Phillip Rhodes
12-06-2008, 12:04
Question: How do you quantify historical importance? I’ve spent ten years trying to save former RAF Driffield, and the one, key issue is this: how historically important was this East Yorkshire airfield?
Setting aside the architectural merit of a structure, developers or English Heritage have constantly argued that this site isn’t important enough to warrant statutory protection or sympathetic renovation.
So, how do you quantify historical importance, both relating to local and national history?
My concern is that we are too obsessed with key events, that the rank and file are ignored. Yes, The Dambusters raid was an astonishing feat of ingenuity and bravery, and the hangars at RAF Scampton rightly deserve to be protected, but at what cost? Awarding statutory protection should also encompass those airfields and structures that are more representative of the overall Bomber Command effort, namely Driffield and dozens of other sites that need protecting.
Finally, I wrote the following, which hopefully will be published in The Driffield Times:
Dear Editor
It was recently suggested to me that Strawsons Property, who bought the former RAF camp near Driffield, will create 100 temporary jobs in both demolition and construction, when they start work wrecking this historically important site.
Obviously Strawsons are keen to win over planning officials, councillors and apathetic residents. The promise of creating 100 jobs must appear enticing and will appease a few of your readers. Yet, when the work has been done and the contractors have been given their P45s, Driffield will be left with no heritage and upwards of 500 over-priced houses.
This could result in hundreds of new families moving into the area, but where will they find work? Yes, we need affordable housing, but this isn’t in the interest of Strawsons Property. They make money out of selling expensive houses that will only drive up prices. Obviously the housing market is in turmoil, while securing a mortgage has proven difficult for many wanting to step onto the property ladder. Allowing Strawsons Property to build unwarranted houses will not alleviate the problem.
Moreover, the 68 former married quarters will not be replaced with a similar number of affordable houses, if they are demolished. In these uncertain times, Driffield needs permanent jobs, and not empty promises or temporary fixes, designed to win over planning officials or an apathetic community. More jobs can and will be created by preserving the site AND in building both additional houses and new business units.
I would like to end this letter to express my concern that Strawsons Property does not value the historical importance of RAF Driffield.
In a recent article syndicated across Australia, Adrian Sail (Property Manager for Strawsons Property) was quoted as saying: "There's nothing of particular historical interest there." Accordingly, I’m not only campaigning to save RAF Driffield, but I’m also trying to defend or at lease quantify “historical interest” or value. This has been a much quoted putdown. Those who died in battle deserve better, and so do the countless thousands of servicemen and women who served at Driffield, namely those who support my endeavours.
Quantifying historical value or importance is at best a subjective science, little understood by objective scholars. How many killed in action does it take to promote one aerodrome as being more important than the next? How many operational sorties does it take to assure that an aerodrome is preserved for future generations? Defining historic value also encompasses rarity. There are very few aerodromes that remain as complete as Driffield (maybe around a dozen across the UK).
Preserving our heritage is of serious concern, yet I fear that the running joke that is Driffield’s apathy will result in more than the loss of the former RAF camp. This is my umpteenth letter to The Driffield Times. Yet my concerns and coherent suggestions have always been met with a deafening silence. I ask this of you, dear reader: what will it take for you personally to get involved? How much of Driffield’s heritage needs to be demolished before we see a change in attitude?
Yours Sincerely
Phillip Rhodes
Setting aside the architectural merit of a structure, developers or English Heritage have constantly argued that this site isn’t important enough to warrant statutory protection or sympathetic renovation.
So, how do you quantify historical importance, both relating to local and national history?
My concern is that we are too obsessed with key events, that the rank and file are ignored. Yes, The Dambusters raid was an astonishing feat of ingenuity and bravery, and the hangars at RAF Scampton rightly deserve to be protected, but at what cost? Awarding statutory protection should also encompass those airfields and structures that are more representative of the overall Bomber Command effort, namely Driffield and dozens of other sites that need protecting.
Finally, I wrote the following, which hopefully will be published in The Driffield Times:
Dear Editor
It was recently suggested to me that Strawsons Property, who bought the former RAF camp near Driffield, will create 100 temporary jobs in both demolition and construction, when they start work wrecking this historically important site.
Obviously Strawsons are keen to win over planning officials, councillors and apathetic residents. The promise of creating 100 jobs must appear enticing and will appease a few of your readers. Yet, when the work has been done and the contractors have been given their P45s, Driffield will be left with no heritage and upwards of 500 over-priced houses.
This could result in hundreds of new families moving into the area, but where will they find work? Yes, we need affordable housing, but this isn’t in the interest of Strawsons Property. They make money out of selling expensive houses that will only drive up prices. Obviously the housing market is in turmoil, while securing a mortgage has proven difficult for many wanting to step onto the property ladder. Allowing Strawsons Property to build unwarranted houses will not alleviate the problem.
Moreover, the 68 former married quarters will not be replaced with a similar number of affordable houses, if they are demolished. In these uncertain times, Driffield needs permanent jobs, and not empty promises or temporary fixes, designed to win over planning officials or an apathetic community. More jobs can and will be created by preserving the site AND in building both additional houses and new business units.
I would like to end this letter to express my concern that Strawsons Property does not value the historical importance of RAF Driffield.
In a recent article syndicated across Australia, Adrian Sail (Property Manager for Strawsons Property) was quoted as saying: "There's nothing of particular historical interest there." Accordingly, I’m not only campaigning to save RAF Driffield, but I’m also trying to defend or at lease quantify “historical interest” or value. This has been a much quoted putdown. Those who died in battle deserve better, and so do the countless thousands of servicemen and women who served at Driffield, namely those who support my endeavours.
Quantifying historical value or importance is at best a subjective science, little understood by objective scholars. How many killed in action does it take to promote one aerodrome as being more important than the next? How many operational sorties does it take to assure that an aerodrome is preserved for future generations? Defining historic value also encompasses rarity. There are very few aerodromes that remain as complete as Driffield (maybe around a dozen across the UK).
Preserving our heritage is of serious concern, yet I fear that the running joke that is Driffield’s apathy will result in more than the loss of the former RAF camp. This is my umpteenth letter to The Driffield Times. Yet my concerns and coherent suggestions have always been met with a deafening silence. I ask this of you, dear reader: what will it take for you personally to get involved? How much of Driffield’s heritage needs to be demolished before we see a change in attitude?
Yours Sincerely
Phillip Rhodes