Stop the demise of Archerfield and other GAAP airports
Thread Starter
Stop the demise of Archerfield and other GAAP airports
A desperate struggle is occurring at Archerfield Airport.
All aviation hub business will be irretrievably lost and the airport turned into an industrial park if Federal Minister Truss approves the 2005 – 2025 draft master plan for Archerfield.
All of the Beatty road side of the airport and the Mortimer road side – the entire aviation precent is scheduled for destruction by re-zoning as General industry or Light Industry.
Large hangars are already being torn down and aviation leases not renewed! Check the story and pictures at www.aircentre.com.au (select News Desk and Week 1).
It is a sad day when pilots have to tear down hangars on an operating airport. All so they don’t become the property of greedy airport leasing companies who think they have a right to your asset and a right to profiteer from and cause harm and misery to those struggling in general aviation.
We need a show of strength to demonstrate to Minister Truss that the proposed plans for Archerfield are NOT in the interests of Aviation and won’t be tolerated. Minister Truss has to consider your validly lodged objection when deciding to approve the master plan. Failure to object means the plan is not contested by civil aviation users and you are giving it your tacit approval.
All pilots across Australia and their passengers, or any aviation business that deals with the airport or other civil aviation user can lodge an objection to the draft Master Plan. You do not necessarily need to have flown into Archerfield recently.
Objections must be received by 17 August 2005 otherwise they won’t be considered.
Download a pilot/civil aviation user objection form here and post it by 15 August 2005. DO NOT DELAY. DO IT NOW
Click this link to download the objection form.
http://www.scoutsqld.com.au/branch/s...lyer-Final.pdf
Even the Scouts have been slammed hard by this Commercial Ruthlessness.
The Scouts’ Air Activity Queensland (SAAQ) Centre lease costs were raised from $4,992 in 1998 (before privatisation) to $50,965 in 2001. The first rental review of the lease after privatisation was on 1st October 2001. The SAAQ received notification on 5th July 2001 from Archerfield Airports Corporation (“the notice”) that the new rental was $45,000.00 (nearly six times the former rental) bringing the total rent after notified increase to $50,965.20 plus GST.
The Scouts under financial duress surrendered their youth safe loading area block 615 in July 2003, and negotiated the total leases down to the amount of $31,847.20 including GST, but not including outlays.
But only a few days ago on 3rd August the Scouts have been hit yet another blow with ground lease rents being raised by another $13,000. The scouts can only use their lease for an air activities centre – not general industry – so they cannot possibly ever make their centre pay and are therefore being driven from the airfield.
We need to act now to stop further degradation of aviation activities at Archerfield. Download the objection form and post it NOW!
Thanks, Paul
Added by Edit
Forgot to add...here is a picture of the Scout Air Activities Centre that looks certain to be lost when the lease runs out in 2007.
http://www.scoutsqld.com.au/branch/s...airactivities/
All aviation hub business will be irretrievably lost and the airport turned into an industrial park if Federal Minister Truss approves the 2005 – 2025 draft master plan for Archerfield.
All of the Beatty road side of the airport and the Mortimer road side – the entire aviation precent is scheduled for destruction by re-zoning as General industry or Light Industry.
Large hangars are already being torn down and aviation leases not renewed! Check the story and pictures at www.aircentre.com.au (select News Desk and Week 1).
It is a sad day when pilots have to tear down hangars on an operating airport. All so they don’t become the property of greedy airport leasing companies who think they have a right to your asset and a right to profiteer from and cause harm and misery to those struggling in general aviation.
We need a show of strength to demonstrate to Minister Truss that the proposed plans for Archerfield are NOT in the interests of Aviation and won’t be tolerated. Minister Truss has to consider your validly lodged objection when deciding to approve the master plan. Failure to object means the plan is not contested by civil aviation users and you are giving it your tacit approval.
All pilots across Australia and their passengers, or any aviation business that deals with the airport or other civil aviation user can lodge an objection to the draft Master Plan. You do not necessarily need to have flown into Archerfield recently.
Objections must be received by 17 August 2005 otherwise they won’t be considered.
Download a pilot/civil aviation user objection form here and post it by 15 August 2005. DO NOT DELAY. DO IT NOW
Click this link to download the objection form.
http://www.scoutsqld.com.au/branch/s...lyer-Final.pdf
Even the Scouts have been slammed hard by this Commercial Ruthlessness.
The Scouts’ Air Activity Queensland (SAAQ) Centre lease costs were raised from $4,992 in 1998 (before privatisation) to $50,965 in 2001. The first rental review of the lease after privatisation was on 1st October 2001. The SAAQ received notification on 5th July 2001 from Archerfield Airports Corporation (“the notice”) that the new rental was $45,000.00 (nearly six times the former rental) bringing the total rent after notified increase to $50,965.20 plus GST.
The Scouts under financial duress surrendered their youth safe loading area block 615 in July 2003, and negotiated the total leases down to the amount of $31,847.20 including GST, but not including outlays.
But only a few days ago on 3rd August the Scouts have been hit yet another blow with ground lease rents being raised by another $13,000. The scouts can only use their lease for an air activities centre – not general industry – so they cannot possibly ever make their centre pay and are therefore being driven from the airfield.
We need to act now to stop further degradation of aviation activities at Archerfield. Download the objection form and post it NOW!
Thanks, Paul
Added by Edit
Forgot to add...here is a picture of the Scout Air Activities Centre that looks certain to be lost when the lease runs out in 2007.
http://www.scoutsqld.com.au/branch/s...airactivities/
Last edited by pbwhi0; 9th Aug 2005 at 11:42.
It was inevitable that this was going to happen when the airports were privatised. Don’t blame the owners for the airports as they are in it to make the maximum return for their shareholders. Blame the Federal Government for selling them in the first place.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Great Southern Land
Age: 57
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sunfish you raise the same point every time this topic comes up. What bit don't you understand? Aircraft need airports!!!! A shopping mall or industrial estate can be built anywhere. Once the airport's gone it's gone forever.
Did you miss the real estate boom? "Find cheaper land and build there" doesn't work. Where do you suggest? The other side of the Darling Downs? Halfway out to Roma? The point of having an airport at place 'X' is to fly to the places adjacent to place 'X'.
Do you really suggest GA becomes something people do on weekends 3 hours drive away from where they live?
Strewth this makes me mad.
Did you miss the real estate boom? "Find cheaper land and build there" doesn't work. Where do you suggest? The other side of the Darling Downs? Halfway out to Roma? The point of having an airport at place 'X' is to fly to the places adjacent to place 'X'.
Do you really suggest GA becomes something people do on weekends 3 hours drive away from where they live?
Strewth this makes me mad.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i still cant believe in a country as remote, and with such large distances between pockets of civilisation, we are the fastest at going backwards when it comes to general aviation....
with our landscape, we should be world leaders!
soon in the sydney basin, all that will be left for GA will be The Oaks..
with our landscape, we should be world leaders!
soon in the sydney basin, all that will be left for GA will be The Oaks..
Thread Starter
404 Titan - I agree, blame the Government. If they can't privatise a secondary airport in a capital city correctly, how can we trust them to get the privatisation of Telstra correct???
Sunfish - A developed country needs a well maintained and progressive infrastructure to continue to thrive. Just like roads and rail, this country needs to maintain and grow a modern airport system to meet the high demands of this vast country. Killing off GAAP airports is not a smart move. Brisbane airport is already stretched at the seams and to push light aircraft over there would be disastrous.
Like this - Do that: We are mad too, in fact furious. I am a member of the Scouts Air Activates Centre at Archerfield and most weekends we introduce general aviation to young people through structured courses and a scenic flight. In a lot of instances the courses we run are the first time a young person has been introduced to the joys of aviation.
For a non profit organisation to find $1,000 per week just to rent a building we own and built through community effort is appalling - but this just goes to show the greed of the current airport owner and lack of any social conscience. That is why we are trying to do something about it.
We all can do something about this. Send a message to the Government via the OBJECTION form. But please do it NOW. All objections need to be posted by Monday 15 August 2005 to count.
Sunfish - A developed country needs a well maintained and progressive infrastructure to continue to thrive. Just like roads and rail, this country needs to maintain and grow a modern airport system to meet the high demands of this vast country. Killing off GAAP airports is not a smart move. Brisbane airport is already stretched at the seams and to push light aircraft over there would be disastrous.
Like this - Do that: We are mad too, in fact furious. I am a member of the Scouts Air Activates Centre at Archerfield and most weekends we introduce general aviation to young people through structured courses and a scenic flight. In a lot of instances the courses we run are the first time a young person has been introduced to the joys of aviation.
For a non profit organisation to find $1,000 per week just to rent a building we own and built through community effort is appalling - but this just goes to show the greed of the current airport owner and lack of any social conscience. That is why we are trying to do something about it.
We all can do something about this. Send a message to the Government via the OBJECTION form. But please do it NOW. All objections need to be posted by Monday 15 August 2005 to count.
Last edited by pbwhi0; 12th Aug 2005 at 09:25.
One would have thought that as a former minister for Agriculture and a National Party MP, Truss would recognise the needs of the rural community.
Can't speak for AF, but BK was quite popular with rural folk organising a charter into Sydney from parts of NSW which aren't served by RPT airlines. Whilst a lot of business people eventually need to get into the CBD, quite a few small businesses are situated in places like Parramatta and Liverpool (both closer to BK).
Whats the point of the charter if you're just going to end up 100km or more from the CBD? Another blow for GA!
TL
Can't speak for AF, but BK was quite popular with rural folk organising a charter into Sydney from parts of NSW which aren't served by RPT airlines. Whilst a lot of business people eventually need to get into the CBD, quite a few small businesses are situated in places like Parramatta and Liverpool (both closer to BK).
Whats the point of the charter if you're just going to end up 100km or more from the CBD? Another blow for GA!
TL
Please refrain from shooting the messenger.
All I'm saying is that private owners will do what private owners will do. Unless the Government pays them to keep it as an airport, or the industry pays them to keep it as an airport, they are not going to do it.
All I'm saying is that private owners will do what private owners will do. Unless the Government pays them to keep it as an airport, or the industry pays them to keep it as an airport, they are not going to do it.
Not enough $$$ ...
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The almighty dollar is a powerful temptation. Imagine how much the owner would make by turning that land into a residential development ..... MILLIONS, possibly hundreds of. Now look at the paltry income he receives from the current tenants.
Of course it's tragic, but understandable and not unexpected.
Greedy? I don't know - how magnanimous would you be in the circumstances? Would you run the airport for charity? Would you sit on a pot of gold and not look for some way to take advantage of it?
So, when's the Amberly GA field opening up?
Of course it's tragic, but understandable and not unexpected.
Greedy? I don't know - how magnanimous would you be in the circumstances? Would you run the airport for charity? Would you sit on a pot of gold and not look for some way to take advantage of it?
So, when's the Amberly GA field opening up?
Thread Starter
wishtobflying - Your argument may stand up if the OWNER did not realise he was buying an interest in an AIRPORT. He tendered on the airfield knowing he was 'buying' an interest in an aviation concern.
He probably paid a low price for the lease hold because it was an airport. Now he realises he can make more money elsewhere does not mean it is right to degrade the aviation sector. He obviously didn't do his homework before purchasing the airport (note I say airport and not commercial land). Should aviation now pay for this persons poor business sense???
He probably paid a low price for the lease hold because it was an airport. Now he realises he can make more money elsewhere does not mean it is right to degrade the aviation sector. He obviously didn't do his homework before purchasing the airport (note I say airport and not commercial land). Should aviation now pay for this persons poor business sense???
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: NZ
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What I want to know.........and this IS true......
How come the airport owner was NOT the highest bidder a few years ago when it was sold off and yet, he won the bidding?
Seems to me, this whole issue is more than skin deep.
Way to go Mr. TURD, I hope you bring plenty of Vasoline when you finally meet Satan.
How come the airport owner was NOT the highest bidder a few years ago when it was sold off and yet, he won the bidding?
Seems to me, this whole issue is more than skin deep.
Way to go Mr. TURD, I hope you bring plenty of Vasoline when you finally meet Satan.
pbwhi0
I doubt very much they made a poor commercial decision in purchasing the airport. If I and I suspect thousands of other people knew this was going to happen when the government privatised the GAAP airports around Australia, I bet my bottom dollar the CEO’s of the companies knew as well and could see a gold mine.
I doubt very much they made a poor commercial decision in purchasing the airport. If I and I suspect thousands of other people knew this was going to happen when the government privatised the GAAP airports around Australia, I bet my bottom dollar the CEO’s of the companies knew as well and could see a gold mine.
Thread Starter
404 Titan
I suspect you are right. There is also probably some thruth to what TinDriver has intimated. Given the owner at Archerfield was previously in the Child Care business!
I suspect you are right. There is also probably some thruth to what TinDriver has intimated. Given the owner at Archerfield was previously in the Child Care business!
pbwhi0
I can’t answer that question, though I would add that the highest bid isn’t always the successful one. There could be a number of reason why this was the case. The only way you are going to find out is ask the Government why the highest bid wasn’t successful.
I can’t answer that question, though I would add that the highest bid isn’t always the successful one. There could be a number of reason why this was the case. The only way you are going to find out is ask the Government why the highest bid wasn’t successful.
Thread Starter
404 Titan
Do you think we haven't asked?
We believe that part of the land that makes up Archerfield Airport was deeded to the Federal Government in WW2 by a local family and that a condition of this deed requires the land be used solely for aviation.
A recent freedom of information (FOI) request with the Federal Department to obtain access to this deed has resulted in an invoice for $24,461. Until we pay we cannot get access to this document.
Do you think the Federal Department may be stone walling?? or worse still, covering up???
I realise the highest tenderer may not always receive the go ahead, however in this case other tenderers were aviation related businesses. Would it not be strange that a higher tenderer with proven aviation involvement lose to lower tenderer with NO aviation back ground?
Do you think we haven't asked?
We believe that part of the land that makes up Archerfield Airport was deeded to the Federal Government in WW2 by a local family and that a condition of this deed requires the land be used solely for aviation.
A recent freedom of information (FOI) request with the Federal Department to obtain access to this deed has resulted in an invoice for $24,461. Until we pay we cannot get access to this document.
Do you think the Federal Department may be stone walling?? or worse still, covering up???
I realise the highest tenderer may not always receive the go ahead, however in this case other tenderers were aviation related businesses. Would it not be strange that a higher tenderer with proven aviation involvement lose to lower tenderer with NO aviation back ground?
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Awstraya
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When Archerfield Airport was privatised, there were already a large number of tenants on the field who held leases for hangar sites. At the time that these leases were established, the airport was a GAAP airport catering to aviation in lighter aircraft (including private, training and charter operations). There was a reasonable expectation at the time the leases were established and reassurances given at the time of privatisation that this would continue.
Perusal of the proposed Master Plan (and the experience of lessees) makes it clear that consultation was not carried out with users/tenants of the airport, in particular those businesses/individuals who hangar their aircraft there. Although mention is made of training and charter operations continuing, there is no provision at all for private (including business-operated) aircraft activity.
These facts as well as the actions of the AAC in insisting on taking ownership of assets built on the leased plots and then charging a greatly inflated additional rental for these facilities which were already paid for is clearly designed to drive private operators and businesses, who house their aircraft there, off the field to realise the “grand vision”.
It is also obvious from looking at the proposed Master Plan that it is not necessary to drive existing tenants off the field to realise value from the $3 million paid for the large area of land included in the airport purchase.
If ACC was serious about the general aviation business, it would have made an effort to consult with what is already a large number of its customers and negotiate a reasonable outcome.
Instead it chooses a belligerent tone such as illustrated below in an extract from the latest Archerfield Airport Corporation News:
Who said we are a recreational airport?
There is a section of the airport community who believe the airport should become a recreational facility. This idea flows into the thought that landing charges and rentals should also be kept to a minimum. Unfortunately for those who dream of such an environment it is not going to happen. Archerfield Airport was privatised 7 years ago in June 1998. Archerfield Airport Corporation is a private business that has to make a commercial return from its investment. One of our key challenges is to be able to fund the maintenance and replacement of existing operational facilities. If you are looking for a recreational airport in a subsidised environment then I suggest that you look for a sponsor or maybe a Government body that may oblige. At Archerfield Airport we are operating on a commercial basis, in a security designated environment, 12 kilometres from the CBD of Brisbane and we are open for business.
So, if you are a business (whether or not you own aircraft) and if you think that your business shouldn’t be ripped off by monopolistic and non-consultative landlords, you are “recreational”, not a business…...and if you are a not-for-profit organisation with a long term association with the facility - forget even negotiating about it.
Perusal of the proposed Master Plan (and the experience of lessees) makes it clear that consultation was not carried out with users/tenants of the airport, in particular those businesses/individuals who hangar their aircraft there. Although mention is made of training and charter operations continuing, there is no provision at all for private (including business-operated) aircraft activity.
These facts as well as the actions of the AAC in insisting on taking ownership of assets built on the leased plots and then charging a greatly inflated additional rental for these facilities which were already paid for is clearly designed to drive private operators and businesses, who house their aircraft there, off the field to realise the “grand vision”.
It is also obvious from looking at the proposed Master Plan that it is not necessary to drive existing tenants off the field to realise value from the $3 million paid for the large area of land included in the airport purchase.
If ACC was serious about the general aviation business, it would have made an effort to consult with what is already a large number of its customers and negotiate a reasonable outcome.
Instead it chooses a belligerent tone such as illustrated below in an extract from the latest Archerfield Airport Corporation News:
Who said we are a recreational airport?
There is a section of the airport community who believe the airport should become a recreational facility. This idea flows into the thought that landing charges and rentals should also be kept to a minimum. Unfortunately for those who dream of such an environment it is not going to happen. Archerfield Airport was privatised 7 years ago in June 1998. Archerfield Airport Corporation is a private business that has to make a commercial return from its investment. One of our key challenges is to be able to fund the maintenance and replacement of existing operational facilities. If you are looking for a recreational airport in a subsidised environment then I suggest that you look for a sponsor or maybe a Government body that may oblige. At Archerfield Airport we are operating on a commercial basis, in a security designated environment, 12 kilometres from the CBD of Brisbane and we are open for business.
So, if you are a business (whether or not you own aircraft) and if you think that your business shouldn’t be ripped off by monopolistic and non-consultative landlords, you are “recreational”, not a business…...and if you are a not-for-profit organisation with a long term association with the facility - forget even negotiating about it.
That about sums it up
