WY1 Land south of Little Wymondley

Most of the issues are well handled and sensible requirements are included. My main concern, other than the large size of the development in what is a small village is the risk of flooding downstream of the development. While I agree that SUDs and other measures should limit the risk, the issue remains that the current stream is already inadequate, constrained by high banks and often blocked by debris and rubbish. Therefore one necessary task which should be included in the plan is to ensure that the watercourse is restructured and properly maintained. This should be included as one of the obligations of the development.

Living very close the proposed development and being a commuter out of the village I see the detrimental effect local traffic has on the village at peak times. The plans do not seem to take into account the access from the village onto the A602 and how this could be improved/ impacted by the additional 300 homes. This would massively increase traffic through the village and impact on access to and from the village - and potentially cause a real risk through dangerous junctions. The size of the village will be almost doubled by this development and will lose its appeal and potentially affect house prices detrimentally. Also local access to the school for villagers would be affected by doubling the demand to the school without proper planning.
Currently there is limited public transport and footpaths to the village and safe passage to nearby shops is via several dual carriageways. None of this seems to have been factored into the plans.
Much of the area also seems to take over green space within the edges of the village and this would be a real loss to the village and people living here.

See attachment

WY1 is partly on an old landfill site. The landfill site was in operation before there were any record kept of what was dumped there. The land is toxic/contaminated and you can not build WY1 on an unsafe old landfill site.

Additional consideration needs to be made on the additional traffic onto the A602 Wymondley Bypass. The A1(M) junction 8 roundabout is grid locked at peak times and the addition of further traffic from the new housing needs to be allowed for, especially in conjunction with the plans for development from Stevenage around the junction. Also the Ashbrook junction with the A602 is hard to join the A602 when leaving Wymondley, as such traffic goes through Great Wymondley to enter Hitchin. Great Wymondley has a protected planning status, but the historic buildings will be impacted by the additional traffic.
There has been a long term local campaign to provide a village hall in Little Wymondley. The additional housing adds to this requirement further and provision should be made to include this in the plans.
No provision is mentioned for the planned development area to determine the impact of removing the Green Belt land on wildlife.
Further provision should be included for safe children's play areas and significant green space and gardens in keeping with a village setting. Whilst the plan includes provision for keep some existing trees, a 1 for 1 replanting scheme should be included to replace trees that are removed since significant areas of the development area are currently wooded. This will aid with countering air pollution and maintain a village character.
The plan does not state that the development should offer affordable and/or social housing, including housing being made available for people who have grown up in the parish. Housing should also include properties suitable for retired people from the parish, particularly those with mobility requirements.
Provision should be included that properties should not be more than 3 stories high, to keep in with the character of the existing properties.
Additional provision needs to allow for installation of super fast broadband, since the current infrastructure cannot cope with the demands of the current village.

I write to express my concerns regarding the planned housing development on green-belt land in Wymondley parish. As a resident of Wymondley Parish, I feel that this development will lead to unsustainable levels of traffic and heightened congestion within the parish, not to mention increased pollution and an increased risk of flooding. The impact on schools will also be considerable; I have first hand experience of the schooling crisis in the region, having been unsuccessful in attempt to get my child into a local school, and having had little or no support from North Herts District Council.

This development should only proceed if these concerns, and those raised by local residents, have been addressed; to date, I have not received any notification that they have and as such have no confidence in your plans.

The Wymondley Parish council & Action Group has informed us of the NHDCs plans for an additional 300 homes in Little Wymondley. This is a matter that I am strongly opposed to this based on the unprecedented number of additional houses proposed which would essentially double the size of our rural village.

Asides from the glaringly obvious point that the proposed location is Green Belt land (which can't just be re-classified as 'Urban Open Land' to suit ones needs) there are a multitude of infrastructure shortcoming. These include road access, broadband, mains gas (I'm on an oil fired burner) schooling, convenience shops, parking, recreational sites etc.

As a village, we manage with what we have and I'd suggest on the whole, we have what we need to live very happily. This however would not be the case with the addition of another 300 homes. Asides from the obvious increases in population, cars (and associated pollution); the main factor for consideration are the erosion of our living space, countryside and our identity as a small village.

It's not just the Green Belt fields that the 300 x houses will occupy that need to be considered; it's the fields that the larger school will need to go on, the fields that will have to have a road(s) carve their way through, the fields that accommodate the new corner shop, the fields that need to be taken up for utilities infrastructure, the fields for a new playground for the families that will be moving in, the fields that additional parking for the village etc.

It's not just 300 x homes, it's everything else that comes with doubling the size of a rural village, on Green Belt land, in a high flood risk area!

Asides from all of the above points (as if this isn't reason enough) there is also the very valid point of urban sprawl on a tiny cluster of villages between the towns of Hitchin & Stevenage. We are seeing a significant attack on our rural space, be that from housing or proposals for solar energy farm sites. This housing proposal is eroding the very core of village life in North Hertfordshire and genuinely damaging the character of the affected villages. If this sort of application process continues for housing, it shan't be long before the towns of Hitchin and Stevenage amalgamate into one and totally erode away some of the most idyllic countryside in North Herts.

Please consider the lives we work so hard to live before financial gain and 'box ticking' exercises.

I object to this development in it's entirety.
1) the land is all green belt. Yet NHDC have failed to specify what exceptional circumstances exist to justify building on greenbelt. So this plan and site is in breach of the NPPF, plus Little Wymondley used to be an excluded village because of it's standing inside the greenbelt, I do not understand why NHDC want to change this?
2) The green belt here has been established and govt says green belt is permanent - there is no justification to build here when all brownfield sites in Hertfordshire have not been exhausted in this plan.
3) the greenbelt at this site helps prevent urban sprawl and the risk of the towns of Stevenage and Hitchin merging into one town, whereby Little Wymondley, the village, would then simply be an area of a mega-town, and not a village anymore
4) The development on this site and the removal of green belt does NOT have the support of the local people, 92% of those who responded to the Neighbourhood plan survey said they want to protect the green belt and would accept 50 homes or less, not 300+
5) Inappropriate - the proposed development of 300+ houses is inappropriate in a village of just 340 dwellings, and where there is an enormous sense of community and safety. An almost 100% increase dwellings would destroy the character and ambiance of the village and lead to a reduction in the quality of life for its residents. A development of this size would not integrate into the existing village and social cohesion would be lost. 50 houses or less would have a chance to integrate into the village and enhance village life, not destroy it.
6) Flood risk - Little Wymondley is classed as a high flood risk area but the Environment Agency. Whilst the plan acknowledges this, and says they would have to make sure the new development would not exacerbate flood risk, it is bound to, as the flooding is largely caused by water run-off from the fields, and once built on this, water that is currently absorbed by the fields would have nowhere to go expect downhill onto Stevenage Road and this would cause more flooding. There must be other sites in the NHDC are which do not have such high flood risk and can be built on? This risk is massively increased when you consider that the proposed site NS1 is also building on a flood risk area and on the area where the water course known as Ash brook also runs through, further increasing flood risk onto Junction 8 of the A1(M) and into Little Wymondley. Plus, Stevenage Borough Council's plan also includes building an industrial estate on Stevenage road, on a field which is a flood plan, which will push even more water into Little Wymondley and cause it to flood. Until NHDC can specify exactly how they will remove the flood risk the site WY1 should be removed from the plan - indeed, Hertfordshire County Council commissioned a report into the flood of February 2014, and yet have yet to do anything to address the issue.
7) Questions over whether the site is contaminated land due to it's historic use as a land fill site - what investigations have been done to test the ground and ensure it is even safe to build on??
8) This proposed site does NOT have the support of the local people of the parish, who stated they wanted 50 houses or less.
9) This proposed site is NOT catering for a local need - there is not a local need for 300+ houses. Most local need is for retirement bungalows, so that the older generations can stay in the village and continue to have their beloved gardens, but free up family homes for the younger generations. There are not 300+ households in the Parish looking for a retirement bungalow.
10) Air quality/pollution - the village was bypassed in recent history with the building of the A602 Stevenage to Hitchin bypass. This was to make the main road through the village safer and also to improve our air quality. Building and additional 300 homes, potentially adding another 600 cars to in village traffic, would negate a lot of the good done by building the bypass, especially when considering that the junction 8 of the A1(M) is already grid-locked at risk hour - additional traffic would increase the traffic volume and standing traffic in the village, polluting our air and causing more health issues for residents.
11) Related to point 10 is the potential of this development to add to commuting misery of those of working age in the parish. Journeys are already slow at rush hour. Combined with Stevenage Borough Council's plan to close a key arterial route through the town and to also cause queues going into 2 rather than the current 8 car parks at rush hour, which will cause grid-lock, additional local traffic in the village as well could see journey times from Little Wymondley increase from 15-20 minutes to an hour plus - and it's only 3 miles away!! The resident's survey of 2015 showed that traffic management was a major concern of most residents.
In summary, this development is in conflict with the NPPF and the wishes of the of the local people - it is also in conflict with creating sustainable transport solutions, and would instead make the existing problems of the A1 and junction 8 much worse. It also has the real potential to ruin the lives of many residents with more frequent and more severe flooding of their homes on a more regular basis.

We have no concerns with this site being allocated providing our previous recommendations are addressed. We previously mentioned that there was Potential contamination from previous uses (farmland) but the requirement for a Preliminary Risk Assessment has not been included within the policy text. While all the proposed development is in Flood Zone 1, you are aware that there is significant Surface water and fluvial flood risk to the proposed access (Stevenage Road) to the site. With this in mind you should strengthen the policy by specifying the need for a site-specific Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) as we previously mentioned

We moved into Little Wymondley three months ago and was appalled recently when we received a pamphlet about the proposed plan to build 300+ houses and infra-structure. We totally oppose this proposal and list below the reasons why it should not go ahead.

1. The whole purpose of GREEN BELT is to stop towns and villages merging into each other. The UK has always been known for its individual towns and villages and more and more proposals to use GREEN BELT will destroy the villages as we know it.

2. Every morning and evening the A602/Dual Carriageway cannot cope with all the traffic either going into Hitchin or on its way to Stevenage or A1. It goes without saying that the extra volume of traffic created by this new proposed development would have serious consequences and cause gridlock. Little and Great Wymondley are already being used as a 'rat run' between Stevenage and Hitchin and beyond. Having lived in the area all our lives we have seen a dramatic change in the volume of traffic locally.

3. Little Wymondley has a history of flooding. A development on this scale would only increase the danger.

4. It has also come to our attention that there is a proposal to build 23 gas turbine electrical generators (power station) adjacent to the transformer already in Little Wymondley.. This would cause further pollution and unacceptable noise. Little Wymondley is already surrounded by noise from traffic and trains. Adding to this would be totally unacceptable.

5. All GREEN BELT is vitally important for wildlife and maintains the beauty of the countryside. It would be a travesty to destroy it. Once it's gone it's gone!!!

I am writing to express grave concerns over the proposed development WY1.
The proposed addition of 300+ houses will have a detrimental effect on the village, virtually doubling the size bringing further disruption, doubling traffic, greater noise, high pollution on already congested roads particularly in the rush times, taking up land which currently holds water resulting in further flooding in an area already known to flood.
The proposal did not reassure me that the points had been considered, Hertfordshire County Council's own report in February 2014 stated that the food risk for Little Wymondley has increased I cannot see how adding further house will reduce this risk.
The additional pressure on local roads with pressure through the village will be unmanageable. During the past month there was an incident on the Hitchin by-pass and traffic was coming through the village at 6.30 in the morning it was virtually impossible to cross the Wymondley road to walk the dogs, if the traffic was increased this would be every morning.
I have little faith that road systems and flood management will be given the right support to make sure that these issues are addressed and before any further development these are the issues that need to be clearly dealt with.
I also feel that green belt was set up for a reason, to make sure that our green spaces were protected, to ensure that future generations could benefit from green spaces and good quality air.
The decision to suddenly decide that this is not important is quite staggering we need to make sure that all other options have been looked at. The sheer number of houses proposed leads itself to seriously looking at the possibility of a new garden city, rather than create further problems in local communities.
I sincerely hope that this proposal is not taken forward, Hertfordshire need to protect local communities, listen to local people and keep Hertfordshire healthy for future generations.

Policy Sp1 - Sustainable Development in North Herts Building 300 plus houses onto a village of 340 properties is not meeting in a sustainable way the needs of the residents of Wymondley. It brings with it issues of coalescence.
There does not appear to be in place any infrastructure, support plans or funding which would be needed to support a development of this scale.
The council has produced no evidence of exceptional circumstance to build on the Green Belt. They have unused Brownfield sites and non- Greenbelt sites available.
A development of this scale with hard surface run-off, particularly from roadways, will increase the flood risk in Little Wymondley which has a recent history of significant flooding.

Policy Sp 5 - Countryside and Green Belt This supports the principles of the Green Belt. The council has not, we believe, demonstrated or justified removing land from the Green Belt to make it available for building.

Policy Sp 6 - Sustainable Transport
The local area is already prone to gridlock on a daily basis in the rush hour and any minor delay can be the trigger.
The junction in Great Wymondley is identified by the council themselves as a particular problem. It already it has extremely high levels of 'rat running' as the Neighbourhood Plan traffic data confirms.
The local country lanes cannot simply be widened as this would destroy the rural nature of the parish.
The situation is made worse by the inability of the A1M to cope with the volume of traffic, forcing motorists to use alternative routes through the villages.

Policy Sp 8 - Housing
A 100% increase in the size of Little Wymondley housing stock is disproportionate to local needs as confirmed by the Neighbourhood Plan.
Hitchin on the other hand is just being asked to have a 10% increase!

Policy Sp 10 - Healthy Communities
Removing existing Green Belt land seems to be at odds with the policy statement to protect, enhance and create new physical green infrastructure to foster healthy lifestyles.
The levels of airborne pollution on the A602 already regularly exceeds the legal limits at the Air Quality Monitoring Point and is already one of the worst in the county. Additional traffic can only make the situation for the residents.

Policy Sp 11 - Natural Resources and Sustainability There is no budget to address the issue of the collapsed culvert in Stevenage Road which contributes significantly to flooding risk.
The drain clearing programme is ineffective and also adds to the flooding problem.
The SuDs regulation would not cover all aspects of a potential large scale development and hard surface run off would again contribute to potential flooding. The EA flood maps also shows the potential for water run off from the south of Stevenage Road.

Site WY1

The surface water movement through Little Wymondley is a major issue and there is currently no structural plan or adequate financial commitment to address this issue satisfactorily .
Currently surface water runoff from agricultural land to the north of the village and downstream water from Corey's Mill is sufficient to create flooding of properties in Stevenage Road Little Wymondley as has happened historically.
There is not just the problem of surface water runoff from the possible additional building in Little Wymondley but the construction of hundreds of houses in the upstream catchment area on the eastern side of the A1M with its associated runoff.
Additionally plans by Stevenage Borough Council to build an industrial complex directly on the flood plain at Corey's Mill will make the situation even worse.
Downstream at Nine Springs at the bottom of the Wymondley Road a greater flow of water will create a significant additional flood risk to properties bordering the stream culvert.
A practical and funded solution must be found for these problems before any commitment to further building is given the go ahead.

In Conclusion:-
The Wymondley Neighbourhood Plan states the residents' acceptance for housing need but that it must be on a manageable scale.
The Plan also clearly states opposition to building on Green Belt land which provides space between the area's villages and towns thus preventing urban sprawl eliminating the rural nature of a North Hertfordshire.
Clearly the traffic and flooding issues of the area need to be resolved before consideration is given to any substantial house building.
A retrospective approach with the traffic gridlocked and flooded properties in the area is not the way forward.

I would like to express concerns and to object to the planning proposal.

Little Wymondley is a pretty, small village. In order to retain this beautiful village status I must object to the 300+ homes that planners wish to engulf our village.

Having moved from Stevenage, looking for the village life, I do feel the whole village way of life will change when increasing the size massively.

If this is allowed to proceed then village boundaries will cease to have any meaning and the traditional village will be engulfed by new modern houses, that are not in keeping with our beautiful quiet village.

I strongly object while understanding the need for new houses. Councils MUST look at alternative options within existing towns and cities, unused land and upgrading of existing land more suitable.

I do hope my concerns are duly noted.

I am writing to express grave concerns over the proposed development WY1.
The proposed addition of 300+ houses will have a detrimental effect on the village, virtually doubling its size. The effect this will have will be devastating, doubling traffic, greater noise, high pollution on already congested roads (particularly in the rush hour) and building on land which would currently hold water, the result of which would increase the flooding in an area that already has regular flooding.
The proposal does not reassure me that any points have been thoroughly considered. Hertfordshire County Council's own report in February 2014 stated that the flood risk for Little Wymondley has increased and adding further houses will increase it. This will probably increase insurance premiums to unaffordable levels for a lot of residents.
By adding 300+ houses you are potentially adding 600+ cars using the already limited road structure within the village. At present between the hours of 07:30 to 09:30 and 16:30 to 18:30 it is extremely difficult, and at times impossible to drive out of the village at either end onto the major roads, i.e. The A1(M) roundabout at the Stevenage end and The Stevenage Road on the Hitchin end due to extreme traffic congestion. The A1(M) roundabout has no traffic lights for the Little Wymondley Junction and due to the constant jumping of Red lights at other points on the roundabout there is never a gap to pull into if you are turning right or going straight on and at the Hitchin there is a constant stream of traffic making it extremely difficult to turn right, both of these create risks, and have sometimes led to accidents. The additional pressure on local roads, especially through all the local villages, will be unmanageable. Recently there was an incident on the Hitchin by-pass and traffic was coming through the village at 6.30 in the morning it was virtually impossible to cross the Wymondley road to walk the dogs, if the traffic was increased this would be every morning. A second incident on the A1(M) when a van caught fire created long tailbacks through Little Wymondley. There is further planned industrial development and housing development by SBC and NHDC (Graveley proposals) around the A1(M) roundabout (junction 8), which will further increase traffic and flooding problems.
I have no faith that road system and flood management will be given the right support to make sure that these issues are addressed. I also feel that green belt was set up for a reason, to make sure that our green spaces were protected, to ensure that future generations could benefit from green spaces and good quality air.
The decision to suddenly decide that this is not important is quite staggering and we need to make sure that all other options have been looked at. The sheer number of houses proposed leads itself to seriously looking at the possibility of a new garden city, rather than create further problems in local communities. I understand you are already aware of a suitable area of brown belt land for this purpose which would more than cover the future needs. Why have we not seen any plans for this alternative?
92% of the local residents are against this proposal and have raised genuine reasons of extreme concern, yet you still appear to be seriously considering going ahead with this proposal. I can only assume that you are not listening to your residents.
I sincerely hope that this proposal is not taken forward, Hertfordshire need to protect local communities, listen to local people, and keep Hertfordshire healthy for future generations.

Re site WY1
I am in agreement with the Wymondley Parish Neighbourhood Planning Forum (WPNPF). I believe a new garden city should be built in Hertfordshire to accommodate housing needs. I also believe that the infrastructure needs off the proposed development have not been adequately addressed and there is a genuine serious risk of additional increased flooding if these plans go ahead.

Comments Re-Site WY1 of the NHDC Local Plan.
Traffic:
Is it reasonable to assume that NHDC has conducted a traffic survey in regard to the lanes serving the village and in particular at peak times?
Access to the village with the exception of Stevenage Road is primarily via narrow country lanes which have either limited or no lighting and no provision for pedestrians. Even at current traffic levels these lanes can be dangerous particularly at busy times, in the dark and in bad weather. Further they are used as "rat runs" between Stevenage, Letchworth and Hitchin
Stevenage Road and the lanes become congested when traffic problems occur on the A1(M) or the by-pass and are subject to vehicles travelling at speeds well in excess of the speed limit.
Access/exit to and from the proposed development will be extremely dangerous.
This situation will be aggravated of the proposed industrial developments also take place.
Flooding:
Presumably NHDC has investigated the whole issue of flooding in the village as clearly Stevenage Borough Council indicated earlier in the year that it was unaware of any problems of local flooding.
The Environment Agency recognise that parts of the village are at a high risk of flooding.
It is not difficult to understand why. The village is in a river valley; several watercourses meet at various points within the village; the topography is such that the natural flow of rain water is down to the centre of the village; and the soil structure in the area is sand over clay, hence the ater tower/pumping station in the village. Living in Church Path, this can be seen whenever it rains. Surface water flows down the incline to collect in Stevenage Road but more significantly so does underground water which can be seen as it seeks to rise through the road surface and does so with ease. When Affinity Water undertook pipe repair work a few years ago, every hole dug quickly filled with water from underground and the contractors noted that they had not been made aware of the underground streams that they discovered. This, of course, is supported by the fact that all of the properties originally had hand pumps in their gardens to access water and that the clay is less than 3 feet below the surface.
Stevenage Road turns into a small river when it rain heavily, collecting water from adjacent fields which is exaggerated by the barrier of the A1(M), the railway embankment, and the by-pass.
Flooding is clearly likely to occur more often irrespective of this development as climate change would suggest that we will experience more heavy downpours rather than previous steady but longer periods of rain.
Environment:
Presumably, NHDC has considered the balance between the number of businesses in the parish and the number of residential properties. On a rough calculation this is currently 1:10. This already contributes to traffic levels as the majority of employees are from outside of the village and will increase if further industrial units are also built.
Education:
It has been suggested that the school in the village would be expanded to meet the demands of families in the new development.
Have NHDC investigated what percentage of pupils currently live outside of the village. Given the number of cars dropping children of this would appear to high, but this should be obvious as clearly a village of 300 houses cannot sustain even a 0.5 FE. If HCC agree to add a further 0.5 FE to support the new development, there will still be insufficient children to fill the school but, of course, HCC would see it as an opportunity to allocate children from the local towns where there are insufficient places.

I am writing to express grave concerns over the proposed development WY1.
The proposed addition of 300+ houses will have a detrimental effect on the village, virtually doubling its size. The effect this will have will be devastating, doubling traffic, greater noise, high pollution on already congested roads (particularly in the rush hour) and building on land which would currently hold water, the result of which would increase the flooding in an area that already has regular flooding.
The proposal does not reassure me that any points have been thoroughly considered. Hertfordshire County Council's own report in February 2014 stated that the flood risk for Little Wymondley has increased and adding further houses will increase it. This will probably increase insurance premiums to unaffordable levels for a lot of residents.
By adding 300+ houses you are potentially adding 600+ cars using the already limited road structure within the village. At present between the hours of 07:30 to 09:30 and 16:30 to 18:30 it is extremely difficult, and at times impossible to drive out of the village at either end onto the major roads, i.e. The A1(M) roundabout at the Stevenage end and The Stevenage Road on the Hitchin end due to extreme traffic congestion. The A1(M) roundabout has no traffic lights for the Little Wymondley Junction and due to the constant jumping of Red lights at other points on the roundabout there is never a gap to pull into if you are turning right or going straight on and at the Hitchin there is a constant stream of traffic making it extremely difficult to turn right, both of these create risks, and have sometimes led to accidents. The additional pressure on local roads, especially through all the local villages, will be unmanageable. Recently there was an incident on the Hitchin by-pass and traffic was coming through the village at 6.30 in the morning it was virtually impossible to cross the Wymondley road to walk the dogs, if the traffic was increased this would be every morning. A second incident on the A1(M) when a van caught fire created long tailbacks through Little Wymondley. There is further planned industrial development and housing development by SBC and NHDC (Graveley proposals) around the A1(M) roundabout (junction 8), which will further increase traffic and flooding problems.
I have no faith that road system and flood management will be given the right support to make sure that these issues are addressed. I also feel that green belt was set up for a reason, to make sure that our green spaces were protected, to ensure that future generations could benefit from green spaces and good quality air.
The decision to suddenly decide that this is not important is quite staggering and we need to make sure that all other options have been looked at. The sheer number of houses proposed leads itself to seriously looking at the possibility of a new garden city, rather than create further problems in local communities. I understand you are already aware of a suitable area of brown belt land for this purpose which would more than cover the future needs. Why have we not seen any plans for this alternative?
92% of the local residents are against this proposal and have raised genuine reasons of extreme concern, yet you still appear to be seriously considering going ahead with this proposal. I can only assume that you are not listening to your residents.
I sincerely hope that this proposal is not taken forward, Hertfordshire need to protect local communities, listen to local people, and keep Hertfordshire healthy for future generations.

See attached

See attachment

This policy states: "Encourage development in locations which enable sustainable journeys to be made to key services and facilities;"
The site WY1 will put increased pressure on an already insufficient motorway for today's volume of traffic (junction 8 of the AI (M)). This junction is already grid-locked at peak hours, and the A1 (M) from junction 9 (Baldock) right into London and beyond into London, is exceptionally slow moving and almost stationary south bound. Site WY1 has no access to trains and the bus service is woeful, so the only option residents have is the car. How building more houses on top of this junction can be classed as "Encourage development in locations which enable sustainable journeys to be made to key services and facilities" is beyond the realms of common sense. Hertfordshire County Councillor Terry Douris already stated in the Mercury Newspaper October 18th 2016 that "Hertfordshire is the busiest county in the country and our roads are under incredible pressure - we have a network of more than 5,000km (3,000 miles) and very high traffic levels, with millions of car journeys and 2.5 times the national average of lorries using our roads." How can building an additional 14,000 homes, potentially another 28,000 cars using this junction, or the A1(M) in Hertfordshire possibly be a sensible thing to do? There is also a significant health risk posed in the increase in air pollution from additional slow-moving/standing traffic. The rest of the commentary in the 'plan' around transport is rather vague, stating that changes will be made, but not stating any specific plan with any details as to how sustainable traffic will be achieved. The plan passes the transport buck to Hertfordshire County Council (HCC) and to the developers. This is not good enough. HCC have just launched a public consultation on the future of transport in our area, stating that they envisage travel times in the local area will increase by 25% in the next few years, and asking the public how to resolve this, so until there is a proper model for how to 'keep Hertfordshire moving', a local plan for increasing the density of population should not be made. Once a sensible expansion plan for the A1(M) is in existence and delivered, then it would make sense to review where houses might go, but a new garden city with it's own transport infrastructure might well be the best solution for the period of this plan. You cannot simply add houses and cars without having a proper plan for how all this additional traffic will move around at rush hour and cater for it, what is clear, is that our current road and rail infrastructure will not cope, and Hertfordshire will not be a great place to live at all, if commuting times are increased by 25% or more.

See attached

See attachments

See attached

See attached

See attachment