KB2 Land off Gypsy Lane

Perfect site, but the access road is key. It seems to me, only a new road off the London /Road south of Knebworth, under the railway and northward to tis site is the only safe solution. It's costly, but vital, so needs to be defined in the Plan as an obligation.

I am a resident of Knebworth and am aware of certain developments in our village. Deards End and Gypsy Lane. I am a little concerned about. Housing developments of some 300 - 400 housing. The access from the village to these particular sites are under two bridges and over another bridge. All three bridges are of very narrow roadways plus pedestrian too, one side of road actually. To encourage more traffic to new housing development through under these bridges would be madness. It is at the moment a major hazard driving under these bridges plus not to say the pedestrian too, where mothers walk their children to the local school in London Road. An accident is waiting to happen!!!! Before even thinking of housing one needs to look at access to these developments from the Knebworth village.Plus another hazard is the high street of Knebworth, madness when the A1 has problems ie: accident. Then the traffic come though the high street, complete dreadlock many times !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Your officers need to look into these issues before moving further with these housing plans !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am writing to you with my concerns in relation to the North Hertfordshire Local Plan.
My overriding concern relates to the development at site KB2. In February 2014, along with 18 other properties in Orchard Way and Broom Grove, my house, 48, Broom Grove, was flooded. The water flowed from the field which it is now proposed to be developed (KB2). Covering this field in concrete will increase the speed of run off and, therefore, increase the chance of flooding in the future. Does the plan have any measures that will improve the drainage of the area and reduce the chances, rather than increase them, of flooding in the future? I would be very grateful if you could respond to this question now. I intend to be at the public meeting in Knebworth Village Hall on the 23rd November and I hope all my other concerns will be raised then.

My other concerns.
Apart from a new primary school, there appears to be no plans to improve the local infrastructure despite a significant increase in the housing stock (31%).
Congestion is likely to become a lot worse for the following reasons.
With 3 of the developments on the edge of the village many of the new residents are likely to drive to the village centre.
With no plans for local employment expansion many of the new residents are likely to commute to work increasing parking problems near the station. I also note that Knebworth may be losing its direct link to Peterborough and overall there may be less trains stopping at Knebworth.
To get to the main road running through Knebworth from sites KB1 and KB2 the railway has to be crossed. There are 3 crossing points all of which are narrow.
To alleviate present congestion problems proposals had been made to turn the Chas Lowe site into a car park. Building 14 new dwellings on the site will worsen, rather than improve, congestion.
I believe that the A1 is soon to be widened between Stevenage and Welwyn. Whilst this work is going on more traffic is likely to go through Knebworth.

Whilst the A1 is being widened could a new junction be put in between KB1 and KB2 so that a lot less traffic has to go through the centre of Knebworth?

I believe there is a proposal to build a new town in Cambridgeshire close to the Hertfordshire border. Is this a possibility and if built would we need the proposed developments in Knebworth?

Hoping all my concerns will be taken into account, particularly the flooding one.

The Parish Council objects to the development of this site, principally because it is designated as Green Belt. The Green Belt performs an important function in this location because it prevents the encroachment of Knebworth Village into the open countryside to the west. It also provides an effective noise buffer between the A1(M) and the village.

To the east of the site is the Stockens Green Conservation Area, the character of which would be severely affected by the amount of housing and the amount of traffic which would be generated.

The Local Plan acknowledges that the volume of traffic would have an adverse impact on the Gun Lane railway bridge, which is narrow and unsuitable for increases in traffic. This is a major concern, as it would provide the main entrance to the development area from the east. Any improvements would affect rail traffic, and thus could affect the deliverability of development.

The proposals would also have a major impact on Gypsy Lane and adjoining residential roads. As with KB1, it should be noted that concerns about the speed and volume of traffic using this road are among the complaints most often raised by local residents.

The development would be bounded to the west by the A1(M) which generates high levels of traffic noise. Noise mitigation measures are proposed in the Local Plan, but these likely to reduce the size of the developable area.

Currently the site contains a balancing pond which takes surface water draining from the A1(M). It is recognised that there are surface water flood risk issues on the site, which cannot be resolved by SUDs alone.

A 1FE primary school is proposed for the site. It is questionable whether a school should be proposed in an area so close to a busy motorway. The ultimate viability of this proposal, however, depends on whether other sites (KB1 and KB4) are allocated in the Local Plan. The target of 184 dwellings is well below the County Council threshold for the provision of primary schools, which is approximately 500 dwellings.

We object to the local plan because of the following reasons:
There is a lack of capacity in the local infrastructure and no plans to increase transport solutions i.e: There is heavy congestion already on a daily basis on normal days. This is trebled if there is an issue on the motorway. With extra homes being built this would create further pressure on the traffic and there is no solutions proposed from HCC Highways to deal with such traffic issues.
The railway station is already heavily used in the village with large congestion of traffic picking up passengers in the evening. With the increase of extra homes this would increase traffic congestion in this area.
The plan forecasts a much higher development for Knebworth compared to other parts of North Herts. This seems unfair as we want to keep Knebworth a village and avoid the threat of coalescence between Knebworth, Stevenage and Woolmer Green by removing large areas of the east and west of the green belt to the east and west of Knebworth. We enjoy the openness of the landscape that surrounds Knebworth Village and want to keep it that way.
There are constraints in the drainage infrastructure. Already the infrastructure drainage struggles to cope in supplying the village with reduced water pressure at times. This would mean that water pressure would further drop with the additional new homes.
The local GP surgery is very heavily used with over 4,000 residents registered there and our family finds it difficult to get appointments. This difficulty would be negatively impacted further with the addition of an extra 600 + homes being registered at the GP surgery.
With an extra six hundred homes there are no plans for access for children to secondary schools.

North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011-2031: Housing development in Knebworth

With regard to the above, I write to register my objection to the proposed development of all green belt land on the outskirts of Knebworth, but in particular to the western edge of the village, referred to in the latest documentation as 52 Land at Deards End and 53 Land at Gipsy Lane.

Green Belt
Proposed sites 52 and 53 are currently part of the Knebworth House Estate. For many years, the estate has repeatedly offered this land for development to one scheme or another (regardless of the suitability of the land or location), eager to profit no doubt from its sale.

Both parcels of land are located within the green belt.

They form a buffer between the village and the farmland to the west and as such are important to the preservation of what is left of the rural character of the village and the farmland around it. The green belt policy was established to 'control urban growth, with the idea that there is a ring of countryside where development will be resisted for the foreseeable future, maintaining an area where agriculture, forestry and outdoor leisure can be expected to prevail'.

Recently, planning permission for a solar farm to be built on green belt land to the east of Knebworth (south of Three Houses Lane) was refused by the Secretary of State. The main issues for refusal were:
* harm to the green belt;
* loss of agricultural land; and
* the impact on local listed buildings.
If urban-scale development proceeds on sites 52 and 53, the green belt would certainly be harmed, there would be loss of superb agricultural land (which post-Brexit would be more vital than ever) and both proposed sites are next to conservation areas - Stockens Green/Gipsy Lane and Deards End Lane.

Water supply and sewage system
Any large-scale development would cause serious problems with regard to the supply of water to this development and with the disposal of sewage from it. Inevitably, households already established in this area would suffer further loss of water pressure (it is already very low, following the building of the high-density Orchard Way/Broom Grove estate) and also be affected by the over-usage of the sewage system. Extensive infrastructure investment would be required and I think it unlikely developers would be willing to lose too much profit investing substantially in that. I dare say any major works would then fall at great expense to the taxpayer.

Flooding
As things stand, properties in the Orchard Way/Broom Grove estate are increasingly subjected to flooding by water coming off proposed site 53 between Gipsy Lane and the motorway, despite much of this water being absorbed into the fields.

A report was commissioned after flooding occurred in 2014. With more and more extreme weather events happening (a problem not likely to lessen in the future), main recommendations explored to help reduce future flooding were:
* survey and clean the highway drainage system;
* increase frequency of gully cleaning;
* develop a programme of surface water management measures;
* look at individual property level protection; and
* monitor the effectiveness of the A1(M) attenuation storage pond.
As I currently understand it, measures recommended to help alleviate the problem have not been carried out fully by the necessary parties, i.e. the landowner (Knebworth House Estate), Hertfordshire County Council (responsible for Gipsy Lane, Orchard Way and Broom Grove) and the Highways Agency (responsible for the motorway).

If site 53 is concreted over, even less water will be absorbed and more flooding will occur - both on the Orchard Way/Broom Grove estate and in Gipsy Lane.

Access to/from the proposed development sites
To the west of the proposed sites lies the A1(M) motorway and beyond that agricultural and other rural land. The roads are narrow and, because of the volume of traffic currently carried, can be dangerous for pedestrians and cyclists.

To the east is the main body of Knebworth. Traffic in the area is heavy for most of the day, and almost invariably, every day sees a traffic jam of some sort on the main road, particularly when trouble arises on the motorway.

Any residents in the proposed new housing developments would need to drive from their homes to the village centre for local facilities, or to gain access to Stevenage in the north, Welwyn Garden City in the south and elsewhere. The new developments would make driving through Knebworth horrendous.

To get to the village centre, motorists would be forced to drive over either a small railway bridge from Deards End Lane to join the main road, or under one of two railway bridges over minor roads. I understand that the bridge over Deards End Lane has a weight restriction on using it and the two other bridges provide a narrow and awkwardly angled road for traffic using these routes.

Substantial additional traffic would also have environmental implications, particularly as all routes would be directed through conservation areas.

During the late 1970s the Orchard Way/Broom Grove estate was built, with some 220 houses (of which I believe 20 were built on a site originally designated for a primary school). There is one entrance/exit to this estate - onto Gipsy Lane and thereby through the conservation area. Since this estate was built, car ownership has increased tenfold and so the volume of traffic has thereby increased. This estate has a huge impact today on the Stockens Green/Gipsy Lane conservation area, but those 220 households will be dwarfed in comparison to the proposed development (which again has a school earmarked for inclusion, but will probably be quietly disregarded in favour of more profitable 'executive' homes and a few extra cars).

My point is this. Cars have been, and continue to be, a very real problem in the village. The Local Plan proposes swelling the village by over 30%. Driving through the village is a problem now. Parking is a problem now. Nothing has ever been done to satisfactorily resolve this. Building hundreds of new homes is hardly a solution to this.

Impact on rail travel
The village currently has a very large number of residents who commute daily to/from London for work. During weekday peak periods, there is normally overcrowding on services and the small station's platforms are generally very busy. In recent years, station usage has increased by 71% (with commuters from Knebworth and surrounding villages), and rail services have not adjusted to account for the demand. With the Victorian viaduct at Welwyn, there is limited capacity to substantially increase services that would be able to stop at Knebworth without impacting the faster, non-stopping services to/from the north.

Strain on local facilities
Doctors' surgery
The surgery is totally inadequate for the needs and demands of the current population of Knebworth and those in the surrounding villages who use this surgery as well, and at present there is some uncertainty where the surgery will finally be relocated to after its current site is redeveloped for flats.

The proposed new location (above the library!) is a long way from being settled as several residents in that area are unhappy with this location, the general appropriateness of this new site and the disruption/increase of traffic this would bring to the immediate area. A site that would have lent itself well (a former nursing home), has now been developed with 13 residential properties. That site would have allowed the surgery to expand sufficiently to cope with the requirements residents so badly need right now.

Primary school
The local primary school is, as I understand it, almost full to capacity. To build a separate, additional primary school is ill thought-out and in my view unnecessary. The existing school could have been substantially extended if the land recently developed next to it had been used. Flats were built instead (this time for affluent retirees). However, I do still feel the current school could be extended if necessary, by utilising some of its recreational ground. And why split resource to two different sites, when one site could benefit so much more?

Retail/businesses
Other than the high street, there are no more areas within the village for any form of retail/business expansion in which to serve the community. Every area that is available (or will become available), is and has been earmarked for residential development. This illustrates to me that there is no well thought-out plan intended for Knebworth to help it flourish, nor any prospect of offering new employment opportunities for locals. The reality is that most residents earn a living away from the village and it is unfortunately turning into somewhat of a dormitory.

Conclusion
The development proposed for Knebworth has exasperated local residents, with the majority opposing the plan put forwards.

The Local Plan shows proposals that have completely ignored residents' concerns and objections voiced during public meetings, in publications and online, by adding even more development sites than initially schemed. The growth is much too large for the area.

The Local Plan does not bring any benefits to Knebworth, only to property developers who will scar the landscape for profit before moving on.

The Local Plan is neither reasonable nor fair. It does not bring opportunity for employment within the village, or improve the quality of life for residents who moved here for a semi-rural environment. It will place strain on village facilities, resource and infrastructure.

The Local Plan is attempting to urbanise areas where it should not. It is planned solely around the willingness of landowners prepared to sell, not on the basis of whether the location and potential for good, reliable infrastructure and facilities is achievable.

The Local Plan would be the ruin of Knebworth.

I am writing in response to the above consultation. I live in Knebworth and I object to the plans for new houses to be built in Knebworth and, in particular, the plan to build new houses on site KB2.

Is the Plan positive?

No.

I am not aware of any engagement with local residents. I have not been engaged in this plan in any way.

Had I been given the opportunity to pass comment, I would have objected in the strongest possible terms.

The plan fails entirely to recognise the local infrastructure issues. Knebworth's local services are already highly over subscribed and cannot take any more demand on them . The High Street is already highly congested, the trains from Knebworth station are already full and there is already a severe lack of parking available as shown by the vast number of cars parked on the kerbs all around the village. The plan does not take into account that Knebworth cannot sustain further residences as it is already at capacity. Whenever I try to book a Doctor's appointment, I am always forced to wait 3 or 4 weeks to be seen. If I need an emergency appointment, I am always kept waiting on the phone in a queue for long periods of time and am not always successful in obtaining an appointment.

There is simply no way that the proposed development can be sustained without a huge increase in infrastructure. The village would need another post office, supermarket, doctor's surgery, primary and possible secondary school (to avoid further congestion of more children commuting to school), more parking and more parks. I am not sure what, if any, measures can be taken to ease the congestion on the roads but certainly more frequent train services to and from London, Peterborough and Cambridge would be needed in order to ease overcrowding at Knebworth station.

I note that a new primary school is tentatively proposed but without the addition of all the other improvements to infrastructure that are needed, the plan clearly fails to adequately address these needs.

Is the Plan justified?

No.

There are far better alternatives to the proposed housing sites. Welwyn and Stevenage have far greater resources to support new homes. Building on the Green Belt around Knebworth will remove from the community a vital space for leisure and recreation, will make the village much less aesthetically pleasing and will stretch the village's resources too far. There is also a real danger of coalescence between Knebworth, Stevenage and Woolmer Green.

The evidence for the plan isn't reasonable or fair. As currently forecast, Knebworth is being developed at a much higher rate than other parts of North Hertfordshire. This isn't fair and it isn't sensible. There is no provision for the creation of local employment meaning there is inevitably going to be further congestion on the roads and trains as people commute to work.

The plan will bring no benefits to Knebworth. Knebworth is a large village already. Its facilities are at breaking point and the proposed plan will only stretch local services even further.

There are real threats to implementing plan. The plan is not sustainable. The roads in and around the village are already highly congested. I am always being held up along the High Street. My experience of the healthcare in the village is that it is almost impossible to get an appointment unless you can wait a month to be seen. There is also a real danger of coalescence between Knebworth, Stevenage and Woolmer Green.

Is the Plan effective?

The plan will not deliver a sustainable solution for Knebworth. It is likely to be rendered ineffective by the lack of infrastructure capacity.

See attachment

See attachment

See attachment

Should not build on green belt.
Access onto B197 is dangerous now under the narrow railway bridges, especially for pedestrians.

No building on green belt.
Why make rules that mean nothing
The railway bridges are already too dangerous for pedestrians and motorists
Why build a school next to a motorway!
Just going to cause health problems later in life for children and teachers.

1. The green belt surrounding Knebworth makes a significant contribution to protecting the space between the village and the surrounding villages and Stevenage. Removing it will likely mean there is a considerable danger of coalescence, destroying the identity of Knebworth. Developing KB2 will remove the green-belt buffer between Gypsy Lane and the A1(M).
2. KB2 is next to the A1(M) - not only will people living in houses built here suffer from noise pollution, this section of the A1(M) is the most congested and polluted part of this motorway. This is also the site for the proposed primary school, given the level of pollution here a different site may have to be considered.
3. Access to KB2 is an issue. Gun Lane railway bridge is a narrow bridge unsuitable for additional traffic. The plan needs to include new, wider, access routes to KB1.
4. KB2 includes a conservation area. This will be damaged if this area is developed according to the current plan. The plan needs to include safeguards to preserve this area.
5. KB2 has long-standing drainage issues, resulting in surface water flooding from the A1(M), which the current plan does not address in detail.

We have lived in Knebworth for almost 40 years and have seen how natural growth has caused an increase in issues such as traffic flow, parking, appointments for Doctors, utility supplier problems etc. Not putting aside the obvious objections, building on the Green Belt and expanding the 'village' proportionately more than other areas, the proposed development will have a detrimental effect on all these and more. Building several hundred homes plus a school will only exacerbate an already present problem.
For example , the main access to either KB1 or KB2 means travelling along three existing narrow roads, blind corners and dangerous bridges, and the term dangerous is not an exaggeration and applies to all the approaches, particularly for pedestrians, as the bridge pathways are suitable for just one person to walk safely.
The proposal increase the schedule for train journeys will also impact on the parking issues as commuters are already spreading further out into the surrounding streets.
Knebworth streets are difficult to traverse and with six hundred plus homes, meaning probably nearer a thousand resident vehicles plus associated delivery vans, work vans etc not to mention refuse collection and emergency vehicles, it will result in gridlock especially when there are problems on the A1M when Knebworth main street becomes the only escape.
Having a new school in KB2 will presumably mean the catchment area includes surrounding areas, with the associated traffic disruption twice a day too.

I object to this development as it's on Green Belt land and it would remove the buffer to the west of the village. The roads accessing the village are all very narrow with existing congestion already due to the large number of parked cars, with insufficient parking at the station for commuters who then park on the various side roads. This increases the risk of accidents occurring and more housing with extra traffic will only aggravate the situation. Current traffic levels have already lead to accidents at both narrow railway bridges, unsuitable for heavy traffic, leading to the B197.

Existing major problems with traffic flow, parking and access around the narrow streets. access to KB1+KB2 means travelling along narrow roads, blind corners and dangerous bridges, also unsuitably narrow pathways for pedestrians. Building 600+ homes means probably 1000 resident ,along with delivery/utility (refuse), vehicles. add this to the extra traffic when there are problems on A1M there will be gridlock and accidents.
Increasing rail journeys will impact on parking issues as commuters are already spreading into surrounding streets.
A new school will presumably include a wider catchment area with associated traffic twice a day too.

As with kb one and kb four this proposal is unsustainable. It sees the removal of greenbelt which buffers the village from the A1. It does not address access issues due to the East Coast mainline. Impacts on conservation area. Like all the proposes for Knebworth it does not address infrastructure needs, road issues, additional strain on sewage and utility infrastructure.

Overall strategy:
The overall strategy is not clear. In fact, there is not an overall strategy and as such means that the plan is not effective. The fact that there is no strategy is apparent in the lack of connections between housing, cumulative development and infrastructure needed to support growth sustainably.
Amount of housing:
The amount of new housing (663 dwellings) would increase the village size by 31%. This is an increase of approximately 200 homes in this Plan to 2 years ago. None of the issues highlighted then have been addressed, so how can the village now support and additional 200 homes to 2 years ago? Please note Knebworth is a village, even though it is referred to as a town in the Plan.
Plan for over 500 homes should have a specific plan with developer obligations. Because of the separate sites, this obligation has been overlooked at bets, or deliberately manipulated at worse (by calling each site separate in its own right, rather than all part of the Knebworth site). There is no provision for jobs creation in the Plan as a whole and therefore no consideration for the local economy.
Planning has been granted for the Odyssey site to the north of Knebworth for approx. 70-100 homes. This hasn't been taken into account when determining amount of housing for Knebworth. These houses are being termed 'windfall gains'. A clear strategy should take these into account.
Furthermore, Stevenage West land has already been reserved for 3,100 homes. This would be better able to provide facilities and services.
There is no joined up thinking with adjacent parishes. Plans for Woolmer Green of 150 homes (to the north of Woolmer Green) have not been taken into account. If all the proposals go ahead then Knebworth and Woolmer Green will merge and Stevenage and Knebworth would be practically joined up. The town and villages will all merge into one.

Green Belt:
Green Belt land makes a significant contribution to protecting spaces between towns and maintaining the separate identity of Knebworth as a village. Development of sites KB1 and KB2 will remove the Green Belt buffer between the village and the A1. There will be a loss of countryside and the open landscape setting.
Drainage issues:
Drainage issues have been raised time and time again. There will be a major capacity issue at Rye Meads Sewage Treatment Works and this has not been addressed. Surface water is already a problem; this will be exacerbated with increased population and households.

Transport:
It was raised in the previous consultation in 2014 that the existence of the railway line poses huge challenges regarding transport/traffic through the village. These challenges have not been addressed in this plan; in fact, the Plan says (13.195) that there are no mitigation requirements regarding transport. In fact, the Highways Agency has raised this issue previously. The problem with the bridges has been ignored. The two railway bridges at either end of the village are already dangerous due to the current volume of traffic, narrow roads, corners, and narrow pavements. An increase in volume of traffic and pedestrians will make this increasingly dangerous. There have already been many near misses. These two routes are used extensively by small children going to and from school, in the morning rush hour. An increase of 31% of this scale can only add to the problems.
The high street is also a known pinch point; it current takes over 35 minutes to reach junction 6 of the A1 in rush hour, which is only 2 miles away. Increased traffic will only exacerbate this).

In the Plan (13.192) it states that much of the traffic in the mornings is caused by secondary school pupils going to school in the car. This is simply not true. Virtually ALL secondary school pupils use the trains (to Hitchin and Hatfield) and the school provided buses (to Stevenage, Welwyn Garden City, Hatfield, Hertford, Ware), and public buses. Therefore, the idea that possible secondary school provision could ease the traffic volume is simply inaccurate.

Schools:
Primary:
* A second primary school on site KB2 is not well considered. This would be adjacent to the A1 and as such noise and air pollution will be significant. Children and teachers cannot learn and teach in this environment. In December 2014 the Environmental Audit Committee issued a report stating that: 'A ban on building schools, hospitals, and care homes near air pollution hotspots must be introduced to help cut thousands of deaths connected to the 'invisible killer' of traffic fumes.'
* A second primary school will change the village feel of Knebworth to more of a town, or urban sprawl. It will increase pressure on the roads under on the railway bridges because more people would be crossing the village each morning, in both directions, with young children. I would be naïve to assume that parents would automatically chose the primary school nearest to them, or on their side of the village
* Finally, regarding a new primary school, it will create a 'divide' in the village. One school will be 'better' than the other, and therefore a social dividend will emerge. This would not be healthy for the community feel of Knebworth.

Other facilities (doctor's, library, pharmacy):
The Plan states that the planning permission has already been granted for a new doctor's surgery and library. This is true, but this is to REPLACE the current doctor's surgery and library; this did not take into account additional population. Therefore, the services provided will not meet the requirements of a village increased by 31% (number of homes), of which site KB2 has a significant proportion.

1) Traffic Access via Knewbworth, narrow railway bridge, or to A1M South via Rabley Heath.
2) Traffic in the morning rush hour to A1M South, already over congested leading us to divert through Rabley Heath which cannot cope. Morning Hour traffic Rush hour traffic at J6 congested and already diverting through the Old Welwyn high street. Only get worse
3) Loss of Green belt west of village.

In addition to personal worries about the effect on our property, we have the following general concerns about the impact of the proposed KB2 development:

1. Road Infrastructure
* The existing Orchard Way/Broom Grove estate has always had road problems, with only one way in and out of it. Traffic is often busy and dangerous where Orchard Way joins Gipsy Lane. The KB2 development could only dramatically increase this kind of problem.

* The current roads for the proposed site are smaller and poorly maintained. With Rabley Heath Farm now turned into light industry, cars & vans often heavily load them. The County Council apparently has no plans to improve them.

* The site development is also bound to make the congestion around the Station Road and Gun Lane bridges far worse.

2. Doctors
* The doctors' surgery barely copes with the current population and appointments within two weeks cannot be guaranteed. With a possible 663 homes considered, the existing facilities would have to be completely reviewed.

3. Environment
* Replacement of the fields with a built environment would have a huge impact on the immediate area.

* We have slowworms living in uncultivated area at top of our garden and they are also in nearby hedgerows and fields.

* Skylarks also nest in these fields.

4. Parking
* Spaces are currently insufficient for local needs, making it easier for residents to shop outside Knebworth, which cannot be good for our few local businesses. General street parking in Knebworth is also deteriorating through pressure from commuters. To have any possibility of Knebworth having a village/community feel, parking pressure in the centre especially must be relieved, not increased as it would be by such a population increase.

* The KB3 site & Chas Lowe business is a key factor in making Knebworth inhospitable to visitors.

All points as per KB1 and also access via Gypsy Lane toward Woolmer Green goes via narrow residential road at railway bridge (Bridge Road).

A second primary school will change the village feel of Knebworth to more of a town, or urban sprawl. It will increase pressure on the roads under on the railway bridges because more people would be crossing the village each morning, in both directions, with young children. It would be naïve to assume that parents would automatically chose the primary school nearest to them, or on their side of the village. Also not appropriate to build a school next to motorway

As there is no provision for increased local employment this will only increase traffic trying to leave the area.
The local roads are inadequate at the moment, any increase in housing will add to congestion and polution. The B197 is often at a standstill at peak periods and is also used as a diversionary route when the A1(M) is blocked it will not cope with any more traffic.
Access to the site is either via a narrow bridge in Gun Lane with a narrow footpath alongside it, extra traffic will add to the danger to pedestrians, often parents and children walking to the primary school, or via local lanes which are very narrow often with passing places to enable traffic to run in both directions. Neither of these options will cope with extra residential or construction traffic.
Parts of Gypsy Lane flood on occasions and the water can then spread through the gardens boardering it to Orchard Way and Broom Grove. This water runs off the neighbouring field when the ground is saturated, building here will only exacerbate the problem.
Government policy is to protect the Green Belt, this is Green Belt.

As a resident of the local area I strongly object to this proposed development site for residential houses or additional schools on the proposed KB2 plans. Firstly the site suggested (KB2) is green belt land and more importantly the additional houses and residence that these houses will home, will add to the already overloaded traffic issues in Knebworth and the surrounding areas, at peak times during the day (8:00am - 9:30am, 3:00pm - 3:30pm and 5:00pm - 6:00pm). The site KB2 (alone) will likely feed at least 200 more cars each day onto the B197 via either, Gun Lane/Station Road; Stockens Green/Gun Lane, Wych Elm Lane/Bridge Road or Deards End Land. All of which either pass under or over very narrow railway bridges which are not suitable for either two cars to pass each other, or for cars and pedestrians, as it is at the moment. A further 200 (or 400 more cars if the KB1 site is approved) will be a catastrophic amount of congestion, as well as a potential safety risk for pedestrians (especially between 8:15am - 9:00am & 3:00pm- 3:45pm), when a lot of families are walking to and from school. Additionally, we will see more cars using Pondscroft Road as a bypass to the High Street. This road is already a risk to pedestrians, as the road is narrow due to cars parking on both sides of the Road. The knock on effect of additional traffic will also drastically affect neighbouring villages such as Woolmer Green and Oakland. From 7:30am in the morning these villages already see backed up traffic to the A1 on a regular occurrence. Aside from the severe issues additional cars will cause the infrastructure of the village is already at capacity with schooling and doctor's surgery. Any additional commuters using the Knebworth railway station will also be an issue, as parking at the station is at a premium, with nearby residential roads already overloaded with parked cars. It would seem clear that none of these issues have been taken into consideration when proposing KB2 as a potential site for additional housing.

Combined with the proposed building of 200 dwellings at Deards End Lane, this proposed build would essentially mean that 400 families with eduactional and highway needas would be traveling to and from the village on a daily basis. Park Lane is already a very busy road and we are concerned about our children's safety.
We are also worried about meeting the needs of so many more young families that would be living in these new properties, in particular, children under school age. Early years providers in Knebworth are currently over subscribed and would struggle to accomodate these children.

There is no suitable access to the proposed development. Access can only be via Park Lane, from Station Road or Stockens Green from Gun Lane. There are railway bridges in both Station Road and Gun Lane which act as pinch points to vehicular traffic. The Gun Lane bridge is of particular concern due to the angle of approach to the bridge and the width of the carriageway. Vehicles travelling in either direction approach the bridge 'blind' to traffic coming the opposite way.
The inclusion of a primary scholl will result in increased vehicular traffic through Stockens Green. This traffic is likely to include coaches taking children to and from the school. Stockens Green is not suitable for the likely increase in traffic especially large vehicles such as coaches.
The proposed development will result in a ssignificant increase in traffic in Stockens Green which will damage the character of Stockens Green Conservation Area

Housing for housing sake is not planning policy. Incremental additional housing is not fulfilling the amenity needs and joined up thinking needed to provide long term sustainable development. The proposals are simply box ticking to hit housing targets having no regard for the wider implications and planning needs or support.

The council has failed to consider or respond to the valid concerns relating to the access for construction traffic or the resulting congestion should the homes be built. The site is only accessible via country lanes and under a narrow railway bridge. Not only would this cause congestion but would be dangerous to the public as the bridge is the only access from one side of the railway line to the other for pedestrians and the footpath is already barely wide enough for one person.
The site would remove the Green Belt between the village and the A1(M) (which itself is due to be widened in the near future), increasing the impact of the noise and air pollution on the local population.
No credible plan has been brought forward to alleviate the already serious flooding that has occurred in the village that would be heightened by an increase in the built up area.

Increase traffic congestion via Knebworth's limited access railway bridges, or to A1M South via Rabley Heath.
Increased traffic within village morning and evening will cause safety issues for workers and school children accessing village on foot.