Hundreds signed petitions against the idea and more than 50 letters of objection have been sent to say why Bridlington’s coach park should not move to the clifftops.
But plans to relocate the facility from Hilderthorpe Road to Limekiln Lane look likely to go ahead.
East Riding of Yorkshire Council applied to make the controversial move, and its own officers have said in a report that it should be allowed to happen.
Its planning committee, made up of 12 councillors - but only one of whom represents Bridlington - will make the final decision at a meeting in Beverley tomorrow afternoon (Thursday).
That would go against the views of Bridlington Town Council, who refused to support the scheme as a show of support for the hundreds of residents who had campaigned against the move, and other local groups.
A report by Alan Menzies, East Riding Council’s director of planning and economic regeneration, will be presented to councillors today.
It says: “The existing coach park on Hilderthorpe Road has a capacity for 90 coaches, although records from 2015 and 2016 showthe maximum usage on a single day was 30 coaches.
“It is part of the Burlington Parade area proposed for comprehensive redevelopment and regeneration of the town centre - its relocation is necessary to enable redevelopment proposals to come forward.”
The Limekiln Lane car park currently has room for 1,500 cars but has been chosen because last year’s busiest day saw only 540 spaces taken.
Because it is already in use as a car park, no permission is needed to change the use of the site, but the planning application is to construct a new access, improve surfacing, lighting, drainage and landscaping.
Bridlington Town Council sent a list of nine reasons why they objected to the plans.
They included traffic congestion, “unnecessary destruction of a place of natural beauty” on the clifftops, and it felt there were other, more suitable locations for a new coach park in Bridlington.
The town’s civic society also said they were against the plans, citing concerns about pollution and what would happen to the Limekiln Lane site of the number of coaches visiting Bridlington to decline in the future.
In addition, more than 50 people wrote to East Riding Council asking for the scheme to be stopped - compared to two members of the public who wrote in support.
The objectors criticised the design, the fact coaches would have to pass three schools to get to the new site and called it a “blot on the coastline”.
A further 240 people signed a petition, hundreds more added their names to an online campaign and Sewerby Village Residents Association and the Campaign for Rural England have both said they cannot support the proposal.
Despite this, Mr Menzies’ report recommends the application should be approved.
It says: “Planning policy supports the principal of the proposal and there are no design, landscape and visual amenity, residential amenity, flood risk and drainage, nature conservation and ecology, heritage assets, mineral safeguarding, access, parking or highway safety concerns.”