Housing – Whitby Community Network CIC

Whitby Parish : Second Homes Premium for 2025-2026

Andy Jefferson — Mon, 26 Jan 2026 10:59:26 +0000

For the financial year 2025-2026 North Yorkshire Council (NYC) introduced a second home premium to council tax, meaning that dwellings with no permanent resident subject to council tax will pay 200% of the normal rate. There are a list of exceptions to this categorisation, which you can read on the linked page (above) – one such exception is if the property is listed as for sale (for up to 12 months) then it would not be subject to this premium.

It is important to mention that this premium does not apply to a “holiday let”, which is subject to business rates (with relief if income below a certain amount) and not council tax.

An FOI has revealed the revenue obtained via this premium. Firstly, for the financial year 2024-2025 there were 1042 “second homes” in the Whitby parish. In 2025-2026 that dropped to 912. This is likely the result of the introduction of this premium, and some of those that are no longer may have been flipped to be a holiday let (nominally paying business rates instead of council tax).

The amount of revenue pulled in by the “premium” within the Whitby parish for 2025-2026 was …

£1.6 million

Given that NYC have seemingly agreed to spend the second homes premium on social housing, how much of that will now be spent on social housing in the Whitby parish? or will it be spent elsewhere?

Clearly this will be something that we will follow up on each financial year until the housing situation in the parish is improved.

Addendum : it has since been announced that Whitby & district provides 24% of all of the second homes in North Yorkshire. See this link.

Objection to Rievaulx Road greenspace sell off

Andy Jefferson — Sat, 29 Nov 2025 13:44:05 +0000

On 27/11/2025 North Yorkshire Council posted a Public Notice, as follows [link]

Local Government Act 1972 – Section 123(2A)

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to Section 123(2A) of the Local Government Act 1972 that The North Yorkshire Council intends to dispose of (by way of freehold sale) an area of public open space at Byland Road / Rievaulx Road, Whitby (“the Land”) shown edged red on the plan below. In accordance with the provisions of Section 123(2A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the Council will consider any objections to the proposed disposal of the Land which are received within 14 days of the date of the first publication of this notice and which are addressed to: Bryan Walker, Principal Estates Manager, North Yorkshire Council, County Hall, Northallerton, North Yorkshire, DL7 8AD, or by email to estatesteam@northyorks.gov.uk Any objections or representations made within the time set out in this notice will be considered by the Council before a decision is made. Copies of the plan of the proposed Land to be disposed of can be made available upon request by emailing the address above or by telephoning 01609 535714.

Open to feedback from 27/11/2025 until 11/12/2025.

The situation with Whitby greenspace has been well publicised. We have also spent the last 22 months developing a Neighbourhood Plan for the parish that explicitly protects all areas of greenspace, including this one. Our response to this proposed sell off was as follows (submitted on 29/11/2025), sent to NYC Estates, NYC CEO, Cllr Les, Cllr Swannick, Cllr Trumper, and NYC Director of Public Health.

Proposed disposal of an area of public open space, Whitby: Byland Road / Rievaulx Road

Whitby Community Network CIC objects in the strongest terms to this proposed disposal.

NPPF 103 states “… Planning policies should be based on robust and up-to-date assessments (qualitative and quantitative) of the need for open space, sport and recreation facilities. …”).

We firstly state that North Yorkshire Council (NYC) do not possess a robust and up-to-date assessment of the green space of Whitby parish. The most recent green space audit was performed in 2014 by the now defunct Scarborough Borough Council (SBC). The SBC (2014) assessment report was not robust, in that it contained various errors – incorrect per person scaling of secondary school sports space, double accounting for Helredale Playing field, inadequate allowance for the “accessibility” of a green space, and so on. The report simply treated “accessibility” as the distance to get to it, and not how accessible and inclusive it was, for example to elderly / disabled people. With respect to accessibility, the Whitby parish has double the national average of over 65 residents, so ask yourself the question – would a 10ha portion of green space on a cliff at an incline of 40 degrees be of the same value as a 10ha gently rolling country park?

The SBC (2014) assessment is not up-to-date in that several tracts of green space have been built on by NYC in the intervening years, yet the report has never been updated to take account of this.

NPPF 104 requires that any designated green space not have its use changed or built on, unless the robust, up-to-date assessment mentioned above shows that it is surplus to requirements.

The only robust, up-to-date assessment of Whitby green space is provided by Whitby Community Network CIC and not NYC. Even ignoring accessibility and inclusivity of green space (as mentioned above) this clearly shows a net DEFICIT of 10.9ha of green space (deficit of 5.4ha of Natural, 6.2ha of Urban Parks, and 1.0ha of Sports with surplus of 1.7ha of Amenity), relative to the minimum standard. Once we take in to account accessibility and inclusivity for the resident and visitor, this shows a net DEFICIT of 22.9ha of green space (deficit of 10.9ha of Natural, 6.2ha of Urban Parks, and 7.5ha of Sports, with surplus of 1.7ha of Amenity).

The forthcoming Whitby Neighbourhood Plan will be requiring protection of all Whitby green space, given the extremely poor provision in this area, and this is one such green space included in that required protection. Going against that would represent overriding the requirements of the parish, and question the position of North Yorkshire Council in representing the best interests of the residents.

If we look at other recognised assessment mechanisms for green space, on the Natural England “Green Infrastructure”

There are several areas in Whitby that fail the AGst Doorstep standard (0.5ha within 200m) – notably large parts of Stakesby, Castle Park, Mayfield, Railway, Eskdale.
The majority of the residential areas in Whitby fail the AGst Local standard (2.0ha within 300m).
All of the Whitby urban area fails the AGst Neighbourhood standard (10.0ha within 1km).

Similarly for the Fields In Trust “Green Space Index” (broadly similar to the AGst Doorstep standard) the majority of Whitby urban area is below the minimum standard.

Removal of this area at Rievaulx Road would only cause further areas of the town to fail these standards.

We have thus demonstrated that this green space is NOT SURPLUS TO REQUIREMENTS.

NYC has recognised in many reports the benefit that can be obtained from access to green space, and the NYC Director of Public Health has stated “There have been positive impacts from having accessible, local green spaces, which have supported both physical and mental health and wellbeing”. Whitby has some of the lowest health outcomes in the whole of the county, with a widely publicised “coastal health crisis”. Life expectancies of both Whitby NYC divisions are in the lower reaches for the whole county, with significant areas with multiple indices of deprivation. It is essential that green space in such areas be both protected and enhanced to benefit the health and well-being of the community.

Local Plan Rule HC 14 b iii) requires “a replacement open space of an equal or higher quantity and quality can be provided in a nearby accessible location”. There are deficits in all categories of green space, and NYC have no published plan for how they aim to get Whitby parish up to the minimum standard (quantity as well as quality) of green space, as a result they cannot offer a viable alternate site in a nearby accessible location that would replace the green space being proposed to be disposed of.

As a consequence the equivalent Local Plan Rule HC 14 prevents any such change of use of this green space, and any ignoring of such would be the subject to legal challenge.

Going further, Local Plan Policy ENV 8 states “The value and strategic role of the Green Infrastructure corridors within the Local Plan area will be protected and enhanced …”. This greenspace provides a green corridor between Pannett Park and the Stakesby residential area. It has been used for decades by local people for recreation (evidence is available for this assertion). As such it is of significant value locally, and to dispose of it would devalue the area of the town. It provides areas for local children to play, as well as for dog walking (remember, dog walking is prohibited in the nearby Pannett Park). Such areas should be enhanced, not diminished.

Local Plan Policy ENV8 continues “Developments that will have an unacceptable impact on Green Infrastructure will be resisted unless other policy considerations within this Local Plan indicate otherwise”. By disposing of this green space, any proposed development will clearly have an unacceptable impact on Green infrastructure, and there are no other considerations to indicate otherwise.

Regarding the intended use of this open space (a joint venture with Lovell Homes), Whitby has no need of more housing at the expense of green space. It simply needs better use of the existing housing. Since 2011 there have been the order of 1300 dwellings given planning approval in the Whitby area (either completed, or awaiting construction), and between 2011 and 2021 the population of the town reduced, with up to 44.5% of dwellings with no permanent resident (cf Housing Needs Assessment for the Whitby Neighbourhood Plan)! There are the order of 700 dwellings currently for sale in Whitby and within 5 miles of the town centre. Newly built dwellings are not selling; there is little demand. To destroy yet another green space in an area with significant deprivation is frankly deplorable.

Yours faithfully,

Whitby Community Network CIC

This received a reply from NYC (Skipton) on 02/12/2025 stating “I am emailing to confirm receipt of your below email. This has been forwarded onto the surveyor dealing with this case to look at“.

Note that we separately raised the matter that there were no notices tied to lamp posts in the area surrounding this greenspace, as would have been expected.

NYC Continual Desire to Build on Green Space – Lovell Homes venture

Andy Jefferson — Wed, 18 Jun 2025 07:38:34 +0000

In 2021, Scarborough Borough Council (SBC) put in motion a plan to sell off an amount of green space for the purposes of “provision of affordable homes”. They entitled this project “Better Homes” (nobody with any imagination working in local government? why not consider the detrimental impact of removing green space and call it “Concrete Jungle”). In addition to land in Scarborough and Filey, it originally encompassed 4 tracts of land in the Whitby area – namely the former Golf Course land behind Love Lane, 2 tracts of land alongside Rievaulx Road, and a space near California Road (behind Abbot’s Walk). This proceeded through to an outline agreement (unsigned) with Lovell Homes before SBC was abolished. At the time, Whitby Area Development Trust sent a letter to SBC objecting to the disposal of 3 of the 4 tracts of land.

Nothing more was heard until Tuesday 17th June 2025 when it appeared on the agenda of an NYC Executive meeting. Item 6 presented a very similar arrangement, but this time with some different areas of land being proposed. The 2 tracts of land on Rievaulx Road are still listed, as is the former Golf Course land on Sandsend Road (labelled as “Sandsend Lane” in the NYC document, symptomatic of the level of local knowledge present in said organisation seemingly). The Whitby areas of land are shown on the map below.

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states

103. Access to a network of high quality open spaces and opportunities for sport and physical activity is important for the health and well-being of communities, and can deliver wider benefits for nature and support efforts to address climate change. Planning policies should be based on robust and up-to-date assessments of the need for open space, sport and recreation facilities (including quantitative or qualitative deficits or surpluses) and opportunities for new provision. Information gained from the assessments should be used to determine what open space, sport and recreational provision is needed, which plans should then seek to accommodate.

104. Existing open space, sports and recreational buildings and land, including playing fields and formal play spaces, should not be built on unless:

an assessment has been undertaken which has clearly shown the open space, buildings or land to be surplus to requirements; or
the loss resulting from the proposed development would be replaced by equivalent or better provision in terms of quantity and quality in a suitable location; or
the development is for alternative sports and recreational provision, the benefits of which clearly outweigh the loss of the current or former use.

NYC do not possess an up-to-date assessment of the need for open space in this area. WCN do, and you can find it here. The most recent council assessment was in 2014, and not only did it contain errors, it is also now completely out of date. It concluded that Whitby does not have a surplus of open space. The situation is even worse now.

To summarise the current situation a deficit of 12.6ha of open space (5.4ha of Natural, 6.2ha of Urban Parks and 1.0ha of Sports), with a surplus of 2.7ha of Amenity open space (so an overall deficit of some 10ha). Note that this summary does not take account of accessibility of open space. The largest contributory open space in Whitby parish is West Cliff, and by this we mean the actual cliff (sloping at 30-40 degrees gradient). For an ageing population this is simply not accessible. Consequently the real measure of available, accessible open space is even worse.

The proposed use of former Golf Course is also of concern as the viability of the golf course is in significant doubt given that the part of coastline it borders is listed as not to be protected by the Environment Agency, and is apparently decaying at an alarming rate.

In the 2022 report by the Director of Public Health for NYCC which particularly looked at the effects of COVID and how it changed people’s habits, we see statements such as “There have been positive impacts from having accessible, local green spaces, which have supported both physical and mental health and wellbeing“, “Support equitable access to green space” and “However, access to gardens and good quality green spaces are not equitable across all parts of society“. Have other parts of NYC not got the memo? With a coastal health crisis and green space being acknowledged as very beneficial to people’s health and wellbeing why would anyone in their right mind think that building on green space was a good idea?

Any such proposed sell off will be resisted by Whitby Community Network.

We have written to the NYC Director of Public Health, Louise Wallace, who presented at one of our recent public meetings, for her thoughts on the continual depreciation of Whitby green space, as follows.

Dear Louise,

at the Whitby Community Network meeting on 28/04/2025 we highlighted the clear benefits of active travel and green space on the health and wellbeing of resident populations (as mentioned in your annual reports), and the fact that other parts of the organisation that you represent have seemingly not got the memo about these factors and the need to take positive action in the Whitby area. Green space has been continually appropriated over years despite being below minimum standard, and active travel investment is non-existent despite having some of the lowest uptake of active travel in the county. If we are to ever make a difference on people’s health this has to change, and preferably soon.

You promised to have one of your people follow up on this. We have not received any such communication on this matter.

We were particularly reminded of the green space situation since in an NYC Executive meeting on Tuesday 17th June (2025) an item on the agenda, subsequently approved, proposes to use (via land sell off) Whitby green space for the building of yet more houses. Let’s leave aside the fact that this would be contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (the need for a thorough up to date assessment of quality, quantity and accessibility of all green space prior to any disposal, together with a thorough assessment that this green space is indeed “surplus to requirement”). The fact that NYC are seemingly making no effort whatsoever to improve the dire public health / wellbeing issues here, by addressing 2 important contributary factors, should be of significant concern to anyone.

We await your thoughts.

Whitby Community Network

Whitby Parish Neighbourhood Plan is needed

Andy Jefferson — Thu, 09 Nov 2023 18:52:52 +0000

On Tuesday 7th November 2023 there was a Whitby Town Council (WTC) meeting. We decided to attend, since the fact that they were going to discuss the recent Town Poll reminded us that we had a Town Poll on June 13th 2022 where 93% of (2288) residents who turned out to vote requested that all new build homes were made “primary residence only, in perpetuity”. Not one council has respected this vote since that date, with SBC/NYC taking no action, and WTC stating that they would be initiating a Neighbourhood Plan back in July 2022, yet have never publicised anything about it since then. For the record, a Neighbourhood Plan gives localities the opportunity to place preferred restrictions on housing, as well as green spaces, to name but two things.

Our question at their meeting was as follows

This meeting will be discussing what to do about a Town Poll.

The town had such a Poll in June last year where residents turned out in large numbers and requested a primary residence clause on new build housing. The simplest way of achieving this, in this councils remit, would be to create a Neighbourhood Plan.

In July 2022, the Planning Committee recommended to undertake a Neighbourhood Plan.

In Sept 2022, Full Council finally passed a motion to undertake a Neighbourhood Plan and people were informed that the Neighbourhood Plan “will probably take 12-18 months”

Here we are 15 months from deciding to undertake this, no discernible progress has been made – such inaction only serves to disrespect the people who took the time to vote, and impact on their faith in voting for anything in this parish if the council doesn’t follow through.

Instead we have meaningless housing motions calling on North Yorkshire Council to do things beyond their remit, and consequently achieve nothing, for media attention and not much more.

Can this council please CEASE and DESIST from activities that achieve little and instead focus efforts on delivering the Neighbourhood Plan, something that could make a meaningful difference to life in this parish, and by doing so respecting the votes of everyone who turned out for that Town Poll?

2 basic questions that require answers:

What are the current timescales for this council delivering the Neighbourhood Plan?
Which groups other than Whitby Community Network will be involved?

Thank you

The answers we got from WTC were that it would take 18-24 months from initiation (so confirming that nothing has been done) to complete the Neighbourhood Plan, and that no other groups had agreed to take part (other than ourselves). WTC also finally assigned 5 councillors to be part of a Steering Group, with one member of our group.

Doing nothing for 15 months is inexcusable. Having a town council that focusses on the critical issues important to residents has seemingly been a problem for the last year or so. We have to hope that this intervention will be the start of something better …

NYC Consultations on Housing

Andy Jefferson — Thu, 12 Oct 2023 13:44:16 +0000

North Yorkshire Council (NYC) are conducting 2 consultations currently on the topic of housing.

The first involves how social housing is allocated. It uses a system called North Yorkshire Home Choice. You can reach the consultation here. Closes on 27th November 2023. Does North Yorkshire Home Choice really provide for residents of this town being able to remain here?

The second is around how the council builds new homes to meet the needs of residents. You can reach the consultation here. Closes on 11th December 2023.

Please have your say, particularly if you are directly impacted by these 2 policies, or know people who are. Also please share this with your family and friends.

Affordability of new builds in Whitby (Aug 2023)

Andy Jefferson — Fri, 04 Aug 2023 12:39:22 +0000

In our general Housing page outlining the problems with housing in Whitby we touched on the aspect of affordability, particularly when you pose it relative to the local earnings. It would be a good exercise to expand this with the case in point of a new build property currently being offered.

Let’s meet a 2 bed semi-detached house on “Green Lane” via Together Homes listed as “shared ownership”. Note that this is an example, not just picking on the Green Lane area development, since Barratts “Abbey View” also has similar properties at similar pricing.

This house, being shared ownership, is advertised as “Shared Ownership is a way for people who may not normally be able to afford to buy a property on the open market, to be able to purchase their ideal home in an affordable way“. It is for 40% ownership with an asking price of £84000. The implication is that the cost of the house is circa £210000.

Shared Ownership .v. Full Ownership

Let’s just assume you have a 10% deposit, so that is £8400. This then implies a mortgage of £75600 over 25 years. The mortgage component would mean payments of just under £500/month at current interest rates. Being shared ownership there would also be a rent to pay for the other 60% ownership, hence a stated ~£290/month, plus a service charge (buildings insurance, estate maintenance, etc) of ~£20/month. In total you are looking at ~£810/month.

Let’s for one moment consider if we simply bought a property like this outright. The going price, from earlier “Abbey View” ads had a 2-bed semi of this nature around £210000. In that case, assuming we are a first time buyer, we would have the UK Government “First Homes” scheme, and be able to get a 30% discount (we explained in our Housing page how a larger discount would be effective in an area like this, but 30% is the current number). Hence the asking price would effectively be £147000. This would, at current interest rates, work out as £765/month (assuming 10% deposit of £15000). Add to that insurance and maintenance fee and you have ~£785/month. Note that this is lower than the “shared ownership” number above since we used a higher deposit (£15000 .v. £8400).

Are “shared ownership” options really making things much easier for people? Only slightly if you have a small deposit.

How Affordable Are They?

When defining the affordability we have to put it in context of local earnings. This table shows ONS data for what people in the Scarborough borough earn, with Whitby earnings considered to be not dissimilar.

Location	Mean	10th %	20th %	25th %	30th %	40th %	Median	60th %	70th %	75th %	80th %	90th %
Harrogate & Knaresborough	34,203	x	x	x	x	24,935	29,357	31,935	x	x	x	x
Richmond & Northallerton	29,859	9,738	14,052	17,473	21,127	24,296	27,717	31,615	36,789	39,970	42,556	x
Scarborough & Whitby	28,081	9,633	13,684	16,394	18,823	21,982	26,281	30,008	33,927	36,582	35,945	x
Selby	38,187	x	20,889	21,805	24,805	27,181	28,877	34,842	41,837	43,872	x	x
Skipton & Ripon	32,566	x	10,418	13,481	15,535	18,936	27,126	32,447	38,410	41,768	x	x
Thirsk & Malton	29,953	x	x	x	21,863	25,048	27,935	30,575	37,026	39,266	x	x

Let’s just take the case of purchasing outright for simplicity of calculation. Previously, with low interest rates, it was considered acceptable to get a mortgage of up to 4.5 times gross salary. With current interest rates, it would be unwise to borrow greater than 3.5-4 times gross salary for any mortgage (when going the full ownership route). For £147000 and 10% deposit (£15000), that would be a salary of at least £33000 (using 4x salary as basis). Only with lower interest rates would people with lower salaries be able to contemplate this (i.e using 4.5x salary as basis).

From the earnings listed for this area, very few people would be able to contemplate purchase of such a property unless they had a much more significant deposit. Couples would be able to look at say 3.5 times their joint salary if both were earning, and that then could include more people as potential purchasers, but still it would not be realistic for the majority.

The definition of “affordable” clearly needs updating to reflect average earnings for that area, otherwise it will continue to be seen as laughable. Councils ticking off numbers of “affordable homes provided” are simply ignoring the problem.

How many dwellings in Whitby are second/holiday homes (2021 Census edition)?

Andy Jefferson — Sat, 10 Jun 2023 06:52:15 +0000

Whitby Community Network has previously quoted ONS estimated figures from the 2011 Census that there were 19.9% of dwellings with no usual resident (i.e subject to council tax). On top of that we would need to add how many business-rated properties present (and small business rates relief has been introduced since 2011, so we expect this part of the market has grown significantly from 2011 to 2021) to get a representative number for the amount of second/holiday homes. The market in the last 7 or 8 years has been to a very large degree driven by this sector of the market and so, with the 2021 Census numbers gradually being released, we really would like to see an up-to-date number to provide context to fully appreciate the devastation being caused to this town.

The 2021 Census figures (released March 2023) show that 1735 of the 7950 dwellings (i.e subject to council tax) in the town/parish of Whitby have no usual resident. Thus we have 21.8% of those are either second homes or temporarily vacant; given the high demand and soaring prices for homes in this area the majority of these are undoubtedly second homes.

As said, the 2021 Census figures only include dwellings that are eligible for council tax. In addition, the Valuation Office Agency provides additional data to attempt to identify those being run as holiday let businesses. We then look for category code 131 in YO21/YO22/TS13 on the VOA list and pick out those for the Whitby parish. Most appear to be registered as single business premises but some were described as holiday cottages or apartments (i.e plural) so we count them as 2 (or more, if the actual number was specified). Consequently there are some ~1476 properties in Whitby which are classed as self-catering holiday accomodation, eligible to pay business rates.

We then add the 1476 to 1735, resulting in 3211 of 9426 (34.1%) domestic residential properties in Whitby town/parish which have no usual resident.

If they were subject to registration, AirBnB lettings of rooms within council-tax rated dwellings would be in addition to this figure.

Any Council Action?

So here we are nearly 1 year on to the day from the parish poll which called for a primary residence clause on all new build homes, and councils have not made any actual change, just a lot of talk about window dressing

North Yorkshire Council (NYC) want to impose 200% council tax on second homes. Faced with paying this, the majority of the second homes (many of the 1735 currently with no usual resident) will simply switch to being a business holiday let, and avoid the charge. Besides, the NYC plan has no clause to retain the monies for the part of the county where the tax was levied.
Michael Gove’s UK Government department has had recent consultations about class use changes to attempt to capture holiday let numbers and to require planning permission for change of use to become a holiday let, meaning that local authorities can then put a limit on the overall numbers in an area. This also, even if NYC decided to put a limit in an area, would only serve to not allow the percentage of holiday lets to go above that number. It would do nothing to gradually lower the percentage to the widely accepted cut off of 20% to maintain social cohesion in a town. One thing it could achieve is the end goal of preventing the continual reduction in long term rentals.

In the meantime, hospitality in Whitby is facing many closures due to lack of staff, with multiple cafes / restaurants around town centre closing, with some applying for planning to convert to holiday lets also. Other establishments have simply cut back working hours, or what they offer since they cannot find sufficient staff. Shop closures continue also, and the average Whitby resident simply goes in to town centre very little now, with societal cohesion at an all time low. Residents have left due to lack of long term lets, or inability to afford to buy houses. The continual pressure to convert more properties to second / holiday homes removes many dwellings from the long term rental market also, meaning renting is very difficult. If younger people cannot afford to live here then they will leave, and with them go their children who would have worked in the hospitality sector. Consequently there is an urgent requirement for housing of the right type. Simply building more (the MPs advice!), and allowing more to be converted to holiday lets will only exacerbate the over capacity of tourist accomodation and under capacity of hospitality.

The question then goes back to when NYC will (ever) provide a primary residence clause on new build accomodation in this parish; they currently do not employ adequate numbers of planning enforcement officers to implement it for the estates that do have it, apparently. The Neighbourhood Plan (being pursued by Whitby Town Council), which will take at least 2 years to develop, is currently the only thing being mooted that could impact on this, and even then, a Neighbourhood Plan is advisory.

Whitby Cemetery Extension Anger

Andy Jefferson — Fri, 25 Nov 2022 06:48:48 +0000

Scarborough Borough Council (SBC) have been attempting to find a site for a cemetery extension given that the current Whitby cemetery will fill within a few years. They keep coming back to Larpool Playing Field, despite assurance by the same organisation in 2014 that it would remain green space ad infinitum due to their appropriation of Helredale Playing Field. Whitby Town Council have been continually resisting this, and the matter was before a committee of SBC this week. A story appeared in Whitby Gazette, ThisIsTheCoast, and Yorkshire Post etc highlighting the anger that is brewing over SBC’s continued attempts to appropriate Whitby green space. Here is our response

We stand with Cllr. Abbott in objecting to the use of Larpool Playing Field as a cemetery, and be assured he would not be alone on the picket lines. Scarborough Borough Council (SBC) has continually eroded the Whitby green space over decades, building housing development after housing development. These developments have made no impact on the significant housing problem that we have in the town, of truly affordable housing for local people.

Whitby Community Network has updated the SBC green space audit of 2014, to correct some errors and bring it up-to-date with the Councils recent appropriations of Whitby land (see our website). The town now has a deficit of some 10ha of natural green space, 6ha of urban park green space, and 7ha of sports green space compared to the local standard; this is before taking into account the proposed removals of Rievaulx Road (0.8ha) and part of Calla Beck (0.5ha) for “Better Homes”, together with Larpool Playing Field (1.7ha). Further to that, Larpool Playing Field was classed as “poor” standard back in 2014, and has had no effective maintenance by SBC for many years; this is just one example of how Whitby infrastructure has been left to decay by SBC, whereas with a little effort it could be restored to be a great resource for the (living) residents of this town.

The whole point of having an audit is to report findings and plan for correcting deficiencies, and SBC know of the deficiencies in green space yet have failed to provide a plan for remedying the situation. There is now next to no amenity space left for kids to have a kick about on a free-to-access playing field, with school fields being fenced off, yet another sign of the utter failure of local councils (SBC and NYCC) to provide for the physical and mental well-being of the residents of this town; little wonder that the recent report by the Chief Medical Officer into Coastal Health showed both Whitby wards in the lower reaches of life expectancy.

The Better Homes project (a 30-year commitment) has not been adequately consulted on with the Whitby residents, and the proposed appropriation of further green space just to provide space for developers is unacceptable. Why is publicly owned land not being developed by social housing groups to provide the much needed local affordable and accessible homes, for primary residency, rather than a private developer who may provide some affordable homes ? – we note the number to be provided is unclear. The fact that SBC has assigned what would be an ideal cemetery site on the land to the west of Love Lane to the Better Homes project beggars belief.

An assessment of why SBC’s housing policy has failed to provide for local people for years, and how to truly fix the problems, should happen before any further wide-scale sell-off. The common sense solution would be to halt the Better Homes project in its tracks until a well thought out solution to the housing problem is found, and for the land to the west of Love Lane be assigned for the cemetery scheme given that it has excellent access and transport links and is available now.

What do you think? Will you be joining us on the picket line if it comes to that?

NeighbourhoodPlan for Whitby

Andy Jefferson — Thu, 24 Nov 2022 09:52:54 +0000

Whitby Town Council requested permission to start preparing a Local Neighbourhood Plan for Whitby, and Scarborough Borough Council have approved this. A Neighbourhood Plan could be very useful in blocking the selling of new build houses for other than primary residence. This process can be very long and drawn out (often taking many years!), but Whitby Community Network is ready to provide any assistance it can if Whitby Town Council requires support in developing this.

Affected by the housing problems in Whitby and want to share your experience?

Andy Jefferson — Wed, 29 Jun 2022 15:21:04 +0000

The fact that the order of 28% of all residences in Whitby are now second-homes / holiday-lets and the subsequent impact on prices has clearly had a massive impact on families and their ability to purchase in the town. We are interested in hearing first-hand stories from anyone who

wanted to buy a house / flat in the town but was unable to afford anything suitable with the typical salary available here
was out-bid when purchasing a property here and subsequently lost out
couldn’t find a suitable house in the town due to availability issues

We would like to speak to you about your experiences, and about whether you ended up buying elsewhere as a result. Please contact us via the contact form, and we’ll take your experiences and work towards it not happening to future generations in this town.