Airport has been sale finalised 

But Council is standing by its contention that buyer John Ferrara has complied with all aspects of the sale contract.

The $2.5 million deal was settled on Thursday afternoon, three days after the due date and two years after a lease agreement with option to buy.

The Goulburn Airport Users Group (GUAG) enlisted Bowral based Accomplished Development Services to independently examine the sale and whether Mr Ferrara had met all obligations.

But the firm only examined a works improvement schedule contained in a previous lease contract and enhancements proposed by Mr Ferrara himself. It did not look at the current sale contract terms or go on private property to check compliance.

Nevertheless, author Peter Mitchell says construction of an “airport terminal would not appear to have occurred.” This facility was a contract requirement but did not have to be a separate building, according to Council.

“Any intention to utilise a portion of the existing motel for this purpose would require a development consent and detailed assessment under the Building Code of Australia (BCA),” the report stated.

“Issues relating to fire safety, egress and disabled access would be prominent considerations as the two uses have differing requirements under the BCA and are also required to be separated by a fire wall.”

But Council general manager Chris Berry told the Post the terminal, in a separate section of the motel, did comply with use and the 200 square metre minimum requirement in the contract.

He referred to a development application lodged by Mr Ferrara on March 23, 2011 and approved the following May. Part of the DA was to change a section of the motel’s use to an airport terminal.

Mr Berry said it was assessed as such. This 300sqm area was in a sunken area to the left of the main entrance and comprised 19 tables and chairs.

The DA also covered a walkway and turbine, other features required under the sale contract.

Mr Berry said the fact that the motel had only obtained an interim occupation certificate at this stage did not affect the terminal. A swimming pool still has to meet standards and the veranda enclosed to win a full certification. The council contends these aspects are not critical to the contract.

The motel’s completion was a key condition of the deal, given its construction had been underway for 20 years. Asked whether Council should have insisted on a full occupation certificate, Mr Berry said: “When you compare it to what it was before, a building site not being used, to one that’s now 80 per cent capable of being used, it’s come a long way.

“…He’s (Mr Ferrara) achieved a lot and it’s sufficient for compliance with the condition of sale.

Yes, there are a few areas that can’t be used but they can easily be brought up to speed.”

Mr Mitchell’s report also concluded that landscaping obligations fell short of the mark.

“If it were Council’s intent to establish a landscaping statement as well as screening and beautifying the area, the landscaping provided falls well short of this objective,” the report states.

An airport improvement schedule under Mr Ferrara’s lease contract dictated a six-month timeframe to plant 200 trees. Users and Mr Mitchell say there are only 60 in place.

But Mr Berry told the Post there was no timeframe on the landscaping placed in the sale contract.

The report also: 

• Questions the adequacy and certification of tie downs at the airport required under the contract.

• States that the effectiveness of street lighting improvements needs to be independently verified against required standards.

• Questions whether a wind turbine called for in the contract, and which exploded in high wind, was given planning approval. Users were concerned that footings did not comply with structural engineers’ specifications.

• Raises users’ concerns that public toilets remain locked.

“While the ultimate decision on the future of the airport rests with Council, it may be prudent for independent audits to occur prior to any sale of such a valuable community asset to protect the interests of GAUG members,” the report concluded.

All councillors received the report two weeks ago. Mayor Geoff Kettle said it was referred to management, who then sent it to Council’s solicitors overseeing the sale.

“That’s their opinion,” he said of the report.

“Our advice from our legal people and inspecting officers is that everything complies. I’m comfortable with the response I’ve been given.”

Mr Berry said council inspectors, development control manager Richard Davies and acting land and property services manager Jim Styles, checked for contractual compliance during an airport visit last Friday.

“Everything was done with the legal people looking over their shoulder,” he said.

“The advice back was that everything had been done satisfactorily and there was no impediment to the sale going ahead.”

Mr Berry also rejected suggestions there was any gap between previous council resolutions about the sale terms and the eventual contract. He said solicitors prepared the document with all resolutions and reports at hand.