with the 2007 Master Plan”. Further, at 3.1.3.3 of the EIS it states that new runway 13/31 (original option) “was a refinement of the preferred option identified in the SCA Master Plan 2007” and developed as “part of the Masterplan Implementation Project) by AECOM in 2010. It is noted that the spatial extent of this ‘refinement’ is stated as being approximately 4 degrees clockwise (without any reference to the location of the centre point of the swing) at 3.7.2.1 of the EIS. Verbal feedback from the Airport EIS team at one of the public sessions indicated that this deflection of the east west runway centreline was to ensure the south eastern End Safety Zone (ESZ) aligned more closely with Keith Royal Park’. For the proponent to now state that the preferred alignment is the same as the SCA Masterplan alignment is incomprehensible given the chronology outlined above. For this reason, the proponent should be required as a minimum to provide geo-referenced mapping that clarifies this issue with absolute certainty which proves without any doubt what alignment is embedded in the preferred option, and what alignment the flight paths and noise mapping in the EIS and AEIS have been centred upon. 186. If it is to be assumed The proponent has largely relied upon the Council Comments that this is the pre-2007 adoption and public availability of the SCA Masterplan citing the Masterplan 14/32 for some 7 years and its subsequent incorporation into original option alignment, it should be the Sunshine Coast Planning Scheme, 2014 as its as the noted that the change justification for not offering any mitigation or preferred was formally adopted compensation for properties effected by new or option by Council in the 2007 increased aircraft noise from the new runway.
with the 2007 Master Plan”. Further, at 3.1.3.3 of the EIS it states that new runway 13/31 (original option) “was a refinement of the preferred option identified in the SCA Master Plan 2007” and developed as “part of the Masterplan Implementation Project) by AECOM in 2010. It is noted that the spatial extent of this ‘refinement’ is stated as being approximately 4 degrees clockwise (without any reference to the location of the centre point of the swing) at 3.7.2.1 of the EIS. Verbal feedback from the Airport EIS team at one of the public sessions indicated that this deflection of the east west runway centreline was to ensure the south eastern End Safety Zone (ESZ) aligned more closely with Keith Royal Park’. For the proponent to now state that the preferred alignment is the same as the SCA Masterplan alignment is incomprehensible given the chronology outlined above. For this reason, the proponent should be required as a minimum to provide geo-referenced mapping that clarifies this issue with absolute certainty which proves without any doubt what alignment is embedded in the preferred option, and what alignment the flight paths and noise mapping in the EIS and AEIS have been centred upon. 186. Comments citing the original option as the preferred option If it is to be assumed that this is the pre-2007 Masterplan 14/32 alignment, it should be noted that the change was formally adopted by Council in the 2007 The proponent has largely relied upon the Council adoption and public availability of the SCA Masterplan for some 7 years and its subsequent incorporation into the Sunshine Coast Planning Scheme, 2014 as its justification for not offering any mitigation or compensation for properties effected by new or increased aircraft noise from the new runway.
sunshine_coast_airport_expansion_aeis_submission.docx