HedgehogCycling.co.uk

Cycling in Yorkshire & Beyond

Header image with bicycles

Knaresborough Cycle Route Priorities

Cycling route priorities for Knaresborough
Cycling route priorities for Knaresborough

North Yorkshire Council (NYC) has decided on priority cycling routes for Knaresborough, to be developed as part of its Harrogate & Knaresborough Local Cycling & Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP).

The priorities are in a report which will be considered at a council meeting on 24th January 2025.

The council looked at 87 routes, or segments of route, and assessed them against criteria in these categories:

  • effectiveness
  • policy alignment
  • deliverability

The top priority schemes were further assessed using the Active Mode Appraisal Tool (AMAT), which gives an approximate Benefit Cost Ratio.

Cycle Route Priorities

Knaresborough cycle route priorities
Knaresborough cycle route priorities

The priorities are split into short-, medium- and long-term schemes. (In reality, NYC have not delivered any meaningful schemes for 10 years, and are unlikely to deliver any of these).

Short-Term Priorities

The short-term priorities are on the A59 at High Bridge, Knaresborough.

One of them is the missing link in the cycle path on the first stretch of the A59 from High Bridge towards Harrogate. The other is on the bridge itself – although with the space available, it’s hard to imagine anything worthwhile being done for cycling there.

Medium-Term Priorities

The medium-term priorities are low-cost improvements to a square of routes around King James School.

Long-Term Priorities

The long-term priorities are:

  • a proposed path by the railway line that would be the first part of a route to York
  • a link along the B6164 Wetherby Road to St James Retail Park
  • Chain Lane
  • A59 east towards new developments at Castle Gate and Trinity Fields

Next Steps

Engagement with key stakeholders would be the next step, but NYC want to limit this as much as possible. They propose to consult with ‘key external stakeholders’ only.

They also regard internal meetings with colleagues as engagement. It is not.

A second report envisages (para 4.4) engaging only with:

  • the division Councillor
  • other NYC officers (this is not engagement)
  • local cycling groups (if appropriate, the report says)

The council would then, theoretically, proceed to develop the priority routes by undertaking feasibility studies, detailed designs, and construction.

Other North Yorkshire Towns

The second report recommends that prioritisation work starts for other North Yorkshire towns with LCWIPs.

Purpose of LCWIPs

The report says (para 3.1) that LCWIPs:

‘…are created to operate as a basis for future bid work, influence junction design and highway schemes, and guide new development and developer contributions in creating a holistic and safe cycle network’.

The reality in North Yorkshire is different.

Harrogate & Knaresborough’s LCWIP was completed in 2019, but none of the routes in it have been built.

The LCWIP and the Harrogate prioritisation work have been largely ignored in plans for the West Harrogate urban expansion.

Officers have a car-centric mindset, and the council Executive lacks the will to ensure that active travel schemes are delivered. In those circumstances it is hard to imagine any meaningful progress being made.

Knaresborough Cycle Route Priorities