New Permanent Campsite proposed in Newlands Valley We are pleased to report that proposals for a new permanent campsite in the Newlands Valley were refused by the Lake District National Park Authority’s development control committee on 3rd August on grounds of harm to the landscape, visual impact, flood risk and insufficient information regarding highway safety and access arrangements. Expand 5th August 2022 We are pleased to report that proposals for a new permanent campsite in the Newlands Valley were refused by the Lake District National Park Authority’s development control committee on 3rd August on grounds of harm to the landscape, visual impact, flood risk and insufficient information regarding highway safety and access arrangements. 15th February 2022 We have responded to proposals for a new campsite in the Newlands Valley. The site was used for camping temporarily under ‘permitted development rights’ last year, but this proposal would see the site used for tented camping for over 6 months every year. We share the views of many people who have also already submitted objections that the proposal conflicts with local planning policies. The site lies in the open countryside, distant from any existing buildings, farm or other settlement and would and impact on landscape character, tranquillity and views from surrounding summits and would exacerbate the well-documented local traffic issues. If you would like to find out more about the proposals, they can be viewed here by searching using the reference 7/2022/2011 and comments can be sent to [email protected] Our response can be viewed here>
Zip World Plans for Elterwater Quarry Burlington Stone is proposing to develop an adventure tourism experience and interpretation facility at Elterwater Quarry, in partnership with Zip World. Expand Update 21 July 2022 Elterwater Quarry Update Members and supporters continue to get in touch with us to let us know their views on the proposals for a Zip World development at Elterwater Quarry. Thank you again to everyone who has been in touch. Almost exclusively, views are focused on concerns about traffic impacts, impacts on local character, views, tranquillity and biodiversity and this is reflected by the fact that over 54,000 people have now signed ZipOff’s petition against the plans! What you can do A planning application has not yet been submitted to the National Park planning authority so we would ask that you refrain from contacting the National Park directly at this stage. You can still make your concerns heard and let Burlington Stone know that these plans are inappropriate at this location by taking any of the following actions: Sharing and replying to our Facebook and Twitter posts about the plans @FriendsofLakes https://twitter.com/FriendsofLakes https://www.facebook.com/FriendsoftheLakeDistrict Signing the petition Writing to Burlington Stone themselves to let them know your views - https://elterwaterquarry.co.uk/contact/ If you live locally, writing to Lakes Parish Council, your local Councillor and/or your local MP to let them know your views Letting us know your views if you have not done so already, as this will help to inform our response when a formal consultation takes place, email us: [email protected] Send us your images: We need images of Elterwater and the surrounding area so that can show people just what is at stake. Submit your images> You can help our specialist staff continue to challenge unsuitable developments like Elterwater Quarry by donating to our Planning for the Future Appeal. We don’t know when to expect an application, but we will use all comments received to help inform our response. A really important factor in determining this case will be that the planning consent for Elterwater Quarry’s current operations is subject to a condition that the site be restored once operations cease, therefore the restored site is the baseline against which the Zip World proposals must be assessed. Another will be whether the proposal has the potential to constitute major development, which is only permitted in National Parks in exceptional circumstances, and where it can be demonstrated that the development is in the public interest. This includes consideration of whether it could have a significant adverse impact on the purposes for which the area has been designated. View the Lake District National Park's Elterwater Quarry page Note on Change.org:Friends of the Lake District has no connection at all to Change.org, which is a for-profit business and one of several that hosts online petitions. It is the hosting site used by the local group that started the Zip Off Langdale petition. Change.org operates by asking people who sign any petition to ‘chip in’, which in turns funds the service they provide. This includes helping to share the petition to increase its reach but the money does not, to our knowledge, go direct to helping the individual cause in any other way. There is no obligation to contribute to Change.org and we have not, at any point, suggested anybody should do so. Update 22 June 2022 We asked for your views on an ‘adventure tourism experience’ at Elterwater Quarry. This has been proposed by quarry operators Burlington Stone in partnership with Zip World.Many of you have since been in touch (thank you!), and without exception have expressed deep concern about the plans, which involve a zip wire, ropes courses, an ‘alpine coaster toboggan-style ride and extensive car-parking. Over 30,000 people have also signed an online petition against the proposal. The main concerns raised to us are the traffic and the inappropriateness of this type of attraction in such a rural location near a small village in the Langdale valley, in the heart of the Lake District. Impacts on local character, tranquillity views from surrounding fells, biodiversity and public rights of way have also been highlighted. This type of proposal further adds to concern that our National Park remains very much at risk of becoming a theme park. Find out more, including how you can have your say here. What you can do No application has yet been submitted, but you can make your views known by: • Sharing and replying to our Facebook and Twitter posts about the plans @FriendsofLakes https://twitter.com/FriendsofLakes https://www.facebook.com/FriendsoftheLakeDistrict • Signing the petition• Writing to Burlington Stone themselves to let them know your views - https://elterwaterquarry.co.uk/contact/• If you live locally, writing to Lakes Parish Council, your local Councillor and/or your local MP to let them know your views• Letting us know your views if you have not done so already, as this will help to inform our response when a formal consultation takes place, email us: [email protected]• Send us your images: We need images of Elterwater and the surrounding area so that can show people just what is at stake. Submit your images> You can help our specialist staff continue to challenge unsuitable developments like Elterwater Quarry by donating to our Planning for the Future Appeal. The main concerns among those against the plans are the traffic and the inappropriateness of a theme-park type attraction in such a rural location near a small village in the Langdale valley, in the heart of the Lake District.Elterwater is popular as a location to visit in its own right and as a starting point for walks, so the village itself and the narrow, winding local lanes already suffer the impacts of high levels of traffic and parking problems, including on the surrounding Common Land (Common Land is one of the attributes of Outstanding Universal Value for which the Lake District was designated a World Heritage Site). While removing the currently relatively low levels of quarry traffic from the roads, this proposal would see a huge rise in private cars and coaches passing through the village to access the site. Local businesses in the valley already have to bring in staff from distant towns, due to the lack of a more local workforce, so this would add further to the traffic generated by the development.Although the site itself is a brownfield site - a former quarry - there will be an impact on the landscape character and tranquillity of the area as a result of traffic increases and the nature and level of the activity. There will be an impact on views of the valley from surrounding fells (including open access land) and on the public right of way that currently runs through the quarry itself.While people have been walking on the path through the quarry for many years, slate is nevertheless a natural feature of the landscape and the quarrying of it a centuries-old industry that has shaped the landscape and its communities. Walking through a modern visitor attraction with rides, assault courses, car parks and throngs of people would be a totally different experience and not one that people are usually looking for when they visit Langdale or any part of the National Park. Nor is it an appropriate way of giving an understanding of the hard work and riving hands of Lakeland’s quarrymen or their contribution to and connection with the landscape and local vernacular.The scaling-back of quarrying operations in the Lake District is in line with the conditions made by ICOMOS (the International Council on Monuments and Sites) and UNESCO when the National Park was designated a World Heritage Site in 2017. However, planning consents given for Elterwater quarry as recently as 2021 were subject to a restoration condition, meaning that the operator was expected to carry out a restoration scheme to enhance the local landscape and wildlife habitats once quarrying at the site had ceased. The restored site should be the baseline against which the proposal and its impacts are assessed.The site is also adjacent to a Site of Special Scientific Interest and a County Wildlife Site and close to ancient woodland, so we are also concerned about impacts on biodiversity and the loss of opportunities to enhance it.We continue to ensure that the Lake District is protected from developments that would damage its fabric, its character and its integrity. That it is loved but not exploited. That we and those who follow us can continue to enjoy it and can better understand it. This must surely be possible without also sacrificing it to commercialism. After all, it’s the landscape, in all its glory that’s the real attraction, isn’t it? If you can, please help us continue to protect the Lake District from harmful developments. Donate to our Planning for the Future Appeal today. 30 March 2022 Plans are emerging for the significant redevelopment of Elterwater Quarry. Burlington Stone are proposing to develop an adventure tourism experience and interpretation facility at Elterwater Quarry. We are glad to have been identified by Burlington Stone Ltd. as a specific consultee in relation to these proposals as this will help us to ensure that the landscape and natural environment and the views of our members and supporters are taken into account as the project moves forward. We have already had an informal discussion on-site with Burlington and have highlighted some initial thoughts and potential areas of concern to them, including traffic generation and management, how biodiversity and rights of way might be incorporated and of course, how the proposal will fit within the landscape. We can expect a planning application in the coming months. Read more about what the proposal might involve on www.elterwaterquarry.co.uk – we would be interested to hear your thoughts, email: [email protected] Image credit: Burlington Stone.
Car Park at The Swan, Grasmere refused on appeal We are pleased that the Planning Inspector dealing with the appeal shared our view, and that of the Lake District National Park Authority, that this proposal would harm the landscape, and the appeal has been dismissed. Expand 19th July 2022 We are pleased that the Planning Inspector dealing with the appeal shared our view, and that of the Lake District National Park Authority, that this proposal would harm the landscape, including impacts on Dark Skies, and the World Heritage Site. The appeal has therefore been dismissed. Read the Inspector’s report and decision here. 19th May 2022 An appeal has now been lodged against the refusal of this application and we await the outcome. 18th November 2021 We are pleased to report that this application was refused on 16th July 2021 on grounds of impacts on the landscape character, views, tranquillity and World Heritage attributes as well as a lack of information such as lighting information. 16th December 2020 A new 52-space car park is proposed at the Swan Hotel, Grasmere. We share the local community’s concerns over what this will mean for the landscape and settlement character, light pollution and ambitions to shift to more sustainable modes of travel. The application reference number is 7/2020/5743 - find out more here Read our response to the proposals here Photo: View over Grasmere from Helm Crag by Nicky Simmon
The Planning Bill in the Queen's Speech The Queens Speech this week set out that rather than a separate Planning Bill, significantly scaled back changes to the planning system will now take place as part of the Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill. Expand The Queen's Speech this week set out that rather than a separate Planning Bill, significantly scaled back changes to the planning system will now take place as part of the Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill. While details will follow in the regulations and updates to National Policy, we tentatively welcome some proposals in the speech and the Bill, including: confirmation that some of the most concerning proposals previously set out, such as zoning, nationally-set mandatory housing targets and permission in principle, have been dropped, thanks in part to pressure put on the Government by organisations such as Friends of the Lake District. that the lighter reforms now proposed still seek to enable local people to have more involvement in the planning process measures aimed at helping to bring empty buildings back into use, including what appears to be provision for Council Tax charges to be increased by up to 100% on dwellings occupied periodically, such as second homes strengthening neighbourhood planning, including Neighbourhood Priorities Statements allowing local priorities to be set out, including those relating to the natural environment greater priority for the environment and the requirement for Environmental Outcomes Reports that will include consideration of the landscape, wildlife and cultural heritage. We particularly welcome the proposed new requirement that local plans and other planning documents must ensure that the use and development of land will contribute to the mitigation of, and adaption to, climate change. We remain concerned about certain aspects, including: - the conflict between seeking to make the local plan process quicker and simpler whilst also trying to enable greater public involvement - the conflict between seeking to make the environmental assessment process quicker and simpler whilst also trying to enhance the priority given to the environment - the lack of detail on how Environmental Outcome Statements will be prepared and how they will ensure positive outcomes for the environment - the indication that national policies will now have more weight and, crucially, may outweigh locally-set policies We expect public consultations on the detail of the changes over the coming months. You can view the Bill, which includes several other aspects in addition to planning matters, here.
Charges change for second homes The Queen's Speech introduced the Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill, which proposes changes to planning policy, including provision for council tax charges to be increased by up to 100% on dwellings occupied only periodically, such as second homes. Expand The Queen's Speech last week introduced the Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill. Wider changes through a dedicated Planning Bill had been expected, but plans, including several concerning and damaging proposals that we and others challenged during earlier consultations, have been scrapped. Much of the detail will come later in the form of regulations and changes to the National Planning Policy Framework, on which there will be public consultation. However, some specific details of the Bill were particularly interesting. This included provision for council tax charges to be increased by up to 100% on dwellings occupied only periodically, such as second (or third, or fourth) homes. 100% of council tax can already be charged on second homes. However, allowing an increase of up to 100% will enable councils to charge double the rate of council tax on second homes. This is already legislated for and in use in Wales (although they are increasing this to 300% from April 2023 along with introducing other measures) and could deter some second home ownership while also providing an additional revenue stream that councils can use to support communities. This isn’t about banning second homes or pitting ourselves against second home-owners. We recognise that these, along with holiday lets, have a role to play in the economy and communities of the Lake District. Indeed, some of the prominent cultural figures of the Lake District themselves owned second homes here and some of the properties that are now prime examples of the cultural characteristics for which the National Park is designated a World Heritage Site were built as holiday homes. However, it has long been recognised that when high proportions of the dwellings in a community have been lost to these other uses, there are negative implications, from school closures to putting pressure on authorities to develop greenfield sites for additional housing that would not necessarily be needed if local people could still access (physically and financially) a home amongst the existing stock. We therefore welcome this move; it is a positive step forward, and one that we and many others asked for, but it isn’t enough. This is a complex issue and it will take more than additional charges to put our communities on the right footing. A suite of tools is required. The Countryside Charity CPRE shares our concerns – their research earlier this year highlighted that South Lakeland saw a 1,231% increase in short term letting listings between 2016 and 2020, as do local MPs such as Tim Farron. The Lake District National Park Partnership is delivering on its Partnership Plan action to lobby the Government for changes to address these issues and recently wrote to Cumbria County Council seeking their support. The Campaign for National Parks and parish councils are also behind us. The Campaign for National Parks submitted a response to proposals for further strengthening of measures in Wales recently while Allithwaite and Cartmel Parish Council are seeking to introduce a primary residence policy in their Neighbourhood Plan. In addition to extra council tax charges, we would like to see: a mechanism to control the conversion of first to second (or third, fourth etc) homes in the Lake District through the planning system, namely changes to the Use Classes Order to differentiate between categories of dwelling and a requirement for planning permission to be sought to move between the categories (this will more than likely need to be accompanied by policy, guidance and relevant monitoring to provide criteria and evidence with which to inform a refusal or approval of such permission) the closing of business-rate relief loop-holes for holiday lets; a compulsory licensing scheme for holiday lets ring-fencing of additional council tax monies for projects that support communities, such as to bring other empty homes back into use We at Friends of the Lake District need to continue lobbying and campaigning for these further changes - including through the Lake District National Park Partnership, working with other like-minded organisations and parties such as CPRE and local MPs and through our own responses to relevant consultations on changes to national and national planning policy and guidance and on relevant legislation. These measures could then work alongside others, such as local occupancy clauses on new homes and projects to bring other types of empty home back into use to help ensure that a significant percentage of dwellings remain in use for their intended purpose, as homes, helping local people and communities to thrive, while protecting our landscapes and wider environment from unnecessary development.
Raising awareness of the need for consent to develop on Common Land We have long campaigned and lobbied for the protection of common land and town and village greens in Cumbria. In recent cases development has been carried out on common land and village greens without proper consent or appropriate scrutiny. Expand Friends of the Lake District has a long-standing involvement with Common Land and town and village greens in Cumbria, which includes our lobbying and campaigning for their protection. Although not a new issue, recent cases we have been involved in have increased our awareness that works are being carried out on Common Land and town and village greens without the proper consent or appropriate scrutiny. This includes cases where someone has secured planning consent for the works. Sometimes people are aware that they need, and then obtain planning consent but do not realise that separate Common Land consent is also necessary. However, in other cases they are unaware, or simply press ahead knowing that there are weaknesses in the reporting and enforcement of Common Land breaches. This issue is relevant across Cumbria, where we have one third of all the Common Land in the country, meaning its landscape, culture, character and heritage are all heavily influenced by it. In the Lake District National Park there is the additional dimension of Common Land being one of the attributes of Outstanding Universal Value of the World Heritage Site. Common Land should have extra protection by virtue of the World Heritage Site being a heritage asset of international value. It is therefore really important that where it is required, including where it is needed alongside planning consent, that Common Land consent is sought. This will help to ensure that the impacts on Common Land are given appropriate consideration. Failure to do this devalues Common Land, risks harm to and loss of Common Land and puts at risk the benefits and value it has for the landscape, our cultural heritage and for society. We have considered what might help to improve this situation. Whilst legislative or procedural changes might be a longer-term answer, we’re exploring some simpler but more immediate actions and asking key relevant organisations if they will support us in doing so. This will include raising general awareness of the issue and why it’s important to address it as well as asking relevant local planning authorities to highlight the need for Common Land consent where it is relevant to any planning permission they give. Keep an eye out for updates on our website, social media and in our newsletters to see how you can help.
Glover Landscape Review We applaud the Government’s proposals that our protected landscapes should be available to all and that nobody should feel excluded. While this needs balancing with managing visitor pressure, we are extremely supportive of ensuring our protected landscapes are inclusive. Expand Update 12th April 2022 In January, the Government published a series of proposals in response to an independent review of England’s National Parks and AONBs, led by Julian Glover. On April 8th we submitted a full written response to these proposals. Read/download our full written response here> Our submitted response in summary: We applaud the Government’s proposals that our protected landscapes should be available to all and that nobody should feel excluded. While this needs balancing with managing visitor pressure, we are extremely supportive of ensuring our protected landscapes are inclusive and we would urge Government to emphasise this within its ‘levelling up’ agenda. To truly ‘level up’, people need access to cheap, reliable public transport. Among Government proposals is a sustainable transport pilot in Cumbria to develop new sustainable ways to access the Lake District National Park. This has the potential to transform public transport in the area and provides a huge opportunity to improve transport for Cumbrian communities and visitors alike, enabling those without a private car to access the wider landscape for recreation and providing access to employment opportunities for those living in local communities. It could also help to meet local climate change targets and ensure the impacts of tourism do not damage the landscape it relies upon. We have called for this sustainable transport pilot to be actioned as soon as possible to deliver the ‘levelling up’ agenda and help Cumbria recover from the economic effects of the Covid pandemic. It is now urging the Government to commit financial support and provide guidance to deliver a truly outstanding sustainable transport network in the Lake District. Alongside first-rate public transport, the charity believes that the people who work in the Lake District should be able to afford to live there. The issue of affordable housing and second homes is particularly acute in protected landscapes and the charity is disappointed that Government proposals have not provided any real solutions to the issue. Landscape sensitivity and a desire to live in the National Park means that simply building more is even less appropriate than it is elsewhere and wants to see the Government develop a unique approach for our protected landscapes. In further support of our remit to ‘secure a landscape that is accessible and enjoyed by all’ we would like to see every child in Cumbria given the opportunity to enjoy the benefits of spending time in its National Parks and AONBs. In our original response to the Glover Review, we recommended introducing designated landscapes into the national curriculum and providing opportunities for all children to visit a designated landscape. Whilst we welcomed a subsequent Government proposal to support capacity building in schools to help young people engage with nature, we would like to see the Government go further and take forward a proposal in the Glover Review to introduce ‘a night under the stars’ in a protected landscape for every child. The response from Government and associated consultation is long overdue. It is therefore essential that the Government is ambitious. We need to see some immediate action to bring lasting change and remove the barriers that prevent people enjoying and benefitting from the special landscapes of Cumbria. Policy paper: Landscapes review (National Parks and AONBs): government responsewww.gov.uk/government/publications/landscapes-review-national-parks-and-aonbs-government-response/landscapes-review-national-parks-and-aonbs-government-response Update 30 March 2022 One week left to respond to the Government’s consultation on the Landscapes Review The Government is seeking the public’s views on its response to the Glover Landscapes Review, published on 15th January. Friends of the Lake District is producing a detailed response for the consultation and we encourage others that live in, work in or visit protected landscapes to do the same. The consultation closes at 11:45pm on 9 April 2022. There are several questions focusing on specific aspects of the Government’s response: The proposed changes to the statutory purposes for protected landscapes The development of the new environmental land management scheme The management of visitor pressure and potential enforcement powers The use of unsealed roads by recreational vehicles The role of AONB teams in planning Proposed changes to the boards of protected landscapes The role of public bodies and strengthening their statutory duties There is also a final section asking if respondents have any further comments about other aspects of the Government’s proposals. We will publish our own a detailed response here soon, but in the meantime you may like to refer to our summary response at the link below to help inform your own response. This highlights the aspects that we believe are most important for the protected landscapes in Cumbria and also provides a link to the consultation for you to submit your own personal response. Summary response highlighting aspects we believe are most important for the protected landscapes in Cumbria> Update 21 January 2022 We have had some time now to digest the Government’s response to the Landscapes Review. We will provide a more in-depth response to the consultation soon, but our initial thoughts are that whilst there is some good news, there is little detail and some key recommendations from the Glover Review are missing. The Government agreed with the Glover review that we need stronger Governance and national leadership with more collaboration between our protected landscapes. However, Government does not propose establishing a new body, instead they will ensure existing partners work together more effectively through a new national landscapes partnership. Whilst the details of this have not been outlined, there is concern that a new landscapes partnership would not have the capacity, resources or independence to fully deliver the strong leadership that is required. We are particularly disappointed that there has not been a commitment to the multi-year funding agreements suggested by the Glover Review. The Government recognises that the core grant will not be sufficient for the work that needs to be done. They therefore propose a new funding model with more diverse sources of funding, such as private finance for nature-based solutions and a role for the new landscapes partnership to harness commercial and sponsorship opportunities. This does not provide protected landscapes with the certainty they need to plan ahead. There is also concern that private investors could influence management decisions or that they use their investment to offset their environmental impact elsewhere. We welcome the proposals to strengthen the statutory purposes and align the purposes of National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. There is no specific wording proposed, but the Government recommends that the first purpose should include driving nature recovery as a core function of protected landscapes. They propose that it encompasses a wider range of societal benefits from nature, and there is specific reference to biodiversity and natural capital. Friends of the Lake District is disappointed that the Government has not recognised the importance of landscape and landscape character. It is the landscape that provides us with all the benefits that the Government want our protected landscapes to deliver. Landscape is the dynamic backdrop to our lives. It is the relationship between nature and culture, and encompasses biodiversity, geodiversity, cultural and natural heritage, along with all the health and wellbeing benefits of being immersed in the landscape. Its recognition will ensure the landscape continues to provide us with these benefits. Improving access to protected landscapes and addressing the current inequality in those accessing the landscape is seen as a priority. Whilst this needs balancing with managing visitor pressure, we are extremely supportive of ensuring our protected landscapes are accessible to all. With no commitment to funding, however, it will be challenging for protected landscapes to deliver the long-term engagement activities required to increase the diversity of people using the landscape. There is also no mention of the Glover Review’s recommendation to introduce a night under the stars for every child in a protected landscape. The Government has recognised the additional pressures seen in protected landscapes since the Glover review as a result of the pandemic and there are proposals for greater enforcement, making a greater range of enforcement powers available to National Park Authorities to help manage visitor pressures. it also wants to develop new sustainable ways to access the Lake District National Park that may transform public transport in the area and become a blueprint for other landscapes. Friends of the Lake District would be very keen to support this. Friends of the Lake District will continue to scrutinise the Government’s suggestions and will work with our partners to develop our response to the consultation. The consultation is open until the 9 April 2022 and we would urge everyone to provide their views. Landscapes review (National Parks and AONBs): government response - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk) Update 15th January 2022 Government’s response to the Glover Landscape Review and associated consultation Friends of the Lake District welcome the much anticipated response from the Government to the Glover Landscape Review and the opportunity to respond to their consultation. We will provide an in-depth response once we have considered the Government’s proposals in more detail. The Government’s independent review of England’s National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), led by Julian Glover, was published in October 2019. It was an ambitious report that largely agreed with many of our recommendations and we are pleased to see the Government supporting some of these. However, we will need to scrutinise the detail of the proposals to ensure they are ambitious enough to deliver the action that is urgently required. One of our key recommendations to the Glover Review was to establish a strong central co-ordination body to provide strategic direction to protected landscapes. Any proposals should provide a stronger system of governance and ensure consistency, accountability and a voice to champion designated landscapes at government level. Another key ambition of Friends of the Lake District is to better involve and educate children and young people about national parks. We were very supportive of the Glover Review’s recommendation to allow every child to experience a night under the stars in a protected landscape and we are very keen to explore ideas for better engaging young people. Friends of the Lake District welcome proposals to extend and designate new protected landscapes. Central to this should be plans to address the complex and lengthy designation process as suggested by the Glover Review. We will continue to advocate for a southern boundary extension to the Lake District National Park and understand there will be opportunity for this to be considered in the future. The response from Government and associated consultation is long overdue. It is therefore essential that the Government are ambitious and maintain momentum to deliver lasting improvements that will secure the future of our protected landscapes. This will require protected landscapes to be sufficiently funded to allow them to deliver their purposes and benefits to the nation. Read the Government's full response to the Glover Landscapes Review here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/landscapes-review-national-parks-and-aonbs-government-response Update 14th May 2020 Protected Landscapes (Glover) Review The current crisis is showing just how important landscape and nature are to our health and well-being. We understand that the Government will be considering the report prepared by an independent panel led by Julian Glover. We will be writing to the Government asking them to move forward on elements of the review that we support. Update 8th October 2019 The report was published last month, sooner than we had expected. The report is ambitious and agrees with a number of our recommendations, the key one being that a National Landscapes Service should be established to bring together our 44 designated landscapes (National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty). The Review considered the current system of landscape protection to be fragmented, marginalised and misunderstood- not really a system at all. We certainly agree with the principle of this and think National Parks should have a stronger voice in Government but also stronger governance to make sure that there is consistency in how the statutory purposes are applied throughout the Parks. With regard to the statutory purposes of National Parks there is mention of reference being made within the purposes to improving nature and biodiversity, there is also mention of an updated Sandford Principle where greater weight must be given to the first purpose to conserve and enhance natural beauty. We had also recommended that National Parks be included in the National Curriculum and one of the proposals is for every child to spend a night under the stars in a national landscape. We welcome references to helping people from minorities and less well- off areas to access our landscapes. There is also a reference to increasing the amount of land accessible to the public and again, this is something we had recommended. We are pleased that the report recognises the Lake District is heavily congested at times with an over reliance upon cars. There is also a recognition that unlimited car use can spoil the special beauty. A new approach to co-ordinating public transport in the Lake District is a specific proposal within the report. However, there is not enough recognition that too many visitors can undermine the quality of the landscape. We believe that there needs to be more discussion about the measures that can be implemented to alleviate the impact on infrastructure of an ever increasing number of visitors to the Lake District. On funding the current system is considered unnecessarily complex. Other recommendations include reducing the administrative burden by reducing the numbers of people on National Park Boards. This should raise some money, but not enough if the ambitions of the report are to be fulfilled. The report considers that there should be an ambitious and philanthropic programme of funding including both a charitable and commercial approach. However, there is no clear framework for this and we have concerns about the conflicts that may be created from commercial funding and that charitable fundraising for landscape protection purposes may just take from the existing pool of finance available for such work. A link to the summary of the findings can be seen below: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/designated-landscapes-national-parks-and-aonbs-2018-review/landscapes-review-summary-of-findings Update 31st July 2019 We are pleased with one of the key suggestions of the Designated Landscapes Review. Julian Glover who leads the review has published a letter which sets out a guide to the review panel’s thoughts on what they have found. The main ask from Friends of the Lake District was that some form of central governing and co-ordinating body is set up to provide strong governance and consistency around the purposes of National Parks. The letter from Julian Glover to Michael Gove makes clear that we should not be happy with what we have at the moment and that the system of landscape protection is fragmented, sometimes marginalised and often misunderstood. In the light of this the panel is going to explore the potential of a National Landscape Service- effectively supporting our key request. The letter also emphasises that our designated landscapes should be at the forefront of nature recovery and take a lead in tackling climate change. In terms of funding at the very least the panel want to see existing budgets secured in real terms and sustained for a further five year period. The initial findings in the letter are generally challenging, that is heartening and we look forward to the full report.Read Julian Glover's July 2019 letter setting out the interim findings of the Landscapes Review. 18th December 2018 A summary of our response is detailed below together with a link to our full response. While we consider that our designated landscapes have been a great post war success story our landscapes must meet the challenges of today. We have made a significant number of recommendations to the review but our key points are that: There should be a strong central co-ordination body to provide strategic direction to national parks and to ensure consistency, accountability and a voice to champion designated landscapes at government level A greater emphasis should be placed upon conserving and enhancing natural and cultural heritage to make sure that enhancement of the special qualities of our landscapes takes place The types of recreation promoted must be in line with the first purpose to conserve and enhance The review should consider opportunities for introducing designated landscapes into the national curriculum and providing opportunities for all children to visit a designated landscape Read our response in full here 25th October 2018 Friends of the Lake District welcomes the Government’s independent review of England’s National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) launched on 20th October. The review is led by Julian Glover supported by an experienced advisory group. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity to make your views known on the future of our National Parks and AONBs and how they are run. We will be submitting a response to the review but we would urge individual members to feed in their own comments directly. As part of the response process, there is an option for you to submit an image illustrating what is special to you about a National Park or AONB. We believe that this provides an exciting opportunity for us all to demonstrate what these landscapes mean to us. With a deadline for submissions on 18 December, the review will report next year, 70 years after the landmark National Parks Act 1949 that established National Parks in England and it will consider all aspects of England’s National Parks and AONB's. Background information about the review together with the consultation can be found here: https://consult.defra.gov.uk/land-use/landscapes-review-call-for-evidence We will provide an update and some initial thoughts once we have considered the review in more detail.
Revisions to National Planning Policy Framework The process of revising the National Planning Policy Framework is ongoing. The revisions were previously expected to be part of a wider overhaul of the planning system through a dedicated Planning Bill, but The Queen's Speech in May 2022 set out that significantly scaled-back changes will now take place as part of the Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill. Expand 24th May 2022 The process of revising the National Planning Policy Framework is ongoing. The revisions were previously expected to be part of a wider overhaul of the planning system through a dedicated Planning Bill, but The Queen's Speech in May 2022 set out that significantly scaled-back changes will now take place as part of the Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill. You can find out more about this here> The Bill will result in changes to the National Planning Policy Framework as well as new regulations and we expect public consultations on the detail of these changes and more information as to what they might mea for our landscapes, environment and rural communities over the coming months. 31 March 2021 We recently responded to a consultation on revisions to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and proposals for a new national design code. The proposed changes to the NPPF are relatively few in number, but nevertheless include some important revisions that we very much welcome. We were particularly pleased to see new text requiring development in the setting of protected landscapes to be sensitively located and designed and a new paragraph focusing onthe importance of trees. We also expressed our support for new text to reinforce the need for sustainable patterns of development, environmental enhancements, public access to nature and mitigating climate change as well as new text requiring development to provide a choice of transport options and active travel. We welcome greater recognition of the wildlife and climate change benefits of open space and a proposed requirement for new development to make as much use as possible of natural flood management techniques. We expressed concerns about some of the proposed changes, such as the failure to recognise environmental capacity when deriving local housing targets, the prematurity of some proposals given the outcomes of other related consultations are not yet known. We also suggested some additions to help further strengthen proposed new text and in some cases, to strengthen existing text. We also welcomed the proposed new national design code, which, it is intended, will guide local authorities in creating locally-specific design codes for their area. There is much to be welcomed in the proposed code, but we highlighted the need for it to be relevant to rural as well as urban areas and provided detail on how it could better take into account landscape and light pollution and the protection of dark skies. We also emphasised the level of resources that would be needed to secure genuine and meaningful public engagement in the process of preparing local design codes. You can see our full response here This consultation was part of the Government’s wider review of the planning system and further consultations are expected in due course.
Redevelopment of Hartside Café This application has now been withdrawn. While we supported the reinstatement of a café at the site, we did not support the substantially larger proposals for retail, hotel, exhibition space and formal urban-style carpark. We hope any new proposal will be amended to reflect the concerns raised by us and others. Expand 19th May 2022 This application has now been withdrawn. While we supported the reinstatement of a café at the site, we did not support the substantially larger and expanded proposals for retail, a hotel, exhibition space and formal urban-style car parking. We hope any new proposal will be amended to reflect the concerns raised by Friends of the Lake District and others. Plans have been submitted to Eden District Council for the redevelopment of the well-known former café at Hartside Pass.The café was destroyed by a fire in 2018 but the site remains a popular stopping point because of the expansive views it offers over Cumbria and beyond.Whilst it is a brownfield site and the principle of a café and public viewpoint at the site is well-established, the site lies in a very rural, prominent and exposed location in the North Pennines Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and any redevelopment will need very careful consideration.We have some concerns about the scale and design of the proposal, which includes not only a café but a 10-room hotel, retail and exhibition space, viewing gallery and extensive paved, formal parking. Expanding such a rural site and attracting potentially larger numbers of visitors may also raise concerns about sustainable travel and other impacts, including impacts on tranquillity and dark skies. The proposal site also appears to encroach on to open access land.We’d be grateful for your thoughts on the proposal [email protected]You can view and comment on the plans here by entering reference 22/0071. Read our response here Image: Hartside by Claire Dowling
West Cumbria Coal Mine The Inquiry into the West Cumbria Coal Mine closed in the early hours of Saturday 2nd October 2021. The Inspector has now issued his report to the Secretary of State Michael Gove and his decision is expected by July 2022. Expand Update 4th October 2021 The Inquiry into the West Cumbria Coal Mine closed in the early hours of Saturday 2nd October 2021. The Inspector has now issued his report to the Secretary of State Michael Gove and his decision is expected by July 2022. Update 28th September 2021 Friends of the Earth Coal Mine Meeting Friends of the Earth has organised a free online meeting on Thursday 30 September where it will be providing a recap of what’s happened in its campaign so far, and outline what will be coming up. Bookings for this meeting can be made online now at: www.eventbrite.com/e/find-out-about-the-campaign-against-the-whitehaven-coal-mine-tickets-169086737985 Meeting title: 'A session for people that are concerned about the impact of the Whitehaven Coal Mine, but haven’t been involved in the campaign thus far'. This event has been created for people who are concerned about the impact of the Whitehaven Coal Mine but haven’t been involved in the campaign thus far. You’ll hear from a Friends of the Earth campaigner about the significance of this coal mine and what activities are coming up in the campaign. The event will finish with a discussion about what action you can take. Update 6th September 2021 Watch the coal mine inquiry via Youtube this week The coal mine inquiry is taking place from 7 September 2021 and is scheduled to last for 4 weeks. Listen to it live here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQqDetL1R5aRgbNm8PDViNw Complete a short survey to share your views Friends of the Earth is currently running a survey to elicit the views of people in west Cumbria. it is particularly interesting in knowing more about the views of Cumbrian residents on Whitehaven's future, and West Cumbria Mining’s proposal to establish a new deep coal mine in Whitehaven. Please do visit the link to complete the survey: https://friendsoftheearth.typeform.com/to/POH7tkAf South Lakes Action on Climate Change Publishes its Expert Proofs of Evidence On 31 August, South Lakeland Action on Climate Change (SLACC) published formal challenges to of some of the key points raised in favour of the proposed mine. The documents are quite long and technical, so we've summarised the main points below or you can read the full “Rebuttals” written by SLACC’s expert witnesses at the link: https://slacc.org.uk/the-truth-about-the-coal-mine/We would encourage anybody with an interest in this proposal to get involved. Please do complete Friends of the Earth's survey to let them know your views and do drop in via YouTube to see the inquiry in progress. Summary of SLACC 'Rebuttals' The quality of the coking coal (evidence from Professor Stuart Haszeldine) The coal has a much higher sulphur content than is acceptable for use in EU and UK steelworks. This means that around 87% of the coal will be exported outside of the UK and EU which tears up the “reducing the need to ship coal” argument. Any of the coal that is used within the UK and EU will likely need to be mixed with Australian low sulphur coal before it reaches acceptable sulphur levels, meaning that we will be importing coking coal from Australia rather than the US. Again tearing up the shipping agument relating to the climate impact of shipping coal in from abroad. Development of EU steelmaking without needing to use coking coal (evidence from Professor Lars J Nillson) The applicant’s proof of evidence appears to clearly assume that EU and UK legislated climate targets will not be met – this is clearly unacceptable The applicant’s evidence rests on a forecast which assumes the steel sector in the UK and Europe will not follow a two-degree warming pathway which is incompatible with legislated EU and UK emissions The applicant discounts much of the work going on in Europe to develop non-coking coal methods of creating steel and therefore grossly overestimates the amount of coking coal that will be necessary after 2030 Steel production in the EU has been declining since 2007, but the applicant’s proof of evidence posits an annual growth of 0.5% in EU steelmaking. This is a highly unlikely figure Carbon Capture and Storage is expensive and not very efficient. It adds about 30% cost to steel production using coal. As this is the case, EU steel-making is more likely to look to invest in modern lower carbon technology such as hydrogen based production. The “perfect substitution” argument (evidence from Professor Paul Ekins) the perfect substitution argument is contrary to the way in which modern markets operate: the Woodhouse mine will not “displace US mines with higher emissions” and therefore lead to a reduction in global GHG emissions. The US mines will simply sell their product elsewhere if the WCM mine opens, such that the total global level of GHG emissions will be increased, not reduced, by the opening of the mine. If, as a result of this mine being granted permissions, the UK is required to import low-sulphur coal from Australia to blend with their new domestic product, then Mr Truman’s case appears to be that the UK is effectively switching from the import of US coal to the import of Australian coal. (The analysis for Europe is the same). Even if there was already some existing import of Australian coal, the lower quality (as against US HVA coal) of the WCM coal would presumably require a higher amount of Australian coal. At best for WCM, this means there is no justification at all for making any claim that there will be net transport GHG savings. Inhibiting the transfer to low-carbon steel technology (evidence from Professor Paul Ekins) Steel makers are already looking to make the transition to lower-carbon methods of production in order to ensure that their business will remain viable within legislated climate targets, because they are aware that prices on carbon emissions are very likely to rise significantly over the coming decades, and because they see an emerging market for “green steel” and the opportunity to establish market share globally selling it. The availability of cheap coking coal, given the broadly comparable capital investments being considered might well influence steel makers away from the H-DRI technologies that are currently being demonstrated in the EU. The jobs argument (evidence from Rebekah Diski, Senior Researcher at the New Economics Foundation) Mr Kirkbride asserts that the project will create “up to” 532 permanent staff positions. However the applicant provided no clear methodology for how these employment numbers were ascertained and there is no independent verification of these figures, merely an assertion in the WCM documentation. Any apprenticeships offered are in the context of a development necessarily limited to 2049 for a technology rendered redundant because of climate change legislation. It is therefore difficult to see how such apprenticeships offer any meaningful long-term benefit to local young people, leaving them stranded in terms of future employment prospects. It’s the equivalent of offering apprenticeships in asbestos-based building techniques. Rather than committing to offering a high level of local jobs, this target is not actually set, but is something to “aim at” on the basis of what is commercially convenient. There will be no penalties if WCM fails to reach this target. Local skills shortages mean that WCM would need to employ a significant number of non-local staff and likely look beyond the UK for appropriately skilled mine workers. Only 3% of the respondents to WCM’s local labour survey would be realistically capable of working at the mine. One of the key obstacles to meeting Cumbria’s climate targets is appropriate investment in green skills (e.g. heat pump installers, insulation retrofitters, builders with low carbon construction skills etc). Clearly, the development of skills in the local area in respect of a project with a lifetime shorter than the average career (if the mine is operational 2024-49) which could otherwise be focussed on alternative low-carbon jobs will only intensify the local green skills shortage and also leave those employed by the mine without relevant skills for a net zero carbon economy. Update 29th April 2021: Whitehaven Coal Mine, final chance to have your say. The application for a coal mine at Whitehaven will be decided at a Public Inquiry in September this year. There is a final opportunity for members of the public to send in a representation to the Planning Inspector by May 6th next week. You can also ask to speak at the Inquiry. Read on for details of our concerns about the project and for how to send your comments to the inspector. You can send your comments to the Planning Inspector or register to speak even if you didn’t respond to the original planning application. Friends of the Lake District has written to the Planning Inspector reiterating our objections to the plans for the coal mine near Whitehaven. Our concerns about the mine can be summarised as follows: It is not in the public interest as it prioritises a small number of investors and employees above the international climate crisis and environmental damage; It contradicts local, national and international climate change commitments; It increases the risk that local, national and international greenhouse gas emissions targets will not be met; It will exacerbate local, national and international climate change impacts (including impacts upon the Lake District National Park and the English Lake District World Heritage Site and their settings); It will severely compromise Cumbria’s chances of securing a sustainable economic future and fulfilling its potential as a leader in the green revolution, It will lock West Cumbria into a short-term boom-and-bust cycle over a period of 25 years at the most, saddling communities with outdated high-carbon industrial infrastructure and skillsets and limited prospects to participate in the green revolution and a net zero carbon economy. It is not in the interests of the common good for development of this mine to go ahead. It is unsustainable in the true meaning of the word in that it will leave the world a worse place for future generations. Friends of the Lake District firmly believes that the environment and therefore the wider public interest is not served by this development. You can read our letter to the Planning Inspector here Friends of the Earth have put together a helpful information sheet on how to go about sending a representation to the Inspector and also how to register to speak at the Planning Inquiry. You can find the information sheet here, it contains some more information about the proposed development along with links to the original planning documents, Lord Deben’s letter on behalf of the Climate Change Committee and the email address/postal address to send your comments to. Update 16th March 2021: Coal Mine to go to public inquiry The Government has finally stepped in to review the decision to open a new coal mine in Cumbria. On Friday, the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government Robert Jenrick informed Cumbria County Council that he will ‘call in’ the proposed planning application for the mine – the approval of which would have significantly increased greenhouse gas emissions. This is exactly what we’ve been campaigning for, and is a huge step towards the coal mine being scrapped for good. A Public Inquiry will now be held by an independent Planning Inspector to assess the evidence around climate change, something which has been hard for Cumbria County Council to do objectively due to pressure from local politicians and interest groups. Public pressure has paid off once again. In his letter to the Council, Robert Jenrick stated that he was intervening, in part, because of controversy surrounding the mine. Together with other local and national organisations, we spoke up and our collective voice could not be ignored. Read the government's letter about calling in the coal mine decision here Update 10th February 2021 Friends of the Lake District welcomes Cumbria County Council’s decision to rethink the Whitehaven coal mine Commenting on Cumbria County Council’s decision to reconsider their earlier decision to approve the Whitehaven coal mine, Douglas Chalmers said: “The increase in carbon emissions from this mine alone would amount to more emissions than the Climate Change Committee has projected for all open UK coal mines up to 2050. A new mine jeopardises the UK’s goals of phasing out coal by 2035, and achieving net-zero emissions by 2050, as well as undermining the UK’s COP26 Climate Change Conference Presidency and international credibility. We do not need the mine, 85% of the coal to be produced is for export. “The County Council has the chance to show real leadership in the fight against climate change by recognising Cumbria’s potential to be at the heart of a Green Industrial Revolution. Mining jobs have a fixed timespan. Instead, there is the potential to create jobs that will be sustainable into the future by maximising Cumbria’s significant renewable energy resources and innovating sustainable alternatives to traditional manufacturing processes. Then we could all look forward to the future Cumbria deserves rather than regretting a missed opportunity.” FAQs about the proposed Coal Mine Q: The mine is for coking coal to make steel not for power stations generation, so it's OK isn't it?A: We understand that the coal is for coking plants. It still has a huge carbon cost. The total emissions from the mine (420 million tonnes of CO2) will exceed the whole of the UK’s carbon emissions in 2018. You can read more about this here https://www.green-alliance.org.uk/resources/The_case_against_new_coal_mines_in_the_UK.pdf Q: No one has invented a substitute for steel and it has to be made somewhere. The alternative to the Cumbrian mine is imported coking coal or exporting the steel making jobs.A: The steel industry is fast moving away from using coking coal. By the time the coal mine is up and running, Europe’s steel industry (where the 85% of the coal not used in the UK is supposed to go) will be quickly moving away from use of coking coal and towards hydrogen. Steel making using coking coal is old, dirty technology and the steel industry is quickly innovating to ensure they bring their carbon emissions down https://greenallianceblog.org.uk/2021/02/09/why-europe-doesnt-need-cumbrias-coking-coal/ Q: Imported coal will only ADD to carbon emissions as transport will have to be taken into consideration.A: If there were savings from reduced transportation of coal, these would not cancel out or neutralise the emissions from the mine operations. In the context of the UK’s target of net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 and global efforts to keep carbon emissions in line with a scenario compatible with no more than a 1.5*C increase, absolute reductions of emissions are required, rather than balancing off one set of emissions against another. Q: Without this source of coal the future of British steel is threatened. However burning coking coal won't go away to salve our conscience, it will just move to China where environmental protection is less enforced than in Britain, won't it?A: British Steel will only be using 15% maximum of the extracted coal. Using the import/export emissions argument, the 85% of coal exported from the UK will also cause emissions. British Steel is also moving towards lower carbon models of manufacturing, so it’s unlikely that not opening Woodhouse Mine will cause British Steel to collapse. Q: West Cumbria is a deprived area, with high unemployment and low wage jobs. This mine would help reverse that.A: The Local Government Association estimates that there will be nearly 900 jobs created in West Cumbria thanks to the development of green and low carbon technologies such as offshore wind and low carbon energy generation. We need to take a step for the future now rather than putting it off again and leaving the mess for future generations to deal with. Coal used to be one of our backbone industries, when we had fewer alternatives. The world is different now, we know more about how these industries damage the environment, so we need to look for better, cleaner ways of making things. Local Government Association statistics on green jobs in their report “Local green jobs - accelerating a sustainable economic recovery”: https://lginform.local.gov.uk/reports/view/lga-research/estimated-total-number-of-direct-jobs-in-low-carbon-and-renewable-energy-sector Q: The mine would be in Whitehaven, not the Lake District. So why are you objecting?A: Friends of the Lake District covers the whole of Cumbria, and exists to protect the landscape of Cumbria and the Lake District, for the future, for everyone. Q: You're a landscape charity, why are you objecting to this?A: As a charity that campaigns to look after Cumbria and the Lake District, we are very aware of the impact that climate change is having on our landscape and environment. The emissions that this mine will cause will originate from our backyard so to speak. We need to be calling out the danger of climate change to future generations, we need to give them the chance to appreciate the environment of Cumbria and the Lake District. Any process that will increase world carbon emissions this much needs to be opposed. It’s time to force progress on new industrial processes rather than looking back at the old damaging ways of doing things. Update 4th February 2021 Friends of the Lake District signs letter to the Prime Minister protesting the new Cumbria coal mine decision We have joined with 79 other concerned groups and written to the Prime Minister questioning why Robert Jenrick decided not to put the proposed Whitehaven Mine in west Cumbria through a Planning Inquiry process. Read more: Friends of the Lake District signs letter to the Prime Minister protesting the new Cumbria coal mine decision Read the full letter to the Prime Minister about the Cumbria Coal Mine here. 11th January 2021 We were very disappointed to hear on Friday that the Government has decided not to call in Cumbria County Council's decision to allow a new coal mine to be built near Whitehaven. We agree with Friends of the Earth and the World Wide Fund for Nature and others that this is the wrong decision in the face of climate emergency. Read more: Jenrick criticised over decision not to block new Cumbria coal mine 16th October 2020 We, along with several other organisations including the World Wide Fund for Nature, have written to the Secretary of State requesting that he ‘call in’, or reconsider, Cumbria County Council's decision to approve a new coal mine near Whitehaven. An Article 31 holding direction has now been placed on this application, to allow the Secretary of State time to consider whether call in is warranted. This means that Cumbria County Council cannot issue a decision notice until the Secretary of State has decided whether he will call in the application. Our concerns about this proposal relate primarily to climate change, which will affect many aspects of our lives and the environment both within and outside protected landscapes. We recognise that many support the scheme on the basis that it will provide jobs for the area. While this is of course important, we share the view of many others that in the context of climate emergency (as has been declared by the County Council), the economy should be supported in ways that will also help us to avoid or mitigate the issues of climate change, and not in ways that will further exacerbate them or that will make it more difficult to address them. Read more on the BBC website: Whitehaven coal mine approved for third time
A66 Upgrade Consultation The A66 upgrade east of Penrith damages the North Pennines AONB, harms wildlife and flouts the Government’s carbon budget. Expand 1st February 2022 We have today submitted comment to the project director A66 Highways detailing what we consider to be the inadequacies of the A66 Northern Trans-Pennine Upgrade Consultation. The full document can be viewed at the link. Our concluding comments detailed in this letter follow. Friends of the Lake District Inadequacies of A66 Consultation letter to NH (pdf) Conclusions: a. National Highways should not proceed with a DCO planning application until they have consulted properly and are clear which option is being progressed, and consult on those proposals. b. National Highways should have put forward an option to improve the safety of the A66 through junction upgrades, underpasses and bridges and use of average speed cameras without making the road a dual carriageway. We want to know why this option was not considered. c. Upgrading the A66 to a dual carriageway for its entire length from Penrith to Scotch Corner will make it more difficult to secure a sustainable future for Cumbria’s landscapes, people and wildlife. Implementation of this scheme would lead to significant damaging impacts on the natural capital of Cumbria and the North Pennines. This damage would include harm to protected landscapes, loss of and damage to habitats, severing of wildlife corridors, loss of flora and fauna, increases in noise, light and air pollution; local community severance and issues with flooding and run-off. d. The extra traffic from the eight schemes would increase carbon emissions by up to 3 million tonnes over the lifetime of the scheme (Table 7-2 in the GHG Emissions Assessment Appendix) e. The emissions resulting from the construction of the scheme would cause up to 1.4 million extra tonnes of carbon (Table 7-1 in the GHG Emissions Assessment Appendix) f. In total the scheme would lead to an increase of up to 4.4 million extra tonnes of carbon from extra traffic and the construction process. This is completely unacceptable in a climate emergency, and takes us further away from reaching our 68% cut by 2030 required under the Paris Agreement.g. It is unacceptable that consultees and the public were asked to assess this scheme without being provided with photomontages. A fly through over an inaccurately rendered cartoon depiction of the landscape at 50m height does not provide the information needed as it does not represent how people see the landscape. h. We have serious concerns about the sections from Temple Sowerby to Appleby (particularly at Kirkby Thore) and Appleby to Brough where the road goes into the North Pennines AONB. Please take these representations as coming from Friends of the Lake District, CPRE Cumbria Branch. 10th November 2021 Friends of the Lake District responded to the National Highways consultation on the upgrade of the A66. We raised concerns over the impact of the road on the landscape around Kirkby Thore, and in the setting of the North Pennines AONB, around loss of and damage to wildlife, and we also raised concerns about the huge amount of carbon emissions that the road will incur both in construction and use. You can read our response here. 15th October 2021 The A66 Upgrade East of Penrith damages the North Pennines AONB, harms wildlife and flouts the Government’s carbon budget National Highways (formerly Highways England) are consulting on building a new dual carriageway road along the boundary of the North Pennines AONB through some of the county’s most beautiful landscapes. Friends of the Lake District is concerned that the proposals to make the road “safer” are actually an excuse to make the entire road a dual carriageway, encouraging the use of this unique landscape as a rat-run for HGVs to cross the country. The landscape damage, loss of wildlife, severance of hedgerows and destruction of farmland that this road proposal will cause is of huge concern to us as a landscape charity covering the whole county of Cumbria. We have particular issues with the section of the road which will drive through the landscape north and east of Kirkby Thore. This increases the length of the road significantly, impacting on wildlife habitats, tranquillity and views into and out of the AONB. Of great concern are figures from the National Highways themselves which demonstrate that the road will increase carbon emissions over the 60 year appraisal period by 3,308,479 extra tonnes of carbon (the fourth biggest emitting scheme in the Government’s roads programme). This is just the total for the additional traffic caused by the scheme, and does not include the carbon emissions caused by the construction of the road (materials, land loss, trees felled etc). Upgrading this road will go a long way towards busting the UK’s carbon budget making it harder to meet the Government’s legally mandated carbon budgets, including reducing emissions by 78% by 2035 (sixth carbon budget), and 68% by 2030 (Paris Agreement). Throughout the route evaluation process, Friends of the Lake District has been asking for National Highways to look at upgrading junctions and building underpasses for farm traffic to increase safety on the A66, rather than wholesale dualling it. We are aware of the road’s poor record on safety, but know that these issues could be addressed through junction improvements, changes to alignment and lower speed limits. However, National Highways have not even looked at this option in their appraisal of the route, solely fixating on dualling the whole road. On this basis we do not consider that the proposal has actually adequately assessed all the options which is a legal requirement of the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations and we will be pushing for more information on why safety upgrades without dualling were never considered. You can see and respond to the proposals here https://highwaysengland.co.uk/our-work/a66-northern-trans-pennine/ Consultation closes on 4th November 2021.
Housing Development Proposed in St Bee’s Heritage Coast Extension Area We have challenged plans for 139 houses in the area proposed for the extension of the St Bee’s Heritage Coast. Expand Along with the National Trust, we have challenged plans for 139 houses in the area proposed for the extension of the St Bee’s Heritage Coast. Heritage coasts are defined to protect and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and heritage features of the coastline and to enable the public to enjoy and understand it. The St Bee’s Heritage Coast is the only such area in the North West. It currently stretches from St Bee’s village across St Bee’s Head to Saltom Bay but an extension was proposed and agreed in 2019 by The National Trust, Colourful Coast Partnership, Copeland Borough Council and Natural England, following an independent landscape assessment, although the area has yet to formally be defined as part of the Heritage Coast. As part of a larger proposal, which also includes the redevelopment of a large brownfield site, significant greenfield housing development is now proposed in the extension area, which is concerning in both landscape terms and for its potential to undermine efforts to secure the extension.We have raised our wider concern about the delay in finalising the extension with the National Trust, Natural England and Copeland Borough.If you wish to view and comment on the housing proposals you can do so here – enter application reference number 4/21/2432/0F1 Read our response here.
Cat Bells - Ullock Moss Car Park Proposals We are very pleased that the Lake District National Park has refused plans for the proposed 150-space car park at Ullock Moss, near Catbells, by 7 votes to 2. Expand 1 December 2021 We are very pleased that the Lake District National Park’s Planning Committee has refused plans today for the proposed 150-space car park at Ullock Moss, near Catbells, by 7 votes to 2. We spoke against the plans at the Committee meeting today, along with a representative from the local community. Members of the committee discussed a range of issues in coming to their decision - including the likelihood of attracting more cars, and impacts on landscape, the World Heritage Site and biodiversity. There was clear concern about whether the car park would really provide a solution and also about whether the criteria for allowing an exception to planning policy by allowing a new car park in open countryside were met. One member listed the various organisations that had objected, including Friends of the Lake District, and indicated that given there were so many with shared views, these organisations should be listened to. Another mentioned that in light of COP26 and the climate emergency it is time do something different in terms of finding solutions to parking and traffic issues. We thank all those who added their voice and support to our campaign to challenge the car park. We hope that this decision, along with two other decisions made in November to refuse proposals for new car parks, will provide the impetus to bring forward a range of positive, sustainable alternative and integrated travel options for National park visitors and residents alike. 3rd November 2021 A Development Control Committee meeting took place on Wednesday 3rd November where it was decided that the Ullock Moss Car Park application would be deferred to enable the Committee to carry out a site visit before coming to its decision. We welcomed the decision at the meeting by the Lake District National Park Authority to refuse two other proposals to extend the time period of two temporary car parks. Applications for new car parks at Waterfoot (next to Ullswater) and Lands Field (Coniston) were refused, due to concerns about impact on the landscape, conflicts with recently adopted planning policies, and the potential precedent for more similar proposals for car parks elsewhere in the national park. 29th October 2021 A Statement by Friends of the Lake District, with Campaign for National Parks, National Trust, Cumbria Wildlife Trust, Woodland Trust, West Cumbria Bus Users and West Cumbria Friends of the Earth. Friends of the Lake District and other leading environmental organisations are very concerned by the recommendation to approve the proposed 150-space car park at Ullock Moss near Catbells. This development would set a precedent that would have a major bearing on the wider future of the Lake District, what it will look like and what it will become – and other National Parks - and we urge the Lake District National Park Authority’s (LDNPA) Development Control Committee to reject this proposal. Whilst we very much recognise the need to address ongoing and growing issues relating to parking and vehicle numbers in the Portinscale and Catbells area, this proposal is not an appropriate solution. We agree with Campaign for National Parks and the National Trust that the plan raises fundamental policy conflicts in regard to development in the open countryside and the development of new car parks. Local planning policy calls for a ‘coordinated and strategic approach’ to decision making about transport. This proposal directly conflicts with this sentiment and is not part of an integrated plan that will enable sustainable travel. We also share the views of groups such as West Cumbria Bus Users and West Cumbria Friends of the Earth that it undermines the LDNPA’s own target to reduce, as a minimum, the % visitors arriving by car from 83% to 64% and to secure a modal shift towards more sustainable transport in the Park. Instead it will increase traffic to the area, harm the landscape and conflict with the Park’s own climate and ecological commitments. Lorayne Wall, Planning Officer, Friends of the Lake District said: “Allowing a new car park in this location threatens to set back plans for sustainable travel and a low-carbon Lake District before they even get started. We are simply asking that the Park adheres to its own plans and policies and implements them.” The Campaign for National Parks has raised concerns that allowing a permanent car park in this location will make it harder to persuade people to use alternatives to the car in future and will set a dangerous precedent. Ruth Bradshaw, Policy and Research Manager for Campaign for National Parks, said: "Campaign for National Parks remains strongly opposed to plans for a new car park in open countryside in an already very popular area. Allowing a new car park here will facilitate yet more car use and will do nothing to encourage more sustainable travel. It is in direct conflict with the National Park Authority's ambitions to reduce car use to help meet its net zero target. It also sets a dangerous precedent for other similar developments both elsewhere in the Lake District and in other National Parks. Given the urgency of the nature and climate emergencies, it is even more essential than ever that National Park Authority members consider the longer-term impacts of the decisions they make." Notwithstanding the wider implications, Friends of the Lake District also shares the concerns of Cumbria Wildlife Trust and the Woodland Trust about the immediate area. There would be significant harm to the area’s hydrology and to woodland that is of high ecological value and home to priority species protected under the NERC Act. The obligation for the applicant to demonstrate that their proposals would not adversely impact ancient woodland through increased pollution has not been met. With the decision on 3rd November coinciding with the UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26), it is an opportunity for the LDNPA to demonstrate its conviction in tackling climate change in line with the recent comments of its own Chief Executive: *“Our knowledge and expertise mean we are uniquely placed to lead on addressing the climate crisis….National Parks [are] at the centre of reducing emissions…and delivering ecological resilience. *“If we can inspire even a small percentage of our visitors to think about some of their lifestyle choices while they are enjoying the benefits of being in our amazing landscape it will make a difference”. The LDNPA’s own targets and ambitions in reducing car travel, in tackling climate change and in ecological recovery are laudable, but this proposal clearly conflicts with these. We therefore urge the Park’s Development Control Committee to support this ambition and refuse this application. *Press Release: UK’s 15 National Parks Release Joint Statement on Climate Change in lead up to COP 26 - National Parks 22nd October 2021 Like many people, we fully recognise the ongoing and growing 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, the proposed 150-space car park for Cat Bells at Ullock Moss, south of Portinscale, near Keswick, is not an appropriate solution for a number of reasons. Our key concerns are: The Lake District National Park Authority’s (LDNPA) own clearly stated vision for sustainable transport in the national park hinges on reducing car-based visits and use of more sustainable modes of travel to, from and around the national park. A new car park in open countryside will undermine this plan. The LDNPA’s own very recently adopted planning policies require that new car parks are only permitted when they are a proven and integral part of a strategic plan for sustainable travel in the area and meet certain other criteria. This proposal is not part of a strategic plan and does not meet the other criteria. The proposal will necessitate and encourage cars to travel through Portinscale village, exacerbating rather than helping to resolve issues there. The success of the proposal is reliant on some measures being agreed and implemented by other parties and there is no guarantee of this. A new car park and shuttle bus terminus would not conserve and enhance the character and special qualities and attributes of the National Park and World Heritage Site, including tranquillity, as is required by planning policy and legislation. We set these out in our letter of objection to the plans and many of our members and supporters to did the same. You can read our response here: Ullock Moss response (pdf) 24th May 2021 It’s not too late to join the fight! New policies make it clear that Ullock Moss is not the place for a new car park and that alternative ways of exploring the National Park are what’s really needed. The proposed car park at Ullock Moss near Portinscale could: Undermine hopes of achieving plans for Sustainable Travel and a Low Carbon Lake District Set a dangerous precedent for other temporary car parks across the National Park You’ll find details of the application by searching for application reference number 7/2020/2291 at www.lakedistrict.gov.uk/planning/planning-application-search-tool Many thanks to those of you who have already written to the LDNPA about this case. If you have not written already but are able to do so, we have prepared a template to help you (see below). A huge number of responses have been made to this planning application, and many share our concerns about the proposal, including many local residents of Portinscale itself. Like us, they recognise the need for parking and traffic issues to be addressed in the Cat Bells area, but also see that this proposal is not an appropriate solution. Join us in letting the Lake District National Park Authority (LDNPA) know that we will support them in standing by their local planning policies and their clearly-stated vision for sustainable travel in, to and from the National Park Help us ensure that this proposal is not allowed to set a precedent for temporary car parks to become permanent Write TO THE LDNPA to help the fight against this proposal. We've created a letter template to help you write your own response (with suggested text to guide you) and then email it to the Lake District National Park Authority. VIEW LETTER TEMPLATE(Template includes instructions on what to write and where to send) This case is not just about whether or not this particular proposal fits certain criteria or not. There is a lot more at stake, because this case could have significant bearing on the wider future of the Lake District, what it will look like and what it will become, as well as impacting directly on important views and habitats. It could undermine hopes of achieving plans for Sustainable Travel and a Low Carbon Lake District It could set a dangerous precedent for other temporary car parks allowed across the Park as emergency measures during 2020 to become permanent There are specific solutions for this area that are already set out by the LDNPA as part of a wider Smarter Travel plan for the whole of the National Park. This is the plan that should be implemented instead of developing new car parks. Comments on the proposal should be made to the Lake District National Park Authority by 25th June 2021. Responses submitted shortly after that will still be accepted up until the decision is made (currently expected to be 7th July 2021). We would be grateful if you would also consider copying us into your reply by copying our planning officer [email protected] into emailed submissions. Your comments will help to inform our own position on these issues. You'll find more background information in the planning section of our website, including details of our comment to date and a copy of a press release sent to highlight this issue. 4th February 2021 Like many people, we fully recognise the ongoing and growing 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, the proposed 150-space car park for Cat Bells at Ullock Moss, south of Portinscale, near Keswick, is not an appropriate solution for a number of reasons. Key reasons we have taken this approach are: The Lake District National Park Authority’s (LDNPA) own clearly stated vision for sustainable transport in the national park hinges on reducing car-based visits and use of more sustainable modes of travel to, from and around the national park. A new car park in open countryside will undermine this plan. The LDNPA’s own planning policies (current and proposed) require that new car parks are only permitted when they are a proven and integral part of a strategic plan for sustainable travel in the area and meet certain other criteria. This proposal is not part of a strategic plan and does not meet the other criteria. The proposal will necessitate and encourage cars to travel through Portinscale village, exacerbating rather than helping to resolve issues there. The proposal is reliant on some measures being agreed and implemented by other parties and there is no assurance of this. A new car park and shuttle bus terminus would not conserve and enhance the character and special qualities and attributes of the National Park and World Heritage Site, including tranquillity, as is required by planning policy and legislation. We have set these out in our letter of objection to the plans and urge our members and supporters to do the same. You can read it here: Ullock Moss response (pdf) Give your viewThe earliest date a decision will be made is 5th May. Although the official deadline for comments on the application was 5th March, responses will be accepted until a decision is made, so there is still time if you wish to respond. Please quote application reference number 7/2020/2291. More instructions for commenting on planning proposals are available here. 20th January 2021 Before Christmas a planning application was submitted to the Lake District National Park for a new car park at Ullock Moss, south of Portinscale, close to Catbells. The area had been used for temporary parking last summer. The applicants had carried out some pre-application consultation at the time and we made our concerns clear at the time which can be seen in our initial response.Members and supporters may wish to look at and comment on the application. Comments can be accepted up until the 5th March. The application can be viewed on the Park Authority website.Follow this link and enter planning reference number 7/2020/2291 in the search box to view the latest information for this proposal on the Park Authority website. 29th July 2020 We have today submitted a written response to the consultation Ullock Moss, Portinscale Car Park. We very much welcome the principle of managing the situation around access to Catbells and in principle may support the idea of park and ride type proposals. However, we think there are a number of issues around this particular location. Read our full response here> 29th June 2020 A pre application consultation is being carried out by Crosby Granger Architects for a proposed car park at Ullock Moss, Portinscale. We think the proposal raises concerns around the principle of a car park at this location, how this fits with planning policy and potential landscape impacts upon the site and its surroundings. We will be looking carefully at the proposal and responding accordingly. The link below provides information on the proposal and a link to survey monkey for your views. The consultation runs until 31 July. https://www.crosbygrangerarchitects.co.uk/ullockmoss/ Banner image by: Ian Brown
Luge Track and Chair Lift Proposal in the Eden Valley We’re supporting concerned members of the local community to challenge a proposal for a luge track, chair lift and associated buildings on Blaze Fell near Armathwaite in the beautiful Eden Valley. Expand Thursday 11th November 2021 'Protect Eden' has created an online petition 'Save Blaze Fell' asking people to sign up and say 'NO to the Luge Development on Blaze Fell'. Click the Change.org link below to view the petition: www.change.org/p/eden-district-council-save-blaze-fell-from-development (link opens in a new tab) Friday 15th October 2021 We have now submitted our response to this application Ref:21/0783 LUGE TRACK, CHAIRLIFT, OPERATIONS BUILDING, CAR-PARKING AND LANDSCAPING, LAND AT BLAZE FELL NORD VUE, ARMATHWAITE PENRITH CA4 9TN We'd like to thank all of you who have taken the time to submit your own comments about this planning application. Details on how to submit comment on this application are available below so please do consider contacting Eden District Council if you would like your voice heard. View / download our full response and our argument setting out why we feel that this application should be refused (pdf).blazefellluge210783Response.pdf Thursday 30th September 2021 Friends of the Lake District is supporting concerned members of the local community to challenge a proposal for a luge track, chair lift and associated buildings on Blaze Fell near Armathwaite in the beautiful Eden Valley. Blaze Fell is part of a sandstone ridge in open countryside and the site is immediately adjacent a County Wildlife Site and open access land. The proposal would have a significant impact on views and the character of the landscape in the area. We’re also concerned about the sustainability of the location – the developer anticipates that 80% of visitors will arrive at the attraction by car. We attended a packed public meeting on Wednesday 29th September, where many questions were asked of the applicants by local residents and Parish Councillors. Whilst we were pleased to hear that there are no plans to operate the site in the hours of darkness, reducing potential light pollution concerns, significant concerns remain about impacts on the local landscape, wildlife, traffic generation and the principle of this sort of development taking place in open countryside, contrary to Eden District Council’s planning policies. We will be submitting our response to the application during the coming weeks. If you’d like to view the application you can do so here by entering reference number 21/0783 and you can comment by emailing Eden District Council on [email protected] (being sure to state the reference number). Your response will carry most weight if you can explain whether you consider the proposal meets relevant local plan policies such as LS1 (‘Other rural areas’ section), EC4 (‘large scale tourism development’ section), ENV1, ENV2, ENV5 and DEV3. The local plan can be found here. If you do comment, we would really appreciate your letting us know that you have done so and what comments you made by emailing [email protected]
Waterfoot and Lands Field Car Parks We are pleased to report that these applications were both refused on 3rd November 2021 Expand 18th November 2021 We are pleased to report that these applications were both refused on 3rd November 2021. 22nd October 2021 Both of these proposals are to make temporary car parks more permanent. The proposal at Waterfoot relates to a car park that was installed to enable people to park whilst access to Pooley Bridge was restricted whilst the new bridge was being installed after the old bridge was washed away in Storm Desmond. The current proposal is to extend the use for a further two years. The proposal in Coniston is on a site that has previously been refused for a very similar development. This new proposal was to operate seasonally between March and November until the end of 2022.Despite being only temporary proposals, we have previously made clear to the LDNPA our view that it is important that the presence of temporary car parks does not set a precedent for more permanent development and that allowing applications for further temporary periods may eventually lead to difficulty resisting permanent car parks. Some of the concerns mentioned above also apply to the proposed car parks at Waterfoot and Lands Field and we fully support the reasons for the recommended refusal of these applications, which focus on landscape impacts and the lack of integration with sustainable transport measures. You can read our responses to these proposals here:Waterfoot (pdf)>Lands Field (pdf)> There are some differences in the circumstances and the parts of the key policies that are relevant, and these differences appear to account for the difference in the recommendation between the these applications and that for Ullock Moss. Ultimately, though, new car park proposals conflict with the clear need to move away from car-based travel and to incentivise and develop a range of sustainable and integrated alternatives that will reduce harm to the landscape and enhance people’s enjoyment of their visit to the Lake District as well as reducing carbon emissions. New car parks may have a role in certain situations, but only where they have a clear function within an integrated and strategic approach that genuinely supports a shift towards more sustainable travel. The LDNP have been very clear that this is their view too and we will be urging them to bear this in mind as they make their decisions. You can find a link to live stream the development control committee meeting and read the committee reports for all three proposals here www.lakedistrict.gov.uk/aboutus/committee-meetings-calendar/development_control_committee/development-control-committee-3-november-2021
St Cuthbert's "garden village" Carlisle Expand Update 29th October 2020 - Carlisle Southern Link Road Consultation The Carlisle Southern Link Road has now been approved by Cumbria County Council Update 14th September 2020 We attended a technical stakeholder workshop in Autumn 2019 to contribute to working up the detailed proposals for the garden village, including reiterating our messages about how the setting of protected landscapes, green infrastructure and sustainable travel should feature in the plans. We were also pleased to learn that the Garden Village will be subject to its own local plan document, meaning that specific policies for the Garden Village will be drawn up against which each of the planning applications will be assessed. Further information and latest updates can be found here. This project is closely linked with the Carlisle Southern Link Road application, which is progressing and which we recently commented on Update 14th September 2020 - Carlisle Southern Link Road Consultation We have recently submitted a response to the planning application for the link road. Whilst we recognise that the link road has Government support and is likely to go ahead, we have reiterated concerns raised earlier in the process about the principle of building the new road, explaining why more sustainable travel solutions should be prioritised. Our full response can be read here Update 15th July 2019 - Carlisle Southern Link Road Consultation We have now submitted our full written response to the Carlisle Southern Link Road public consultation. You can view or download our submission at this link. Carlisle Southern Link Road Public Consultation Response (pdf) Update 29th April 2019 - Carlisle Southern Link Road Consultation Cumbria County Council is currently carrying out a public consultation about proposals for the new Carlisle Southern Link Road. The consultation closes on 12th July. The proposal is closely associated with St Cuthbert’s Garden Village, which will involve around 10,000 homes being built south of Carlisle. Both projects have financial backing from the Government and so are highly likely to go ahead. The consultation enables residents to view and comment on the proposed route of the road and details such as location of junctions and bridges and opportunities for cycle provision and green infrastructure alongside the scheme. Friends of the Lake District will be responding to the consultation in detail once we have had a closer look at the proposals. The consultation can be found online at https://www.cumbria.gov.uk/cslr/ and there are a series of public drop in events in Carlisle (see webpage for details). Update 14 August 2018 We are pleased to see that preferences expressed in our earlier comments for smaller expansions to several settlements rather than one huge extension to Carlisle have been taken on board. We also welcome the many positive intentions set out in the consultation document, particularly for green infrastructure. However, we still have some concerns, including over the scale of and justification for the development; the reliance of the project on increasing road capacity through a southern link road; the likelihood of these positive ambitions materialising in the final plans and the lack of evidence of proper consideration of landscape and visual impacts. Read our latest response here Update 2 August 2018The deadline for the public to respond to this consultation is 10th August. There will be further opportunities to respond further along in the process though. Update 28th March 2018We have responded to the first consultation about the proposed 'garden village' south of Carlisle. The UK government has indicated that it is minded to support the development of an entirely new and very large settlement of up to 10,000 homes to the south of Carlisle and has awarded some initial funding for the development of this concept. Read our full response here.