KB2 Land off Gypsy Lane

The 'transport' bullet point in the DPD refers only to the Deards End Lane railway bridge. This would apply only to the proportion of traffic passing to and from Stevenage and beyond.
Traffic passing from KB2 to or from the South of Knebworth (e.g. Welwyn and the A1(M) junction), will tend to try to pass under either of the Gun Lane or the Bridge Rd (Woolmer Green) railway bridges, both narrow single track, with narrow pedestrian pathways. Wych Elm Lane, which borders the proposed KB2 site to the west, and leads into Bridge Rd., is a single track road with passing places, unlikely to be suitable for the expected increased traffic flow. Bridge Rd, from the railway bridge to the junction with the B197, is a narrow residential road with necessary on-street parking that is already difficult to transit through. Increased traffic from KB2 would present a considerable safety issue. The junction with the B197 would be a major problem, as this is a very busy road at commuter times, and turning right from Bridge Road will be very difficult.

This is contrary to national planning policy (para 14/footnote 9 of NPPF). I can't begin to imagine how you would address the traffic/road access issues. Gipsy Lane/Orchard Way has been subject to flooding more than once from surface water from the A1(M). The land itself is currently used as agricultural land - a precious and rare resource. There is no way you can convince me that you can mitigate the noise from the A1(M). I live further away and it's clearly heard. Putting a primary school there would put children's health at risk from pollution.

- KB2 and KB1 sites are sandwiched between the A1M and the East Coast rail line and has limited road access. Access to the B197 is via Stockens Green Road, which is a Conservation area, is under a narrow rail bridge with a single narrow footpath. When approaching the bridge you cannot see vehicles approaching from the other side because of the angle of the road and vehicles often sound their horns to warn oncoming vehicles.
- An alternative route to the B197 is via Bridge Road in Woolmer Green. This is a single track lane with no footpath path. The road goes under a narrow rail bridge which has no footpath.
- Proposals for a school on KB2 will create a huge number of extra car journeys to and from the KB2 site. Access issues as above.
- The school would be adjacent to the A1M and pupils would be subject to adverse noise and pollution.
- There are already drainage issues in the area where the adjacent Orchard Way estate suffers from flooding during heavy rain.

This site with a proposal for approximately 200 dwellings is sensitive for development.

The NHDC Land Allocations - Additional Suggested Sites July, 2009 highlighted the site's weaknesses as:

i. Green field site as grade 3 agricultural land

ii. Adjoins a conservation area

iii. Site is groundwater source protection zone 3

iv. Site is located next to the A1M

v. Identified constraints on utilities and capacity of primary school

vi. Flooding in the adjoining Wimpey estate has also occurred this past winter

Council's weakness iv above has recently been reinforced by the Department for Transport in their A1 East of England strategic study: interim report of August 2016 which concluded, inter alia, that parts of the A1 are located unacceptably close to residential locations, causing unpleasant environmental conditions for local residents. It is hard to understand how moving Knebworth closer to the A1(M) is consistent with this very recent government finding.

In summary the site has the capacity for new dwellings but no other attributes.

There is no justification for developing Green Belt, and no evidence that I have seen that building on brownfield land has been considered (this land might not be in Knebworth). The suggested primary school would be adjacent to the motorway, which seems unwise. The Gun Lane railway bridge is narrow and the additional traffic generated by development would prove unsustainable. There are already serious flooding problems in Gipsy Lane with the existing housing stock. These would be severely exacerbated. Scant if any attention has been paid to the existence of a conservation area (as with KB1).

The land at KB2 (Gypsy Lane) is designated green belt land. No exceptional circumstance exists which would lead to the conclusion this land needs to be developed.

The land is bound at its western side by the A1(M) and subject to atmospheric and noise pollution from the motorway; it is not suitable for permanent housing and is particularly unsuitable as a site for a
primary school.

The land is prone to flooding (and in particular runoff from the A1(M) when the drainage pond fills); existing housing at nearby Broome Grove suffer from this runoff.

No provision has been made for any future widening of the A1(M) which is two-lane through its Knebworth section.

Access is difficult due to local narrow lanes and low bridges.

The current rail infrastructure is not sufficient to support the total number of houses that are proposed for all four sites. My wife and I commute by train to London and regularly experience issues, including overcrowding and cancelled or delayed services, which would be severely exacerbated with an increase in passengers. The proposed changes to the train service in 2018 will not support such an increase in passengers from Knebworth, with proposals to stop fast services to London, fewer trains at off-peak times and only one train route through Knebworth (local villages such as Welwyn North will be served by more). This is despite the fact that Knebworth has had the highest increase in passengers numbers in North Hertfordshire. Furthermore, we have seen increased commuter parking in streets near the station, creating dangerous environments and making it hard to drive round Knebworth due to the amount of parked cars - this is something that would only get worse if the volume of station users increased. All the above concerns are made even worse by no plans to create local employment in Knebworth - as the rail services will be a primary source for work.

Furthermore, we are very concerned about the strain on local public amenities. For instance, there is currently an average of a three-week wait for a doctor appointment in the village. This situation cannot afford to get any worse - but clearly will under these plans, compromising the health and wellbeing of residents.

Neither justified nor effective:
- Development would be contrary to government policy on Green Belt as set out in the NPPF. NHDC have not demonstrated that "exceptional circumstances" exist for the development of the site. Housing need alone is not a sufficient justification, as confirmed by the Minister of State in August 2016 in a letter to MPs.
- This particular tract of Green Belt is important because it prevents the encroachment of Knebworth into the countryside to the west.
- The site is located between the A1(M) and the western edge of Knebworth Village and is affected by traffic noise from the A1(M). The adjacent stretch of the A1(M), between Junction 6 and 7, is poorly-rated in the recent Highways England report (AI East of England Strategic Study, June 2016). There are high levels of congestion, accidents, and noise. The building of housing on this site would impact on the future viability of any plan to widen the A1(M). such a scheme cannot be ruled out, given that this section of the A1(M) is one of the most heaVily-congested in the UK.
- The amount of traffic generated by about 200 new dwellings would add considerably to the levels of traffic impacts on the B197. Congestion levels in the centre of the village would be exacerbated.
- A new primary school is proposed for this site. This is environmentally unacceptable as this means citing a primary school adjacent to the most polluted, congested and noisy part of the A1(M).
- There would also be pressures on the Deards Lane End Lane railway over-bridge, which is a Scheduled Ancient Monument. Increases in traffic are likely to have an adverse effect on the structural integrity of the bridge, which crosses the East Coast main railway line.
- Deards End Conservation Area and Stockers Green Conservation Areas are adjacent, the character of which would be severely affected by the proximity of so much new housing and the increased levels of traffic. With a potential link to Park Road, and north-south movement through the village limited by three narrow railway bridges, there is a clear risk that a "rat run" would be created by drivers seeking to access Stevenage of Welwyn Garden City from both KB1 and KB2. Deards End Lane and Gypsy Lane are narrow single track road in parts with no pavements, giving rise to safety concerns for all road users as well as pedestrians.
- The infrastructure improvements suggested by the District Council are impracticable. Any road widening would have an adverse effect on the character of the Conservation Areas, and would involve the loss of residents' gardens.
- Potential existing flooding concerns

The northerly part of KB2 has, after prolonged rainfall, become waterlogged, causing surface water to flow eastward onto Gypsy Lane, blocking road drainage and overflowing into gardens and houses in Orchard Way, across Orchard Way and pooling into Broom Grove, to a depth sufficient to flow into some of the houses. Development of the KB2 site, will decrease the absorption area of the site, increasing the potential frequency for this flooding.

The proposal to move Green Belt boundaries from their current long established position solely because there is an equally or more defensible location elsewhere is contrary to national Green Belt policy. The availability of land, offered to meet a perceived housing need, is not an exceptional circumstance, and is not justified. The removal of Green Belt status from the land affected would be likely to cause significant harm to the Green Belt and its purposes, and requires fuller explanation and justification in the Local Plan.

The plans as a whole are not sound:

Traffic:
Knebworth already suffers from congestion and insufficient parking provision, leading to commuter parking in the residential areas near to the station and potentially dangerous congestion in the high street. These proposals would exacerbate the above problems and also lead to increased access traffic through residential areas such as Gypsy Lane, Stockens Green and Deards End Lane, none of which are suitable for use as through roads: Deards End Lane and Gypsy Lane are single track roads constrained by rail bridges which would have to be widened to permit greater access whilst Deards End Lane and Stockens Green are conservation areas.

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

Green Belt :
The developments encroach upon significant elements of Green Belt which is contrary to national policy.

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

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

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

The issues surrounding the railway bridge at Gun Lane have not been addressed. There will be no green belt buffer between Gypsy Lane and the motorway. The drainage issue has not been addressed. An overall strategy needs to be in place to address all of these issues.

I object to the development of the site KB2. If this site is developed, it will mean a loss of green belt land between the developments to the east of Gypsy Lane and the A1(M) which will be detrimental to the well-being of all its residents. The wide range of flora and fauna in this area will be seriously affected by the projected development.
This site is not suitable for development as it is adjacent to the A1(M) and therefore suffers from serious pollution of both noise and air quality.
There is a proposal to place a new primary school within the development. Even if all the new houses were to be built, there would not be enough primary aged children in these houses to fill a new school and therefore, children from further away would have to be brought in to fill the school, thus increasing the amount of traffic as parents drop their children off. It is also wrong to place a new primary school adjacent to the motorway, in what is regarded as one of the most polluted stretches of the road.
The current GP practice in the village is severely stretched. They try to do their best, but it is obvious to all that when you have to wait 10 days to get a routine appointment at the surgery, there is no room for further residents to be signed up. There has been a noticeable decline in the number of partners and the turnover of staff at the surgery over the last two years; it is hard to see that more staff can be recruited to deal with any more residents.
Sites KB1 and KB2 in Knebworth are both less well suited to development than other sites in the area through their lack of vehicular access. There are three access points across the railway, two under and one over bridges; as I use these bridges daily, I am only too well aware of the lack of space, each one is almost single track for vehicles and I often have to wait for a vehicle coming in the opposite direction to finish their manoeuvre before continuing. The pedestrian footpath under or over these bridges is only wide enough for one person, currently, pedestrians have to dangerously move into the road in order to pass each other. If the village were to increase by 31%, I cannot see how these access points would cope.
In the construction phase, which is planned to take 15 years, how will the construction vehicles access the sites when they too have to either pass under the railway bridges or access from Codicote down winding country lanes?
There is currently little direct employment within Knebworth, thus nearly all residents leave the village for work. Over the last year the traffic using the B197 has increased considerably. The journey to the A1(M) which used to take 5 minutes can now easily take 20 minutes at 7.40 a.m. I believe this to be because of the amount of school traffic, both private and school buses, and the number of people joining the road from side turnings. If the number of homes in Knebworth is increased this road will become further blocked with health and economic ill results.

This site with a proposal for approximately 200 dwellings is sensitive for development.

The NHDC Land Allocations - Additional Suggested Sites July, 2009 highlighted the site's weaknesses as:

i. Green field site as grade 3 agricultural land

ii. Adjoins a conservation area

iii. Site is groundwater source protection zone 3

iv. Site is located next to the A1M

v. Identified constraints on utilities and capacity of primary school

vi. Flooding in the adjoining Wimpey estate has also occurred this past winter

Council's weakness iv above has recently been reinforced by the Department for Transport in their A1 East of England strategic study: interim report of August 2016 which concluded, inter alia, that parts of the A1 are located unacceptably close to residential locations, causing unpleasant environmental conditions for local residents. It is hard to understand how moving Knebworth closer to the A1(M) is consistent with this very recent government finding.

In summary the site has the capacity for new dwellings but no other attributes.

My objection to the Plan is the failure of the Council to justify a long series of proposals for the removal of land from the Green Belt around towns and villages. Such justification should have specifically included the demonstration by the Council of the 'exceptional circumstances' for removing land from the Green Belt on a site by site, and settlement by settlement basis, and setting them out in the Plan. Instead, the Council appears to have relied on a blanket assumption that all housing and other development needs, not just in the District but in Stevenage and Luton as well, identified through their background studies, must be met in full, despite national planning policy and planning case law to the contrary. If the Plan is allowed to proceed as published by the Council, it would commit future generations to continuing development which would cause incalculable harm to the Green Belt.

I believe that the Council has not considered all reasonable alternative approaches to meeting the District's development needs, particularly when setting a Housing Target, and that this failure has contributed to an unsound Strategy. A realistic contribution to housing capacity from a greater range of sources including windfall sites, changes of use in accordance with current permitted development rights, and other measures promoting the recycling of previously developed land and property, should have been included in the Plan, and a Housing Target then determined that reflects both development needs and the nationally important constraints that exist in this part of Hertfordshire.

The proposal to move Green Belt boundaries from their current long established position solely because there is an equally or more defensible location elsewhere is contrary to national Green Belt policy. The stated reason for doing so is not an exceptional circumstance, and is not justified. The removal of Green Belt status from the land affected would be likely to cause significant harm to the Green Belt and it's overall purpose.

Many of my points objecting to KB1 are also relevant to KB2, particularly in terms of traffic increase and the impact on safety on Deards End Lane. Traffic from this area is also likely to use Deards End Lane as the shortest route north to Stevenage.

Concern regarding the removal of the Green Belt between the A1(M) and the village.
Concern about the pollution from the A1(M)
this part of the A1(M) is the worst polluted in the area. Concern at building a Primary School so close to a known pollution hazard.
Concern that housing will be immediately adjacent to a known pollution zone.
Access to the site is via Gun Lane Railway Bridge, a bridge of limited width and height including a severe bend at the east side of the railway. Access through Stockens Green conservation area. Severe damage would be done to the surrounding area.
Drainage issues, these fields suffer from flooding on a regular basis from surface water created by the motorway.
The increase of traffic that would be created by the proposed Primary School would severely damage the surrounding area. Traffic would use the single track Gypsy Lane causing damage and deterioration to a lane of historical interest, which is earmarked for protection. Traffic congestion created by the additional vehicles of the Deards End proposal plus the Gypsy Lane development would be unmanageable at peak travel times.
Residents having no local employment will have to travel to work adding to the parking pressures at Knebworth Railway Station and the local streets surrounding the Station.
The added pressure on the already overloaded B197 in both directions.
Current traffic modelling is inadequate, recent road narrowing on the B187 at Woolmer Green has slowed traffic down and caused congestion. Roundabouts in South Stevenage cause congestion back to Knebworth as motorists cannot make progress due to heavy traffic coming from their right.
Concern about local services ability to cater for an increased population, no commercial opportunities have been planned, current businesses in Knebworth are limited.

I object to the development of the site KB2. If this site is developed, it will mean a loss of green belt land between the developments to the east of Gypsy Lane and the A1(M) which will be detrimental to the well-being of all its residents. The wide range of flora and fauna in this area will be seriously affected by the projected development.
This site is not suitable for development as it is adjacent to the A1(M) and therefore suffers from serious pollution of both noise and air quality.
There is a proposal to place a new primary school within the development. Even if all the new houses were to be built, there would not be enough primary aged children in these houses to fill a new school and therefore, children from further away would have to be brought in to fill the school, thus increasing the amount of traffic as parents drop their children off. It is also wrong to place a new primary school adjacent to the motorway, in what is regarded as one of the most polluted stretches of the road.
The current GP practice in the village is severely stretched. They try to do their best, but it is obvious to all that when you have to wait 10 days to get a routine appointment at the surgery, there is no room for further residents to be signed up. There has been a noticeable decline in the number of partners and the turnover of staff at the surgery over the last two years; it is hard to see that more staff can be recruited to deal with any more residents.
Sites KB1 and KB2 in Knebworth are both less well suited to development than other sites in the area through their lack of vehicular access. There are three access points across the railway, two under and one over bridges; as I use these bridges daily, I am only too well aware of the lack of space, each one is almost single track for vehicles and I often have to wait for a vehicle coming in the opposite direction to finish their manoeuvre before continuing. The pedestrian footpath under or over these bridges is only wide enough for one person, currently, pedestrians have to move into the road in order to pass each other. If the village were to increase by 31%, I cannot see how these access points would cope.
In the construction phase, which is planned to take 15 years, how will the construction vehicles access the sites when they too have to either pass under the railway bridges or access from Codicote down winding country lanes?
There is currently little direct employment within Knebworth, thus nearly all residents leave the village for work. Over the last year the traffic using the B197 has increased considerably. The journey to the A1(M) which used to take 5 minutes can now easily take 20 minutes at 7.40 a.m. I believe this to be because of the amount of school traffic, both private and school buses and the number of people joining the road from side turnings. If the number of homes in Knebworth is increased this road will become further blocked with health and economic ill results.

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.

My house was flooded 6 February 2014 from the surface water run-off from the land proposed for development. This was the third time this happened the first two times were near misses but no water came into the house. If houses are built no water will be able to drain away through the existing soil because of the tarmac on roads and pavements of the development.
The cars from the new homes will cause additional traffic through the bottle neck of the bridge in Gun Road and onto the early morning rush hour, which is horrendous.
The additional impact will be the removal of productive agricultural land, in a time of a larger population. This is also green belt land that is supposed to be protected. No matter which way you leave the proposed development your going to increase the movement of traffic from the other 3 sites on the plan and possibly impact the traffic by the railway bridges.
We are a village and wish to remain so.

The plan will remove the Green Belt buffer and affect the Stockens Green Conservation areas between Gypsy Lane and the A1M. Any houses built in this area will be subject to pollution from the busy A1M and this would also badly affect the health of any children who would be attending the proposed new school.
Access to the new development would primarily be through the Gun Lane Railway Bridge. This is a very narrow bridge supporting main line rail services to and from Kings Cross/ St Pancras but would create congestion during the construction of the new site, and also thereafter for the new residents.
The development would also be in an area where there has been a history of surface water flooding. The construction of new houses and infrastructure would exacerbate the problems.

No response has been given by the council to the concerns raised by residents regarding the inaccessibility of the site, the resulting congestion that would be caused both during building and from the resulting increase on traffic volumes. This would also be a danger to pedestrians due to the narrow railway bridge and insufficient footpath that is the only access from that side of the village to the high street, the school, the doctors and library and is also the only access from the other side of the village to the railway station.
Any large scale development would remove the buffer of Green Belt between the village and the A1(M), which is due to be widened, causing increased noise and air pollution.
The local area has been prone to flooding and the current agricultural use of the land has to some degree helped to mitigate this, removal of this would make the situation worse. There is nothing in the plan that addresses this point.

Green Belt — removal of Green Belt buffer between Gypsy Lane and A1(M)
* Impact of A1(M) — noise and pollution from A1(M) — proposed primary school site adjacent to A1(M)
* Gun Lane Railway Bridge — narrow bridge unsuitable for additional traffic. First hand witness of near fatality due to insufficient width of roadway and pavement beneath railway bridge
* E ect on Conservation Area — damage to character of Stockens Green Conservation Area
* Drainage issues — surface water flooding from A1(M)

land is likely to contribute to flooding problems. Local infrastructure is not properly considered for expansion

This development will entail the removal of land from the Green Belt. A school is proposed on land adjacent to the A1M which is soon to be widened. The site is unsuitable due to its proximity to the motorway and the attendant noise and air pollution.

The narrow railway bridge on Gun Lane is unsuitable for additional traffic and is hazardous for pedestrians at peak times due to the narrow footpath. see photo

Gipsy lane itself will face increased congestion at peak times - see photos

It is our view KB2 and KB1 should be treated as one development rather than the two currently listed. Positioning of the two sites and the issues relating to the two sites are the same.

We feel the number of dwellings proposed are too high for this location both in terms of their proximity to the A1M (its busiest sectiion between Junction 6 and 7, and the consequential impact on the village, its existing and future residents.

No account appears to have been taken for the number of vehicles each dwelling will have and the effect of this increase in the village.

Knebworth Village is already severely impacted by poor transportation planning, extremely heavy road traffic through the village and the peripheral roads. Access from KB2 to London Road and Stevenage Road will in the main be via Stockens Green/Gun Road and the narrow railway bridge or via Gun Lane to Station Road and the narrow railway bridge . The narrow access under the railway bridges which only allow for small cars to pass through both ways at one time will only lead to increased local traffic issues. More cars, more traffic, more pollution for the existing and new residents of Knebworth Village.

Knebworth Village is served by a relatively small railway station which also caters for commuters from surrounding villages and, also Stevenage. I understand commuter usage through Knebworth Railway Station had increased 70% in the last ten years. Access to the Railway Station is through Station Road/Park Lane. KB2 is going to contribute both further infrastructure and transportation problems to this area and for the future residents of KB2.

We also believe that KB2 is an assault on the Green Belt which has clearly contributed to the continuance of local fauna and flora in the area, contributed to defending, albeit on a small scale, the local environment from the impact of the increased traffic and the consequent pollution from the A1M.

The Green Belt has also been a significant barrier to coalescence between Woolmer Green and Knebworth. The approval of KB2 would make coalescense with Woolmer Green inevitable.

Schooling, health and social amenities will all be impacted by a development of this size. Primary schooling in the village is already stretched by both Knebworth children and children from other villages. The proposal provides for a Primary School in KB2, next to the A1M with its inherent noise and air pollution issues. This doesn't make sense.

Secondary schooling is non-existent and children travel to Stevenage or Welwyn Garden City for their continued education.

An increasing young population will only exacerbate what is already a poorly provided area. This Local Plan does not provide, in any coherent way, for this growth and the negative impact on the Village infrastructure, its residents, environment and local habitat.

While we are not, per se, against the building of new dwellings we believe the numbers proposed are significantly higher than the Village needs or can manage. This Local Plan for Knebworth Village in its current form is therefore unacceptable and should be significantly reduced or rejected.

This Local Plan must include a comprehensive review of the existing transportation links and whether it is future-proofed to sustain a development such as KB2. Nothing in this plan suggests it looks beyond the building of a high number of dwellings other than to meet a target and tick a box.

This site is east of the Stockens Green Conservation Area and the character of which would be affected by the amount of housing and traffic. Stockens Green railway bridge is very narrow and unsuitable for an increase in traffic. It is also Green Belt land,
Adjacent to the A1(M) which generates high levels of traffic noise and have a impact on the B197 which is used when the A1(M) is closed.

Increased pollution in an area already higher than average.
Increased risk of flooding from a high water table site with previous history of flooding.
Removal of green belt and further coalescence of villages (woolmer green/knebworth.
Local roads unable to support increased traffic.
Access roads pass under 3 dangerously narrow railway bridges (c14feet wide) with inadequate pavements.

Development of this site would cause a detrimental loss of the green belt and loss of openness and damage to the character of the village of Knebworth. There is insufficient local infrastructure to support this number of additional occupants of Knebworth and traffic in Knebworth would increase drastically which Knebworth cannot accommodate.

If this site is developed it will result in loss of the greenbelt and loss of openness of the greenbelt. It will also remove the buffer between Knebworth village and the A1M motorway.

Due the already over congested B197 at peak times during weekdays the suggestion to introduce 200 house on this site (potential 200 plus cars) and 600 houses in Knebworth generally (600 plus cars). The area is unsafe and unsound as a location for additional Housing. The strain will push the local community infrastructure (Doctors, Schooling and Railway Station) beyond breaking point.

Additionally, the only access point to this location is under or over very narrow railway bridges, which already poses a road safety risk for pedestrians.