Northrepps Airfield Planning - formal request for help

John Brady · Post by **John Brady** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 8:23 pm

I now have the full sp on this planning issue from Northrepps. Please read the following and use the links to support the application. The North Norfolk online planning comment form is a breeze to use.

John

NORTHREPPS AIRFIELD NEEDS YOUR HELP

There has been an airfield at Northrepps for over 39 years. Chris Gurney operated the original strip until the end of 2007. However following the death of the owner of the land on which the original strip was located the ownership of the land transferred to the owner’s son who did not wish the airfield to continue in operation. As a result Chris Gurney physically relocated the airfield by about half a mile (two field widths) to land he owns at Winspurs Farm.

Much effort has gone into developing the new site which boasts two grass runways. A micro-light school (Catch a Cloud) has been established and recently catering facilities have been provided.

The new airfield has been open since early 2008 and has been operating on a temporary planning permission. On 2nd November 2009 Chris Gurney filed an application for permanent planning permission as follows :

Planning Application PF/09/1082

“……to Continue Use of Land as Aerodrome with an Increase in Aircraft Movement from 1780 to 5000 per Annum and to Permit Take-off and Landing at Any Time in an Emergency and Limited Banner Towing and Aerobatics.”

There is considerable local support for the airfield but, regrettably, there is also organised opposition led by Mr Simon Gurney who became the landowner of the original airfield site on the death of his father. Simon Gurney is a cousin of Chris Gurney but this is not simply a family disagreement and a significant number of people are involved in opposing the airfield. The basis of their objection is stated to be noise and the associated adverse effect this is likely to have on local property prices.

On 3rd December an on-line petition was started to support the airfield and this has attracted hundreds of positive responses.

http://www.catchacloud.co.uk/page2.htm

However as of 9th December 43 objections to the permanent planning application had been lodged with North Norfolk District Council In view of this letters of support are urgently needed to counter the objections.

It should be understood that without permanent planning permission, and an attendant increase in allowed aircraft movements, further development of the airfield would be extremely difficult and its long term viability would be in question.

Details of the planning application can be found here

Comments in support of the application can be submitted on line using this linkwhich is very simple and easy to use.

Alternatively Letters in support of the application can be sent to :

The Planning Section
North Norfolk District Council
Council Offices
Holt Road
Cromer
NR27 9EN

F.A.O. Mr Ian Thompson – Planning Officer

All correspondence should quote the planning application reference PF/09/1082.

As the consultation period ends on 4th January 2010 please submit any comments in support of the application as soon as possible.[

Alan Kilbride · Post by **Alan Kilbride** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 9:55 pm

mike newall · Post by **mike newall** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 1:06 am

Done - with my normal pithy comments.....

NickChittenden · Post by **NickChittenden** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 1:02 pm

If you reading this and wondering whether to bother supporting the application please click on the link. It take but a minute or so to register your support.

I assume 'support' as I can't imagine an LAA member objecting!

Bob F · Post by **Bob F** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 7:24 pm

Done.

mike hurn · Post by **mike hurn** » Tue Dec 15, 2009 11:37 am

Cross posted from Kevin

Reading through its not very good that most of the supporters are Paramotors/microlighter's they need a bit more help from the GA pilots, it only takes 5 min to send a email

Rgs Mike

Just to clarify a few things:

The Microlight school was in existence at time of original Planning Application (and planners knew it) when the airfield was granted a years Tmeporary Permission with a view to Local Authority monitoring sound levels. It is a fact that no monitoring was done because there were no credible complaints. Complaints only started when this Planning Application (Renewal of permission) was made public a few weeks ago.

The main objector, who's land Northrepps Airfield was originally on, is adamant that he's going to throw whatever money he can at it in order to shut down the airfield. He has actively canvassed objectors, which is why a lot of objection letters are identical. Although he is a 'Gurney' it is not a personal feud. The objector is (I'm being polite here) an absolute pain to all and sundry in Northrepps as he thinks he is the 'Lord' of the village.

Chris Gurneys Planning Agent put the figure of 5000 movements, I think with a view to Planners reducing it. Other conditions like totals of individual aircraft types, were put in by the Planners last year and now seem irrelevant as no noise testing/monitoring has been done during this past year of any aircraft.

Planners have openly admitted that the application was going to be 'rubber stamped' until objections started coming in and had said that there were over 200 letters of objection recieved. Although I see not all have appeared on Council website. Chris's agent said that we ought to balance things out a bit which is why we asked for some messages of support for the application. We have had just over 150 sent to the Planners direct. half of these are from Paramotor Pilots and the other half from BMMA members.

The main objectors latest 'ploy' is to open up the old strip last week (the one which he chucked Chris off of and buldozed the entrance) and to inform Planners that 'it never closed', thereby causing a breach of our original application where Chris stated that any flying would all be at the new site and ceasing on the old one.

The main objector is trying everything he can to get airfield shut. He's hoping that if he has confused Planning Committee enough, they'll shut Chris down and then he'll promptly close the old strip again making Northrepps airfield free.

I know that there are a lot more devious methods he is using but there's no point in tittle tattle.

Anyway, thanks to those of you that have put in support messages for us. Consultation period ends on 4th Jan 2010 so if you hav'nt already, please use this link :

http://tiny.cc/h2QEB

Kevin Smith

Bill Scott · Post by **Bill Scott** » Tue Dec 15, 2009 3:27 pm

menestrel · Post by **menestrel** » Tue Dec 15, 2009 6:19 pm

have added my support. good luck and best wishes.

Bill Dobinson

mike hurn · Post by **mike hurn** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 11:56 am

Come on everyone this is a pretty poor show im sure there are a lot of pilots on here that have visited cromer airfield would it not bother you if it was closed ???we need to keep airfields open not just let them close because we cant be bothered ...What about all you plane spotters on here ive seen you at cromer airfield, it wouldnt do your hobby any good if it closed ..get emailing your support its easy and it dont take long , you only have till the end December

Rgs Mike

Just checked Council website (1109hrs 16/12/09) and it shows

In Favour: 82
Representation Details Against: 47
In Favour = 82

Against = 49

Both are now creeping up, albeit slowly.

Kevin Smith

Norfolkjohn · Post by **Norfolkjohn** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 3:41 pm

Having just spoken to the planning department at North Norfolk District Council can I suggest that the figures for responses to the planning application shown on their web site are NOT up to date.

I submitted my comment of support on-line last Sunday afternoon (13th) but as of now (15.30 on the 16th) it is still not showing on the list of received comments. In view of this I have just phoned the planning department and they have advised me that the on-line comment system is entirely new (part of a newly installed IT upgrade) and, incredibly, they didn't even know it was there until someone phoned them about it last week !!!!!

Since then they have been getting to grips with it and there is a significant delay between comments being received and them bring shown on the web site against the address of the person commenting.

I have been assured that my comments have been received but they, along with many others, are going through some sort of vetting process - I assume to make sure that someone isn’t submitting the same comment hundreds of times like one of the objectors apparently did – prior to being shown on the on-line listing.

On the basis that the forum posts requesting help (here, Flyer and other places) hit the Screens on Sunday evening i.e. after my comment had already gone in, I think it is highly probable that NNDR Planning department are now snowed under with comments !

I do strongly urge people that have not sent in supportive comments to do so but it may well take several days – if not a week – before their comment is added to the on-line tally and their address appears on the list of those who have made comments. However the comments do count and will be taken into consideration if they are made before the 4th Jan deadline.

All the best,

John A

mike newall · Post by **mike newall** » Fri Dec 18, 2009 2:14 am

Should have a wave of support from the RV community, great response from a copy over to the RV Forum

mike hurn · Post by **mike hurn** » Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:38 pm

Thats great Mike thanks quite a few support emails are coming in now

Cheers Mike

ChampChump · Post by **ChampChump** » Fri Dec 18, 2009 4:22 pm

Comments submitted to NDC, although there seemed to be a hiccough and I received a confusing response showing both confirmation and message that there was a problem with my comment

Hopefully just a computer glitch. Have attempted to clarify this with them without duplicating anything.

Norfolkjohn · Post by **Norfolkjohn** » Sat Dec 19, 2009 12:06 pm

This morning I got a letter from NNDC confirming receipt of my comments regarding Northrepps. Enclosed with the letter was an advice leaflet about commenting on planning applications. Based on this, and for the benefit of people that have not yet made comments, it would be worth keeping a few points in mind.

Firstly the letter of acknowledgement states :

“…any points which you have made and which are material planning considerations will be taken into account when determining this application.”

Concerning what are or are not “material planning considerations” the guidance leaflet highlights the following :

“…. Relevant planning issues which may be taken into account ….include :-

Planning policy, such as the North Norfolk Local Plan, the Local Development Framework, and the Regional Spatial Strategy, Government guidance, case law, previous decisions by the Council.

Design, appearance and layout.

Impact on visual or residential amenity including loss of light or overshadowing, loss of privacy, noise disturbance, smell or nuisance.

Impact on trees, listed buildings, or a conservation area, public right(s) of way, highway safety and traffic.

The following are not “relevant planning issues” and we cannot take them into account in reaching a decision.

Private property rights, boundary or access disputes, restrictive covenants, private rights of way, ancient rights of way.

Effect on property values

Loss of private view

Personality or a developer’s motives

Anything covered by other types of legislation”

Based on all the above I suspect that a fair number of the objections may be ruled out as irrelevant, but equally supportive comments which are general in nature, and which perhaps focus more to the benefit the airfield brings to recreational aviation in the wider sense, may not be taken into consideration either. I would suspect that noise is likely to be the most significant of the possible relevant isssues and certainly seems to be the thrust of the objectors arguments.

As of this morning NNDC were showing 296 responses with 242 in favour of the Northrepps planning application with 54 against. This looks fairly good but as mentioned above a lot will depend on how much of the content of the responses is deemed relevant.

Further support for Northrepps will definitely be welcomed !

John A

Nick Allen · Post by **Nick Allen** » Mon Dec 21, 2009 1:48 pm

If I've read it right, this advice leaflet says that if someone objects to noise only on the grounds that this affects the value of his/her property, then this cannot be taken into account; there is only the issue of "noise disturbance" itself to deal with.