Looking back: Jaguars on the runway at RAF Coltishall. Norfolk County Council now wants to buy the former RAF base.
Norfolk County Council’s plans to buy RAF Coltishall come under attack
by DAN GRIMMER
Monday, June 18, 2012
4:40 PM
A multi-million pound move by Norfolk County Council to buy the former air base at RAF Coltishall has been criticised by opposition councillors, who say the authority needs to make its business plan public.
The ruling Conservative cabinet last week agreed in principle to purchase RAF Coltishall after the Ministry of Justice picked the county council as its preferred bidder for the 600 acre-site.
The authority, which has not revealed how much it plans to pay for the base, has indicated it would like the majority of the land to be used for agriculture, with its own tenant farmers leasing land.
It added that former air force buildings could be converted into about 65 homes, while other buildings, such as refurbished hangars, could be offered to small or medium-sized businesses to buy or rent.
But with no masterplan drawn up yet, the opposition Liberal Democrat group at County Hall say there are too many question marks hanging over such a major investment of public funds.
They have ‘called in’ the decision to be looked at by the council’s cabinet scrutiny committee and want the Conservatives to show exactly what they intend to do at Coltishall.
Mike Brindle, Liberal Democrat group leader said: “It baffles me that the council can proceed with what is a substantial investment with no business plan.
“While we are fully supportive of the concept of redeveloping the former RAF Coltishall site, we know there are private bidders who have consulted with local residents as to their plans for the site, we do not think it is too much of the council to do the same and declare their plans for the site before they proceed with spending a large amount of Norfolk tax-payers’ money.
“I hope the administration will come to the scrutiny committee with a detailed business plan so that councillors and the public can judge their motives for the site and decide whether or not to support the project.”
The Lib Dems have requested that Cliff Jordan, cabinet member for efficiency, Mike Jackson, director of environment, transport and development at County Hall and Mike Britch, managing director of Norfolk Property Services attend the meeting.
They also want Bruce Giddy, managing director of the Hans House Group of Companies, which had plans to create a heritage centre and museum at the base, to attend.
Mr Jordan said it was too soon for a detailed business plan to have been drawn up and said there was no secret about the council’s proposals for the base.
He said: “I’ve been delighted that the public reaction to the news that we are seeking to bring the former Coltishall site back to life for the benefit of Norfolk’s economy and the local community has been greeted so positively by a large number of people, including local parish councils, the business community and local MPs such as Norman Lamb.
“We are, of course, some way from concluding a deal with the Ministry of Justice, but I am convinced the price we are prepared to pay will offer very good value for money for local council taxpayers and that it is in the long term interests of our county.
“All we have done so far is set out a high level outline for possible uses for the site and as we have said, we want to hear people’s views on those and any others through the proposed new liaison group.
“Given that we do not own the site, and will not do so for some time yet, it would have been premature to produce a detailed business case for the entire site prior to any discussions with interested parties taking place. We have made no secret of our intentions.
“Having said that, I welcome the opportunity for a further discussion at cabinet scrutiny because I am convinced that we are doing the right thing for Norfolk and the case stands firmly on its own merit.
“Failing to intervene in this matter would have been a failure for the people of our county and I firmly believe that bringing the site into local public ownership offers the best way forward for a site which has been left alone for far too long.”
The council’s cabinet scrutiny committee will meet to discuss the call-in at County Hall next Tuesday.
Other Business Articles
- Norwich Airport boss offers support to struggling regional airline operator Flybe
- Norse Group gains foothold in south-east after signing £70m deal with Medway Council
- Britvic cutbacks will not affect Norfolk operation
- Norwich-based Brandbank gets foothold in US market
- Norfolk car-share firm starts rental idea
- Causes for cheers as much-loved brewery name returns after a gap of 45 years
- Norfolk turkey giant Bernard Matthews in talks to sell stake in business
- New Costessey superstore could bring new jobs – and traffic
- Archant Anglia managing director to retire at end of the year
- Chinese learn regeneration secrets of city
ADVERTISEMENT
21 comments
So NCC are saying they want the majority of land for agriculture, and how exactly will that recoup the cost of purchasing it. Their lack of transparency has even made the front page of Nigerian national papers. Good VFM for taxpayers, where have we heard that before? When exactly are Norfolk’s County Councillors who are apathetically sitting back silently, while the minority dictate the county’s misery, actually going to develop a spine and do not only what they were elected to do, but also what they are being paid for?
Report this comment
Honest John
Thursday, June 21, 2012
I'm not saying a bypass for Coltishall wouldn't have benefits Johnnyboy. However, we both know it ain't ever going to happen. The Bure has similar environmental status to the Wensum, and the county council is no way going to start planning on building a bridge over it, when it has backed away from finishing the NDR over the Wensum.
Report this comment
Tom Jeffries
Wednesday, June 20, 2012
If there's to be any hope of it being used as an airfield again, then all efforts MUST be made to prevent the 2 wind turbines being planned on the adjacent Scottow estate. The Met Mast is already up and a planning application for its continued use is under consideration. Quite apart from its use as an airfield here we have another wind turbine application being kept very quiet. It WILL interfere with Norwich Radar as did the failed N Walsham proposal so there is some hope there.
Report this comment
windup
Wednesday, June 20, 2012
It would be better spending money on doing something worthwhile than on spending millions on trying to dig up an old runway for hardcore. Return the rest to farmland, which will probably not be fit for growing and making a few of the hangers into industrial lets.I take it that you don't live in North Norfolk TJ? The need for better infer-structure out here is desperately needed and another river crossing would help businesses in the North Norfolk area. And to say that millions will be spent on handling passengers, have you flown out of NWI recently??? I don't think that the current terminal is much ti right home about to be honest. I would go on...
Report this comment
Johnyboy65
Wednesday, June 20, 2012
Anyone who feels it would be a good idea to move the airport further north into Norfolk; away from part of its natural catchment and nearer to the, er, sea; where there would be a need to spend countless millions on new infrastructure to handle passengers and the planes they fly on; where there would be a need to build a major bypass around Horstead and Coltishall; where the supporting industries like KLM UK Engineering and Sprayavia would need to be relocated at huge expense - needs to go and have a lie down. Get real, it ain't ever going to happen for these and dozens of other reasons. Plus, the sale of St Faiths for housing would probably bring in about 20% of the total required to deliver such a pipedream. Where does the rest come from?
Report this comment
Tom Jeffries
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
Great points JB, I have said all these things time and time again as they just all make logical sense. Unfortunately the powers to be do not think so. I think NWI will die a death in the years to come and return to a regional airport as it was once before. With no major expansion plans in the pipeline, the NDR being built then they have nowhere to go and expand. Sell the airport site, build housing on it and move it all to Colt. We need some bigger planes going in to reduce the price of flying regional and drop the development tax. I could go on...
Report this comment
Johnyboy65
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
Great points JB, I have said all these things time and time again as they just all make logical sense. Unfortunately the powers to be do not think so. I think NWI will die a death in the years to come and return to a regional airport as it was once before. With no major expansion plans in the pipeline, the NDR being built then they have nowhere to go and expand. Sell the airport site, build housing on it and move it all to Colt. We need some bigger planes going in to reduce the price of flying regional and drop the development tax. I could go on...
Report this comment
Johnyboy65
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
QUOTE - “Given that we do not own the site, and will not do so for some time yet, it would have been premature to produce a detailed business case for the entire site prior to any discussions with interested parties taking place. We have made no secret of our intentions. “Having said that, I welcome the opportunity for a further discussion at cabinet scrutiny because I am convinced that we are doing the right thing for Norfolk and the case stands firmly on its own merit. “Failing to intervene in this matter would have been a failure for the people of our county and I firmly believe that bringing the site into local public ownership offers the best way forward for a site which has been left alone for far too long.” - UNQUOTE.
Report this comment
Andy T
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
Assuming that Norwich needs an international airport, and there are obvioulsy mixed views on this, it would make more sense economically and certainly operationally to move NWI out to Coltishall and have the economic benefits of being able to devolop two sites. The Coltishall runway is 25% longer than NWI's current home with not just safer operations but the abilty to expand the range of aircraft using it and the destinations available - there is ample room to accomodate all the current operational. passenger and engineering facilities and much more - it would be close to the proposed NDR and could even have a rail connection, and it would bring much needed employment into a rural community as well as allowing the City of Norwich to expand without destroying yet more of the countryside. Surely before any irrevocable decisions are made to destroy the Coltishall infrastructure a proper objective, and transparent, study of the pros and cons should be made with a reasoned recommendation for the way forward taking all views into account - the decision should not be based on the emotive opinions of a few councillors or anybody else for that matter.
Report this comment
JB
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
It appears that Norfolk County Council are following their usual behind closed doors policies.
Report this comment
Admetus
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
I too am appalled, that there appear to be no plans to relocate the Sculthorpe Tyre Mountain, or indeed to start another one from scratch. Surely that should form the basis of any viable business plan?
Report this comment
Tom Jeffries
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
As with others I am shocked and appalled that the County Council should step in and make sure this site should return to farm land, and use the buildings to create homes, and spaces for business. How dare they prevent the natural order of vandalism and decay, and unfulfilled white elephants, that has been the future for every other ex airbase in recent years.
Report this comment
Local Dad
Monday, June 18, 2012
Sadly, the majority of the electorate of Norfolk - for whatever reason - always votes Conservative, without thinking, How do we change that? I would even prefer to see the Monster Raving Loony Party take their seats. It couldn't be worse.
Report this comment
Nemesis
Monday, June 18, 2012
Do I assume they can be voted off by losing their council seat at the next election, as this seems to be the wish of most of the comments?
Report this comment
Bruce87
Monday, June 18, 2012
get derrick murphy and cliff jordan out now !!
Report this comment
Double Bill
Monday, June 18, 2012
I read the whole truth about this proposal on the snubcampaign.org website....the council intend to 'smash-up' Norfolk's only real airport with future potential usage and use the runways as ;infill; for it's other 'white elephant', the Norfolk Developers road ( the NDR). Imagine this! 40,000 tipper-lorry trips minimum!. How very 'green and eco' they are...Disgusting .
Report this comment
kingsize
Monday, June 18, 2012
Cliff Jordan voted against a full council debate that would have stopped the proposed waste incinerator in King's Lynn. Don't listen to the spin it means nothing, NCC cannot be trusted. You may end up with the very same problem as King's Lynn, Cliff Jordan and Mike Jackson love waste incinerators and have bent over backwards to please Cory Wheelabrator and betrayed West Norfolk. Mike Jackson was the one who went to King's Lynn to tell them they would be ignoring 65.516 so don't say you have not been warned.
Report this comment
Jack
Monday, June 18, 2012
He was able to rush ahead with a deal for RAF Coltishall in months, but 10 years on we're still waiting for him to seal a deal for a car park in Holt.
Report this comment
Jono
Monday, June 18, 2012
Couldn't agree more,newsflash.Is Cllr Jordan the most inefficient cabinet minister for efficiency ever?
Report this comment
Peter Watson
Monday, June 18, 2012
Would any other organisation spend millions of pounds of public money on the purchase of what is, in part, a “problem” site speculatively, i.e. with no pre-formed business plan on the table? I suspect that there is such a plan hidden away, but its objects are so unpopular that they will only be revealed after the purchase has been concluded and sham consultations have been carried out.
Report this comment
John Martin
Monday, June 18, 2012
Cliff Jordan is the cabinet member for efficiency but with no business plan and millions of pounds spent he appears to be inefficient himself. Time to go, Mr Jordan!
Report this comment
omnishambles
Monday, June 18, 2012