MicrolightDriver wrote:Of course some will be quick to dismiss the achievement, and ignore the collaborative effort that led to it, but this is clearly an important step towards securing the long term safety of XH558.
IgnatiusJReilly wrote:MicrolightDriver wrote:Of course some will be quick to dismiss the achievement, and ignore the collaborative effort that led to it, but this is clearly an important step towards securing the long term safety of XH558.
I'm sorry, but when you consider the number of salaried employees and consultants who have been available to work on this, the time taken to get to this stage, the generous support provided by professional companies and the great pile of cash that they've burned through these past couple of years... Gaining a non-contested planning consent for a building in a less than desirable location that isn't yet funded, doesn't constitute much of an achievement in my eyes.
MicrolightDriver wrote:Of course some will be quick to dismiss the achievement, and ignore the collaborative effort that led to it, but this is clearly an important step towards securing the long term safety of XH558..........but the fact is VTTS have done the homework and engaged with the right people to successfully obtain the permission they need.
BDL wrote:MicrolightDriver wrote:Of course some will be quick to dismiss the achievement, and ignore the collaborative effort that led to it, but this is clearly an important step towards securing the long term safety of XH558..........but the fact is VTTS have done the homework and engaged with the right people to successfully obtain the permission they need.
Sorry, but utter codswallop. Planning permission will be granted in 99% of cases where there has been no objection or no environmental issues regardless of who you have spoken to. Be that a householder wanting to extend his home or a large "Charity" that is still desperately clinging on to their cash cow.
That was the easy bit, now raise the money to pay for the building in the three years that you have.
*Edit - As Rockhopper said above!
MicrolightDriver wrote:They've done the work with the airport, they've prepared an extensive application supported by various studies / assessments, it's been successful. I appreciate that's really bad news for some, but to me it's another step towards XH558 returning to a hangar.
IgnatiusJReilly wrote:MicrolightDriver wrote:They've done the work with the airport, they've prepared an extensive application supported by various studies / assessments, it's been successful. I appreciate that's really bad news for some, but to me it's another step towards XH558 returning to a hangar.
I thought the 'objections' were clarifications and requests for more detailed information - not strict objections as such.....
BDL wrote:Sorry, but utter codswallop. Planning permission will be granted in 99% of cases where there has been no objection or no environmental issues regardless of who you have spoken to. Be that a householder wanting to extend his home or a large "Charity" that is still desperately clinging on to their cash cow.
jalfrezi wrote:[Does anyone know if it was outline planning permission (3 years), or full (5 years)?
Application Type : Planning FULL Major
MicrolightDriver wrote:BDL.
There are obvious concerns, on many levels, about the situation surrounding XH558 at present. Things have clearly not gone as planned at Doncaster. I share many of the concerns.
What I have also explained is my view that 'we are where we are'. Now and onward is the reality we have to deal with. We can all have our views on the situation, but crying over what 'could/should/would' have happened is achieving nothing for XH558.
The only plan now which seeks to offer XH558 an intact and long term future 'inside' is the one being proposed by VTTS. In my view, the various 'chop it up' schemes are simply not acceptable. The vagueness around the notion of a coherent volunteer group suddenly materialising, and being welcome on the airport, overcoming the legal issues around ownership and then successfully maintaining the aircraft for the long term is not inspiring me to join excited calls for a 'coup' at all.
In the absence of anyone proposing a better plan for permanent hangarage, and while nobody (that I know of?) is credibly accusing VTTS of anything illegal, the success of the VTTS plan seems to me the best outcome for XH558. It is not a 'blind loyalty' to anyone, but a simple conclusion that in my view, nobody is proposing a better idea and things might not always be as 'dark' as certain posters like to make out.
People are free to support, or not, and the granting of planning permission is a step forward.
Brevet Cable wrote:jalfrezi wrote:[Does anyone know if it was outline planning permission (3 years), or full (5 years)?
Council's website shows...Application Type : Planning FULL Major
( http://planning.doncaster.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=details&keyVal=OW61G9FXJRD00 )
We are delighted to report that yesterday, Thursday 21st December, Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council granted planning permission for our new heritage hangar at Doncaster Sheffield Airport. Work already ongoing to secure the financial backing for the development can now proceed with much increased confidence.
Robert Pleming, on behalf of the Trust, stated: “This really is a wonderful Christmas present. It’s a major step forward and marks a significant milestone in the development the our new hangar, coming after months of work by several firms and consultants working pro-bono for the Trust. They have really looked after our interests and settled last minute queries in order to secure this positive decision just before Christmas. We thank them and the officers of the council most sincerely for their efforts.”
The formal Decision Notice has not yet been published, but the conditions stipulated on the approval are not unreasonable, are standard within the building industry, and present no major obstacles to progress.
Please look out for more updates on developments in the New Year by following our newsletters or the website for the latest.
Wonderful news with which to end the year!
Just read what the article says:Brevet Cable wrote:If the artists impression is accurate, I wouldn't be a happy bunny if I was the owner of the Swift.....
DISCLAIMER: bold edited by me.Artists impressions which formed part of the planning application for the hangar included the Vulcan, a 1950s Canberra bomber, which the trust hopes to restore to flying condition, and a Supermarine Swift cold war jet fighter, inside the building.
had planning permission approved to create a hangar on a site next to Doncaster Sheffield Airport which was once used as a sewage treatment works.
HeyfordDave111 wrote:My word, do we actually think, for example, that after keeping her safe, dry and warm for many years, Mr Walton, for example, would have left his baby out at the corner of the airfield to weather and get cold? I think not!
Fingers crossed something happens soon, as otherwise the begging bowl will be out again, you can just see it.
Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 6 guests