North Yorkshire Council
Scarborough and Whitby Area Committee
Minutes of the meeting held on Monday, 2 March 2026 commencing at 10.00 am.
Councillor Liz Colling in the Chair and Councillors David Chance, Eric Broadbent, David Jeffels, Janet Jefferson, Rich Maw, Clive Pearson, Heather Phillips, Neil Swannick, Roberta Swiers and Phil Trumper.
Officers present: Chris Bourne, St John Harris and Richard Marr
Apologies: Councillors Derek Bastiman, Tom Seston and Subash Sharma.
|
Copies of all documents considered are in the Minute Book
|
|
179 |
Apologies for Absence
Councillors Derek Bastiman, Tom Seston and Subash Sharma, and Alison Hume MP.
|
|
180 |
Minutes of the Meeting held on 28 November 2025
Resolved
That the Minutes of the meeting held on 28 November 2025, having been printed and circulated, be taken as read and confirmed and signed by the Chair as a correct record.
|
|
181 |
Declarations of Interest
Councillor Heather Phillips declared an interest in Minute Item 186 – Whitby Cliff Lift since she was on the Executive which was the decision-making body in respect of this matter. Councillor Phillips did not take part in the discussion and determination of this item by the Area Committee but remained present to listen to the discussion.
|
|
182 |
Feedback from previous meetings - Chair's report
The Chair provided the following updates on matters raised at previous meetings:
Speed limit on New Bridge, Whitby - following the petition to this committee on 28 November, we wrote to the Executive Member for Highways and Transportation who responded that the council was looking into a 30mph speed limit on New Bridge.
Scarborough Community Football Pitch - work was starting that week on site to remedy the defects to ensure a stable base for the new pitch to be laid. It was expected that this phase would take 8-10 weeks to complete before the new pitch surface would be put in place ahead of the start of the next football season in the summer.
Alpamare Waterpark - officers were currently exploring a range of options for the future of the Alpamare site, having regard to its strategic location within the wider North Bay regeneration area. A Request for Proposal (RFP) had been issued to five specialist leisure agents, inviting them to propose and present potential strategies for the sale of the site. The RFP was intended to inform the Council’s understanding of market interest and potential approaches and was one element of the wider review being undertaken to inform consideration of future options for the Alpamare site. The RFP would focus on a freehold sale of Alpamare as an operational waterpark. However, bidders may propose offers incorporating one or more vacant development plots within the North Bay area, where this could be justified as necessary to support Alpamare’s long term financial viability and contribute positively to the wider leisure and entertainment offer. Flamingo Land had been informed that the Council was exploring future options for the asset, including a potential disposal. The Flamingo Land lease would expire on 31 October 2026. During the remaining term of this lease, officers would continue to review and assess options for the future of the Alpamare site, including (but not limited to) a potential disposal. Officers would work to progress a preferred option within this timeframe, though it may be necessary, subject to mutual agreement, to extend the existing agreement with Flamingo Land. Any preferred option arising from this work would be subject to further appraisal and reported to members for consideration at the appropriate time.
Attendance of Mayor of York and North Yorkshire, David Skaith at meeting on 30 September 2026 - As per the work programme, the committee looked forward to the attendance of the Mayor later this year. Among other issues, this was an opportunity to raise with him the Government’s proposed tourism tax.
Next meeting, 23 March 2026 – a special scrutiny meeting of the committee had been convened in Scarborough to review bathing water quality in the resort.
|
|
183 |
Public questions and statements
There were ten public questions and statements submitted to the committee. Questions 3 and 4 were considered at Minute 185 – North Yorkshire Council Harbours Strategy questions 5 to 10 were considered at Minute 186 – Whitby Cliff Lift.
1. I refer to my question raised at the September meeting in respect of meetings to be held regularly in Whitby, when it was agreed that future meetings will be held alternately in Whitby from March 2026. The September meeting should be held in Whitby and I would like to know the progress that has been made to find a venue with the required technology. In 2027 Whitby Leisure Centre will revert back to NYC at the end of the 10 year lease agreement with Everyone Active. May I suggest that NYC agrees to rent the Community Room at the Centre for future meetings, and to install the technology required to stream meetings or to use a portable system? By installing the equipment the room will be ready for use when NYC takes over, but will also allow Everyone Active to rent out the room until the end of their lease with the added bonus of the streaming ability. This way it would be a cheaper option for NYC and ensure continuity of Whitby meetings from September. (Vivienne Wright) Reply
Thank you for your question. I can confirm that for the forthcoming 2026-27 year, ordinary meetings of Scarborough and Whitby Area Committee will alternate between Scarborough and Whitby.
6 June 2026 – Scarborough Town Hall 30 September 2026 – Whitby Pavilion 27 November 2026 – Scarborough Town Hall 31 March 2027 – Whitby Pavilion
Because of the current technological limitations at Whitby Pavilion, it has been agreed to audio record the meeting and then upload the recording to the council website afterwards.
Thank you for your suggestion of use of the Community Room at Whitby Leisure Centre which the council will investigate. The council is also exploring the feasibility of a portable technical solution for venues such as Whitby Pavilion.
In response, Ms Wright welcomed a portable technical solution noting that Whitby Leisure Centre could prove a cost effective option with such a solution and had better parking provision.
2. Will the members of this committee contact the Executive committee and request that all changes affecting Whitby are discussed with Whitby Town Council, and that no decisions will be made without WTC agreement and support? (Councillor Sandra Turner)
Reply
The Parish Charter adopted by the Executive in July 2023 describes the working relationship between NYC and local councils. Parish Charter | North Yorkshire Council
Among the council’s pledges are to:
However, it is important to note that WTC remains a consultee (among many) on such matters and that the ultimate decision rests with NYC.
In response, Councillor Turner noted the large number of parish councils in North Yorkshire (over 400) but reiterated that given Whitby’s importance to the local tourist economy (the town welcomed over two million visitors a year), the town council deserved closer collaborative working with North Yorkshire Council.
3. On the North Yorkshire Council website in the section for consultations regarding the current consultation on the draft harbours strategy. On the website page it states:
“We are taking the draft plans to committees, sharing with ward members, town councils, and harbour user groups to gain a breadth of expertise.”
I would like to understand the proposed measures for accommodating the Crew Transfer Vessels and dozens of Guard Vessels in connection with the servicing and maintenance of the largest offshore wind farm in the world, to which our port is the closest.
You will be aware that a local business has invested over £100m in Crew Transfer vessels and has a keen desire to operate these vessels from his hometown of Scarborough.
Please confirm when the draft harbours strategy will be presented to stakeholder groups and Scarborough Harbour user representatives so that members of the public and harbour users can finally engage with the authors of what is proposed and so that then they can provide consultation replies for 22nd March 2026.
(James Corrigan)
Reply There are a number of proposals in relation to CTV and Guard Vessels in the draft strategy that are included in the Strategic Action Plans. These include: · Improve dredge depths. Strategic Action 5 (1) · Extend West Pier. Strategic Action 5 (2) · Explore provision of a boat lift. Strategic Action 5 (6) The draft harbours strategy has been available as a public document since 8 January 2026 and the website enables any member of the public to download the strategy and provide feedback and comments on the strategy through the website. The draft harbours strategy has been presented to two public facing committees where members of the public can attend and ask questions. The first of these was the Transport, Economy, Environment and Enterprise Overview and Scrutiny Committee of North Yorkshire Council at its meeting on 28 January 2026, and the second is this meeting today. The proposals for the strategy were discussed at the Whitby Harbour Users meeting on 23 January 2026. The proposals for the strategy were discussed at the Filey Coble Landing Users meeting on 26 January 2026. The proposals for the strategy will be discussed at the Scarborough Harbour Users meeting on 5 March 2026. In response, Mr Corrigan was critical of the engagement process behind the draft strategy, noting that asking a question at a formal meeting like this did not allow proper engagement, and regarded the draft strategy as a desk top opinion not substantiated by evidence, such as his Freedom of Information request for the transit data of commercial vehicle vessels at Scarborough Harbour for the last five years. 4. The Harbour Strategy document that has been published is as stated a Draft. The document states clearly that NYC will share with amongst others Harbour User Groups to gain a breadth of experience and expertise. Who are the User Groups you are considering consulting with, who chooses who sits upon those groups and when will those groups be consulted? (Robin Gray)
Reply
Prior to writing the strategy the Council set up three specific Harbours Development Strategy Working Groups which consisted of Councillors, harbour users and other interested parties.
· The Scarborough Group meeting was held on 24 July 2023 · The Filey Working Group meeting was held on 28 July 2023 · The Whitby Working Group meeting was held on 31 July 2023
In addition, the strategy was discussed at the following harbour user meetings:
· The proposals for the strategy were discussed at the Scarborough Harbour Users meeting on 16 September 2023 · The proposals for the strategy were discussed at the Scarborough Harbour Users meeting on 14 November 2023 · The proposals for the strategy were discussed at the Scarborough Harbour Users meeting on 23 October 2024 · The proposals for the strategy were discussed at the extraordinary Scarborough Harbour Users meeting on 23 September 2025 · The proposals for the strategy were discussed at the Whitby Harbour Users meeting on 16 September 2024 · The proposals for the strategy were discussed at the Whitby Harbour Users meeting on 29 May 2025 · The proposals for the strategy were discussed at the Whitby Harbour Users meeting on 21 August 2025 · The proposals for the strategy were discussed at the Whitby Harbour Users meeting on 23 January 2026 · The proposals for the strategy were discussed at the Filey Coble Landing Users meeting on 26 January 2026 · The proposals for the strategy were discussed at a Scarborough Business Ambassadors Marine & Renewables networking event on 26 February 2026 · The proposals for the strategy will be discussed at the Scarborough Harbour Users meeting on 5 March 2026
The groups are attended by Elected Members and Harbours Management, with users representatives being selected in consultation with the users themselves.
Where a properly constituted organisation already exists such as the Scarborough Yacht Club or the RNLI, the organisation is asked to nominate their representative. Where a constituted organisation does not exist, harbour management have previously approached selected users of good character to see if they would be willing to represent a class of users informally.
Many of the group members have been members of the harbour users group for many years; decades in some cases, demonstrating the longevity and success of the approach.
Notwithstanding that groups for harbour users exist, individual harbour users are not obliged to communicate through these groups and are free to contact the harbours team direct at any time in respect of the draft harbours strategy or any other harbour matter.
In response, Mr Gray requested a list of the people who sit on the Scarborough Harbour User Group.
5. Firstly I would like to thank all the area Councillors in particular Councillors Trumper and Swannick for their support in attempting to re-open the Whitby West Cliff Lift. I have been in receipt of a reply to my FOI request since July 2025 copies of which I circulated to my 2 local Councillors, MP and Whitby Community Network. The request was for the last 10 years inspection reports for the structure which weren't supplied but from the ones I’ve received from 2016 and 2021 I am of the opinion SBC’s neglect of the structure has contributed to its eventual closure. It would appear that there has been a major structural issue in the lift house where the main beams have twisted and the brickwork badly damaged. The roof structure is rotten with damp and the concealed rainwater drain pipes have been recommended to be surface fixed. I can only presume this is to make sure the unseen water doesn't enter the shaft. Everything below the lift house becomes affected if the lift house is not repaired. Reading the 2 reports 5 years apart a lot of items are at category C status and need to be category B, a few are category D hence the closure. In simple terms if any of us had a water leak in our loft which is easily accessible and easily repaired would we leave it and wait until ceilings and floors below it started taking in water. We all know the answer is No so why Yes when it's Whitby Cliff Lift. If the lift has to close a new alternative needs to be put in place so the beach is accessible to everyone, a stipulation that if not fulfilled will result in NYC losing its only Blue Flag beach. Many countries I visit have lifts and even escalators for accessing beaches so it's not a luxury, it's a necessity. A Nippy standard minibus is not the solution, as the main people who need to use it are those with health and physical issues, wheel chair users are unable to access the standard mini bus. SBC’s total neglect of both Whitby and Scarborough’s infrastructure in particular the harbours is in the past and now up to NYC to sort. Please start with Whitby's West Cliff Lift. (Peter Graham)
6. As one of the many who braved the elements in support of Whitby’s iconic and much needed Cliff Lift I’d like to know how closure could even be considered given the obvious and growing need for access to the huts, cafe and toilet areas. My wife and I have been effectively denied access to all these facilities since the Lift’s hopefully, temporary closure,as the minibus option provided was little more than a joke, access to it was totally unsuitable and its dropping off point a considerable distance from where we needed to be. Whitby needs the Lift and it’s your job to make sure speedy repairs are put in place and a suitable and proper maintenance schedule instigated. (John and Pat Howarth)
7. How is right to deny people with disabilities access to the beach? (Benita Nicholson)
Reply
It is not right to deny people with disabilities access to the beach, and North Yorkshire Council is not denying people with disabilities access to the beach.
Like most UK beaches, the beach can be accessed by slipways and ramps. A beach wheelchair is also available.
Councillor Phil Trumper put the remaining three questions on behalf of local residents.
8. It is difficult to see without an accurate up to date costing how the council can make a decision on whether to repair Whitby Cliff Lift. Therefore have you had any recent quotes for the repair of Whitby Cliff lift and the necessary work needed, if so when will they be made public? (Sue Stuart)
Reply
The Council has not had any recent quotes for the repair of the cliff lift.
However, the quotes from 2020 show the huge financial scale of the potential problem and costs are not expected to have decreased since 2020.
In response, Councillor Trumper suggested that in light of Anglo American’s recent report that an up to date survey was required.
9. Whitby is North Yorkshire Council’s cash cow and the jewel in the crown. The cliff lift is essential for me to access my beach hut and the promenade. I have had a debilitating stroke, the paths are too dangerous for me to navigate and the bus wasn't reliable or fit for purpose. Are you willing for Whitby to lose its prestigious Blue Flag award and discriminate against the disabled, the elderly and young families making our fantastic beach inaccessible? (Averil Jefferson)
Reply
Whitby beach has been the recipient of a Blue Flag Award highlighting its superior water quality, environmental management, and safety standards for over 10 years.
The Blue Flag Award does not and has not ever relied on the provision of either the former cliff lift or the replacement bus service.
In response, Councillor Trumper noted the importance of the Blue Flag but also that everyone had access to the beach.
10. I have used the cliff lift for over 70 years. It has always been damp in the tunnel, to be expected, as it goes so far underground. I believe that ventilation of the lift is key to its life. When, not IF, it is repaired will you guarantee an ongoing maintenance plan so this scenario doesn't happen again? (Dorothy Russell)
Reply
No decision has yet been made on the future of the cliff lift, however all of the options for repair that will be presented to the Executive would include associated maintenance.
In response, Councillor Trumper commented that it was important if the council decided repair the lift, that a proper maintenance plan was put in place.
|
|
184 |
Attendance of MP Alison Hume
This item was not considered since Alison Hume MP had given her apologies for health reasons.
|
|
185 |
North Yorkshire Council Harbours Strategy
Considered a report of the Corporate Director of Environment which presented the draft North Yorkshire Council Harbours Strategy for members’ comments.
James Corrigan and Robin Gray put their questions to the committee and received replies. (see Minute 183 above).
Introducing the report, the Head of Harbours and Coastal Infrastructure, Chris Bourne explained that the draft strategy before members was the result of extensive consultation with a range of stakeholders, taking their views and advice into account to produce a comprehensive, easy to read document which was itself subject to further consultation. He outlined the strategy’s vision and mission and then explained the eight strategic objectives for what constituted a clear roadmap to secure the long-term future of North Yorkshire’s harbours through investment, innovation, and collaboration, namely:
A summary was also provided of consultation undertaken, including engagement with harbour users, working groups and town councils. The strategy was open for public consultation until 22 March 2026 after which it would be submitted to the Executive for adoption.
Members raised a number of points and questions including:
· Clarification of governance arrangements, including potential future use of a harbour board structure. · The role of dredging and the need for improved dredging capacity and licence flexibility. · Delivery of new infrastructure, including the proposed boat lift at Scarborough. · Concerns from Whitby Yacht Club regarding bridge opening arrangements and dredging depth. · The need for improved shoreside power provision. · Importance of ensuring meaningful involvement of local division members in strategy development and harbour user groups. · The relevance of rail connections to Whitby Harbour and whether this should be referenced in the strategy. · How findings from the ‘Beyond the Shoreline’ economic report could be more explicitly reflected.
In response, Mr Bourne: · reaffirmed that the current governance model was through the Council’s Executive but alternative models could be considered following consultation feedback; · confirmed active work on dredging and recent agreement from the Marine Management Organisation to remove the 5,000‑tonne monthly dredging limit; · noted that delivery of a Scarborough boat lift was dependent on completion of the West Pier regeneration scheme, removal of Building 4 and securing of external funding; · agreed to consider adding reference to bridge opening issues, rail access and governance models within the final strategy where appropriate; · agreed to invite Whitby division members to future Whitby Harbour User group meetings.
Members emphasised the importance of strong communication, transparency and engagement with all harbour users, noting the need to harness local maritime knowledge and experience.
Resolved
That the committee notes the draft Harbours Strategy and the comments made during the meeting to be fed into the ongoing consultation process.
|
|
186 |
Whitby Cliff Lift
Considered a report of the Corporate Director of Environment which provided an update on the second inspection of the Whitby Cliff Lift shaft undertaken by Anglo American on 21 January 2026 and the issues facing the council in respect of the lift.
The statements and questions of Peter Graham, John Howarth, Benita Nicholson, Sue Stuart, Averil Jefferson and Dorothy Russell were put to the committee and replies received. (see Minute 183 above).
Members were advised that the findings remained largely unchanged from the previous inspection in August 2025, confirming that whilst the shaft appeared dry, water ingress continued to be the underlying cause of corrosion and structural deterioration.
Members were further reminded that the previous estimate of £5 million for full waterproofing works was only an indicative worst‑case scenario and not based on detailed surveys. Further extensive investigative work would be required before any definitive costings could be established. The cost of repairing the lift mechanism itself was estimated at approximately £599k, not including any deterioration since 2020.
Members noted the significant financial pressures facing the Council following the reduction in Government funding and the need for £20.7m in savings over three years. Despite this, members expressed strong support for reinstating the lift, emphasising its importance for accessibility, heritage value, and Whitby’s visitor economy.
During discussion, members raised the following key points:
· The original £5m waterproofing cost was not credible and should not be relied upon for decision making. A full set of updated surveys was needed to establish accurate figures. · The replacement bus was inadequate for disabled users and did not provide equivalent accessibility to the lift. · The cost of decommissioning (up to £538k) offered poor value compared to repair costs and would remove an important historic asset. · The need for the lift to operate as a going concern supported by a robust business plan, including future maintenance and operational costs. · The petition previously submitted demonstrated extremely strong public backing for reinstatement. · Members referenced concerns about potential long‑term dereliction should demolition not proceed and sought clarity on planning requirements depending on the Executive’s chosen option.
In response, the Head of Harbours and Coastal Infrastructure confirmed: · Further surveys would be required before any repair scheme could proceed; the 2020 figures were indicative only. · Planning permission would be required if the top station building were to be demolished, as it lay within a conservation area. · The Executive was scheduled to consider the future of the lift on 17 March 2026.
Following debate, it was
RESOLVED that the committee request that the Executive:
1. Recognise the Whitby Cliff Lift as an important historic and heritage asset for the town. 2. Direct officers to commission a full up‑to‑date technical survey of the lift shaft, structure and mechanical systems, together with robust costings for repair, waterproofing and ventilation solutions. 3. Prepare a full business plan for the lift as a going concern, including maintenance, operational costs and opportunities for income generation. 4. Consider these updated findings before making any decision regarding decommissioning.
With the final wording to be determined by agreement after the committee meeting.
(Following her declaration at Minute Item 181 Councillor Heather Phillips did not take part in the discussion and determination of this item).
|
|
187 |
Results of the Experimental Traffic Regulation Order (ETRO) prohibiting overnight motor caravan parking on various streets, including at Sandsend, Scarborough and Cayton Bay and the proposals for a permanent Traffic Regulation Order
Considered a report of the Corporate Director of Environment which detailed the outcomes of the Experimental Traffic Regulation Order to prohibit the overnight parking of motor caravans at two locations on the East Coast and sought the views of the Scarborough and Whitby Area Committee on the proposal to introduce a permanent traffic regulation order prohibiting the overnight parking of motor caravans in Sandsend and North Bay in Scarborough, between the hours of 11pm and 7am.
Members were informed that:
During the discussion, members raised the following points:
In response, the Highways Area Manager, Richard Marr confirmed:
Resolved That the committee notes the report and submits the following comments to the Corporate Director and Executive Member:
|
|
188 |
Appointments to Committees and Outside Bodies
Considered a report of the Assistant Chief Executive Legal and Democratic Services which invited the committee to make an appointment to Groundwork Yorkshire Board of Trustees.
The Chair advised that two nominations had been received: Councillor Derek Bastiman and Councillor David Jeffels.
Upon being put to the vote by a show of hands, it was
RESOLVED that Councillor Derek Bastiman be appointed to Groundwork Yorkshire Board of Trustees.
|
|
189 |
Scarborough & Whitby Area Committee Work Programme 2025/26
Considered the latest draft of the committee’s work programme for 2025-26.
Following discussion, the Chair confirmed the following topics for consideration by the committee (to be discussed at the next mid cycle briefing):
In reply to members’ questions, it was confirmed that (i) the Area Committee work programme was retrospective and spanned a single year to enable the committee to review its work and outcomes over that period and to assist in the drafting of the committee’s annual report, and (ii) Whitby West Cliff Beach’s Blue Flag Status was not dependent on the Cliff Lift but on other factors notably the bathing water quality.
Resolved that the work programme be noted.
|
|
190 |
Any Other Items
There was no urgent business.
|
|
191 |
Date of Next Meeting
Extraordinary meeting to review bathing water quality in Scarborough – 23 March 2026
|
|
192 |
Reports circulated for information only
|
|
193 |
Alpamare Waterpark update
This was provided by the Chair under Minute item 182.
|
The meeting concluded at 1.08 pm.