Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
#1787908
@Gertie is right about prefabs and many labour councils sold bonds to fund building council estates and the standard design used was pretty high quality compared to the terraced houses many people were used to.

Private development to similar high standards was also encouraged

Where they missed a trick was in failing to realise the impact of increasing car ownership

We desperately need a coherent but locally controlled planning system.
#1787912
IainD wrote:We won’t be happy until we’ve concreted over the UK. There is so much building in Norfolk villages at the moment but no visible investment in infrastructure :(

If Attleborough continues to expand southward as it is currently, it will become almost impossible to avoid overflying the southern end of it while flying from 25 at Old Buck, while obeying the current noise abatement procedures to avoid overflying the local villages, with the possibility of more Attleborough residents complaining (yes, I’ve taken calls from disgruntled residents).

Ian
#1787927
Like the Curate's Egg this policy is good in parts.

The one bit I like is "Renewal' which covers such things as turning vacant and derelict inner city buildings into liveable spaces.

Our best hope is Grant Shapps' plan to give legal safeguarding protection to airfields. Whilst I disagree with the scope and extent of his aspirations adding Licensed Aerodromes at least to the DfT list of 28 would go a long way to help.
#1787939
Well this government doesn't do detail. It could possibly be good in parts, dependung upon the detail, but it seems that people will just be able to build whatever they like in "Renewal" areas. Surely for effective renewal, you need decent services, good transport, employment opportunities, pleasant public spaces etc. This is just going to give carte blanche for developers to bang a few thousand low quality breeding boxes onto brownfield sites.
Along with the vast extension of permitted development it seems we're heading for very little control and joined up thinking.
#1787951
Bert Presley wrote:Complainers might suddenly find that they really love their local airfield :D


When the local Labour council sold off Ipswich Airport in early 1990s to a developer for mainly industrial development, the main vocal campaigners against the sale were the folks in the housing estates surrounding and backing on to the Airport.

The Ipswich Airport Association still holds regular meetings : In fact I believe I am a member.......

Peter :wink:
Sooty25 liked this
#1787985
Should we be worried?


It'll depend if the aerodrome has been designated "for renewal". But then we should have been very worried long ago as to how it ended up as "renewal".

land will be designated in one of three categories: for growth, for renewal and for protection.


My next questions would be which categories do aerodromes sit in today and is anyone doing anything to ensure their protection.
#1787986
Anyone who thinks that a relaxation of planning law to allow more building is going to protect aerodromes must have a very rosy outlook on life.
chevvron liked this
#1787991
johnm wrote:..

We desperately need a coherent but locally controlled planning system.


[my bold, underlining]

.. quite. If the designations of 'growth' or 'renewal' for areas/sites formerly (in some sense) 'protected' can be made by a SoS in Westminster alone without obligation to seek (let alone heed) the views of LAs affected, then there is a clear danger that a 'susceptible' SoS may be unduly influenced by those who had recent official or informal access to his/her ear. Recent news stories rather suggest that such 'susceptibility' may indeed exist. :roll:
johnm, Kemble Pitts liked this