GA1 Land at Roundwood (Graveley parish)

Showing comments and forms 1 to 30 of 83

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 113

Received: 25/10/2016

Respondent: Mr Alan Rawlins

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Object to site GA1: access, no HMO restrictions, lack of public transport, infrastructure (schools, doctors), lack of complementary employment

Full text:

There has been a total lack of thought in designating this area for housing.

Access - Current access is totally in capable of dealing with the existing population and the vehicles that go with that. Mendip Way is already already a ' rat run' that is too narrow for cars to park and pass safely, increasing the households with' primary access' from Mendip Way is utter madness. the weight of traffic will bring this area to a halt at certain times of the day during morning and evening peak periods.

There is no provision to prevent more HMO's in this area. The developers will inevitably build large family homes of 4/6/6 bed rooms. a number of these, especially the three floor town house style property, will lend themselves to investors turning them into multi let properties of 7/8/9 rooms. these occupants will all have their own cars. Public transport in this area is an absolute non-entity. It only runs through the day and stops early evening so people have no option to drive.

With these 857 properties being suggested, where are they all going to park ?

Where are they going to take the children to school or the doctors surgery.

This is an ill thought out plan just to satisfy quotas from central government.

By attracting more people into this area, there is no employment uses. People travel somewhere else to work.

Where are they going to park their cars when they go to the station for example in Letchworth or Stevenage? there is insufficient space now before these ridiculous expansion plans are implemented.

Developers only build for profit, they are not interested in the sustainability of an area if it gets in the way of profit.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 208

Received: 03/11/2016

Respondent: Mr and Mrs Peter and Mary Lawson

Number of people: 2

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Nevis Road will become a rat run and access for emergency services will be restricted. Consider building a new road to the north of the development.

Full text:

See attached

Attachments:

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 230

Received: 08/11/2016

Respondent: Mrs Fiona Hutton

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

Object to GA1 on grounds of:
- traffic and flooding on Church Lane

Full text:

This proposal will increase traffic on Church Lane Graveley. This country lane is already unsafe and also susceptible to flooding.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 493

Received: 19/11/2016

Respondent: Mr David Spicer

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

The proposed Croudace development at Roundwood will increase traffic, decrease parking space, endanger safety, and generally damage the existing environment of Great Ashby.

Full text:

Croudace proposes to widen Mendip Way and Haybluff Drive and reduce parking spaces in these roads. This will lead to a bigger parking problem in this area. If the Council approves option 1, it will leave existing residents with only 46 parking spaces: Mendip Way: 19 spaces; Haybluff Drive: 3 spaces; Bray Drive: 14 spaces; Nevis Road: 14 Spaces. Option 2 will give 69 spaces with just three trees. This is inconsiderate.

By widening the roads, Croudace will reduce the grass verges and trees along Mendip Way, putting lives at risk as houses will be very close to the road. The pavements will hardly be wide enough and there will be no safe way for buggies, mobility scooters etc. - if someone trips and falls, the chances are that they will already be in the road! As a side defect, there will be no pavement space for pedestrians on bin days.

The proposed development will bring at least 700 additional vehicles into the area and possibly - this has to be doubted because the planning application does not demonstrate any genuine interest in local services, which is no surprise given the apparent target market for the new homes - a bus route. Furthermore, it is inevitable that even more drivers will take to avoiding congestion on the A1M around Stevenage by cutting though Weston once the single-track Calder Way is closed and traffic is routed along Mendip Way. Volume and, more significantly, speed of rat-run traffic through the village of Weston is already an issue.

Overall, the development will bring no benefits to local residents. It won't even be neutral. It will only have deleterious effects.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 590

Received: 21/11/2016

Respondent: Mrs Saba Karim Clark

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Object to GA1 on the grounds of:
- infrastructure
- parking
- schools
- gp surgeries

Full text:

Don't have infrastructure to support it. Will affect parking, schools, gp surgeries

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 606

Received: 22/11/2016

Respondent: Mr James Kerbey

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Object to GA1: Green Belt, density, loss of recreational opportunities, infrastructure, traffic, parking, GP capacity, distance from retail / commercial centres of Stevenage and Hitchin, lack of employment, rail capacity, A1, no mention of affordable housing.

Full text:

I am writing to place my objection about the GA2 development on land to the North of Great Ashby, Herts.
We urge North Hertfordshire District Council to remove GA1 and GA2 from the list of allocated sites for development in North Stevenage and consider the implications to all those involved/affected.
Objections/reasons against GA1/GA2 include:
Greenbelt is precious and should not be developed - building on these sites contravene protected status and this precedence must not be set. Greenbelt areas are important to prevent urban sprawl, stop towns from merging, protect the countryside and promote urban regeneration. The density of the proposed housing is of city nature and not suited to Greenbelt countryside, I believe it is not inline with the 2007 Urban design assessment report commissioned by NHDC.
The land in GA2 houses a rich and diverse amount of wildlife including endangered red kites, barn owls, bats and the currently protected badger. NHDC have a DUTY to conserve the biodiversity of this area. The muntjac deer population has already seriously decreased since Great Ashby was built. Further development would be catastrophic to our wildlife. GA2 would totally encompass ancient woodland and a natural spring, building in this area would destroy valuable wildlife habitats.
A development of this magnitude would be visibly intrusive and harm the character and appearance of an area of outstanding beauty scattered with listed buildings and villages, such as Graveley. This area is used and enjoyed by many people, footpaths and bridleways crossing the proposed sites GA1 & GA2 form part of the historic Hertfordshire way and are frequented by many ramblers, horse riders and dog walkers.
The infrastructure is not suitable for another 2000 homes. Traffic through Great Ashby is already at capacity and congested with many parked cars and can be quite dangerous at peak times.
Doctors surgeries in North Stevenage are struggling with the extra volume of patients already.
Proposed developments are remote from the retail and commercial centres of Stevenage and Hitchin, many businesses are already struggling in Stevenage and a number of shops have closed in the town centre. Extra housing would put severe pressure on an already lack of employment. For commuters, trains are already at full capacity during peak times and the A1 is congested.
Socially affordable housing is not mentioned within the proposals, surely local councils should be considering the needs of people already living in Stevenage & the huge waiting lists .
We understand that housing is needed but feel it would be more sensible to build a completely new settlement/garden city somewhere with reasonable transport links, but away from any towns or villages and NOT at the loss of important Green Belt or woodland. A new settlement that over time can grow to meet the needs of the people with the correct infrastructure designed into it from the beginning and would create thousands of jobs and new employment. We also urge local councils and government to build on brown field sites as an alternative and to look at the many thousands of boarded up council homes that lay dormant across the UK.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 610

Received: 22/11/2016

Respondent: Mr Steve Ralph

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Object to GA1: Green Belt, density, loss of recreational opportunities, infrastructure, traffic, parking, GP capacity, distance from retail / commercial centres of Stevenage and Hitchin, lack of employment, rail capacity, A1, no mention of affordable housing.

Full text:

I am writing to place my objection about the GA2 development on land to the North of Great Ashby, Herts.

We urge North Hertfordshire District Council to remove GA1 and GA2 from the list of allocated sites for development in North Stevenage and consider the implications to all those involved/affected.

Objections/reasons against GA1/GA2 include:

Greenbelt is precious and should not be developed - building on these sites contravene protected status and this precedence must not be set.
Greenbelt areas are important to prevent urban sprawl, stop towns from merging, protect the countryside and promote urban regeneration. The density of the proposed housing is of city nature and not suited to Greenbelt countryside, I believe it is not inline with the 2007 Urban design assessment report commissioned by NHDC.

The land in GA2 houses a rich and diverse amount of wildlife including endangered red kites, barn owls, bats and the currently protected badger. NHDC have a DUTY to conserve the biodiversity of this area. The muntjac deer population has already seriously decreased since Great Ashby was built. Further development would be catastrophic to our wildlife. GA2 would totally encompass ancient woodland and a natural spring, building in this area would destroy valuable wildlife habitats.

A development of this magnitude would be visibly intrusive and harm the character and appearance of an area of outstanding beauty scattered with listed buildings and villages, such as Graveley. This area is used and enjoyed by many people, footpaths and bridleways crossing the proposed sites GA1 & GA2 form part of the historic Hertfordshire way and are frequented by many ramblers, horse riders and dog walkers.

The infrastructure is not suitable for another 2000 homes. Traffic through Great Ashby is already at capacity and congested with many parked cars and can be quite dangerous at peak times.

Doctors surgeries in North Stevenage are struggling with the extra volume of patients already.

Proposed developments are remote from the retail and commercial centres of Stevenage and Hitchin, many businesses are already struggling in Stevenage and a number of shops have closed in the town centre. Extra housing would put severe pressure on an already lack of employment. For commuters, trains are already at full capacity during peak times and the
A1 is congested.

Socially affordable housing is not mentioned within the proposals, surely local councils should be considering the needs of people already living in Stevenage & the huge waiting lists .

We understand that housing is needed but feel it would be more sensible to build a completely new settlement/garden city somewhere with reasonable transport links, but away from any towns or villages and NOT at the loss of important Green Belt or woodland. A new settlement that over time can grow to meet the needs of the people with the correct infrastructure designed into it from the beginning and would create thousands of jobs and new employment. We also urge local councils and government to build on brown field sites as an alternative and to look at the many thousands of boarded up council homes that lay dormant across the UK.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 708

Received: 23/11/2016

Respondent: Mr Charles Duncan-Turnbull

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Object to GA1: Traffic issues, Schools and GP surgery issues, Lack of amenities,
Emergency access issues

Full text:

Parking/Driving:
Mendip way is already a rat run with insufficient parking spaces that leads to poor and dangerous parking/driving, widening this road will only increase the poor parking and add to the dangers of using this road because the traffic will increase in speed and the dangers will increase for both the young and old.

Not only will the development have an impact on the Haybuff drive and Mendip way it will increase rat run traffic from the community centre and shops through Mendip way, where again the parking is both sides of the road and highly inaccessible

To remove the verges and trees would be a great idea if the number of parking spaces could be increased and allow the traffic to flow down this road, currently the fire and ambulance service do have issues getting down this road, this will only become worse as the Roundwood development grows when you start adding a bus route and

Lack of amenities

The shops at the community centre are the only local shops, Budgeons, this will add pressure on the local infrastructure

Healthcare:
St Nicholas GP surgery is already in financial crisis and is currently full - you cannot get an appointment without queuing up at 8am and 12pm or telephone at these times. Bringing in another 360 homes will only add to the burden on the local Dr's and the A&E/national health services

Schools:
Round Diamond is a local school that local kids cannot get into, the school is not big enough to sustain a further 360 homes with an average of 1-2 children of possible primary school age, and that's is without factoring in the secondary aged children

Emergency Access:
Fire, Ambulance and Police have an almost impossible task to wend their way down Mendip Way due to the poor availability and silly parking, this is a frightening prospect that all emergency services will use this route to attend incidents in Roundwood, my thought on this is that there is one way in one way out of what essentially is going to be a big cul-de-sac with no other alternative route into Roundwood, not the best scenario if a major incident occurs within its boundaries!

Support

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 715

Received: 23/11/2016

Respondent: Mr BALARAM JUJJAVARAPU

Representation Summary:

Support GA1: Attempt to positively address any issues raised

Full text:

I would like to support this proposal keeping in mind the requirement for
new homes in Stevenage and better chances for first-time buyers to achieve
their dream of buying a new house.

At the same time, I would like to request the concern bodies to address the
issues raised and try to find a solution before approving the proposal
rather than saying NO to the proposal itself.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 733

Received: 23/11/2016

Respondent: Mr Robert Thompson

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Object to GA1: Access, loss of parking

Full text:

As previously noted in the Roundwood Application comments, this development is totally unviable given its access proposals and the ineffective and dangerous plans to widen the access road along Mendip Way and Haybluff Drive. The current parking situation has been severely underestimated by the applicants and as such their proposals are totally inadequate and would exasperate an already critical situation with the parking along Mendip Way.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 800

Received: 20/11/2016

Respondent: Mr Frederick Evans

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Object to GA1: Loss of parking, traffic (Gt Ashby Way), pedestrian safety, closure of Back Way, disruption during construction.

Full text:

I am writing to you to raise my objection to the proposed plan to build 360 new houses off Back lane. The following is the outline of the objections.

Great Ashby was built with a minimum of 1.5 parking spaces per household. By reducing parking, which already is extremely tight and limited, it will take it below the minimum legal requirements set out by the government of the day. This is illegal and therefore, should you continue with the plan we will be seeking compensation from you.

Traffic on Great Ashby way is extremely busy, it is a major bus route and local residents are using this road for parking. This on its own is causing huge tail backs and causing major congestion, which will only get worse once the planning goes ahead, not to mention the number of HGV using the road around the clock.

By widening the roads, they will reduce the grass verges and trees along Mendip thus putting lives at risk as the houses will be so close to the road (if someone trips and falls, the chances are they will be already on the road!) There will be no safe ways for buggies, mobility scooters, etc as the pavements will not be wide enough, No pavements on bin days, thus forcing school children walk on the busy highway which is already overloaded with major bus routes.

Closure of Back lane. All traffic from Weston will be tunneled via Haybluff, Mendip and Bray Drive.

HGV construction traffic = disruption and movement of ground. What about parking while the removal of grass verges and trees take place/

Mendip way will be reduced to 10 parking spaces, Haybluff drive 8 parking spaces, Bray Drive 14; Nevis Road 14 spaces. Option 2 will only give us 69 spaces with 3 trees left. What about local residents who are using the road to park. Currently along Bray drive well over 200 cars are parking up and down the road, reducing the parking down to 14 will cause all residents to be unable to park their cars.

Assuming each house hold have an average of 2 cars, this will mean over 700 cars been parked on the road, in addition to the huge volume of cars already been parked along these major routes, this will mean over congested roads, unsafe, and putting local residents and children living in these communities at risk.

It is your duty of care to safeguard children, elderly, disabled and school children. Accepting this proposal to continue will result in placing the lives of children, and other people at risk of death.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 910

Received: 26/11/2016

Respondent: Mr Kai Jaeger

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Object to GA1 on the grounds of:
- loss of countryside
- overcrowding
- infrastructure: schools, streets, parking, train station, GP services

Full text:

I object against giving up wonderful countryside in a town that is already overvrowded. The infratstructure is just not up to it: schools, streets, parking slots, the train station, GPs, you name it.

We need more houses, yes, but not at this place, and not at all anywhere in Stevenage unless the infrastructure is improved.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 992

Received: 27/11/2016

Respondent: Mr Ian Cambridge

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

I object to the planned development of both GA 1 and GA 2 due to the insufficient planned road infrastructure that will have an enormous impact by reducing available local parking, already a major issue and seriously increasing traffic volume.

Full text:

I object to the planned development of both GA1 and GA2 due to the insufficient planned road infrastructure that will have an enormous impact by reducing available local parking, already a major issue (ie. Bray/Mendip Way & associated roads) and seriously increasing traffic volume both at a "micro level" (ie. Bray/Mendip Way and associated roads) and at a "macro level" (ie. The 2 main access roads in and out of Great Ashby - in particular the St.Nicholas exit).

In more detail:

1) Impact on available parking in an already congested area.

The plan to widen Bray Drive, Mendip Way (up to Haybluff) and Haybluff drive itself will reduce current available parking from around 100 to 55, a loss of 45 spaces. This will have a direct parking impact on these roads and all roads leading off of them (eg. Nevis, Cheviot etc) as there are no spare parking areas currently or planned.


NB. The above parking figures are taken from a) Current = actual numbers of cars parked at weekends (in late afternoon/early evening) as audited by residents in Mar 16 and NOT the extremely conservative figure of 68 parking spaces available as stated in Croudace off street parking spaces drawing Apr 16 submitted as part of the planning application. b) Revised = proposed figure of 55 as stated in Croudace off street parking proposals drawing Apr 16 submitted as part of the planning application.

Additionally these roads and all leading off them are impacted by;

a) Previous planning laws allowing only 1.5 car spaces per property (now 2 cars).
b) Previous planning laws allowing garage sizes to be built smaller 2.5m x 5m (vs current 3m x 7m). This directly impacts current parking congestion in Great Ashby by severely limiting the use of private garages for parking average size vehicles as they are too small.
Eg. Audi A3 Hatchback car width 1.8m (tyre to tyre) width (excluding door mirrors) leaves 70cm of 2.5m spare garage width or 35cm spare each side. Space required to open the car door and get out is an absolute minimum 50cm. You just can't get out!
c) The large & growing number of Homes Of Multiple Occupancy (HMO'S) resulting in further parking needs.
NB. According to the NHDC planning website (register of licensed HMO'S and management orders last updated Dec 15) 85% of recorded NHDC HMO properties are located in the Great Ashby area and 44% are located in the roads that will be directly impacted by the planned access to Roundwood (ie. Bray Drive, Mendip Way, Haybluff Drive and roads leading off these). Again this already severely impacts parking congestion in this area.
These figures do not include a) any properties granted licenses in 2016 and more importantly those un- licensed (Unregistered with NHDC or fall outside the license rules of 3 storeys + / 5 persons + living in residence).
d) No plans for Croudace to improve the planned 2nd entrance into the roundwood 350 via Calder Way thus putting all pressure on the primary Bray Drive entrance.

2) Impact of increased road traffic down Bray/Mendip way (up to Haybluff) & Haybluff due to;

a) No plans for Croudace to improve the planned 2nd entrance into the roundwood 350 via Calder Way thus putting all pressure on the primary Bray Drive entrance.

b) Moving the bus route to travel through the primary Bray Drive/Mendip Way entrance.

c) Planned Closure of Back Lane (from the exit of Calder Way up to the planned new connection through Haybluff Drive).

d) No consideration given to "the bigger picture" plans (GA 1 & 2 combined) and the impact on roads (including Mendip Way) and local services . Surely the original planned 3rd exit "link road" out of Great Ashby is the only sensible route here.

3) Other "local" Great Ashby Infrastructure impacts.

a) Increased volume of traffic via the 2 exits out of Great Ashby (especially the St.Nicholas exit) particularly around peak travel times. NB. Already a major issue at peak times.

b) Impact on medical services (GP's) and schools as no plans to improve as part of planning application.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 1017

Received: 27/11/2016

Respondent: Ms Deborah Mason

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

Object to GA2: No exceptional circumstances, unsustainable location, traffic, access, Green Belt (permanence, encroachment, sprawl, indefensible boundaries)

Full text:

I wish to object very strongly to the NHDC Local Plan 2011-2031 proposals relating to development at Great Ashby (referenced GA1 and GA2 -comprising 330 and 600 houses respectively ), especially GA1 (Roundwood). Both sites are within the Green Belt and my reasons are as follows:

* Due to its location at the extreme edge of the NHDC area, development at GA1 and GA2 does not address the housing needs of North Herts and therefore no 'exceptional circumstances' have been demonstrated which would warrant relaxing planning restrictions in the Green Belt (GB). Development here would be to serve the needs of Stevenage only. Stevenage planners should be looking to resolve their own housing needs (using brown field sites, more flats, better use of available land, etc), but if NHDC wish to work with Stevenage to solve their housing needs they should collaborate on more appropriate and most importantly, sustainable sites, such as West of Stevenage (with its close proximity to the town centre shopping district, business and leisure centres, rail/road connections) .This is the most logical and sustainable area for development in the Stevenage area and should be the first priority for development, rather than designating it as 'safeguarded land' for development at a later date.

* The current GB boundary at GA1 along Weston Road has already been re-located once as part of the wider GB expansion to enable the initial Great Ashby development to be built (which now comprises approximately 3,000 homes) and was only completed in 2011. When defining the boundary, planners would/should have satisfied themselves that the boundary would endure and not need to be altered, in accordance with guidance current at that time and with current NPPF policy. By developing at GA1 and GA2 NHDC would effectively be moving the GB boundary for as second time in this location. Other more appropriate sites should be considered before re-defining the Stevenage boundary here for a second time.

* Weston Road was selected by planners to define the GB boundary in the location of the proposed GA1 area, because it was considered 'robust' and 'defensible' and this was endorsed by the Environment Secretary of the time, Nicholas Ridley. I understand the condition of 'exceptional circumstances' already existed at that time, so if the current boundary was designed to be robust and defensible then, why is NHDC planning to disregard it and develop within the GB. This is completely against one of the key objectives of GB policy which is their permanence.


* Development at GA1 (and to a lesser extent GA2) is not sustainable and therefore should not be considered for housing. The proposed plan already acknowledges there would be significant problems with development here.

Developing the sites at GA1 and GA2 on the edge of Stevenage would have the effect of moving the green belt margin further away from Stevenage. According to the NPPF, when reviewing GB boundaries planners should 'take account of the need to promote sustainable patterns of development' (NPPF). Development at GA1 would not be sustainable and therefore extending Stevenage into the GB at these locations should not be considered. All the access roads to a potential development at GA1 are very narrow and widening would be either impossible or impractical. To be viable there would need to be a link road around the north of the sites, either connecting Great Ashby to A1M at Junction 8 or to more major roads into Stevenage. This would be either very expensive or in the latter case impossible due to the lack of available land/narrow roads through residential areas. There is no provision for such a road in the development plans.

The country lanes from Gravely and Weston are barely passable for 2 cars and Calder Way which would link GA1 to the rest of Gt Ashby is traffic calmed, single track and with houses on both sides, so the development would not be easily accessible by car and impossible by bus. It is understood a new local access road linking Gt Ashby to GA1 via Hay Bluff Drive (crossing Weston Road) is being considered by developers, but again Hay Bluff Drive is too narrow and frequently choked with parked cars, due to the failure of earlier planners/developers to insist on sufficient parking provision in the existing Gt Ashby development. Parking is a particular problem as Gt Ashby has one of the highest concentrations of homes of multiple occupancy (HMOs) in the county. Widening Hay Bluff Drive to accommodate buses for GA1 would just exacerbate an already intolerable parking problem, according to local residents. They are concerned that emergency services may not be able to access houses in the HBD/Martins Way area already, so taking away more parking spaces to widen access could make the area unsafe.

* Calder Way which would link GA1 to the rest of Gt Ashby/Stevenage is single track. This narrow (and very effective) traffic calmed road was specifically included as a planning condition of the first phase of development at Gt Ashby, to reduce rat running from Stevenage through Weston and Gravely. To make GA1 sustainable there would have to be better access to the site (as discussed above). This would specifically breach the traffic calming (effectively voiding the planning condition which has proved so effective to date) and would result in the flood gates being opened for rat running from all over Stevenage into Gravely and Weston. Breaching this earlier planning condition is totally unacceptable.

* One of the key purposes of GB is to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment. Development at GA1 and GA2 will result in very significant encroachment into the countryside around the hamlets of Warrens Green and Halls Green, as well as the village of Weston.

Similarly, GB is designated to 'prevent urban sprawl' by keeping land permanently 'open'. Development at GA1 and GA2 will contribute yet again to the continued urban sprawl of Stevenage with the resultant slow merging of Stevenage, Hitchin , Letchworth and Baldock , all of which causes great harm to the GB and is completely contrary to GB guidance. Planning guidance states 'special circumstances' will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations' (NPPF). The proposed plan gives no explanation of why planners consider this harm is outweighed by other considerations in these locations. I do not believe it is.

* The proposed developments do not appear to have clear boundaries that would be defensible in future, (contrary to the NPPF) and further coalescence with Halls Green, Warrens Green and Weston would be inevitable, in the short term.

* It seems NHDC have based their proposal for development s GA1 and GA2 on the land being made available for development by the land owner and the desire of a developer to pursue a development, rather than any sound planning criteria.
I am not opposed to appropriate development in GB in accordance with planning guidance, where appropriate eg in my own village of Weston. Here the proposed development and effective new GB boundary is logical, defensible, durable and importantly development on the released land would be accessible, sustainable and clearly defined by the main road into the village.

I do not believe any criteria for demonstrating exceptional circumstances are met at GA2 or GA1. Neither site is sustainable and GA1 especially should be taken out of the Plan altogether. Efforts should be concentrated on West of Stevenage development and other proposed locations where exceptional circumstances can be demonstrated.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 1026

Received: 27/11/2016

Respondent: Ramblers Association (Hertfordshire & North Middlesex Area)

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? Yes

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

Object to GA1: Impact upon Hertfordshire Way / Graveley FP10

Full text:

The Hertfordshire Way, a 200 mile route round Hertfordshire uses Graveley FP10 which borders this area. It also uses the lane between GA1 & GA2 which will become more dangerous.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 1029

Received: 27/11/2016

Respondent: Mr Chown

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Object to GA1: inadequate roads (for construction traffic and for local traffic); insufficient school provision (primary and secondary); inadequate public transport links to Stevenage and beyond; environmental impact too large

Full text:

I do not believe that this proposed development is sustainable.

The existing road infrastructure is inadequate for construction traffic and would impose greatly on existing residents. Roads around Greatt Ashby are congested with on-street parking due to the flawed car-reduction measures from earlier planning regulations. Whichever access route from Stevenage was chosen for this site would be affected by this. Back Lane is already a 'rat run' for car commuters wishing to avoid the A1(M) - this proposed development would worsen this practice, given the greater number of drivers with access to it.

The existing primary school for Great Ashby, Round Diamond, is massively oversubscribed - it is extremely unlikely that any children from this site would be able to enter Round Diamond. The plan envisages a new 2FE primary school for this site but some existing Great Ashby residents would likely apply for children unable to get into Round Diamond for this new school. Accordingly, I do not believe that one 2FE primary school would be sufficient for this development. The plan offers few details on secondary school provision. Existing secondary school students from Great Ashby travel several miles to the secondary schools in Stevenage. Travel from this new development, being further from the centre of Stevenage, will be longer. There had previously been plans to relocate Thomas Alleyne school to land near Tilekiln farm, under the last Labour government, which were cancelled under the Coalition government. Nothing in the draft plan, other than a few vague references, gives a firm indication that plans to relocate a (or create a new) secondary school in the Great Ashby area is on the cards.

The plan is also insensitive to the natural environment, destroying valuable habitat and impinging on existing woodland. The current Great Ashby development has shown that euphemistic 'green corridors' are no substitute at all for open countryside. This will also adversely affect Great Ashby residents, who will have further to go to reach open countryside. This countryside is a valuable amenity used by many residents. This site would also adversely affect the landscape surrounding the abandoned church of St Ethelreda

Public transport links for Stevenage are already stretched. Bus provision is sparse and inadequate. Trains from Stevenage at peak hours are packed. A number of residents at the planned sites would undoubtedly be commuters to London (or possibly Cambridge) putting still further pressure on this link.

Support

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 1157

Received: 29/11/2016

Respondent: Croudace Strategic Limited

Representation Summary:

Support GA1: Support allocation as promoter / landowner. Site is deliverable, as demonstrated already through the negotiations on the current planning application, supporting information submitted with planning application. The site will be capable of delivering homes in the early part of the plan period.

Full text:

The council is aware that Croudace owns the site proposed for allocation as GA1: Land at Roundwood. The site is currently the subject of a planning application (Reference 16/01713/1) for 360 homes, 40% of which will be affordable. Croudace therefore supports the proposed allocation, and confirms that the site has no constraints to delivery and is capable of being delivered within the early part of the plan period.

We do not propose to resubmit here all the evidence which accompanies the current planning application, but the site has been discussed at length with the council's development management and planning policy teams over many years. The draft site allocation GA1 identifies eight bullet points in respect of this site, on which we comment as follows:

Drainage: The planning application is accompanied by a proposed drainage strategy, utilising a mixture of deep bore soakaways and swales to deal with the surface water on the site. Foul water treatment and fresh water supply can both be provided.

Integration into existing settlement: The layout of the proposed planning application shows that the site will integrate well with the adjoining settlement. The main accesses will lead into the estate, whilst the current country lane which lies between the site and the existing urban area will become a pedestrian and cycle way, increasing the sense of linkage between the site and the existing urban area.

To the northern and western boundaries, the site is bounded by woodland, giving a very high sense of enclosure. This has the twofold effect of limiting the impact on the wider countryside to the north and west, and ensures that the new development will be perceived as a logical continuation of the Great Ashby area.

Vehicular access: The main vehicular access is taken from Haybluff Drive, with off-site works proposed to Haybluff Drive, Mendip Way and Bray Drive so as to cater for the levels of traffic anticipated. The main access will therefore link with the existing residential streets of Great Ashby.

The existing secondary access onto Back Lane and Weston Road will continue to provide for access from Great Ashby to the nearby villages of Graveley and Weston and associated farms and hamlets. That said, the transport assessment work undertaken to support the planning application shows that these country routes will be considerably less desirable to traffic arising from the development than the new access via Haybluff Drive. As such, Back Lane and Weston Road will continue to have a character as rural lanes serving predominantly local traffic, and the main flow of traffic from the site will be into Great Ashby, as sought by this policy.

Maintain general integrity of Weston Road: The existing country lane (Back Lane / Weston Road) which runs alongside the current settlement edge will be altered, turning much of the existing lane into a footpath / cycle way, integrating with the existing network of footpath and cycle ways at Botany Bay Lane, leading to the neighbourhood centre at Great Ashby, less than half a mile from the site. Vehicular traffic currently using this lane is to be diverted along the site's spine road, allowing the lane to retain its hedgerows and act as a green infrastructure corridor. Pedestrians and cyclists will therefore retain the ability to use the existing route of Back Lane / Weston Road, or may choose to go through the site. This increases the permeability of the area.

Adjoining woodland habitats: The site borders woodlands to the west, north and north-east. None will be adversely affected by the development, with the proposed layout setting development back from the woodland edge and allowing for appropriate lighting schemes.

Parsonsgreen Wood Local Wildlife Site: The planning application was accompanied by a Phase 1 Habitat Survey, which identified no significant effects on the adjoining Local Wildlife Site at Parsonsgreen Wood.

Footpath Graveley 10: Footpath Graveley 10 forms part of the Hertfordshire Way long-distance path. The footpath itself lies outside the site, but the site layout shows the potential for at least one and possibly more points of access onto this path. The development will therefore integrate with the footpath network, whilst the visual impact of the development on the path itself will be very limited, given that the footpath is predominantly within the woodland to the north of the site, separated from it by the existing hedgerows.

Wider landscape and heritage impacts: The Planning Statement which accompanies the planning application shows that the scheme will have little or no impact on the wider landscape, and particularly that any effects on the heritage assets at Chesfield will be very limited given their separation and little if any intervisibility.

Conclusion: Croudace therefore supports the proposed allocation of Site GA1, and believes that the evidence already presented to the council accompanying the current planning application should give confidence that the particular criteria set out in the draft allocation are all capable of being satisfied. With the planning application being already submitted, the council can have confidence that delivery of this site will be able to proceed apace once permission is granted. We look forward to delivering a successful development here, helping to deliver the homes which are so much needed.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 1256

Received: 29/11/2016

Respondent: Mr Paul Murray

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Object to GA1:
- Construction work and access
- Impact on infrastructure and residents which need more consideration
- Education provision
- Amenities
- Highway infrastructure and congestion
- Parking infrastructure
- Cycle ways/provisions
- Pedestrian facilities
- Ground water
- Access to Open Space
- Access to public transport

Full text:

Please see attached PDF document containing representations as to elements of the Local Plan. 29.11.16.

Attachments:

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 1262

Received: 29/11/2016

Respondent: Mr Gavin Fernandez

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Object to GA1: Infrastructure (amenities, roads, schools, broadband), loss of Green Belt, biodiversity impact, pollution, highway safety, sustainability of construction materials, sustainability of added power demand

Full text:

-Insufficient existing local amenities and infrastructure to cope with existing housing let alone new development.
-The existing roads barely cater for the amount of cars in the area already.
-Local schools do not have enough space for admission to existing children let alone the increased families.
-Loss of Greenbelt land that should not be developed
-Destruction of habitat to local wildlife
-Environmental health deterioration from added pollution during construction and ongoing from new development
-Fibre network in area already at capacity
-Increased cars and safety issues this brings
-Sustainability of materials used in construction
-Sustainability of producing power for the network grid for new development

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 1264

Received: 29/11/2016

Respondent: Miss Joanne Slade

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Object to SP18:
- Object to the Croudace Homes Application.
- Will restrict parking on Bray Drive, Mendip Way and Haybluff Drive.
- Highway safety
- Village characteristics.
- Access restrictions for buses to village.

Full text:

You cannot possibly approve the plan by the Croudace Homes Application. This will massively restrict parking on Bray Drive, Mendip Way and Haybluff Drive. It already has overcrowding where parking is concerned anyway. In the summer months, I'm amazed there hasn't been an accident there already. We chose to move to Great Ashby because of the lovely spaces and wonderful family atmosphere, don't ruin it by crowbarring loads more houses into it please!!! You also cannot possibly put a bus route through this village, its just not big enough by far.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 1343

Received: 29/11/2016

Respondent: Mrs Denise Mitchell

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Objection to GA1:

- parking is poor
- to create wider roads for more traffic and bus routes will turn this area into a small town without any additional amenities
- house prices could potentially drop and the uniqueness of Great Ashby will be destroyed.

Full text:

Parking in Great Ashby is poor at the best of times and often causes disputes between neighbours. To reduce the parking further will cause more issues. This is a residential area and to create wider roads for more traffic and bus routes will turn this area into a small town without any additional amenities to cater for the influx of people that will live here. Residents of Great Ashby bought their homes based on the current layout and facilities of the area, house prices could potentially drop and the uniqueness of Great Ashby will be destroyed.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 1357

Received: 30/11/2016

Respondent: Mr Robert Logan

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? Yes

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

Object to GA1:
- This proposal should be rejected forthwith because it lacks infrastructure adjacent to Great Ashby which in itself lacks infrastructure expected of a community of nearly 6,000 residents.
- The access to the site both pre and post construction is based on traffic modelling which a consultant declares to be flawed.
- Green Belt
- Healthcare facilities
- Education facilities

Full text:

The proposed use of this land is wholly inappropriate because it is totally lacking in infrastructure and requires vehicular access on roads which are unable to cope with existing volumes of vehicle movements let alone the volumes which would be generated by an additional 360 dwellings during and after construction.
The use of green belt land for an unwanted and totally lacking development cannot be justified.
There are no medical facilities in Great Ashby and it's only primary school is heavily oversubscribed. There is no secondary school provision and a complete lack of a public house/restaurant.
New residents will need to access medical and school facilities in other areas of Stevenage which are already overloaded.
Great Ashby has been constructed on a shoe-string using minimum standards appropriate at the time. Our garages are too narrow to accommodate modern vehicles and off road parking is negligible thus forcing residents to park on roads constructed with a minimum width thereby creating areas which emergency vehicles cannot access. Unbelievably, it is along these very roads that construction traffic and subsequent new residents will be required to travel.
I understand that Great Ashby Community Council and the adjoining parishes of Graveley and Weston have commissioned a Transport Planning and Assessment consultant whose report states quite categorically that the original traffic assessment is deeply flawed and should be rejected as inadequate thereby rendering the development of the Roundwood site as in need of substantial re-planning.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 1437

Received: 29/11/2016

Respondent: Mr Neil Heyes

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Object to GA1: Insufficient local amenities and infrastructure, too great an effect on local wildlife.

Full text:

Insufficient local amenities and infrastructure.
Too great an effect on local wildlife.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 1468

Received: 29/11/2016

Respondent: Mr David Lodge

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

This site is unsuitable for development without better access provision. It is recognised that parking is already compromising emergency vehicle access and proposed access arrangements are not compliant with current parking provisions planning requirements.
A new dual carriageway access road connecting Great Ashby and this development to A505 roundabout with London Road at the south of Baldock. This will provide both good access for Great Ashby and allow a broader capability to continue with further housing development in the north of Great Ashby without increasing congestion in Great Ashby and the north of Stevenage.

Full text:

This development is ill considered given the transport access to site. Back Lane to Graveley is narrow and unsuitable for construction traffic. The proposed access routes through the Great Ashby estate do not meet the current requirements for the construction traffic and the planning submissions make construction access better but pedestrian safety and parking provision much worse. Construction traffic will present both a danger and a nuisance in terms of noise and dust.
Great Ashby Way is already congested and the increased traffic flows along the route down to St Martins Way will make current problems worse.

I have some concerns about the planned drainage solution at this site as this requires deep drilled soak aways which are a non-preferred solution according to Environment Agency. They leave present a medium and long term maintenance issue and its not clear how this will be managed and funded. While road runoff water may pass through oil seperaters, there is a significant risk of ground water contamination through uncontrolled disposal of household chemicals, paint, thinners, etc down the drains rainwater drains.

Parking provision is proposed to be changed for the access routes within Great Ashby. The parking provision at the time was less than is required now. The proposed solutions are required to meet the current parking provision requirements of 1 space minimum per single bed house and 2 spaces per house with 2+ bedrooms. Current planning submissions do not meet this minimum requirement.

Future developments should include provision for additional schooling, dentists, doctors surgery, and schools provision as well as a social centre such including a public house / restaurant space.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 1493

Received: 29/11/2016

Respondent: Mr Nicholas Hatch

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

I believe the infrastructure of the local area cannot sustain the new development without major investment. Also the loss of greenbelt land.

Full text:

I believe the infrastructure of the local area cannot sustain the new development without major investment. Also the loss of greenbelt land.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 1517

Received: 30/11/2016

Respondent: Mrs Deborah Lodge

Legally compliant? No

Sound? Yes

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

Object to GA1: Green Belt, unsuitable access for construction traffic, pedestrian safety, loss of existing parking, lack of amenities for existing residents

Full text:

The proposed development is on Green Belt Land. This land is supposed to be protected. It is essential to well being and the Eco structure. This development is inappropriate given the access to the proposed site. On previous occasions I have been informed by the council that back lane is a farm track making it difficult to maintain. It is narrow and unsuitable for large vehicles never mind construction traffic. It provides access to and from the equestrian centre whose larger vehicles struggle to pass cars never mind larger vehicles. The proposed access routes for construction traffic via existing Great Ashby roads do not meet current requirements for construction traffic. Great Ashby Way is already congested during peak times and busy at other times of day. It is crossed by children and their parents accessing local schools and amenities throughout the day without any assisted crossings. This is not limited to the start and finish of school as younger children attend nursery sessions which both start and finish outside of normal school hours. The intention to use Mendip Way for construction access following the removal of grass verges and the trees planted along them poses a huge risk to both resident and pedestrian safety. The space between people's front doors and the road will be significantly reduced. These are family homes, many with young children as residents. Families have purchased these homes as pleasant and safe places to raise their children. They chose to live on a housing estate with open areas and a leafy outlook not in the middle of a city where you expect to have large vehicles passing in front of your windows and large volumes of traffic passing by. The loss of parking spaces will increase the danger for pedestrians as well as causing further parking congestion. The construction requirements at the time these houses were built allowed for only 1.5 parking spaces for homes of 2 or more bedrooms. Requirements are now for 2 parking spaces for such dwellings. If parking provision is changed, it must meet with current requirements i.e. Removing the verges and parking areas will mean that 2 spaces must be created for each dwelling of 2 or more bedrooms. The plan does not make provision for this. Construction traffic will present both a danger and a nuisance with regard to noise and dust. Increased traffic flow along Great Ashby Way towards St Martins Way will make the congestion problems that already exist considerably worse. Great Ashby does not provide sufficient amenities for its current residents - the school does not have sufficient places for local children who live in Great Ashby NOT St Nicholas which has a completely different demographic. There is no dentist surgery, no doctors surgery and no secondary school provision.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 1638

Received: 30/11/2016

Respondent: Mrs Louise Creighton

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? Yes

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

Object to GA1:
- Concern at overdevelopment of Great Ashby.
- Pressure on local services
- Green Belt and local villages and roads
- Roads already can't cope and neither can schools - Round Diamond you already have to live 300yard or less from
- Other schools nearby also over subscribed
- Not enough car parking provision
- Brownfield sites

Full text:

My comments for GA2 Weston parish also apply here.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 1733

Received: 30/11/2016

Respondent: Mr William Harris

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Object to GA1: Firstly I do not agree with widening/expanding of the local minor roads. Construction would reduce car parking spaces. Increasing housing numbers would be overloading on services such as schooling, healthcare and play areas. Do not support building on Green Belt.

Full text:

I hereby object to the development of the proposed round wood site.
Firstly I do not agree with widening/expanding of the local minor roads (Mendip way, Hay bluff Drive or Bray Drive), My property is situated just off these roads and if they were redeveloped then I would be left living just off a main road and this is not acceptable. This would also cause major disruption whilst under construction and also reduce the currently used to capacity car parking spaces for the people on these roads. Secondly the increased housing would be overloading the existing services such as schooling, healthcare and play areas. (In respect to play areas the existing one which Crouadace built is still not open after almost a decade. Thirdly I object to building upon greenbelt land.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 1777

Received: 30/11/2016

Respondent: Mrs Melanie Murray

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Object to GA1: Traffic, access, Not in accordance with SP7, road and pedestrian widths unviable.

Full text:

Please see attached letter.

Attachments:

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 1867

Received: 30/11/2016

Respondent: Mr & Mrs Sejal Sira

Number of people: 2

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

Object to GA1: Unchecked Urban Sprawl, destroy Weston's historic village character, tranquility, biodiversity inc Red Kites, Bats and Barn Owls, important green spaces for recreation, footpaths and bridleways, large increase in numbers (with GA2), lack of Infrastructure, traffic and road capacity, lack of bus service, Green Belt, visual impact, noise, pollution, impact on Tile Kiln Farm.

Full text:

Reference: Local Plan Consultation 2011-31 North Herts District Council - Proposed development GA1 (Roundwood) and GA2 (SP18).
I write in connection with the above planning application. I have examined the plans and I know the site well. I moved into Weston a year ago & have settled into the area. We wish to strongly object to the proposed development of the above areas and find the Local Plan to be unacceptable.
Herein are our comments and objections relating to this planning application:
1. Unchecked Urban Sprawl
Weston is a small settlement within the Green Belt, where development proposals should be considered very carefully: infilling could ruin the character of the village & it's beautiful surrounding area, full of woodland and historical rural buildings, some Listed. Furthermore, Back Lane which runs to Weston, is a buffer from the increasing urban spread of Stevenage and Great Ashby. It is a tranquil, peaceful place and an estate development & school would overwhelm it. This Plan would simply allow the urban spread of Stevenage and Great Ashby to continue unchecked.
2. Protecting the Biodiversity of the area
There area is also rich with diverse animal habitats for endangered Red Kites, Bats and Barn Owls. These have a PROTECTED STATUS under Law (Directive 92/43/EEC/of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats of wild fauna and flora. With the increasing urban sprawl into the countryside, these protections are more important than ever. I do not feel the Plan has adequately considered the impact on these animals.
NHDC should be mindful of their duty to conserve the wildlife in their jurisdiction.
The areas of GA1 & GA2 are also an important green spaces. These are enjoyed by many people from the local area and beyond. The area is full of well-worn footpaths and bridleways, which cross sites GA1 and GA2. These are in constant use by horse riders, ramblers, locals and organised walks etc.
The protection of Weston's Green Belt visual, historic and archaeological qualities should be given considerable support. Paragraph 64 of the National Planning Policy Framework states that permission should be refused for development of poor design that fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions.
3. The Number of Proposed Houses
The Local Plan is proposing the development of 7700 (or a lessor figure, which has been recently been announced) in this area. I am very concerned that this small community will not be able to sustain such a large increase in numbers and corresponding cars, pressure on poor local amenities. It is a very large number compared to the existing dwellings and will alter the character of the area irreversibly.
The number of houses, is far greater than the local demand for housing in both areas. This has already been tacitly agreed, by the recent announcement by NHDC -that fewer houses will be necessary. This shows the lack of planning and local sustainable interest with the Local Plan.
4. Lack of Infrastructure
Pressure for the development of these areas are considerable, mainly for housing Stevanage and Great Ashby commuters, but has been successfully resisted in the past where a common sense approach was taken.
The reasons for rejecting those schemes also included the inadequacy of the lanes apart from the main trunk roads to the area, which cannot accommodate even small increases in traffic, and because road widening would destroy ancient field boundaries.
The area is served by busy rural roads like Back Lane and Church Lane (GA1 and GA2). These roads are often single track in many locations and already heavily congested due to recent new developments already in the area.
There is no mention of improving access on these roads or Calder Way. This concern is evidenced by the A1 East of England interim report (June 2016). There is no viable plan in place in the Proposed Local Plan for this lack of access and poor infrastructure.
The traffic assessments prepared for the GA1 development did not take into account the flow of traffic at peak times, the reduction of traffic flow due to local farm vehicles or simply the hazards faced with increased traffic in such narrow roads, where it is often difficult to pass without one car reversing large distances. How will the traffic flow in these conditions?
Furthermore, with the Council's recent cancellation of the last bus service through this area, this could limit opportunities for the residents of the new development to travel by public transport. More cars, traffic and congestion in Weston and Gravely, are inevitable if this Proposal Local Plan goes ahead.
5. United Local Support Against the Plan
Weston Parish Council have strongly objected to the development of GA1 and GA2 and have found considerable support amongst the local residents: They have asserted that the proposed developments are particularly ill-considered: it is on a greenbelt land used by many villagers and tourists for recreation and walking dogs, and building here would both diminish the striking views. New developments are necessarily modern in design and this style design is out of keeping with the Weston village's and surrounding areas strong historic character. While design issues might be solved by conditions or revised proposals, these could not remedy the siting problem.
6. Lack of Infrastructure and burden on local Access roads
The proposed developments of GA1 and GA2 to the North East of Stevenage are poorly positioned in terms of infrastructure and local amenities. I think that a properly considered development plan is vital for the continued growth and prosperity of the local area, businesses and residents. I would support the building of a new Garden City or further development should be around brown field sites and surrounding areas. The green Belt is important and should be conserved.
7. Our Right to quite enjoyment of our home.
Both GA1 and GA2 have grossly underestimated the individual impact these large developments will have on our quiet enjoyment of our home. The GA1 and GA2 development would lead to a loss of privacy, loss of view and will certainly impact on the peaceful enjoyment of our home and garden.
The likely effect of the development on the residential amenity of neighbours has not been given thoughtful consideration.
The proposed developments will be visually overbearing, cluttered and out of scale with existing homes in the area. It is an inappropriate design for this part of the rural area. Such a large development would be totally out of keeping with the neighbouring properties, which are mainly smaller cottage style houses and small farm dwellings and miscellaneous existing developments in the vicinity. Furthermore, the inevitable loss of existing views from neighbouring properties would adversely affect the residential amenity of neighbouring owners.
As well as the increased noise, destruction of our views and quite enjoyment of our land, there is also the consideration of our safety. Parking would be a problem on our land. With the lack of turning opportunities on Back Lane, increased traffic will inevitably give rise to the dangerous situation with cars trying to turn on blind corners causing noise, pollution and dust at all times of the day and night. This additional concentration of traffic and roadside parking will cause traffic problems and create a safety hazard for other motorists.
We invite you to visit our home to verify that these objections are valid.
8. Impact on Tile Kiln Farm
Tile Kiln Farm and woods has significant historical significance and local importance. GA1 and GA2 would grossly affect my life and where I live. Tile Kiln Farm compromises of Listed Buildings and adjacent fields. I strongly believe that these two proposed developments would adversely affect the setting of the Listed Buildings.
Whilst living in a Listed Building, the Council rightly, put severe restrictions on any changes to the site. It is only fair that they do the same. I therefore strongly feel that NHDH have a duty to consider this impact.
9. Lack of Planning and Investigation into West of Stevenage site Location
I fully support another more suitable location on the West of Stevenage,
There is no need for this kind of open market housing in the GA1 and GA2. North Herts District has more than several years' supply of housing land to meet the requirements in an alternative area - West of Stevenage which is closer to transport links, recreational and shopping facilities. This site is well served by Junction 7 and 8 of the A1(M), a busy town centre, bus and rail links and retail park. It will also benefit from the newly constructed east-west A505 link to Luton and Cambridge.
This alternative would provide a suitable location which ensured that the Council fulfilled its obligation to provide affordable homes for local people.
Summary
Therefore, we ask that North Herts District Council refuse this Planning Application for GA1 and GA2 and encourage the planners to resubmit a more viable and sustainable Plan.
Should you require any additional information, clarification of any comments made, or would like to arrange a visit to our home; do not hesitate to contact us.
If this application is to be decided by Councillors, please take this as notice that I would like to speak at the meeting of the committee at which this application is expected to be decided. Please let us know as soon as possible the date of the meeting.