Opponents of a contentious plan to build a proposed car park for 150 vehicles in a North Lakes village say they are furious that the application has been recommended for approval.
Members of the No Portinscale Car Park campaign group say giving the go ahead contradicts the Lake District National Park Authority’s own core planning policies and risks villages being ruined across the World Heritage Site.
The LDNPA’s development control committee is due to consider the planning application for a new car park with toilets at Ullock Moss, at the southern edge of the village, on Wednesday. Also included in the scheme is a new shuttle bus turning facility further down the road at Cupboard Field.
They say many local residents have responded to the planning consultation process and claim 80 per cent of Portinscale villagers opposed the development submissions to the LDNPA.
Also weighing in with objections are the National Trust, Friends of the Lake District and the Cumbria Wildlife Trust.
But supporters of the application, by Michael Anderson of the Lingholm Private Trust, say it would significantly improve road safety and address major parking problems seen at Portinscale and Catbells where hundreds of cars cram along rural roads.
The campaign group is urging that the LDNPA reject the application because no comprehensive proposals have ever been proposed. explored or trialled to control the traffic and parking.
These, they say, could include double yellow lines, time-limited disc parking, seasonal restrictions and residents-only parking in the village.
And they add that potential solutions on the road out of the village, past Nichol End, could be continuous double yellows or a clearway to the south past Cat Bells.
This would then allow shuttle bus services from Keswick to bring people in or use the launch to Cat Bells.
They add that the development is also contrary to the core planning principles for car parks in LDNPA’s own Local Plan as it will attract more vehicles into the area.
Campaigners argue that any new car park development should instead link directly to the A66 and reduce traffic through the village.
But planners say “public benefits” would arise as it would resolve the current “unacceptable highway safety issues” which affect residents and visitors.
They say the scheme would provide more “convenient parking” and introduce measures to reduce “problematic parking” on local roads.
Opponents claim that assessments of traffic flow in peak season estimate around 1,000 vehicles will be trying to access space for 150 vehicles – and there will be no way of ‘turning off the tap’ once the car park is full – leading to more congestion problems.
Resident and campaign group member Ray Coan said: “With their advice to approve the Portinscale car park, planning officers are effectively tearing up their own work and riding roughshod over their own strategy.
“Portinscale would be a ‘Trojan horse’ planning decision which would give a green light for any opportunistic landowners to build impromptu car parks from Buttermere to Bootle and Askam to Eskdale.”
