AR
  • AR
  • 50.2% (Neutral)
  • Newbie Topic Starter
15 years ago
I queried this case with High Peak BC a while back as the application was showing as invalid on their website, apparently due to lack of an environmental impact assessment. I can't understand why the application went to the public comment stage if it didn't have all the necessary documents with it, but it now looks like it's been resubmitted, which will mean I need to resubmit my objections too.....

EDIT - now read the letter informing me of the resubmission, this states that comments on the previous application will be carried forward so that's one less job at least!
Follow the horses, Johnny my laddie, follow the horses canny lad-oh!
sougher
15 years ago
Me too! :curse:
simonrl
  • simonrl
  • 51% (Neutral)
  • Administration
15 years ago
I've been asked to post this up:

Quote:

Cowdale Quarry Threat

I am the retained agent on the proposed development. I have followed the thread which has been pretty fair.

The proposed development is now varied to include a Heritage Centre and Trail, rather than Climbing Centre. This is to detail the history of Cowdale and limestone quarrying with a trail from the Heritage Centre within the quarry bowl to the lower limestone workings which will be stabalised/restored as agreed as a condition of the planning permission.

I hope your members will find the Archeological Report (AR) in the Environmental Statement of interest.

Your members will decide themselves what they personally believe. Previous objections/ support are still valid but basically:

a) The buildings and structures of the former limestone quarry are on private land with no public access to them. The buildings are a fine cluster but are deteriorating and will continue to do so until they eventually decay and collapse.
b) English Heritage (EH) in various studies and reports (all noted in the AR) has recognized these structures and buildings of relative importance up to national level. EH have also stated that whilst ideally they would wish to restore, the cost makes this impractical.
c) The proposed development requires the removal of the Powerhouse building and it is proposed this building will be surveyed in detail and reproduced as a scale model in the Heritage Centre. The access road can not be designed to be realigned.
d) EH are presently in the process of deciding how they are to proceed and what designations (if any) should be given to the buildings and site.
e) In the event of planning permission being granted then there is the opportunity of planning conditions (grant of 999 year lease at a peppercorn rent of the lower limestone workings to an appropriate organization plus developer contribution towards repairs to the kilns and other structures/buildings, etc) with in conjunction EH and other interested parties to save the buildings and structures, excepting the Powerhouse, opening the site to the public. Cowdale is possibly the last opportunity left in the UK to undertake such a limestone quarrying Heritage Centre and Trail.

If interested organizations or individuals wish to visit Cowdale in the forthcoming weeks to assist in getting a better understanding please would they contact me by email [email protected]. I will do my best to organize.

Regards

Ben Dean MRICS

http://planning.highpeak.gov.uk/portal/servlets/ApplicationSearchServlet?PKID=123157 


my orders are to sit here and watch the world go by
AR
  • AR
  • 50.2% (Neutral)
  • Newbie Topic Starter
15 years ago
Now I know I'm not paranoid - they are watching me..... :blink:
Follow the horses, Johnny my laddie, follow the horses canny lad-oh!
ICLOK
  • ICLOK
  • 50.2% (Neutral)
  • Newbie
15 years ago
OOOOps had a walk up there yesterday morning.... its very private having met 2 other locals with dogs and disturbed the resident tramp.... beautiful buildings close up and a real tragedy if they go.... never seen nothing like them anywhere before in a quarry or mine...... and sorry but I couldn't see any structural cracks or damage in the big building and the buttressed structures whilst abit ropey are as good as some I've seen in use recently... nothing that patching could sort. 🙂
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagh Creeper!!!!!
toadstone
15 years ago
Thanks Sougher for the planning link. I've downloaded all the supporting documents (130 mb+).

Having also read the comments here so far, I am kind of in two minds as to the benefits of the preservation of some 1900s lumps of concrete against the potential to see the continued expansion of a resource by which many derive a living from. In my years of living in and around the High Peak/Peak District I can't recall the number times I've seen/heard of knocks to employment in both the farming and limestone industry. While Buxton Water is by no means a major employer, it is a well known product. In the current economic climate we need to encourage sound developments that have added value.

Forgetting the proposed site for a moment, lets concentrate on the applicant/proposal. From my understanding there is history here of a political nature namely the "people of Buxton" vs Buxton Water. Their current site has no storage facilities, is slap bang in the middle of the town but is against a potential distribution rail line (do they use it?). The current storage facility is right across town. Correct me if I'm wrong the well head for the water is not located at the bottling site and quite rightly the company's concern is as to the continued integrity of that pipeline, crossing roads etc.

With that in mind the proposed site addresses many of the problems already mentioned. Looking at them in reverse order.
The new site will have its own spring head, namely Rockhead Spring. So the people of Buxton can have their original water back and perhaps the Pump Room wellhead too?
Storage will no longer be a problem but distribution is still a problem because in relocating to the new site a road will have to be built that will involve the demolition of some of the original quarry buildings as mentioned to allow free access.

Clearly some form of compromise is needed. Personally I think that the access should be looked at in more detail and in doing so it doesn't mean that the people of Cowdale should suffer as a consequence. If you look at the position of the quarry there is another potential means of access from the A6 further along via the Pig's Tor road into Cowdale. Admittedly this looks more difficult and would be a far greater cost but would leave the concrete structures alone.

Buxton Water in their own way do much to support the town. The additional bits of the site development can only benefit both local and visitor. Perhaps the current bottling plant could be given over to some other use once made redundant.

In any event sentiment is a luxury few if any can afford in the current climes. If the structures are that worthy then I'm sure a way will be found to accommodate all concerned.

Peter.
sougher
15 years ago
Iclok - many thanks for putting in the Cowdale Limestone Quarry User Album the latest photographs of the five reinforced concrete buildings in the quarry (architectually termed "concrete masonary") for us to look at. Incidently English Heritage classed the dwelling house which was built by Charles Drake in 1873 of the "Patent Concrete Building Company" i.e.549 Lordship Lane, Southwick as a rare example of a nineteenth century house built of concrete when they listed this house as a Grade 2 Listed Building and it would appear to be in a far worse state of preservation than the quarry buildings! Surrounded by their summer greenery the buildings shew a complete contrast to the stark winter photos kindly taken by AR earlier in the year, they also shew the present use of the quarry which lies within an Area of Special Landscape adjacent to the Peak District National Park and is registered as Agricultural Land (there is also rare flora and fauna on this site covered by the Wildlife and Countryside Act of 1981). From a Derbyshire industrial archeology point of view, these are very important buildings of architectual design and the materials they were constructed in at the time of erection i.e. the date over a doorway of one of the buildings shews 1909 - 101 years ago! - something needs to be done about them, albeit there is a great shortage of funding and always will be. I have lived in Derby and the Peak District for almost sixty years of my life and I don't know of any other industrial quarry buildings like them, perhaps other members of the forum do? I've also been involved in the building construction business for many years of my life (on the admin side) so am experienced in costing, planning etc., the mind boggles at the unpractical cost of preservation that will be arrived at by so called experts in Government departments if consulted, who have had unlimited sources of money to fund such undertakings in the past and who have very little experience of economical costing in the present financial climate.

Toadstone - I fully understand your argument, having lived in the Peak District for many years I understand the problem of shortage of jobs and the low wages paid in the area, there needs to be other work available than tourism, quarrying, farming and lorry driving. This planning application causes one a very big dilemma when debating it, such as the possible loss of these very early industrial archaeolgical buidings constructed in reinforced concrete, which are unique and a very important part of Derbyshire's Industrial Archaeology, weighed against the provision of work for people living in and around the Buxton area. It's a bit like King Soloman deciding which of the two mothers who claimed the same baby should have it!
toadstone
15 years ago
I took a little time out yesterday to re-acquaint myself with the exact dimensions of the area against the proposed access in the application. Also to look at a possible alternative given the radical nature of the proposed access.

It's hard for anyone who has not been to the location to grasp exactly what is proposed. Furthermore not wishing to be too cynical there is perhaps an opportunity by the developers to re-coup some of the access cost by selling what in my mind is going to be a vast amount of stone. ? Lateral Quarrying.

Anyway that aside the disruption to traffic on the A6 will be enormous. Not only that from what I can tell from the drawings not only will the road be widened it will take from both sides of the current road line. This means on one side the rock face which is already only feet from the edge of the current lay-by will have to be cut back and stabilised. But also the other side which is basically the River Wye. For those who are unaware the A6 has been closed for some extended periods over the last couple of years in order to stabilise these rock faces.

Regardless of the concrete structures I think this means of access is ill conceived, will cause major disruption and I can not understand how such a major exercise can measure up to the value of the land it will access.

So I looked at the alternative area I had mentioned in my previous posting. This is further down the A6 at the junction of the A6 with the back road access to Cowdale, "a local road for local people". This natural opening to my mind affords a better way in, not only that, there is the beginnings of a route up which would come along the current rail line and access the top end of the old rail line that eventually meets up with the other access. I really do think the planners should request investigation of this route.

Additional benefits might be that with judicial juggling of the carriageway the A6 traffic may not be adversely affected at this point.

Edit: This means of access would not affect the residents of Cowdale. There is another alternative but might require the purchase of land? If you care took look at the land ownership it might be feasible to access the quarry from the Staden Lane end without impinging on the residents at the end of the lane, in other words branch off before just after where the current industrial estate ends.

Also for those wondering why it has to be Cowdale. The reason as I understand is simply that of water, wellhead access. There are certain criteria to be met before you can abstract water for bottling purposes. In this case Buxton Water will be changing sources from St Annes well to Rockhead.

Peter.

In the universe that is computing, there are worlds other than Microsoft. PJN Aug 2010.
AR
  • AR
  • 50.2% (Neutral)
  • Newbie Topic Starter
15 years ago
The Staden lane junction with the A515 is certainly a much better place for an access to a main road, and as Toadstone says, doesn't involve major excavations at the side of the A6 in an area with a history of rockface instability....

Sougher - my photos were taken in January 2009, at that point there were no plans to develop the site that I was aware of and like ICLOK, I just wandered up there to take a closer look at the buildings!
Follow the horses, Johnny my laddie, follow the horses canny lad-oh!
oildrum
14 years ago
Having passed by these structures & buildings yesterday, I decided to check the position with regard the planning application.

The application was REFUSED on 12/10/2010 by High Peak Bourough Council :thumbsup: The main reasons being the substantial engineering works to Ashwood Dale to create the new junction & access, unwarrented industrial development in the countryside, loss of protected trees and insufficient information submitted to enable the LA to adequately assess the impact with regard to noise.

Full details are on the High Peak Planning website, application HPK/2010/0380
'where's the shearer?'[center]
AR
  • AR
  • 50.2% (Neutral)
  • Newbie Topic Starter
14 years ago
Whoops, I found out a bit back and forgot to post the news here.... Anyway, in the course of deciding on this one particularly important fact came up. The developers had claimed that the water had to be bottled within 2km of source in order to be sold as coming from the Rockhead spring but in actual fact, the rules only say that you can't ship it by tanker from its source and it has to be bottled within a reasonable distance. To really push this home, Nestle (who have the Buxton water brand) are going for a big new bottling plant at Waterswallows piping up from the springs in the centre of Buxton and this won't stop them selling it as Buxton spring!

I've heard that the developers are threatening to appeal but as stated above, without the need to be within 2km, wanting to use ground that isn't designated as development/industrial land is on shaky ground for this appeal. I will keep watch and I understand HPBC should notify me if they do get an appeal over this but I'm hopeful the threat to the buildings is past.
Follow the horses, Johnny my laddie, follow the horses canny lad-oh!
sougher
14 years ago
To update what is happening at Cowdale quarry - I recently received a "round robin" email from Mrs. Jane Jones, the Secretary to the Parish of King Sterndale, Cowdale, and Staden, saying that plans have been resubmitted for a variation of the siting of the proposed factory in the quarry and other works.

To view the resubmitted planning application online please go to:-

http://planning.highpeak.gov.uk/portal/servlets/ApplicationSearchServlet?PKID=128680 

The reference is:- HPK/2011/0182 - Water Bottling Plant, Cowdale Quarry.
AR
  • AR
  • 50.2% (Neutral)
  • Newbie Topic Starter
14 years ago
I've heard this morning that the power house at Cowdale has been demolished - in spite of the publicity around the application, someone at HPBC merrily granted demolition consent without bothering to speak to English Heritage, or the planning department it seems. Needless to say, HPBC have some hard questions to answer now..... :curse:
Follow the horses, Johnny my laddie, follow the horses canny lad-oh!
Vanoord
14 years ago
"AR" wrote:

I've heard this morning that the power house at Cowdale has been demolished - in spite of the publicity around the application, someone at HPBC merrily granted demolition consent without bothering to speak to English Heritage, or the planning department it seems. Needless to say, HPBC have some hard questions to answer now..... :curse:



Oh dear. :curse:

A bit of unique architecture destroyed in an underhand manner so that someone can build a tin shed.

Not the first time and it won't be the last.
Hello again darkness, my old friend...
AR
  • AR
  • 50.2% (Neutral)
  • Newbie Topic Starter
14 years ago
It seems HPBC granted demolition consent on the grounds the building was in a dangerous, which is at odds with the surveyors report which only concluded that public access to them should be prevented as the stability of the roof could not be guaranteed. English Heritage had been assured that the owner had no intention to demolish prior to the determination of the application, so it seems that no trust can be placed in anything said by the developers and their agents, particualrly as they had promised in the application that a full survey of the power house would be carried out prior to demolition if their application was passed.


So, it's been Butterley all over again, consent given and buildings demolished before anyone with an interest to prevent it finds out. HPBC building control have a lot of questions to answer about their conduct in this....
Follow the horses, Johnny my laddie, follow the horses canny lad-oh!
ICLOK
  • ICLOK
  • 50.2% (Neutral)
  • Newbie
14 years ago
This is sad news ... this will I believe have been done on a section 80 demolition order as per Butterley.. It stinks :sneaky: 😠
I have examined lots of engine sheds and concrete structures/loading hoppers with surveyors and these were pretty solid, there was no roof dip or substantive cracking indicating collapse, just powdering and a little surface shelling (unlike a certain Cleveland Winding House)... neither was there jointing issues in the structure indicative of subsidence etc.... so god help me if this their idea of dangerous as in our company we have renovated much worse and still have them in use now!
So whats the point of BS Council processes, BS English Heritage involvement when the developers ultimately win.... money (like water) will always find a way!

I was reliably told that council planning is completely seperate to enforcement (who I am told issue the section 80 demolition permission) and that the left hand usually knows little re the right hands actions.. thats what happened at Butterley I believe... perhaps someone should ask HPBC if they were aware of the demolition in open chamber like we did... ?
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagh Creeper!!!!!
AR
  • AR
  • 50.2% (Neutral)
  • Newbie Topic Starter
14 years ago
It was pretty much the same as Butterley as far as I can tell, someone signed off the section 80 without consulting anyone else, including EH who it seems should be consulted before any structure under consideration for statutory protection gets knocked down....

:guns:
Follow the horses, Johnny my laddie, follow the horses canny lad-oh!
ICLOK
  • ICLOK
  • 50.2% (Neutral)
  • Newbie
14 years ago
Therein lies the lesson... nothing is safe until its saved.... next time make sure we write to enforcement as well...

I think we will see this more and more... for all our aspirations!!
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagh Creeper!!!!!
AR
  • AR
  • 50.2% (Neutral)
  • Newbie Topic Starter
14 years ago
http://www2.highpeak.gov.uk/council/agenmin/devcon/part1/20110620/06.pdf 

Some things I hadn't picked up on previously, for all the talk of how many jobs this will allegedly create, apparently there isn't a firm committement from any company to actually run the bottling plant - the applicants are business park developers who would build and ****** off if this was passed...

However, it seems the DCC archaeologists are still stressing the importance of the remaining buildings, so I'm still hopeful the remaining two BLF buildings and the kilns will get scheduled.
Follow the horses, Johnny my laddie, follow the horses canny lad-oh!
droid
  • droid
  • 50.2% (Neutral)
  • Newbie
14 years ago
Isn't John Barnatt of the PDMHS a DCC archaeologist?

Disclaimer: Mine exploring can be quite dangerous, but then again it can be alright, it all depends on the weather. Please read the proper disclaimer.
© 2005 to 2023 AditNow.co.uk

Dedicated to the memory of Freda Lowe, who believed this was worth saving...