Threat to UK airfields

[Flying Lawyer]

The future of UK airfields is threatened as a result of a Planning Policy Statement recently issued by the Department for Communities and Local Government.

The proposal was originally made by John Prescott’s ‘Office of the Deputy Prime Minister’ but, despite assurances that the threat to airfields was ‘an error’, a ‘slip of the pen’ etc which would be corrected in the final version, it has not been.

Please would you consider signing a Petition which calls upon the Prime Minister to consider the threat to airfields caused by the Planning Policy Statement.
Unless the Statement is amended, airfields will be increasingly vulnerable to property developers.

Link to electronic Petition: http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Airfields (http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Airfields)

NB: There are 2 stages:

Sign
Confirm your signature when asked to do so by emailYou must do both or your signature will not be counted.


The entire process takes only 2 minutes.

[The Boy Lard]

Done and it doesnt even take 2 minutes of your time!

[i4iq]

Done. Expats can do it too...

[HillerBee]

Done........

[swordfling]

Done.

Thanks for bringing the petition to our attention FL.

Let's hope it has more effect than the flying community's significant response to the consultation. :ugh:

[md 600 driver]

done also so easy just needs every one on the forum to do it
even ex pats can do it
by my reconing all usa citizens are ex pats too [sometime in the past ] so every one click on the link and do the business
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Airfields

[puntosaurus]

FL I've signed up obviously, and originally I wrote to my MP (Rifkind) who extracted a reply from Milliband promising to "consider reinstating the airfield clause". Their line was very much that dropping the airfield clause was an issue of drafting rather than policy.

In the original text which we felt gave us some protection, both airfields and hospital sites were singled out as 'brownfield sites' that were nevertheless deserving of special protection. My question to you (since I can't find the text of either the original PPG3 or the new one) is did they keep the hospital exemption whilst dropping the airfield one, or did they drop both ?

Their claim that they have nothing against airfields would be much more suspect if they had kept the hospital example.

[rotorcraig]

My question to you (since I can't find the text of either the original PPG3 or the new one) is did they keep the hospital exemption whilst dropping the airfield one, or did they drop both ?

Their claim that they have nothing against airfields would be much more suspect if they had kept the hospital example.
Both the old PPG3 and the new PPS3 can be downloaded from the Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing (http://www.communities.gov.uk/index.asp?id=1504591) page at the Communities and Local Government website.

The old PPG3 said (on this page (http://www.communities.gov.uk/index.asp?id=1143950#P222_54118))The curtilage is defined as the area of land attached to a building. All of the land within the curtilage of the site (as defined above) will also be defined as previously-developed.

However, this does not mean that the whole area of the curtilage should therefore be redeveloped. For example, where the footprint of a building only occupies a proportion of a site of which the remainder is open land (such as at an airfield or a hospital) the whole site should not normally be developed to the boundary of the curtilage. The local planning authority should make a judgement about site layout in this context, bearing in mind other planning considerations, such as policies for the protection of open space and playing fields or development in the countryside, how the site relates to the surrounding area, and requirements for on-site open space, buffer strips, landscaped areas, etc.
Can't find any reference to either an airfield or a hospital in the new PPS3.

RC

[swordfling]

If I'm looking at the right things...
The final document is available here: Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing (http://www.communities.gov.uk/index.asp?id=1504592)
I think the relevant part of this final version, which makes no mention of hospitals either, is this (from Annex B: Definitions):
Previously-developed land (often referred to as brownfield land)
‘Previously-developed land is that which is or was occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated fixed surface infrastructure.’
The definition includes defence buildings, but excludes:
Land that is or has been occupied by agricultural or forestry buildings.
Land that has been developed for minerals extraction or waste disposal by landfill purposes where provision for restoration has been made through development control procedures.
Land in built-up areas such as parks, recreation grounds and allotments, which, although it may feature paths, pavilions and other buildings, has not been previously developed.
Land that was previously-developed but where the remains of the permanent structure or fixed surface structure have blended into the landscape in the process of time (to the extent that it can reasonably be considered as part of the natural surroundings).

There is no presumption that land that is previously-developed is necessarily suitable for housing development nor that the whole of the curtilage should be developed.
The previous document is available here: Planning Policy Guidance 3: Housing (Cancelled) - Annex C: Definitions (http://www.communities.gov.uk/index.asp?id=1143950#P222_54118)
(oops - looks like rotorcraig posted whilst I was still typing!)

[chester2005]

Done, its soooo easy everyone involved in aviation should do it!
Chester:ok:

[Darren999]

Done. Even from the US it only took 2 mins!! Cleaver that. :ok:

[Lord Mount]

Done.........

[Thud_and_Blunder]

Done. Some notable aviation names on the "recently appended" list, including Dickie Duckett, Graham Forbes and our very own John Eacott. Hope it has the right effect.

[Flying Lawyer]

T&B

I sent an open email to all kindred spirits in my address book (and some potential supporters) yesterday. Dickie Duckett was one.
It seems to have been effective - each time I've looked at the list since, some of the names have been there.

Others might want to do the same.
My email was as per the first post plus 'Please consider forwarding this message to kindred spirits and potential supporters in your address book.'

If anyone wants to copy it to save time - feel free.


Tudor

[tomotomp]

Done less than a minute

[Spiritrider]

Also completed petition on traveltax that might interest you all

[Gaseous]

Done. Thanks FL

[puntosaurus]

Thanks for the references swordfling and rotorcraig. I've written again.

[Flying Lawyer]

Thanks all.
The numbers are building well. :ok:


FL
I've signed up obviously, and originally I wrote to my MP (Rifkind) .......
We're obviously neighbours - or at least live in the same borough.
Our MP has always struck me as a pompous sort, but let's hope he tries to help.
Tudor

[puntosaurus]

Hello Neighbour !

Well, he may be pompous but he actually went to the trouble of writing to the ODPM last Feb at my request and extracted a reply from Milliband, and that's a lot more than Portillo ever did when I wrote to object to the war.

Cheers.

[Cron]

Done, Thanks FL.

[Trevors cat]

Done!
Thank you Flying Lawyer. Keep up the selfless devotion to the cause! Bless You.

[stabout]

Done

Up yours Prescott!

[gls.fly]

All done..

Thanks FL for highlighting the issue.

[VfrpilotPB/2]

FL,

Thank you for this thread and how to TRY to show the HMG that people out here in Joe Public land really feel and see things, Sad thing is though, whilst we have MPs and their A**e licking types in government( who would even try to sell the works cat) we will continue to see such badly drawn up rules by which THEY ( the MPs ) want US ( Joe P) to lead our lives.


Peter R-B
VfrpilotPB/2

[OldRookie]

Done

Thank you for bringing this to our attention FL