UKC

Lakes NP car restrictions

Please Register as a New User in order to reply to this topic.
 fuzzysheep01 14 Nov 2021

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/nov/14/tourists-cars-may-be-banned-from-most-popular-parts-of-lake-district

Just seen this article. In my view some sort of means of limiting traffic in the Lakes is probably inevitable after the issues experienced in the last year or two. Personally I think it'd be a good move. Far preferable to a permit system, and hopefully it would increase the appetite for large scale free at the point of use public transport systems more broadly, with all of the environmental and economic benefits that could bring.

Thoughts/insights?

​​​​

 C Witter 14 Nov 2021
In reply to fuzzysheep01:

I think it could be a very good move and much needed solution to some of the problems facing the Lake District. On the other hand, I worry on two fronts:

1) current public transport within the Lakes is extremely expensive
2) how will it be flexible enough to allow climbers the sort of access they currently enjoy?

I spent years going to the Lakes on public transport. I could only get to certain places. Despite getting up at the crack, I'd never arrive before 10am. Sometimes, delays would mean connections were missed and I'd have to change my entire plan for the day. Then I'd have to run down the hill to catch the last bus, which would be leaving just as everyone else headed to the pub for a nice pint. The bus would then get stuck in traffic, miss a connection and I'd get home very late. All of this at extortionate prices. Given how bad the current system is, I don't feel a lot of optimism for the new system.

I hope that ways of massively reducing traffic can be found, whilst preserving access.

 LakesWinter 14 Nov 2021
In reply to fuzzysheep01:

If you want to limit traffic then shut certain valleys 10-4 or some such. This would get round the transport problem as public transport is so limited and also reduce traffic a lot.

 wercat 14 Nov 2021
In reply to fuzzysheep01:

Till I was over 30 I didn't drive or have a car (obviously).  I took buses to the Lake District and round the Lake District.  Now I have an income level where if cars were banned (w live just outside the NP) that would be it as current public transport is simply unaffordable, at least till I collect my bus pass if it isn't withdrawn before then (it's already jumped by six years in age/eligibility)

Sort frequency, availability and pricing out to make it cheap and I'll jump at it.  Without that - goodbye hills

ps - Love the idea of taking my bike into the Lakes on a non existent railway line!

Post edited at 17:21
 Doug 14 Nov 2021
In reply to fuzzysheep01:

Shame the journalist didn't do a little bit more research and describe the many schemes already running elsewhere in Europe.

 RobAJones 14 Nov 2021
In reply to C Witter:

> I think it could be a very good move and much needed solution to some of the problems facing the Lake District. On the other hand, I worry on two fronts:

> 1) current public transport within the Lakes is extremely expensive

Not the free ones? I agree it would help if a Keswick day rider was the same as a West Cumbria one (8.50 v 3.50?) For many of my friends all buses are free. 

> 2) how will it be flexible enough to allow climbers the sort of access they currently enjoy?

Not sure that is possible, but is a major problem, Shepherds seemed much quite this year because getting there involved a 20 minute walk or 5 mins. on your bike. The main problem with the free Cockermouth Buttermere bus this summer was how busy it was at peak times. I'd like to see more buses at these times and some later earlier ones, possibly funded by charging (about £4)

> I hope that ways of massively reducing traffic can be found, whilst preserving access.

I remember visiting the Polish Tatras in the '90's. I could see a similar system working in the the North Lakes. So you would drive to Cockermouth, Keswick, Penrith but then catch a bus up Buttermere Borrowdale ullswater unless you had a permit. 

In reply to fuzzysheep01:

I think care must be taken not to over react to recent year's lakes usage.

Taking draconian measures now only for the hordes to return to Benidorm etc would not do the lakes any good at all. 

I live half a mile from the np boundary. There is potential for restrictions to seriously impinge on the daily lives of those in my position. 

In reply to fuzzysheep01:

I think that, like Snowdonia, the main issue is too many tourists/visitors and not too much road traffic. However tourist-dependent local businesses may well not agree with that point of view. For example the cafe at the top of Snowdon no doubt does not want to see a fall in visitor numbers.

Personally I dislike park-and-ride schemes, preferring to travel in my own way and not take the bus - but if the roads and car parks are full then that point of view is unsustainable.

In reply to fuzzysheep01:

No sure about the public transport being expensive comment. You can get a 7 day unlimited bus use ticket for £29 that covers whole of Lakes plus select buses to Newcastle or Dumfries or Chester or Lancaster etc.  Just using a Lakes pay and display car park for up to 4 hours for 7 days will exceed that.

Post edited at 18:39
 C Witter 14 Nov 2021
In reply to Currently Resting:

£8.50 return from Windermere to Ambleside. Is that supposed to be cheap? You could also get from Windermere to Langdale for the same amount, but even so... not cheap for 30mins collective journey and not cheap compared to a car.

In reply to fuzzysheep01:

The obvious solution is a zip-line from Cockermouth bus terminal to the summit of Fleetwith Pike. 

In reply to fuzzysheep01:

Agreed. North Wales too? Close Llanberis Pass a weekends? 

 Wainers44 15 Nov 2021
In reply to fuzzysheep01:

I can see a scheme closing Wasdale for the school summer hols being attractive.  Lake shore no longer destroyed, or littered with BBQs, windbreaks, etc. Valley largely free of traffic.  Very inconvenient for climbers and walkers though? However, as Doug said, there are similar schemes to this in Europe that do seem to work?

Langdale as a valley with a through route maybe not so easy. All our family holidays were spent at a holiday park in Langdale, and unless residents of that park were exempt from the restrictions,  that business would be totally knackered. 

This year has been exceptional,  but at the peak of the visitor influx I think the numbers will remain just too high. 

Public transport in the busy parts, during the summer,  is pretty good,  but especially for families it's just too expensive.  OK the weekly passes etc are better value, but thinking back to our family hols up there, we wouldn't have gone for that as we would want to do a variety of things through the week.  Some in the NP, some outside, and many things in the quieter bits not served by buses anyway.

In reply to Presley Whippet:

I'm in a similar position and exactly the same initial reaction. If I can't drive to Buttermere via Loweswater from my house there'd be little point living on the edge of the NP!

 Doug 15 Nov 2021

Here's some detail on a French scheme that I've used which might be of some interest

https://www.claree-tourisme.fr/la-claree/sur-place/infos-pratiques

(In French)

Seems to work & the upper valley is a much more pleasant place than it used to be in summer, in winter the road isn't cleared & is used as an  XC ski trail

In reply to Iggy_B:

Sounds like you might be a neighbour given that route.

Over fangs? 

 wercat 15 Nov 2021
In reply to fuzzysheep01:

I want to make it clear that I am not opposed to reducing car use by making it unnecessary to get round the Lake District - in fact I've been wanting that for the last 30 years - just that the big negative is the cost of transport in Cumbria.  We use the park and ride by parking one stop from Newcastle airport and getting the Metro into town or to the coast and the staggering thing (apart from there being a 20th century public transport system) is the cost!  Parking for the day for £1 and freedom to use the whole network for a little over a fiver!

You dislikers might have access to affordable public transport.  We have one bus in and out per week and the cost of buses is prohibitive.  I'm wholly in favour of more and better PT,  It's a tragedy that people can't get to Keswick by train (taking their bikes too if they want) and use an integrated and affordable transport network.

Dislikers, please dislike this if you like the idea

Post edited at 10:06
 wercat 15 Nov 2021
In reply to Currently Resting:

I am sure about the affordability of buses - I've lived here for 30 years - compare to the ridiculously cheap cost of park and ride, buses and Metro  in the North East

I've wanted better public transport for over 30 years - I just don't believe we'll get it in my lifetime

perhaps, if the country wants to use us as its nuclear dustbin they could make it affordable to use PT here and make it available too!

Post edited at 10:06
 wercat 15 Nov 2021
In reply to purplemonkeyelephant:

electric zeppelin flights to the summits with a docking tower on every peak

 cragtyke 15 Nov 2021
In reply to wercat:

We were in Northumberland a few days back, walked from Alnwick to the coast and on to Alnmouth, caught the bus back, £3.70 for about 3 miles. But at least they seem to run up to about 11pm.

 Justaname 15 Nov 2021
In reply to fuzzysheep01:

My (albeit limited) experience of buses in the Lakes are that they are too expensive and the services are too infrequent and finish too early, e.g. the last bus from Keswick to Threlkeld in August is 7:30pm.

Buses won't cater for MTBers, Paddlers and all the Van Lifers unfortunately.

In reply to Bulls Crack:

> Agreed. North Wales too? Close Llanberis Pass a weekends? 

They're thinking about it

https://www.snowdonpartnership.co.uk/parking-and-transport

There was also a brief discussion on here

https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/hill_talk/eryrisnowdonia_parking_consultation-741120

One of the difficulties is that outdoor pursuits of all kinds have different needs from 'holiday' visitors. In particular, we often want to be at our chosen location earlier, and leave later.  Having to rely on bus services could be difficult.  On the the other hand, we must recognise that we are part of the problem.

 Andy Johnson 15 Nov 2021
In reply to fuzzysheep01:

1. Very much in favour. The current situation is unsustainable, especially in Langdale.

2. How would this affect the NT campsites in Wasdale and Langdale? Car parks too.

3. Hopefully this would end the 4WD damage to green lanes in Little Langdale and other places.

4. I suspect the schemes will default to servicing the needs of valley tourists rather than climbers and more ambitious hillwalkers. Winter provision will be telling.

Post edited at 11:11
 fred99 15 Nov 2021
In reply to :

If they were to "close" the Lake District to outside car traffic, then how would anyone arriving late on Friday evening get in ?

After all, many of us live far enough away to mean that we arrive quite late, and currently if we have accommodation arranged - B&B, Hut, campsite - all we have to do is keep driving.

The idea that we could empty everything from a car and transfer it to a (non-existent as they stopped hours ago ??) bus some time between 9.30 p.m. and midnight, which would then take a further hour to get to somewhere within a mile (maybe) of our potential lodgings just doesn't seem likely. Similarly when finishing on Sunday evening, transferring everything back to the homeward bound transport  - along with everyone else trying to do the same ! - just doesn't seem practical.

Public transport is all very well and good, but it needs to start early, finish late, have a massive kit storage area, travel into all the nooks and crannies of the area, and be reliable. If they came up with something that answered all of these needs, then I imagine the cost would be so prohibitive that the only people who could afford it would be turning up in Rolls Royce's and Bentleys.

Please note - I do say needs, not wants. Unless someone thinks it's OK to leave people on the side of the road 10 miles or more from their beds, whilst it pours with rain or snow comes down - we don't want the local hospitals (and mortuaries !) to be filled up with hypothermia cases.

Then what about businesses which have grown up - how many would survive a blanket traffic ban ? And how much could the NP end up paying out in compensation to bankrupted businesses if they entered into a class action ?

The other matter is - What if other areas respond in like mode ? The rest of Cumbria refuses to allow cars from INSIDE the NP to enter "their" roads. After all, what's sauce for the goose could become sauce for the gander.

Post edited at 11:19
In reply to fred99:

I think if your b&b was at the end of borrowdale then you'd effectively be a resident that weekend. But all those who simply wanted to do a loop from Keswick, up honister, around Buttermere... wouldn't be. Driving for the sake of it, or day visitors wouldn't have vehicle access. 

In reply to fuzzysheep01:

I would like to see a tourist tax applied to accommodation and used to fund a much higher level and coverage of bus service (including long hours to take account of e.g. going to the pub, so service from 0600-0000 on all routes) which would be free at the point of use throughout your stay.  The cost could be about £5 per night for indoor accommodation but substantially reduced (£1 maybe) for camping, recognising that camping is a budget choice.  Making the bus free at the point of use hugely increases people choosing to use it, as the OAP passes demonstrate.

Potentially add to that a congestion charge on a per-day basis, which would allow for people who would want to drive to their campsite but then park up all weekend and use the bus, as well as bringing in some more funds to fund the public transport options.

You could build a large park and ride at Oxenholme station, with the Windermere branch being upgraded and acting as the main way in.  There's already a car park there, you'd just have to double deck it.

Also good would be to improve the quality of bus interchange facilities.  Ambleside, for example, has a couple of bus stops next to a car park.  This should be a proper, attractive looking bus station in a prominent position (e.g. the current main car park) with quality facilities and staffing, again funded via the tourist tax.

Same deal for Snowdonia (much easier to do by bus - you basically only need 3-4 routes to cover the whole thing).

Talking of Ambleside, if you wanted to spend decently, I have wondered if it'd actually be better rather than having through services to Windermere from Manchester, to turn the branch into electrified light rail, with on-street running down to Bowness and Ambleside.  I think this would substantially increase usage compared to people having to switch to a bus at Windermere.

Post edited at 12:01
In reply to fred99:

As per my other post, I think the way is not a ban but a combination of a congestion charge and tourist tax.  Thus, you could drive to your accommodation if needs be (for camping, this will always be preferred - not everyone has super-lightweight kit, and camping that way is not viable for families with young children) at a cost, but you would then be motivated to stay parked up for the duration of your stay.

Tourist taxes work well for this sort of thing - the Swiss do them, for example.  It also deals with the way tourists aren't paying Council Tax despite most of the services in an area like the Lakes being for them.

Post edited at 11:59
 C Witter 15 Nov 2021
In reply to fred99:

On the subject of people in Rolls Royces and Bentleys, i.e. the wealthy, my other concern would be that people with second homes would manage to get residents' rights, creating a two-tier system for the very wealthy, where they can still whizz around unaffected.

On the other hand, lots of people don't have access to cars due to the cost or health issues. Lots of young people (i.e. teenagers, young adults) and older people (i.e. no longer driving/no longer wishing to drive, but forced to) in the area also have difficulty getting around. So, a decent PT system could be very beneficial for local and low-income people, if done correctly.

In reply to fuzzysheep01:

I am a bit sceptical when people point to successful schemes in Europe. They seem to run bus services so much better than the UK. Most of the buses I have used in Europe have been clean, frequent, cheap and reliable. 

If only the same could be said here. Privately-run services aren't profitable enough to run with sufficient frequency, especially outside peak times.  Publicly-run ones all too often are not given sufficient priority and eventually become starved of resources by cash-strapped authorities.  All too often the services become under-resourced, the vehicles grow old and tired, and services become slow and unreliable, while fares go up.

In reply to Howard J:

This is very true, though have you used Stagecoach's commercial network in the Lakes?  It's surprisingly good, not dissimilar to the other little rural-bus gem, Southern Vectis on the Isle of Wight.  Both a bit expensive but really quite good.

But I don't see any reason, other than political will, why things in the UK couldn't match Switzerland.

In reply to Neil Williams:

But is the political will there?  And after the initial enthusiasm and kudos of a shiny new scheme has worn off, will it still be there?  Will they still want to protect its funding when they are under pressure to cut costs and divert resources to other needs?

Among local voters I suspect opinion will be strongly divided between those who resent being locked out of their own communities by visitors' traffic and want that reduced, and those who are concerned about the effect it might have on their tourist-dependent jobs and businesses.

Maybe I'm getting too cynical in my old age.

 wercat 15 Nov 2021
In reply to Neil Williams:

what about people who don't live in the valley but are from nearby, force them on to the buses - if so where do they have to park for the bus ?  A free bus service would help but more likely that it would be priced for tourists spending higher on holiday than people in Cumbria forced out of their cars.  They would be placed at a disadvantage (lower residence status) compared with people coming and staying in hotels, guesthouses and campsites.  As long as that is addressed fairly and affordably.  The tourist bus prices are one reason transport is so expensive compared with the cheapness of the North East or London transport etc.   The nuclear premium should pay for very cheap transport and better infrastructure.

 wercat 15 Nov 2021
In reply to Howard J:

some of the Swiss people I've spoken to about the subsidised visitor travel passes (Swisscard etc) are very resentful of the fact that they don't benefit from the travel discounts available to tourists.  This would be even unfairer if it were to happen here as generally locals do not have Swiss levels of income.

In reply to wercat:

To be fair, we don't face Swiss prices either. 

In reply to Neil Williams:

Or just build a few more miles of track and have electrified rail all the way to Ambleside. 

 Justaname 15 Nov 2021
In reply to fuzzysheep01:

I think that the best they'll ever achieve is some pedestrianised zones in Bowness and possibly Windermere. To ease congestion in the lakes would need proper by-passes built around Ambleside and a link to Borrowdale that cuts out Keswick, neither of which are going to happen. A dedicated cycleway linking the old railway track to Borrowdale would be brilliant, but I can't help think that any of the above will happen as there simply isn't the space to build them.

 guffers_hump 15 Nov 2021
In reply to Howard J:

"All too often the services become under-resourced, the vehicles grow old and tired, and services become slow and unreliable, while fares go up."

This is done on purpose to push for privatisation.;

In reply to summo:

> Or just build a few more miles of track and have electrified rail all the way to Ambleside.

If Wordsworth managed to stop that way back when, there is no chance you'd get away with building a railway across the national park now (despite the line through the Peak not being at all disruptive and making much of it accessible without a car).  The WCML was meant to have gone through it!

A tram down the road, by contrast, would be entirely feasible if the money was there.

In reply to Neil Williams:

> If Wordsworth managed to stop that way back when, there is no chance you'd get away with building a railway across the national park now (despite the line through the Peak not being at all disruptive and making much of it accessible without a car).  The WCML was meant to have gone through it!

It's plain bizarre, not being able to build a clean green transport route through an area that sits in a national park which is almost all created by different stages and types of industrial destruction. 

> A tram down the road, by contrast, would be entirely feasible if the money was there.

That just adds another station, another change over. Imagine getting on electric train with your bike in say Manchester or Crewe, then hoping off at Ambleside and cycling traffic free into Langdale. 

Post edited at 15:57
In reply to guffers_hump:

> "All too often the services become under-resourced, the vehicles grow old and tired, and services become slow and unreliable, while fares go up."

> This is done on purpose to push for privatisation.;

Or because those who want everything in public ownership aren't willing to pay enough tax to fund them sufficiently, meaning they can't invest for the future. 

In reply to summo:

> That just adds another station, another change over. Imagine getting on electric train with your bike in say Manchester or Crewe, then hoping off at Ambleside and cycling traffic free into Langdale. 

True.  That's why I think the Keswick branch would actually have done better than the Windermere one had it not closed - it goes right to where people want to be, not to an interchange on the edge.

In reply to Neil Williams:

That's the problem, the more changes required to get from home to the hill, it just becomes unusable for many and they will drive as near as they can. 

Uk national parks aren't great nature reserves, wildernesses, they are areas set aside for leisure. Everything should be done to facilitate that, there's too many treating them like they are saving the great barrier reef etc...  not some over grazed mono culture hills and in the case of the lakes, many man made reservoirs. 

In reply to summo:

I don't disagree.  Thing is, if people have a serious voice about putting HS2 through random bits of woodland in fairly boring parts of the South East and the Midlands, you're going to have Swampy's whole family trying to stop a Windermere-Ambleside heavy railway being dug into the hillside.

In reply to Neil Williams:

> I don't disagree.  Thing is, if people have a serious voice about putting HS2 through random bits of woodland in fairly boring parts of the South East and the Midlands, you're going to have Swampy's whole family trying to stop a Windermere-Ambleside heavy railway being dug into the hillside.

Totally agree, they'd rather choke on diesel fumes walking along narrow paths right next to the road. A road that's also not wide enough for folk to cycle safely. Sadly those who just want to drive a to b and enjoy the views only from within their car are the majority. 

 Wainers44 15 Nov 2021
In reply to summo:

> That's the problem, the more changes required to get from home to the hill, it just becomes unusable for many and they will drive as near as they can.

That's true, but its not as simple as that. The facilities provided and the ease that people can plan trips etc are also important.

Keswick is a good, bad example.  Main bus terminus is an open air lay-by. Limited time parking in the supermarket next to it. Only a couple of printed timetables. No other info. When it rains you get soaked waiting for the bus, or stand with the smokers under the canopy attached to the supermarket. And of course you have driven through most of the town centre to get there in the first place!

Keswicks pool is now closed, permanently.  Although they need a new pool, maybe that site is a better one for a bus station?

In reply to Wainers44:

I think the site is fine (it doesn't make sense as a park and ride location as that would make the traffic in Keswick terrible).  It just needs a nice overall roof and passenger information screens.

If you wanted to do a P&R for the north Lakes, best thing to do would be to agree something with Rheged to use that as a gateway, it's already quite a good "visitor centre" type thing.

Post edited at 17:36
 Marek 15 Nov 2021
In reply to Neil Williams:

> As per my other post, I think the way is not a ban but a combination of a congestion charge ...

I'd very anti-congestion-charge - or for that matter any charge based demand management. That just makes the NP into a rich person's playground. For them a CC is peanuts, but for the less well off it a complete stopper. Is that we want? Yes it'll help with 'congestion in the NP', but it's hardy a socially equitable solution.

I'm toying with the idea of closing selected roads* to non-local cars/vans/coaches during the day. Local PT and residents ( and businesses) can carry on using them. Staggered times based on local patterns/seasons etc. 

Note: this is not concerned about 'other' issues like raising money or limited climate change. It's just about how to address the congestion problem in a (tolerably) socially equitable way.

* E.g., all road southbound from Keswick; Wastwater, Ennerdale, Langdales (both); west from Boot; and between Coniston and Ambleside. Something like that.

Post edited at 17:43
In reply to Marek:

> I'd very anti-congestion-charge - or for that matter any charge based demand management. That just makes the NP into a rich person's playground. For them a CC is peanuts, but for the less well off it a complete stopper. Is that we want? Yes it'll help with 'congestion in the NP', but it's hardy a socially equitable solution.

Actually, in many ways it is.  The money from it from those people who would pay it can be put into making the bus network excellent for everyone.  That actually very much helps poorer people who don't own a reliable car or don't own one at all.

You can't see it separately from the funds it would bring in.  That redistribution of rich peoples' money to something for the greater good is absolutely key in why congestion and pollution charges are a socially equitable solution.

(Other way you could do basically the same thing is to make the whole Park a controlled parking zone, with a £20 per day Permit needing to be purchased to park anywhere, discounted to say £5 for parking at private businesses only so people could drive to the hotel/campsite, park up on site and leave their car for the duration of stay for much cheaper than using it)

Post edited at 17:53
In reply to fuzzysheep01:

I don't see how cars could actually be banned.  Most of the valleys are important through routes.  All the valleys have too many businesses, residences and accommodation providers to simply close the gates.  Locals would have to go about their business.  Visitors would have to be allowed to get to their accommodation, after a long drive they're not going to struggle onto a bus with their suitcases, kids, dogs, sporting equipment and supplies. It would be impossible to stop everyone entering the valley to check that they had a valid reason to be there.  OK, not impossible, but the queues would go back to the M6.

The Welsh consultation is contemplating removing, or at least reducing, parking provision in the central area.  However there most of the parking is on-road or in council-owned car parks and therefore under their control.  In the Lakes my impression is that most of the parking is in private hands, in particular the National Trust.  Will the NT be willing to give up what I guess is an important source of income? Maybe, if they're compensated sufficiently for it. But will their members allow it? Free parking is a valuable perk of membership. And what's to stop farmers opening up a field for parking for the 28 days a year which they're permitted before they need planning permission?

I can see that shuttle services to specific honeypots could work - Hawkshead, for example.  And I agree with LDNP that there are too many visitors (but that doesn't include me of course ) Certainly discouraging those holiday visitors with little real interest in the area, and encouraging others to move between popular attractions by public transport could bring some benefits, but trying to exclude cars from the popular valleys is not a realistic proposition.

 Wainers44 15 Nov 2021
In reply to Neil Williams:

Yes Rheged would be a good site for the P&R. 

On a sunny day the Keswick location is OK, especially with Skiddaw towering over it. On a rainy day it's not a good place for a family to wait for a bus.

In reply to Wainers44:

> On a sunny day the Keswick location is OK, especially with Skiddaw towering over it. On a rainy day it's not a good place for a family to wait for a bus.

Which is why it needs a proper building etc.  But the location is good - very central and the supermarket is handy.

 wercat 15 Nov 2021
In reply to Neil Williams:

unless you issue exemption permits for everyone in Cumbria that would be the kind of horrendous scheme that encourages tourists but penalises the relatively local.  I can't afford to pay £20 to visit Keswick - the fuel is cost already limits car usage.

you could end up making it prohibitive for people to visit friends and relatives.

Unless we reverse the trend of National Parkspread (note the creep of the YDNP eating parts of Cumbria up towards the Eden Valley) and just have a tiny core of a NP with buses only for all but inhabitants of that tiny area?  Premium prices on all campsites and overnight accommodation within the park on the basis that the polluters pay?

 As the NPs have exacerbated living and housing costs, perhaps remove them all together?

Perhaps a high premium tax on all outdoor shops too to encourage shops that sell necessaries for inhabitants of the area instead of 5001 varieties of the same outdoor brands/bistros/expensive coffee shoppes?

Post edited at 18:17
 Wainers44 15 Nov 2021
In reply to Neil Williams:

> Which is why it needs a proper building etc.  But the location is good - very central and the supermarket is handy.

 Location is excellent.  If the plan is to increase its use, the space available is insufficient though. You could redesign the supermarket car park, or better utilise the bus holding area nearby,  but its all just a bit too busy already and a bit too tight. The ex Leisure Centre would be better as the main hub, and you can spring access straight off the A66 reasonably easily.

In reply to wercat:

Why could you not visit by public transport, given that the idea of the scheme is that that would be considerably improved using the funding?

People just outside London aren't exempted from the ULEZ/C-charge.

Post edited at 18:17
In reply to Howard J:

You don't close the roads, just have number plate scanners. Non resident, not a local business.. then expect a letter with a big fine. There's a difference between say the Ambleside to Keswick road, and the loop many drive through little langdale, over passes etc.. the system could be smart enough now that it pre scans your reg and warns you visually a km before a turn around point. 

 wercat 15 Nov 2021
In reply to Neil Williams:

well, perhaps everyone should have to visit by public transport as if coming off the airport with your alpine gear for the Alps - encourage people to travel light and tread lightly on the landscape - come to think of it it could be marvellous to have no traffic other than local farmers/doctors etc!

Electric vehicles to shuttle heavier gear like Zermatt.  All the over 60s will just have to carry heavy rucsacs as if they were teenage backpackers in their prime.  Or they could employ impoverished locals/vagabond climbers as native porters.

you'd probably want the roadheads close to motorways - come off the M6 into a tunnel exit for vast caverns of stored vehicles where you pick up local services.

Rheged is a significant problem to local traffic ever since it opened and now increasingly so due to its daft traffic arrangements directly on to a roundabout on a major route, but that's our local planners for you - read up on John Moffat's career as a councillor on the planning committees, carrying on after public censure in a enquiry by the Local Governemtn Ombudsman

Thinking about it - the best way to store vehicles fairly and with less impact is to have the park and ride hubs round a very large perimeter from the LDNP, perhaps a perimeter line about 25 miles from the boundary so the very large number of vehicles is spread widely

Post edited at 18:29
In reply to wercat:

> Electric vehicles to shuttle heavier gear like Zermatt.  All the over 60s will just have to carry heavy rucsacs as if they were teenage backpackers in their prime.  Or they could employ impoverished locals/vagabond climbers as native porters.

You speak as if trolley cases don't exist.  What year is it again?

 Marek 15 Nov 2021
In reply to Neil Williams:

> Actually, in many ways it is.  The money from it from those people who would pay it can be put into making the bus network excellent for everyone. 

So rich people are free (for all intents and purposes) to drive around the NP as they wish while the rest of us have to put up with whatever PT is available - and I'll bet serious money that it'll never be adequate (in terms of frequency and timing) for climbers and serious walkers. A quick google suggests that running a bus cost about £1000 a day (6am-midnight). For an twice-hourly service (Swiss standard) you'd probably need about 4 buses per route. For decent coverage of the NP I'd guess 20-30 routes? So we're talking about £100k a day. Every day. That doesn't look like the sort of money you could get via a congestion charge (£20 x 5k cars?). And how long will it be before 'cost-cutting' will remove the largely empty buses in the early morning and late evening. Or outside the summer season. Trouble is you can't have buses lying idle (too expensive), so seasonal variation (i.e., for tourists) is also untenable. I just don't see it. 

And I still don't see how letting the rich have the 'freedom of the hills' when others don't is socially equitable. I'd rather see a car-registration based permit system (for non-locals). First come first served, bookable arbitrarily in advance, limited outstanding booking at any one time (variable by season/popularity).

In reply to fuzzysheep01:

Of course the situation in the Lakes is unsustainable  - but you can't reverse 50 years of encouraging people to enjoy our NPs then come up with a policy like this at a stroke of a pen! It fails at the most basic scrutiny. Is there something of a broad idea there that might work? Yes  - now go away, consult, then come up with something that addresses the 1001 practical issues, then put the infrastructure in place...... That takes us to about 2030

In reply to WVRox:

The answers is easy. Improve town planning, have more green spaces within all towns and cities, fund all sports facilities better, build more, make them affordable... folk won't feel so much need to drive 200miles of congested roads on a Friday night for 36hrs of open space, then drive home again. 

 RobAJones 15 Nov 2021
In reply to Marek:

> A quick google suggests that running a bus cost about £1000 a day

That's gone up a lot since I finished work. Just over £200 per day for a 30 seater 

>(6am-midnight).

Granted it wasn't for that length of time, but I don't think there is any need to close the roads until about 8am and you wouldn't need many to still be running after 8pm.

I think the plan is to do it on selected days (Easter, Bank Holidays?) A you suggested earlier I really like the idea of Borrowdale, Buttermere having traffic restricted between say 8 and 6. Residents would be exempt along with trades working those weekends. Guests and campers need to be allowed to drive to their accommodation initially, but could then be subject to restrictions and a 20mph speed limit. Parking in Cockermouth and Keswick needs some  thought /work. I'd like to see this pilot being free, like the Buttermere bus this year. 

The idea of a family being able to cycle on relatively traffic free roads or the ability to climb at Shepherds with no worries about where to park seems far preferable to sitting in a queue from the Bowderstone to Keswick on a glorious Easter Saturday afternoon. 

 Ridge 15 Nov 2021
In reply to wercat:

> unless you issue exemption permits for everyone in Cumbria that would be the kind of horrendous scheme that encourages tourists but penalises the relatively local

This seems to have been overlooked by everyone who doesn't live adjacent to the park.

Why should a wealthy family who can afford to live in the NP be allowed free access, whilst a poor family living just outside the NP, (who pay their council tax to the same local authority), be regarded in the same way as someone up from London for a couple of weeks?

In reply to Ridge:

Why can't they use public transport?  If they did they would be beneficiaries.

 Ridge 15 Nov 2021
In reply to Neil Williams:

> Why can't they use public transport? 

I can't imagine the bus timetables would align with work/shift patterns, or would, (for example), run from Cleator Moor to Mungrisedale for anyone doing the Blencathra fell race after work.

In reply to Ridge:

> I can't imagine the bus timetables would align with work/shift patterns, or would, (for example), run from Cleator Moor to Mungrisedale for anyone doing the Blencathra fell race after work.

So you'd pay, and car share with other participants to keep the cost, and the number of cars, down to a minimum.  Events could have social media pages where people could arrange this between themselves.

Most of this thread is basically summed up as "I want other peoples' cars to be banned so I can use mine".  That is not the idea.

The reason residents would have to be exempted is that they need their own cars to go other places, and for work (e.g. farming) purposes.  I suppose this adds weight to the controlled parking zone idea if you were to exclude certain car parks from mandatory charging, e.g. 2 hours max at a supermarket, as then those living in the Park would have to pay to drive to Langdale too.

Post edited at 21:11
In reply to Neil Williams:

I fear you have little knowledge or experience of life in Cumbria.

In reply to Presley Whippet:

> I fear you have little knowledge or experience of life in Cumbria.

I do know it is rather car dependent, which conflicts with getting cars out of the National Park.

 wercat 15 Nov 2021
In reply to Neil Williams:

I had to go to Grasmere for my first Jab  (closest available offer)- took me into the NP even though I live outside it.  Other options for appointments also involved travelling through the NP.  People who live in Cumbria need to travel in Cumbria - you can't just put up an iron curtain at the edge - that's why I suggest a 25 mile perimeter within at which all tourists have to choose to park.  You'd need smaller hubs than the external perimeter travel interfaces within in the DMZ between the perimeter and the NP boundary for locals not living in the NP to get into the cheap travel network - that way you lot would not be inflicting mass traffic fumes and congestion on a small area just outside the NP blighting our lives with traffic and huge concrete parking deserts/service stations

ps have you thought what would happen to property/accommodation  prices within the NP area if they carried residency privileges?  They'd be bought up by people personally and London businesspersons trading in them as appreciating assets.  Any one not in the bonanza would have serf status pushed out of the NP to find a way of travelling in daily to service the needs and whims of the rich.

Post edited at 22:17
In reply to C Witter:

This is tourists, why buy the most expensive tickets when you don’t have to? Plus the car will involve car park fees meaning not really cheaper.

Post edited at 22:26
In reply to wercat:

> People who live in Cumbria need to travel in Cumbria - you can't just put up an iron curtain at the edge

You could say the same about the boundaries they are putting up around cities. It’s not convenient but the problems we have created don’t have easy no cost solutions. 

 RobAJones 15 Nov 2021
In reply to fuzzysheep01:

Local news has just claimed that running more park and ride buses next year is being considered, but there are currently no plans to ban cars. 

In reply to wercat:

> ps have you thought what would happen to property/accommodation  prices within the NP area if they carried residency privileges?  They'd be bought up by people personally and London businesspersons trading in them as appreciating assets.  Any one not in the bonanza would have serf status pushed out of the NP to find a way of travelling in daily to service the needs and whims of the rich.

That happened 20 years ago, what percentage of say 2 bed houses in any NP are sold to a young local born and working in the same NP? From my experience of LD and YD I'd say way less than 10%.

Many houses are sold to southerners who sell their London home for £1m, then buy a 2 bed 'cottage' for £1/2m banking the rest as a pension pot.

In reply to Ridge:

> I can't imagine the bus timetables would align with work/shift patterns, or would, (for example), run from Cleator Moor to Mungrisedale for anyone doing the Blencathra fell race after work.

I think climate change more than NP congestion might in time curtail what could be considered non essential travel for the sake of exercise. I'm not suggesting it's a good thing, mid week sport is great, I used to love the cumbrian gallopen.

 C Witter 16 Nov 2021
In reply to Currently Resting:

For a day trip to the Lakes for my partner and myself from Lancaster, I used to pay over £40 a pop. We would travel with two "Lakes Ranger" tickets on the train to Windermere or Penrith and then buses on to Coniston, Ambleside, Grasmere, Langdale, Patterdale or Keswick. Those were the only places that felt worthwhile trying to get to, in terms of travel.

Why would we get those tickets? Simply: 1) the train part made it quicker and even more significantly 2) getting the train meant you didn't have to have your breakfast and then sit on a toiletless bus for hours. Trying to travel without a toilet would have induced a panic attack in my partner.

We got our first car, in our thirties, in the spring of 2020. Suddenly I could visit Wasdale, Eskdale, the Duddon, Swindale, Buttermere; Pike O'Blisco without having to walk up from the valley; other places, too... Borrowdale, Langstrath and St John's in the Vale became doable in a day. Petrol would be negligible and parking costs were almost always avoidable - even in Langdale. I could get up later and be there earlier; in the summer, it became possibly to stay out climbing until 8, 9, 10pm. After work, I could leave Lancaster and go running in Coniston or the Howgills; in the summer, I could sneak out at 3.30pm and have a great evening climbing at White Ghyll or Black Crag (Wrynose). Being able to drive has been really enriching, during a generally pretty bleak couple of years.

So... that's why I didn't get your £29 for a week whatever-clever-buggers ticket.
 

 guffers_hump 16 Nov 2021
In reply to summo:

Hmm, I think it is people who don't want things in public ownership are the ones who probably don't pay enough tax.

In reply to summo:

> You don't close the roads, just have number plate scanners. Non resident, not a local business.. then expect a letter with a big fine.

Whether its a physical barrier or ANPR, it's more complicated than "locals good, outsiders bad".  Not all out-of-area traffic is tourists.  Local businesses are served by out-of-area suppliers, and perhaps out-of-area staff. Most of the valleys are through routes - the Little Langdale loop could be closed to non-locals without causing too many problems, but most of the others are essential.  There are of course alternative routes, but these would add considerably to the cost, journey time and emissions.

Are you going to prevent visitors from reaching their accommodation? That will devastate all the hotels, B&Bs and campsites in the valleys, and the pubs and shops they support. Many farms only keep going because they have diversified into tourism. 

People can be incentivised to use public transport if it is affordable, convenient and reliable. Car use can be made more inconvenient and more expensive, for example by restricting parking in the valleys.  However I don't believe banning tourist cars is a practical proposition and I will be interested to see how the LDNPA proposes to do it.

 Jimbo C 16 Nov 2021
In reply to fuzzysheep01:

I'm wondering to what extent the number of holiday lets available has influenced the build up of visitor numbers to unsustainable levels. So here's an idea; heavily tax second home ownership in some areas and use the money to fund infrastructure and subsidise public transport. Over time the number of holiday lets will decrease, and therefore so will visitor numbers (OK, that doesn't affect day trippers and campers, but they will have more public transport options). House prices will stagnate, potentially making them more affordable to locals. The possible downside is that less visitors may reduce tourist industry revenues, but this might be offset by day trippers and campers who tend to spend locally rather than holiday homers who's money goes to distant landlords and supermarkets.

In reply to fuzzysheep01:

Comparisons with Zermatt are misleading. Zermatt is a destination town at the head of a closed valley with no through traffic.  Outside the town there are only a few attractions, and most can only be reached on foot or by cable-car or funicular.  

The Lakes is a large sprawling area with many attractions., and the valleys are mostly through routes.  People don't confine themselves to the attractions immediately around where they are staying. There would have to be a very effective public transport system to enable them to travel around.  That's not inconceivable, but I think it would lead to a concentration of visitors staying in the main hubs, which is probably not good for those towns and would be damaging to accommodation providers in the valleys.  Why stay in Borrowdale if to go anywhere else you would first have to get a bus into Keswick?  You might as well stay in Keswick and avoid the extra hassle.

To be clear, I am obviously not against encouraging people to use public transport.  However these have to be well thought out schemes which balance the competing needs of all the different stakeholders.  People will be happy to use whatever is most affordable and convenient, and if car travel has to be be made more expensive and inconvenient in order to tip the balance in favour of public transport, so be it. Carrot is probably more effective than stick, although some stick might be necessary. However I don't think outright bans on vehicles, expect perhaps in very limited areas, is going to be workable.

In reply to guffers_hump:

> Hmm, I think it is people who don't want things in public ownership are the ones who probably don't pay enough tax.

Sorry, I didn't realise there were different tax rates according to views on states services. 

In reply to Howard J:

I agree, but if say a camera in borrowdale flags up a frozen food supplier from Lancs using a 20 ton truck to deliver to hotel, it's pretty obvious. 

Yes, it will be a pain, it will be awkward to implement perfectly, but plenty other places manage it. The biggest problem is Brits are wedded to their car and won't respect local rules or road signs, there will be big rants about rights, paying road tax etc..  

In reply to Howard J:

> People can be incentivised to use public transport if it is affordable, convenient and reliable. Car use can be made more inconvenient and more expensive, for example by restricting parking in the valleys.  However I don't believe banning tourist cars is a practical proposition and I will be interested to see how the LDNPA proposes to do it.

It's fairly questionable if you'd need to ban cars 24/7/365, anyway.  Even Langdale isn't busy *all* the time.   I bet if I went there now it wouldn't be.

For Langdale specifically, managing the parking (with prebooking as per Pen y Pass, and enforced double yellows all down the road on both sides) coupled with an increase to the existing bus service would probably deal with it sufficiently.  There isn't really a great issue with people driving to the campsite, as that will tend to be (a) in one direction at any given time, and (b) mostly not when people are going there to walk.

 Ramblin dave 16 Nov 2021
In reply to Howard J:

> To be clear, I am obviously not against encouraging people to use public transport.  However these have to be well thought out schemes which balance the competing needs of all the different stakeholders.  People will be happy to use whatever is most affordable and convenient, and if car travel has to be be made more expensive and inconvenient in order to tip the balance in favour of public transport, so be it. Carrot is probably more effective than stick, although some stick might be necessary. However I don't think outright bans on vehicles, expect perhaps in very limited areas, is going to be workable.

The article originally posted talked about car bans at peak times and in "the most popular valleys", with Langdale and Wasdale being given as examples, which to me feels like reasonably limited areas. You could probably make a similar case for the top ends of Borrowdale and Buttermere.

I think the bigger picture thing here is that we have a situation where extremely large numbers of people are using a very inefficient form of transport to travel along essentially very similar routes, and trying to replace some of the hundreds of cars schlepping along the side of Windermere and through Ambleside to get to Langdale with a far smaller number of buses seems like an absolute no-brainer of a thing to want to do. Actually finding the right combinations of carrots and sticks and rules and infrastructure to achieve it without causing some sort of unintended consequences is not easy, but it's going to take some sort of bold steps to get there, and I'm glad that people are actually talking about trying some stuff out rather than just sitting on their hands running consultations and not doing anything until they can come up with a complete and perfect solution that no-one can find anything to complain about even on paper, because honestly I doubt that that would ever happen and we'd just be stuck with traffic fumes forever.

In reply to summo:

> I agree, but if say a camera in borrowdale flags up a frozen food supplier from Lancs using a 20 ton truck to deliver to hotel, it's pretty obvious. 

But how would the system tell if it was delivering to a local business or simply using a through route?  Tracking the number plate across the park starts to raise privacy and data protection issues.  And not all business use is that obvious.  I sometimes visit the area on business as well as for leisure, and use the same private car for both.  Often I time the business trip to fit in with the leisure one.  On the other hand, residents could be using their vehicles for leisure purposes.  Asking everyone to justify their visit would be very difficult and probably very costly to administer.

> plenty other places manage it

Can you give examples, preferably ones which are comparable with the Lakes' pattern of tourism?  I am aware of the Alpine Pearls scheme, but those appear to be individual villages where people are encouraged to stay in that immediate locality. Many visitors to the Lakes want to explore the whole area. Even the Alpine Pearls don't ban you from arriving by car, although you're discouraged from using it once you're there. 

Something like that within individual valleys might very well work, although I suspect they would mainly attract those who would stay in the valley anyway.  You would still have to let people get to their accommodation - I can't see an Alpine Pearls system being able to cope with people arriving at various times late on a Friday night needing to be transferred to accommodation spread along several miles of valley. I not so sure it would be attractive to the sort of visitor who wants to visit Wordsworth's cottage one day, the Pencil Museum the next and then the Honister via ferrata another, all from the same base.

 TheGeneralist 16 Nov 2021
In reply to Neil Williams:

>  ..... 24/7/365, ...

Nnngggg. 😬

In reply to Howard J:

Examples are usually whole towns, islands or wilderness. The uk approach will have to be bespoke but it's hardly impossible. How many folk really need to cross honister, wrynose etc.  Or drive the last couple of miles into Langdale, borrowdale, Eskdale, wasdale? Not that many, dozens compared to the hundreds or thousands now. 

The challenge is self inflicted when you declare areas of industrial heritage a national park, then treat them like a precious sssi.

Dig in some massive underground multi storey car parks(£5-10/day flat rate) near the start of most valleys, build proper cycle paths, run electric buses on a one way loop, deliveries must be outside 0800-1600(yeah a pain but tough). There are already trains and boats which could be drawn into the plan.

In reply to TheGeneralist:

> >  ..... 24/7/365, ...

> Nnngggg. 😬

OK, 24/7/52.  You knew what I meant

 wercat 16 Nov 2021
In reply to fuzzysheep01:

Encourage more tourists to discover south west Scotland and the Borders (lovely wild country round the A7) and so bypass the lake district.

We've got what the endless "let's boost tourism" consultations over the last  40 years have been aimed at.   We should instead be having consultations to reduce Cumbria's dependence on tourism and try and make it a more functional place to live, work and obtain necessaries, as well as some proper public transport/local service infrastructure worthy of  being part of the UK.

Post edited at 17:19
 Wainers44 16 Nov 2021
In reply to wercat:

> Encourage more tourists to discover south west Scotland and the Borders (lovely wils country round the A7) and so bypass the lake district.

> We've got what the endless "let's boost tourism" consultations over the last  40 years have been aimed at.   We should instead be having consultations to reduce Cumbria's dependence on tourism and try and make it a more functional place to live, work and obtain necessaries, as well as some proper public transport/local service infrastructure worthy of  being part of the UK.

Agree with the sentiment,  but replace tourism with what? Exactly the same problem down here in D&C but realistically there isn't another industry or employment sector of equal size coming here anytime soon?

If anything, the Lakes has the edge when it comes to rethinking it's tourism.  Many (most?) who come to the SW are looking for the scorchio beach experience,  and so mostly want to come mid summer.  Very hard to attract yet more visitors without making the numbers coming in the peak months even worse.  Thanks a bundle Doc Martin and Poldark!

People do want decent weather in the Lakes but don't expect it so much? With the right restrictions,  with suitable public transport alternatives,  the local authorities could make things much better, and take some of the peak off the season maybe? Let's hope their attention isn't diverted onto something else, like mergers etc, at this critical time.....

 Dave Hewitt 16 Nov 2021
In reply to Neil Williams:

> OK, 24/7/52.  You knew what I meant

Funnily enough 24/7/52 is the date on which one of the early unlisted Munroists completed his round - a chap named Guybon John Hutson, on Carn an Fhidhleir. Not that this is anything to do with Lake District car restrictions etc, just that it rang a very tangential bell.

 afx22 16 Nov 2021
In reply to Justaname:

Not great for bouldering either.

In reply to summo:

Yes, that could work in Wasdale, and Langdale. I'm not so sure about Buttermere and Borrowdale - I don't know how many people "need" to use Honister Pass but it always seems fairly busy.  I suppose they could be made to go via Newlands. I can't see major restrictions on visitors working for Coniston or Ullswater because of the through traffic, although better local services for people staying there would certainly help.  

I still think you'd have to allow people to get to their accommodation. I can't see visitors being willing to transfer a family with kids, dogs, a huge tent, chairs, boats, bikes and all their other camping paraphernalia from their car onto a bus, or the bus being either willing or indeed able to take them.  OTH, if that discourages all those who head to the Lakes at weekends simply to get pissed and party all night on the campsites maybe that's not a bad thing.

However I assume that a lot of the pressure on Langdale and Borrowdale in particular comes from day visitors.  Finding parking at busy times can often be a bit of a lottery, so assured easy parking together with reliable and frequent bus transport down the valley could be very attractive to them.

In reply to Howard J:

> I still think you'd have to allow people to get to their accommodation. I can't see visitors being willing to transfer a family with kids, dogs, a huge tent, chairs, boats, bikes and all their other camping paraphernalia from their car onto a bus, or the bus being either willing or indeed able to take them.  OTH, if that discourages all those who head to the Lakes at weekends simply to get pissed and party all night on the campsites maybe that's not a bad thing.

Yeah, I'd say if you're in accommodation in say Rosthwaite, then you are a resident over those dates, but you can't expect to be driving around to Eskdale or Coniston for the day, you should be walking, cycling or using the public transport in the area you reside. Arguably the next time you visit you stay in another area and explore there. Everyone is then able to enjoy their area, minimum driving time, traffic, pollution and impact. Personally there's nothing better than doing stuff from the door and not using the car every day. 

In reply to fuzzysheep01:

Sell the car park tickets at Chapel Stile/Gosforth/Santon Bridge. When it's full it's full, 1 in 1 out. Monitor number of available spaces. Stick that number on a big sign (town centres and shopping malls have had this worked out for years). And maybe a website so people know their chances before they set off. Pre-booking could be a thing or not a thing, whatever works. If you've got somewhere to stay booked in the valley then no bother, drive there and park up. If not, go no further because you're not getting parked. Options are shuttle bus or go somewhere else.
Can decide how many cars is enough cars. Businesses still have n cars full of customers to sell to. Early bird still gets the worm. People who want to stay late still can. Through traffic isn't affected.
What have I not thought of? (other than the queue of stubborn clowns at Gosforth with nothing better to do than wait)

Post edited at 21:09
 TheGeneralist 16 Nov 2021
In reply to Neil Williams:

> OK, 24/7/52.  You knew what I meant

True. Soz having an annoying week.

 Ramblin dave 16 Nov 2021
In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

There's probably room to quibble over implementation details (like, in an ideal world you'd get as many people as possible out of cars and onto buses before they have to go through Windermere) but restricting tourist parking in the honeypot areas and providing a regular bus alternative does seem like a natural solution. It doesn't depend on deciding what constitutes a valid non-recreational reason to visit the area or being able to check who has one, it's reasonably even handed, it's even possible to implement in places that have a lot of through traffic (like Grasmere).

I guess the risk is that it'd take a while for people to get the idea, and until that happens you'd end up with a lot of people driving in anyway and either parking on verges, over gates, in drives etc or just doing endless laps of the area looking for somewhere else to park...

In reply to Ramblin dave:

You just start with the easiest valleys first, then learn the lessons on implementation as you go. So by the time you clamp down on the biggest problem areas, word is out and the system refined. 

Granted what would happen in practice is some not so bright spark in national park management will do the complete opposite. 

 RobAJones 17 Nov 2021
In reply to summo:

> You just start with the easiest valleys first, then learn the lessons on implementation as you go.

To be fair that seems to be pretty much what they are doing. Free/cheap buses up Wasdale and Buttermere last summer. Hopefully extend those services next year, both in terms of number of buses and other valleys. 

>So by the time you clamp down on the biggest problem areas, word is out and the system refined. 

Looking further ahead, in order to restrict tourist car trafic, it will help if these schemes have been successful, as they were last summer, and for the North Lakes there will need to be more parking by the A66

> Granted what would happen in practice is some not so bright spark in national park management will do the complete opposite. 

They might have been small scale schemes this summer, but I rather them build on small success than mess up something too ambitious. 

 Jim Hamilton 17 Nov 2021
In reply to RobAJones:

> To be fair that seems to be pretty much what they are doing. Free/cheap buses up Wasdale and Buttermere last summer. Hopefully extend those services next year, both in terms of number of buses and other valleys. 

The £5 park and ride from Cockermouth didn't seem to make a noticible difference to the number of cars parking in Buttermere? 

In reply to RobAJones:

It's a start, but I don't think it will reduce car numbers by much, as many I suspect see themselves above getting a bus. There's going to have to be some perceived harsh measures to force people out of their cars. 

I hope eventually there will be lots of revelation moments as people begin to realise it's quite nice walking along a track or road and not spending the entire time on the look out for cars, jumping on and off verges etc..

 fred99 17 Nov 2021
In reply to summo:

> Dig in some massive underground multi storey car parks(£5-10/day flat rate) near the start of most valleys, ...

UNDERGROUND parking near the start of most valleys - with the amount of rain (and subsequent flooding) the Lake District has ?????

In reply to fred99:

> UNDERGROUND parking near the start of most valleys - with the amount of rain (and subsequent flooding) the Lake District has ?????

Plenty quarries dotted around that don't seem to flood, or you build on the surface and cover over. Or build literally just 20m above lake and river level and add drainage. Wouldn't be hard to get on slightly higher ground at Ambleside or windermere, Keswick a little more challenging. 

There will always be challenges, the question is if the current lakes model is working. If not then it's time to move forwards, any parking could also be combined with EV charging for the journey home. The plan should be where does the Lakes NP want to be in 20 years time, not hanging onto the past.

 RobAJones 17 Nov 2021
In reply to Jim Hamilton:

> The £5 park and ride from Cockermouth didn't seem to make a noticible difference to the number of cars parking in Buttermere? 

On the other side of that argument, friends in Lorton complained they weren't able to use it as often as they wanted as it was often full, so it must have made a small difference. It was small scale but its a start, would x4 buses make a noticeable difference, probably not, and where would the extra parking in Cockermouth be? From that angle I'd say it needs to be promoted as a benefit to locals in particular. OK teenagers could cycle to Crummock for a swim, but a regular bus might help out some parents. If a number of people are in the habit of using the bus, some restricted access and a bus service that does make a noticeable difference will be less of a shock, but I'd rather see that gradually introduced over the next 5 years. 

 RobAJones 17 Nov 2021
In reply to summo:

>  Keswick a little more challenging. 

I actually thought the opposite, plenty of flat ground, does it matter that a car park might flood in the winter? Although with climate change perhaps they will flood in the summer. Good luck greeting out of Borrowdale if they do. 

In reply to RobAJones:

> >  Keswick a little more challenging. 

> I actually thought the opposite, plenty of flat ground, does it matter that a car park might flood in the winter? Although with climate change perhaps they will flood in the summer. Good luck greeting out of Borrowdale if they do. 

There is plenty space just flooding car parks with ev charging wouldn't be ideal, you could stick a 3 level multi storey on 1m stilts out towards portinscale, plant a 10m ring of trees around it, grass or solar panels roof. Job done.

 a crap climber 17 Nov 2021
In reply to summo:

> ... walking along a track or road and not spending the entire time on the look out for cars...

Plenty of people already do this, often on A roads 😂

 RobAJones 17 Nov 2021
In reply to summo:

> It's a start, but I don't think it will reduce car numbers by much,

Not initially but hopefully in 5 years time. 

>as many I suspect see themselves above getting a bus.

That and not adapting you plans, for me the North Cumbria bus service is pretty good if a little expensive, some of that is luck, I was surprised the last bus from Keswick to Penrith was before 8pm. There is one after midnight for me. 

>There's going to have to be some perceived harsh measures to force people out of their cars. 

All the more reason to have some successful small scale schemes before you try to introduce restrictions. 

> I hope eventually there will be lots of revelation moments as people begin to realise it's quite nice walking along a track or road and not spending the entire time on the look out for cars, jumping on and off verges etc..

With the exception of a few delivery drivers, the first lockdown highlighted that. More needs to be done to highlight the positives. 

 Ridge 17 Nov 2021
In reply to summo:

> There is plenty space just flooding car parks with ev charging wouldn't be ideal, you could stick a 3 level multi storey on 1m stilts out towards portinscale, plant a 10m ring of trees around it, grass or solar panels roof. Job done.

Blimey. The residents of Keswick thought putting a decent surface on the old line to Threlkeld and planting some trees was an environmental apocalypse that destroyed the character of the North Western Lake District.

A car park??!!!

In reply to Ridge:

> Blimey. The residents of Keswick thought putting a decent surface on the old line to Threlkeld and planting some trees was an environmental apocalypse that destroyed the character of the North Western Lake District.

Yeah. That's why I actually think little will change. But if I was Keswick resident who actually used the outdoors I'd be excited about a traffic free borrowdale. 

 RobAJones 17 Nov 2021
In reply to Ridge:

> Blimey. The residents of Keswick thought putting a decent surface on the old line to Threlkeld and planting some trees was an environmental apocalypse that destroyed the character of the North Western Lake District.

> A car park??!!!

Although the residents of Portinscale might be persuaded that a big car park on the "other" side of the A66 is preeferable to small on on theirs?

 Kalna_kaza 17 Nov 2021
In reply to fuzzysheep01:

It's obviously a complex problem and I think any option, including doing nothing, ends up with a fair number of losers.

Cumbria is a large county with a small population so the road budget doesn't stretch very far. Cumbrian residents (myself included) have to put up with generally poor roads, limited expensive public transport and foot most of the bill caused by the impact of large visitor numbers. 

The second home loophole to any restrictions would have to be closed to prevent justified resentment from locals and near NP residents. Personally I think second homes should have eye watering high council tax to compensate for the negative impact on local communities.

The blanket ban on vehicles across large parts of the lakes isn't going to work but the smaller schemes in the lesser populated valleys could definitely make a big positive differences. 8am - 4pm restrictions on non-residents would probably only be needed Easter to October. Wasdale might need special thought due to the high numbers of 3 peak challengers arriving in the early hours.

One thing not mentioned thus far is the up coming dissolution of Cumbria into two separate council areas, roughly a North West Vs South East devide. If one of the new council areas implements big restrictions on one area it could push the pressure onto other unrestricted valleys.

 Ridge 17 Nov 2021
In reply to Kalna_kaza:

> One thing not mentioned thus far is the up coming dissolution of Cumbria into two separate council areas, roughly a North West Vs South East devide. If one of the new council areas implements big restrictions on one area it could push the pressure onto other unrestricted valleys.

Not sure that would really impact things, it was already 6 different local authorities, plus Cumbria country council. The NP is it's own bizzare little kingdom.

In reply to Kalna_kaza:

> Cumbria is a large county with a small population so the road budget doesn't stretch very far. Cumbrian residents (myself included) have to put up with generally poor roads, limited expensive public transport and foot most of the bill caused by the impact of large visitor numbers.

And this is one reason why I am in strong support of a tourist tax on accommodation, as applied in most European countries.  Why should tourists not contribute to the Council Tax coffers when temporarily in residence?

Parking charges are probably the way to get it from day visitors. 

Post edited at 14:23
 Kalna_kaza 17 Nov 2021
In reply to Ridge:

> Not sure that would really impact things, it was already 6 different local authorities, plus Cumbria country council. The NP is it's own bizzare little kingdom.

My thinking was more around that currently if just Copeland wanted to make a move it's only really Wasdale with large visitor numbers. The impact on restricting Eskdale and Ennerdale would be less. 

I doubt if 3 or 4 of the local authorities could be coordinated enough to act in unison. A single unitary authority covering half of the NP could act more decisively than a local one battling CCC and the LDNPA. 

Having said all that... whenever a councillor sees the £££s I'm sure anything is possible. 

 Rick Graham 17 Nov 2021
In reply to Ridge:

> Not sure that would really impact things, it was already 6 different local authorities, plus Cumbria country council. The NP is it's own bizzare little kingdom.

Most locals I know consider it an (ineffective) dictatorship competing with incompatible aims of the tourist board.

I am not expecting any progress on park and ride, its been on the agenda since the late 60s.

 steveriley 17 Nov 2021
In reply to Rick Graham:

Mm, I imagine the result of the current discussion to be plentiful internet noise and few tangible outcomes. There are too many stakeholders to get any kind of big picture agreement and the joined up thinking that lead to meaningful behaviour changes from most of us. Same discussion Re: Snowdonia.

In reply to Rick Graham:

> I am not expecting any progress on park and ride, its been on the agenda since the late 60s.

Me neither. The lädt 2 years have been skewed by both covid and unusually dry summers. 

Parking and traffic difficulties although serious are actually quite rare.

Care must be taken not to make a large investment in a project which immediately looks to be a white elephant due to 2 or 3 years of more typical summer weather. 

 RobAJones 17 Nov 2021
In reply to Presley Whippet:

> Me neither. The lädt 2 years have been skewed by both covid and unusually dry summers. 

True, but before that tourist numbers had been increasing by between 3% and 7% every year. 

> Parking and traffic difficulties although serious are actually quite rare.

And fairly predictable, so initially any restrictions would only need to be for a few days a year. 

> Care must be taken not to make a large investment in a project which immediately looks to be a white elephant due to 2 or 3 years of more typical summer weather. 

It's why I think parking is more of an issue than buses. Getting the mini/midi buses that normally take kids to and from school to drive round the Lakes at the weekend, bank holiday, school holidays doesn't require much investment, building a car park, never mind a multi storey does. 

In reply to RobAJones:

Another factor which has skewed traffic and parking recently is social distancing/biosecurity. A group of 4 may well have arrived using 4 cars rather than the usual one, add to this a reluctance to use public transport for the same, understandable reasons and it skews upwards further. 

 RobAJones 17 Nov 2021
In reply to Presley Whippet:

> Another factor which has skewed traffic and parking recently is social distancing/biosecurity. A group of 4 may well have arrived using 4 cars rather than the usual one,

It will have had some effect but I'm not sure how much. A significant number of cars will contain families, many groups will meet up having driven from different starting points anyway. If we are mainly concerned about tourist rather than local/semi local traffic I doubt there were many cases of 4 people driving for more than 2 hours in separate vehicles from the same town/ City to then walk/climb/wander around cafes and shops. I'd like to think there will be a significant drop in the number of cars in the Lakes in future years, but I doubt it 

>add to this a reluctance to use public transport for the same,

Again, I would agree that many people were avoiding public transport, dispite this the Cockermouth shuttle was often full, suggesting there is scope for a significantly increased service next year 

 fred99 18 Nov 2021
In reply to Kalna_kaza:

> .... Personally I think second homes should have eye watering high council tax to compensate for the negative impact on local communities....

I do wish they would do this. Too many of the well off are getting away with effectively screwing up the lives of people who live "in the sticks".

 biggianthead 19 Nov 2021
In reply to fuzzysheep01:

I have lived just less than a mile outside the National Park all my adult life. The Lake District has always been busy. Even the late 1970’s we would make sure we were walking early to beat the crowds. Of course it has become busier since due to the continuous advertising of the Tourist Board and the Lake District National Park Authority.  Additional pressure came from the “3 Peaks Traffic”. Making the Lake District a UNESCO site has further added pressure. But never a really serious issue.

The last two summers have been exceptional. Many people visited the Lakes to find a sense of freedom from the restrictions imposed by Covid. Equally huge numbers of locals from the Cumbrian west coast, who were furloughed, used the Lakes as playground for swimming /BBQs. Many of the visitors and locals will probably go further afield as things return to normal.  Only once in the last two years have failed to find a parking spot where I would have liked. So I had to park a couple km away. No great hardship.

The travel arrangements being developed in Snowdonia may be appropriate. However the Lakes and Snowdonia are geographically/ economically different. So a similar arrangement is unlikely to be appropriate. In Snowdonia there are two through roads the A4086 and the A5. There isn’t much between Capel Curig and Llanberis or Bethesda (except one brilliant pub at Pen Y Gwryd). In the Lake District the roads tend to radiate like the spokes of wheel. Many valleys have communities with hotels, pubs, small shops, B&B, cafes, campsites etc. These businesses are usually run by locals, and employ locals, that rely on through traffic. The economic effect of playing with this delicate balance that has developed over decades could be disastrous.

The Lake District is not Yosemite. It is where communities have live and work and raise families. Amazing the strapline on the LDNPA website is “The Lake District National Park Authority looks after this unique corner of England, encouraging people to enjoy and understand its beauty and helping those who live and work here” Anyone who lives here will tell you the Authority lost the plot decades ago. Their moral compass flutters around in the political wind. They have no real interest in the community, walkers, mountain bikers or climbers. They sole purpose is the pursuit in expanding the power of the Authority. As one of my mates said to me 20-30 years ago - “The NP Authority is worse than the original land owners”

 Root1 19 Nov 2021
In reply to Neil Williams:

> And this is one reason why I am in strong support of a tourist tax on accommodation, as applied in most European countries.  Why should tourists not contribute to the Council Tax coffers when temporarily in residence?

> Parking charges are probably the way to get it from day visitors. 

The Lakes makes a huge amount of money from tourism. Hotels, B&Bs, Car Parking Charges, restaurants and shops are always bursting with customers. I am suprised anyone has to pay Council Tax in Cumbria considering the money coming into the area from tourism.

Post edited at 15:37
In reply to Root1:

> The Lakes makes a huge amount of money from tourism. Hotels, B&Bs, Car Parking Charges, restaurants and shops are always bursting with customers. I am suprised anyone has to pay Council Tax in Cumbria considering the money coming into the area from tourism.

Business rates are to do with the nature of the premises, they aren't a percentage of takings, so the Councils will be getting surprisingly little of that money.  Corporation tax etc is a national tax, the Councils will never see any of that.  Plus they've having to pay all the money for bus pass holders from elsewhere using their buses...

Parking charges yes, but they aren't *that* expensive, and most Councils have that income.

There's certainly a lot of money comes into the area, but most of it goes into private pockets.

Post edited at 15:51
 wercat 19 Nov 2021
In reply to Root1:

We pay a lot of council tax for not much service at all and the roads are falling apart

In reply to Neil Williams:

If the lakes is like the Dales many roll up to their second home having tanked up near their primary home, they then either unload a load of shopping from their boot, or a hour later a supermarket home delivery van pulls up. The benefit to the local economy from many weekenders is negligible. 

In reply to C Witter:

No one is denying how convenient the car is for the individual but it is not sustainable on a mass basis.  You block the cars and the demand either completely goes away or it generates demand for buses along those roads.   Mass public transport and suddenly the price comes right down and congestion goes away as we don’t have all these individual cars clogging up and blocking every road imaginable or ever more inventive ways.

In reply to Neil Williams:

That  corporation tax feeds it’s way back into local government and other local services ranging from nhs to social services to local schools. . 

So yes you do benefit from it locally. 

In reply to Root1:

Just about 5O % of the gdp in the Lakes is from tourism. 
 

 C Witter 20 Nov 2021
In reply to Currently Resting:

Of course I agree that it is unsustainable for petrol cars to remain the main form of transport - and not only in the Lakes! But, I disagree with the assumptions that underpin your comments, specifically the idea that a draconian approach will force markets to provide a solution in the form of lowering "demand" or creating competitive public transport. That's absolute BS. A fundamentally different approach focused on providing sustainable access is needed: one that is not based on private for-profit companies nor a tourism economy nor on banning people from a landscape that is, for many, an emotional homeplace, not merely a tourist attraction. Frankly, there isn't the political will for a non-capitalist approach and, in the face of the inequities of a neoliberal approach the only viable position I can see is a defence of access, over the concerns of emissions and traffic.

In reply to C Witter:

Private non profit companies do not really exist unless you count charities. 
 

you could have Patagonia running the Lakes quite well from a sustainably perspective

Post edited at 10:56
 C Witter 20 Nov 2021
In reply to neilh:

Yes... but what is your point? Have you heard of democracy? We could have democratic government organisations running this, allowing local communities and the public to actively participate in shaping solutions and provision. But, whilst we have private profits at the centre of the political economy of Cumbria, it's not very likely that we will find a sustainable solution, nevermind an equitable and sustainable solution.

We should learn from the pandemic: when sh*t hits the fan, if we're not careful, what we will see is immense amounts of public money and power being handed over to private companies with very little scrutiny and a great deal of corruption.

In reply to C Witter:

That really is a red herring in this case.

unless you have an organisation sustaining a return ( Profit to you) then you will not have any money to invest in the future of the lakes.

In reply to neilh:

It doesn't properly cover the costs, though.


Please Register as a New User in order to reply to this topic.
Loading Notifications...