Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Search representations

Results for Mrs Judith Dean search

New search New search

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Policy SP14: Site BA1 - North of Baldock

Representation ID: 973

Received: 29/11/2016

Respondent: Mrs Judith Dean

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

Object to SP14 - BA1:
- NHDC have not given adequate justification for the siting of this development and have not taken into consideration the effect of dismantling the green belt on the homogenous character of Baldock.
- Scale of development
- Percentage of settlement growth distributed over the district
- Highway infrastructure
- no evidence of 'exceptional circumstances' to build on the Green Belt
- Community infrastructure

Full text:

Whilst not objecting in principle to the building of new houses in and around Baldock and fully accepting the need for this I feel that this current plan has not given sufficient thought to the fundamental need to choose the most appropriate site and the right number of dwellings. These needs are supported in the NPPF which NHDC claims it has followed with care. However, NHDC is proposing a development which will increase the number of dwellings (and therefore proportionately its population) by at least 40 per cent, whilst Hitchin and Letchworth will be increased by no more than 6 percent. NHDC seem unable to justify this. On the FAQ page of the Local Plan website they list the question, 'Why is so much housing proposed for Baldock?'. The response is marked for its total lack of reference to Baldock, it merely states that 'large sites make a significant contribution to these requirements, rather than place a burden on existing facilities....this means that some areas will take more development than others.' Obviously NHDC are relying on the detail that the Neighbourhood Plan will supply to see that the burden of the new development will not fall on the existing Baldock but that still does not explain why this is the most suitable site.
NHDC also fails adequately to explain why it is making inroads on the London Metropolitan Green Belt surrounding Baldock. It is interesting to note that the original Housing Location plan of February 2013 shows a plan of just over 1,000 to be built in a reasonably allocated way around the town, whereas the additional sites version of July 2013 shows that massive addition that we see now, independent but officially part of Baldock.
Along with the expansion of housing NHDC proposes an employment (industrial) park of 19 hectares along the Royston Road NHDC creating an extensive incursion into the Green Belt area whilst not submitting substantive reasoning for why building on this site would meet the government's requirement for this to be done solely under 'exceptional circumstances' as defined in the NPPF.
The site of BA1 is being foisted on Baldock which will have to cope with the consequences of the pressures that will be placed on its already crowded roads and its facilities. The thoughtless and careless approach of NHDC will no doubt effect Baldock's future and in spite of their wise words in Section 2 3.6 that states its intention that the 'vitality and viability of Hitchin, Letchworth, Royston and Baldock are safeguarded in a way that takes account of their distinctive role', as a long time resident this seems very unlikely.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Policy SP5: Countryside and Green Belt

Representation ID: 1488

Received: 29/11/2016

Respondent: Mrs Judith Dean

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

NHDC have used the caveat of 'exceptional circumstances' as detailed in the NPPF to allow them to make inroads on the Green Belt boundaries around Baldock without due concern for the safeguarding of the character of this historic town.

Full text:

NHDC have used the caveat of 'exceptional circumstances' as detailed in the NPPF to allow them to make inroads on the Green Belt boundaries around Baldock without due concern for the safeguarding of the character of this historic town.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

BA10 Royston Road

Representation ID: 1491

Received: 29/11/2016

Respondent: Mrs Judith Dean

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

The projected 'employment area' will cause significant traffic problems and the by pass will be unable to cope adequately.

Full text:

The allocation of 19.6 hectares for an 'employment area' unrealistically thinks that this is feasible as it will 'take advantage of a good location close to the junction with the by pass and reasonably close to the proximity of the station and town centre'. Firstly the junction with the bypass will have to bare not only the industrial traffic but also the traffic from the proposed Blackhorse Farm site (BA1). Having lived in Baldock for over 27 years I have witnessed the before and after of the bypass opened in 2006. The improvement in the traffic flow as a result of the bypass has been much eroded and much heavy traffic now passes through Baldock again,using it as a short cut. At peak times in the morning and evening there is often gridlock on the approach road to the A1 at junction 8 where the London Road and By pass meet. A significant rise in traffic volume can only make this situation worse. An other major area of concern will be the junction in the town where Whitehorse Road crosses Station Road, which is already a black spot. this is just adjacent to the proposed 'employment area'.
An industrial area at this site of this size will also detract from the character and appearance of this historic town at one of the major entrances to it.

For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our help guide.