KB1 Land at Deards End

This site already forms part of an "appropriate, defensible Green Belt boundary" and its reclassification for housing development is unjustified, owing to improper consideration of the environmental impact and poor accessibility. Development will damage the character of the Deards End Conservation Area and will potentially harm species in Knebworth Woods SSSI and the adjacent priority habitat. Furthermore, the existing Deards End Lane access road is insufficient to support increased traffic from new housing and cannot be widened owing to railway bridge and existing properties.

The plan does not represent the best interests of the district. This is a small historic village.
The infrastructure provision for transport, waste management and water supply has
not been fully thought out. Problems with the width of the roads. Lanes are too narrow to cope with significant traffic.

Site KB1 involves erosion of the Green Belt - this should not be permitted. The Green Belt was created for a reason. If this and other areas are removed under this consultation what will stop further erosion under future proposals?

Access to KB1 is via narrow roads and under bridges under the East Coast Main Rail Line. These roads and bridges would need to be widened to cope with construction traffic during building and residential traffic after building.

Knebworth is already choked with traffic at busy times, particularly when there are problems on the A1(M). Development of the village would exacerbate the situation.

Any development would be adversely impacted by noise and pollution from the A1(M).

Any development could impact on conservation areas and SSSI.

I object to the proposed developments KB1 KB2 KB3 and KB4 at Knebworth for the following reasons:

Knebworth is unsuitable for this large scale expansion because of insufficient infrastructure. The proximity of the A1 M motorway and any expansion on the KB1 and KB2 sites will then exceed the new government air pollution levels. The noise is bad now so sound barriers would be needed making building less viable for builders. Particularly if it is widened as proposed. The proposed dedesignation of Green Belt land for building is unacceptable when prime agricultural land is required to feed our ever growing population. Once built on, the land for agriculture is lost for ever. If more low cost housing is required then why build in one of the most expensive villages. The only people who would be able to afford to buy them would be London commuters as local jobs if any, are not high salaried.

Access to KB1 and KB2 sites will currently have to pass under Gun Lane or Knebworth railway bridges. These bridges are too narrow for vehicles to pass each other as these are dog legged. They are also unsuitable for high vehicles as there is a height restriction .

The Deards End Lane railway bridge has a 7.5 ton weight restriction and is narrow , also it is listed as a historic monument. Deards End lane is narrow and a Conservation area with many listed Lutyens properties . Thus the lane is unsuitable as a cut through to avoid the village.

If there is an accident on the A1M , which is frequent particularly in the winter months, the current knock on effect is a complete blockage through Knebworth high street and all the surrounding roads. This is because Knebworth is on the B197 which is the old great North Road and runs parallel to the A1M. Complete gridlock ensues
which means increased pollution and thousands of wasted man hours.

If we have the proposed 663 dwellings then there will be an extra approx. 1300 cars using the roads and adding to the pollution. Since we have no local industry or proposed job creation all the new residents will be driving or commuting elsewhere to work. The trains are already full when they get to Knebworth and the rail companies are considering reducing the fast rail services from Knebworth
to accommodate other stations.

There is also increased building planned in the surrounding villages so this will also increase traffic. Extending the fixed village boundaries eg Odyssey development and Woolmer Green proposals reduces the traditional Green Belt corridor between towns and villages.

The current drains in Knebworth are no longer maintained, in fact along Park Lane have been tarmacked over, and increased housing will exacerbate the drainage problems. Re KB1 and KB2 the fields adjacent to the motorway are a run off for water from the motorway. Also there are natural springs making it unsuitable for development. The proposals state that wouldn't be a problem. In practice any assurances cannot be relied on as there is flooding in places now and our climate is currently changing to be more extreme.

The current plan to build a single form entry school to accommodate 663 dwellings and possibly about 1300 children is hardly sufficient. What planet do these forecasters live on. The Chas Lowe site should not be developed for housing but for creating a new badly needed surgery and facilities for the village. We have also recently had a small new estate, Oak Tree Gardens, built on the Bulwer Lytton site , the new large retirement home. Also various small developments in the last few years plus infill in every conceivable place. So Knebworth has already played its part in local development. Any more will change the village into a suburb of Stevenage.

If Luton and surrounding need more housing then why build on a more expensive area that few can afford. It is far more sensible to build a purpose built new town with the appropriate infrastructure and employment.

See attachment

Further to the proposed developments in Knebworth as part of the North Hertfordshire Local Plan, we object to each of the proposed developments. All four developments, at site KB1, site KB2, site KB3 and site KB4, will increase the existing housing stock by some 30%. This increase can in no way be accommodated in Knebworth without major new infrastructure and amenities also implemented, for which there are virtually no proposals within any of these developments. The only proposed community facility is within site KB2, being another primary school. This will be adjacent to the A1(M) which clearly is not an acceptable location for a primary school, with the high levels of noise and air pollution.

Knebworth already suffers from a number of issues, being:

- Inadequate doctors' surgery provision

- Very busy railway station and very limited car parking provision. Because NHDC has still not properly addressed the ongoing problem with commuter parking in Knebworth, there are numerous instances where commuters park badly, so as to prevent access by emergency vehicles, as well as causing general nuisance parking. This problem will become rapidly worse with the building of so many more dwellings and make Knebworth streets even more unsafe. In addition, Govia Thameslink Railway is currently reviewing its services and is proposing to potentially cut the fast train services from Knebworth to London in the future.

- Overused and busy roads, with limited/narrow access at two locations under the railway bridges, Station Road and Gun Lane. These two passing points particularly make major proposed developments highly unsafe and practically impossible because of such a lack of access (KB1 and KB2 will rely heavily, if not completely, on these two road access points, in order to build 200 and 184 dwellings respectively). We personally have witnessed a number of incidents where cars have struck pedestrians with wing mirrors and other pedestrians having to duck out of the way because of passing vans and larger vehicles. It will only be a matter of time if there were to be consistent heavy goods vehicle traffic through these points that a serious or fatal road accident will occur. The high street is also consistently congested with traffic and provides limited access.

- Limited leisure facilities. There is also speculation that Knebworth's only public house will be sold for yet more housing.

- Limited choice for secondary school places. Knebworth Primary School already at capacity.

To plan for such a housing stock increase without first properly addressing and eliminating these issues, as well as making adequate provision for new future issues which will be caused by both the building of the proposed developments and the subsequent strain on local amenities by those developments, is unacceptable and unviable.

Specifically, our objections for each site are:

KB1

- Green belt land. Helps protect the village to be a discrete entity as well as the importance of green space.
- Very close to the A1(M). Noise and air pollution.
- Traffic and access problems as stated above.
- Conservation area impact.

KB2

- Green belt land. Helps protect the village to be a discrete entity as well as the importance of green space.
- Very close to the A1(M). Noise and air pollution.
- Traffic and access problems as stated above.
- New additional primary school. Not acceptable location for a primary school as detailed above. Also, divisive for a village to have two separate primary schools; breaks down the community spirit.
- Conservation area impact.

KB3

- Hub of Knebworth. Loss of jobs and support of other village cafe and retail units.
- Vital to have a mixed use development here.
- Unsuitable for residential dwellings because of busy roads, noise and air pollution.
- Opportunity to use the land for Knebworth community, much needed extra facilities for existing Knebworth population could be incorporated here.

KB4

- Green belt land. Helps protect the village to be a discrete entity as well as the importance of green space.
- Loss of identity of Knebworth as village separate to Stevenage.
- Loss of much needed agricultural land.

Overwhelmingly, it is clear that these proposed housing developments have not been properly considered and at no time has a cohesive approach to these proposals been put forward to ensure Knebworth can incorporate such a character-changing plan while still providing day-to-day needs for its residents, as well as retaining its identity as both a community and a village surrounded by green belt land. Therefore, we object to each of the 4 housing proposals.

I would object strongly to any development to West of railway in view of the fact that that any increase in traffic under the two already dangerous
Railway bridges word worsen the situation unless some arrangement
Can be made for pedestrian tunnels under railway at both locations
Thus widening the roads for traffic and increasing pedestrian
Safety.

site KB1 the current road size and layout is inadequate even as existing and will not cope with further traffic from development, in particular railway bridge at Deards End Lane

site KB2 the current road layout and size is inadequate even as existing and will not cope with further traffic from development, in particular railway bridge at Gun Lane

site KB4 the coalescence with Knebworth and the edge of Stevenage would be a great visual impact to the environment and greatly reduce productive agricultural land

See attachment

I wish to make representations regarding the above plan to be placed before the Inspector. I am not using your form as its layout does not suit the comments I wish to make.

I wish to object formally to proposals KB1, KB2 and KB4.

GREEN BELT
The existing Green Belt around Knebworth was established to prevent development and uncontrolled urban expansion. Government policy requires that all development in the Green Belt should be rejected unless there are specific overriding requirements for that development. No such requirements have been put forward leading to the obvious assumption that they exist.
Policies KB1 and KB2 propose the creation of areas of defendable Green Belt to the North of KB1 and the South of KB2. It is the existing Green Belt that must be defended. If that does not happen, clearly North Herts cannot be trusted to protect any Green Belt which is necessary to maintain the identity of the village, prevent coalescence with adjoining settlements and protect high quality agricultural land.

Other Objections should not be necessary but in view of North Herts apparent intention to ignore the Government's Green Belt requirements they clearly are.

TRAFFIC
Paragraphs 13.195 and 13.196 set out the traffic problems as existing. Paragraph 13.197 ducks responsibility for dealing with them. At peak periods, and that is not just the rush hour, the centre of the village is completely gridlocked. In the morning rush hour the B197 is often blocked as far as J6 of the A1(M), and in the afternoon rush hour as far as Tesco at the Roebuck.

The two railway bridges at Station Road and Gun Road are both accidents waiting to happen. Both are low and narrow with narrow pavements on one side only. The Western approaches to both are from the Northwest where drivers are often blinded by the morning sun.

The above are existing problems which would be greatly exacerbated by increasing the population by 30% as you propose especially if any new homes are occupied by a high percentage of commuters. This is especially true of the bridge issues in relation to sites KB1 and KB2 with a total of 384 additional dwellings proposed where most owners would probably be two car families or worse. The end result is likely to be total gridlock and not just when motorway traffic is diverted through the village.

RAILWAY
Commuter trains are already arriving full at Knebworth and commuter parking is as you know a increasing problem. Now the frequency of trains may be downgraded and you are proposing a massive new residential development in Baldock, further up the line. Also there are proposals for more development in surrounding villages where the commuters use Knebworth station and park in the surrounding streets. Is it intended that the whole village will eventually be double yellow banded?

Clearly your proposals are likely to make these problems unacceptably worse.

DRAINAGE
Your draft finally acknowledges these issues, but no large scale development of the nature you propose can take place before they are actually dealt with. This presumably includes the major undertaking of a new sewage link to Rye Meads, about 11 miles as the crow flies.

With specific reference to KB2 I presume in the absence of any comment to the contrary that it is intended to leave the developer to resolve the flooding problems. As you know there were severe floods in 1989 and 2014 when a number of houses in Orchard Way and Broom Grove were flooded at considerable cost and anguish to the residents due to extreme weather (which is on the increase due to climate change), failure to maintain existing drains including those serving the motorway and the natural lines of drainage across the Northern half of KB2 and along Gypsy Lane from both ends. After the 1989 flood, I understand that a drainage maintenance scheme was put in place but this was subsequently an unacceptable victim of recession. Any development on this site would clearly need to be carried out by a single developer with a new drainage maintenance scheme put in place and guaranteed in perpetuity. Clearly a ploughed field soaks up water better than a housing estate, so any scheme must be very robust and include the existing carriageway of Gypsy Lane.
IF AS A RESULT OF ANY DEVELOPMENT ON THAT PART OF KB2 NORTH OF GYPSY APPROVED BY NORTH HERTS DC THE FLOODING PROBLEMS IN ORCHARD WAY AND BROOM GROVE GET WORSE IN EXTENT OR FREQUENCY THEN NORTH HERTS DC WILL BE CULPABLE.

OTHER VILLAGE FACILITIES
13.183 states that Knebworth offers a good range of facilities, but these are of course only suitable for the existing population.

13.200 The proposed new surgery and library building offers one extra consulting room necessary for the current population and a downgraded library to volunteer operation with insufficient parking. Both will be totally inadequate for even a small increase in population and therefore a waste of money.

There is a provision for a new primary school in KB2, although no suggestion precisely where or how it would be accessed. I suspect this has not yet even been considered. A similar provision was made in 1976 when the Orchard Way estate was built. It never happened and the site became Bellamy Close many years later. Will this promise go the same way?

13.192 The council should also consider that the existing village school (like all others) is a cause of traffic congestion twice a day and any new school would create a similar problem.

No consideration has been given to employment for the new residents which strengthens the view tat most, if not all, would be commuters.

KB3 I presume the designation of this site for housing only is an error. The frontage to the High St at ground floor level should of course be commercial with residential above and behind.

CONCLUSION
I consider that as far as it concerns Knebworth this is not a properly considered Draft District plan. Apart from the capacity of Rye Meads none of the potential problems of the proposals have been given full consideration, nor do the Council appear to have carried out the necessary liaison with other responsible bodies, para 13.197 being an example.
Its North Herts District Plan so liaison responsibility is theirs.
It appears that the North Herts thought process has been:-
Can we put any more houses round Knebworth?
Yes, there are a couple of farmers who want to sell their land.
Its Green Belt.
Oh never mind.
Full stop.
This is certainly true in the case of KB2 which has been touted in several previous consultation documents with North Herts making it clear at that time that it was the landowner's proposal not theirs.

In view of all the above comments I strongly feel that the Inspector should reject all the proposed allocation for housing in sites KB1, KB2 and KB4. If he or she is minded to let a small part of it through it should not be in the Northern half of KB2 because of the drainage issues.

KB1- access to this site would be via park lane under a low railway bridge with a very narrow path only safe for one person to walk on, it is already very dangerous often people having to pass in the road which approaches a bend to the station.
The site proposed has many beautiful birds flying and living within this area buzzards, red kites herons. These fields give food to the wildlife, absorb the excessive rain, building on this site would spoil the environment! There is no infrastructure,
There are 2 more ways to access this site 1 via Deards End Lane which has a weight limit of 7.5 tonne the other is gypsy lane very very narrow single lane, not practical or safe! Alternatively you would have to drive through Codicote, again is a very narrow & dangerous road.
KB2 land off gypsy lane is green belt which building on this would make a mockery of have the green belt law, this land provides drainage to Orchard Road also there is no infrastructure in place to build access this site, these roads can not cope with any more traffic, the council cannot maintain the drains or roads now just not practical all roads are very narrow!
The doctor can't take any more patients, bad enough now trying to get an appointment, the doctors have already said there isn't enough funding.
The traffic in rush hr is horrendous now with bottle neck through the high street!
It is actually quicker to cycle to work than drive 2.5 miles from Knebworth to Stevenage, to increase the amount of homes will be at least 663 or more cars causing more pollution and destroy our village!
I strongly object to these plans, please review! We understand you need to build but not the amount you propose please! Its not like they will be affordable homes for the local young people! These local young people are told not to even put their name on council as they don't stand a chance! Not fair!!!!

KB1 Land at Deards End Lane
Deards End Lane is a busy access point into Knebworth from Stevenage and is used to access the west side of Knebworth without travelling along the B197 through the often congested high street. Deards End Lane is a single track road for most of its length with some passing points and many blind corners make it dangerous to drive and especially for pedestrians. At its junction with the B197 there is a bridge, over the railway. This bridge is weight limited and narrow allowing only single lane traffic. The proposed development on the KB1 site will cause increased traffic on this already congested and dangerous route.
An alternative route through Knebworth to the KB1 site is via the bridge, under the railway, on Station Road/Station Approach, which is height restricted is too narrow for traffic to travel in both directions, and subsequently does not even have road markings down the middle of the road.
Both of the above routes terminate at the B197 which suffers from traffic congestion due the weight of traffic using it. Another contributor to this is the A1M motorway running past Knebworth reduces to 2 lanes at junction 7 to the north of Stevenage through to junction 5 to the south of Knebwort/Welwyn. This stretch becomes very congested causing traffic to route through and already congested Knebworth via the B197.

KB2 Land off Gypsy Lane Lane
The KB2 site Can be accessed via multiple routes. One such route is Deards End Lane as detailed above.
There are three other main access routes through Knebworth
1. Via the bridge, under the railway, on Station Road/Station Approach, This is height restricted and does not have a white line separating traffic travelling in opposite directions as it is too narrow.
2. Via the bridge, under the railway, on Gun Lane, which is height restricted and does not have a white line separating traffic travelling in opposite directions as it is too narrow and is blind to traffic travelling from Stockens Green.
3. Via Wych Elm Lane which reaches Wolmer Green via Bridge Road. This is a single track lane for most of its length with a height restricted bridge which is too narrow for traffic to travel in both directions.
All of these routes terminate at the B197 which suffers from traffic congestion due the weight of traffic using it.

Living in Broom Grove I travel along Gypsy Lane to Park Lane daily and experience high congestion due to Gypsy lane being single track for most of its length with limited passing points.

The KB2 site is prone to surface water run off onto Gypsy lane. This causes the drains to overflow into Orchard Way and Broom Grove. This has occurred twice within the last four years to an extent that houses flooded. The concern is that development of both the KB1 and KB2 sites will cause greater surface water run off and subsequent flooding.

The development of the KB2 site conflict with national Green Belt policy (Section 9 of the NPPF).

KB4 Land East of Knebworth
There are three possible access routes through Knebworth
1. Via Watton Road which has traffic calming measures to improve road safety by restricting road width by the use of two single lane passing places.
2. Via St Martins Road which is a private road.
3. Via Swangleys Lane, the site of Knebworth Primary School, which is also narrow.
All three of these routes terminate at the B197 which suffers from traffic congestion due the weight of traffic using it.

The development of the KB4 site will risk convergence of Knebworth and Stevenage and put the identity of Knebworth as a village at risk.


The cumulative effect of all four sites (KB1, KB2, KB3 and KB4) would put a great strain on local services and facilities including roads as detailed above, health services and the Knebworth Primary School. The Knebworth Primary School is consistently oversubscribed year on year and with an intake of just 60 children per year, children living in Knebworth are often refused places. The addition of the proposed approximately 660 houses will greatly increase this demand and will be detrimental to both new residents moving into the new houses and current residents of Knebworth. The lack of a local secondary school results in high volumes of applicants to secondary schools in nearby towns Stevenage, Hitchin and Hertford from Knebworth. The proposed development will cause increased competition for secondary school places, which will again be to the detriment of both new residents moving into the new houses and current residents of Knebworth.

KB1 Land at Deards End Lane
Deards End Lane is a busy access point into Knebworth from Stevenage and is used to access the west side of Knebworth without travelling along the B197 through the often congested high street. Deards End Lane is a single track road for most of its length with some passing points and many blind corners make it dangerous to drive and especially for pedestrians. At its junction with the B197 there is a bridge, over the railway. This bridge is weight limited and narrow allowing only single lane traffic. The proposed development on the KB1 site will cause increased traffic on this already congested and dangerous route.
An alternative route through Knebworth to the KB1 site is via the bridge, under the railway, on Station Road/Station Approach, which is height restricted is too narrow for traffic to travel in both directions, and subsequently does not even have road markings down the middle of the road.
Both of the above routes terminate at the B197 which suffers from traffic congestion due the weight of traffic using it. Another contributor to this is the A1M motorway running past Knebworth reduces to 2 lanes at junction 7 to the north of Stevenage through to junction 5 to the south of Knebwort/Welwyn. This stretch becomes very congested causing traffic to route through and already congested Knebworth via the B197.

KB2 Land off Gypsy Lane Lane
The KB2 site Can be accessed via multiple routes. One such route is Deards End Lane as detailed above.
There are three other main access routes through Knebworth
1. Via the bridge, under the railway, on Station Road/Station Approach, This is height restricted and does not have a white line separating traffic travelling in opposite directions as it is too narrow.
2. Via the bridge, under the railway, on Gun Lane, which is height restricted and does not have a white line separating traffic travelling in opposite directions as it is too narrow and is blind to traffic travelling from Stockens Green.
3. Via Wych Elm Lane which reaches Wolmer Green via Bridge Road. This is a single track lane for most of its length with a height restricted bridge which is too narrow for traffic to travel in both directions.
All of these routes terminate at the B197 which suffers from traffic congestion due the weight of traffic using it.

Living in Broom Grove I travel along Gypsy Lane to Park Lane daily and experience high congestion due to Gypsy lane being single track for most of its length with limited passing points.

The KB2 site is prone to surface water run off onto Gypsy lane. This causes the drains to overflow into Orchard Way and Broom Grove. This has occurred twice within the last four years to an extent that houses flooded. The concern is that development of both the KB1 and KB2 sites will cause greater surface water run off and subsequent flooding.

The development of the KB2 site conflict with national Green Belt policy (Section 9 of the NPPF).

KB4 Land East of Knebworth
There are three possible access routes through Knebworth
1. Via Watton Road which has traffic calming measures to improve road safety by restricting road width by the use of two single lane passing places.
2. Via St Martins Road which is a private road.
3. Via Swangleys Lane, the site of Knebworth Primary School
All three of these routes terminate at the B197 which suffers from traffic congestion due the weight of traffic using it.

The development of the KB4 site will risk convergence of Knebworth and Stevenage and put the identity of Knebworth as a village at risk.


The cumulative effect of all four sites (KB1, KB2, KB3 and KB4) would put a great strain on local services and facilities including roads as detailed above, health services and the Knebworth Primary School. The Knebworth Primary School is consistently oversubscribed year on year and with an intake of just 60 children per year, children living in Knebworth are often refused places. The addition of the proposed approximately 660 houses will greatly increase this demand and will be detrimental to both new residents moving into the new houses and current residents of Knebworth. The lack of a local secondary school results in high volumes of applicants to secondary schools in nearby towns Stevenage, Hitchin and Hertford from Knebworth. The proposed development will cause increased competition for secondary school places, which will again be to the detriment of both new residents moving into the new houses and current residents of Knebworth.

KB1 Land at Deards End Lane
Deards End Lane is a busy access point into Knebworth from Stevenage and is used to access the west side of Knebworth without travelling along the B197 through the often congested high street. Deards End Lane is a single track road for most of its length with some passing points and many blind corners make it dangerous to drive and especially for pedestrians. At its junction with the B197 there is a bridge, over the railway. This bridge is weight limited and narrow allowing only single lane traffic. The proposed development on the KB1 site will cause increased traffic on this already congested and dangerous route.
An alternative route through Knebworth to the KB1 site is via the bridge, under the railway, on Station Road/Station Approach, which is height restricted is too narrow for traffic to travel in both directions, and subsequently does not even have road markings down the middle of the road.
Both of the above routes terminate at the B197 which suffers from traffic congestion due the weight of traffic using it. Another contributor to this is the A1M motorway running past Knebworth reduces to 2 lanes at junction 7 to the north of Stevenage through to junction 5 to the south of Knebwort/Welwyn. This stretch becomes very congested causing traffic to route through and already congested Knebworth via the B197.

KB2 Land off Gypsy Lane Lane
The KB2 site Can be accessed via multiple routes. One such route is Deards End Lane as detailed above.
There are three other main access routes through Knebworth
1. Via the bridge, under the railway, on Station Road/Station Approach, This is height restricted and does not have a white line separating traffic travelling in opposite directions as it is too narrow.
2. Via the bridge, under the railway, on Gun Lane, which is height restricted and does not have a white line separating traffic travelling in opposite directions as it is too narrow and is blind to traffic travelling from Stockens Green.
3. Via Wych Elm Lane which reaches Wolmer Green via Bridge Road. This is a single track lane for most of its length with a height restricted bridge which is too narrow for traffic to travel in both directions.
All of these routes terminate at the B197 which suffers from traffic congestion due the weight of traffic using it.

Living in Broom Grove I travel along Gypsy Lane to Park Lane daily and experience high congestion due to Gypsy lane being single track for most of its length with limited passing points.

The KB2 site is prone to surface water run off onto Gypsy lane. This causes the drains to overflow into Orchard Way and Broom Grove. This has occurred twice within the last four years to an extent that houses flooded. The concern is that development of both the KB1 and KB2 sites will cause greater surface water run off and subsequent flooding.

The development of the KB2 site conflict with national Green Belt policy (Section 9 of the NPPF).

KB4 Land East of Knebworth
There are three possible access routes through Knebworth
1. Via Watton Road which has traffic calming measures to improve road safety by restricting road width by the use of two single lane passing places.
2. Via St Martins Road which is a private road.
3. Via Swangleys Lane, the site of Knebworth Primary School
All three of these routes terminate at the B197 which suffers from traffic congestion due the weight of traffic using it.

The development of the KB4 site will risk convergence of Knebworth and Stevenage and put the identity of Knebworth as a village at risk.


The cumulative effect of all four sites (KB1, KB2, KB3 and KB4) would put a great strain on local services and facilities including roads as detailed above, health services and the Knebworth Primary School. The Knebworth Primary School is consistently oversubscribed year on year and with an intake of just 60 children per year, children living in Knebworth are often refused places. The addition of the proposed approximately 660 houses will greatly increase this demand and will be detrimental to both new residents moving into the new houses and current residents of Knebworth. The lack of a local secondary school results in high volumes of applicants to secondary schools in nearby towns Stevenage, Hitchin and Hertford from Knebworth. The proposed development will cause increased competition for secondary school places, which will again be to the detriment of both new residents moving into the new houses and current residents of Knebworth.

See attached

Please find here my OBJECTIONS to the proposed local plan relating to:-

Knebworth (paragraphs 13.183 - 13.202 of the local plan)

1.The plan seem to have no strategy to deal with the additional transport and services infrastructure required for the additional homes.
2.Green belt removal is contradictory to government policy. This is not justifiable when there are suitable brownfield areas are available for development.
3.Effect on Conservation areas. Both Deards End Lane and Stockens Green would be heavily impacted by the increased population, traffic, flooding and pollution generated by such an enormous developments.

Site KB1
- Traffic congestion and pedestrian safety at the railway bridge by the station (Park lane). This bridge is narrow and would be completely unsuitable for higher traffic levels.
- Traffic congestion to Deards End Lane. This is a narrow road with no spare capacity.
- Loss of wildlife in the various wooded site of Park lane. A full conservation study should be conducted to asses the risk.
- Drainage.The current system is regularly over capacity after rainfall and results in flooding. More homes would reduce the natural dranage and add to the high levels of run off and over capacity drainage.

Site KB2

- Building a new school in an area of high pollution will put the health of children and staff at risk and make it a "second choice" school and divide the village socially.
- Traffic congestion and pedestrian safety at the railway bridge at Gun Lane. Vehicles frequently mount the pavement at present (personal observation). Additional traffic will only add to this current pinch point.
- Drainage. The current system is regularly over capacity after rainfall and results in flooding.

Site KB4

- Yet more Green belt loss as above, it's is contradictory to government policy
- Traffic issues related to the increased traffic on the narrow Watton Road
- Yet again no consideration to the effect on the current drainage system.
This plan is ill-considered and seems to have been drawn up with little thought regarding the environmental and social impact, current and future residents or infrastructure affects.

Please find here my main objections to the proposed local plan relating to:-

Knebworth (paragraphs 13.183 - 13.202 of the local plan)

-The plan seem to have no overall strategy. There is no mention of how the current infrastructure with be improved to accommodate such a huge percentage growth (663 additional homes)
-Green belt removal is contradictory to government policy. How can this be justified when much more suitable areas are available for development?
-Drainage. The current system is regularly over capacity after rainfall and results in flooding. I see no consideration within the plan to tackle this and the addition surface water created by a major development.
-Effect on Conservation areas. Both Deards End Lane and Stockens Green would be heavily impacted by the increased population, traffic, flooding and pollution generated by such an enormous developments.

Re. Site KB1

-Traffic congestion and pedestrian safety at the railway bridge by the station (Park lane). This bridge is narrow and would be completely unsuitable for higher traffic levels.
-Traffic congestion to Deards End Lane. As per railway bridge, this is a narrow road with no spare capacity.
-The impact on the wildlife in the various wooded site of Park lane. How will these be protected?
-Drainage. As above - . The current system is regularly over capacity after rainfall and results in flooding.

Re Site KB2

-How the A1(M) will impact the proposed school. Building a new school in an area of high pollution show no thought of the motorways environmental effect has been considered.
-Traffic congestion and pedestrian safety at the railway bridge at Gun Lane. Vehicles frequently mount the pavement at present (personal observation). Additional traffic will only add to this current pinch point.
-Drainage. As above - . The current system is regularly over capacity after rainfall and results in flooding.

Re Site KB3

-This is a key commercial site and if lost will detrimentally alter the High street and overall village feel.
-The High Street drainage is already an issues. 14 new home will only add to this problem.
-Employment in the village will fall. No alternative employment opportunities are noted.

Re Site KB4

-Yet more Green belt loss as above, it's is contradictory to government policy
-Traffic issues related to the increased traffic on the narrow Watton Road
-Yet again no consideration to the effect on the current drainage system.

This plan is completely flawed and seems to have been hastily drawn up with little consideration to the environment, current and future residents or infrastructure affects.

I trust this OBJECTION will be useful to you.

I would like to object to the above planned developments, they are poorly conceived and will detract from the village and the quality of life of both existing residents of this country village and of the potential residents of this housing complex. The site is distinctly separate from the current historical largely linear housing along the high street. This means a large number of vehicles will be leaving and entering this estate, and this development will be bolted on to the existing village in a completely unsympathetic manner. Alongside the excess numbers of vehicles this will generate, especially at commuting time- there are no jobs within the village and so this traffic will overwhelm a woefully inadequate road system. Additionally, there are no appropriate facilitates within the village to properly support these new residents, resulting in even more traffic. Whilst new housing is obviously required simply building disproportionate housing estates alongside small villages is clearly not the answer. We need all our communities in North Hertfordshire to build houses in a community sustainable manner. These developments particularly BK3 would blight the natural beauty of this country village.

With reference to the Local Plan in respect of the proposed to development around Knebworth.

I do not feel that the plan provides an adequate solution to the development of Knebworth.

The current plan does not offer any connection between proposed development location.
The current plan does not have a strategy to upgrade local resources to cope with the additional population and houses introduced.
The suggested development at KB4 would cause excessive erosion of the green belt between Knebworth and Stevenage
The site at KB3 should not be developed for property but should remain as commercial to increase employment and facilities for Knebworth ie Parking/shops/schools
The current transportation links and highways are already congested. Areas such as the narrow railway bridge with narrow pavements causing people to stand in the highway to pass are already dangerous. Increasing developments on either side of Knebworth would dramatically increase both vehicular and pedestrian traffic through these locations

A plan that centred around development in ie Old Knebworth would appear to offer a better solution as resources and infrastructure could be concentrated in one area.

I am writing to detail my objections to the proposed local plan. In general the proposed local plan takes no account of the following:-

1. The proposed development of the green belt land amounts to an increase of 31% dwellings in Knebworth. There is no account taken of the impact this would have on the infrastructure of Knebworth. The development would have a major impact on the Rye Meads Sewage Treatment Works, already heading towards major capacity. There is no allocation for commercial premises in the plan so how can the development create jobs in the village. There is no connection between housing, further development and infrastructure to support this development.

2. The removal of the green belt goes against government policy in that the green belt protects the space between towns and villages and maintains the separate identity of Knebworth. It would have a major impact on the two Conservation areas in Knebworth.

3. There would be a very serious negative impact on the local roads. The B197 is always congested at busy rush hour times, the local roads are not suitable for further traffic which would be created by further development in the area. I suggest that the planning inspector visits the area during rush hour times to witness the chaos that ensues at busy times on the B197.

3. One other thing to think about is the amount of extra, heavy traffic which would use the narrow local roads whilst construction is going on. Dears End Lane which runs from Park Lane to Stevenage has a narrow bridge at one end with a weight restriction. This is not in any way suitable for heavy construction lorries as besides the weight restriction on the bridge Deards End Lane is part of a conservation area and as the word Lane suggests it is a narrow lane suitable for only single car traffic. If the construction traffic travelled through the village on the B197 it would have to go along Station Road and under the railway bridge by Knebworth Railway station which again is only suitable for single lane traffic and also has a height restriction. The only other route for construction traffic from Welwyn or Stevenage would be along the B197 and then along Gun Lane which again is a narrow lane with a bridge again only suitable for single lane traffic and with a height restriction.

KB1
This development is sited next to a conservation area in Deards End Lane. Looking at the placing of KB1, the only entry and exit point would be Park Lane which again, as the name suggests is a narrow lane. Residents wanting to drive to Stevenage would have to travel along Park Lane and the only way to get to Stevenage by car is either along Deards End Lane or through Station Road and onto the B197. Both routes would be grid locked at busy times and at best busy at all other times.

KB2
This site again would only be entered and existed via Park Lane directly opposite the KB1 site. There has been mention of a school being built on this site. However the County Council have shown no interest in building a school and as there will be several developers on this site, none of them would have an incentive to build a new school which would be needed if the housing in the area is increased by 31%. When the Orchard Road development was built during the early seventies, a school was promised by the builders in what is now Bellamy Close but once the development was passed no school was built. Instead of a school which was badly needed even then, a development of large detached houses was built on the land which was supposed to have a school. Nothing was done about this at the time so how can Knebworth residents believe the NHDCs' promises of a new school on this site. The site is next to the A1 so pollution levels should be taken into account if a school was to be built and in fact flooding is another problem with this site. During heavy rain, flood water drains from this site onto the houses and gardens in Orchard Way, these houses are often flooded and Gipsy Lane which runs beside this site is often flooded at the lowest point of the lane making it impassable at times. As I have said before this all has an impact on the infrastructure of the area.

KB3
This proposed development is on the Chas Lowe site in the middle of the village. Once again the problem with this site is flooding. Shops on the B197 within the village are regularly flooded and in fact have to put sand bags at the doors some times during bad weather. This site is a commercial site at the moment so a housing development would in fact remove an area which supplies employment.

KB4
This site again would suffer from flooding, the cemetery on the Watton Road is often flooded during bad weather and the KB4 site is on the same level or maybe lower than the cemetery. The entry and exit points are again on a narrow lane ( Watton Road) and this would have a detrimental affect on the area with heavy traffic which the lane is not suitable for. This site is also a large agriculture area which would be lost with this development.

In summary, the local plan is not a positive plan for Knebworth. The roads in the area will not sustain an increase of 31% in housing development, the drainage and sewage system will not cope with this increase. The loss of green belt will be detrimental to the area, it is national policy to protect the green belt so how can this vast decrease of green belt be positive for Knebworth. The Govia Thameslink railway is proposing significant changes to the train timetable for trains stopping at Knebworth meaning less 'all stations' trains. The NHDC has identified Knebworth as having a 71% rise in use during the last decade so how can a 31% increase in housing be justified.

Land at Stevenage West has been identified and reserved for housing (3,100 homes) so how can NHDC justify the proposed Locan Plan.

I submit my objections to the Local Plan and trust that they will be taken into account along with others.

KB1 Land at Deards End Lane

Access through Knebworth is via Deards End Lane, which is a single track road for most of its length and the bridge, over the railway, at its junction with the B197. The bridge is weight limited and narrow allowing only single lane traffic.
The alternative route through Knebworth is via the bridge, under the railway, on Station Road/Station Approach, which is height restricted and does not have a white line separating traffic travelling in opposite directions as it is too narrow.
Both of these routes terminate at the B197 which suffers from traffic congestion due the weight of traffic using it.

KB2 Land off Gypsy Lane Lane
There are two access routes through Knebworth
1. Via the bridge, under the railway, on Station Road/Station Approach, which is height restricted and does not have a white line separating traffic travelling in opposite directions as it is too narrow.
2. Via the bridge, under the railway, on Gun Lane, which is height restricted and does not have a white line separating traffic travelling in opposite directions as it is too narrow.
Both of these routes terminate at the B197 which suffers from traffic congestion due the weight of traffic using it.

KB4 Land East of Knebworth
There are three possible access routes through Knebworth
1. Via Watton Road which has traffic calming measures to improve road safety by restricting road width by the use of two single lane passing places.
2. Via St Martins Road which is a private road.
3. Via Swangleys Lane, the site of Knebworth Primary School
All three of these routes terminate at the B197 which suffers from traffic congestion due the weight of traffic using it.

I am sending this email of behalf of myself and my husband, to register our objections to the current proposals to build a minimum of 633 dwellings in Knebworth. As we understand matters the proposals are as follows:-

Site KB1 Land at Deards End - 200 dwellings
Site KB2 Land off Gypsy Lane - 184 dwellings
Site KB3 Chas Lowe Site, London Road - 14 dwellings
Site KB4 East of Knebworth - 200 dwellings

Knebworth currently has 2002 dwellings with a population (from the 2011 census) of 4496, using the same ratio the proposal would give a 35% increase in population, although we believe that to be a very conservative number as the population has grown since that census. In addition it is likely that there will be an average of 2 cars per dwelling thus increasing the number of residents cars by over 1200.

It is also relevant to consider this proposal in the context of the other proposed sites in neighbouring villages/towns which will impact significantly on the infrastructure in Knebworth, in particular the proposed developments on the Odyssey site and in the neighbouring villages of Woolmer Green, & Codicote.

I can confirm that my husband and I are residents of Knebworth, and have been for the last 30 years, we know the village and surrounding areas very well having also lived in Stevenage for nearly 20 years.

Our objections are as follows:

1. Assessment of Need - We question the accuracy of the assessment of housing needs for the future, population forecasts have fluctuated and the impact of Brexit resulting in less immigration has not been taken into account. We ask that the current forecasts are revisited.
2. Infrastructure - the current proposal does not provide any strategic policy for the proposed expansion, yet the Local Plan provides that there should be a Strategic Policy for each Strategic Housing Site, a Strategic Housing Site is defined as a site of 500 homes or more. The proposal provides for a collective total of 663 homes and will have a massive impact on the current infrastructure which cannot cope with the present needs, if this proposal is to progress it must have a Strategic Policy covering all 4 sites dealing with transport, parking, sewerage, education, jobs, & health care.
Railway - Knebworth is served by a railway service it is a very busy commuter transport link between London and Cambridge, the station serves all surrounding villages, and South Stevenage. During rush hour the platforms are overcrowded to the point of being dangerous. There is inadequate parking at the station to accommodate commuters, they therefore seek parking in non-restricted streets around the village, which simply creates a new problem in a different location, the village cannot cope with an increase to the current numbers. The increase in the commuter population with not only come from the additional dwellings that are proposed in Knebworth but also from the expansion in the surrounding villages and south Stevenage.
Road - The main access in and out of the village is via the B197, formerly known as The Great North Road, it runs north and south through the centre of the village and forms the high street. It is constantly congested, it is often not possible for 2 vehicles to pass side by side, buses and lorries have to wait until nothing is coming in the opposite direction. During rush hour traffic is at a standstill it can take 30 to 40 mins to travel through the High Street. Traffic is diverted from the Motorway (A1M) if there has been an incident or big event (erg. Festivals/concerts regularly held in the nearby Knebworth Park), this being a designated route. Congestion along this route is also compounded by the fact that the local school (mixed infants/juniors) is located in Swangleys Lane which is directly off one end of the high street. Swangleys Lane is a very narrow road with no pavement, which coupled with the current volume of traffic presents a high safety risk for pedestrians. The other roads in Knebworth are minor street roads some are only single lane, all have residents and commuter cars parking on the road way. The village is divided by the railway line, vehicular and pedestrian access from one side to the other is via narrow bridges which only provide for single file traffic, and also have height restrictions. The bridge at the station end of the village is the route taken by commuters, it only has a narrow path on one side, on which you have to walk in single file, it presents as a high risk for the current volume of pedestrians. An increase to road and pedestrian traffic will increase the risk to unacceptable levels.
Sewerage/drainage - The existing sewerage and drainage infrastructure is not sufficient for the current level of use, many parts of Knebworth suffer from surface water flooding, an example is St Martin's Road which is a private un-adopted road with no foot path on either side but which is likely to be a possible access route for the proposed KB4 development, this suffers from surface water flooding, and the sewage run is constantly getting blocked, feeding another 200 dwellings into this old system is simply not sustainable. It should be noted that the field forming part of the KB4 site that is parallel to St Martin's road is one of the lowest points in the village to which water flows, it together with Old Lane the single track road that runs adjacent to is are regularly flooded.
Education - There is a mixed infants/junior school as described above, it is over-subscribed year on year. Whilst a site is identified for a school there is no certainty it will be built either at all or at the same time as other development, increasing the population further without appropriate education provision leaves parents no option but to school children outside the village, leading to social detachment from village life, and added congestion on the roads/trains to and from Knebworth as well as impacting on the location where they travel to. There is no mention of a secondary school provision.
Jobs - there is no plan in the proposal to create jobs, this means that the proposed housing will increase the commuter population which has the impact as set out above. There is no commercial/retail allocation, and indeed the proposal for Site KB3 is for a change of use replacing a current retail outlet and local employer entirely with dwellings. If the village is to be expanded a proper plan to incorporate commercial/retail growth is essential if the village is to maintain its character and serve its population, if this starts to be eroded it is likely to be the beginning of the demise of Knebworth as a self-sufficient community.
Healthcare - The current GP and dental services. The GP practice is looking for a new site to serve the current population, the proposal they are submitting would not be adequate to accommodate a 35% population growth. 2 new Care Homes for the elderly have recently been opened which will add to the already overstretched service. There are 2 dental practices, only 1 takes NHS patients and their intake is at its limit.
3. Green Belt - Sites KB!, KB2, and KB4 are all green belt land around Knebworth. We oppose development on these sites and as custodians of our Green Belt we would ask you to protect it. Green Belt is deemed to be the least acceptable land for development and if they have to be chosen then it should be sites that do least harm to the purpose of the Green Belt that are chosen first. There must be exceptional circumstances to remove Green Belt protection. We do not believe that exceptional circumstances exist, and further that there is another solution which would not have the unsustainable impact on Knebworth and the surrounding villages. One of the key purposes of the Green Belt is to prevent the coalescence between neighbouring conurbations, should the proposal proceed the impact will start to merge housing developments between Stevenage and Welwyn/Hatfield Councils. Stevenage Borough Council stated in their June 2015 Local Plan housing consultation that KB1 and KB4 were a significant contribution for Green Belt purposes. There are other sites which are rated as only having a moderate contribution which are not being considered. The KB4 site in particular is the only open space between Knebworth and Stevenage on the East side of the village, these sites are fundamentally important and key to preserving the distinct community of Knebworth, preventing the coalescence of settlements, sites that narrow the strategic gap between Knebworth and Stevenage and Knebworth and the neighbouring villages should be protected at all costs, this is a view not only held by the residents of Knebworth but also by the residents of Stevenage and the neighbouring villages.
4. The Alternative - In our view the better plan would be to build on the site that has already been set aside on the west of Stevenage, this site will accommodate in excess of 3000 dwellings, work had already commenced but has been parked. The plan should be resurrected, were it to proceed, it will meet the bulk of the housing needs currently identified, and will only require a small number of houses to be accommodated elsewhere. Logistically the development can progress without causing health and safety risks to existing residents, and a good, modern, infrastructure can be incorporated to ensure building to a good and efficient level.
5. Procedural Compliance - Finally I would like to bring to your attention the fact that the KB4 site has not previously been identified in the Local Plan as a preferred site for development, therefore due process has not been followed, by including it at this late stage insufficient time has been allowed for consideration and comment.

I would like to strongly object to the proposals on the following grounds:

1. There is a clear lack of strategy for Knebworth .The roads are already blocked with insufficient parking and the infrastructure particularly around the high street and station are already dangerous and over crowded

2 . The are obvious consequences in terms of lack of schools and doctors etc

3 Stevenage west is already reserved for over 3000 homes which will design the correct infrastructure around it

4.The villages are a conservation area this will be the final straw

5.With regard to k31 and k32 ,Gypsy Lane and Deards end lane are already death traps and this will make these roads totally unsafe

The area will become a bottleneck with particular risks to the weight restricted railway bridge,

Deards end is its own conservation area and this will be the final straw especially taking away the green belt buffer between the roads and the A1

There are more appropriate and safer areas than this solution

See attachment

See attachment

We have very strong objections to this proposed development over four main issues
* Deterioration of a village environment
* Unnecessary detrimental use of Green Belt land
* Further overloading of an already overstretched environment
* Detrimental effect on a Conservation area
Deterioration of a village environment
Intentionally, people decide to settle in a village, town, or city to meet their own personal preference; fully aware of the benefits and limitations of each.
It is totally wrong to overdevelop a village which would then require additional facilities to suit and effectively evolve to become a town and against the reason most residents settled or would want to live there.
The need for increased housing should be achieved in areas around main towns and cities who have the necessary infrastructure and facilities already in place to accommodate.
It is also understood that the full requirements could have been addressed by the development
a) Of a new garden city; achieving the required results in a more carefully thought through and suitable approach, and/or
b) On ground to the west of Stevenage and the A1(M) allowing much easier access and development alongside a major town already constructed to meet volume residential and roadways.
Unnecessary detrimental use of Green Belt land
It is important that those given and holding the responsibility of protecting the environment take that responsibility seriously. The Green Belt was a facility introduced to help with that control; ignoring it will cause irreversible environmental damage.
Further overloading of an already overstretched environment
The road infrastructure around Knebworth is already struggling to cope with current traffic levels, and it is understood similarly are the services.
It would appear untenable to outlet traffic from more homes onto side streets already dangerous and overloaded.
Further, links between the west and east sides of the village are through two tunnels beneath railway bridges and a further bridge, all of which are narrow and difficult to manoeuvre for vehicles, and have very poor, narrow, and dangerous paving for pedestrians; particularly children.
This development and that of other proposed Knebworth developments resulting in a 33% increase in population would seriously aggravate the situation even further.
Further, the problem of excessive cars using Deards End Lane as a cut through and already causing damage to its conservation environment would bring even more harm.
Proposed development on these lands was already rejected a few years ago as being unsuitable, and yet amazingly is being considered again.
Detrimental effect on a Conservation area
Any development on this green belt land would also have a seriously detrimental effect on the adjacent Deards End Lane conservation area for which North Herts is responsible for protecting, and goes against many of North Herts own publicity of its importance.
From North Herts own conservation documents, Deards End Lane Conservation Area comprises Deards End Lane and a short section of Park Lane which has a rural setting to the west of open fields, historic routes connecting Knebworth to the settlement of Old Knebworth - the green belt land in question.

The conservation area includes three early 20th century buildings by Lutyens on the lane; a granary, barns and farmhouse all grade II listed and dating from the 15th century or earlier. All other subsequent building have been carefully controlled to be in keeping with the conservation area.
Many other buildings are classified by North Herts as 'positive' buildings; considered to make a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the conservation area.
Any buildings on this adjacent land would be in view of, but not be in keeping with the carefully controlled buildings of the conservation area.
Residents of the Deards End Lane conservation area, particularly those in listed buildings rightly have to adhere to strict regulations aimed to protect the area, which in the past has in part been policed by North Herts Council.
This now doesn't appear to be the case with residents the only one's appearing to be trying protect the conservation area.
We would therefore ask North Herts to honour its responsibility of protecting one of its conservation areas, of unsuitable development to the environment, and therefore refusing the development on this adjoining land.

I would like to put forward the following comments for consideration by the Planning Inspector.

Knebworth has already grown massively over the past 40 years with Green Belt being taken and used for housing (hundreds of new dwellings in the Rialto estate during the 1980s and the Wimpey estate during the late 1970s), plus more recent housing developments on brownfield sites within the village. All this without any increase in infrastructure or facilities to date. Knebworth is currently at breaking point and cannot sustain any further large housing schemes. All facilities within the village are stretched beyond their limit. The school is oversubscribed and the health providers over capacity. The village cannot sustain the proposed 31% increase in housing and the loss of Green Belt around the entire village is against Government policy of protecting space around villages to maintain a separate identity and will definitely not support the character of Knebworth as it is. So living conditions will not be sustained for current residents.

Traffic in Knebworth has a long history of being a disaster. The A1(M) was built as a bypass around Knebworth. However, the congested B197 continued to be very busy with local traffic and previous plans to widen the A1(M) to alleviate the problem were abandoned. So the existence of the traffic issues in and around Knebworth have been known for years, but the issue has never been properly addressed and the B197 is busy, almost continuously. This is made worse whenever there is a problem on the A1(M) and all traffic comes through the village centre. Often there is complete gridlock.

All proposed developments in Knebworth and north of Knebworth along the A1(M) would have an impact on local roads. While the plan to use the hard shoulder of the A1(M) between junctions 6 and 8 may help current traffic flow a little, with the proposal to have over 14,000 new dwellings in North Hertfordshire, this is nowhere near enough. The volume of traffic and importance of the A1(M) to Knebworth should not be underestimated. The current two lane section and the route south should be widened to four lanes before any house building work commences. Also, the plan to widen the Welwyn viaduct to eliminate the bottle neck for trains there should be revisited. There is currently often standing room only on commuter trains from very early in the morning. The rail infrastructure in the area needs vast investment and parking provision for Knebworth train commuters should be increased to sustain even the status quo.

Local residents are often unable to even get out of side roads to join the main road. Any increase in the volume of commuter or social traffic due to an increase in population can only make these situations more likely and last longer. This is not in line with the sustainable journeys to services and facilities desired in the Preferred Options Consultation Paper.

The new houses are likely to be bought by workers employed elsewhere and add to the current traffic and parking problems. The proposals for Knebworth will increase pressure on the infrastructure. The side roads of Knebworth are divided by three bridges. All these are narrow with very narrow footpaths. In addition, leaving Knebworth along the B197 towards Welwyn Garden City the road layout has recently changed to widen the footpaths and narrow down the road, bus stops are opposite each other and buses stopping there halt traffic completely from time to time. Shortly after this, there is another narrow bridge. Two of the bridges in the centre of Knebworth have electrical substations next to them and are therefore unlikely to be able to be widened.

Previous developments were supposed to have a certain housing density and provide multiple accesses to and from the estates, but this did not happen. There is only one access to each large estate and the density of the housing built was higher than that agreed.

Parking is another major issue. Knebworth lacks sufficient parking even for current requirements let alone additional needs. Roads around the station area have commuter cars parked from 5a.m. during the week. Actions to relieve parking close to the station only served to push the problems to residential roads slightly further away. Knebworth station is not only used by Knebworth residents, but also residents of Codicote, Woolmer Green, Datchworth, Bragbury End and all other local rural settlements. The trains are packed every day.

It is true that limited parking is allowed in the village centre, but this is vital to keep the local businesses going. If short term parking was not allowed, customers would be driving straight through to the nearest supermarket and local traders would not be able to sustain their business. There has not been any provision within the NHDC proposal for increasing or improving local trade, retail or commercial. This adds to Knebworth becoming a dormitory village, so not even local trading can be sustained.

I believe that previous housing development proposals have been discounted due to the constraints in the infrastructure of connecting to the Rye Meads Sewage Works which services Knebworth sewage and that this is still a relevant limitation.

The allocation of 31% increase in housing for Knebworth does not seem justified as there is a large plot of land to the West of Stevenage, reserved by NHDC for housing development. It would seem more logical to use that land, with direct access to the A1(M), for housing without destroying the sustainability of Knebworth and other North Hertfordshire villages. Future planning should then be directed towards a completely new town or garden city type settlement, with infrastructure put in place before house-building begins. Currently proposals seem to be directed towards total coalescence along the B197, or with Stevenage, neither of which would be a good outcome.

All these issues, which would impact enormously on the quality of life of Knebworth residents, have been raised in previous suggested developments. There have been local meetings with planning officers attending to hear residents' concerns, but their concerns do not seem to have been addressed. In fact, quite the opposite, this latest proposal is much, much bigger than anything previously suggested, especially as none of the infrastructure problems have been solved.

KB1
This site is currently in the Green Belt, government policy saying that housing does not justify going into the Green Belt, makes this site unsuitable. The narrow bridge giving access to this site is unsuitable for heavy traffic and would damage the character of the Deards End Conservation Area. It is close to the motorway and therefore there are risks of pollution and traffic noise.

KB2
This site is currently in the Green Belt, government policy saying that housing does not justify going into the Green Belt, makes this site unsuitable. The narrow bridge giving access to this site is unsuitable for heavy traffic and would damage the character of the Stockens Green Conservation Area. It is close to the motorway and therefore there are risks of pollution and traffic noise.

KB3
Although vehicles going in and out of this site can currently be a traffic problem, it is a large employment site. It brings outside customers into Knebworth, who then use other facilities such as cafes and shops within the village. Change of use here, without commercial proposals, could reduce the sustainability of village trading. In the past, there have also been issues in the main road due to flooding.

KB4
This site is currently in the Green Belt, government policy saying that housing does not justify going into the Green Belt, makes this site unsuitable. Building on this site creates a danger of coalescence with Stevenage destroying the whole character of Knebworth village. It is currently productive agricultural land and an area of open landscape viewed from the village. There have been flooding problems on this land over many years, mainly due to poor drainage and a high water table. Hard standing will surely increase flooding problems.

Legally Compliant - No
I believe this does not comply with the regulations as this is the first time KB4 has been included in the Plan, so we have not had a reasonable amount of time to consider it.

Sound -
Positively prepared - No
I do not believe the infrastructure requirements for this new amount of development can be met because of the major unresolved problems in Knebworth, existing for donkey's years. These are chiefly the inadequate roads (including 3 dangerous railway bridges), traffic, parking, as well as poor medical facilities (NB the long-awaited current plans for rebuilding a new doctors' surgery, along with pharmacy and library, were designed to accommodate current needs only), and the known drainage/flooding issues. The main arterial roads in Knebworth, namely Stevenage/London Road (B197), and Watton Road/Station Road/Park Lane, come to a standstill twice a day, and Swangley's Lane (a narrow country lane without footpath beyond the school) jams twice a day at school times. The High Street, with vital parking on both sides, can scarcely allow two cars to pass, and buses and trucks have to wait, sometimes for 10 minutes or more, until someone at the far end selflessly decides not to enter the fray. This road cannot be widened, like many others in Knebworth. Swangley's Lane for example is narrow, and the lack of footpath means it is dangerous for children going to and from school. Also residents cannot safely back out into the road when cars are parked outside their drive, as without the vision of the road a footpath gives, drivers are blind to oncoming traffic which then travels down effectively a single lane. A guest of mine attempting to back out recently had his car virtually written off by a passing car, and dangerous incidents happen frequently. Yet this is yards from where the plan will site a new crossroad/roundabout to service the southern KB4 development.
Flooding is frequent in many places, including east of Knebworth, exacerbated by poor drainage - another major problem for any new development.

Justified - No
Effective - No
The plans are to increase Knebworth housing by 31%. Will the infrastructure also effectively increase by a third? It seems unlikely,
but if it does not the plan seems unworkable.
More specifically, if the plan is implemented as it stands this village, having accommodated considerable development over the years, will have finally overstretched its limitations. Chief among these is the problem of access via the High Street bottleneck, and the dangerous narrowness of the three railway tunnels/bridge, which appear to be insuperable problems. This in itself would make the plan unworkable.

We understand that the question of a new town/settlement after 2031 has been considered. Why is it not being considered now? With all the current problems of expansion of existing built up areas, the urgency of this would seem a no-brainer, and would help retain the semi-rural character of the North Herts area, especially our already over-populated southern section.

Consistent with national policy - No
The Green Belt - while this is now allowed to be eroded, we should still be aware of its aims and strive to keep these intact wherever possible.
One is to retain the rural character of villages. Despite considerable development in recent decades Knebworth, though now a large village, still manages to retain much of its rural character, for example its narrow lanes without footpaths, which traffic somehow manages overall to accommodate, e.g. Swangley's Lane, Old Lane, Deards End Lane. These will surely be rationalised into anonymous straightened and paved modern roads given the inevitable increase of traffic.
Another is to avoid merging with neighbouring towns and villages. However the new plans give the go-ahead to the real possibility of Knebworth coalescing with Stevenage, a purpose-built town with a totally different living environment. This is surely not justified.

Complies with the duty to cooperate - No
I don't believe the local plan fulfils the duty of cooperation to give Knebworth residents living in KB4 , especially those having been here for well over 40 years as I have, such a short time to make considered representations about the plan about to be decided.
Secondly, I don't think it is reasonable cooperation to expect one village, Knebworth, which has already accepted considerable expansion over the years, to accept such an additional proportion (31%) of new development - and probably unreasonably disproportionate to what has been allocated elsewhere.

I don't agree with any of the plans for development on the planned four sites:
Site KB1 Land at Deards End (200 dwellings)
Site KB2 Land off Gypsy Lane (184 dwellings)
Site KB3 Chas Lowe Site, London Road (14 dwellings)
Site KB4 Land East of Knebworth (200 dwellings)
KB1, KB2 & KB4 are all Green Belt and are a threat to the openness of the landscape which surrounds the village. This will also affect walkers that enjoy our beautiful countryside. We've paid a higher cost to live in this area because of our surroundings.
Building on site KB3 is taking away employment. Also there is no planned extra employment within the area and what the planned extra properties to be built this only means more people around the village travelling by car, train or bus to work and school (every child in secondary school has to travel to school by either car, bus or train) at the busy peak time rush. These times currently around the village are really bad at present so this is only going to make matters a whole lot worse. They are currently no plans to add extra trains or buses. There is currently parking issues at the train station and around the village. As these plans are on the surrounding areas of Knebworth, this will only encourage people to use their vehicle to move about. Parking around the village centre is always very busy at it is. With no extra plans for more parking I don't understand how this will work?
I have a son that's registered blind and autistic that gets collected for School in a School bus. The driver is always complaining how busy Knebworth is at the moment. These Plans are only going to add to the stress to my son and others on the bus due to the amount of traffic that would be added.
I believe Knebworth already has the largest population of any village within Hertfordshire. Surly we shouldn't be adding to this?

Site KB1 Land at Deards End
Not ideal ground to build of being so near to the A1, traffic noise and pollution. You'll be removing Green Belt buffer to west of village. Also causing traffic congestion on narrow Deards End Lane and on narrow railway bridge which would be unsuitable for heavy traffic. This will also damage character of Deards End Conservation area. Impact to wildlife sites and Knebworth woods site of special scientific interest.
Site KB2: Land off Gypsy Lane
Not ideal ground to build as being so near to the A1, traffic noise and pollution this area of land isn't great for plans to build a primary school on also. You'll be removing Green Belt buffer to village. This will also damage character of Stockens Green Conservation area. There would also be a drainage issue of surface water flooding from A1. In the past these fields have suffered flooding in heavy downpours. Impact on traffic as not near to any current bus stop or the local train station will be a 10-15 minute walk which only encourages people to use their cars.
Site KB3 chas lowe site
As mentioned above removal of local employment (ideal area for local business)

Site KB4 Land East of Knebworth
This will only bring Stevenage and Knebworth together, not leaving a border between the two. Taking away the current open landscape. Loss of productive agricultural land. Impact on traffic to Watton road and Swangleys lane.

I hope you'll take my points into considering and understand the upset these plans would have on my family and the current residents of Knebworth.

I am writing regarding the proposed Village Plan for Knebworth.

My understanding is that the any proposed development must be compliant under four main headings:
*Is the Positive
*Is the Plan Justified
*Is the Plan Consistent With National Planning Policy
*Is the Plan Effective

There are currently four development sites proposed for Knebworth and it is my assertion that each fail to meet the requirements of the inspection process.

Knebworth is a small area and any issue that affects one area of proposed development will have the same impact across all sites. Also many objections can be lodged under one or more of the inspection process criteria: for this reason I am grouping my responses as a whole.

Consultation
For a plan to be adopted it is required to be developed with the interests of the village at its centre and with full consultation with the residents. The KB3 site is a relatively new addition to the development and there has been no formal discussion regarding it. This is the same as KB4 which has not been, as far as I am aware, discussed at any level with residents. This is a large area to be developed without full discussion and local input, especially as it is agricultural land that has never been developed.

Housing Targets
It is my understanding that the housing targets have increased during this process: there is a concern that the numbers of houses required by the plan are not actually required by the village. There is a view in the village that new houses will be for those moving from London who cannot afford London prices rather than for local people. Recent developments in the village have sold for £400k+, this is not affordable housing. I have neighbours that rent and who are desperate to buy but there is no affordable housing stock. What assurances are there that the plan is for local people to help build a community rather than create a larger commuter belt.

The current plan will increase the size of the village by 31%: to grow any area by one third seems excessive. There is a plan to build 3,100 homes in Stevenage West and 150 homes in Woolmer Green which do not seem to have been taken into account during the formulation of this plan. What is the justification for such a large increase in dwellings in a small area: is this sustainable and actually needed? Are there any figures that show that these houses are actually needed in Knebworth?

Infrastructure
It appears that Knebworth does not have a Strategic Policy in place: the reason being that one is only required if a development exceeds 500 houses. In essence, although there is not a proposal for one development of 500 houses, the total amount across the village is 663 which will have just the same impact as one major development. By not developing a Strategic Policy it is impossible to assess the impact on the village for transport , education and commerce: this seems to have been side stepped in the desire to build houses.

There is a major issue in the village: Drainage. I live in Orchard Way and the cul-de-sac regularly floods during periods of heavy rain. We have been told that this is because the land at KB2 gets saturated and fills the drains, the overflow then finds its way to lower ground and floods outside my house. If this field is to be built upon there will be nowhere for the water to go except to flood the lower areas more regularly: what provisions have been put in place for adequate drainage in the village. Will the provisions be implemented for the whole village or just for the development sites? If the problem is only fixed for the development sites it will impact on the rest of the village.

This leads onto a concern that more homes mean more water usage & sewage disposal and the capacity of the Rye Meads Sewage Treatment Works needs to be .carefully evaluated to ensure that it can process the increased effulense.

There are plans for a school in the village but it is not made clear if this is an additional school or if the current schools will be closed when it opens. This leads to further concerns: if the old school is closed are there plans for yet further development of homes on that site? Any future plans have not been disclosed in the proposed building figures. The traffic generated by a new school will impact on the morning & afternoon rush-hour. There are already queues out of Knebworth towards Stevenage of a morning and more cars will be added to this as parents try to drop children off and head off to work. The village is also gridlocked at school pick-up time: it has taken me 20 minutes to drive from Orchard Way the High Street in the past. There was a comment that parents would walk their children to school but a lot of parent use their cars as necessity. There is also a question of noise from a school: it will be in a residential area and children shouting & playing in a playground can be very disturbing, especially for these working at home. There doesn't seem to be any consideration for the increased traffic and the noise & pollution that will come with it.

Services
There is no provision in the plan for growth of the medical centre in Knebworth. At present there is a lead time of approx. 4 week for an appointment. 663 houses is at least 663 new patients to be treated at the surgery and there is not the capacity.

Having spoken to one of the doctors, it appears that house prices are a deterrent for recruiting GPs to the practice, plus doctors would prefer to work in London. It was admitted to me that they do not know how they will cope with the influx, especially as their budgets are being cut. As an example, I had a bad shoulder earlier this year but they were not able to refer me for an MRI: what will be cut next due to the demand from the extra patients.

The high street is a busy & has a good range of shops but it is very crowded. There is not enough parking for the current users and the road can be dangerous with cars trying to park and pass through the high street.

Greenbelt & Conservation
Knebworth is a village set in the Hertfordshire countryside: this countryside is being slowly eroded with various building projects taking place, plus the proposed developments. Knebworth is in danger of losing its identity as a village in its own right, instead blending into a suburb of Stevenage. The idea of the Greenbelt was to guarantee open spaces and to allow space between towns & villages. It could be claimed that the KB4 development is in breach of the National Planning Policy Framework that exists to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas; stop towns merging into each other and safeguard against countryside encroachment.

There are several areas in the village that are designated as conservation areas. The extra traffic and the pollution it brings will have an impact on these areas. The pollution and extra people in the village will also impact on the natural wild life in the area: we often see roadkill and this will only get worse with extra cars. I also believe that the extra pollution will have an impact on the natural woods and greenery around the village.

Transport
Knebworth is a commuter village and it can be assumed that many people moving into the new developments will be commuters: the system cannot cope with an influx of train users. I have been commuting for 16 years and the trains have got worse year on year. They are always late, are over-crowded and now face the threat of cuts from the Govia Thameslink 2018 review.

Knebworth is limited in its train capacity due to the viaduct at Welwyn North: only one train each way at a time can pass through which causes a bottle neck and sets a finite number of trains that can cross it each day. There is no room for growth on the trains which means that more users (from other stations as well as Knebworth) will overload the system.

If 663 homes are built in the village then it is likely to lead to 663 cars: the roads cannot cope with this number of extra vehicles. They are not wide enough: many of the country lanes already struggle with the number & size of cars. Will the new homes have driveways or garages, and if so, how many? Will the development cater for all the extra cars or will they park where they can? The roads are already treated as a car park and the roads are clogged. Buses cannot always pass through the high street as there is not enough room with the parked cars which leads to delayed services and scratched cars.

There have been occasions when the emergency services have been unable to reach their destination due to the roads being blocked by parked cars.

The situation is made worse when there is a problem on the A1 as Knebworth is an overflow and alternate route for the motorway traffic. This includes all lorries and trucks that can hardly pass through with the parked cars.

Commerce
The plan, especially KB2 & KB4, will be building on agricultural land which will have an impact on farming jobs in the area. Not only will it reduce these jobs, there are no provisions in the plan to create any jobs of any type. The development of KB3 is again reducing employment opportunities in the village. This means that the village will be increasing residential with no commercial opportunities and people will need to commute to work.

I hope that my concerns will be taken into consideration during the consultation period: the village plan will have a huge impact on the people living in Knebworth and the future of the village.