KB4 Land east of Knebworth

Again, perfect site, as long as the access roads and junctions to the main road (or a by-pass) are assured in the Plan.

One of the main objectives of Green Belts is to prevent the merging of settlements. Any expansion to the east (or indeed north) of Knebworth would impinge upon the already very small separation between Knebworth and Stevenage. In this case, KB4, the area of Stevenage would be Bragbury End.
Secondly there is the question of road access. Although I can find no reference to this thus far, There appears to be only one reasonable route: from Watton Road. To use Oakfields Road at the north end of the proposed site would both ruin the character of the road and also cause huge problems at the junction with the B197. To use Haygarth at the south end would similarly destroy the character of that road and add to the already chaotic traffic problems through the village. Should the development proceed then Watton Road would surely have to be widened, maybe even straightened, and again the issues of traffic at the Knebworth end must be addressed. Furthermore the problems caused during the construction period would be massive.
Although some issues concerning the village infrastructure are mentioned (eg school provision) long-standing problems with provision of medical and dental services, drainage and again traffic remain.

To build houses on a beautiful site which in Spring resounds to the song of skylarks, a fast fading breed, would be sad to say the least. However, I realise that this in itself does not constitute a reason for opposing the application. There is,however, a far more justifiable reaction to this proposal and that is the problem that Watton Road. The former is problematic already. Due to the nature of the turning, it is impossible to see any traffic exiting onto the Stevenage Road until it is almost at the junction. Coupled with this, cars have now started to park near to the junction - probably due to commuters having to park further from the station as a result of yellow line where previous parking was possible, so, if a car is coming towards the junction from Oakfields Road and a car turns in from Stevenage Road there would be nowhere to go. At present , although it is sometimes dangerous, the small volume of traffic generated in Oakfields Road is acceptable. However, given the added volume of traffic that would ensue due to the new housing, if this were to be the chosen exit from the new site, gridlock would happen. The alternative entrance/exit onto Watton Road would have exactly the same effect. Cars are parked on one side of the road and traffic calming systems render part of this road single lane. Heavier traffic in this road would also cause grid lock. Knebworth High Street is already problematic. Traffic unable to turn into or out of Stevenage/London Road would reender both roads impassable. This building cannot possibly go ahead as it would cause chaos to all roads in the centre of Knebworth.

I should be most grateful if you could take the time to look into this matter.

The Parish Council strongly objects to the development of this area principally because it is designated as Green Belt. The Green Belt performs two important functions on the eastern side of Knebworth. First, it prevents the encroachment of the village into the surrounding countryside. Second, it protects the gap between the edge of Stevenage to the north and east, thus preventing the coalescence of the two settlements. The existing development boundary is soundly defined on the ground, beyond which is open countryside.

The tract of countryside to the east of the village, on rising ground, provides a significant open landscape setting for Knebworth which would be compromised by the extent of the proposed development area. There are long views into and out of the village which add much to its overall character. The views from the village recreation ground are significant and would be severely restricted by the proposed development. Most of the KB4 land is actively-farmed and its loss to development would be contrary to the NPPF (paragraph 112), which seeks to protect the best and most versatile agricultural land.

The amount of traffic generated by the development would have an adverse effect on the capacity of the B197 route thorough the village. More locally, it would severely affect the character and capacity of Watton Road and Datchworth Road. Both these roads are narrow and winding and are damaged by "rat-running" traffic seeking to avoid congestion on the B197 and the A602, as well as the A1(M). This contravenes the Hertfordshire Local Transport Plan 2011 (LTP3), which seeks to protect rural roads. With the development of KB4, these problems can only get worse.

It should be noted that Watton Road is already problematic in that it is used as a "rat run". At the west end, it has been necessary to introduce traffic calming measures to slow traffic through the residential area. Old Lane was formerly heavily used by traffic seeking to avoid the village centre, but has now been closed to south-bound traffic.

In recent years there have been problems with excessive surface water flooding on the east side of the village. This will be exacerbated by the proposed housing development which cannot be overcome by SUDs alone. The problems of sewage disposal and drainage capacity have been summarised in the Parish Council's general representations on Knebworth.

No additional schooling is proposed for this site, but it is acknowledged (in paragraphs 13.190 - 13.194) that there could be a deficiency in school places, particularly if all four sites in Knebworth were developed. This would also apply to secondary education, which is not currently provided in the village. There is speculation about the provision of an "all through" school, but no concrete proposal. The District Council states (in paragraph 13.194) that it "will work with Hertfordshire County Council and the Parish Council" to provide "the most appropriate education solution for the site" but there is no firm plan and no guarantee of delivery.
There is already a problem with the provision of secondary education for Knebworth. Recently, there was an application to build a "free" school in the village but this was rejected by the Secretary of State at an early stage. There is clear evidence that he village is under-served in terms of secondary education, a problem which would be compounded if the proposed developments were to be include in the Local Plan.

My main objections to KB4 are the risks of coalescence with Stevenage due to the proposed removal of Greenbelt east of Knebworth where there is already little separation between East Knebworth and West Stevenage. There is also no assessment in the local plan or from HCC Highways on access arrangements to the KB4 site and the impact this will have on surrounding traffic and roads. Current access to the site either through Watton Road or Oakfields Road would require major redevelopment of these residential roads (Watton Road has already needed traffic calming measures because of its use as a shortcut to Stevenage) with a large impact on the already congested B197. The plan also makes mention for the potential provision of a secondary school/All Through School at this site which would again carry a large risk of increased traffic congestion and access problems. On this basis I do not believe this part of the plan is justified.

The northern part of this plot uses land that will narrow the gap between Knebworth and Stevenage.
Transport. The Knebworth-Watton road is already congested with parking and speed humps and chicanes.
Oakfields Road at the NorthWest corner of the plot is already congested with commuter parking with traffic over all the grass verges. This road has a narrow egress out onto the B197. There was a serious accident there last December.
This road also carries heavy pedestrian traffic, often children, into the Recreation Ground as well as to and from Stevenage

Any development east of Knebworth would demand a substantial and effective solution to dealing with the extra traffic generated, both vehicles and pedestrians/cyclists [cf SP7 a b c d]

Watton Road is at peak times already overloaded, due to the current volume of local and through traffic.

The current layout of Watton Road east of the junction with the B197 and west of Bell Close creates chronic problems for through traffic, because of traffic calming structures and on-street parking. More housing and services east of Knebworth will exacerbate the existing problem.

Motorists effectively increase the capacity at peak times by driving on the southern pavement in the built-up area. [cf T1 a]

This already presents a hazard to pedestrians (this is a walk-to-school route) and causes damage to property. This would certainly worsen. [cf T1 a dii]

This could be mitigated by examining whether the current blockage of the old Stevenage - Hertford Road is still justified (near Ranworth Avenue). That road was built to cater for heavier traffic flows, because it is a former trunk road. [ SP7 e]

Or by creating an effective new by-pass, with a new entry to the development area, between Watton Road near Old Lane and Stevenage Road north of Knebworth. Or by implementing a one-way system using roads such as Old Lane, Oakfields Road, Haygarth etc.

The plan for KB4 is unfeasible given the existing road infrastructure specifically Watton Rd and local land drainage issues. The development will over-look our house at ground level and 1st floor. It will ruin our view and remove our privacy. We will be constantly intruded upon with the commensurate increases of noise and loss of security. This will have an impact on our house price. KB4 will also erode the edge of the village between Knebworth and Stevenage. It is an unacceptable reduction and use of Green belt land. Watton Rd and Bell Close already suffer due to the amount of traffic that use Watton Rd as a route to and from Stevenage. If 200 homes are built Watton Rd and Bell Close will become an on-going traffic jam as these roads cannot be widen without the destruction of mature trees and pavements creating unacceptable health and safety issues for people walking into the village or accessing the recreation ground. This will further erode the character of the village. The traffic issue is particularly true in the rush-hour or any time of day when lorries or vans come down Watton Rd. The roundabout at the top of Watton Rd/London Rd will be constantly jammed. The infrastructure of the village cannot cope with the present volumes of traffic and this increase in the number of dwellings is unsustainable.

This site should be viewed in conjunction with the proposed development by Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council on the southern side of the same field. The southern boundary of this Metropolitan Green belt area is not clearly defined and can easily be breached: this valuable Green Belt land should not be used for housing and has been so defined in the North Herts Green Belt assessment. In addition, the traffic generated southwards along the B197 and through the adjacent village of Woolmer Green will be insupportable.

See attachment

See attachment

See attachment

See attachment

We are writing in objection to the proposed development site KB4 in Knebworth. We live in a peaceful country lane with little traffic and outstanding views of countryside (KB4) from our house.

We bought our house eight years ago with a view to raising a family in this lovely setting, which we have done up until now.

We would far rather have had the once proposed solar farm in our view than housing. We are totally opposed to any housing being built on KB4 especially on the field at Swangleys Lane end of Old Lane. This would absolutely ruin the beautiful view from our house and any houses on Old Lane.

Old Lane is exactly this - an Old Lane, narrow and quiet, one of the reasons we bought a house along it. I would strongly encourage anyone who thinks that this lane could fascilitate the development of KB4 to come and have a look at it. We are extremely concerned that the proposed housing would mean that Old Lane becomes a far busier road, bringing significantly more traffic and traffic noise. There is currently no pavement on Old Lane and as the road is narrow, cars have to pull over into the side to let oncoming vehicles pass by. A busier road would make it hazardous to walk to and from our house. A busier road would also make it far more hazardous for us to back our cars out of our driveway.

The only way Old Lane could be widened is by the removal of ancient hedgerow which runs along it, thus destroying wildlife habitat. We have often watched in delight foxes in the field opposite our house (KB4), by day and night in snowy weather. We enjoy seeing pheasants, hawks hovering and even an owl on and above the field.

I will also make the point, that not only is it important to protect this Greenbelt land as wildlife habitat, but also to protect its agricultural usage for arable farming.

We are completely against the proposed development on KB4. We do not believe that the proposed development plan considers the outstandingly beautiful countryside and wildlife habitat of KB4. We do not believe that the proposed development plan considers the people already living on Old Lane and the massive impact that the significant increase of traffic flow and noise, plus the great loss of countryside view will have. Old Lane would no longer be the lovely country lane it currently is and that people love it for.

Will practically join Knebworth to Bragbury End and Stevenage.

No mention of road access to this proposed development

Land will be removed from the green belt

Don't recall any of our district councillors canvassing for this type of development at their last election. It is undemocratic and Kafkaesque or Orwellian

Do not build on green belt.
Do not build any houses until the A1M is widened or Knebworth has a bypass.
The village is very often gridlocked, either due to A1M accidents or the build up of traffic from the traffic lights at Broadwater.
Please send your representative to the village on these occasions and see how poorly served Knebworth is when these happen.

Yes we need new homes but let's sort out where all the traffic is going to go first.
663 homes potentially over 1000 more cars.

1. KB4 added to the plan last year (this version). There was no consultation with residents which it not in line with housing policy. KB4 should not have has been added at this late stage, particularly as it's a key area of land that separates Stevenage and Knebworth.
2. 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 KB4 will remove the green-belt buffer between Knebworth and Stevenage, meaning there is danger of coalescence. 'Structural landscaping and planting to provide and / or reinforce Green Belt boundary to east' is not sufficient to prevent coalescence.
3. Access to KB4 is an issue. Both Watton Road and Swangley's lane are narrow roads and there is insufficient capacity to support traffic to and from 200 houses here. Swangley's lane is very wiggly and it can be difficult for two cars to pass in places and there are blind spots. Watton Road is already a commuter cut through - during rush hour the traffic is usually backed up to the edge of the village. This would become unbearable for the residents of Watton Road if traffic use on this road increased. The plan needs to include new, wider, access routes to KB4.
4. KB4 has long-standing drainage issues, resulting in surface water flooding problems, which the current plan does not address in detail.
5. Developing KB4 will also mean the loss of productive agricultural land.

I object to this development as it is on Green Belt land and will increase the likelihood of coalescence between Knebworth and Stevenage with the resulting loss of productive agricultural land. The roads between this site and the village centre are unsuited to any additional or heavy traffic. Commuters already park along Oakfields Road and Watton Road due to insufficient parking at the station. A serious accident occurred recently at the junction of Oakfields Road and Stevenage Road involving a lorry turning into Oakfields Road. It stopped abruptly due to both parked vehicles and an oncoming car. This resulted in a car, travelling south on Stevenage Road, colliding with the lorry and the driver having to be cut out. During peak traffic times, access from Oakfields Road on to the B197 is already difficult as the B197 is frequently used by drivers to avoid congestion on the A1(M). Any additional housing will aggravate the problem further with traffic building up on Oakfields Road and Watton Road and even longer queues occurring more frequently on the B197.

GREEN BELT - the presence of the fields between Knebworth and Stevenage, even though already a relatively narrow area, is vital to preserve the character of the village. The open landscape (and tree lined road by the water pumping station) are strong features of the area. The loss of these would not only change the character from rural to urban but also would include the loss of productive agricultural land.
The lie of the land would put the proposed buildings on the top of the skyline around the east side of the village.
The impact on the local lanes is significant. Watton Road is already used as a rat-run for commuters trying to get down to the Welwyn junction of the A1.

Contrary to the stated aim this proposal does nothing to reinforce green belt boundaries which are already well defined it simply moves the boundaries eroding the unique character of Knebworth and risking absorption into Stevenage. Wotton Road already struggles to sustain traffic demands peak times which will only increase. Wotton Road would have to be widened with the destruction of mature trees. The proposed density of houses is completely out of character with the immediate environment and the village in general. There would be loss of productive agricultural land. Surface drainage problems already in existence would increase.

Lack of capacity on Watton Road and Swangley's Lane for increased volume of traffice. There will be a loss of countryside and the open landscape setting. Knebworth will merge into Stevenage and the village identity will be lost.
The site KB4 has not previously undergone any consultation. This is against policy and verging on illegal.

Secondary schooling:
13.193 mentions an 'all-through' school. It uses the term 'possibly' and 'provides the opportunity to look at alternative approaches' .This is certainly nothing definitive.The developers would have no obligation to built a secondary school. It does not seem likely that a secondary school would be built; in fact there is not actually a shortage of secondary school places in Stevenage and so there would be no reason to provide a secondary school.

1) Traffic in the morning rush hour to A1M South Lack of capacity on Watton Road and Swanleys Lane and the high street.
2) Once down towards J6, already congested and already diverting through the Old Welwyn high street. Only get worse.
3) Loss of Green belt and danger of coalescence between Knebworth and edge of Stevenage
4) Impact on Local Landscape

This would mean the recreation ground would be boxed in by development; Knebworth would lose view from its main green space; when football matches are being played the field due for development provides an alternative venue for walking dogs or running. This also brings Knebwoth development closer to Stevenage (at Bragbury End) reducing the separation currently enforced by the green belt.

Summary of why the proposed plan fails on grounds of soundness
- KB4 site inclusion has had no community involvement; and the legal compliance of doing so is questionable
- Coalescence. The removal of green belt land will create an urban sprawl into Stevenage
- Green belt land. Removing green belt land runs counter to national policy and the land of KB4 is identified in NHDC's own studies as being a significant contribution; to the green belt; this contrasts with lesser green belt land which is not under proposal for development
- Infrastructure. The plan in its current form is uninformed and does not address significant local worries and realities with regards to how Knebworth would cope with a housing increase of 33%.
- Schooling (vague suggestions in the plan which are not mathematically sound)
- Doctors (currently at over capacity and the plan incorrectly says there will be a new doctors surgery; it will be a replacement surgery of the same size)
- Roads (KB4 will spans Watton Road, a road that is essentially a single track road due to on street parking; in addition parking in the village centre already creates significant congestion - traffic modelling; suggested in the local plan appears to be desktop in nature and does not represent reality
- Trains (peak commuter trains are under threat from a down grade in frequency and timing from the current operator. They are at full capacity already. A population increase of +33% with no provision for employment opportunities in Knebworth or surrounding towns will lead to the obvious result of increased commuters into London)
- Bridges (the rail bridges can not be changed - with a particular dangerous pinch point vulnerable to increased traffic)
- Alternative options. The plan is not positively prepared as it ignores the option of a new garden city, or a more eloquent solution of using land sufficient for 3,000 homes to the west of Stevenage; bizarrely this land has been removed from the green belt for development but is not under consideration for development in this consultation
 
Is the plan positively prepared? No, for the following reasons the plan is NOT und
1. No community involvement. Site KB4 has not previously been included as one of the sites which is a preferred option until this final plan. This is contrary to the Council's Statement of Community Involvement and therefore the legality of this site being included at all is questionable and it fails to meet the Legal Compliance criteria.
2. Residents have not been adequately listened to. This is demonstrated by the inclusion of site KB4 post the previous consultation document dated Dec-14. In the Dec-14 document the housing proposal was for 433 homes which contrasts to the current proposal of 663 homes. Given the objections formally submitted previously based on evidence including infrastructure deficiencies, I cannot see how the plan has been positively prepared to the point that the current proposal is for +53% more dwellings that the last consultation in Dec-14
3. Coalescence - Contrary to evidence in North Hertfordshire Green Belt Review - July 2016. On page 20 of this review, it states that Knebworth green belt is of the highest strategic importance; makes a significant contribution to Green Belt purposes, helping to prevent sprawl, merger and encroachment. It goes on further (page 42-43) to highlight again the significant contribution the green belt plays at site KB4 (e.g. 8b in the "Green Belt Review"), performing a vital separation function between Stevenage and Knebworth. Additionally land in this document (8c) which is site KB4 is cited as being an elevated position creat[ing] a sense of openness. The removal of this would permanently damage the landscaping of Knebworth to the east of the village and create a sprawl into Stevenage
4. The plan includes inconsistent information with regards to Knebworth. Knebworth is a village (both by feel for the residents and definition in the plan as a category A village). This is contrary to supporting documents to the plan, namely the North Hertfordshire Green Belt Review - July 2016. In this document, Knebworth is incorrectly defined as a town (2.1.11, page 9)
5. Infrastructure - the plan is not positively prepared as it fails to promote sustainable development as there is no reference to the infrastructure challenges Knebworth currently faces which will only accentuate with an increase in village size by 33%. See points 12 and 13 relating to infrastructure below.
6. Alternative solutions (West Stevenage) - there approach of North Herts District Council is not justified in the manner which it has discounted certain options which are both more viable, have fewer implementation challenges and would not damage the character or green belt of rural villages such as Knebworth. In the proposal Strategic Policy 8, paragraph 4.104 (page 50), the plan identifies an area of land west of the A1(M) and Stevenage which is "identified as a suitable location for a substantial urban extension to the town". It goes on to say that this site is being removed from the Green Belt and is to be safeguarded for future use. This area of land is sufficient for c.3,000 homes which would easily mitigate the imposition of extra housing on green belts of existing villages with in adequate infrastructure. Stevenage has much greater capacity to absorb more housing that Knebworth does
7. Alternative Solutions (New Garden City) - The North Hertfordshire New Settlement Study (Apr-16) concludes that a new Garden City will be required in Hertfordshire post 2031 but this has been left too late for consideration in this consultation. It is clear that the plan in its current form has not been positively prepared and should be withdrawn as it is not assessing the options that are both (a) the most viable; and (b) the least disruptive and manageable within the constraints of local communities. A new Garden City would be able to take account of the needs for highways, social and affordable housing, education, health and other transport infrastructure.
 
Is the plan justified? No, for the following reasons the plan is NOT sound
8. Green Belt - there are no exceptional circumstances in any of the evidence to justify the destruction of the Green Belt around Knebworth, particularly on site KB4 which is working agriculture land. By permitting this development, the very existence of the Green Belt through to Stevenage will be at risk. I see that this is setting a precedent for destroying the green belt and lacks any understanding of what a village like Knebworth stands for. It is a village with a clear and distinct rural boundary which is both green belt and working agricultural land. Opening this up to developers is only positive for the developers who will profit substantially and is to the detriment to all residents (new and existing) of the village. There is no infrastructure plan which is a disaster - see section below
9. Green Belt - land on site KB4 in North Hertfordshire's own North Hertfordshire Green Belt Review - July 2016 categorises the KB4 site as making a significant contribution to the Green Belt (pages 115 & 211, site ref 55, 56, 58, 211). The development of KB4 would break the boundary with Stevenage. It is therefore not justified or effective in line with the principles of Green Belt in the UK. It should be noted that of all the sites proposed in Knebworth, KB4 is the only site classified as making a significant contribution to the Green Belt, in contrast to the other sites that are classified as moderate. Notwithstanding this point, the development of any of the sites in Knebworth do not address the major infrastructure points raised below.
10. Fairness - the plan is proposing to increase the village size by 33%, a much higher rate than other areas in North Hertfordshire and also other areas that do not have infrastructure constraints like Knebworth does (healthcare and rail at capacity, road congestion, flood risk etc)
11. Economy and Town Centres - there is no provision for local employment in the plan for Knebworth, in fact there is the risk of reducing employment opportunities due to the removal of site KB3 into residential properties and the mitigations that will likely be required to limit parking in the village centre which will have a knock on effect onto the strength of the remaining retail businesses. It is clear that the majority of the population growth proposed (+33%) in Knebworth will work outside of Knebworth, placing greater pressure on roads and the station which is already at capacity for peak commuter services into London.
 
Is the plan effective? No, for the following reasons the plan is NOT sound
12. The plan lacks any coherent strategic approach between housing, cumulative development and infrastructure need to support growth and sustainability. Rather it appears to be a box ticking exercise so North Herts Council can claim to have met the requirements of National Housing Policy by having a plan. Whilst other developments in North Herts which have over 500 proposed new homes have the benefit of a Strategic Policy, this approach has not been adopted for Knebworth, despite 663 homes (a minimum) being forced on a community that already suffers from sub-standard and stretched infrastructure (see infrastructure below). This appears to be due purely to these homes being spread over 4 sites when in reality they are on 2 sites on east and west Knebworth which means that our community do not have a coherent Strategic Policy. Given the proposal in its current form has the number of dwellings increasing by 33% it would have been appropriate for Knebworth to have its own specific Strategic Policy which would have been able to address the challenges population growth in Knebworth will suffer from and therefore conclude in short order what the constraints are. Without this, there is the risk that piecemeal development leads to none of the infrastructure concerns being managed in a collective manner. Any Strategic Policy should cover:
a. Road access to the sites and the traffic implications
b. Educations
c. Parking implications (high street, Watton Road and Station parking)
13. The plan fails to address any of the crucial issues around adequacy of infrastructure which at present is very vulnerable and over stretched and would not be able to cope with an increase in the size of the village by 33%.
a. Roads - Roads and parking continue to be a major problem in Knebworth.
i. Knebworth is a rat-run used when the A1(M) is congested, for access to Welwyn Garden City and for access to South / East Stevenage / Hertford all of which takes traffic down Watton Road
ii. Watton Road (which will dissect KB4) - point 1. Watton Road is essentially a single track road from the mini roundabout through to the last house on Watton Road (number 49). It has speed bumps every 50-100 yards which funnel traffic into a single lane. In addition, cars are permanently parked on the north side of the road which makes it a single tracked road. The cars parked are a mixture of residents (who have more than 1 or 2 cars) and overflow onto the road, commuters using Knebworth train station and overflow from the recreational ground which houses a tennis club, bowls club, 2x play areas and 4 football pitches). As a consequence, the road is at all times log jammed meaning cars have to give way and drive on the pavement to pass each other creating a danger for young mothers and their children and elderly residents. I would welcome the Inspector to visit this road between the hours of 7-9am and 5-7pm to witness the volume of traffic and tailbacks this creates. I walk to the station in the morning and it is not uncommon for me to be walking much faster than the cars given the traffic.
iii. Watton Road (which will dissect KB4) - point 2. At the point where Watton Road becomes a country lane (past the entrance to Bell Close), it lacks central road markings demonstrating its unsuitability to carry more traffic and at speed. It has no provision for pedestrians or cyclists. It is already a dangerous stretch of road, hence the speed bumps were added in the approach into the village to limit speeds. It is also the access route for the crematorium meaning traffic volumes are high. KB4 is a highly unsuitable site to have incremental traffic and there is no evidence or planning proposed to address any of these issues meaning the plan as currently proposed is ineffective from the beginning.
iv. Other potential access points to KB4. As highlighted Watton Road is inadequate to service incremental traffic volume into KB4. Additionally, other roads into KB4 suffer from congestion and are inadequate. Swangleys Lane is not wide enough to cope with traffic from any new development. Haygarth is not viable to access B197 (London Road). Old Lane is too narrow and has already had measures to reduce its use enforced by changing the junction on to Watton Road to be one way. St Martins Road is a private road (no pavements) and traffic is accentuated in this area due to the School meaning tail backs are quite common. The replacement doctors surgery and redeveloped library on St Martin's road will only increase traffic in this area meaning any development of KB4 is not viable or effective based on accessibility.
v. Transport Modelling - the plan mentions very vaguely that there has been transport modelling and rather alarmingly states that said modelling does not identify any specific mitigation scheme requirements for Knebworth. I, and the rest of our village, find such as statement to be highly irresponsible. There are severe issues with the robustness of Knebworth's road infrastructure which should the village increase in size by 33% as proposed would become insufferable and increase the risk of accidents (or death) on the roads.
vi. High Street - The plan does highlight the high street as a pinch point and vaguely says that this could be resolved through managing short stay parking. This is inconsistent with other elements of the Strategic Plan which want to encourage employment and community in Knebworth. Without parking for the local businesses, they would have insufficient custom and would fail. This is quite a circular argument in the plan! Parking on the high street is only used for short stay parking and is essential to service local businesses.
vii. Railway underpass (Station Road) - This is one of the most dangerous pinch points in Knebworth where it is a single track road with only one very narrow pavement meaning pedestrians walking in opposite directions have to cross each other by stepping onto the road. The road width is only 4.5m, insufficient for two large vehicles so essentially it becomes a single lane. Road visibility on the approach to the tunnel is restricted due to the road alignment. For mothers with children and elderly residents it is already very dangerous. Having only one pavement through the tunnel requires multiple road crossings and associated danger with cars (often at high speeds) going to and from the station and village centre. The proposed sites at KB1, KB2, KB3 and KB4 would naturally divert traffic to this pinch point (as well as the High Street) creating greater volume of traffic, congestion and as consequence risk of accidents or death on the roads. The facts are that there is no mitigation for this, rather it is not effective for a village of Knebworth's size and historical infrastructure to house an extra 663 houses, an increase of 33%.
viii. Adjacent villages - the adjacent proposed developments in Codicote and Woolmer Green will also place additional pressure on Knebworth's roads and rail as it is used as a commuter station for other villages.
b. Rail (bridges)
i. The pinch point highlighted above cannot be mitigated given the cost and complexity of widening the bridges used to support the East Coast Mainline. The reality is that these will never be widened due to the complexity and the associated impact on train journeys (national and commuter) into London Kings Cross using this infrastructure. It is yet another reason why the plan is ineffective.
c. Rail (station capacity)
i. The station is already at full capacity for morning journeys into London. The fast journeys to London (0711 and 0811) are already standing room only with the platform full at these times with commuters. Current proposals by the train operator are to potentially reduce service numbers and remove these fast trains. The pressure on remaining services will therefore only increase, notwithstanding the impact of an extra 663 homes (+33% village size). The adjacent developments in Codicote and Woolmer Green will also place additional pressure on Knebworth's roads and rail as it is used as a commuter station for other villages. The plan is not effective in addressing this as there is no coherent linkage to rail infrastructure.
d. Doctors - the plan (paragraph 13.200) includes a misleading statement about a "new" doctors surgery. It fails to mention that this is a replacement doctors surgery to replace the current site on Station Road. This is highly misleading as the doctors surgery is already under immense pressure with GP appointment waiting times regularly 3-4 weeks away and often residents are directed to go to the Marymead Surgery in Stevenage as an alternative - an option which is not possible for those that are elderly or do not have a car. The site proposed for the replacement doctors surgery is already being challenged by local residents and there is clearly not enough room to develop this site any further to manage a population increase of 33% as currently proposed.
e. Schooling - Knebworth has one primary school and no secondary school, Secondary education provision is currently available in neighbouring towns such as Stevenage and Hitchin. The plan in its current form has a very limited and high level mitigation to the addition of 663 homes by suggesting a new primary school on KB1 and the even higher level notion of a possible "all through school" on KB4. Simple maths and assumptions based on 663 homes show that the lack of schooling would be a major issue. If one was to assume that there were 0.5 children per home from the ages of 4-11, additional children from the ages of 4-11 would be 331, based on classes of seven age groups at a primary school this would be 47 children per class. The statutory maximum number of children per class is 30 pupils; this highlights the huge black hole in this proposal on the inadequacy of schooling making the plan ineffective. This is not to mention the impact on the roads of additional school runs - see section above.
f. High Street Retail - Site KB3 is removing retail from the centre of Knebworth, which surely runs against trying to make Knebworth village centre a thriving centre.
g. Drainage - the plan has very vague statements that the Rye Meads wastewater draining facility near Hoddesdon "should" have sufficient capacity to handle all planned development within its catchment until at least 2026 and this downgraded to reasonable prospect for development through to 2031. This is clearly not an effective proposal for such as serious issue as water management and associated drainage. KB4 has specific issues with surface water drainage and often Watton Road looks like it is close to flooding.
 
Is the plan consistent with national policy? No, for the following reasons the plan is NOT sound
14. Consultation timeframe - this is the first time that KB4 has been included in any Local Plan as a preferred site for development. Including it now in this fashion with limited time for consideration and comment is out of line with standard national planning cycles and processes. As a result, NHDC could be sanctioned for not following agreed due process.
15. Green Belt - The development of land on KB4 would breach criteria set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (paragraph 80) in relation to the purpose of green belt land. These conditions include:
a. To prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another;
b. To assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment; and
c. To check the unrestricted sprawl of large built up areas
16. Coalescence - this is one of the main reasons for the existence of green belt land, in order to prevent neighbouring conurbations to merge and become an urban sprawl. The current local plan runs counter to this and essentially is sanctioning a north to south sprawl from Stevenage, through Knebworth into Welwyn Garden City and through to Hatfield. Green Belt land on site KB4 in North Hertfordshire's own North Hertfordshire Green Belt Review - July 2016 categorises the KB4 site as making a significant contribution to the Green Belt (pages 115 & 211, site ref 55, 56, 58, 211). The development of KB4 would break the boundary with Stevenage. It is therefore not justified or effective in line with the principles of Green Belt in the UK. It should be noted that there are other sites noted as a moderate contribution to green belt which have not been proposed for development.
17. Agriculture Land - KB4 is working agricultural land and is classified as good to moderate in the supporting documents. Development would impact the operation of Swangleys Farm which is a working farm with Swangleys Road the only road accessible to move heavy agriculture machinery and for heavy transportation to move crops to market. The removal of working good quality land is counter to national agriculture policy.
18. Landscape - Site KB4 in particular will destroy the landscape to the east of Knebworth and create an urban sprawl merging with Stevenage. If allowed to be developed it will dominate the sky line given the undulations in the land around Knebworth

Summary of why the proposed plan fails on grounds of "soundness"
- KB4 site inclusion has had no community involvement; and the legal compliance of doing so is questionable
- Coalescence. The removal of green belt land will create an urban sprawl into Stevenage
- Green belt land. Removing green belt land runs counter to national policy and the land of KB4 is identified in NHDC's own studies as being a "significant contribution" to the green belt; this contrasts with lesser green belt land which is not under proposal for development
- Infrastructure. The plan in its current form is uninformed and does not address significant local worries and realities with regards to how Knebworth would cope with a housing increase of 33%.
- Schooling (vague suggestions in the plan which are not mathematically sound)
- Doctors (currently at over capacity and the plan incorrectly says there will be a new doctors surgery; it will be a replacement surgery of the same size)
- Roads (KB4 will spans Watton Road, a road that is essentially a single track road due to on street parking; in addition parking in the village centre already creates significant congestion - "traffic modelling" suggested in the local plan appears to be desktop in nature and does not represent reality
- Trains (peak commuter trains are under threat from a down grade in frequency and timing from the current operator. They are at full capacity already. A population increase of +33% with no provision for employment opportunities in Knebworth or surrounding towns will lead to the obvious result of increased commuters into London)
- Bridges (the rail bridges can not be changed - with a particular dangerous pinch point vulnerable to increased traffic)
- Alternative options. The plan is not positively prepared as it ignores the option of a new garden city, or a more eloquent solution of using land sufficient for 3,000 homes to the west of Stevenage; bizarrely this land has been removed from the green belt for development but is not under consideration for development in this consultation
 
Is the plan "positively prepared"? No, for the following reasons the plan is NOT "sound"
1. No community involvement. Site KB4 has not previously been included as one of the sites which is a preferred option until this final plan. This is contrary to the Council's Statement of Community Involvement and therefore the legality of this site being included at all is questionable and it fails to meet the Legal Compliance criteria.
2. Residents have not been adequately listened to. This is demonstrated by the inclusion of site KB4 post the previous consultation document dated Dec-14. In the Dec-14 document the housing proposal was for 433 homes which contrasts to the current proposal of 663 homes. Given the objections formally submitted previously based on evidence including infrastructure deficiencies, I cannot see how the plan has been positively prepared to the point that the current proposal is for +53% more dwellings that the last consultation in Dec-14
3. Coalescence - Contrary to evidence in "North Hertfordshire Green Belt Review - July 2016". On page 20 of this review, it states that Knebworth green belt is of the highest strategic importance; "makes a significant contribution to Green Belt purposes, helping to prevent sprawl, merger and encroachment". It goes on further (page 42-43) to highlight again the "significant contribution" the green belt plays at site KB4 (e.g. 8b in the "Green Belt Review"), performing a vital "separation function" between Stevenage and Knebworth. Additionally land in this document (8c) which is site KB4 is cited as being an "elevated position creat[ing] a sense of openness". The removal of this would permanently damage the landscaping of Knebworth to the east of the village and create a sprawl into Stevenage
4. The plan includes inconsistent information with regards to Knebworth. Knebworth is a village (both by feel for the residents and definition in the plan as a category A village). This is contrary to supporting documents to the plan, namely the "North Hertfordshire Green Belt Review - July 2016". In this document, Knebworth is incorrectly defined as a town (2.1.11, page 9)
5. Infrastructure - the plan is not positively prepared as it fails to promote sustainable development as there is no reference to the infrastructure challenges Knebworth currently faces which will only accentuate with an increase in village size by 33%. See points 12 and 13 relating to infrastructure below.
6. Alternative solutions (West Stevenage) - there approach of North Herts District Council is not justified in the manner which it has discounted certain options which are both more viable, have fewer implementation challenges and would not damage the character or green belt of rural villages such as Knebworth. In the proposal Strategic Policy 8, paragraph 4.104 (page 50), the plan identifies an area of land west of the A1(M) and Stevenage which is "identified as a suitable location for a substantial urban extension to the town". It goes on to say that this site is being removed from the Green Belt and is to be "safeguarded for future use". This area of land is sufficient for c.3,000 homes which would easily mitigate the imposition of extra housing on green belts of existing villages with in adequate infrastructure. Stevenage has much greater capacity to absorb more housing that Knebworth does
7. Alternative Solutions (New Garden City) - The North Hertfordshire New Settlement Study (Apr-16) concludes that a new Garden City will be required in Hertfordshire post 2031 but this has been left too late for consideration in this consultation. It is clear that the plan in its current form has not been positively prepared and should be withdrawn as it is not assessing the options that are both (a) the most viable; and (b) the least disruptive and manageable within the constraints of local communities. A new Garden City would be able to take account of the needs for highways, social and affordable housing, education, health and other transport infrastructure.
 
Is the plan "justified"? No, for the following reasons the plan is NOT "sound"
8. Green Belt - there are no "exceptional circumstances" in any of the evidence to justify the destruction of the Green Belt around Knebworth, particularly on site KB4 which is working agriculture land. By permitting this development, the very existence of the Green Belt through to Stevenage will be at risk. I see that this is setting a precedent for destroying the green belt and lacks any understanding of what a village like Knebworth stands for. It is a village with a clear and distinct rural boundary which is both green belt and working agricultural land. Opening this up to developers is only positive for the developers who will profit substantially and is to the detriment to all residents (new and existing) of the village. There is no infrastructure plan which is a disaster - see section below
9. Green Belt - land on site KB4 in North Hertfordshire's own "North Hertfordshire Green Belt Review - July 2016" categorises the KB4 site as making "a significant contribution to the Green Belt" (pages 115 & 211, site ref 55, 56, 58, 211). The development of KB4 would "break the boundary" with Stevenage. It is therefore not justified or effective in line with the principles of Green Belt in the UK. It should be noted that of all the sites proposed in Knebworth, KB4 is the only site classified as making a "significant" contribution to the Green Belt, in contrast to the other sites that are classified as "moderate". Notwithstanding this point, the development of any of the sites in Knebworth do not address the major infrastructure points raised below.
10. Fairness - the plan is proposing to increase the village size by 33%, a much higher rate than other areas in North Hertfordshire and also other areas that do not have infrastructure constraints like Knebworth does (healthcare and rail at capacity, road congestion, flood risk etc)
11. Economy & Town Centres - there is no provision for local employment in the plan for Knebworth, in fact there is the risk of reducing employment opportunities due to the removal of site KB3 into residential properties and the mitigations that will likely be required to limit parking in the village centre which will have a knock on effect onto the strength of the remaining retail businesses. It is clear that the majority of the population growth proposed (+33%) in Knebworth will work outside of Knebworth, placing greater pressure on roads and the station which is already at capacity for peak commuter services into London.
 
Is the plan "effective"? No, for the following reasons the plan is NOT "sound"
12. The plan lacks any coherent strategic approach between housing, cumulative development and infrastructure need to support growth and sustainability. Rather it appears to be a box ticking exercise so North Herts Council can claim to have met the requirements of National Housing Policy by having a "plan". Whilst other developments in North Herts which have over 500 proposed new homes have the benefit of a Strategic Policy, this approach has not been adopted for Knebworth, despite 663 homes (a minimum) being forced on a community that already suffers from sub-standard and stretched infrastructure (see infrastructure below). This appears to be due purely to these homes being spread over "4" sites when in reality they are on 2 sites on east and west Knebworth which means that our community do not have a coherent Strategic Policy. Given the proposal in its current form has the number of dwellings increasing by 33% it would have been appropriate for Knebworth to have its own specific Strategic Policy which would have been able to address the challenges population growth in Knebworth will suffer from and therefore conclude in short order what the constraints are. Without this, there is the risk that piecemeal development leads to none of the infrastructure concerns being managed in a collective manner. Any Strategic Policy should cover:
a. Road access to the sites and the traffic implications
b. Educations
c. Parking implications (high street, Watton Road and Station parking)
13. The plan fails to address any of the crucial issues around adequacy of infrastructure which at present is very vulnerable and over stretched and would not be able to cope with an increase in the size of the village by 33%.
a. Roads - Roads and parking continue to be a major problem in Knebworth.
i. Knebworth is a "rat-run" used when the A1(M) is congested, for access to Welwyn Garden City and for access to South / East Stevenage / Hertford all of which takes traffic down Watton Road
ii. Watton Road (which will dissect KB4) - point 1. Watton Road is essentially a single track road from the mini roundabout through to the last house on Watton Road (number 49). It has speed bumps every 50-100 yards which funnel traffic into a single lane. In addition, cars are permanently parked on the north side of the road which makes it a single tracked road. The cars parked are a mixture of residents (who have more than 1 or 2 cars) and overflow onto the road, commuters using Knebworth train station and overflow from the recreational ground which houses a tennis club, bowls club, 2x play areas and 4 football pitches). As a consequence, the road is at all times log jammed meaning cars have to give way and drive on the pavement to pass each other creating a danger for young mothers and their children and elderly residents. I would welcome the Inspector to visit this road between the hours of 7-9am and 5-7pm to witness the volume of traffic and tailbacks this creates. I walk to the station in the morning and it is not uncommon for me to be walking much faster than the cars given the traffic.
iii. Watton Road (which will dissect KB4) - point 2. At the point where Watton Road becomes a country lane (past the entrance to Bell Close), it lacks central road markings demonstrating its unsuitability to carry more traffic and at speed. It has no provision for pedestrians or cyclists. It is already a dangerous stretch of road, hence the speed bumps were added in the approach into the village to limit speeds. It is also the access route for the crematorium meaning traffic volumes are high. KB4 is a highly unsuitable site to have incremental traffic and there is no evidence or planning proposed to address any of these issues meaning the plan as currently proposed is ineffective from the beginning.
iv. Other potential access points to KB4. As highlighted Watton Road is inadequate to service incremental traffic volume into KB4. Additionally, other roads into KB4 suffer from congestion and are inadequate. Swangleys Lane is not wide enough to cope with traffic from any new development. Haygarth is not viable to access B197 (London Road). Old Lane is too narrow and has already had measures to reduce its use enforced by changing the junction on to Watton Road to be one way. St Martins Road is a private road (no pavements) and traffic is accentuated in this area due to the School meaning tail backs are quite common. The replacement doctors surgery and redeveloped library on St Martin's road will only increase traffic in this area meaning any development of KB4 is not viable or effective based on accessibility.
v. "Transport Modelling" - the plan mentions very vaguely that there has been "transport modelling" and rather alarmingly states that said "modelling does not identify any specific mitigation scheme requirements for Knebworth". I, and the rest of our village, find such as statement to be highly irresponsible. There are severe issues with the robustness of Knebworth's road infrastructure which should the village increase in size by 33% as proposed would become insufferable and increase the risk of accidents (or death) on the roads.
vi. High Street - The plan does highlight the high street as a "pinch point" and vaguely says that this could be resolved through managing "short stay parking". This is inconsistent with other elements of the Strategic Plan which want to encourage employment and community in Knebworth. Without parking for the local businesses, they would have insufficient custom and would fail. This is quite a circular argument in the plan! Parking on the high street is only used for short stay parking and is essential to service local businesses.
vii. Railway underpass (Station Road) - This is one of the most dangerous pinch points in Knebworth where it is a single track road with only one very narrow pavement meaning pedestrians walking in opposite directions have to cross each other by stepping onto the road. The road width is only 4.5m, insufficient for two large vehicles so essentially it becomes a single lane. Road visibility on the approach to the tunnel is restricted due to the road alignment. For mothers with children and elderly residents it is already very dangerous. Having only one pavement through the tunnel requires multiple road crossings and associated danger with cars (often at high speeds) going to and from the station and village centre. The proposed sites at KB1, KB2, KB3 and KB4 would naturally divert traffic to this pinch point (as well as the High Street) creating greater volume of traffic, congestion and as consequence risk of accidents or death on the roads. The facts are that there is no mitigation for this, rather it is not effective for a village of Knebworth's size and historical infrastructure to house an extra 663 houses, an increase of 33%.
viii. Adjacent villages - the adjacent proposed developments in Codicote and Woolmer Green will also place additional pressure on Knebworth's roads and rail as it is used as a commuter station for other villages.
b. Rail (bridges)
i. The pinch point highlighted above cannot be mitigated given the cost and complexity of widening the bridges used to support the East Coast Mainline. The reality is that these will never be widened due to the complexity and the associated impact on train journeys (national and commuter) into London Kings Cross using this infrastructure. It is yet another reason why the plan is ineffective.
c. Rail (station capacity)
i. The station is already at full capacity for morning journeys into London. The fast journeys to London (0711 and 0811) are already standing room only with the platform full at these times with commuters. Current proposals by the train operator are to potentially reduce service numbers and remove these fast trains. The pressure on remaining services will therefore only increase, notwithstanding the impact of an extra 663 homes (+33% village size). The adjacent developments in Codicote and Woolmer Green will also place additional pressure on Knebworth's roads and rail as it is used as a commuter station for other villages. The plan is not effective in addressing this as there is no coherent linkage to rail infrastructure.
d. Doctors - the plan (paragraph 13.200) includes a misleading statement about a "new" doctors surgery. It fails to mention that this is a replacement doctors surgery to replace the current site on Station Road. This is highly misleading as the doctors surgery is already under immense pressure with GP appointment waiting times regularly 3-4 weeks away and often residents are directed to go to the Marymead Surgery in Stevenage as an alternative - an option which is not possible for those that are elderly or do not have a car. The site proposed for the replacement doctors surgery is already being challenged by local residents and there is clearly not enough room to develop this site any further to manage a population increase of 33% as currently proposed.
e. Schooling - Knebworth has one primary school and no secondary school, Secondary education provision is currently available in neighbouring towns such as Stevenage and Hitchin. The plan in its current form has a very limited and high level mitigation to the addition of 663 homes by suggesting a new primary school on KB1 and the even higher level notion of a possible "all through school" on KB4. Simple maths and assumptions based on 663 homes show that the lack of schooling would be a major issue. If one was to assume that there were 0.5 children per home from the ages of 4-11, additional children from the ages of 4-11 would be 331, based on classes of seven age groups at a primary school this would be 47 children per class. The statutory maximum number of children per class is 30 pupils; this highlights the huge black hole in this proposal on the inadequacy of schooling making the plan ineffective. This is not to mention the impact on the roads of additional "school runs" - see section above.
f. High Street Retail - Site KB3 is removing retail from the centre of Knebworth, which surely runs against trying to make Knebworth village centre a thriving centre.
g. Drainage - the plan has very vague statements that the Rye Meads wastewater draining facility near Hoddesdon "should" have sufficient capacity to handle all planned development within its catchment until at least 2026 and this downgraded to "reasonable prospect" for development through to 2031. This is clearly not an effective proposal for such as serious issue as water management and associated drainage. KB4 has specific issues with surface water drainage and often Watton Road looks like it is close to flooding.
 
Is the plan "consistent with national policy"? No, for the following reasons the plan is NOT "sound"
14. Consultation timeframe - this is the first time that KB4 has been included in any Local Plan as a preferred site for development. Including it now in this fashion with limited time for consideration and comment is out of line with standard national planning cycles and processes. As a result, NHDC could be sanctioned for not following agreed due process.
15. Green Belt - The development of land on KB4 would breach criteria set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (paragraph 80) in relation to the purpose of green belt land. These conditions include:
a. To prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another;
b. To assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment; and
c. To check the unrestricted sprawl of large built up areas
16. Coalescence - this is one of the main reasons for the existence of green belt land, in order to prevent neighbouring conurbations to merge and become an urban sprawl. The current local plan runs counter to this and essentially is sanctioning a north to south sprawl from Stevenage, through Knebworth into Welwyn Garden City and through to Hatfield. Green Belt land on site KB4 in North Hertfordshire's own "North Hertfordshire Green Belt Review - July 2016" categorises the KB4 site as making "a significant contribution to the Green Belt" (pages 115 & 211, site ref 55, 56, 58, 211). The development of KB4 would "break the boundary" with Stevenage. It is therefore not justified or effective in line with the principles of Green Belt in the UK. It should be noted that there are other sites noted as a "moderate contribution to green belt" which have not been proposed for development.
17. Agriculture Land - KB4 is working agricultural land and is classified as "good to moderate" in the supporting documents. Development would impact the operation of Swangleys Farm which is a working farm with Swangleys Road the only road accessible to move heavy agriculture machinery and for heavy transportation to move crops to market. The removal of working good quality land is counter to national agriculture policy.
18. Landscape - Site KB4 in particular will destroy the landscape to the east of Knebworth and create an urban sprawl merging with Stevenage. If allowed to be developed it will dominate the sky line given the undulations in the land around Knebworth

There was no local consultation on this proposed development, not consistent with national guidelines.

Green Belt land makes a significant contribution to protecting spaces between towns and maintaining the separate identity of Knebworth as a village - this area divides Knebworth and Bragbury End

As a resident of the local area I strongly object to this proposed development site for residential houses or additional schools on the proposed KB4 plans. Firstly the site suggested (KB4) is green belt land and more importantly the additional houses and residence that these houses will home, will add to the already overloaded traffic issues in Knebworth and the surrounding areas, at peak times during the day (8:00am - 9:30am, 3:00pm - 3:30pm and 5:00pm - 6:00pm). The site KB4 (alone) will likely feed at least 200+ more cars each day onto the B197 via either, Watton Road; St martins Road, Swagleys Lane or via single track country roads into Woolmer Green directly via; New Road or Bragbury lane/Bury Lane. All of which are already congested at peak times mentioned above. The Watton Road route is only passable by one car due to residential parking on one side of the road. The St Martins route is very congested, as it feeds both left and right onto the B197, which is normally at a standstill at peak times as traffic struggles to move through the High Street. The Swagleys Lane route directly passes the local JMI School and at 9:00am and 3:15pm for 10-15 minutes either side of these times there are several hundred children and parents on the very narrow footpath leading to the main B197 road (very often pedestrians have to walk onto the road to pass each other). The other two routes onto the B197 via Woolmer Green are both down very narrow country lanes, which are at most places not suitable for two normal width cars to pass each other and additional traffic on these routes will likely be unsafe and a potential for traffic collisions. The knock on effect of additional traffic will also drastically affect neighbouring villages such as Woolmer Green, Datchworth and Oakland. From 7:30am in the morning Knebworth, Woolmer Green and Oaklands already see backed up traffic to the A1 on a regular occurrence. Aside from the severe issues additional cars will cause the infrastructure of the village is already at capacity with schooling and doctor's surgery. Any additional commuters using the Knebworth railway station will also be an issue, as parking at the station is at a premium, with nearby residential roads already overloaded with parked cars. It would seem clear that none of these issues have been taken into consideration when proposing KB4 as a potential site for additional housing.

We are concerned that these 200 extra homes will have a determential effect on Early Years provision and the community spirit in the village. Although it has been mentioned that a school would be built, there is no mention of Early Years and we currently are operarting at full capacity until 2018.
Another issue is how the medical needs will be met as although plans have already been made to build a new surgery in St Martin's Road. this was before the propsed 600+ housing.

Housing for housing sake is not planning policy it is a meeting of targets rather than joined up thinking.

Knebworth boundary should be respected rather than merging further towards Stevenage and the loss of Agricultural and green belt land should be avoided.

Surface water and drainage is problematic and therefore development is likely to be less viable.

The KB4 site appears to have been added very recently without any apparent community involvement. Part of it appears to have been added in 2015 allowing for 55 dwellings, however it has now in 2016 been increased to 200 dwellings. The reason for its earlier omission is not clear, but would seem likely to be due to its total unsuitability for development as outlined below:-
1 The site is Green Belt for the obvious reason that Stevenage is less than 1 mile away. Accordingly the proposal would not appear to be legally compliant as there are no exceptional circumstances outlined in the plan for removing this part of the Green Belt.
2 The site appears to involves building on one of the three fields which separate Knebworth from Stevenage. This would appear to be totally against the whole principle of Green Belt which is surely to stop the creation of continuous urban development. If built on, this gives further ammunition for further developments on the next field, when future planning reviews occur irrespective of the suggestion of strengthening the proposed new Green Belt boundary.
3 Anyone who lives in the vicinity or drives down Old Lane will know that with the slightest rain, due to the topography and no doubt underlying geology, part of Old Lane routinely is flooded with the slightest rain.While there is a mention that this will need addressing no thought has been put into the magnitude of the problem.
4 Watton Road and Swangley's Lane are indeed lanes. Two vehicles approaching in opposite directions, if any larger than small cars, cannot in general pass each other without one stopping or slowing down considerably. Furthermore the bends in Watton Road coupled with the narrowness contribute to accidents.
5 A significant access road to KB4 is via St Martin's Road. It is planned for the Village Doctors surgery to be located here which will increase traffic flow issues down the narrow initial part of the road by the Church which is already under stress at school drop off and pick up times. No consideration has been made for the increase in traffic here if KB4 is developed.
6 The fields in question are agricultural land heavily used for farming purposes which is surely helpful for the English economy.
7 The proposed housing would no doubt use the space occupied by allotments accessible by the footpath leading South from Watton Road. I understood allotments were not meant to be built on apart from in exceptional circumstances.
8 The site will impinge heavily on the natural country side of the area which provides good walking areas for the population of Knebworth and South Stevenage to enjoy the open countryside. In an era of increasing obesity discouraging exercise through the taking away of local open countryside, which may lead to inhabitants resorting to cars to take them to such areas, should surely be discouraged.

In conclusion I consider that:-
a It is not legally compliant due to its failure to show exceptional circumstances for destruction of Green Belt.
b It is not positively prepared with no significant consideration of infrastructure demands
c It is not justified as there are other areas recognised by the Council with less development constraints.
d it is not effective as the infrastructure demands are such that development is unlikely to be considered viable and certainly not for affordable housing which is required.
e It is not consistent with National Policy with regard to the destruction of critical Green Belt