NO HELICOPTER BASE HERE
  • News
    • Media
    • Politicians addresses
  • Proposal
  • Helicopter Noise/safety

Due process - what is Mr Cronin afraid of?

12/9/2022

2 Comments

 
​The Mission Beach community is calling for Mission Helicopters director Ray Cronin to fulfill his obligations by referring his Helicopter aerodrome development to the federal government for assessment.
Picture
  • Urgent appeal   to Federal Environment    Minister​
  • Call    for developer to fulfil   obligations​ ​​
  • Important part of  assessment process   ignored​ ​
The controversial development to build an aerodrome in what the community describes as the’ heart of their town’ has approval from the local and state governments but has so far not been assessed under federal environment law.

​​In a recent interview with Charlie McKillop, Mr Cronin told ABC radio Far North he has legal approval for the development. “The process is there for a reason” Mr Cronin said “The horse has bolted and the gate is closed.”

“We are not satisfied with the process that has so far allowed this development to proceed” said Mission Beach Cassowaries president Liz Gallie. “Shortcomings in local and state assessment processes have meant the legitimate concerns of the public have not been addressed”.
 
The Mission Beach community questioned the process from the outset. Why did six Cassowary Coast councillors ignore  community objection to vote 6-1 in favour of the development and against the Mission Beach representative Councillor Trudy Tschui?

​The state government gave approval without requiring an environmental impact study and to date Mission Helicopters has not referred the development to the federal government for assessment under the EPBC Act.  
Picture
Picture
​Under the EPBC Act a developer has an obligation to refer their proposal if it is likely to have an impact on a matter of national environmental significance (MNES) such as the cassowary. 
​
The proposed development site is within foraging range of cassowary habitat, contains a water source and contains a known cassowary corridor. These are all criteria in the Cassowary Significant Impact Guidelines used by  developers to self assess proposals in order to fulfil their obligations under federal environment law.
Decades of community work could be undermined
​

​The Mission Beach community says an important part of the development assessment process has been ignored.
 
 “We have every reason to question the process particularly as the former federal environment minister Peter Garrett saw fit to deny a development on Lot 66 in the same locality because of the impact it would have on the endangered cassowary” said Ms Gallie.”If this development is allowed to go ahead it will undermine Mr Garrett’s decision and the integrity of the whole Wongaling Creek cassowary habitat corridors system.

In 2015 when the then federal Threatened Species Commissioner  Gregory Andrews visited Mission Beach for World Cassowary Day  he was so impressed by the community's commitment to protect the cassowary, it was included in the  20 birds  threatened species list. 

 
The community has sent an urgent appeal for the new federal environment minister the Hon Tanya Plibersek to use her power to call in the development for assessment under the EPBC Act.
 
“We are asking for proper process to be observed; for the impacts on the sensitive environment and important wildlife to be assessed. 

"The process is there for a reason. What is Mr Cronin afraid of?”  said Ms Gallie "Or is Mr Cronin exempt from the law”?
LG
Mission Beach Cassowaries
​missionbeachcassowaries@gmail.com
 The cassowaries of Mission Beach need your  help
​
Send an  email to the Minister

Picture
Sign the petition - send a message to Minister Plibersek
2 Comments

Developers tortuous process flies ahead of public interest

22/8/2022

3 Comments

 
 Petition fails to fly'  (Weekend Post 15th August) and
​ABC Far North interview with Mr Cronin  (23 Aug 2022)
​Letters to the editor Cairns Post  (23 Aug 2022)


 Mr Cronin’s ill disposed media response (Petition fails to fly) to an  appeal to locate his industrial development  away from residential and sensitive  and important wildlife  areas is very disappointing and ignores  legitimate community concerns.

An industrial aerodrome located in the heart of Mission Beach threatens everything Mission Beach stands for and represents. Visitors and residents know Mission Beach as  a special place while Mr Cronin views it as a 'gap in the market'.

​The block of land  chosen for the development might be perfect for his needs but has a far greater value to the needs of the community and their rightful expectation to live in peace and quiet and not be disturbed by noisy intrusive helicopter activity.

Mr Cronin claims the tourism and emergency services he is planning as part of his development will benefit the community. This is a furphy playing on the emotional  interests of the public to gain support. There is no pressing need for these services. They are already being provided. He is avoiding discussion about the true intention of establishing an industrial helicopter base in the heart of Mission Beach.
Picture
In an interview with rural reporter Charlie McKillop on ABC Far North radio this morning,   Mr Cronin said "The funny part about this application is it is solely about erection of buildings on the site,  nothing to do with helicopters".  

Why  then, was the  development application  a Material Change of Use   to include air services?  Why did the council condition the number of helicopters on the site, the hours of operation and the flight path if the application had nothing to do with helicopters?  The community certainly doesn't think there is anything funny about this application. 

Mr Cronin also said  the community had their chance to have a say during the comment period.  The community spoke with a strong voice  when a     high number of  submissions were lodged against the DA.   Community concerns were not only ignored but the councillors were ordered by the then CEO not to talk to their own constituents, the very people who voted them to be their representatives.  One councillor claimed he could not discuss the application claiming conflict of interest.  A  culture of separation emerged between council representatives and the public  with   flippant behaviour    bordering on contempt by some councillors. ​
"This must have been a tortuous experience for you Mr Cronin"
ABC reporter Charlie McKillop
We are being told by Mr Cronin that it's too late  to object to his proposal  since the gate's closed and the horse has bolted.  He emphasises he has legal approval.  There is a difference between legal and proper.   Governments on all levels have failed the Mission Beach community forcing them  into a costly court battle,   perhaps  ill equipped  to take on  legally enforceable negotiations    with a wealthy developer who has made it clear he is not interested in doing anything  to address their concerns unless he is forced to.   

In defending his position, Mr Cronin added, "Quite frankly if I hadn’t done it someone else would have. There is already helicopter activity right in town,  we are taking a responsible approach by placing it between the towns". Based on Mr Cronin's argument we might as well all start importing fentanyl because if we don't, someone else will. 
​
 Referring to the  compromise reached between C4 and himself during the court appeal mediation, Mr Cronin claimed "We are taking a far more responsible approach to noise mitigation than other people are."   In    the absence of   regulations    covering helicopter activity in Queensland, C4 and Mr Cronin  agreed to use the noise levels in Victorian regulation as a benchmark  in the trials carried out at Mission Beach.  

 Aircraft noise is gauged  against  ambient noise of an area. We have not been able to establish exactly what the regulations are for Victoria or where in Victoria the comparison is being made  but it would be safe to say the environment would be vastly different than the high biodiversity of the Mission Beach environs.   
Being legal doesn’t make it right.
​C4 has entered into a legally binding agreement  determining 'acceptable' noise levels with an expert  who would be fully aware of how much noise a helicopter makes. The agreement was made    without  any consultation with  residents during the negotiations. 

 Charlie McKillop concluded the process must have been tortuous for  Mr Cronin. Does that mean  Mr Cronin is  a victim  instead of a wealthy businessman who has got his own way,  against the public interest?  It may be tortuous for  Mr  Cronin but  it continues to be  torturous for the community and their unknown future.​
Picture
Company (Mission Helicopters) advises it will seek advice from the (environment) department when appropriate
Being legal doesn’t make it right.  The Mission Beach community has been left in the lurch by all levels of government.    Decisions have been made behind closed doors and planning laws ignored. The community concerns have not been addressed.   ​ Where are the   governments’ responsibilities for serving communities in the public interest?  

Governments place the onus on developers to take responsibility in referring their developments for environmental assessment or entering  into fly neighbourly agreements with residents in an affected area.  Neither of these things have been done.  (see left correspondence from the Federal  Environment Minister).
Mr Cronin is the sole beneficiary of a proposal that has already caused social division and continues to cause ongoing anxiety and stress within our community. An industrial aerodrome at 2224 Tully Mission Beach Road will have an irreversible impact on our community’s sense of place and wellbeing.​
Mission Beach community continues to  voice their concerns
 
​Residents continue their  objection to this grossly inappropriate  development. They continue their appeal to Mr Cronin to demonstrate he has a genuine commitment to the Mission Beach community.

​He is the only one who can take away community angst by building his helicopter hangar at a more appropriate location. ​
Liz Gallie
President Mission Beach Cassowaries

Picture
Letters to the editor in todays Cairns Post Tuesday 23 August
3 Comments

LEGALITY FLYING IN THE FACE OF MORALITY

18/8/2022

18 Comments

 
Mission Helicopters director Ray Cronin  was a guest speaker at the Mission Beach Community Association (MBCA) meeting on Monday 15th August. 
 
In opening the meeting, MBCA president  Patrick Bluett  asked that decorum be observed and there be no heckling during the meeting.   There were several other speakers during the meeting  with questions invited from the floor but in strict adherence to his  request questions were denied following  Mr Cronin's presentation. 

​Why not allow questions?  What is Mr Cronin afraid of?
​

An    Open Letter   addressed    to Mr Cronin outlined public concerns about his proposed helicopter aerodrome with a request  to locate the business to a place away from  residential  and sensitive important  environmental areas. The letter   was sent to MBCA  for delivery to Mr Cronin ahead of the meeting.​ 
Picture
Mission Helicopters director Ray Cronin
Picture
MBCA letter to CCRC Jan 2021
  In the   presentation, Mr Cronin outlined his business intentions. Two of the reasons he gave   for locating  his proposed  helicopter   aerodrome  at Mission Beach were "recognising a gap in the market"  and that it was simply "in our DNA".
​
​
A large part of Mr Cronin’s presentation was  focused on his part in the rescue of the sole survivor of a recent tragic sea accident. 
​

Mr Cronin concluded his address without  reference to the open letter or community concerns. The concerns are consistent with  MBCA's letter to the Cassowary Coast Regional Council in January 2021 representing their members.  (left).  In the minutes of the meeting  MBCA's active support of the proposed aerodrome was clarified in the statement  from the  Chair ;  "this is not a case of changing position or a need to canvas community as the application was approved by council and upheld in a court of law following due process". 

​ While one question was allowed by a MBCA committee member another attempt to  ask a question of Mr Cronin  was denied.
​
Reliant on legal structures to ignore legitimate needs of the local community
During  his   presentation,    Mr Cronin claimed his business will help the community but his actions show  his  interests lie  in what is allowed by law, not the legitimate needs of the local community. 

Mr Cronin made it  clear  the court had approved  his development adding there was now no further legal avenue of appeal  .


"It might be legal but that doesn't mean it is moral, ethical or acceptable to the residents of Mission Beach who have an expectation they can live in peace and quiet and not be disturbed by noisy intrusive helicopter activity". said Ms Gallie.  "Legal processes are easily available to a wealthy developer to intimidate the local community into putting up with the unacceptable"

"Wooing the public with  a promise of  local benefits  through tourism transfers  from Cairns and Townsville to Dunk Island and Bedarra and a feel good focus on emergency services  belies the true impact Mission Helicopters aerodrome will have on our small community". 

​Mission  Helicopers is not a boutique business servicing our nature sensitive  tourist  town. said Ms Gallie. "  In Mr Cronins 'DNA' as he puts it, is  the ability to   establish   
 Kestrel  Aviation, one of Australia's largest fleets of specialist multi-role helicopters in Australia. 

This trojan horse will be bringing  all the  helicopter  activities in  the following list, with work for;
  • Utilities
  • Power
  • Water catchment
  • Land management
  • Construction
  • Survey and
  • other helicopter related activities
  • AMSA (Australian Maritime Safety Authority) 
  • JRCC  (Joint Rescue Coordination Centre) as well as  
  • Disaster response.

Given this extensive list of  helicopter activites   made legal  through the court order, it is difficult  to understand what was meant in   C4's media release following their withdrawal   from the appeal when President Peter Rowles  said: “We were not able to stop the helicopter base altogether but we were able to secure some more favourable conditions governing its operation". ​
Picture
Mission Helicopters presentation

​No law or regulation exists to limit aviation activity
The Air Services Noise and complaints information service     know how disturbing helicopter activity is  but  concede that no law or regulations exists to limit any type of aviation activity.   This fact was established during the appeal negotiations between C4 and Mission Helicopters and highlighted in Mr Cronins presentation.
 
The negotiations relied on the willingness of each party to reach an agreement. The community expectation was any agreement would only be acceptable if it addressed their well voiced concerns. Failing a suitable mediation outcome, it was believed the appeal would continue to a court hearing.
 
The outcome was not what the community was looking for. The appeal against the Council’s approval was withdrawn in favour of a negotiated agreement.  The approval and conditions were based on an agreed  noise level and other compromises during the mediation.
 
How much noise do Robinson 444 and Bell Long Ranger helicopters make? "Most certainly Mr Cronin knows" said Ms Gallie. "Who was responsible for establishing the noise level the trials were assessed against"?   "Who decided the noise level generated from either of the two medium size helicopters used in the trials and now allowed to operate from 2224 Tully Mission Beach Road was acceptable"?   "Why was Mr Cronin allowed to pilot the helicopters during the trials"?

"Who was responsible for the decision that 120 helicopter take offs and landings anytime of any day in the heart of Mission Beach was acceptable"?
 
These questions  go unanswered as the community was not involved or consulted during the negotiations nor did the conditions agreed to and ordered by the court address the community concerns. The matter was not taken to court.  

One of the court ordered conditions is the flight path. Flight paths cannot be enforced as they are determined by the pilot and dependant on weather conditions at the time. Likewise, it is left to the heliport operator to consider any impacts on sensitive areas such as national park and residential areas.   Mr Cronin has not acknowledged or made any attempt to address these community concerns. 

Local Council Assessment process  fails community
Aircraft noise and/or environment impacts are usually managed within the development application with impact statements.  The local council failed to consider the impacts of the development on the residents,  and important wildlife and environment at Mission Beach.
 
CASA encourages fly friendly agreements to be considered by council and with the helipad operator and local residents during the assessment process.   There has been no mention of a fly friendly agreement either during the initial development approval or during the appeal. 
​
An    industrial business with  Mission Helicopters legal capability located in the heart of Mission Beach villages at 2224 Tully Mission Beach Road will undermine community sense of place and the foundations of a tourism economy built on the points of difference at Mission Beach.

 
The local planning scheme, the development assessment process, and any moral obligation Mr Cronin may have, has completely failed the  Mission Beach community and the expectation   their peaceful lifestyle, environment and important wildlife is protected.
Buy Back for 2224 Tully Mission Beach Road
Mr Cronin is aware of the social division and ongoing anxiety and stress his proposal has caused to members of the community.
 
The   petition    asking Mr Cronin to please fly elsewhere now has 314 signatures. The petition  comments explain  the community concerns.
 
If Mr Cronin has a commitment to the community as he claims, why did he avoid questions at the MBCA meeting and why has he not responded to our  open letter?

2224 Tully Mission Beach Rd  is  a strategic rehabilitation area most suited to  a property buy back to establish a robust cassowary corridor  and allowing opportunity for the  rural land to be developed  appropriately, for example, a  high value niche cropping/ farm tourism venture. 

 

LG
​Mission Beach Cassowaries
No Helicopters Here campaign
nohelicoptershere@gmail.com 
18 Comments

“DEAR MR CRONIN…PLEASE FLY ELSWEHERE”

10/8/2022

0 Comments

 
Media release
10 Aug 2022

Residents call for developer to rethink location of proposed helicopter aerodrome
An Open letter, to be published in the local Cassowary Coast newspaper, calls on Director of Mission Helicopters Ray Cronin to locate his planned obtrusive helicopter aerodrome business where it cannot disrupt residential areas and wildlife. 

“The present Council-approved site lies between two villages and immediately adjacent to a wilderness reserve” Ms Gallie said “residents and visitors alike are attracted to the very special low-key village atmosphere and nature amenity of Mission Beach – into which this helicopter aerodrome approval has brought nothing but social division, anxiety and stress”.
​
“The community has no objection to a helicopter aerodrome being located near Mission Beach, but it must be situated where its operations cannot disrupt residential areas and cassowary habitat” said Ms Gallie “this proposed three-storey industrial hanger complex will introduce a visually jarring and peace-shattering interruption right on the scenic route into town
THE COURT CASE THAT DIDN’T HAPPEN
​

With the support of the Mission Beach community, which made many submissions against the Mission Helicopters aerodrome proposal, community group C4 (Community for Coastal and Cassowary Conservation) started a legal appeal against the Council’s approval; but then withdrew from the case in favour of a negotiated agreement allowing Mission Helicopters to conduct 120 helicopter movements daily, from early morning to late afternoon, 7 days a week.
President of local conservation group Mission Beach Cassowaries,  Ms Gallie said “this is not the outcome the community wanted.  Noise trials conducted during C4’s negotiations with Mission Helicopters highlighted just how disruptive and intrusive this helicopter aerodrome would be if it goes ahead”.
UNHAPPY LOCAL RESIDENTS SPEAK UP
“Local residents are speaking up” Ms Gallie said.  “They fear loss of their community’s sense of identity, which depends on the low-key village atmosphere. Decades of consistent feedback from the community have highlighted the special amenity, character and natural environment of Mission Beach”.

New arrivals Robyn and Tony Pembroke moved to Mission Beach from ‘overdeveloped’ Byron Bay, believing they were buying into a peaceful neighbourhood. They had not been advised of the helicopter plans. “It’s unfair to expect residents to accept the noise of a helicopter operation right in the middle of town” said Robyn. “Helicopter noise is extremely loud, unpleasant and intrusive and needs to be well away from houses, especially at a place like Mission Beach”.

Another new resident, who did not wish to be named, had bought a house lot next to the rainforest.  “I was devastated” she said.  “we bought next to the reserve thinking it would be a quiet nature block – we had no idea we’d be next to a helicopter aerodrome! We saved up for this block- it was to be our first home. Now we don’t know what to do. It’s right under the flight path”.

Ends
Picture
0 Comments

Open Letter to Mr Ray Cronin, Director Mission Helicopters

8/8/2022

8 Comments

 
​​​ 8/08/2022
​
From: Mission Beach ‘No Helicopters Here’ campaign supporters
To: Mission Helicopters

​
Dear Mr Cronin,
​
​We refer to your business Mission Helicopters Air Services currently proposed and approved for 2224 Tully Mission Beach Road.   We ask you to change its location to one where it cannot disrupt and disturb Mission Beach residents and wildlife.
Picture Mission Helicopters Kestrel Aviation
Helicopter noise is extremely loud, unpleasant and intrusive
Residents of Mission Beach have already suffered serious disharmony as a result of the approval for your development.​

 There is strong community objection to any type of helicopter facility being located in the heart of town at 2224 Tully Mission Beach Road.

​
The noise trials have reinforced to residents in the vicinity of your proposed development how disruptive and intrusive this development would be.

​
The ‘compromise deal’ brokered to avoid a court hearing against the facility does not represent the community that campaigned against the development.

​Mission Beach has built a reputation as a nature-based tourism destination set within the Wet Tropics and Great Barrier Reef World Heritage environments. Residents and visitors are attracted to experience the low-key village atmosphere, peace and quiet, and to be immersed in nature; with the best chance of seeing a cassowary in the wild.  ​ These qualities underpin our community ‘sense of identity’ reinforced over decades of consistent messaging during community feedback for projects affecting amenity, character and the natural environment.
​
​
The community has no objection to an appropriately located helicopter service near Mission Beach - but not on your chosen site, where it is adjacent to the wilderness reserve between two villages.

​
Your proposed three-storey industrial hanger complex will comprise a jarring interruption along the scenic route into town, along with the risk of encountering the peace shattering sound of low-level helicopter use. ​
​
Even if there were a strong case for a rescue helicopter to be based at Mission Beach, it should only be located well away from residential areas and cassowary corridors.
Picture
  • Strong community objection to helicopter facility at 2224 Tully Mission Beach
​​​​
  • No objection to   helicopter  service appropriately located    well away from residential areas and cassowary corridors.
​​
  • Proposal has  caused social division,  ongoing anxiety and stress within  community.
​
  • Request  to change its location  where it cannot disrupt and disturb Mission Beach residents and wildlife.
Helicopter noise is extremely loud, unpleasant and intrusive. The recent increase in helicopters flying over Mission Beach and along the shoreline has shown just how disruptive and upsetting the noise can be to residents and shorebirds.
Local residents who value the natural context of Mission Beach and its village amenity know that a helicopter service in the heart of our villages can only have an unacceptable impact on the overall amenity of Mission Beach.
Your proposed helicopter aerodrome has already caused social division and continues to cause ongoing anxiety and stress within our community.
 
The No Helicopters Here campaign supporters respectfully appeal to you, Mr Cronin:

We ask you to locate your business to a place where it cannot disturb and disrupt Mission Beach residents, our peaceful residential lifestyle, and our sensitive and important wildlife.
Mission Beach ‘No Helicopters Here’ campaign supporters
nohelicoptershere@gmail.com
www.nohelicoptershere.com
Picture

Picture
Open Letter - Mr Ray Cronin, director Mission Helicopters
8 Comments

No Helicopters Here GoFundMe fundraiser

6/3/2022

0 Comments

 
Picture
C4 has withdrawn from the court case they initiated, with the support of the Mission Beach Community, against the council’s 2021 approval of a helicopter aerodrome at 2224 Tully Mission Beach Road. There will be no court hearing. A voluntary mediation session with the developer resulted in a compromise agreement comprising a set of conditions that was then ratified by the court. 

​Details of the conditions negotiated by C4 during this mediation can be found   
here.

Mission Beach community members who campaigned against the development are grappling with what this outcome will mean for their future at Mission Beach.
 Instead of the developer being stopped from building a helicopter aerodrome in the wrong place, the developer has been granted the movement of 120 helicopters every day.  Instead of town planning principles and legislation protecting residents and their surroundings, there will be never-ending impacts on the local cassowaries and community.
 
The court approval of the new agreed conditions replaces the original approval.  Should these conditions be breached, there is no way of enforcing them without going to court.  
 
We have yet to learn what was negotiated for C4 during the mediation.
 
Before anyone decided to go to court, Mission Beach Cassowaries obtained preliminary legal advice that outlined just how inadequate is the local planning scheme to protect the village characteristics and natural environment so highly valued by the present community. Development by Material Change of Use (MCU) – ie by overriding what we used to call “zoning” – is now the path to anti-community development under a complicit local council.
 
Mission Beach Cassowaries set up the  Go Fund Me fundraiser  to help the appeal with an expectation it would proceed to a court hearing.   We thank you for your generous support.   The No Helicopters Here supporters did not receive any correspondence from C4 during the proceedings. Nor were they consulted about the possibility of negotiations with the developer; nor about what, if any, conditions would be acceptable during such negotiations.  Supporters of NO HELICOPTERS HERE meant just that – NO HELICOPTERS HERE. 
 
   As the appeal did not proceed to a hearing we have received some requests for donations to be refunded. The refunds have incurred a GoFundMe fee of 2.2%.   

Please let us know if you would like to:
  • Receive a refund (less GoFundMe fee ) 
  • Send your donation to C4, or
  • Donate to Mission Beach Cassowaries to engage professional advice on how to strengthen the Cassowary Coast Regional Council Planning Scheme and be kept informed of other ways you can have meaningful input to better planning outcomes.  
MBC will now focus our efforts on how the community can have meaningful input into the CCRC Planning Scheme currently under review.
 
If you would like to to receive updates and ways you can help please let us know by emailing us at  missionbeachcassowaries@gmail.com
LG
​Mission Beach Cassowaries
0 Comments

C4 withdraws from appeal following judgment on agreed conditions

3/3/2022

1 Comment

 

​On Monday 28th February the  appeal led by the Community for Coastal and Cassowary Conservation (C4) against the  helicopter development at Mission Beach was reviewed  in the Land and Environment court  with  all parties of the appeal accepting  conditions negotiated during the mediation process. 
​
 Judge Morzone handed down his judgment after an agreement was made  between  Mission Helicopters and  C4 . 

The appeal will now not proceed to a court  hearing .

Picture
Cairns Post article
​  
Picture
List of agreed conditions

​In their media release  titled COMPROMISE REACHED ON BEACH HELIPORT      C4 claims  the development operations will be more favourable  than in the orginal council approval.

C4 President Peter Rowles said: “We were not able to stop the helicopter base altogether but we were able to secure some more favourable conditions governing its operation than those the council saw fit to impose despite widespread community opposition.” (read full 'agreed' conditions left) 

The community is wondering what, if any, compromise was   made  by Mission Helicopters in the deal agreed to during mediation between the parties. 
​The conditions include rehabilitation of cassowary habitat to the north and to the south of the development. 

It's all  downwash under the blades now, and there might be lots of it if the developer exercises  his full rights.  The  new conditions will allow up to 120 helicopter movements   a day    from the site  at the centre of  Mission Beach.

Residents who showed  strong support against the devlopment and were willing to  help with  the appeal and expenses   are  asking why they were not consulted  at any time   during the appeal  particularly on what, if any,   conditions might be considered acceptable  to take to mediation with the developer.

The outcome of the appeal has  community members  grappling with the knowledge   their quiet peaceful  township, the reason many  have chosen to settle  at Mission Beach,  will now have the unpredictable intrusion of  noisy  helicopters any time from early morning to late afterrnoon seven days a week.  


Affected residents say they were  given little or no opportunity to have  input into the appeal.  They were discouraged from public show  of  support against the development. There was no  mention of  community expectation in the judgment handed down from  Judge Morzone,  a factor that has strong sway in community court appeals.   

 By sidelining the supporters of the appeal, C4, has  unilaterally negotiated an outcome that will have a significant impact on the future amenity and environment  at    Mission Beach.

With the  appeal no longer proceeding to a hearing, those who contributed to the   No helicopters Here Go Fund Me appeal have been contacted by Mission Beach Cassowaries  (MBC) for instructions regarding their  donations.    See GoFundMe  fundraiser update .
LG
​Mission Beach Cassowaries
1 Comment

Judge orders a list of conditions in helicopter appeal

7/12/2021

5 Comments

 
On the 3rd December Judge Morzone ordered  that, by December 20th, C4   provide to the other appeal parties, a list of conditions they  believe need to be considered for  any approval of the development application.   (See copy of orders right).

Based on C4's response, by the 21st January, the  respondent (CCRC), will then circulate  a set of conditions for consideration by all parties. 
Depending on the outcome of these  'negotiations', C4 will either agree to the  conditions or not. If there is no agreement,  by the 14th February, they will need to state  the reasons why the development should still be refused and on what grounds they wish to defend their position.  
​

The next step would be  to proceed to a court hearing. 
​
We have no knowledge of  what  conditions  C4  will be putting forward.  Based on the No Helicopters Here campaign objectives,   the following are the only conditions that could be considered appropriate;
  • ​No helicopter noise to eminate  beyond the boundaries of  2224 Tully Mission Beach Road.
  • No helicopters to take off or land  at  2224 Tully Mission Beach Road.
  • No helicopters to be stored at 2224 Tully  Mission Beach Road.
Picture
Judge Morzone orders

We  trust  the appeal legal team have a strong enough case (as in the grounds for the appeal) to argue, the development does not comply with the planning scheme  and  no conditions  can reduce the unacceptable impacts of  helicopters  operating from 2224 Tully Mission Beach Road,    i.e.   on the; 
  •  amenity of Mission Beach,
  • the sensitive environment and
  • the residents    within   the noise range.

We trust the position will be to   maintain the  development should be refused.
Approval for ANY helicopter activities at this location would be  the 'foot in the door' to future variations and expansion. 

We must wait until Monday 14th February 2022 for the outcomes of the appeal parties' 'negotiations'. 
Picture


​​Has Mission Helicopters left town?

It appears for now, Mission Helicopters  has left the area.  There are no helicopters in the  Tully aerodrome hanger.  The last news on the Mission Beach Helicopters facebook was a post was on October 20th announcing they were at the Whitsundays.

Helicopters offering scenic tours have long been  an annoyance to those enjoying  Whitehaven Beach, one of the most well known picturesque beaches in the Whitsundays.  If locals want to enjoy the beauty of the beach they  avoid  visiting  until  late afternoon when  all the flights have ended.

This is the very reason the Mission Beach community objects to the intrusive activity being  considered  for Mission Beach.
 

Why was there no  Acoustic Consultant report  with the  Helicopter DA?
​Last year  the council apaproved a Material Change of Use  for Low Impact Industry (Ice Making) at Coconuts .  In the   UNCONFIRMED MINUTES - LOCAL GOVERNMENT MEETING 27/08/2020  it states: "The implementation of the noise attenuation measures outlined in the Acoustic Consultant’s Report will reduce noise to a level that is acceptable and in compliance with the Environmental Protection Act 1994, Environmental Protection Regulation 2019, and Environmental Protection (Noise) Policy 2019. The report outlines that noise emissions will not exceed background noise levels by more than 3 decibels, making it largely inaudible for surrounding properties. To ensure compliance, it has been conditioned that further testing is undertaken subsequent to the installation of the noise mitigation measures (within 30 days), to confirm that the noise levels comply with those outlined in the legislation. It will also be conditioned that loading and unloading of trucks occurs within the shed and with the doors closed".
 Why didn't the council require  an acoustic report with the  Mission Helicopter application? Why didn't the council impose conditions of noise  abatement  while helicopters were on the ground, during warm up, after landing and during maintenance?  

An email  Mission Beach Cassowaries  received   from  CASA   (22   Jan 2021)  stated " CASA cannot enforce requirements and/or conditions placed on land development application through state or council authority.  These are matters for the local and/or state authority"
 
Why did the council absolved themselves of any responsibility for noise associated with helicopter activity stating they did not have any jurisdiction once an  aircraft was airborne?   CASA informed us the responsibility does lay with local government. "  CASA does not regulate aircraft noise and/or environment impacts.  It is usually a matter managed within the land development application with impact statements.  On these matters you should refer to the local council authority.  While CASA cannot enforce fly friendly agreements we encourage consideration by council authorities and with the helipad operator and local residents".   

The answers to these questions are part of the costly court case  the community has been forced into.   This is  now an accepted part of the current development assessment process.
LG
​Mission Beach Cassowaries

Picture
Fly Neighbourly Agreements

Picture
CASA Email (22Jan2021)

5 Comments

Helicopter noise trials carried out at 2224 Tully Mission Beach Road

28/10/2021

7 Comments

 
Helicopter noise trials were carried out at  the proposed helicopter development site  in Mission Beach during the middle of the day on Wed  28th October as per the  Court order issued on September 3rd.  
Picture
Kestrel Aviation boss Ray Cronin who   owns Mission Helicopters, piloted  the two  aircraft  used in the trials;  a Bell 206 Long Ranger and the smaller Robinson which is currently used for passenger transfers to and from Bedarra Island. ​
Picture
Bell 206 Long Ranger                                                                                                                          Robinson - Bedarra passenger transfer helicopter
Representatives from both sides of the  court appeal against the helicopter development approval were present to observe the trials including the CCRC Planner Byron Jones who wrote  the Planning Department reports during the development assessment process.

C4 president  Peter Rowles and committee member Ian Shankley were at the front of  2224 Tully Mission Beach Road with  the independent acoustic expert  while vice president and committee members Helen and Jeff Larson observed from the mouth of  Wongaling (Porters) Creek under the flight path. 
​
Acoustic recording devises were placed strategically at either end of the fenced development area  as well as  at houses  within the impact zone.   
Picture
C4 President Peter Rowles with independent noise expert at 2224 Tully Mission Beach Road during the helicopter noise trials.
Picture
Mission Helicopter's noise level meter at southern corner of the development site.
​It was made clear the noise trials   were only concerned with  impact on residents so it was disappointing the community was not  informed of the trial date and time.  Noise levels from any model  helicopter  on a designated flight path are known or can be  calculated, so it could have added weight to a fair assessment to give opportunity for   feedback from  residents within the noise impact zone. The trials  were not concerned with any noise impacts on  the bike path or the beach or the environment.

We were told   the appeal process has made the whole  council approval null and void. "That a lot has changed since then. Such as  the  aircraft now being proposed for the development is the Bell Long Ranger and the Robinson". With little or no  information being shared with the community we must  trust  that any 'negotiations' or 'agreements' during the  appeal  proceedings are from  a firm position of 'No Helicopters Here'. 
Takeoff of Bell Long Ranger flight number 4
 Residents feedback
We were alerted  to the trials by a Conch Street resident during the third of    four   Bell 206 Long Ranger    flights  from the development site. The video above is of the  last flight takeoff.    Residents in Conch Street,  Oasis and residential subdivision south of Marcs Park  reported  intrusive  noise during the trials. A recording taken by a resident at  Shelly Court registered   65.9 db at  11.56am and 87.3db at 11.58 during the Bell 206 flight.   As another  Mission Beach resident  observed..." that is   loud band level".
Picture
A homeowner  in Conch Street described the sound of the smaller Robinson aircraft as "loud and   intrusive,  similar to the Bell."    The resident who enjoys living next to  the rainforest  and identifying the sounds of the birds  said after the helicopter  flew past there was no bird sound for  about   15 to 20 minutes.

​Another   resident  on the western end of Conch Street   said the noise was unacceptable. He is  devastated to think there is a possibility this could be  the norm. 
​
A resident in Huchison Street  said   
 she could hear the constant noise from inside and outside her house  and is furious this Council approved  what she describes as  "this abomination" without a properly conducted Environmental Impact Study"
The graphic shows the locations of the above feedback to the north  of the flight path and assumes  the helicopters were using the  path provided to the CCRC as mentioned in approval Condition no 7.
Picture
A facebook user commented  "Helicopters are loud. Full stop. Everybody knows this, especially when taking off and landing, there should be no landing pads or flight paths any where near residency or nature sanctuary".

​
Community members  have questioned   why the trials were carried out during    the hottest time of the day.    While   sound moves faster in warm air than colder air, the wave bends away from the warm air and back toward the ground. That's why sound is able to travel farther in cooler weather.  Was this taken into account by both parties within the ''agreed approach' for the trials?    Mr Cronin would be well aware of the nuances of helicopter sound.
 CASA explained
The public might be under the false understanding  the  Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) has some control over noise levels or impacts on people or the environment.  CASA has no remit in land development application approvals and/or the process of aircraft permissions in using the facilities.   CASA's responsibility under civil aviation legislation is to oversee aviation safety. 
 
 CASA does not regulate aircraft noise and/or environment impacts.  It is usually a matter managed within the land development application with impact statements.     The council could, or better,  should  have made this a  requirement of  the Development Application (DA) but dodged it by claiming they only have no responsibility  once a  helicopter is in the air. While CASA cannot enforce fly friendly agreements they encourage consideration by council authorities and with the helipad operator and local residents. No such agreement was considered as part of  the helicopter development assessment process.


Further, CASA does not  have any jurisdiction over where  helicopters  can fly . The pilot must determine the safest route in landing and take-off,  depending on conditions at the time.  The helipad/heliport operator generally specifies operating procedures for aircraft using the landing site, and this will include flight paths relevant to safe routes and can be in consideration of impacts of aircraft with sensitive areas, such as national park and residential areas.  This means  a specific flight path is not enforceable which leaves in question how  the full potential noise impact can be accurately  gauged.
  Increased helicopter activity at Mission Beach
Meanwhile, since Mission Helicopters has been promoting scenic tours operating from Tully aerodrome, residents  from South Mission Beach to Brooks Beach   are reporting an increase in helicopter   activity  around the region.    Island Reef Helicopters  has been observed flying noisily along the beach close to the water disturbing Red-tailed black cockatoos. 

Residents at Brooks Beach report helicopter movements regularly, using no particular flight path; sometimes over land, sometimes directly overhead and other times following the coastline over the sea. The helicopter used in the noise trial video (above) was identified  flying "quite low'  directly over houses along Brooks Beach  on the day of the trial.

It seems  there isn't a day without  helicopter activity at Mission Beach. Under any circumstances  helicopters  are intrusive and destroy the   normally quiet peaceful ambience Mission Beach is known for.
Helicopter flying over Bingil Bay
During the court appeal process, there is no room  for compromise   from  the position  of NO HELIPORT at   2224 Tully Mission Beach Road    An      agreement to allow   any     helicopter business to operate from the site  is simply the first  'foot in the door' to  future applications for variations and increased use.

The appeal will be reviewed on 3 December 2021.​
LG
​MBC
7 Comments

Request for community cooperation during noise trials

25/10/2021

3 Comments

 
 As per the September 3 court order,      Mission Helicopters will be carrying out a set of helicopter movements to and from 2224 Tully Mission Beach Road this week as part of a noise level trial.   The date and times of the trial depend on the availability of the  monitoring  company  and are unknown  at the time of this publication.

 C4   advised  that noise levels  will be recorded of the aircraft   described  in Mission Helicopter's   Development Application    (DA) i e  the   large medium lift  helicopters Sikorsky S-76,   Bell 412, and  Bell 206L3 (below)   .
Picture
Bell 206
Picture
Sikorsky S76
Picture
Bell 402
The process for the trial has been determined by helicopter and noise experts as   agreed by both parties   and will be monitored by two  independent noise-recording experts.
​
The data from the recordings will then be analysed for use by the  expert witnesses   in the upcoming Planning and Environment Court case.

 Recordings will be taken during take off, landing   and to and from  the proposed development site following the approved flight path; although  there has always been  some confusion over which is the correct flight path  given condition 7 of the   CCRC approval document   differs significantly from the  Approach/Departure Waypoint Flight Plan  provided by Mission Helicopters.  
Picture
Picture
Picture
 The  CCRC Planners    report  presented at the CCRC General meeting 21 Jan  2021 (Page 256)   stated     3 helicopters could be   in use at any one time. None of the approval conditions limit the number of helicopters.  Fully representative  trials would need to take this into account.   ​
Picture
 Community  people (sic) have been asked to cooperate with the trial process so the best information can be gathered for  the  legal proceedings.   In the public interest, C4 has requested people  to    monitor noise levels from their homes so they can determine what the likely effects of proposed helicopter movements might have on them.
Given the impact would also be felt   by those enjoying the beach or using the bike path,  these are other places the community could  gain  an insight into the selected activities of the trial. The map, above right, shows the supposed impact zone of both flight path scenarios.

It is stressed  that  noises other than  those of the helicopters can negate the results of the tests so those interested in being present while the trials are being carried out are asked to please observe quietly.

The community could rightfully ask why the burden of proof is  on the objectors to demonstrate noise nuisance?

Why wasn't  Mission Helicopters  required to  lodge a   report  with the DA to   show that the noise he intended making was below acceptable limits?

We will keep you informed as soon as we have any further information on the trial date. 
LG
MBC
​

3 Comments
<<Previous
    Please show your support
    ​Sign the petition
    Picture
    Call to the Hon Tanya Plibersek to call in helicopter development for proper assessment

    Picture
    This website is managed by Mission Beach Cassowaries inc to share information about the No Helicopters Here campaign against  the approval of  A HELICOPTER BASE   on 2224 Tully Mission Beach Road.
    https://www.change.org/Consider-Mission-Beach-Residents-Amenity-Wildlife
    2022Aug26-Update-#1

    Picture
    Post your helicopter sightings on the No Helicopters Here facebook page
     Court appeal   chronology
    Picture
    28th February 2022.
    C4  entered into a  compromise  settlement with Mission Helicopters. The appeal did not proceed to a court  hearing. 

    Picture
     3rd December  2021
    The appeal was reviewed.  Judge Morzone ordered  (above) the appellant (C4) to provide a list of matters they wish to be considered for inclusion in the proposed conditions attached to any approval  of the development application.

    Picture
     3rd September  2021
      
     Order (above)  made  by his Honour Judge Morzone QC.​
    Appeal review listed for  3 December 2021

    Picture
    6th August 2021
    Court ordered MH to  respond to  C4 correspondence by  August 15th. Appeal review   listed for 3rd September.

    Picture
    3rd June 2021
    ​Grounds on which Mission Helicopters, as co respondent ,   defended the appeal .

    Picture
    5th Mar 2021
    C4  filed to appeal the  Heliport approval  decision

    Map-Generator



    Archives

    September 2022
    August 2022
    March 2022
    December 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    February 2020

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed

Proudly powered by Weebly
  • News
    • Media
    • Politicians addresses
  • Proposal
  • Helicopter Noise/safety