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