Anyone
who would like to ask a question or make a statement at the meeting should
email notice of their wish to do so, including the full text of what they
intend to say, to Mark.Codman@northyorks.gov.uk
as soon as possible, and by midday on
Tuesday 2 May 2023 at the latest.
Speakers are each asked not to exceed 3
minutes’ speaking time and to read out only the statement/question of which
they have submitted notice, without adding to or altering it. No person may submit more than one question
or statement. No more than one question may be asked, or statement made, on behalf of one
organisation. The overall time available
for public questions or statements is 30 minutes.
If
you are asking a question or making a statement at this meeting but do not wish
to be recorded, please inform the Chairman who will instruct those taking a
recording to cease whilst you speak.
Minutes:
Thirteen
notices had been received of statements and/or
questions from members of the public to be put before the committee at the
meeting.
The following public statement was read out by Kevin
Douglas:
From Harrogate District Cycle Action and
Open Country
We ask Councillors to support
the Harrogate Station Gateway project for six main reasons
which I will now outline.
1) It will improve the town centre as a place for
people
The town centre will become a
more pleasant place for people, and make them want to stay longer to eat, drink
and shop.
2) Harrogate should benefit from the opportunity of
this investment not reject it
Harrogate stands to benefit
from an investment of £10.9 million. If we reject it now the money will be
spent somewhere else – not in Harrogate or the District as a whole.
It will also almost certainly
put in doubt the opportunity for future funding bids to be successful,
therefore impacting upon the securing of further
external funding.
3) Station Gateway will be good for town centre
businesses
All the evidence shows that
public realm improvements and active travel infrastructure lead to higher
spending.
4) Responding to the 2019 Congestion Survey
In 2019, 77% of 15,500
respondents to the Harrogate Congestion Survey asked for better cycling and
walking infrastructure. The Station Gateway projects shows a commitment to
putting in place a hub on which to build that cycling and walking
infrastructure.
5) Station Gateway will improve active travel
facilities
66% of people say that it’s too dangerous for them to cycle in traffic. To make
cycling an option for all, including children, we need dedicated cycle tracks.
There are planned
improvements for those on foot too. Of course people
can continue to drive into town if they prefer.
The status quo does not
represent a town centre accessible to all; Station Gateway will begin the
process of changing that.
6) The Climate
Transport represents 28% of
North Yorkshire’s greenhouse gas emissions.
The Routemap
to Carbon Negative for the York & North Yorkshire region recognises the
need to:
·
Reduce vehicle
miles and
·
Increase active
travel
To do that, we need to enable
active travel through better infrastructure. The Station Gateway project is a
platform to begin to provide that infrastructure.
Without positive action North Yorkshire will not achieve its climate goals.
Summary
For these six reasons, we ask
Councillors to support Harrogate Station Gateway. Please show your commitment
to improving our active travel facilities, and to securing the future
prosperity of Harrogate and its town centre
The following public question was read out by Sue Savill of Party Fever Ltd:
We’ve been situated on Station Parade since 2011. We are a
party supplies shop and we provide a balloon decorating service. Customers either
collect balloon orders or we deliver locally. We also provided large
installations for corporate clients.
There’s a good mix of other
businesses on our street too, offering services to clients who may not be
particularly mobile, hairdressers, a long-established shoe shop whose client
base is 50+ and a physiotherapist, to name a few.
For the businesses situated on the
east side of Lower Station Parade, who have NO access to the rear of their
properties how does the council propose, if you take away our vehicular access
at the front of our premises by introducing both a bus lane and a cycle lane,
we should
The provision of 3 parking spaces/1 disabled on the west side of the street
is not enough for the businesses whose customers require ease of access due to
convenience or lack of mobility.
And the 2 loading bays on the opposite side are
impractical and unsafe.
I think the bus lane is
unnecessary for the number of busses that pass along our road and nothing is to
be gained by introducing one. If all these proposed
changes are to add nothing but one minute to a typical car journey around town.
What difference will a 66-metre stretch of bus lane make to the efficiency of a
bus route?
If, despite new laws in
favour of cyclists, the cycle lane has to be introduced then reduce the width
of the wide pavements on both sides and situate the cycle lane on the West
side, where businesses have access to the rear and leave ALL the parking in
place.
Rather than restricting
vehicular access, I think the aim should be to encourage a move to electric
vehicles.
It has been
stated that this is a transport project aimed to rebalance travel and
promote other transport options.
However, if this goes ahead
it will make shopping in Harrogate more
difficult and the cost to local businesses will be devastating. It will result
in less of a town centre for anyone to visit and the bus lanes and ‘attractive
corridors and welcome’ will be pointless and redundant!
Richard Binks confirmed that
the project team would work with concerned businesses with regards parking and
loading areas. He explained that the assessment had demonstrated that a bus
lane was viable but the lane was to be truncated and there would be similar
loading and customer parking option, i.e. 30 minute drop off, as there was
currently.
The following public question was read out by Andrew
Brown for the Harrogate Civic Society:
Harrogate Civic Society has
over 300 members and these comments are the result of an open meeting of the
members and detailed consideration of the proposal by the Planning and
Development sub-group of the Society.
Whilst the Society recognises
that some changes could enhance the town centre, the present proposal focus on
a relatively small section and there is no indication of these being part of a
longer-term, integrated traffic policy.
Without long-term planning these changes may, in the
future, be seen as having been unnecessary and/or detrimental. In particular, the Society is concerned that
reducing the main south-bound route through the town
centre to a single lane will result in significant tailbacks, increased
pollution, and, potentially, grid-lock.
The proposal appears to have
been driven by an imperative to introduce cycle lanes wherever possible (even
when they will be of little use) with limited, if any, consideration being
given to the way that pedestrians, the users of mobility scooters, and disabled
drivers move around the area. The
Society considers that the proposed cycle lanes, accelerating traffic after the
single carriageway section, and the additional street furniture, will hamper
their movement.
The proposals relating to the
northern section of Station Parade are welcomed but
the suggested cycle lanes along the remainder of Station Parade are fragmented
and confusing; as a result, they will not result in safe, attractive routes for
cyclists. The Society considers that the
previous proposals for extensive cycle lanes along East Parade represent a much
better option.
The widening of the pavements
along James Street and the introduction of trees is welcomed
but the Society would strongly prefer James Street to remain open to vehicular
traffic and to provide on-street parking at all times. In relation to the detailed design for James
Street, there is concern about the introduction of low-level planting, which
will be vulnerable to damage.
The Society is concerned that
the detailed design of the proposal will result in a clutter of signs,
barriers, and other street furniture, plus a variety of surface treatments, that will be detrimental to the character and
appearance of the Conservation Area. Also, the need for major change to Station Square is
questioned. The principal problems with
this space relate to inadequate maintenance and poor collection of litter
(problems that we suspect will remain however much money is
spent on re-design). The proposed
introduction of water jets suggests that the designers have failed to
understand that for much of the day, the relevant section of the Square is in
shadow.
As a result of all the above, the Society considers that the
proposals will be detrimental for many users of the town centre and will result
in serious damage to the character and appearance of the Harrogate Conservation
Area.
The
following public question was read out by William Woods of William Woods and
Independent Harrogate:
I am William Woods
representing 156 businesses called Independent Harrogate.
The Station Gateway scheme is
very well intentioned to encourage people out of cars to walk or cycle thus
reducing congestion and pollution but I strongly believe this is the wrong
scheme at the wrong time.
Like most town and city centres Harrogate is struggling to recover from COVID, the
impact of Brexit and the challenges of on line
shopping. The last thing businesses want now is 12 months or more disruption of
the town being turned into a building site. This
disruption will be hugely damaging and undoubtedly tip many over the edge.
On September 13th 2021 The
Chamber of Commerce, The BID and Independent Harrogate conducted a
comprehensive survey of nearly 900 businesses which
showed emphatically they were against the scheme.
Those against were: The Chamber
of Commerce -The BID -Independent Harrogate -The Harrogate Residents
Association ( over 1000 members) The Harrogate Civic Society, Granville Road
Residents Group( over 300 members) and finally The British Independent Retail
Association, a national organisation, representing over 3000 retailers across
the country. You must ask yourselves “can all these important groups be wrong”?
There are two very successful
businessmen in Harrogate who have a considerable stake
in the town centre. They are prepared to spend over 1/2 million
pounds opposing this scheme because they believe it would be
hugely damaging to the town and its future. You have to ask if the scheme is such a good idea why would they waste their money and not
fully support it.
How many of you have read the
Economic assessment report cobbled together to try to justify the scheme and
say it would boost the economy - the conclusions are dubious at best. Key
businesses in the town do not believe for one moment cycling and walking will
increase business by 30%. The vast majority of businesses rely on 60-70% of
customers coming from all over the country by car, so they need easy access to
the town and easy places to park including on street parking.
Consultation has been poor -
zoom meetings are limited especially when you can only ask questions by typing
them out. For something that impacts on the town so
seriously why has there not been a public meeting so everyone can air their
views. The Chamber of Commerce organised an open meeting when Don Mackenzie and
others spoke - about 100 attended and a vote produced only 2
in favour.
What upsets us is that all
the business groups have made alternative suggestions and amendments to improve
the scheme but they have been totally ignored apart
from one or two minor adjustments.
If NYCC is serious about
reducing congestion and pollution they need to address
the queues of traffic coming into Harrogate daily especially on Wetherby Road.
The 11 million pounds spent on the Gateway Scheme will do nothing to solve this
significant problem.
There has been three
consultations and three times people have voted against the scheme. The
significant stake holders in the town have shown they are against the scheme
but still NYCC is trying to force this harmful scheme upon us - how is that
democratic?
It is not WSP, County
Councillors scattered across North Yorkshire or their officers that live as far
away as Rotherham that will have to live with this detrimental scheme. It is
the residents and the business communities who live in the district that will
have to suffer the consequences.
I firmly believe you have
never had to make a more important decision as Councillors. If you really care
about Harrogate and its future wellbeing you must
reject this scheme and look at other options.
The following public question was
read out by J M d’Arcy Thompson, Chair of the Stray Defence Association:
What this project will create
is a road to nowhere, achieving nothing. Not a Gateway but a Portcullis
slamming down on the main A road, restricting Harrogate’s centre for emergency
vehicles, commerce and those who drive in order to work. Hindering not only
Harrogate folk but those from outlying villages.
The scheme is
based on the overriding premise of the May 2021 WSP report ‘Transforming
Cities fund- Harrogate Gateway’.
Which starts: ‘Need for the
proposed scheme POINT 1’ …’Harrogate has no dedicated cycle route which
connects with the front of Harrogate Railway Station to the Bus Station, resulting
in fewer opportunities for sustainable modal transfer’.
As the walk between them is
merely 20 paces, is a cycleway really required? £11. Million + seems
very costly for such a distance, even with supposed improvements to the
public realm.
Surely people arriving by bus or train will, as always
…dissipate and depart to where they want to be, not lingering outside but
heading for their Harrogate destination?
Construction itself will
create pollution, havoc and significantly increased congestion, creating a
narrow corridor, decimating and dividing the town, and blighting it’s centre.
How are less able people on
the Western Arc going to access the other side of Harrogate?
Closing roads between West
Park and Station Parade means a lengthy, convoluted route will
be needed to get from one side of the town to the other.
Many people already choose to
walk and cycle when it is possible and conducive to do so. However, this is not
Holland but hilly and often chilly Harrogate.
Realistically who is going to
walk or cycle at night or in bad weather, to either shop, visit a professional
business, go the theatre, cinema or a restaurant?
Gateway will remove freedom
and flexibility from residents and others throughout the district whilst discriminating
against the elderly and disabled. It will accelerate use of internet shopping,
creating a doughnut effect, with accessible companies only on the outskirts,
while a large hole, empty of businesses, shops, recreation… is
left in the centre.
Harrogate & Knaresborough
host the secondary schools and much congestion is created by
parents driving children long distances in and out of town and nearby villages.
Wouldn’t better use of Government funding be a fleet
of electric school minibuses to collect and return children, thereby removing
many private cars from rush hour roads?
Harrogate does not have a
university, or factory based industry which might
warrant extra cycleways. What we do have is a
largely intelligent, conscientious population, aware of, and very much engaged
with, the need to protect the planet. The integrity of Harrogate’s many
excellent green credentials must be safeguarded.
Bordered by the Yorkshire
Showground, and Harlow Carr’s gardens, within the
town are 18 parks, the largest being the Valley Gardens.
Harrogate has several notable
woods. The Pinewoods connect Harlow Carr to the
Valley Gardens, providing a much used green corridor
to the town. Another, from the Showground to the Stray, is Hookstone
Wood.
At the centre of all of this
is our wonderful Stray, open grassland with over 2000 mature trees, free for
the use of all. Two hundred acres of what is arguably Harrogate’s greatest
environmental resource. A much loved, well walked, and run,
enormously beneficial green lung wrapped, quite literally, around the very
centre of Harrogate.
Gateway would isolate the
crucial hub of Harrogate from so many. Please, do not bring down the portcullis
and tear the heart out of Harrogate.
N.B. Ref: May 2021 WSP TCF-WSP-NYC-16X-RP-LE-EIASCR-P01
report ‘Transforming Cities fund- Harrogate Gateway’.
The following public statement was read out by
Caroline Bayliss:
This project was originally designed in 2016, before Covid
and before the vast increase in on-line shopping. The town centre landscape
going forward suggests a totally different future.
For the tourism offer in this
town shopping is a vital ingredient and its uniqueness
is essential to its success. Visitors come for the specialist independent
shops, the wonderful ironwork facades, the amazing cafes all set in a sea of greenery which is our Stray and our wonderful Victorian
flower beds.
The Gateway Plan though
seemingly unobjectionable is bland and could be found
in Peterborough, Milton Keynes or Croydon. There is nothing unique about it.
A totally new plan of how the
town centre is going to be used for the next twenty years needs working on
before £11 million of our money is spent on a scheme that finds little favour
with residents, solves so few problems, adds to congestion and does nothing to
beautify the town that we love,
Rather it takes away yet more
of our distinct character to be replaced by concrete. Please think again?
The following public statement was read out by Barry
Adams of Harrogate Resident's Association Member:
Harrogate is not against
change but the meaningless Gateway Project is one that NYC seem determined to
champion at all cost. Is this because they secured funding
before the idea was thoroughly explored in detail? As with the doomed
Otley Road cycleway all for the sake of doing something.
The Highways Executive has a
history of ignoring the democratic process; not listening and dismissive of
public comment, hiding behind a meaningless excess of words in press releases.
A publicity exercise massaged to justify the Project but with a hint of
desperation as threats emerge of funding being moved
elsewhere. Businesses and residents understand what is at the heart of the town
far better than those on the Executive representing disparate constituencies across the new County.
Public consultation has been
poor. Wording of surveys steer you in a particular direction. Results can be
deceptive. Clearly demonstrated in consultations, even prior to the Gateway
Project. It has relied on Consultant’s irrelevant and questionable data
relating to much larger towns with a totally different
demographic.
It will not solve congestion
in Harrogate – a problem generated by ever increasing
levels of traffic in and out of as well as through the town. It is not an
inclusive vision delivering a balanced and green approach to travel for all
road users. No inclusion of high quality sustainable public transport links.
What is required is an holistic Masterplan for
Harrogate that looks at all factors and influences to form a solid basis for
future co-ordinated projects. No ‘Pocket Planning’ which
the Gateway Project is.
We do care what the millions
are spent on so why all this public realm expenditure if it doesn’t
amount to real improvements. It is a vanity project, blinkered and contrived. Unfortunately a Highway Engineer's led solution not capable
of celebrating this as an exemplary and attractive Gateway to the town. And I say that as an award winning Architect, albeit now
retired.
We need clear leadership on
the design side - an experienced Urban Designer capable of bringing together
all stakeholders and co-ordinating professional disciplines to deliver a
considered solution through a highly motivated Design Team knowledgeable of the
town, capable of engaging in original, imaginative but structured thinking.
After all, would you go to an eye consultant for brain surgery? Then we need
ongoing maintenance – something which has been missing
over the last decade or more.
Consider, what has made the
town successful in the past. We are getting nothing more than a
"desktop" design because of this lack of awareness from those with
limited understanding of Harrogate, it’s character and the largely cohesive
Conservation Area it sits in The proposals must clearly say "This is
Harrogate" - not Leeds, not York or any other place The DNA of these is so
different.
The Gateway Project will do
far more harm than good. No guarantee of success. Obsessed with "changing
travel patterns and behaviours" to the detriment of much broader concerns.
Businesses and residents are vehemently against it. We therefore ask you to
make the sensible and important decision not to support the Gateway Project.
There is an alternative
…………………….
The following public statement was read out by Veronica
Adams:
When Malcolm Neesam passed away last year Harrogate lost a brilliant and
highly respected citizen of this town. Unfailingly polite, an often reserved
person but one who was deeply committed to the idea of civic pride.
Knowledgeable on every aspect of Harrogate’s history and heritage, willing to
share this through his many books, writings and columns that were published on
a regular basis, often using these columns in the local media to express his
concerns.
It is only within the last
week or so that a good friend of Malcolm’s came across some of his thoughts
expressed in writing, not long before he passed away and obviously wished to
share. He was clearly not impressed with the direction Harrogate was moving in
and in light of the Gateway Project I would like to
share his thoughts with you to reflect on.
“At all the peaks of
Harrogate’s past successes, the authorities not only had a clear vision for
what the town could become, but also managed to fire the community with an
understanding of what the vision was and how their enthusiastic support could
convert that vision into profitable reality for the benefit of the entire
community. Let us, for the moment, discard all the fashionable rubbish about
goals, targets, objectives and policy statements, which can be so much verbal
fudge for doing nothing, and ask if today’s Harrogate Council really knows what
it wants Harrogate to become, and how it intends to invoke the aid of the
population. And please, don’t try to tell me that
“consultation exercises” with biased questions that lead to pre-approved
answers, have anything to do with a genuine council/populace spirit of mutual
striving for the improvement of Harrogate. The scale and tone of recent
correspondence to the Harrogate Advertiser is ample evidence to show the degree
of public concern about the future of our community, so it is not only
reasonable to ask the council what – in clear and basic English – is its vision
for Harrogate?, but also to demand an answer. If this basic question cannot be
answered, then the top leadership and administration should be replaced by one which is in possession of such a vision.
I suggest that Harrogate’s
past successes have arisen because the authorities and residents have been united in their efforts to provide the highest
standards, the best facilities, and the most attractive amenities for whatever
special, niche market they succeeded in attracting to Harrogate. Today, it is
irrelevant whether that market is for the spa, exhibitions and conferences,
festivals or tourism. It is here that I find the lack of clear vision for the
town’s future so alarming. Again, I ask of our council, what is your vision for
our community?”
Malcolm concludes
“I have written enough, so will end.”
On behalf of Malcolm I would like to thank you for listening.
The following public statement was read out by Jemima
Parker:
Good morning. I’d like start with a quiz question for you?
What do Sheffield, Wakefield,
Huddersfield, Barnsley, Oxford, Cambridge, Bristol, London
Kings Cross, have in common? The answer,
if you haven’t guessed already, is that these towns
and cities have all invested in multi-million pound projects to improve their
gateway for visitors arriving by train, limiting traffic and creating an
attractive pedestrian environment. These are in local authorities, like North
Yorkshire, that have made public climate emergency declarations, and they are
actively striving to shape places that are conducive to low carbon living.
The project
which you are being asked to endorse today seeks to add Harrogate to
this list of forward-thinking, climate-crisis responsive places. These are places that have grasped the need to invert the
transport pyramid and prioritise infrastructure for pedestrians and public transport
users ahead of private car drivers.
At 49% of the district’s
emissions, carbon from transport in Harrogate and across North Yorkshire are
higher than the UK average of 36%, and these are probably the hardest area of
emissions to tackle. While this scheme is predicted to
bring only modest carbon reductions, it sits at the centre of wider sustainable
transport opportunities for the town. The first few key pieces of a bigger
jigsaw puzzle.
Of course
there are transport elements to the climate change strategy, being developed by
North Yorkshire Council at the moment, but you will be aware that there is at
present, no budget to support these. The current approach to deliver the
Council’s net zero ambition is to bid for government pots of money, such as the
Transforming Cities Fund. Whatever
imperfections we may see in this Station Gateway scheme, it is a £10 million
investment. Decarbonisation funds are not coming from anywhere else in the near
future.
Throughout the consultation
processes local public opinion has been split pretty much 50/50
for and against the scheme, so you will not please everyone whatever you
decide. Can I suggest this leaves you free to take a long view of the best
interests of the town, to grasp the vision of a low carbon future where shared
and active travel complement a more attractive and less polluted Harrogate?
I urge you to follow the
Officers recommendations and endorse the implementation of the scheme and
recommend that the Executive approves the making of
TROs.
The following public statement was read out by Dame
Francine Holroyd JP:
Good morning Councillors,
Guests and members of the public.
By way of introduction
my name is Francine Holroyd and I am the very proud owner of a large number of
properties in Princes Square and the Montpellier Quarter in Harrogate. I am
also Chair of Governor's for Harrogate Ladies’ College as well as being both an
Adult and Youth Magistrate for over 18 years.
The Gateway Project is not
the way forward for Harrogate, it does not deliver
what our town needs in any shape, manner or form. For our town to thrive we
need excellent infrastructure and yes that means good on-street parking
allowing easy access to a good range of independent and chain stores. Walking,
cycling, bus and rail services are not able to fully deliver
this. The key to Harrogate’s success is that it is unique, it is special and
the plans we have seen are generic, soulless, lacking in character and without
individuality, in fact it could be any town anywhere
in the UK. Cars and taxis are essential for the elderly and disabled to enable
them to have a good quality of life and I would say this Project is actively
discriminating against them.
Let’s be honest, when someone thinks about going for a day
out shopping do they see travelling by bike as the answer? I don’t
know about you but getting hot and sticky cycling over Harrogate’s hilly
topography, which you must have to agree is unsuited to non-leisure cycling,
then trying to try on clothes etc. and subsequently cycling home with a load of
parcels just does not work. A lunch out with friends? Again, the same problem.
Yes, I agree we need to
encourage more walking and cycling but not at the detriment of making our town
centre unusable.
Now let’s talk about the
areas of Harrogate that are pedestrianised; Cambridge Street, Oxford Street,
Beulah Street - can you honestly say that the pedestrianisation
is successful and we can all look at the street scene with pride? You have to
agree that the answer is a resounding NO - the street scene is dirty, the
paving is damaged with pooling water, the materials used are poor quality and
really need replacing, the street furniture is tatty and most of the
anti-social behaviour is conducted around these areas. If we continue to pedestrianise will this encourage the use of electric
scooters and increase anti-social behaviour? I see the evidence weekly in
Harrogate’s Magistrates Court.
If Station Parade was reduced to one lane the traffic would back up all the way
back to Ripley, it already backs up to Ripon Road frequently and there are two
lanes. People would really think twice about visiting Harrogate at all. The
Gateways Scheme also shows cycling both ways on Station Parade,
that is just an accident waiting to happen. All of Harrogate’s business
groups, who after all represent businesses, have been totally
ignored. Is that right?
Councillors, please see sense
and reject the Gateway Project in its entirety. You need to work with local
businesses and stakeholders on a scheme to enhance Harrogate for the future, I
am sure that many business and property owners would
be happy to help and I am one of them.
Thank you.
The following public statement was read out by Rachael
Inchboard:
Residents are quite horrified
after 3 consultation results against this scheme that
it is still going ahead- where is democracy?
I have lived in the town
centre on Granville Rd since 2001. Residents believe this scheme in its whole entirety, will have many negative impacts on our daily
lives. Many who also run small businesses in and around the town
which are just recovering them from the lockdowns.
·
The scheme proposes to redirect the town centre traffic from the A61,
including large vehicles, to go onto residential areas-Cheltenham Mount (which
is at the bottom of Granville Rd) and across Mount Parade (which is at the top
of Granville Rd, a very narrow small road) or towards Bower Road creating some
dangerous junctions near Commercial Street/Bower Rd and Strawberry Dale for
pedestrians and vehicle traffic.
·
Concerns include- reduced parking/
congestion/ noise/ air pollution/ visual intrusion/safety/health &
wellbeing/ Construction of the scheme will be over 1 year taking place
during the night/ Access to our properties during this construction phase/
Traffic Data Modelling Data and how this was worked out for an increased
volume of traffic into the area onto small roads such as Mount Parade.
·
Residents have
all raised individual and collective concerns. Even requesting for a Public
Meeting, which was refused.
·
As a Landscape
Architect I
requested to see the EIA- Environmental Impact Assessment at the start.
I was led to believe there was one- however, we
discovered they never undertook this important process. Through a FOI request we found that English Heritage had requested one
too. Due to the Conservation Area status of the town and
where we live.
·
An EIA would
have identified most of the resident’s concerns at the start, which would have held the scheme drivers to have some
form of accountability as to what this project presented. Perhaps this is why
it never got done and they kept quiet about this.
·
We have
requested Air quality monitoring to get a baseline reading- this has been ignored and deemed unnecessary. An EIA would have given an air quality baseline to
work with. We later found out from the planners that the only place they are
conducting air quality monitoring is at the far end of Station Parade, beyond
Waitrose.
·
The Beech
Grove LTN, caused a similar redirection of traffic
causing congestion on Cold Bath Road
area. Weston County Primary School managed to install an air monitor, the
findings were worrying- the levels of air pollution were above the acceptable
levels. Caused directly from this scheme- of re-directing large volumes of traffic which then caused congestion. Mirroring the proposed
redirection of town traffic onto the residential area where we live.
·
Traffic Orders
schedule 1/ Column 2 FOR Cheltenham Mount and LTN 1/20 -Local Transport
Notes-provides guidance of traffic management issues for local authorities-when
implementing new cycle infrastructure.
·
Should meet
objectives set out the statement of reason-``avoiding danger to persons or
other traffic using the road or any other road or for preventing the likelihood
of any such danger arising``, or ‘’ facilitating the passage on the road
or any other road of any other class of traffic’’,
·
Therefore the
‘Traffic Order’ would be likely to increase congestion and cause problems for
pedestrians. Both from a safety
perspective and air pollution from the higher volumes of traffic (estimated to
be an extra 6 cars/per min equivalent to 360 cars per
hour. Not to mention weekends, events in Harrogate and holiday periods of
increasing traffic)
·
Pedestrians’
ability to cross any of our local roads
could be difficult for any type of pedestrian user.
·
The crossing
of Cheltenham Parade our local pedestrian route into the town, will also prove very difficult with the layout and configuration of
the design. With three different lanes to negotiate when crossing- a cycle
lane, bus lane and a car lane. Not only is that daunting there will be raised
kerb type edging defining each lane.
·
A few issues
to consider in this equation are- the
width of the road for three lanes- is this wide enough? What
if a cyclist falls from their bike? Will they fall into the pedestrian
or the bus lane?
·
Re-cap Air
quality/ congestion/safety/ Access/parking.
·
Finally, the
people who have imposed this scheme on Harrogate- do not live here. The
Executive Committee that drove this scheme to go ahead, only one of the people
lives in Harrogate.
The following public statement was read out by Martin
Mann:
Many thanks for the opportunity to be involved in the
discussion around the
Harrogate Station Gateway.
·
Harrogate
District Chamber of Commerce has represented the views of the business in and
around the town for over 125 years, and currently has a membership of 124
businesses ranging from sole traders to some of the largest employers in the
town representing well over 3000 employees in the town.
·
Whilst the
Harrogate District Chamber (HDC) is broadly in favour of active travel, we
cannot support this Gateway Project as it currently stands. We have received
measurable feedback from our membership twice throughout the lifecycle of this
proposal, and on both occasions our membership has
come back with a resounding No to the project in its current format.
·
We believe that
although the project is well intentioned, it is badly timed and based upon out
of date 2016 data which does not reflect the changes to retail over the last 8
years, nor does it take in to account the precarious position many businesses
in town find themselves following Covid.
·
A few figures
from our members:
o
Are you in favour
of the Station Gateway proposals, taking in to account the recent proposed
changes? - 75% against
o
Will the Station
Gateway proposals encourage you or your team to participate in more active travel? - 65% replied No.
o
How do you think
the proposals will affect business in the town centre? - 60% replied ‘Worse’
·
Is your business
located in Harrogate town centre? 48% replied Yes
·
Active Travel
projects have been heralded in both Cambridge and abroad in Holland, both flat
cities, and both have a far younger demographic. Harrogate has an older
population, and attracts an older visitor, very many of whom cannot or will not
cycle, and if they feel that Harrogate is a cycle destination then they will
spend time and money elsewhere.
·
This project
should be paused in its current form and brought back to the table once the
data has been brought up to date, and a complete town
plan has been developed, instead of the piecemeal approach currently being
considered. It does nothing to encourage residents or visitors from the
outlying villages to visit more, nor does it tackle the congestion on Skipton
Road or Wetherby Road. A wider town plan should reconsider the need for Park
& Rides – a missed opportunity in my opinion at the Dunlopillo
site adjacent to Pannal railway station and the route
of the 36 bus. And any future project must start with
accessibility and improved safety for all, starting with those who may have
limited mobility and work out from there. Similarly, the ‘Northern Relief Road’
was nothing more than a paper project designed to fail by the then NYCC. The
Northern and Western Bypasses were identified as necessary in the 1980’s should
have been pursued more vehemently at the time, as we are now suffering the
result of NYCC’s failure to build infrastructure for the future.
·
Harrogate
deserves more, and we have been let down by the predecessors of North Yorkshire
Council in a variety of ways. HBC and NYCC have failed to deliver on the Otley
Road cycleway, only completing 1/3rd of the proposal, and only seeming to
improve the junction from Otley Road to Harlow Moor Road and the Harrogate
Spring Water site.
·
Similarly, the pedestrianisation of Oxford Street and Cambridge Street
have not achieved greater footfall, nor fewer shop closures, nor a safer
environment throughout the day or night. Should pedestrianisation
continue, there needs to be an acceptance by the new NYC that we need to use
better quality street furniture, better quality materials, and have better
governance over the utility companies that fail to repair the road surface
after their works. The Station Gateway Project is by
its very nature a ‘low maintenance’ public realm area and does nothing to
create an attractive first impression for those few travellers arriving by
train.
·
It is widely
believed that by businesses in the area that the narrow strip of land adjacent
to the station carpark will be developed in to a tower
block overshadowing Station Parade and the redeveloped public realm. Along with
this, there is understood to be a major infrastructure project about to be
started by Northern Powergrid which again will cause major disruption in the area. Given
the co-ordination between NYC and City Fibre, I suspect the same failure to
co-ordinate the works will be the same with this project.
This is not just a 12 month project to redevelop one area, this is the start of
possibly 2-3 years of disruption for the benefit of a few and to the detriment
to the future of our town, our residents, and our employers. Given the amount
of money spent so far by the tax payers throughout North Yorkshire, isn’t it
time to stop wasting money on this project and focus on projects that will
benefit everyone and not just a few?
The following public question was read out by Austin
Leaver:
Can the NYC please
categorically state that no financial charges will be brought to private
vehicle owners due to the implementation of LTN'S, AQMA'S and CAZ'S in the
Harrogate area in the future, with ANPR cameras being used for enforcement?
In response
Richard Binks explained that low traffic neighbourhoods Air Quality
Management
areas and clean air zones our well-established tools so managing the impact of
motorized traffic on the local environment and as such
the Council may wish to utilize these measures in the future where there was an
identified need. Any considerations relating to Associated
matters such as Financial charging and Camera enforcement would be considered
at that time.