Council blocks bid to redevelop Vulcan bomber airfield
THE future of an airfield near Stratford-upon-Avon which houses one of the last Avro Vulcan bombers remains uncertain after a council was forced to stop its owners from demolishing buildings on it.
Stratford on Avon District Council has taken urgent action preventing Littler Investments from tearing down buildings on Wellesbourne Airfield, which would have placed around 200 jobs under threat.
It emerged a few weeks ago that Littler Investments wanted to demolish a large portion of the site as it bids to redevelop the land with around 1,500 new houses.
Stratford District Council has now agreed to remove permitted development rights from the owners and seek powers to compulsorily purchase the airfield if negotiations break down over a deal to buy it.
The authority will also obtain an injunction if any attempt is made to start the demolition process.
If the airfield closed, all the businesses currently based there, including several flying schools and a museum, would be forced to relocate or shut.
Their leases are due to expire on Christmas Eve. Family-owned Littler Investments and its developer Gladman have fallen at every hurdle in their bid to win planning permission to redevelop the site, including being rejected by the Government’s planning inspectorate earlier this year.
David Scott-Morgan, an instructor with South Warwickshire Flying School, said: “I have not stopped being hopeful during this whole process as I don’t think the owners have just cause at all. This was a great decision by the council.”
Referring to the historic Vulcan plane – one of the last of the Cold War nuclear bombers which can still be taxied – he added: “We get lots of people coming to look at the Vulcan. It’s a national asset and people have lovingly looked after it to keep it in a good condition. But there’s been talk of it being chopped up. The airfield owns the Vulcan as they own the land so they can do that if they want.”
A statement from Littler Investments said: “The council’s stated objective seems to be preservation of jobs.
“Yet jobs would only be lost if existing businesses cannot relocate and we have done everything to pro- vide sufficient notice to allow them to do so.
“The previous redevelopment proposals would have seen more than 800 full-time-equivalent jobs generated at the site while the figures variously quoted for existing employment are, firstly, significantly lower in comparison and, secondly, potentially inflated as many existing jobs are not full time.”