Knebworth

I have taken this opportunity to write to you to object to the proposed development detailed in paragraphs 13.183 to 13.202 in the local plan for Knebworth.
The objections that I have to the local plan are in relation to Knebworth and are as follows:
Firstly 600+ new residential units is an enormous increase on a village this represents approximately 35%. I do not believe this is a responsible increase. The plan does not address the current limitations on infrastructure, such as
* the roads are at peak times during the day are grid locked, this will get worse and there is no mitigation planned for this.
* lack of parking in the village is a known issue , there is currently not enough space, there is no plan for where additional vehicles will park
* the current primary school is at capacity, there is no plan for how the additional children locating into the village will be educated
* the drainage at the local treatment works is at capacity - there are no mitigating plans for this.
* the access roads to any proposed development to the land referred to as KB4 [ID278] does not have sufficient carriageway width for the increased number of vehicles, this has not been planned for.
My strong objection based upon the above is that this plan has not been thought through and appears to be revolving around more housing and little else that is needed alongside it for people to live.
As having been a commuter to London for the past 16 years, I have personally witnessed the train service going from a regular service where one was pretty much guaranteed a seat to and from Kings Cross to an overcrowded standing room only service.
Back in 2000 the platform at Knebworth in the morning was quiet by comparison to today. Over the past 16 years , the platforms are considerably busier, and to get a comfortable standing space is a luxury - a seat is a rareity indeed. We are told frequently that the network is at capacity, so more trains are not an option to solve this awful situation, adding 600 plus houses in Knebworth, and 150 in neighbouring Woolmer Green [who also use Knebworth station to commute from] will push the situation on the trains to a point where you physically will not be able to get on to trains. This is a very real and worrying prospect. The local plan does not account for this and will seriously impact on many people's ability to get to and from work, thereby affecting livelyhoods.
In addition to the operational side of the village and the associated infrastructure, the land that is being proposed for development is Green Belt. This Green Belt land protects the village and indeed its' identity by preventing it conjoining neighbouring towns and villages, namely Stevenage and Woolmer Green. I believe this is contrary to current Government Policy.
Also I think that bringing land, which could be hundreds of miles away into Green Belt to trade off Green Belt in Hertfordshire is flawed. This is nothing but a cheap conjouring trick to take land which works hard to protect villages in a very developed part of the country, make disappear and reappear hundreds on miles away where urban encroachment is not a risk or a threat. This land is in this current location for a reason which is applicable to its particular geography.
Once this land has been taken out of Green Belt, and is built upon there is no going back, ever.
There also does not appear to be any provision for the development of additional employment as part of the plan. On the contrary, the builders merchant Chas Lowe may be deducted from the community as part of this plan!
Again it just all seems to be residential and no retail / commercial. This also points to this development not having been thought through in a wholistic manner.
Personally I would be most affected by the development to the land known as KB4 [ID278]. With respect to this particular development my objections are as follows.
* This land is green belt - my objections are as mentioned above.
* Village identity will be lost as Stevenage [Bragbury End] will be brought closer to Knebworth
* The roads that would be used to access / egress this site are not currently suitable for 2 way traffic and are currently at over capacity at certain times of the day, additional traffic would merely increase this problem. These roads are Oakfields Road, Swangleys Lane and Watton Road.
* This land is good agricultural land, with the population of the country increasing we cannot afford to lose land such as this
Finally I am not against any development of housing in the Village, but it must be on a scale much smaller than what is currently in the plan. The plan should also be balanced to consider how the current village operates and should be sympathetic and positive to it The current plan is just to construct an enormous number of residential units to sort out one problem but in itself creates many many more.

See attachment

I wish to respond to the Local Plan to which I refer above.

I wish to register a strong objection to the scale and nature of the plan.

Knebworth is a large village as a result of development. The population of Knebworth has increased significantly in recent years. There have been two major developments and a great deal of infilling, since I moved to Knebworth 38 years ago. This was just after the first Wimpey development
Firstly, I would say that the plan is all about building houses. There is nothing in there for Knebworth, to improve the infrastructure or to increase employment prospects. It is merely about cramming more houses onto available space. Use of available space will destroy fertile farmland and reduce the green belt. I am aware of the risk of merging Knebworth and Stevenage and this does concern me although you may not be willing to take this into account but there is a grave danger of Knebworth losing its separate identity and character.

A buzz-acronym these days is JAM (Just about managing) ,and in many respects, Knebworth is JAM.

* The new plan will increase the number of homes within Knebworth by a third. This will be a serious issue for a village that is JAM.
* Knebworth is already seriously impacted by through and local traffic and by commuter parking.
* The part of Knebworth to the west of the B197 is an island hemmed in by the railway and the B197. Access is via three (under track) road bridges and one (over track) road bridge. The only other way in is via Old Knebworth along little more than single track country lanes. They cannot take more traffic. The roads under and over the railway are all narrow and all offset so that through visibility is compromised. Indeed it is already dangerous and so many more passages will increase the danger significantly. I strongly believe that to plan to create an increase in the number of journeys along these roads is reckless.
* The school is already crowded. An earlier plan included a primary school but this appears to have become less certain.
* The doctor's surgery is unable to cope and re-location is planned although planning permission has not yet been forthcoming.
* There is significant flooding and there is a major capacity problem at the local sewage works
* You will see that I live on Stockens Green which is a conservation area. The plan will have a significant impact on this.

I have tried to be objective and not to take a NIMBY approach to the plan but I strongly feel that the sheer size this plan threatens the character, life and safety of the people of Knebworth Given the extent of development to the west of Knebworth and in Woolmer Green the numbers proposed for Knebworth are excessive and disproportionate.

I wish to register my complete objection to North Herts District Council proposed plans for the development to expand areas of Knebworth Village. The reasons for my objection as follows: -

1. Under this proposed plan it is clear that no consideration has been given to the impact it will have on the, already overstretched, local infrastructure.

2. The traffic flowing through, or trying to negotiate passing through Knebworth village, is horrendous at the best of times and mostly at a standstill, particularly on the B197 which is the main route through the village. Car parking, even for residents, is practically impossible and is exasperated by non-resident car owners parking their vehicles (where ever they feel fit) in order to use the local railway station for their daily to commute to work in London, Peterborough or Cambridge.

3. I myself have had occasion where inconsiderate drivers have parked in front of my property, for the whole day, preventing me from exiting my own driveway until they return in the evening. This type of situation (which is very common through-out the village) is intolerable and will only get worse if this planned development goes ahead. This plan simply does not provide for the current local resident's needs in anyway what so ever.

4. This proposed local plan lacks any form of strategy for Knebworth and cannot be deemed justified or fair in anyway in-so much as the forecast development proposed for Knebworth is much, much higher than other areas in North Hertfordshire. Furthermore the is no connection between the proposed extra housing, cumulative development and infrastructure needed to support the growth sustainably.

5. There are ample "Brown Field" and empty sites with-in North Hertfordshire that could be utilized to accommodate such additional housing/dwellings projects in the region, without the need of having to build on and remove designated Green Belt space between towns and villages in the district. The old Kodak site at Caxton way Stevenage is a prime example of such wasted acreage and unused wasteland.

6. National government policy states it will protect the Green Belt and Green Belt buffer zones, yet this local plan proposes the complete opposite by identifying three large areas to the east and west of Knebworth. Furthermore the proposed sites at KB1 & KB2 to the west of Knebworth are designated conservation areas. What is the point of having a National protection policy if it's not to be maintained?

7. The areas being consider for development KB1, KB2 and KB4 are prime productive Agricultural land which, if lost, will have an impact on wildlife sites of special scientific interest and will result in additional traffic congestion on narrow roads, unsuitable for heavy traffic and usage, not to mention the additional surface water and flooding problems.

8. The local primary school in the centre of the village is completely over-subscribed, mainly by the children of families that do not live in the village, and whilst the proposed plan has provision for new schooling, it is totally inadequate and does not take into consideration any future needs for access to secondary education and schooling.

9. There is absolutely no provision or consideration in this plan to address the impact such an additional influx would have on the already oversubscribed current medical practice and services.

10. The local Doctors surgery, at the centre of the village, is not fit for purpose and cannot cope with its current registered patients and ever growing elderly population, let alone and additional influx of families and their needs. As a patient of the practice I know by experience that it is near on impossible to secure an appointment to see your own local doctor and trying to do so often results in being offloaded to their sister surgery in Marymead, Stevenage - which is equally over-subscribed and at capacity.

11. There is no provision in the plan for the creation of any new (local) employment opportunities, potentially resulting in extra strains on the local unemployment and social services/benefits offices. Where and how are these new families going to be able to secure gainful employment when, as a district, North Herts already fairs poorly?

12. There is no provision in the plan to tackle the additional congestion on the roads and railway station during peak periods. The limited car parking spaces available are already at capacity, which often leads to double or illegal parking and the main train station struggles to cope as it is.

I have been resident in Knebworth village for the last 30 years, during which time I have witnessed the whole of the village (and surrounding areas) slowly grind to a halt. Should this plan go ahead as proposed, it is likely going to kill off all of what is left.

I trust my, and other concerned residents of Knebworth views will be seriously considered and that these proposals will be rejected as they are ill thought out and not feasible or sustainable.

We are writing to express our concern about the Local Plan, which we feel is unsound. The proposed sites in Knebworth, as well as Codicote and the surrounding area, will have a detrimental impact on roads, railways, education, the environment and the character of our villages.

Knebworth surgery is already overstretched. There are plans to build a new surgery, but this is to replace the current one, it is not an additional service.

The Great Northern railway service is overcrowded at peak times and even off peak there is often standing room only. Parking at Knebworth Station is totally inadequate.

The B197 through Knebworth and the B656 through Codicote take a lot of commuter traffic from adjoining villages which converges at Old Welwyn to join the A1M. At peak times, all these roads become congested, even gridlocked. When the A1M, M1 or M25 have closures the extra traffic converges on our local roads bringing everything to a standstill. The impact of extra housing and therefore more vehicles will be catastrophic.

Contrary to the Department of Transport's guidelines Sites KB1 and KB2 in particular are unacceptably close to the AlM, potentially causing unpleasant and unacceptable environmental conditions for residents.

We feel that the Council has not demonstrated 'exceptional circumstances' for removing land from the Green Belt. Green Belt land offers significant protection of the space between villages and towns in the district enabling Knebworth to keep a separate identity.

The Local Plan is inadequately prepared and, if the proposed housing goes ahead, the character of Knebworth and the surrounding villages will be changed irrevocably. A new garden city, as has been suggested by our MP Stephen McPartland, would seem to be an excellent solution to the district's housing dilemma.

See attached

See attached

See attached

I object to the North Hertfordshire District Council Local Plan 2011-2031 with respect to the proposed submission relating to Knebworth. I do not consider the plan to be sound; it is not positively prepared, justified, effective or consistent with national policy.
The proposed local plan shows a distinct lack of strategic planning for Knebworth; pieces of land have been identified for development in isolation and no account has been taken of the cumulative impact on the existing village or its infrastructure. A piecemeal approach has been taken and neither the best interests of the village nor its ability to cope with the large proposed increase in dwellings have been taken into account.
The proposed 31% increase in dwellings is made without any provision to improve the roads, parking, social amenities or public services.
The B197 is already heavily congested every day at peak times and this is exacerbated and extended to other times of day when there are problems on the A1. I drive south from Knebworth every day for work and it regularly takes 30 minutes to drive about 3 miles both out of the village in the morning and back in at night. In addition to this, there is regularly a traffic jam leaving the village at the north end from Deards End lane towards Stevenage which seems to be caused by the traffic lights at the Broadwater Tesco store. It can take 20 minutes to drive from the northern boundary of Knebworth to the Roebuck. With the exception of Sundays, there is congestion on the High Street at all times of day and often in the evening. The current infrastructure is struggling to cope now and will not cope with a 31% increase in dwellings.
Given that there are no plans for additional employment in the immediate vicinity, all new householders will be commuters, putting additional strain on road, rail and parking. There are currently plans to actually reduce train services to Knebworth with the village losing the fast trains to London. There will be more passengers and less trains on an already busy route. Parking near the station is already an issue; causing tensions between residents and commuters.
NHDC is planning to build on greenbelt but their interpretation of "exceptional circumstances" is against Government policies. Development of sites KB1, KB2 and KB4 would result in a loss of productive agricultural land.
Site KB4 has restricted access; neither Swangley's Lane, Old Lane nor Watton Road is suitable for construction traffic. St Martin's Road is a private road and would be in danger of becoming a "rat run" and used for parking. There is an alternative site on land west of the A1(M) which has been under discussion since the 1950s but no progress has been made due to access issues. The access to site KB4 is no better than the access to this site.
The proposed local plan would result in a loss of commerce in the village with the Chas Lowe site being used for housing. This is a prime commercial site in the centre of the village and should not be reallocated to housing.
There are currently proposals for the construction of a new surgery to replace the existing one. This is not additional capacity. A 31% increase in dwellings will require additional capacity however there is no expansion capacity built into the surgery plan whatsoever either in terms of the service it will provide or parking for the facility.
The proposed Local Development Plan will have a detrimental impact on the village of Knebworth and will not enhance the village in any way. Bolting on new developments of hundreds of homes on the edge of Knebworth is not a solution to the need for homes. It will erode its boundaries with neighbouring settlements and the village will lose its separate identity. Knebworth is not the most appropriate location for an additional 663 homes. There is an alternative site which would be better suited to the proposed to the west of Stevenage.
NHDC have not worked with neighbouring local authorities but have developed local plans in isolation rather than working together to provide the best solution to housing needs in the area.
Hertfordshire is a rural county and it is vital that space between towns and villages is protected in line with Government policy to maintain the identity of villages, in this case Knebworth.
I would ask that the proposed local plan is scrapped and a more positive plan developed in co-operation with neighbouring authorities to best meet the housing needs of the area in a way which enhances local communities.

Please see below my concerns with respect to your Local Plan 2011 - 2031 Proposed Submission Draft and in particular with regards to the village of Knebworth.

Re Section 2, 13, Communities, Knebworth:
Inadequate consideration has been applied with respect to selection of land for development in Knebworth in that:
1) It is predominantly land which is currently green belt and the use of green belt should only be considered in exceptional circumstances (as per your document). I have not seen any exceptional circumstances mentioned so struggle to understand why you are even thinking of requesting repurposing these plots of land.
2) Sites KB1 and KB2 are next to the A1M and with respect to this will have the problem of a) high noise and pollution levels next to residential properties b) no consideration of the pending widening of the A1M which is still on the plans for taking place c) extreme difficulty with large heavy construction vehicles attempting to access these sites and d) a school being developed next to the A1M on site KB2 which will cause safety concerns. Furthermore land which is currently under agricultural use which will be lost.
3) Site KB4 appears to be a very late addition to the plans and has accessibility issues for construction purposes and also will add a significant amount of traffic to roads which are narrow and already very busy. With Woolmer Green applying for turning green belt land (which is on the same side of the road as site KB4) into residential use then one sees the threat of land between the two sites being proposed for yet further development and with this the total loss of any separation with green land.
4) Site KB3 (centre of the village) appears to be predominantly for residential use. This means additional traffic and also pressure on local services (doctors, dentist...) and nothing in the plans that support bringing additional business development into Knebworth to help provide the opportunity of local employment to the increased population of people seeking employment.
5) The number of dwellings proposed has been increased from initial proposals and additionally no allowance/consideration has been taken into account with respect to land adjacent to the Odyssey Sports Club on which some 60+ residential properties have had planning approval? There is no justification for not including this development within the numbers for Knebworth.
6) Furthermore the repurposing of Green Belt land is contrary to Government policy and the proposed plans make no attempt to protect space between towns and villages in the area and this is significant to Knebworth in regard to Stevenage and Woolmer Green. Such plans, if approved, will erode the separate identity that Knebworth, as a village, has.

The addition of an excess of some 600+ residential properties in Knebworth has not really recognised the negative impact and issues which will arise:
1) The B197 was never built to accommodate such an increase in population and the village already suffers from significant traffic congestion and there is a shortfall in the centre of the village for parking for shoppers etc.
2) Areas of the village are difficult to access for large vehicles and there would be the necessity for such vehicles to attempt to gain access to planned sites and via one of the two railway bridges that exist and which are already danger points.
3) Lack of consideration for the local economy and nothing is proposed in respect to job creation or allocation of sites for commercial use. In fact the proposals show such land being removed with the planned development of site KB3.
4) Local NHS facilities will become more overstretched than they currently are - there is not even one full time NHS Dental provider in the village? Recognition needs to be given to the fact that Knebworth is a village and as such residents do need easy access to such NHS facilities - travelling to Stevenage , Welwyn Garden City or elsewhere is not going to be practical especially with Knebworth having an ageing population.
5) Building an additional, single form entry, junior school is neither cost effective from an operational perspective nor cost effective from a cost of build perspective. We currently have a very good two form entry Junior School in the village and this does operate cost effectively at present but with NHDC funding challenges it may well struggle in the not too distant future and especially with a second Junior School for NHDC to fund. I also understand that there are no monies available to fund the purchase of the land nor construction and setup of a new school and with this being the case one can only summise that the company that develop the facility on site KB2 will need to uplift the costs of each property that they develop and sell to cover such costs - something that I am sure they will not appreciate and especially with the cost of properties in Knebworth which are already at the higher end of the market. Unless there is a thoroughly considered and funded approach for this then it does not and will not stack up financially.
6) Additional traffic will occur, onto already highly used roads, by parents whose children attend school at the new site proposed in KB2. Such additional traffic will just add to the current overload and there are no alternative easy access points that would obviate such a position.
7) There does not appear to have been any consideration of the land that has already been secured and planning approved on the west of Stevenage. This site would provide for much more accommodation than Knebworth and other similar areas could provide and would also be able to provision commercial properties that would support and need additional employment which would be locally available.

See attached

See attachment

See attachment

I support the notion that development should be sustainable.

With particular respect to Knebworth there are insufficient park and green spaces; the railway is running to capacity and cannot be expanded without upgrading the viaduct at Digswell; people are already parking up to half a mile from the station causing inconvenience to local residents and to anybody trying to use the residential streets; Deards End lane is a conservation area and is unsuitable for commercial traffic; the listed railway bridge over the East Coast main line has a weight limit.

Section 1:

Knebworth Estates congratulates North Hertfordshire District Council on a Plan that has - not before time - been positively prepared, and - within its delayed and limited time frame - appears justified, effective and consistent with national policy.

Section 4.9 - Policy SP2:

Knebworth Estates supports Knebworth's inclusion as a Category A village, and Old Knebworth's inclusion as a Category B village - although it argues that there are sometimes cases where it is preferable for a village to evolve outside of its "built environment" rather than on the open and green spaces within its "built environment", and that the Plan should allow for such cases.

Section 4.37 - Policy SP4:

Knebworth Estates supports the Plan's commitment to protecting the vitality and viability of the range of retail facilities in the local centre of Knebworth.

Section 4.127:

Knebworth Estates supports the Plan's commitment to deliver appropriate primary and secondary school facilities for Knebworth.

Section 4.162:

Knebworth Estates supports the Plan's commitment "to find new, appropriate uses and solutions to secure the future of heritage assets."

Section 4.165:

Knebworth Estates does not support the Plan considering serving Tree Preservation Orders within historic parks and gardens as this could run contrary to the Plan's commitments in Section 4.162 and the management of historic parks and gardens - and the preservation of, interpretation of, and access to, the heritage assets within - are unlikely to be any better served than by those to whom it is a day-in-day-out commitment and responsibility. Knebworth Park and Gardens has its own Historic England approved Conservation Plan and an exemplary record in its heritage management, and yet another level of statutory requirement is unjustified, unnecessary and counter-productive.

Section 5.28 & 5.29:

Knebworth Estates supports the Plan's intent that Knebworth village centre should continue to provide a mix of shopping, services and community facilities.

Sections 5.39 to 5.48 and Policy ETC8:

Knebworth Estates supports the Plan's commitment to Tourism and argues that - whilst being an Historic England "Priority Building At Risk" - Knebworth House and Knebworth Park belie Section 5.41's statement that North Hertfordshire is not a major tourist destination. The Visit Herts DMO, VisitEngland, the LEP, and Hertfordshire County Council all recognise the district's strong tourism draw and impact. Knebworth House is one of only two Historic Houses in Hertfordshire with a national profile (the other being Hatfield House in the Welwyn and Hatfield district) and Knebworth Park is unique nationally in its capacity for large music events. The Plan should be aspirational to the benefits and potential of Tourism.

Section 6:

Knebworth Estates broadly supports the Plan's Green Belt policies - although, as in Section 4.9, Policy SP2 above - it argues that there are sometimes cases where it is preferable for communities to evolve outside of the "built environment" rather than threatening the quality of life, open and green spaces, balanced zoning and heritage of the "built environment". Knebworth Estates supports the consideration of "exceptional circumstances" within Green Belt policy.

Section 12 - Policy HE2:

Knebworth Estates supports the Plan's "Heritage at risk" policy.

Section 13.183 to 13.202 - Knebworth:

Knebworth Estates supports the Plan's policy for Knebworth within the context and scope of the Plan's objectives and time scales.

Ref - Knebworth - KB1 & KB2:

Knebworth Estates supports the Plan's Housing Allocation and site specific criteria for KB1 and KB2:

Commitment

As freehold owners of the sites identified as KB1 and KB2, Knebworth Estates reiterates its commitment, as expressed in previous consultation responses - and in consultation responses of the independent charity representing Knebworth House (The Knebworth House Education and Preservation Trust), to which Knebworth Estates is primary donor - that if these sites are brought forward for residential designation, it will move swiftly to work with the Council to deliver the full required housing targets with maximum sensitivity to the community of which it has been a part for over 500 years.

Proof of this commitment is to be found in the Estate's long record of involvement in the evolution of the community of Knebworth - since the settlement's beginnings - and specifically, in its multi-generational quest to restore and protect Knebworth House, its Park and curtilage, for public benefit and access (see "Opportunity" below).

The Estate treasures Knebworth's green spaces and environment - it has been a long term guardian of these - however it also believes that Knebworth should play its part in contributing to housing need identified in the Plan, and in the planned evolution of the District as conceived in the Plan. It recognises, with the Plan, Knebworth's pre-existing infrastructure - "a good range of facilities including a railway station, school, doctors and dentists, library, a range of shops, village hall and churches" - and thus considers it right that Knebworth shares responsibility to provide for residential growth with other communities in the District.

As part of Local Plan residential growth, the Estate supports the provision of affordable housing and schemes to provide homes for those who have grown up in the community. It recognises that new homes generate extra pressure on schools and supports increasing school provision. Increased school provision will strengthen Knebworth's independence of Stevenage and other growing towns, promote community spirit - a deficiency identified in the Knebworth Parish Plan (April 2007) - and ease pressure on road and rail networks at peak times.

Delivery

The Estate recognises the extensive evidence base compiled by the Council to support the suitability of sites KB1 and KB2 and looks forward to working with the Council, the community, neighbouring landowners and future development partners to conduct further studies to confirm and expand on this evidence, which it believes to be sound.

The Estate is pleased to have already contributed to existing evidence with input into Knebworth Parish Council's Knebworth Parish Plan (April 2007 - http://www.knebworthparishcouncil.gov.uk/uploads/knebworth-parishplan-1sted-web.pdf) and Knebworth Sites Appraisal Report (December 2007 - http://www.knebworthoptionsreport.org/).

Sustainability

The Estate recognises the Council's Capacity and Sensitivity Studies of 2006, and - as part of the community, and its owners resident within the community - is particularly sensitive to the issues raised by those who oppose development on these sites. It has listened to, recorded, and considered the practical concerns of its neighbours - through previous consultations, involvement in the Knebworth Parish Plan (April 2007) and the Village Appraisals of 1996 and 2007, and at a number of public meetings over the years - and is confident there are practical solutions and mitigations to the issues raised.

The Estate would seek - in working with the Council, any development partners and its neighbouring landowners - to work with Knebworth's new Neighbourhood Plan to promote a balance of achieving the Local Plan's targets, addressing sustainability and infrastructure issues and concerns, and fulfilling community aspirations. Within the parameters of the Plan, it would look to development in keeping with - and improving on - Knebworth's existing Conservation Areas and Edwin Lutyens' original 1910 framework for "Knebworth Garden Village".

Opportunity

Reinforcing the Estate's commitment, and adding to the opportunity of facility and infrastructure improvement in the wider community, is one factor that is unique to Knebworth Estates. Reflecting the intent of the Plan in Policy SP13a - "Maintaining a strong presumption in favour of the retention, preservation and enhancement of heritage assets and their setting" - the Local Plan's requirement of Estate sites for residential provision would present a once-in-a-generation opportunity to solve the Estate's multi-generational quest to endow the Knebworth House Education and Preservation Trust, a charity created in 1984 for the preservation and enhancement of the heritage asset of Knebworth House and its setting.

Residential designation of KB1 and KB2 would result in sufficient funding for this charity to halt the decay of Knebworth House - an Historic England designated "Priority Building At Risk" - complete its half-finished programme of urgent restoration, and secure an endowment for its future survival, and continued and expanded public access and interpretation.

The Knebworth House charity's record over its 33 year history, its established "exceptional circumstances", its Conservation Plan as submitted to North Hertfordshire District Council in July 2001 - and the Estate's record in endowing, and seeking to complete that endowment - is evidence of the commitment of the Estate and the Charity.

The collateral opportunity presented by the designation of KB1 and KB2 within the Local Plan therefore extends beyond the crucial issue of local residential shortfall, to address also major issues of benefit to the whole region and the nation beyond.

Ref - Knebworth - KB4:

Knebworth Estates supports the Plan's Housing Allocation for KB4. Whilst comfortable that KB1 and KB2 could be successfully delivered without KB4, Knebworth Estates expresses its support for KB4. The Estate enjoys a close and mutually supportive relationship with the landowners of KB4 and, in the event that both landowners have sites proposed for development in the final Plan, we would look to work closely with each other to take an holistic view of Knebworth village and, together, maximise infrastructure advantages for the greater benefit of the wider village and its long-term future.

See attached

See attached

See attachment

See attachment

See attached

See attachment

I am, along with many Codicote residents, very disappointed with the proposed submission of the above as it is very prejudicial, not justified and certainly not a practical solution to resolve housing needs. Having read many documents on this issue it seems a last ditch effort in the short term to solve a much bigger problem - the long term need for many thousands of new homes in North Hertfordshire. I believe the suggestion has already been made for a new Garden City.
My obvious concern relates to Codicote, but similar issues apply to our close neighbours in Knebworth. To add another 315 new houses on Green Belt land in Cowards Lane, The Close, Heath Lane and Codicote Garden Centre is completely ridiculous - a growth of 25%, putting pressure on already overloaded infrastructure in the village. Issues of traffic, parking, road safety, power, water, drainage, schooling, healthcare, community, environment and character. All of which is already under pressure, particularly with our other issue - Codicote Quarry.
Codicote School is already full to capacity as people cannot get places on an already restricted site. I believe the proposed Local Plan states that expansion is needed but the existing site cannot support further development. This would mean further impingement onto Green Belt land.
The proposal also has no clear strategy for mitigating traffic, and yet in Codicote we are already struggling with high volumes of traffic. The road between Hitchin and Codicote is extremely busy and dangerous, with parking and heavy lorries already creating a problem. St Albans Road is now used as a short cut to areas around St Albans, and with the ever increasing heavy lorry traffic for the Quarry and the necessary parking of residents cars, further housing expansion is just not practical. Just imagine what increased traffic from an additional 315 homes would produce, without the impact from the other proposed developments in Knebworth and Stevenage. The B656 is already used as a bypass for the A1(M).
Little thought seems to have been given to the obvious issues surrounding such expansion of a VILLAGE and the infrastructure limitations. It is clear that the proposed Local Plan is not fit for purpose and should be withdrawn or certainly quashed by Central Government. A new Garden City would be the answer instead of adding more homes to villages already under pressure from the issues aforementioned.
Let us hope for some common sense.

3.ii Soundness

Positively prepared

The Preferred Options document was open to public consultation between Dec 2014 and Jan 2015. Site KB4 (the land to the East of Knebworth) was not included in that document. This is, therefore, the first time that local residents and the school have had the opportunity of seeing, and commenting on, the planned KB4 development

The North Herts Local Plan is for an increase of 598 new homes in Knebworth plus a further 65 homes which have already been granted planning permission. This is a 31% increase in the size of the village. For development of more than 500 houses (what NHDC call a 'Strategic Housing Site') they require a Strategic Policy. Whilst none of the individual proposed sites around the outskirts of Knebworth meet this threshold, collectively they do.

Additional development is proposed in the Local Plans of adjacent district councils of Stevenage and Welwyn Hatfield (at Woolmer Green). All of the proposed sites will impact on the infrastructure of the village. I have outlined, in section 4 below, some of the infrastructure requirements that directly affect the school which appear have been overlooked.
The failure to have an integrated Strategic Policy for Knebworth is clear evidence that the Plan has not been positively prepared.

Effective

1. Infrastructure

Schools

Additional primary school place provision is an obvious requirement should the proposed development proceed. This has been acknowledged in the Plan
Section 13.191 says, site KB2 will provide an additional primary school in the West of Knebworth. This was a reasonable approach in the preferred options document of 2014/15, when KB4 was not included in the development proposals, However, now that KB4 is in the final version of the Local Plan, this does not make sense.

It is my considered opinion that Primary schooling in Knebworth is not best delivered from 2 separate sites, so far apart. It is unlikely that from an effectiveness and efficiency aspect, 2 separate primary schools, requiring separate management and administration teams, could be justified.
Also, if you have 2 sites with the separation proposed, if you can imagine a parent with a child in each site, which is a likelihood, dropping children off at their respective schools at the same time. Difficult without a fast car!
This would do little encourage parents to walk with their children to school. This would not be sustainable and do little to ease the traffic and parking problems.

So the additional school should be as close as possible to the existing site.

In the current Local Plan, land adjacent to the existing school site, KB4, is now proposed for development. Surely, if the developments proceed, it would be better if the additional primary school were adjacent to the existing school. This would appear to be possible, but has not been considered.

In addition, there is no additional provision for school spaces for the 150 houses proposed for Woolmer Green. The current school site at Woolmer Green has no space for additional classrooms and is at capacity. The location of their proposed housing development is North of Woolmer Green and South of Knebworth, but within walking distance of the current school and would, I believe fall into our catchment area.

Roads and Footways

Traffic and parking are significant problems in the vicinity of the school, particularly when parents are dropping off and picking up children from school. This adds to the delays in the High Street and joining roads and creates hazardous situations for pedestrians crossing at the road junctions.
Swangleys Lane often becomes impassable for wider vehicles, due to parents parking their cars.
Swangleys Lane is not wide enough to cope with the traffic that would result from the new development
There are no footways on Old Lane, Swangleys Lane or St Martins Road for much of their length.
There are no safe drop off or pick up points adjacent to the school. Perhaps the local Plan could provide this facility ?

One of the main pedestrian routes, for parents and children on the west side of the railway to get to the school, is by the Station Road bridge footway. The footway is approximately 1 metre wide over the 52 metre length of the underbridge. This is insufficient for 2 people to pass without 1 person stepping in to the road.
The current situation for pedestrians is unsafe.

This is not an exhaustive list. In the event that development proceeds in accordance with the Local Plan, all of the the infrastructure needs should be addressed

Safeguarding and KB4

Safeguarding the children attending Knebworth school is our highest priority.
Governors, staff and parents have expressed concerns previously about new developments overlooking the school playing fields. This is currently a particularly sensitive issue. The school has no control of who lives in these developments and whether they have been assessed through the Disclosure and Debarring Service.
KB4 would appear to overlook the School Playing Fields. If the development of KB4 proceeds the school would want assurance that the design of the buildings will prevent or significantly reduce the incidence of oversight of the School Playing Fields.

See attachment

See attachment

See attachment

See attachment

See attached

See attachment

See attachment