DURHAM TEES VALLEY AIRPORT - 5
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Durham
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Peel didn't invest the BmiBaby money into the airport. It would be even less likely to put the profits made from housing into the airport. So a few hundred houses would do nothing to help the airport. As the comments on the Northern Echo site say, the new houses, if built, would not have to put up with much aircraft noise. If the public can see through Peel why can't the MPs and councillors?
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Near MME, England, UK
Age: 35
Posts: 866
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Today's press articles are completely misleading, the housing development is a tiny part of the master plan which includes up to nine new aircraft hangars. The houses are not up to the perimeter fence and are on land unsuitable for airport development
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Teesside
Posts: 630
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, the plan is revealed....
Firstly, the announcement seems to play nicely into the hands of the cynics who say this was the plan all along. Yet again, the owners have failed to discredit and blow away the criticism.
I like the idea of building hangers and creating a sustainable airport future - all makes sense though one could argue the money from the BMI win could have provided the same cash to do such a thing. Moreover, if the rents from the hangers would provide such a sustainable future, then why couldn't Peel have provided a loan from their other companies? If the business plan is so sound - why not self-fund?
On another note...I don't fully understand how this protects passenger services. For the passenger services to remain, they have to be profitable in their own right; which can only happen from increased revenues and/or lower costs from that side of the operation. Does the re-structuring of the terminal and a few redundancies make passenger operations profitable?
If the answer to that last question is 'no', then all this additional investment will make for a profitable business but will simply subsidise the passenger operations. Any accountant or business person within the company though would have to ask why bother with the passenger side in the long term - let's focus on the stuff which makes money.
If the answer to my question is 'yes' - passenger operations are now profitable...then there is a chance that the airport will survive.
If not, we're looking at an airfield rather than an airport. Or worse still, simply development.
My conclusion is that Peel have created a masterplan for a sustainable business, which is good for the region. I have to question though whether this is a masterplan for a sustainable airport.
I like the idea of building hangers and creating a sustainable airport future - all makes sense though one could argue the money from the BMI win could have provided the same cash to do such a thing. Moreover, if the rents from the hangers would provide such a sustainable future, then why couldn't Peel have provided a loan from their other companies? If the business plan is so sound - why not self-fund?
On another note...I don't fully understand how this protects passenger services. For the passenger services to remain, they have to be profitable in their own right; which can only happen from increased revenues and/or lower costs from that side of the operation. Does the re-structuring of the terminal and a few redundancies make passenger operations profitable?
If the answer to that last question is 'no', then all this additional investment will make for a profitable business but will simply subsidise the passenger operations. Any accountant or business person within the company though would have to ask why bother with the passenger side in the long term - let's focus on the stuff which makes money.
If the answer to my question is 'yes' - passenger operations are now profitable...then there is a chance that the airport will survive.
If not, we're looking at an airfield rather than an airport. Or worse still, simply development.
My conclusion is that Peel have created a masterplan for a sustainable business, which is good for the region. I have to question though whether this is a masterplan for a sustainable airport.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: NE ENGLAND
Posts: 957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DTVAirport
Surely you have "woken up & smell the coffee!", you are being stitched up big time.
It actually isn't the size of the proposed housing development that is the main issue, more the precedent that is being established. It's the commencement of the erosion of airport land for other purposes. It is actually a self fulfilling prophesy, as once the development exceeds a critical mass, then those new inhabitants will actually side with developers to restrict & actually "get rid" of that "nasty noisy airport" that someone had the audacity to construct on their doorsteps all those years ago !
Unfortunately it's the way things are !, if you consider this far fetched then review as to how much trouble was caused by very few inhabitants prior to the construction of the second Tyne Tunnel.
Anyway even if all this goes over your head then who in their right mind builds housing on airport land when the view for UK development in the UK is completely the opposite?
Unfortunately it may possibly transpire that the best contribution that Peel may offer to those currently employed at DTVA is in the proviosion of their shares as a home for redundancy monies.
Surely you have "woken up & smell the coffee!", you are being stitched up big time.
It actually isn't the size of the proposed housing development that is the main issue, more the precedent that is being established. It's the commencement of the erosion of airport land for other purposes. It is actually a self fulfilling prophesy, as once the development exceeds a critical mass, then those new inhabitants will actually side with developers to restrict & actually "get rid" of that "nasty noisy airport" that someone had the audacity to construct on their doorsteps all those years ago !
Unfortunately it's the way things are !, if you consider this far fetched then review as to how much trouble was caused by very few inhabitants prior to the construction of the second Tyne Tunnel.
Anyway even if all this goes over your head then who in their right mind builds housing on airport land when the view for UK development in the UK is completely the opposite?
Unfortunately it may possibly transpire that the best contribution that Peel may offer to those currently employed at DTVA is in the proviosion of their shares as a home for redundancy monies.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Middlesbrough U.K.
Age: 86
Posts: 360
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A Big Con Trick
In other words a massive con trick for which so many fell. There was never a plan for a successful airport, just a plan for a billionaire to make even more money. And the people of Teesside and the Councils were the suckers.
Spend £500,000 and make millions.
Spend £500,000 and make millions.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: North east
Age: 70
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a surprise....to some of you it seems . I was rubbished five years ago when I put forward the view that this was peel holdings medium term plan to build on the site .The 400 houses you hear of today is merely phase one of a number of phases. Housing sites aren't built near airports one will have to go and by now even the most optimistic poster will realise what it is that's going ( which was always the plan) mr lang ms Quinn et al were all just pawns in a very big game that was being played out from the first few weeks in 2003 when the hard up councils sold their interests in the place.Before anyone starts knocking the politicians of the day they had no choice ,no council in the North East could afford to spend money on an airport, things like schools libraries bin men and street lights come first and rightly so.No doubt someone will accuse me of trolling here but how many of you have seen the inside of Peels boardroom?...
Today's press articles are completely misleading, the housing development is a tiny part of the master plan which includes up to nine new aircraft hangars. The houses are not up to the perimeter fence and are on land unsuitable for airport development
Also not a 'tiny' area in terms of the total development.
Phew ,,!!!!!!
So much to take in.my initial thoughts were great...then I looked in depth.
So many questions...that western apron and housing...will people be renting out their rooms for the spotters?
That eastern road...traffic lights for movements or reduced distances on the runway...surely the ils will be affected?
Infrastructure through and around msg...surely costing more than the development it self?
Access to large aircraft to south side freight areas..new taxiways? Who pays for those ...us ?
There are lots more questions but those are open for comment to start with!
So many questions...that western apron and housing...will people be renting out their rooms for the spotters?
That eastern road...traffic lights for movements or reduced distances on the runway...surely the ils will be affected?
Infrastructure through and around msg...surely costing more than the development it self?
Access to large aircraft to south side freight areas..new taxiways? Who pays for those ...us ?
There are lots more questions but those are open for comment to start with!
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Teesside
Age: 38
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The housing looks far more distant from the perimeter fencing in this diagram:
http://dtva-master-plan.co.uk/wp-con...m.php?id=tLKYQ
Taxiways to the south side development look to be the old runways which would probably just need a clean up and a resurface?
http://dtva-master-plan.co.uk/wp-con...m.php?id=tLKYQ
Taxiways to the south side development look to be the old runways which would probably just need a clean up and a resurface?
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: NE ENGLAND
Posts: 957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guy's! why do you keep on considering the interaction between an active airport & housing when actually there wont be an issue as the place will have closed !
The only issue is as to how long Peel will be forced to maintain a licenced runway for aircraft dismantling.
At this rate KL will see out their contract & then they will be off too, as there simply wont be any pax, even if they don't get lost in housing estate side streets in trying to find the place.
On another tack I can suggest as to just how ridiculous this all is
. Say you are a pax looking for a car parking space, then there would be many residents happy to capitalise on their location & quite prepared to rent out their drives / garages for £30 - £40 p.w. or more 
The whole scheme is as has been said already, only about one thing, how much money can Peel extract from the site development & absolutely nothing about contributing to the long term benefit of the local ecconomy. But then you really can't blame them, Peel were and still remain the same animal they were when they bought the place - property developers, there were simply too many stupid enough to be taken in and sell them the place in the first place.
The old american comedian W C Fields quotation sums it all up "Never give a sucker an even break !".
The only issue is as to how long Peel will be forced to maintain a licenced runway for aircraft dismantling.
At this rate KL will see out their contract & then they will be off too, as there simply wont be any pax, even if they don't get lost in housing estate side streets in trying to find the place.
On another tack I can suggest as to just how ridiculous this all is
. Say you are a pax looking for a car parking space, then there would be many residents happy to capitalise on their location & quite prepared to rent out their drives / garages for £30 - £40 p.w. or more The whole scheme is as has been said already, only about one thing, how much money can Peel extract from the site development & absolutely nothing about contributing to the long term benefit of the local ecconomy. But then you really can't blame them, Peel were and still remain the same animal they were when they bought the place - property developers, there were simply too many stupid enough to be taken in and sell them the place in the first place.
The old american comedian W C Fields quotation sums it all up "Never give a sucker an even break !".
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Teesside
Posts: 463
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is just a plan. No one has even applied for planning permission yet ,let alone received it. Pie in the sky ( pardon the pun ). If the airport is to continue then you have Typhoons doing overshoots and a helicopter running 24hrs a day. Would you buy a house in a place like that?
It's either the houses or the airport and not both.
It's either the houses or the airport and not both.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: NE ENGLAND
Posts: 957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Paarmo
Precisely ! & in proceeding with a policy of undermining the airport, as in step one “withdraw all IT flights”, then it appears that the strategy of Peel has already been taken to address this particular issue.
However note does need to be made that there are a number of reasons as to why DTV has not been successful in recent years that are nothing to do with Peel, i.e. that fundamentally the whole area economy has declined / changed and there is no longer no giant petrochemical / steel industry remaining on Teesside, replaced by what ? service industries, & small pockets of overseas investment? ….DTV / Teesside airport, call it what you may, has simply followed the trend.
It's either the houses or the airport and not both
However note does need to be made that there are a number of reasons as to why DTV has not been successful in recent years that are nothing to do with Peel, i.e. that fundamentally the whole area economy has declined / changed and there is no longer no giant petrochemical / steel industry remaining on Teesside, replaced by what ? service industries, & small pockets of overseas investment? ….DTV / Teesside airport, call it what you may, has simply followed the trend.
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Teesside
Age: 38
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A little off topic but only 8 days left until the Lightining talk if anybody is interested:
Lightning Presentation 2013 - FoDTVA
Lightning Presentation 2013 - FoDTVA
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Near MME, England, UK
Age: 35
Posts: 866
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The bulk of the people slating the place have little or no understanding of how airports work and/or just like to criticise for criticising's sake, those same people want me to defend the place so they can achieve a thrill trying to pick apart my defence, so after this post I think I'll join Beafer by giving up on pprune, bar the odd post.
Airport development and land development go hand-in-hand these days, Peel are port operators as much as they are land developers and have done nothing different to what most other UK airports have done, capitalised on land adjacent to an airport to bring in extra income.
I do have one question for Beafer however, if Peel are not a company you wish to be associated with, does that mean you'll be leaving the flying school? Because if not, like it or not, you still have an association of sorts? Just curious.
Airport development and land development go hand-in-hand these days, Peel are port operators as much as they are land developers and have done nothing different to what most other UK airports have done, capitalised on land adjacent to an airport to bring in extra income.
I do have one question for Beafer however, if Peel are not a company you wish to be associated with, does that mean you'll be leaving the flying school? Because if not, like it or not, you still have an association of sorts? Just curious.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Teesside
Posts: 630
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I'm not giving up....
Well I'm not giving up on PPrune. There are some sensible and interesting reads between the "repeat" posts.
That said, if we didn't have all the repeats, we'd have little to discuss.
I think the reality in all this is there are those who doubt, and who quite frankly are being proved right at every opportunity by the owners, and those who are more optimistic and trusting of their intentions.
I spent an hour last night reading the full 179 page plan. On the face of it, it is a great plan...a plan that reads well and talks sense. It is a plan that has probably cost of lot of money in consultant fees to write too! And I would love to believe that the plan would come off, because if it did, it would be good for our airport and good for the region.
The problem is, there have been many plans, many promises, precedents set elsewhere and crucially a truly dreadful track record on delivery (some of which is down to economics, granted) that simply feeds the sceptics. And until Peel actually start delivering, or at least getting their PR right for starters, the doubters will remain.
I want this plan to work. It can work. But until Peel build up a track record of success, this will simply be another plan and crucially its a plan that talks about building houses...something which many said would always happen.
That said, if we didn't have all the repeats, we'd have little to discuss.
I think the reality in all this is there are those who doubt, and who quite frankly are being proved right at every opportunity by the owners, and those who are more optimistic and trusting of their intentions.
I spent an hour last night reading the full 179 page plan. On the face of it, it is a great plan...a plan that reads well and talks sense. It is a plan that has probably cost of lot of money in consultant fees to write too! And I would love to believe that the plan would come off, because if it did, it would be good for our airport and good for the region.
The problem is, there have been many plans, many promises, precedents set elsewhere and crucially a truly dreadful track record on delivery (some of which is down to economics, granted) that simply feeds the sceptics. And until Peel actually start delivering, or at least getting their PR right for starters, the doubters will remain.
I want this plan to work. It can work. But until Peel build up a track record of success, this will simply be another plan and crucially its a plan that talks about building houses...something which many said would always happen.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Leeds Yorkshire England
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe Blackpool Airport built some houses and industrial units around the perimeter and it seems to be booming as an airport again. Its never over until the fat owners sing.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: here ???
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Propesed devopment public exhibitions
For those who want to know more about the proposed delovment and discuss with the team
there is a public exibition at the St George hotel at the Airport on 21 November 3pm to 7pm and at the Dolphin Centre Darlington on 28 November 3pm to 8pm
there is a public exibition at the St George hotel at the Airport on 21 November 3pm to 7pm and at the Dolphin Centre Darlington on 28 November 3pm to 8pm
