Policy D4: Air Quaility
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
Increased traffic will decrease air quality in Baldock. The town will see an increase of at least 7,000 cars. This is not acceptable.
'...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
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.
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
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.
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
Support
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
Representation ID: 3903
Received: 29/11/2016
Respondent: Letchworth Garden City Heritage Foundation
Support the inclusion of policies regarding air quality.
See attached
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
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.
See attachment
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
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.
See attached
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
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
See attachment