The airport was one of two parties to appeal the decision last year to grant consent for the proposed municipal landfill south of the city.
Airport business development general manager Megan Crawford said the airport’s appeal was "based on a very narrow scope relating to the management of wildlife risks" at the proposed landfill.
"An agreement was reached with the Dunedin City Council regarding this matter."
She did not respond to a request for clarification.
The council-controlled airport company initially gave the Environment Court six reasons for an appeal.
Among them, it said the proposed landfill was closer to the airport than the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) recommended in order to avoid an increase in bird-strike hazard to aircraft.
It said the CAA had the power to impose restrictions on the airport and the conditions of the consent did not avoid the risk that the CAA could impose restrictions on the airport because of an increased risk of bird strike.
The airport’s notice of appeal said it wanted conditions on the landfill consent that avoided the risk that the CAA might impose those restrictions on the airport’s operations.
It also wanted conditions that avoided the risk there might not be the required "zero increase" to the risk of bird strike.
After the airport and the other party, the South Coast Neighbourhood Society, filed their appeals, the New Zealand Airline Pilots’ Association said it wanted to be party to the proceedings.
The association said, at the time, the risk of a reduced availability of "safe air transport infrastructure" must be avoided.
The risk that related to bird strike was carried by association members and the travelling public, rather than council, it said.
Yesterday, it was not clear if the association still wanted to be party to an appeal.
A request for comment went unanswered.
A council spokesman said Dunedin Airport dropped its appeal after a deal was reached late last year.
"The agreement has not resulted in any change to consent conditions, but the DCC has committed to working directly with the airport on an ongoing basis to ensure that the planned Smooth Hill landfill does not increase the risk of bird strike for the airport," he said.
The South Coast Neighbourhood Society appeal was more closely related to the planned landfill’s effects on the environment and community.
Spokeswoman Sarah Ramsay said yesterday the airport was appealing on different grounds and its agreement had no bearing on the society’s concerns.
Mediation was scheduled for April.
"Our position hasn’t changed," she said.
"We fully intend to proceed as planned."
