Local viewpoints
What do those who live, work or stay in Britain’s national parks think about the potential development in the area? BBC Countryfile Magazine talks to people on the ground...
Naomi Clark Single parent and yoga teacher Naomi Clark lives in Lewes in the South Downs National Park with her son.
“I’m torn about the new North Street Quarter housing development that was passed recently. It will be around 400 homes and live/work units on a brownfield site in the town, which sounds great, but it has meant that lots of little community, artistic and music organisations that were based there – some of which my son loved attending – have had to go.
“Part of me wants to keep Lewes small and friendly in its beautiful setting nestled in the Downs, but I would also like to be able to continue to live and make a home here. With people moving here having sold up in London, prices are rocketing so I can’t buy and can only just afford to rent. I had hopes when the developer said that 40% of the units would be affordable homes, but there don’t seem to be any guarantees. And even if they’re sold at 80% of market value, that’s hardly affordable for lots of people here.”
Keith Griffiths Chair of architectural firm AEDAS, Keith Griffiths has restored historic Pembrokeshire buildings including Roch Castle (right) and Twr y Felin, which are now luxury hotels in Pembrokeshire National Park.
“Development in the national parks must add value. This should be measured holistically, in terms of economic, lifestyle, tourism and indigenous industry as well as natural attributes of the park.
“A new hotel may bring vibrant new life and work and be designed as a welcome landmark in the landscape. A new industry may be housed in sustainable buildings, making use of local materials and skills and add to a former industrial archaeology while attracting young families to schools and towns. Disused or endangered buildings can be restored, provided that historic buildings officers are flexible and understanding of the economic principles and gains to be made.
“The national parks are a vast resource of living land, living creatures, economy, history and culture acting together to provide a beautiful, evolving and fascinating place. They are not museums and must evolve in a caring, imaginative and resourceful way.”
Shirley Learoyd Retired teacher Shirley Learoyd lives in Beverley and holidays for a week every year in the North York Moors National Park, after growing up there as a child.
“As a regular visitor, I believe that national parks should not have major industrial areas. The North York Moors have already been considerably developed and I don’t see the area being crippled by decline – so why the need for a massive development like this potash mine? “National parks are meant to have the strongest planning protections of any part of the countryside. They are our lungs, vital places of release from urbanisation, so how on earth anyone thought that gigantic trucks on newly built roads transporting tonnes of earth out of the 23-mile tunnel that will now be dug is going to enhance this area is beyond me. Oh, it brings in jobs, but it has totally undermined the whole ethos behind what a national park should be. If this sort of major development can get through on just one vote, then God help not only the North York Moors, but all national parks.”
William McNamara Co-founder of the Bluestone holiday resort in Pembrokeshire National Park, William McNamara has lived in the county all his life.
“I passionately believe that the parks must be protected for all time, but not always at any cost. I have witnessed the loss of rural communities – village shops, pubs, small businesses, rural bus services – together with an ongoing relentless urbanisation of our country.
“Therefore any housing developments that are sensitive, appropriate and relevant to the rural community and landscape should be championed.
“And while industrial development shouldn’t be permitted – any industry that could operate equally well outside the boundary should do so – ‘industrial’ is a loose term and potentially misleading. Is a blacksmith wishing to start up in a village ‘industrial’ from a planning perspective? Is a bee keeper, or a boat builder?
“Scale and relevance to a rural location should be considered. Tourism, in which I have a vested interest, is integral to the parks’ ethos of promoting access. If there is considered, managed and controlled development, the benefits will outweigh the conservation tensions.”
“Development in the parks must add value. This should be measured holistically in terms of economic, lifestyle, tourism and indigenous industry as well as natural attributes of the park” Keith Griffiths, AEDAS Have your say? What do you think about the issues raised here? Write to the address on page 3 or email editor@ countryfile.com