Saturday 31 January 2009
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.
Thursday 29 January 2009
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.
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.
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.
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.
