Panshanger Airfield At Risk Again?
 

Mariposa Investments, the owners of Panshanger, have engaged the PPS Group
(‘Welcome to the PPS Group, the country's best lobbying, stakeholder relations and PR consultancy. From a network of UK offices, PPS offers two distinct services.
· It was the UK's first and is its foremost supplier of lobbying, communications and consultation advice to the property industry.
· It is an experienced provider of media relations, communications and stakeholder programmes– an advocate for clients wanting nationwide reach and a regional presence.)
to assist them to get Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council to change its Local Development Framework so that Panshanger can be used for housing. They are holding public exhibitions nearby on 24th through 26th April.

Currently Panshanger is an Area of Special Restraint (ASR) in the Hertfordshire Structure Plan Alterations 2001-2016. Mariposa seeks to overcome this hurdle. In 2002 Welwyn Hatfield Councils view was, “However it would require the release of greenfield sites to meet the shortfall such as the Area of Special Restraint (ASR) at Panshanger. This would be contrary to local plan policy, therefore …is not supported by Welwyn Hatfield.”

I think out of the many airfields in Hertfordshire in the post-war years only Elstree will be left if Panshanger goes.

Sentiment is all very well, but it's commercial reality which keeps places such as Panshanger, or any other airfield, going these days.

There's a lot of misguided loyalty with regard to similar operations on this forum but the reality is, put up or shut up.

You takes yer choice.

now its made the welwyn and hatfield times,

The Welwyn & Hatfield Times - 1,000 new homes could be built on Welwyn Garden City airfield

Morgage?
 

At the moment most people could not get a morgage on a garden shed so just how do these people expect to sell a thousand new homes?

Well, the last time I attempted to go to Panshanger their radio was awful and the chap on the other end was less than helpful in any case.

Admittedly we no PPR, as it was an en-route decision, and he wasn't even prepared to entertain PPR over RTF. Which wouldn't have been a problem, but he was so abrupt about it - almost to the point of being rude. So onwards we went!

Hope it doesn't get turned into houses though... that would be awful for GA; but can't help thinking if they go around alienating pilots they won't have many on their side!

(And before I am shot down in flames, I am aware that there are probably 1,000 pilots who have had excellent service from Panshanger - but I can only speak as I find :)).

My Panshangar experience was equally unfriendly. The guy I phoned for PPR did not know what I was talking about but we both decided I would just turn up. No briefing so no advance warning of the stroppiness to come. We got a row for not wearing hiviz jackets despite most of the folk on the airfield not wearing them. We parked in the wrong place and had to start up and relocate. We had attempted to get instructions on the radio but without success.
On the positive side we met some friendly folk there who we were more than happy to meet. The catering was excellent and served by friendly waitresses.
I guess all airfields can have their off days but I would go back.

Wasn't a bearded guy with an accent giving you a hard time was it? On the whole people there are fine but there are one or two who could do with talking to.

I've not had the stroppy RT, but I seem to recall the visitor parking is exceedingly well signposted...

Tim

Panshanger under threat
 

I gather the local council are thinking of closing what remains of Panshanger and building 700 houses on it. There's apparently little or no local support for the idea and even the MP doesn't agree.

Save Panshanger

I've no idea if it will do any good but there's a link to a petition against the plans there.

What's left probably less than a quarter of the airfield from when I first knew it in the middle 50s but it would be shame to lose it.

I did my PPL there and there is indeed a serious threat to the airfield and North London Flying School. The site has been earmarked for 700 homes and a traveller site by the local authority, Welwyn-Hatfield council.

The local community is up in arms as there would be huge strain on existing infrastructure, schools and medical facilities. For local pilots it is one of only two licensed airfields left in Hertfordshire - the other being Elstree.

I'd urge anyone who has visited EGLG or indeed is interested in preserving the general aviation facilities we have left in Britain to back the campaign to keep Panshanger open. The current management have done a great job revamping the airfield and cafe and there are hundreds of members of the club. Recent events such as the popular Goodwood-style Revival have attracted 1,500 visitors.

Besides the petition, there is a website with more information: Save Panshanger

And also a Facebook group: http://en-gb.facebook.com/SavePansha...drome?filter=3

We must act now before the public consultation period ends in mid-January.

Lunchmaster

It really comes to something when local councils want to plough up airfields to house "travellers".

I will certainly be signing the petition.

TT,

Careful what you say - all comments on Pprune, while not necessarily attributable to a particular individual, are available for public/commercial view.

It is not unknown fro developers or councillors to come across Pprune and use views expressed here - genuine or facetious - as representative of the entire aviation community.

So it might be better to say:

It has come to a sorry state where the council can't find anywhere better for travellers than a working airfield with extremely poor infrastructure which will mean inadequate healthcare, education, water and sewerage for some of the most deserving people in our community.

Then we know exactly what you mean.

Our perhaps criticise the council because the only site in the entire county they can find for some of the least fortunate people in our midst is one which would lead to the loss of scarce private sector aviation-related jobs - which cannot be easily relocated - and would have inadequate healthcare, education, water and sewerage for some of the most deserving people in our community.

I am sure that if the council really cared for the less fortunate of their constituents, they would have taken the trouble to find a better site.

And if they really care about job creation and preservation, they would not be supporting this development.

Xrayalpha, you're quite right. It's the welfare of the travellers I was thinking of in my post. Those poor souls.

Mmm, was on my list of 'to visit' places for next year. Best get there before it becomes houses.

I hear from my sister, who lives on what was part of the airfield until 20 - 30 years ago and told me about the threat, that the council have gone away to look at it again after a lot of opposition. Many pointed out the council's responsibility to support airfields which is apparently under some EU directive, not UK policy.
Info is second-hand and as remembered so apologies if anything's not right.

DHfan,

It would be very interesting if you could find out some more information around this EU directive. You never know, it could help allow you to live on an Airpark in the UK one day!

xrayalpha,

as with all public forums, posts are the opinion of the owner, these can in no way be representative of the forum or community. there's no need for sarcasm, no need to make it sound PC. just tell it like you see it.

taxistaxing was right first time - why ruin an airfield to house travellers and build loads of houses? there are probably other sites that can be flattened in the county.

AndoniP,

No sarcasm meant by me.

But, I can tell you from experience - with wind farms - that people use Google and find Pprune and then state in "expert analysis" what they see here as representative "facts".

Or Google the G-STYX story and see what the AAIB wrote after scouring the internet forums!

Saving Panshanger, Saving History! Dean McBride Group Leader of Holwell Hyde Heritage

National Planning Policy Framework guidelines have not been followed by Welwyn Hatfield Council over their jandling of Panshanger Aerodrome
If they followed the guidelines (or 'Hide'lines) then Panshanger Aerodrome would not have been put forward for housing.

How then can it be put forward for housing but deny the other options as being Perverse and having a planning vote.

The Margin by which the nearest rival was seperated was not 10, 20 or 75 but 600 votes against Panshanger Aerodrome. This came out of research for Save Panshanger which I led prior to saving history.

Please get in touch if you feel this is not the case.:ok:

Regards,

Dean.