21 November 2024
Pilots, enthusiasts and anyone with an interest in keeping Nottingham City (Tollerton) Airport operating are urged to reject a council’s plan to build 2,700 houses on the site.
The Greater Nottingham Strategic Plan (GNSP) covers three local boroughs including Rushcliffe which is where the airport is located. The airport is included in the plan which identifies potential housing developments.
That local plan is currently out for public consultation and this is our opportunity to say “hands off the airport”.
Sarah Deacon, part of a campaign group to save the airport, said, “Please could you ask your readers to sign up and comment on Policy 31 (Allocation east of Gamston/North of Tollerton) of the draft of the GNSP and state that they do not believe it to be sound because it includes the airfield.
“The plan is not sound because it contravenes the National Planning Policy Framework that states planning authorities should recognise the importance of maintaining a national network of general aviation facilities, and the airfield was included with no consultation with the industry.
“If your readers could write about how important general aviation aerodromes are to them, in order for the sector to flourish that would be wonderful please.
“We need to get the message across loud and clear: Homes can be built in many places, but airfields cannot.”
Click here to take part in the consultation
Nottingham City Airport is a thriving general aviation airfield, with two fixed wing flying schools and a rotary school, two specialist engineering firms offering CAA apprenticeships, and a cafe open to the public.
In 2014 the site was allocated into the Local Plan for 4,000 homes – this was done on appeal to the Planning Inspector after Rushcliffe Borough council rejected the site originally from the local plan. The Planning Inspector increased the target for Rushcliffe to cater for the un-met needs of a neighbouring authority.
Through one of several Freedom of Information requests, Sarah discovered that there was no consultation with the Aviation Sector, no industry bodies, or any of the key stakeholders who use the airfield regularly – such as the Air Ambulances, Forestry Commission, Police, Military and the National Grid, as well as passenger transport firms and flying schools from across the country.
“Also, the site was presented as ‘brownfield’ even though it has never been disused,” said Sarah. “And the flying activities were described as 26 small planes flown once every three weeks – which bears no resemblance to the picture of activity and use of the airfield from across the country and abroad that we see today.”
The situation is further confused because Nottinghamshire Country Council, which owns the land, renewed the lease to the airport last July with no mention of the housing plan. The length of the lease and other terms have not been released to the public because they are “commercially sensitive”.
