Malton needs a new intersection between the Broughton Road and the  A 64 - 7th October 2009

What kind of planet do Ryedale members think they are living on?

They are still pursuing the redevelopment of Wentworth Street Car Park, with a clear preference for a supermarket with a net sales area of 29,000 sq. ft. There are alternative proposals for new retail development in the Cattle Market, and in May the Council granted planning consent for a new Lidl store at Robsons Garage and an extension of Morrisons, which when built, will together provide another 18,000 sq. ft. net sales area.

Now, whether you agree or not with any of these proposals, you don’t have to be genius or a highly qualified and well paid official or consultant to realise that developments of this size, if built, are going to have some impact on the existing road system, and that therefore it should be in the public interest to plan ahead accordingly.

Not Ryedale or North Yorkshire County Council!

One would have thought that it would be sensible to allow room for a new intersection from the A 64 to the Broughton Road to accommodate much of the new traffic which will inevitably be generated by these new developments. I am one of many people who have campaigned for years for a new joint use sports hall at Malton School. After ten wasted years, the Council at last agreed to fund the greater part of the cost, and as one would have thought, would have some say in the design and location of the building and the new Multi-use Games Area (MUGA). Nevertheless, in spite of clear representations and requests to change its position and the prospect of funding from the developers of neighbouring property, the planned location of the MUGA encroaches onto the site of an intersection proposed on plans prepared by the County Council in 2004.

County Highways and Ryedale Planners have simply taken the view that it is unlikely that the proposed intersection will be built in the next ten years, and that if they are wrong, the MUGA could be moved, or the natural position of the intersection changed, at the additional cost of several hundred thousand pounds. So, even in this depressed period of financial austerity, it is assumed that money is no object! 

An alternative proposal was put forward for an entirely new highways intersection further North. This was likely to cost approximately twice as much as the proposed Broughton Road intersection, because it includes the building of a new bridge. It was proposed that a substantial proportion of the cost would be paid by the developers of adjacent land, but there would have to be some public funding. Again, the view has been taken that this project too is unlikely to happen within the next ten years. To add insult to injury, the Council’s consultants, as part of the LDF (ie.local plan) process, have categorised the proposals to develop the adjacent land as unsuitable for development in the next five years.

So we can now strip the gloss off the administration’s favourite project and see all the ugly details. The Council (if it gets the chance) will sell Wentworth Street Car Park to a supermarket, and will pocket the proceeds. It will not spend a penny on providing access from the A64 to that part of the town, and the consequent traffic chaos and congestion does not even bear thinking about.

Leading councillors say they want to regenerate (they now say “revitalise”) Malton, in a way that will enhance and improve the town. When their proposals are put under the microscope, one realises that what they want to do will achieve the very opposite.