For an FAQ about the Old Grammar School development, click here.
See also our main Old Bridge Car Park page.
What is being proposed and where?
How do I view the plans and comment?
What mistakes and inconsistencies are there in the application?
What will be demolished?
What will be the effects on the area?
Is a car park needed here?
What do Historic England say?
What does the council's Built Heritage and Design (conservation) officer say?
What does Natural England say?
What does NCC's Environment and Design department say?
What does the Northumberland Historic Environment Record say about the Wilson building?
Does the application contravene the town's Local Plan?
Who is behind the application?
Who will benefit from the application?
What is the history of the site?
What do independent assessments of the conservation area say?
What is proposed and where?The site in question adjoins the east side of the Tweedmouth end of the Old Bridge. The site has been used as a monunumental sculpture yard since the middle of the 19th century, first by the Wilson family, and then from 1986 by Robertson Memorials who left in 2022. It is owned by the Port of Berwick, on whose Harbour Commission the ward county councillor sits.
Near this site is the 19th century Gardo Fishing Shiel, used by the River Tweed Wild Salmon Company.
The application proposes to build a 41-space car park at the site. To create the car park, they will first need to demolish a brick store/garage and a Victorian timber-frame and brick sales office (Wilson's Workshop) which is listed as a non-designated heritage asset in the Northumberland historical database. The car park will have a 50cm embankment around it.
Nominally it would be temporary - with a life of five years - but in the past, temporary car parks have tended to become permanent, such as the extension to the car park off Castlegate at the Ramparts end.
How do I view the plans and comment?Click to see the NEW proposal on the planning portal: 24/02489/CCD. Click to see the OLD withdrawn proposal on the planning portal: 23/02694/CCD. You will need to create an account and log in before you can add a new comment under "Comments". You may add as many comments as you wish and they will be collated. See also our brief guide to objecting online, by email or by post.
What mistakes and inconsistencies are there in the application?The application states no trees will be removed. If they had answered yes, they would have had to make an application for it. However, the plans show no trees, and indeed some parking spaces are indicated where one of the trees currently is. The biodiversity report states "the two trees on site will be lost" but after five years, replacement trees in a "lower (poor) condition" will be planted. This appears to be an assumption for the purposes of the ecology consultant's calculations, and nowhere stated or promised in the application. There is then contradictory text in the ecology report: "The mature trees within the site will be retained if possible, based on the advice of a suitably qualified arboriculturalist."
They state that there will be a biodiversity net gain, even though the ecology report says there will be a 26% loss of biodiversity.
They answer 'no' to the question "Does your proposal involve the loss, gain or change of use of non-residential floorspace?" On the contrary, the garage and sales office were used until recently.
The Design and Access Statement says the scheme "doesn't affect the local area visually," which is plainly untrue in many ways (views from various vantage points, loss of the sales office building which helped masked the warehouse, loss of trees, extra signage, loss of green space, increased traffic, and so on).
It seems that as well as failing to inform Historic England, no local residents were notified about the application! This is either an unfortunate oversight, or an attempt to slide the application in below the radar. After we started to complain, a notice was eventually posted on a telegraph pole, in a position that makes it difficult to read.
Some documents from the old application have not been copied to the new application, such as the archaeologist's response. This again prevents the public being able to make an informed decision. Update: the archaeologist's response is now up.
The consultant archaeologist points out that "the submitted Heritage Statement falls short of the minimum requirements of NPPF 194 and NLP ENV7". We agree.
What will be demolished?
A Victorian timber-frame and brick sales office (pictured here in 1986) and a possibly contemporary brick store/garage. With its timber cladding, barn-style door, and unusual (asymmetrical!) stone roof finials, the sales office/workshop building in a conservation area has historic interest and charm. The building was owned by John Wilson & Son, funerary sculptor, before the company was taken over by Robertson - the last occupier before they were asked to leave by the harbour board. John was the son of the notable Berwick architect and funerary sculptor William Wilson, whose work can be found around Spittal.
The site is where Wilson's Jimmy Strength sculpture was repaired in 1953 (the remains are now at the Barracks). The building can be seen in an 1899 Ordnance Survey map (Northumberland IV.SW, revised 1897 and published in 1899).
What will be the effects on the area?There will be a loss of visual and other amenity: from the Quay Walls and higher positions in Berwick, and from the Old Bridges and other bridges, the historic, peaceful view of the bridge will be marred by vehicles, tarmac, signs and other paraphernalia of a car park. The King Charles III England Coast Path will be interrupted by the car park entrance, complicating the approach to the bridge from Tweedmouth. At present, the site provides a welcome green, open space, complementing the grassy river bank on the other side.
Views towards the Quay Walls from around this area of Tweedmouth will be ruined, as there will be cars at the bottom of the view instead of a green space. Importantly, the loss of the old sales building will mean that the eye rests on the huge modern dock building, instead of being drawn to a building of human scale in keeping with Berwick's quirky mixture of old buildings.
There will be a loss of heritage, including the Wilson Workshop which could be put to good use, for example as an information centre and shelter for those enjpying the views. The current scheme represents a staggering loss of opportunity for Tweedmouth and lack of imagination, when Tweedmouth needs more heritage investment, not heritage destruction.
There will be greater traffic which will affect pedestrians with pollution, noise and the hazards of turning vehicles.
There will probably be the loss of one or both of the beautiful rowan trees. Given the heightened awareness of green issues in NCC, this is at best hypocritical. Other biodiversity loss is predicted by the ecology report.
Is a car park needed here?We think not. The Berwick Civic Society have done a parking survey, and conclude that there is no need for extra parking, but instead argue for better signage for existing parking space. Although some Tweedmouth businesses have welcomed the idea of a car park, we argue that there is existing space if people are directed to the available parking which may require walking for about a minute. The natural habit of wanting to park right outside a business or service is producing a false impression of a lack of parking space.
We have written a detailed rebuttal to the Chamber of Trade's arguments in their supporting comment for the car park application.
What do Historic England say?Historic England must be informed of planning applications that meet certain criteria according to their advice online. This application appears to meet at least two of them:
Applications for planning permission for development which affects a Grade I or II* listed building or its setting, a Grade I or II* registered park or garden, a scheduled monument or a registered battlefield
Local planning authorities' own applications for planning permission for relevant demolition in Conservation Areas
However, when we contacted Historic England on 27/08/2024, they had not been informed of the application, and told us they would get in touch with NCC. We bumped into Historic England inspecting the site on 28/08/2024, which is an extremely speedy reaction! We will update this page when we hear more. (In the 2023 and 2024 design and access statements, it was stated that Historic England had been contacted on 25/04/2022, but Historic England pointed out that they should have been contacted about this application too.)
What does the council's Built Heritage and Design (conservation) officer say?Staggeringly, no built heritage and design officers appear to have been initially consulted on this application, despite the site's sensitive location and destruction of a historic building!
However, as of 11th September 2024, there is now a response from the built heritage and design officer after a site visit on the 29th August (days before the public consultation was originally due to close - the response is after that original date). It's an OBJECTION due to the harms done to the site and setting.
The officer notes that during pre-application consultation, the applicant was advised to seek advice on harms done to the setting. This did not happen, and the applicant's heritage statement instead states that the plan will have no visual impact! He also observes that the applicant should have consulted the historical record about Wilson's Workshop (see below). Again, this obviously didn't happen, since the building was described as having 'no heritage value'. So this smells pretty fishy.
What does Natural England say?Natural England say (2024-09-12) they may need to object if they don't receive information about "demolition procedure and subsequent car park construction focusing on measures to avoid and/or mitigate pollution of nearby designated river environment to inform a suitable Construction and Environmental Management Plan", and also a Habitats Regulations Assessment. "As submitted, the application could have potential significant effects on the Tweed Estuary Special Area of Conservation and the Tweed Catchment Rivers – England - Lower Tweed and Whiteadder Site of Special Scientific Interest."
What does NCC's Environment and Design department say?NCC's Environment and Design department (Planning Services) has objected to the application (2024-09-13). The response cites insufficient information about impacts on ecology, including demolition and construction methods, risk of contamination disturbance, how surface water will be disposed, and confirmation of no new lighting. If one tree remains, the response predicts its loss due to impacts on the tree's root protection zone. Concern is also expressed about biodiversity loss and uncertainty about how this will or even can be made up, especially when the site is owned by a third party.
What does the Northumberland Historic Environment Record say about the Wilson building?If you search for "William Wilson" in the Heritage Gateway, and click on the found records for Northumberland, you will find that the county has already determined it to be of historic significance to the area.
Monumental mason's showroom/workshop, Tweedmouth (Berwick upon Tweed)
Works off Main Street. The building is first depicted on the Second Edition Ordnance Survey map of 1898 and its footprint has remained intact ever since. It is a small rectangular single storey building constructed of weatherboard with a hipped roof of slate, roof lights on the north side and a pair of ball finials. There is an entrance through one side with a window to the right. It is thought to have been a purpose built showroom for John Wilson's monumental masons business which stood at the centre of an ornamental garden for displaying his creations. John Wilson was the son of William Wilson, Berwick's most celebrated mason and funerary sculptor who was responsible for a number of extraordinary elaborate house elevations in Berwick and Spittal, one of which in Spittal is listed at Grade II."
"...it is of significance to the local community, as a late 19th century showroom associated with Berwick's most celebrated mason and funerary sculptor."
This is a very far cry from how the application has dismissed the building.
Does the application contravene the town's Local Plan?Yes, very much so. Developers in Berwick are obliged to follow the Berwick-upon-Tweed Borough Local Plan (April 1999) and the National Planning Policy Framework 2019 for conservation areas, including reusing old buildings where possible. The Local Plan says:
POLICY F24 Within Conservation Areas, consent to demolish a building or buildings will be permitted, provided that:
i) the building or buildings do not make a positive contribution to the character or appearance of the Conservation Area; and, (ii) a contract for the carrying out of the works for redevelopment of the site has been made and planning permission has been granted for the redevelopment for which the contract provides. Where the building does make a substantial contribution to the character or appearance of the area, consent will be granted provided that: (iii) (a) all reasonable efforts have been made to sustain existing uses and find alternative viable uses including ownership under charitable or community uses and these efforts have failed; or, (b) redevelopment would produce substantial benefits for the community which would decisively outweigh the loss resulting from demolition. The partial demolition of such a building will be permitted provided that its overall contribution to the character or appearance of the Conservation Area is not adversely affected.
The requirement "all reasonable efforts have been made to sustain existing uses and find alternative viable uses" has not been met, since a sculptor enquired about using the building as a studio - thus continuing the long-standing tradition of sculpture on this site - and was turned down.
The Town Council's objection to the 2023 application was partly on the grounds that the former sales office is a building of worthwhile character. It has been a feature of Tweedmouth for well over a century, with ties to the notable builder and funerary sculpture William Wilson. It could be reused, perhaps as a studio or as a visitor centre with a focus on local fishing history.
Once renovated, the building will make ‘a positive contribution to the character or appearance of the Conservation Area’ – both on its own merit and by preserving the historic appearance of this area. It is also important in breaking up the view to the massive dock warehouse.
Who is behind the proposal?The application has been made by the Place and Regeneration Group (and or part of?) Highways and Transport Department, Northumberland County Council. The logic is that it will replace parking temporarily displaced by the putative regeneration of the Maltings. As with the temporary cinema, it would seem premature when Borderlands funding is not yet guaranteed for the development and the design is still in flux. As several people have pointed out, it's unlikely that the car park could replace central parking, and better location suggestions have been offered in some of the objections.
A strange feature of this application is that an article in the Northumberland Gazette from 2023 describes the new car park as being part of a regeneration at the port - and nothing to do with the Maltings car park. It seems that the justification is rather fluid.
Who benefits from the proposal?The Berwick Port would benefit financially, since they would be leasing the land to the NCC. There is a potential conflict of interest between the Local Area Planning Committee and the Port's Board of Commissioners, since the ward county councillor is on both and will not be taking part in the planning decision, and will be reluctant to take the case up with the Port. Unfortunately, this leaves Berwick East, including Tweedmouth, without truly independent county council representation on this issue.
To some extent a car park is a tick-box on the Borderlands funding form for the Maltings. It doesn't matter too much where the car park is, from that perspective. There is an element of Tweedmouth's conservation area and its residents being sacrificed for the 'greater good' (which in our opinion doesn't exist as the car park is not necessary).
Businesses in Berwick have asked the Chamber of Trade to add a supporting comment for the application. We have written a detailed rebuttal to the arguments in their comment.
What is the history of the site?Up until the 1850s, there was a boatbuilder, a corporation weighing machine and weighing house, and a herring boat depot on the site (see a map from 1855).
In the late 19th century, John Wilson, son of notable local builder and funerary sculptor William Wilson, set up a sculpture yard at the site and built the workshop planned for demolition, with its wood cladding, slate roof and asymmetric stone roof finials. We can see the building in a map drawn in 1997.
William Wilson was responsible for the busts that you can see on houses around Berwick and Spittal, probably including Bower House in Palace Street, which has a bust of the Duke of Wellington over its door. Wonderful examples of Wilson's work can be seen in Wilson Terrace, Spittal.
John Wilson & Son survived well into the 20th century, and it was then taken over in 1986 by the memorial company Robertson, meaning continuity from the middle of the 19th century until 2022. This is when the Harbour Commission asked Robertson to leave so they could develop the site.
What do independent assessments of the conservation area say?
The 2008 Tweedmouth Conservation Area Assessment says:
"Three or four much smaller-scale single storey administrative buildings also survive in this sub-area, important for their historic association with the dock's past (including that now used by Robertson funerary memorials). Although generally larger in scale, this sub-area's buildings still have pitched roofs and are relatively low, only one matching the height of Nos.7-11 Main Street. Collectively, the built forms here describe an intelligible, traditional dockside scene uncomplicated by incoherent shapes and arrangements."
"...few surviving smaller admin buildings, which contrast sharply with today's large bland warehouses and depots."
The more recent Berwick neighbourhood plan includes this:
"There are a number of positive aspects of character which should be sustained, reinforced or enhanced. These generally relate to the riverside setting and large number of historic buildings.
* Open, panoramic views towards Berwick providing uninterrupted vistas of the townscape and distinctive roofscape.
* Proximity to the River Tweed and the views experienced along it including the three bridges."