Hambleton Local Plan Input Into Local Plan on Transport Related Issues

HAMBLETON LOCAL PLAN INPUT INTO LOCAL PLAN ON TRANSPORT RELATED ISSUES

FINAL

HAMBLETON LOCAL PLAN

INPUT INTO LOCAL PLAN ON TRANSPORT RELATED ISSUES Hambleton District Council

Final

Project no: 70020552 Date: May 2016

WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Block A Clifton Park Avenue York YO30 5PB

Tel: +44 (0)1904 615227 www.wsp-pb.com

QUALITY MANAGEMENT

ISSUE/REVISION FIRST ISSUE REVISION 1 REVISION 2 REVISION 3 Remarks Final

Date 16/05/2016

Prepared by Michael Boother

Checked by Chris Appleton

Authorised by Richard Jones

Project number 70020552

Report number 1.0

1 INTRODUCTION AND STUDY OBJECTIVES ...... 1 1.1 PROGRAMME OBJECTIVES ...... 1 1.2 STUDY AREA ...... 1 1.3 REPORT STRUCTURE ...... 3 2 REVIEW OF CURRENT PLANNING POLICY AND RECENT STUDIES ...... 4 2.1 INTRODUCTION ...... 4 3 CURRENT SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONTEXT ...... 9 3.1 SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONTEXT ...... 9 4 CURRENT TRANSPORT CONTEXT ...... 26 4.1 TRANSPORT CONTEXT ...... 26 5 FUTURE TRANSPORT CONTEXT ...... 40 5.1 CHAPTER OBJECTIVES AND STRUCTURE ...... 40 5.2 PLANNED AND COMMITTED IMPROVEMENTS ON THE STRATEGIC HIGHWAY NETWORK...... 40 5.3 PLANNED AND COMMITTED IMPROVEMENT SCHEMES ON THE LOCAL HIGHWAY NETWORK...... 42 5.4 FORECAST TRAFFIC GROWTH ...... 43 5.5 PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS TO PUBLIC TRANSPORT SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE ...... 44 6 PROPOSALS REVIEW...... 45 6.1 INTRODUCTION ...... 45 6.2 OPTION 1: PRINCIPAL TOWNS – DEVELOPMENT FOCUSED ON NORTHALLERTON AND THIRSK ...... 47 6.3 OPTION 2: CENTRAL TRANSPORT CORRIDORS – DEVELOPMENT FOCUSED AROUND THE MAIN ROAD AND RAIL LINKS ...... 48 6.4 OPTION 3: FIVE TOWNS: DEVELOPMENT FOCUSED AROUND THE FIVE MARKET TOWNS OF NORTHALLERTON, THIRSK, BEDALE, EASINGWOLD AND STOKESLEY ...... 49 6.5 OPTION 4: FIVE TOWNS AND VILLAGES – DEVELOPMENT DISPERSED ACROSS THE FIVE MARKET TOWNS AND VILLAGES WITHIN THE DISTRICT ...... 51 6.6 OPTION 5: A NEW SETTLEMENT – THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW SETTLEMENT OR SIGNIFICANT EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING SETTLEMENT ...... 52 7 OPTION SIFTING ASSESSMENT ...... 53 7.1 OPTION SIFTING ASSESSMENT ...... 53 8 OPTION ACCESSIBILITY ASSESSMENT ...... 65 8.1 OPTION SIFTING ASSESSMENT ...... 65 8.2 RECOMMENDED APPROACH TO SPATIAL PLANNING ...... 76

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 70020552

iii

TABLE S

TABLE 3-1: KEY SERVICE CENTRE POPULATION ...... 9 TABLE 3-2: HAMBLETON AND NATIONAL AGE STRUCTURE ...... 10 TABLE 3-3: ECONOMIC ACTIVITY ...... 12 TABLE 3-4: SOCIAL ECONOMIC CLASSIFICATION OF WORKERS ...... 12 TABLE 3-5: HOUSEHOLD COMPOSITION ...... 13 TABLE 3-6: JOURNEY TO WORK DATA, 2011 CENSUS ...... 23 TABLE 3-7: DISTANCE TRAVELLED TO WORK ...... 24 TABLE 3-8: TRAVEL TO WORK MODAL SPLIT ...... 24 TABLE 4-1: ANNUAL AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC FLOWS ...... 26 TABLE 4-2: PICS BY KEY SERVICE CENTRE AND SEVERITY 2012-2014 ...... 30 TABLE 4-3: SRN AVERAGE PEAK HOUR SPEEDS ...... 31 TABLE 4-4: NORTHALLERTON BUS SERVICES ...... 37 TABLE 4-5: THIRSK BUS SERVICES ...... 37 TABLE 4-6: BEDALE BUS SERVICES ...... 37 TABLE 4-7: EASINGWOLD BUS SERVICES ...... 37 TABLE 4-8: STOKESLEY BUS SERVICES ...... 37 TABLE 4-9: NORTHALLERTON AND THIRSK RAIL SERVICES ...... 39 TABLE 4-10: TRAIN STATION FACILITIES ...... 39 TABLE 4-11: ESK VALLEY TRAIN STATION FACILITIES ...... 39 TABLE 5-1: TEMPRO TRAFFIC GROWTH ...... 43 TABLE 6.1: NORTH YORKSHIRE TRIP RATES ...... 46 TABLE 6.2: OPTION 1 DEVELOPMENT SPLIT ...... 47 TABLE 6.3: OPTION 1 CUMULATIVE TRIP GENERATION DAILY TWO-WAY ...... 47 TABLE 6.4: OPTION 1 TRIP DISTRIBUTION ...... 47 TABLE 6.5: OPTION 2 DEVELOPMENT SPLIT ...... 48 TABLE 6.6: OPTION 2 CUMULATIVE TRIP GENERATION DAILY TWO-WAY ...... 48 TABLE 6.7: OPTION 2 TRIP DISTRIBUTION ...... 48 TABLE 6.8: OPTION 3 DEVELOPMENT SPLIT ...... 50 TABLE 6.9: OPTION 3 CUMULATIVE TRIP GENERATION DAILY TWO-WAY ...... 50 TABLE 6.10: OPTION 3 TRIP GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION ...... 50 TABLE 6.11: OPTION 4 DEVELOPMENT SPLIT ...... 51 TABLE 6.12: OPTION 4 CUMULATIVE TRIP GENERATION DAILY TWO-WAY ...... 51 TABLE 6.13: OPTION 3 DEVELOPMENT SPLIT ...... 52 TABLE 6.14: OPTION 5 CUMULATIVE TRIP GENERATION DAILY TWO-WAY ...... 52 TABLE 7.1: EARLY ASSESSMENT AND SIFTING EXERCISE - OPTION 1: PRINCIPAL TOWNS .. 54 TABLE 7.2: EARLY ASSESSMENT AND SIFTING EXERCISE - OPTION 2: CENTRAL TRANSPORT CORRIDORS ...... 56 TABLE 7.3: EARLY ASSESSMENT AND SIFTING EXERCISE - OPTION 3: FIVE TOWNS ...... 58 TABLE 7.4: EARLY ASSESSMENT AND SIFTING EXERCISE - OPTION 4: FIVE TOWNS AND VILLAGES ...... 60 TABLE 7.5: EARLY ASSESSMENT AND SIFTING EXERCISE 5: A NEW SETTLEMENT ...... 62 TABLE 7.6: SPATIAL PLANNING OPTION RANKING ...... 64 TABLE 8.1: ACCESSIBILITY APPRAISAL EXERCISE - NORTHALLERTON ...... 66 TABLE 8.2: ACCESSIBILITY APPRAISAL EXERCISE - THIRSK ...... 68 TABLE 8.3: ACCESSIBILITY APPRAISAL EXERCISE - BEDALE ...... 70 TABLE 8.4: ACCESSIBILITY APPRAISAL EXERCISE - EASINGWOLD ...... 72

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 70020552

TABLE 8.5: ACCESSIBILITY APPRAISAL EXERCISE - STOKESLEY ...... 74 TABLE 8.6: SERVICE CENTRE ACCESSIBILITY RANKING ...... 76

GRAPHS

GRAPH 3.1: HOUSING TENURE ...... 12 GRAPH 3.2: DWELLING TYPE COMPARISON ...... 13 GRAPH 4.1: AADT AND HGV % ...... 27

FIGURES

FIGURE 1-1: STUDY AREA...... 2 FIGURE 3-1: HAMBLETON POPULATION DENSITY PER KM2 ...... 10 FIGURE 3-2: PROPORTION OF POPULATION OVER 65 ...... 11 FIGURE 3-3: INCOME DEPRIVATION ...... 15 FIGURE 3-4: EMPLOYMENT DEPRIVATION ...... 16 FIGURE 3-5: EDUCATION, SKILLS AND TRAINING DEPRIVATION ...... 17 FIGURE 3-6: HEALTH AND DISABILITY DEPRIVATION ...... 18 FIGURE 3-7: CRIME DEPRIVATION ...... 19 FIGURE 3-8: BARRIERS TO HOUSING AND SERVICES DEPRIVATION ...... 20 FIGURE 3-9: LIVING ENVIRONMENT DEPRIVATION ...... 21 FIGURE 3-10: HAMBLETON IMD ...... 22 FIGURE 3-11: METHOD OF TRAVEL TO WORK - CAR ...... 25 FIGURE 4-1: SLIGHT INJURY COLLISIONS ...... 28 FIGURE 4-2: SERIOUS INJURY COLLISIONS ...... 29 FIGURE 4-3: FATAL INJURY COLLISIONS ...... 30 FIGURE 4-4: NORTHALLERTON DRIVE TIME ISOCHRONES ...... 32 FIGURE 4-5: THIRSK DRIVE TIME ISOCHRONES ...... 33 FIGURE 4-6: BEDALE DRIVE TIME ISOCHRONES ...... 34 FIGURE 4-7: EASINGWOLD DRIVE TIME ISOCHRONES ...... 35 FIGURE 4-8: STOKESLEY DRIVE TIME ISOCHRONES ...... 36 FIGURE 5-1: A1 LEEMING TO BARTON ROUTE, HIGHWAYS ENGLAND 2014 ...... 41 FIGURE 6-1: TRANSPORT CORRIDORS ...... 49

A PPENDICES

A P P E N D I X I DEVELOPMENT AND TRAFFIC IMPACT

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 70020552

1 INTRODUCTION AND STUDY OBJECTIVES 1.1 PROGRAMME OBJECTIVES

1.1.1 Hambleton District Council (HDC) is in the process of updating the Local Plan (2015-2019), which previously set out levels of new housing and employment development necessary to support forecast economic growth within the District. It is envisaged that the new Local Plan will establish the development requirements of Hambleton District up to and including 2035.

1.1.2 A Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) to 2035 has also been commissioned jointly by Local Planning Authorities in the York, Ryedale and North York Moors Districts. This evidence base will assist the relevant Local Authorities to objectively assess the need for homes and jobs within the County. The SHMA will consider information such as official population and household projections, census data, economic statistics, local evidence relating to the housing market, etc, with the new Local Plan expected to meet the objectively assessed need for open market and affordable housing.

1.1.3 In order to inform the overall process of developing the SHMA and the new Local Plan an ‘Issues and Options Consultation’ report was prepared during February 2016. This document identified the long term vision for the District and set out five options for the future approach to the spatial planning of development, as follows: 1. Principal Towns – Development focused on Northallerton and Thirsk. 2. Central Transport Corridors – Development focused around the main road and rail links. 3. Five Towns – Development focused around the five market towns of Northallerton, Thirsk, Bedale, Easingwold and Stokesley. 4. Five Towns and Villages – Development dispersed across the five market towns and villages within the District. 5. A New Settlement – The development of a new settlement or significant expansion of an existing settlement. 1.1.4 It is acknowledged that either one or a combination of these spatial planning principles may provide the most appropriate solution to the spatial planning requirements of Hambleton District and, in order inform development of the new Local Plan, WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff has been commissioned to undertake a study of the transport implications associated with each option. 1.2 STUDY AREA

1.2.1 The District of Hambleton is located within the County of North Yorkshire and is bounded by:

 Darlington, Middlesbrough and Stockton to the North.  Ryedale and Scarborough to the east.  The City of York to the south.  Harrogate and Richmondshire to the west.

1.2.2 The District is primarily rural in nature and supports a population of approximately 90,000 people, with many residing in the principal market towns of Northallerton, Thirsk, Bedale, Easingwold and Stokesley. A diagram showing these major service centres within the context of the District boundary and the United Kingdom is presented at Figure 1-1.

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Figure 1-1: Study Area

1.2.3 The image presented above also illustrates the strategic road links which connect Hambleton with the wider highway network. The key receptors within the District are:

 A1(M) London to Edinburgh.  A19 Doncaster to Seaton Burn.  A61 Derby to Thirsk.  A167 Topcliffe to Cowgate.  A168 Northallerton to Wetherby.  A170 Thirsk to Scarborough.  A172 Ingleby Arncliffe to Middlesbrough.  A684 Kendal to Ellerbeck.

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

1.3 REPORT STRUCTURE

1.3.1 Following this ‘Introduction and Study Objectives’ section, the Evidence Report is structured as follows:

 Chapter 2 – Review of Current Planning Policy and Recent Studies: This chapter will establish the current policy base by reviewing national, regional and local planning policy.  Chapter 3 – Current Socio-Economic Context: This chapter provides an overview of the socio-economic context associated with the study area, considered within the wider North Yorkshire context.  Chapter 4 – Current Transport Context: This chapter provides an insight into the current transport context, network operations and safety considerations associated with the area.  Chapter 5 – Future Transport Context: This chapter outlines the forecast transport context of the area, looking at planned growth, planned and committed schemes and proposed improvements.  Chapter 6 – Proposals Review: This chapter will review HDC’s proposals for the updated Local Plan, looking specifically at the five spatial planning options, as set out in the Local Plan Issues and Options Consultation document.  Chapter 7 – Option Sifting Assessment: This chapter provides a high level assessment of the five spatial planning principles using a matrix style appraisal (based upon criteria from the Department for Transport’s ‘Early Assessment and Sifting Tool’).  Chapter 8 – Options Accessibility Assessment: This chapter conducts an accessibility appraisal of the five key service centres to provide an indication of where development may be focused.

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

2 REVIEW OF CURRENT PLANNING POLICY AND RECENT STUDIES 2.1 INTRODUCTION

2.1.1 This section of the report seeks to establish the current policy base, which is considered pertinent to development of the new Hambleton Local Plan. The following documents have been reviewed and the key aspirations are summarised below:

 National Policy

 National Planning Policy Framework and Planning Practice Guidance

 Road Investment Strategy

 Regional Policy

 Transport for the North – The Northern Powerhouse: One Agenda, One Economy, One North

 North Yorkshire Community Plan

 North Yorkshire County Council: Local Transport Plan 4

 York, North Yorkshire and East Riding Enterprise Partnership – Strategic Economic Plan

 York, North Yorkshire and East Riding Enterprise Partnership – Growth Deal

 York, North Yorkshire and East Riding Housing Strategy

 Local Policy

 Hambleton Local Plan 2010

 Hambleton Local Plan Issues and Options Consultation

NATIONAL POLICY

National Planning Policy Framework and Planning Practice Guidance

2.1.2 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) sets out central planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied to development proposals. Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) is an accompanying web-based resource published by the Department for Communities and Local Government, which collates relevant advice, providing links between the NPPF and relevant legislation. Key to the NPPF is paragraph 1.4:

“At the heart of the National Planning Policy Framework is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread through both plan-making and decision- taking.”

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

2.1.3 Paragraphs 30 and 35 of Section 4 note that:

“In preparing Local Plans, Local Planning Authorities should therefore support a pattern of sustainable development which, where reasonable to do so, facilitates the use of sustainable modes of transport.”

“Plans should protect and exploit opportunities for the use of sustainable transport modes for the movement of goods and people.”

Road Investment Strategy 2015 to 2020

2.1.4 In December 2014, the Department for Transport (DfT) published the Road Investment Strategy (RIS), which sets out the vision (2015 to 2020) for addressing the Strategic Road Network’s deficiencies and inconsistent investment by focussing on the following key issues:

 Condition of the network.  Capacity of the roads.  Connectivity of the road network.  Certainty of investment.  Construction of housing and creation of jobs.

2.1.5 The RIS aims to provide an element of certainty, stating that £15 billion is to be invested over the period 2015 to 2020, which it is estimated will benefit up to 250,000 people by reducing the noise impact of the SRN, and preventing over 2,500 deaths or serious injuries.

2.1.6 The District of Hambleton is located within Area 14 of the Highways England maintenance network, which will benefit from improvements to the A1(M) as follows:

 A1 Dishforth to Leeming (completed) - A1: Jn 49 (Dishforth) to Jn 51 (Leeming): upgrading to three lane motorway standard the strategic M1/A1(M) route between London and Newcastle.  A1 Leeming to Barton (on-going) - A1: Jn 51 (Leeming) to Jn 56 (Barton): upgrading to three lane motorway standard completing the remaining non motorway section on the strategic M1/A1(M) route between London and Newcastle.

REGIONAL POLICY

Transport for the North – The Northern Powerhouse: One Agenda, One Economy, One North

2.1.7 One North was published in July 2014 and is led by the city regions of Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle and Sheffield. Its ambition is for the North to be a dynamic counterweight, which complements London and the South-East economy, a destination of choice for investors, helping rebalance and grow the national economy. It acknowledges that transport for freight and people will be central to this ambition and for economic success in the North. Journey times across the North are generally much slower, service frequencies are lower and the interconnectivity of the transport networks is much weaker than the South.

2.1.8 The strategic economic plans of all five city regions, prepared by the respective Local Enterprise Partnerships, each recognise the importance of improving transport links to achieve economic growth. One North identifies that poor transport links could be limiting the competitiveness of the North as a region. It also states that whilst the individual cities of the North may be relatively small, experience in the most prosperous European nations tends to demonstrate that clusters of highly interconnected cities can perform very well in economic terms.

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

2.1.9 One North looks to build on the Northern Way Transport Compact, which started in 2006 and forged a strong pan-northern strategic direction for transport, driven by economic objectives. Many of the short and medium term priorities identified by the Northern Way are now complete, under construction, in programme or in a project pipeline.

North Yorkshire Community Plan

2.1.10 The vision, as stated in the Community Plan, is for North Yorkshire “to be a thriving county which adapts to a changing world and remains a special place for everyone to live, work and visit”. In order to facilitate this aspiration three main priorities have been developed:

 Facilitate the development of housing and employment sites across North Yorkshire by delivering necessary infrastructure investments through partnerships.  Supporting and enabling North Yorkshire communities to have greater capacity to shape and deliver the services they need and to enhance their resilience in a changing world.  Reduce health inequalities across North Yorkshire.

North Yorkshire County Council: Local Transport Plan 4

2.1.11 The North Yorkshire Local Transport Plan 4 (LTP4) supports the North Yorkshire Community Strategy in aiming to make North Yorkshire a thriving county, which adapts to a changing world.

2.1.12 The commitment for the LTP4 is to manage, maintain and improve transport networks and services. The management and maintenance parts are the statutory duty of North Yorkshire County Council (NYCC) and come before any improvements, which will be sought where management and maintenance cannot address a transport issue.

2.1.13 LPT4 considers a 30 year time period, broken down into short, medium and long term aspirations. The key objectives set out within LTP4 are as follows:

 Economic Growth.  Road Safety.  Access to Services.  Environmental and Climate Change.  Healthier Travel.

2.1.14 With specific regard to the District of Hambleton, the A1(M) and A19 corridors are perceived to form the boundaries of a key growth area in North Yorkshire, with Northallerton the main priority in terms of development and congestion alleviation. There are also plans to upgrade the A168 and A19 corridors between Dishforth and Teesside to Expressway standard in order to facilitate a high quality connection between Hambleton and the wider North Eastern economy.

York, North Yorkshire and East Riding Partnership: Strategic Economic Plan and Growth Deal

2.1.15 The vision for the York, North Yorkshire and East Riding Partnership is to make the region the place in England to grow, combining a quality business location with a great quality of life. To achieve this, the Economic Plan and Growth Deal lay out four clear ambitions to deliver by 2021:

 20,000 new jobs.  £3 billion in growth.  Every student connected to business.  Double house building.

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

2.1.16 The A1 and A19 are to be the subject of financial investment to unlock strategic housing and employment sites. As with the LTP4, Northallerton is once more highlighted as a growth town and strategic investment site, receiving a share of £16.7 million of investment in housing and employment in order to provide around 950 jobs and 600 new homes.

York, North Yorkshire and East Riding Housing Strategy

2.1.17 The major priority for the York, North Yorkshire and East Riding Housing Strategy is to double the house building rate within the area to 5,400 completions per year and triple the rate of affordable housing delivery to 1,600 dwellings per year. With specific regard to Hambleton, the implication of these aspirations are:

 Over the period 2012 to 2021, an additional 365 households will be completed per year.  Over the period 2004 to 2026, the housing target will be 290 homes per year, with 6,540 new homes likely to be constructed in total.

LOCAL POLICY

Hambleton Local Plan

2.1.18 The Hambleton Local Plan sets out the current policy base upon which planning and development decisions are formed within the District, with the adopted Core Strategy detailing specific policies. With regard to transport related issues, the Local Plan sets out that:

 CP1: The use and development of land will be assessed against the community’s housing, economic and social requirements, protection and enhancement of the natural and built environment and minimisation of energy consumption and need to travel. Development that would significantly harm the natural or built environment, or that would generate an adverse traffic impact, will not be permitted.  CP2: Development and the provision of services should be located so as to minimise the need to travel. Transport schemes that lead to improvements in accessibility will be supported.  CP5: From 2011 to 2016, 290 additional dwellings per annum. From 2016, to 2021 260 additional dwellings per annum. The focus would be on the Northallerton and Thirsk service centres, but also between Bedale, Easingwold and Stokesley.  CP6: In order to achieve CP5, at least 51% of overall housing development will occur in Northallerton and Thirsk.

Hambleton Local Plan Issues and Options Consultation

2.1.19 As discussed previously, HDC is in the process of updating the Local Plan (2015-2019), which previously set out levels of new housing and employment development necessary to support forecast economic growth within the District. It is envisaged that the new Local Plan will establish the development requirements of Hambleton District up to and including 2035.

2.1.20 A Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) to 2035 has also been commissioned jointly by Local Planning Authorities in the York, Ryedale and North York Moors Districts. This evidence base will assist the relevant Local Authorities to objectively assess the need for homes and jobs within the County. The SHMA will consider information such as official population and household projections, census data, economic statistics, local evidence relating to the housing market, etc, with the new Local Plan expected to meet the objectively assessed need for open market and affordable housing.

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

2.1.21 In order to inform the overall process of developing the SHMA and the new Local Plan an ‘Issues and Options Consultation’ report was prepared during February 2016. This document identified the long term vision for the District and set out five options for the future approach to the spatial planning of development, as follows: 1. Principal Towns – Development focused on Northallerton and Thirsk. 2. Central Transport Corridors – Development focused around the main road and rail links. 3. Five Towns – Development focused around the five market towns of Northallerton, Thirsk, Bedale, Easingwold and Stokesley. 4. Five Towns and Villages – Development dispersed across the five market towns and villages within the District. 5. A New Settlement – The development of a new settlement or significant expansion of an existing settlement. 2.1.22 It is acknowledged that either one or a combination of these principles may provide the most appropriate solution to the spatial planning requirements of Hambleton District. To ensure that the most viable option is selected, consideration will be given to the impact that each spatial principle will have on infrastructure and the improvements required to facilitate development. 2.1.23 Furthermore, consideration will also be provided regarding how the spatial planning principles align with strategic issues, challenges and opportunities which have been identified by HDC through public consultation exercises recently held with key stakeholders, as set out below:  Supporting Economic Growth.  Supporting Housing Growth.  Managing Our Environment.  Improving Transport.  Creating Better Places.

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

3 CURRENT SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONTEXT 3.1 SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONTEXT

3.1.1 The current socio-economic context within the District of Hambleton (as recorded during the Census 2011) will be considered within the wider regional and national context, under the following headings:

 Socio Demographic Overview.  Deprivation.  Journey to Work Patterns.  Skills and Qualifications.

Socio-Demographic Overview

3.1.2 The population of each of the five key service centres within Hambleton, as detailed previously, are presented at Table 3-1 below. It can clearly be seen that in 2011 the market town of Northallerton had 16,832 residents, which equates to more than three times the population of Thirsk, Stokesley and Easingwold, with more than five times the population of Bedale

Table 3-1: Key Service Centre Population

SERVICE CENTRE POPULATION Northallerton 16,832 Thirsk 4,998 Stokesley 4,757 Easingwold 4,627 Bedale 3,156

3.1.3 It is evident that the combined population of the five key service centres was recorded as 34,370 during the census of 2011, which equates to more than a third of the total population of Hambleton. These urban conurbations, therefore, clearly form the principal settlements within the District and likely play a key role in its economic vitality.

3.1.4 In order to demonstrate how residents are dispersed across the District, Figure 3-1 presents the relative population density per square kilometre of land. The image illustrates that much of the District is sparsely populated, with large areas of northern Hambleton (particularly to the east of Northallerton/Thirsk and the South of Stokesley) recording less than 25 people per square kilometre.

3.1.5 The statistics presented above, relating to the number of residents within the five key service centres, are confirmed by the population density image which demonstrates that the most intensively occupied areas of the District are centred around Northallerton and Thirsk, which both recorded in excess of 6,000 people per square kilometre.

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Figure 3-1: Hambleton Population Density per km2

3.1.6 The corresponding age profile associated with residents of Hambleton is presented at Table 3-2 and clearly demonstrates that the proportion of people aged 65+ is 1% higher than the average for North Yorkshire and over 5% higher than the average for England/Wales. The profile of residents aged between 0-15 and 16-64 is less than 1% below the county average and 2-3% below the national average.

Table 3-2: Hambleton and National Age Structure HAMBLETON NORTH YORKSHIRE ENGLAND AND WALES Age 0 to 15 16.9% 17.4% 18.9% Age 16 to 64 61.5% 62.1% 64.7% Age 65 + 21.6% 20.6% 16.4% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

3.1.7 Figure 3-2 demonstrates the geographic displacement of residents aged 65+ throughout the District. The image clearly illustrates that Stokesley has the greatest proportion of elderly residents, with in excess of 35% aged 65 and above, which more than double the national average. Northallerton and Bedale generally recorded the lowest proportion of elderly residents during the Census 2011, with less than 10% aged 65 or over.

Figure 3-2: Proportion of Population over 65

3.1.8 The economic status of the general population is shown in Table 3-3 and demonstrates that 23.1% of residents within Hambleton were classified as retired in 2011, which is higher than both the county (17.3%) and national (17.9%) averages. When compared against the fact that only 21.6% of residents were aged 65 and above, this indicates that approximately 1.5% of the population elected to take early retirement.

3.1.9 With regards economic activity, the figure also shows that 49.3% of residents within Hambleton were employed, which is higher than both the county (49.1%) and national (45.4%) averages. The proportion of residents not in work was recorded at 6.8%, which is similarly much lower than the county (10.4%) and national (11.0%) averages.

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Table 3-3: Economic Activity HAMBLETON NORTH YORKSHIRE ENGLAND AND WALES Children <16 16.9% 17.4% 18.9% Student 3.8% 5.8% 6.8% Employed 49.3% 49.1% 45.4% Not Working 6.8% 10.4% 11.0% Retired 23.1% 17.3% 17.9% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

3.1.10 With regards the 49.3% of residents recorded as being in employment, the statistics presented at Table 3-4 illustrate the social economic classification of the jobs performed. The information clearly demonstrates that Hambleton supports a higher proportion of higher/lower managerial workers and a lower proportion of routine workers than both the county and national averages.

Table 3-4: Social Economic Classification of Workers HAMBLETON NORTH YORKSHIRE ENGLAND AND WALES Higher Managerial 13.5% 11.8% 12.0% Lower Managerial 26.6% 25.2% 24.4% Supervisory 35.8% 36.3% 34.1% Routine 24.1% 26.7% 29.5% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

3.1.11 In order to illustrate how the high proportion of managerial employees residing in Hambleton relates to the breakdown of housing tenure, Graph 3.1 has been prepared which shows that 70% of residents in the District own their homes, compared to the national average of 64% of the wider population. This is indicative of the relative affluence of Hambleton as a District, with only 13% of homes socially rented compared with the national average of 18% throughout England/Wales.

Graph 3.1: Housing Tenure

England and Wales 64% 15% 18% 3%

North Yorkshire 70% 14% 11% 4%

Hambleton 70% 12% 13% 5%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% % of Households

In Own Home Private Rented Social Rented Other

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

3.1.12 In relation to the specific type of dwelling, Graph 3.2 illustrates that 92% of properties in Hambleton were houses or bungalows, which is significantly higher than the county (86%) and national (78%) averages.

Graph 3.2: Dwelling Type Comparison

People per Household (2011) 3.00

2.50

2.00

1.50

1.00 No.People per HHld

0.50

0.00 Hambleton North Yorkshire England and Wales No. People per HHld 2.34 2.45 2.40

3.1.13 In terms of the typical profile of residential household composition, Table 3-5 illustrates that Hambleton was identical to the national average with regards the number of families living in the district.

Table 3-5: Household Composition HOUSEHOLD TYPE HAMBLETON NORTH YORKSHIRE ENGLAND AND WALES 1 Adult Pensioner 14.6% 14.4% 12.4% 1 Adult Other 13.4% 14.8% 17.8% 2+ Pensioners 12.5% 11.2% 8.4% 2+ Adults, No Children 30.5% 30.2% 27.2% 2+ Adults, with Children 21.9% 21.1% 21.9% Lone Parent 4.6% 5.3% 7.2% Student 0.0% 0.1% 0.6% Other 2.5% 2.8% 4.4% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

3.1.14 Statistics relating to households facilitating either couples with no children or pensioners, illustrate that Hambleton was higher than both the county and national averages. However, the figures also demonstrate that the District recorded less single adults and lone parents than the averages for North Yorkshire and England/Wales.

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Deprivation

3.1.15 The English Indices of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) 2015 have been compiled to identify the most deprived areas of the country from the perspective of seven key factors, which cover a range of economic, social and health issues. These factors are combined into a single score, which represents an overall measure of deprivation associated with an area (after a weighting is applied to income and employment deprivation in order to represent the influence that they have on economic prosperity in a specific area).

3.1.16 In order to establish the baseline position in Hambleton with regards the operational characteristics of the District, details of the seven individual domains of deprivation covered within the IMD will be presented under the following headings:

 Income.  Employment.  Education, Skills and Training.  Health and Disability.  Crime.  Barriers to Housing and Services.  Living Environment.

3.1.17 The IMD scores for each domain of deprivation have been used to rank areas of Hambleton in relation to the whole country. By adopting this methodology, the study effectively provides an indication of how well specific areas of the District perform in relation to the wider national context.

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

3.1.18 The Income domain of deprivation provides a measure of the proportion of the population suffering from low financial income. The definition of low income which is used to calculate the ranking relates to both residents that are currently out of work and those that are employed but with low earning potential (i.e. those who satisfy the respective means tests).

Figure 3-3: Income Deprivation

3.1.19 Figure 3-3 illustrates the relative level of income deprivation associated with Hambleton and clearly shows that the District does not generally suffer from a poor classification. The figure demonstrates that the District does not generally experience a large proportion of income deprivation. The majority of the District is ranked within the least deprived 30% of the entire country.

3.1.20 Certain areas of the five key service centres experience greater levels of income deprivation than the remainder of the District, which likely correlates with higher property prices in more rural areas of Hambleton. Despite this fact, it remains evident that there are no parts of the District which rank in the most deprived 20% within a national context.

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

3.1.21 The Employment domain of deprivation provides a measure of the proportion of the working age population who are involuntarily excluded from the labour market. This includes residents who wish to work but are unable to do so due to unemployment, sickness, disability or caring responsibilities.

Figure 3-4: Employment Deprivation

3.1.22 Figure 3-4 illustrates the relative level of employment deprivation associated with Hambleton and clearly shows that the District does not generally suffer from a poor classification. The figure deomstrates that the District does not generally experience a large proportion of employment deprivation. The majority of the District is once again ranked within the least deprived 30% of the entire country.

3.1.23 Certain areas of the five key service centres experience greater levels of employment deprivation than the remainder of the District, with Northallerton ranking in the most deprived 20% within the national context.

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

3.1.24 The Education, Skills and Training domain of deprivation provides a measure of the lack of attainment and skills in the local population. The relevant indicators are categorised into two sub- domains, which relate to the education profile of children/young people and typical skillsets held by adult within a specific area.

Figure 3-5: Education, Skills and Training Deprivation

3.1.25 Figure 3-5 illustrates the relative level of education, skills and training deprivation associated with Hambleton and clearly shows that the District does not generally suffer from a poor classification. The majority of the District is ranked within the least deprived 40% of the entire country.

3.1.26 Certain areas of the five key service centres experience greater levels of education, skills and training deprivation than the remainder of the District, with Northallerton, Thirsk and Stokesley ranking in the most deprived 20% within the national context.

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

3.1.27 The Health and Disability domain of deprivation provides a measure of the risk of premature death and impaired quality of life through poor physical or mental health. The domain classifies rates of morbidity, disability and premature mortality, however, it does not consider aspects of behaviour or environment that may be predictive of future health deprivation.

Figure 3-6: Health and Disability Deprivation

3.1.28 Figure 3-6 illustrates the relative level of health and disability deprivation associated with Hambleton and clearly shows that the District does not generally suffer from a poor classification. The majority of the District is ranked within the least deprived 30% of the entire country.

3.1.29 Certain areas of the five key service centres experience greater levels of health and disability deprivation than the remainder of the District, with Northallerton, Thirsk and Stokesley ranking in the most deprived 50% within the national context.

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

3.1.30 The Crime domain of deprivation provides a measure of the risk associated with becoming a victim of personal attack or experiencing material victimisation of property on a local level.

Figure 3-7: Crime Deprivation

3.1.31 Figure 3-7 illustrates the relative level of crime deprivation associated with Hambleton and clearly shows that the District does not generally suffer from a poor classification. The majority of the District is ranked within the least deprived 30% of the entire country.

3.1.32 Certain areas of Northallerton and Thirsk experience greater levels of crime deprivation than the remainder of the District, however, neither ranks in the most deprived 30% within the national context.

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

3.1.33 The Barriers to Housing and Services domain of deprivation provides a measure of the physical and financial accessibility of housing or local services. The relevant indicators are categorised into two sub-domains, which relate to ‘geographical barriers’ (i.e. the physical proximity of local services) and ‘wider barriers’ (i.e. issues concerning access to housing, such as affordability or homelessness).

Figure 3-8: Barriers to Housing and Services Deprivation

3.1.34 Figure 3-8 illustrates the relative level of barriers to housing and services deprivation associated with Hambleton and clearly shows that the District does not generally benefit from a positive classification. The majority of the District (especially rural areas) is ranked within the most deprived 20% of the entire country. This is likely due to high property prices/relatively low housing stock (compared to the remainder of the country) and poor levels of accessibility to local services (such as employment, education, health, welfare, shopping, leisure, etc) within rural areas of Hambleton.

3.1.35 Each of the five key service centres experience lower levels of barriers to housing and services deprivation than the remainder of the District, with Northallerton and Stokesley ranking in the least deprived 20% within the national context.

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

3.1.36 The Living Environment domain of deprivation provides a measure of the relative quality of the local environment. The relevant indicators are categorised into two sub-domains, which relate to the ‘indoors’ living environment (i.e. the quality of housing) and the ‘outdoors’ living environment (i.e. surrounding air quality and road traffic accidents).

Figure 3-9: Living Environment Deprivation

3.1.37 Figure 3-9 illustrates the relative level of living environment deprivation associated with Hambleton and clearly shows that, once more, the District does not generally benefit from a positive classification. The majority of the District (especially rural areas) is ranked within the most deprived 20% of the entire country. This is likely due to the relative age/condition of residential dwellings (compared to the remainder of the country) and personal injury accident rates experienced on rural roads which form the local highway network within Hambleton.

3.1.38 Each of the five key service centres experience lower levels of living environment deprivation than the remainder of the District, with Northallerton, Thirsk, Bedale, Easingwold and Stokesley ranking in the least deprived 50% within the national context. This is likely due to the fact that more urbanised areas of the District benefit from a range of modern dwellings (which meet current building regulations) and a less rural network of roads connecting them with key services.

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

3.1.39 The Indices of Multiple Deprivation combines each of the individual domains discussed previously to provide a singular measure of deprivation throughout the District of Hambleton (when considered within the national context). The domains are offered a weighting to reflect their relative significance, with Income (22.5%) and Employment (22.5%) deprivation receiving the greatest bias and Crime (9.3%), Barriers to Housing and Services (9.3%) and Living Environment (9.3%) deprivation receiving the smallest bias.

Figure 3-10: Hambleton IMD

3.1.40 Figure 3-10 illustrates the relative Indices of Multiple Deprivation associated with Hambleton and clearly shows that the District does not generally suffer from a poor overall classification. The majority of the District is ranked within the least deprived 50% of the entire country.

3.1.41 Only very isolated areas in and around Northallerton, Thirsk and Stokesley fall below the 50th percentile, however, none rank within the most deprived 20% within the national context.

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Journey to Work Patterns

3.1.42 The 2011 Census based Journey to Work (JTW) dataset provides information relating to the origin/destination profile, mode of travel and journey lengths associated with daily commuter trips. This ‘Journey to Work’ census data has been interrogated to determine employment destinations of residents within the five key service centres, which are summarised at Table 3-6 below.

Table 3-6: Journey to Work data, 2011 Census

ORIGIN Destination Northallerton Thirsk Stokesley Bedale Easingwold Northallerton 60% 10% 6% 18% 3% West Hambleton 5% 4% 1% 8% 1% NW Hambleton 4% 1% 1% 7% 1% Harrogate 4% 12% 1% 11% 5% South Thirsk 3% 24% 1% 2% 2% Middlesbrough 3% 2% 20% 1% 1% Richmondshire 2% 1% 1% 8% 0% Darlington 2% 1% 2% 2% 0% North Thirsk 2% 21% 1% 2% 1% Stockton on Tees 2% 2% 12% 1% 1% Bedale 1% 1% 0% 25% 1% York 1% 4% 1% 2% 28% North Hambleton 1% 0% 0% 1% 0% Leeds 1% 3% 0% 2% 3% Redcar and Cleveland 1% 1% 13% 0% 0% County Durham 1% 0% 1% 1% 0% Hutton Rudby 1% 0% 5% 0% 0% Easingwold 0% 2% 0% 1% 31% Ryedale 0% 2% 1% 0% 5% Stokesley 0% 1% 26% 0% 1% South West Hambleton 0% 1% 0% 1% 7% Craven 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% ER of Yorkshire 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% Selby 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% Hartlepool 0% 0% 1% 0% 0%

3.1.43 The table above clearly illustrates that 60% of residents in Northallerton also work within their hometown, with only 40% travelling to reach an alternative location for employment purposes. It is evident that Thirsk (46%), Bedale (25%), Easingwold (31%) and Stokesley (26%) also have relatively high proportions of residents who are able to live and work within the same town.

3.1.44 The information at Table 3-7 illustrates typical distances associated with the ‘Journey to Work’ data presented previously, with commuter trips from each of the five key service centres documented. The figures confirm that residents of Northallerton (60%), Thirsk (39%), Bedale (39%), Easingwold (33%) and Stokesley (27%) are all able to work within a 5 kilometre catchment of their home.

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Table 3-7: Distance Travelled to Work

DISTANCE NORTHALLERTON THIRSK BEDALE EASINGWOLD STOKESLEY Less than 2km 53% 33% 24% 29% 22% 2km to less than 5km 7% 6% 15% 4% 5% 5km to less than 10km 7% 13% 7% 9% 14% 10km to less than 20km 11% 22% 33% 27% 34% 20km to less than 30km 10% 6% 4% 14% 13% 30km to less than 40km 4% 11% 5% 4% 3% 40km to less than 60km 3% 5% 6% 8% 4% 60km and over 4% 4% 5% 5% 6% Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

3.1.45 Table 3-8 illustrates the typical mode of travel adopted by residents of Hambleton in order to complete commuter trips to a normal place of work and makes comparisons against county and national averages.

Table 3-8: Travel to Work Modal Split MODE OF TRAVEL TOTAL COUNT HAMBLETON NORTH YORKSHIRE ENGLAND AND WALES Works at Home 7270 16.1% 15.5% 10.3% Underground 37 0.1% 0.1% 3.8% Train 550 1.2% 1.1% 5.0% Bus 676 1.5% 3.1% 7.2% Taxi 80 0.2% 0.3% 0.5% Motorcycle 193 0.4% 0.6% 0.8% Car/ Van Driver 27312 60.4% 56.4% 54.5% Car/ Van Passenger 2079 4.6% 5.8% 5.0% Bicycle 1196 2.6% 2.4% 2.8% On Foot 5612 12.4% 14.1% 9.8% Other 250 0.6% 0.7% 0.5% Total 45255 100% 100% 100%

3.1.46 The data presented above clearly illustrates that sustainable travel within the District only accounts for around 17.7% of the total number of trips made, with pedestrians (12.4%), cyclists (2.6%), bus users (1.5%) and rail passengers (1.2%) accounting for a relatively low proportion of the population. In light of the fact that so many residents of the five service centres live within 5 kilometres of their place of work, this may be indicative that residents within more rural areas of Hambleton are heavily reliant upon the private car for commuting.

3.1.47 In order to demonstrate areas of the District where residents were documented as using the private car as the primary mode of travel for commuter purposes, the image at Figure 3-11 has been prepared. The figure clearly indicates that areas local to Northallerton, Thirsk and Bedale typically benefit from the lowest level of dependency upon the private car within the District.

3.1.48 Car borne travel is typically most prominent in rural areas of the District, in addition to the settlements of Easingwold and Stokesley. This is likely due to lack of alternative sustainable travel options and/or the remoteness of these locations relative to local employment sites.

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Figure 3-11: Method of Travel to Work - Car

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

4 CURRENT TRANSPORT CONTEXT 4.1 TRANSPORT CONTEXT

4.1.1 This section provides an insight into the current transport context associated with operational conditions on the local and regional highway networks. Specific details are presented below in accordance with the following structure:

 Strategic Highways Overview.  Bus and Coach Services.  Rail Infrastructure and Services.

Highways Overview

4.1.2 Within the district of Hambleton, as identified previously, the strategic road links which connect the District with the wider highway network are as follows:

4.1.3 The Department for Transport (DfT) maintains a database of Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) flows recorded on major highway links throughout the United Kingdom. The information provided at Table 4-1 and Graph 4.1 illustrate the two-way average daily traffic demand on each of the receptors detailed above over the latest three year period recorded.

4.1.4 It can clearly be seen that, with in excess of 70,000 vehicles per day, traffic flows on the A1(M) are significantly higher than any other receptor passing through Hambleton. The A19 and A168 both support in the region of 25,000 two-way vehicular movements per day, with all other receptors facilitating less than 10,000 two-way trips per day. The percentage of HGV trips recorded on each of the key receptors is proportionately similar to the total AADT figure, with the A1(M), A 19 and A168 facilitating the most intensive levels of usage.

Table 4-1: Annual Average Daily Traffic Flows

YEAR A1(M) A19 A61 A167 A168 A170 A172 A684

2012 69,065 27,413 7,937 7,388 24,756 7,531 7,466 8,680

2013 70,809 26,080 8,001 7,433 24,846 7,593 7,522 9,144

2014 75,737 26,109 8,051 7,572 23,112 7,769 7,670 9,186

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Graph 4.1: AADT and HGV %

80000 25%

70000 20% 60000

50000

15%

40000

AADT HGV HGV % 10% 30000

20000 5% 10000

0 0% 2012 2013 2014

A172 A61 A168 A19 A167 A170 A684 A1(M) A172 HGV % A61 HGV % A168 HGV % A19 HGV % A167 HGV % A170 HGV % A684 HGV % A1(M) HGV %

Network Safety

Accident and Incident Information

4.1.5 Personal Injury Collision (PIC) data for the most recent three year period available (2012-14) has been extracted from the national STATS19 database, which is maintained by the Department for Transport. Figure 4-1 to Figure 4-3 provides a summary of all PICs recorded on the highway network in Hambleton during the study period, with incidents categorised as:

 Slight.  Serious.  Fatal.

4.1.6 It must be noted that damage only collisions (i.e. where no injuries occurred) have not been included in the analysis, as they are not reported as frequently or reliably to the Police and may not be representative.

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Figure 4-1: Slight Injury Collisions

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Figure 4-2: Serious Injury Collisions

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Figure 4-3: Fatal Injury Collisions

4.1.7 Table 4-2 shows the breakdown of PICs by severity in each key service centre. Northallerton has the highest volume of PICs, however, it is also the largest area and has the longest total road length of all the key service centres. Stokesley recorded the highest number of PICs per kilometre of road network out of the five key service centres.

Table 4-2: PICs by Key Service Centre and Severity 2012-2014 ROAD KEY SERVICE CENTRE SLIGHT SERIOUS FATAL TOTAL NETWORK LENGTH (KM) Northallerton 72 19 1 92 103 Thirsk 42 10 2 54 86 Bedale 19 8 1 28 41 Easingwold 18 8 2 28 74 Stokesley 23 7 1 31 28

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Journey Time and Travel Reliability

Average Speeds and Reliability on the Strategic Road Network

4.1.8 The Highways England WebTRIS database has been interrogated to ascertain average speeds on the Strategic Road Network. The information at Table 4-3 shows average speeds recorded on the A1(M) and the A19 (to the north of the A168, which are the only sections of Strategic Road Network which pass through Hambleton) since March 2016. The data illustrates that the average speed on both roads was close to the maximum national speed limit, suggesting that neither congestion nor link capacity are currently issues on the two routes.

Table 4-3: SRN Average Peak Hour Speeds

MAR-16 PERIOD NORTHBOUND (MPH) SOUTHBOUND (MPH) AM Peak 69 69 A1(M) PM Peak 69 69 AM Peak 65 65 A19 PM Peak 70 65

4.1.9 The associated Planning Time Index (PTI) provides a measure of journey time reliability on certain receptors, which is ranked against all journeys on the Strategic Road Network. Both the A1(M) and the A19 within Hambleton are categorised within the top two bands for reliability, which is indicative of the fact that journey times are generally consistent and reliable.

Drive Times

4.1.10 In order to illustrate the typical journey times currently associated with travel throughout the District for each of the five key service centres, drive time isochrones are presented at Figure 4-4 to Figure 4-8, which show the distance that can be travelled in 15 minute intervals up to a maximum of 90 minutes.:

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Figure 4-4: Northallerton Drive Time Isochrones

Ordnance Survey data © Crown Copyright and database right 2014

4.1.11 Figure 4-4 shows that from Northallerton journey times are typically:

 Thirsk 0-15 minutes  Bedale 0-15 minutes  Easingwold 15-30 minutes  Stokesley 15-30 minutes  Middlesbrough 30-45 minutes  York 45-60 minutes

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Figure 4-5: Thirsk Drive Time Isochrones

Ordnance Survey data © Crown Copyright and database right 2014

4.1.12 Figure 4-5 shows that from Thirsk journey times are typically:

 Northallerton 0-15 minutes  Bedale 15-30 minutes  Easingwold 0-15 minutes  Stokesley 15-30 minutes  Middlesbrough 15-30 minutes  York 30-45 minutes

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Figure 4-6: Bedale Drive Time Isochrones

Ordnance Survey data © Crown Copyright and database right 2014

4.1.13 Figure 4-6 shows that from Bedale journey times are typically:

 Northallerton 0-15 minutes  Thirsk 15-30 minutes  Easingwold 30-45 minutes  Stokesley 30-45 minutes  Middlesbrough 30-45 minutes  York 30-45 minutes

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Figure 4-7: Easingwold Drive Time Isochrones

Ordnance Survey data © Crown Copyright and database right 2014

4.1.14 Figure 4-7 shows that from Easingwold journey times are typically:

 Northallerton 15-30 minutes  Thirsk 15-30 minutes  Bedale 30-45 minutes  Stokesley 30-45 minues  Middlesbrough 30-45 minutes  York 15-30 minutes

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Figure 4-8: Stokesley Drive Time Isochrones

Ordnance Survey data © Crown Copyright and database right 2014

4.1.15 Figure 4-8 shows that from Stokesley journey times are typically;

 Northallerton 15-30 minutes  Thirsk 15-30 minutes  Bedale 30-45 minutes  Easingwold 30-45 minutes  Middlesbrough 0-15 minutes  York 45-60 minutes

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Bus and Coach Services

4.1.16 In order to understand the current transport context with regards the suitability of bus infrastructure to provide a valid alternative to car-borne trips within the District of Hambleton, analysis of the various routes and service frequencies has been conducted. Table 4-4 to Table 4-8 show regular bus services operating out of each of the five key market towns, with the approximate frequency. The information clearly demonstrates that Northallerton benefits from the greatest number of services (9), whilst Thirsk (3), Bedale (2), Easingwold (4) and Stokesley (4) facilitate the least.

Table 4-4: Northallerton Bus Services SERVICE FROM TO FREQUENCY DAYS CONNECTIONS 54 Northallerton Kirkby Fleetham Every 3 hours Mon-Sat - 55 Northallerton Richmond Every 4 hours Mon-Sat - 70 Northallerton Ripon Every 2 hours Mon-Sat Thirsk 72 Northallerton Darlington Every 2 hours Mon-Sat - 73 Northallerton Bedale Every hour Mon-Sat Bedale 74 Northallerton Northallerton Every hour Mon-Sat - 80-89 Leeming Stokesley Every 2 hours Mon-Sat Stokesley 153 Northallerton Thirsk Every 2 hours (midday only) Mon-Sat Thirsk X80-X89 Leeming Bar Middlesbrough Every 3 hours Mon-Sat Stokesley

Table 4-5: Thirsk Bus Services SERVICE FROM TO FREQUENCY DAYS CONNECTIONS 30-30X Thirsk York Every hour Mon-Fri Easingwold 70 Ripon Northallerton Every 2-3 hours Mon-Sat Northallerton 153 Thirsk Northallerton Every 2 hours (midday only) Mon-Sat Northallerton

Table 4-6: Bedale Bus Services SERVICE FROM TO FREQUENCY DAYS CONNECTIONS 73 Northallerton Bedale Every half hour Mon-Sat Northallerton 155 Bedale Leyburn Every 1-2 hours Mon-Fri -

Table 4-7: Easingwold Bus Services SERVICE FROM TO FREQUENCY DAYS CONNECTIONS 29-29A York Easingwold Less than one per hour Mon-Sat - 30-30X Thirsk York Less than one per hour Mon-Fri Thirsk 31-31X Helmsley York Less than one per hour Mon-Sat - 40 Crayke York Less than one per hour Mon-Fri -

Table 4-8: Stokesley Bus Services SERVICE FROM TO FREQUENCY DAYS CONNECTIONS 28a Stokesley Middlesbrough Every hour Mon-Fri - 80-89 Leeming Stokesley Every 2 hours Mon-Sat Northallerton 81 Stokesley Marske Every hour Mon-Fri - X80-X89 Leeming Bar Middlesbrough Every 3 hours Mon-Sat Northallerton

4.1.17 Due to the fact that certain routes benefit from multiple services, for example Easingwold to York, Table 4.3 has been prepared to summarise the relative level of service between the five key

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

market towns. In order to document connections between the five key market towns and major employment centres outside of the District, consideration has also been given to connections with

Darlington, Middlesbrough and York.

ORK

HIRSK

EDALE

TOKESLEY

ARLINGTON

ASINGWOLD

IDDLESBROUGH

ORTHALLERTON

M N

Every 2 Every 30 Every 1-2 Every 2 Every 3 Northallerton hours minutes hours hours hours

Every 2 Every 1 Every 1 Thirsk hours hour hour

Every 30 Bedale minutes

Every 1-2 Several Stokesley hours per hour

Every 1 Several Easingwold hour per hour

Every 1 Several York hour per hour

Every 2 Darlington hours

Every 3 Several Middlesbrough hours per hour

Rail Services

4.1.18 In order to understand the suitability of rail infrastructure to provide a valid alternative to car-borne trips within the District of Hambleton, analysis of the various routes, service frequencies and stations has also been conducted. A total of three nationwide services run through Hambleton, which call at stations in Northallerton and Thirsk, as detailed below:

 TransPennine Express – Northallerton and Thirsk  Virgin Trains East Coast – Northallerton only  Grand Central – Northallerton and Thirsk

4.1.19 The services documented previously provide residents with a regular level of travel frequency, with Northallerton providing a junction that facilitates onward connections via Darlington

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

(TransPennine Express/Virgin Trains East Coast) and via Stockton on Tees (TransPennine Express/Grand Central). Table 4-9 summarises these services and Table 4-10 presents the facilities available at Northallerton and Thirsk stations.

Table 4-9: Northallerton and Thirsk Rail Services FROM TO FREQUENCY DAYS CONNECTIONS Transpennine Liverpool/ North East Less than one per Mon- Thirsk, Northallerton Express Manchester hour Sun Transpennine Newcastle/ Manchester/ At least one per Mon- Northallerton, Thirsk Express Middlesbrough Liverpool hour Sun for some trains Virgin East London Scotland At least one per Mon- Northallerton Coast hour Sun Grand Central London Sunderland Less than one per Mon- Thirsk, Northallerton hour Sun

Table 4-10: Train Station Facilities

SERVICE NORTHALLERTON THIRSK Car Parking 131 spaces (10 accessible) 45 space (3 accessible) Bicycle Parking 18 spaces 24 spaces Bus Stop Yes Yes Ticket Office Yes (Monday to Sunday) Yes Ticket Machines Yes No Taxi Rank Yes No Customer Help Points Yes No Step Free Access Yes No

4.1.20 There are also three additional stations located to the east of Stokesley (Great Ayton, Battersby and Kildale) which operate on the Esk Valley Railway Line. These stations do not facilitate a direct connection with the wider District of Hambleton (i.e. Northallerton or Thirsk).

4.1.21 Great Ayton, Battersby and Kildale all facilitate services between Middlesbrough and Whitby, which run approximately every 3 to 4 hours. Table 4-11 summarises the facilities at the three stations.

Table 4-11: Esk Valley Train Station Facilities

SERVICE GREAT AYTON BATTERSBY KILDALE Car Parking 10 spaces (0 accessible) 0 spaces 5 spaces (0 accessible) Bicycle Parking 2 spaces 0 spaces 6 spaces Bus Stop No No No Ticket Office No No No Ticket Machines No No No Taxi Rank No No No Customer Help Points No No No Step Free Access Yes No No

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

5 FUTURE TRANSPORT CONTEXT 5.1 CHAPTER OBJECTIVES AND STRUCTURE

5.1.1 This section forecasts the anticipated future transport context associated with operational conditions on the local and regional highway networks. Specific details are presented below in accordance with the following structure:

 Planned and committed improvements on the strategic highway network.  Planned and committed improvements schemes on the local highway network.  Forecast traffic growth.  Planned improvements to public transport services and infrastructure.

5.2 PLANNED AND COMMITTED IMPROVEMENTS ON THE STRATEGIC HIGHWAY NETWORK

A1 Leeming to Barton

5.2.1 As discussed previously, the Department for Transport (DfT) developed Road Investment Strategy (RIS) sets out a vision for addressing deficiencies on the Strategic Road Network between 2015-20 focussing on the following key issues:

 Condition of the network.  Capacity of the roads.  Connectivity of the road network.  Certainty of investment.  Construction of housing and creation of jobs.

5.2.2 The RIS aims to provide an element of certainty, stating that £15 billion is to be invested over the period 2015 to 2020, which it is estimated will benefit up to 250,000 people by reducing the noise impact of the SRN, and preventing over 2,500 deaths or serious injuries.

5.2.3 The District of Hambleton is located within Area 14 of the Highways England maintenance network, which will benefit from improvements to the A1(M) as follows:

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Figure 5-1: A1 Leeming to Barton Route, Highways England 2014

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

5.3 PLANNED AND COMMITTED IMPROVEMENT SCHEMES ON THE LOCAL HIGHWAY NETWORK

Bedale, Aiskew and Leeming Bar Bypass

5.3.1 The Bedale, Aiskew and Leeming Bar Bypass (BALB) will provide 4.8km of new highway, in order to connect the A684 north of Bedale with the A684 east of Leeming Bar. The improvement scheme will facilitate construction of three new roundabouts and two new rail bridges along the route of the bypass, which will intersect the A1(M) at junction 51.

5.3.2 It is anticipated that the new bypass road will open in August 2016 and alleviate congestion in the immediate area surrounding Bedale, Aiskew and Leeming Bar. Once operational, the improvement scheme will significantly improve average drive times between Bedale and Northallerton.

North Northallerton Link Road

5.3.3 The North Northallerton Link Road is being developed in conjunction with a planning application associated with the North Northallerton Development Area. The scheme proposes construction of around 900 new homes, a school, rail bridge, commercial and leisure facilities, which will be facilitated by delivery of the new link road.

5.3.4 The North Northallerton Link Road will be constructed in order to mitigate the traffic impact generated by delivery of the development proposal, following an alignment which runs between the A167 Darlington Road and A684 Stokesley Road. The scheme also includes the delivery of a new bridge crossing over the existing Northallerton to Middlesbrough railway line.

Sowerby Gateway - A168/B1448 Topcliffe Road Junction Improvement

5.3.5 The Sowerby Gateway development proposal was granted planning consent in 2011 and will facilitate delivery of 925 new homes with ancillary retail units, restaurants, a community centre, sports facilities and a school on land to the south of Thirsk. It is anticipated that the scheme will be the subject of phased delivery, with completion expected around 2025.

5.3.6 In order to facilitate delivery of the approved scheme, developers will be required to construct a major improvement scheme on the local highway network. The agreed Section 106 agreement requires that the A168/B1448 Topcliffe Road interchange be upgraded to provide an ‘all movements junction’ with north facing merge and diverge slip roads constructed on the A168 mainline. It is envisaged that this mitigation scheme will be delivered prior to 2025, following completion of the initial phases of development.

Northallerton East West Bypass

5.3.7 North Yorkshire County Council (NYCC) has developed a list of 23 priority highways schemes, which concern delivery of strategic improvements on the wider road network throughout the county. The Local Authority has recently performed a sift of these schemes to establish how they perform with regards issues such as Local Enterprise Partnership and cross-boundary benefits, with 5 of the proposals being nominated for potential development, as detailed below:

 Hambleton A167 Northallerton Bypass (Eastern)  Hambleton A167 Northallerton Bypass (Western/Southern)  Hambleton A19 Shipton by Beninbrough Bypass  Ryedale Malton and Norton Bypass (Southern)  Selby A19 Burn Bypass

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

5.3.8 The various options for the three schemes located in Hambleton have not been developed to date and currently represent high level, conceptual proposals. The A167 Northallerton Bypass schemes (Eastern and Western/Southern) are documented within the Strategic Economic Plan as future potential improvement schemes.

5.3.9 NYCC has not applied to the Local Enterprise Partnership for funding to assist with delivery of either of these schemes within the forthcoming Growth Deal, however, it is anticipated that one of the options will be included in the next round of Growth Deal applications (2021). The Local Highway Authority will seek to establish, through discussions with Hambleton District Council, where strategic housing allocation sites are likely to be located within Northallerton in order to inform the decision making process and ensure that the most appropriate option is developed prior to applying for funding.

5.3.10 Following delivery of the initially selected bypass option (i.e. either Eastern or Western/Southern), it is a long term aspiration of NYCC to eventually consider development of the remaining option in order to facilitate delivery of continued growth around Northallerton, however, the Local Highway Authority considers that the programme associated with the proposal would likely fall outside of the Local Plan period.

5.3.11 With specific regards to the A19 Shipton by Beninbrough Bypass, the Local Highway Authority has not applied to the Local Enterprise Partnership for funding to assist with delivery of the scheme within the forthcoming Growth Deal and do not envisage including it in the next round of Growth Deal applications (2021). NYCC consider that the proposal would only be viable in the event that significant delivery of strategic housing sites is facilitated on the northern side of York and/or dualling of the A1237 outer ring-road. In this instance the A19 Shipton by Beninbrough Bypass may be considered in order to facilitate cross-boundary connections and assist with the Authority’s duty to co-operate.

5.4 FORECAST TRAFFIC GROWTH

5.4.1 TEMPRO 6.2 has been interrogated to determine representative growth factors for Hambleton District. The factors determined that up to 2035, traffic in Hambleton is predicted to rise by approximately 23%1. This equates to around 1.2% growth per year from 2014. Table 5-1 shows how much this would affect the main roads in Hambleton. This traffic growth does not take specific developments into account that would be built as a result of the emerging local plan, so depending on which Option is chosen, the actual traffic levels will vary.

Table 5-1: TEMPRO Traffic Growth 2014 2035 A172 7,670 9,464 A61 8,051 9,934 A168 23,112 28,518 A19 26,109 32,216 A167 7,572 9,343 A170 7,769 9,586 A684 9,186 11,335 A1(M) 75,737 93,452

1 Using TEMPRO 6.2

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

5.5 PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS TO PUBLIC TRANSPORT SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE

5.5.1 North Yorkshire County Council has been consulted with in order to establish details of any planned or committed public transport improvements, which may be delivered within Hambleton prior to or during the new Local Plan period. No details have been provided by the local highway authority with regards any anticipated changes to:

 Bus service routing, frequency and station improvements.  Rail service routing, frequency and station improvements.

The Northern Powerhouse: One Agenda, One Economy, One North

5.5.2 Transport for the North’s rail strategy highlights how transport will aid changes in future patterns of land use and economic growth, with the following key deliverables:

 Transform city to city rail connectivity east/west and north/south through both HS2 and a new TransNorth system, radically reducing travel times across this intercity network.  Ensure there is the capacity that a resurgent North will need in rail commuter services.  Deliver the full HS2 ‘Y’ network as soon as possible.  Develop integrated and smart ticket structures to support a single economy across the North.

5.5.3 The rail plan sets out a number of key issues such as:

 Many rail journeys in the North (particularly east-west) are too slow.  There is unacceptable overcrowding on some rail services in the North of England.  Overcrowdin is compounded by the infrequency of some services.  The quality of some of the rolling stock in the north of England is very poor.  The rail connections north and south are slow and crowded at peak times.

5.5.4 The plan vision is defined by the following aspirations:

 TransNorth is designed to radically improve journey times and frequencies between major cities to support a single economy through major investment in rail infrastructure.

TransPennine Express Improvements

5.5.5 From April 2016 a new TransPennine Express franchise began, which is provisionally programmed to run for seven years (with the possibility of a two year extension). This franchise will see the introduction of:

 Additional 9,000 seats (66% extra peak period capacity) on services into major cities by 2019.  Additional services during the week and on weekends.  Over 500 new carriages including 125mph intercity bi-mode trains operating on the route.  SMART ticketing schemes and real-time passenger information screens on all trains by 2020.  Station improvements, with over £30 million of investment throughout the region.  A new Northern Connect service.  Increased support and funding for Community Rail.

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

6 PROPOSALS REVIEW 6.1 INTRODUCTION

6.1.1 This section examines five spatial planning principles currently being considered as part of the new Hambleton Local Plan, which were described within the ‘Issues and Options Consultation Report’ as follows:

1. Option 1 - Principal Towns “This option would focus development on the largest towns within the existing area of opportunity. It would mean that Northallerton and Thirsk would be the main focus for future growth and development in Hambleton. The market towns of Bedale, Easingwold and Stokesley would continue to fulfill a supporting role for growth. Limited development would be supported in villages. This option represents a continuation of the current planning strategy for Hambleton as set out in the LDF Core Strategy, in effect rolling this forward from 2026 to 2035.”

2. Option 2 - Central Transport Corridors “This option would focus development on settlements that are linked to the main transport corridors and connections in Hambleton. This includes rail stations on the East Coast Main Line and the A1, A168, A684 and A19 corridors. The main focus of development would be a range of settlements and locations within the existing area of opportunity. Within the area of opportunity there would be an emphasis on Northallerton, Thirsk and Bedale/Aiskew but also on other locations such as Dalton, Dalton Industrial Estate, Topcliffe and other villages. This option retains much of the current planning strategy for Hambleton as set out in the LDF Core Strategy, but shifts and spreads the development emphasis.”

3. Option 3 - Five Towns “This option would mean that the five market towns of Bedale, Easingwold, Northallerton, Stokesley and Thirsk would be the main focus for future growth and development in Hambleton. Compared to the current approach each of the five market towns would have an equal role in meeting the growth needs for the district, rather than the majority of development being focused in Northallerton and Thirsk. Limited development would be supported in villages. This option represents a change from the current planning strategy for Hambleton as set out in the LDF Core Strategy. It has more of a district wide focus.”

4. Option 4 - Five Towns and Villages “This option would mean that the five market towns of Bedale, Easingwold, Northallerton, Stokesley and Thirsk and a range of villages would be the main focus for future growth and development in Hambleton. Compared to the current approach there would be a much greater emphasis on villages to accommodate growth. This would include the existing Service Villages, Secondary Villages and also other villages, with development being proportionate to their scale and character. This option represents a distinct change from the current LDF planning strategy for Hambleton. It has a district wide focus beyond the existing area of opportunity and spreads development beyond the towns.”

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

5. Option 5 - A New Settlement “This option would involve planning for a new settlement. A new settlement could take different forms. It could be completely ‘new’ or involve a very significant expansion of an existing village or hamlet. This approach would need to be linked with another option as it would take time to develop a new community and would be unlikely to meet the needs of the whole district. Transport links and access to services, facilities and employment would be key considerations. This option represents a complete change from the current planning strategy for Hambleton as set out in the LDF Core Strategy. Potential different areas of search are highlighted below. The location would have a key influence on how much demand there might be from people living in adjoining areas to live there.”

6.1.2 In order to establish the anticipated transport impact of the five spatial planning options, the traffic generating potential and a trip distribution profile (associated with the existing ‘Journey to Work’ data set out previously), have been considered. A high level approach has been utilised to distribute traffic onto the local and strategic highway networks, informed by Journey to Work patterns recorded during the 2011 Census.

6.1.3 Vehicular trip rates extracted from the TRICS database and considered representative of the various market towns under consideration have been utilised to establish the traffic generating potential of each of the five spatial planning options, which are set out at Table 6.1 below. For the purposes of this study Northallerton has been classed as a ‘medium’ town, with Thirsk, Bedale, Stokesley and Easingwold considered to form ‘small’ towns. Service and secondary villages are considered to fall under the ‘Service Villages/Rural’ category.

6.1.4 The traffic generating potential of the five spatial planning options have been assessed using an assumption that 320 new dwellings will be delivered each year over a 17 year period, with a total of 5,440 new dwellings provided.

Table 6.1: North Yorkshire Trip Rates

AM PEAK (08:00-09:00) PM PEAK (17:00-18:00) DAILY TRIP RATE (07:00-19:00) Arrivals Departures Two-way Arrivals Departures Two-way Arrivals Departures Two-way Medium 0.168 0.426 0.594 0.397 0.240 0.637 2.669 2.747 5.416 Town Small 0.160 0.422 0.582 0.404 0.242 0.646 2.668 2.769 5.437 Town Service/Rural 0.097 0.260 0.357 0.314 0.191 0.505 2.006 2.215 4.221 Villages

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

6.2 OPTION 1: PRINCIPAL TOWNS – DEVELOPMENT FOCUSED ON NORTHALLERTON AND THIRSK

6.2.1 As discussed previously, Option 1 would focus the majority of development on the two principal market towns within the District, with the remaining three service centres providing a supporting role with regards growth and limited or no development in supporting villages.

6.2.2 In order to ensure a robust assessment is provided, it has been assumed that all residential allocation sites will be divided equally between Northallerton (50%) and Thirsk (50%) with no development elsewhere within the District as presented at Table 6.2 below.

Table 6.2: Option 1 Development Split

DWELLINGS PER YEAR TOTAL DWELLINGS Northallerton 160 2,720 Thirsk 160 2,720 Total 320 5,440

6.2.3 The cumulative traffic impact (during the AM peak period) of delivering development in this manner is presented at Table 6.9 with the total quantum of residential dwellings and associated vehicular trip generation levels in each service centre established at set intervals. A full breakdown of the development level and trip generation which will occur on a yearly basis is attached at Appendix I to the rear of this report.

Table 6.3: Option 1 Cumulative Trip Generation AM Peak Two-Way

TOTAL NUMBER OF YEAR NORTHALLERTON THIRSK TOTAL DWELLINGS 1 320 95 94 189

5 1,600 475 470 945

10 3,200 950 940 1,890

15 4,800 1,425 1,410 2,835

17 5,440 1,615 1,598 3,213

6.2.4 Following an examination of the ‘Journey to Work’ statistics presented previously, it is envisaged that traffic generated by development in these service centres would be likely to distribute onto the local and strategic highway networks during the AM peak period as presented in Table 6.4 below. It is considered reasonable to assume that during the PM peak period these percentage distribution assumptions would be likely to reverse.

Table 6.4: Option 1 Trip Distribution

DIRECTION OF TRAVEL NORTHALLERTON THIRSK North 20% 23% South 20% 31% Internal 60% 46%

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

6.3 OPTION 2: CENTRAL TRANSPORT CORRIDORS – DEVELOPMENT FOCUSED AROUND THE MAIN ROAD AND RAIL LINKS

6.3.1 As discussed previously, Option 2 would focus development on settlements that are close to the main transport corridors and connections within Hambleton, the A1(M), A19, A168 and A684, in addition to major rail stations located on the East Coast Mainline. The focus of this option would be to locate development in Northallerton, Thirsk and Bedale, and a modest volume of allocation sites in Service/Secondary Villages. Figure 6-1 shows the central corridors.

6.3.2 To ensure a robust assessment is provided, it has been assumed that all residential allocation sites within the District will be divided between Northallerton (30%), Thirsk (30%), Bedale (30%), services villages (5%) and secondary villages (5%) as presented at Table 6.5 below.

Table 6.5: Option 2 Development Split DWELLINGS PER YEAR TOTAL DWELLINGS Northallerton 96 1,632 Thirsk 96 1,632 Bedale 96 1,632 Service Villages 16 272 Secondary Villages 16 272 Total 320 5,440

6.3.3 The cumulative traffic impact (during the AM peak period) of delivering development in this manner is presented at Table 6.6 with the total quantum of residential dwellings and associated vehicular trip generation levels in each service centre established at set intervals. A full breakdown of the development level and trip generation, which will occur on a yearly basis is attached at Appendix I to the rear of this report.

Table 6.6: Option 2 Cumulative Trip Generation AM Peak Two-Way

SERVICE SECONDARY YEAR DWELLINGS NORTHALLERTON THIRSK BEDALE TOTAL VILLAGES VILLAGES 1 320 57 56 56 6 6 181

5 1,600 285 280 280 30 30 905

10 3,200 570 560 560 60 60 1,810

15 4,800 855 840 840 90 90 2,715

17 5,440 969 952 952 102 102 3,077

6.3.4 Following an examination of the ‘Journey to Work’ statistics presented previously, it is envisaged that traffic generated by these service centres would be likely to distribute onto the local and strategic highway networks during the AM peak period as presented in Table 6.7 below. It is considered reasonable to assume that during the PM peak period the percentage distribution assumptions would be likely to reverse.

Table 6.7: Option 2 Trip Distribution

ROAD / DIRECTION NORTHALLERTON THIRSK BEDALE North 20% 23% 43% South 20% 31% 32% Internal 60% 46% 25%

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Figure 6-1: Transport Corridors

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

6.4 OPTION 3 – FIVE TOWNS: DEVELOPMENT FOCUSED AROUND THE FIVE MARKET TOWNS OF NORTHALLERTON, THIRSK, BEDALE, EASINGWOLD AND STOKESLEY

6.4.1 As discussed previously, Option 3 would focus development on the five key service centres of Northallerton, Thirsk, Bedale, Easingwold and Stokesley, with each provided an equal role.

6.4.2 In order to ensure a robust assessment is provided, it has been assumed that all residential allocation sites within the District will be divided between Northallerton (20%), Thirsk (20%), Bedale (20%), Easingwold (20%) and Stokesley (20%) as presented at Table 6.8 below.

Table 6.8: Option 3 Development Split DWELLINGS PER YEAR TOTAL DWELLINGS Northallerton 64 1,088 Thirsk 64 1,088 Bedale 64 1,088 Easingwold 64 1,088 Stokesley 64 1,088 Total 320 5,440

6.4.3 The cumulative traffic impact (during the AM peak period) of delivering development in this manner is presented at Table 6.9 with the total quantum of residential dwellings and associated vehicular trip generation levels in each service centre established at set intervals. A full breakdown of the development level and trip generation which will occur on a yearly basis is attached at Appendix I to the rear of this report.

Table 6.9: Option 3 Cumulative Trip Generation AM Peak Two-Way

YEAR DWELLINGS NORTHALLERTON THIRSK BEDALE EASINGWOLD STOKESLEY TOTAL 1 320 38 37 37 37 37 186

5 1,600 190 185 185 185 185 930

10 3,200 380 370 370 370 370 1,860

15 4,800 570 555 555 555 555 2,790

17 5,440 646 629 629 629 629 3,162

6.4.4 Following an examination of the ‘Journey to Work’ statistics presented previously, it is envisaged that traffic generated by these service centres would be likely to distribute onto the local and strategic highway networks during the AM peak period as presented in Table 6.10 below. It is considered reasonable to assume that during the PM peak period the percentage distribution assumptions would be likely to reverse.

Table 6.10: Option 3 Trip Generation and Distribution

ROAD / DIRECTION NORTHALLERTON THIRSK BEDALE EASINGWOLD STOKESLEY North 20% 23% 43% 21% 53% South 20% 31% 32% 48% 21% Internal 60% 46% 25% 31% 26%

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

6.5 OPTION 4: FIVE TOWNS AND VILLAGES – DEVELOPMENT DISPERSED ACROSS THE FIVE MARKET TOWNS AND VILLAGES WITHIN THE DISTRICT

6.5.1 As discussed previously, Option 4 would focus development on the five key service centres of Northallerton, Thirsk, Bedale, Easingwold and Stokesley, with service villages and secondary villages each provided an equal role.

6.5.2 In order to ensure a robust assessment is provided, it has been assumed that all residential allocation sites within the District will be divided between Northallerton (14.3%), Thirsk (14.3%), Bedale (14.3%), Easingwold (14.3%%), Stokesley (14.3%), service villages (14.3%) and secondary villages (14.3) as presented at Table 6.11 below.

Table 6.11: Option 4 Development Split DWELLINGS PER YEAR TOTAL DWELLINGS Northallerton 46 782 Thirsk 46 782 Bedale 46 782 Easingwold 46 782 Stokesley 46 782 Service Villages 45 765 Secondary Villages 45 765 Total 320 5,440

6.5.3 The cumulative traffic impact (during the AM peak period) of delivering development in this manner is presented at Table 6.12 with the total quantum of residential dwellings and associated vehicular trip generation levels in each service centre established at set intervals. A full breakdown of the development level and trip generation which will occur on a yearly basis is attached at Appendix I to the rear of this report.

Table 6.12: Option 4 Cumulative Trip Generation AM Peak Two-Way

SERVICE SECONDARY TOTAL YEAR DWELLINGS NORTHALLERTON THIRSK BEDALE EASINGWOLD STOKESLEY VILLAGES VILLAGES 1 320 28 26 26 26 26 16 16 164

5 1,600 140 130 130 130 130 80 80 820

10 3,200 280 260 260 260 260 160 160 1,640

15 4,800 420 390 390 390 390 240 240 2,460

17 5,440 476 442 442 442 442 272 272 2,788

6.5.4 Following an examination of the ‘Journey to Work’ statistics presented previously, it is envisaged that traffic generated by these service centres would be likely to distribute onto the local and strategic highway networks during the AM peak period in a very similar profile to Option 3 (as presented in Table 6.10 previously). Once again, it is considered reasonable to assume that during the PM peak period the percentage distribution assumption would be likely to reverse.

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

6.6 OPTION 5: A NEW SETTLEMENT – THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW SETTLEMENT OR SIGNIFICANT EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING SETTLEMENT

6.6.1 As discussed previously, Option 5 would involve planning for a new settlement or a significant expansion of an existing village or hamlet.

6.6.2 In order to ensure a robust assessment is provided, it has been assumed that all residential allocation sites within the District will be focused on a single new development site (100%) as presented at Table 6.13 below.

Table 6.13: Option 5 Development Split DWELLINGS PER YEAR TOTAL DWELLINGS New Development 320 5,440 Total 320 5,440

6.6.3 The cumulative traffic impact (during the AM peak period) of delivering development in this manner is presented at Table 6.14 with the total quantum of residential dwellings and associated vehicular trip generation levels in each service centre established at set intervals. A full breakdown of the development level and trip generation which will occur on a yearly basis is attached at Appendix I to the rear of this report.

Table 6.14: Option 5 Cumulative Trip Generation AM Peak Two-Way

YEAR DWELLINGS NEW DEVELOPMENT TOTAL 1 320 190 190

5 1,600 950 950

10 3,200 1,900 1,900

15 4,800 2,850 2,850

17 5,440 3,230 3,230

6.6.4 In light of the fact that the exact location of the new development has yet to be identified, the distribution of traffic generated by the settlement cannot be estimated.

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

7 OPTION SIFTING ASSESSMENT 7.1 OPTION SIFTING ASSESSMENT

7.1.1 This section provides a high level assessment of the five spatial planning principles currently being considered as part of the new Hambleton Local Plan and using a matrix style appraisal (based upon criteria from the Department for Transport’s ‘Early Assessment and Sifting Tool’). This process will perform a qualitative and quantitative approach to appraise the various options from the perspective of potential impact on the strategic transport network has been conducted to establish the relative merits or potential disadvantages of each approach.

7.1.2 The strategic assessment will examine each of the following factors from the perspective of the five spatial planning principles and award a score between 1 and 3 accordingly:

 Strategic

 Scale of Impact and Compliance with Policy  Economic Growth

 Connectivity

 Reliability

 Resilience

 Delivery of housing

 Wider Economic Impacts  Carbon Emissions

 Activity

 Embedded Carbon

 Efficiency and Sustainable Transport  Socio-distributional Impacts

 Socio-distributional Effects

 Regeneration

 Regional Imbalance  Local Environment

 Air Quality

 Noise

 Natural Environment, Heritage and Landscape

 Streetscape and Urban Environment  Well Being

 Severance

 Physical Activity

 Transport Accidents

 Enjoying a Range of Goods, Services, People and Places

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Table 7.1: Early Assessment and Sifting Exercise - Option 1: Principal Towns

OPTION 1 – PRINCIPAL TOWNS

Strategic – Scale of Impact and Compliance with Policy What is the anticipated scale of impact upon specific service centres? High Impact (1) x Moderate Impact (2) Low Impact (3) What is the anticipated fit with local and national transport objectives? Poor Fit (1) Moderate Fit (2) Good Fit (3) x

Economic Growth – Connectivity Does the option have potential to limit end-to-end journey times for commuting? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) X Does the option have potential to limit the cost of travel associated with commuting? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) x Economic Growth - Reliability Does the option have potential to impact upon day-to-day variability in journey times for commuting? Increase (1) Moderate Change (2) x Decrease (3) Does the option have potential to impact upon incidents causing variability in journey times for commuting? Increase (1) Moderate Change (2) x Decrease (3) Economic Growth – Resilience Does the option have potential to impact upon the resilience of infrastructure across the District? Reduce (1) Moderate Change (2) x Improve (3) Economic Growth – Delivery of Housing Does the option have potential to provide for new housing requirements across the District as a whole? Low Potential (1) x Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) Economic Growth – Wider Economic Impacts Does the option have potential to influence wider economic impacts? Negative Impact (1) Moderate Impact (2) x Positive Impact (3) Does the option benefit from good levels of accessibility to key locations? Poor Accessibility (1) Moderate Accessibility (2) Good Accessibility (3) x Does the option facilitate good connections between residential and central business districts? Poor Connections (1) Moderate Connections (2) Good Connections (3) x

Carbon Emissions – Activity What is the anticipated scale of vehicular trip generation impact upon specific service centres? High Impact (1) x Moderate Impact (2) Low Impact (3) Does the option have potential to limit end-to-end journey distances for commuting? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) x Does the option have potential to promote active travel (such as walking and cycling)? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) x Carbon Emissions – Embedded Carbon Does the option have potential to require significant construction work within a specific service centre? High Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x Low Potential (3) Carbon Emissions – Efficiency and Sustainable Transport Does the option have potential to encourage the use of more efficient travel modes (such as bus and rail)? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) x

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Socio-distributional Impacts – Socio-distributional Effects Does the option have potential to provide good levels of accessibility for vulnerable residents? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) x Socio-distributional Impacts – Regeneration Does the option have potential to develop brownfield sites or regeneration areas? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) x Socio-distributional Impacts – Regional Imbalance Does the option have potential to address regional imbalance across the District? Low Potential (1) x Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) Does the option have potential to impact upon economic growth within the District? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) x

Local Environment – Air Quality Does the option have potential to impact upon local air quality in a specific service centre? High Impact (1) x Moderate Impact (2) Low Impact (3) Local Environment – Noise Does the option have potential to impact absolute noise disturbance levels within a specific service centre? High Impact (1) x Moderate Impact (2) Low Impact (3) Local Environment – Natural Environment, Heritage and Landscape Does the option have potential to impact upon the natural environment within a specific service centre? High Impact (1) x Moderate Impact (2) Low Impact (3) What is the anticipated value of the natural environment affected? High Value (1) x Moderate Value (2) Low Value (3) Local Environment – Streetscape and Urban Environment Does the option have potential to impact upon the urban environment within a specific service centre? High Impact (1) x Moderate Impact (2) Low Impact (3) What is the value of the urban environment affected? High Value (1) Moderate Value (2) x Low Value (3)

Well Being – Severance Does the option have potential to provide quality connections with surrounding neighbourhoods? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) x Well Being – Physical Activity Does the option have potential to impact upon levels of physical activity amongst residents? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) x Well Being – Transport Accidents Does the option have potential to impact upon the number of people injured within a specific service centre? High Impact (1) Moderate Impact (2) x Low Impact (3) Well Being – Enjoying Access to a Range of Goods, Services People and Places Does the option have potential to benefit from access to key services (supermarkets, doctors, hospitals)? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) x

Total Score: 65 / 90

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Table 7.2: Early Assessment and Sifting Exercise - Option 2: Central Transport Corridors

OPTION 2 – CENTRAL TRANSPORT CORRIDORS

Strategic – Scale of Impact and Compliance with Policy What is the anticipated scale of impact upon specific service centres? High Impact (1) Moderate Impact (2) x Low Impact (3) What is the anticipated fit with local and national transport objectives? Poor Fit (1) Moderate Fit (2) Good Fit (3) x

Economic Growth – Connectivity Does the option have potential to limit end-to-end journey times for commuting? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) x Does the option have potential to limit the cost of travel associated with commuting? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) x Economic Growth - Reliability Does the option have potential to impact upon day-to-day variability in journey times for commuting? Increase (1) Moderate Change (2) x Decrease (3) Does the option have potential to impact upon incidents causing variability in journey times for commuting? Increase (1) Moderate Change (2) x Decrease (3) Economic Growth - Resilience Does the option have potential to impact upon the resilience of infrastructure across the District? Reduce (1) Moderate Change (2) x Improve (3) Economic Growth – Delivery of Housing Does the option have potential to provide for new housing requirements across the District as a whole? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3) Economic Growth – Wider Economic Impacts Does the option have potential to influence wider economic impacts? Negative Impact (1) Moderate Impact (2) x Positive Impact (3) Does the option benefit from good levels of accessibility to key locations? Poor Accessibility (1) Moderate Accessibility (2) Good Accessibility (3) x Does the option facilitate good connections between residential and central business districts? Poor Connections (1) Moderate Connections (2) Good Connections (3) x

Carbon Emissions – Activity What is the anticipated scale of vehicular trip generation impact upon specific service centres? High Impact (1) Moderate Impact (2) x Low Impact (3) Does the option have potential to limit end-to-end journey distances for commuting? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3) Does the option have potential to promote active travel (such as walking and cycling)? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3) Carbon Emissions – Embedded Carbon Does the option have potential to require significant construction work within a specific service centre? High Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x Low Potential (3) Carbon Emissions – Efficiency and Sustainable Transport Does the option have potential to encourage the use of more efficient travel modes (such as bus and rail)? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3)

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Socio-distributional Impacts – Socio-distributional Effects Does the option have potential to provide good levels of accessibility for vulnerable residents? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) x Socio-distributional Impacts – Regeneration Does the option have potential to develop brownfield sites or regeneration areas? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) x Socio-distributional Impacts – Regional Imbalance Does the option have potential to address regional imbalance across the District? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3) Does the option have potential to impact upon economic growth within the District? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3)

Local Environment – Air Quality Does the option have potential to impact upon local air quality in a specific service centre? High Impact (1) Moderate Impact (2) x Low Impact (3) Local Environment – Noise Does the option have potential to impact absolute noise disturbance levels within a specific service centre? High Impact (1) Moderate Impact (2) x Low Impact (3) Local Environment – Natural Environment, Heritage and Landscape Does the option have potential to impact upon the natural environment within a specific service centre? High Impact (1) Moderate Impact (2) x Low Impact (3) What is the anticipated value of the natural environment affected? High Value (1) x Moderate Value (2) Low Value (3) Local Environment – Streetscape and Urban Environment Does the option have potential to impact upon the urban environment within a specific service centre? High Impact (1) Moderate Impact (2) x Low Impact (3) What is the value of the urban environment affected? High Value (1) Moderate Value (2) x Low Value (3)

Total Score: 69 / 90

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Table 7.3: Early Assessment and Sifting Exercise - Option 3: Five Towns

OPTION 3 – FIVE TOWNS

Economic Growth – Connectivity Does the option have potential to limit end-to-end journey times for commuting? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3) Does the option have potential to limit the cost of travel associated with commuting? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3) Economic Growth - Reliability Does the option have potential to impact upon day-to-day variability in journey times for commuting? Increase (1) Moderate Change (2) x Decrease (3) Does the option have potential to impact upon incidents causing variability in journey times for commuting? Increase (1) Moderate Change (2) x Decrease (3) Economic Growth - Resilience Does the option have potential to impact upon the resilience of infrastructure across the District? Reduce (1) Moderate Change (2) x Improve (3) Economic Growth – Delivery of Housing Does the option have potential to provide for new housing requirements across the District as a whole? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) x Economic Growth – Wider Economic Impacts Does the option have potential to influence wider economic impacts? Negative Impact (1) Moderate Impact (2) x Positive Impact (3) Does the option benefit from good levels of accessibility to key locations? Poor Accessibility (1) Moderate Accessibility (2) Good Accessibility (3) x Does the option facilitate good connections between residential and central business districts? Poor Connections (1) Moderate Connections (2) Good Connections (3) x

Carbon Emissions – Activity What is the anticipated scale of vehicular trip generation impact upon specific service centres? High Impact (1) Moderate Impact (2) x Low Impact (3) Does the option have potential to limit end-to-end journey distances for commuting? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3) Does the option have potential to promote active travel (such as walking and cycling)? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3) Carbon Emissions – Embedded Carbon Does the option have potential to require significant construction work within a specific service centre? High Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) Low Potential (3) x Carbon Emissions – Efficiency and Sustainable Transport Does the option have potential to encourage the use of more efficient travel modes (such as bus and rail)? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3)

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Socio-distributional Impacts – Socio-distributional Effects Does the option have potential to provide good levels of accessibility for vulnerable residents? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) x Socio-distributional Impacts – Regeneration Does the option have potential to develop brownfield sites or regeneration areas? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) x Socio-distributional Impacts – Regional Imbalance Does the option have potential to address regional imbalance across the District? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) x Does the option have potential to impact upon economic growth within the District? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3)

Total Score: 70 / 90

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Table 7.4: Early Assessment and Sifting Exercise - Option 4: Five Towns and Villages

OPTION 4 – FIVE TOWNS AND VILLAGES

Strategic – Scale of Impact and Compliance with Policy What is the anticipated scale of impact upon specific service centres? High Impact (1) Moderate Impact (2) Low Impact (3) x What is the anticipated fit with local and national transport objectives? Poor Fit (1) Moderate Fit (2) x Good Fit (3)

Economic Growth – Connectivity Does the option have potential to limit end-to-end journey times for commuting? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3) Does the option have potential to limit the cost of travel associated with commuting? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3) Economic Growth – Reliability Does the option have potential to impact upon day-to-day variability in journey times for commuting? Increase (1) Moderate Change (2) x Decrease (3) Does the option have potential to impact upon incidents causing variability in journey times for commuting? Increase (1) Moderate Change (2) x Decrease (3) Economic Growth – Resilience Does the option have potential to impact upon the resilience of infrastructure across the District? Reduce (1) Moderate Change (2) x Improve (3) Economic Growth – Delivery of Housing Does the option have potential to provide for new housing requirements across the District as a whole? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) x Economic Growth – Wider Economic Impacts Does the option have potential to influence wider economic impacts? Negative Impact (1) Moderate Impact (2) x Positive Impact (3) Does the option benefit from good levels of accessibility to key locations? Poor Accessibility (1) Moderate Accessibility (2) x Good Accessibility (3) Does the option facilitate good connections between residential and central business districts? Poor Connections (1) Moderate Connections (2) x Good Connections (3)

Carbon Emissions – Activity What is the anticipated scale of vehicular trip generation impact upon specific service centres? High Impact (1) Moderate Impact (2) Low Impact (3) x Does the option have potential to limit end-to-end journey distances for commuting? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3) Does the option have potential to promote active travel (such as walking and cycling)? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3) Carbon Emissions – Embedded Carbon Does the option have potential to require significant construction work within a specific service centre? High Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) Low Potential (3) x Carbon Emissions – Efficiency and Sustainable Transport Does the option have potential to encourage the use of more efficient travel modes (such as bus and rail)? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3)

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Socio-distributional Impacts – Socio-distributional Effects Does the option have potential to provide good levels of accessibility for vulnerable residents? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3) Socio-distributional Impacts – Regeneration Does the option have potential to develop brownfield sites or regeneration areas? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3) Socio-distributional Impacts – Regional Imbalance Does the option have potential to address regional imbalance across the District? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) x Does the option have potential to impact upon economic growth within the District? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3)

Local Environment – Air Quality Does the option have potential to impact upon local air quality in a specific service centre? High Impact (1) Moderate Impact (2) Low Impact (3) x Local Environment – Noise Does the option have potential to impact absolute noise disturbance levels within a specific service centre? High Impact (1) Moderate Impact (2) Low Impact (3) x Local Environment – Natural Environment, Heritage and Landscape Does the option have potential to impact upon the natural environment within a specific service centre? High Impact (1) Moderate Impact (2) x Low Impact (3) What is the anticipated value of the natural environment affected? High Value (1) x Moderate Value (2) Low Value (3) Local Environment – Streetscape and Urban Environment Does the option have potential to impact upon the urban environment within a specific service centre? High Impact (1) Moderate Impact (2) x Low Impact (3) What is the value of the urban environment affected? High Value (1) Moderate Value (2) x Low Value (3)

Well Being – Severance Does the option have potential to provide quality connections with surrounding neighbourhoods? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) x Well Being – Physical Activity Does the option have potential to impact upon levels of physical activity amongst residents? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) x Well Being – Transport Accidents Does the option have potential to impact upon the number of people injured within a specific service centre? High Impact (1) Moderate Impact (2) Low Impact (3) x Well Being – Enjoying Access to a Range of Goods, Services People and Places Does the option have potential to benefit from access to key services (supermarkets, doctors, hospitals)? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3)

Total Score: 69 / 90

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Table 7.5: Early Assessment and Sifting Exercise 5: A New Settlement

OPTION 5 – A NEW SETTLEMENT

Economic Growth – Connectivity Does the option have potential to limit end-to-end journey times for commuting? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3) Does the option have potential to limit the cost of travel associated with commuting? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3) Economic Growth – Reliability Does the option have potential to impact upon day-to-day variability in journey times for commuting? Increase (1) Moderate Change (2) x Decrease (3) Does the option have potential to impact upon incidents causing variability in journey times for commuting? Increase (1) Moderate Change (2) x Decrease (3) Economic Growth – Resilience Does the option have potential to impact upon the resilience of infrastructure across the District? Reduce (1) Moderate Change (2) x Improve (3) Economic Growth – Delivery of Housing Does the option have potential to provide for new housing requirements across the District as a whole? Low Potential (1) x Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) Economic Growth – Wider Economic Impacts Does the option have potential to influence wider economic impacts? Negative Impact (1) Moderate Impact (2) x Positive Impact (3) Does the option benefit from good levels of accessibility to key locations? Poor Accessibility (1) Moderate Accessibility (2) x Good Accessibility (3) Does the option facilitate good connections between residential and central business districts? Poor Connections (1) Moderate Connections (2) x Good Connections (3)

Carbon Emissions – Activity What is the anticipated scale of vehicular trip generation impact upon specific service centres? High Impact (1) x Moderate Impact (2) Low Impact (3) Does the option have potential to limit end-to-end journey distances for commuting? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3) Does the option have potential to promote active travel (such as walking and cycling)? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3) Carbon Emissions – Embedded Carbon Does the option have potential to require significant construction work within a specific service centre? High Potential (1) x Moderate Potential (2) Low Potential (3) Carbon Emissions – Efficiency and Sustainable Transport Does the option have potential to encourage the use of more efficient travel modes (such as bus and rail)? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3)

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Socio-distributional Impacts – Socio-distributional Effects Does the option have potential to provide good levels of accessibility for vulnerable residents? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3) Socio-distributional Impacts – Regeneration Does the option have potential to develop brownfield sites or regeneration areas? Low Potential (1) x Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) Socio-distributional Impacts – Regional Imbalance Does the option have potential to address regional imbalance across the District? Low Potential (1) x Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) Does the option have potential to impact upon economic growth within the District? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3)

Local Environment – Air Quality Does the option have potential to impact upon local air quality in a specific service centre? High Impact (1) x Moderate Impact (2) Low Impact (3) Local Environment – Noise Does the option have potential to impact absolute noise disturbance levels within a specific service centre? High Impact (1) x Moderate Impact (2) Low Impact (3) Local Environment – Natural Environment, Heritage and Landscape Does the option have potential to impact upon the natural environment within a specific service centre? High Impact (1) x Moderate Impact (2) Low Impact (3) What is the anticipated value of the natural environment affected? High Value (1) x Moderate Value (2) Low Value (3) Local Environment – Streetscape and Urban Environment Does the option have potential to impact upon the urban environment within a specific service centre? High Impact (1) Moderate Impact (2) Low Impact (3) x What is the value of the urban environment affected? High Value (1) Moderate Value (2) Low Value (3) x

Well Being – Severance Does the option have potential to provide quality connections with surrounding neighbourhoods? Low Potential (1) x Moderate Potential (2) High Potential (3) Well Being – Physical Activity Does the option have potential to impact upon levels of physical activity amongst residents? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3) Well Being – Transport Accidents Does the option have potential to impact upon the number of people injured within a specific service centre? High Impact (1) Moderate Impact (2) x Low Impact (3) Well Being – Enjoying Access to a Range of Goods, Services People and Places Does the option have potential to benefit from access to key services (supermarkets, doctors, hospitals)? Low Potential (1) Moderate Potential (2) x High Potential (3)

Total Score: 50 / 90

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

7.1.3 The results of the five strategic appraisals are presented at Table 6.4 below and clearly illustrate Option 1, Option 2 and Option 3 rank highest in terms of potential impact on the strategic transport network, with Option 1 and Option 5 scoring relatively poorly. It is evident, therefore, that a dispersed approach of some nature is preferable, however, the three highest ranking options are extremely close in terms of their final ranking.

Table 7.6: Spatial Planning Option Ranking

SPATIAL PLANNING OPTION SCORE Option 1:Principal Towns – 65 / 90 Development focused on Northallerton or Thirsk Option 2: Central Transport Corridors – 69 / 90 Development focused around the main road and rail links Option 3: Five Towns – Development focused around the five market towns 70 / 90 of Northallerton, Thirsk, Bedale, Easingwold and Stokesley Option 4: Five Towns and Villages – Development dispersed across the five market towns 69 / 90 and villages within the District Option 5: A New Settlement – The development of a new settlement or 50 / 90 significant expansion of an existing settlement

7.1.4 It is considered that, in order to inform the study with regards the specific option (or options), which may be preferable to develop and where residential allocation sites should be dispersed throughout the District, consideration should be given to the accessibility of each of the five key service centres under consideration.

7.1.5 The following section of this report sets out a more detailed accessibility appraisal to assess each of the five service centres and provide an indication of where development may be focused.

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

8 OPTION ACCESSIBILITY ASSESSMENT 8.1 OPTION SIFTING ASSESSMENT

8.1.1 Following the high level assessment conducted previously and the conclusions drawn that a dispersed approach of some nature is preferable from the perspective of potential impact on the strategic transport network, a more detailed accessibility appraisal has been conducted to assess each of the five service centres and provide an indication of where development may be focused.

8.1.2 The five spatial planning principles currently being considered as part of the new Hambleton Local Plan are assessed below using a further matrix style appraisal (based upon current accessibility guidance). This process will ensure that a qualitative and quantitative approach to appraise the various options from the perspective of access to/potential impact on the local transport network has been conducted in order to establish the relative merits and potential disadvantages of focusing development in each location.

8.1.3 The strategic assessment will examine each of the following factors from the perspective of the five spatial planning principles and award a score between 1 and 3 accordingly:

 Access to Central Highway Corridors

 Ease of access to the A1/A19/A168 corridors  Access to Central Rail Corridors

 Access to high/low frequency services on the East Coast Mainline or Esk Valley Railway Line  Access to Local Bus Services

 Ease of access to low/moderate/high frequency bus services  Access to Local Facilities for Cyclists

 Services within 2.0 / 5.0 / 10.0km of the centre of each service centre  Access to Local Facilities for Pedestrians

 Services within 0.5 / 1.0 / 2.0km of the centre of each service centre  Access to Local Employment Centres

 Ease of access to retail / technical / professional employment opportunities  Access to Local Education Centres

 Ease of access to a primary / secondary / higher education facility  Access to Local Health Centres

 Ease of access to a local medical practice / hospital with or without Accident & Emergency  Access to Local Retail Centres

 Ease of access to a local shopping centre / food store / super market  Accessibility with Regards Existing Travel Mode Profile

 Relative level of pedestrian / cycle / bus / rail / car driver / car passenger activity  Accessibility with Regards Existing Journey to Work Travel Profile

 Relative ease of access to employment opportunities within 0-10 /10-20 / 20+ miles

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Table 8.1: Accessibility Appraisal Exercise - Northallerton

SERVICE CENTRE – NORTHALLERTON

Access to Central Highway Corridors Ease of access to the A1 corridor Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Ease of access to the A19 corridor Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Ease of access to the A168 corridor Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x

Access to Central Rail Corridors Access to high or low frequency services on the East Coast Mainline (i.e. Northallerton Station) Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Access to low frequency services only on the East Coast Mainline (i.e. Northallerton or Thirsk Station) Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Access to services on the Middlesbrough to Whitby Line (i.e. Great Ayton or Battersby Station) Low (1) x Moderate (2) High (3)

Access to Local Bus Services Ease of access to high frequency bus services (0-30 minutes) Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Ease of access to moderate frequency bus services (31-60 minutes) Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Ease of access to low frequency bus services (61+ minutes) Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x

Access to Local Facilities for Cyclists Services within 2.0km of the centre of each service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Services within 5.0km of the centre of each service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Services within 10.0km of the centre of each service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3)

Access to Local Facilities for Pedestrians Services within 0.5km of the centre of each service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Services within 1.0km of the centre of each service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Services within 2.0km of the centre of each service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x

Access to Local Employment Centres Ease of access to retail employment opportunities Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Ease of access to retail and technical employment opportunities Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Ease of access to retail, technical and professional employment opportunities Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Access to Local Education Centres Ease of access to a primary school facility Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Ease of access to a secondary school facility Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Ease of access to a higher education facility Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x

Access to Local Health Centres Ease of access to a local medical practice Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Ease of access to a hospital facility (without Accident & Emergency) Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Ease of access to a regional hospital facility (with Accident & Emergency) Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x

Access to Local Retail Centres Ease of access to a local shopping centre Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Ease of access to a local shopping centre or food store Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Ease of access to a local shopping centre, food store or supermarket Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x

Accessibility with Regards Existing Travel Mode Profile Relative level of pedestrian/cycle activity within a service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Relative level of bus/rail activity within a service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Relative level of car driver/car passenger activity within a service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3)

Accessibility with Regards Existing Journey to Work Travel Profile Relative ease of access to employment opportunities within 0-10 miles of a service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Relative ease of access to employment opportunities within 10-20 miles of a service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Relative ease of access to employment opportunities in excess of 20 miles of a service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3)

Total Score: 90 / 99

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Table 8.2: Accessibility Appraisal Exercise - Thirsk

SERVICE CENTRE – THIRSK

Access to Central Rail Corridors Access to high or low frequency services on the East Coast Mainline (i.e. Northallerton Station) Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Access to low frequency services only on the East Coast Mainline (i.e. Northallerton or Thirsk Station) Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Access to services on the Middlesbrough to Whitby Line (i.e. Great Ayton or Battersby Station) Low (1) x Moderate (2) High (3)

Access to Local Bus Services Ease of access to high frequency bus services (0-30 minutes) Low (1) x Moderate (2) High (3) Ease of access to moderate frequency bus services (31-60 minutes) Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Ease of access to low frequency bus services (61+ minutes) Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3)

Access to Local Facilities for Cyclists Services within 2.0km of the centre of each service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Services within 5.0km of the centre of each service centre Low (1) x Moderate (2) High (3) Services within 10.0km of the centre of each service centre Low (1) x Moderate (2) High (3)

Access to Local Employment Centres Ease of access to retail employment opportunities Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Ease of access to retail and technical employment opportunities Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Ease of access to retail, technical and professional employment opportunities Low (1) x Moderate (2) High (3)

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Access to Local Health Centres Ease of access to a local medical practice Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Ease of access to a local hospital facility (without Accident & Emergency) Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Ease of access to a regional hospital facility (with Accident & Emergency) Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3)

Accessibility with Regards Existing Travel Mode Profile Relative level of pedestrian/cycle activity within a service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Relative level of bus/rail activity within a service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Relative level of car driver/car passenger activity within a service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3)

Accessibility with Regards Existing Journey to Work Travel Profile Relative ease of access to employment opportunities within 0-10 miles of a service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Relative ease of access to employment opportunities within 10-20 miles of a service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Relative ease of access to employment opportunities in excess of 20 miles of a service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3)

Total Score: 75 / 99

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Table 8.3: Accessibility Appraisal Exercise - Bedale

SERVICE CENTRE – BEDALE

Access to Central Highway Corridors Ease of access to the A1 corridor Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Ease of access to the A19 corridor Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Ease of access to the A168 corridor Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x

Access to Central Rail Corridors Access to high or low frequency services on the East Coast Mainline (i.e. Northallerton Station) Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Access to low frequency services only on the East Coast Mainline (i.e. Northallerton or Thirsk Station) Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Access to services on the Middlesbrough to Whitby Line (i.e. Great Ayton or Battersby Station) Low (1) x Moderate (2) High (3)

Access to Local Bus Services Ease of access to high frequency bus services (0-30 minutes) Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Ease of access to moderate frequency bus services (31-60 minutes) Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Ease of access to low frequency bus services (61+ minutes) Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3)

Access to Local Facilities for Pedestrians Services within 0.5km of the centre of each service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Services within 1.0km of the centre of each service centre Low (1) x Moderate (2) High (3) Services within 2.0km of the centre of each service centre Low (1) x Moderate (2) High (3)

Access to Local Employment Centres Ease of access to retail employment opportunities Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Ease of access to retail and technical employment opportunities Low (1) x Moderate (2) High (3) Ease of access to retail, technical and professional employment opportunities Low (1) x Moderate (2) High (3)

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Accessibility with Regards Existing Travel Mode Profile Relative level of pedestrian/cycle activity within a service centre Low (1) Moderate x High (3) Relative level of bus/rail activity within a service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Relative level of car driver/car passenger activity within a service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3)

Accessibility with Regards Existing Journey to Work Travel Profile Relative ease of access to employment opportunities within 0-10 miles of a service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Relative ease of access to employment opportunities within 10-20 miles of a service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Relative ease of access to employment opportunities in excess of 20 miles of a service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3)

Total Score: 69 / 99

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Table 8.4: Accessibility Appraisal Exercise - Easingwold

SERVICE CENTRE – EASINGWOLD

Access to Central Highway Corridors Ease of access to the A1 corridor Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Ease of access to the A19 corridor Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Ease of access to the A168 corridor Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3)

Access to Central Rail Corridors Access to high or low frequency services on the East Coast Mainline (i.e. Northallerton Station) Low (1) x Moderate (2) High (3) Access to low frequency services only on the East Coast Mainline (i.e. Northallerton or Thirsk Station) Low (1) x Moderate (2) High (3) Access to services on the Middlesbrough to Whitby Line (i.e. Great Ayton or Battersby Station) Low (1) x Moderate (2) High (3)

Access to Local Facilities for Cyclists Services within 2.0km of the centre of each service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Services within 5.0km of the centre of each service centre Low (1) x Moderate (2) High (3) Services within 10.0km of the centre of each service centre Low (1) x Moderate (2) High (3)

Access to Local Employment Centres Ease of access to retail employment opportunities Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Ease of access to retail and technical employment opportunities Low (1) x Moderate (2) High (3) Ease of access to retail, technical and professional employment opportunities Low (1) x Moderate (2) High (3)

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Access to Local Health Centres Ease of access to a local medical practice Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Ease of access to a local hospital facility (without Accident & Emergency) Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Ease of access to a regional hospital facility (with Accident & Emergency) Low (1) x Moderate (2) High (3)

Access to Local Retail Centres Ease of access to a local shopping centre Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Ease of access to a local shopping centre or food store Low (1) x Moderate (2) High (3) Ease of access to a local shopping centre, food store or supermarket Low (1) x Moderate (2) High (3)

Accessibility with Regards Existing Journey to Work Travel Profile Relative ease of access to employment opportunities within 0-10 miles of a service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Relative ease of access to employment opportunities within 10-20 miles of a service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Relative ease of access to employment opportunities in excess of 20 miles of a service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3)

Total Score: 61 / 99

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Table 8.5: Accessibility Appraisal Exercise - Stokesley

SERVICE CENTRE – STOKESLEY

Access to Central Highway Corridors Ease of access to the A1 corridor Low (1) x Moderate (2) High (3) Ease of access to the A19 corridor Low (1) Moderate (2) High (3) x Ease of access to the A168 corridor Low (1) x Moderate (2) High (3)

Access to Local Employment Centres Ease of access to retail employment opportunities Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Ease of access to retail and technical employment opportunities Low (1) x Moderate (2) High (3) Ease of access to retail, technical and professional employment opportunities Low (1) x Moderate (2) High (3)

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Accessibility with Regards Existing Travel Mode Profile Relative level of pedestrian/cycle activity within a service centre Low (1) x Moderate (2) High (3) Relative level of bus/rail activity within a service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3) Relative level of car driver/car passenger activity within a service centre Low (1) Moderate (2) x High (3)

Total Score: 66 / 99

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

8.1.4 The results of the five detailed appraisals are presented at Table 8.6 below and clearly illustrate that Northallerton is the most accessible of the key service centres by a significant margin, with Thirsk and Bedale also performing well. Stokesley and Easingwold do not rank as highly as the previous three service centres, however, they remain reasonably accessible within the context of a rural district such as Hambleton.

Table 8.6: Service Centre Accessibility Ranking

SPATIAL PLANNING OPTION SCORE Northallerton 90 / 99 Thirsk 75 / 99 Bedale 69 / 99 Easingwold 61 / 99 Stokesley 66 / 99

8.2 RECOMMENDED APPROACH TO SPATIAL PLANNING

8.2.1 The initial high level assessment concluded that a dispersed approach of some nature is preferable from the perspective of potential impact on the strategic transport network and the detailed accessibility appraisal concluded that Northallerton, Thirsk and Bedale are the preferred locations with regards the promotion of sustainable development.

8.2.2 It is therefore recommended that, from the perspective of transportation, one of the following approaches to spatial planning be adopted in development of the new Hambleton Local Plan (with priority locations for residential allocation sites documented below each spatial planning option):

 Option 2 - Central Transport Corridors

 Development focused around the main road and rail links with a specific focus on residential allocation sites in the key market towns of Northallerton, Thirsk and Bedale. A relatively modest quantum of development may also be preferable within specific service and secondary villages located between the three principal service centres.

 Option 3 - Five Towns

 Development focused around the five market towns of Northallerton, Thirsk, Bedale, Easingwold and Stokesley with a specific focus on residential allocation sites in the key market towns of Northallerton, Thirsk and Bedale. It may also be preferable to facilitate a relatively modest quantum of development in Easingwold and Stokesley.

 Option 4 - Five Towns and Villages

Hambleton Local Plan WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff Hambleton District Council Project No 700181200

Appendix I

DEVELOPMENT AND TRAFFIC IMPACT

Spatial Planning Option 1: AM Peak Period Vehicular Trip Generation NORTHALLERTON THIRSK DWELLINGS ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY 1 320 27 68 95 26 68 94 2 640 54 136 190 52 136 188 3 960 81 204 285 78 204 282 4 1,280 108 272 380 104 272 376 5 1,600 135 340 475 130 340 470 6 1,920 162 408 570 156 408 564 7 2,240 189 476 665 182 476 658 8 2,560 216 544 760 208 544 752 9 2,880 243 612 855 234 612 846 10 3,200 270 680 950 260 680 940 11 3,520 297 748 1,045 286 748 1,034 12 3,840 324 816 1,140 312 816 1,128 13 4,160 351 884 1,235 338 884 1,222 14 4,480 378 952 1,330 364 952 1,316 15 4,800 405 1,020 1,425 390 1,020 1,410 16 5,120 432 1,088 1,520 416 1,088 1,504 17 5,440 459 1,156 1,615 442 1,156 1,598

Spatial Planning Option 1: PM Peak Period Vehicular Trip Generation NORTHALLERTON THIRSK DWELLINGS ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY 1 320 64 38 102 65 39 104 2 640 128 76 204 130 78 208 3 960 192 114 306 195 117 312 4 1,280 256 152 408 260 156 416 5 1,600 320 190 510 325 195 520 6 1,920 384 228 612 390 234 624 7 2,240 448 266 714 455 273 728 8 2,560 512 304 816 520 312 832 9 2,880 576 342 918 585 351 936 10 3,200 640 380 1,020 650 390 1,040 11 3,520 704 418 1,122 715 429 1,144 12 3,840 768 456 1,224 780 468 1,248 13 4,160 832 494 1,326 845 507 1,352 14 4,480 896 532 1,428 910 546 1,456 15 4,800 960 570 1,530 975 585 1,560 16 5,120 1,024 608 1,632 1,040 624 1,664 17 5,440 1,088 646 1,734 1,105 663 1,768

Spatial Planning Option 2: AM Peak Period Vehicular Trip Generation NORTHALLERTON THIRSK BEDALE SERVICE VILLAGES SECONDARY VILLAGES DWELLINGS ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY 1 320 16 41 57 15 41 56 15 41 56 2 4 6 2 4 6 2 640 32 82 114 30 82 112 30 82 112 4 8 12 4 8 12 3 960 48 123 171 45 123 168 45 123 168 6 12 18 6 12 18 4 1,280 64 164 228 60 164 224 60 164 224 8 16 24 8 16 24 5 1,600 80 205 285 75 205 280 75 205 280 10 20 30 10 20 30 6 1,920 96 246 342 90 246 336 90 246 336 12 24 36 12 24 36 7 2,240 112 287 399 105 287 392 105 287 392 14 28 42 14 28 42 8 2,560 128 328 456 120 328 448 120 328 448 16 32 48 16 32 48 9 2,880 144 369 513 135 369 504 135 369 504 18 36 54 18 36 54 10 3,200 160 410 570 150 410 560 150 410 560 20 40 60 20 40 60 11 3,520 176 451 627 165 451 616 165 451 616 22 44 66 22 44 66 12 3,840 192 492 684 180 492 672 180 492 672 24 48 72 24 48 72 13 4,160 208 533 741 195 533 728 195 533 728 26 52 78 26 52 78 14 4,480 224 574 798 210 574 784 210 574 784 28 56 84 28 56 84 15 4,800 240 615 855 225 615 840 225 615 840 30 60 90 30 60 90 16 5,120 256 656 912 240 656 896 240 656 896 32 64 96 32 64 96 17 5,440 272 697 969 255 697 952 255 697 952 34 68 102 34 68 102

Spatial Planning Option 2: PM Peak Period Vehicular Trip Generation NORTHALLERTON THIRSK BEDALE SERVICE VILLAGES SECONDARY VILLAGES DWELLINGS ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY 1 320 38 23 61 39 23 62 39 23 62 5 3 8 5 3 8 2 640 76 46 122 78 46 124 78 46 124 10 6 16 10 6 16 3 960 114 69 183 117 69 186 117 69 186 15 9 24 15 9 24 4 1,280 152 92 244 156 92 248 156 92 248 20 12 32 20 12 32 5 1,600 190 115 305 195 115 310 195 115 310 25 15 40 25 15 40 6 1,920 228 138 366 234 138 372 234 138 372 30 18 48 30 18 48 7 2,240 266 161 427 273 161 434 273 161 434 35 21 56 35 21 56 8 2,560 304 184 488 312 184 496 312 184 496 40 24 64 40 24 64 9 2,880 342 207 549 351 207 558 351 207 558 45 27 72 45 27 72 10 3,200 380 230 610 390 230 620 390 230 620 50 30 80 50 30 80 11 3,520 418 253 671 429 253 682 429 253 682 55 33 88 55 33 88 12 3,840 456 276 732 468 276 744 468 276 744 60 36 96 60 36 96 13 4,160 494 299 793 507 299 806 507 299 806 65 39 104 65 39 104 14 4,480 532 322 854 546 322 868 546 322 868 70 42 112 70 42 112 15 4,800 570 345 915 585 345 930 585 345 930 75 45 120 75 45 120 16 5,120 608 368 976 624 368 992 624 368 992 80 48 128 80 48 128 17 5,440 646 391 1,037 663 391 1,054 663 391 1,054 85 51 136 85 51 136

Spatial Planning Option 3: AM Peak Period Vehicular Trip Generation NORTHALLERTON THIRSK BEDALE EASINGWOLD STOKESLEY DWELLINGS ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY 1 320 11 27 38 10 27 37 10 27 37 10 27 37 10 27 37 2 640 22 54 76 20 54 74 20 54 74 20 54 74 20 54 74 3 960 33 81 114 30 81 111 30 81 111 30 81 111 30 81 111 4 1,280 44 108 152 40 108 148 40 108 148 40 108 148 40 108 148 5 1,600 55 135 190 50 135 185 50 135 185 50 135 185 50 135 185 6 1,920 66 162 228 60 162 222 60 162 222 60 162 222 60 162 222 7 2,240 77 189 266 70 189 259 70 189 259 70 189 259 70 189 259 8 2,560 88 216 304 80 216 296 80 216 296 80 216 296 80 216 296 9 2,880 99 243 342 90 243 333 90 243 333 90 243 333 90 243 333 10 3,200 110 270 380 100 270 370 100 270 370 100 270 370 100 270 370 11 3,520 121 297 418 110 297 407 110 297 407 110 297 407 110 297 407 12 3,840 132 324 456 120 324 444 120 324 444 120 324 444 120 324 444 13 4,160 143 351 494 130 351 481 130 351 481 130 351 481 130 351 481 14 4,480 154 378 532 140 378 518 140 378 518 140 378 518 140 378 518 15 4,800 165 405 570 150 405 555 150 405 555 150 405 555 150 405 555 16 5,120 176 432 608 160 432 592 160 432 592 160 432 592 160 432 592 17 5,440 187 459 646 170 459 629 170 459 629 170 459 629 170 459 629

Spatial Planning Option 3: PM Peak Period Vehicular Trip Generation NORTHALLERTON THIRSK BEDALE EASINGWOLD STOKESLEY DWELLINGS ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY 1 320 25 15 40 26 15 41 26 15 41 26 15 41 26 15 41 2 640 50 30 80 52 30 82 52 30 82 52 30 82 52 30 82 3 960 75 45 120 78 45 123 78 45 123 78 45 123 78 45 123 4 1,280 100 60 160 104 60 164 104 60 164 104 60 164 104 60 164 5 1,600 125 75 200 130 75 205 130 75 205 130 75 205 130 75 205 6 1,920 150 90 240 156 90 246 156 90 246 156 90 246 156 90 246 7 2,240 175 105 280 182 105 287 182 105 287 182 105 287 182 105 287 8 2,560 200 120 320 208 120 328 208 120 328 208 120 328 208 120 328 9 2,880 225 135 360 234 135 369 234 135 369 234 135 369 234 135 369 10 3,200 250 150 400 260 150 410 260 150 410 260 150 410 260 150 410 11 3,520 275 165 440 286 165 451 286 165 451 286 165 451 286 165 451 12 3,840 300 180 480 312 180 492 312 180 492 312 180 492 312 180 492 13 4,160 325 195 520 338 195 533 338 195 533 338 195 533 338 195 533 14 4,480 350 210 560 364 210 574 364 210 574 364 210 574 364 210 574 15 4,800 375 225 600 390 225 615 390 225 615 390 225 615 390 225 615 16 5,120 400 240 640 416 240 656 416 240 656 416 240 656 416 240 656 17 5,440 425 255 680 442 255 697 442 255 697 442 255 697 442 255 697

Spatial Planning Option 4: AM Peak Period Vehicular Trip Generation NORTHALLERTON THIRSK BEDALE EASINGWOLD STOKESLEY SERVICE VILLAGES SECONDARY VILLAGES DWELLINGS ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY 1 320 8 20 28 7 19 26 7 19 26 7 19 26 7 19 26 4 12 16 4 12 16 2 640 16 40 56 14 38 52 14 38 52 14 38 52 14 38 52 8 24 32 8 24 32 3 960 24 60 84 21 57 78 21 57 78 21 57 78 21 57 78 12 36 48 12 36 48 4 1,280 32 80 112 28 76 104 28 76 104 28 76 104 28 76 104 16 48 64 16 48 64 5 1,600 40 100 140 35 95 130 35 95 130 35 95 130 35 95 130 20 60 80 20 60 80 6 1,920 48 120 168 42 114 156 42 114 156 42 114 156 42 114 156 24 72 96 24 72 96 7 2,240 56 140 196 49 133 182 49 133 182 49 133 182 49 133 182 28 84 112 28 84 112 8 2,560 64 160 224 56 152 208 56 152 208 56 152 208 56 152 208 32 96 128 32 96 128 9 2,880 72 180 252 63 171 234 63 171 234 63 171 234 63 171 234 36 108 144 36 108 144 10 3,200 80 200 280 70 190 260 70 190 260 70 190 260 70 190 260 40 120 160 40 120 160 11 3,520 88 220 308 77 209 286 77 209 286 77 209 286 77 209 286 44 132 176 44 132 176 12 3,840 96 240 336 84 228 312 84 228 312 84 228 312 84 228 312 48 144 192 48 144 192 13 4,160 104 260 364 91 247 338 91 247 338 91 247 338 91 247 338 52 156 208 52 156 208 14 4,480 112 280 392 98 266 364 98 266 364 98 266 364 98 266 364 56 168 224 56 168 224 15 4,800 120 300 420 105 285 390 105 285 390 105 285 390 105 285 390 60 180 240 60 180 240 16 5,120 128 320 448 112 304 416 112 304 416 112 304 416 112 304 416 64 192 256 64 192 256 17 5,440 136 340 476 119 323 442 119 323 442 119 323 442 119 323 442 68 204 272 68 204 272

Spatial Planning Option 4: PM Peak Period Vehicular Trip Generation NORTHALLERTON THIRSK BEDALE EASINGWOLD STOKESLEY SERVICE VILLAGES SECONDARY VILLAGES DWELLINGS ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY ARR. DEP. 2-WAY 1 320 18 11 29 19 11 30 19 11 30 19 11 30 19 11 30 14 9 23 14 9 23 2 640 36 22 58 38 22 60 38 22 60 38 22 60 38 22 60 28 18 46 28 18 46 3 960 54 33 87 57 33 90 57 33 90 57 33 90 57 33 90 42 27 69 42 27 69 4 1,280 72 44 116 76 44 120 76 44 120 76 44 120 76 44 120 56 36 92 56 36 92 5 1,600 90 55 145 95 55 150 95 55 150 95 55 150 95 55 150 70 45 115 70 45 115 6 1,920 108 66 174 114 66 180 114 66 180 114 66 180 114 66 180 84 54 138 84 54 138 7 2,240 126 77 203 133 77 210 133 77 210 133 77 210 133 77 210 98 63 161 98 63 161 8 2,560 144 88 232 152 88 240 152 88 240 152 88 240 152 88 240 112 72 184 112 72 184 9 2,880 162 99 261 171 99 270 171 99 270 171 99 270 171 99 270 126 81 207 126 81 207 10 3,200 180 110 290 190 110 300 190 110 300 190 110 300 190 110 300 140 90 230 140 90 230 11 3,520 198 121 319 209 121 330 209 121 330 209 121 330 209 121 330 154 99 253 154 99 253 12 3,840 216 132 348 228 132 360 228 132 360 228 132 360 228 132 360 168 108 276 168 108 276 13 4,160 234 143 377 247 143 390 247 143 390 247 143 390 247 143 390 182 117 299 182 117 299 14 4,480 252 154 406 266 154 420 266 154 420 266 154 420 266 154 420 196 126 322 196 126 322 15 4,800 270 165 435 285 165 450 285 165 450 285 165 450 285 165 450 210 135 345 210 135 345 16 5,120 288 176 464 304 176 480 304 176 480 304 176 480 304 176 480 224 144 368 224 144 368 17 5,440 306 187 493 323 187 510 323 187 510 323 187 510 323 187 510 238 153 391 238 153 391

Spatial Planning Option 5: AM Peak Period Vehicular Trip Generation NEW SETTLEMENT DWELLINGS ARR. DEP. 2-WAY 1 320 54 136 190 2 640 108 272 380 3 960 162 408 570 4 1,280 216 544 760 5 1,600 270 680 950 6 1,920 324 816 1,140 7 2,240 378 952 1,330 8 2,560 432 1,088 1,520 9 2,880 486 1,224 1,710 10 3,200 540 1,360 1,900 11 3,520 594 1,496 2,090 12 3,840 648 1,632 2,280 13 4,160 702 1,768 2,470 14 4,480 756 1,904 2,660 15 4,800 810 2,040 2,850 16 5,120 864 2,176 3,040 17 5,440 918 2,312 3,230

Spatial Planning Option 5: PM Peak Period Vehicular Trip Generation NEW SETTLEMENT DWELLINGS ARR. DEP. 2-WAY 1 320 127 77 204 2 640 254 154 408 3 960 381 231 612 4 1,280 508 308 816 5 1,600 635 385 1,020 6 1,920 762 462 1,224 7 2,240 889 539 1,428 8 2,560 1,016 616 1,632 9 2,880 1,143 693 1,836 10 3,200 1,270 770 2,040 11 3,520 1,397 847 2,244 12 3,840 1,524 924 2,448 13 4,160 1,651 1,001 2,652 14 4,480 1,778 1,078 2,856 15 4,800 1,905 1,155 3,060 16 5,120 2,032 1,232 3,264 17 5,440 2,159 1,309 3,468