Subscribe to trusted local news
In a time of both misinformation and too much information, quality journalism is more crucial than ever. By subscribing, you can help us get the story right.
- Subscription costs less than £1 a week with an annual plan.
Already a subscriber? Log in here.
18
Apr
Emails reveal ‘high risk’ of further cost increases to £12.6 million Harrogate Station Gateway
Internal North Yorkshire Council emails reveal there is a ‘high risk’ of the cost of the Harrogate Station Gateway scheme increasing further.
The finding is contained in more than 100 pages of correspondence between the Department for Transport and North Yorkshire Council, which the Stray Ferret received following a freedom of information request.
Councillor Keane Duncan, the council's executive member for highways, has said the gateway represents the biggest investment in Harrogate town centre for 30 years. It would see major changes to Station Parade, Station Square and the One Arch pedestrian tunnel.
But the Get Away business campaign group in Harrogate believes it will harm the town centre and has launched a legal challenge that is due to be heard next week.
We have already revealed this week that the correspondence shows just 39% of the total cost of the scheme, which has risen to £12.6 million even though the project has been downgraded, is going towards construction while 22% is being paid to consultants.
We also highlighted that the council's own business-cost ratio assessment deemed the benefits to be 'low'.
In this article we look at the council’s determination to plough ahead despite concerns about costs and a high court challenge.
Summer start
The gateway is mainly funded by the Department for Transport, which provided £11 million through its Transforming Cities Fund. But North Yorkshire Council and its predecessor Harrogate Borough Council have contributed £1.1 million. North Yorkshire’s Labour mayor David Skaith has awarded a further £500,000.
Businesses opposed to the scheme have already flagged up concerns that further cost increases could be borne by council taxpayers, particularly as construction has not yet started. The council now says work is due to get underway in summer this year rather than spring.
Business concerns are likely to be heightened by a council ‘project highlight report’ dated January 16.
A section on risk flags up two issues as ‘high’ risk: the first is a ‘potential legal challenge’; the second is ‘unexpected cost increases’.
The legal challenge materialised when Get Away launched a high court challenge in February that is due to be heard next week.
The report warns that any cost increase could mean the council ‘may need to descope further elements to fit budget’.
Considered dropping scheme
The emails show the council considered dropping the gateway scheme after it abandoned its initial proposals in 2023 due to them being legally flawed.
A Department for Transport email to council economic and regeneration project manager Matt Roberts, dated November 21, 2023 suggested the funding could be allocated to other gateway schemes overseen by the council in Selby and Skipton. It said:
You mentioned that one possibility North Yorkshire Council could consider would be to cancel the Harrogate scheme and reallocate funding to cover the cost pressures at Selby and Skipton. If North Yorkshire Council decided this was the best solution for the TCF Programme, we would be happy to consider this through a change control request following the usual procedures which demonstrate the evidence and rationale for the proposed change.
The message ends: “I appreciate colleagues have worked really hard to get Harrogate’s TCF scheme this far and there are no easy solutions here.”
But a council officer, whose name is redacted, replied on January 5.
The council strongly supports the three projects, with their focus around the railway stations at Selby, Skipton, and Harrogate. These align closely with our ambitions to create a dynamic and successful economy, to boost growth and travel and to encourage sustainable transport by upgrading transport gateways in these key towns that form part of the functional economic area of the Leeds City Region.
Cllr Keane Duncan, who has oversight of the scheme, on Station Parade.
Could previous gateway plans be revived?
The emails also reveal the council may revive other elements of the gateway scheme that were previously dropped. The original proposals included more ambitious cycling elements as well as partly pedestrianising James Street, reducing a section of Station Parade to single lane and alterations to Cheltenham Crescent, Cheltenham Mount and Cheltenham Parade.
The council said in one document dated January 5 this year:
The council is committed to delivering improvements in Harrogate and will seek to deliver the remaining elements (the Odeon roundabout, East Parade etc.) on a phased basis as funding becomes available. The rescoped full business case therefore represents phase 1 of a programme of work that links in with other projects within the town’s strategic active travel plans.
'Astounded, but not surprised'
Get Away said it was astounded, but not surprised, by the Stray Ferret revelations.
Spokesperson Steven Baines said:
It beggars belief that the council is completely going against the wishes of the majority of the local business community who oppose the scheme, even though its been flagged up it offers poor value for money and that there is a high risk of unexpected cost increases.
In a way we shouldn’t be surprised as there has been inadequate consultation and no economic impact assessment undertaken.
The council said in a statement it was considering reallocating more funds into the Harrogate gateway. It said:
A start date for the Harrogate scheme and appointment of a contractor depends on the upcoming decision by the council’s executive, and the legal challenge which is due to be heard on April 24. However, we are aiming to start work in the summer.
The benefit-cost ratio has been impacted by changing the scope of the scheme, as we have removed certain elements. Work is ongoing to finalise the figure.
The rising cost to deliver the scheme is due to redesigns in response to the original legal challenge, the three public consultations and inflation due to the length of the project this far. We can’t comment on unexpected costs before construction has started, hence factoring in a contingency.
We have been able to make savings on the Skipton scheme, mainly by using our own company NY Highways which is more cost-effective than an external contractor. We are exploring the possibility of transferring funds to the Harrogate scheme if required.
0