January 18, 2016 at 6:03 pm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-35346003
Ministry of Defence sites for sale
RAF Mildenhall, Suffolk
RAF Barnham, Suffolk
RAF Alconbury, Cambridgeshire
RAF Molesworth, Cambridgeshire
Kneller Hall, Twickenham
Claro and Deverell barracks, Ripon, North Yorkshire
Lodge Hill, Kent
Craigiehall, Edinburgh
HMS Nelson Wardroom, Portsmouth
Hullavington Airfield, Wiltshire
MOD Felton, London
By: P Bellamy - 23rd January 2016 at 22:42
I’m not sure if the MOD has released the former fire control centre yet.
However the remainder of Waterbeach is in the hands of the same developers as Alconbury.
By: plough - 23rd January 2016 at 13:23
Think about it at the start of WW2 Airfield’s sprang up all over the country almost over night.
I daresay they they were built mostly on farmland and not built over built up areas,these empty[ish] expanses of countryside are now going to be high density housing which the surrounding infrastructure just cannot cope with
In the case of the airfields that ‘sprang up’ during WW2, most were built on farmland that was compulsorily acquired from the landowner (or acquired under a threat of compulsion). Such land will therefore fall under the umbrella of what are known as the ‘Crichel Down Rules’ which apply to Government land acquired by threat of compulsory purchase between 1935 and 1992. Under these rules the former landowner, their successor, or the current landowner have to be offered the opportunity to repurchase the land. A great many of those offered such land so far have taken up the offer, and in the main have returned those former airfields to agricultural use.
Presumably the airfields in question here were not built on compulsory purchase land between 1935 and 1992, and the Crichel Down rules don’t apply?, or the former landowner/successors did not wish to buy the land back and the Government/MOD is free to dispose of the land as they wish?
By: Bombgone - 22nd January 2016 at 16:34
I daresay they they were built mostly on farmland and not built over built up areas,these empty[ish] expanses of countryside are now going to be high density housing which the surrounding infrastructure just cannot cope with.By all means return them back to countryside but this continual building,building, :(.
Tarrant Rushton like so many other airfields’ were handed back to the farmers and returned for use as agriculture. True most airfields were in remote locations not suitable for housing development. That said if there ever was a need in the future for the defence of this country the MOD would more than likely have the power to do what ever they like by way of compulsory purchase what ever location even built up area’s.
Jack Currie’s brilliant documentary Lancaster legend quotes a farmer receiving a call from two MOD officials saying we are going to build an airfield on your land. These days of high tech were drones can be operated from almost anywhere most unlikely airfield’s of WW2 magnitude would ever happen again. Its a bit like the old railway branch lines some want them back but they are not financially viable.
By: TwinOtter23 - 22nd January 2016 at 14:21
Those who know what it is like to be based on a rural airbase away from towns might recall the poor standard of country lanes around the bases. if a developer was made to pay for road upgrades they would run away fast from many sites.Even small stretches of new road are expensive to build and unlike a house cannot be sold.
Many such developments are already liable to the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), which contributes towards the cost of road upgrades etc.
http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/planning/applications/howtoapply/whattosubmit/cil
As usual it is quite complex e.g. as a registered charity Newark Air Museum managed to secure exemption for its Small Objects Store, but on the understanding that it was solely used for storing museum objects and not any shop stock for the associated trading company.
By: trumper - 22nd January 2016 at 14:19
Think about it at the start of WW2 Airfield’s sprang up all over the country almost over night. .
I daresay they they were built mostly on farmland and not built over built up areas,these empty[ish] expanses of countryside are now going to be high density housing which the surrounding infrastructure just cannot cope with.By all means return them back to countryside but this continual building,building, :(.
By: scotavia - 22nd January 2016 at 14:11
Those who know what it is like to be based on a rural airbase away from towns might recall the poor standard of country lanes around the bases. if a developer was made to pay for road upgrades they would run away fast from many sites.Even small stretches of new road are expensive to build and unlike a house cannot be sold.
We had no choice about living on base or nearby quarters so it was pointless complaining. But that would not apply to potential new home owners and no doubt far more peopel would be expected to live at these locations than when they were active bases.
By: rutley78 - 22nd January 2016 at 09:26
Surely the Suffolk moles at Barnham should move to Molesworth?
By: Wyvernfan - 22nd January 2016 at 06:59
Isn’t Hullavington one of the best preserved WW2 / early postwar airfields left in the country?
Rob
By: AlanR - 21st January 2016 at 22:26
That’ll be handy for the shops 🙂
By: Moggy C - 21st January 2016 at 19:34
Where will Lakenheath aircraft operate from if their base needs work done ?
Spangdahlem
Moggy
By: AlanR - 21st January 2016 at 19:08
Think about it at the start of WW2 Airfield’s sprang up all over the country almost over night. So if they were needed again it would not be a problem.
Well that’s ok then 🙂
By: Bombgone - 21st January 2016 at 18:23
If these bases are no longer needed what’s the point of keeping them going, surplus to requirement’s. Mothballing would cost money in maintenance in other words dead money. Think about it at the start of WW2 Airfield’s sprang up all over the country almost over night. So if they were needed again it would not be a problem. I did my basic training in the RAF at Swinderby in 1967 the station is all gone now. No longer needed, now a housing estate, life has to move on.
By: charliehunt - 21st January 2016 at 17:55
Spot on Bob, exactly right, but never let the facts get in the way of a good myth!!;)
By: AlanR - 21st January 2016 at 17:26
I know the local council were worried that Mildenhall may have been “mothballed”, but once properties are built,
where are the residents going to work ?
I think it’s short sighted to close so many military bases. You never know when there might be a need for them.
Where will Lakenheath aircraft operate from if their base needs work done ? Marham maybe ?
Barnham seems to be used more for Caravan storage. The biggest problem in that area is moles.
That part of Suffolk seems to be mole city 🙂
By: Bob - 21st January 2016 at 16:04
I think the threat of 24 hour flights into and out of Alconbury as part of the air freight proposal upset more than the former PM. The counter argument that the USAF had flown for many years failed to recognise that they actually stopped flying at night (apart from the occasional night arrivals during the Gulf War).
No traffic from the airfield would have driven past his abode as the road link from the airfield gate would have joined the A14 at the old Megatron on/off slip road.
I suspect he was more concerned about the plans to build on the fields between Great Stukeley and the A141/Spittals Interchange which would have spoilt his view…
By: rutley78 - 21st January 2016 at 13:53
I’m not sure if the MOD has released the former fire control centre yet.
By: rutley78 - 21st January 2016 at 13:51
Back in 1993, just after Alconbury closed, there was a plan to turn it into a freight and business hub. The airport be licensed and run by TNT airfreight and a rail link put into it, plus the A1 for trucks. Marshall of Cambridge were seriously considering moving there too as pressure to build houses in Cambridge at that time was very high. However, down the road at Alconbury Weston, a certain person decided that he did not want this on his doorstep. More or less single handedly, he stopped it. His name, John Major. I wonder if he approves of it now becoming wall to wall housing with the potential traffic volume outside of his house being quite high?
By: 91Regal - 20th January 2016 at 20:30
Panshanger is going as well-a former RAF training station
Closed September ’14 – they are still debating how many houses to build there – interestingly (or not) the option with the least number of houses incorporates a realigned runway, but I’m not holding my breath. All the remaining wartime (and postwar) buildings were flattened a few months back.
By: Oxcart - 20th January 2016 at 02:39
Panshanger is going as well-a former RAF training station
By: Bob - 19th January 2016 at 22:14
Defence Minister Mark Lancaster said all the sites would be used as housing sites
Good luck there then…