“Restricting growth is purely a NIMBY argument” - Ed Taylor

“It is not a NIMBY thing...we need to preserve the unique values of...Wanaka...and its surrounding environment that makes this Upper Clutha region so special” - Chris Riley

The High Court’s decision to overturn the Queenstown Airport Corporation’s lease of Wanaka Airport has provided an opportunity for reflection on the future of our airport.

In a judicial review in April the court found that the Queenstown Lakes District Council (QLDC) did not follow the correct statutory processes to lease the airport to the Queenstown Airport Corporation (QAC). The review was requested by the Wanaka Stakeholders Group (WSG), which opposes the development of jet-capable services at Wanaka Airport.

The court noted that if the lease was not overturned, the public’s ability to have a say in the future uses of Wanaka Airport over the next 100 years would be limited.

“Councillors will now want to take time to discuss what the future looks like for Wanaka Airport and consider how we can best consult with the community to hear all perspectives,” QLDC mayor Jim Boult said in May.

He said no timeframes had been discussed regarding future long-term options for air services in the Upper Clutha, and said the QLDC “would not be rushing into any long term planning”.

Jim also acknowledged that any potential future development of Wanaka Airport had divided some members of the Upper Clutha community, and said the council would be mindful of ensuring “robust consultation and reflecting the full range of views when considering any future planning”.

Two views from the community

In the interim, the Wanaka App has asked two well-known locals for their views on the polarising topic of the future development of Wanaka Airport. 

Chris Riley has lived in Wanaka for 30 years, and has owned tourism business Eco Wanaka Adventures for 14 years. He believes the development of a jet-capable airport here would result in amenity loss for residents and visitors.

Ed Taylor has lived here for 18 years and is the general manager of Warbirds Over Wanaka, based at Wanaka Airport. He believes the development of Wanaka Airport is a necessary development as the area grows..

Here are their responses to the Wanaka App’s questions:

What type of development would you be happy with at Wanaka Airport?

Chris: “ATR, small passenger ‘planes like Sounds Air, and small boutique airline business such as maintenance, flightseeing, private planes (not private jets), Warbirds and Skydive.”

Ed: “What I have found so frustrating is that the whole Wanaka Airport debate has been hijacked and reduced to a ‘No Jets’ bumper sticker campaign. What we really need is to have an adult conversation about what air services we need in the wider region to adequately service residents from right around the QLDC and CODC areas.

In my opinion we need one jet capable airport. There seem to be three options – Queenstown, Wanaka and Tarras. Queenstown has a number of unique limiting factors, none less than the fact that it is now basically sitting right in the middle of the town as that area grows. That leaves Wanaka and Tarras. Wanaka would be a viable option while Tarras also has potential. This should be the basis of the debate going forward.”

What would be the positive outcomes from expansion and development at Wanaka Airport?

Chris: “Convenience for locals to fly direct to Auckland, but they can do this already from Queenstown, which is only an hour away, or via Christchurch with the new Sounds Air service.”

Chris Riley: “Amenity value is a fragile thing and once lost will never be regained.” PHOTO: Eco Wanaka 

Ed: “I have always been a big supporter of looking at ways to diversify our economy. I believe tourism will always play a significant role in our economy but Covid has shown us the folly of having “all your eggs in one basket”. 

The movie studio proposed for Corbridge will be a huge boost towards diversification. This could bring several thousand people to our town by the time families are taken into account. I also believe the sheer size of this project will be a catalyst for numerous other related businesses to also locate here. In terms of Wanaka Airport there are already a number of aviation-related businesses which operate there. Regardless of what happens with the debate over where this region’s jet-capable airport should be, there remains lots of potential to attract even more businesses to Wanaka Airport.”

What would the negative outcomes be?

Chris: “There are many negatives to expanding the Wanaka Airport to allow large jet planes.

Loss of amenity value of our beautiful town by having large amounts of hire cars and campervans stored in the Wanaka area. We do not wish to “Kill the Goose that laid the Golden Egg”. Our town is beautiful: let’s keep it that way. 

The noise created by the larger jet planes would be a sad loss of one of the town’s major amenities: Wanaka’s relatively quiet skies. Flight paths for any larger jet planes would go over built up areas at either end of the runway. We are so lucky to live in a quiet peaceful town and it would be very sad indeed to see this lost.

I have heard that there are safety issues relating to these proposed flight paths that have caused concern to authorities and associations, due to the topography of the proposed flight paths.

As a tourism operator in this town I can say that 95 per cent of our clients hire a car and drive to Wanaka and are happy to do so. There is no reason why the tourism numbers can’t continue to expand, as they have been doing quite happily, prior to Covid-19, without Wanaka needing to expand the airport. 

An example of a similar resort to Wanaka on a larger scale is Whistler in Canada where international flights have to land hours away but they still have all the visitors they want. Visitors land at Vancouver and they have good roads to their resort. We need to look at using Dunedin and Invercargill Airports for visitors and improve the roads from these towns to the resorts. With more electric cars coming into use this is also a less polluting option for our environment.”

Ed: “There doesn’t need to be any negative outcomes. Recreational flyers based at Wanaka Airport are concerned about their future at the airport but I know there are ways to accommodate those guys while increasing scheduled services into Wanaka including jets. Also the initial proposal for development of Wanaka Airport and the plans outlined so far for Tarras both have a strong focus on minimising the impact on the community and the environment. This will only be increased as more technology advances are made enabling airports to offset more of their carbon footprint.”

Some opposition to airport expansion appears based on a belief that jet aircraft will cause a detrimental strain on public infrastructure and an increase in population. What is your opinion?

Chris: “The cost of related infrastructure outside of the airport boundary to service an expanded airport, as well as the increased numbers of both visitors and people coming to live in Wanaka to service the needs of a larger airport, would be borne by the ratepayers.

Infrastructure increases would be required to be made to roads, water, sewerage, parking etc. An infrastructure cost that can be anticipated is an upgrade required to the Crown Range, (e.g. already suggested bypass/shortcut via Mt Barker Rd), and Kawarau Gorge roads being required due to increasing traffic which again would be borne partially by ratepayers for visitors to visit Queenstown from Wanaka Airport.

An expanded Wanaka Airport would also encourage more tourist visitors to come to Wanaka than we actually want. We have had really good growth in tourism numbers to the town prior to Covid-19 without an expanded airport. There was even quite a lot of anti -tourism sentiment developing in the town prior to Covid-19 due to over-tourism being perceived to have hit this town as well as other tourist hotspots around New Zealand. We want more control over our tourism numbers and not unfettered growth caused by an expanded airport with airlines - not the community - dictating our visitor growth.

Parking issues around the airport and town are a concern with these expanded visitor and population numbers. It would also mean more people coming to this town to live, a town which is already growing at an alarming rate to fill the jobs from the expanded airport.”  

Ed: “Restricting growth is purely a NIMBY argument. I remember being at a gathering of around 60 locals with growth very much the topic of the night. Deputy mayor Calum Macleod called for a show of hands for those who were born here. Not one hand went up. We had all “found” Wanaka for whatever reason. Who are we to now say ‘pull up the drawbridge behind us’?  

This is a beautiful place and people are attracted to it and technology now means more people can now make the move. And when most people coming to live here make the move they usually drive with the removal van not far behind – they don’t come by jet aircraft. When I moved here with my family 18 years ago there were few employment opportunities unless you bought an existing business or started a new one. Technology now means we have plenty of people working remotely and commuting to bigger centres such as Christchurch and Auckland on a reasonably regular basis. When I suggest to people that this greater region will be bigger than Dunedin in the next 20 to 30 years they simply don’t believe me. I point to the fact that the Wanaka Ward population has increased from around 6,000 when I arrived to around 13,000 today. QLDC projections are that those numbers will double again in the next couple of decades and on an average day there will be around 100,000 people in the district. 

This shouldn’t scare people. There are plenty of small cities around the world that are great places to live. Someone suggested to me that Wanaka will lose its sense of community when it gets that big. A community is all about the people that are in it. Yes, it will be different but it doesn’t follow that as this area grows it will become a worse place to live.” 

Ed Taylor: “We really need to have an adult conversation about what air services we need in the wider region.” PHOTO: QLDC 

What are your concerns/views, if any, about jet aircraft? 

Chris: “Noise is a major negative relating to jet aircraft. The volume of visitors they are able to bring is also a concern. What we need now is more sustainable growth, not just more and more and more visitors. 

There are other values that need to be considered apart from jobs and money, such as the amenity value of the town and its environs for the community that live here. We should not be sacrificing our town just so visitors can get here more easily and external businesses (airlines and QAC) can make more money by flying more visitors directly to Wanaka. Some businesses will benefit from increased tourist numbers but there are also many downsides to these increased numbers of visitors and an expanded airport which allows jet airplanes.”

Ed: “I have no concerns about jet aircraft. They are an efficient way to transport people and the makers of jet aircraft engines have made huge gains in recent years when it comes to making them much more fuel efficient and lessening the impact on the environment. I believe those technological advances will only continue. I was recently standing near Queenstown Airport when a jet took off. I counted seven seconds from the time the aircraft lifted off to when the noise abated. While the initial noise of a turbo prop may not be as loud as a jet the noise from the smaller aircraft goes on for a lot longer. Someone suggested we could have a turbo-prop service between Wanaka and Auckland. While I have no doubt an ATR can make the flight I seriously doubt any viable airline would ever consider doing this. Jets simply stack up so much better on longer domestic routes.”

The debate about airport development growth is closely tied in with the debate about growth. Are you concerned about population growth in the Upper Clutha, and if so, what are your concerns?

Chris: “Wanaka is growing exponentially already with infrastructure struggling to keep up so why would we expand the Wanaka airport to make this rapid growth increase even further?”  

Ed: “I am convinced that our population will continue to grow at a significant rate and not having a jet-capable airport will not stop that. So the growth argument doesn’t really stack up when talking about the airport. People are attracted to this region, for many different reasons, and they will get here - jet aircraft or not. This is where the diversification of our economy comes in and the hope that this will lead to a diversification in our population. To have a great community we need to have a wide range of people here. We don’t want a situation like some resort towns in the US where ‘the millionaires are being forced out by the billionaires’. Working families also need to be able to live and thrive here.”

Do you have any solutions for these concerns?

Chris: “Utilising existing airports in other towns, e.g. Dunedin and Invercargill. As mentioned, more than 95 per cent of the visitors to Wanaka hire a car or a campervan and self-drive so there is no reason they cannot land at one of these existing airports and travel to Wanaka. Upgrading roads from these airports could possibly assist.” 

Ed: “The thing about growth is ensuring the infrastructure is in place to support it. While the council is blamed for not keeping up with growth I am aware of a number of significant infrastructure projects either already underway or planned over the next 10 years. There’s also lots of work being done on establishing where the additional infrastructure needs will be looking out as far as 30 years. Can the council do better? Yes, but they will always be hampered by huge expectations for infrastructure along with a reluctance by ratepayers to pay more rates.”

Large jets create noise and amenity loss; jets are an efficient way to transport people, and huge gains have been made in making them more fuel efficient and lessening their impact on the environment, our commentators say. PHOTO: Supplied

Do you think the public debate about airport expansion made some people reluctant to share their views publicly?

Chris: “Yes, in some sectors possibly due to sensitivity to some employers who wish to see growth at any cost, and threat of public backlash towards individuals as people have become quite passionate about this issue.

However, in view of the win in the High Court by the WSG getting the QAC lease of Wanaka Airport set aside, I think more people have come to realise that council’s granting of the lease to QAC was unlawful. It will hopefully give people time to pause and think about what they really want the Wanaka township to look like in 20 years’ time and whether they would still want to live here with a noisy airport on our backdoor and thousands more visitors in the town. Time to stop and think about why they came to Wanaka in the first place and what they value about living here.

It is not a NIMBY thing, it is a concern that we need to preserve the unique values of the Wanaka village and its surrounding environment that makes this upper Clutha region so special that visitors still want to come here and we still want to live here. Amenity value is a fragile thing and once lost will never be regained. Our chance is now to realign the QLDC’s attitude to listen to the community’s wishes and give Wanaka what we want - not what others outside our community want to do to our town.”

Ed: “Most definitely. I have been openly supportive of exploring the whole issue of increasing air services in this region including at Wanaka and numerous locals have sought me out privately to let me know they agree. These have ranged from a young 30-year-old mum to a 90-year-old resident. The latter drove out to my workplace at Wanaka Airport just to “shake your hand to thank you for going public on this issue”. When I have asked these people why they don’t also speak up to put some balance in the argument they simply say they don’t want the aggravation of being singled out by some of the more aggressive people opposed to jets. Those contacting me have also included a number of significant employers in town. I understand why they don’t want to go public with their view but it still disappoints me because it means we will never be able to have an open and honest debate.”