A large part of this site lies very close to Baldock train station and the direct fast (34 minutes) link to Kings Cross. This area has not previously been developed because it has until now been protected by Green Belt. Releasing land for development so close to the train station will in fact provide housing against London housing need rather than against North Hertfordshire housing need. It seems this has been missed by the Sustainability Review, presumably because they have assumed that all new development will fall under the Stevenage housing market area, which itself is based on an assumption of natural organic growth where areas of high desirability (such as those close to the train station) will already have been developed - but release of such a large section of land so close to the train station is quite exceptional and this should have been considered. Without mitigation this site will not deliver against North Hertfordshire housing need and risks increasing local house prices - exacerbating problems rather than improving them. The simplest mitigation is to maintain a strip of land (20 minutes walk from the train station) as Green Belt and so separate the new development from Baldock, the number of homes in this site should be reduced accordingly - alternatively, this policy needs to state that this strip of land will be developed only after all the rest of the site has been developed (allowing house prices to grow slowly and only the last set of homes risk being consumed solely against London housing need).
Furthermore, this is a very large site that is intended to be developed rapidly (with a dependency on other developments, like transitional school provision in Baldock Town and Clothall Common). Recent experience (for example, Great Ashby or the Church Gate development) do not show a competency within the district and county councils for successfully delivering this. It is too risky and should be scaled back. The remaining homes should be found via a more even spread across the district (for example by reconsidering sites that were in previous iterations of the plan) - this plan includes too much development around Baldock (an 80% increase in size!) too rapidly to be likely to be delivered sustainably or effectively. Especially considering that facilities and infrastructure in Baldock is already overstretched - school places are already over subscribed, GP surgery is at capacity, and road infrastructure is constrained by pinch points at narrow historic roads and junctions bounded by listed buildings hundreds of years old - these roads simply cannot be widened, and there is no guarantee the modest improvements suggested in the plan will effectively mitigate against traffic and infrastructure problems. This plan is currently planning to fail and should be scaled back at this site and housing spread more evenly among a greater number of smaller sites around North Hertfordshire.

The number of self-build plots should be increased - over the time of the plan, these will provide an affordable housing option and will be deliverable. This should be at least doubled to 56 plots.

4.177 The location of the site means it will be relatively close to the town centre and very close to the train station - the sustainability of building so close to a train station a direct fast (34 minutes) link into central London is arguable when it is likely that homes near the train station (within a 20 minute walk) will in fact go to meet London housing need instead of local housing need and will likely drive up house prices - it cannot be argued that encouraging inward migration, without supply of sufficient housing for local housing need and the driving up of house prices and making housing more unaffordable is sustainable development. The plan should accept that development close the train station is not good in terms of sustainable development, local house prices and meeting local housing need, and should indicate what mitigations will be put in place to prevent housing close to the train station simply being consumed by demand from London and the subsequent uplift in house prices. The strip of this site that lies with 20 minutes walk of the train station should be left undeveloped, or left until the rest of the site has been fully developed (i.e. until after 2031) in order that this site can maximise its benefit to the people of North Hertfordshire.

Re: point h of SP14.
It should be noted that Baldock is not very large and has an established secondary school, Knights Templar, which may be able to expand to provide the required provision. The plan should be careful not to presuppose the building of a new secondary school as the best solution, but development of this site should certainly contribute to the required provision, either by building of a new secondary school or by expansion and improvements to Knights Templar, or a combination of both.

SP14, point 4.178 states that development will not errode gaps between towns. It should be noted that the development will run right up to Bygrave Common, obliterating the character of Bygrave as a separate place from Baldock. Mitigations, such as a strip of green belt or undeveloped land between the two should be mentioned in the plan and considered as part of any development on this site.

I support the requirement for a site masterplan, for additional neighbourhood provision and for structural planing at this site. I support the construction of a road connecting the A507 London Road to the A505 Baldock bypass. I support the construction of a secondary rail crossing for pedestrians and cyclists, and safe access routes to/from Baldock station. I support integration of existing rights of way, which should be maintained as green spaces. I support the requirement of a community hall and GP surgery. I support the provision of new primary school on this site.