Chopper resumes flights
What started as an attempt to put more cruise ship passengers on a helicopter tour of Grand Cayman and drum up some business on the north side of George Town harbour has ended up in a court fight between the helicopter company, Cayman’s Civil Aviation Authority and some downtown property owners.
In an application for judicial review filed earlier this month, Axis International Ltd. – the owner of the Whitehall House property on the George Town waterfront – claims the Civil Aviation Authority acted “unlawfully and/or perversely and/or irrationally” in granting permission for Cayman Islands Helicopters Ltd. to operate a helipad along the waterfront.
“The [Civil Aviation Authority] could not…be properly satisfied that the heliport was ‘safe’, having regard in particular to the physical characteristics of the aerodrome and of it’s surroundings,” the application for judicial review filed on 9 February stated.
The helipad officially opened on Friday, 11 November, and is operated by Jerome Begot, the owner and pilot of Cayman Islands Helicopters, Ltd. The facility includes a newly-constructed viewing deck and a shop on North Church Street between Burger King and the Lobster Pot restaurant on the northern end of Grand Cayman’s downtown tourism district.
The helicopter company generally provides aerial tours of the Island for visitors. It has also been heavily used in the past by the Royal Cayman Islands Police Service for certain search and rescue missions.
Mr. Begot said in November that he hoped the new helipad would help boost his own business and others around it.
“At the moment, cruise ship passengers get off the ships and turn right, businesses to the left [north] of the port do not attract quite the same numbers,” he said. “I think it will be good for the Island.”
A week after the helipad opened, a lawsuit was filed in the Grand Court against Cayman Islands Helicopters by Axis International and another company, Coastal Two Ltd. The helicopter ceased operations at that time. According to the writ: “The defendant [referring to Mr. Begot] has wrongfully caused or permitted to be caused excessive noise and vibration to come into the affected properties during the helicopter’s operation…
“The noise emitted is sufficient to prohibit reasonable or proper face to face and telephonic conversations inside One Cayman House [the building owned by Coastal Two Ltd.]. The helicopter’s operation at the property causes the desks in One Cayman House to vibrate.”
A statement responding to claims made in the legal filing was sent to the Caymanian Compass on Thursday by Mr. Begot’s attorney, George Giglioli: “Despite objection by some of the neighbouring property owners, the Central Planning Authority granted planning permission to Cayman Islands Helicopters in September 2010 to refurbish the building on the site and build a helipad. Refurbishment of the building and construction of the helipad commenced in December 2010…On 28th June 2011 the Certificate of Occupancy was granted in respect of the helipad and office.
“In March 2011 the neighbouring property owner (“Coastal Two”) sought to appeal that grant of planning permission. That appeal was some 6 months out of time. An appeal should have been brought within 14 days of the CPA’s decision. On 16th September 2011, a year after planning permission had been granted by the Central Planning Authority, Axis International Ltd., the owners of Whitehall House, also sought to appeal the grant of planning permission. The Planning Appeals Tribunal having heard their appeals has upheld the CPA’s decision and dismissed Coastal Two’s and Axis’ appeals.
“On 10th November 2011, the Civil Aviation Authority of the Cayman Islands granted Cayman Islands Helicopters an Aerodrome Certificate in respect of the helipad. Helicopter operations commenced from the helipad on 11th November, 2011.”
The planning appeals tribunal ruled in favour of Mr. Begot’s company on Tuesday. Helicopter flights from the helipad resumed the same day, Mr. Giglioli said.
Axis International’s judicial review application makes a number of claims regarding oversights Axis believes was made in considering an aeronautical study completed for the helipad operation. It also identifies a number of technical issues that Axis states would impact on the safety of flying and landing the helicopter in that area.
For example, the application states: “The heliport safety area…extended {and extends} over the boundary onto One Cayman House. The heliport safety area was (and remains) not free from impediments extending 10 metres at a 45 degree angle measure from the edge of the helicopter flight and take-off area on at least three sides.
“The aeronautical study recommended that flight operations should cease if there were 17-knot westerly winds. However, there was no analysis of safety issues caused by northerly winds, which would cause the same safety issues as a westerly wind because of the site of the heliport. The aeronautical study did not take into consideration the fact….that the helicopter could not fly within 500 feet of a cruise ship.
“The [Civil Aviation Authority] failed to consider (properly or at all) any of the above safety issues raised and the deficiencies of the aeronautical study. In the circumstances, it was unlawful, perverse and irrational for the [Civil Aviation Authority] to grant the exemption [to minimum separation angle rules required for helicopter landing].”
According to Mr. Giglioli’s statement on behalf of Cayman Islands helicopters: “The Civil Aviation Act (which has been extended to the Cayman Islands) provides that no action in nuisance may be brought in respect of aircraft operations from a certificated aerodrome.
“The day before the maximum time limit for seeking judicial review of the Civil Aviation Authority of the Cayman Island’s decision to grant an aerodrome certificate for the helipad expired, Axis applied for leave to seek judicial review of that decision. Judicial review applications are required to be brought promptly and Cayman Islands Helicopters does not accept that the application was made promptly.
“In light of the Planning Appeal Tribunal’s decision dismissing Coastal’s and Axis’ appeals Cayman Islands Helicopters has resumed operations from the George Town helipad.”
Related Videos
This helicopter is a noisy nuisance to tourists and residents alike as it flies too low and directly over hotels, condos, and private homes.
When I did my tour we flew mainly over the water except right after takeoff and before landing at the airport. Maybe you’re thinking of the police helicopter that hovers wherever they want at all times of the night (and day). I personally think this is great for the Cayman tourism product and wish them well.
We can tell the difference between the tourist helicopter and the police because the police is much louder. Whilst I agree that the police go where they want and whenever they want, why compound the problem with another helicopter? And yes, it does go over water but you are splitting hairs because when it sometimes does it is still too low and close to shore.