Hexham Civic Society is sad to report that the proposed demolition of Hexham’s Grade II Ropery was approved 14:1 at Planning Committee in Morpeth on the 3rd November. Despite Hexham Civic Society’s offer to work with developer Dysart to retain and refurbish the building the proposal to demolish was approved. This was in the face of concerns raised by NCCs own conservation and historic buildings officers who assessed the proposals as causing ‘substantial harm’.
Historic mapping showing the Grade II Ropery Image © Nicholson Nairn Ltd
The Northumberland County Council Planning Officer Jenny Green recommended approval of the scheme, of which Dysart and NCC are the main beneficiaries. Hexham resident Dr Anne Pickering made representations against the scheme, highlighting that the loss of the bus station was opposed by in excess of 10,000 individuals who had signed her petition against the relocation to Loosing Hill at the edge of the town centre.
The demolition of the Ropery was judged to be acceptable due to the ‘substantial public benefit’ arising from the development of the vacated bus station site. HCS contested that this benefit was unrelated to the loss of the Ropery and would occur anyway. Only Dougie Watson, Liberal Democrat Councillor for Norham and Islandshires (Near Berwick upon Tweed) stood up for Hexham in voting against the proposed demolition. We thank him for his impartial interest in the town and wish that Tynedale representatives on the Planning Committee were capable of similar feats.
Our statement to committee read:
3rd November 2015
15/02794/FUL and 15/02795/LBC – HCS objection to demolition of the Grade II Ropery
Hexham Civic Society notes that the proposed demolition of Hexham’s Grade II Ropery is recommended for approval by the Case Officer. We wish to highlight x3 issues which we would like Committee to consider before making its judgement. Although we share the concerns of the Council Heritage Officer regarding the bulk of the southern units, and the demolition of the Nicky Westgate Photography building, we focus our objection on the loss of the Ropery.
The Ropery is a Grade II building which was listed in 1991 and has been in the ownership of the developer Dysart for over a decade. Our first point is that we believe that the present neglected state of the building can expressly not be taken into account in determining this application – as per paragraph 130 of the NPPF which states that “Where there is evidence of deliberate neglect of or damage to a heritage asset the deteriorated state of the heritage asset should not be taken into account in any decision”. It is clear that allowing the growth of trees at the building, from saplings to large specimens, allowing timber wall-heads to remain exposed and doing nothing to forestall areas of collapse are not characteristic of normal levels of maintenance. We therefore argue that deliberate neglect has occurred and para 130 applies.
Secondly, we contest the argument that the loss can be justified as per NPPF para 133 by the delivery of ‘substantial public benefits’. If members look at the site plan of this application they will see that the delivery of the bus station scheme is in no way hinged on the loss or retention of the Ropery. The loss of the Ropery is convenient for the applicant, that is all. We contend that as a listed building in the ownership of the developer Dysart, the Ropery should have been the recipient of profits arising from the bus station scheme being used to bring it back into use, not viewed as an acceptable loss as part of the wider scheme. We contend that the development of the wider site does not in any way rest on the demolition of the Ropery. The case has not been made that the demolition can be justified on ‘substantial benefits’ as these in fact accrue off-site and are peripheral to the Ropery footprint. In short, they will be delivered whether or not the Ropery is lost.
Lastly, the Civic Society is prepared to explore the formation of a Building Preservation Trust to safeguard the building and bring it back into productive use without wholesale demolition. We believe that if this option is allowed then the Ropery could be delivered as a usable building in a matching time-frame to the wider development and could enhance the setting of the scheme and address the concerns over the dilapidation of the Ropery without demolition and delisting. We agree with the applicants Engineer’s Report that an option of conservative repair and like-for-like rebuild is a possible option.
We ask that members consider the above and issue a ‘split decision’ – approving the bus station scheme but refusing lbc for the Ropery. Hexham Civic Society proposes that you ask the developer to cooperate with us and explore the establishment of a Building Preservation Trust that will draw in external funding and bring the building back into use.
Hexham Civic Society Statement
3rd November 2015