Agenda and minutes

Decision

Members voted unanimously in favour of Will Scarlett being elected as Chair of the North Yorkshire Local Access Forum.

Decision

Members voted unanimously in favour of Patricia Coulson being elected as Vice-Chair of the North Yorkshire Local Access Forum.

The Chair introduced Judith Hooper to Members and welcomed her to the Forum.

No apologies for absence had been received.

There were no declarations of interest.

Resolved

That the minutes of the meeting held on 29 January 2025 be agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

Members of the public may ask questions or make statements at this meeting if they have given notice to Dawn Drury of Democratic Services and supplied the text (contact details below) by midday on Thursday 22 May 2025, three working days before the day of the meeting.  Each speaker should limit themselves to 3 minutes on any item.  Members of the public who have given notice will be invited to speak:-

·         at this point in the meeting if their questions/statements relate to matters which are not otherwise on the agenda (subject to an overall time limit of 30 minutes);

·         when the relevant agenda item is being considered if they wish to speak on a matter which is on the agenda for this meeting.

If you are exercising your right to speak at this meeting, but do not wish to be recorded, please inform the Chairman who will instruct anyone who may be taking a recording to cease while you speak.

No public questions had been received.

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.

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  ...  view the full minutes text for item 47.

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  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48.

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.

Members expressed appreciation for the inclusion of the Muslim Hikers Walk on the Yorkshire Wolds Way in the report, noting how encouraging it was to see such initiatives highlighted.  They emphasised that access to the countryside should be inclusive and available to all, regardless of cultural background, and welcomed the sharing of this positive story.

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.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 49.

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  ...  view the full minutes text for item 50.

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.

Mr Brown referenced a previous scheme initiated by Network Rail (NR) to remodel the train station area and its approach; the scheme had not been progressed, however he suggested that it could merit a conversation with NR.  The Sustrans officer commented that this was useful information and requested that, if any additional details about the scheme were available, they be shared with Sustrans, as the organisation was not previously aware of its existence.

A member of the public had attended the meeting, and with the Chairs permission spoke on the subject.  It was confirmed, that as part of a local Campaign group, the proposed development of a safe walking, wheeling and cycling link between Sowerby Gateway, Green Lane and Thirsk Railway Station was one of the most popular proposals in Thirsk, and that as a local stakeholder group they would welcome the opportunity to contribute to the feasibility study.

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,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 51.

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 Inspectoratewas 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  ...  view the full minutes text for item 52.

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.

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  ...  view the full minutes text for item 54.

Any other items which the Chair agrees should be considered as a matter of urgency because of special circumstances

There were no other items.