Peak District National Park Authority Reviews 15

The PDNPA's local plan review survey contained heaps of loaded questions such as one where residents were asked whether they agree with large scale tourism development providing it is in hub format and offers non motor vehicle access. Yes or no...

What they don't tell you is that this survey was administered after the then Chief Exec Sarah Fowler had already signed a joint venture agreement with Milligan private construction firm so as to assist Milligan in securing funding for multiple massive hubs (unprecedented for a national park authority to jump into a joint venture with a construction/development company!) and after one of such large scale tourism resort hubs (Gateway PEAK hub) had over 2500 car (note MOTOR VEHICLE) parking spaces baked into the plans 😂- which essentially shows that the Local plan review survey was an utter sham, filled with similar loaded and undemocratic questions which gave residents no option to vote against what was already decided upon behind closed doors. It painted a dreadfully bleak picture for the future and was underlined by an attempt to fundamentally shift the underpinning tenets of the National Park from 'Conservation and Enhancement' into the direction of 'Innovation and Change'- which essentially translates to shifting the park away from being a protected landscape to being geared towards incrementally chipping away at the protections that exist so as to open the door to the inappropriate expansion of settlements etc.

As soon as the loaded nature of the survey was raised, the then new Head of Planning had the original survey from the website removed and replaced with a totally different survey which enabled it to avoid scrutiny yet he still used the results of the original loaded survey.

It's also to be noted that the leadership over the years has been abhorrent, misleading the public about schemes to sell off Peak District Authority owned woodland- note they label the privatisation of these woodlands; 'returning woodlands to the public'. What they mean is 'selling off chunks of National Park owned publicly accessible woodlands to private individual landlords'.

PDNPA are biased in their approach to minority user groups and small businesses to the extent this persecution borders on hate crimes perpertrated by an unelected organisation

Well where do I start. I will try and remain polite. Completely bias unyielding, selfish, back handing and corrupt. Stop shutting legitimate access to legal motor vehicles to create your own version of utopia. The countryside is for everyone and we can all share with care. Your agenda is harmful and should be a human rights violation we all ha e rights you know, not just your inner circle.

A terrible organisation that panders to big business whilst trampling on the rights and needs of the individual.
They pass planning permission to large organisations whilst preventing householders from making very modest, sympathetic changes to their homes.
To the PDNPA, it seems that its all about the £££.

PDMPA.... Absolute muppets so far away from reality it's almost unbelievable.. the businesses in the local area are suffering due to you lack of intelligence and common sense. You are taking away lively hoods of local people just to discriminate against smaller groups of people

There is an insistent and totally unnecessary wanton desire from PDNPA to remove the right for motorised vehicles to travel along the ancient byways which exist within the Peak District National Park.
There’s an annual campaign from walking groups to remove the right of passage from motorised vehicles.
When theses closures do take place the routes become overgrown and eventually impassable for the casual rambler.
From a tourist point of view, what is left of the Byways Open to All Traffic attract users from all over the country and also Europe.
In most European counties there is what’s known as the TET (trans European trail) which is an off road route which allows you to navigate through the country mainly using these off road trails and byways, the Peak District National Park has such a route passing through the very heart of it, these routes therefore contribute to the revenue of small local businesses such as hotels, B&B’s, camp sites, cafes, restaurants and fuel stations.
The usable byways now available for motorised vehicles is less than 2%, surely the remaining 98% is enough for the hikers and walkers to use.
An alternative to closing byways would be to construct public footpaths which run alongside the byways giving the none motorised users an alternative route.

I find the PDNPA to be very biased against minority groups, as a member of one such group I constantly feel discriminated against whenever I visit the national park. Can anyone tell me how to overcome this discrimination by a publicly funded organisation ? Surely it cannot be right !

National parks were formed to give access to the contryside. Unfortunately pdnpa what to limit who they let use the area they control and as such discriminate against certain user groups.

Have been walking on trails and paths over 65 years. Remember actually seeing steam trains on the Bakewell to Buxton line( now the monsal trail.
Always walked on the right. Riders on the left, walkers on the right
Why is the PDNPA pressurising all users to keep left

The contempt they have and discrimination against certain user groups. The park is for all to enjoy, what shame that these authorities abuse their power.

What can you say, nothing but disregard for this biased none accountable authority!
The park is supposed to be for EVERYONE to use and enjoy and was built upon this ideal, but all I've witnessed is the persecution of specific groups, their activities and hobbies to the detrement of local businesses!
Shame on you pdnpa!

This authority are supposed to protect the rural business community yet set about closing routes to legal motorcycle tourists that spend money in the Derbyshire area. Their policies on traffic restrictions has hit our accommodation business hard. We have appealed and asked for these restrictions to be removed in order to fillip and progress this kind of tourism however, despite a significant amount of signatures on a recent petition they have so far refused to assist.