Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Re SP3 f. (Promote and support the expansion of the knowledge based economy in the District), the success of this policy will depend significantly on transport by train. Workers in the knowledge economy will require frequent fast train services to London, Stevenage and Cambridge, throughout the day and not just at peak times. Many will need to commute at peak times to jobs outside the district, and others will need to commute outside of peak times to accommodate flexible working (e.g. to manage childcare). Those with jobs in the district will need to travel to major centres in the knowledge economy, e.g., London, Cambridge or Stevenage, for purposes such as business development or training. At present the train operator, Govia, is consulting on timetable amendments which would significantly reduce the frequency of fast trains to London. This should be opposed in order to help ensure the success of SP3 and SP3 f. in particular.

SP6 c. should include increasing total train capacity, particularly to and from Baldock at peak times, and preventing any reduction in the frequency, journey speed and capacity at other times . Para 4.26 of the proposed local plan acknowledges that, "transport infrastructure ... is already under
strain at peak periods." The proposed development of Baldock in particular will inevitably increase the number of people using the trains from Baldock. At present the train operator, Govia, is consulting on timetable amendments which would significantly reduce the frequency of fast trains to London. This should be opposed in order to help ensure the success of SP6.
Also, SP6 c. should include creating step-free access to the platforms at Baldock station. The present lack of step-free access prevents use (or convenient use) of the station by those with prams/pushchairs, wheelchair users and those with other mobility problems. Failure to provide step-free access at Baldock will force those users to either rely on transport by car (less sustainable and contributes to road congestion) or prevent access to shops and services in Letchworth, Hitchin and elsewhere.

Re SP14: I agree with these policies in principle, but I object because they do not go far enough to ensure that the town's infrastructure can cope with the additional residents (that is, the policies will not be effective without amendment).
i) SP14 does not mention rail transport. Para 4.26 of the proposed local plan acknowledges that, "transport infrastructure ... is already under
strain at peak periods." BA1 in particular will inevitably significantly increase the number of people using the trains from Baldock, because of the size of the development and the fact that Baldock will be the closest station. At present the train operator, Govia, is consulting on timetable amendments which would significantly reduce the frequency of fast trains to London. This should be opposed in order to help ensure the success of SP14.
ii) SP14 e.ii is ineffective because it does not explain what "upgrades" are necessary to Baldock station. SP14. should include creating step-free access to the platforms at Baldock station. The present lack of step-free access prevents use (or convenient use) of the station by those with prams/pushchairs, wheelchair users and those with other mobility problems. Failure to provide step-free access at Baldock will force those users to either rely on transport by car (less sustainable and contributes to road congestion) or prevent access to shops and services in Letchworth, Hitchin and elsewhere.
iii) SP14 d and e do not go far enough to mitigate the impact of additional traffic that will be generated by BA1. Para 13.29 of the plan acknowledges that, "The Station Road / Clothall Road / Royston Road junction is identified as a pinch point in the Council's transport modelling." and asserts that, "Provision of a new road associated with
BA1 linking the A507 with the A505 will help mitigate this issue enabling movement
from north to east without the need to use the junction." I agree that the new road should be built and that it will likely somewhat assist in mitigating the impact of additional traffic using the junction. However, that road on its own will not be sufficient and/or will not mitigate the impact enough to prevent that junction from becoming an even more problematic pinch point. SP14 fails to include any proposal to help deal with the additional traffic that will result from residents of BA1 travelling by road from BA1 to locations in Baldock such as the Baldock industrial estate (BE1, BB1), the hypermarket (Tesco), the health centre, and schools outside of BA1. Without specific proposals for managing the traffic at that junction, SP14 d and e is ineffective.
iv) SP14h is ineffective because it only mentions primary and secondary education, and fails to mention nursery and pre-school provision. Baldock will need additional nursery and pre-school places, especially to ensure that parents are able to return to work.