I cant understand why those with blue badges are denied access when the ATTRO is in force but you let pushchairs, prams, bicycles etc into the area without being checked. Any of those could carry explosives into an event as easily as a vehicle.  I can understand the polices point of view but not at the cost of disabled people who have a right to access the city centre. Unless police are going to check every backpack, pram bicycle etc accessing the center its discrimination.  At present public transport in York is not fit for purpose let alone for disabled people to access the city centre. I am rarely able to access the city centre from public transport and as a bluebadge holder rely on vehicle access. The city seems to care more about the needs of visitors than it's actual residents who pay council tax.  I hope the council will do the right thing and keep blue badge access for those who need it.	The proposal if approved would only remove all vehicles form the pedestrian area when the ATTRO is put in place.  This will help to reduce the risk of a vehicle been used as a weapon. If the ATTRO is approved and put in place there is no guarantee that an incident will occur, but the ATTRO will help to reduce the risk of a vehicle being used as a weapon.
In light of potential of reprisal terrorist action around Western Cities, due to unstable situation in Iran/ Lebanon/ Isreal - I can understand the concerns of Police to allow restricted access to vehicles in York City centre. However if Disabled Drivers are restricted access for the foreseeable future is over reaction. One could utilised same argument to Shopping Centre Car Parks in all area’s of York. Covering all vehicles including  delivery / collection services.  In case of disabled access. I am of the opinion access should be granted and in these situation all vehicles with blue badges.,  should be checked to ensure the users are disabled and not family members freeloading. Do not discriminate against genuine disabled and access. Thin out numbers by fraudulent use of said badge.	If approved the ATTRO would not be in place constantly, it would only be put into operation if there was deemed to be a threat or an incident had occurred. The proposed ATTRO is not a full time ban on Blue Badge vehicles, outside of the times that the ATTRO is brought into force, Blue Badge Access will be maintained and managed in the existing process.
Please note I am totally against this plan of banning blue badge holders in the city centre.	If approved the ATTRO would not be in place constantly, it would only be put into operation if there was deemed to be a threat or an incident had occurred. The proposed ATTRO is not a full time ban on Blue Badge vehicles, outside of the times that the ATTRO is brought into force, Blue Badge Access will be maintained and managed in the existing process.
This ATTRO regulation is nothing more than a joke as it would not stop a determined terrorist wanting to carry out a bombing. You would think the Police could come up with a better excuse as not all bombers enter into the city using a car. A cyclist, a moped driver and even a person pushing a buggy or pushchair could convey a large bomb into a built up area or a large store, yet nothing absolutely nothing had been done to combat that. York council are hiding behind this regulation as they can't make the city centre a tourist place ( which is what they want) by just banning cars any other way. They could not care less about people with a disability and they have shown that numerous times but had to back down due to the public anger , so they turn to the police to do it for them. I have not been able to go into York since this council decided that tourist mean more to them than local people , this is so obvious that it's embarrassing that they still try to say it's for our safety, complete and utter rubbish and they know it.	The proposal if approved would only remove all vehicles form the pedestrian area when the ATTRO is put in place.  This will help to reduce the risk of a vehicle been used as a weapon. If the ATTRO is approved and put in place there is no guarantee that an incident will occur, but the ATTRO will help to reduce the risk of a vehicle being used as a weapon.
City of York Council already have temporary ATTROs. It need not take long for the council to implement a temporary ATTRO. It is right that ATTROs are considered each time. York is not at high risk from terrorism. Do not encourage a Police State by putting a permanent ATTRO in place.	If approved a Permanent ATTRO, would mean that the process to implement the ATTRO if required is more efficient, which will provide a better reaction if a potential danger is deemed.  The proposed ATTRO, will help remove the administrative impact of the introduction.
Why waste my monies paid to the government on things that won’t happen
NO no no to ATTRO.   The police have to much power as it is. They all think they're gods.  We do not live in a totalitarian area.  Terrorism doesn't hit the UK like it does the USA.	If approved the ATTRO would not be in place constantly, it would only be put into operation if there was deemed to be a threat or an incident had occurred.
I wish to object to the extension of the ATTRO entirely - whilst I have no issues with the current arrangements made when deemed necessary in relation to the footstreets in Central York (particularly during times of Xmas Market etc) - I do not understand why this ATTRO requires extension to streets such as the Minster Yard. These areas are not in a location with mass traffic and to date, this is the closest area to the city people with Blue Badges can park.  Car Parks such as Bootham Row are wholly inadequate and over subscribed - both due to a large loss in disabled parking due to the installation of electric vehicle spaces, and the fact the kerbs are too narrow to accommodate a wheelchair etc without being forced into the road path.  ATTRO seems to have no further indication of how those who work at the Minster and thus need access to the parking will do so either. Duncombe place has recently been given increased Disabled provisions, and so to then extend the ATTRO here seems unwise.  There is no explanation of when this ATTRO will be utilised other than "under very strict conditions" - based on the current use of the ATTRO, this COULD mean being excluded from the City centre for weeks - if used around the Xmas Market, or other major city wide events. Unless the dates the ATTRO would be used were declared well in advance, and limited to a maximum of 10-15 days per year, not just used as a "blanket" arrangement, I would be unable to support them Should this go ahead I would consider a legal challenge against the council. Labour were voted in due to the disabled oppression which was exercised by the Green party - of which Labour were staunchly against.	If the proposed ATTRO is approved it will not be put in place on a permanent basis, it would only be put in place during an incident or if a danger/risk to the public is deemed. The area was extended to out side the HVM barrier area to include the area in front of the Minster as it has been subject to temporary ATTRO in the past.  If put in place, the whole area does not need to be implemented, it can be implemented in sections.
I have no faith in City Of York Council.  I realise that whatever I, or others say it will be ignored. This has the word security attached.  The whole city can be closed down based on that one word.  I was in the police for thirty years.  I watched incompetent career builders dream up ‘plans’, implement them, then retire, or move to anther job and leave everyone else to cope with the aftermath. Listen to what’s said then apply, the question, is this career building, do we really need this.	This proposal is not about career building, ATTRO’s have been put in place in other cities across the country.  The Purpose of the ATTRO is to help reduce the potential risk.
Not sure the Chief Constable has his thinking hat on ! Man / Person on foot carrying a bag ? And person carrying weapons like a sword. (Never mind the daily issue nationwide of knife crime). How does this proposal stop suicide bombers. If they were in a car its likely they would still have a device on board.  Spend more effort on intelligence and less time on the 0.00000000001% chance of something happening. Plenty more to worry about than more barriers.	If the ATTRO is approved and put in place there is no guarantee that an incident will occur, but the ATTRO will help to reduce the risk of a vehicle being used as a weapon.
Why do york police want to close everything down blaming terroism Yes it would be easy for them if everyone stopped at home. My suggestion is YORK POLICE start doing your job you are responsible for  public safety which does not mean stopping everyone going about there daily buisiness, and closing all the roads on ridiculous excuses, it apears all you are interested is catching motorist speading and stopping free speach your being ridiculous . City Centre access and freedom of movement are our right how dare they try to deny us all of that.	The proposal has been made to help to reduce the risk of vehicle attack happening within the proposed area.  This would not be put in place at all times.  Outside of the times that ATTRO is put into place vehicle access to the proposed area will be as it is now.
I write in response to the Notice of Proposals dated 18 March 2026 regarding the proposed Anti-Terrorism Traffic Regulation Order (ATTRO) affecting York City Centre. 1. Support for Public Safety Objectives At the outset, I wish to express my full support for measures aimed at protecting public safety and reducing risks associated with terrorism. As a business operating in a high-footfall, tourism-driven area near York Minster, we recognise the importance of ensuring that the city remains safe for residents, visitors, and businesses alike. 2. Significant Concerns Regarding Business Impact Notwithstanding the above, I must formally raise concerns regarding the practical and financial impact that the proposed ATTRO may have on small independent businesses such as mine. a) Access for Deliveries and Suppliers [We rely] on frequent and time-sensitive deliveries, including: Fresh milk and perishable goods Coffee beans and supplies Bakery and food products The proposal indicates that access, loading, and waiting may be restricted or prevented when the order is activated. This creates a material risk of: Disruption to supply chains Inability to trade effectively Increased operational costs Without guaranteed access arrangements, the viability of daily operations is put at risk. b) Lack of Operational Certainty The ATTRO is described as being capable of immediate activation without prior notice based on police intelligence or events. This creates uncertainty for businesses in terms of: Staffing and stock planning Scheduled deliveries Customer access and service continuity A lack of advance notice could result in avoidable financial losses. c) Impact on Customer Accessibility Restrictions on movement within the area may: Reduce accessibility for certain customers Create confusion regarding whether businesses remain open Negatively affect footfall during activation periods This is particularly significant for small independent businesses that rely on consistent daily trade. 3. Requested Amendments and Safeguards In light of the above, I respectfully request that the Council incorporates the following safeguards into the final Order: 1. Guaranteed Delivery Access Provision of clearly defined and protected time windows or controlled access arrangements for essential business deliveries. 2. Business Access Permits Introduction of a permit or exemption system for: Registered suppliers Essential service vehicles 3. Advance Notification System Implementation of a real-time notification system (e.g. SMS/email alerts) to provide businesses with: Advance warning of activation where possible Clear indication of expected duration 4. Business Impact Mitigation / Compensation Consideration of appropriate compensation or support mechanisms where businesses can demonstrate: Loss of income Operational disruption directly caused by ATTRO activation 5. Clear Signage and Public Communication Commitment to ensuring: Clear signage indicating that businesses remain open Public communication strategies to minimise confusion and support continued trade 4. Conclusion While I support the underlying objectives of the proposed ATTRO, it is essential that its implementation does not disproportionately impact small independent businesses operating within the affected area. I respectfully request that the Council gives full consideration to the concerns outlined above and incorporates appropriate safeguards to ensure that public safety measures are balanced with the economic sustainability of the city centre. I would welcome the opportunity to engage further on this matter and to contribute constructively to any consultation process.	The proposed suggestions are noted and if the ATTRO is made, these will be considered to help business operation at times when the ATTRO is put into operation.
I trust the police will not overstep their powers but I think the road closures are silly.  Any terrorist could simply walk into the city centre with explosives  in their shopping bags / back packs	The proposal has been made to help reduce the risk of a vehicle attack from occurring in a high density pedestrian area, it is not to completely remove the risk of a terrorist attack.
So, this is just another away to stop residents using their cars to get to the city centre!!   I don't want anything permanent closing the roads we still have access to!!	If approved the ATTRO would not be in place constantly, it would only be put into operation if there was deemed to be a threat or an incident had occurred. The proposed ATTRO is not a full time ban on Blue Badge vehicles, outside of the times that the ATTRO is brought into force, Blue Badge Access will be maintained and managed in the existing process.
My concern with this is that authorities have already shown themselves willing to extend the definition of terrorism beyond its original intention (the ban on Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation rather than a radical protest group). Coupling such draconian responses with the ability to close down the centre of York offers a worrying possibility of overuse and escalation. It is not clear where this permanent ATTRO would ever be rescinded, not how that would happen or if the legislation allows for that.	If approved the ATTRO would not be in place constantly, it would only be put into operation if there was deemed to be a threat or an incident had occurred.
Received the proposals for ATTRO in York and see that I will be fully cut off from the centre of York----why did I ever decide to live in a lovely city which I am not now able to access.  This further proposal takes the biscuit. If I want to do relaxed shopping, I take my car on a 60 miles round trip to Northallerton as parking is easy for a Blue Badge holder, whereas York is dire.  I have difficulty walking, but am not at the stage where a wheelchair/scooter is necessary, but since access points into central York (namely Goodramgate) have been closed since November 2025, first for the Christmas market (which I therefore could not attend) and now for roadworks until May-----I have had to cancel appointments indefinatly. Now the police have said JUMP, you are only considering the able and tourists (pity any disabled among them).  As a member of your staff checks the blue badge before entry----how can a terrorist find it easy to enter by car?  Do you have a member of staff at all road entries checking people with rucksacks/ bags etc to see if they are carrying bombs? Thought not. The police are important, but we have become a nanny state and the laughing stock of the world------put more police out on patrol if they are that worried, but do NOT stop the citizens of York being able to go about their daily business	If approved the ATTRO would not be in place constantly, it would only be put into operation if there was deemed to be a threat or an incident had occurred. The proposal has been made to help reduce the risk of a vehicle attack from occurring in a high density pedestrian area, it is not to completely remove the risk of a terrorist attack.
We object to the proposal for an ATTRO in York for the following reasons: When they were elected the controlling group on the Council had promised an end to the Blue Badge ban brought in by the previous administration. So far no reasonable adjustments have been made to the existing closure due to the Christmas Market and the current possibility of one day break is insufficient. Parking in the centre needs to be designed that satisfies NYP and accessibility without the need for an human-operated barrier, although it would need enforcement rather than constant operational supervision, perhaps being a saving.	Thank you for your comments. The management of the Christmas markets are not part of this review but appreciate the impact the markets have with the potential implementation of an ATTRO at that point.
While we fully understand the need for the traffic order we want to limit harms to our business. Would you be able to help me with some questions we have please? 1 Limited access to our Centre causes severe disruption to our business. What notice could we expect when a regulation order is to be activated? 2 We have a parking space for one vehicle on our land, by the side of our building, it is ringed with a lockable steel barrier. During the last regulation order the police told us they could enter our land and interfere with our vehicle parked there behind the steel barrier. They provided no proof of authority to enter our land nor proof that they had authority to interfere with our vehicle there. They talked about towing it away. Can you clarify please whether our vehicle can be parked on our land enclosed by the lockable steel barrier? 3 Currently our Centre Manager drives into the city centre and parks in our parking area, on our land at the side of our building. We depend upon this for the deliveries of some of the food supplies, picked up by the manager, for the cafe business in our Centre. If we are not allowed to park that vehicle on our land will we still be allowed access at some times for deliveries? Presently once delivery has taken place the car is parked there. 4 Following on from 3, above, if we are not able to park a vehicle on our land, inside the lockable steel barrier, may we have some parking permission for elsewhere please? We are thinking of the same sort of thing as the market traders who park somewhere near to the inner ringroad?	1. Notice would depend on the reason for the activation of ATTRO, as it may be put in place due to an incident or as a requirement to an event. 2. This is a query for North Yorkshire Police, the highway authority is only responsible for the highway. 3. This will depend on the reason and extent of the implementation for the ATTRO. 4. We are unable to offer alternative parking.
1. The proposed ATTRO states that were the Police to seek to restrict vehicular access for a continuous period longer than 48 hours, prior approval must be sought from the Commissioner of Police (presumably the Deputy Mayor for Crime and Policing?) and the Chief Executive of City of York Council. Does this open up the risk of considerations unrelated to public safety being given undue weight resulting in a legitimate ATTRO request being refused or curtailed? 2. Over recent years police and counter-terrorism officer advice has been published as part of suites of documents which have informed City of York Council decisions on city centre access – for example see item 38 at council decision It would be helpful to know whether any aspects of this advice have changed?	1. The presumption is in correct Deputy Mayor, would no need to provide approval. 2. There is no indication that the police and counter terrorism advice has changed.
There has been no promotion of the proposals for an anti-terrorism traffic regulation order. I'm unclear about the impact on blue badge holders and would like to understand what has been considered as part of an equality impact assessment, and what mitigations have been put in place. Of course temporary and emergency responses will be vital to ensure, but my concern is how the proposal takes into account the need to safeguard access for disabled people to the city centre in the future.	If the ATTRO is put into effect it is likely that the access to the city centre will be revoked, but this may be dependant on the area that sees the ATTRO imposed as it may not be in place for the whole pedestrian area.
Hello. I have received an email about the ATTRO  proposals, asking for my comments, as a Blue Badge User.  My thoughts about the practicalities are: 1). if  restrictions  are  going to be activated at short notice it would be useful for Blue Badge users (and  shop  staff/ delivery drivers) to receive a text message alert to inform us, rather than doing this by  email, for faster communication so that no one sets out on a journey into town that will be unsuccessful or cause chaos.  2). The other consideration is  that cars and their drivers will be trapped in town if the restriction is activated while they are already there. (eg: if I park in Kings Square at 10am, then  an ATTRO is activated at 11am, how am I going to get out via  the Exit point at  the end of Colliergate?) 3). My other thought about this is that if Terrorism is such a genuine  threat, the Council should consider  cutting out  opportunities for Terrorism in the city centre -such as the Xmas Market, which brings far too many people into a small area.	1. Comms plans will need to be considered to ensure communication of the implementation of the ATTRO is successful if the proposal is made permanent. 2. If implemented at short notice, the Police will provide advice on the safety approach in each situation. 3. This decision would be outside of this consultation, but the comment is noted.
My comments on the proposal: 1 What are the actual savings, in £’s and time, arising from the proposed changes to the process? If it is normal to give 7 days notice of a closure, where is the saving? 2 Using the logic that York Minster is a Tier 1 structure that requires inclusion in order to remove/reduce the possibility of damage, what are your proposals to safeguard the other 20+ Tier 1 structures in York? Or don’t you think terrorists will be interested in damaging Tier 1 buildings? 3 While you have the ability to charge groups for an ATTR, what are the costs involved and on how many occasions an ATTR has been required, have you obtained payment?	1. The cost saving will be in officer time, as the implementation of a Temporary ATTRO, would require the writing of the legal notice and the placement on street, whenever it was proposed to be put in place.  If a permanent restriction is put in place, then the temporary notice would not be required. 2. There are other buildings and structures in York, which hold significant historical importance, but they are not considered Tier 1 sites. 3. The cost of the ATTRO, would depend on if additional infrastructure is required to protect the area in which the ATTRO is implemented.  On occasions when the a temp ATTRO has been put in place on Duncombe Place for Police activities/events and additional infrastructure has been required, this has been paid for by the Police.
We have received today the council letter as per my email subject title with regards to the ATTRO your proposing to introduce. Can I ask as the letter does not explain this that as a resident of High Petergate/ Precentors Court that if the Police activate the ATTRO are myself & family with two vehicles allowed access & egress? It slightly concerns me that with events outside the Minster or on Duncombe Place as it stands now we have major problems getting in/out & that if this ATTRO is indeed implemented (which let's be honest it will) this will indeed impact myself & my family going about our daily lives ? If you could be kind enough to explain what the council/NYP are planning to do if such a ATTRO is implemented i would be very grateful.	The proposed introduction of an ATTRO is proposed for a larger area than the footstreets, due to the significant importance of York Minster. If the proposed ATTRO does come in to effect, it will only be only be put into effect if required, which will mean that it would be dormant for the majority of the time, which will not affect any access. Three Temporary ATTRO has been recommended to be put in place previously by North Yorkshire Police for Duncombe Place, i.e. Kings visit.  The proposed introduction of the ATTRO, will remove the requirement to process a temporary ATTRO, if required in future.
Can you advise the following please: What access will residents, who are now going to be included in the extended area, have to their home either by foot or car during the use of this proposal? What notice will be recent residents get? Why, if the Minster is a likely target, were no permanent  electronic anti terrorism bollards installed at the entrance to Duncombe place or under the historic gate?  Is there a plan for this in the future ?	If the proposed ATTRO does come in to effect, it will only be put into effect if required, which will mean that it would be dormant for the majority of the time, which will not affect any access. If the proposed ATTRO is approved and then required to be put in place, it may not affect the whole area of the ATTRO as it can be put in place in just areas or streets within the proposed ATTRO area. The notice to residents if the ATTRO is put in place will depend on the reason that the ATTRO is put in place, as it may not be possible to provide Notice.  There has previously three temporary ATTRO put in place on Duncombe Place and Notice has always been provided to residents at the earliest opportunity.