Our private Helipad and proposed 'adjacent' new wind turbine!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: oxfordshire
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Our private Helipad and proposed 'adjacent' new wind turbine!
Hi guys
I need some advice please, which appears to be an ever growing problem everywhere.
I have just heard a rumour (it is at 'pre planning' application), that a 55m, with two 32m bladed (making it in total) 87m wind turbine is being considered just 500 metres from our private helipad which is at our home.
Our helipad is actually within the curtilage of our home, as it's made out of a raised grass mound, within a fenced section of our back lawn around it. We use various paddocks etc as our 'approach areas', then hovering onto the pad.
We do not have planning permission for the pad, as I understand we are within the 28 day ruling and it's within the property's curtilage. We have been using the helipad since 2002, and we probably see on average, movements of circa 20 - 35 per annum to the site, although there are plans to increase that.
The 'erection'
of this 
proposed turbine will not only de an eye-sore, be noisy, 'worry' ours and neighbours horses etc (it's proposed site is less than 300m from a bridleway, but also potentially causes our heli movements a great safety hazard.
'HELP'!
Do I apply for retrospective planning for the pad?
Do I apply for a 'safe zone' to protect any other such applications being considered?
Thanks in advance
Jono
[email protected] (maybe quicker)
I need some advice please, which appears to be an ever growing problem everywhere.
I have just heard a rumour (it is at 'pre planning' application), that a 55m, with two 32m bladed (making it in total) 87m wind turbine is being considered just 500 metres from our private helipad which is at our home.
Our helipad is actually within the curtilage of our home, as it's made out of a raised grass mound, within a fenced section of our back lawn around it. We use various paddocks etc as our 'approach areas', then hovering onto the pad.
We do not have planning permission for the pad, as I understand we are within the 28 day ruling and it's within the property's curtilage. We have been using the helipad since 2002, and we probably see on average, movements of circa 20 - 35 per annum to the site, although there are plans to increase that.
The 'erection'
of this proposed turbine will not only de an eye-sore, be noisy, 'worry' ours and neighbours horses etc (it's proposed site is less than 300m from a bridleway, but also potentially causes our heli movements a great safety hazard.'HELP'!
Do I apply for retrospective planning for the pad?
Do I apply for a 'safe zone' to protect any other such applications being considered?
Thanks in advance
Jono
[email protected] (maybe quicker)
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
As far as I understand the situation, if the helicopter is operated only within the curtilage of your property you don't actually need planning permission.
I think you will need to object to the proposal in the normal way, stating your personal reasons for doing so.
I think you will need to object to the proposal in the normal way, stating your personal reasons for doing so.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,900
Received 2,834 Likes
on
1,210 Posts
EGNX has just erected 2 on the airport and the Air Ambulance is based about the same distance, if not closer, the red navigation light is only on the tip of the "generator" box in the middle of the rotor, but the unlit blades soar some 40- 60 plus feet higher which strikes me as how can they do that?
I don't think that applying for retrospective planning permission in order to then be able to use the heli movements as a grounds for objecting is likely to succeed, either in terms of being granted planning permission or as a subsequent objection. (beware opening a can of worms that might result in scrutiny being applied to your use of the land as an "H" - once you've said it is, it may be difficult to say it's not).
As Shy says - you'll have to object on the normal grounds with everyone else.
OH
As Shy says - you'll have to object on the normal grounds with everyone else.
OH
Code:
be noisy, 'worry' ours and neighbours horses etc
As for...
Code:
also potentially causes our heli movements a great safety hazard
The only thing you actually have a problem with is:
Code:
proposed turbine will not only de an eye-sore
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fly around it..... You're not IMC - what's the problem
On departure, you'll meet it about 40 seconds out. Assuming there is viz, there's a high probability that you'll be able to figure out how not to hit it.
Lafite
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that applying for planning permission for your helipad is a can of worms that you may regret opening...keep to the current situation.
As you have learnt about the turbines in the 'pre-planning stage' there is time to gain information from the planners and Council members as to what is being considered and how best to have your views heard (not necessarily taken into account mind).
Only 'material considerations' will be taken into account by the planners and Councillors. You have time to learn and understand what these are and therefore how best to make representations.
Your view and opinion as to its 'beauty' are not material considerations....nor the 'frightening the horses' or possible additional difficulties you may have in using your land for 'exceptional' events.
As for it being 'noisy' the application documentation should deal with environmental acoustics and you can, subject to having to hand good data, make a material case.
However if the fact that you use a helo in your land is known that may ensure that any objection you make regarding noise is viewed with a certain 'bias' that is understandable. It might be that in your conversations with the plannnig officers and your ward councillor that they are relatively insensitive to your concerns regarding noise as a result.
I know its a very different type of noise and affects people in a very different manner...but the perception remains the key.
As you have learnt about the turbines in the 'pre-planning stage' there is time to gain information from the planners and Council members as to what is being considered and how best to have your views heard (not necessarily taken into account mind).
Only 'material considerations' will be taken into account by the planners and Councillors. You have time to learn and understand what these are and therefore how best to make representations.
Your view and opinion as to its 'beauty' are not material considerations....nor the 'frightening the horses' or possible additional difficulties you may have in using your land for 'exceptional' events.
As for it being 'noisy' the application documentation should deal with environmental acoustics and you can, subject to having to hand good data, make a material case.
However if the fact that you use a helo in your land is known that may ensure that any objection you make regarding noise is viewed with a certain 'bias' that is understandable. It might be that in your conversations with the plannnig officers and your ward councillor that they are relatively insensitive to your concerns regarding noise as a result.
I know its a very different type of noise and affects people in a very different manner...but the perception remains the key.
The use of your helicopter for 28 days to land at your private dwelling is a legitimate reason to object on health and safety grounds at least.It is,in principle,no different to someone building a wall which blocks the view when you exit your drive.
Also the fact that your use is not officially safeguarded under CAA regulations should not prevent a legitimate objection.
However ,because planning officers (and members) rarely have intimate knowledge of helicopters,flight paths etc.it would be a good idea to ask the CAA for technical advice and to detail FATO requirements ,prevailing winds and other factors such as existing obstructions ,to demonstrate how the wind turbine would be a danger.
If necessary you should ask the Council to employ their own specialist consultant to report on the issue.If you can get your local Councillor on side that will help....you could also offer to demonstrate the flight path to members and officers to underline the point.Unless they want to be seen as unreasonable they should go along with that...but don't offer them a passenger seat.That might be seen as a bribe!
Finally ,if your helipad was not built but a natural feature ,then your use is ancillary to the dwelling and you dont need planning permission...after all it is just a mode of transport like your car .However if the pad involved engineering operations it would need planning permission.
In that event if you have been using your helipad for more than 28 days ,for more than 10 years without objection,and can prove that by logbook entries and/or dates you could apply for a Certifiacte of Lawful Use.This is decided on the balance of probabilities so good evidence is vital .
Good luck.
Also the fact that your use is not officially safeguarded under CAA regulations should not prevent a legitimate objection.
However ,because planning officers (and members) rarely have intimate knowledge of helicopters,flight paths etc.it would be a good idea to ask the CAA for technical advice and to detail FATO requirements ,prevailing winds and other factors such as existing obstructions ,to demonstrate how the wind turbine would be a danger.
If necessary you should ask the Council to employ their own specialist consultant to report on the issue.If you can get your local Councillor on side that will help....you could also offer to demonstrate the flight path to members and officers to underline the point.Unless they want to be seen as unreasonable they should go along with that...but don't offer them a passenger seat.That might be seen as a bribe!
Finally ,if your helipad was not built but a natural feature ,then your use is ancillary to the dwelling and you dont need planning permission...after all it is just a mode of transport like your car .However if the pad involved engineering operations it would need planning permission.
In that event if you have been using your helipad for more than 28 days ,for more than 10 years without objection,and can prove that by logbook entries and/or dates you could apply for a Certifiacte of Lawful Use.This is decided on the balance of probabilities so good evidence is vital .
Good luck.
Last edited by heli1; 20th Apr 2011 at 08:17.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: oxfordshire
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Heli1
We used to use an area of natural lawn, but then improved the lawn through some 'artistic' landscaping which provided us with a more level, attractive 'feature' of the lawn. It just happens to be round, but still made out of soil! We normally have sun loungers on it!
We used to use an area of natural lawn, but then improved the lawn through some 'artistic' landscaping which provided us with a more level, attractive 'feature' of the lawn. It just happens to be round, but still made out of soil! We normally have sun loungers on it!
"Bats" are your best soloution... like newt colonnies stop roads.
Bat colonies have stopped wind turbines being erected the animals are heavily protected in law and the argument is the turbine interfers with there flying.
Are you luck enough to have a local colony?
Bat colonies have stopped wind turbines being erected the animals are heavily protected in law and the argument is the turbine interfers with there flying.
Are you luck enough to have a local colony?
Are you luck enough to have a local colony?
Sav
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Wiltshire, UK
Posts: 504
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Obstacle lighting
... the red navigation light is only on the tip of the "generator" box in the middle of the rotor, but the unlit blades soar some 40- 60 plus feet higher which strikes me as how can they do that?
"An aerodrome obstacle is one that is located on an area intended for the surface movement of an aircraft or that extends above a defined surface intended to protect aircraft in flight or exceeds 150 m height above ground, within a radius of up to 15 km of the aerodrome.
Fixed obstacles of 45 m or less in height, width and length are normally lit by a single steady redlight placed at the highest practicable point; those obstacles of greater size are normally provided with additional red lights in order to outline the extent of the obstruction.
Objects located beyond the vicinity of an aerodrome are considered to be obstacles to aircraft in flight if they exceed 150 m in height. However, prominent objects of lesser height may also be regarded as obstacles where, for example, they are located on or adjacent to routes regularly used by helicopters or low flying (military) aircraft.
En-route obstacles are normally lit by steady red lights at night and, in exceptional circumstances, by high intensity flashing lights."
CAP764 CAA Policy and Guidelines on Wind Turbines would be worth reading. It would be interesting to assess the effect of the turbulence caused by the turbine blades.
Last edited by TRC; 20th Apr 2011 at 10:49.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,900
Received 2,834 Likes
on
1,210 Posts
45 metres tall
East Midlands Airport : Wind turbines take off at EMA
Shame they CUT the only woodland of any size on the Airport down to accomodate them..................how "green" is that?, believe there is a 20 acre solar panel farm due next offsite.
East Midlands Airport : Wind turbines take off at EMA
Shame they CUT the only woodland of any size on the Airport down to accomodate them..................how "green" is that?, believe there is a 20 acre solar panel farm due next offsite.
kickon - use the bat argument if its relevant, but the very word makes me angry and reminds me of the appalling waste of public money installing "bat bridges" across the A38 close to Castle Air's place at Liskeard, looking like this...
If your local council is anything like the ones in Cornwall who spent a staggering £300,000 on this you may end up making a rod for your own back in the council insisting on providing extra stuff to protect the bats...
Yes, we have to say this is BATTY but true!
If your local council is anything like the ones in Cornwall who spent a staggering £300,000 on this you may end up making a rod for your own back in the council insisting on providing extra stuff to protect the bats...
Yes, we have to say this is BATTY but true!
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: engineer at large
Posts: 1,409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wind turbines are bird processors...
what is most annoying, is the low frequency vibration the turbine resonates through the ground...people in Oregon have decided health issues due to this vibration. Not sure if your soil type will transmit this or not...
you may not want a bunch of flashing lights either....
this makes no sense...
wind turbines also create a doppler effect, which disrupts the airbourne radar and airport radar systems. Currently, I believe they are trying to coat the blades with the military grade radar absorbing paints, but I am not sure if this is successful or not.
FAA testimony....
"The clutter that is created by wind turbines can result in a complete loss of primary radar detection above a wind farm. When that clutter occurs, it appears at all altitudes, so simply directing the aircraft to a different altitude does not solve the problem. Similarly, on the Next Generation Weather Radar (NEXRAD), wind farm activity looks remarkably like storm activity, thus complicating the communication of precise weather information by controllers to pilots. (Wind turbine impacts on NEXRAD, which are owned and operated by the National Oceanic and Atomospheric Administration, are not currently considered in FAA’s evaluation process.) Existing FAA radars have limited capability to filter out clutter. The radar can be modified by increasing the sensitivity to reduce clutter from the wind turbines, but in doing so, what the radar can see is also reduced, to the point where actual aircraft targets can drop off. Consequently, there are real and significant issues that must be evaluated by the government prior to the approval of wind turbines."
Testimony – Statement of Nancy Kalinowski
Good Luck!
what is most annoying, is the low frequency vibration the turbine resonates through the ground...people in Oregon have decided health issues due to this vibration. Not sure if your soil type will transmit this or not...
you may not want a bunch of flashing lights either....
this makes no sense...
EGNX has just erected 2 on the airport
FAA testimony....
"The clutter that is created by wind turbines can result in a complete loss of primary radar detection above a wind farm. When that clutter occurs, it appears at all altitudes, so simply directing the aircraft to a different altitude does not solve the problem. Similarly, on the Next Generation Weather Radar (NEXRAD), wind farm activity looks remarkably like storm activity, thus complicating the communication of precise weather information by controllers to pilots. (Wind turbine impacts on NEXRAD, which are owned and operated by the National Oceanic and Atomospheric Administration, are not currently considered in FAA’s evaluation process.) Existing FAA radars have limited capability to filter out clutter. The radar can be modified by increasing the sensitivity to reduce clutter from the wind turbines, but in doing so, what the radar can see is also reduced, to the point where actual aircraft targets can drop off. Consequently, there are real and significant issues that must be evaluated by the government prior to the approval of wind turbines."
Testimony – Statement of Nancy Kalinowski
Good Luck!
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: swansea, wales
Age: 66
Posts: 467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If its only a two blade turbine I'd try flying between the blades at take off and landing, however if its three blades its a little more tricky, not impossible by any means, just that you have to keep your skills up to date? Hows that for a smartarse answer?
On the serious side I think you have a case as you have been flying from that site ands such an empennage is a clear infringement rather like the big bloody Tescos they have decided to build practically in my back garden!
On the serious side I think you have a case as you have been flying from that site ands such an empennage is a clear infringement rather like the big bloody Tescos they have decided to build practically in my back garden!