As they had threatened the owners of Redhill Aerodrome (RAV) have formally submitted yet another planning application to both local planning authorities, (Tandridge and Reigate & Banstead), to develop the Green Field Site with a hard runway.
We are opposed to the latest application from RAV to develop a hard runway on the site. It follows a least 3 other previous applications to develop a concrete runway at the grass strip site, all of which have been comprehensively rejected.
We have spent the last 19 years fighting with RAV over their various unviable schemes to develop the Aerodrome. The current application is little different in substance from the one that was rejected last year. In fact because of the displaced threshold aspect the runway it is in fact longer than the 2011 proposal by some 150 metres at each end!
We believe that the current system that allows developers to make repeated but similar applications amounts to nothing short of a “war of attrition”, disadvantaging both Local Planning Authorities and local people.
The government have recently made massive changes to the planning system and yet still allow this inequitable situation to continue unchecked. There is nothing to prevent developers from making repeated planning applications for the same proposal on the basis that they only have to win once. This effectively permits developers to wage a war of attrition against anyone who opposes their plans.
It encourages a deep pocket planning system which is both unreasonable and unfair.
RAV have a history of misleading the public over the various planning applications they have submitted over the past 19 years. They even apologised for previous “mistakes” at the recent Redhill Aerodrome Consultative Committee AGM. Any statements and/or information provided by them should in our opinion be viewed with huge suspicion.
To demonstrate their unreliability RAV claim that their latest proposed facility will have little visual impact on what they accept is a GREEN BELT site. Yet the runway they are proposing will require them to lay a minimum of 37,475 m² of concrete.
This is the equivalent of about 37 Wimbledon Centre Courts.
How can this have a minimal impact on the existing rural landscape?
We urge those affected to lodge a formal objection to the application using the
information that is provided on this site at