Knebworth

1. There is no strategy meaning this plan is unlikely to be effective. This plan is not a co-ordinated development and there are no overall infrastructure delivery plans. This will likely result in the piecemeal development of Knebworth with no single developer responsible for delivering the necessary infrastructure to support these plans (e.g., roads, schools, drainage, doctors). A co-ordinated plan is required to
deliver a plan for the village as a whole and not four independent sections.
2. This plan identifies four local housing allocations within Knebworth for an estimated 598 new homes and further 65 homes have already been built or granted planning permission. This is a 31% increase in the size of Knebworth. 150 homes being built at Woolmer Green and also ~70 on the Oddessy site have not been taken into account in these numbers. Overall this is huge number of house for one area, and are not justified when the Stevenage west land is reserved and not being developed in this plan (3,100 homes). Why does this plan not propose developing this area? This could considerably reduce the scale of development of the villages surrounding Stevenage in NH.
3. The plan does include a new primary school but the proposals are not specific and need to be more detailed about what will actually be provided. Knebworth does not currently have a secondary school, with children having to travel to Stevenage, Hitchin or further for secondary schooling. The plan does not explain how it will actually support increased secondary education requirement needs associated with an increase in population. One solution would be to include a new secondary school in the plan specifically rather than vague non-committal statements (e.g., KB4 / Up to 4ha of land for education purposes subject to up-to-date assessments of need).
4. The green belt surrounding Knebworth makes a significant contribution to protecting the space between the village and the surrounding villages and Stevenage. Removing it will likely mean there is a considerable danger of coalescence, destroying the identity of Knebworth.
5. Already the B197 is a very busy road and traffic often queues right back from Stevenage to Knebworth in rush hour, taking up to 30 mins to drive. I live on Watton Road in Knebworth and this road is also solid in rush hour. The plan does not include infrastructure development plans in an around Knebworth to address managing the increased burden of traffic associated with increased housing.
6. This plan has no considerations for the local economy with no proposals that support job creation in the village. At the moment Chas Low, the builder's merchants, on the KB3 site has a positive impact on the local economy - once this relocates this will be lost. The KB3 site should include retail/office premises - currently it is all housing.
7. Three proposed areas for development (KB2, KB3 and KB4) have long-standing drainage issues which the plan does not address in detail. The 31% increase in the size of Knebworth will also place a huge burden on Rye Meads Sewage Treatment works. The capacity of Rye Meads Sewage Treatment works will need to be increased - the current plan only supports part of the development, not all.
8. '13.200 A planning application has recently been submitted for a new library, doctors surgery and pharmacy on the site of the current library within the identified village centre' These are not new services, it is to replace the current ones. The plan is misleading here. Furthermore, these services are already stretched and the plan does not take into account the expansion of these services needed to support a 31% population increase.
9. The plan will have a negative impact on the surrounding countryside and damages two conservations areas in the Knebworth.

The overall Plan will have a detrimental effect on the Village and the village community. Whilst it is true that the individual development sites are less 500 houses, this is a technicality as the developments together total 663 dwellings. To meet the objectives, the proposals regarding Knebworth should have been subject to a Strategic Planning review which would show that it is neither practical, nor does it meet community needs for sustainable growth.
Specifically, my objections to the Plan are as follows: -
1. The residents have chosen Knebworth for its rural village setting. The additional housing and location of the developments will effectively make the village part of Stevenage.
2. There is no suggestion that the new homes will are needed to support new or existing commercial enterprises. Indeed with regard to KB3, housing will replace an existing business. Therefore the village is being asked to support businesses elsewhere.
3. The majority of the new developments will be on land currently designated as Green Belt. This is against Government Policy and such space between towns should be retained to protect the integrity of the Village.
4. Currently the road system in Knebworth is congested with improvements to some of the arterial roads impossible due to narrow railway bridges supporting the main lines from Kings Cross/St Pancras. The main road through Knebworth is the B197 where there is continual congestion through the working day. On occasions, when there is an incident between Junctions 6 and 7 of the adjacent A1M, this problem creates gridlock in the High Street where not even the emergency vehicles are able to operate. The proposed increase of 31% of houses will create at least that proportion of extra traffic which will be unsustainable.
5. In addition to the situation in 4. above, there will be considerable disruption and inconvenience to the residents caused by heavy lorries transporting equipment, raw materials etc., to the respective sites. As the proposal is for the period to 2031, this represents a further 15 years of misery.
6. It has been proposed that the railway service to Kings Cross will be effectively reduced by the removal of the fast services at rush hour. Railway travellers to London will know well enough that the trains are already crowded when arriving at Knebworth in the morning. As the vast majority of new residents will be working outside Knebworth, the reduction in train services and the increase in usage of at least 31% will cause even more overcrowded trains.
7. There is only one medical practice Knebworth. As people in the village will be aware, the practice is already under pressure in terms of facilities /appointments etc. and the additional influx of people will swamp the practice.
8. Much of the proposed area for houses are vulnerable to surface water flooding and the construction of additional roads, houses and the infrastructure will increase that risk, not only for the proposed houses, but also for current residents. It is also understood that there are capacity issues at the Rye Meads Sewage Treatment Works which serve the area
9. The building of 663 new homes will have a dramatic impact on the need for education - particularly pupils at Primary and Secondary School. Based upon figures from the ONS adjusted for the likely demographic profile for the occupants of the new houses, there will be just over 1000 additional children aged 5-18 requiring school places. Only a Primary school with 200 pupils is currently available in Knebworth, with the Secondary school pupils travelling to Stevenage. Whilst an additional Primary school is proposed, this will be insufficient and it should be noted that a previous promise following a Development Plan to open another school has never been implemented.

The plan represents a 30% increase in the village without any additional infrastructure. Roads are already overcrowded with commuter cars from Stevenage and outlying villages. All increases in developments elsewhere will only add to the stress on local roads. Rail bridges are both narrow with no white line down the centre. This is already dangerous for pedestrians as footpaths only one person width. The remaining bridge allowing access to the west of the village has a weight and width restriction on it. The school is full as are the dentists and doctor. The B197 is already severely congested.
through the high street, it can take up to 10 minutes to get through. In peak hours it already takes around 30 minutes to get the A1 Motorway. The B197 is also used if the A1 is blocked. This road is already under great strain and these houses together with additional housing in Woolmer Green will only add to the situation. This housing is on green belt and will only add to the liklehood of coalescence of the village with Woolmer Green and Stevenage. The site KB2 suffers from flooding and has on a number of occasions flooded large parts of the village. The drains cannot cope with the existing situation. There is only a junior school in the village which is full where are the large number of children expected to be educated. Sites KB1 and KB2 will both have an impact on the villages two conservation areas. Site KB3 makes no allowance for the loss of both jobs and local trade by not having a mixed use development. All the sites are on green belt land the size on the proposed developments will have a huge impact on the village way of life.

The proposed developments of Knebworth are totally disproportionate to a village of it's size. To propose an increase of over 600 new dwellings, without showing a strategic improvement plan of the local infrastructure, shows a clear lack of strategic thought.

There will be a significant strain on local roads, railways, dentist, doctor, library and school with this level of development.

A particular worry is the development to the east of the village in KB4. This will mean that the village will merge with Stevenage and become a suburb of a large town, rather than a rural village. The views from the recreation ground are of open agricultural land and will be completely destroyed by the proposed development. Both Oakfields road and Watton Road are completely inadicate to deal with the increase volume of traffic resulting from the new housing development

This plan would entail the coalescing of Knebworth into the town of Stevenage and the surrounding villages. It has been put forward without any consideration of the lack of transport infrastructure through the village, in particular the fact that the high street is a major route between Welwyn Garden City and Stevenage, especially during periods of congestion on the nearby A1(M) and access between one side of the village and the other is via very narrow bridges with very small (1 metre wide) pavements and a roadway that does not allow large vehicles to pass one another. Although this objection has been raised at every stage of the process the council has not responded to these concerns. The plan is for over 600 houses in Knebworth but as the council has decided to enter this as 4 items on the plan no strategic planning has been done with regard to social and economic impact, traffic or education requirements beyond primary level.

There are four proposed sites for residential development,and there appears to be no strategic plan for dealing with the impact that this overall large expansion relative to the existing Knebworth.
There are no new employment opportunities within the Knebworth settlement, the occupants of the new dwellings will be younger people who will have to commute by road or by rail.
Each of the four sites would feed into narrow roads where the traffic volume is high, particularly at peak periods. Sites KB1 and KB2 will lead under the Station Road railway bridge where the road is very narrow, has a bend at each end and very narrow footway on one side of the road only. Pedestrians can only pass each other by one of them stepping into the road.
The alternative for KB2 is the Gun Road railway bridge, also with a bend in the narrow roadway where vehicles meet each other in the middle of the road. Driving under this bridge is a nightmare, particularly during the rush hour in the dark evenings. There is also only one narrow footway.
Regarding KB1 and KB2, there are also the questions of Deards End Lane and Gypsy Lane both extremely narrow, essentially single track roads with no footways at all.
KB3 traffic will emerge either on to Station Road close to the London Road mini-roundabout or on to London Road itself which regarded as a "pinch point" at present.
KB4 traffic would emerge on to Watton Road and/or on to Swangleys Lane both narrow. There is no possibility of widening the built-up sections of these two roads.
There is very limited car parking at Knebworth railway station; commuters already jam up the roads of Knebworth with parked cars and this can only get much worse with a greatly increased population.
No information has been given on the wider environmental impact of the proposed developments. For example, serious flooding has occurred on various occasions for many years because of inadequate drainage. Both KB1and KB2 are above the level of the rest of "new" Knebworth and the decreased permeability of new built-up areas could only make things worse without considerable investment in the infrastructure.
One further point is that the B197 road is used as the diversion for the A1(M) motorway in the event of closure for accidents and maintenance and traffic comes to a standstill in and around the high street in peak periods.

Draft is not legally compliant due to lack of consultation when it was decided to include the removal of KB4 from the green belt.

Unsound because the plan is unrealistic regarding the infrastructure needs of Knebworth, in particular the traffic around the junctions of the B197 with the school on Swangleys Lane, the church and post office on St Martin's Road, and the shops along Knebworth High Street.

This concentrated area is the heart of the village - in the long term it needs to be pedestrianised with provision for public transport and a considerable increase in car parking facilities (for the village and the nearby railway station).

Unfortunately the high street on the B197 is a rat-run for the parallel A1M which reduces to 2 lanes from Welwyn heading North. When there is an incident on the A1M, there are queues of traffic from Woolmer Green through Knebworth up to Stevenage.

Attached are photos of the morning traffic in this area on a typical school day (28 November 2016) when the weather is clear and dry and there are no abnormal incidents on the road system. As can be seen, it is already a dangerous situation, heavy traffic going in all directions mixed with children and other pedestrians.

The

The planned increase of 663 dwellings in Knebworth is not justified when the land west of Stevenage is better suited. Whilst none of the individual sites within Knebworth involve over 500 dwellings, the aggregate is 663 dwellings and it is clear that all of the sites are interrelated in that each will require access to the B197 and will increase the already congested High Street. Access from the sites to the West of the village will also increase the amount of traffic using the three narrow crossings over/under the railway line. It is, therefore, contested that there should be a Strategic Policy covering all of the proposed sites in Knebworth; this should include road access to the sites and traffic implications for the centre of the village, education requirements and parking implications for people using the railway.
The two 'under' bridges and one bridge over the main East Coast railway line are not wide enough to take existing levels of traffic, let alone the increased volumes that would result from sites KB1 and KB2. The road alignment on the approaches to the bridges restricts forward visibility. On Station Road the road width at the underbridge is 4.5 m, which is insufficient for 2 large vehicles to pass. There are height restrictions on the underbridges and a weight restriction on the overbridge. The existing footway, at both underbridges, is along one side of the road only; the footways are just over 1 m wide. This is not wide enough for two pedestrians to pass and so pedestrians must step into the road to pass. The footway at the Station Road bridge is the main pedestrian thoroughfare to the railway station and thus is the main link between the parts of the village on either side of the railway line. The existing situation for pedestrians is inadequate and unsafe. An increase in both vehicular and pedestrian traffic as a result of the proposed development is unacceptable.
Parking is already a serious issue in the village. There is a small car park at the station but many commuters park their cars in roads throughout the village where there are no parking restrictions, which displaces congestion, causing greater problems throughout the village. There are no large employers in the village and few jobs in Stevenage. This will mean that, if the housing proposals proceed, the people buying the houses will probably commute to work in London by train and this will only add to an already overburdened demand on parking.
The only doctors' surgery in Knebworth is inadequate for existing volumes of patients and, as a result, they are looking for new premises with planning permission applied for. Even if this were successful, the new premises would not be adequate to cope with a 31% increase in the population of the village.
The plan is not effective as there are no proposals for job creation within Knebworth.
The plan calls for the release of Green Belt land around Knebworth. If the proposed plan is allowed to proceed, there would be almost continuous housing between Stevenage and Welwyn/Hatfield.
This is the first time that proposed site KB4 has ever been included in any Local Plan as a preferred site for development and so to include it in this iteration, with only limited time for consideration/comment, is out of line with standard national planning cycles and processes.

The size and scale of the proposed development in Knebworth is alarming, particularly as this is proposed without any strategic plan to develop the local infrastructure to support the growth sustainably. Examples of areas of concern are:
The current main road through the village (B197) is already congested - I do not see how it could cope with the extra traffic from 800+ homes (Knebworth and Woolmer Green). Likewise for the roads in the village that would be the link roads to the development - these are narrow, one is single track in places and are not capable of taking increased traffic.
- the doctors surgery and school (infants and juniors only) are already over subscribed
- there is no proposal for local jobs. This is of particular concern as one of the developments is in the heart of the village, closing the builders merchant that brings in much business to the rest of the village.
- the removal of the green belt particularly to the east of the village further reduces the space between Knebworth and Stevenage, thereby increasing the threat to the identity of the village. It also removes one of the most popular areas for dog walking.

The plans as a whole are not sound:

Traffic:
Knebworth already suffers from congestion and insufficient parking provision, leading to commuter parking in the residential areas near to the station and potentially dangerous congestion in the high street. These proposals would exacerbate the above problems and also lead to increased access traffic through residential areas such as Gypsy Lane, Stockens Green and Deards End Lane, none of which are suitable for use as through roads: Deards End Lane and Gypsy Lane are single track roads constrained by rail bridges which would have to be widened to permit greater access. The roads within these suggested areas are conservation areas. Deards End Lane (http://www.north-herts.gov.uk/sites/northherts-cms/files/deards_end_lane_conservation_area_map.pdf) and Stockens Green (http://www.north-herts.gov.uk/sites/northherts-cms/files/stockens_green_conservation_area_map.pdf). Increasing the volume of traffic would undermine the conservation nature of these sites.

A1
The proximity of the proposed development to the A1 is problematic. Noise and air pollution would be significant, the impact of which could only become worse as traffic levels increase. The proposals run contrary to the Environmental Audit Committee's aspiration that Councils should ensure that they "prioritise air quality in planning decisions" .

Green Belt :
The developments encroach upon significant elements of Green Belt which is contrary to national policy. Can I refer you to this site http://www.stevenage.gov.uk/content/committees/87812/88269/88273/Executive-28-May-2013-Item-6-BD13.pdf
which is interesting in regard to the contribution Knebworth Green belt makes to the area. Stevenage council paper also assesses Knebworth green belt as significant to stop urban sprawl.

Again, this website
http://www.north-herts.gov.uk/sites/northherts-cms/files/green_belt_review_part_2_november_2014_0.pdf
suggests that green belt east of Knebworth should be maintained.
The National Planning Policy Framework and the 2015 Conservative Manifesto state clearly that Ministers attach great importance to the Green Belt and will maintain existing levels of protection. It says that Green Belt land should only be developed in exceptional cases, and that economic growth is not in itself an 'exceptional case'.



Sewerage:
The plan as a whole could exceed the constraints imposed by the current capacity of the sewerage system serving the area. This constraint led to previous plans for development to be abandoned and is not addressed in the current plan

Public Services
There is no commitment - only suggestions- to provide public services which will cope with an overall increase of 31% in the size of the village. Medical services, schools and access will all be affected and cannot be considered beyond the scope of plans of this scale.

The plans are not justified:
- No justification or consideration is given to the economic impact of the plans on the village e.g without increased local employment impacts on roads and railway are likely to be exacerbated
- the plan provides for a disproportionate rate of growth in Knebworth vis-à-vis other parts of North Hertfordshire which does not seem equitable
-the plans require removal of green belt land without any other justification than construction of housing
- benefits which the plan could provide - eg. improved medical services; greater access to school of choice, particularly secondary; stimulation of local businesses and increased employment opportunities; rail station development alongside improved services - are either ignored or given token consideration

[1] the railway bridges on Station Road and Gun Lane are already dangerous: the pedestrian footpaths are very narrow and completely unsuitable for wheelchairs or pushchairs. At busy times cars and other road transport have to take a chance that they won't meet something coming the other way!
[2] the proposal to build new homes and a school next to a motorway is unwise considering the current fear of the effects of air pollution. Who would indemnify against future health claims?

I do not feel that there is a cohesive strategy for Knebworth and thus there is a connection between housing and the infrastructure required. It is ludicrous to be considering increasing the number of houses within Knebworthby such an enormous percentage at the same time as considering reducing the train service to the village. Whether or not this falls within the remit of the Council it needs to be taken into consideration in the interests of a cohesive response.
The number of houses planned is excessive both in terms of its impact on the village itself and when considering the additional building planned in neighbouring areas. The amount of traffic through the village is already a problem and the roads cannot cope with the additional cars that would be involved. Additionally, there would be a huge impact on the village character and the surrounding landscape, scenery and wildlife

The high street is a 'pinch point' EVERY DAY at rush hours and when children arrive and leave the school, typically being driven by their parents. It is not just a pinch point when the A1(M) is closed. The additional housing will add substantially to this daily congestion.

There are two bridges which effectively divide Knebworth along a north-south axis. Traffic under both bridges has to excercise considerable caution as they are narrow, have very small pavements, and are approached on bends. Extra housing will result in much more traffic using the bridges.

The plan is rather vague about the need for extra schools. The plan should not be adopted unless an extra primary and secondary school is built - it is not enough to hint at the need.

I served on the original "Knebworth Village Plan" sub- team for the "Parking & Traffic" item. The top-most safety issue for the village at that time was the railway underpass on Station Road, the most central of the three underpass / bridge pinch-points. This underpass is on an 'S' bend, and has a single narrow pavement (opposing pedestrians have to step into the road to pass each other) - an "accident waiting to happen". My most significant contribution was, over a week, to count / record the number of vehicles and pedestrians (the latter included many baby-buggies and children) negotiating that Station road underpass at the morning rush-hour. The results amazed the North Herts District Council Transport Dept., which said it had had 'no idea of the vast mixed volume of traffic'.
No action was taken then, or since.

The proposed housing developments KB1 and KB2 will generate a very significant additional volume of vehicle and pedestrian traffic through the three railway bridge / underpasses as they access the B197 main road.
The vital safety upgrades necessary to accommodate these additional traffic flows are not included in the Proposed Submission Draft.
In addition, each of the four proposed housing sites will aggravate the already serious rush-hour traffic congestion in and around the village.

1) Reference is made to the construction of a new primary school. However, this will be one form entry only (approximately 30 children per year). This is unlikely to accommodate the number of new children the local plan will likely bring. The existing school is already under significant pressure and this will only increase. There is also no provision for when the new school will be built. Will this be before any of the new homes are built, or half way through, or at the end. If it is anything other than before any new homes are built, there are going to be serious difficulties in getting local Knebworth primary children into a Knebworth school.

2) The plan makes no firm provision regarding secondary education. Again, this is an area already under considerable pressure as Knebworth has no obviously placed secondary school. To introduce a significant number of children into an area without giving any firm thought to how they will be educated seems short sighted. To delay this to a later date risks it being overtaken by other issues and ultimately forgotten. Why not bottom out the issue now?

3) Despite identifying the traffic problems of Knebworth there is no provision for how the local plan will alleviate these problems, which can only be made worse by the introduction of so many new houses. The high street is frequently at a standstill and in my view simply removing parking restrictions will not prevent this. The true reason is simply a backlog from the Stevenage roundabout at Broadwater and the A1 roundabout towards WGC. Again, to defer considering this issues risks it not being considered at all.

4) The plan highlights the importance of a balance between new development and ensuring continued vitality of the local centre without giving any indication of how this will be achieved. If the congestion within Knebworth through the high street becomes too great people will avoid it completely, and in any event it is likely that current parking provisions will be completely swamped if this development goes ahead. How then will the centre thrive? There is no indication that any additional facilities will be built despite existing facilities being already under pressure due to the size of the village. Whilst there are plans for a new library/doctor's my understanding is that these will not be any larger.

5) The local plan references transport but again does not suggest how clearly foreseeable problems will be resolved. Trains into London are already full. If commuting into London becomes too difficult then people will not want to live in Knebworth. There is also a forthcoming transport consultation which may make this problem even more pressing.

The above proposal to increase the size of Knebworth is I believe, ill-conceived and unsustainable and I oppose it. The Knebworth sites are both less sustainable for development than a combination of one or more of the 231 sites that were put forward in the 'call' for sites as outlined in the 'Site Selection Matrix' of the current consultation '(Background Papers, Preferred Options-Consultation. November 2014)'.

My principle objections are in two areas.

Inadequate Infrastructure - Over a relatively small number of years Knebworth has increasingly suffered from traffic congestion. The B197 running through the centre of the village is increasingly used at peak times by traffic as a way of avoiding the congested A1M. Gypsy Lane, Gun Road, Station Road and Deards End Lane are used as rat runs by traffic between Stevenage/Codicote and Welwyn/Stevenage. These roads are all narrow with limited footpath facilities and are already dangerous to pedestrians-as I can personally testify!!They are made even more dangerous by narrow railway bridges on their route which make two way traffic very difficult. This situation will only get worse if some 400 extra houses (and therefore circa 5-600 extra cars) are
added to the mix and I believe accidents and serious injury are inevitable. Knebworth also has a railway station on the main London line and parking for this facility is already inadequate and out of hand. With no new facilities planned, it will get worse. Adequate junior schooling is currently not an issue for Knebworth but health care and GP surgery provision is, a situation which will get worse if the plans go ahead.

Topography of the proposed sites - The proposed sites at Gypsy Lane and Deards End Lane are deeply undulating fields with high water tables and a history of flooding. Vast amounts of earth moving and concrete infill will only exacerbate this flooding problem and its attendant issues for house owners in locations like 'Broom Grove' and 'The Meadway.' Because of its location-sitting in a small hollow against surrounding countryside-Knebworth already experiences high levels of pollution. Building 400 new homes -and the accompanying 5-600 additional motor cars, coupled with the planned expansion of the A1m-can only increase the problem. It would also seem in conflict with the Parliamentary Environmental Audit Committee recommendations of December 2014 regarding new development.

Given the important issues these proposals raise, both locally and nationally, it is not the time for proposals of a 'quick fix' nature designed to satisfy short term Political agendas and deadlines. I believe the Council has a unique opportunity to develop a long term strategic plan for a 'New Town' development in Hertfordshire that would meet the objectives set.
Irrespective of the Council's planned desecration of the green belt they would be acting against their own 2006 study which stated that-"Knebworth is not suitable for further development as it would risk the sustainability of the village."

The Village center has a lively trading environment serving the wider rural area but has traffic congestion on the B197, to increase Knebworth by 31% would over stretch the amenities. No additional Schooling is proposed. Doctors Surgery full. Cemetery provision not included.Any plan would change the Rural Roads to urban roads to cope with increased traffic, but no upgrades planned for the B197 or the Watton road to the A602 (east) from the village both known congestion areas. Loss of Green Belt should only be made in exceptional circumstances.

The plan appears to want to defer decisions on schooling and transport.

Secondary education is particularly pressured around Knebworth and any plan approval should include plans for schooling upfront and not be allowed to be forgotten.

Transport into London is already over subscribed. It is difficult to see how the number of additional housing proposed could possibly be supported by the current timetable or the proposed timetable for the trains.

STRATEGY

There is no Strategy for the planning of 663 dwellings within Knebworth, when there is a requirement for a strategy for 500+ dwellings on a single site. Whilst the 663 dwellings are spread over four sites, these are all within a <1 km radius of the village centre and are this, in effect, one site!

It was suggested as the conclusion to a study by NHDC in 2006 that to extend the size of the village from its existing size would not be sustainable, as any increase in size would result in overload of the Village amenities. i.e. shops, transport / roads, Doctor's surgery etc. It is now proposed to increase the size by 663 homes, an increase of 31%. The village infrastructure is already creaking at the seams; with the proposed increase it will likely burst.

GREEN BELT ENCROACHMENT

This is contrary to Government policy and where within your own NHDC Green Belt Review of July 2016 at Table 2.4 states that Knebworth "Overall makes a significant contribution to Green Belt purposes, helping to prevent sprawl, merger and encroachment."

HIGHWAYS

Within the Local Plan Transport Review dated 23 Sep 16 by Odyssey Markides
there is one minor mention of Knebworth.

However, the proposed 663 extra dwelling will generate additional strain on the already heavily used B197 through the village along with other connecting roads. London Road in the centre of the village is frequently congested, notably when a Bus or Truck is travelling as there is not enough width to the road, with parked cars either side for a Bus/Truck to pass through with oncoming traffic.

The approach roads to the mini-roundabout on the B197 at the junction of
London Rd/Stevenage Rd/Station Rd/Watton Rd frequently has queues of traffic >500m at peak hours. This will only be exacerbated with additional housing.

Traffic congestion in the village centre is exacerbated by the B197 being used as a 'rat run' and Diversion route for traffic from the A1(M).

Knebworth is dissected by the London, Kings Cross to Edinburgh Railway line with the main road through the village, the B197, being to the east of the railway line. Two of the proposed four sites sites are to the west of the railway line. Thus any/all vehicles wishing to go from these two proposed sites to Stevenage or Welwyn (or further afield) need to cross over or under the railway line by one of three bridges on Gun Lane, Station Road or Deards End Lane.

All three of these bridges have narrow roadways that frequently mean vehicles have to wait at one end or the other as it is hazardous for vehicles to pass in a two-way manner.

Additionally, whilst the roads on these three bridges are narrow, the pavements for pedestrians are even narrower and, if being constructed today, I'm sure would be less than the safe permitted width. Pedestrians frequently have to step into the road to avoid one another and it is a miracle there have not been many accidents over the years.

The increased vehicle traffic from an additional 633 dwellings, of say a further 950 cars i.e. 1.5 per dwelling, will provide unwarranted congestion and danger to road user and pedestrians alike at these bridges.

EMPLOYMENT

There are no plans for increasing employment prospects within the village and even the loss of jobs with the conversion of site KB3, currently commercial, to housing. There may be a few jobs created within the village Estate Agents to service the additional housing stock.

I have read the proposed plan in relation to Knebworth as a whole. There are four proposed development sites; two the east of the village and two to the west. Previous plans have not included KB4.
In general I consider the whole plan ill conceived and refer you to the letter in response to the plan from Mr Stephen McPartland, the MP for Stevenage. I concur with everything he says. For my own part, as a resident of Knebworth for 20 years I have the following specific comments:
1 Roads.
Knebworth is on the B197. It is a single carriageway road that is constantly busy in itself. During peak times it suffers massive traffic overload as motorists use it to avoid the A1(M). In addition, during peak times the traffic from the A602 into Stevenage that once used the Old Hertford Road is directed along the Watton Road into Knebworth as a route to the Roebuck roundabout in Stevenage. Watton Road is country lane, at some points single track, and at the village end is a residential road that is clogged up by cars using it to park for access to the Knebworth Station. At all times there is queuing to negotiate the residential section of Watton Road and at peak times it is an acute problem. With KB4 this road (the only viable eastern approach into the village) would basically be subject to an overwhelming problem for motorists and a nightmare for residents.
To the west, the road to the station has to negotiate a low bridge with what is virtually a single track (and already very busy) road with a very narrow and very busy pavement, which is only wide enough for one person. Mothers with children in buggies take big risks already when accessing that route.
The western access route from Codicote is the only other route to the station and into the village, It too is very narrow and passes through a residential area. Parked cars makes it a treacherous route.
Deard's End Lane at the northern end of the village provides a short cut to and from Stevenage/Codicote/Station. It is a very narrow,single track residential lane with no footpath at all. It is already overloaded and extremely dangerous for pedestrians.
The high street is a single carriageway road with constant parking either side. It is only just about possible for two standard cars to pass in opposite directions: as soon as there is a lorry (frequently) or a bus (every five minutes) long queues form and accidents occur.
In short, the road infrastructure is already inadequate, over used, and dangerous.
Railway Station
Knebworth is very popular and convenient for those commuting either to Stevenage and Hitchin (schools) and or London (working people). There is an acute shortage of parking at the station and in the village roads. The platforms are already very busy in peak times and never not busy. The trains are always standing room only from Hatfield onwards on the London-bound journeys at all times of day, and standing room only in peak times from Knebworth itself. It is consequently uncomfortable and potentially very dangerous. There have been major fatal accidents on the line at both Hatfield and Potters Bar. The station cannot manage an increase in passenger traffic as it stands. To make things worse, Thameslink/Great Northern are proposing as of 2017 to halve the number of trains to and from Knebworth. This is a potential disaster.
Coalescence
The proposed KB4 is potentially a planning disaster. Not only does it remove highly productive farmland, it reduces the already small gap between Knebworth and Stevenage. Moreover it removes Greenbelt in contravention to National and regional policy. I believe it is critical that Knebworth retains its integrity as a village and a creeping development removes even more of its independence. Access to that site is also catastrophic for the road infrastructure and could potentially reduce the economic balance of the farmland such that it is no longer viable. Farm traffic already struggles to access the farm and this will be exacerbated.
Schools
Knebworth Junior School could not cope with additional demand. Stevenage schools cannot provide the places that Knebworth children need. The proposed site for a suggested school is too close to the A1(M) for the health of children and the staff. There is also a flood risk in that area as I understand it.
Heatlhcare
The doctor's surgery is already unable to provide an adequate service because of unsatisfiable demand. The same is true of the dental practices. It will be no better with a potential move of site for the doctors' surgery. The existing site is almost certain to be developed for housing: which is not ideal for the reasons already stated.
I understand that a separate Strategic Policy should accompany and support a proposed site of more than 500 houses. That this has not been prepared is an error/omission at best and underhand at worst. If one were prepared, the key issues would need to be addressed and any sensible mind would conclude that development on most of the proposed sites are not sustainable. The site at KB1 and KB 2 are at least as restricted for access as KB4. The narrow lanes at every point of the village would simply be inadequate for the access required.

For any development of more that 500 houses, NHDC has put together a strategic plan. Although the individual sites proposed have less that 500 houses, the total of all the sites is 598. All the sites together will impact the village in similar ways, so an integrated approach to highways, transport, schools, employment and housing makes sense.
Any new housing residents are likely to be commuters working in London. The trains and station from this commuter village are already over-crowed at peak times, and busy at others.There is a current proposal by Govia Thameslink to reduce the frequency the trains.

My objection is based around 4 key areas:

1. The plan itself provides no clear strategy for the future of Knebworth as a village. The plan seems to be designed around justifying the need for 600+ houses as opposed to fully exploring the impact the extra population will have on the village I i.e. The direct and obvious relationship between housing and the infrastructure which is required to fully support the new inhabitants (education, dental surgery, parking, doctors surgery, trains and buses as well as the capacity of the local roads).

2. The impact on the highways and transport links. Knebworth high street is already heavily congested. Local traffic already use cut through routes such as Pondcroft Road to try and miss the traffic. On the other side of the village Swangleys Lane and St. Martin's Road are used for the same purpose.

3. Drainage - a couple of years ago the village flooded in a couple of areas (gun Lane and Watton Road). The access along Watton Road will become even more important if these extra houses were built and there has been no planning to prevent this re-occurring. In addition there will be a capacity issue at Rye Meads Sewage Treatment works.

4. Green belt removal from around Knebworth. Knebworth is very much a village. By increasing the number of dwellings by upwards of 30% Knebworth will lose it's village character and identity. Removal of the Green belt goes against Government policy and will have an inevitable negative loss of countryside to the detriment of existing residents.

As a local resident I am writing to express my objection to the proposed development of up to 638 new houses on green belt land around Knebworth.

I feel this is a totally unwarranted development proposal, with no consideration given to major points as detailed below:

*This is green belt land and should not be built on. It creates a natural break between Knebworth and the surrounding villages and towns. To build on this land will forever erode this space and deprive the local community of unspoilt countryside which is vital for promoting healthy living and recreation.

*The A1(M) is on the boundary of two sites. Imagine the detrimental effects of air quality on the residents of the proposed development. Being located next to a motorway will encourage developers to build not detached and semi-detached houses suitable for families, but flats instead. This would in no way suit the character of the village or surrounding properties.

*The infrastructure serving the sites is totally unsuitable. The fields are subject to flooding and the increase in hardstandings will only exacerbate this, moving the water into adjacent areas. SUDS is not a solution as it only works where water can naturally drain away.

*There is no access to two of the sites without passing under one of three narrow railway bridges, one of which does not even have a footway. The other two have a single narrow footway. Pedestrians already have to walk in the road to pass each other and cars regularly wait in turn to pass under the bridges. The situation is already unsuitable and unsafe; adding a potential 800 (400 houses x 2 cars) additional vehicles and 1200 (average 3 persons/property) pedestrians into this equation will cause gridlock and undoubtedly more accidents. The bridges cannot be widened.

*Knebworth is a commuter village. There is already a well-documented problem with commuter parking around the village and Knebworth station is very small. Residents of the Wadnell Way development, which is on the fringes of Knebworth, do not walk to the station, they drive. The proposed developments are a similar distance from the station as that at Wadnell Way, therefore all the train commuters would attempt to park around the village. There are no more parking spaces in our current situation. Under current financial constraints what steps could the council take to overcome this?

*Road commuting. The bulk of current Knebworth residents do not work in Knebworth, so residents of this new development would almost certainly not work in Knebworth. This would mean 1200 additional vehicles taking to the roads in rush hour. All roads leading to the main road, London Road, are narrow and congested with commuter parking. Additionally, Knebworth High Street is a known congestion bottleneck. The additional traffic could not hope to get to the major roads safely, efficiently or quickly. None of the existing roads have the capacity to be widened.

*Schools. Knebworth School is already at capacity, so a new school would be needed if additional families are to move to Knebworth. We need not only a primary school but a new secondary school, as current options are limited to secondary schools out of the area, which currently already adds to the traffic leaving Knebworth. Without additional schooling at all levels this development is totally unviable.

*Current housing trends do not suit the character of the village with regard to density and style. I am a Quantity Surveyor and work on local new commercial and industrial developments on a daily basis. If the density of housing that is currently built in Stevenage is proposed in Knebworth, this will not be in keeping with the nature of the village and will be undesirable.

*The recreational and community facilities in Knebworth are already limited. We have one small supermarket, one Indian restaurant and one public house. Adding 638 additional houses on the fringes of the village will form an isolated housing estate that will not enhance the village and will overwhelm the existing facilities.

I believe the proposal to build so many houses in Knebworth is flawed. There are suggested improvement to infrastructure (such as the school) but history has shown that these things rarely happen. It will mean more secondary students needing transport into Stevenage. There is the obvious loss of greenbelt land in the area. We have concerns about the increase traffic that would result from so many houses being built. With restricted traffic already along the high street and the two pinch points by the railway bridges any increase in housing will only exacerbate the problem.

Sites KB1, KB2 and KB4 propose a cumulative total of 584 dwellings, which results in a 31% increase in the size of the village and exceeds the threshold requirement for a specific Strategic Policy (SP). There is no SP in Section 4 for Knebworth and therefore the impact of housing development on this Category A village has not been properly considered, and is in conflict with the NPPF.

The railway service going South during rush hour is already at capacity and services are also planned to be cut with trains to Peterborough no longer stopping at Knebworth. Gun Lane has become a dangerous cut through for cars travelling too fast down a road which is only wide enough for one car in order to avoid the High Street which is always gridlocked as it is also only wide enough for one car to get down at a time, due to parking on both sides of the road. Further housing development would increase the local population and execerbate these problems.

The proposed submission by NHDC adding hundreds of new homes on the edges of our village is disappointing, unjustified, ineffective and not consistent with national policy. It unjustifiably uses swathes of Greenbelt land and will put an enormous strain on public services. The B197, the main road through the village is already extremely busy and there is often a build up of traffic in both directions as it tries to pass through the high street. Such an increase in housing would add to this and cause gridlocks to occur more frequently. The information about secondary schools attended by Knebworth children is incorrect. They tend to be placed in schools in Stevenage, Hitchin and Hatfield ( not Welwyn). Most of them travel by public transport or school buses so they create the minimum amount of traffic congestion at the moment.
Not enough attention has been paid to the infrastructure required for such a radical increase in the size of the village. The proposed housing to the east of the village would be very difficult to access with causing constant traffic jams and the parking problems would certainly get worse.

Knebworth is a small village. It's infrastructure can not cope with this amount of development. The roads are too narrow, the station is already dangerously overcrowded, as is the doctors surgery and school. Many area's flood in wet weather and plans are not well thought out.

See attachment

I object to this plan. There is no strategy at all.

This plan has not been thought through what so ever.

The impact on all aspects of everyday life will be extremely damaging.

1. The roads are already congested especially around villages and bridges.
2. The conservation area will be effected dramatically decreasing wildlife.
3. Green belt area is at risk as Knebworth basically merges with Stevenage with this destroying good agricultural land.


There as so many reasons this is wrong. My advice is to go back to the drawing board and think again. Instead of building on to local villages impacting on already stretched services why not find an area and build a new Garden City.