Lord Jim wrote:bound to maintain a certain number of Quarters which the RAF leased back
Like I said, trying to find out has been not easy on the interwebs that usually abound with details ... commercial contracts may have only a headline released?
Lease backs are a normal biz practice for companies that operate in busy (capital) hubs and are releasing capital, for it to be redeployed for more profitable business purposes/ investments.
- using the same construct in less 'multi-purpose' situations may not be as sound (as for releasing capital). But again, @LJ seems to have a better recollection (and as for @topman comment that just appeared: if the statement was true, the privatisation contracts, ie. to take the stock, to service it and then - while doing it - develop new housing on the 'excess' land, would not have caused such a 'big stink'??)
Looking at it from afar, the relocating of the army (back from Germany) seems to have
A. been giving birth to these super-garrisons, which are reaping [err, future continuous tense might apply] the benefits of doing 'one Corps' technical training in a more concentrated way, and
B. been driving a lot of 'green field' housing -thus of high quality - in those locations, but
C. the move still overwhelmed what was available at this end (and was, indeed and officially, slowed down by one year purely for that reason)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)