Keep The Wannies Wild Appeal Statement Ref 3244389
Planning appeal Ref: APP/P2935/W/20/3244389 Cold Law, Northumberland Construction of a publicly accessible landmark, commissioned to commemorate Queen Elizabeth II and the Commonwealth
Appeal statement by the objectors’ group ‘Keep the Wannies Wild’ (KTWW)
About the KTWW group
1. This group was formed on 12 June 2019 in urgent response to the Northumberland County Council (NCC) Strategic Planning Committee’s deliberations of June 4th 2019. At that meeting NCC officers had recommended the proposal be granted but, following the number and nature of representations received, the councillors voted to defer the decision for a site visit. They carried this out on the morning of July 2nd 2019 and at the Strategic Planning Committee meeting later that day a resolution was passed by 13:3 votes to refuse permission, leading to this appeal.
2. Between these two committee meetings the size of the KTWW group grew exponentially and is still increasing. This statement is made on behalf of its over 1900 members and others who objected at application stage. Some 128 letters, e mails and online comments were made then and more are expected at the current appeal stage. This strength of feeling is despite some local tenants and employees of the Ray estate feeling unable to voice their objections publicly. The Wannies area extends between and beyond the A68 and A696 roads which are circuitously linked by the unclassified Wannies Road C195.
3. Many residents and visitors were unaware of the proposal until June 2019; some on the Council’s notification list did not receive their letters. One West Woodburn resident says she only heard about it from her son in Australia because it was on the news there! The address of the proposal was given as Kirkwhelpington, some miles from Cold Law, so the location was misunderstood. Although exhibitions were held at some locations in 2018, the number of responses was only 43. One objector who is closely involved in community matters was unaware of the exhibition despite living only yards from the village hall. People were asked to choose between three artists’ concepts rather than express whether the brief for a 56m high monument was appropriate in that location. West Woodburn First school (for children aged 4-9, fewer than 20 pupils at the time) was also involved but little children could hardly be expected to understand the project. More than one 9-year-old
1 Keep The Wannies Wild Appeal Statement Ref 3244389
has said recently that they are furious to have been used in this way because they are against the monument being built.
4. Objectors were therefore slow to respond and the 4th June committee report mentions only 29 letters received. It is an indication of the strength of local feeling that, between the two committee meetings, objectors mobilised to ensure that there was wide publicity including on social media, in the press and on local television. Although the committee report for 2nd July still recommended approval, the contemporaneous notes made at the meeting (Appendix 1) demonstrate that support was waning by then and that the planning arguments expressed through oral contributions were important in the decision-making process. The Tourism Officer’s presentation was lacking in evidence and councillors were diligent in their discussions and questioning of the Planning Officer. Their morning site visit, which brought out the inappropriateness of the Cold Law site, was fresh in their minds. They thus made the decision to refuse permission on the basis of much more information than had previously been available either to them or the Planning Officer and did not act unreasonably.
5. This statement has been complied by members of the KTWW group and is presented on behalf of members. A number of individual letters have been submitted at appeal stage to the Planning Inspectorate but the Inspector should also bear in mind that this statement represents many more who have relied on the group to speak for them. It includes a number of quotations to illustrate the ‘flavour’ of objections and to provide the evidence to justify dismissing the appeal. All literary sources and references are in the Miscellany at Appendix 2.
Parish Councils and other Prominent Objectors
6. It is highly unusual for 5 Parish Councils to be involved in a planning application as is the situation here. Objections were made at application stage by the statutory consultee, Corsenside Parish Council, but little notice appears to have been taken of that. Cold Law lies very close to the boundary of Corsenside with Kirkwhelpington Parish Council but they were not consulted. Learning about the proposal late in the day, the other 4 Parish Councils were concerned as the appeal development would be widely seen in views from outside Corsenside Parish. People living in Otterburn and Rochester, for example, would pass through the Wannies area going to larger towns and could not avoid seeing it.
7. At appeal stage the following Parish Councils have objected: Corsenside, Elsdon, Otterburn and Rochester with Byrness.
2 Keep The Wannies Wild Appeal Statement Ref 3244389
Kirkwhelpington is not meeting until after the deadline for this statement but its minute of 2nd July 2019 shows that it was concerned at not having been consulted at application stage which implies opposition to the proposal. Appendix 3 contains copies of the 5 Parish Council objections and a plan showing their boundaries in relation to the appeal site.
8. Other substantial objectors are The Redesdale Society, the British Mountaineering Council, local councillors and Guy Opperman MP. Individual objections from relatives of Sir Charles Parsons, professional climber Robbie Phillips and Sir Simon Jenkins are included in Appendices 7, 9 and 14 respectively. KTWW fully agrees with the Council’s reason for refusal and this statement provides hard evidence from the local community to demonstrate why the refusal of permission is justified.
Use of Social Media
9. The appellant divides his time between his Sussex home and the Ray Estate. Peasemarsh, Sussex is, we believe, his primary home and is the address on the draft S106 agreement. Since the appeal was lodged he has aggressively tried to use social media to demonstrate support but failed. He has purchased full page adverts in local papers and covered their webpages with pictures of ‘Ascendant’ asking people to support it (Appendix 4). The Inspector should take a critical approach to representations made in support of the proposal as they may come from people who have no knowledge of the area or, alternatively, they may be employed by the appellant or be his tenants. Notwithstanding the money thrown at this by the appellant, the Hexham Courant’s online poll, completed on 3rd February 2020, showed 86% of the poll’s 1300 respondents were opposed to the appeal development.
THE MAIN POINTS FOR KEEP THE WANNIES WILD GROUP
The nature of the application
10. The proposal is described as ‘A publicly accessible landmark, commissioned to commemorate Queen Elizabeth II and the Commonwealth’. The two main items that identify it with this description are the name: The Elizabeth Landmark and the promise that the walkway around the monument would bear inscriptions related to Her Majesty and the Commonwealth. Misleadingly, the promotional material for ‘Ascendant’ has implied that the project has Royal approval, but this is not the case. This may have led some official bodies to not oppose it for fear of embarrassment.
3 Keep The Wannies Wild Appeal Statement Ref 3244389
11. The KTWW group has no anti-royal agenda as made clear by three objectors’ letters published in the Hexham Courant on February 13th 2020 (Appendix 5). But when the hyperbole surrounding the proposal is penetrated it is clear that there is no connection to the Commonwealth that would make sense of it. Indeed, far from ‘bringing communities together’ as the application claims, it has already brought together the rural communities of this part of Northumberland, but in opposition not support. The Queen has previously stated that she would be pleased to be honoured by a Commonwealth Canopy of indigenous tree planting instead (Appendix 6). It advises that: it is important that proposed projects should not be politically controversial or likely to attract adverse publicity. Regrettably the appellant has not followed this good advice.
12. Personal matters are not the subject of planning control but this highlights the weakness that the proposal has been dealt with primarily on the basis of the Queen’s name plus unsupported claims about sparking tourist interest. None of these are capable of being secured through planning conditions. Since the appeal was lodged the promoters have striven to link it more closely to its location by referencing industrialists such as Sir Charles Parsons who was a previous owner of the Ray estate. They do not seem to have made up their minds what the monument represents but are casting around for justification after the event by loading the design with symbolism. Sir Charles Parsons had no descendants beyond his two children so it is notable that the three close relatives whose father was in charge of the Parsons Engineering company have voiced their strong opposition (Appendix 7). They say:
We consider it highly unlikely that Uncle Charlie would view the proposed Elizabeth Monument with anything other than dismay and horror. We feel that he valued the wildness and unspoilt beauty of the area, just as walkers and others enjoy it today.
13. Turning to the proposal itself, consider for a moment that another landowner decides to fund an identical monument but to call it after his cherished wife The Gladys Landmark, with her favourite poems inscribed along the walkway. Would the Council and technical consultees really recommend that permission be granted? Or would they say it was not highbrow enough or not sufficiently attractive to tourists to outweigh the visual harm? We put forward this argument not to be facetious but to assist the Inspector in being clear about what is proposed, whether the royal and Commonwealth connections could be secured and whether indeed the monument differs significantly from any other proposal that looked the same.
4 Keep The Wannies Wild Appeal Statement Ref 3244389
14. The height of the monument would be 56m; the appellant states that this is the difference in height between the summits of Cold Law and Hepple Heugh, some 750m to the south. Also, at this height (336m AOD) is the Queen Victoria Cairn at Hartside on the north side of the Lisles Burn valley. It has not been explained why it is desirable for the monument to be of equal height to these landforms; terms such as ‘symbiosis’ are used without explanation or justification. KTWW argues that this competition for dominance is more likely to diminish the drama of the landscape than benefit it. Because the height was part of the initial artists’ brief it has made the proposal inherently unacceptable, whatever the credentials of the artist and the details of the design. As David Caygill writes (see Appendix 2 for all references):
I think it is the height demanded of this structure that is the primitive vanity of the 'landmark'. Each of the designs, brought to a brief of this specific height, seemingly embodies a desire to 'dominate' the landscape, rather than embellish or complement it - and that is this artwork's downfall!
15. The appellant has posed the question ‘Why Cold Law?’ and followed this by claims about the relationship of the design to local associations with iron working/turbine development and its significance as a ‘sundial’. This material has been given greater prominence at appeal stage in an effort to overcome criticisms that there is no connection to the Queen and Commonwealth. Indeed, it is hard to know what this monument is supposed to be about at all. It seems rather to be one man’s obsessional vanity project and the photograph in Appendix 8 shows him demonstrating that it would be a focal point in the view from his property. He may not know that Cold Law is known locally as Tit Hill because of its obvious shape; this is an unfortunate location for a monument that is supposed to uphold the Queen’s dignity.
16. Artist and gallery owner Mary Ann Rogers writes:
There is one huge difference between the Elizabeth Landmark and both ‘Couple’ and the Angel of the North from an artist’s point of view. Both the latter strike the viewer and are recognizable and organic in form. A response IS elicited. Art touches us and communicates at a deep level. When a piece of art evokes bewilderment, requires the viewer to first of all search for an interpretive board we are making people feel ignorant, stupid, uneducated and smaller somehow than they did before. ‘Ascendant’ is unwanted, does not provide evidence of any predicted effect whatsoever on tourism, is ecological vandalism and if erected will make the decision- makers a laughing stock. However, it will be irreversible and the people who live in and love the area will be stuck with it.
5 Keep The Wannies Wild Appeal Statement Ref 3244389
Sustainability
17. The proposal is environmentally unsustainable. It involves substantial rock removal, mutilation of the summit of Cold Law, the insertion of large amounts of concrete for the necessarily deep foundations and the fabrication of an enormous steel monument; its carbon footprint would be huge to no practical benefit. Tim Bird writes:
A conservative estimate would suggest the base needs to be constructed of some 10,000 tonnes of cement, the manufacture of which will liberate 12,500 tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere. That is the equivalent of an extra 2,800 cars on the road for 12 months.
18. Concrete is increasingly being recognised as a major problem for the environment in terms of the greenhouse gas released in its manufacture. It also replaces natural infrastructure - soil and vegetation which help to absorb water and greenhouse gases - with enormous amounts of environmentally damaging concrete.
19. A further environmental problem would be the emissions of visitors’ vehicles as there is no effective public transport in this sparsely populated area. Northumberland County Council has declared a climate emergency and published a Climate Commitment Action Plan 2020-21. A new requirement is for reports on planning applications to include a section on ‘Design Responses to Climate Change’ and this is being developed with other local planning authorities in the region. A recent Court of Appeal case rejected plans for Heathrow based on conflict with the Paris Climate Agreement. The appeal development would work against the aims of these vital initiatives; the tide is turning away from the type of damaging and wasteful development exemplified by the appeal proposal which now appears old-fashioned in its excess.
20. It would also be unsustainable in social terms, being imposed on an unwilling community and completely divisive. It would remain in perpetuity as a festering sore, demonstrating the dominance of one man over a much wider area than he actually owns. In economic terms there is no evidence to support benefits for tourism but there is contrary evidence that existing walkers and rock climbers would stop coming to this area because of the intrusion from the monument. Some business owners have stated that they would forego any potential increase in custom to avoid this being built (see later). It does not meet any aspect of national and local planning policies that support sustainable development.
6 Keep The Wannies Wild Appeal Statement Ref 3244389
The Iconic Character of the Wannies area
21. Cold Law, the site of the proposed monument, is within an area known as the Wanneys or Wannies from the nearby sandstone ridge of Great and Little Wanney Crags. The Wanney area extends between and beyond the A68 and A696; the minor road linking them is known as the Wannies road and the former railway line passing around the north eastern side of Cold Law was known as the Wanney line. This is an iconic area, not only for its wild and open landscape but for its literary and musical associations and its popularity as a well-used Northumberland figure of speech ‘The Wilds of Wanney’. Appendix 2 is a compilation of cultural references to the Wannies, including wildlife, walking and rock climbing, with quotes showing the depth of feeling from those who have written about their opposition to the appeal proposal.
22. The 1888 Comprehensive Guide to Northumberland by W. W. Tomlinson describes the area, the extensive open views and refers to the Northumberland poet James Armstrong who lived for many years at Aid Crag close to Great Wanney Crag. The writer Nancy Ridley, a member of one of the oldest families in Northumberland, in her book Northumbrian Heritage (Robert Hale and Co. 1968) tells us that: “In the wild country of the Wannys where the Wansbeck rises, a local poet and writer, James Armstrong, was inspired to sing the praises of the river in his 1860 poem Wild Hills o’ Wannys”:
There’s the Reed an’ the Wansbeck, where the dews sweetly fa', The Lyles Burn and Reasey we oft fisht them a', Aye, there's monie a burnie and sweet heather brae Round the wild hills o' Wannys sae far, far away
23. This has been followed by a number of more recent musical and literary allusions. Among 20th century poets, Peter Bennet, who lived for some time in Armstrong’s cottage, was inspired by the Wanney atmosphere and his poem Snow in Northumberland includes the lines:
So let the unicorns of blizzard rage about their business on the Wanney Hills
For him the Wild Hills O’Wanney “seem to require poetry” and it gave the young Kathleen Raine her first sense of another, more essential world. A publisher in Alnwick has named his imprint ‘Wanney Books’ and his website wildsofwanney.co.uk, an indication of its iconic status, even for a business that is outside the Wannies area.
7 Keep The Wannies Wild Appeal Statement Ref 3244389
24. Alistair Anderson, the renowned Northumbrian Piper, acknowledges the great Billy Pigg (1902-68), as a significant influence in his playing. Billy learnt the pipes by ear and his song, The Wild Hills of Wannies, illustrates his staccato style and distinctive variations. Tanfield pitman poet Tommy Armstrong used the original Wanney’s tune and the Brothers Gillespie also recorded The Wild Hills of Wannies on Spotify.
25. The objection from the British Mountaineering Council confirms the importance of Great Wanney Crag to generations of climbers, it is instantly recognisable and was chosen for the front cover of the current Northumbrian Mountaineering Club guidebook. Members consider the crag and its environs are ‘a special place worthy of our protection’ and photographs at Appendix 10 show that the full height of ‘Ascendant’ would be visible from the Crag above forestry. Professional Climber Robbie Phillips is a member of the KTWW group and enthusiastic about protecting the wild character of the area. He is making a short film about it and his views are in Appendix 9.
26. The area is popular with walkers as there are many rights of way, there is open access land around the monument site and long- distance walking and cycle routes. See photos in Appendix 10 and map of Lisles Burn walk in Appendix 11. Organised walks are regularly held and a Director of the Haltwhistle Walking Festival, Anne Palmer, writes:
It is surprising how many people think The Wannies is a place that exists only in myth and legend. For them, the idea of actually going there and walking around the area was an exciting prospect.
Ann and Bernard from Newcastle write:
We have been supporting the Haltwhistle Walking Festival for many years…Thanks to you we have explored remote parts of Northumberland (such as the Wilds of Wanney!) in the company of like-minded walkers.
27. ‘The Wilds of Wanney’ is a well-known Northumberland saying, even amongst families who have never been there (see quotations in Appendix 2). These include:
• Allyson Jervis writes, following the 2 July decision to refuse Planning Permission: I'm so very happy that this iconic place has been saved. I grew up in Newcastle, so did my mother and her mother before her, but to them anywhere off the beaten track was known as the "Wilds of Wanny". Many a time, if I was late home, I was asked if I'd walked from the wilds of Wanney; its reach is far and wide. Once, when I was taking my mother home, I drove her over the Wannies and showed her the crags. She was surprised. She didn't know it was a real place;
8 Keep The Wannies Wild Appeal Statement Ref 3244389
she'd just heard it from my Nana Jessie and carried on using the term. It’s nice to know the name has been in common usage in other parts of the North East for generations. • Catherine Almond writes: I was brought up in Felling and the “The Wilds of Wanney” was used in our family to denote a place of wildness, isolation and wonder. I never knew it was a reality. • Denise Jackson Cooper writes: My Mam used the phrase and we lived in Seaton Delaval. Now I live right next to the Wannies. They are real, beautiful, wild and inspiring. • Lesleyann Bradford writes: I too thought it was a magical land, like Narnia, until I moved here three years ago. It’s even more magical than Narnia, that’s why I joined the group.
28. Wildlife is another important component of the wildness and Emma Anderson writes in Appendix 2 about the hen harriers that were seen here. Local residents were involved in wardening them and David Baines writes:
I recall the peace over the Wannies while watching over the birds. The sight of peregrines, hen harriers and buzzards aloft at the same time almost needed air traffic control. It was wonderful. In the case of the hen harriers, the sense of community pride in having one of the very few nests in England was also quite something.
29. Roads in the area are also used for walking, for example the Lisles Burn circular walk route (Appendix 11) uses the open access land and also part of the C195 Wanney Road. It is simplistic to say that the only people on rural roads are those driving who will not be paying attention to the view. People living in rural areas often have to walk along roads to go to the pub, the letter box, the bus stop, to visit friends and they take in the wider view as they do so. Drivers can also appreciate the open and wild character of the area, two residents saying:
Guy Thouret writes: Come over the crest of the hill after passing the Wanney Crags and it is breath taking no matter what the weather and for locals it's uplifting. (see photos in Appendix 10).
Jane Daglish writes: My journey home from work in Newcastle each day was greeted by this wonderful view on the Wanney road - it was so relaxing and chilled me out. Can you now imagine a gigantic sculpture in the midst of this to detract from the natural beauty?
30. The iconic WILD character of the Wannies landscape is widely recognized, cherished and celebrated. It is a benefit to the mental and physical health of those who love and visit this area. This adds to its value as natural capital and makes it more sensitive to
9 Keep The Wannies Wild Appeal Statement Ref 3244389
change. It is against this character that the proposal’s performance in terms of landscape value and planning policies needs to be assessed.
Industrial local history
31. The appellant has emphasised the industrial history of the area in the detailed design of the monument. The main points are, firstly, that the former Ridsdale Iron Works, used for a brief period by Lord Armstrong, justify the use of steel for the monument. The second is that the developer of the compound steam turbine, Sir Charles Parsons, once lived on the Ray estate although his house is no longer there. He and his wife are indeed buried at Kirkwhelpington and the recent renovation of their graves is a welcome memorial to them. But their close relatives have objected to the appeal proposal and their views (Appendix 7) should carry more weight than the appellant’s flights of fancy:
He was a man of simple tastes and without vanity, and he would not have welcomed a massive overbearing monument supposedly celebrating his connection with the area but, in the process, changing completely the place he loved.
32. Turbines were made in Newcastle not in this area. Iron smelting was carried out at Ridsdale for a very short time but over the last 150 or more years the area has been known primarily for its natural beauty and industrial relics have blended into the landscape. Local history is the domain of the Redesdale Society and, if the proposal were regarded as beneficial to local history, it might be expected that the Society would be supportive but it is strongly opposed. Whatever the references to industrial features or sundials the fact remains that a monument of this height and appearance cannot be justified on the basis of the symbolism of its detailed design.
33. Conrad Smith (author of books on transport) writes:
The unspoilt surroundings of the legendary Wansbeck to Redesmouth railway trackbed would be ruined by such an environmentally crass erection in the Northumberland landscape. As a railway historian and one who has travelled the line by passenger train in its twilight years I would consider the proposed construction a desecration of our very own precious Border countryside. I am sure I am not alone in this.
34. Industrial archaeology and local history are important to some in this area and beyond. However, at present their interests can be pursued by visiting particular locations and features that no longer impinge significantly on the landscape: buildings have been
10 Keep The Wannies Wild Appeal Statement Ref 3244389
demolished, the railway line and iron workings overgrown (See photos in Appendix 10). At the same time the Wannies provides for walkers, cyclists, bird watchers and climbers and there is no conflict with local history interests. Erecting the appeal structure would, however, promote the one aspect of local history at the expense of other users of the landscape. Its dominance would seriously detract from the existing recreational value and reduce natural capital for no good reason.
A Restorative Environment
35. The benefits to physical and mental health from contact with the natural world are well recognized. The Wannies area has a great sense of spaciousness, tranquility and remoteness from everyday life that are particularly valued by those who visit it for outdoor recreation. Sir Charles Parsons recognized this when he chose to live on the Ray Estate and enjoy quiet and solitary outdoor activities. Inserting the over-dominant and alien looking ‘Ascendant’ would draw the eye to it, detracting from the valued characteristics of this landscape and reducing its contribution to health and well- being. Tim Bird writes:
Why do some people think they can improve our recreational environment by building on it? I, and many others, value Northumberland for its wilderness; something that is difficult to find in much of England and something that is known to be of benefit to health, both mental and physical, when experienced.
Planning policies
36. Current development plan policies are those of the Tynedale Local Development Framework Core Strategy of October 2007 (TLDFCS) and the Tynedale District Local Plan of 2000 (TDLP). Those considered most relevant to this appeal are mentioned below.
37. TLDFCS Policy GD1 limits development in the open countryside to the re-use of existing buildings. Policy EDT1 allows for economic or tourist development where appropriate. The appellant claims that his proposal is exempt from the tight control of Policy GD1 because it is for tourism but we would argue that its primary purpose is as a personal monument without any evidence that it would serve a useful purpose for tourism and in any case it would not be ‘appropriate’. Furthermore, Policy EDT4 follows on from EDT1 in permitting only small-scale new build tourism development in the open countryside and at a height of 56m the appeal development could not by any stretch of the imagination be described as small scale.
38. TLDFCS Policy NE1 requires (a) development to protect and
11 Keep The Wannies Wild Appeal Statement Ref 3244389
enhance the character and qualities of the landscape and not cause unacceptable harm in either respect; (b) to minimize risk of environmental damage and avoid urbanization of the countryside and (f) for areas close to the National Park not to adversely affect landscape quality. The group considers that the appeal development would conflict with this policy by introducing a prominent feature of industrial appearance, urbanizing the countryside and harming the character and qualities of the landscape which are wild, open and remote.
39. Saved policies of the TDLP are now some 20 years old. Policy GD2 requires all development to respect the positive characteristics of the District’s natural and built environment, in particular be appropriate to the character of the site and surroundings. Policy TM4 limits small scale new tourism development where, amongst other things, it can be absorbed into the landscape. We consider that neither of these requirements is met by the appeal development because of its significant adverse visual impact.
40. The emerging Northumberland Local Plan (NLP) is at an advanced stage where a final group of hearings are being held in late February 2020. While Policy ECN15 encourages heritage and cultural visits in Northumberland, the principles for new visitor attractions require, amongst other things, that (g) they enhance the environment. Policy QOP1 requires the design of proposals to respect and enhance the natural and built environment and any significant views or landscape setting. Policy ENV3 requires (1a) proposals affecting the character of the landscape to conserve and enhance important elements of that character and, if harmful (fii) there have to be significant regional or local planning reasons to outweigh that. The appeal development does not meet these requirements because of the harm to landscape character.
41. NLP Policy ENV4 seeks to protect tranquillity, dark skies and a sense of rurality and requires that there be no reduction of openness where this is a key quality of the local landscape character. It is our case that the appeal proposal would clearly not meet this policy which is likely to proceed to be adopted without changes. It should therefore be afforded weight in line with para 48 of the National Planning Policy framework (NPPF February 2019).
42. The NPPF in paragraph 8 encourages sustainable development in terms of economic, social and environmental factors. Paragraph 170 states that planning policies and decisions should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by, amongst other things, (a) protecting and enhancing valued landscapes and (b) recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside,
12 Keep The Wannies Wild Appeal Statement Ref 3244389
along with the wider benefits from natural capital. It has already been explained that the landscape around the appeal site is highly valued not only for its intrinsic character and beauty but also its cultural associations. It is an area high in natural capital as recognised by the many people who enjoy quiet exercise and recreation there. This would not be sustainable development in economic, social or environmental terms as detailed previously in paras 17-20 of this statement.
43. NPPF paragraph 83 encourages sustainable rural tourism and leisure development which respect the character of the countryside but it is our view that the appeal development would harm that character. In paragraph 127 it emphasizes quality of design but it is our case that the detailed design of the monument does not prevent it being harmful to the landscape as in (c).
44. The Northumberland Economic Strategy 2019-2024 has been quoted in the appellant’s statement but merely speaks of ‘raising the tourism profile’ and has nothing specifically related to the appeal development.
Harm to the landscape
45. As part of the planning application a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) produced by Southern Green was submitted; NCC commissioned a brief review of that by Stephenson Halliday dated May 2019. Appendix 12 to this statement contains a detailed critique of the LVIA and review; the main points are brought out in the following paragraphs. The Inspector is asked to familiarise themselves with the methodology in GLVIA3 as well as the detailed judgements in the LVIA compared with the group’s critique in order to appreciate how the conclusions were reached. In particular it should be noted that the term ‘significant’ used in Southern Green’s conclusions has a specific meaning in relation to LVIAs used for Environmental Impact Assessment. It would be easy to think that concluding the appeal proposal was not ‘significant’ means that it is too minor to be matter. But it is not being treated as EIA development and this term does not hold that meaning. Its use should not imply any sort of status to the LVIA’s conclusions; like the use of the terms ‘substantial’ or ‘harmful’ it is merely a matter of judgement. Quoted planning policies also use the term ‘significant’ and it is in line with this general usage that it is employed in this KTWW statement.
46. The LVIA involves a step by step approach to provide transparency so that the many judgements involved can be identified. National
13 Keep The Wannies Wild Appeal Statement Ref 3244389
guidance in para 2.25 of GLVIA31 accepts that, even with qualified and experienced professionals, there can be differences in the judgments made on aesthetic grounds. The guidance states that an LVIA can be a useful tool as part of the design process, assisting modification and mitigation to overcome identified harmful effects. However, the appellant’s scheme has been ‘set in stone’ from the beginning because of the uncompromising brief requiring it to be 56m high. There are no possibilities for modifying it except perhaps in the car park design. The LVIA has been carried out at too late a stage, appearing to be a retrospective exercise, and the proposal has to be taken as it comes or not at all. GLVIA3 [3.44] comments that there is no point in seeking ideas and views if it is actually too late for the scheme design to be modified
47. The KTWW group would take this argument even further in suggesting that any LVIA submitted by the appellant would be guaranteed to be supportive of his development. Common sense tells that he would not have submitted a critical LVIA as that would effectively be damning his own proposal. Because the impact on landscape was the main issue for determining the application, the LVIA was central to the decision-making process. In having to give a ‘yes or no’ verdict on this issue, this retrospective LVIA came close to pre-empting the decision-making role of the Council’s committee. But, being drawn up before the application was submitted, it lacked the information that would come forward later about the high value placed on the Wannies landscape and this reduced the validity of its conclusions. Fortunately the councillors on the committee were able to recognise the importance of these matters in reaching their better-informed decision.
48. The appellant’s statement of case (para 8.5.5) says that the Council commissioned a review because it needed an ‘incontrovertible’ conclusion on this issue. But the review suffered from the same drawbacks as the original. The approved methodology had not fully been followed, there was a lack of real information put in. The review lacked detail about how its assessment had been carried out. Without a close reading of GLVIA3 one might fail to recognise that the need for multiple qualitative judgements make LVIAs unsuitable for retrospective assessment of proposals that cannot be modified. It is not enough just to use the LVIA conclusions, it is necessary to read the detail of how their authors have arrived at them. LVIAs are but a tool; they need to be read with caution and should not replace the critical faculties of decision makers.
1 Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (GLVIA3), 3rd Edition, Landscape Institute 2013
14 Keep The Wannies Wild Appeal Statement Ref 3244389
49. In preparing a LVIA, cultural factors such as the perceptual aspects and literary/artistic associations already discussed should be included alongside scenic quality, conservation interests etc. [GLVIA Box 5.1]. The writers of the appellant’s LVIA did not have any consultation with the local community so did not know what the local interests and values are. The benefit to the LVIA would have been in providing better understanding of the sensitivity of the landscape and its susceptibility to change [3.43]. This omission leaves a glaring gap in the information used. As one experienced landscape practitioner put it “the LVIA is only as good as the information put into it”.
50. Furthermore, the many written objections from those living in and visiting the area for recreation are first-hand evidence of the harmful effect of the proposal on the landscape and on their views of it as receptors. The writers of the LVIA repeatedly copied and pasted the following equivocal remark: the effect would be theoretically considered adverse in comparison to the undeveloped baseline in terms of this assessment, however is likely to be perceived as a positive addition by many receptors (sic). This massively important leap from adverse to positive was unsubstantiated by evidence and relied purely on professional judgment. The hard evidence of significant harm described over and over again by massive numbers of objectors should be preferred.
51. Effect on the landscape is the main issue in this appeal and the group strongly contests the idea that the monument would sit well in the landscape and not be harmful. It would be exceptionally high at 56m and, as a landmark, intended to be prominent. Its curved form is said to reflect the profile of Cold Law but when placed vertically it loses all connection with the hill and any significance is lost. Being equal in height to nearby hills would merely serve to detract from their drama and from closer viewpoints it would look even higher (see photos in Appendix 10).
52. The tilted form would be unnatural, rather like a shipyard crane, making it a discordant feature which would draw the eye to it as indeed is intended. The LVIA does not include many close viewpoints although a recognised walk, the Lisles Burn Circular, goes right around Cold Law on open access land. To anyone walking nearby, the proposed leaning structure would be huge, overbearing and frankly quite frightening. ‘Northumbrian Stonework’ writes:
The arrogance of the thing is astonishing! As a dry stone waller, I am fortunate enough to see a fair bit of Northumberland’s remoter places; they should be preserved for all, not marred by transient vanity projects.
15 Keep The Wannies Wild Appeal Statement Ref 3244389
Unfortunately, it would not be transient!
53. The structure’s relatively slender proportions have been used to claim through the LVIA that its effect on the landscape and views would be low. However, this is not a case of blocking views, except from very close quarters, but of intruding an eye-catching and alien feature into them. The Landscape Character Types (LCT) identified by Natural England and Northumberland County Council identify the ‘open, relatively remote character’ and ‘uninterrupted, sweeping moorland’ as key qualities of the Outcrop Hills and Escarpments LCT (see section 3.2 of the LVIA). It takes only a single intrusive man- made feature to destroy these qualities. There would be a loss of rurality and an increase in urbanisation contrary to the emerging Local Plan. Far from being in the local tradition of hillforts, which are low-lying and made from the same materials as the hill they appear to grow out of, this would clearly be an alien structure. Comparison with hill forts cannot be a serious suggestion.
54. There are wind turbines some 2-3km away to the south east and south west but they appear only in some views. They should not be used as a precedent for other high structures in the area, indeed their visual impact is quite different from that of the proposal which would be on top of a hill and stand out against the sky because of its dark colour. Objectors dislike the wind turbines but 33 of their original letters comment that at least they serve a useful purpose and will be removed when no longer needed. Those on the Ray Estate near Kirkwhelpington were approved on 11th November 2010 subject to condition 2 requiring them to be decommissioned 25 years after their first generation of electricity (Appendix 13) so their visual impact is reversible. The monument by contrast has no useful function and would remain indefinitely.
55. The group appreciates the awkward position of the artist who won the competition and hoped to see his concept brought to life. Indeed, in his interview in The Northumberland Journal on January 24 2020, Simon Hitchens said:
There must be a sensitivity to the people living there now and yet to be born, but also to that landscape because it’s a beautiful place. I realise it’s a heck of a privilege to be able to place something on that very special hill.
56. But high-flown concepts and design statements are themselves not enough and the KTWW group has had to take the role of the little boy who cried ‘But the emperor has no clothes!’ Indeed, the artist’s concepts are not readily apparent to the viewer in the countryside unless they have already read and digested an explanation of them. Objectors are not uninformed philistines; some are interested in
16 Keep The Wannies Wild Appeal Statement Ref 3244389
contemporary art but are clear that the appeal development is unacceptable as Karl Fisher writes:
I am very much pro-wild and pro-public art and sculpture, and very against art commissions that are parachuted in which, it seems to me, is what is proposed with this piece.
Alison Walton-Robson writes:
I’m a lover of public art which can be so inspiring – but this piece is so intrusive into the landscape.
Lastly, a very important point is that this development is irreversible; as Martin Bewick writes:
If you put something that size in the landscape then you prevent anyone from ever again experiencing that landscape in a more natural state.
57. On the basis of the national guidance in GLVIA3 the group takes issue with the lack of vital evidence in evaluating the sensitivity of the landscape and strongly contests many of the subjective judgements made about the impact of the proposal and whether its effect would be adverse or beneficial. The critique at Appendix 12 contains a table highlighting the differences between it and the Southern Green LVIA. In 8 out of the 12 relevant viewpoints, the LVIA agrees that landscape sensitivity is High. The main difference is that the LVIA judges the magnitude of the changes resulting from the appeal development as Low and thus that the effect would be largely Moderate or Minor.
58. Our clearly-argued assessment is that the changes resulting from the appeal development would be of High magnitude and the effects Substantial and adverse as evidenced by the comments of objectors that it would spoil their views and enjoyment of the landscape. No evidence whatsoever has been provided to justify the LVIA author’s assertion that some receptors would find it beneficial. This assertion is repeated in the appellant’s statement of case para 9.5.10 but no evidence is given for the ‘variety of ways’ in which it would be perceived as beneficial. There are none. We believe that context is all-important and that the design of the monument cannot be assessed separately from its setting where it would clearly be inappropriate. GLVIA3 acknowledges that there can be differing opinions about these matters, even amongst professional practitioners and the Inspector is invited to weigh the evidence following their site visits and to uphold our findings.
59. The well-known writer on art, architecture and the countryside Sir Simon Jenkins has commented as follows (Appendix 14 personal e
17 Keep The Wannies Wild Appeal Statement Ref 3244389
mail of 15 July 2019):
Many thanks. Yes, I know of it. I cannot believe it. This is not even a statue but just a spike, an ugly bit of clutter. And like most of these things, it is not a monument to anyone but its financier.
Good luck with the campaign
60. In view of the strong local resistance to having the development imposed on an unwilling population by a single individual it is highly unlikely that the monument would ever become accepted or regarded with interest or affection. Nor would there be cooperation with the appellant’s fanciful suggestions of community engagement in writing about the local area or the Commonwealth. Public money would not be given to build the monument where such local opposition was evident. The only impetus behind this misguided scheme is that of the appellant’s obsessive desire to dominate the shared countryside.
61. There is convincing evidence that the proposal would fail to meet development plan policies and would not comply with the emerging Local Plan or national policies in NPPF. This is because of the impact on the wild, sweeping and open character of the landscape and harm to the sense of rurality from its urbanising effect.
Purported Benefits to tourism
62. The appellant contends that there would be benefits to tourism in the area. The desirable end benefit of tourism is jobs, either new ones or extra income for existing businesses. No evidence has been provided as to the numbers of people who might be attracted to visit the Elizabeth Landmark. As it lies between the two main routes from the north east to Scotland at Carter Bar, it is likely that travellers might stop off on their journeys as a place to take a break and gawp at this novelty attraction. Indeed the ‘Gladys Landmark’ might be as attractive to these types of passers-by as the Elizabeth Landmark.
63. The appeal site is in a remote and sparsely populated area with little for tourists to spend their money on. The C195 Wannies road is of a poor standard with narrow bridges; the Inspector is requested to drive along the whole section from the A696 to the A68 to experience this for themselves. The only nearby facilities are one struggling pub, a closed pub awaiting a community buy-out and a small shop at West Woodburn with a Post Office in a 6 foot wide cubby-hole. There is one public toilet at Kirkwhelpington some miles
18 Keep The Wannies Wild Appeal Statement Ref 3244389
away in the opposite direction. If indeed there were any benefit from ‘Ascendant’ to local businesses and jobs, that would have to be weighed against the harm to the landscape which the group considers would be substantial and contrary to development plan and emerging policies. There is no evidence to demonstrate an overwhelming tourism benefit that would outweigh such harm.
64. If it did become a big attraction there could be problems (evidenced in Appendix 15) as Gill Cookson writes:
Compare Ascendant with the ego-trip Old Man statue on Castleton Rigg, a wild part of the North York Moors, for which the North Yorkshire Moors National Park gave a temporary permission. As well as being a blot on the landscape, visible for miles around, it caused serious collateral damage, not helped by massive publicity on regional TV attracting many visitors. The result: parking damage to verges, road safety issues, damage to surrounding moorland, dogs running off the leash disrupting sheep, etc. There was no discernible benefit to local economy or otherwise. Last year someone saw sense and it was whisked away to a sculpture park.
65. The appeal development, however, would be permanent and could not be moved elsewhere in the event of it proving an unwanted attraction. Social media can lead to massive interest in the unlikeliest places and this effect cannot be predicted. The appellant seems to claim that the tourist effect would be ‘just right’, not too much and not too little, but where is his evidence? He cannot prevail on this issue. There is an existing well-defined tourism offer in the Wannies area that majors on the wild and sweeping open landscape. Some who enjoy the area as it is have stated that they would go elsewhere if the monument were built. Carol Nunan a local artist writes:
Once visitors arrive they are struck by the grand, spectacular sense of remoteness, the space to breathe, the uninterrupted horizons and wide open skies, the dark, star-filled skies, the sights and sounds of bird life, … the geology and the archaeology, discovered and as yet undiscovered across the region. The Wannies is part of this and these issues should be key considerations which, once destroyed, will have a very negative impact on tourism that allows my own business and others to thrive.
Sarah Morpeth writes:
I have a holiday cottage at Elsdon and the repeated comments over twenty years are that people come here for the wildness and unspoilt landscape - which this ugly erection will destroy.
19 Keep The Wannies Wild Appeal Statement Ref 3244389
66. Some local business people have stated that they would rather not have potential extra income if it meant spoiling the landscape. Roy Garrington writes:
I own a business that would benefit from any increase in visitor numbers but I do not, and would not, want one penny of income from this vile vanity project. I moved here sixteen years ago and not a day goes by that I don’t fall in love with this incredible county. I am so pleased that this environmental vandalism has been stopped.
The Strategic Planning Committee minutes of 2 July 2019 include Emma Anderson’s point that an eminent archaeologist, a local publisher, writers, artists, musicians, craft workers, brewers, ramblers, horse riders and businesses who depend upon tourism were happy to set aside profit for principle (see also contemporaneous notes of the meeting at Appendix 1).
67. The development plan and other policies dealing with tourism do not directly cover the type of development proposed in this appeal because it is very unusual. The appellant’s statement of case (para 9.6.1) admitted that ‘it is difficult to predict exactly the likely economic benefits …’. Reference to the Angel of the North and ‘Weeping Window’ (paras 9.6.3-9.6.5) are not comparing like with like. Economic benefits to Gateshead from the Angel have been conflated with other projects such as the Sage and Millenium Bridge and it is in an urban location where people can easily flock. ‘Weeping Window’ was part of a nationwide tour of ceramic poppies commemorating WWI. It was installed in the Woodhorn museum on the edge of Ashington and received national publicity. Apparently much of the increased income came from car parking charges. The appeal site is not a museum nor a regeneration area so these examples are not at all comparable. It is in fact a sparsely populated remote area with no planning policy imperative for allowing this type of themed attraction. Whether the proposal results in little tourist interest or a lot, the appellant’s arguments do not hold and he provides no evidence.
Purported benefits to ecology
68. Any purported ecological gains in the long term should be provided as a matter of course by a responsible landowner. They should not be offered as bribes to offset a damaging development. The promised improvements have to be weighed against the ecological harm resulting from the development. Soil and vegetation help to absorb water and greenhouse gases but the proposal excavates a massive gash in the hill and fills it with enormous amounts of environmentally damaging concrete. In any event, even if there
20 Keep The Wannies Wild Appeal Statement Ref 3244389
were to be a net gain in ecological terms, this should not outweigh the significant harm caused to the appearance and character of the landscape.
Response to letters of support
69. The appellant’s statement of case includes 10 letters of support from friends but none of them live in the vicinity of Cold Law nor express any connection to that area. Many of these are copy-and- paste standard letters including material that was recently posted on the Elizabeth Landmark Facebook page. Mr Browne-Swinburne states that he writes in his capacity as Chair of Capheaton Parish Council but there is nothing in the minutes of that PC to say that it ever discussed the appeal proposal and he has been asked to retract his statement. Michael Orde is Lord Devonport’s land agent from Savill’s and thus would be required to demonstrate support. Other writers suggest that the councillors who refused permission did not understand the proposal as well as the enthusiastic primary schoolchildren who visited the local exhibitions! The fact that this is all that can be put forward to demonstrate the level of support for the proposal speaks for itself.
CONCLUSIONS
70. Planning permission was refused for this application after the committee of councillors had made a site visit and then carried out lengthy and pertinent discussions. The committee’s decision was not unreasonable or weakly based. Indeed, councillors took into account material that had not been available at an earlier stage including additional public comments and what they saw at the site inspection earlier that day. The contemporaneous notes of the meeting in Appendix 1 make it clear that the councillors understood the issues perfectly well.
71. The previous recommendation to grant permission was based on the absence of objections from ‘technical’ evidence, prominent amongst which was the LVIA. However, that is not a purely technical document but involved a large number of value judgements about matters of appearance which the KTWW group strongly refutes. National guidance on in GLVIA3 accepts that there can be differing opinions about these matters even amongst professional practitioners and it is for the Inspector, as the competent authority, to come to a decision based on the evidence. They should, however, bear in mind the advice of GLVIA3 that there is no point in seeking ideas and views if it is actually too late for the scheme design to be modified.
21 Keep The Wannies Wild Appeal Statement Ref 3244389
72. Indeed the appellant’s case is short on evidence but long on assertion while this KTWW statement and appendices have provided overwhelming evidence about the harm that the proposal would cause to interests of acknowledged importance. The structure would introduce an eye-catching but alien feature into a cherished landscape recognised by Natural England and NCC as having an ‘open, relatively remote character’ and ‘uninterrupted, sweeping moorland’. Context is all-important and, whatever the quality of the design, it is not appropriate for this location. It would be a heavy responsibility to allow a development that would, once and for all, destroy the sense of tranquillity, remoteness and openness that residents and visitors currently value and which contributes positively to the local economy and to people’s well-being. This is natural capital that would be lost rather than enhanced.
73. Nothing could be done to mitigate this impact, ‘Ascendant’ would be impossible to ignore and would be there in perpetuity. There is no evidence that it would benefit tourism or jobs, on the contrary there is evidence that it would harm the existing tourist businesses that rely on those seeking tranquil outdoor recreation. If, surprisingly, it were successful in attracting large numbers of tourists then that in itself could cause problems in a rural area with no facilities. It would not be sustainable in any of the economic, social or environmental terms used by NPPF. This remote and sparsely populated area is not the right location for this type of development that is more suited to a regeneration area. The domination of the shared countryside for one man’s personal satisfaction is just not acceptable.
74. For the above reasons the proposal would conflict with the development plan, in particular TLDFCS policies GD1, EDT1, EDT4, NE1 and TDLP policies GD2 and TM4. There would also be conflict with the emerging Local Plan policies ECN15, QOP1, ENV3 and ENV4 and national policies in the NPPF by significantly harming a valued landscape. There are no material considerations to outweigh this harm and the appeal should therefore be dismissed.
Site Inspection
75. The group requests that the Inspector includes the following on their site visit: • A drive along the full length of the Wannies road (the unnumbered road linking Knowesgate on the A696 with Ridsdale on the A68. • The view from the road alongside the south west side of Cold Law including viewpoints 1 and 2
22 Keep The Wannies Wild Appeal Statement Ref 3244389
• Viewpoints 4, 7 and 14 for which ‘before and after’ photographs were provided in the LVIA. • Closer viewpoints 8, 9 and 10 • Further viewpoints 13 and 15
23 Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
APPENDICES TO APPEAL STATEMENT OF THE ‘KEEP THE WANNIES WILD’ GROUP
APPENDICES Page
1. Notes of Northumberland County Council Committee 2/7/19 ………………………… 2
2. Miscellany of information and quotations about the Wannies ………………………… 6
3. Objections from 5 local Parish Councils …………………………………………………………… 16
4. Screenshots of Northumberland Gazette webpage 31st January 2020 …………… 19
5. Letters published in the Hexham Courant 13th February 2020 ……………………….. 20
6. Information about The Queen’s Commonwealth Canopy ………………………………… 21
7. Objections from relatives of Sir Charles Parsons …………………………………………….. 23
8. The appellant showing the view of Cold Law from his property …………………….. 24
9. Objection by professional climber Robbie Phillips …………………………………………… 25
10. Photographs related to the appeal proposal……………………………………………………. 26
11. Map showing the Lisles Burn circular walk……………………………………………………….. 30
12. Critique of the appellant’s LVIA ………………………………………………………………………… 31
13. Permission for the Ray Estate windfarm, condition 2 ……………………………………… 41
14. Objection dated 15 July 2019 from Sir Simon Jenkins …………………………………… 44
15. Problems with public sculpture result in removal ……………………………………………. 45
1
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
APPENDIX 1:
Notes of a meeting of the Strategic Planning Committee of Northumberland County Council held at County Hall, Morpeth on 2.7.19 at 4pm
The Chair Cllr Horncastle opened the meeting & after apologies for absence & approving the minutes of the last meeting, explained the procedure to members of the public, ie that they would not be allowed to comment or ask questions and that their allocated time for speaking was 5 minutes. The meeting was paused for 20 minutes to allow everyone time to read the additional reports which had been provided, and further objections which had been received, since the last meeting. The Director of Planning summarised the issues surrounding the application and the new information which had been provided • There would be an agreement to secure the ecological management of the site • Provision to be made for cycle pathways and parking • The light required by the MOD to be infra-red • There had been a response from the Building Conservation Office
He went on to highlight • The economic value to tourism of the development was questionable • Acknowledged there had been IT problems on the Council’s website for the last couple of months, but this was not confined to Northumberland and he was satisfied that anyone who wanted to object had been able to do so • The Council had received 128 objections • The status of the land was that there would be public access in perpetuity
He stressed the difficult nature of this particular application. Because it was so unusual, it did not lend itself to site-based and evidence-based evaluation. There was a need for objectivity in coming to a decision. Arguments for and against were equally valid. He mentioned the Angel of the North and the sculptures at Kielder, which had initially provoked objections but which people had subsequently come to like & value. Councillors should be aware of evidence, but at the same time they were justified in taking their own view. Senior Planning Officer Katherine Robbie confirmed that • landscaping would be carried out at the first planting season after completion of the site works. • Cycle parking would be provided • Infra-red light would be provided
She then showed photos and plans of the site.
Emma Anderson on behalf of the objectors (against approval) • Emma said that the group Keep the Wannies Wild had two objectives, to inform the public about the proposal and to oppose it • 534 members had joined in the first month 2
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389 • Public consultation had been woefully inadequate • The design has caused ill-feeling in the community • HM the Queen would be horrified that something in her name had caused so much division • Corsenside Parish Council, Cllr John Riddle, Guy Opperman MP, the Redesdale Society and other groups all supported KTWW • Support had even come from business groups which might be thought to benefit from increased tourism, but they put principle before profit & also opposed the proposal • The monument would be an industrial structure in a rural environment and therefore inappropriate. • The concrete foundations amounted to desecration of the land • The tourism officer had estimated that the monument would by itself not increase visitor numbers by much, so what was the rationale for approving it • She asked the councillors to reject the proposal
John Riddle OBE, NCC Councillor (against approval) • Cllr Riddle stated that he was a strong supporter of the monarchy and HM in particular, but the monument was not a fitting way to honour her, or the Commonwealth. • The presence of the wind farm a few miles away did not justify a monument on the Wannies. What was acceptable in an urban or semi-urban environment, was not acceptable in a wild, rural area. Furthermore, the concrete which would be used was not environmentally friendly. • In 30 years as a councillor, he had never been aware of so many objections to a planning proposal • It was a matter for the councillors’ own judgement, to weigh any benefits against the damage to the environment • He noted the visual impact of the monument and the poor road access
Matthew Jarratt (for approval) • Very few houses affected even within a radius of 3-4km away • The wind farm contributes £250,000 a year to local projects • Discover Northumberland had said that Northumberland needed a ‘chain of destinations’ to encourage tourists, and the monument would provide one • He had been commissioning public art for 20 years and recognised that even though there was often initial hostility, this would usually be replaced by acceptance • It was the biggest consultation he had ever carried out with presentations in various locations
Ros Southern (for approval) • The Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment had shown that the landscape would remain ‘open’ after construction • The landscape has been utilised in the area for various purposes in the past eg iron ore mining and the Wannie Line railway • The slender form of the monument meant it would sit well, within the landscape • The cycle park would have stone walls 3
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
The Chairman then invited questions from the Councillors to be put to the Planning Officers. [sorry I could not identify all the councillors & in some cases couldn’t make out what they were saying] Q. How would the infra-red light be changed? A. Maintenance of the structure including the light would be a condition of permission being granted, and would be the responsibility of the applicant. Q. A councillor [?Jeff Reid] said he had had numerous letters complaining about the lack of consultation. He had never had so many, and these were all genuine letters, not simply photocopies. He questioned the Officers’ assertion that the consultation process had been adequate. A. Director of Planning said that the process had gone beyond the statutory requirements. Ms Robbie said the letters were dispatched in January and the Council was at the mercy of the Royal Mail. She said the letters were addressed to ‘The Occupier’ and it could be that the recipients had not bothered to open them, or that if they did, they hadn’t realised what was involved in the application. Q. A question was asked about the second (new) report & it was asserted that it was more favourable to the applicant. The legality of this was questioned. A. Council Solicitor said that all relevant information must be obtained and this was what the Council had done. Q. Cllr Robinson asked how for long the notices had been displayed. A. Ms Robbie said they were removed after 21 days. Q. Cllr Reid asked how ‘public art’ could be defined – did it mean the public paid for it? Was there any record of any previous ideas for public art in this area? A. Director of Planning Defined public art as ‘publicly visible art’. He said there was no identified need for public art on this site. Q. Cllr Reid suggested that there was no public impetus for this art work and that it constituted one man’s vision. He was not aware of a strategy to promote public art within the tourism strategy. A. Director of Planning confirmed that the strategy did not identify a need for public art. Q. Cllr Hepple asked if something simply being inappropriate was sufficient grounds to refuse permission. A. Director of Planning said that the evaluation simply stated that the proposal was acceptable and that there were no technical reasons for refusal. However, he stressed that even if something is acceptable, the councillors still had the right to refuse on the grounds of inappropriateness, if that was their judgement of what was right. Q If the monument was in the National Park, would the Park Authorities have approved it? A. Director of Planning replied that was a matter of conjecture. But the Park Authorities said that the monument would not harm the National Park at the proposed site. Q. Cllr Robinson questioned the amount of evidence that there was to support the application. A. The Director of Planning said that different levels of importance had to be attached to the issues raised. Notification of those potentially affected was not of great importance, and nor was the source of payment for the construction. But a lot of weight could be attached to the opinion and opposition of local residents. [There was another question which I couldn’t hear/understand at all] Councillor Flux then moved that permission was refused on the grounds that it was inappropriate to the location. Councillor Reid seconded the motion. He referred to a council policy which sought to protect and enhance the environment. Councillor Swithenbank spoke in support of the motion.
4
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389 Councillor Thorne spoke against the motion. He said that tourism was increasing and the monument would be an asset and would add something to the landscape. Councillor Bowman spoke for the motion. He said that increased traffic from coaches, minibuses, and 4x4’s would damage the narrow roads which were unsuitable for these types of vehicles. He added that the monument was not suitable for the wild, precious area of the Wannies and that visitors came here because of the wild beauty. Councillor Reid said that he had struggled with this decision, but that the site visit on the morning of the meeting had changed his view. Car access was too difficult. In answer to those who said that the windmills were already spoiling the view, his answer would be that they were serving a purpose and also that they wouldn’t be there for ever. It was the wrong place for such a structure. The Director of Planning said that too much weight should not be placed on the highways issue. Cllr Hepple spoke in favour of the motion. He said that the residents’ views were very important. He thought that the local village halls had not been consulted and the public consultation could have been better. The Director of Planning reiterated that they had gone beyond statutory requirements in the consultation process. Councillor Flux summed up for the motion that permission be refused on the grounds of inappropriate location. He said that it had been a very difficult case, and that until the site visit he had been undecided. This had convinced him that the wild landscape should be preserved, and that was what tourists came to Northumberland for. He paid tribute to the group of objectors who had raised awareness in a very short time and who had fostered a great community spirit. The monument might be acceptable in a different location, but not in the Wannies. The Chairman then asked for a show of hands. The motion was carried by 13 votes to 3. The meeting ended at about 5.30. Jane Ainsworth Typed on 3.7.19
5
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
APPENDIX 2: MISCELLANY OF INFORMATION AND QUOTATIONS ABOUT THE WANNIES
A Wannies Miscellany Compiled by Keep the Wannies Wild - Fighting to preserve our shared landscape
6
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
Contents
Introduction ...... 7
The Wannies in Writing, Poetry and Song ...... 8
The Natural History of the Wannies ...... 9
Climbing on The Wanney Crags ...... 11
Walking in the Wannies ...... 12
Passions run high ...... 12
Introduction
The Wannies is a tract of remote, upland moorland between the Northumberland villages of Kirkwhelpington and Ridsdale. The moorland is home to a diversity of wildlife including, some years ago, a breeding pair of Hen Harriers. The Wannies are popular with outdoor enthusiasts particularly walkers, photographers and climbers; the latter attracted by the numerous climbing routes on the imposing sandstone outcrops of the Wanney crags. The Wannies have also inspired and have been memorialised in poetry, art and song, notably The Wild Hills O’ Wannys. The expression “The Wilds of Wanney”, spoken as a suggestion of indefinable remoteness, is in common usage throughout the North East and beyond.
Formed in the summer of 2019, Keep the Wannies Wild is a grass roots protest movement, comprising local people and people regionally, nationally and even internationally. Our common purpose is to defend and preserve our shared and unique landscape. This document is an expression of our members’ passion for The Wannies and their anger that it might be desecrated; emotions rooted in their deeply personal sense of place and their interactions with the location.
7
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
The Wannies in Writing, Poetry and Song
W. W. Tomlinson, introducing his short discussion of The Wannies in his invaluable Guide to Northumberland (1888, taken from a facsimile edition by Davis Books Ltd, 1985) tells us that: “… the source of the Wansbeck … expands a short distance away into the extensive sheet of water called Sweethope Lough, covering an area of 180 acres. Overlooking the lake are the wild and picturesque Wanny Crags, a cluster of huge sandstone rocks, known as Great Wanny, Little Wanny, Aird Law and Hepple Heugh. They are all precipitous towards the west. In Great Wanny there is a long cleft or chasm which extends nearly parallel with the front of the rock, and is called The Wanny-byer, probably from some tradition of its having been occupied as a den for wild beasts. The place is still frequented by foxes. The crags are luxuriantly covered with heather, and among the great disjointed masses of rock may be found various ferns, lichens, mosses, and hepaticae [liverworts]. From the highest peak of the crags, a magnificent view is to be obtained of the surrounding hills - Ottercaps, Hareshaw, Darna, Peaden, Simonside, and Darden, with the rugged crests of the Cheviots towering away to the north. The praises of the Wild Hills o' Wannys have been glowingly sung by James Armstrong, a local poet, who lived for many years at Aid Crag.” In his poem of the same name, Armstrong speaks of watching Red Grouse (gorcocks), nodding and clucking like strutting cocks (their beck), moving briskly (sae crousely) while moaning (gurlin’) and uttering a low musical note like the tap of a drum (their eerie strum). The modern interpretation of Armstrong’s heavy dialect reveals a scene that any twenty-first century birdwatcher would recognise:
“High o'er wild Wanny's lofty crest, Where the raven cleaves the cloud, An' gorcocks beck around Aid Crag, Sae crousely and sae proud, Gurlin' through the glens o’ Reed Wi’ a weird and eerie strum, When around yon auld cot The winter winds they’d come."
The writer Nancy Ridley, a member of one of the oldest families in Northumberland, in her book Northumbrian Heritage (Robert Hale and Co. 1968) tells us that: “In the wild country of the Wannys where the Wansbeck rises, a local poet and writer, James Armstrong, was inspired to sing the praises of the river in his poem Wild Hills o’ Wannys”:
“There’s the Reed an’ the Wansbeck, where the dews sweetly fa', The Lyles Burn and Reasey we oft fisht them a', Aye, there's monie a burnie and sweet heather brae Round the wild hills o' Wannys sae far, far away.”
James Armstrong published his book Wanny Blossoms in its second edition in 1879 (its introduction is pictured right). It is described as: “A book of Song, with a brief treatise on Fishing, with the fly, worm, minnow and roe; Sketches from Border Life, and Fox and Otter Hunting. Price 2/6 in extra cloth binding, by post for 33 stamps. To be had from the author, or from The Hexham Herald, Hexham.” Opinion may differ as to Armstrong’s gifts as a poet, yet his writing has a certain charm, conveying his great love for his county, especially Redesdale and, in these examples, The Wannies.
Alistair Armstrong, the master of the English Concertina and a fine performer on the Northumbrian Pipes, acknowledges the great Billy Pigg (1902-68), as a significant influence in his playing. Billy learnt the pipes by ear and his song, The Wild Hills o’ Wannys, illustrates his staccato style and distinctive variations. Billy formed a popular band known as The Border Minstrels with John Armstrong of Carrick, Annie Snaith and Archie Dagg. He also wrote many fine tunes for the instrument, winning international fame among pipers for his repertoire of traditional music. 8
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389 The Natural History of the Wannies
Geoffrey Wright, in his book The Northumbrian Uplands (David & Charles, 1989), speaks of: “The clean air and wide lonely horizons [being] still remarkably unravaged by the tourist industry … [the Uplands] exert their own unique and enduring magic on the visitor. Here is some of the finest walking country in England … where the curlew calls and the cloudberry grows among the mosshags.” The historian G M Trevelyan (1876-1962), himself a native from nearby Wallington, knew and loved his local hills through many years of mainly solitary walking among them. No one has better expressed or evoked their character. He speaks to many, both native and visitor, when he writes: “In Northumberland alone, both heaven and earth are seen; on long ridges, high enough to give far views of moor and valley, and the sense of solitude far below . . . It is the land of far horizons. Northumberland throws over us, not a melancholy, but a meditative spell.” It is this feeling of peace and safety, and no doubt a measure of Trevelyan's meditative spell, which draws the walker, naturalist and visitor alike, again and again, to The Wannies.
Hen harriers at Aid Moss by Emma Anderson For the keen birdwatcher, the common species of garden, woodland or coastal birds will always give pleasure. But the same birdwatcher will tell you that what they never forget is their first sight of a special bird. To watch a Peregrine falcon fall out of the sky at 200 miles per hour during its hunting stoop or a White-tailed eagle gently pick a fish from the water of a Scottish sea loch before climbing upwards with barely a movement of its eight-foot wide wings, these are sights that thrill in the moment and leave an indelible memory.
Some years ago, a breeding pair of hen harriers nested at Aid Moss, on the Wannies, between the Aid and Little Wanney Crags. The RSPB put out a call for volunteers to watch over these endangered, often persecuted, birds during their breeding season. A friend and I were amongst the many who answered the call.
The female hen harrier is brown above with buff underparts streaked with brown. It has white upper tail coverts, hence its ringtail sobriquet. The smaller male is an altogether showier creature, mainly grey above and on the chest, with a white underbelly and a distinctive white rump. Its wings are grey with black tips.
During the breeding season the female stays mainly at the nest while the male hunts. The subsequent food-pass between the two, which my friend and I observed at Aid Moss, is one of the finest spectacles in all of nature. We watched the male come in with food, probably a meadow pipit, holding one leg low so that his mate could see what he was offering. He called to her and she rose up into the sky. As they came together she turned beneath him and he dropped the food into her outstretched talons while upside down. It was a feat of unrivalled acrobatics, both moving in synchrony to meet one another. The female either eats the food herself or feeds her chicks.
Hen harriers were on the brink of extinction in England and were uncommon breeding birds in Northumberland when they nested at Aid Moss. Their chances of breeding successfully today are not without difficulty. In 2017, for example, two satellite-tagged Northumberland chicks disappeared over grouse moors, just months after fledging. However, in 2018, the fourth successive year that Northumberland had successful hen harrier nests, eleven youngsters fledged from three pairs in the county. The North East is now the most consistent breeding location for hen harriers in England. Their success in Northumberland has been dependant on the support of a partnership of conservation groups, the Forestry Commission, Northumberland National Park Authority and Northumbria Police. With this level of support in future, and without disturbance from the public, there is no reason why hen harriers should not return to breed on the Wannies. The thrill of watching them, and observing their behaviour, will bring pleasure and delight to local people and will only add to the pride they already have in their shared and beautiful landscape. 9
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
Anne E Palmer added: “I went on a safari up into the Wannies when the hen harriers were there. We met at The Gun in Ridsdale. Where we were going was top secret and we had to answer questions about our intentions before we were allowed into the RSPB Land Rover. It was exciting. We were all taken to the disused quarry where experts were on hand to tell us all about the project. There was live footage of the nest and plenty of twitchers with great big telescopes so we could all see the birds. And we saw the food-pass. It was a real adventure.”
David Baines added: “As another volunteer on this RSPB project, I recall the peace over the Wannies while watching over the birds. The sight of peregrines, hen harriers and buzzards aloft at the same time almost needed air traffic control. It was wonderful. In the case of the hen harriers, the sense of community pride in having one of the very few nests in England was also quite something.”
Observing wildlife in The Wannies Jane Daglish writes: “I love seeing the first spring birds and hearing the song of the skylark. I love to hear the calls of the curlews and lapwings, but over the years their numbers have decreased. I have often seen buzzards, owls and more common birds on my way across the Wannies road. I've watched a stoat stalking and chasing a rabbit and regularly see foxes and deer.”
Angela Wilson writes: “Our house borders on the Wannies. We have a huge variety of wildlife around us including badgers, pheasants, foxes, shrews, swallows and stoats. We even had resident adders for a few years although none recently. My favourite experience has to be the haunting cry of the curlew.”
Roddy Matthews writes: “The natural landscape of the Wannies was a part of my childhood and we have lived all our lives in the area at Kirkwhelpington, Great Bavington and now at Bingfield. I pass the Wannies many times in a week. I still walk to the Crags as often as I did as a child. The beauty of the place are the natural sounds of a windswept moorland; curlew cries and other birds. How can someone think for one minute that local people would want this dreadful modernistic scar in such a beautiful place. Peace and natural beauty are far better. We specifically don’t want anything else that makes any noise.”
The sense of place in Poetry The Hexham-born poet, Wilfrid Wilson Gibson (1878-1962), although not writing specifically about the Wannies in these two poems, captures the same feeling of harmony with the place that so many of our members feel. The poems are reproduced here from Homecoming, a collection of Gibson’s work published by the Wagtail Press, Hexham, to celebrate the 125th anniversary of his birth.
Northumberland Curlew Heatherland and bent-land, That note - that note! Black land and white, Comes there a call so clear from any throat, God bring me to Northumberland, So clear a call to me The land of my delight. Back to the hills, the hills of memory
Land of singing waters, The curlew’s call And winds from off the sea, Is April’s sunshine on cold fells, and all God bring me to Northumberland, Rapture of youth to me, The Land where I would be. Calling me to the hills, the hills of memory.
Heatherland and bent-land, And valleys rich with corn, God bring me to Northumberland, The land where I was born.
10
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
Climbing on The Wanney Crags
Rock-climbing on the Wanney Crags by Steve Blake I first visited the Wannies in 1967 as part of a day’s rock-climbing excursion from the now submerged Outdoor Activities Centre in Kielder. Back then there was an orange mountain rescue stretcher permanently in place in Central Gully. It's long since gone, but its presence was always a reminder to ‘look well to each step’.
Generations of climbers have developed and honed their skills on the crags of Northumberland and Great Wanney has been central to this activity over the last hundred years. In the time I have been visiting, the forest has come, and gone, and the necessity for clean energy has seen the arrival of the wind farms. Despite this the Wannies remain a wild place, startlingly so for a young lad from Longbenton.
The earliest recorded climbing activity on the crag is attributed to G. W. Young who climbed the obvious chimney lines along with the Trevelyan’s, M. Beresford-Heywood and the Bicknells. Unsurprisingly, it has remained a popular venue ever since, with subsequent generations of climbers developing ever more difficult climbs on the walls, overhanging arêtes and faces. Some of the most difficult climbs in Northumberland will be found here, drawing visitors from around the UK. An instantly recognisable venue, it was chosen for the front cover of the current Northumbrian Mountaineering Club guidebook.
In relative terms, even Great Wanney is a small crag, but countless climbers have successfully applied the skills learned there to climbs around the world. The climbs on the crag demand physicality, endurance, technique and nerve. These attributes, hard won through tough days on the crag, stand any climber in good stead.
Some critics may look at the Wannies and ask: “How can they be wild?” Man, embedded in the landscape, manufactures it over centuries. If anyone doubts how wild it is, they should consider the position of the climber in the picture (right). That, believe me, is a particularly wild and lonely place.
The crag and its environs are a special place worthy of our protection. Hopefully any attempt at inappropriate development will be rejected.
Guy Thouret writes: “The awe and wonder of nature. One of the quiet hidden natural gems of the Great Wanney Crag, The Soldier and The Chinaman. No inappropriate monument is needed. Give it time and you should see one or the other.”
Guy’s picture of The Old Man of Wanney is shown far right.
11
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
Walking in the Wannies
Anne E Palmer writes about two walks she led in The Wannies as part of the Haltwhistle Autumn Walking Festival 2019:
I led a walk on The Wannies on Friday, 4 October, as part of the Haltwhistle Walking Festival. Walkers come to the Festival from all over the world, although the majority are from the north-east if not from Northumberland itself. That said, it is surprising how many people think The Wannies is a place that exists only in myth and legend. For them, the idea of actually going there and walking around the area was an exciting prospect. The day was disappointingly wet and, given the recent heavy rain, conditions underfoot were challenging to say the least. Aid Moss had become a lake, footpaths had turned into streams, while streams were raging torrents. But the Wannies are fabulous in all weathers. The walk took us from Ridsdale, past Aid Crag to the base of Great Wanney Crag and then across the saddle to Sweethope Lough. We walked around the Lough before returning to Ridsdale via the quarry. A warm welcome, oven-fresh scones and hot tea awaited us at the Gun Inn in Ridsdale. Twenty-four people came on the walk and, for the most part, enjoyed it. They can now put a place to the name and know that the iron used to build Newcastle’s High Level Bridge came from Ridsdale.” Guy Thouret’s picture shows the rain-swept walkers at Sweethope.
Passions run high
Members of Keep the Wannies Wild are happy to express their passion for the Wannies, their frustration with the Ascendant proposal and even their surprise and delight when they discover that The Wilds of Wannie is an actual place, not just an old family saying.
These extracts come from the Facebook page of the Keep the Wannies wild group; it is a public page and can be seen by anyone. The date before each quote shows when the comment was posted.
12/6/19 Mary Ann Rogers writes: “At least two members have put aside the potential for financial gain for their own creative businesses in favour of keeping our Wannies as wild as possible; we couldn’t bear to see the monument there. For the past 34 years the Wannies has been a source of inspiration for my paintings, as well as a place where most of life's great issues have been contemplated, put into perspective and sometimes resolved. I have climbed on the Wanney Crags, walked through the paths, watching deer, rare birds including hen harriers, owls and peregrine falcons. I have frequently had to step aside to avoid treading on adders, so rarely
12
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389 seen in other parts of Northumberland. It would break my heart to have the skyline broken by the proposed monument, which would belittle the beauty of this rare, remote and wild jewel of a place in Northumberland.”
12/6/19 Anne E Palmer writes: “We may be accused of being Philistines, because we don’t ‘get’ this proposal. I say, the photos posted on Keep the Wannies Wild in recent days show we have a very deep appreciation for the beauty of this countryside. We don’t need it to be explained to us by a model. I think we are all capable of travelling to Newcastle, Gateshead, Rome or New York if we want to see urban splendour but, out here, what we want and need is wildness.”
12/6/19 Karl Fisher writes: “I am very much pro-wild and pro-public art and sculpture, and very against art commissions that are parachuted in which, it seems to me, is what is proposed with this piece.”
14/6/19 Guy V. Thouret writes: “Come over the crest of the hill after passing the Wanney Crags and it is breath taking, no matter what the weather, and for locals it's up-lifting because you know you are home.”
25/6/19 Ian Halstead writes: “Northumberland is one of my favourite destinations in the UK. The raw natural beauty is precisely the thing that draws me there. Honour the ordinary people of the area. Those with farms or small businesses. Everyone. Those out of work, disabled or disadvantaged in other ways. The young, the old. Honour the community and the landscape. Leave the landscape be. I'm sure the Queen is honoured enough elsewhere many times over.”
2/7/19 Sonya Wright writes: “I just get very emotional when it comes to this area [The Wannies]. There’s a lot of my family history here, going back hundreds of years.”
27/6/19 Tim Bird writes: “I am effectively a neighbour living thirty miles away and regularly visiting the area. As with so many ‘public art’ installations, no thought has been given to the environment. I have no problem with the money being spent; it is not, after all, public money, but I do have a problem with intrusive ‘industrial’ structures being placed in wilderness environments. Why do some people think they can improve our recreational environment by building on it? I, and many others, value Northumberland for its wilderness; something that is difficult to find in much of England and something that is known to be of benefit to health, both mental and physical, when experienced. Why stick a dirty great steel structure, 180-feet high, in the middle of an otherwise unspoiled area? Has anyone fully thought through the environmental impact of such a structure? A conservative estimate would suggest the base needs to be constructed of some 10,000 tonnes of cement, the manufacture of which will liberate 12,500 tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere. That is the equivalent of an extra 2,800 cars on the road for 12 months. Should we not all be thinking of ways to reduce CO2, in whatever way we can? If we must have a monument to HM Queen Elizabeth II, how about using the money to plant a small or indeed large broadleaf forest; a fitting and lasting monument that would have enormous environmental impact, but in the correct way.
27/1/20 Katie Yossarian writes: “I don't understand why they think putting a random bit of metal in the middle of the countryside will boost tourism. They're hardly going to build a 'big spike giftshop' or a 'rusty blade café'. I can't imagine anyone making a specific trip to go there (unlike the Angel of the North) unless they were already going for a walk. It seems to me that the applicant is just doing it for his own kudos. And the proposal for the piece itself reads like someone's GCSE Art coursework: a random, incomprehensible piece of tat with a far-fetched meaning that was written in a rush to justify doing it.”
27/1/20 Gill Cookson writes: “Compare Ascendant with the ego-trip Old Man statue on Castleton Rigg, a wild part of the North York Moors, for which the North Yorkshire Moors National Park gave a temporary permission. As well as being a blot on the landscape, visible for miles around, it caused serious collateral damage, not helped by massive publicity on regional TV attracting many visitors. The result: parking damage to verges, road safety issues, damage to surrounding moorland, dogs running off the leash disrupting sheep, etc. There was no discernible benefit to local economy or otherwise. Last year someone saw sense and it was whisked away to a sculpture park. Artistically it was c**p too, but that’s another matter.
13
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389 31/1/20 David Maris writes: “I come from the Fens and have lived there all my life. A low flat land of endless fields, surrounded by reed-edged dykes and waterways. Some would say an unprepossessing landscape of agricultural production. However, the endless landscape with large sweeping skies has its own beauty and feeling of rural space. Several years ago, a power station was built. Two high chimneys capped with red lights and visible from a long distance, in every direction. From that moment the area became diminished. No longer a wide rural landscape, but shrunken in size, pivoted around this abnormal structure. In a small country with a large urbanised population, those areas that are wild and extensive should be cherished and kept unspoiled, to allow people the experience of a true wild expanse. Keep up the fight.”
Conrad Smith, author and railway historian, writes: “The unspoilt surroundings of the legendary Wansbeck Valley Railway (The Wannie Line) track bed would be ruined by such an environmentally crass erection in the Northumberland landscape. As a railway historian, and one who has travelled the line by passenger train in its twilight years, I would consider the proposed construction a desecration of our very own precious Border countryside. I am sure I am not alone in this.”
14/1/20 Martin Bewick writes: If you put something that size in the landscape then you prevent anyone from ever again experiencing that landscape in a more natural state.
1/7/19 Stephen Blake writes: "In my capacity as one of the British Mountaineering Council’s (BMC) Access and Conservation representatives, I tasked the BMC to run a poll of regional members to ascertain how many object to the development at Cold Law Hill. Currently, 176 members have responded with an objection to the development. In due course the BMC will write to the local authority with the full results of the survey. Meanwhile please take note of the above."
1/7/19 Carol Nunan writes: “I am a professional artist and printmaker, living and working in Hexham. My work is rooted in the Northumberland landscape, its wide-open spaces and its wild places. I consider it an immense privilege to have this amazing landscape on my doorstep from which I draw inspiration. The Northumberland landscape, The Wannies included, inspires and forms the basis of my work. It is a key part of my art business promoted through my website and my social media. My customers are drawn to, and buy, my prints and other related products through galleries across the UK, The National Trust and The Sill Landscape Discovery Centre. They do so as a reminder of the wild, remoteness of the area in which they either live and work, or have come to see as a visitor. I live next door to a key member of staff working for the Northumberland National Park (NNP). Tourism is part of his remit for the NNP. I know that the Dark Skies Park designation came about as a direct result of conversations between our neighbours, one of whom is an amateur astronomer. A project that has now generated a significant income for many businesses across the Dark Skies Park. Through many a long conversation with this particular neighbour, we have often discussed what it is that brings visitors back to Northumberland; many only initially come visit to see Hadrian’s Wall. Once they arrived however, they are struck by the grand, spectacular sense of remoteness, the space to breathe, the uninterrupted horizons and wide open skies, the dark, star-filled skies, the sights and sounds bird life, the isolated environment that supports and allows wildlife living within it to survive, the geology and the archaeology, discovered and as yet undiscovered across the region. The Wannies is part of this and these issues should be key considerations which, once destroyed, will have a very negative impact on tourism that allows my own business and others to thrive.” Sonya Wright writes: “I’m just really glad to know that it’s not just me that feels this is a terrible idea. Seeing how many people actually agree with me has made me feel less isolated by saying I hate it. I love living here. I was born here. I think that sometimes it shouldn’t be about money. Our area is so beautiful, which is enough to bring people here without having that massive rust bucket sticking out of the ground. The beauty sells our area.”
2/7/19 Roy Garrington writes following the 2 July decision to refuse Planning Permission: “I own a business that would benefit from any increase in visitor numbers but I do not, and would not, want one penny of income from this vile vanity project. I moved here sixteen years ago and not a day goes by that I don’t fall in love with this incredible county. I am so pleased that this environmental vandalism has been stopped.”
14
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389 2/7/19 Allyson Jervis writes following the 2 July decision to refuse Planning Permission: “I'm so very happy that this iconic place has been saved. I grew up in Newcastle, so did my mother and her mother before her, but to them anywhere off the beaten track was known as the "Wilds of Wanny". Many a time, if I was late home, I was asked if I'd walked from the wilds of Wanney; its reach is far and wide. I don't think either of them had a clue where it was. Once, when I was taking my mother home, I drove her over the Wannies and showed her the crags. She was surprised. She didn't know it was a real place; she'd just heard it from my Nana Jessie and carried on using the term. It’s nice to know the name has been in common usage in other parts of the North East for generations.
2/7/19 Angela Elliott writes: “At 76 years old, I remember when I was a toddler that my grandparents referred to the Wilds of Wannie. Let's keep it that way.”
2/7/19 Catherine Almond writes: “I was brought up in Felling and the ‘The Wilds of Wanney’ was used in our family to denote a place of wildness, isolation and wonder. I never knew it was a reality.”
2/7/19 Denise Jackson Cooper writes: “My Mam used the phrase and we lived in Seaton Delaval. Now I live right next to the Wannies. They are real, beautiful, wild and inspiring.”
2/7/19 Kathleen Nixon Writes: “I am from the Felling area and we also used to say we were in ‘The Wilds of Wannie’ when we were out in countryside.”
2/7/19 Lesleyann Bradford writes: “I too thought it was a magical land, like Narnia, until I moved here three years ago. It’s even more magical than Narnia, that’s why I joined the group.”
3/2/20 David Caygill writes: I think it is the height demanded of this structure that is the primitive vanity of the 'landmark'. Each of the designs, brought to a brief of this specific height, seemingly embodies a desire to 'dominate' the landscape, rather than embellish or complement it - and that is this artwork's downfall!
14/6/19 Jane Daglish writes: My journey home from work in Newcastle each day was greeted by this wonderful view on the Wanney road - it was so relaxing and chilled me out. Can you now imagine a gigantic sculpture in the midst of this to detract from the natural beauty?
30/1/20 ‘Northumbrian Stonework’ writes: The arrogance of the thing is astonishing! As a dry stone waller, I am fortunate enough to see a fair bit of Northumberland’s remoter places; they should be preserved for all, not marred by transient vanity projects.
4/7/19 Alison Walton-Robson writes: I’m a lover of public art which can be so inspiring – but this piece is so intrusive into the landscape.
15
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
APPENDIX 3: OBJECTIONS FROM 5 PARISH COUNCILS
PARISH COUNCIL AREAS
Rochester with Byrness
Otterburn
Elsdon
Corsenside
Cold Kirkwhelpington Law
PARISH COUNCIL COMMENTS
CORSENSIDE
Minute of meeting of 3rd February 2020
County Councils decision to refuse planning to construct a publicly accessible landmark at Cold Law. JR explained that the appeal had now gone to the Planning Inspectorate and that NCC had requested there be a local public hearing, although JR stated that this was a decision only the Planning Inspector could make. JR informed all that the Planning Inspectorate were based in Bristol and usually the Inspector was not from anywhere local however they would be visiting the site and the surrounding area. JR stated that the Planning Inspectors decision would be final, whether that be
16
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
to reject the appeal or accept it. Councillors discussed the letters sent out to those who had commented on the original planning application. Councillors stated that not everyone who had commented appeared to have received a letter notifying them of the appeal. County Councillor J. Riddle will take this up with NCC. Councillors discussed the application further, noting that since the appeal there seemed to be more local opposition to the landmark. Councillors discussed what benefits the landmark could bring to local businesses, it was noted that there had been little, if any, support for the landmark from local businesses. Councillors discussed submitting another comment re-iterating the points made in their original response which strongly objected to the landmark. All present were in agreement to do so.
KIRKWHELPINGTON
Minute of Meeting of 2 July 2019
2019/49/03 Wannies Ascension sculpture It appeared nobody within the near vicinity had been consulted apart from Corsenside Parish Council, and it was therefore agreed to write to County Council to state it would have been polite for neighbouring parishes to be consulted due to the huge financial, physical and environmental implications regarding the proposed project. The fact a Parish Cllr had attempted to place comments via the planning portal but was unable to would also be brought to the planning department’s attention. Correspondence had been received by Action Group “Keep the Wannies Wild,” vehemently against the proposals and Clerk would reply, thanking them for their information and noting the application had as of tonight been rejected by County Council planning committee.
ELSDON
Minute of Meeting of 9th January 2020
7b) Elizabeth Landmark–
The details received from Lord Devonport’s Assistant were considered by the Councillors. It was agreed that there was nothing new to change the minds of the Councillors and they felt unable to support the application.
OTTERBURN
Draft minute of Meeting of 4th February 2020
7c) Elizabeth Landmark, Cold Law – appeal support request: The Councillors assessed and discussed the information provided by Lord Devonport via the Clerk. It was agreed by all Councillors that they felt they could not support the appeal.
17
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
ROCHESTER WITH BYRNESS
Draft minute of Meeting of 28th January 2020
7v) Elizabeth Landmark – There was discussion of the details received in respect of the appeal of the application. The Councillors agreed all previous objections were still valid and the Parish Council could not support the appeal.
E mail from clerk to 3 Parish Councils:
Yes I can confirm that responses were posted on the site of the Planning Inspectorate for all three Parish Councils.
I received an automated email on the three respective email addresses to confirm comments had been posted.
I can also confirm that for all three the Councillors agreed not to support the appeal and confirmed their objection to the application. As no doubt you are aware none of the three Parish Councils were officially approached by County Council as the proposed location lies outside the Parish Boundaries of all three.
Regards
Parish Clerk, Elsdon, Otterburn and Rochester with Byrness
18
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
APPENDIX 4: SCREENSHOTS OF NORTHUMBERLAND GAZETTE WEBPAGE 31ST JANUARY 2020
19
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
APPENDIX 5: LETTERS PUBLISHED IN THE HEXHAM COURANT 13TH FEBRUARY 2020
20
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
APPENDIX 6: THE QUEEN’S COMMONWEALTH CANOPY (see final bullet point)
What is it? • The Queen’s Commonwealth Canopy (QCC) is an opportunity for the Commonwealth family to unite to save one of the world’s most important natural habitats - forests. • The QCC will create a pan-Commonwealth network of forest conservation projects, marking Her Majesty The Queen’s service to the Commonwealth and conserving indigenous forests for future generations. • Launched at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Malta 2015 and conceived by the Right Honourable Frank Field MP, the QCC is being led by The Royal Commonwealth Society in partnership with Cool Earth and the Commonwealth Forestry Association.
What will it do? • The QCC is committed to raising awareness of the value of indigenous forests and to saving them for future generations. • It will create a network of forest conservation projects that brings collective credibility and integrity to individual Commonwealth initiatives. • It will raise the profile of the Commonwealth, demonstrating the capacity of its 53 member countries to act together as one to ensure forest conservation. • It will use the Commonwealth network to facilitate a programme of knowledge exchange activities, share best practice and to create new, collaborative initiatives that contribute to forest conservation across the globe. • It will create a physical and lasting legacy of The Queen’s leadership of the Commonwealth.
Who can participate? • Every Commonwealth country is invited to participate in the QCC by nominating and dedicating existing or future conservation projects that meet with the broad objectives of the initiative.
21
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
• Participation in the QCC does not impact on the ownership, sovereignty or management of dedications. • Those countries with limited forest cover will be able to participate through the planting of native trees, the conservation of other indigenous vegetation or by supporting QCC partnerships with fellow Commonwealth members.
Why should you join? • Your high-profile dedication will meaningfully demonstrate your country’s actions to address climate change, through forest conservation. • QCC dedications could act to showcase your country’s efforts to meet UN SDG 15, which seeks to ‘Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss.’. • Your country will have the opportunity to nominate young foresters to be considered for participation in the QCC Youth Training Programme, which will support the professional development of young foresters by placing them at internationally recognised centres in forest conservation and management. • Your dedication will benefit from being part of a wider network, and QCC status may assist governments to conserve participating forest areas. • You will gain the advantages that membership of a select and prestigious brand can provide (e.g. international profile-raising, tourism opportunities, etc.). • Your dedication can act as a focus for forest education and community participation.
• As the QCC is a flagship programme in The Queen's name, it is important that proposed projects should not be politically controversial or likely to attract adverse publicity.
22
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
APPENDIX 7: LETTER OF OBJECTION FROM CLOSE RELATIVES OF SIR CHARLES PARSONS
To: The Planning Inspectorate Planning reference 3244389
We the undersigned are the three daughters of Norman Parsons, who for many years was managing director of the C.A.Parsons engineering firm (it had various titles during his time there) and great-nephew of Sir Charles Parsons. We write this letter to oppose the granting of planning permission for the Elizabeth Monument.
In family tradition our Uncle Charlie (Sir Charles Parsons) loved the peace of his estate at Ray. He enjoyed solitary pursuits such as fishing and walking, choosing for his home a place far from his industrial works. We remember being taken as children and teenagers by our father, Norman Parsons, to fish on Sweethope Lough, and revelling in the intense quiet and beauty of the place.
We consider it highly unlikely that Uncle Charlie would view the proposed Elizabeth Monument with anything other than dismay and horror. We feel that he valued the wildness and unspoilt beauty of the area, just as walkers and others enjoy it today.
It appears that the design of the monument, in taking the shape of a turbine blade, is intended to celebrate Sir Charles’s connection with the place. We suggest that this is not in keeping with what we know of Sir Charles Parsons’ love of the area – rather, he seems to have wanted to keep his industrial business and his peaceful country home apart from each other.
We feel that the monument is an intrusion which desecrates the integrity of an open and wild landscape, and that its justification as a tribute to Sir Charles is not supported by what we know of his deep love of the wildness of the place. He was a man of simple tastes and without vanity, and he would not have welcomed a massive overbearing monument supposedly celebrating his connection with the area but, in the process, changing completely the place he loved. Yours sincerely,
Deborah Martin Clare Parsons Kate Gentles
23
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
APPENDIX 8: THE APPELLANT SHOWING THE VIEW TOWARDS COLD LAW FROM HIS PROPERTY (Cold Law is the snow covered lower hill, Hepple Heugh beyond)
24
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
APPENDIX 9: OBJECTION BY PROFESSIONAL CLIMBER ROBBIE PHILLIPS
I'm a professional climber from Edinburgh and have been climbing at the crag known as Great Wanney for the last couple of years. The crag became known to me for its classic hard rock climbs that I subsequently went and climbed a couple of years ago, and since then the crag has become very dear to me.
I've been a big supporter of the "Keep the Wannies Wild" campaign. As it happens, I'd like to do more to get people aware, in particular have thought about doing a short video for YouTube to support the group. Northumberland is a hugely important area for climbing in the UK and the climbing community are fiercely passionate about the places they love, so I think it could be a great support to do a video like this. Also, I work for Patagonia (Outdoor Clothing Brand) who are massively supportive of enviro issues. I have already spoken to them and they are interested - the Athlete Manager is actually from Northumberland.
Regards the video, I'm thinking of basically going down to the crag, climbing some classic rock climbs and talking about the issue to draw light onto it. It would be good to talk to some locals about the issue and hear first-hand from people who live in the area. Also, some local climbers who I know well would be involved and I think with some thought and collaboration it could be a really nice film. It's important to me that we do this with the support of the locals and of those on the front line, to make sure it's done well. As my angle would be from the view of "Sports Activism", it would include the climbing, which is important as it's what connects me and many others to the area, but I want to have the non-climbing perspective in there too.
25
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
APPENDIX 10: PHOTOGRAPHS RELATED TO THE APPEAL PROPOSAL (photo credits (a), (b), (c), (d), & (f) Guy V Thouret; (e), (g) John Dalrymple; (h) Gavin Duthie)
(a) Photograph taken on Lisles Burn circular walk (see Appendix 11 for route). View of Cold Law looking north east from C195 Wannies Road
Cold Law appeal site
(b) Walkers’ view of the ‘backside’ of Cold Law looking south west
Cold Law
26
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
(c) Walkers’ view of Cold Law with Hepple Heugh behind looking south west
Cold Law
(d) View of Redesdale, looking north west with the Cheviots beyond. Taken from path to Hepple Heugh, Cold Law on extreme right, C195 Wannies Road in centre
Cold Law
27
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
(e) View to south east from Staniel Heugh towards Cold Law (extreme left), Hepple Heugh (centre) and Aid Crag (far right)
Cold Law
(f) View from Great Wanney Crag. The full height of ‘Ascendant’ would be seen above the trees
Hepple Heugh Cold Law
28
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
(g) Climber on Staniel Heugh
(h) Cyclists heading towards The Wannies: From bridleway on Buteland Fell (GR 388600 582100) looking north to Broomhope and the disused iron workings which have blended into the landscape and do not harm its wild, open character.
29
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
APPENDIX 11: ROUTE OF THE LISLES BURN CIRCULAR WALK AND LOCATIONS OF SOME PHOTOGRAPHS
Staniel Heugh
COLD LAW (forest now cleared)
Wannies Road
Hepple Heugh
Great Wanney Crag
Aid Crag
30
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
APPENDIX 12: CRITIQUE OF THE APPELLANT’S SUBMITTED LVIA
PROPOSED ELIZABETH LANDMARK LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT (LVIA prepared by Southern Green January 2019 for Lord Devonport)
CRITIQUE ON BEHALF OF ‘KEEP THE WANNIES WILD’ GROUP
Introduction
1. My name is Jean Jones, I hold a Master of Arts degree in geography from Cambridge University and a Diploma in Town and Country Planning. I have 36 years’ experience working for a large local authority and as a Planning Inspector dealing with appeals by written representations, hearings and inquiries and also carrying out examinations into several Core Strategies. I hold a first-class BSc degree from the Open University covering Geology, 20th Century Art History (special subjects Land Art and Ian Hamilton Finlay’s sculpture garden at Little Sparta) and applied psychology (special subject relationships with the natural world). I am a member of the ‘Keep the Wannies Wild’ group and have an interest in contemporary art and sculpture.
2. I have read the LVIA, prepared by Southern Green dated January 2019, also the review of it prepared by Stephenson Halliday dated May 2019 commissioned by Northumberland County Council (NCC). I have also carefully read the national guidance on preparing an LVIA [GLVIA3]1 and visited the appeal site and surroundings. In addition, I have discussed my approach with a landscape architect who is highly qualified and experienced in the LVIA process. My own experience as an Inspector has included assessing many technical reports such as this and I am competent to carry out this critique.
The role of the LVIA
3. The guidance in GLVIA3 is intended to improve good practice in relation to LVIAs as these involve subjective judgements on landscape and visual matters. It emphasises in para 2.2 that ‘landscape’ does not mean just special or designated landscape but the ordinary and everyday – the landscapes where people live and work and spend their leisure times. Landscape is a resource in its own right, not just a matter of aesthetics. Para 2.25 points out that professional judgements may legitimately vary:
If, for example, the professional judgements made on behalf of different interested parties vary widely it is the decision makers in the competent authority who will ultimately need to weigh up the evidence and reach a conclusion.
Northumberland County Council as the competent authority refused planning permission for this development and it is for the Inspector as the competent authority to weigh up the evidence to make the appeal decision.
1 Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (GLVIA3), 3rd Edition, Landscape Institute 2013
31
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
4. One function of the LVIA is to inform the development of the design so that identified harmful effects can be mitigated through the design process. With proposals for buildings or other structures they could be re-sited, made smaller, use different materials or be screened by planting. However, this appeal proposal is for a single monument of given height (56m) and location where there are no possibilities of modifying the scheme except in the minor element of car parking design. The main structure is uncompromising and has to be taken as it is or not at all. Ideally the LVIA would have been carried out at an earlier stage so as to feed back into development of the artists’ brief. Carrying it out once the proposal has been so to speak ‘set in stone’ does not allow the LVIA to fulfil its proper functions and can appear to be retrospective justification. As GLVIA3 says [para 3.44] There is no point in seeking ideas and views if it is actually too late for the scheme design to be modified.
Scope of this critique
5. Clearly the first part of the LVIA is the most technical where computer modelling of the topography assists in defining the areas from which the development would be visible. Technical expertise is also required for the viewpoint photography and the photomontages showing ‘before and after’ views. I do not take issue with these aspects of the report and my critique is confined to the evaluative sections from 3.0 onwards. GLVIA3 emphasises the importance of using correct terminology and being consistent in its use. For the purposes of this critique and in the interests of clarity I have followed the terminology used in the submitted LVIA.
Comments on Section 3
6. Section 3.1.5: The LVIA states that there are no local wildlife or geological sites nearby but in fact there are both adjoining the appeal site, separated only by the minor Wannies road.
Section 3.1.8: Public rights of way and open access land are mentioned. It should be emphasised that popular rambles have routes passing all around Cold Law as part of the Lisles Burn Circular. Photographs of walkers in this area and the mapped walking route are at appendices 10 and 11 of the main appeal statement.
7. Section 3.2: The landscape character types identified by Natural England and Northumberland County Council are not at issue. The site lies in the Sweethope and Blackdown character area 8g which is within the Outcrop Hills and Escarpments landscape character type (LCT). The ‘open, relatively remote character’ and ‘uninterrupted, sweeping moorland’ are key qualities of this LCT. The adjoining character area 11b Buteland and Colt Crags has the key characteristic of ‘extensive views and a sense of remoteness’. The guiding principle for the Outcrop Hills and Escarpments LCT character refers to its strong identity and includes the need to sensitively manage the landscape. Emerging Northumberland Local Plan policy ENV4 seeks to protect tranquillity, dark skies and a sense of rurality and requires that there be no reduction of openness where this is a key quality of the local landscape character.
32
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
8. The area’s character is not just visual but also includes cultural, perceptual and associational aspects that have been highlighted in the main appeal statement. These emphasise that the area has a wild and remote character and the comments from residents and visitors demonstrate the psychological and health benefits of the Wanneys as a restorative environment. The LVIA has not given appropriate weight to these factors in assessing the sensitivity of the landscape and the magnitude of the proposed changes.
9. Section 3.3: The site description and context at this section is not contested.
Section 3.4 is discussed below under ‘Visual receptors and Viewpoint Assessment’.
Comments on Section 4, Assessment of Predicted Effects
10. This is the section where most issue is taken with the LVIA. It is divided into two separate assessments:
1. Effect on the landscape, that is its sensitivity and the magnitude of the change resulting from the proposed development;
2. Effect on visual receptors, that is the effect of the proposed development on the people seeing the views of it.
1. Effect on the landscape
11. GLVIA3 states in Section 5.1 that the concern here is with how the proposal will affect the elements that make up the landscape, the aesthetic and perceptual aspects of the landscape and its distinctive character. Turning to the LVIA itself, it is agreed that the sensitivity of the landscape as a receptor should be graded as High (Section 4.2.2). However, the Stephenson Halliday LVIA review suggests that this is an over-generous assessment and ‘worst case’ scenario. The group strongly contests this and believes that important information has been overlooked in both the LVIA and that review. This is because neither exercise involved any public consultation and the writers were unaware of the iconic wild status of the Wanney area in poetry, song and family sayings as indicated in our main statement. Neither did they take on board the value as natural capital in terms of health-giving recreation. The guidance in GLVIA3 is that consultation should be carried out at an early stage with the local community in order to obtain information about the value accorded to the landscape, including cultural, perceptual and associational matters [GLVIA3 Box 5.1]. These aspects are very important but are totally absent from the appellant’s LVIA and review. When they are properly counted they make an overwhelming case for the baseline situation of the landscape being accorded High sensitivity.
12. In any event, the landscape character and proximity to the National Park boundary (4.7km away at Corsenside crossroads) are themselves sufficient to justify High sensitivity. GLVIA3 [para 5.47] states that National Park boundaries are often drawn along convenient physical features such as roads and there may be land outside them that is of similar value. We
33
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
argue that the area of the Wannies, including the appeal site, is one of these and that in any case it forms a very supportive setting to the National Park.
Effects during construction and at completion
13. Section 4.2.3. In fact this section does not mention construction effects at all, although they are expected to last for 8-12 months with rock cutting, stone grinding, concrete pouring, vehicle movements and on-site fabrication. There would be heavy machinery and a crane at times. That in itself would be very disruptive to the landscape.
14. As regards the effects at completion, a mere two brief sentences assess the magnitude of change as Low, consisting merely of some loss of surface vegetation. This section does not even mention that the summit of Cold Law (or Tit Hill as it is known locally) would be mutilated by the cutting of a deep trench in the rock and loss of its summit cairn which is part of its characteristic profile. This cannot by any stretch of the imagination be a development of a very limited scale and the group considers that the magnitude of change should be High. Mitigation measures cannot alter this. On completion, the monument would be exceptionally high and its duration would be for perpetuity, the effects irreversible. The car park works would also be noticeable
Residual Significance of Effects on Landscape Character
15. Section 4.2.8 – 4.2.9. I take issue with the LVIA statement that the change will result in minimal direct landscape impacts and only a minor change in character; this substantially underestimates the impact. The authors of the LVIA suggest that using ‘a localised hillock’ for the landmark would not be out of keeping with the landscape character, given the many hillforts in the area. However, the introduction of a very high and tilting steel structure of industrial character is completely different from a hillfort which is low-lying, made out of the materials on which it sits and appears to grow organically out of the hilltop. This cannot be a serious comparison.
16. Section 4.2.10. The proposed monument should not be considered similar to the wind turbines which can only be seen from some viewpoints and do not stand out against the skyline because of their light colour. Those on the Ray Estate near Kirkwhelpington, for example, were approved on 11th November 2010 (Appendix 13) subject to condition 2 requiring them to be decommissioned 25 years after their first generation of electricity so they are reversible features. The monument by contrast is intended to have an indefinite duration. Because of its dark colour it would stand out when seen on the skyline which is exactly how it is seen from close quarters and also from the National Park boundary at viewpoint 14, Corsenside crossroads.
17. Section 4.2.10 goes on to assert that, while the introduction of any man-made object could be considered an adverse change in comparison to the undeveloped baseline, the change could also be beneficial and could encourage greater appreciation of the landscape. What would prompt this leap from adverse to beneficial is not explained nor supported by evidence and does not stand up to scrutiny. The evidence of local people and those who value this landscape is that the effect on landscape character would clearly be adverse.
34
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
18. I strongly believe that the magnitude of change should be assessed as High because the insertion of an enormous object of industrial appearance would interrupt and damage the wild and remote, open and sweeping landscape character. Coupled with the High sensitivity of the baseline situation, that would result in a Substantial residual effect on landscape character that would be significant and adverse.
2. Effect on Visual Receptors (that is residents, workers, visitors for recreational purposes, those passing through)
Viewpoint Selection
19. Section 3.4.3: It is noted that long distance views are expected from all sides and that coniferous plantation blocks have been treated as a temporary landscape feature due to the relatively short crop rotation. Indeed, some blocks of forestry on the flanks of Cold Law as shown on the 1:25 000 OS map have already gone.
20. Section 3.4.5: The site has been selected to allow good visibility towards the landmark and there will be elevated views from several PROW footpaths and bridleways and the surrounding access land. Views will also be available from recreational and cycle routes. Not all of these are covered by the LVIA.
21. Section 3.4.8 – 3.4.9: Sixteen viewpoints were selected over the 5km study area, some being to test the effect on the setting of Scheduled Ancient Monuments, Listed Buildings and the Northumberland National Park. LVIA figure 6 shows what a wide area the monument would be visible from but this only extends to the 5km radius and it is obvious that there would be views from much further afield including from elevated land to the north in the National Park. Only three viewpoints (4, 7 and 14) had photomontages provided (LVIA figures 15, 16 and 17). This did not include any viewpoints within 2km and therefore did not give an accurate picture of the closer impact although the artist’s concept sketch with tiny figures in the foreground demonstrates how much it would loom over those nearby.
22. GLVIA3 points out [para 6.33] that the visual receptors most susceptible to change are residents at home, people engaged in outdoor recreation and communities where views contribute to the landscape setting enjoyed by residents in the area. Even for those travelling by road, awareness of views on scenic routes is likely to be particularly high (see para 29 of the appeal statement). For the many walkers there would be views of long duration as they moved around the wider area during the day. These sensitive receptors are in fact the people who have sent in their objections to the proposal and their opinions must carry very significant weight in this exercise. They are not hypothetical people but real ones.
23. In the case of some viewpoints (1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 15) the conclusion ends with a stock phrase along the lines of: the nature of effect would be theoretically considered adverse in comparison to the undeveloped baseline in terms of this assessment, however is likely to be perceived as a positive addition by many receptors. The cut-and-paste use of this awkwardly-phrased couple of sentences suggests that the writers are equivocal and struggling to provide some form of positive comments that their client would be seeking.
35
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
There is no evidence whatsoever for this repeated assertion when the actual people who are the receptors take the opposite view.
Visual Receptors and Viewpoint Assessment
24. In carrying out this assessment I have followed the methodology of the Southern Green LVIA and assessed the effect using the matrices in their tables D and E from paragraphs 2.1.42 and 2.1.43.
25. Viewpoint 1: The allocation of Medium sensitivity here is contested. This is a minor road well used by walkers as part of the Lisles Burn circular route (see photos and route in KTWW Appendices 10 & 11) and thus should be accorded High sensitivity. The monument would be only some 400m away and seen partly against the skyline. A coach would be visible in the car park. As well as the disruption from the construction period, the development would bring about a noticeable change in the existing wild and open view, being massive, industrial and overbearing. There would be a High magnitude of change which objectors clearly consider would be adverse. The LVIA writers’ assertion that it is likely to be perceived as a positive addition by many receptors is a stock phrase (see above) and totally unsubstantiated. The combination of High sensitivity and High magnitude results in a Substantial adverse effect.
26. Viewpoint 2: It is agreed that this viewpoint has High sensitivity being part of a public right of way and used by walkers who visit specifically to enjoy the wild and open landscape (see photos and route in Appendices 10 & 11). It is agreed that the proposal would bring about a noticeable change in the nature of the view. As well as disruption from the construction period, the development would bring about a noticeable change in the existing wild and open view, being massive, industrial and overbearing. There would be a High magnitude of change which objectors clearly consider would be adverse. The ‘slenderness’ of the steel blade would not prevent it being an interruption to the current view, indeed the eye would be drawn to it at this close distance, as of course is intended. This would not just be theoretically adverse, the evidence from those who regularly look at this view is that it would definitely be adverse. The LVIA writers’ remark that it is likely to be perceived as a positive addition by many receptors is not substantiated but is a bare assertion. The combination of High sensitivity and High magnitude results in a Substantial adverse effect.
27. Viewpoint 3: This is again part of the minor road and is used by people walking as well as driving (see photos and route in Appendices 10 & 11). A forestry plantation at present would screen the lower parts of the development but the LVIA states that forestry is regarded as a temporary feature as are the wind turbines. Taking these factors into account, the sensitivity of the view should be High. The magnitude of change would be High because it would be so close, only 1.5km away. The effect would be adverse and the LVIA writers’ assertion that it is likely to be perceived as a positive addition is strongly contested as being unsubstantiated. The combination of High sensitivity and High magnitude results in a Substantial adverse effect.
28. Viewpoint 4: It is agreed that the sensitivity of this view is High. It is agreed that the proposal would be clearly visible, set on the summit of the hillock and seen against the sky
36
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
only 2.4km away. The assessment of the magnitude of change as Low is strongly contested. Any alien interruption of the open and wild view should be considered a High magnitude of change. The nature of the effect would be adverse and the LVIA writers’ assertion that it is likely to be perceived as a positive addition is strongly contested as being unsubstantiated. The combination of High sensitivity and High magnitude results in a Substantial adverse effect.
29. Viewpoints 5 and 6: The assessment is not contested.
30. Viewpoint 7: It is contended that the sensitivity of this viewpoint is High rather than Medium because it represents also the views from public rights of way nearby. The site is clearly visible against the horizon and there would be changes resulting both from construction and after completion when the car park would be seen as well as the monument. The magnitude of the change would be High rather than Medium because, although relatively slender, the monument would attract attention by its discordant shape and coloured material, drawing the eye to it. This would make an adverse effect on the existing open character, notwithstanding the wind turbines which of course would only be there for a temporary period. The combination of High sensitivity and High magnitude results in a Substantial adverse effect.
31. Viewpoint 8: It is contended that the sensitivity of this viewpoint is High rather than Medium because it represents also the views from public rights of way nearby. The magnitude of the change would be High rather than Medium because, although relatively slender, the monument would attract attention by its discordant shape and coloured material, drawing the eye to it. This would have an adverse effect on the existing open character, notwithstanding the wind turbines which of course would only be there for a temporary period. The combination of High sensitivity and High magnitude results in a Substantial adverse effect.
32. Viewpoint 9: Residents of Ridsdale and users of public rights of way would see the monument in this view about 2.2km away and it is agreed that sensitivity would be High. The monument would look taller and darker than the wind turbines which are further away, light coloured and only temporary features. The foreground is a very plain slope such that the change would make a very noticeable punctuation of its sweeping moorland character, a key landscape character item. Therefore a High magnitude is appropriate rather than Low and this effect would be adverse. The combination of High sensitivity and High magnitude results in a Substantial adverse effect.
33. Viewpoint 10: It is agreed that sensitivity would be High because of the cycle route. It is agreed that the distinctive landmark would bring about a noticeable change in the nature of the view. The magnitude of the change would be High rather than Medium because, although relatively slender, the monument would attract attention by its discordant shape and coloured material, drawing the eye to it and creating an adverse effect. The combination of High sensitivity and High magnitude results in a Substantial adverse effect.
34. Viewpoint 11: It is agreed that sensitivity would be High. Although the lower parts of the monument would be screened by a block of forestry, this would be removed when mature,
37
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
revealing a clear view of the development. There is a wind turbine in the view but this is light coloured and only a temporary feature. The proposal would be prominent and dark against the sky, drawing the eye to it and resulting in a High magnitude change with adverse effect. The combination of High sensitivity and High magnitude results in a Substantial adverse effect.
35. Viewpoint 12: The assessment of this viewpoint is agreed.
36. Viewpoint 13: It is agreed that sensitivity would be High. This is a location where seating is provided for deliberate looking at the view. The monument would intrude into the horizon and attract the eye to it, spoiling the uninterrupted skyline and harming the spacious open character of the view. The slenderness of the monument would not prevent this High magnitude change and the effect would be adverse. The combination of High sensitivity and High magnitude results in a Substantial adverse effect.
37. Viewpoint 14: It is agreed that sensitivity would be High. The development would be on the skyline and even from the 4,7km distance it would interrupt the sweeping and open character of the view. The wind turbines are less prominent because of their light colouring and in any event they are temporary features. The magnitude of the change would be High and adverse. The combination of High sensitivity and High magnitude results in a Substantial adverse effect.
38. Viewpoint 15: It is agreed that sensitivity would be High. The LVIA states that the development would bring about a noticeable change in the nature of the view. Its slender form would not prevent the eye being drawn to this intrusive feature so that the magnitude of change would be High. The combination of High sensitivity and High magnitude results in a Substantial adverse effect.
39. Viewpoint 16: The assessment of this viewpoint is agreed.
Comparison between the viewpoint assessments
40. The table below sets out the conclusions of the Southern Green LVIA report alongside my conclusions from this critique:
Table of comparison between the Southern Green LVIA and the Critique on behalf of the ‘Keep the Wannies Wild’ group
Southern Green LVIA KTWW’s Critique of LVIA
Viewpoint Sensitivity Magnitude Effect Sensitivity Magnitude Effect
1 Medium Medium Moderate High High Substantial 2 High Medium Substantial/Moderate High High Substantial 3 Medium Low MInor High High Substantial 4 High Low Moderate/Minor High High Substantial 5 Medium - No change Medium - No change 6 Medium - No change Medium - No change
38
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
7 Medium Medium Moderate High High Substantial 8 Medium Low Minor High High Substantial 9 High Low Moderate/Minor High High Substantial 10 High Low Moderate/Minor High High Substantial 11 High Low Moderate/Minor High High Substantial 12 Medium - No change Medium - No change 13 High Low Minor High High Substantial 14 High Low Moderate/Minor High High Substantial 15 High Low Moderate/Minor High High Substantial 16 No view - - No view - -
41. It is apparent that viewpoints 5, 6, 12 and 16 are not at issue, mainly because there is little or no visibility of the appeal site from them; they were chosen for proximity to ancient monuments or other heritage assets which are not themselves directly affected. There would either be no change or no view.
42. What is clear from the table is that the author of the Southern Green LVIA agrees that in the case of 8 of the remaining 12 viewpoints the landscape has High sensitivity. The difference between us is that nowhere does the LVIA assess the magnitude of change as High and mostly considers it would be Low. On the contrary, my assessment, using the same methodology but more comprehensive information about the value of the landscape character, has led to a finding of a Substantial adverse effect from all of the 12 relevant viewpoints. The term ‘significant’, used in the Southern Green LVIA, has a specific technical meaning in EIA legislation and its conclusion that the proposal is not significant does not mean it is too minor to matter. GLVIA3 states that proposals may be more or less significant on a sliding scale and it is our case that this is highly significant.
43. The Stephenson Halliday review of the LVIA is brief and deals mainly with methodology rather than examining the detailed judgements made. It notes that there can be a degree of subjectivity to an assessment for a proposal of this nature, influenced by one’s individual opinion on the artwork. I contend that the views of the massive numbers of people objecting to the proposal transcend the notion of ‘individual subjectivity’. They are instead a very large sample size providing a coherent and realistic assessment by the community that values this landscape highly.
CONCLUSIONS
44. On behalf of the ‘Keep the Wannies Wild’ group I conclude with the following main points:
• The LVIA should have been carried out at an earlier stage where it could have contributed to the brief and the design process. But the appellant’s initial brief did not include any possibility of change to the fundamental parameters. • The authors of the LVIA completely omitted to investigate the value placed on the landscape by the local community and visitors, contrary to the advice of GLVIA3. • The photomontages did not include the closest viewpoints where the visual impact would be greatest even though many people walk in this area. During a walk they
39
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
spend a long time in the landscape and the duration of the impact from the proposal could be many hours. • The 5km radius excludes many further areas from which the monument would be visible including from the National Park. • Wind turbines and forestry plantations should be regarded as reversible features in the landscape rather than factors that reduce the magnitude of the proposed development’s impact. • In almost all cases the viewpoints should be accorded High sensitivity because of the visual and cultural value of the landscape. • Although the monument might be relatively slender from a distance, it would draw the eye because of its exceptional height, tilted form and industrial appearance. By intruding into the otherwise open, wild and sweeping landscape it would in most cases create a High magnitude of change. • The combination of High sensitivity and High magnitude results in a Substantial effect from all the relevant viewpoints. The use of the term ‘significant’ buy Southern Green should be viewed with caution as it has a technical meaning specific to EIAs. • The effect is clearly adverse as evidenced by the comments of objectors that it would spoil their views and enjoyment of the landscape. No evidence whatsoever has been provided to justify the LVIA writers’ assertion that some receptors would find it beneficial. The receptors are the actual people who have made massive objection to the proposal. In view of the strong local resistance to having the development imposed on an unwilling population by a single individual it is highly unlikely that the monument would ever become accepted or regarded with interest or affection. • The Stephenson Halliday review of the LVIA is brief and deals mainly with methodology rather than examining the detailed judgements made. There is nothing in the review that would lead me to vary my conclusions.
40
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
APPENDIX 13: EXTRACT FROM PERMISSION FOR THE RAY ESTATE WIND FARM
Department of Energy & Climate Change Development Consents and Planning Reform Team 3rd Floor Area A 3 Whitehall Place London SW1A 2HD www.decc.gov.uk
Tel: 0300 068 5770 Email: [email protected]
11 November 2010 Mr David Hodkinson Vattenfall Wind Power Ltd Bridge End Hexham Northumberland NE46 4NU
ELECTRICTY ACT 1989 (“the Act”) TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 APPLICATION FOR CONSENT TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A WIND TURBINE GENERATING STATION ON LAND AT RAY ESTATE, NEAR KIRKWHELPINGTON, NORTHUMBERLAND …………
Pages 1-22 omitted for brevity
………DIRECTION TO DEEM PLANNING PERMISSION TO BE GRANTED UNDER SECTION 90 OF THE TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF AN OVER 50MW AND UP TO 56MW WIND GENERATING STATION AT RAY ESTATE, NORTHUMBERLAND
Definitions
References in these conditions to the carrying out or implementation of any scheme, or the carrying out of work in accordance with any details, plan, statement or methodology, approved by the local planning authority shall be construed as permitting the scheme to be carried out or implemented or the work to be carried out subject to such amendments or modifications of the scheme, details, plan, statement or methodology as originally approved as
41
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
shall have been agreed in advance in writing by the local planning authority, and as permitting the local planning authority to approve one scheme in place of another relating to the same matters.
In these conditions unless the context otherwise requires – ‚bank holiday‛ means a day that is, or is to be observed as, a Bank Holiday or a holiday under the Banking and Financial Dealings Act 1971
‚BS 4142: 1997‛ means British Standard 4142:1997 – Method for rating industrial noise affecting mixed residential and industrial areas
‚commissioning‛ means the date on which the Development first supplies electricity on a commercial basis
‚emergency means‛ circumstances in which there is reasonable cause for apprehending imminent injury to persons, serious damage to property or danger of serious pollution to the environment
‚schedule 1 raptors means‛ any raptor defined under part I or part II or schedule 1 to the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended)
‚the development‛ means the onshore windfarm generating station on land at Ray Estate near Kirkwhelpington, Northumberland
‚the local planning authority‛ means Tynedale District Council or Northumberland County Council as appropriate and their successors
Commencement of development 1. The development hereby permitted shall be commenced within 5 years from the date of this decision. Reason: To strike a balance between ensuring that the development is constructed in a timely manner; allowing the Company an appropriate degree of flexibility as regards the timing, finance and other arrangements for its construction, including the resolution of issues arising from the need to mitigate potential radar problems; and minimising the impact of any period of uncertainty for those who may be affected by the existence of the deemed planning permission pending the company’s decision to begin construction. The default planning permission duration of 3 years provided for in s.91 is not considered sufficient for all these purposes. Duration of permission 2. The generation of electricity from the development shall cease no later than 25 years after the first commercial generation of electricity at the site, after which time the site shall be restored in accordance with the approved Decommissioning and Site Restoration Scheme as referred to in condition 4 below.
42
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
3. The operator shall, within one month of the first commercial generation of electricity from the wind farm, notify the local planning authority in writing of the date on which the first commercial generation of electricity occurred. Reason: To comply with the requirements of section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Decommissioning and Site Restoration 4. No later than 3 years before the expiry of the planning permission hereby deemed to be granted, a Decommissioning and Site Restoration Scheme shall be submitted to the local planning authority. The scheme shall, in particular, include the methods and measures and timetable to secure the removal of the turbines, turbine bases, buildings, site compound and related mitigation measures arising from the proposed operations. The scheme shall be implemented as approved. 5. If any turbine fails to produce electricity for a continuous period of 12 months, the turbine and any ancillary equipment shall be dismantled and removed from the site (unless the developer has demonstrated to the local planning authority that the turbine is under repair and that there is a remedy) in accordance with a restoration plan, which shall include a time- table for the works. The restoration plan shall be submitted to the local planning authority within 2 months after the expiry of the 12 month period; and the relevant turbine shall thereafter be removed and that part of the site shall be restored in accordance with the approved scheme. Reason: To ensure the site is not allowed to become derelict after the cessation of electricity generation.
43
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
APPENDIX 14: E MAIL OF SUPPORT DATED 15 JULY 2019 FROM SIR SIMON JENKINS
On 15 Jul 2019, at 10:56, simon jenkins (address redacted) wrote:
Many thanks. Yes I know of it. I cannot believe it. This is not even a statue but just a spike, an ugly bit of clutter. And like most of these things, it is not a monument to anyone but its financier.
Good luck with the campaign
Simon Jenkins
44
Appendices to statement of Keep the Wannies Wild Group Appeal Ref 3244389
APPENDIX 15: FROM BBC ONLINE NEWS 24 JULY 2019
The Seated Figure sculpture moved after moorland erosion fears
SCULPTURE Park
A sculpture moved from a beauty spot because its popularity caused moorland erosion and litter issues has been installed in its new home. The Seated Figure was placed on Castleton Rigg in the North York Moors in 2017 and caused a jump in visitors, the national park authority said.
Following concerns from landowners it was moved and can now be seen at the Yorkshire Sculpture Park (YSP). The bronze sculpture has been lowered into place "in a quiet area".
Depicting a man sat on a three-legged travelling stool, it stands at 10ft (3m) and was created by artist Sean Henry. YSP, near Wakefield, said it had been positioned high up on Oxley Bank overlooking a valley, in line with Mr Henry's wish for visitors to "go and find him".
Clare Lilley,from the park, said: "We get half a million visitors a year so we can deal with all of those issues that have been a problem for them up in Westerdale.
Visitor comments from Tripadvisor: the amount of litter people where leaving and the damage being done by inconsiderate drivers to the surrounding area we’ve all paid the price — he’s Up and Left .
Only spoilt by a mother letting her 2 teenage children climb all over the sculpture and sit on it for photo`s plus having their dachshund off the lead running at people, where there are sheep grazing.
We drove out of Castleton thinking we'd went too far only to see a long line of cars parked on grass verges as if an imaginary arrow indicated the site (can't see from road).
Great little walk super views, but absoloutely horrified by the amount of dog poo bags chucked at the side...... literally hundreds !! Poor sheep if they eat them, as there is a substance in these bags that encourages animals to eat them and it kills them... shame on those people an absolute disgrace Totally worth a visit. Can park on road and follow crowd up the path for short walk.
Apparently the Nat Park are concerned that it is attracting too many visitors, causing erosion of the ground at the edge of the road (no actual parking) and on the footpath (now about 2 m wide with wheel tracks as well) so some talk of its being removed.
45