Im with Ridge on this one,
While I can see that there are some places where a zip wire is 'less worse' than others nothing will convince me that there should be one in a National Park.
is there anyone on here who would support Honister but was against Thirlmere?as we will try to gently persuade then to change their mind by the power of our well thought through arguments.
gently persuade
:knuppel2: :tickedoff: :knuppel2:
If my memory serves me correctly, this is the third application for a zip wire Honister Slate Mine have submitted >:(
From 2013: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-20890063 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-20890063)
What part of "no" don't they understand? >:(
Supporters of the proposal said it would have allowed visitors to return to the base of the mine visitor attraction without damaging the fragile alpine environment on foot.
However, National Park planners said there was a "fundamental principal" at stake that the mountain tops were not the right place for such an activity.
If my memory serves me correctly, this is the third application for a zip wire Honister Slate Mine have submitted >:(
Is this the same fragile alpine environment they're dumping slag heaps from their mining operation all over?
Lovely photo.Zip wire for moving stone looks like a
I have had a hunt on line and can find nothing. Does anyone else know of any quarry in the world that uses a zip wire for moving stone? If you look at the application that is the first purpose listed and the major difference between this application and Thirlmere.
I have had a hunt on line and can find nothing. Does anyone else know of any quarry in the world that uses a zip wire for moving stone? If you look at the application that is the first purpose listed and the major difference between this application and Thirlmere.
my engineering knowledge runs to the easier end of the lego scale.
http://www.lakedistrict.gov.uk/swiftlg/apas/run/WPHAPPDETAIL.DisplayUrl?theApnID=7/2018/2011
there just seems to be less of an all round anti feeling about this application than there was at Thirlmere.
I took a long time looking across from High Snock Rigg on Sunday at Honister Crags and I'm glad I did - there really is no positive side to this proposal - it has no place in this environment!
The Wainwright Society has objected to the zip wire, see below. The title at the top of the article has an error in it, mentioning Thirlmere, it should say Honister.They have corrected the title. Shame it is only signed by the Secretary and not also the Chairman.
They have corrected the title. Shame it is only signed by the Secretary and not also the Chairman.
Honister today, Coniston tomorrow >:(
They have no place in any national park.
I would love to know what Eric Robson's thoughts are on these zip wires :)From time to time I ask either Eric Robson or the Wainwright Society what his opinion is on zip wires. You should try it the silence is deafening.
From time to time I ask either Eric Robson or the Wainwright Society what his opinion is on zip wires. You should try it the silence is deafening.
Eric Robson silent - maybe something to do with his conflicts of interest >:(
Dear Mr Ridge
Thank you for your email.
I have checked with the Membership Secretary and it would appear that you are not a member of The Wainwright Society.
What I am able to tell you is that the Management Committee of the Society takes a collective view of any planning applications that are brought to our attention. Each proposal is considered carefully on its merits and the Society’s response is in line with the criteria laid out in our Campaigns Policy. As Secretary of the Society, my responsibility is to put forward the collective view to the wider world. You can read the statements regarding the Thirlmere and Honister zip wires submitted to the Planning Authority here:
http://www.wainwright.org.uk/articles/2017/thirlmere-zip-wire-objection.html (http://www.wainwright.org.uk/articles/2017/thirlmere-zip-wire-objection.html)
http://www.wainwright.org.uk/articles/2018/wainwright-honister-zip-wire-response.html (http://www.wainwright.org.uk/articles/2018/wainwright-honister-zip-wire-response.html)
With best wishes
Derek Cockell
Secretary
The Wainwright Society
Just had a very evasive reply from the Wainwright Society
Also just noticed that the minutes of the April meeting say that there will be a site inspection at Honister on 9 May.
Papers have gone up for next week's planning meeting - I can't see this one on the papers so presumably it's going to be another month at least before a decision is made. This one is running and running.
Under Leafe it seems that the park is actually under attack from the people who are meant to support it!
I walk regularly in the alps and like most walkers I head as far away from the ski infrastructure as possible as it scars the landscape so much.
Not on next week's agenda. Trying to sneak this one through.
The full report from the planners is now on the planning app page, just reading through it.
Interesting that Burlington Quarry in Elterwater are in support of the zip wire.
How about a zip wire from Lingmoor Fell?
Good news, I think. The committee will have to have some very strong arguments to go against the recommendation.
I stand corrected, however is there no right of appeal to the planning inspectorate - I seem to remember doing this year's ago?According to the government website:
Noooooooooo.... don't say that :-X
Good news, I think. The committee will have to have some very strong arguments to go against the recommendation.
This might be the next zip wire planning app if Honister gets the go ahead. Precedent set, how could they say no?
Interestingly, I was reading the Acoustic Report provided by Hann Tucker yesterday and that was quite intriguing how the measured noise survey data and 'appropriate' acoustic qualifiers were... erm... how should I put it.... used very carefully :(
I thought their sound report was a total load of b*ll*x ;D
:)
Most people on here know when you are out on the fells you can here people shouting from half a mile away. It is no different on Fleetwith Pike despite what that daft report states.
:)
Most people on here know when you are out on the fells you can here people shouting from half a mile away. It is no different on Fleetwith Pike despite what that daft report states.
Talking of what can be done with mines....................................….
It's been approved subject to conditions (not sure which conditions). The 10 member committee voted 7-3 in favour.
Richard Leafe (Lake District National Park Chief) has just posted this on his Twitter account:
A good outcome for adventure and supporting our mining heritage in the Lakes. Well done Honister.
Adventure my a#se! This isn't an adventure it's a fairground ride. I am sickened by this - the LDNPA should hang their heads in shame.
Now watch the next step, a drip feed of applications to vary any conditions that get in the way - these do not normally get referred to the planning committee.
Richard Leafe (Lake District National Park Chief) has just posted this on his Twitter account:
A good outcome for adventure and supporting our mining heritage in the Lakes. Well done Honister.
ninthace - what would the position be if the noise levels are actually as bad as people fear they will be? Is there any way that someone can appeal later on the basis that the installation produces more noise/traffic etc than is set out in the application?
Paul
committee member Bill Jefferson said walkers would realise it was a mine, adding: "They wouldn't necessarily be looking for tranquillity in a mine."
"committee member Bill Jefferson said walkers would realise it was a mine, adding: "They wouldn't necessarily be looking for tranquillity in a mine."
No, but the people on the surrounding fells might be....
a glimmer of hope perhaps?
In my red mist yesterday I fired off an email expressing my dismay to the LDNPA
a glimmer of hope perhaps?
https://www.tgomagazine.co.uk/news/doubts-surface-regarding-new-zip-wire-scheme-does-honister-planning-contravene-unesco-world-heritage/
I sympathise with your anger concerning the committee overriding the Planning Officer's recommendation but as I said - it can happen. If decisions always went with the recommendation, there would be no point in having a Planning Committee. I accept right now you may think that would be a good idea but supposing the Officer had recommended approval and the Committee had rejected it, you might think differently.
I hope the Zip Off folk have something in terms of improper process but I fear they may be disappointed.
... driverless pods on footpaths etc..
Oh you are joking!! Where are these crazy ideas detailed April?I’m not April but here is a starter for 10
I’m not April but here is a starter for 10
If their justification for allowing this is that the area is (relatively) heavily industrialized - which, let's be honest, it is: I can only think of one other place in the lakes that has a comparable level of industry - then hopefully it doesn't set a precedent for places like Thirlmere.
Interesting that Burlington Quarry in Elterwater are in support of the zip wire. How about a zip wire from Lingmoor Fell?
I’ve paid to park up there once and have also bought food in the cafe. A good start would be for people against the zip wire to boycott Honister’s other facilities.
Lets just hope this gets called in. Fingers are crossed.
email and website of the Secretary of State
[email protected]
www.jamesbrokenshire.com (http://www.jamesbrokenshire.com)
Apart from any other issues, think what the extra traffic caused by zip riders and voyeurs will cause. It's not exactly the M6 up there!Too late for that approach I'm afraid. As part of the initial approval process Highways would have been asked to comment.
Readers will remember that I mentioned that once planning permission has been granted an applicant can apply to vary the conditions attached to that permission to their advantage without the need to involve the planning committee again. I have just come across a planning application that illustrates this neatly. A company applied to build a solar farm in 2015. This application was refused by the planning committee but approved on appeal in 2017. One of the conditions attached to the approval was that the site should only produce electricity for 30 years and after then the site was to be returned to its original condition within 6 months. Now the company has submitted an application to vary the condition to extend the period to 40 years. This application does not have to go before the planning committee.Don't assume that planning committee councillors are any more likely to refuse applications than planning officers. Planning Officers tend to determine applications based on straightforward facts and hard truths, backed up by national and local policies. Councillors are far more influenced by local politics and lobbying. That lobbying can come from both sides. It might be that they are persuaded by an avalanche of objections but they can also be persuaded by business interests who want development. In that respect, councillors are far more likely to ignore policy issues and that's why many of their decisions are subsequently overturned at appeal.
Please keep an eye on the Honister application and be prepared to scream blue murder if the applicant tries the same trick - say adding an extra line - you still have the right to object but you may not be told of such an application but it must be published on the authority website.
Don't assume that planning committee councillors are any more likely to refuse applications than planning officers. Planning Officers tend to determine applications based on straightforward facts and hard truths, backed up by national and local policies. Councillors are far more influenced by local politics and lobbying. That lobbying can come from both sides. It might be that they are persuaded by an avalanche of objections but they can also be persuaded by business interests who want development. In that respect, councillors are far more likely to ignore policy issues and that's why many of their decisions are subsequently overturned at appeal.All that is true but the application has to come before the Planning Committee. Many, if not most planning applications are “Delegated” which means they are decided by the Planning Department without ever going before the Committee. The Committee only get to see potentially contentious applications. Thus once an application is approved, variations to that application are usually Delegated.
All that is true but the application has to come before the Planning Committee. Many, if not most planning applications are “Delegated” which means they are decided by the Planning Department without ever going before the Committee. The Committee only get to see potentially contentious applications. Thus once an application is approved, variations to that application are usually Delegated.It's not that simple. Delegated agreements vary from Council to Council and include all sorts of different things, so it's not just contentious things. From personal experience, I would expect a VOC application relating to an earlier permission which was contentious and was heard by committee to be sent back to committee to determine. If a VOC came in with Honister, that's what I'd expect to happen. To make sure that happened, it would be quite straitforward to ensure it did go back to committee. One way would be to send in a load of objections. Another would be to lobby Councillors directly and request that they make sure it goes to committee. In most (all) delegated agreements, Councillors have the authority to request any application (including VOC) to go to committee.
It's not that simple. Delegated agreements vary from Council to Council and include all sorts of different things, so it's not just contentious things. From personal experience, I would expect a VOC application relating to an earlier permission which was contentious and was heard by committee to be sent back to committee to determine. If a VOC came in with Honister, that's what I'd expect to happen. To make sure that happened, it would be quite straitforward to ensure it did go back to committee. One way would be to send in a load of objections. Another would be to lobby Councillors directly and request that they make sure it goes to committee. In most (all) delegated agreements, Councillors have the authority to request any application (including VOC) to go to committee.You are of course right. I was simplifying things and drawing from my experience of watching a neighbouring council in Cumbria in action. In particular, I have seen on more than one occasion a delegated VOC which, had it been part of the original application, may well have resulted in a different outcome or at least different conditions attached to the approval. As to lobbying, I once approached my District Councillor over a planning application to be told planning was "nothing to do with him" - an interesting reply given that he held the planning portfolio at the time. It made me so angry I stood against him at the next election - I didn't win but I frightened him. In my opinion, the outcome of Planning Committee can be something of a lottery but the system is very much skewed in favour of the developer.
But I'd say again, it's unwise to assume a committee is less likely to approve things. I'm aware of situations where an officer intends to refuse an application. A pile of objections arrive, triggering a committee hearing, and then the committee approve it! No appeal possible there!
You are of course right. I was simplifying things and drawing from my experience of watching a neighbouring council in Cumbria in action. In particular, I have seen on more than one occasion a delegated VOC which, had it been part of the original application, may well have resulted in a different outcome or at least different conditions attached to the approval. As to lobbying, I once approached my District Councillor over a planning application to be told planning was "nothing to do with him" - an interesting reply given that he held the planning portfolio at the time. It made me so angry I stood against him at the next election - I didn't win but I frightened him. In my opinion, the outcome of Planning Committee can be something of a lottery but the system is very much skewed in favour of the developer.You are quite right to say the system is entirely skewed in favour of the developer. Not least in the fact that refusals can be appealled but not approvals.
I didn't want to loose it again.Link for you
Thanks for this pdstsp, you deserve more than a hug for driving so far for the meeting O0
We must do everything we can to stop this utterly mad proposal :(
Not sure they were offering more than a hug - it didn't seem that kind of meeting :-* ;D
I am doing an evening course in photography, and wanted some sunset shots and star shots, as this weeks homework was slow shutter speeds. It was a lovely evening to watch the sun go down over Cat Bells and Derwent Water, attend the meeting, and then take some star shots from the road to Whinlatter. Unfortunately the star shots are, without exception, cr@p.
:) We want pics :)
Press release is on the LDNPA site.
Press release is on the LDNPA site. It says specific reference to a gondola has been removed, following consultation, which is good. Then it says a future developer would need to consider one ,whichv is bad. Haven't read the whole doc as I am away, but first impression is this is a small improvement, but not what we all wanted.
Park and ride with electric busses would be a lot better environmentally, visually, practically and financially than a high impact vanity project like gondolas.
'Adventure Capital Lake District' oh dear God
DA, can I suggest you read the Sandford principals underlying the creation of the National Park? You may find it enlightening.
Also - both Penrhyn slate quarry and Dolgarrog aluminium works are outwith Snowdonia National Park!
You might as well compare chalk and cheese as compare these developments with Honister.
The younger generation... need other reasons to travel to the NW of EnglandNot my son, his friends or a fair number of people that we met up there a week ago.
Areas of outstanding natural beauty need other attractions to persuade people to visit the area.
Walking i agree is very popular, but what else is there to do in the Lakes other than walk the fells.
I'll add La'al Ratty to your list, April
You missed Gondolas off your list >:D
Oh yes, the Coniston Steam Yacht Gondola :DMy daughter chartered the steam gondola as part of her wedding with Bucks Fizzes all round. They let her toot the whistle - bad idea - by the time she had finished there was no steam pressure left.
I am hoping the gondolas you really mean remain as a bleddy stupid idea on a drawing board.
Oh yes, the Coniston Steam Yacht Gondola :D
I am hoping the gondolas you really mean remain as a bleddy stupid idea on a drawing board.
They let her toot the whistle - bad idea - by the time she had finished there was no steam pressure left.
Hopefully gondolas of the bleddy stupid variety will never be on the list.