From: Scobie, Catriona [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 15 January 2016 10:30 To: Edwards, Steven; North Wales Wind Farm Connection; Chris White Cc: EDWARDS Tom ([email protected]); GRIFFITHS Richard ([email protected]); Thomas, Huw (Major Projects); Downie, David (Solicitor- Energy Networks); HOLGATE Jennifer ([email protected]) Subject: NWWFC EN020014 Berain Dear Chris, North Wales Wind Farms Connection Project Applicant: SP Manweb PLC Reference: EN020014 Please find attached the document titled “Heritage Assessment: Effects on Berain, Llanefydd, Conwy”. This is an independent assessment of the potential effects upon the historic environment in the vicinity of Berain, prepared by Dr Jonathan Edis of the Heritage Collective. Dr Edis has had no previous involvement in the project. SP Manweb asked him to visit Berain and the surrounding area and provide his own independent views of the effects upon Berain, following the exchange that took place at the Issue Specific Hearing in December 2015, where the Examining Authority explained that they had some concerns as to potential impact of the Proposed Development on Berain and the land within its ownership. Dr Edis has now completed his assessment and SP Manweb now submits a copy of the resulting document to the Examination. We hope that this statement provides necessary supporting evidence to the Examining Authority and all Interested Parties, given that a second independent and very experienced cultural heritage expert agrees with the conclusions reached in the Environmental Impact Assessment, that the impact is moderate and Berain is capable of absorbing the proposed change that will result from the 132kV Overhead Line. I would be grateful if you could acknowledge receipt. On behalf of Steve Edwards With Kind regards Catriona Catriona Scobie, MCIEEM Principal Consultant, Environment and Planning Tel: DD: 0161 927 8223, Mobile 07921 646 185 [email protected]AECOM, AECOM House, 179 Moss Lane, Altrincham, WA15 8FH AECOM and URS have joined together as one company. Learn more
26
Embed
From: Scobie, Catriona [mailto:[email protected] ... · HeritageCollective Heritage Assessment The North Wales Wind Farms Connection Project Effects on Berain, Llanefydd,
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
From: Scobie, Catriona [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 15 January 2016 10:30 To: Edwards, Steven; North Wales Wind Farm Connection; Chris White Cc: EDWARDS Tom ([email protected]); GRIFFITHS Richard ([email protected]); Thomas, Huw (Major Projects); Downie, David (Solicitor- Energy Networks); HOLGATE Jennifer ([email protected]) Subject: NWWFC EN020014 Berain Dear Chris, North Wales Wind Farms Connection Project Applicant: SP Manweb PLC Reference: EN020014 Please find attached the document titled “Heritage Assessment: Effects on Berain, Llanefydd, Conwy”. This is an independent assessment of the potential effects upon the historic environment in the vicinity of Berain, prepared by Dr Jonathan Edis of the Heritage Collective. Dr Edis has had no previous involvement in the project. SP Manweb asked him to visit Berain and the surrounding area and provide his own independent views of the effects upon Berain, following the exchange that took place at the Issue Specific Hearing in December 2015, where the Examining Authority explained that they had some concerns as to potential impact of the Proposed Development on Berain and the land within its ownership. Dr Edis has now completed his assessment and SP Manweb now submits a copy of the resulting document to the Examination. We hope that this statement provides necessary supporting evidence to the Examining Authority and all Interested Parties, given that a second independent and very experienced cultural heritage expert agrees with the conclusions reached in the Environmental Impact Assessment, that the impact is moderate and Berain is capable of absorbing the proposed change that will result from the 132kV Overhead Line. I would be grateful if you could acknowledge receipt. On behalf of Steve Edwards With Kind regards Catriona Catriona Scobie, MCIEEM Principal Consultant, Environment and Planning Tel: DD: 0161 927 8223, Mobile 07921 646 185 [email protected] AECOM, AECOM House, 179 Moss Lane, Altrincham, WA15 8FH AECOM and URS have joined together as one company. Learn more
Historical and communal value2: Berain is associated with
Katherine of Berain, a 16th century heiress who is celebrated as the
“Mother of Wales”. This important cultural dimension, which is partly
abstract and intangible, is explored in Chapter 2 below.
Aesthetic and evidential value: Chapter 3 of this assessment
addresses the way in which the farmstead group acts as a physical
(architectural and archaeological) link with the past, and how its form
and appearance interact with its surroundings.
Cultural identity and sense of place: The interwoven threads of
significance create a sense of place, which has a cultural identity that
is explained further below.
1.6 This is an assessment of the heritage significance of Berain as it is
experienced within the setting (surroundings) of the listed farm group. To
that extent it is the significance of the group that is the receptor for the
purposes of assessing sensitivity and change. This is not a landscape
assessment, either in terms of visual effects (where an individual observer
may be the receptor) or effects on landscape character.
2 Conservation Principles, published by Cadw in March 2011, describes four distinct strands of heritage significance,namely evidential value, historical value, aesthetic value and communal value, in that order. In the case of Berain itis appropriate and convenient to discuss these four closely related values in pairs in Chapters 2 and 3.
2.1 This chapter of the assessment takes two of the main strands of heritage
significance described in Cadw’s Conservation Principles 2011, namely
historical value and communal value, and it explores the way in which these
attributes give Berain a sense of place and cultural importance. The historical
and communal dimensions have their own characteristics, and can be
summarised as follows:
Historical value: A historic asset may have associative historic value
with a person or event, or illustrative historic value with a particular
aspect of past life. Both of these attributes appear in the case of
Berain.
Communal value: This is the commemorative or symbolic value
which people attach to a place in their collective experience or
memory. Such values may change over time, and they can include
aspects of cultural identity and the spirit of a place.
2.2 The historical and communal strands of heritage significance overlap to some
degree, and they are sufficiently closely related for discussion within a single
chapter of the assessment.
Historical associations - Katherine of Berain
2.3 Katherine3 of Berain is crucial to understanding the historical and communal
value of the listed farm group because she is an important 16th century figure
of national significance in her own right. Born in 1540 or 1541, her parents
were Tudor ap Robert Vychan and Jane Velville. There is a tradition that King
Henry VII of England was her great-grandfather on her mother’s side of the
family. Whether this is historically true or not, the association has become
part of the symbolic value that people attach to Berain as a place.4
3 Kathryn in some sources. Her name is Catrin o Ferain in Welsh, and she is sometimes referred to as KatherineTudor.4 The list description states (unlike most other secondary historical sources) that Katherine was born specifically atBerain. This is not now something that is easy to prove either way, but it may be considered by some to be atradition that has passed into collective memory to the point where it amounts to a symbolic association.
Environmental Statement took a precautionary approach in its assessment of
effects.
5.11 The Berain Paper refined the assessment of effects to the “lower end of
‘moderate’” (e.g. paragraph 6.1.39) – that is, significant in EIA terms but less
than substantial in terms of paragraph 5.8.14 of National Policy Statement
EN-1 which reads as follows:
“There should be a presumption in favour of the conservation of designated
heritage assets and the more significant the designated heritage asset, the
greater the presumption in favour of its conservation should be. Once lost
heritage assets cannot be replaced and their loss has a cultural,
environmental, economic and social impact. Significance can be harmed or
lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development
within its setting. Loss affecting any designated heritage asset should require
clear and convincing justification. Substantial harm to or loss of a grade II
listed building park or garden should be exceptional. Substantial harm to or
loss of designated assets of the highest significance, including Scheduled
Monuments; registered battlefields; grade I and II* listed buildings; grade I
and II* registered parks and gardens; and World Heritage Sites, should be
wholly exceptional.”
5.12 Substantial harm has been the subject of consideration in the High Court,
where it has been held that it amounts to a serious effect on the significance
of a historic asset such that the significance is either vitiated altogether or
very much reduced.8 It is abundantly clear that the 132kV overhead line will
not altogether destroy, spoil or impair the significance of Berain, or very
much reduce it. Therefore, the possibility of substantial harm does not arise.9
5.13 The reality is that the harm to the setting and significance of Berain will be
much less than substantial, and less than the precautionary “moderate/large”
effect described in the Environmental Statement. The Berain Paper is closer
to the mark in assessing the effect as being towards the lower end of
moderate. The effect of the proposed development is significant in EIA terms
and it is no surprise that a tabular methodology points towards a moderate
8 Nuon (also known as Airfield Farm, Podington) Neutral Citation Number: [2012] EWHC 4344 (Admin) – seeparagraph 25. The judgment was issued in 2013 but the original copy (widely in circulation) bears the date 2012which was later corrected by the Court.9 Careful consideration has been given to Viewpoint 26 in making this assessment.