Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Our comments relate to Baldock, in particular to proposals BA1, BE2, BA10, BA3, BA4.
[1]"... secondary rail crossing for pedestrians and cyclists in the vicinity of Ashwell Way."
QUESTION: how will users of such a route be able to safely join or cross B656 Royston Road? That road should become less busy after the construction of the A507 / A505 link road, but it will remain a major route into and through Baldock.
[2]SP14(e)(ii) refers to "Safe access routes to/from, and upgrades to Baldock station."
Relevant to this is the Govia/Thameslink consultation on revised train services from 2018 (see http://www.thameslinkrailway.com/download/12366.9/timetable-consultation/). In that consultation document, it is proposed that all off-peak semi-fast train services should not stop at Baldock. This is completely unacceptable, even with the present needs of Baldock residents, and will become even more unacceptable when the huge BA1 development is in progress and completed.
Hertfordshire County Council and North Herts District Council should make immediate submissions to Govia/Thameslink to alter this decision. If (as seems likely) one of the reasons is that 12-car trains cannot now use Baldock station, then the obvious remedy is to lengthen Baldock station's platforms to accommodate 12-car trains. The number of commuters from Baldock to Cambridge, London, and Stevenage will massively increase after the development of site BA1, and it is unacceptable that Baldock will be reduced to the same status as (say) Ashwell and Morden with the loss of semi-fast train services.
Pedestrian and vehicular access to Baldock station from the north, without using the extremely narrow railway bridge, is essential. The pavements under the bridge are so narrow that they represent a hazard to pedestrians. Baldock station appears to have a bricked-up northern entrance and a (rather steep) access way from just north of the bridge to the back of the station.
[3]We applaud the plan to provide a link road from A507 North Road to the A505 Royston Road roundabout. This will hugely reduce the incredible amount of traffic (including many heavy lorries) that still uses B656 and A507 to access the A1 northbound, despite signage directing them to use the Baldock Bypass. That traffic all has to negotiate the very awkward turn at the Royston Road / Station Road traffic lights, causing traffic jams, pollution, and many accidents.
[4]Related to [3] is the idea of downgrading A507 to a B-road. All of that road from Clothall Road to the A10 is quite unsuitable for heavy traffic. One way of achieving a reduction in lorries using that road is to put a weight restriction on the existing A507 (whether or not it is downgraded to a B-road). We have been unable to locate the revised Hertfordshire Local Transport Plan LPT4 as it applies to Baldock, but this matter should be considered as part of that plan.

[5]The proposal for a southern link road to enable development of sites BA3 and BA4 and providing connectivity to the south of Baldock to help bypass the Royston Road / Station Road crossroads is welcome, but it is not at all clear where it would run. Clarification of this (a map?) would be helpful.

This refers to the proposed Link Road joining the A507 to the A505/B656 roundabout at the northern end of the A505 bypass (across, and serving, housing development BA1).

The ideal solution would be to run the Link Road from the roundabout by Baldock Services on A507 to the bypass roundabout on A505 (red line on attached image baldock1.jpg). That would take all the traffic not heading for Baldock centre, either to A1 or to A505, leaving the narrow A507 clear for purely local traffic.

However, that involves building a new road across land presumably not already owned by the County Council. So something like attached image baldock2.jpg might be necessary.

There are two objections to this: (1) A507 from the new Link Road roundabout north to A1 would need to be widened; (2) traffic from development BA1 might be tempted to travel south on A507, negotiating the awful crossroads and traffic lights at B656/A507 junction, and Whitehorse Street and High Street/London Road to reach A1 south, or Whitehorse Street and Hitchin Street to reach Letchworth. That would cause traffic chaos at the crossroads and through Baldock.

Whichever route is chosen, it is essential that the only road outlet from BA1 be to the new Link Road, not direct on to A507.

While new building is taking place (BA10), it would also be sensible to make an outlet from the Clothall Common development direct to the B656/A505 bypass roundabout. This would stop east-bound traffic from Clothall Common having to use the A507/B656 crossroads.

Our comments relate to Baldock, in particular to proposals BA1, BE2, BA10, BA3, BA4.
[1]"... secondary rail crossing for pedestrians and cyclists in the vicinity of Ashwell Way."
QUESTION: how will users of such a route be able to safely join or cross B656 Royston Road? That road should become less busy after the construction of the A507 / A505 link road, but it will remain a major route into and through Baldock.
[2]SP14(e)(ii) refers to "Safe access routes to/from, and upgrades to Baldock station."
Relevant to this is the Govia/Thameslink consultation on revised train services from 2018 (see http://www.thameslinkrailway.com/download/12366.9/timetable-consultation/). In that consultation document, it is proposed that all off-peak semi-fast train services should not stop at Baldock. This is completely unacceptable, even with the present needs of Baldock residents, and will become even more unacceptable when the huge BA1 development is in progress and completed.
Hertfordshire County Council and North Herts District Council should make immediate submissions to Govia/Thameslink to alter this decision. If (as seems likely) one of the reasons is that 12-car trains cannot now use Baldock station, then the obvious remedy is to lengthen Baldock station's platforms to accommodate 12-car trains. The number of commuters from Baldock to Cambridge, London, and Stevenage will massively increase after the development of site BA1, and it is unacceptable that Baldock will be reduced to the same status as (say) Ashwell and Morden with the loss of semi-fast train services.
Pedestrian and vehicular access to Baldock station from the north, without using the extremely narrow railway bridge, is essential. The pavements under the bridge are so narrow that they represent a hazard to pedestrians. Baldock station appears to have a bricked-up northern entrance and a (rather steep) access way from just north of the bridge to the back of the station.
[3]We applaud the plan to provide a link road from A507 North Road to the A505 Royston Road roundabout. This will hugely reduce the incredible amount of traffic (including many heavy lorries) that still uses B656 and A507 to access the A1 northbound, despite signage directing them to use the Baldock Bypass. That traffic all has to negotiate the very awkward turn at the Royston Road / Station Road traffic lights, causing traffic jams, pollution, and many accidents.
[4]Related to [3] is the idea of downgrading A507 to a B-road. All of that road from Clothall Road to the A10 is quite unsuitable for heavy traffic. One way of achieving a reduction in lorries using that road is to put a weight restriction on the existing A507 (whether or not it is downgraded to a B-road). We have been unable to locate the revised Hertfordshire Local Transport Plan LPT4 as it applies to Baldock, but this matter should be considered as part of that plan.

[5]The proposal for a southern link road to enable development of sites BA3 and BA4 and providing connectivity to the south of Baldock to help bypass the Royston Road / Station Road crossroads is welcome, but it is not at all clear where it would run. Clarification of this (a map?) would be helpful.

Our comments relate to Baldock, in particular to proposals BA1, BE2, BA10, BA3, BA4.
[1]"... secondary rail crossing for pedestrians and cyclists in the vicinity of Ashwell Way."
QUESTION: how will users of such a route be able to safely join or cross B656 Royston Road? That road should become less busy after the construction of the A507 / A505 link road, but it will remain a major route into and through Baldock.
[2]SP14(e)(ii) refers to "Safe access routes to/from, and upgrades to Baldock station."
Relevant to this is the Govia/Thameslink consultation on revised train services from 2018 (see http://www.thameslinkrailway.com/download/12366.9/timetable-consultation/). In that consultation document, it is proposed that all off-peak semi-fast train services should not stop at Baldock. This is completely unacceptable, even with the present needs of Baldock residents, and will become even more unacceptable when the huge BA1 development is in progress and completed.
Hertfordshire County Council and North Herts District Council should make immediate submissions to Govia/Thameslink to alter this decision. If (as seems likely) one of the reasons is that 12-car trains cannot now use Baldock station, then the obvious remedy is to lengthen Baldock station's platforms to accommodate 12-car trains. The number of commuters from Baldock to Cambridge, London, and Stevenage will massively increase after the development of site BA1, and it is unacceptable that Baldock will be reduced to the same status as (say) Ashwell and Morden with the loss of semi-fast train services.
Pedestrian and vehicular access to Baldock station from the north, without using the extremely narrow railway bridge, is essential. The pavements under the bridge are so narrow that they represent a hazard to pedestrians. Baldock station appears to have a bricked-up northern entrance and a (rather steep) access way from just north of the bridge to the back of the station.
[3]We applaud the plan to provide a link road from A507 North Road to the A505 Royston Road roundabout. This will hugely reduce the incredible amount of traffic (including many heavy lorries) that still uses B656 and A507 to access the A1 northbound, despite signage directing them to use the Baldock Bypass. That traffic all has to negotiate the very awkward turn at the Royston Road / Station Road traffic lights, causing traffic jams, pollution, and many accidents.
[4]Related to [3] is the idea of downgrading A507 to a B-road. All of that road from Clothall Road to the A10 is quite unsuitable for heavy traffic. One way of achieving a reduction in lorries using that road is to put a weight restriction on the existing A507 (whether or not it is downgraded to a B-road). We have been unable to locate the revised Hertfordshire Local Transport Plan LPT4 as it applies to Baldock, but this matter should be considered as part of that plan.

[5]The proposal for a southern link road to enable development of sites BA3 and BA4 and providing connectivity to the south of Baldock to help bypass the Royston Road / Station Road crossroads is welcome, but it is not at all clear where it would run. Clarification of this (a map?) would be helpful.

Our comments relate to Baldock, in particular to proposals BA1, BE2, BA10, BA3, BA4.
[1]"... secondary rail crossing for pedestrians and cyclists in the vicinity of Ashwell Way."
QUESTION: how will users of such a route be able to safely join or cross B656 Royston Road? That road should become less busy after the construction of the A507 / A505 link road, but it will remain a major route into and through Baldock.
[2]SP14(e)(ii) refers to "Safe access routes to/from, and upgrades to Baldock station."
Relevant to this is the Govia/Thameslink consultation on revised train services from 2018 (see http://www.thameslinkrailway.com/download/12366.9/timetable-consultation/). In that consultation document, it is proposed that all off-peak semi-fast train services should not stop at Baldock. This is completely unacceptable, even with the present needs of Baldock residents, and will become even more unacceptable when the huge BA1 development is in progress and completed.
Hertfordshire County Council and North Herts District Council should make immediate submissions to Govia/Thameslink to alter this decision. If (as seems likely) one of the reasons is that 12-car trains cannot now use Baldock station, then the obvious remedy is to lengthen Baldock station's platforms to accommodate 12-car trains. The number of commuters from Baldock to Cambridge, London, and Stevenage will massively increase after the development of site BA1, and it is unacceptable that Baldock will be reduced to the same status as (say) Ashwell and Morden with the loss of semi-fast train services.
Pedestrian and vehicular access to Baldock station from the north, without using the extremely narrow railway bridge, is essential. The pavements under the bridge are so narrow that they represent a hazard to pedestrians. Baldock station appears to have a bricked-up northern entrance and a (rather steep) access way from just north of the bridge to the back of the station.
[3]We applaud the plan to provide a link road from A507 North Road to the A505 Royston Road roundabout. This will hugely reduce the incredible amount of traffic (including many heavy lorries) that still uses B656 and A507 to access the A1 northbound, despite signage directing them to use the Baldock Bypass. That traffic all has to negotiate the very awkward turn at the Royston Road / Station Road traffic lights, causing traffic jams, pollution, and many accidents.
[4]Related to [3] is the idea of downgrading A507 to a B-road. All of that road from Clothall Road to the A10 is quite unsuitable for heavy traffic. One way of achieving a reduction in lorries using that road is to put a weight restriction on the existing A507 (whether or not it is downgraded to a B-road). We have been unable to locate the revised Hertfordshire Local Transport Plan LPT4 as it applies to Baldock, but this matter should be considered as part of that plan.

[5]The proposal for a southern link road to enable development of sites BA3 and BA4 and providing connectivity to the south of Baldock to help bypass the Royston Road / Station Road crossroads is welcome, but it is not at all clear where it would run. Clarification of this (a map?) would be helpful.

Our comments relate to Baldock, in particular to proposals BA1, BE2, BA10, BA3, BA4.
[1]"... secondary rail crossing for pedestrians and cyclists in the vicinity of Ashwell Way."
QUESTION: how will users of such a route be able to safely join or cross B656 Royston Road? That road should become less busy after the construction of the A507 / A505 link road, but it will remain a major route into and through Baldock.
[2]SP14(e)(ii) refers to "Safe access routes to/from, and upgrades to Baldock station."
Relevant to this is the Govia/Thameslink consultation on revised train services from 2018 (see http://www.thameslinkrailway.com/download/12366.9/timetable-consultation/). In that consultation document, it is proposed that all off-peak semi-fast train services should not stop at Baldock. This is completely unacceptable, even with the present needs of Baldock residents, and will become even more unacceptable when the huge BA1 development is in progress and completed.
Hertfordshire County Council and North Herts District Council should make immediate submissions to Govia/Thameslink to alter this decision. If (as seems likely) one of the reasons is that 12-car trains cannot now use Baldock station, then the obvious remedy is to lengthen Baldock station's platforms to accommodate 12-car trains. The number of commuters from Baldock to Cambridge, London, and Stevenage will massively increase after the development of site BA1, and it is unacceptable that Baldock will be reduced to the same status as (say) Ashwell and Morden with the loss of semi-fast train services.
Pedestrian and vehicular access to Baldock station from the north, without using the extremely narrow railway bridge, is essential. The pavements under the bridge are so narrow that they represent a hazard to pedestrians. Baldock station appears to have a bricked-up northern entrance and a (rather steep) access way from just north of the bridge to the back of the station.
[3]We applaud the plan to provide a link road from A507 North Road to the A505 Royston Road roundabout. This will hugely reduce the incredible amount of traffic (including many heavy lorries) that still uses B656 and A507 to access the A1 northbound, despite signage directing them to use the Baldock Bypass. That traffic all has to negotiate the very awkward turn at the Royston Road / Station Road traffic lights, causing traffic jams, pollution, and many accidents.
[4]Related to [3] is the idea of downgrading A507 to a B-road. All of that road from Clothall Road to the A10 is quite unsuitable for heavy traffic. One way of achieving a reduction in lorries using that road is to put a weight restriction on the existing A507 (whether or not it is downgraded to a B-road). We have been unable to locate the revised Hertfordshire Local Transport Plan LPT4 as it applies to Baldock, but this matter should be considered as part of that plan.

[5]The proposal for a southern link road to enable development of sites BA3 and BA4 and providing connectivity to the south of Baldock to help bypass the Royston Road / Station Road crossroads is welcome, but it is not at all clear where it would run. Clarification of this (a map?) would be helpful.

This refers to the proposed Link Road joining the A507 to the A505/B656 roundabout at the northern end of the A505 bypass (across, and serving, housing development BA1).

The ideal solution would be to run the Link Road from the roundabout by Baldock Services on A507 to the bypass roundabout on A505 (red line on attached image baldock1.jpg). That would take all the traffic not heading for Baldock centre, either to A1 or to A505, leaving the narrow A507 clear for purely local traffic.

However, that involves building a new road across land presumably not already owned by the County Council. So something like attached image baldock2.jpg might be necessary.

There are two objections to this: (1) A507 from the new Link Road roundabout north to A1 would need to be widened; (2) traffic from development BA1 might be tempted to travel south on A507, negotiating the awful crossroads and traffic lights at B656/A507 junction, and Whitehorse Street and High Street/London Road to reach A1 south, or Whitehorse Street and Hitchin Street to reach Letchworth. That would cause traffic chaos at the crossroads and through Baldock.

Whichever route is chosen, it is essential that the only road outlet from BA1 be to the new Link Road, not direct on to A507.

While new building is taking place (BA10), it would also be sensible to make an outlet from the Clothall Common development direct to the B656/A505 bypass roundabout. This would stop east-bound traffic from Clothall Common having to use the A507/B656 crossroads.