IWM Duxford and a plan for a Motor Way Service Station
Originally Posted by mfaff
This is not a Planning Application...its a change of use application...which if granted will amke a planning appllciation for an MSA impossible to refuse.
We must object to this change of use....as if it gets through its too late....If the land is reclassed as suitable for an MSA when the application to build one is lodged (the day after the change of use is granted) then it will be impossible for the Council to refuse it...there would be no material grounds for doing so...
We must object to this change of use....as if it gets through its too late....If the land is reclassed as suitable for an MSA when the application to build one is lodged (the day after the change of use is granted) then it will be impossible for the Council to refuse it...there would be no material grounds for doing so...
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chessington, Surrey
Age: 76
Posts: 419
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree with much that has been said. Could I offer a suggestion to those who are able to speak direct with South Cambs. DC.
Phone, ask to speak with a senior member of the Planning Dept.
Ask on what grounds can one object to the proposal. Yes press them to tell you, do'nt be put off by any local government obfuscation!
When submitting your objections stick "strictly to those grounds whereby an objection is allowable" and no other.
Believe me this works, I have successfully objected to several local planning applications in Kingston, Surrey.
Planning Officers can be very helpful if phoned.
Kieron.
Phone, ask to speak with a senior member of the Planning Dept.
Ask on what grounds can one object to the proposal. Yes press them to tell you, do'nt be put off by any local government obfuscation!
When submitting your objections stick "strictly to those grounds whereby an objection is allowable" and no other.
Believe me this works, I have successfully objected to several local planning applications in Kingston, Surrey.
Planning Officers can be very helpful if phoned.
Kieron.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Under the clag EGKA
Posts: 1,028
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Friend of mine is on one of the local parish councils and he was very concerned about an idea that Marshalls were negotiating to move to Dux. This would free up large lumps of Cambridge for housing etec.. I don't know what happened to this.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DH,
Change of use is far less 'visible'....and it does not under go the same depth of consideration as a planning application.
The implication is that the scope of the Stautory Consultation is far narrower and will essentially be 'local' rather than 'national', so the CAA remit is curtailed.
This means issues of 'safety' are not necessarily utmost in the 'official' consideration....
Remember guys this is part of the planning process...its not necessarily logical or obvious to us.. but the planners have a defined set of rules and under those rules they can only consider what is allowed under those rules...regardless of how obvious something else might be....
Change of use is far less 'visible'....and it does not under go the same depth of consideration as a planning application.
The implication is that the scope of the Stautory Consultation is far narrower and will essentially be 'local' rather than 'national', so the CAA remit is curtailed.
This means issues of 'safety' are not necessarily utmost in the 'official' consideration....
Remember guys this is part of the planning process...its not necessarily logical or obvious to us.. but the planners have a defined set of rules and under those rules they can only consider what is allowed under those rules...regardless of how obvious something else might be....
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: England
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's how 'they' work - STUPID
We who posted our OBJECTIONS on the webpage of South Cambs have probably been wondering why we cannot veiw our/others text there.
From a penpusher there this message:
Makes you bloody weep egh!
TG
From a penpusher there this message:
They can be viewed online, by clicking on the magnifying glass next to the pencil icon for each site, however, the council has to undertake a checking and registration process before they will appear, and this could take a number of weeks after the end of the consultation period. You can however view the representations from previous consultations in this manner.
TG
It strikes me that this is far too important a topic to be hidden away in History and Nostalgia. This is NOW! Duxford is a working airfield - not just a museum.
Please Moderators, move this thread to where a lot more people will see it.
Please Moderators, move this thread to where a lot more people will see it.
Cool Mod
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: 18nm N of LGW
Posts: 6,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We are certainly not going to plaster it all over PPRuNe but I will put a link in Private Flying.
I think you might care to look at the viewing figures of AH&N.
I think you might care to look at the viewing figures of AH&N.
I object
In case anyone's interested, here's the text of my objection to South Cambs DC, accepted this afternoon, Thursday. Deadline is 1200 tomorrow Friday. A nice planning officer I spoke to at S Cambs told me there had been lots of objections, and that it was always worth putting one in - objections don't have to be from 'planning experts' only.
Whilst this proposal (to build a Motorway Service Area (MSA) at Duxford) may be superficially attractive, it suffers from one fatal flaw: such a development would almost certainly result in the closure of both runways (hardtop and grass) at Duxford Aerodrome. To anybody involved in the aviation aspects of Duxford (such as myself), this seems such an obvious objection that I am surprised that the proposal has got as far as it has done. I should point out that I am lodging this objection as an individual. I do not represent anyone or anything else, and the views here are entirely my own - other than where I directly quote the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA).
The edge of the MSA would be separated from the aerodrome only by the width of the motorway. Thus The MSA would be directly under the final approach of aeroplanes landing on runway 24 (the south-westerly runways), or, alternatively, directly under the take-off path of aeroplanes taking off on runway 06 (the north-easterly runways). As things stand, without the MSA, there is enough space between the end of the runways and Duxford village to allow pilots to avoid flying directly over the village. Were the MSA to be built, that ‘buffer area’ would be lost; thus aircraft in two of the most safety-critical areas of flight (immedately before landing and immediately after take-off) would be unavoidably flying at low altitude over an area which would be heavily populated with people and vehicles at all times, and which would also include the added risk of a vehicle refuelling area.
Under those circumstances it seems unlikely that the CAA would allow the Duxford runways to continue to be used. Indeed, the CAA’s Safeguarding Coordinator for UK Aerodromes tells me, in an email dated 27 July 2006, that “The CAA will enforce safety standards at licensed aerodromes with rigour and without favour, and the fact that Duxford Aerodrome (which you mentioned) is an important national resource will not make licensing restrictions any less likely should safety regulation make them necessary.”
Closure of Duxford’s runways would be a disaster of global proportions. Duxford Aerodrome, operated by the Imperial War Museum (IWM), is numbered among the world’s greatest sites for historic aviation. It is a unique mecca for anybody who cares about the great aviation history of this country - and its worldwide reputation is such that it also attracts flying visitors from all over the aviation world. Its four annual air shows - three directly organised by the IWM, and ‘Flying Legends’, operated by The Fighter Collection in conjunction with IWM - are known the world over for their excellence. Indeed I have heard it said by a very distinguished American ‘warbird’ pilot that ‘Flying Legends’ is the best ‘warbird’ Air Display in the world, bar none. The aerodrome also hosts numerous other events that depend on the active state of the runways. In addition, the site is home to several companies that restore and operate historic aeroplanes - companies which, naturally, depend on the runways’ being available. It goes without saying that all of these events and companies bring quantifiable benefits to South Cambridgeshire.
Ironically, the proposal cites the proximity of IWM Duxford as a positive factor for the proposal. This clearly demonstrates that the proposers have made no effort to research what actually happens at Duxford Aerodrome.
CAA’s Safeguarding Coordinator for UK Aerodromes also mentions in the email quoted above that “It is a principle of Planning Law that a Planning Authority must not grant Planning Permission without first fully considering how such a decision may be expected to affect those lawful land-uses that already exist. It is also generally accepted by Planners that aerodromes are particularly sensitive to adjacent developments in view of the need for airspace to remain free of obstruction. The Government's own advice endorses this (for example Planning Policy Guidance Note 13), as does its Directions to Planning Authorities (DfT Circular 1/2003), and some recent Planning and Appeals rulings such as in the case of Chatteris Aerodrome in Cambridgeshire. ...... In the event of decisions which do have the effect of curtailing an existing land-use and perhaps causing a quantifiable loss of business, those decisions could be open to procedural challenge if their effects had not been realistically considered.”
So, the question that has to be asked is this: are we seriously saying that we are prepared to give up such a centre of global heritage excellence for a mere Motorway Service Area? I suggest that such an act would be a travesty of all the good governance that British local government strives for.
airsound
Whilst this proposal (to build a Motorway Service Area (MSA) at Duxford) may be superficially attractive, it suffers from one fatal flaw: such a development would almost certainly result in the closure of both runways (hardtop and grass) at Duxford Aerodrome. To anybody involved in the aviation aspects of Duxford (such as myself), this seems such an obvious objection that I am surprised that the proposal has got as far as it has done. I should point out that I am lodging this objection as an individual. I do not represent anyone or anything else, and the views here are entirely my own - other than where I directly quote the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA).
The edge of the MSA would be separated from the aerodrome only by the width of the motorway. Thus The MSA would be directly under the final approach of aeroplanes landing on runway 24 (the south-westerly runways), or, alternatively, directly under the take-off path of aeroplanes taking off on runway 06 (the north-easterly runways). As things stand, without the MSA, there is enough space between the end of the runways and Duxford village to allow pilots to avoid flying directly over the village. Were the MSA to be built, that ‘buffer area’ would be lost; thus aircraft in two of the most safety-critical areas of flight (immedately before landing and immediately after take-off) would be unavoidably flying at low altitude over an area which would be heavily populated with people and vehicles at all times, and which would also include the added risk of a vehicle refuelling area.
Under those circumstances it seems unlikely that the CAA would allow the Duxford runways to continue to be used. Indeed, the CAA’s Safeguarding Coordinator for UK Aerodromes tells me, in an email dated 27 July 2006, that “The CAA will enforce safety standards at licensed aerodromes with rigour and without favour, and the fact that Duxford Aerodrome (which you mentioned) is an important national resource will not make licensing restrictions any less likely should safety regulation make them necessary.”
Closure of Duxford’s runways would be a disaster of global proportions. Duxford Aerodrome, operated by the Imperial War Museum (IWM), is numbered among the world’s greatest sites for historic aviation. It is a unique mecca for anybody who cares about the great aviation history of this country - and its worldwide reputation is such that it also attracts flying visitors from all over the aviation world. Its four annual air shows - three directly organised by the IWM, and ‘Flying Legends’, operated by The Fighter Collection in conjunction with IWM - are known the world over for their excellence. Indeed I have heard it said by a very distinguished American ‘warbird’ pilot that ‘Flying Legends’ is the best ‘warbird’ Air Display in the world, bar none. The aerodrome also hosts numerous other events that depend on the active state of the runways. In addition, the site is home to several companies that restore and operate historic aeroplanes - companies which, naturally, depend on the runways’ being available. It goes without saying that all of these events and companies bring quantifiable benefits to South Cambridgeshire.
Ironically, the proposal cites the proximity of IWM Duxford as a positive factor for the proposal. This clearly demonstrates that the proposers have made no effort to research what actually happens at Duxford Aerodrome.
CAA’s Safeguarding Coordinator for UK Aerodromes also mentions in the email quoted above that “It is a principle of Planning Law that a Planning Authority must not grant Planning Permission without first fully considering how such a decision may be expected to affect those lawful land-uses that already exist. It is also generally accepted by Planners that aerodromes are particularly sensitive to adjacent developments in view of the need for airspace to remain free of obstruction. The Government's own advice endorses this (for example Planning Policy Guidance Note 13), as does its Directions to Planning Authorities (DfT Circular 1/2003), and some recent Planning and Appeals rulings such as in the case of Chatteris Aerodrome in Cambridgeshire. ...... In the event of decisions which do have the effect of curtailing an existing land-use and perhaps causing a quantifiable loss of business, those decisions could be open to procedural challenge if their effects had not been realistically considered.”
So, the question that has to be asked is this: are we seriously saying that we are prepared to give up such a centre of global heritage excellence for a mere Motorway Service Area? I suggest that such an act would be a travesty of all the good governance that British local government strives for.
airsound
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Oxford
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sadly this consultation ended on Friday (28th). I was too late. However the page showed only one SUPPORT and a whole list of OBJECTS...!
Well done all, hope this proposal is scotched.
Tim
Well done all, hope this proposal is scotched.
Tim
