KB2 Land off Gypsy Lane

Driving in the area is already difficult and increased traffic will make this worse. In addition the number of houses proposed will increase the size of the village considerably and no credible has been put in place for schooling/doctors (already nearly impossible to get an appointment). The current drainage cannot cope with heavy rainfall and additional housing will make this worse.

This site is on land adjoining, on its western boundaries, the A1(M). This presents three issues.

Firstly, any new housing sited next to a busy arterial Motorway is surely undesirable and subject to regulation and constraint on the ground of noise and air pollution. Would we want a Primary School (as proposed) playground within 400m of the Motorway?

Secondly, and more importantly, the Government has announced in 2015 the reinstatement of the Widening project for the A1(M) between J6 (Welwyn) and J8 (Stevenage North). Clearly additional land to the East and West of the current Motorway will be required to allow for the widening and this will no doubt encroach into the site. The details of the A1(M) widening will clearly need to be taken into consideration before the proposals for this site can be settled.

Finally, the creation of this site will remove the Green Belt buffer between the village and the A1(M).

Additionally, this site is designed to provide a new single entry Primary School of approx 250 pupils. There are 663 new homes proposed within Knebworth that will surly create more that 250 children of Primary School age.

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

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

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

The increased vehicle traffic from an additional 184 dwellings, will provide unwarranted congestion and danger to road user and pedestrians alike at these bridges.

Am concerned that this development is too large and near another proposed site, which will cause congestion and heavy traffic in an already busy area. The village is already at bursting point with health, education and transport and there is a chronic parking shortage.
There is a greater need for a secondary school as every child beyond 11 has to travel out of the village currently. Early years is not mentioned - where will children under 5 go in the future as there is no room at the present time in the village, to accommodate every child.

There is no strategic policy written for this proposal & does not identify any transport congestion mitigation measures.
The proposed site is surrounded by narrow deep roads which become congested with the smallest of road traffic.
The proposal would damage the character to Stockens Green Conservation Area and poses drainage issues; surface water flooding from A1 and land.
Any removal of Green Belt buffer would increase noise and air pollution to surrounding neighbourhoods.
The proposed development would pose a demand on the current over stretched village infrastructure; such as GP surgery, dental practices and the only primary school.

This is a current flood area. In the last heavy rains season people in Broom Grove and Orchard Way had some significant and considerable damage to their homes....some where moved out for over 6 months and others lost animals in garages and low floor levels due to the water. This was due to poor management of the water from the fields and A1M.....where will this water go if buildings are built. A flood risk for all developments?
A new school location has not be properly thought through. Near to a busy motorway with traffic, noise and air pollution.

As a doctor, I strongly object to the siting of so many new houses and a primary school on a site so close to a major road. The air quality will be poor, particularly when the wind is in the west, and on still days. Particulates and oxides of nitrogen cause excess cardiac and respiratory mortality; we know that people living close to major roads have reduced life expectancy, as a direct function of their proximity to the road.
I also don't believe that the development is sustainable, on grounds of additional traffic, railway bridges, drainage, sewage, and noise pollution.

My principal objection to the proposed development is the lack of suitable infrastructure in and around Knebworth. Access via the 3 railway bridges connecting Knebworth to the B197 is completely inadequate for the existing residents let alone an increased number of householders.

The size and density of the KB2 proposed site is not sustainable and insufficient consideration has been given to its environmental impact and accessibility. The site already forms an "appropriate, defensible Green Belt boundary" between Knebworth and the A1(M) motorway, which would be removed by this development. It also suffers from significant existing surface water flooding, including any run-off from the A1(M) which would increase after the proposed widening of the carriageway. Road access to the KB2 site is limited and difficult to expand, as it will create congestion at the insurmountable obstacle of the narrow railway bridge at Gun Lane. Furthermore, development of KB2 risks damaging the architectural and historic character of the adjacent Stockens Green Conservation Area, and extends the South and West boundaries of Knebworth risking coalescence with the neighbouring hamlet of Potters Heath.

After reading your recent proposal I am very concerned about the proposed 184 houses off Gypsy Lane. As a mother of two traffic around the village is already a huge concern for us which this proposal will accelerate. The village high street also suffers from traffic and inflicting a further intake of cars would be problematic. We would also lose the countryside setting and gives Knebworth its village character.

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 KB2 will remove the Green Belt buffer between the village and the A1. There will be a loss of countryside damaging the open landscape setting.
Plus, the width of the road under the railways is a problem.
Lack of draining/inadequate drainage is a problem too.

The land at KB2 is not a sound site as it is joined by a part of the A1 which is the most congestion and polluted part of the whole stretch of the A1.
Flooding from the proposed site often runs in to the houses in Orchard Way. The infrastructure around this site can simply not cope with more developments.
Gipsy Lane adding the site is a narrow lane which is already used as a cut through to avoid the congestion in the town.
Access to the site is limited by numerous bridges, making it inaccessible for large vehicles. These bridges are single lane traffic which already causes problems in peak times.
Gipsy lane does not have any footpaths for the current residents of the 7 houses on the lane, I can't see how it would be safe to add a further 184 houses without the infrastructure to support them.
Schools -
The proposed one intake primary school on KB2 is not sound as it is adjacent to the A1 and as such noise and air pollution will be significant. In 2014 the environmental audit committee issued a report stating that "a ban on building schools, hospitals and care homes near air pollution must be introduced to help cut the number of deaths connected to the invisible killer of traffic fumes. Taking away the greenbelt buffer between the A1 and the current Knebworth greenbelt boundary would in effect be a death sentence for many people.
A secondary primary school will also change the dynamic of the village and the current village school. It would create a divide in the community.
There is no proposal for a secondary school. Secondary allocation in the village is an issue for many parents years before they have to chose their options. Many families move from the village to gain better access to secondary education. Adding more homes and a primary school would only add to this problem.

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.

Site KB2 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 KB2 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).

An additional single form primary school is mentioned but not guaranteed. This would most likely be insufficient to cope with the numbers of extra children in the village. There is no secondary education provision.

Any development could impact on conservation areas and surface water drainage from the A1(M).

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

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.

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.

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.

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.