Thirlmere Zipwire Proposal

General chat about walking and related subjects.

Re: Thirlmere Zipwire Proposal

Postby ScoutScarShuffler » Sat Dec 23, 2017 8:21 pm

For anybody wishing to write to the planning authority but not sure how to go about it, there is a template with guidance on what you might like to include, as well as a link to examples of what are considered to be some of the main planning issues, this can all be found by following the link below :-



https://www.friendsofthelakedistrict.org.uk/Pages/FAQs/Site/thirlmere/Category/write-to-the-planning-authority

This from Grough :-
https://www.grough.co.uk/magazine/2017/ ... e-zipwires

This Page that has up to date information http://zipoff.org/



lets all strive for a Zip wire free new year :)


P.S. the online Petition can found here https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/ ... 1511534681 ;)
ScoutScarShuffler
Last edited by ScoutScarShuffler on Sat Dec 30, 2017 10:22 pm, edited 2 times in total.
ScoutScarShuffler
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2016 8:11 pm
Location: Cumbria
 

Re: Thirlmere Zipwire Proposal

Postby Lancashire Lad » Wed Dec 27, 2017 4:51 pm

The impetus seems to have stalled slightly over Christmas, but hopefully people will pick up the gauntlet once again and not let this profit driven commercial nonsense of a plan gain any more ground.

The Sandford principle - (I make no apology for citing it here once again. ;) ): -
"If it appears that there is a conflict between conservation and development, the National Park Authority shall attach greater weight to the purpose of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the area".


From what I've read, all of the organisations and "household names" below, are unified in being against the wholly inappropriate zip-wire proposal: -

British Mountaineering Council
Campaign for National Parks
The Facebook Group: - “ZipOffThirlmere” (with more than 1250 followers).
The Fell and Rock Climbing Club of the English Lake District
Friends of the Lake District
Grough Magazine
KE Adventure Travel – Travel Agency, Keswick.
Icicle, Windermere (technical mountain store)
St. Johns and Castlerigg & Wythburn Parish Council
The Great Outdoors Magazine
The National Trust
The Open Spaces Society
Thirlmere History Society
Wainwright Society
WalkLakes!!

Alan Hinkes – Mountaineer, (Only Brit thus far to climb all 14 of earths 8000m peaks).
Andy Beck – Artist, (Author of the Wainwrights in Colour etc.).
Caroline Quentin – Actress, (President of Campaign for National Parks).
Chris Townsend – (Outdoor writer and photographer).
Terry Abraham – Videographer, (Life of a Mountain – Scafell Pike, etc.).


Hopefully there will be many more joining that list!

Two articles I've seen recently are of particular interest, and definitely well worth reading: -

http://www.tgomagazine.co.uk/news/roger ... thirlmere/
and: -
https://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/page.php?id=9998

Regards,
Mike.
User avatar
Lancashire Lad
 
Posts: 120
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 1:55 pm
Location: Red Rose County
 

Re: Thirlmere Zipwire Proposal

Postby Lancashire Lad » Sat Dec 30, 2017 2:20 pm

The John Muir Trust is also now amongst the organisations to advise their stance on the zip-wire proposal.

They have issued this statement: -
QUOTE
Thirlmere zip wire
Given our interest in the Lake District in relation to Glenridding we have been assessing the impacts of the proposed Thirlmere zip wire application and have concluded we will object. We are now preparing our objection. (An extension for representations has been extended to 12 January 2018).
UNQUOTE

The statement can be seen at: - https://www.johnmuirtrust.org/latest/ne ... e-december

Regards,
Mike.
User avatar
Lancashire Lad
 
Posts: 120
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 1:55 pm
Location: Red Rose County
 

Re: Thirlmere Zipwire Proposal

Postby SheepFarmer » Sun Dec 31, 2017 1:06 pm

First off thank you to Mike/Lancashire Lad for all his postings & links on this subject to allow us all easy access to peoples views out there. I would like to add to the list with an excellent walk report (http://www.wainwrightwalking.co.uk/thir ... -zip-wire/) with pics done by Brenda & John whos site it is.

Having looked through some of the plans what strikes me among other things is the size of the gantries with one being 15.8m wide by 7.2m high or roughly 52ft by 24ft in old money, also the sound reports suggest that up close the mechanical sound of the carriages will be louder than a passing car & that doesn't take account of people screaming.
User avatar
SheepFarmer
 
Posts: 50
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:15 pm
 

Re: Thirlmere Zipwire Proposal

Postby ScoutScarShuffler » Sun Dec 31, 2017 8:10 pm

The John Muir trust statement can also be viewed here :-
http://zipoff.org/

Along with some interesting articles from the successful campaign against the Glenridding zip wires

Such as visitor comments which as said many of the comments apply to Thirlmere :-
http://www.helvellyn.com/nozip-quotes.html

And this from an open meeting in Glennriding
http://www.helvellyn.com/ZipWireOpen%20 ... 20v1.0.pdf



It is well worth reading Tony Stephensons latest post on http://zipoff.org/ (posted today 31/12/17) he also promises more information tomorrow.


https://www.friendsofthelakedistrict.or ... -authority

This from Grough :-
https://www.grough.co.uk/magazine/2017/ ... e-zipwires

This Page that has up to date information http://zipoff.org/

To be honest it would appear that there was much more momentum against the Glenridding zip, than there is against the Thirlmere operation which appears to be on a larger scale.

Be aware that the date for objections in respect of united utilities retrospective planning permission
for the `upgrade of the forest track leading up to the return launch site of zip wires is the 5th of January

So come on folks lets strive for a Zip wire free new year, after all World heritage must mean something surely :)




P.S. the online Petition can found here :-
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/ ... 1511534681 ;)
ScoutScarShuffler
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2016 8:11 pm
Location: Cumbria
 

Re: Thirlmere Zipwire Proposal

Postby TallPaul » Sun Dec 31, 2017 9:31 pm

ScoutScarShuffler wrote:Be aware that the date for objections in respect of united utilities retrospective planning permission
for the `upgrade of the forest track leading up to the return launch site of zip wires is the 5th of January

Ahem, it's actually 12th January, as confirmed by "IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT THIS APPLICATION UPDATE 3 - 20/12/2017" which is currently the last document on the application page.
User avatar
TallPaul
Site Admin
 
Posts: 255
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2012 2:06 pm
 

Re: Thirlmere Zipwire Proposal

Postby ScoutScarShuffler » Mon Jan 01, 2018 3:52 pm

TallPaul wrote:
ScoutScarShuffler wrote:Be aware that the date for objections in respect of united utilities retrospective planning permission
for the `upgrade of the forest track leading up to the return launch site of zip wires is the 5th of January

Ahem, it's actually 12th January, as confirmed by "IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT THIS APPLICATION UPDATE 3 - 20/12/2017" which is currently the last document on the application page.


Sorry Tall Paul but my reference in red was in relation to United Utilities application for retrospective Planning permission for work that they have already carried out on the Forest track that leads up to the return Launch site around Fisher Crag
More details here :-
http://www.timesandstar.co.uk/news/Thir ... bac53b3-ds

Which as far as I can tell is separate to the application submitted By Tree Top Treks the deadline for which is of course is the 12/1/ 2018.

Of course if I am wrong I apologise and stand to be corrected, however if folk want to submit comments to the planning authorities then it is better done sooner than later.


As I have said before up to date developments and links to various notable notes of objection can be found here :-

http://zipoff.org/

Check out the extremely poignant poem By Stuart Atkinson entitled `WIRED` which can be found here:-

https://astropoetry.wordpress.com/2017/12/31/wired/

and the online Petition Here :-
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/ ... 1511534681 ;)


Thanks for the prompt and thanks for an excellent site
Last edited by ScoutScarShuffler on Mon Jan 01, 2018 4:49 pm, edited 2 times in total.
ScoutScarShuffler
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2016 8:11 pm
Location: Cumbria
 

Re: Thirlmere Zipwire Proposal

Postby Lancashire Lad » Mon Jan 01, 2018 4:06 pm

SheepFarmer wrote: . . . I would like to add to the list with an excellent walk report (http://www.wainwrightwalking.co.uk/thir ... -zip-wire/) with pics done by Brenda & John whos site it is . . .

Some good photos there that show the extent of what's been done - without obtaining the requisite planning permission! to the Fisher Crag path.

Here's another letter of objection that Mike Turner, the rest of TreeTop Trek's owners, and all those of like mind who suggest that this zip-wire application is beneficial for the LDNP would do well to read: -

https://kingsleyjones.com/2018/01/01/wi ... adventure/

Regards,
Mike.
User avatar
Lancashire Lad
 
Posts: 120
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 1:55 pm
Location: Red Rose County
 

Re: Thirlmere Zipwire Proposal

Postby Lancashire Lad » Tue Jan 02, 2018 3:33 pm

Further to the recent appearance of additional documentation on the planning application webpage: -
http://www.lakedistrict.gov.uk/swiftlg/ ... /2017/2298

I've sent another email of objection to the zip-wire proposals. - I have copied that email below.

Keep the pressure on, everyone. This proposal is not about bringing further prosperity to the LDNP, it is about lining the pockets of TreeTop Trek's owners.
There are only 10 more days left to object. Please don't be amongst those who don't bother. The integrity, character, heritage, future conservation and enhancement of the LDNP might depend on it!

02/01/18
To: thirlmereactivity@lakedistrict.gov.uk

Planning Reference: 7/2017/2298 (Major full application) - RE: Objections to Zip-wire facilty at proposed Thirlmere Activity Hub

Sirs,

Treetop Trek have recently made additional planning documentation information available, within the latter stages before closure date for comments on this planning application.
This late availability of relevant and important documentation will undoubtedly affect the numbers of objections which would otherwise be submitted regarding same.

From that additional documentation I would draw your attention to the following statements – written by the planning applicant’s own team, and which by definition, are wholly contrary to the requirements for conserving and enhancing the Lake District National Park.

I would further remind the planning committee of their legal duty under Sandford Principle, translated into law in 1995 by the The Environment Act 1995 s62 (1) (2), which states: -
"In exercising or performing any functions in relation to, or so as to affect, land in a National Park, any relevant authority shall have regard to the purposes specified in subsection (1) of section five of this Act and, if it appears that there is a conflict between those purposes, shall attach greater weight to the purpose of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the area comprised in the National Park.”

From TreeTop Trek’s own planning application documentation: - (Any emboldening, capitalization, or underlining of the quoted text below, added by myself in order to draw attention to that text).

Additional information received 20 Dec 2017 - Landscape and visual appraisal addendum: -
From section 2 - Appraisal of Landscape Effects
2.1
“There would be an effect on the tranquillity of the area, as visitors take part in the zip line experience . . . ."
From section 2.5 - Land use and Land Management
2.5.2
[b]“. . . the overall effects on landscape character would be moderate ADVERSE.”[/b]
From section 2.6 - Effects on landscape character.
2.6.1
“The magnitude of identified effects within the area of Local Character Area of Distinction 23: Thirlmere are primarily limited to the low-lying landscape within approximately 0.5km of the site. The impact on the character from the transportation and people movement and the arrival of visitors would be medium
And: -
“From these localised locations there would be a noticeable effect within the context of the current tranquil character. It would result in partial alteration to the key features of the baseline character. The overall level of landscape effect would be moderate ADVERSE”.
From section 2.8 – Lake District National Park
2.8.1
The movement of walkers and cyclists within the National Park is a transient activity which is common throughout the locality. The movement of people, in particular that of the 4x4 vehicle along the forest tracks, is assessed as medium magnitude. Although the routes are commonly used by other vehicles for management of land and habitats the frequency of the use is much less than that proposed. The overall level of effects is assessed as moderate ADVERSE. The proposals have a noticeable effect within the wider context of the area, in particular the influence of vehicular travel to gain access to the point of arrival.
From section 3 Appraisal of Visual Effects – 3.3 Highway Transport Network
3.3.2 - Viewpoint 2 – A591 Highway
. . . The overall level of effect is assessed as slight ADVERSE.”
3.3.4 - Unnamed Road
. . . the overall level of effect is assessed as slight ADVERSE”.
From section 3.6 - 3.6 Footpaths and Bridleways
3.6.1 Viewpoint 1 – Station Coppice
. . . . The visual effect is assessed as slight ADVERSE . . . “.
3.6.3 Viewpoint 4 – Helvellyn
. . . . The movement activity would result in small change to views the impact is assessed as slight ADVERSE.”
3.6.5 Viewpoint 7 – Raven Crag
. . . . The overall level of effect is assessed as slight ADVERSE.”
3.6.7 Viewpoint 6 - Great Howe
. . . . The overall level of effect is assessed as slight ADVERSE.”
From section 3.7 - Recreational
3.7.1 Viewpoint 3 – Armboth Car Park
. . . . The visual effect is appraised as slight ADVERSE . . . “.

By definition, the word “adverse” means: - “having a negative or harmful effect on something”. Can it be any clearer than that?

It is perfectly obvious from the above, and when considered with the previously available planning application documentation and drawings, that these proposals fall outwith the guidelines and legal obligations pertaining to an acceptable level of management of the Lake District National Park.

I maintain that these zip-wire proposals will be detrimental to the landscape and character of Thirlmere Valley, that they will prove to be a dangerous distraction to those travelling on the A591 main artery between Windermere and Keswick, and that they will be detrimental to the peaceful and tranquil enjoyment of the many outdoor activities currently available to the thousands of existing visitors to that area.
If this application were to be approved, then it would undoubtedly set precedent for future large scale commercial development schemes within the LDNP – which would then be much harder to reject.

When one considers that a previous planning application for a zip-wire facility at Honister Mine area was refused, when that immediate area is of largely industrial quarry type landscape (similar to the existing “ZipWorld” facility in Wales), it would be an utter outrage, and gross dereliction of duty by all those concerned, were this Thirlmere zip-wire planning application to be granted.

Yours faithfully . . . .
User avatar
Lancashire Lad
 
Posts: 120
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 1:55 pm
Location: Red Rose County
 

Re: Thirlmere Zipwire Proposal

Postby Lancashire Lad » Thu Jan 04, 2018 5:26 pm

Just seen this email response from Gill Haigh, Cumbria Tourism’s Managing Director.
(it’s on the ZipOff Thirlmere site https://twitter.com/ZipOffThirlmere/sta ... 9419876354 ).

If you cannot read the text in the image below, it can be found via the above link, where the jpeg image of the reply can be clicked on, and is then enlarged to a more easily readable text size.
Actually, it's well worth viewing the linked page, because directly below Ms Haigh's reply, is the original (very well written) email to which she has replied, and, as the writer suggests: - QUOTE "It's interesting to see what she doesn't answer, rather than what she does..." UNQUOTE.

Capture.JPG


QUOTE “this is a board position . . . “ UNQUOTE – Oh well, that’s just fine and dandy then.
Just forget the small fact that we’re talking about a National Park and World Heritage Site here.
Obviously, all that’s of concern is creating QUOTE ”UK’s Adventure Capital” UNQUOTE, at all costs, regardless of any detriment to the LDNP.

If the people that run Cumbria Tourism, i.e. “the Executive Board”, are prepared to make decisions that encourage running roughshod over the legal obligations required in managing a National Park, i.e. the Sandford Principle, then in my opinion they are not fit to hold those no doubt lucrative board positions.

Absolutely disgusted!

Regards,
Mike.
User avatar
Lancashire Lad
 
Posts: 120
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 1:55 pm
Location: Red Rose County
 
 
PreviousNext

Return to General discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests