North Yorkshire Council
Harrogate and Knaresborough Area
Constituency Committee
14 September 2023
Harrogate Transport
Projects
Report of the Corporate Director of
Environment
1.0 PURPOSE
OF REPORT
1.1
To update Members on the progress on three projects within their
area: the Oatlands feasibility study, the Harrogate Transport
Improvements Programme and the Killinghall bypass.
2.0
SUMMARY
2.1 This
report provides an update on each project and it sets out ongoing
work where relevant and next steps.
3.0
BACKGROUND
3.1 A
variety of projects have been under development in the Harrogate
area for some time. As these schemes are strategic projects
and likely to require significant investment, they are developed in
line with the Department for Transport (DfT) framework for large
local major transport schemes. These schemes are developed by
the Council’s transport planning team, who lead on
development of scheme business cases, government bidding
opportunities and transport policy.
3.2
The DfT has a specific framework
within which they expect major scheme business cases to be
developed and they are also clear that they expect major schemes to
have a focus on sustainability, have high levels of public support
and to have considered a wide range of options before
selecting an optimum solution. Developing a DfT compliant business
case is a significant undertaking, which in general would be
expected to take as a minimum around six years from the point at
which a range of options are shortlisted.
3.3 North
Yorkshire Council will soon begin the process of forming a Mayoral
Combined Authority (MCA) with City of York Council and at that
stage, major transport schemes from both authorities are expected
to come together to form a major schemes pipeline. A list of
potential schemes is currently being developed by officers from
both authorities, with the potential that schemes such as Harrogate
Transport Improvement Programme (HTIP) may be included in the major
schemes list. It is anticipated that the MCA will have a greater
degree of control over its investment decisions, but schemes will
still need to be assessed through a rigorous assurance process into
which the DfT will input.
3.4 This
report sets out the latest position with the development of the
HTIP study, the Oatlands feasibility study and the Killinghall
Bypass study, all of these studies are at the optioneering stage.
This means that a range of possible options are being identified,
considered and tested.
4.0
HARROGATE TRANSPORT IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAMME
4.1 Since
2019, when the Harrogate Congestion Study public engagement showed
very low support for any of the Harrogate relief road alignments
(78% against), the Council has been working on developing a number
of options to reduce congestion. This study, known as HTIP, in its
first phase considered options for several corridors into the
centre of Harrogate, but due to the funding required to develop a
compliant business case, its current second phase has been focussed
on one corridor, the A61 Leeds Road. The rationale for this,
is that whilst discrete intervention can bring some level of
benefit, evidence points to a coordinated approach in an area
providing more opportunities to reduce congestion and improve
facilities for all modes of transport.
4.2 The cost
of implementing a solution likely to deliver any form of traffic
reduction is such that it exceeds the Council’s current own
budgets. On that basis, officers have been developing a
number of potential options which could form a larger major scheme.
The intention of that would be gaining entry to the DfT’s
large local major scheme programme or recommending the scheme for
further development as part of the MCA pipeline of major
schemes.
4.3
Framework consultants WSP have been developing measures to form the
basis of a number of possible approaches on the corridor,
comprising varying levels of ambition for change. Officers and
engineers are currently reviewing these from a technical and policy
perspective, with a view to feeding back to consultants and
providing a final report in the autumn.
4.4 Measures
include provision of sections of bus priority facilities, improved
signals and crossing facilities for pedestrians, cycle
infrastructure and also consideration of how junctions can be
improved to enhance movement of all modes along the corridor.
Clearly a balance of competing needs will have to be considered
and, in particular, the constraints on land availability due to
highway extents and Stray land, mean that in some cases, the
optimum solution cannot be deliverable.
4.5 Work on
HTIP has been progressing well, but has taken longer than
anticipated, in order to ensure that transport modelling for the
project aligns with the transport assessments being undertaken for
the West of Harrogate Development Management Plan. Officers
from both projects are working closely together to ensure that
transport forecasting and modelling is based on figures that have
been agreed in line with the development plan work.
4.5 Park and
Ride forms part of the HTIP study, but the scope of the park and
ride element of study is wider than that for the main study itself
and considered the whole of the Harrogate and Knaresborough urban
area.
4.6 The
reasoning for the study being extended beyond the A61 considers the
recognition that for park and ride to work effectively, would
almost certainly require some degree of parking management, and for
this to be applied equitably, park and ride options would need to
be available from a range of access points around the town
centre.
4.7 The Park
and Ride element of the study builds on the work that was
undertaken as part of the first stage HTIP review, but includes
some additional potential sites and also considers the
deliverability of suitably designed sites in the areas of land that
have been considered. At the time of writing, costs are being
worked up for the development of the sites, as this will help to
inform a broad overview of costs and benefits, in line with
expected best practice.
4.8 The
study has considered a range of operating models, including using a
dedicated service, and providing park and ride facilities on an
existing bus route. It has also looked at sites on and off
the main public highway and on land both publicly, and currently
privately owned. Early indications from the study are that
none of the sites that have been considered would be financially
self-sustaining, but with a degree of subsidy from public funds,
could in time operate at a profit. However, this would require a
period of investment. Further details on this will be provided in
due course, once further technical information has been developed
and recommendations of the study can be finalised.
4.9 In order
to develop final recommendations, and in view of the important
links between HTIP and the West of Harrogate Development Project,
collaboration between teams will ensure that further reporting can
take place at the earliest possible opportunity once the final
assessment work has been undertaken. Timescales are still being
determined for this, but is expected to be during the
Autumn.
5.0 OATLANDS
FEASIBILITY STUDY
5.1 The
Oatlands Feasibility Study came about following the public
engagement that was undertaken on the options suggested as part of
the Harrogate Active Travel Fund Tranche 2 (ATF2) proposals, which
were developed as part of the government’s response to social
distancing during the Covid 19 pandemic.
5.2 The
original proposals that were developed at short notice in line with
government timescales, were consulted on but failed to gain a level
of public support sufficient to allow them to be either developed
further
5.3 On that
basis, officers agreed with the DfT and then Active Travel England
(ATE), that the money that had been nominally set aside to consider
issues in the Oatlands area could be used to further develop
alternative proposals for active travel in that area.
5.4 As part
of this new project, the responses from the original public
engagement were combined with information collected through a
number of traffic and transport surveys, to establish what other
options might be feasible for delivery in that area. Further, a
separate public engagement, using the Commonplace platform, was
used to allow local residents and people who visit or travel
through the area, the opportunity to comment on issues within the
study area, both positive and negative.
5.5 In
addition to this, officers met with the local ward member and have
also met with other key stakeholders as part of on-going
discussions around issues and options in the area.
5.6
Discussions with stakeholders suggest that two of the biggest areas
of concern in the area are indiscriminate parking and also the
reduction in bus services and bus penetration into some of the
smaller side roads running off the main thoroughfares of Oatlands
Road and Hookstone Chase.
5.7 Data
collected as part of the project showed that a large proportion of
vehicles in the study area were making through trips and that
traffic speeds on some roads suffered from speeds that were higher
than the posted speed limit. The study also demonstrated that high
numbers of vehicles were parking on streets between the hours of
8am and 5pm, indicating a level of commuter parking.
5.8 With
regards to the data collected through the public engagement, there
was no clear consensus on what constitute the priority issues in
the area, although indiscriminate parking, traffic speeds and
issues in crossing the road were all mentioned in
responses.
5.9 When it
came to identifying solutions to the issues in the area, there was
somewhat more consensus. Less parking and reduced traffic
volumes were the two most popular options, with cycle lanes, slower
traffic, and easier ways to cross the road also achieving a high
level of support.
5.10 Based on this information, officers have been
working to determine a series of possible next steps. In addition
to this, they have also been meeting with local schools and
organisations, to discuss how support for behaviour change
initiatives might reduce the numbers of people travelling into the
area each day by car. Designs are currently being reviewed and it
is envisaged that residents will be consulted later this
year. Results of this consultation will be presented to the
ACC in the new year, alongside recommended improvements. Currently
no budget is available for delivery.
5.11 It should be noted
that the designs are being considered alongside the 20mph review
recommendations in the area and road safety improvements already
agreed for delivery such as the Oatlands Drive crossing, at
Slingsby Walk.
6.0
KILLINGHALL BYPASS
6.1 Work on a
possible bypass for the village of Killinghall, has been in
consideration for some time, and the project has subsequently
featured in the Council’s list of major schemes for many
years.
6.2 Whilst
the proposals for potential bypasses of Harrogate were rejected
comprehensively in the 2019 Harrogate Congestion Study engagement,
a village bypass on Killinghall still had a level of support and on
that basis, the Executive agreed that it would be appropriate to
consider developing the project further to assess its suitability
for submission to the DfT’s large local major schemes
programme.
6.3 Work on
the bypass looked at a number of possible highway alignments, and
as set out above, in line with DfT requirements also looked at
alternative approaches to reducing the impact of traffic in the
village of Killinghall. However, in this case, there are
fewer opportunities for significant mode switch to walking, cycling
or passenger transport because of the more rural nature of
Killinghall.
6.4 A number
of standardised assessments were undertaken of the economic impact
of the scheme and on that basis, all of the alignments that were
considered offered a strong value for money.
6.5 On that
basis, it is recommended that the scheme continues to form part of
the Council’s large local major scheme list. However,
it should be noted that the DfT has made it clear that as we move
into the new period for the LTP, they expect major schemes
pipelines to comprise a range of types of schemes, with far fewer
new road schemes than was previously the case.
7.0
CONSULTATION UNDERTAKEN AND RESPONSES
7.1
Consultation has not been undertaken in this phase of the HTIP
study, but as noted in section 4 above, extensive consultation was
undertaken as part of the Harrogate Congestion Study. Officers
suggest that once a preferred option, or series of options have
been recommended as part of the study, these will be taken out to
public consultation.
7.2 As noted
above, scheme specific consultation was undertaken on the original
ATF2 proposals and this formed part of the background information
for the feasibility study. For the Oatlands Feasibility
Study, public engagement was undertaken during the summer of 2022
using the Commonplace online platform. Through this engagement,
there was an opportunity to note positive and negative features of
the local area, both generally and at specific locations.
Approximately 380 comments were
received, and they fed into the development of the
options.
7.3 For the
Killinghall Bypass scheme, no public engagement has been undertaken
since the Harrogate Congestion Study public engagement in
2019. It is recommended that before the scheme progresses any
further, engagement on the principle of pursuing the scheme
further, and possible recommended alignments is
undertaken.
8.0
ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS
CONSIDERED
8.1 All of
the projects listed above have followed national guidance and best
practice on scheme development, which requires that a variety of
options are considered before a preferred option is selected. In
all cases, preferred options have not been determined thus far,
with that process likely to take place once public engagement or
consultation has taken place.
9.0 IMPACT
ON OTHER SERVICES/ORGANISATIONS
9.1 All
three of these projects are in the early stages of development and
no specific impacts have been identified as yet. Should any of the
projects be taken forward for further development, impact on other
services or organisations will be considered in more
detail.
10.0 FINANCIAL
IMPLICATIONS
10.1 There are no
financial implications arising specifically from this report as it
is providing an update. As schemes are in an early stage of
development, costs and potential funding sources will be identified
as part of the scheme business case work. HTIP and the Killinghall
bypass are schemes being developed as part of the existing scheme
development budget. The Oatlands feasibility work has been funded
out of the Covid response grant funding, which was provided to the
Council during the pandemic. In all cases, further scheme
development work and budget management will form the basis of a
future report to the ACC.
11.0 LEGAL
IMPLICATIONS
11.1 There are no
currently identified legal implications related to these studies.
Should any of the schemes progress further, consideration will be
given to any relevant legal matters.
12.0 EQUALITIES
IMPLICATIONS
12.1 There are no
equalities impacts as a consequence of this report, which sets out
to report on the progress of three transport studies. An equalities
impact screening assessment has been undertaken and this recommends
that at this time, no further assessment is required, see Appendix
A. However, in all cases, should these projects develop further,
there will be a requirement for an equalities impact assessment to
be undertaken during the development of the scheme.
13.0 CLIMATE CHANGE
IMPLICATIONS
13.1 There are no climate change impacts as a
consequence of this report, which sets out to report on the
progress of three transport studies. A climate change impact
screening assessment has been undertaken and this recommends that
at this time, no further assessment is required, see Appendix B.
However, in all cases, should these projects develop further,
there will be a requirement for climate, and broader environmental,
impact assessments to be undertaken at a number of stages
throughout the development the projects.
14.0
REASONS FOR
RECOMMENDATIONS
14.1 To allow members to
be updated on several projects within their area and to have the
opportunity to comment on those projects.
|
15.0
|
RECOMMENDATION(S)
|
|
15.1
|
It is recommended that Members note the
content of the updates on the three studies:
HTIP, the
Oatlands feasibility study and the Killinghall Bypass.
|
APPENDICES:
Appendix A – Equalities Impact
Assessment
Appendix B – Climate Change Impact Assessment
BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS:
Karl
Battersby
Corporate
Director of Environment
County
Hall
Northallerton
25.08.23
Report Authors:
Rebecca Gibson, Senior Transport Planning Officer and Melisa
Burnham, Highways and Transportation Area Manager
Presenter of
Report – To be confirmed
Note: Members
are invited to contact the author in advance of the meeting with
any detailed queries or questions.
