North Yorkshire County Council
North Yorkshire Local Access Forum
Minutes of the public meeting held on Wednesday, 28 May 2025 commencing at 10.00 am.
Will Scarlett in the Chair plus Patricia Coulson, Stephen Clark, Rachel Connolly, Mark Cunliffe-Lister, Councillor Robert Heseltine, Councillor David Jeffels, Samantha Perks, Martin Reynolds, Belinda Ryan, John Toogood (attended remotely via Teams); and Judith Hooper (attended remotely via Teams).
Officers present: Ian Kelly - Head of Countryside Access Services, Andrew Brown – Principal PROW Officer, Beth Brown - Principal Definitive Map Officer, Rachael Balmer - Planning Policy and Place Officer; and Dawn Drury - Democratic Services Officer
Other Attendees: Naomi Lawes - Project Officer, Sustrans and Mark Baty - Senior Engineer – Sustrans (attended remotely via Teams).
|
Copies of all documents considered are in the Minute Book
|
|
40 |
Election of Chair
Decision
Members voted unanimously in favour of Will Scarlett being elected as Chair of the North Yorkshire Local Access Forum.
|
|
41 |
Election of Vice Chair
Decision
Members voted unanimously in favour of Patricia Coulson being elected as Vice-Chair of the North Yorkshire Local Access Forum.
|
|
42 |
Apologies for Absence
The Chair introduced Judith Hooper to Members and welcomed her to the Forum.
No apologies for absence had been received.
|
|
43 |
Declarations of Interest
There were no declarations of interest.
|
|
44 |
Minutes of the Meeting held on 29 January 2025
Resolved
That the minutes of the meeting held on 29 January 2025 be agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.
|
|
45 |
Public Participation
No public questions had been received.
|
|
46 |
Secretary's Update Report
The report of the Secretary, which updated on developments since the last meeting.
In terms of the formal responses listed at appendix A of the agenda pack, the Chair thanked Mark Cunliffe-Lister for composing the letter to Daniel Zeichner MP, regarding the Sustainable Farming Initiative funding, and advised that, as yet, the Forum had not received a response.
Councillor Jeffels advised that at a recent meeting of the Transport, Economy, Environment and Enterprise Overview and Scrutiny Committee a working group had been established to look at rural transport in North Yorkshire as a whole and stated that he would act as a conduit for any information that came from that working group so that the LAF could have an input.
Mark Cunliffe-Lister suggested the importance of informing the public about how public transport could provide access to specific walking routes and where there were suitable car parks and queried if there was the potential to develop this idea further, ensuring that transport links were clearly integrated with walking opportunities. The Chair stated that the work being undertaken on the new NYC Local Plan may address some of these issues, and that the Forum should aim to be actively involved in all the relevant aspects of that work, for both transport infrastructure as well as planning and development and that should this be identified as a key priority, that it could become a focus area for a sub-group.
Resolved
That the update be noted.
|
|
47 |
LAF Sub Group and Individual Project Updates
The report of the Secretary giving LAF members the opportunity to update the Forum on Council liaison and other LAF representative project activity since the last meeting.
Rachel Connolly presented her question which was contained at Appendix I to the report, for Members consideration. It was explained that Natural England (NE) was a statutory consultee for development applications which had a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), or environmental dimension of importance, however, NE did not address access elements in their consultation responses which resulted in a loss of access advice from the one organisation who could make an impact in the planning process. Following a discussion between the Head of Access at NE and Mrs Connolly it had been proposed that the LAF support a letter from the Yorkshire, Humber & North Lincolnshire Regional Access Forum (YH&NL RAF) to Natural England (NE), the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), and the local Member of Parliament, advocating for access issues to be considered in large-scale planning applications. It was agreed that such a letter would carry more weight if it was sent from the YH&NL RAF. Members expressed full support for the proposal and the Chair offered to raise the matter with the Secretary to the YH&NL RAF to request inclusion of the item on their next meeting agenda. Will updated Members on the recent YH&NL RAF meeting that he and Pat Coulson had attended on the 5 March 2025. One item discussed was the potential for the Head of the Countryside Access Service (CAS) at NYC, Ian Kelly, to attend and speak at the next meeting of the RAF as interest had been expressed by a representative from another Council in understanding where the CAS sat within the structure of NYC in terms of the Directorate and budget.
The Chair raised the topic of district/area representatives, and a discussion took place around the area allocation, especially in light of the Council areas being split in a different way to that when it was North Yorkshire County Council and the seven District Council’s. The Chair acknowledged the difficulty in allocating geographic responsibilities, particularly where member coverage was lacking, but did feel that it was a subject to be investigated for the future. Judith Hooper referenced her previous experience with the Harrogate Planning department, queried the district/area representative role and offered to discuss it further with the Chair outside the meeting.
Resolved i) That the additional information provided at the meeting be noted, alongside the written updates provided in the report. ii) That the Chair and Rachel Connolly develop a proposal on access in large-scale planning applications to present to the YH & NLRAF; and the Chair to speak with the Secretary of the YH & NLRAF regarding adding this as an item on the next Regional Access Forum agenda. iii) Will to speak with Ian re the possibility of his attendance at the next meeting of the YH & NL RAF. iv) The Chair and Judith Hooper to speak outside the meeting to explore district/area representation further.
|
|
48 |
Review of Best Practice in Northern Local Access Forums Sub-Group
The Chair thanked Stephen Clark for the report and the work he had undertaken in researching LAF best practice and asked that he present the paper.
Mr Clark explained that he and the Chair had devised a questionnaire which had been emailed to all the LAF’s in the North of England, of those LAF’s surveyed, seven responses had been received from Lancashire, Cumbria and Lakes, Northumberland, Bradford, East Riding of Yorkshire Council and Kingston upon Hull City Council, Calderdale and North Yorkshire Moors.
Mr Clark noted that both he and the Chair had gained valuable insights from the individual responses received and went on to outline the key findings from the feedback.
Mr Clark highlighted Northumberland LAF as highly effective, they were well-organised and action-oriented, maintained a blog to celebrate achievements, held informal sessions for team building and issue discussion, tracked the actions from the meetings diligently and worked actively between meetings. Members were advised that a Better Practice Guide for the LAF existed, however this was over 20 years old, therefore there was a need for updated guidance and improved information sharing between LAFs.
Mrs Connolly made reference to the interaction with NYC Planners around planning applications and observed that it was very rare that an acknowledgement or feedback was received, the Chair made the suggestion that the phraseology in the final paragraph of the standard letter template be changed, to request feedback within 3 weeks.
The Chair commented that there had been a recent change in the NYLAF membership and expressed appreciation for the current group’s energy and enthusiasm and stated that he would share the paper with the RAF to help them understand how the LAF operated.
A list of suggested changes to the NYLAF ways of working had been formulated by the Chair and Mr Clark and were contained within the committee report for Members consideration.
One Member highlighted that the Forum was already doing some of the actions included within the recommendations, however they would welcome the informal sessions and were of the opinion that working in sub-groups provided the opportunity for members to team build and learn each other’s strengths and weaknesses. They went on to say that action tracking would be beneficial and that the LAF should always share best practice.
Another Member stated that they were also part of the North Yorkshire Moors LAF, and that they would take the paper to the next meeting for information and discussion. Councillor Jeffels advised that he also attended these meetings as an observer, and that if raised, that he would lend his support.
The Chair provided a summary of the proposed changes to the NYLAF ways of working and what the Forum were already doing. It was noted that Members had a clear understanding of their roles within the Forum. The Chair expressed interest in exploring the option of holding informal sessions, highlighting that such sessions would be beneficial for both Forum Members and the Council.
In relation to engagement with the Secretary and the CAS team, as well as the organisation of meetings, the Chair acknowledged that these aspects were functioning well. The Chair informed Members that he and the Secretary had spoken regarding the production of a list of actions which could be emailed out in a timely fashion, so the Members knew what they had committed to. It was muted whether Members could gain access to NYC SharePoint, so that rather than communicating via email, there could be an area specifically for the NYLAF to use.
The Chair stated that the sub-groups worked well and in terms of the development of a stronger identity for the NYLAF to promote visibility, this had already been identified as a project for the future.
Resolved
i) That the additional information provided at the meeting be noted, alongside the written updates provided in the report. ii) That the Chair and Stephen Clark formalise suggestions on how the LAF will move forward, including the potential establishment of a sub-group. iii) That the Chair and secretary explore opportunities for informal sessions. iv) That the secretary speak with the NYC technology department regarding the possibility of SharePoint access for Forum Members.
|
|
49 |
North Yorkshire Council Countryside Access Service (CAS) Annual Report
Members reviewed a detailed report delivered by Ian Kelly, Head of the Countryside Access Service (CAS), which outlined the service’s activities during 2024–25 and provided an overview of planned initiatives and anticipated challenges for 2025–26. Andy Brown, Principal Public Rights of Way (PROW) Officer, and Beth Brown, Principal Definitive Map Officer, were also present to respond to any questions raised by the Forum.
Over the course of 2024-25 Members heard that the CAS had: · Successfully recruited a new Senior Public Rights of Way Officer. · Seen a significant state of flux in terms of staffing with a number of key personnel changes, however, the team had united in their determination to maintain the service. · Secured a further £150k of funding, utilised on the PROW network from sources external to CAS, to include National Trail Grants, Councillor localities budgets and National Landscape projects. · Seen case load pressures due to the number of Definitive Map Modification Order (DMMO) applications which continued to be submitted at a high rate despite the Government’s announcement that it intends to repeal the 2031 cut-off date for applications based on historic evidence. · Continued to work towards Natural England’s objective of establishing the Coast-to-Coast National Trail and were on track to complete most of the work in the North Yorkshire area ahead of the spring 2026 opening. · Delivered significant improvements to the PROW and Unsurfaced Unsealed Road (UUR) networks. · Continued to effectively utilise volunteers and Path Keeper groups to manage the networks, all despite significant changes to staffing within the service. · Commenced a significant programme of large-scale infrastructure installations with the addition of the bridge engineer.
The Chair remarked on the positive outlook while Councillor Jeffels praised Mr Kelly for an excellent report, commended the whole CAS team on their work and stated that he was awaiting the official opening of the Coast to Coast Trail with great interest as he considered it an investment in both public health and tourism.
In response to a query regarding whether there was a deadline for the Right to Apply for Public Path Orders (PPO) the Principal Definitive Map Officer explained that due to the general election and staffing changes at DEFRA, there had been no update on the implementation of the Rights of Way reforms included in the Deregulation Act.
Stephen Clark asked whether there were specific areas of the CAS’s work that the LAF could assist in prioritising. In response, Mr Kelly noted that the service had previously consulted the LAF and confirmed that, should any further need arise, the service would certainly engage with the Forum again, as their support was highly valued and beneficial, particularly with CAS being such a small team.
Mr Kelly advised that the service did not include a dedicated tourism officer, highlighting an opportunity to collaborate more closely with tourism colleagues. He acknowledged the challenging financial outlook but emphasised the significant value of the PROW network and added that the LAF had an important role to play in supporting this work. The Chair suggested that officers from NYC’s health and tourism services be invited to a future LAF meeting to initiate dialogue and demonstrate the potential benefits of collaboration between the services.
Mr Brown highlighted that the UK National Parks were currently involved in a project that used mobile phone data to understand patterns of movement, visitor numbers, and pressure points in the parks. This helped park authorities make better decisions about infrastructure, conservation priorities, and public engagement, and it was hoped that NYC would have access to the data in the future.
The importance of the tourism economy and the role of countryside access in people’s daily lives was emphasised, particularly in urban hotspots such as Harrogate. Each year, hundreds of hours of outdoor activities took place which contributed significantly to public health and wellbeing. A study had estimated that Active Travel generated approximately £36 billion to the United Kingdom economy annually, this included substantial savings for the NHS, as people remained healthier into later life, and contributed to reduced pollution levels. It was noted that CAS had been proactive in prioritising urban routes.
Resolved
That the report be noted.
|
|
50 |
Rights of Way Improvement Plan Sub-Group
Pat Coulson presented the report to Members, but firstly thanked Mr Brown for his guidance on the project.
It was noted that at the last meeting of the Forum in January 2025, the Principal PROW Officer had shared a briefing paper and presentation with Members which outlined the current position of the North Yorkshire Council (NYC) Rights of Way Improvement Plan (ROWIP). At that time the Countryside Access Service (CAS) asked that Members provide strategic guidance on the development of the next NYC ROWIP, which was scheduled for review in 2027. In response to this request, a sub-group was established at the meeting, comprising Pat Coulson, Belinda Ryan, and John Toogood.
Mrs Coulson reported that, in response to the CAS teams request, the sub-group had undertaken a review of several ROWIPs. It was noted that many of the documents were difficult to locate online and, in several instances, only draft versions were accessible, with no finalised documents available. Additionally, some of the plans were particularly lengthy and contained numerous acronyms, which posed challenges in interpretation. Despite these issues, the sub-group reached a consensus that the Northumberland ROWIP represented a particularly strong and effective model.
Following the review, attention was directed to the eleven questions outlined in the January 2025 briefing paper, which were included in the appendix of this report. Each member of the sub-group completed the questions independently, then the individual responses were consolidated into a single, unified set of answers for further discussion.
Given current financial restraints, the sub-group could see no benefit in commissioning a new ROWIP of the length and detail of the 2007 document and stated that the 2027 document should be: · Concise as many people only read the beginning of a document. · Strategic, providing high level objectives, not how to achieve them · Deliverable and with SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, time-bound) objectives · Written in plain English, avoiding the use of abbreviations and acronyms · Included in the current Local Transport Plan, but not hidden away, it should be easily identifiable. Members noted that the sub-group had identified six key areas for the CAS to consider when drafting the new ROWIP, these could be found from section 4.0 of the report. For each area, the sub-group proposed a method for implementation and outlined potential outcomes to support the development of the next ROWIP. A detailed discussion then took place between Members and officers on the six key areas identified. Mr Brown expressed that all six identified areas held significant value and emphasised the importance of fostering collaboration with teams from other organisations. However, he acknowledged the challenge of ensuring that shared information remained both useful and up to date.
Ms Ryan suggested leveraging modern technology, such as social media platforms or dedicated mobile applications, to facilitate real-time reporting of issues on the Public Rights of Way (PROW), for example, enabling users to report fallen trees.
Mrs Coulson highlighted the importance of making the network accessible to as many people as possible. Mr Brown stated that inclusivity was central to everything the team did, and that efforts were made to engage with groups who may currently feel excluded or underrepresented.
One of the areas agreed upon was the importance of raising public awareness about the achievements of the CAS, particularly given the constraints of a limited budget. Of the ROWIP’s researched, a number had showcased their key projects through a “you said, we did” approach.
Mr Brown noted that specific schemes had not been included among the key areas and questioned whether this was consistent across the sub-group. Mrs Coulson explained that while the sub-group had considered this issue, it was felt that being overly prescriptive could lead to criticism if certain projects were not delivered, however if CAS were aware of good schemes, then it would be beneficial to include them as examples.
Mr Clark cautioned against including too many ideas, which could become unmanageable and suggested a balanced approach, avoiding both overly brief and excessively long documents. Concerns were raised that as the Local Transport Plan (LTP) would be produced by the York and North Yorkshire Combined Authority, that major infrastructure schemes may be prioritised at the expense of local needs.
Resolved
That officers take note of the recommendations of the ROWIP sub-group.
|
|
51 |
Sustrans Feasibility and Design Project for Green Lane, Sowerby, Thirsk
Naomi Lawes, Project Officer and Mark Baty, Senior Engineer for Sustrans attended the meeting remotely to share an overview of a new design and feasibility project in Thirsk, being delivered in partnership with North Yorkshire Council (NYC). The project built on the Council’s plans to upgrade an existing footpath to a shared-use path, which aimed to create a safe and accessible walking, wheeling and cycling link between Sowerby Gateway, Green Lane and Thirsk Railway Station.
Members heard it had been identified that, at present, there was no continuous, safe route for pedestrians or cyclists traveling from the new housing developments to the railway station. Low levels of train commuting and high car use from this area underlined the need to improve sustainable transport options, particularly for residents with pushchairs, wheelchairs or limited mobility.
The Sustrans officers shared a presentation which could be seen at page 53 of the agenda pack and provided an overview of the project to include the current condition of the footpath, the project proposals, the wider objectives and the planned next steps.
Sustrans officers drew attention to the route options appraisal and explained that potential routes had been identified, however, they explained that progressing with any of these options would require further discussions and agreement with the relevant landowners, local residents, and stakeholders.
Members questioned the proposal to use
Olivette Crescent, a residential road with extensive on street
parking, as the primary access route to the A61, and queried
whether alternative options had been explored. The suggestion
was made to look at the possibility of incorporating a Section 106
(S106) agreement to facilitate the development of a dedicated cycle
route through the housing estate, which would also bring the route
closer to the train station. The Sustrans officer confirmed
that the possibility of creating a separate path had been
explored.
The Chair commented that the overall sentiment of the LAF was one of strong support for improvements to the network which made them safer for people to travel and encouraged active travel. A positive development noted was the establishment of a local point of contact, which would provide valuable insight into the specific needs of the area.
Ms Lawes stated that Sustrans would welcome the opportunity to return and present to the LAF as the project progressed, in response the Chair confirmed that the Forum would be delighted to re-engage and hear further updates.
Mr Cunliffe-Lister highlighted that the Division Councillor, Dan Sladden had been unable to attend today’s meeting, however as the local representative, he would welcome the opportunity to engage with Sustrans officers going forward.
Resolved
i) That the information provided at the meeting be noted ii) That the Secretary forward contact details to the Sustrans officers for the public attendee and North Yorkshire Councillor Dan Sladden. iii) That Mr Brown provide the Sustrans officers with a contact and information on the Network Rail scheme. |
|
52 |
Consultation response on the proposed modifications to new settlement (Maltkiln) Development Plan Document
Stephen Clark summarised the report which set out the Forums formal agreement, by correspondence, to a response on the proposed modifications to new settlement (Maltkiln) Development Plan Document, which concerned plans for a new settlement that included at least 3000 residential units, located between York and Harrogate near to Cattal.
Members noted that formally the plans for the settlement had been set out in a Harrogate District Development Plan Document (DPD) which was published in 2022 and at that time the NYLAF had responded to a consultation on those plans. The original vision set out for the Maltkiln settlement was that it would be "a place where people were not dependent on a car". It would have a network of safe and attractive walking and cycling routes which connected people, places and facilities, including nearby villages. It would have "attractive and accessible green spaces both within and around the village, provide increased space for nature, as well as placing recreational opportunities close to the community." These elements of the vision were much in line with the NYLAF’s own objectives of seeking improvements to public access for the purposes of open-air recreation and enjoyment, and utility or functional access.
In autumn 2024 the DPD was the subject of a review by the Planning Inspectorate. Since then, and following set out processes, “Main Modifications” to the DPD were proposed by North Yorkshire Council (NYC) in January 2025. Following this a six-week consultation by NYC on the “New Settlement (Maltkiln) Development Plan Document, Schedule of Main Modifications” was run from 10 February to 24 March 2025, with the consultation defined narrowly around the modifications to the plans.
In light of the significance and scale of the plans, Mr Clark had volunteered to research and draft a response on the proposals on behalf of the Forum as the consultation ended on the 24 March 2025, prior to the next meeting of the Forum. A draft response was formulated by correspondence between forum members in February and March 2025, with the final response and representation forms, which could be seen in the Appendix to the report, being agreed by email in March 2025.
Mr Clark explained that he had compared the proposed modification document with the original vision for the settlement as set out in the Harrogate District Development Plan Document (DPD). This comparison raised concerns as the modifications appeared to shift the plans away from Harrogate’s original vision of a village not dependant on cars, with walking & cycling routes to ensure connectivity.
Members heard that the Planning Inspectorate was in the process of finalising its report, which could be published as early as summer 2025. Mr Clark advised that once the document became available, he would analyse the content and provide an update to the NYLAF, outlining whether their representations had been reflected in the final planning documents.
Mr Clark thanked Members for their
contributions, and the Chair expressed appreciation to Mr Clark for
his efforts on this important piece of work. Resolved
That the response to the consultation be noted.
|
|
53 |
Natural England - Coast to Coast National Trail Newsletter
The Senior Officer, People, Landscapes, Access and Nature at Natural England had provided the spring edition of the Coast to Coast Path National Trail Stakeholder Update Newsletter in advance of the meeting. Members raised no questions on the information contained therein.
Resolved
To note the information.
|
|
54 |
NYLAF Forward Plan Programme
The Chair informed Members that he had received correspondence from North Yorkshire Council (NYC) concerning two consultations relating to the proposed new NYC Local Plan (LP). The two consultations were scheduled to run concurrently for a period of eight weeks, commencing on 19 May and concluding at midnight on 15 July 2025. Given that the LP had previously been identified as a potential item for inclusion on a future NYLAF Forward Plan, the Chair had invited an officer from the Planning Policy and Place team to attend the meeting. The purpose of their attendance was to provide an overview of the consultations and the process to be followed.
Rachael Balmer, Planning Policy and Place Officer attended the meeting remotely and delivered a presentation which provided an overview of the two ongoing consultations to include an explanation of the LP, the timetable for the LP preparation, the scope of the consultations, key issues to be considered in the development of the new LP, and the proposed next steps.
Of the two consultations under review—the Issues and Options Consultation and the Sustainability Appraisal—the officer highlighted that the Issues and Options document was the most relevant to the LAF, and therefore suggested that the LAF may wish to focus its attention on this particular document. The purpose of the Issues and Options consultation was to determine whether the document accurately identified the key issues and priorities that the LP should address. It also aimed to gather public feedback on the consultation questions, which included various options for the new LP, and to engage with local communities to invite views on local matters of concern.
The document contained two overarching themes: tackling climate change, zero emissions and building resilience against the changing climate, and promoting healthier lives, sustainable communities and reducing inequalities through planning.
Members heard that the government had set a clear expectation for a substantial increase in housebuilding across North Yorkshire over the next five years, with the annual target rising to 4,156 homes, this was significantly higher than previously experienced levels. In considering the key factors influencing where the Council should focus development within the county, the following priorities had been identified: addressing local housing needs, reinforcing the role and function of existing settlements, overcoming infrastructure constraints, capitalising on opportunities for sustainable transport, and taking into account environmental considerations.
The LP consultation was also seeking views on the new growth strategy and how it should be focussed, the sustainable growth strategy was based around 5 areas: · Developing entirely new settlements and communities. · Growing locations that were well served by sustainable transport links. · Dispersing development across a broader range of settlements. · A greater proportion of development in larger villages with a good range of services and infrastructure. · Prioritising growth in and around main urban areas. Other growth considerations included settlement hierarchy, whether to apply development limits to control urban sprawl and direct growth to specific areas, and whether to review the green belt to assess whether some land should be released for development or if protections should be strengthened. Finally, Members heard that other key
priorities for the LP were achieving natural environment
resilience, meeting specific housing needs, creating a
In terms of responding to the consultation, Members were advised that responses could be submitted via the NYC website through the planning policy consultation portal, there was also a dedicated email address for responses and that there were also duty officers on call who were available to answer questions and provide assistance during the consultation period.
In response to a query from the Chair, the officer explained that the online consultation response form spanned 99 pages and included approximately 30 to 40 questions. However, it was noted that respondents were not required to complete the entire form; instead, they may choose to answer only those questions most relevant, allowing the response to be focused and targeted.
The officer also highlighted that additional supporting evidence was available in the Housing and Economic Development Needs Assessment (HEDNA), a comprehensive document comprising around 400 pages. Furthermore, it was confirmed that the LAF could submit a collective response as a consultee, while individual members could submit their own responses, either via the online consultation portal or by email.
In terms of the LP timeline, Members noted that the initial target for adoption was 2028, in line with the five-year timeframe set out in the North Yorkshire (Structural Changes) Order 2022 following the creation of the new unitary authority. However, the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities was currently in the process of implementing a range of planning reforms under the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act. These reforms were expected to streamline the planning system, and local authorities would be duty-bound to comply with the new regulations once enacted, therefore, there was a strong likelihood that the LP timeline may be moved back to 2029, although this remained subject to change.
The Chair thanked the officer for her attendance at the meeting.
Members reviewed the proposed content for
future inclusion on the Forward Plan. The Chair emphasised
the importance of the LAF’s engagement in the LP consultation
process and as referenced at item 1.7 invited volunteers to form a
Local Plan Consultation Sub-Group to co-ordinate the Forum’s
response. A sub-group was formed to consist of Martin
Reynolds, Samantha Perks, Stephen Clark, Belinda Ryan and Judith
Hooper, and the Chair. Mr Kelly drew Members attention to item 1.4 of the proposed items and informed them that two separate consultations were due to commence this month: the Nidderdale National Landscape Management Plan 2025–2030 and the Howardian Hills National Landscape Management Plan 2025–2030. Mr. Kelly emphasised the time-sensitive nature of the upcoming consultations, noting that the deadlines for responses would fall before the next scheduled Forum meeting in September 2025. Forum Members Mark Cunliffe-Lister and John Toogood volunteered to contribute to the consultation responses, and it was suggested that Roma Haigh assist, subject to confirmation of her availability; if unavailable, the Chair agreed to step in and support the process.
Resolved
i) To create a Local Plan Consultation Sub-Group to consist of Martin Reynolds, Samantha Perks, Stephen Clark, Belinda Ryan and Judith Hooper, and the Chair. ii) To form a Nidderdale National Landscape Management Plan 2025-30 and Howardian Hills National Landscape Management Plan 2025-30 Sub-Group to consist of Mark Cunliffe-Lister, John Toogood and Roma Haigh, subject to her availability. |
|
|
|
|
55 |
Any Other Items
There were no other items.
|
The meeting concluded at 12.52 pm.