zones in the Auckland Unitary Plan.
If it is found they are already non-complying this would make it less likely new applications in developed suburbs would be granted. Council staff say they will treat new consents as non-complying until they have an answer.
What does this mean for the recent Rawene Ave Consent? This is being appealed by Quiet Sky Waitemata. A date is yet to be set. The Environment Court determination may well be funded by the community then rather than council. On the positive side, it seems unlikely council will defend the decision of its appointed commissioners.
One thing is sure, whether Lee or Hill’s approach was chosen the plan change process will be arduous, expensive, and take commitment. There are risks of failure - so targeting the change as prudently as possible makes sense. It was reassuring to hear many of the councillors (the mayor was absent) reiterate their position that it was not acceptable for there to be a proliferation of helicopters in residential areas, and that they would do something about it.
And yet, they made this point: Central government, the Environment Court and independent hearing commissioners have far more power over local government planning decisions in New Zealand than in other countries like Australia, the US or Europe (where private helipads coincidentally are generally more restricted).
To underscore this, central government has instructed local government to halt plan changes unless they get an exemption from the Minister of Housing. So much for localism. Elected members will want to keep this issue on their radar to ensure progress is made. And communities, who keep on stepping up to do this work, will too. They care deeply about this.