This joint submission has been made in response to the release of the Essendon Airport's Preliminary Draft Master Plan 2008-2012.

The Draft Master Plan sets out a number of proposals by Essendon Airport Pty Ltd (EAPL) in relation to developments, initiatives and projects it proposes to undertake over the next five years (See Section 9).

This submission identifies the proposals being put forward by the Draft Master Plan and identifies the issues associated with them (See Section 10).

Numerous concerns have been raised by constituents with Mr Thomson MP and Mrs Maddigan MP.

A number of recommendations are made that EAPL and the Department of Transport and Regional Services are encouraged to consider and implement.

In accordance with the Airport Act 1996, EAPL released its Draft Master Plan for the next five years. The Act requires all airports to put forward a Draft Master Plan to set out management's intentions for the airport for the next five years.

The Draft Master Plan must be publicly accessible and provide a period for public comment. All airports have the same timeframe for public comment as Essendon Airport. Mr Thomson has raised concern over the amount of time constituents have been given to consider the Draft Plan. The detail of this concern is discussed further in Section 10.13.

The Master Plan, any variation to it, and any Major Development Plan, require the consent of the Minister for Transport and Regional Services following public consultation (EAPL 2007:93). Once the plan is approved it will remain in effect for five years as prescribed under the Act. Within this timeframe EAPL may amend the Master Plan with the consent of the Minister following the public consultation. Alternatively, the Minister may write to EAPL and direct the lessee to replace the approved Master Plan (EAPL 2007:98).

Recommendation 1: Proposals to construct any new aviation facilities should not be undertaken. The Draft Master Plan should put forward plans to phase out existing aviation infrastructure.

Recommendation 2: While aircraft remain at the Airport no proposals to significantly invest further in aviation support systems be undertaken unless aviation and residential safety would be otherwise compromised.

Recommendation 3: Single and Twin Piston aircraft to be phased out and relocated to other airports.

Recommendation 4: Jet aircraft should be phased out from Essendon and relocated to Tullamarine and Avalon. In the interim, jet aircraft movements should be capped at existing rates.

Recommendation 5: The existing curfew to be enforced, with no exemptions, between the hours of 11pm and 6am.

Recommendation 6: No changes to existing weight limitations on aircraft accessing Essendon Airport should occur.

Recommendation 7: EAPL and Air Services Australia should investigate 'fly neighbourly' flight paths for helicopters at Essendon similar to the paths that are in place throughout Australia's National Parks.

Recommendation 8: An alternative long term permanent base for Emergency Service Helicopters and aircraft should be sought.

Recommendation 9: The Minister commission an environmental and health impact study from the Department of Transport and the EPA, on aircraft fumes and their impact on resident health and the local environment if aircraft remain at the Airport.

Recommendation 10: Minimum buffer zones between residential back fences and future commercial developments to be proposed.

Recommendation 11: Public comment process to be extended by at least 1 more month.

There has been a great deal of local media coverage regarding the EAPL proposal.

On the 21st January The Moonee Valley Leader ran a story titled 'Apathy on airport', which outlined local residents concerns (Nilbett 2008).

The following day the Moonee Valley Community News ran a story titled 'Flight Plans; International runway for Essendon Airport?'

On the 3rd March the Moonee Valley Leader ran a story on residents' concerns about aircraft fumes and the impact on their health. Residents are concerned that since the commercial redevelopment of the airport, in particular the Bulla Precinct, where the majority of aircraft were once located, aircraft have moved closer to the east side of the Airport, the residential side. They believe this has caused a substantial increase in fumes being blown into their homes and are concerned that this will have adverse implications for their health (See Section 10.7).

On the 10th March the Moonee Valley Leader ran a story on Moonee Valley Council's decision to support a motion aimed at addressing the community's immediate concerns in relation to noise, frequency of flights, helicopters, flight paths, pollution and the curfew. The Moonee Valley Council has endorsed the State Government's position to phase aviation activites away from the Airport in the medium term.

Over the years there has been a great deal of media commentary regarding the future of the Airport, with local media and ABC television coverage undertaken in the late 90s of a rally of local residents opposing the Government's decision to privatise the Airport (Carman 2001).

Copies of some of this media coverage are at Appendix 1.

As stated in Section 10.13, public feedback commenced over the Christmas and New Year period, with the publicity also occurring over this period. Given this, many constituents who would normally be interested in taking part in the process may not have been aware of it. To generate further public discussion and feedback, more time to consider the Draft Master Plan is advisable.

Mr Thomson sent approximately 4000 letters to constituents that live within the immediate vicinity of Essendon Airport, on the 17th January 2008, advising of EAPL's latest five year Draft Master Plan (See Appendix 2).

As of the 28th February, Mr Thomson had received over 50 individual letters and emails and a further 100 phone calls. Each piece of correspondence raised various issues, and provided resident opinions on what should occur with the site (See Appendix 6).

Residents are overwhelmingly against any proposals by EAPL to increase aviation activity through the construction of new and upgraded aviation infrastructure, and any changes to the existing curfew and weight limitations. Some feedback from residents is described below;

Mr Gary Gardiner from Strathmore Heights;

"Having obtained and studied a full copy of your (EAPL) proposed Draft Master Plan…I am compelled to write in the strongest terms to express my opposition and concerns about the Plan".

Ms Elizabeth Fugowski of Gowanbrae;

"As a resident of Gowanbrae, I am totally opposed against this development…we certainly don't need anymore planes".

The Gandolfo Family of Strathmore;

"I am writing to voice my concerns re: the continued activity and possible increase of aviation at Essendon Airport…The area needs to be developed without aviation…"

Ms Marion Abada of Essendon;

"I have just read the Essendon Airport Master Plan and am very concerned as to the future direction of the use of the Airport facility, particularly with respect to the increase in the number of larger aircraft movements…"

On Saturday 23rd March the Moonee Valley Council arranged a public meeting at Boeing Reserve in Strathmore. The 150 residents who attended stated they are concerned about the amount of noise pollution, aviation fumes and helicopters that fly over their homes. They asked Mr Thomson to take the necessary action to address these issues (See Appendix 5).

Public debate about the Airport had been occurring before the release of the recent Draft Master Plan. Last year there were two public meetings with Essendon Airport Management and local residents.

The first meeting was held on the 7th March 2007 at Boeing Reserve, Strathmore. This meeting was attended by approximately 120 local residents. Issues raised by local residents included Helicopter and fixed wing aircraft flight paths, the curfew, noise generated from the Airport and the types of developments that were being undertaken by EAPL. Please see Appendix 3 for a copy of the minutes from this meeting.

The second community meeting was held on the 28th June 2007 at the Essendon Airport Terminal. This meeting reported back on the issues raised during the first meeting. Please see Appendix 4 for a copy of the minutes from this meeting.

During these two public meetings, Essendon Airport management were made aware of residents views. Besides having aircraft re-located, the consensus from residents was that in the interim more effective flight paths need to be adopted by helicopters to minimise noise and disturbances. More community oriented developments should take place on the Airport and that no access from residential streets, in particular Mascoma and Lebanon Streets, should be constructed into the Airport along its eastern perimeter.

Essendon Airport (2008) was established in the 1920s. It was Melbourne's main airport until the opening of Tullamarine Airport in 1970, which saw international flights relocated, followed by domestic flights in 1971 (Carman 2001).

It was initially established after the Federal Government bought 36.8 hectares of land, then known as St Johns, for aviation activities. Another 36.5ha was added 14 years later, notably part of Bulla Road and an area to the west in Keilor in 1938 (Carman 2001).

The Airport's first tenant was J H Larkin in December 1921. It was used by many aviation pioneers and welcomed many international visitors and distinguished guests (Carman 2001).

Essendon Airport (2008) was also used as a defence facility during the Second World War.

In 1996 the Federal Department of Transport recommended Essendon Airport's closure. But the then Transport Minister, The Hon John Sharp MP, determined that the Airport would stay open and that it would be sold to private operators (Carman 2001).

In 1998 EAPL (2007:14) was granted a 50 year lease with a 49 year option. Control of Essendon Airport Pty Ltd was transferred to a joint venture of the Linfox and Becton Groups in September 2001. In 2005, the Becton Group transferred its interest to Beck Corporation.

The joint venture company paid A$22 million for the lease of the 305 hectare site, which is located only 14 kilometres from the Melbourne CBD. This lease specifically requires EAPL to continue operating the facility as an airport, while also undertaking commercial development (Carman 2001).

The Lease Agreement between the Commonwealth and EAPL states that throughout the term of the lease, the Lessee must develop the Airport Site at its own cost and expense, having regard to the actual and anticipated future growth in traffic demand for the Airport site (Commonwealth 1998:12)

The previous Federal Government imposed this Agreement upon the local community without any consultation. Had public feedback been sought, the Government would have known that the strong majority of residents want aviation activities to be relocated.

The site is well past its used by date as an Airport. The proposals in this Draft Master Plan to intensify aviation activity are out of step with both the local community's wishes and the changes which have happened and continue to happen both on and off the site.

The Wills electorate covers an area of approximately 57 sq km from Fawkner and Glenroy in the north to Brunswick in the south and also includes Essendon Airport. The main suburbs include Glenroy, Gowanbrae, Hadfield, Oak Park, Pascoe Vale, Strathmore and parts of Brunswick, Coburg and Fawkner (AEC 2007). See Appendix 7 for a map of the electorate.

The Essendon Airport is located along the electorate's north western perimeter. Residents in Strathmore, Strathmore Heights and Gowanbrae live within the immediate vicinity of the Airport and are very concerned about airport operations.

Flight paths for Runway 17 arrivals, show aircraft commence their descents over various Wills suburbs including Gowanbrae, Glenroy, Pascoe Vale and Coburg (EAPL 2007:51).

Many residents have expressed their concern over aircraft flight paths and the disturbances they experience as a result of them.

Mr Chris Trentin of Gowanbrae states;

"…I'm really tired of how the curfew is ignored by all, and really concerned about future plans to upgrade the site to carry Boeing size planes with much higher passenger loads to increase volumes".

Mr Fred Vitale of Strathmore believes the current disturbances are excessive and any future increases in movement, will make things worse for locals. He states;

"To increase air traffic is absolutely insane as we the residents are already fed up with the noise increasing…not to mention helicopters who are causing major concerns".

The electorate of Wills is a very heavily residentially developed area. The location of the Airport is no longer suitable for aircraft and the aircraft should be relocated.

As Mr & Mrs Roberts of Strathmore state, increasing air traffic will increase the risk of aircraft accidents to surrounding homes;

"More air traffic not only means more noise and disruption, it also means there will be a corresponding increase in the potential for accidents, which in turn compromises residents safety".

Resident safety is discussed further in Section 10.9 of this submission.

The Victorian State electorate of Essendon covers 22.7 square kilometres and is an inner western suburban electorate. It lies between the Maribyrnong River and Moonee Ponds Creek. It includes the suburbs of Ascot Vale, Moonee Ponds, Essendon, Glenbervie, Strathmore and parts of Flemington. It includes Moonee Valley racecourse, the Windy Hill home of the Essendon Football Club, and Essendon Airport (ABC 2006), which is located in the north of the electorate (VEC 2008). See appendix 7 for a map of the electorate.

Residents located in the Essendon electorate believe that as long as the airport remains open, residents are faced with a risk of air accidents occurring.

Mr and Mrs Skinner of North Essendon state;

"We totally disagree with any expansion to the airport and are absolutely against any increased activity and most certainly any increase in larger jet aircraft…The airport surrounds are now far too heavily populated to be even considering more air traffic into it…"

The area surrounding the airport is heavily populated. Intensification of aviation activity will increase the risk of air accidents for residents, as stated by Mr and Mrs Skinner and many other residents who have telephoned our electorate offices.

Aviation activity needs to be relocated to eliminate the risks posed to residents in Essendon.

There are a number of proposals that have been put forward by EAPL in their Draft Master Plan. The proposals include increasing aircraft infrastructure, decreasing the number of light aircraft using the site, substantially increasing the number of corporate jet aircraft accessing the site, a new helipad and the development of aged care and housing facilities within the Hart precinct.

There is also some discussion of the curfew and the weight of aircraft that are permitted to access the site. EAPL do not propose changes to each of these, but the Draft Master Plan foreshadows the possibility of changes due to the demand their proposals will generate.

The EAPL vision is;

'To establish a commercially viable, safe and functional general aviation facility which meets projected aviation requirements and opportunities whilst utilising the property's strategic land holdings for high quality development' (EAPL 2007:7)

In order to achieve the objectives of this vision, the Draft Master Plan's main features include;

• Increase market awareness of development opportunities at the airport

• Consolidate airport operation and aviation requirements to ensure efficient and sustainable land use.

• Retention of the two runway system

• The pursuit of emerging aviation opportunities, especially those in corporate jet sector

• Establishment of a new Vic Police Air wing and Air Ambulance hangar and apron complex

• The potential establishment of a new single and twin engine aircraft parking apron for up to 70 aircraft

• The potential further development of up to thirteen new general aviation hangars (EAPL 2007:7)

The Draft Plan proposes the construction of new aircraft infrastructure.

EAPL propose;

"Pending demand, especially from jet operators, it is possible that up to seven new hangars capable of accommodating aircraft up to 45,000 kilograms MTOW could be constructed within the aviation precinct. Construction of a further six smaller hangers could also occur" (EAPL 2007:82)

The Draft Plan also discusses proposals to construct a new air traffic control tower. This is an idea that has been contemplated by Airservices Australia, and EAPL says that it has no specific view on the matter. It reads;

"In recent years, Airservices Australia has contemplated the establishment of a new Air Traffic Control tower at Essendon Airport…whilst EAPL has no specific view on this matter, its preference is for a tower to be located on the Southern Finger of the terminal Apron…it could be possible that Air Services Australia determines to establish a new Air Traffic Control Tower…within the next five years". (EAPL 2007:82)

The Draft Plan states the current terminal building has been in severe disrepair over the last three decades and it is the intention of EAPL to upgrade the building and reverse the decline. Their efforts to improve the terminal apply to their intention to focus on the emerging growth of international corporate jet activity (EAPL 2007:81).

The Airport predicts the use of aprons over 20 years is likely to diminish. EAPL proposes the construction of a low cost aircraft parking area for up to 70 single and twin engine aircraft. This will likely be established along the Hart precinct.. This proposal continues on with the airport's construction of four new hangars and apron areas at the front of these hangars over the last five years (EAPL 2007:77).

EAPL states it has spent significant amounts of money since 2006 upgrading its aircraft navigational systems. Refuelling facilities are also being upgraded due to;

"..the anticipated needs of the aviation industry"(EAPL 2007:77)

During 2006/07 the airport also invested $5 million in a runway/taxi field and airfield lighting system. The master plan states;

"..this $5 million project indicates the commercial link between the airport's broader property development opportunities and aviation." (EAPL 2007:77)

These proposals to construct further aircraft infrastructure, along with expenditure to date on upgrading existing facilities, indicate the airport is positioning for an increase in aviation activity. There are no indications from the Draft Master Plan of a scaling back aviation activities. There are no specific proposals to remove and demolish existing aviation oriented infrastructure. See Section 10.1 for further discussion.

Over the last five years, aircraft traffic at Essendon Airport has fluctuated between 58,000 and 68,000 movements. Movements for last year were estimated at 55,000.

The Draft Plan states;

EAPL state this trend is occurring because of the worldwide expansion of corporate jet travel. Investment in smaller general aviation at Essendon Airport is continuing to decline. Smaller aviation is declining because of competition from smaller general aviation airfields in Melbourne's outskirts (EAPL 2007:43).

In relation to jet aircraft, the airport is receiving interest for additional corporate jet hangars. During 2007, EAPL established four new corporate jet hangars, each able to accommodate two Global Express sized aircraft. EAPL (2007:43) say further interest is being received for additional corporate jet hangar construction with little interest for general aviation hangars.

Due to the existing Air Navigation (Essendon Airport) Regulations 2001, EAPL will not be able to meet the complete requirements of the corporate jet market.

These regulations refer to the curfew and weight limitations that are currently in place at Essendon Airport. The Draft Master Plan reads;

"…under existing Air Navigation (Essendon Airport) Regulations 2001 it is deemed that EAPL cannot meet the complete requirements of the corporate jet market in years ahead. This failure in growth expectations is largely due to the existing curfew status arrangements and weight limitations". (EAPL 2007:43)

The current curfew is between 11pm and 6am and applies only to jet engine aircraft, with propeller planes and emergency helicopters being exempt.

"Using the April 2007 figures as a base, the projection of aircraft movements into the future, Air services published approaches and departures, and the possible change to the airport curfew".

The plan then makes no specific proposal to alter the existing curfew, but the reference to a possible change is a matter of great concern to residents.

In relation to aircraft weight, the Draft Plan reads;

"...Essendon is not permitted to land aircraft above 45,000 kilograms maximum take off weight. Due to this status Essendon presently refuses up to three Boeing Business Jet movements per month. These aircraft exceed 79,000 kilograms. It is envisaged that the demand for these aircraft to use Essendon will significantly rise in the coming decade; however they are not presently permitted to use the airport" (EAPL 2007:43).

The proposals put forward by EAPL involve decreasing the amount of light aircraft movements and increasing the number of jet aircraft accessing the Airport. However EAPL indicate the existing curfew and weight regulations prevent them meeting the foreseen demand in the corporate jet sector.

Section 10.2 discusses the issues associated with these proposals.

The Draft Plan states EAPL envisages a further trend for emergency services use of Essendon Airport. During 2007, the Victorian Government announced the construction of a new Essendon Airport based Victorian Police Air Wing and Air Ambulance Centre.

These facilities will commence construction in 2008 with completion estimated by June 2009. The extent of the project will likely accommodate a new apron, hangars and ancillary support areas including offices, mess areas and maintenance facilities.

There will be five hangars in total, three located for the Victoria Police and two for Air Ambulance Victoria (EAPL 2007:81).

There are also fixed wing Australian maritime authority search and rescue aircraft based there.

EAPL state they are;

"…committed to the sustainability and ongoing use of Essendon Airport for emergency aviation services and considers that the airport meets the long term needs of Emergency Services Victoria" (EAPL 2007:44)

The community response to this issue is discussed in Section 10.5.

Clause 71 (2) (d) of the Airports Act 1996 requires leased Commonwealth Airports as part of the master planning process to produce an Australian Noise Exposure Forecast (ANEF).

Based on projected air traffic, EAPL says it;

"…does not consider that there will be any new areas affected by significant ANEF levels during the next twenty years or any significant change to noise impacts that have existed over the past three decades. Further, flight paths into Essendon Airport have been established for many years and EAPL does not envisage any change creating newly affected areas" (EAPL 2007:47).

The areas most affected by aircraft noise are those directly under the approach and take off paths along the extended centrelines of runways.

Section 10.6 discusses the community response to the noise issue.

An Environment Strategy for the airport was approved by the previous Minister for Transport in June 2005. The strategy takes into consideration air traffic and accompanying activities impact on air quality, water quality, natural resource use and noise.

During the term of the Master Plan, it is likely that a mix of retail, office, light industrial and other general commercial constructions will be undertaken. All will have some impact on the environment, and EAPL outlines the environmental impacts that could arise, either during the construction or after implementation. These issues include;

EAPL's Environment Strategy makes no mention of the aircraft activity and its impact on air quality for surrounding residents. The only mention of air quality made by the Draft Master Plan is in relation to minimising or eliminating dust emission during construction activities at the Airport (EAPL 2007:96).

Many residents have raised the issue of air quality and its impact on their health. This aspect has not been discussed in the Master Plan.

The Draft Master Plan makes mention of water quality and the impact any works at the Airport may have on nearby waterways including the Moonee Ponds Creek.

During construction of a development, stormwater runoff may have increased sediment load. To address these impacts, EAPL's Environment Management Plan specifies reduction controls must be put in place to ensure stormwater sediment concentrations are below Airports Regulations (EAPL 2007:95).

There is no discussion on how runoff water will be collected or diverted to prevent further flooding of properties to the north of the site, as discussed in the previous community meetings (First Community Meeting 2007:4-5 & Second Community Meeting 2007:7-8).

Environmental issues associated with the Draft Master Plan are discussed further in Section 10.7.

Essendon Airport is well located with linkages to the surrounding road network, its proximity to Melbourne's CBD and Tullamarine Airport. Frontage to the Tullamarine Freeway makes it an attractive location for business.

EAPL (2007:82) has split the Airport site into seven parcels, or precincts of land. Land with qualities considered to be attractive to business has been identified for a range of uses (See Appendix 9 for map of precincts).

The English Street Precinct is the main entry in Essendon Airport. EAPL (2007:82) has proposed a number of developments for this precinct. It envisages office buildings, similar to the Essendon Fields head office, to be constructed along the precinct over the next five years. EAPL also plan to construct a child-minding facility, a gym and an 'on-airport hotel' and general accommodation over the same five year time frame.

EAPL (2007:83) envisages high quality commercial buildings, offices and showrooms to benefit from the freeway exposure to be constructed along the Beaufort North and Wirraway Road Precinct. Proposals include showrooms with freeway frontage, office and light industry facilities.

No reference is made to buffer zones for residents' back fences. There is also no mention of construction of sound barriers along the new Wirraway Road entrance into the Airport which local residents have been seeking.

In relation to the Bulla Precinct, EAPL (2008:84) states that, along with the DFO, further improvements are proposed for this precinct in the coming years through office uses, additional retail and a hotel.

EAPL (2007:84) state the Hart Precinct is partly "land locked" by the East-West and the North South Runways, but is accessible via Strathmore.

The Draft Plan reads;

"The Hart precinct is partly "land locked" by the East-West and North South Runways, but is accessible via Strathmore'.

The issue of accessing this precinct of the Airport has previously generated strong opposition from residents, who vehemently oppose any crossover access into the Airport by EAPL from existing residential streets, including Lebanon and Mascoma Streets (First Community Meeting 2007:6).

EAPL state;

"EAPL sees potential for residential development in the Hart Precinct, where it could adjoin off Airport residential areas. This might include a mix of nursing home, retirement village and other specialised residential uses…any future development will have regard to neighbouring interfaces" (EAPL 2007:84).

The Draft Master Plan states (2007:23) the airport lease includes 23 off airport residential blocks, which should be converted to residential and part community use.

Issues and concerns raised by residents in relation to these particular proposals are discussed in Section 10.10.

There has been a great deal of feedback from residents opposing many aspects of the Draft Master Plan.

Residents overwhelmingly oppose any plans to construct new aircraft infrastructure. They strongly oppose increases in any form of aircraft movements and any changes to the existing curfew and weight limitation arrangements.

Residents, and we agree with them, believe aviation activities should be relocated elsewhere. This Draft Master Plan heads in the opposite direction through the intensification of aviation activity.

The proposals contained in the Draft Master Plan indicate an intensification of aviation activity when we would be better served by relocating aircraft elsewhere.

Many residents have contacted us opposing the construction of general aviation and corporate jet hangars and other aviation infrastructure, including an aircraft parking apron for up to 70 aircraft (EAPL 2007:7).

Dr Naveen Singh of Strathmore states;

Ms Madonnah Webb of Essendon states;

Ms Marion Abada of Strathmore states;

Mr Gary Gardiner of Strathmore states;

Ms Raelene Harbour of Strathmore states;

Overall the consensus is that the construction of new aircraft hangars and an aircraft parking apron should under no circumstances be undertaken. The construction of such new facilities will mean the Airport will be able to service and cater for more aircraft than they are currently able to. We are opposed to increases in the number of aircraft accessing the site.

The same applies to the discussion in the Master Plan of Air Services Australia investigating the construction of a new air control tower. EAPL (2007:82) states it has no position on the proposals. This too should not be undertaken. The construction of a new control tower would indicate an intensification of aviation activity.

Recommendation 1: Proposals to construct any new aviation facilities should not be undertaken. The Draft Master Plan should put forward plans to phase out existing aviation infrastructure.

The Draft Master Plan states that existing runways are satisfactory to handle the forecast number of aircraft throughout the 20 year planning horizon (EAPL 2007:75). There are no proposals to alter the existing lengths of runways, although the Draft Plan states the North-South Runway was shortened from 1,585 metres to 1,503 metres, due to the recently completed Calder-Tullamarine Interchange works.

Many residents have raised concern with aircraft that access the Airport along the North-South Runway. Mrs Elizabeth Fugowski who lives directly under this runways flight path says:

Mr & Mrs Williams of Strathmore state;

Mr Fred Vitale of Strathmore who lives within the vicinity of the Airport and flight paths states;

Residents are firmly against any further proposed increases in aviation activity. In order to reduce aircraft activity over the period of this Master Plan, proposals should be put forward to phase out existing infrastructure. Part of this infrastructure includes the runways.

The North-South Runway has already been reduced by 82 metres to accommodate the new Calder-Tullamarine interchange, and is the shortest of the two runways, East-West being 1,921m and North-South being 1,503 metres.

Runway length requirements for aircraft vary depending on aircraft type and local geography. CASA (2004:Ch13) requirements state it is necessary to ensure the runway length is adequate for the most demanding aeroplane that the airport is intended to serve.

In Essendon Airport's case, it is not permitted to land aircraft above 45,000 kilograms MTOW (EAPL:43).

According to CASA (2000) advisory guidelines that outline the preferred method for Airports to comply with Civil Aviation Regulations, runway lengths for aircraft weighing RPT>3500kg are required to be a minimum 2500m in length.

Both runways at Essendon Airport are below the 2500m requirement.

In addition, obstruction free areas on a runway extended centre-line provide for low angles of take-off and safe clearance on approach. A significant clear area at the end of a runway may have an important psychological effect on the way a pilot handles as aeroplane during take off and landing (Ostinga & Goodhew 2001). The dense residential properties to the north of the North-South Runway and the East of the East West Runway at Essendon Airport may not provide sufficient clearance.

Further to this, Gary Gardiner of Strathmore Heights states;

Mr Terry Phippen of Essendon states;

The Draft Master Plan outlines previous expenditure by EAPL (2007:77) on upgrading its aircraft support systems. These systems as outlined in Section 9.1, include the airfield lighting and navigational systems. We believe that while aircraft remain at the Airport, the maintenance of these forms of infrastructure are necessary, although as is the case with other forms of aviation based infrastructure, all investment in increasing such support should be safety related.

Recommendation 2: While aircraft remain at the Airport no proposals to significantly invest further in aviation support systems be undertaken unless aviation and residential safety would be otherwise compromised.

We are opposed to any form of intensification of aviation activity. Many residents have also expressed similar views, arguing that proposals for aviation activity to remain at approximately 54,000 movements per year (EAPL 2007:43) are excessive.

Ms Sue Egan of Strathmore says;

Ms Elizabeth Fugowski states;

Mr John Fleming of Essendon who opposes aircraft remaining at the Airport states;

Mr Gary Gardiner of Strathmore Heights states;

The Gandolfo Family of Strathmore state;

Mr Peter Izatt of Strathmore states;

Ms Vicki Jamieson says;

Mr Peter McDonald of Strathmore states;

Mr & Mrs McLennan express concern over;

Mr Stan Mlinar of Strathmore says;

Mr & Mrs Roberts of Strathmore state;

As part of phasing out aircraft from the Airport, EAPL should be investigating reducing the number aircraft movements at the Airport. Currently aircraft movements at the Airport are allocated to the following aircraft type;

In order to commence phasing out aircraft; a revised Master Plan should propose the re-allocation of some aircraft types from Essendon to other airports and airfields.

It is forecast that single piston aircraft movements are likely to continue to decline by 3% per annum over the next twenty years, and twin piston aircraft movements are likely to continue to decline by 1.5% per annum. During the same timeframe, EAPL (2007:44) forecast single turboprop movements are likely to increase by 3% and corporate jet movements to rise by 3%.

In light of these figures, the revised Master Plan should propose to phase out single and twin piston aircraft, given their demand is decreasing at Essendon due to competition from other airfields.

These airfields which have been expanding and directly competing with Essendon include Bacchus Marsh, Wallan, Lilydale, Coldstream, Sunbury, Tyabb, Moorabbin, Torquay, Mangalore, Barwon Heads and Ballarat. With the exception of Moorabbin, all are significantly smaller, have lower cost structures, fewer regulations and can instigate landing charges lower than Essendon (EAPL 2007:43-44).

Due to the competition from these airfields and the envisaged decline for future demand for light aircraft at Essendon, rather than propose new light aircraft infrastructure to cater for this diminishing sector of the industry at Essendon, such as the aircraft parking apron, EAPL should be planning the phase out of this type of aircraft from the Airport and the dismantling of existing infrastructure for this sector.

All existing piston aircraft that currently access the airport should be relocated to the airfields discussed above which have been expanding to cater for light aircraft.

Recommendation 3: Single and Twin Piston aircraft to be phased out and relocated to other airports.

In relation to jet aircraft, EAPL (2007:43) says demand for corporate jet activity continues to strengthen at Essendon Airport, hence the proposals to construct new aviation infrastructure to cater for this sector (See Section 9.1).

This type of aircraft should be relocated to a more suitable location such as Tullamarine Airport and Avalon.

Avalon Airport, which was leased in 1997 also through LinFox, has substantially increased its jet aviation activity through the construction of new terminals, infrastructure and through its agreement with JetStar. Recent figures show JetStar's operations at Avalon have brought in over one million passengers through its once empty terminal (Pheasant 2006).

JetStar has built its volume and operations as a consequence of landing fees and terminal charges that are lower than those at Tullamarine (Pheasant 2006).

It is anticipated that Avalon could share 10% of Melbourne's domestic passenger market and also win international business. Avalon's plans include increasing the number of staff on site from 1000 to between 4000 and 5000 through aviation and non-aviation developments (Pheasant 2006).

In light of these major expansion plans for jet aircraft at Avalon, EAPL should investigate relocating its jet aircraft there from Essendon.

Tullamarine Airport is also expanding to cater for more aircraft movements and passengers. In 2007 a $330 million expansion was announced, which included the construction of new luggage facilities, terminal facilities, a double decker aerobridge to cater for A380 aircraft and increased space for outbound passenger processing (Melbourne Airport 2007).

Given the expansion of Tullamarine to cater for more aircraft and passengers, and its ability to cater for jet aircraft, EAPL should also investigate relocating its jet aviation activities to this location.

In the interim, movements for jet aircraft should be capped.

Recommendation 4: Jet aircraft should be phased out from Essendon and relocated to Tullamarine and Avalon. In the interim, jet aircraft movements should be capped at existing rates.

Aircraft movements are not permitted at Essendon Airport between the hours of 11pm and 6am, except for propeller-driven aircraft with a maximum take off weight (MTOW) not exceeding 8,618 kilograms, unless the specific aircraft or aircraft type has been included in a Prohibited Aircraft Schedule.

Exception is also granted to propeller driven aircraft with a MTOW exceeding 8,618 kil

Helicopters that comply with relevant noise levels, aircraft involved in an emergency, and the police air wing are also exempt (Air Navigation Regulations 2001).

EAPL (2007:43) says the existing curfew will prevent it from meeting the demand of the corporate jet market. The Draft Plan does not specifically propose any changes to the existing curfew arrangement but the issue is of great concern to residents.

Under no circumstances should the curfew be weakened or watered down. Indeed the present arrangements should be strengthened.

The existing curfew arrangements are ineffective as exempt aircraft still cause disturbances for residents.

Mrs Williams of Strathmore states;

Mr Peter Trengove states;

Mr Stan Mlinar opposes any changes to the curfew;

Mr & Mrs Goodwin of Strathmore state;

Ms Lesla Allen states;

Michael Murdoch of Strathmore states;

In terms of curfew hours, other Airports around Australia currently have 11pm-6am curfews.

As part of a process to phase aircraft out of the site and improve the lives of local residents, the curfew should be enforced for all aircraft between the hours of 11pm and 6am, with no exemptions. In relation to emergency service aircraft, see section 10.5 for alternative options.

Recommendation 5: The existing curfew to be enforced, with no exemptions, between the hours of 11pm and 6am.

EAPL (2007:43) says Essendon is not permitted to land aircraft above 45,000 MTOW. Due to this status, they presently refuse up to three Boeing Business Jet movements per month, which exceed 79,000kg. The demand for this aircraft will significantly rise in the coming decade.

There is no specific proposal by EAPL to increase the weight of aircraft permitted to access the site, but any change in this direction would be vigorously resisted by local residents.

Ms Madonnah Webb of Essendon states;

Mr Terry Phippen of Essendon states;

Under no circumstances should the weight limitations be altered. Corporate jet aircraft should be relocated to more appropriate locations such as Tullamarine and Avalon, who are expanding to cater for larger aircraft.

Existing aircraft infrastructure at Essendon, including the North-South runway is inadequate and below CASA standards to cater for existing jet aircraft, let alone aircraft which are double the weight of existing aircraft.

An increase in weight limitations would mean aviation infrastructure would have to be upgraded and new facilities, beyond what is proposed in this Draft Master Plan, may need to be constructed. As discussed in Section 10.1, no further proposals to increase aircraft oriented infrastructure should be implemented.

Recommendation 6: No changes to existing weight limitations on aircraft accessing Essendon Airport should occur.

We have received a great deal of correspondence from residents regarding the movement of helicopters and emergency service aircraft.

The Victorian Government's Melbourne 2030 plan states that in the medium term, Essendon Airport should be closed and transformed into a significant employment and residential precinct. The Victorian Government (2008:4.3) recently announced the construction of a new Essendon Airport based Emergency Services Air Wing Centre (EAPL 2007:81).

The Civil Aviation Orders (1988) state helicopters are exempt from provisions in the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 pertaining to flight paths and landings.

The Civil Aviation Regulations (1988) state that the pilot in command of an aircraft must not fly the aircraft over any city, town or populous area at a height lower than 1,000 feet or any other area at a height lower than 500 feet.

The Regulations exempt the pilot of an aircraft engaged in a search, rescue, the dropping of supplies, or an aircraft operated by the Federal Police or police of a State or Territory engaged in law enforcement operations.

Currently at Essendon Airport, emergency service helicopters are permitted to operate around the clock with no fixed flight paths or restrictions (Air Navigation Regulations 2001).

Helicopter flights in World Heritage Areas in Australia, specifically Great Barrier Marine Park, Tasmanian Wilderness, Kakadu National Park, Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park and the Blue Mountains, have what is referred to as a 'Fly Neighbourly' Agreement with aircraft relating to sensitive areas of the Parks. These agreements are voluntary codes of practice which ask aircraft to fly above certain elevations except in specific routes and keep a minimum horizontal distance from important areas (Commonwealth Parliamentary Library 2008).

The 'Fly Neighbourly' Agreement is intended to protect both wilderness values and amenity for visitors and residents. A similar Agreement also exists at the Moorabin Training Area, Grampians National Park, and Port Campbell areas.

Many residents have expressed concern about the emergency services at the Airport.

Mr Ross Legudi of Strathmore states;

Mr Geoff Ferns of Strathmore states;

Mr Ian Murphy from Strathaird Street in Strathmore states;

A written response from the previous Minister for Transport and Regional Services, The Hon Mark Vaile, of 24th August 2007, to representations made by Mr Thomson, of 6th July 2007, stated there are no lanes or corridors that helicopters are required to use as they depart or approach Essendon Airport.

The procedures used to manage the noise from aircraft operations are tailored for each airport. In order to minimise disturbances for residents, alternate and more resident friendly helicopter flight paths must be sought. This could involve helicopters being made to follow existing fixed wing flight paths for the North-South and East-West runways and also make the most of local terrain through the Tullamarine and Calder Freeways.

Recommendation 7: EAPL and Air Services Australia should investigate 'fly neighbourly' flight paths for helicopters at Essendon similar to the paths that are in place throughout Australia's National Parks.

The existing curfew permits emergency service helicopters to operate around the clock. Alternative locations to house emergency service helicopters during the curfew period should be investigated.

The argument that Essendon is closer to hospitals than Tullamarine and therefore saves travel times in an emergency is without foundation.

Helicopters can and should land at helipads located at Melbourne's major hospitals, including the Alfred, Royal Melbourne and Childrens Hospitals.

Recommendation 8: An alternative long term permanent base for Emergency Service Helicopters and aircraft should be sought.

The Draft Master Plan does not forecast significant changes in noise levels over the next twenty years. Many residents believe that over recent times noise levels have significantly increased, with aircraft being relocated closer to residential properties following the commercial development of the land where they were once located.

Mr & Mrs Roberts of Strathmore state;

Mr David Caputo of Strathmore states;

Mr Amerio Giordano of Strathmore states;

Increases in noise may have adverse health consequences.

A European study that involved 140 volunteers, living either near London's Heathrow Airport or one of the three other major European Airports, found they had significantly higher levels of blood pressure.

Participants were fitted with a blood pressure monitor, and noise levels were measured in their bedrooms at night. In all participants blood pressure significantly increased after noise even greater than 35 decibels, such as a plane flying overhead, was registered. This effect could be seen even if the person remained asleep, and the louder the noise, the greater the blood pressure. Given that high blood pressure can lead to heart disease, stroke, kidney disease and dementia, it is important that all possible measures are taken to reduce noise generated from aircraft accessing Essendon Airport, particularly in the evenings (White 2008).

Interim measures to minimise noise during the curfew period would be to implement Recommendations 5 and 7.

EAPL's (2007:35) Environment Strategy outlined in its Draft Master Plan predominantly takes into consideration the impact of construction on the site on air quality and on water runoff into local waterways, including Moonee Ponds Creek.

The Draft Master Plan fails to consider the impact aircraft fumes have on air quality and on residents health. Many residents believe increases in fuel residue from the Airport could be affecting their health (Brown 2008). There has been a great deal of feedback regarding this issue.

Many residents who have contacted us believe there is a correlation between the intensification of aviation activities towards the northern end of the North-South Runway and the increase in noise and fumes.

Mr Ian Murphy of Strathaird Street states;

Mr Ross Legudi states;

Ms Vicki Arrowsmith states;

The Eleftheriadis Family states;

Ms Jan Rust states;

In the recent Leader Newspaper article, Ian and Judy Woods said;

At present, Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) emissions and particulate matter (PM) are deemed to be the principal aircraft pollutants for local air quality worldwide. Along with motor vehicle traffic around airports, aircraft exhaust fumes and emissions from ground service equipment and auxiliary power units appear to be the major contributors (Green Skies 2007).

According to the International Society of Doctors for the Environment (2002) most emissions that take place during aircraft flight do not directly expose humans to pollutants as the aircraft move in higher parts of the atmosphere. However there is pollution at ground level during take off, which residents in Strathmore raise concern about. Landing and ground running results in high concentrations of harmful gases and fine particles around airports.

According to a recent assessment by the European Commission, high concentration levels of PM led to approximately 288 000 premature deaths in 2000 in the EU. In the same year high PM levels were also found to have caused 83 000 serious cases of hospital admissions and 25 million respiratory medication use days (Green Skies 2007).

With proposed intensification of aviation activity at Essendon Airport, residents may also be faced with an increased risk of aircraft fumes negatively affecting their health.

Recommendation 9: The Minister commission an environmental and health impact study from the Department of Transport and the EPA, on aircraft fumes and their impact on resident health and the local environment if aircraft remain at the Airport.

Aviation operations at Essendon interfere with those at Tullamarine.

There have been recorded cases involving pilots of major international commercial jets mistaking one of Essendon Airport's Runways for Tullamarine's runway 34, about 5 kilometres to the East. In each instance the pilots made landing approaches however realised their error or were alerted by air traffic controllers and aborted their landing (Carmen 2001:36).

In 1977 two international airlines mistook Essendon Airport for Tullamarine Airport but pulled away in time. In 1987 an Air New Zealand and a Garuda 747 on separate occasions made the same mistake, the later descending to about 500ft before aborting.

There were at least four similar cases of mistaken identity in the 1990s. Two of these mistakes involved a Thai International 747 that was 1.5 nautical miles from touching down at Essendon before redirecting to Tullamarine. Another

B747 was directed to descend 2000ft and lower its landing gear after the crew reported visual contact with what they thought was Tullamarine Airport.

n one 18 month period in the late 1990s, the Bureau of Air Safety Investigation reported that three general aviation aircraft had mistaken Tullamarine for Essendon Airport (Carmen 2001:36).

This is both a safety issue, and an inconvenience for Tullamarine air traffic, which would have further capacity were Essendon operations to be relocated.

Former Mayor of Essendon, Mr Alistair Fraser, states;

As long as the Airport maintains aviation activity, the risk of air accidents at the Airport and within the local community remains.

The worst accident associated with the Airport occurred in 1978, when a Partenavia training flight from the Airport crashed into a house near the Airport, killing the pilot and five members of a family who were in the house at the time.

In 1984 road blocks were set up along the Tullamarine Freeway and homes were evacuated for safety precautions when a fault developed in the nose landing gear of a Cessna 421 on a training flight. Following standard procedure the pilot of the aircraft burnt off fuel and made three controlled passes down the runway before landing on the main wheels and keeping the nose up for as long as possible before lowering it on the runway (Carmen 2001:35)

There have been various other accidents and incidents throughout the lifetime of the airport. Civil Aviation Authority data showed that more than 200 infringements were issued in the last two years to aviators across the country, almost 400 since 2001, in relation to breaches of airworthiness directives and flying without proper maintenance checks. Most of these related to small aircraft, with major airlines only having received four (Masanauskas 2008).

Of the 381 air safety infringements issued by CASA, 174 involved breaches regarding small passenger aircraft, 105 related to personal recreation and 38 involving passenger's conduct (Masanauskas 2008).

Many residents have raised concern over this issue.

Mr Chris Trentin of Gowanbrae states;

Ms Lesla Allen of Strathmore states;

Ms Elizabeth Fugowski states;

In order to minimise the risk as much as possible, the revised Master Plan should phase out aviation activity. This would involve the phasing out of particular types of aircraft, infrastructure and placing further restrictions in relation to the curfew (See Section 11).

The primary concern amongst residents in relation to precinct developments is any possible links from existing residential streets into the Airport.

EAPL (2007:84) say the Hart Precinct is partly land locked although mention that it is accessible from Strathmore.

Under no circumstances do we support a road link into the Airport from Strathmore.

In relation to non aviation developments, the Draft Master Plan makes no mention of buffer zones to residential back fences nor when landscaping between future developments and residential properties will take place.

Recommendation 10: Minimum buffer zones between residential back fences and future commercial developments to be proposed.

Residents have also expressed concern over late night hoons and speeding drivers who access Essendon Field through the new Wirraway Road Entrance. This creates noise and further disturbances for neighbouring properties. The Draft Master Plan should investigate options to minimise these disturbances.

The formal call for submissions opened on the 14th December 2007 and closes on the 20th March 2008. There is no minimum or maximum word limit and submissions must be addressed to the Essendon Airport General Manager, Mr. Tim Anderson, Level 2, 7 English Street, Essendon Airport VIC 3041. Part of the consultation process also involved residents attending morning tea meetings at Essendon Fields House.

We are concerned over the lack of consultation time given to residents to consider and respond to the proposals put forward in the Draft Plan.

Recommendation 11: Public comment process to be extended by at least 1 more month.

Recommendation 1: Proposals to construct any new aviation facilities should not be undertaken. The Draft Master Plan should put forward plans to phase out existing aviation infrastructure.

Recommendation 2: While aircraft remain at the Airport no proposals to significantly invest further in aviation support systems be undertaken unless aviation and residential safety would be otherwise compromised.

Recommendation 3: Single and Twin Piston aircraft to be phased out and relocated to other airports.

Recommendation 4: Jet aircraft should be phased out from Essendon and relocated to Tullamarine and Avalon. In the interim, jet aircraft movements should be capped at existing rates.

Recommendation 5: The existing curfew to be enforced, with no exemptions, between the hours of 11pm and 6am.

Recommendation 6: No changes to existing weight limitations on aircraft accessing Essendon Airport should occur.

Recommendation 7: EAPL and Air Services Australia should investigate 'fly neighbourly' flight paths for helicopters at Essendon similar to the paths that are in place throughout Australia's National Parks.

Recommendation 8: An alternative long term permanent base for Emergency Service Helicopters and aircraft should be sought.

Recommendation 9: The Minister commission an environmental and health impact study from the Department of Transport and the EPA, on aircraft fumes and their impact on resident health and the local environment if aircraft remain at the Airport.

Recommendation 10: Minimum buffer zones between residential back fences and future commercial developments to be proposed.

Recommendation 11: Public comment process to be extended by at least 1 more month.

- ABC (2006) 'ABC Elections Victoria 2006; Essendon'. [Online] http://www.abc.net.au/elections/vic/2006/guide/esse.htm [Accessed 03/03/2008]

- Adelaide Airport Curfew Act (2000) Commonwealth of Australia. Act No.29 of 2000 as amended. [Online] http://scaleplus.law.gov.au/html/pasteact/3/3371/rtf/AdelAirportCurfew00.rtf [Accessed 08/03/2008]

- Air Navigation (Essendon Airport) Regulations (2001) Commonwealth of Australia. Dated 30th May 2001. Parliamentary Library of Australia, Canberra.

- Air Navigation (Coolangatta Airport Curfew) Regulations (1999) Commonwealth of Australia. Dated 15th December 1999. Commonwealth Parliamentary Library of Australia, Canberra.

- Australian Electoral Commission (2007) 'Divisional Profiles; Wills'. [Online] http://www.aec.gov.au/profiles/w/wills.htm [Accessed 29/02/2008]

- The Airports Act (1996) 'Act no.42 of 1996 as amended'. [Online] http://www.comlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/Legislation/ActCompilation1.nsf/0/6663D480BE031ADBCA2572D80007D38B/$file/Airports1996_WD02.pdf [Accessed 29/02/2008]

- Bennett, G. (2008) 'Flight Plans; International runway for Essendon Airport'. Published in the Moonee Valley Community News 22/01/2008.

- Brown, K. (2008) 'Essendon Airport gas stink'. Published in the Moonee Valley Leader 3/03/2008.

- Carman, G. (2001) 'Against all the odds…Melbourne's Essendon Airport is getting an interim make over before its new operator completes a master plan for its longer term future in the second half of next year'. Published Aircraft & Aerospace November/December 2001. Accessed through Commonwealth Parliamentary Library.

- Civil Aviation Authority (2004) Standards for Aerodromes Intended for Small Aeroplanes Conducting Air Transport Operations Under CASA 121b. 'Chapter 13: General'. [Online] http://www.casa.gov.au/rules/1998casr/139/139m13.pdf [Accessed 08/03/2008]

- Civil Aviation Safety Authority (2001) 'Aerodrome Rescue and Fire Fighting Service Procedures Manual; 1 About this manual'. [Online] http://www.casa.gov.au/manuals/regulate/arffs/014r01.pdf [Accessed 6/02/2008]

- Civil Aviation Safety Authority (2000) 'Guidelines on aerodromes intended for small aeroplanes conducting RPT operations'. [Online] http://www.casa.gov.au/download/caaps/ops/92a_1.pdf [Accessed 08/03/2008]

- Civil Aviation Regulations (1988) Commonwealth Consolidated Regulations. [Online] http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/legis/cth/consol_reg/car1988263/s157.html?query=civil%20aviation%20regulations%201988%20reg%20157 [Accessed 11/03/2008]

- Civil Aviation Orders (1988) Civil Aviation Safety Authority; Civil Aviation Order 95.7 (as amended). [Online] http://www.casa.gov.au/download/orders/cao95/9507.pdf [Accessed 11/03/2008]

- Commonwealth of Australia (1998) Lease between the Commonwealth of Australia and Essendon Airport Ltd. Dated 30th June 1998. Accessed through Land Information Services, Land Victoria Title and Search Services 10th Floor 570 Bourke Street, Melbourne.

- Commonwealth Parliamentary Library (2008) Issue Brief provided as requested to Anthony Cianflone 25/02/2008.

- Essendon Airport (2008) 'A significant role in Australia's aviation history'. [Online] http://www.essendonairport.com.au/3/history/default.aspx [Accessed 29/02/2008]

- Essendon Airport Pty Ltd (2007) Essendon Airport Preliminary Draft Master Plan 2008-2012. Released November 2007, Essendon Airport Pty Ltd.

- First Community Meeting (2007) 'Minutes of the Community Meeting with Essendon Airport. Strathmore Heights Community Centre, Boeing Reserve, Wednesday 7th March 2007. Contact Anthony Cianflone from Kelvin Thomson's MP office for a copy.

- Green Skies (2007) 'Air quality around airports; Air Travel is growing, air quality is getting worse'. Printed by Tienkamp en Verhey. [Online] www.greenskies.org [Accessed 11/03/2008]

- International Society of Doctors for the Environment (2002) 'Transport, Environment, Health'. Corcelles-sur Chavornay, Switzerland.

- Masanauskas, J. (2008) 'Light planes, heavy fines'. Published in the Herald Sun 5th March 2008.

- Melbourne Airport (2007) '$330 million expansions for Melbourne's International Terminal'. [Online] http://www.melbourneairport.com.au/t2/facts.asp [Accessed 08/03/2008]

- Nilbett, C. (2008) 'Apathy on Airport'. Published in the Moonee Valley Leader 21/01/2008.

- Ostinga, J., & Goodhew, P. (2001) 'Running out of runway; Determining take-off and landing distance is child's play'. Flight Safety Australia. [Online] http://www.casa.gov.au/fsa/2001/may/22-26.pdf [Accessed 08/03/2008]

- Pheasant, B. (2006) 'Avalon's taking off on Jetstar'. Published in the Australian Financial Review page 60, 12/4/2006.

- Second Community Meeting (2007) 'Minutes from the Second Community Meeting with Essendon Airport 28th June 2007 at Essendon Airport Terminal. Contact Anthony Cianflone from Kelvin Thomson's MP office for a copy.

- Sydney Airport Curfew Act (1995) 'Commonwealth consolidated Acts; Sydney Airport Curfew Act'. [Online] http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/saca1995267/ [Accessed 04/03/2008]

- Thomson, K. (2008) 'Essendon Airport Draft Master Plan call for public comment', Press release issued 15/01/08. [Online] http://www.kelvinthomson.com.au/pressdocs/080115%20Essendon%20Airport%20Draft%20Master%20Plan%20kt%20comment%20ac.pdf [Accessed 16/01/2008]

- Victorian Electoral Commission (2008) 'Electorate profile: Essendon District'. [Online] http://www.vec.vic.gov.au/essendondistrictprofile.html [Accessed 03/03/2008]

- Victorian State Government (2008) Melbourne 2030; Planning for sustainable growth. 'Direction 4: A more prosperous city'. [Online] http://www.nre.vic.gov.au/melbourne2030online/content/policies_initiatives/04c_policy43.html [Accessed 11/03/2008]

- White, Dr. (2008) 'Sleeping with noise raises blood pressure'. Published in The Weekend Australian, February 16-17 2008.