Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

I object to the Local plan for Baldock Hertfordshire BA1 - Site 2 and 3

My reasons are:
1. Easy Option
We were told it was the best option. It felt as if we were being fobbed off by the councillors. They seemed so pleased to find an easy option and dealt with the issues as late as possible, about 11:30pm at the council meeting!! They seem to have decided and we were treated as being "NIMBY" for objecting. There are very good reasons to object and they have not considered any of them.
They kept telling us that this is the preferred option but we have never been offered any alternatives. It has always been presented as a fait accompli.
They have made us write 3 different letters and I doubt that they have read any of them thus showing the total lack of regard for their constituents and wasting our time. They are public servants who are not serving the public or representing us! Counsellor Levitt used bully boy tactics on us at the public meeting, basically telling us that he would discuss it at a closed meeting if the public did not remain silent, we were not allowed to voice our concerns.

2. Unfair weighting
Baldock has been allocated about 4000 houses with 2800 in one block compared to Hitchin having 1332 dwellings and Letchworth only being allocated 1000 dwellings. Baldock is significantly smaller than both Hitchin and Letchworth.
We were always told that the land around Clothall Common would be filled in, this by comparison has been allocated about 500 houses and it is close to the motorway with easy access to the Baldock bypass.

3. Affordable housing???
We keep getting told that we need affordable housing. The plans do not reflect affordable housing at all. If you need affordable housing build flats that are OWNED. Price them at a price that people can afford to buy them as a starter homes. If this happens the flats will retain their value and not become ghettos. Have communal gardens linked to them and make them attractive. This will be good starter homes or retirement homes from where you can upsize if necessary or return to if you are downsizing. These flats should be built on brown field sites close to the railway station for the commuters that they seem to be serving. There is not a great deal of employment locally so there is no reason to site the development here for any other reason than greed, the council wants to sell off the green belt land (the family silver) and realise a very substantial amount of money that will be used all over Hertfordshire and Baldock will be left with inadequate facilities and a logjam with the traffic. Why can they not take advice from places like Singapore where they have dealt with a shortage of land for a number of years. On the local news tonight, there were questions being asked as to why there are so many empty properties that are not being used. Has this option been dealt with sufficiently.
4. Traffic
The access to the new development is totally inadequate. Salisbury Road is a very narrow road that serves the local homes. The proposed development will lead to an increase in cars by 3500 to 7200 per rush hour. Baldock is in a dip and pollution will increase significantly. We will never be able to get out of Salisbury Rd, into Bygrave Road. Councillor Levitt suggested that a bicycle lane be built so that we could get into town.
5. The greenbelt is there for a reason. It keeps the various towns distinct and gives each their own specific characteristics. This specific greenbelt is the habitat of the corn bunting which is on the red list. The planners are fully aware that the development would destroy this habitat and suggested providing alternative habitat. How will this information be imparted to the corn bunting and its success or failure will only be monitored once the bird is extinct.