Proposed Main Modifications

I object to main modifications 207, 208 and 409 (changes to allocations BA3 and BA4, and supporting text) for these main reasons:
I do believe the changes are not effective, as they do not provide any clear guidance on the appropriate size and extent of development in this part of Baldock. Also there is no plan regarding the flow of the extra traffic.
As a result of these changes, there is conflict with national planning policy because they could allow:
- a much-used area of open space to be lost or eroded, without replacement provision (and this open space which will be needed more than ever with the housing proposed in the local plan)
- building on potentially unstable land, as this area is formed from rubble excavated during the building of the Baldock by-pass
- development on rising ground that would be of poor design, especially in relation to its surroundings
It is not justified, as showing this entire area as housing is unnecessary to allow the housing and related infrastructure proposed in the submission local plan to go ahead.
I feel that it is important that the 'white land' that was left unallocated in the submission Local Plan should instead be designated as 'urban open land', which would safeguard its primary role as open space.

I object to main modifications 207, 208 and 409 (changes to allocations BA3 and BA4, and supporting text) for these main reasons:
I do believe the changes are not effective, as they do not provide any clear guidance on the appropriate size and extent of development in this part of Baldock. Also there is no plan regarding the flow of the extra traffic.
As a result of these changes, there is conflict with national planning policy because they could allow:
- a much-used area of open space to be lost or eroded, without replacement provision (and this open space which will be needed more than ever with the housing proposed in the local plan)
- building on potentially unstable land, as this area is formed from rubble excavated during the building of the Baldock by-pass
- development on rising ground that would be of poor design, especially in relation to its surroundings
It is not justified, as showing this entire area as housing is unnecessary to allow the housing and related infrastructure proposed in the submission local plan to go ahead.
I feel that it is important that the 'white land' that was left unallocated in the submission Local Plan should instead be designated as 'urban open land', which would safeguard its primary role as open space.

I object to main modifications 207, 208 and 409 (changes to allocations BA3 and BA4, and supporting text) for these main reasons:
I do believe the changes are not effective, as they do not provide any clear guidance on the appropriate size and extent of development in this part of Baldock. Also there is no plan regarding the flow of the extra traffic.
As a result of these changes, there is conflict with national planning policy because they could allow:
- a much-used area of open space to be lost or eroded, without replacement provision (and this open space which will be needed more than ever with the housing proposed in the local plan)
- building on potentially unstable land, as this area is formed from rubble excavated during the building of the Baldock by-pass
- development on rising ground that would be of poor design, especially in relation to its surroundings
It is not justified, as showing this entire area as housing is unnecessary to allow the housing and related infrastructure proposed in the submission local plan to go ahead.
I feel that it is important that the 'white land' that was left unallocated in the submission Local Plan should instead be designated as 'urban open land', which would safeguard its primary role as open space.

I would like to make further comments on the modified plan.

It has been suggested that to stop through traffic going through the new houses that a new road be built along what is known as Millers Path, a path that runs along the edge of the area designates as a Country Park. This passes along the bottom of a valley which would hold the emissions from the traffic next the area being used for recreation by families.

On the subject of pollution there has still been no measurements taken in Station Road which has the longest queues and is used by many people, young and old going to the railway station and the schools.

With regards to the green belt, the strategic Parcel 21 Bygrave has been upgraded to an overall contribution of Significant, relating to BA1 The council have then said that when aggregated there is no change. However they have taken no consideration of the fact that all the other parcels when added together are still significantly smaller than BA1.

I also find it strange that the interested party, Herts County Council, are the people that are doing the traffic assessment and planning, surely this should be being done by and independent authority.

I would like to make further comments on the modified plan.

It has been suggested that to stop through traffic going through the new houses that a new road be built along what is known as Millers Path, a path that runs along the edge of the area designates as a Country Park. This passes along the bottom of a valley which would hold the emissions from the traffic next the area being used for recreation by families.

On the subject of pollution there has still been no measurements taken in Station Road which has the longest queues and is used by many people, young and old going to the railway station and the schools.

With regards to the green belt, the strategic Parcel 21 Bygrave has been upgraded to an overall contribution of Significant, relating to BA1 The council have then said that when aggregated there is no change. However they have taken no consideration of the fact that all the other parcels when added together are still significantly smaller than BA1.

I also find it strange that the interested party, Herts County Council, are the people that are doing the traffic assessment and planning, surely this should be being done by and independent authority.

I would like to make further comments on the modified plan.

It has been suggested that to stop through traffic going through the new houses that a new road be built along what is known as Millers Path, a path that runs along the edge of the area designates as a Country Park. This passes along the bottom of a valley which would hold the emissions from the traffic next the area being used for recreation by families.

On the subject of pollution there has still been no measurements taken in Station Road which has the longest queues and is used by many people, young and old going to the railway station and the schools.

With regards to the green belt, the strategic Parcel 21 Bygrave has been upgraded to an overall contribution of Significant, relating to BA1 The council have then said that when aggregated there is no change. However they have taken no consideration of the fact that all the other parcels when added together are still significantly smaller than BA1.

I also find it strange that the interested party, Herts County Council, are the people that are doing the traffic assessment and planning, surely this should be being done by and independent authority.