Joining the dots continued on YMEN DFO attempted cover-up -
Extract from "V" off the Accidents - Domestic thread: http://www.auntypru.com/forum/thread-103...ml#pid9334
Following up on the "V" post I refer from page 60 of this Dept FOI document:
03/07/17 Essendon DFO development plan (17-96): https://infrastructure.gov.au/department..._17-96.pdf
Although a bit blurry, I believe the height of the advertising towers is listed as 15.5m. It would appear that this height plus the height of the building on the northern side of the DFO (7.5m) is governed by the 1 in 7 OLS gradient table (refer page 59 & 63):
Therefore by definition the DFO building is in compliance with the ICAO/PAN-OPS/ CASR Part 139 OLS requirements and did not require prior approval or exemption from the Dept or CASA.
However given YMEN is Federal Govt leased airport it also falls under the Civil Aviation (Buildings Control) Regulations 1988 (ref Ironbar above or: http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/c...cr1988441/ ):
Okay so the 7.5m falls under the prohibited 25 ft height requirement but the advertising towers exceed both the 25ft and 50 ft prohibited construction of buildings requirement??
References:
I also note with those regs that other than the height restrictions for building construction there is no mention about 'safety zones' or safety buffer areas around airports.
For the benefit of NASAG perhaps a consultation with the Californian State authority CalTrans would be helpful; or even a reference to chapter 3 of their Airport Land Use Planning Handbook (ref: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/planning/aerona...ndbook.pdf ) for a mature take on mitigating risk around airports...
However I guess this would mean having to admit that there is a problem in the first place - TICK TOCK miniscule 8G McDo'Naught...TICK TOCK indeed -
MTF....P2
Extract from "V" off the Accidents - Domestic thread: http://www.auntypru.com/forum/thread-103...ml#pid9334
Quote:Ventus - The advertising towers ?
Note shadows for height, and the "framework" of the closest one.
Following up on the "V" post I refer from page 60 of this Dept FOI document:
03/07/17 Essendon DFO development plan (17-96): https://infrastructure.gov.au/department..._17-96.pdf
Although a bit blurry, I believe the height of the advertising towers is listed as 15.5m. It would appear that this height plus the height of the building on the northern side of the DFO (7.5m) is governed by the 1 in 7 OLS gradient table (refer page 59 & 63):
Therefore by definition the DFO building is in compliance with the ICAO/PAN-OPS/ CASR Part 139 OLS requirements and did not require prior approval or exemption from the Dept or CASA.
However given YMEN is Federal Govt leased airport it also falls under the Civil Aviation (Buildings Control) Regulations 1988 (ref Ironbar above or: http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/c...cr1988441/ ):
Quote:3. Prohibition of the construction of buildings in specified areas4. Prohibition of the construction of buildings of more than 25 feet in height in specified areas5. Prohibition of the construction of buildings of more than 50 feet in height in specified areas6.Prohibition of the construction of buildings of more than 150 feet in height in certain areas
Also refer schedule 6: http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/c...edule.html
Okay so the 7.5m falls under the prohibited 25 ft height requirement but the advertising towers exceed both the 25ft and 50 ft prohibited construction of buildings requirement??
References:
I also note with those regs that other than the height restrictions for building construction there is no mention about 'safety zones' or safety buffer areas around airports.
For the benefit of NASAG perhaps a consultation with the Californian State authority CalTrans would be helpful; or even a reference to chapter 3 of their Airport Land Use Planning Handbook (ref: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/planning/aerona...ndbook.pdf ) for a mature take on mitigating risk around airports...
However I guess this would mean having to admit that there is a problem in the first place - TICK TOCK miniscule 8G McDo'Naught...TICK TOCK indeed -
MTF....P2