Explore What People Said – Cairngorms Views – Commonplace

Place contributions

Some people making comments

...

A person posting an agreement

...

5 months ago

0

To what extent do you agree or disagree that these are the right objectives and targets for the National Park?

Agree

Why do you say that?

There is a real lack of affordable housing within the National Park at the moment. The young people and those on a lower income are being priced out of the market often by folks moving into the area from the central belt or those that are buying holiday homes either for personal or business use. This is challenging folks to be able to buy or rent close to family or their work. The current increase in buy to let properties is not sustainable if we want a workforce that can live close to their employment. This has a direct impact on the ambitions for active travel for those working in the area as well.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the overall outcome for place we have proposed? (‘A place that people want to live in, work in and visit that works for all’)

Strongly agree

5 months ago

0

To what extent do you agree or disagree that these are the right objectives and targets for the National Park?

Strongly agree

Why do you say that?

Delighted to see your recognition of the second home/holiday let problem. (C8) This is not only a problem in the National Park area but the problem spills over to adjoining areas. We find it difficult to rent long term accommodation for staff serving the local community but there are any amount of holiday let properties. The high cost of property in the Park area, underpinned by the second home market. pushes people out into adjoining areas , spreading the problem further. This is a problem for many rural areas and I hope that the high profile of the Cairngorms National Park will push this up the political agenda.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the overall outcome for place we have proposed? (‘A place that people want to live in, work in and visit that works for all’)

Strongly agree

5 months ago

0

To what extent do you agree or disagree that these are the right objectives and targets for the National Park?

Disagree

Is there anything missing from the above list that you think we should prioritise?

Yes thsoe who have chsoen to live here. Its not a visitor funpark or developer haven yet that is what the place seems to be right now.

Why do you say that?

I live here, my family live here yet the whole emphasis here seems to be on visitors. What about the people who have made their lives here? It all seems bit light on that side.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the overall outcome for place we have proposed? (‘A place that people want to live in, work in and visit that works for all’)

Disagree

5 months ago

0

To what extent do you agree or disagree that these are the right objectives and targets for the National Park?

Agree

Is there anything missing from the above list that you think we should prioritise?

Affordable housing for purchase is required as well as for rental. What about a local occupancy clause? Retain the green spaces that make our villages attractive. It is a huge loss when these areas are eaten up entirely by homes that are unaffordable, destined to be second homes or Air BNBs Ensure appropriate facilities and infrastructure in place to lessen visitor impact. Provide camper van facilities, park and ride to access area like Glenmore and Cairngorm Mountain to decrease issues with congestion and dangerous parking.

Do you have any other comments?

We need to think greener and more sustainable. Investment required in affordable housing without destroying all our green spaces. Better public transport and cycle networks.

Why do you say that?

Affordable housing is certainly of great concern.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the overall outcome for place we have proposed? (‘A place that people want to live in, work in and visit that works for all’)

Strongly agree

5 months ago

0

To what extent do you agree or disagree that these are the right objectives and targets for the National Park?

Strongly agree

Is there anything missing from the above list that you think we should prioritise?

Scotland has some of the best access legislation in the world. However, there are several major factors which conspire against the effectiveness of the legislation, particulary in terms of the public taking reasonable access to the outdoors. Since 2003 the Land Reform Act (Scotland) Act has been eroded by wealthy, powerful landowners & complacent local authorities, many afraid to challenge breaches of access (It is my undestanding CNPA have themselves lost several thought to be 'cast iron cases', which were ruled in favour of the landowners). In recent research, fed to Scot Govt, it has been revealed that Outdoor Tourism brings to the Scottish economy in excess of £730m pa. Yet those taking their recreation & those working in the outdoor, continue to go warily, almost cap-in-hand in to many outdoor situations. There is pressing need for National Parks; Local Authorities and Scot Govt. to work together in making more robust the Scottish Outdoor Access Legislation. Such essential action needs to include a culture change ~ a ridding Scotland of the prevailing Victorian Culture, where Landowners & their (normally wealthy) guests appear to be of the impression that, the rights to be in & make use of the outdoors rests with them & others go 'by their (reluctant) leave'. For many years now leading groups on the River Spey, I still have anglers questionning my rights to be in a canoe on the river. One even recently turning to ask, "What to bloody hell are you doing here!?" Required = making robust the access legislation & Education. Outdoor activities providers employ the 3-R's of outdoor access ~ Reasonabilty; Responsibility and Respect. This is very much a 1-way street. The help of the National Park is required to help bring about this education, helping ensure a move away from Victorian values of 'us and them'. At a local level, within The Park, along the River Spey, apart from at Boat of Garten, there are no river access/egress points with safe parking of paddlers' vehicles. Even at a major access/egress point ~ Aviemore ~ the enterprizing managers at the Old Bridge Inn have blocked vehicular access to the riverside with picnic tables & marquees, which in turn makes it difficult to carry canoes to the river. The 'previous' carpark, no loger servicable as a carpark, means that visitors to this location park along the pavement, sometimes dangerously up round the corner towards the main road. Whilst admiring the entrprizing nature of what is being done by OBI, comprise is required at this key river access point & safe parking for all. Otherwise, as with other access/egress point not welcoming for tourists ~ contrary to what The Park is allegedly working to achieve. Dare I suggest, in such cases compulsory purchase of ground might be an answer to managing such areas of unnecessary, potential conflicts of interest.

Do you have any other comments?

Speyside Way ~ I am saddened to hear many visitors declare disappointment with the route because they see little or nothing of the Spey on many sections. Suggest this be addressed by CNPA, including creating a core path from Pollowick Farm through Tulchan Estate to boundary with Highland ~ along the still clearly visible route of the Speyside Railway line. Presently this section of The Way crosses the A95 & follows a route away up into a bland larch plantation with no proxity or view to the Spey.

Why do you say that?

All required actions

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the overall outcome for place we have proposed? (‘A place that people want to live in, work in and visit that works for all’)

Strongly agree