Plans for an 150-space Lake District car park have been thrown out by the national park authority.
The Lake District Park Authority’s development control committee discussed the application by Lingholm Private Trust for land at Ullock Moss, today, Wednesday, November 5.
Lingholm Private Trust wants to create a car park, toilet block, bike hire facilities and space to operate a shuttle bus.
Authority officers recommended the scheme, on Cupboard Field, be refused.
In a 69-page report prepared for committee members, officers said a previous application in 2021 had been refused as it did not demonstrate that it would resolve illegal and dangerous parking in the area and would cause harm the area’s appearance.
The report said that there were no changes in the proposals from the 2021 application between the harm to the area and the public benefits, which would lead officers to approve the scheme.
It added: “As it appears that there is a conflict between the purposes, as required, I have attached greater weight to the purpose of conserving and enhancing
the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the area comprised in the national park in reaching my conclusions.”
The development control committee was been recommended to refuse the plans because it would cause harm to the character and appearance of the area and it had not been demonstrated that the car park would:
- resolve an unacceptable highway safety issue or hazard
- not lead to net increases in traffic accessing the location
- incorporate specific measures to manage traffic to the site through ‘smart’ parking information
Friends of the Lake District has welcomed the decision.
The landscape charity, Campaign for National Parks, National Trust, Woodland Trust, and West Cumbria and North Lakes Friends of the Earth all objected to the proposal due to, among other things, the impact it would have on the local landscape.
Their objections also focused on the fact that it would set a harmful precedent for carparks in the open countryside at a time when both the local planning authority and national government are trying to reduce reliance on private vehicles, move towards more sustainable forms of transport, and reduce carbon emissions.
Lorayne Wall, head of planning and policy at Friends of the Lake District, said: “We’re pleased that the Lake District National Park Authority has refused this application.
“We’ve been working with partner organisations, and local Friends of the Lake District members and supporters to campaign for this result for a long time. A new car park in this location would have not only damaged the landscape but set back plans for sustainable travel and a low-carbon Lake District before they even started.
“Like many people, we fully recognise the ongoing issues relating to parking and vehicle numbers in the Portinscale and Catbells area, and the need to address these.
“While a new car park might seem the obvious response to parking problems, this is not an appropriate solution. This is the third time that planning has been sought for a car park in this area. We hope that this will be the last.”
Last month, after the report and recommendations were published, architects behind the scheme claimed the authority’s officers disregarded clear, professional evidence of serious highway hazards on the Portinscale to Catbells route.
“The highways authority cited safety issues as the justification for introducing double yellow lines. They haven’t worked and to suggest the problem has gone away is not professional judgement – it is a dangerous misrepresentation of fact.”
Mr Granger confirmed that if the committee followed the officers’ advice, a formal appeal would be lodged immediately.
He added: “The report contains assumptions that are demonstrably incorrect and conclusions that cannot withstand scrutiny.
“Those errors will now be used as the basis of an appeal which will test, line by line, the accuracy and veracity of the officer’s claims.
“To ignore clear professional evidence of risk is an abdication of duty. If this recommendation is endorsed, it will be appealed — and overturned.”
