A visual impression created for the developers of how the zip wire will look from the west shore of Thirlmere. Image: Tree Top Trek
Developers who want to build two zipwires across a Lake District reservoir have submitted their formal plans.
Tree Top Trek, which runs a high-wires facility and small zipwire near Windermere, is proposing to establish its Thirlmere Activity Hub, including two quadruple ziplines, up to 1.2km long, over the main A591 road and the lake.
The company contends that the installation of the activity hub, which also includes extensions to the existing round-lake cycle track, would not detract significantly from the outstanding universal value which gained the national park its world heritage site status recently.
It says in its application that the hub would create 53 jobs, boosting employment income annually by £600,000, which equates to £11,320 per post. Tree Top Trek maintains planning policy allows for development in open countryside, where there is an essential need, and its zipwire would need a steep-sided valley location.
But Lake District National Park Authority planning officers said: “A case has not been made that the proposal would satisfy policy as a matter principle.
“No information has been provided to demonstrate that the zipwire proposals would rely on a fixed geographical resource.
“Based on the information provided and because the proposed development would be in the open countryside the zipwire proposals would be contrary to the provisions of policies, and therefore remain unacceptable as a matter of policy principle.”
The Friends of the Lake District conservation charity was also consulted before the submission of the formal plans this week. The group said it is opposed to the zipwire but supports the upgraded cycle path.
It said it will make a full assessment of the proposals before submitting its own written response, but added: “We are against the proposal and would strongly urge all members and supporters to join us in taking action to stop this intrusive development.
“The siting of zipwires east-west across Thirlmere we consider to be wholly inappropriate in this location and we object strongly to this element of the proposal.
Thirlmere, scene of previous conservation battles. Photo: Bob Smith/grough
“Thirlmere, and the resistance to the desire to create a reservoir to service Manchester in the 1870s was a seminal moment in the history of the conservation movement and landscape protection in the UK and beyond.
“This battle brought in to focus the fact that landscapes matter to everyone, not just those who own land; it highlighted the incredible natural resources of the Lake District but also its vulnerability and sensitivity.
“This proposal once again brings these issues in to focus albeit in a thoroughly modern context.
“This prominence makes the valley a key attribute contributing to the outstanding universal value of the English Lake District world heritage site.
“We consider that the proposal would have a detrimental impact on the landscape character and tranquillity of the Thirlmere valley and, as such, conflicts with the intrinsic purposes of the national park.”
Members of the public can make submissions supporting or opposing the plans. Full details are on the Lake District National Park Authority website.
Submissions should be made by 2 January 2018.
David Anderson
24 November 2017Lake District National Park Development Management are asking for all representations from the public
to be received by or before 2 January 2018.
- How to have your say on the proposals:
they have a dedicated email address to send representations about this application. All
correspondence related to this application should be sent to this email address:
thirlmereactivity@lakedistrict.gov.uk
Stuart
24 November 2017The LDNP Twist there policy's to suit there own damaging agenda, this is a sensible idea
April
24 November 2017Stuart, which policies have the LDNP twisted? What part of their agenda is damaging? Please explain why you think this idea is sensible, thanks.
andy b
24 November 2017come on stuart, we dying to read your response to April
gwyliwr
24 November 2017Stuart
Why don't you send your thoughts to the LDNP? I'm sure they will be impressed, though perhaps you could expand them a little first, as April has suggested.
Perhaps you could also check your speling and gramer (!) to make it even more impressive.
Paul Jones
25 November 2017That’s some classy ad hominem stone-throwing right there, gwyliwr. Not everybody has a great command of grammar, but why would that detract from the point they’re making?
TH
25 November 2017Tree Top Trek must be incredibly stupid. They state "where there is an essential need". How hard can it be to understand that phrase. Put it over the M25 or the Thames, then the majority of the population wouldn't have to travel so far to spend their money.
John Gay
26 November 2017I am going to submit my own objection to the LDNPA and the more people who do that the stronger will be the case against this application. Please see http://www.lakedistrict.gov.uk/swiftlg/MediaTemp/68365-1.pdf
Also Simon Noble has started a petition https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/say-no-to-zip-wires-across-thirlmere
He has also created a web site www.zipoff.org
All these actions will help the campaign and the most important IMHO is to sent your objection to the LDNPA. The Friends of the Lake District have some useful advice on doing this as well as the very helpful information provided by Simon. The link for the FoLD is https://www.friendsofthelakedistrict.org.uk/Pages/Site/thirlmere/Category/thirlmere-zip-wires
The Patterdale community saved the beautiful open landscape of the Glenridding valley by an effective campaign against Tree Top Trek's proposal to build 4 one mile zip wires in 2014. Let's hope we are successful in Thirlmere too.
SH
26 November 2017Throughout this process, Treetop Treks have based their campaign on misinformation, disinformation, fake news and some quite low and dirty tactics. I wouldn't trust a company acting in this way to be an asset to the Lake District or anywhere else to be honest! And I have no affiliation with any agency or interest group. In terms of the arguments put forward by the proponents, none stand up. Firstly, bringing jobs - these will be minimal, low paid and unskilled. There is already a shortage of employees in low paid jobs due to high housing costs and low wages. Zip wires are low paid, seasonal work of which there is already much in the Lakes. This won't help with anything except giving people an expensive short-term buzz with a long-term cost to the Lakes. Secondly, people complain of 'woolly hat brigades opposing any kind of development.' Maybe some people are like that but this week I've been out in the hills with those passionate about the Lakes - all in their early to late 20s. All have moved to the Lakes to work, contribute and make a difference and all oppose the zip wires proposal. Progress as meaning 'development' is not always positive. It is often damaging to people, the environment and to society. In a world where mental health problems abound, the ability to be in places with natural beauty is ever more important. Eight zip wires spanning a lake is not progress, it's a move away from the very core of a National Park. There are already zip wires, climbing walls, ice climbing, kayaking, canyoning etc - hardly a shortage of choice even for teens. Thirdly, the argument that the environment is already 'man made' so can be spoiled is also a poor attempt at sidestepping the arguments. The zip wire would be there simply for profit and not enhance the environment or fit in with any National Park guidelines for development.