Kemble planning permission
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
From: Cirencester UK
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
From: Cirencester UK
Not necessarily I understand. The council (CDC) are going to have another crack, this time getting the 'application' right technically, or so I heard a week or so ago. May have changed since.
As a local ratepayer, sorry Council Tax payer, and 'sports / recreational' pilot resident underneath the approach to K 26, my views on all this anti airfield nonsense are unprintable, and certainly in respect of retired airline pilots who buy houses in the circuit of an airfield established in 1938 and then campaign against it in the 21st Century. The country's going mad.
As a local ratepayer, sorry Council Tax payer, and 'sports / recreational' pilot resident underneath the approach to K 26, my views on all this anti airfield nonsense are unprintable, and certainly in respect of retired airline pilots who buy houses in the circuit of an airfield established in 1938 and then campaign against it in the 21st Century. The country's going mad.
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
From: Cotswolds
Kemble’s latest call to pilots
Many of you will be aware of the ongoing matters being raised by the Local Planning Authorities in connection with the lawful use of Kemble Airport as a civilian airfield, culminating recently in Cotswold District Council withdrawing their misconceived enforcement notice on the day of the appeal. In the context of this we have now, following continuing excessive pressure, agreed to submit an application for a Certificate of Lawfulness to the Councils to illustrate and confirm that the airfield has been operating unrestricted as a General Aviation civilian airfield for a period in excess of ten years.
To support our submission we are now seeking to obtain as many letters as possible from both past and present users of the airfield to confirm this.
If any pilot has either visited or operated from Kemble over the period 1995 – 2007, Kemble Airport would welcome written confirmation of this, together with confirmation of the purpose of your visit / operation. A statement to the effect that to the best of your knowledge Kemble has operated as a GA airfield continually and uninterrupted for a period in excess of the past ten years would also be appreciated.
Due to the restricted timescale of this matter we would be grateful if you could please reply to the address below as soon as possible.
Thank you for your continued support.
Kemble Air Services Ltd., The Control Tower, Kemble Airport, Kemble, Cirencester, GL7 6BA
Tel: +44 (0)1285 771177 e-mail: [email protected]
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
From: ...back of the drag curve
Letter in the post, I cant believe I havent landed at Kemble since 2005....
But, I did a lot of flying from there in the 90s, so hopefully some good evidence that Kemble has been a GA airfield even when the RAF were still there. Was it 1993 that they left? Didnt Vic Norman keep his De Hav Devon there at one time in the 1980s?
But, I did a lot of flying from there in the 90s, so hopefully some good evidence that Kemble has been a GA airfield even when the RAF were still there. Was it 1993 that they left? Didnt Vic Norman keep his De Hav Devon there at one time in the 1980s?
niknak
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
From: UK
Take the TESCO Approach!!!
What Kemble, and every other airfiled under any sort of threat, needs, is a rich sugar Daddy to provide an imaginary fighting fund.
Its no secret that there are a large number of wealthy people in aviation, it's just that they take the sensible option and, for the most part, don't advertise it although most of us know who they are.
All we need to do is persuade 10 of them to guarantee paying the costs of any enquiry or appeal in such cases - then we'd see the local authorities running away like scalded moggies when aviation has a genuine case, cos they know that to persue it would cost the local taxpayers 100s of 1000s of £s. Said sugar daddys lose nothing because there are no real costs to pay.
It works with Tesco nearly every time and in most cases, local councils deserve to be hung out to dry by retailers - I don't see what the difference is here.
What Kemble, and every other airfiled under any sort of threat, needs, is a rich sugar Daddy to provide an imaginary fighting fund.
Its no secret that there are a large number of wealthy people in aviation, it's just that they take the sensible option and, for the most part, don't advertise it although most of us know who they are.
All we need to do is persuade 10 of them to guarantee paying the costs of any enquiry or appeal in such cases - then we'd see the local authorities running away like scalded moggies when aviation has a genuine case, cos they know that to persue it would cost the local taxpayers 100s of 1000s of £s. Said sugar daddys lose nothing because there are no real costs to pay.
It works with Tesco nearly every time and in most cases, local councils deserve to be hung out to dry by retailers - I don't see what the difference is here.
