Creation of a flexible pedestrianised route across the Swingbridge, creating better connections between the East and West sides of Whitby and improved public safety, enabled by improvements to the public realm and physical infrastructure changes to the road network.
The Harbourside Public Realm project will improve the street scene around the Whitby Swingbridge area, allowing the routine closure to road traffic to be implemented more easily and with more permanent signage. This will enhance the centre of the town, improving the visitor experience and promoting additional return visits. The pedestrianisation of this central area will also improve non-motorised links between the east and west sides which links to other projects currently being developed in the town. The scheme will also look at improvements at the junction of Spital Bridge with the A171.
The aims for the Harbourside Public Realm project are as follows:
- Improve pedestrian and cyclist safety on the Swingbridge during times of high tourist activity.
- Improve daytime east-west non-motorised connectivity between the two halves of the town.
- Reduce carbon/carbon-equivalent and pollutants, and improve local air quality
- Improve connections across communities
- Enhance the connection of the networks of interesting spaces to explore and places to linger, and improving knowledge of natural assets
- Enhance the highway network in and around the Swingbridge to improve traffic movements and improve the visitor offer in the centre of the town.
- Provide a public area to continue to develop key visitor attractions.
- Support the tourism economy associated with Whitby.
Investment Plan : Business Case.
Business Case Costs
The financial case presents a total project cost for the preferred option of £2.316m, the allocation from the Towns Fund is £2.3m so this presents a slight funding shortfall of £0.016m. The shortfall is not considered significant and will be addressed at RIBA Stage 3.
A high level breakdown of project costs is presented within the financial case with a Bill of Quantities for the construction works attached as an appendix to the business case. All key costs including risk and inflation appear to be accounted for with narrative provided for the assumptions.
Significant additional maintenance costs are not expected and will be the responsibility of NYCC falling under their routine maintenance schedule / budget.
Our Response
Pedestrianisation of the central part of town makes perfect sense in itself, setting aside the potential impacts on essential services and getting about the town. A separate question is why this does not come out of the NYCC Highways budget itself, and why we have to spend “levelling up” money on a Highways project. Also, how is something “levelling up” when it is basically spent to enhance the offering for tourists?
The claimed “benefits” to cycling in this project are a fallacy. This scheme is pedestrianisation, so that would mean that cycling is prohibited, unless it will be adding cycling permitted signs and that is not mentioned in the business case document. The real problems for cycling are not the very centre of town, but on access roads, and the council(s) are not addressing these at all.
The junction at Spital Bridge was even harder to get out of with the trial of this scheme and needs a complete redesign, as we have listed on our Transport page. Car parking spaces are lost on Tin Ghaut car park, with no extra allocation elsewhere … a sign of no joined-up strategy for moving car parking out of the town centre.
It would have been a good opportunity to establish a broader central area for a 20mph zone as part of this project, rather than just New Quay Road, St Annes Staith, Bridge Street, and a small part of Church Street.
Status
The bridge closure “trial” is still a trial. Awaiting some form of consultation on what the end result will be.