Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
#1516501
JSAG wrote:The airport owners only bought Fairoaks recently.

.

There are two companies owning parts of Fairoaks, these two parts being the airfield, main storage hangar and tower and the other part the other hangars, buildings and car parks. It is only the latter which recently changed hands, the airfield still being owned by the same owners as in 2010.
#1516507
Not been to Fairoaks in years so this might be a dumb question.

Is it possible to develop the recently bought land for housing but retain operations on the longer held parcel utilising runway, tower and some hangars?

I accept that conflict with 'new' neighbours will no doubt arise and the loss of peoples livelihoods will be hard to militate against, but if this landowner only gets revenue from the airfield could a presumption of continuing ops be made?
#1516510
I fly out of Fairoaks so am naturally interested in its future. But not a local so do not know the history, territory etc. The comments are interesting and I'd like to respond to 3 in particular.
1. Public consultation and engagement is a mandatory part of the Planning Process. The rationale is that local concerns and interests be taken on board early in the design process. Don't get hung up on motivation etc. They have to do it and are bound to present their aspirations in the best light. Listen carefully and contribute pragmatically.
2. The reasons any previous applications were refused should be published on the Local Planning Authorities web site. If you cannot find them phone and ask for assistance. Local Policy may have changed since then so check that too.
3. Don't get hung up on labels like Garden or Village stick to the facts ie numbers of units, traffic impact (and despite what the Local Councillor has said traffic or as its known 'trip generation' is a material planning matter. The applicants will have to produce detailed studies to justify any claims of adequacy.)
#1516520
JSAG wrote:According to the Woking News and Mail:
"Surrey Heath Council failed in its bid for Fairoaks to be one of the first garden villages supported by the Government, but the airport owners are continuing with their plans for a large housing development. "

There are two, yes 2 other proposed garden villages situated close by, one at the old MOD Motor Vehicles Evaluation Establishment (MVEE) at Longcross about 2nm MW of Fairoaks which has the advantage of its own railway station, the other in what is presently woodland about 2nm SE.
With any luck, Fairoaks just might be turned down as it could be considered 'over development' in the area.
#1516617
JSAG wrote:Just checking.
There's Longcross Garden Village plus, even nearer to Fairoaks
the proposed New Zealand Golf Course development (I understand they are willing to sell)
Plus the Martyrs Lane development which runs into the McLaren roundabout which in on Fairoaks boundery.

I'll change that to " MASSIVE over development"


The timing of when the planners of the Fairoaks Garden Village do their "local" traffic impact assessment will be interesting. It would be more realistic if they waited until after things settle down with the traffic flows on completion of those other nearby developments and their respective new houses become fully occupied.

I could be cynical and say they wont wait that long so that it appears less of a problem for their plans.
#1517043
JSAG wrote:Just checking.
There's Longcross Garden Village plus, even nearer to Fairoaks
the proposed New Zealand Golf Course development (I understand they are willing to sell)
Plus the Martyrs Lane development which runs into the McLaren roundabout which in on Fairoaks boundery.

I'll change that to " MASSIVE over development"


There are also 1200 homes to consider at the Deepcut Barracks redevelopment named Mindenhurst, Deepcut. Although not on the Fairoaks doorstep, off-peak they are approx 20 minutes apart by car (although the time increases as they gradually lower the speed limits in the area!).

At peak times these developments might combine into the traffic flows of the feeder roads for M3 J3 or the A322 Bagshot-Guildford Road.

Quote from http://www.mindenhurst.co.uk/faq/ :
As part of the approval of the Hybrid Planning Application, extensive traffic surveys were completed to simulate traffic flows including those of the new development. As a result of this process various S106 works form part of the approval and will seek to mitigate the impact of the development.

Relevant Highways Improvement works associated with this development are:
• Works to red route/Maultway/Upper Chobham Road
• Works to Deepcut Bridge Road Railway Bridge
• Environmental improvements to Deepcut Bridge Road
• Works to Frimley Green Road/Sturt Road/Wharf Road
• Red Route/ A322 Roundabout improvements
• Works to Junction 3 of the M3
• Gole Road/Dawney Hill traffic signal works


From the Fairoaks Garden Village perspective, the above affect busy routes between Camberley/Frimley and Lightwater/M3 J3/ Brookwood/Knaphill//Chobham/Woking/Guildford (and beyond).
A Deepcut/Mytchett MP is predicting the disruption from the road developments will last for years.

(The last I heard the M3 Smart motorway developments were running at least a year late).

Also in the Woking area, 3500 houses planned for Woodham Lane by a traffic congestion black spot according to video news : http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/woodham-new-town-public-consultation-12552570 although the narrative says 1200 houses.

If that volume of traffic does not slow down the average speeds I will be amazed.

I wonder how low the speed limits will become near all these developments in the name of road safety that will also contribute to the congestion misery in years to come.

The locals might prefer to have Fairoaks Airport rather than a new garden village...
#1517115
I hinted at that earlier.... No plans presented for either of those Community days, but a "vision" will then be prepared in just 2 working days, and then presented next day at the same venue (noting it is a completely different day of the week so unlikely to get the same people attending to say that's not what we said :twisted: ).

2 working days to come up with the "vision" (which is still not the "plans" that get submitted to the council for planning permission!).