The Raglan Airfield Meeting called by Raglanite Alan Vink decided to ask the Waikato District Council to reconsider plans to fence the airfield. The meeting held on Wednesday 19th May 2021 in the Raglan Town Hall was attended by 72 people. See below for agenda and minutes.
Safety issues at the airfield were again highlighted on Saturday 22nd when an aircraft overshot the runway and came to rest on a fence. Raglan Airfield supporter Alan Vink commented on FB; ‘As far as I am aware this was simply ‘classic pilot error’. Happens more than most of us realise. On that basis this incident had nothing to do with either pedestrians or dogs. Therefore as a shared space both pilots and people need to be extra careful. No different to when you cross the road or a railway line which are also shared spaces. People should Stop, Look left, Look right, look up and listen”. Planes should stick to CAA rules. Do this and we all should be just fine as we have been for some 60 years.’
This summary of the meeting was prepared and issued by Mr Vink:
Summary of Meeting
We are asking WDC to reconsider their plans. We are asking that no fence be built and that signage is clearer. We all agree that safety of both Planes and People is paramount. That said we don’t believe it is necessary to prohibit people walking across the airfield and landing strip. We note that CAA do not require this either. We are asking that some kind of warning system/device be looked into. If this could be installed then the safety of the airfield will ramp up significantly. We are keen to see the risk assessment. We acknowledge that longer term there are ownership of the land issues to resolve and location of the airfield.
Thank you to those who have already indicated that you are keen to stay in the information loop. You have been BCC’ed in. If RCB or WDC personnel want to be part of this group please let me know. A number of you talked to me after the meeting and indicated an interest in a ‘Community Liaison Group’ idea I floated. I will think about this some more, socialise the idea and let you know where I land on this. I am keen to receive any thoughts you might have. Please feel free to send this email to other local folks. If others would like to be in this email group they just need to send me a quick note alan.vink1@gmail.com. Finally, I have been asked to reflect on this issue and our meeting on Raglan Radio next week Tuesday night at 6.30pm and The Chronicle will have a report/article next week as well.
Kind regards, Alan Vink
Raglan Town Hall Meeting
Wednesday 19th May 2021
WELCOME!
Thank you for coming tonight. Here is the Agenda.
- Background and context
- Purpose of this Meeting: To discuss safety concerns around the Raglan Airfield.
- Desired Outcome: To determine if the residents of Raglan have a different view to WDC about safety concerns at the Airfield and if so to brief WDC accordingly.
- WDC Update – Roger MacCulloch
- RCB Update – Gabrielle Parson
- Discussion
- Next Steps. See below.
- Close at 9.00pm. There is no rush to leave.
Summary of Facts
August 2019:
- CAA issue a notice to all Airfield Operators in NZ (Not Available). They also issue a ‘Safety Message’ to all pilots (Available).
- WDC engages a consultant who writes a report identifying some safety concerns (Not Available). WDC addresses a few minor concerns.
31st March 2021:
- WDC staff present report to RCB at Board Meeting. RCB amongst other things ask for a 3-month Education campaign (Available)
5th May 2021:
- Infrastructure Meeting. (Document Available). See Executive Summary and Resolution below.
12th May 2021:
- WDC informs RCB that they are going ahead as per the Infrastructure Committee resolution below and in doing so go against the recommendations of their own Community Board.
19th May 2021:
- Town Hall Meeting
Key Points To Consider:
- CAA has not requested that the public be prohibited to use Raglan Airfield.
- It does appear that the ultimate responsibility for safety is in the hands of the pilot not the public (but not all pilots agree with that apparently).
- We have seen no data to convince us that there is in fact a safety issue.
- It’s intriguing that it took WDC 18 months to address this issue. August19-March21.
- Further work needs to be done to clarify the often quoted ‘Safety at work Act 2015’ by WDC is in fact the correct piece of Legislation for this issue.
Next Steps: Options the meeting may wish to consider.
- Do nothing. Leave things exactly as they are.
- Improve signage only (that accurately reflects the law).
- Do nothing for 3 months in which time:
- WDC/RCB undertake a public education programme.
- Establish once and for all if there is in fact a safety issue.
- Greater clarity around legislative requirements particularly the Civil Aviation Act 1990 and Safety at Work Act 2015.
- Review Fees and charges and the Administration thereof. The goal being that pilots cover 100% of the annual maintenance costs.
- Support the WDC decision as it stands i.e., build a fence and prohibit public access.
Longer Term some folks think (me included) it will be important to consider whether this parcel of land should be used as an Airfield or not long term.
Next Meeting: Yes or No?
Finally. Please email me if you want to stay in the information loop.
Alan Vink – Meeting Convenor
CAA- What we do. https://www.aviation.govt.nz/about-us/what-we-do/
We work to make sure everyone involved in New Zealand aviation meets the legal standards set by the Minister of Transport.
There are two parts to our organisation:
- the agency overseeing aviation safety, and the rules underpinning it.
- the Aviation Security Service, known as Avsec. You’ll see most of Avsec’s staff working at airports – they’re the ones screening passengers and their luggage.
Taken from WDC website.
5th May 2021
To: Infrastructure Committee
From: Roger MacCulloch General Manager Service Delivery
Date: 21 April 2021
Prepared by: Duncan MacDougall Open Spaces Team Leader
Chief Executive Approved: Y
Reference: # INF2021; ECM ID: # 3064505
Report Title: Raglan Aerodrome Improvement Update
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to provide an update to the Infrastructure Committee on issues and discussions involving the Raglan Aerodrome.
Following an accident in 2019 at Hood Aerodrome in Masterton, staff received notification from the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) directing aerodrome operators to review their safety procedures and processes. Following receipt of the notice, staff engaged a consultant to review and audit the Raglan Aerodrome. The audit identified a number of improvements, some of which have since been made to the airfield. These included improved signage at the entrances and updating the airfield’s landing plate/process (attached).
On 31 March 2021, staff presented a report to the Raglan Community Board (RCB) detailing proposed safety measures to mitigate the identified safety risk (report attached). Following discussions, the RCB did not support the proposal to restrict pedestrian access to the landing strip and made an amendment to the recommendation which delayed Council staff making further safety improvements.
Staff are concerned that the amended recommendation does not fully encompass the safety improvements that are required to meet the obligations of the Safety at Work Act 2015. Alternatively, it is recommended that staff work with the RCB to mitigate the safety needs, develop an education programme, and permit access as far as is reasonably practicable without compromising the safety.
Unconfirmed Minutes
Resolved: (His Worship the Mayor/Cr Smith)
THAT the Infrastructure Committee supports staffs’ proposed health and safety improvements to the Raglan Aerodrome as outlined in the agenda report and supporting document. The proposed improvements are to:
• improve signage, and
• restrict pedestrian access to the operational zone of the airfield. CARRIED INF2105/07
Crs Eyre and Thomson voted against the resolution.
Wednesday, May 19, 2021
Raglan Town Hall Meeting Minutes
Raglan Airfield
Purpose: To discuss safety concerns around the Raglan Airfield.
Desired Outcome: To determine if the residents of Raglan have a different view to WDC about safety concerns at the Airfield and if so to brief WDC accordingly.
In attendance:
Roger MacCulloch (WDC representative)
Gabrielle Parson (Chair of RCB)
Alan Vink (meeting coordinator)
Approx. 65-70 members of public
References:
Civil Aviation Authority (CAA)
Waikato District Council (WDC)
Raglan Community Board (RCB)
Summary of facts – extra notes:
August 2019 – CAA issue of notice to all airfield operators was NOT sent
31 March 2021 – RCB recommended the education campaign happens
Roger MacCulloch (Waikato District Council):
Council also received CAA safety message at the time it was released.
Anecdotally 24 incidents have happened at this particular airfield (Raglan) of near misses/issues according to CAA apparently.
Zero Harm Team based on H&S at work act 2015, went through risk exercise – probability/risk and how bad. From risk assessment came actions (tick sheet) – what’s industry best practice at other airfields etc. Two main things: need to review signage and physical distancing between people and aircraft.
Admitted they should have talked to RCB earlier than they did.
Recommendation to infrastructure committee – do things immediately and potentially reverse things later if needed. Meeting last Friday 14th May where team leader met with chair of RCB to look at map. Is there scope to move fence while meeting safety requirements?
Committed to continue to work with RCB. New, more informative signage gone up in last few days. Going forward, given a commitment to RCB, immediate and long term – what that could look like.
Gabrielle Parson (Chair of Raglan Community Board):
RCB position. At 31 March 2021 meeting, received report from council and made recommendation of 3-month education report. Also supported councils work to investigate long term planning. Infrastructure committee meeting. Still went ahead with signage. Majority of board members supportive of overall increased safety – crossing runway. Agreed council process hadn’t been great. Important that council work with us on the walkway. Weds meeting (last week) – heard from members of public(there were 5 out of 10 who spoke on the this issue) update from Roger MacCulloch. Longer term further investigation of airfield, look at wider concern eg. Proximity to town. Board also discussed with Council the next steps. Board to work with council to come up with the right solutions for fences and access. Requested background docs – audit, risk assessment report, safety report (?). Mid-term – look at what might come up from meeting, eg. Better solution than fencing? Important for comms following the meeting – review of RCB comms with community (not just council liaison). Chris, Dennis & Gabrielle met with Duncan at airfield – he sent through revised plan. Have now received risk assessment report and safety report.
Alan:
19/5/21 CAA technical advisor confirmed that pilots are responsible for landing and taking off safely.
Independent legal review – is Safety at Work Act 2015 the right reference for this issue?
Matt Stockman:
H&S at work act – concern this has been used as basis. First guidance – obligation – training, signage. Under H&S at work – required to take reasonable care for their safety, comply with (council) = shared responsibility. Council have meet their obligation eg. with signage, but public is also responsible. Same way you look left/right when you cross the road or a railway crossing. Can we apply that moderate approach?
Marick:
Pilot – they are trained NOT to land if someone is on the runway. Some runways he’s flown into have public access eg. farmers/kids on runway. No evidence that the public are not responsible for crossing the airfield. NOT a “resort” just for pilots. It’s a shared airfield. Welcome people to come into the community.
Chris Rainer (RCB):
Would have appreciated the time to gather community opinion to work together to come up with solutions, esp. over lockdown. Any responsible organisation would have closed off the airport and suspended ALL traffic if it was a H&S issue. Has been used for past 50yrs. Shouldn’t be paying rate payers money on land that’s not rightfully ours to build on in the first place. This (WDC safety plan) is BY pilots, FOR pilots.
John:
Misuse of H&S at work act. Requested pedestrian crossings on road by school but haven’t done anything about it. What about playgrounds?
Noel Bayley:
Pilot in and out of airfield. Teaches people to fly. Noticed increased amounts of people on runway and having to do run/turn arounds. Only starting to happen now, in the last few years eg. people running out and not looking, throwing ball to dogs. Is this regarded as an incident? Noel hasn’t reported it but could potentially be reported as an ‘incident’.
John Lawson
The only people who have it as a place of work are the people employed to mow the lawn. It’s the same problem with the new foot bridge. Council made it “safer” but it’s actually riskier. The old bridge was not as high. Could look at referring it to the local council/auditor general.
IF H&S at work is applicable, there is a civil liability to protect worst case scenario.
Matt Stockman:
Part of the Risk Register Process is to ask, how do I balance the likelihood and the severity? Council cannot manage every single risk. That’s the role of the RCB, to raise the larger risks and help them to prioritise the risks they see within the community. Important to balance severity with frequency.
Noel Bayley:
Many airfields around NZ have security fences and require access to get through (medium size). This is the certified airfields only – confirmed by Alan V.
Martin Henton:
Pilot – keenly following this subject. Don’t want the raglan community to have us/them mentality. Many pilots come here because they have a passion for flying. I run the Gordonton Micro Club (75 members). Raglan is our favourite airfield. It’s world class. One thing we’ve noticed recently is the community is getting lethargic or has a them/us attitude. Examples: People will see the plane but they carry on walking, or people waking their dog with a ball and think it’s fun to kick the ball out in front of you, group of youths in middle of runway and refused to move. Neutral on fence but would like people to look 30sec either way and UP before crossing.
2nd man from Gorge Micro Club (?)
Would come here 20 times each year. Don’t necessarily need fences but more signage would be great. Our planes are quiet. People need to be a bit more aware.
Alan – A number of safety options:
- Pilot can ring a phone number that sets off lights by runway and warns people – approx. $2,000 to setup?
- They can ring Hamilton when coming into land or taking off and they can set lights on/off.
Chris – RCB:
Initial recommendations were not to fence off runway but put in two 20-30m barriers and signage. Whenever someone lands we subsidise them $30.
Q’s: How many towns have a small airport through their town? Should we have an airport at all? Can we put it somewhere else? – these are bigger issues but now need to be resolved.
Anne Cockran:
Lives close to the airstrip and swims/walks dog every day. Can’t really treat as a normal conversation as it’s not owned by council. These are interim measures.
Ra Puriri:
Land was given as a gift in the spread of sharing, taken for the country’s good in 1940 – use it and return it. But returning has taken 60 years to return a gift. But politicians/beaurocracy gets in the way. Tipping point in our community because it will either move us closer or further away from returning the gift. Speaking on behalf of grandchildren. How do we collectively move it back to returning gift. And then a new call/opportunity opens up.
Tariki Thomson:
Descendant of the people who made the “gift”/tuku whenua. It is not stolen land. Not 60 years ago. Context – original 44 acre block is different to the block Ra (above) is talking about, aplit into four: #1 belonged to Newton family (10acres at bottom of airfield), #2 34 acre block, #3 ?, #4 ?. In 1918, determination of ownership to determine title to that land when Maori land court operated here in Raglan. Belonged to Ngati Mahanga/Hourua. Good to create spaces to talk about this. Tuku whenua = customary allocation of land to another party and usually conditions are attached to a tuku, commonly referred to in English as a “gift”. Two parties in the relationship – one party brings in another party in order to retain the land and build a relationship with an unrelated party. Tribe retains that link and never severs the link through a tuku. There are always conditions attached to a tuku whenua. Tuku whenua between Mahanga and Crown conditions; 1. land wouldn’t be sold; 2. Council would recive no benefit; 3. Bridge built; 4. the memorial would be shifted from the library to the burial ground on Papahua; 5. the Crown and Ngati Mahanga/Hourua would have equal rights over the land. This is still in process with council.
Voting on the ‘Next Steps’ options:
Option 1 – 12 raised hands
Option 2 (added: runway lights; landing fee?) – 2/3rd of room, approx 50 raised hands
On Options 3 most people in the room concurred that this work needed to be done and points clarified.
New info from RCB – RCB and council have been working on a new fence perimeter. This has not yet been finalized as pointed out by Roger and Gabrielle.
Amendment to Option 4 – not completely prohibiting pedestrian access, but walkway is going around the main operative area/runway.
Suggestions/final comments:
- Oversized cricket pitch (the landing strip) to show pedestrians where operating runway area is.
- When there’s a tangi on the marae, please do not land/take off as it’s very loud.
- Don’t get hung up on $16k/year on mowing service when it’s a shared space that everyone is using.
- Signage – the beach notice for dog off leash should be on the other side before entering airfield.
Community Liaison Group to address bigger community issues? – Alan raised this matter at the end of the meeting. Further discussion needed about this idea.
Meeting closed at 9.05pm.