North Yorkshire Council (NYC) is holding an initial consultation as it works towards its new Local Plan. The Local Plan will set out how land in North Yorkshire should be used and developed.
The consultation is open until 15th July 2025. The Local Plan is relevant to cycling, so it’s worth responding.
The NYC document broadly says the right things about sustainable travel, but we know from long experience that it’s almost certainly all so much hot air.
When it comes to specific plans at new developments, we get business-as-usual: all the space and priority allocated to motor vehicles, and no meaningful cycle links to essential destinations.
Sustainable Transport is a Key Priority – in Theory
‘Ensuring sustainable transport and accessibility’ is one of eleven key issues or priorities, according to para 1.12 of the NYC document.
‘Develop sustainable and connected places across North Yorkshire’ is one of the ambitions (para 3.4).
That’s the theory, in a document which was probably written by consultants, but we know that NYC does not prioritise sustainable transport in practice.
Local Plan Objectives
The NYC document contains draft strategic objectives for the Local Plan.
Number 8 is relevant to active travel:
‘Ensuring sustainable transport and accessibility: Ensure development is supported by transport infrastructure, and maximise the provision of sustainable transport modes and active travel opportunities.
The delivery of a high-quality network of walking and cycling infrastructure is essential to encourage a reduction in car trips and contribute to carbon reduction across the area’.
Unfortunately, in practice NYC is expanding capacity for motor vehicles, which will lead to an increase in car trips not a reduction.
Delivering Sustainable Growth
Sustainable transport is mentioned again in a chapter on ‘delivering sustainable growth’.
Para 4.6 describes:
‘locating development where it can readily access and benefit from existing or proposed sustainable transport infrastructure, thereby providing genuine choice in transport options and an alternative to private car usage where practicable’.
Unfortunately, NYC is not building any sustainable transport infrastructure, and not giving people a genuine choice of transport options.
The section on ‘developing growth options’ (para 4.23 onwards) is of interest.
It says that a decision needs to be made on where most development should take place, and it gives five main options:
- in the major towns (Harrogate and Scarborough)
- in larger villages
- dispersed, including in smaller villages
- in locations that are well-served by high-quality sustainable transport links (although the accompanying map highlights the A1, A59, A64 and other main roads – the opposite of the sustainable transport)
- developing new settlements
Tackling Climate Change, Flood Risk and Coastal Change
The chapter starts (para 5.1) with a claim that ‘urgent action to tackle climate change is required now…’
It is surprising that a council that repeatedly fails on sustainable transport, and doesn’t appear to understand the concept of urgent action, has the brass neck to talk about it in this document.
Nevertheless, the council says (para 5.2) that addressing climate change will form a ‘golden thread’ running through the Local Plan.
‘This is because measures taken in new developments to mitigate and adapt to climate change can also bring benefits to health, quality of place and economic growth.
For example investing in active travel, reducing traffic congestion and waste, increasing tree planting, reducing energy costs and creating new jobs in green technology sectors’.
If I was to quibble about para 5.2, I would like it to refer to ‘reducing traffic’ not ‘reducing traffic congestion’ – because it is only too easy to imagine a focus on reducing traffic congestion leading to widening junctions for motor vehicles, and taking all the space that could otherwise be allocated to cycling.
Para 5.4 talks about modal shift.
‘Reducing emissions from transport by supporting a shift from North Yorkshire’s high dependency on private vehicles towards sustainable and active travel, including public transport, walking and cycling as well as locating development in sustainable locations, with good access to services, facilities and infrastructure including that relating to digital connectivity and use of electric cars’.
Unfortunately, NYC is not taking any steps that would lead to modal shift to cycling and walking.
Creating Healthy and Sustainable Communities
The chapter on healthy and sustainable communities also mentions active travel (para 6.8):
‘Active travel, including walking and cycling, can help to improve health and the local plan could provide opportunities for it through ensuring new development is located in places with good public transport links and by requiring the design of new developments to include safe walking and cycling routes’.
Para 6.13 adds:
‘Ensuring new development is located close to existing services and facilities with layouts to encourage more people to make journeys on foot, bicycle or use public transport, rather than the car, can have multiple benefits, including reducing carbon dioxide emissions from vehicles and improving people’s health’.
Tourism
The chapter on ‘creating a prosperous economy’ mentions tourism. It says (para 9.8):
‘…the extensive footpath, cycleway and bridleway network is a key attraction’.
It is stretching credibility to say North Yorkshire has an extensive cycleway network.
It does have the potential to create an extensive cycleway network, using old railways and other routes – but that would need a proactive and dynamic council which we absolutely do not have.
Sustainable Transport and Accessibility
The chapter on sustainable transport and accessibility refers to national planning rules (the NPPF).
The NPPF says that development should be in locations where sustainable transport is easy; and that walking, cycling and public transport should be encouraged through good design, layout and location of developments.
The NYC document acknowledges (para 11.10) that:
‘Across North Yorkshire, there is a high reliance on the private vehicle, with low public transport and active travel (walking and cycling) use’.
The document claims that NYC wants to reduce that reliance on the private car, though I have seen no evidence that that is true in practice.
Para 11.16 says that distance is a problem in a primarily rural county – but NYC is failing in Harrogate, which is a compact urban area.
It also talks about Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plans (LCWIPs), and using them to help secure funding to expand a…
‘…safe and secure active travel network that encourages day to day walking and wheeling for commuting and leisure purposes, including safe storage facilities for cycles’.
The problem is that NYC gets consultants to write LCWIPs, then allows them to gather dust on a shelf; and even when it secures funding, it delays, dilutes and abandons projects, and delivers nothing of value.
Specific Issues in Your Area
Chapter 16 invites comments on ‘specific issues in your area’.
How to Respond to the Consultation
To respond, go to North Yorkshire Local Plan: Our First Conversation 2025.
You then have to click on GO TO EVENT. This takes you to the NYC Local Plan document, and wherever there is a question (in green) you can click on ADD COMMENT (in blue).
Responding could take many hours if you get involved in every topic raised.
If you want to respond quickly, I suggest going to Chapter 11, Sustainable Transport and Accessibility, and commenting there.
The main points to make include:
- the document mostly says the right things about active travel, but we know from years of experience that none of it translates into action by NYC
- at new developments, we get business-as-usual with all the space and priority allocated to motor vehicles, and no useful cycle links to key destinations
- giving more space to motor vehicles generates more traffic, and takes all the space at junctions – space that could otherwise be used for proper cycling infrastructure
- in practice, NYC is taking no action that would lead to a modal shift to cycling
- North Yorkshire does not have an extensive cycleway network, as suggested in the section on Tourism. It could have an extensive cycleway network, but that would require dynamic action by the council
- Harrogate and Knaresborough have the greatest potential for utility cycling as these are compact towns, but NYC has not improved facilities in the last decade and shows no sign of doing so in the next decade