Policy D4: Air Quaility

Showing comments and forms 1 to 7 of 7

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 311

Received: 13/11/2016

Respondent: Mrs Rebecca Prior

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation:

Increased traffic will decrease air quality in Baldock. The town will see an increase of at least 7,000 cars. This is not acceptable.

Full text:

'...levels of NO2 are close to exceeding a national air quality objective around the A505 in the Hitchin Street / Whitehorse Street area of Baldock.'
Increased traffic will decrease air quality in Baldock. The town will see an increase of at least 7,000 cars. This is not acceptable.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 486

Received: 22/11/2016

Respondent: Mrs Carole Ann Brown

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation:

Object to Policy D4: Pollution and air quality impacts of sites BA1 to BA4 and BA10 (Baldock), particularly in Whitehorse Street / Royston Road area. Loss of Green Belt will exacerbate this issue.

Full text:

Increased traffic because of the scale of the development of sites BA1 to BA4 and BA10 will cause serious pollution in the town and surrounding area. It is likely that air quality standards will be breached in the Whitehorse Street / Royston Road areas and possibly in much of the rest of the town. Para 9.28 notes that these areas are close to breaching these standards already.
The loss of so much Green Belt will remove the "green lung" which surrounds the town at present and helps mitigate this problem.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 1644

Received: 30/11/2016

Respondent: Mr Jonathan Revell

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? Yes

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation:

Object to D4:
- Development of BA1 will have serious impact to the air quality of Baldock due to the increased volume of traffic alone during & after the development.
- Plan is unjustified and not effective.

Full text:

Ref: SP8/SP14
2) Baldock has a history of bad air quality which was reduced with the development of the bypass. Referring to Policy D4 and specifically 9.28, with a development the size of BA1, this is going to have a significant impact on air quality, even if you assumed an average of one car per household, that's the additional emmissions of 3290 cars being injected into a small town alone, let alone all the other forms of emissions/pollution that will be generated during & post the development. As well as the obvious health concerns, pollutants can cause damage to historic buildings which are plentiful in Baldock, especially within the Conservation area. Based on this policy alone, BA1 should be rejected and therefore plan is UNJUSTIFIED and NOT EFFECTIVE

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 4311

Received: 28/11/2016

Respondent: Save Rural Baldock Group

Number of people: 3

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation:

Objection D4 (Baldock):
-In paragraph 9.28, the plan notes that air quality standards are already close to being exceeded in Whitehorse Street/Hitchin Street. The Housing and Green Belt Background paper notes that former site 209E (Prioroy fields in HItchin) considered unsuitable for the same reason
-Baldock at high risk of exceeding air quality standards,located in a bowl,pollution can nest
-impact of the size of development in the town not been properly assessed
-cannot be justified as being the most appropriate strategy, when considered against the reasonable alternatives(Priory Fields)
-not consistent with national policy-air quality limits NPPF paragraph 124.

Full text:

See attachment

Attachments:

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 4371

Received: 28/11/2016

Respondent: Mr John Gingell

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation:

Object on the following grounds:
plan is unsound - it has not been positively prepared to achieve a sustainable development in the context of safeguarding public health in Baldock; and
there are implications for the integrity of the Sustainability Appraisal.

Full text:

See attached

Attachments:

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 5968

Received: 24/11/2016

Respondent: Hitchin Town Action Group (HTAG)

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation:

Object D4:
Replace existing D4(see below)

Existing D4-move to sit with Natural Environment

-insufficient attention given to control of pollution as required NPPF para109 bullet4
-does not provide sufficient protection against full range of predictable impacts
-weak in 'give consideration to', in(a)is unclear
-omits mention that completion of an air pollution impact assessment is necessary before 'appropriate levels of mitigation' can be proposed
-does not give stronger guidance on most effective mitigation measures
-does not mention active and more sustainable modes of transport

-no policy to ensure conditions to control noise during demolition and construction
-no policy on light pollution

Full text:

See attachment

Attachments: