In the latest chapter of Wellington’s zoning war, the airport could be handed expansive control to approve or block housing projects across much of the city.
Let’s say you wanted to build a couple of new three-storey townhouses on your property to grow your nest egg and help address the housing shortage. You hire an architect and a lawyer to make sure your plans meet the building code. You apply for consent from the city council, and, if you live in a character area, you might have to get the permission of some grumpy local complainers, too. Hopefully, after a few bureaucratic back-and-forths, it’s approved. It’s a long process that eats up a lot of time and money, but at last, you’re ready to get on and build your house. Wait, you’ve forgotten something. Did you get permission from the airport?
The newest absurd saga in Wellington’s ongoing battle to make it even remotely easier to build new houses for people to live in will come to the council table for debate on Thursday this week. The central issue is an obscure little regulatory tidbit known as the Obstacle Limitation Surface, or OLS. It’s a type of zoning that gives special powers to the airport to approve or decline all developments that would affect its safe operations. The OLS exists for good reason. You shouldn’t be able to build a skyscraper right in front of the runway, for obvious reasons.
So what’s the problem?
Wellington International Airport doesn’t just want the power to control developments in its immediate vicinity. It wants the ability to veto developments across the entire city. The proposed new version of the OLS is way, way bigger than the old one.
Aside from covering a greater area, the airport also wants to lower the height threshold where the OLS kicks in to as low as eight metres, which would include almost all townhouse developments. The threshold climbs to 30m further away from the airport, which would still impact many apartment buildings in the city centre.
On the graphic below, the previous OLS is in purple and the new proposed OLS is in red. Any building that penetrates the line would require approval from the airport. As you can see, that would include almost every house built on a hill. When councillors were told that in a briefing, they literally burst out laughing.
One might reasonably expect that Mt Victoria is a far more significant hazard than a townhouse built on the side of Mt Victoria. Even houses built on the other side of the hill or in a gully would still breach the OLS, even if there is no realistic way a plane could hit it.
When asked why the change was necessary, Wellington Airport chief executive Matt Clarke told The Spinoff the changes were required by civil aviation regulations. “Wellington Airport has had airspace protections since 1984, but these have not been compliant to the required level,” he said.
“It is important for us to update this to avoid any restrictions on the airport’s operations, while still providing the flexibility to allow development.”
How much impact will this have on housing?
Analysis presented by the airport suggested the OLS would affect an estimated 20,000 land parcels in Wellington. In terms of housing capacity, a worst-case scenario would mean 29,236 fewer dwellings than the district plan currently theoretically enables, and a 26% reduction in realisable apartment developments.
“This has done more to protect our heritage than anything we’ve had to date,” councillor Sarah Free joked.
An important caveat
Just because a property is within the OLS area doesn’t mean taller buildings won’t be allowed. In fact, under the previous OLS, the airport didn’t reject any proposed developments. Wellington Airport chief executive Matt Clarke told The Spinoff, “It will remain extremely rare and unlikely for any request to be declined.”
“In practice, proposed breaches are always authorised by the airport unless in the very unlikely case that aircraft safety would be compromised. As one of the city’s main gateways we have a strong interest in seeing Wellington grow, develop and thrive. We have absolutely no desire or incentive to unnecessarily limit development in any way.”
However, if the OLS is never used to reject developments, that raises the question: why should it exist at all? Applying for building permission from the airport is a separate process from council permitting and adds another layer of red tape. If the airport finds that the proposed building could impact aircraft safety, the developer would have to commission an aeronautical assessment at their own expense to convince the airport to let them build. If it is rejected again, they would have to take the airport to the Environment Court.
What can the council do about it?
No councillors are particularly happy about handing such broad veto power to the airport, especially given that it is majority-controlled by a private company and previously sued the council to stop it from building a pedestrian crossing.
The problem is that the airport is what’s known as a “requiring authority”, which means the OLS falls outside the council’s control. When it votes on Thursday, the council can’t overturn or change the OLS. All it can do is make a recommendation to the airport, raising concerns or operational issues. It’s then up to the airport to decide whether to accept those changes. If the airport refuses, the council’s only recourse is through the courts.
The council will likely recommend a change to limit the OLS. One possibility is changing the height threshold from 8m to 11m so that townhouses aren’t affected, and eliminating areas that are already shielded by hills. Another idea being tossed around is to require the airport to cover 50% of the cost of any aeronautical survey, which would provide a cost incentive for the airport to allow new housing.
