Baldock

See attachment

Our comments relate to Baldock, in particular to proposals BA1, BE2, BA10, BA3, BA4.
[1]"... secondary rail crossing for pedestrians and cyclists in the vicinity of Ashwell Way."
QUESTION: how will users of such a route be able to safely join or cross B656 Royston Road? That road should become less busy after the construction of the A507 / A505 link road, but it will remain a major route into and through Baldock.
[2]SP14(e)(ii) refers to "Safe access routes to/from, and upgrades to Baldock station."
Relevant to this is the Govia/Thameslink consultation on revised train services from 2018 (see http://www.thameslinkrailway.com/download/12366.9/timetable-consultation/). In that consultation document, it is proposed that all off-peak semi-fast train services should not stop at Baldock. This is completely unacceptable, even with the present needs of Baldock residents, and will become even more unacceptable when the huge BA1 development is in progress and completed.
Hertfordshire County Council and North Herts District Council should make immediate submissions to Govia/Thameslink to alter this decision. If (as seems likely) one of the reasons is that 12-car trains cannot now use Baldock station, then the obvious remedy is to lengthen Baldock station's platforms to accommodate 12-car trains. The number of commuters from Baldock to Cambridge, London, and Stevenage will massively increase after the development of site BA1, and it is unacceptable that Baldock will be reduced to the same status as (say) Ashwell and Morden with the loss of semi-fast train services.
Pedestrian and vehicular access to Baldock station from the north, without using the extremely narrow railway bridge, is essential. The pavements under the bridge are so narrow that they represent a hazard to pedestrians. Baldock station appears to have a bricked-up northern entrance and a (rather steep) access way from just north of the bridge to the back of the station.
[3]We applaud the plan to provide a link road from A507 North Road to the A505 Royston Road roundabout. This will hugely reduce the incredible amount of traffic (including many heavy lorries) that still uses B656 and A507 to access the A1 northbound, despite signage directing them to use the Baldock Bypass. That traffic all has to negotiate the very awkward turn at the Royston Road / Station Road traffic lights, causing traffic jams, pollution, and many accidents.
[4]Related to [3] is the idea of downgrading A507 to a B-road. All of that road from Clothall Road to the A10 is quite unsuitable for heavy traffic. One way of achieving a reduction in lorries using that road is to put a weight restriction on the existing A507 (whether or not it is downgraded to a B-road). We have been unable to locate the revised Hertfordshire Local Transport Plan LPT4 as it applies to Baldock, but this matter should be considered as part of that plan.

[5]The proposal for a southern link road to enable development of sites BA3 and BA4 and providing connectivity to the south of Baldock to help bypass the Royston Road / Station Road crossroads is welcome, but it is not at all clear where it would run. Clarification of this (a map?) would be helpful.

With specific reference to ECON6 and BA1 to 11, how does increasing the size of Baldock by 80%, by adding an additional 3290 homes meet "ensuring development is of an appropriate scale". Say an average of 2 people per home thats at least 6500 additional people trying to utilise the local services & straining infrastructure. Therefore the plan is UNJUSTIFIED

I write to voice my objection concerning the planned large scale building development in Baldock.

Whilst most people accept more houses are required in North Herts, the plan is completely imbalanced with Baldock seemingly having to take much more than its fair share of planned development.

In addition to the obvious change of character of the town which will take place, there are several practical reasons why this plan is ill conceived.

Primarily, there is a major infrastructure issue , ie the roads, schools & health centre will simply not be able to cope. In addition, the railway is in plans to reduce its fast train service to London.

With regards to BA2 near to where I live there are environmental issues ie the nature reserve at Weston Hills & safety issues concerning the road to Buntingford.

See attachment


My main point regarding the local Plan is that it is based upon a good transport infrastructure within Baldock, however Govia Thameslink are reducing Baldock train service.

Increase number of homes and pressure on local transport, reduced train service...

I am writing to express my disagreement with the proposal to build 3,290 new homes in Baldock by 2031.

My concerns are as follows:

- inadequate roads to allow for the proposed increase in population - in particular congestion, pollution and danger to pedestrians under railway bridge close to rail station (which can't be widened)
- insufficient rail capacity for transport into london/cambridge (assuming a part of new residents will commute unless a large number of jobs are created in Baldock to allow newcomers to work there)
- damage to the green belt and local fauna and flora
- pollution levels due to increased traffic
- inadequate capacity in schools, doctors surgery and other public facilities which are already - no detailed measures / actionable detailed plans in place
- artificially doubling the population in such a short space of time will change Baldock from the rural community current residents have chosen to live in

I would like to object in the strongest terms to the NHDC Local Plan proposal and specifically the 3290 new homes indicated for Baldock by 2031 (both the 500 in Clothall Common and 2800 on land North of Baldock).

Baldock does not have the infrastructure or amenities to support such development.

In addition the plans are such that the unique and individual character of our small market town would be utterly destroyed by these proposals.

I do not consider that the plan was positively prepared, justified, effective or consistent with national policy.

I would like to make my objection to the proposed local plan for the following reasons:

Firstly for the inevitable traffic problems. We in Baldock have finally had historical traffic problems eased with the relocation of the A505, due to our long awaited by-pass. Those of us who have lived in Baldock for any length of time remember the chaos of grid locked roads. It is unclear what measures this plan has taken regarding a model of capacity planning for vehicle increases as a direct result of the potential number of houses being mooted.

Secondly our infrastructure. Baldock Town is described as a small Market Town. I would question how has the impact of such an increase in the local population has been measured in terms of the current infrastructure available in the Town, as it is not clear in the proposed plan. By infrastructure I include not only Dr and Dentist surgeries, but schools, parking and our drainage system. Baldock Towns' old Victorian drainage network is well over capacity, as those in the town with basements will know. Storm drains overflow into basements and drains back-up on pavements in the town centre. Drains also block due to overuse and regularly need rodding in lower areas. Church Street being the prime example.

I've touched on parking, but again this is an area that will require support in Baldock within the plan to sustain such potential increases in housing. It may be that the plan eventually provides its own shops, surgeries etc., but many of us are all aware of the Great Ashby scheme, where such provision was expected, but has not materialised to date. How can we guarantee that the Great Ashby debacle doesn't transfer to Baldock?

Is the plan robust enough to withstand the requirements that such an influx in population needs? From what we have seen and heard about it to date, we in Baldock very much doubt this. Questions have been raised at forums without adequate recourse and we in Baldock have little faith that our voice is heard. Even with this new build, Baldock will still be the smallest of the Towns and as such our voice is seldom heard over the needs of the larger towns in North Hertfordshire, even with the full support of our local councillors.

Currently Baldock's road and rail networks are already feeling the strain. At peak times it can still take over half an hour to enter the town on certain roads, especially through our traffic lights at the main crossroad and although a new road system is mooted, no-one can assure the locality that this will come to fruition.

Thirdly, we have recently officially lost our Police Station, where the land was also utilised as a small housing development. Currently in Baldock our crime rates are very low and we much appreciate the efforts involved to retain that situation. However, with new housing and new people this is also going to create inevitable increases on policing and community officers.

And my final point is to do with the youth of Baldock within the neighbourhood plan. What provision is there to keep the young people who will move into the Town entertained? If entertained and kept busy, with sports and facilities provided young people are an asset to any development. But bored and neglected young people encourage a more hostile and volatile atmosphere, where boredom very often leads to vandalism and problematic behaviour. We certainly want to avoid this, but the building of one small community hall does not answer this need at all, if indeed it is ever built.

Certainly Baldock is already doing its bit for a local plan in terms of new housing development proportionally. We do need to do this and there are plenty of infill schemes and new builds proposed, without the need for over 2,800 buildings in one new development on green belt land on its outskirts, which will double the population and have a detrimental effect on the locality, which most of us are objecting too.

Although born and raised in Baldock, since 1985 I have lived on Clothall Common, a housing development built from the early 1980's. I can certainly confirm that there was, for many years, a 'them and us' culture within the town, which I can see being repeated. On that development there were at least 3 affordable schemes, including self build, to get the local people like myself onto the Estate. This time, there seems to be a minority proportion of 'affordable housing', which again, most of the locals probably won't be able to afford. Therefore we would like an assurance that at least some of these houses, if the scheme gets the go ahead, will see that local people can receive some benefit, as otherwise our lives will be detrimentally affected just to alleviate other over crowded areas, perhaps not even Hertfordshire at all.

Please do consider us, the local population and all of our objections. We have lived through this state of affairs with traffic problems before and are loath to have it forced upon us again when we have finally been able to have our Town back, with our bypass and restructured High Street, which we have fully embraced and built upon.

We have been told that people will walk into Baldock from the new development. Who is anyone trying to kid. No one walks anywhere anymore if they can help it and if we rely on this sort of thinking and conjecture, Baldock is doomed!

Considering the investment in housing in Baldock, one would assume some common sense and ensure facilities for young people match that investment. Therefore a prudent decision would be to ensure that investment is made on behalf of young people and especially for Football facilities which are currently lacking.

My family and I would like to object in the strongest terms to the NHDC Local Plan proposal and specifically the 3290 new homes indicated for Baldock by 2031 (both the 500 in Clothall Common and 2800 on land North of Baldock).

Baldock does not have the infrastructure or amenities to support such development.

In addition the plans are such that the unique and individual character of our small market town would be utterly destroyed by these proposals.

We do not consider that the plan with positively prepared, justified, effective or consistent with national policy.

Please confirm receipt of our response.

I am writing to express my concerns and objections to aspects of the Local Plan 2011-2031. My primary concerns centre around BA2 which covers what is currently known as Cambrai Farm. My chief concern regarding this particular development is that the building of houses on this farm will increase the risk of flooding to the houses in this street. Currently, if we have heavy rainfall the road here resembles a river and this does not clear until some time after the rain stops. When you add more houses which will be on a slightly higher level than we are now then the risk is bound to increase and flooding WILL occur.

On a broader level, I object to the high numbers of houses being proposed for Baldock as a whole. The roads through this town are struggling to cope with the traffic we already have. Add to that the local rail proposal for reducing the service into London and it adds up to a potential disaster. The local schools are full to capacity and amenities in the town are already stretched. As the smallest town in the local area why is Baldock being given more houses than any other town. To increase the population by approximately 80% is unjustifiable and will destroy the character and spirit of the community here.

Whilst it is generally accepted that some building will have to take place I feel that the proposed Local Plan is a step too far and should be reduced considerably to preserve to nature of this historic market town.

Following a meeting at Knights Templar earlier this month, regarding the above local plan, I would like to express my concerns for the future of Baldock.

Please can I ask that the current proposed plans are reconsidered and you greatly reduce the number of houses that are planned to be built. I have key concerns over a number of areas regarding the impact the houses will have on the small town of Baldock. Essentially, Baldock cannot cope with such a vast increase in houses and population.

The impact to the local schools will be huge, the numbers of children for each yearly in-take will greatly increase and there needs to be assurances that the high level of current teaching standards are maintained and the children of Baldock do not have to suffer with such an increase in housing. I also have concerns regarding the other vital Council services being provided for the people living in Baldock including Doctors, Hospital and Dental services. How can we know we will be able to continue to receive the service and support that these necessary services provide?

The expectation is that there would be an increase of 5000 cars due to the proposed housing, this will have such a huge impact in traffic and congestion, Baldock just cannot cope with such a large increase and will have such a negative impact to the people already living here as well as such an impact to the local environment through car pollution.
If new roads are to be built to accommodate this increase, this will further be taking our precious green land away and I doubt the roads will be ready in time for the increase in volume of people and cars.

I have also seen that Govia are reducing the fast trains into London from Baldock just at a time when the Baldock population is about to explode, I cannot understand why such a decision would be made unless it was not an informed one. This again shows that decisions are being made without full information being provided and this has encouraged me even more to contact you and highlight key impacts this proposal will have on Baldock.
Baldock is such a lovely market town and one of the last in the area that has managed for so long to retain its character and be somewhere that no-one wants to leave.

Please do not ruin our lovely town, do not put our children's education at risk, do not cause misery for those of us who have chosen to live in Baldock by deciding to build way too many houses that such a small town cannot support. Please ensure that a strong decision to respect Baldock and the wishes of its inhabitants is made.

I wish to make you aware of the following serious flaws in the Local Plan in respect of the housing allocation for Baldock and the failure of the council to consider the environmental factors using up to date, valid information. The 80% increase in dwellings within Baldock will undoubtedly have far reaching health implications because of the following:

* Information from the Baldock Surgery confirms that asthma related diseases amongst young children (5-16 yrs) was running at a dangerous15% prior to opening of the Baldock Bypass in 2006. This was a major factor in Baldock being granted a bypass at the time.

* A more recent survey by the Baldock Surgery revealed that the figure as above had dropped to 6% which is in line with the national average.

* NO INFORMATION ON THIS HAS BEEN SOUGHT FROM BALDOCK SURGERY BY NHDC TO HELP FORMULATE A WORKABLE LOCAL PLAN.

* Adoption of the local plan in it's current format will mean an additional 6-7000 homeowners cars and will inevitably lead to a rapid rise in asthma and other related conditions to similar or greater levels than pre-bypass. This will be exacerbated by an approx 80% increase in delivery vehicles to service the growing trend in online shopping.

* Traffic flow through Baldock cannot be increased to any great extent as the 2 pinch points (A505/A507 and High St/Hitchin St/Whitehorse St) are abounded by historic listed buildings.

* Baldock sits in a valley/bowl thus the polluted air will sit and not easily disperse as was proven during the case for the aforementioned bypass.

*Whatever relief roads and other measures are put in to deter motorists from entering the town the unique culture and facilities will draw them in and gridlock will occur as the town simply cannot physically take these increased volumes of traffic.

* Unfortunately it seems that the Portfolio Holder-Councillor Levett is unfairly biased against Baldock. At a public meeting in 2015 I asked him directly how he could justify such a disproportionate allocation of housing for Baldock and his reply was "Maybe Baldock hasn't taken it's fair proportion in the past".

In short given the above facts and considering that the smallest town in North Herts has been allocated the largest (23%) housing allocation for seemingly no good reason I believe this plan to be unfit for purpose and hope you will take this into account in making your decisions.

I would like to highlight just a few of the many valid reasons why the proposed development will be catastrophic for Baldock.

The Need for Expansion:
The need for such large scale development remains unproved. The expansion is clearly only to facilitate working outside of London and Cambridge, with no evidence of the need for large scale additional housing for the local population; this cannot be disputed. There is no evidence that further employment to be established in the town. It will certainly not benefit and is not wanted by the residents.
There will be greater pressure on all amenities including shops, the GP surgery, dentists, vets, sports facilities as well as the emergency services and schools. Baldock police station was closed within the last few years. Baldock will be changed from being the smallest of the North Hertfordshire towns to being one of the biggest.

Detrimental to the Character of Baldock:
Baldock is a small historic market town, containing the largest number of listed buildings within North Hertfordshire. The town has a well defined sense of community. The proposed development will increase the population of the town twofold and will have an unacceptable effect on the physical character of the town and the community spirit. It is worth highlighting that the Clothall Common development of the 1990s, considerably smaller than that now proposed, not being integrated with the town ethos and being seen very much as a separate entity.

Transport:
Those in the new development will need to travel to and from Baldock to their workplace. This will either be by car or rail.
Traffic within the town centre will be severely and adversely impacted with the real possibility of gridlock within the town, particularly at the junction of Rayban court. Due to the surrounding listed buildings there is minimal scope for development of the road plan and traffic flow. I have seen nothing which would suggest that this has been considered. The A1(M) and other major routes including the A505, A507 and the A602 are already severely congested, with unacceptable journey times extending the working day by several hours. Greater traffic will result in further unnecessary accidents.
Baldock railway station is of small scale with no scope for expansion due to surrounding housing- newly built. The station only has parking for a very limited number of cars again with no prospect of expansion. It is not capable of accommodating any significant increase in the number of people using the service. Trains are very over-crowded during peak travel times.

Environmental Impact:
The environment in which the residents of Baldock live will be significantly affected; greater pollution- air & water and general rubbish. Wear and tear on the roads will increase. Open spaces will be curtailed. Wildlife, including known areas of habitat for rare species will be reduced. Rain water run-off will be affected with increased risk of flooding- Baldock lies within a distinct dip.
Land to be used for housing is prime agricultural land required for the growing crops; locally sourced food reduces the carbon footprint and is in line with the Governments policy.
The listed buildings within Baldock, some over 500 years old are close to the existing roads. Resulting increase vibration as a consequence of traffic escalation, together with pollution increase can only result in deterioration of these historic buildings,

Utility Services:
The current sewage system and treatment works will be unable to cope with the increase in waste. Demands on water supply to the additional homes is unlikely to be met by the present water reserves and infrastructure. Similarly the development will stretch demands for electricity and gas supplies, requiring further infrastructure development and large scale disruption

In summary, the very reasons why those who chose to live their lives in this town will be taken away. The plan is unworkable and the outcome unmanageable, with no benefit to the community.

I am writing to comment on the NHDC 's local plan 2011-2031.
My comments concentrate on the impact which the development will have
1. on the Historic Market Town of Baldock and
2. the particular area which I have lived in since 1982 and
3. the particular dwellings situated in the area I live in

The Construction of 3,436 Houses (Reference 13.15)
The NPPF soundness criteria
Positively Prepared
During the 34 years in which I have lived in Baldock I have already seen the town grow steadily, the largest development being The Clothall Common Housing Estate which is earmarked to be increased by yet another 500 houses.
As a result of this expansion and other regional domestic and commercial growth the town became increasingly congested with huge traffic jams especially on the Eastern approach, a problem which was eased by the construction of the 2006 Baldock Bypass, reference 13,22.
The present plan is likely to reverse the slight improvement which was achieved by the by-pass as 3,436 new households will have to move about the town in addition to whatever new commercial development is planned along the B
Reference No.13.15
The town presently has 4,491 dwellings. The Local Plan intends to add a total of another 3,436 of which 3,136 are still to be built between now and 2031.
The 2011 census presented a population of 10,280 inhabitants. 3,436 new houses will increase the population of Baldock by a minimum of 7-8,000 people.
These figures speak for themselves.
This plan is not positively prepared as it is completely out of proportion with any other development in North Herts.
Justified
The land North of Baldock, reference BA1, is a large open site and seems to have been chosen as a convenient plot because 2,800 houses can be fitted into it. There is no justification for such inadequate planning.
The Local Plan is not justified because reasonable alternatives do not appear to have been fully explored.
Effective
The town of Baldock cannot absorb the intended development, it is not an effective development.
In order to add that number of dwellings the present infrastructure of Baldock needs to be almost doubled which is totally unfeasible. also, that would have to be done BEFORE the 3,436 houses are all up and running or serious shortages will be experienced as we know happened in Great Ashby nr Stevenage. It seems as if Modern Baldock is intended to be built alongside Historic Baldock which is neither effective nor conducive to the nature of this Historic Market Town with its distinct character.
Consistent with National Policy
The development of the land under reference BA1 is not sustainable.

The Importance of Baldock's History and Heritage (Reference 13.13/13.14/13.17)
Positively Prepared
Not at all.
When coming to Baldock on the Eastern Approach there is a BROWN Signpost saying BALDOCK - HISTORIC MARKET TOWN
Baldock's rich history has long been established. During the preparation for the construction of the Baldock Bypass extensive archeological diggings were carried out involving the Baldock Schools. The findings of Roman artefacts can be viewed in local museums.
Baldock's centre has a conservation area and many old buildings which are already seriously compromised by the intense through traffic.
"Managing growth in this relatively developed part of the District whilst allowing each town to retain its identity is one of the challenges to be addressed" (Reference 13.14)

Justified
The need for more housing cannot justify the destruction of a Historic Market Town.

Site BA10 New Employment Allocation- Royston Road

Positively Prepared
Reference 13.20 / 13.21
Justified
Reference 13.20 / 13.21
Effective
No comment, I am not able to assess that
Consistent with National Policy
No comment, I am not able to assess that

The Plan to develop the site BA10 into a larger business park fails in its entirety to acknowledge the fact that there are 8 existing family homes spread along the Royston Road and situated on the very site that is to be developed.
When I moved into my house in 1982 all these houses were owned by Hertfordshire Council.
Over the years the Council sold most of them into private ownership and all the privately owned houses have been renovated, modernised and extended. Two of those houses changed hands in 2015 and it is an outrage that none of the searches which were done found anything about the intended development of the site they are on. This poses some serious questions:
1. Is the Council hiding anything?
2. Why have we not been notified of anything regarding the future of our houses if there is going to be commercial development around our houses?
3. Why can Councillor Michael Muir and Councillor Mike Weeks not offer any information at all
about this part of the plan?
This section of the plan has not considered any alternative or any impact on the 8 dwellings along the Royston Road.
This situation has caused considerable anxiety amongst the residents along the Royston Road.
We do not know what the outcome for these 8 houses will be.
Nobody can tell us whether our homes will be subject to compulsory purchase and will eventually be demolished the Business Park will be built behind and around our houses thus hugely reducing the value of our houses and making a sale impossible.

In this context it is worth mentioning that in 2003 in the context of the construction of the Baldock Bypass I received a document from the Planning & Environment Directorate of North Herts District Council.
This document was a DRAFT REGISTER OF IMPORTANT LOCAL BUILDINGS FOR BALDOCK.
It included
Small Holdings, Royston Road
Early 20th Century small holdings are positioned at regular intervals along Royston Road. Each house has been designed with a group of outbuildings and a small area of land. The houses are simple rectangular blocks with rendered walls and plain tiled roofs. the outbuildings are weatherboarded with slate roofs.

The houses could not be included in the register in the end because the properties are within the Bygrave Parish and not Baldock. However, there is a case for their contribution to the Baldock heritage and they must not be destroyed.

The aspect of transport to and from a potential business park has not been addressed at all , nor has it been addressed how that would further impact on an already congested crossroads in the centre of Baldock.
This plan is neither positively prepared, nor justified, nor effective.

Conclusion
This plan is ill-prepared and unsound in its present form. The size of the suggested development is unfair and completely disproportionate with any other development and will destroy the character of an important town.
Whilst there is acceptance in the town that some development will have to happen, there is a very determined consensus that it cannot take on this size and shape and needs to be revised.

I wish to register my objection to the doubling of the number of residents of Baldock.

We have waiting lists for our schools at present; goodness knows how we shall manage to educate our children when there is no available school place for them to take up. I know there are plans to build a school on this new estate but unless it is up and running by the time the first family moves into the new houses there will begin an ever increasing waiting list for the existing schools.

We have at present three schools, all over subscribed, unless there is an equal number of places in the new promised school - what will likely be the same number of children - we have an even worse situation to surmount. I understand that a school large enough to accommodate the extra children is not in the plan. A worry for us all with small children and Grandchildren.

Once again we , Baldock Residents are asked to submit our thoughts on the proposed housing development using rural , green belt land. Didn't we reject it first time round? Interestingly and allegedly, I believe H.C.C owned the land and wanted to sell so developers have ignored other more suitable sites. There is usually money involved somewhere! Surprise ,surprise.
The fact that there us no advantage to Baldock to having this proposed urban sprawl, i.e this will worsen the following : poor water supply, loss of supposed, protected , green belt land, inadequate, basic, over subscribed amenities like schools, doctor surgeries etc, traffic congestion, small railway station with tiny parking area and congested location for joining town traffic at busy times and a heavily ,congested Great North Road not to mention potential , pollution problems. (Yes, I am aware proposals are under way to stop quick rail services to London from Baldock, interesting timing?) Who will afford all of these houses, probably mostly London commuters? Baldock is a historic, market town and tiny at that, how can you possibly be considering such a madcap , housing plan of up to 3000 houses?
I rest my case. But you are not going to listen to our views are you? Just going through the motions of this supposed Consultation, who are you kidding? Prove me wrong and end this now.

My family and I would like to object in the strongest terms to the NHDC Local Plan proposal and specifically the 3290 new homes indicated for Baldock by 2031 (both the 500 in Clothall Common and 2800 on land North of Baldock).

Baldock does not have the infrastructure or amenities to support such development.

In addition the plans are such that the unique and individual character of our small market town would be utterly destroyed by these proposals.

We do not consider that the plan with positively prepared, justified, effective or consistent with national policy.

Please confirm receipt of our response.

Once again we , Baldock Residents are asked to submit our thoughts on the proposed housing development using rural, green belt land. Didn't we reject it first time round? Interestingly and allegedly, I believe H.C.C owned the land and wanted to sell so developers have ignored other more suitable sites. There is usually money involved somewhere! Surprise ,surprise.
The fact that there us no advantage to Baldock to having this proposed urban sprawl, i.e this will worsen the following : poor water supply, loss of supposed, protected , green belt land, inadequate, basic, over subscribed amenities like schools, doctor surgeries etc, traffic congestion, small railway station with tiny parking area and congested location for joining town traffic at busy times and a heavily ,congested Great North Road not to mention potential , pollution problems. (Yes, I am aware proposals are under way to stop quick rail services to London from Baldock, interesting timing?) Who will afford all of these houses, probably mostly London commuters? Baldock is a historic, market town and tiny at that, how can you possibly be considering such a madcap , housing plan of up to 3000 houses?
I rest my case. But you are not going to listen to our views are you? Just going through the motions of this supposed Consultation, who are you kidding? Prove me wrong and end this now.

I would like to provide comments on the sports facilities in Baldock. My son plays football for one of the Baldock under 10s teams but due to a lack of pitches has to play on a different ground to the other teams. We also regularly go to see the Baldock Town senior team but have to travel outside of Baldock for their home games.

It would be great if we had proper facilities for all of the Baldock Town teams that supported each team both in terms of sporting activity and social activity which is so key for all ages, but especially so for younger children. I think this would support the community of Baldock and help with the integration of the influx of people to the town as new houses are built.

It has become more apparent over the last few years that Baldock do not have the infrastructure in place to support the size of the town when it comes to providing sporting facilities to its local community.

The proposal of new homes is only going to put more strain on these current facilities, unless we put something in place now.

Baldock is a very friendly community and at the heart of it all are its sports clubs and in particular the football club. There are various teams across a number of age groups but who all have to share a small number of pitches and facilities at the weekend.

We make a very big point in this country of stating sport should be for all and how we should get children involved in sports from an early age, for their own health as much as enjoyment. In Baldock we currently do not have the resources to provide this.

I know from my own experience and from my own children and their friends that sport is very important to the younger generation and I'm even often asked by both children and adults why Baldock, a successful sporting community, do not have their own 'home' ground and why they have to play in Stotfold - a town like Baldock should have its own ground/clubhouse/training facilities available to all, something to build the community around.

Thank-you for taking the time to read my thoughts, I hope in some small way it may help.

It is clear that the sporting and leisure facilities in Baldock are incredibly limited. For many years both the numerous youth teams and the senior teams at Baldock FC have had to use facilities outside of the town and local school pitches with inadequate or no facilities.

There is already a severe pressure and lack of facility for the current population, and children will miss out on football, even without any expansion.

I work with the U18 side, and reserve/development side where our goal is to develop young players to become first team players at a high tier in English football....competing in competitions like the FA vase.

If we are to succeed with this goal and give players the best opportunities, it is imperative that within the development plans , land is set aside for improved sports facilities to cater for the bigger population and to include a stadium for Baldock Towns senior sides.

We want to bring Baldock Town FC home to Baldock and have facilities that the club, players and supporters can be proud of and all benefit from.

For years Baldock has watched it's sporting facilities diminish. Baldock is a very communal town, without sports facilities and much needed fund raising all money will go into other towns. For example, closest rugby ground is Letchworth, which is without a doubt a brilliant club, but why doesn't Baldock have one? There are no tennis clubs and the majority of sports can only really be played during the summer as there is no place except for avenue park field, or KTS field to play on.

Baldock Town has no football club ground, no rugby ground, no affordable gym and barely any affordable activities for younger children.

With Baldock's youth football team now improving it is important that healthy activities for children and young adults in the community is being offered and this just can't happen without more facilities. The government is making healthy eating and being active such a big thing but for some people those who don't drive, those who work long hours those who are impaired unless it is on their doorstep they will be unable to use anything outside of Baldock.

The population in Baldock is growing every year and especially with the proposed plans there is a significant need for a new sporting facility, one to accommodate all children and young adults.

For years Baldock has watched it's sporting facilities diminish. Baldock is a very communal town, without sports facilities and much needed fund raising all money will go into other towns.
Baldock Town has no football club ground, no rugby ground, no affordable gym and barely any affordable activities for younger children.

With Baldock's youth football team now improving it is important that healthy activity for children and young adults in the community is being offered and this just can't happen without more facilities.

The population in Baldock is growing every year and especially with the proposed plans there is a significant need for a new sporting facility, one to accommodate all children.

For many years Baldock Town has watched it's sporting facilities dwindle. Baldock Town FC is steeped in history and plays a major role in its local community. In conjunction with Baldock Town Youth they attempt to inspire the next generation of football within the town. They promote healthy activity for children and young adults in the community.

It is vital that Baldock Town has its own football ground and clubhouse. The club has managed this without a home, purely through dedication, passion & pride of both the club and the community. However without a ground the opportunities are limited to grow.

The population in Baldock is growing and with the potential housing plans will increase the need for a football ground.

Regarding the lack of football facilities in Baldock.

My wife and I moved to Baldock with our two children three and a half years ago and, very quickly, began the process of integrating ourselves into the local community. Having two young children obviously helped, but we were, mainly, meeting parents of the children at my son's school.

My son, then 5 years old, joined Football's Future at the Arena but, being an Academy rather than a club, developed no wider a circle of friends - and nor did we.

The following year, through a contact at his school, we were encouraged to join Baldock Youth Football Club. This has turned out to be the most satisfying and successful avenue for the whole family to make new friends and acquaintances and integrate into the community as a whole. My son has now, regularly, plays with boys from all of the Baldock schools (and some of the surrounding villages) and my wife, daughter and myself have made friendships with parents and children we never otherwise would have met.
Over the last three football seasons, our social options have grown way beyond any other place we have lived. The children are being invited to a wide variety of birthday parties, we are being invited out for social evenings, we all share information about many leisure and social activities of which we would otherwise be ignorant, we are helping each other with the multifarious problems that arise in day-to-day living ... the list goes on and on.

Baldock Youth Football Club has become, to us, more than just a football club, it has become the glue within our section of the local community. The sense of camaraderie amongst both children and parents has grown beyond our wildest imaginings; and all of this is just for ONE age group of children, growing up together.
Multiply this by each yearly age group, and the network and communal reach which this club has engendered is incalculable.

So, on a social level ... wonderful! Now for the negative bit !!

During this period I have been struck by the high quality facilities my son's team has been visiting in the local area. Villages, with far fewer people than Baldock, have facilities that we can only dream of.
Buntingford, Morden, Shefford, Stotfold, Ashwell to name but a few - villages with populations varying from 1,000-6,000 - all smaller than Baldock - have superior facilities. We are, routinely, offered hot drinks, hot snacks and, especially in the depths of winter, warm rooms in which to retreat, whereas I have often been embarrassed by not being able to offer even the basic toilet facilities to the visiting teams and their supporters (parents, grandparents, siblings etc.). This is particularly embarrassing when the opposing teams have young girls playing for them. We have had to send them to Tesco's! Not the trip you would have expected to make had you just travelled from Hatfield or Saffron Walden!

With the new development, the population of Baldock is due to double in size from around 10,250 (est.2011) to at least 18,000. Is Baldock still to be the poor relation in terms of its population's accessibility to a footballing Community Centre? And it WILL be a Community Centre!

I am told that, currently, over 300 children between the ages of 5 and 17 play football for Baldock Youth.
One would, therefore, assume that doubling the size of the town would double the number of boys and girls wanting to play. Where, then, would these children go? Already we have trouble finding pitches for the current crop of children. Where, also, would the new, and existing, Baldock residents meet each other?
Baldock is no longer a sleepy little market town. It is being pushed further from its history by the new development. It NEEDS new community facilities for both young and old alike. Football reaches all levels of society and forms a lifelong bond for those involved.

The residents are, therefore, not just asking for a patch of ground on which we can paint a few white lines so our kids can kick a ball around on a Saturday or a Sunday; of course, we need a variety of pitches to service the differing age groups and the various levels of expertise acquired by our teams, that is a given,
but we are, also, asking for a social meeting place for all the residents of Baldock, available any time of the year, for a variety of sports, and for a community club where our children - and their parents - can play, exercise and relax in safety with their friends.

With the development of the new extension to Baldock Town, we have the perfect opportunity to build a custom-made centre capable of facilitating all those leisure activities mentioned and, at the same time, ease the, otherwise, untenable pressure that would be placed on the current facilities available within the environs of the town.

In the common parlance "it is a no-brainer!" So, please, take this "once-in-a-generation" opportunity to make Baldock a 21st Century town in which we can all be proud to live, work AND play.

With or without the increase in homes and population in Baldock, it is vitally important that the Council make provision for new sporting facilities.

Even today, there is little in the way of sporting facilities in Baldock - football in particular, where the adult team have been forced to play in Letchworth, Hitchin and Stotfold just to be able to compete at the level they do.

The Youth football club is also a thriving set up and yet they are being expected to make do with limited pitches and no changing facilities.

For years now both the Senior and youth football setups have been knocking their heads against a brick wall trying to realise a facility that they can all call home.

With the population only set to increase, it is now time something was done! How many successful sporting clubs can we associate with Baldock that are actually playing in the Town?
Sport brings communities together - we just need that sporting community coming together in Baldock not in neighbouring towns please!

I am writing to challenge the Council to address the shortfall in sporting facilities available to the Baldock community.

I followed the fortunes of the "old" Baldock Town FC as a kid and have been involved with the "new" carnation since day one as a player through to today as a main figurehead within the club. I also played my youth football for Baldock Town Youth.

Appreciating that my views maybe biased being involved with the club, but Baldock Town FC has all the ingredients to put Baldock firmly on the sporting map - the only ingredient missing is a site to call home.

Since 2003, we have turned the club from a park football playing outfit into a club rubbing shoulders with some of the best in the County. This is all the more amazing when you consider that 75% of that period has seen the club's 1st team playing outside the Town! I've personally put years of effort - voluntarily - into getting this club to where it is today - on the verge of promotion to the ninth tier of English football.

Since day one, we have had hurdle after hurdle put in front of us and yet we have still continued to battle the odds. There comes a time though when there has to be light at the end of the tunnel - something that makes all the voluntary man hours worth their while. Baldock Town FC have shown that they are not a short term flash in the pan. We are genuinely serious about creating a sporting hub that the community can be proud of.
The club as a whole (including the Youth FC) have been shelling out tens of thousands on pitch hire outside the Town for a number of years and there appears little or no appetite from the Council to address this.

In my view, Councils want to be remembered for their legacies and success stories. You have a thriving football club right here on your doorstep who are doing all the right things, but they need your help to fully realise and unlock its undoubted potential.

I look at other areas in the County and there are pitches everywhere! A sporting facility which the people of Baldock are put at the forefront of is what the adult and junior teams of Baldock Town FC in particular are absolutely crying out for - don't miss this opportunity, with future planning of Baldock at stake, to address the need for sporting and recreational provision.

With the rise of new housing there are going to be more and more youngsters living in Baldock there are no facilities provided for them, sports is a big part of building team spirit, learning to work and be part of a team. It can help with keeping the growing population of obesity down as it promotes being healthy and keeping active. Baldock has nothing to offer.

It needs something, Please don't ignore what the town are asking for.

With the rise of new housing there are going to be more and more youngsters living in Baldock there are no facilities provided for them, sports is a big part of building team spirit, learning to work and be part of a team. It can help with keeping the growing population of obesity down as it promotes being healthy and keeping active. Baldock has nothing to offer.

It needs something, Please don't ignore what the town are asking for.