Letter to Cornwall County Council

23 June 2009

Dear Mr. Mosely,

Re - Land’s End Aerodrome

We understand that you have replaced Mr. Edgecombe as Group Leader and we wish you every success in your new job.

Over the last three months LEAAG has liaised with five different Council personnel, whilst attempting to secure consultee status for our group in the event of any planning applications being submitted concerning Land's End Aerodrome. To avoid any confusion, and also in reply to Mr. Edgecombe's letter of 15/06/09, we feel it appropriate to confirm our understandings so far. These are -

• that Cornwall Council will give LEAAG the opportunity to comment on any planning application that is submitted for development on the aerodrome


• that LEAAG will be consulted before the officer writes his report/recommendation


• that LEAAG's interest in any development on the site has been recorded on the history file for the site

Having taken advice, we acknowledge that the details in Mr. Edgecombe's last letter are technically correct but would however, respectfully request the following -

• that Cornwall Council advise any developer to consult with LEAAG at the pre-application stage


• that under the Freedom of Information Act, LEAAG be given information of any meetings and discussions relating to the aerodrome, and all associated correspondence that is not confidential.

We would appreciate an early response from you.

Status of LEAAG

Non-Statutory Consultee status for LEAAG

In response to our letter of application to Cornwall Council for LEAAG to become non-statutory consultees pertaining to any planning matters relating to Land's End Aerodrome, we received the following reply.

"I am pleased to confirm that should we receive an application with regard to Land's End Aerodrome we will seek the comments of LEAAG before the officer writes his report/recommendation."

Although we welcomed this statement, we sought confirmation that this was the same as non-statutory consultee status, which would involve LEAAG in pre-application discussions, if invited. The government recommends that local planning authorities should encourage and facilitate pre-application consultation between relevant parties. The letter above only prescribes notification after the planning application has been submitted.

LEAAG has continued to seek clear advice from the council concerning LEAAG’s status as non-statutory consultees and has just received the following letter from Paul Edgecombe, Interim Group Leader, Planning and Regeneration, Cornwall Council to C.Passingham LEAAG 15/6/09

"Land's End Aerodrome

I refer to previous correspondence and telephone conversations which concerns the above. I also refer to the message that you left on my voice mail today.

I write to place on record the response to your telephone call and so there is no misunderstanding. In the voice mail messages that you have left you reiterated your contention that your organisation, LEAAG should be considered non-statutory consultees and asked that this council will confirm such a status, which in your opinion will give you a greater chance of being involved in any pre-application discussions that concerns the aerodrome.

Before writing this letter I have referred to the document that you identified in your telephone call, the DCLG Statutory and Non Statutory Consultation Report, which was a 2001 consultation document. I have also referred to Circular 9/95 General Development Order Consolidation 1995 which identifies that non statutory consultees as those specified organisations that the government advises in ' various circulars and other guidance' should be consulted on development proposals. I have also discussed your contention with fellow planners and have received advice from one of the Council's Planning Solicitors, who confirms that you cannot be considered a non-stutory consultee, but can be informed of any application that is submitted on the site. She also confirms that there is no right for non-statutory ( or statutory) consultees to
be involved in pre-application discussions, but that, where appropriate, they could be invited to pre application discussions, as could any other party or individual.

From all that I have read and have been advised, I cannot confirm that your organisation is a 'non-statutory consultee.' However I would re-iterate that you will be given the opportunity to comment on any planning application that is submitted for development on the aerodrome and your interest in any development that is proposed on the site has been recorded on the history file for the site. Your wish to be involved in any pre-application discussions has also been noted."

We will update members on any future developments concerning this issue.

Rotor and Wing magazine

Rotor and Wing, an international magazine for those interested in aircraft, conducted a telephone interview with Jon Passingham in March after failing to obtain any information from British International Helicopters concerning their relocation. Add your voice in the comments slot at the end of the article. (We have informed them that Land's End is not in Wales!)

Latest News

Meeting with Westward

Tony White, Jon Passingham and Caroline Passingham met with Jeff Marston and colleagues, to discuss Westward's part in the BIH move. Mr Marston explained that Westward had plans to improve the airport's buildings but that any works would be within their current footprints, and subject to planning approval. LEAAG intend to monitor applications to check they maintain this position.

We were told that the landing lights were needed to improve flight safety for Skybus, not the helicopters. As they have been flying without them for 23 years, we would have to ask 'why?' They seem to think that as the lights are not necessarily permanent fixtures they won’t need planning permission. They will, however, be making a new Planning Application for them.

We outlined the reasons for LEAAG's opposition to the re location, discussing noise and fume pollution, floodlit car park installations, through to large scale building development. Jeff Marston confirmed that if the helicopter service closed, Skybus would be able to handle all BIH passengers with their current aircraft and without an huge increase in daily flights. They conceded that the car park issue would present them with problems.

We confirmed we are not intrinsically opposed to the airport, but would closely look at any development proposals.

LEAAG Presentation to Penzance Chamber of Commerce 7th April

Tony White and Jon Passingham attended the Chamber's meeting and Tony White presented LEAAG's concerns to them. As a result they have joined us as an organisation, with many members also wanting to join on an individual basis. This, on its own, increases our membership by over 120 people and businesses.

Membership

LEAAG has been targetting surfers and holiday makers at Sennen and Gwynver during the Easter holiday with nearly a hundred new members recruited over last week end alone.

Response from 'Old Mike'

"Following our response to Old Mike's article in the Cornishman in which he seemed to give some support to the heliport move he has published a generous review of his position in last weeks issue. He and the 'Cornishman' have kindly given us permission to republish it on our blog. You will note that his comments regarding the noise disturbance reinforce our own statements and concerns.

Old Mike column. Cornishman 10 March 2009

'Hats off to A.C. White who chairs the Lands End Aerodrome Action Group opposed to the move of the heliport from Penzance to St Just. With forensic skill he picked apart my column on the subject and put in a wealth of facts I didn't know and a very sound case for it not to happen.

However I must take exception to a few points. The ghastly noise and pollution is not 'lost over Mounts Bay'. Would that it were. I used to live in Kerris, where the peace of a summer’s afternoon was substituted several times an hour for the awful clatter which resounded from the hills, making conversation impossible below a shout. When I moved from there I fancied living in Paul, but this seemed to be ground zero for all flights which, having avoided denser areas of population by crossing Mounts Bay came overland to spread their miserable footprint all the way to Lands End.

I also stand by my points on the pollution and danger posed by its present site. But just because I wouldn't miss it doesn't mean I wish it on someone else. I can see that operating companies need to find economies of scale and I understand how crucial transport links are to the future of Scilly, but like Mr/Ms White I resent the impact local people have to suffer for something they can rarely afford to enjoy for themselves. We all need to fight our corner. I’m sorry if the tone of my last article was unsympathetic.'

Planning Decision

LEAAG were today informed by Penwith District Council Planning Department that Lands End Airport is not a relevant airport and therefore has no Permitted Development Rights. This confirms the position LEAAG told them existed some weeks ago, following our own legal advice and confirmation we had obtained directly from the CAA.

The planning decision reverses the information they gave to us in January.

The significance of this statement cannot be underestimated. As a result Westward and BIH will now, as reported by ThisIsCornwall, have to make formal Planning Applications for all the works they will have to undertake if they wish to relocate the Heliport from Penzance. Because of the location of the Airport in the heart of an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty the planning process should demand an Environmental Impact Study which will have to consider the consequences of every aspect of the relocation. This is both time consuming and expensive. They may also be compelled to reveal their intentions for the future.

All members of LEAAG and the public who share our concerns now need to stay alert for a planning application being presented after the 1st April when the new less transparent application system comes into force. Because of changes resulting from the new Unitary Authority procedures it is possible that the application may not be announced in the Cornishman.

We believe that the pressure applied by all those who contacted the planning department and local political representatives caused the Department to look at the facts of the application and gave them no option but to change their position. A huge vote of thanks is due for everyone’s sterling efforts. Without them it seems likely that the first stage of the BIH plan would have passed through by default. There seems little doubt, at the moment, that we will all be called on to act again in the near future but we have to be quietly pleased at our success in this first skirmish.

Response to 'Old Mike'

Don't often find myself disagreeing with Old Mike. I can be a bit of a grouch myself, but on the matter of the heliport he's plain wrong. Whilst I agree there are often more than two sides to an argument it is seldom that all, or even two, are right. The BIH position, and Mike's, don’t stand up.

Mike says the Scilly Islanders have to put up with the noise and do so without complaint. They have to. They need the air link to support their tourism. The tourist industry in the West Penwith coastal area that will be effected by the move is attractive to tourists precisely because of its beauty and tranquillity. Far from supporting our tourism a heliport move will be hugely damaging.

How he can't understand the environmental outrage is beyond me. To allow the move BIH want to install over 60 new landing lights which will be visible from St Just to Carn Brea. Presently there are , I believe, 4. They will have to convert about 3 acres of open countryside into fenced car parking, presumably with security lighting to blight the night skies. They will need to construct new larger hangers and garages in an AONB where every other type of building work is heavily controlled and restricted Their passengers will add over 1.5 million vehicle miles a year [with a fuel burn of at least 50,000 gallons] to the roads between Penzance and the airport, much at the time of greatest holiday traffic congestion, in the peak summer months.

The Airport will suffer four times the number of flights as at present, from aircraft that are three times as noisy as fixed wing; a noise pollution increase of approaching 1000%, during these same peak months. According to the lighting plans BIH have submitted their flights paths would appear to be the same as the Skybus, presumably for safety reasons.

If so their noise and vibration will pass straight over all the major camping sites, holiday accommodation, tourist business's and the coastal footpath and nesting sites from Lands End to St Just, as will their fuel fumes. None of this happens in their present site as the noise and majority of the disturbance is lost over Mounts Bay and the Channel. And every one of the above breaches the Local, County and National environmental guidelines laid down precisely to protect our environmental heritage.

That, Mike, is the reason for the environmental outrage.

Agree with you about PDC though. In recent years they've done a sterling job. They'll be a hard act to follow.

A.C.White
Chair LEAAG

Penzance Town Council Meeting

On Monday 9th February, at a full meeting, Penzance Town Council discussed the relocation of BIH helicopters to Land's End. All but one, agreed to the proposition that they should object and oppose the move on environmental and commercial grounds. We are delighted to have their support. A full report of the Penzance Town Council meeting can be found at ThisIsCornwall

Letter to Andrew England

Letter to Andrew England, Sustainable Development and Design Manager, PDC

Mr A J England
Sustainable Development and Design Manager
Penwith District Council
St Clare
Penzance
TR18 3QW

12 February 2009

Dear Mr England

Re - Application for a Lawful Development Certificate for a Proposed use or development by Westward Airways for runway lighting.

The CAA has confirmed our legal advice, that Land's End Aerodrome is not a relevant airport under the Airport's Act 1986. If our understanding is correct, this means that the airport does not benefit from general permitted development rights.

Westward Airways state in their application that they wish to proceed with their installation under General Permitted Development Order 1995-part 18, class B. In the light of the information above, please advise us whether Penwith District Council intend to grant this application?

We appreciate your help.

Yours sincerely

Caroline Passingham, Liaison Officer

CC Andrew George MP, Kevin Lavery CCC, Jim McKenna PDC

Cornishman Letter from LEAAG

Letter from LEAAG to Cornishman, 11 February 2009

On Feb 4th Tony Jones from BIH and Geoff Marsden from the Isles of Scilly Steamship Co. were invited by Jim McKenna Chief Executive, to answer questions before Penwith District Councils' Social Economic and Environment Committee. This was conducted in closed session, (no-one from the public could attend.)

Why couldn't any sensitive issues have been dealt with first and then the meeting opened up to all? In the public speaking section of the meeting The Land's End Aerodrome Action Group were allowed three minutes to speak, and the ruling was strictly adhered to. Is this a sparkling example of democracy at work?

Are surprise announcements and secret sessions part of BIH's strategy to forge ahead with their relocation? Surely they owe it to the community to offer their long term plans for debate and questioning by all the local people affected?

And while all this is happening a Certificate of Lawful Development for runway lighting, submitted by Westward Airways, is proceeding before the council. PDC have a duty to establish its lawfulness and whether Land's End aerodrome is classed as a relevant airport under the Airport Act 1986. If it is not, we understand that most rights for general permitted developments cannot be granted. Unlike normal planning applications, if legality is established, the certificate can proceed unopposed without going through the usual planning procedures.

We hope that our councillors will decide that this application, affecting one of Cornwall's most beautiful places, needs consideration at a full planning meeting. In 1997, the Government Office for the South West informed PDC that an environmental statement was required before planning for runway lighting could be allowed at Land's End Aerodrome. Will councillors adhere to the integrity of this former ruling?

We hope that the council consider this application within the context of BIH's and Westward Airways long term plans for Land's End Aerodrome. But do they know what they are?

We hope that this will not become an example of what some call, planning by 'gradual creep,' where these certificates can, when added together, culminate in very substantial airport expansion because councils have not stopped them.

Tony Jones has said that if BIH don’t relocate to Land's End they will deploy their helicopters elsewhere. Whatever they do, the citizens of Penwith deserve a long term thriving tourist industry that operates within sustainable development guidelines, not a short term solution, that damages a sensitive environment and turns potential visitors away from the area.

LEAAG Presentation to LEAP

LEAAG will be giving a presentation to Land's End Area Accommodation Providers (LEAP) at St.Just W.I. Hall on Thursday February 12th at 12.15 pm. We hope to see some of our supporters there.

Presentation Document to PDC

Presentation Document to Penwith District Council, 4 February 2009

We are against the relocation of British International Helicopters to Land’s End Aerodrome and believe that our rationale is in harmony with your policies in every respect.

PDC's policies for sustainable tourism state that the council will (I quote) "encourage and assist tourism in a manner which -

* welcomes, involves and satisfies visitors

* achieves a profitable prosperous industry

* engages and benefits host communities

* protects and enhances the local environment"

Our contention is that the relocation of BIH to Land's End fails to satisfy any of these requirements.

DOES THE RELOCATION ACHIEVE A PROFITABLE PROSPEROUS INDUSTRY?

DOES IT WELCOME, INVOLVE AND SATISFY VISITORS?

At all times, a company must play to and maximise its strengths and minimise its weaknesses. Survival depends on identifying and profitably satisfying the customer's needs. The unique selling points that BIH have at present over their competitors are:

* a convenient departure point with easy access to rail, road and bus links

* high departure reliability

* limited additional costs

But their relocation eliminates every marketing advantage they enjoy because -

* BIH will once again subject their customers to the very delays and uncertainties that they once sought to remove from their programme because of the fog and high wind that threaten in all seasons

* customers will face an extra irksome journey between their flight and transport link that will inevitably be subject to delays during holiday periods.

* there will be occasions when Scillonians will have no air link with the mainland

No wonder their customers are already stating that they would prefer to fly from Newquay, take the boat from Penzance or go elsewhere.

Added to this there is already a perfectly adequate, cheaper, quicker, more fuel efficient, quieter and statistically safer fixed wing service operating from the same location.

All these factors determine a dwindling business for BIH, address none of their weaknesses and will inevitably hasten their demise.

It seems that they are relocating to release the capital locked in their existing heliport site. If by doing this they damage West Penwith's long term tourist economy, and discourage people from visiting Penwith and the Isles of Scilly, it is nothing short of shameful.

Four of the largest campsites in West Penwith lie close to the aerodrome, along with rental accommodation and other small businesses. Our members are very concerned that the noise and pollution of helicopters landing and taking off at close proximity, must discourage visitors. Businesses on the Isles of Scilly consider that the extra journey their visitors are now committed to, detracts from a pleasurable holiday experience.

DOES THE RELOCATION ENGAGE AND BENEFIT LOCAL COMMUNITIES?

The roads to Land's End support a rural community of small villages and hamlets, twisting and winding through beautiful landscape. In the Summer they are busy with locals' cars, farm vehicles, bicycles, horses and ponies. Adding even greater visitor traffic is not sustainable growth, but the imposition of a dangerous burden that will change the nature of local villages, challenge their rural way of life and cause frustrating traffic jams for everyone.

According to BIH's own statistics they employ over 80 people and carry an average of about 300 passengers a day. A conservative estimate informs us that in terms of road traffic this will mean 200 round trips a day; 400 journeys of ten miles; 4000 miles per day, and over 1.5 million miles per year. At 30 mpg that will burn over 50,000 gallons of fuel. Quite rightly, county and district policies encourage business to be located close to population centres specifically to avoid this situation.

Helicopters generate up to three times the noise of the fixed wing aircraft. BIH's timetable reveals that a helicopter will take off and land approximately every fifteen minutes in high season. This will subject local people to intolerable noise and pollution, continuously, throughout the day.

The aerodrome is surrounded by farms, moors and downs all hosting farm animals, horses, ponies and wild creatures. It is well documented how the noise and motion from helicopters terrify them and there have been thousands of accidents.

DOES THE RELOCATION PROTECT AND ENHANCE THE LOCAL ENVIRONMENT?

The beauty of the area, is in our view unequalled and its greatest asset. Abutting and almost abutting the aerodrome are stunning cliffs, moors, downs, sand dunes, sheltered valleys, ancient field systems, neolithic remains, footpaths, streams, small water falls, tin mining sites and holy wells, all set against the wonderful Atlantic Ocean. Unusual birds, insects and plants thrive in the different habitats. Two of the best surfing beaches in the country along with the coast path add to the wonderfully diverse richness any visitor experiences. They return year after year because they enjoy the fresh air, peacefulness, wildlife, beaches, and special quality of light that they, along with the locals, love.

Imagine their dismay when encountering repeated helicopter clatter resounding from the cliffs and through the valleys.

To accommodate the number of passengers and staff that would be using the aerodrome, a car park offering 800 additional spaces would seem a reasonable estimate. Acres of parked cars will impinge on the vistas enjoyed from Carn Bosavern, Chapel Carn Brea, Bartinney Downs, the ancient footpaths to Carn Euny and all the surrounding high ground.

How long will it be before holiday makers choose other valleys, beaches, sections of coast path to visit, that are not blighted by car parks, noisy aircraft, pollution and congested roads?

And to conclude, for now, BIH are before you in closed session because they qualify for part 1 of schedule12 A. This does not surprise us, as BIH have, in our view, employed surprise, speed and secrecy as key strategies to drive along their plans, leaving councillors and local people confused and ill informed. What is desperately needed is a public meeting where BIH set out their long term plans for the service, offering them for debate and questioning by all the local people affected, because in general, the people of Penzance, the Isles of Scilly, the Land's End Area and surrounding villages are against this relocation.

The Certificate of Lawful Development for runway lighting, submitted by Westward Airways, is a significant, insidious document before the council, deserving careful scrutiny. It is vital that the council consider it in the context of BIH's long term plans and an Environmental Impact Assessment should pre-empt any permissions granted.

Tony Jones has stated that if the helicopters are prevented from going to Land's End they will be deployed elsewhere. Whatever BIH do, the citizens of Penwith deserve a long term thriving tourist industry that operates within sustainable development guidelines, not a short term solution that damages a sensitive environment and turns potential visitors away from the area.

We hope that this committee will subject BIH to the same rigorous questions that we have posed this evening.

This Is Cornwall news report

Visit thisiscornwall.co.uk and add your voice. The article in the Cornishman that reported our meeting is provoking comment. Go to the box below the article and give LEAAG your support.

Letter to Planning Dept

Dear Mr England

With reference to the Application for a Lawful Development Certificate for a Proposed use or development submitted by Westward Airways (Lands End) ref 08-1513. We would like clarification of the following points.

We understand that in order to qualify for Permitted Development Rights an airport must, subject to economic regulation by the CAA, have a turnover in excess of £1 million in two out of the last three financial years. As Westward Airways operate from several airports how will the council verify that such figures have been achieved solely from the Lands End Aerodrome?

Westward Airways believe they can proceed with the installation of runway lighting under General Permitted Development Order 1995-part 18, class B. However development is not permitted by Class A if it would include the extension of a runway. Since these lights are to go 'along the edge and ends of runways', the runway will have been extended by the lights. In addition, permission for battery and portable lights is sought. These by definition would allow for runway extensions. How will the council reconcile this conflict?

Finally we would like to draw your attention to the enclosed letter from the Government Office for the South West dated July 97, with particular reference to the visual impact of lighting in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. It states that a 'submission of an environmental statement is required'. Will the council be making a similar request of Westward Airways?

Until these points have been clarified we do not see how a Lawful Development Certificate can be issued. We would request that Penwith District Council ask for the proposed runway lighting to be subjected to a full planning application with an environmental statement.


Keep writing letters everyone. They are having an effect.

Runway Lighting

You are probably aware that Westward Airways have submitted an Application for a Lawful Development Certificate for a Proposed Development (not for existing development, as we were told.) I have this in front of me.

I quote, 'Runway lighting - lights along the edge + ends of runways along with approach path light positioned on the airfield abeam the landing threshold - down lighting over the windsock - the lighting will be either hard wired or battery + portable.'

It may be that BIH will not submit their Certificate for Lawful Development until this is passed as they need this to satisfy CAA regulations.

We cannot oppose this certificate only comment on the validity of facts given.
The following information might help explain Jon's letter to Penwith District Council that is below.

To qualify for a certificate an aerodrome has to have a turnover of £1,000,000 a year for 2 consecutive years in the last three. Westward operate from several aerodromes and so it is hard to ascertain what their turnover is at Land's End.

In 1997 The Secretary of State ordered that Penwith District Council should instigate an environmental enquiry when an application to put lights onto runways was made. Councils don't like doing this because they are very expensive.

Our Purpose

We are against the relocation of the Isles of Scilly helicopter service from Penzance to Land’s End because -

1. Land’s End Aerodrome lies within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and designated Heritage Coast. Helicopters landing and taking off, approximately every 15 minutes during the Summer will change the nature of the area, imposing noise pollution and high carbon emissions that compromise its unique beauty.

2. Business will decline because holiday makers who visit the locality for its peace and tranquility will have their holiday experience ruined.

3. The quality of life for local residents will be damaged by continuous daytime noise and pollution.

4. Roads to the airport are not big enough to cope with the inevitable increase in traffic. Villages, on route, will be submitted to increased noise levels from vehicles and the increased likelihood of accidents.

5. Bussing visitors from Penzance to the heliport at Land’s End will lengthen their journey and discourage visits to the locality undermining the local economy. The option of flying from Newquay will inevitably become more attractive.

6. The aerodrome lies in a rural area surrounded by farms and small holdings with cattle, horses and ponies. The noise and motion of helicopters can terrify animals and cause accidents to residents and visitors.

7. Property in the area will decline in value with many residents seeing their investments dwindle.

8. The problems of servicing the Isles of Scilly need long term solutions that fall within existing sustainable development policies, providing a high level of service for the holiday makers and locals. This relocation is a short term strategy that most people in Penzance, the Isles of Scilly and the Land’s End area recognise as transparently damaging in all the ways mentioned above.

Additional news reporting about this issue can be found at the BBC Cornwall News website and the Cornwall branch of the Council for the Protection of Rural England website.