Hi! All
I sincerely apologise to the group a) if this has gone before since I
have been out of the country but was alerted by the Save North Weald
Group and managed to get a letter sent to my MP from Portugal.
b) all group members out
of the UK who the news doesn't directly apply to (Notwithstanding any
loud noises from abroad would probably help!)
Somehow we have to box this "two Jags" Prescott up and post him to the
Polar Regions, he is doing untold damage to our countryside and his
edict will decimate General Aviation in the UK.
Shoulders to the wheels please chaps..... It ay be after the date but
his sneaky way needs sneaky efforts albeit late.
Regards
Bob Harrison.
-----Original Message-----
From: Josephine white [mailto:josephine.white1@btinternet.com]
Sent: 08 March 2006 23:48
Subject: Fw: new definition of airfields as 'Brownfield' sites has been
sneaked into planning guidelines by Prescott for the damn bureaucrats to
follow like sheep ..........PLEASE HELP countermand this move and SAVE
BRITAIN'S AIRFIELDS
----- Original Message -----
From: Stan Parr
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2006 10:44 PM
Subject: Fw: new definition of airfields as 'Brownfield' sites has been
sneaked into planning guidelines by Prescott - SAVE BRITAIN'S AIRFIELDS
>> FROM:
>> Dave Calderwood : Editor-in-Chief, LOOP newspaper : www.loop.aero
>> 15 February 2006
>>
>> WE NEED YOUR HELP TO SAVE BRITAIN'S AIRFIELDS
>>
>> This is not a false alarm. This is the real thing.
>>
>> A new definition of airfields as 'Brownfield' sites has been sneaked
into planning guidelines by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister -
John Prescott's dept.
>>
>> If this goes ahead unchallenged, then ANY airfield with a building on
it could be sold for development as a housing estate. Local councils,
businesses and
>> individuals would be powerless to object. There would be no need for
large scale planning inquiries such as that happening over North Weald
right now.
>> Developers could just go ahead - and they will.
>> We could lose many of Britain's airfields within ten years - the
pressure for land for new housing is so great that these prime sites
would be snapped up.
>>
>> WE HAVE UNTIL 27 FEBRUARY 2006 TO ACT! DON'T DELAY!
>>
>> The proposed change was sneaked in as a change within an Annex. It
wasn't even part of the full consultation document.
>>
>> Was it deliberately hidden like this, or did someone forget to point
it out? We don't know but the change was only spotted last week - too
late for
>> inclusion in the latest issue of LOOP newspaper.
>>
>> Hence this email - it's the only way we can mobilise pilot and public
opinion and register objections to the change before the 27 February
deadline. We have >> consulted with the General Aviation industry and we
have their full support.
>>
>> Indeed, the whole of the GA industry, from flying clubs to engineers
to pilot shops and airfield managers is also doing its bit.
>>
>> WRITE TO YOUR MP!
>>
>> A letter by post is the best form of communication. It's a physical
object which your MP cannot ignore. Imagine MPs standing up in
Parliament waving
>> handfuls of letters from constituents demanding that the Deputy Prime
Minister explain his dept's underhand methods!
>>
>> Emails, phone calls, face-to-face meetings all have their place too.
We have to let the Government know the consequences of their actions,
whatever
>> it takes.
>>
>> HERE IS A SAMPLE OF THE KIND OF LETTER YOU COULD SEND TO YOUR MP:
>>
>> Dear Sir
>>
>> I would like to make you aware of a proposed change to planning
guidelines by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister which could have a
devastating
>> effect on this country's aviation industry.
>>
>> Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS 3) has been developed to progress
the Government's agenda to provide a national policy framework for
housing.
>> It says previously developed 'Brownfield' land sites should be
considered for housing development.
>>
>> The existing PPG 3 section defines 'Previously Developed' land with
two example exclusions, hospital grounds and an airfield.
>>
>> In the revised PPS 3, the definition has been revised and the
airfield exclusion has been omitted.
>>
>> My objections are two-fold:
>>
>> First, this would almost certainly lead to airfields being closed for
redevelopment. General Aviation is a big and valuable industry,
supporting
>> many jobs and essential services as well as providing recreational
facilities for private pilots, of which I am one.
>>
>> Second, most of these airfields are in rural areas with insufficient
infrastructure to support such huge housing developments. They would
change
>> the character of much of rural Britain.
>>
>> Finally, I also object to the sneaky way this change has been
introduced - slipped in an Annex which would not normally be read by the
parties
>> involved in the consultation process. It has come to light with less
than two weeks left of the consultation process - which ends on Monday,
27 February.
>>
>> I would be grateful if you could voice our dissatisfaction with this
proposal.
>>
>> More information on this can be found at www.loop.aero
>>
>> Yours faithfully
>>
>> <------------------ cut -------------------->
>>
>>
>>
>> PLEASE WRITE TODAY TO YOUR MP!
>>
>> Don't delay. Tell your flying friends about this too - and if you
live near an airfield you might want to let your local councillors know
that they might have a huge >> new housing estate on their doorstep
within a few years.
>>
>> Find out the contact details for your MP at:
www.locata.co.uk/commons/
>>
>> Copy the letter to:
>> Office of the Deputy Prime Minister
>> Planning Policies Division (2)
>> Zone 4/J5
>> Eland House
>> Bressenden Place
>> London SW1E 5DU
>> email: pps3consultation@odpm.gsi.gov.uk
>>
>> Background material and references to the planning documents are
available on LOOP's website: www.loop.aero
>>
>> Thank you for your attention.
|