Crossings of Oatlands Drive and Wetherby Road, for the benefit of people using Slingsby Walk, are to be delayed by another year according to a report in advance of a (cancelled) council meeting today.
North Yorkshire Council (NYC) promised to build them by 31st March 2024, but has not started work on them.
Now they are not even going to be built by 31st March 2025, but are to be shunted into the financial year 2025/26, i.e. a theoretical deadline of 31st March 2026.
Will NYC also fail to adhere to that timetable?
Whole of 2024 Spent on Consultations
NYC will have spent the whole of 2024 on consultations – one in March/April, and after a mistake over Stray Land, a second consultation in June/July.
The council says it ‘paused’ design work from May to August. An application to make the Stray common land is put forward as their excuse for stopping work. Apparently design work will now be completed by November 2024.
Stray Defence Association Opposes Safe Crossings
It appears from para 5.3 of the report that the Stray Defence Association opposes these safe crossings.
‘Prior to commencing the consultation with residents, local highway officers met with the Stray Defence Association to brief them on the proposals and to advise them that the consultation was commencing.
Unfortunately they were not supportive of the proposals and expressed the view that the crossing updates were not needed, along with being opposed to Stray Land being enclosed for this purpose’.
St Aidan’s School, on the other hand was ‘broadly supportive of the proposals and were pleased that NYC were taking measures to improve the safety of active travel modes in proximity to the school’.
Support for the Crossings
In the consultation, there was strong support for the crossings.
The Stray Land swap most respondents favoured was by the War Memorial off Wetherby Road. When this was removed from the options in the second consultation there were few responses, but land off Hookstone Drive was the preference of those who did respond.
Cost
The costs are expected to be:
- £115,000 for Oatlands Drive and
- £115,000 for Wetherby Road
Para 8.2.1 of the report says that the crossings have been shunted into the 2025/26 capital programme.
Example Comments in Support of the Crossings
Most respondents supported the crossings. This is one example of a comment in support.
‘I support the new crossing, and Option 1 for new Stray grass (although I think this principle is ludicrous as we have acres and acres of pointless grass – often mud – which could be trees, flowers, playgrounds, special gardens, open veg growing, magnificent cycle tracks, wide beautiful paths etc).
Please ensure the crossing changes instantly or the benefit of all this work is largely lost.
As an example, the crossing outside Betty’s is appalling. This is the most-used crossing by visitors to Harrogate (whom we want to impress?) and they stand for ages and ages watching two lanes of vehicles thundering past. Others…are much quicker. Utterly potty.
There are so many simple cheap things that can be done that aren’t’.
This is another.
‘I crossed Oatlands every morning and evening when I walked my children to school, and crossing Oatlands was always awful (downright dangerous dash across the road between cars) and almost deterred me from walking.
I saw too many near misses with school kids over this time so I believe making these changes would be money well spent, especially if the speed is reduced and parking in the cycle lane stopped (which seriously limits visibility)’.
Example Comments in Opposition to the Crossings
I’m including a couple of comments opposing the crossings, but bear in mind that opponents were very much a minority.
Some comments opposing the crossings said that they weren’t necessary and would increase congestion.
‘I object to both of the proposed crossings on Oatlands Drive and Wetherby Road. There is no need for either of these since there are already existing pelican crossings within a very short distance of both proposed sites.
They will be a waste of council taxpayers’ money. They will increase traffic congestion on both roads’.
Prioritising motor vehicles and making no provision for walking and cycling isn’t a sensible strategy for reducing congestion. If everyone is trying to make short trips around town by car at the same time, traffic jams are inevitable.
On the other hand, making the alternatives to driving convenient and attractive is a strategy that could reduce congestion in the medium and long term.
Other comments against the proposed crossings contained anti-cyclist prejudice.
‘Money spent on cycle lanes in the past has been money wasted, as typically arrogant cyclists don’t use them, preferring to cycle on the pavements. They also totally ignore the council’s no cycling signs on Stray paths, causing a menace to pedestrians, mothers with prams and children and dog walkers’.