Green space is of paramount importance to the physical and mental health of residents, and this is backed up by ample evidence. A report by the WHO in 2017 provides guidance on the impact and effectiveness of providing green space and, as this analysis says “The WHO report represents an important step forward. As worrying trends in mental ill-health, obesity, social isolation, health inequalities and environmental degradation grow globally, there is a pressing need to implement equitable solutions – and green space has a key role to play in this. Urban green-space interventions can deliver health, social and environmental benefits for all population groups – particularly among lower socioeconomic status groups. There are very few – if any – other public health interventions that can achieve all of this.”

In a report by Public Health England in March 2020 “Recognising that greener neighbourhood environments convey a disproportionate health benefit to disadvantaged groups, well-planned green infrastructure can be one approach toward reducing health inequalities. This is particularly salient in the context of widening health inequalities in England. Greenspace must be viewed as a critical infrastructure to achieve wider local priorities, and creativity in how it will be funded, managed and delivered to meet the needs of the population.These times require strong local leadership and political will that recognises the true value of local greenspace as essential assets in the delivery of health, social, environment and economic outcomes to ensure greenspace survive and thrive.”. The report stressed the need to treat greenspace as “critical infrastructure” and as being required to meet local priorities. Specifically a local authority should ensure that the Joint Strategic Needs Assessment (JSNA) and Joint Health and Wellbeing Strategy (JHWS) define how local greenspace can be used to meet the current and future health needs of the population, and to ensure that the Local Plan reflects the health priorities laid out in the JSNA and JHWS.

The countryside charity CPRE issued a report in Feb 2022 saying “Green spaces contribute to (i) climate change adaptation and mitigation; and (ii) to the functioning of wider places and systems (such as wildlife corridors, views and settings, and natural drainage areas). see The Environment Act 2021, Accessible Natural Greenspace Standards (ANGSt) are needed to ensure human health, wellbeing and equality”.

In a report by the Director of Public Health for NYCC (2022) it is stated “Support equitable access to green space”, and “Building back ‘greener’ is a key ambition nationally and for local partners, … such as improving green spaces … we can help limit the harmful impacts into the future“.

Urban green spaces improve the health and well-being of residents conferring benefits from the eco-system by

• buffering noise pollution,
• improving air quality – the absorption and shielding from particulate matter (i.e. exhaust from vehicles and smoke from the burning of fossil fuels),
  and the removal of carbon dioxide a green house gas.
• reduction of flood damage by retaining heavy rain. The role of trees in this function to prevent soil erosion is well established.
• preventing heat stress (shade from trees).
• providing areas for recreation.

Not all green spaces are equal. The greater the biodiversity the greater the health benefits. Grassland is a useful area for recreation. But the increased biodiversity in a flower meadow greatly increases the well-being benefits of the space. The addition of shrubs and trees to a grassed area increases further the visual enhancement and heat stress reduction.

Specifically considering biodiversity, from Scarborough Borough Council (SBC)’s own 2005 Biodiversity Action Plan, where it states “Biodiversity is vital to life and, in its simplest terms, enables life to exist on the earth. The air we breathe, the food we eat, the water we drink, are all linked together in a complex web, every plant and animal having its own small part to play. Even the places we know and the livelihoods that people have are largely dependent on the rich diversity of life around them and together give that sense of place that makes Yorkshire different from Essex or Gristhorpe different from Hunmanby. Change though is a natural and important part of the natural world and development is both inevitable and necessary. It is therefore imperative that such development pays respect to the biodiversity of the region and seeks to maintain and enhance it for our future generations. This is what sustainability is all about“.

In summary, there is consensus amongst a very wide range of organisations (including NYCC and SBC), and local authorities should pay strict attention to this message.

The SBC Green Space Audit (2014) assessed the green space in Whitby as it was in 2014. This report equated it to 75 hectares (ha) of open space, sport and recreation, or 5.6ha per 1000 population, and a third of the sites graded for quality failed to meet the standard required for their types (if something doesn’t meet a required standard, doesn’t that mean that it should not be counted?). This audit did not make any special allowance where green space was not publicly accessible, and hence ineffective (whether due to being very steep, or being fenced off).

Amongst the observations and recommendations of that audit

1. Desire to enhance the quality of Stakesby Vale, which was rated as poor. Nothing has changed with Stakesby Vale in the intervening 8 years, other than further deterioration of the path through that area, with the area discriminating against disabled people also. See our proposal for provision of a shared walking / cycle path through that area.
2. Seek to enhance the quality of Tuckers Field (paddling pool etc), which also didn’t meet the required quality. Again, little has been done here since that report, and parts of it are actually used as an overflow car park by SBC. See our proposal to have a shared walking/cycle path across Tuckers Field as well as along West Cliff.
3. Provision of natural green space was below the local standard, with a deficiency of 5.5ha, though SBC think this is offset by the proximity of the NYMNP, however many people don’t have transport, and to have to use transport just to reach natural space is an excessive obligation (the equivalent country parks in Filey and Scarborough are significantly closer). Additionally, the rules of a national park are not the same as for natural green space in a town, and a national park is not comparable to a country park, like what is provided for Scarborough and Filey residents.
4. The audit notes that “Natural Parks and Green Spaces in Whitby are accessible”, though note that this simply means the green spaces are within reach (walking distance) of residential. It does not mean that they are accessible with respect to less able-bodied residents for example (Stakesby Vale has steps to enter the area, West Cliff has gradients of up to 45 degrees and much of the area is definitely not for use by the public, school sports fields are not accessible for the public except within the scope of a club), and in fact totally ignores this definition of accessibility.
5. Provision of urban green space was below the local standard, with a deficiency of 6.2ha, particularly in the Helredale area. There has been no further provision since then.
6. Provision of other green space was above the local standard with a surplus of 5.6ha, and this could be used to fulfil the deficiencies in other categories, however land around Highfield Road (1.1ha) has been lost since the audit, as has Helredale playing field (1.6ha).
7. Provision of sports green space exceeded the local standard, however Helredale playing field (1.6ha) has since been sold off for housing. Larpool playing field was of poor standard back then and nothing has been done to correct this. There was a lack of green space for ad-hoc sports for residents around the Mayfield area (no amenity space, nearest accessible sports at White Leys or Larpool!).

• Helredale Playing Field was categorised as both Other and Sports, that means duplication!
• East Whitby Primary Academy has a sports field, but this was seemingly not included, why? This would account for the order of 0.6ha.
• West Cliff Primary has a playground, but this was seemingly not included, why? This would account for the order of 0.1ha.
• Whitby RC Primary School had 2 sports fields, but these were seemingly not included, why? They would account for the order of 0.6ha.
• It made no allowance for accessibility of individual green space areas. Both the WHO and Ordnance Survey definitions of green space consider accessibility to be a key aspect and to ignore this leads to an erroneous representation of utility of the space.
• The area for secondary schools (Caedmon College, Caedmon Sixth Form and Eskdale School) are to cater for the whole travel-to-work-area (TTWA), so should be scaled by 13213/25000.
• 0.8ha of Tuckers Field (bowls/tennis) is used as overflow car parking, and so should not be included in any green space calculation. It is one thing or another but not both.

Since the most recent council audit (2014), the West Cliff area has further deteriorated, with land slips as well as lack of weed clearance. In addition, an amount of green space has been lost due to reclassification, or targetted for reclassification, typically for housing by SBC.

1. Helredale playing field (1.6ha) was lost for just this reason, as was land on Highfield Road (1.1ha).
2. Whitby RC Primary playing fields (0.6ha) were lost due to school closure. Unclear if this location was included in the 2014 Audit
3. A current NYC (SBC) target is Larpool playing field (1.7ha approximately); this is the sole publicly-accessible playing field area on the east side of Whitby, and it has not been maintained (other than grass cutting) for many years (rated by SBC as poor in the 2014 Audit) and, despite this, is still well used, particularly in summer and by dog walkers, yet NYC (SBC) want to convert it into a cemetery extension. This land being green space was used by SBC as the argument for reclassifying Helredale playing field in the first place. It would leave the whole town with just 1 free-to-access playing field. We include it in our current list.
4. NYC (SBC) are also considering reclassifying the land either side of Rievaulx Road (0.8ha) for housing, as well as the entry to Calla Beck from Spital Bridge (0.5ha) for the housing project “Better Homes” (contrary to the Local Plan, and residents wishes in Vision For Whitby 2023). We include these in our current list also.
5. Tuckers Field (Bowls/Tennis) raw area is 1.8ha but 0.8ha is (incorrectly) used as overflow car parking, so is marked as 1.0ha for our calculations.