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

With respect...

30/9/2021

8 Comments

 
 The community is  understandably   anxious  that  a helicopter base in the heart of Mission Beach might be a 'done deal' given  all the activity on the approved development site lately.

But that is NOT the case!

While the appellants of the  court appeal against the   helicopter development  approval   are playing their cards close to their chest,  the  co respondent is going for a different tactic.
In stark contrast to the low  profile  C4 has opted for,  Mission Helicopters  (MH)   has  been rolling out  an aggressive   advertising campaign  promoting  scenic tours       on their    facebook page.      Their new business is described as  a    boutique aviation services company "...offering a range of tourism and aerial solution services from its base in Mission Beach in Far North Queensland."

 You could be forgiven  for thinking  this new business  is already operating from 2224 Tully Mission Beach Road    with their facebook announcing   Mission Helicopters    is in   Mission Beach.  The  almost daily posts  feature aerial videos  of farmland, Mission Beach coastline and the offshore islands  with slogans promising   'Let the adventure begin'!    ​
Picture
Mission Helicopters promote helicopter scenic tours over Mission Beach
A     fence has now been erected around the proposed site  and a new "Your Mission Starts Here" sign  installed   announcing  helicopter tours.   

​What is the purpose of this overt  promotion  of helicopter services  while the appeal is still in the court?    Is this a show of contempt for the community who oppose  the development or is it just plain insensitivity?
 When the Deputy Premier and Minister for Infrastructure and Planning, Dr Steven Miles declined the community's request to   use his  'call in' powers to reassess the development, he said  "the Planning and Environment Court  is the appropriate forum to examine any  issues relating to the technical  assessment of this application". The community must  accept  and respect  this current legal process for development assessments.
Picture
The Hon Dr Steven Miles correspondence to MBC 31 March 2021
Respect for process doesn't appear to be a priority for Mission Helicopters.  Apparently the large advertising sign went up without a permit. 

The   
Council has given the landowner 20 business days from 28 September 2021 to either lodge the appropriate development application (a code assessable operational works application for an advertising device) or remove the sign.​
Picture
Picture

​​The Mission Beach community has made it  very clear   they do not want noisy, or  nosy,   helicopters to be   a regular feature of their peaceful lifestyle.  With respect  for  due process,  they  will wait with anticipation for a successful outcome of the court appeal.
LG
​MBC

 The current appeal situation
Proposed helicopter flight trial
1.  On or before 7 October 2021, the acoustic experts will meet to determine the terms of reference, minimum requirements, methodology and reporting for the proposed helicopter flight trial [“agreed approach”]. 
2.       On or before 29 October 2021, the proposed helicopter flight trial will occur pursuant to the agreed approach.
3.      On or before 22 November 2021, the data obtained from the proposed helicopter flight trial will be analysed pursuant to the agreed approach and the acoustic experts will provide to the parties’ solicitors a copy of their reporting pursuant to the agreed approach. 
Review
4.      The appeal will be reviewed on 3 December 2021.
8 Comments

​Court order and C4 report

5/9/2021

2 Comments

 
So “the community” are to be guinea pigs!

From what little information has been given to “the community” (see below) we can only deduce that the very community people who have led the charge against the council-approved anti-social anti-wildlife helicopter aerodrome will now be subjected to a taste of what’s threatened!

And at your expense - whether by the Council spending your rates to defend their decision, or by your donations towards paying to reverse that decision.
Picture
Community opposition is not limited to the acoustic impacts the developer might admit to. In any case, the integrity of the acoustic testing depends on the integrity of the developer and his application - and we’ve already lost faith in that. We don’t have any faith that the limitations he’s agreed with the Council will not be exceeded once his business is installed. Remember the Application and the boat washing facility included in the fine print?

So he’s not likely to disclose future bigger aircraft he’s actually got in mind: why would he invite further community opposition?

All the community can know is that C4 and the developer have now agreed to “an approach” to acoustic testing; this being a negotiated outcome, there must be something in this “approach” for the developer (or he wouldn’t have agreed to it), presumably his opportunity to produce a rosy picture of noise impacts or of mitigation measures. Given the size and tentacles of Mission Helicopters and related business, it would be prudent to guess he’s done all this before.

Within the limits of the “agreed approach”, C4 and the developer have further agreed to prepare terms of reference for the acoustic testing; ie they have agreed to limits as to what and how helicopter “noise” will be measured, and under what conditions. We have no information about these tor, nor what expert advice went into them, but we can be sure the MH knows all about this stuff - after all,  it’s his business.

See invitation below to  contact C4 for more information.


Margaret Moorhouse
Alliance to Save Hinchinbrook (ASH)



Picture

In the Planning and Environment Court
            No 34 of 2021
Held at: Cairns
 
Between:
COMMUNITY FOR COASTAL AND CASSOWARY CONSERVATION INC IA13634
                Appellant
And:          
CASSOWARY COAST REGIONAL COUNCIL
   Respondent 
And:
MISSION HELICOPTERS PTY LTD
ACN 636 565 083            
          Co-Respondent
Picture
ORDER 
Before His Honour Judge Morzone QC
Date of Hearing: 3 September 2021
Date of Order: 3 September 2021
IT IS ORDERED  THAT: 
Proposed helicopter flight trial
1.      On or before 7 October 2021, the acoustic experts will meet to determine the terms of reference, minimum requirements, methodology and reporting for the proposed helicopter flight trial [“agreed approach”]. 
2.      On or before 29 October 2021, the proposed helicopter flight trial will occur pursuant to the agreed approach.
3.      On or before 22 November 2021, the data obtained from the proposed helicopter flight trial will be analysed pursuant to the agreed approach and the acoustic experts will provide to the parties’ solicitors a copy of their reporting pursuant to the agreed approach. 
Review
4.      The appeal will be reviewed on 3 December 2021.
Video source: Mission Helicopters facebook page
2 Comments

Helicopters, infrasound and the fear frequency

17/7/2021

2 Comments

 
While the sound of a helicopter may have many rushing to  their windows to  identify the make of the aircraft,  the majority of  people  feel an intense sense of annoyance, or more  accurately, disruption or anxiety. 
​
So, what is  it about helicopters that  is so intrusive, placing  people  and animals outside their comfort zone?​​
Picture
The answer is    Infrasound    otherwise known as  the 'fear frequency'.

It's all explained   in the following article   'The Fear Frequency'  by Mark  Pilkington ( The Guardian 6 Oct 2003) 

​​
  "Have you ever wondered what a ghost sounds like?"  Engineer Vic Tandy may already know. ​"The key here is frequency: 19hz is in the range known as infrasound, below the range of human hearing, which begins at 20hz. Engineer Vic Tandy  learned that low frequencies in this region can affect humans and animals in several ways, causing discomfort, dizziness, blurred vision (by vibrating your eyeballs), hyperventilation and fear, possibly leading to panic attacks".​
 In the early 1980s, Tandy was working in a laboratory designing medical equipment. Word began to spread among the staff that the labs might be haunted, something Tandy put down to the constant wheeze of life-support machines operating in the building.

One evening he was working on his own in the lab when he began to feel distinctly uncomfortable, breaking into a cold sweat as the hairs on the back of his neck stood on end. He was convinced that he was being watched. Then, out of the corner of his eye, Tandy noticed an ominous grey shape drifting slowly into view, but when he turned around to face it, it was gone. Terrified, he went straight home.
The next day Tandy, a keen fencer, noticed that a foil blade clamped in a vice was vibrating up and down very fast. He found that the vibrations were caused by a standing sound wave that was bouncing between the end walls of the laboratory and reached a peak of intensity in the centre of the room. He calculated that the frequency of the standing wave was about 19hz (cycles per second) and soon discovered that it was produced by a newly installed extractor fan. When the fan was turned off, the sound wave disappeared.
"Can affect humans and animals in several ways, causing discomfort, dizziness, blurred vision (by vibrating your eyeballs), hyperventilation
​and fear, possibly leading to panic attacks
A more recent investigation took place in an allegedly haunted 14th-century pub cellar in Coventry, where people have reported terrifying experiences for many years, including seeing a spectral grey lady. Here Tandy also uncovered a 19hz standing wave, adding further evidential weight to his theory.
In an interesting parallel, researchers have recorded that, prior to an attack, a tiger's roar contains frequencies of about 18hz, which might disorientate and paralyse their intended victim. Is this the sound of fear itself?"

We have uploaded  some articles of interest  on the subject here.  You can  listen to  the sound  of 20 Hertz,  the theoretical minimum frequency a human can hear.

An article    
 in Vertical magazine 'The science behind helicopter noise — and how the industry is working to reduce it '     identifies  "... two locales where helicopter noise seems to be a major issue. In urban areas, you have a multitude of helicopter operations: law enforcement, medical transport, local news, some business transportation, and tourism. And then there’s the more remote, scenic tourist destinations, where those on the ground object to aircraft interrupting their experience in an otherwise serene wilderness. Typically, helicopter tours are the main source of annoyance in these places.

The  majority of  this  information can be logically applied to  what is anticipated from  heliport activities on 2224 Tully  Mission Beach Road. The  Kestral Aviation  information sheet   states  " 
We will be predominately using our Bell 206L3 Long Ranger and Sikorsky S-76 helicopters, and on rare occasions, our Bell Medium (212 or 412) fleet when need requires (such as in response to natural disasters).  Vertical magazine informs   "...The  Bell 212 generates high levels of impulsive noise..."
Picture
"To reduce the number of noise complaints, HAI’s Fly Neighborly Guide recommends flying higher and further away from populated areas when possible".
The article  Dynamics of rock arches  shows  a plot of the sound spectrum generated by a two-blade Bell 206 helicopter (below).  In it you see the first frequency peak at 13 Hz with a series of overtones at integer multiples
Picture
​The sound spectrum generated by a Bell 206

​Thank you to Margaret Moorhouse  from ASH for sharing this information. 
2 Comments

Update on the C4 – vs– CCRC  court appeal

15/7/2021

1 Comment

 
At the C4 general meeting held Friday on 3rd July, the C4 theatrette was overflowing with community members interested in an update on the court appeal.
 
C4 president, Peter Rowles, recapped on the court process saying the respective parties had lodged their relevant documents  for the appeal,    and that C4’s solicitors had engaged experts in the areas of;
  • helicopter operations,
  •  planning, and
  •  the environment.
 Links to these documents can be seen  in the column to the right and are    part of Steps 1 to 3 of the appeal process (as outlined below*).

Peter reported that although details of the Appeal could not be discussed, he could say that the parties were in discussions.
 
Peter went on to say that Mission Helicopters would have helicopter operations experts design trials to demonstrate the noise levels from the activities being planned for the Heliport site.   This forms part of the directions order within Stage 4 of the appeal process.
 
Council’s Approval for Material Change of Use (MCU) is not only for the Air services (listed below), it also allows for “other related entities operated by the Directors / Shareholders of the applicant/owner” (CCRC Planners Report 27 Jan 2021).  Given Mission Helicopters’ high profile and operational connections across the national and international aviation industry, the reality of the Council’s reprehensible MCU Approval is that Mission Helicopters’ operational possibilities are left wide open.
 
Air Services include:
  • The arrival and departure of aircraft;
  • The housing, servicing, refueling, maintenance and repair of aircraft;
  •  The assembly and dispersal of passengers or goods on or from an aircraft;
Any ancillary activities directly serving the needs of passengers and visitors for:
  • Associated training and education facilities; and
  • Aviation facilities.
Associated uses including medical transfers, aerial firefighting and search and rescue operations will also be undertaken on an as required basis.

To be relevant to the Mission Helicopters Proposal, the operational trials mentioned by Peter would presumably have to include all the possible operational aspects of the above.
​

Another important consideration is what flight path will the trials be based on?
 
In the CCRC Decision Notice (27 Jan 2021) (where CCRC mistakenly refer to the applicant as Mission Beach Helicopters) the approval conditions state “. the applicant/owner ‘must ensure”…”helicopters will head directly east over the Coral Sea prior to heading towards intended destinations (emergency situations excepted) as per the Mission Beach Helicopters (sic) Approach/Departure Waypoint Flight Plan received by  Council on 14th October 2020…”  Yet the Waypoint Flight Plan received on that date (below left) shows a quite different flight path, angled considerably to the south. The actual direct east flight path (below right) shows the impact zone covers the whole of the Conch Street residential area.
Picture
           MBH Approach/Departure Waypoint Flight Plan                                                                                     Actual Direct East Flight Path
Picture
 In any case, local councils and Approval conditions may not legally control take-off paths of helicopters.
 
During the meeting, Peter also commented that helicopters were already operating at Mission Beach and that Mission Helicopters can already operate helicopters from their property  “…whether we like it or not…”. Such comments are of course irrelevant to this Appeal.  If Mission Helicopters could carry out all its desired operations without council approval it would not have bothered applying to the council for approval. Clearly they have something much larger in mind than some minor activities for which approval is not required.  
 
From the community’s point of view: the bottom line is it’s a helicopter aerodrome and the community doesn’t want it there.   That’s why the community campaign was called No Helicopters Here!    Because we know:
There are NO conditions that can be applied to this Approval which can mitigate the impacts of ANY commercial helicopter operation at 2224 Tully Mission Beach Road.
The Appeal, after having been adjourned at the first scheduled review on 25th June. will now be reviewed by the Judge on August 6.
 
Could anyone who sees any sign of cassowaries in the vicinity of the development area, including on the beach near Porters Creek,  please post photos or sightings with times and dates onto   Mission Beach Cassowaries facebook page  or email to    missionbeachcassowaries@gmail.com.  This information is invaluable to the Appeal.
Picture
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
* COURT APPEAL PROCESS 

STEP 1
Appeal Period Notice of Appeal filed
Within 20 business days from notice of decision
 
STEP 2
Notice of Appeal to Other Parties 10 business days from when Notice of Appeal is filed
 
STEP 3
Other Parties may elect to join appeal
10 Business Days from when they receive Notice of Appeal
 
STEP 4
Directions Order
Within six (6) weeks of filing the Notice of Appeal the Appellant must apply for directions
To apply for Directions you have to file an application with the court accompanied by affidavit material confirming that the notice of appeal was served on the relevant parties
 
(The Directions order sets out the steps that need to be completed by the parties before the matter can proceed to hearing and normally includes the following:
- Disclosure
- Confirmation of issues in dispute & request for particulars
- Mediation
- Meeting of experts
- Preparation of expert reports
- Continued case management of appeals by court
- when the matter will be set down for hearing 

STEP 5
Hearing of Appeal
If the parties cannot reach agreement to settle the appeal after the
directions have been complied with, the matter can be set down for
hearing    
1 Comment

Mission Helicopters launch inaugural Scenic Flights

6/6/2021

2 Comments

 
 Mission Helicopters has distributed  an  information sheet (right) announcing    inaugural Scenic Flights operating from Tully  airport.

The move raises many questions. Has  a permit been approved  to operate scenic flights?  If so, when? And under what conditions? The Mission Beach residents made it quite clear  to the council  they   value the peace and quiet of  their  villages.  Were the councillors aware   Mission  Helicopters  are quite happy to operate  a business from Tully Aerodrome?


What about the 'argument'    presented in favour  of the Mission Beach heliport development at the general meeting  on 21 January; when the council made their decision to approve the development?  

In the following statement  from  page246  of the   21 Jan general meeting agenda  ,  the  Planner claimed     the number of flights  would be lower compared to  tourism joy flights, implying there would be less impact.

     "The applicant has confirmed that the majority of the helicopters proposed to be   stationed at this aviation  facility are not proposed to be used for “joy flights”. The type of helicopters proposed are highly specialised  multi-role helicopters and provide a range of services including aerial firefighting, heavy-lift and aerial  crane, and reconnaissance missions. There is a direct linkage between the specialist nature of these  helicopters, and the high cost of operation, the number of movements will generally be lower than what  would be expected from a tourism joy flight operation". 

Are scenic tours (joy flights),  a new Mission Helicopters enterprise?    Are we now  to expect  helicopters to be travelling up and  down our coastline    from South Mission Beach to Garners  to show people  "...the beautiful sights that Mission has to offer?

What about the residents? What about those people who are enjoying  the peace and quiet, the natural amenity along the 14 kilometers of   beaches  Mission Beach is  famous for?
​


​

Picture
2 Comments

Friends of Ninney Rise May 2021 Newsletter -

12/5/2021

0 Comments

 
The  Friends of Ninney Rise  periodical newsletter (Click below) has a focus on planning following the  Mission Beach heliport  approval decision. 


Picture
FoNR Issue 2  May 2021 Different Drum
0 Comments

Mission Beach Community rejects Minister's decision

23/4/2021

0 Comments

 
Wet Tropics Times 23 April
Picture
Picture
Picture
0 Comments

ABC Far North interview with Pedro O'Connor and Liz Gallie

8/4/2021

3 Comments

 
Picture
Picture
​  Ministers' decisions unacceptable

​
The Mission Beach community is bitterly disappointed  at the Federal Environment Minister, Sussan Ley and the Queensland Minister for Infrastructure and Planning Dr Steven Miles,  in deciding against using their ‘call in’ powers to reassess the helicopter facility development.

​ In his   response     to  requests to use his power under the Planning Act to call in the development, Dr Miles said the helicopter development wouldn't  impact any matters of state interests that would warrant his involvement. He also said the  court was the appropriate place to examine any technical assessment issues relating to this application".
​

Liz Gallie of Mission Beach Cassowaries said the Ministers decision is unacceptable, “How can the strategic intent of the planning scheme, High Environmental Significance mapping, cassowaries and community expectation not be of interest to the state?”  “The Helicopter facility development will impact on all of those things” said Liz
 What advice did the Minister receive to make that decision? Was the Minister fully informed of the facts"?
These and other  questions will be asked  in a Right to Information request by  Mission beach Cassowaries.

Pedro O'Connor,   Director of Australian Inbound - Private Epic Journeys agrees. “Mission Beach is one of the few places in Australia where you can enjoy a true nature experience. It attracts the same market as the Daintree. " said Pedro. ”Why would you bring in this noise factor when the iconic features of Mission Beach are the Dunk Island butterfly and the cassowary. It just doesn’t go hand in hand with current community and visitor expectations”.

Pedro said there was no evidence the helicopter development would bring any economic benefits  to Mission Beach. “Of course we need balanced growth. That is what everyone is looking for ".said Pedro, "but who is to benefit from this development?”  "It won't be employing a lot of people so it needs to be weighed up against who will not benefit" . The accommodation houses and other providers along the coast who are selling their region for its nature and that’s being interrupted”.

“What is the developer’s true agenda"?  Pedro asked? “There is no high end tourism industry at Mission Beach. It has developed as a low key boutique nature based tourism industry. 

"The council and the Minister has been made well aware of the community's concerns. There is no evidence to show there would be any benefits for the community said Liz  "But they have chosen to ignore it". 

 ​"How can we have faith in the assessment process”? The public feel they have been sidelined, let down and treated with contempt. Liz said “Council decisions are dividing communities and forcing some into costly court battles”.

“What is the point of council writing plans claiming to put “Community First’ and to “… listen to the people and support their quality lifestyle and unique natural environment", when council decisions, policies and actions are often in direct conflict to the vision in those plans? asks Liz.

"The community has been thrown into a state of anxiety over this decision".  said Liz "They are now unsure of their future.  Their lifestyle and  economy are threatened.  “What we want is sound future-focused planning, and state and local governments which defend that planning; not to play the double game of writing good things into policy and legislation and doing bad things on the ground”.

The  Mayor of the  Cassowary Coast Regional Council   told ABC Far North  he couldn't comment as the matter is in  the court. Cr Nolan said the submitters are exercising their right of appeal and confirmed  the ratepayers will be paying for the council to  defend the appeal.
"This is what the assessment process has come to" said Liz "The public   input during the consultation process is ignored, the planning scheme is ignored,  and the  planning department  recommendation is  skewed  in favour of the developer. The council will  then use  public funds to defend  themselves against any  appeal against the decision. A 'win win' for the developer and a 'lose lose' for the  community and public expectation of a  fair due process". said Liz. 

 “All of this angst could have avoided by the council sticking to their planning scheme and working in the public, not the developer’s interest said Liz. The helicopter facility belongs at one of the designated air services facilities in the Cassowary Coast".

The Community For Coastal and Cassowary Conservation (C4) has filed an appeal in the Planning and Environment court against the helicopter development approval.

Mission Beach Cassowaries is helping raise funds for the appeal. Please go to nohelicoptershere gofundme if you would like to help.
Ends

More information
Liz Gallie
Mission Beach Cassowaries
​0414402315

Pedro O’Connor
Australian Inbound - Private Epic Journeys
0418 113 227
3 Comments

Is the government determined to trash Mission Beach?

31/3/2021

0 Comments

 
It has been  confirmed. The people and the cassowary are of no interest to the State government and the cassowary and the World Heritage  areas are of no significance to the Federal  government.

First they take no notice  when the  council  puts together a shoddy planning report clearly skewed in favour of the developer and when it is bought to the Federal and State  governments attention by  hundreds of people they   say it is not of interest or of no significance.

The Federal Environment Department informed us   on 4th March "  I can confirm that the consultant working on behalf of Mission Helicopters Pty Ltd responded to the department advising that Mission Helicopters Pty Ltd is aware of its obligations under the EPBC Act but is focusing on finalising the Local Council processes at this point in time".
 Minister Ley  confirms in her response to our 'call in' request,  "The company has advised it is aware of its obligations under the EPBC Act  and will seek  advice  from the department when appropriate. "

The State Minister for Infrastructure and Planning/local government   has  decided against  using his power to call in the development for reassessment. He informs us   the  appropriate place for any community concerns to be heard  is in a costly court appeal. ,    "This is a reserve power that is used only in exceptional circumstances. In this instance, there are no state interests impacted by the development which would warrant my involvement. The Planning and Environment Court is an appropriate forum to examine any issues relating to the technical assessment of this application.

It's all in the  letters below.

The ordinary people, the ones  the governments are  supposed to be  working for, have been dismissed.

​
Picture
Response from Sussan Ley
Picture
Response from Dr Miles
0 Comments

How the Mission Beach aviation facility impacts YOU!

27/2/2021

0 Comments

 
Wet Tropic Times
​Feb  26 2021
Picture
0 Comments
<<Previous
Forward>>
    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