Policy SP18: Site GA2 - Land off Mendip Way, Great Ashby

I am writing to put forward my objection to the proposed GA2 site. Given the scale of the development I have serious concerns about the impact that this would have on the local community, roads, infrastructure, wildlife and greenbelt land.
Great Ashby is already dealing with parking problems on virtually every street, this being made even worse in the last few years with the increase in HMO's that can have up to 6 cars per household. If there are potentially another 1000+ cars filtering through Mendip Way and Great Ashby Way , this is going to exacerbate an already growing problem. On busy mornings it can be difficult to get out of our driveway as it is without even more cars using the road.
Also the infrastructure simply isn't strong enough to cope with all these extra homes and people. The local primary schools are over-subscribed and there is no local secondary school. The doctors surgery is over-subscribed and Lister hospital is struggling with the amount of patients it has to deal with

Whilst I realize that there is a national need for housing, I don't think it's right that we will be forced to deal with all of these problems due to poor initial planning of our narrow roads and lack of facilities.

I object to North Herts District Council's Local Plan 2011 - 2031 as follows.
I object to NS1, GA1and GA2 proposed housing for Stevenage expansion into Hertfordshire Green Belt; EL1,EL2 and EL3 proposed housing for Luton overspill in to Hertfordshire Green Belt; BA1 proposed near doubling of the town of Baldock into Green Belt land; HT1 proposed incursion into Green Belt bringing Hitchin within a stone's throw of Letchworth. It is against Government policy to build on Green belt land unless "very special circumstances" pertain (see Appendix 1). Nowhere in the Local Plan are any "very special circumstance" identified. The Green Belt was expressly put into place to curb urban sprawl. The siting of these proposed developments, mostly adjoining already existing estates is typical of the urban sprawl long discredited by town planners for its poor environmental impact and weakening of community. Several hitherto distinct village communities such as Cockernhoe, Gravely and Bygrave will be either absorbed. The Green belt promotes physical and mental health by providing recreational space. It is vital for biodiversity, especially when 60% of British wild species are in decline. Up to the present, NHDC has a good record of management of the Green belt. In its Biodiversity Action Plan of 2005 it pledged to protect it (see Appendix 2). This measure, having had no formal modifications since, is deemed to be still in force. Therefore I question the legality of NHDC's proposed flagrant disregard of it.
The site LG1 is ancient cultivated land dating back to medieval times and probably far beyond. Its ditches, banks and hedges are artefacts of early agricultural systems of archaeological significance. There are a number of pollarded oak trees estimated to be over four centuries old. These features carry their own biodiversity which has evolved over the same time-span. The richness of biodiversity is also the result of soil diversity, generated by the particular mix of sand, gravel, chalk and boulder clay laid 500,000 years ago in the last glaciations and known to geologists as 'The Letchworth Gravels'. NHDC has played its part too, cutting down the use of agri-chemicals and encouraging wide field margins. 114 bird species have been recorded, 28 of which are endangered, together with Great Crested Newt, Brown Hare, Common Toad, Polecat and 3 rare butterfly species (see Appendix 3). There is a House Sparrow roost of over 300 birds, the biggest in the county which is now under consideration for a designation of protected status. There is in increasing currency an idea that land lost to the Green Belt can be balanced by new Green belt designation elsewhere. Quite apart from the fact that there is no spare land in North Herts for such new designation, an eco-system such as that of LG1 cannot be moved as its centuries of evolution has been specific to that site.

I object to site LG1 because of the threat it poses to the unique heritage of Letchworth. This heritage is that of the world's first garden city, embodying influential principles of town planning and social welfare. Proximity to the open countryside was one of them, to which end the founding father, Ebenezer Howard, proposed to limit the population to 32,000 (thereby limiting the footprint of the town) (see Appendix 4). He further stated nowhere on the urban boundary should be more than 15 minutes walk from the town centre. Such principles have already been infringed but this is no reason to abandon the spirit of them; there is still a heritage to be preserved if tourists and visiting students of town-planning from all over the world are not to be disappointed. Another principle was the town should be self-sustaining, in the sense that the population would work locally, so housing and industry were carefully balanced. Rather than use the opportunity to restore this balance, the Local Plan proposes to upset it further. With the increase in population generated by LG1, plus the change of use from industrial to residential of many of the smaller sites in the town under the Plan, the percentage of residents employed locally will sharply decrease. Letchworth will become predominantly a dormitory town with all the weakening of community that entails. The increase in commuter numbers will cause insuperable problems for road infrastructure as Letchworth's narrow roads were designed for low car use. In a self-sustaining town everybody could walk to work or school. The crucial routes from LG1 into the town centre and station are already bottlenecks: narrow roads lined with grass verges and specimen trees, some rare, which cannot be removed for road widening without completely destroying the distinctive garden city ambience.

I object to site LG1 because of the circumstances of its proposed sale by the owners. The owners, Letchworth Garden City Heritage Foundation, propose to abdicate its responsibilities to protect and preserve the site. The Foundation was set up by Parliament in 1993 to continue the town's development by Ebenezer Howard's the principles, of which the Green Belt was one - the world's first Green Belt. The sale of this land is a betrayal of principle by those whom Parliament has charged to be its protector. The sale of the land could be (and should be) open to legal challenge.

I wish to object to the development site LG6. This land was compulsorily purchased by Letchworth Urban District Council as part of the Jackman Estate land. The Inspector at the time stipulated that it should be left as a Garden City-style green space. NHDC now wants to forget this decision, together with its own Biodiversity Action Plan (2005) which identified the same piece of land as an Urban Wildlife Site to be protected.
I wish to oppose the LG10 which would nearly double the number of households using Croft Lane, part of Norton old village. The pond at Norton is a breeding area for toads and other species which make their way to the pond inevitably crossing local roads especially Croft Lane. Doubling of the traffic would risk wiping them out.

Appendix 1

Extract from Hansard 15.7.2016
Green-belt Land
Next


Share this debate
18 July 2016
Volume 613
* Philip Davies (Shipley) (Con)
Share this contribution
16. What his Department's policy is on the building of houses on green-belt land. [905899]
* The Minister for Housing and Planning (Gavin Barwell)

Share this contribution
The Government are committed to the strong protection and enhancement of green-belt land. Within the green belt, most new building is inappropriate and should be refused planning permission except in very special circumstances.
* Philip Davies


Share this contribution
I welcome the Minister to his post, although I am sure he is disappointed to no longer be my Whip.
My constituents in Burley-in-Wharfedale, and other villages such as Baildon and Eldwick, to name but a few, are facing planning proposals for green-belt land, with 500 houses proposed for Burley-in-Wharfedale alone. Surely the whole point of the green belt is that it should not be subject to housing, and particularly not until all brownfield sites in the district have been built on. My constituents do not trust Bradford council to look after their interests, so they look to the Government to protect them. What can my hon. Friend do to protect their interests and stop that building on the green belt?
* Gavin Barwell

Share this contribution
I thank my hon. Friend for his kind words and wish his new Whip the best of luck.
If he looks through the national planning policy framework, he will see a clear description of what development is appropriate on the green belt, and a strong presumption that inappropriate development is harmful and should not be approved except in very special circumstances.
* Mr Speaker

Share this contribution
The Whip will certainly need to be a natural optimist.

Appendix 2

North Hertfordshire District Council Biodiversity Action Plan (2005)
Foreword
Diverse rural and urban landscapes, their integral habitats and wildlife, still make North Hertfordshire a very special place in which to live and work. However we should not become complacent, for all is not well. Many changes, some quite dramatic and others very subtle, continue to degrade local habitats, reduce the diversity of wildlife and threaten the qualities of our surroundings.
The importance that your Council places upon the environment that we share, not least with many important facets of wildlife that indicate its health, is clearly outlined within its corporate vision. Its priorities promote conservation of our historic towns and rural settlements together with protection of the countryside.
In the wake of national and international concerns about environmental degradations together with loss of biodiversity, including the tenet to 'think globally, act locally', the Council initiated measures to effect positive local conservation to both habitats and species. Detailed studies and correlation of holdings of data have facilitated a timely overview that elucidates the ranges and status of the District's wildlife and wild places, and have facilitated production of this, our very own Local Biodiversity Action Plan.
With policies and evolving programmes towards effective conservation of the environment we share, the North Hertfordshire Bio-diversity Action Plan meets criteria of the Council's vision and priorities. However, these can only be really workable if each and everyone of us share in the many challenges and commitments required to ensure appropriate care for our surroundings, whether it be in town or countryside
Your Council will lead these challenges but there will be opportunity for all of us to be involved, not least toward education at all levels, joining partnerships and actively supporting the care that our urban and rural countryside needs and deserves.
Local Actions make Global Changes
Leader North Hertfordshire District Council
Councillor F.J. Smith

Appendix 3
BIODIVERSITY OF SITE LG1
Red-listed species
(Red -listed species have the highest conservation priority. In addition, where indicated SAP, some are subject to national Species Action Plans )

Skylark (SAP)
Lesser Redpoll
Common Linnet (SAP)
Cuckoo
Corn Bunting (SAP)
Yellowhammer (SAP)
Reed Bunting (SAP)
Yellow wagtail
House Sparrow
Grey Partridge (SAP)
Dunnock
Common Bullfinch (SAP)
European Turtle Dove (SAP)
Common Starling
Song Thrush (SAP)
Northern Lapwing (SAP)
Woodcock
Grasshopper Warbler
Fieldfare Redwing
Mistle Thrush
Nightingale
Whinchat
Grey Wagtail
Bittern
Red Kite

A further 20 or so species found on the site are amber-listed: unfavourable status in Europe

Other red-listed fauna found on Local Plan site LG1
Brown Hare (SAP)
West European Hedgehog
Polecat
Common Toad
Great Crested Newt (SAP)
Small Heath butterfly
Small Blue butterfly
Wall butterfly

INFORMATION: Brian Sawford: NHDC Countryside Officer (Retd), Curator of Natural History for North Herts Museums Service (Retd).
:Trevor James: Curator of Natural History for North Herts Museums Service (Retd), Director of Herts Biological Records Centre (Retd).
Appendix 4

GARDEN CITIES OF TO-MORROW
Ebenezer Howard
Garden Cities of To-Morrow (London, 1902. Reprinted, edited with a Preface by F. J. Osborn and an Introductory Essay by Lewis Mumford. (London: Faber and Faber, [1946]):50-57, 138- 147.

Let me here introduce a very rough diagram, representing, as I conceive, the true principle on which all towns should grow, Garden City has, we will suppose, grown until it has reached a population of 32,000. How shall it grow? How shall it provide for the needs of others who will be attracted by its numerous advantages? Shall it build on the zone of agricultural land which is around it, and thus for ever destroy its right to be called a 'Garden City'? Surely not. This disastrous result would indeed take place if the land around the town were, as is the land around our present cities, owned by private individuals anxious to make a profit out of it. For then, as the town filled up, the agricultural land would become 'ripe' for building purposes, and the beauty and healthfulness of the town would be quickly destroyed. But the land around Garden City is, fortunately, not in the hands of private individuals: it is in the hands of the people: and is to be administered, not in the supposed interests of the few, but in the real interests of the whole community.

I would like to register my objection in respect of the proposed GA2 plans for a further 600 new homes on precious Green Belt land north of Brooches Wood.

As a resident of Ryders Hill, I appreciate that I myself am living within an area that once upon a time was also woodland area and also realise that there is a need for further housing, however, I cannot understand how it can be deemed necessary to further expand Great Ashby. The area is almost becoming a town within its own right; yet without any of the desperately needed infrastructure. We have one local store (Budgens), no doctors surgery and a primary school (Round Diamond) that was too small for local residents on the day it opened. I live 750 metres as the crow flies from the school and yet have to drive my children to Datchworth primary as I was unsuccessful with my local primary applications. This situation will no doubt replicate itself for secondary school places as the area does not have those facilities either.

Residential parking is insufficient everywhere which will no doubt be the same with any proposed new houses as the builders will be keen to squash as many houses as possible on any land available and disregard the need for decent roads and parking for growing families.

There have been a significant number of houses recently completed on the old Dixons site - surely there are other areas within the town which need to absorb the need for greater housing.

We are desperate to retain some form of countryside; I want my children to grow up enjoying the beautiful woods and fields which we are so lucky to have on our doorstep not in a concrete jungle with no facilities such as leisure, shopping, schooling and surgeries to cope with an influx of 600 new homes.

My Objections to the Proposed GA2 Development

Background:
Although this is generated by NHDC, it will greatly affect Stevenage and Great Ashby in particular.
The figures on which this development is based is flawed. Generally predicted calculations from HCC and Central government are incorrect, remember 1989 when many schools in Hertfordshire were to be closed as the predicted population was falling. Schools included Willian, in Letchworth, which was closed, Collenswood in Stevenage, The Sele school in Hertford, both saved from closure, plus schools in Harpenden and St. Albans, incidentally, all chosen schools were on Green Belt land. We now know that the population has risen. So, are these figures flawed as well?
All derived figures were calculated prior to Brexit, therefore, before raping valuable Green Belt Land, let's see the effects on the population, after Brexit occurs.
The number of people on Stevenage and North Herts Council waiting list are circa 4000, the number of people in rent arrears is double that. Careful management of these debts could free up many houses again reducing the need for house building.

Before developing Green Belt Land, have any Brownfield sites been looked at?

I want to change the local Plan and wish to be involved in the Examination

Objections:

1. This is Green Belt Land, frequented by various valuable and endangered species of wildlife, including Bats, Red Kite, Deer, Hedgehogs and many others. For Green Belt Land to change should only be considered in exceptional circumstances, this development does not meet that criterion. The development would have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the surrounding area. It would devastate local flora and fauna, see above.
Green Belts are a buffer between towns, and town and countryside. Within their boundaries, damaged and derelict land can be improved and nature conservation is encouraged, see above. The ever-increasing pressure on land for more roads, housing and airport expansion means that it is vital to protect the Green Belts that we have. Over 800 hectares a year of this land is disappearing under new developments.
Stevenage has many problems, however, two very positive things about Steveange are the closeness to beautiful countryside walks, plus as mentioned above, the varied wildlife.

1. This site is frequented by horses and riders from the two nearby equestrian centres, it is crossed by several footpaths including the Hertfordshire Way, and STOOP, The Stevenage Outer Orbital path as well as used by cyclists as part of a cycle network. Many people join or leave the walks here using the SB7 bus. Any building work and subsequent development is likely to cause hazards to these cyclists, riders and walkers, many with children. A bridleway crosses at the intersection of Bray Drive and Mendip Way, which is very popular with the riders from the equestrian centres.

1. This is a serious safety and security issue. My road has had no recorded incidents of crime, increasing the population would increase the risk of crime.

2. The infrastructure cannot cope with further development, The Lister hospital is at breaking point, particularly A & E and the MacMillan Cancer Centre. The staff are over worked and under intense stress. There are insufficient school places and teachers. All GP surgeries are oversubscribed and as such it is so difficult getting appointments. As Stevenage has an ever increasing elderly population as well as the two large retirement homes opening in the Old Town, again this is increasing the pressure on the Lister and GPs.


3. Concerns that the access roads and particularly the pathways represent a serious security risk to surrounding properties, where to date there has been no significant crime as well as a danger to pedestrians crossing Mendip Way and Great Ashby Way, where parking is a serious issue. Also there is great difficulty passing these footpaths for mobility scooters, mothers with prams due to the lack of parking spaces.

4. This building on open land would change the tranquil nature of the meadow into an urban extension with its associated noise and light pollution.

5. Increased traffic would make it more hazardous for children walking to local schools.

6. There are no schools in easy walking distance, therefore this will greatly increase traffic in the local area, in particular Mendip Way and Great Ashby Way. Getting out of Orwell Avenue on to Great Ashby Way is difficult now, an extra 1000+ cars will greatly increase the traffic flow, plus increase the risk of accidents.


7. 25% will be affordable homes, that leaves 600 homes that will be purchased by people from outside of the town, generally from Hertford, Ware, Hoddesdon and from within the M25. People can move house but rarely move the place of employment, this will add extra traffic on the A602 and A1M. These are already exceptionally busy roads now, an increase of traffic will mean increased risk of accidents of which there are 2 serious accidents a week now.

I am writing in connection with the proposed housing application at site GA2.
I list my objections to the proposed extension of Great Ashby in bullet point form for ease of reading:
* Site GA2 is a breach of the Green Belt and is indefensible.
* The Green Belt land at site GA2 is surrounded by wildlife. I cycle twice daily along Back Lane towards Calder Way and see the regular passage (both morning and evening) of the roe deer and munkjack that cross Back Lane from Parsonsgreen Wood and Tilekiln Wood. There is also a bats colony by the 5 properties which can be seen swooping in our gardens in large numbers as well as nesting red kite in the tree line.
* Site GA2 abuts ancient woodland (Tile Kiln Wood and Brooches Wood) and this would be damaged and destroy the character and valuable wildlife habitats of the area. Ancient woodland is any woodland that has remained as woodland for the last 400 years (since 1600).
* The proposed housing site (GA2) is on protected Green Belt land which should be enjoyed by all. I quote from hertfordshirelife.co.uk/out-about/walks: 'with a community park, ancient woodlands and open countryside, Great Ashby on the edge of Stevenage holds many surprises. Countryside Management Service projects officer Heidi Hutton gives a guide to walks in the area.' There is a crisscross of footpaths across the GA2 site currently enjoyed by walkers would be lost to concrete.
* The proposal by its sheer size (depth, width, height and mass) would lead to an inappropriate development in the Green Belt which is detrimental to it's open, rural and undeveloped character as well as an unacceptably adverse effect on the 6 properties immediately adjacent to the site and surrounding neighbourhood by overlooking, a loss of privacy, noise disturbance and a visually overbearing impact.
* Back Lane is a narrow un-marked country lane unfit for increased traffic and heavy good vehicles. In fact, only last week my partner's vehicle clipped wing mirrors with another vehicle travelling in the opposite direction.
* The proposed site at GA2 would engulf 5 listed properties (English Heritage Building ID: 162725 / 162726 / 162724). Tile Kiln Farm is a late medieval open hall house and the barns are circa 17th century. The layout and siting of GA2 in relation to listed buildings, spaces and views is inappropriate and unsympathetic to the appearance and character of the local environment.
* There are 3 natural springs on the GA2 site, namely Dell Spring, New Spring and New Acre Spring. These springs feed into the working wells at Tile Kiln Farm and Brooches Barn. The well at my property is 200 feet in depth and listed in the Doomsday Book.
* Just as importantly, you will be engulfing the village of Weston (Brooches Barn is in the village of Weston) with Stevenage. The village of Weston dates back to Roman times, is a quintessential English village infamous for its Robin Hood styled villager called Jack O'Legs. Stevenage, although once a village, has sadly for many decades been a New Town.
* The GA2 site is environmentally unsustainable and it is remote from the retail and commercial centres of Stevenage and far from both road and rail facilities.

Another very important matter that needs to be addressed is the fact that I have learned from my neighbours,that they have been invited to a meeting at on the 8th December to discuss connectivity and movement between the GA2 site and a proposed secondary school on the field alongside Back Lane and opposite the private driveway to the farm house and barns. At no point in your report has this development been mentioned, why?

Lastly, if additional housing on a large scale is needed, rather than cause uproar and disruption by building 400-1,000 houses in villages and neighbourhoods across the county that do not have the infrastructure to cope nor welcome it, consideration should be given to building another Garden City along the A1M corridor. Failing that, land to the West of Stevenage would be a more viable option as it is closer to the centre of the town and road and rail links and most importantly, not Green Belt.

I do hope you seriously consider the above significant points. We ALL have an obligation to save our Green Belt and villages, not only for our enjoyment, but for the generations to come after us!

We object to GA1, GA2 and WE1 because of the encroachment on the Green Belt land and resultant traffic problems which are already hazardous. The infrastructure is not there to support said expansion in these areas.

Thank you for sharing my concerns and objections to these plans to the council.

I write specifically regarding the proposed Roundwood (GA1) development in the proximity of Great Ashby, Stevenage, and GA2 as part of the larger local plan. I wish to object to these proposals. My reasoning is as follows:

1. Existing transport access is poor, via already congested residential roads (such as Mendip Way in Great Ashby). Large scale movements of construction traffic will not be suitable on these roads.
2. Proposals to widen Mendip Way by removing existing grass verges will reduce parking space on this road from currently around 100 to 55, a loss of 45 spaces. This will force traffic onto side streets (such as Nevis Road, Cheviot Way, Cotswold Drive, Snowdonia Way). These streets already have existing parking problems that will only be exacerbated with additional traffic from Mendip Way. The existing parking problems have been caused by previous planning laws allowing only 1.5 car spaces per property (now 2 cars). Also, previous planning laws also allowed smaller garage sizes (2.5m x 5m vs the current 3m x 7m). This directly impacts current parking congestion in Great Ashby by severely limiting the use of private garages for parking average size vehicles as they are too small.
3. Additional residential traffic from the new development will be forced onto already congested roads. Mendip Way and Great Ashby Way will be especially prone to this during morning and evening rush hours, with obvious safety implications for current residents.
4. Other smaller roads will become 'rat runs' as residential traffic moves during rush hour periods. Nevis Road and Snowdonia Way are examples.
5. Taking into account the increased traffic (both construction and eventually residential) that will be forced onto local roads, the existing public transport service will suffer at key times such as morning and evening rush hours, especially if the route is changed to include Mendip Way.
6. No consideration has been given to GA2 plans for a further 500 houses in Great Ashby. The original planned 3rd exit "link road" out of Great Ashby is very much needed.
7. The are no spaces available at local schools, with Round Diamond Primary school already turning down applications from large numbers of existing residents for places. This will lead to further traffic problems as parents are forced to drive their children to schools that are further away.
8. There do not appear to be any plans for the provision of additional amenities, such as places at doctors and dental surgeries. The Lister hospital is struggling to cope now, without all the extra residents the housing development will bring in. The Comet newspaper (11th March 2016) reported how A&E waiting time targets set by the government have not been met since emergency services were centralised at Lister following the closure of the emergency department at the QEII in Welwyn Garden City in October 2014. Adult minor injury services have been suspended twice this year at Lister's A&E due to the number of more serious cases.
9. The proposed development is not sustainable. There are no additional facilities proposed. Existing facilities are already stretched or non-existent, and will be further stretched by this proposed development.

If you need any further details regarding my objections, please don't hesitate to contact me.

I would like to register my concerns with the proposals to the expansion of Great Ashby - GA1 & GA2 and also the proposal for Weston - WE1.

As you surely know, the area around Great Ashby is Green Belt land which has already been breached by the previous development of Great Ashby. With further expansion planned, what really is the point of having a Green Belt?! The traffic along the road is already far higher and at peak times is at capacity for what the narrow lane between Weston and Great Ashby can take. Noticeable traffic levels have already impacted the surrounding villages as well as other undesirable consequences.

WE1 is another area for concern as the proposal for number of houses is far higher than the identified need of 14. No reason seems to have been given for this and yet again creates more traffic which stretches the facilities of the village further. Once again, the propose site is also on Green Belt land which causes concern as to where or when the development will actually stop as clear boundaries previously put in place are not being adhered to.

With the population of the area significantly increasing, we have seen a rise in trespassing across land including scrambler motorbikes, etc on footpaths and going across private land. At the very least, I would like to see assistance to land owners in helping combat this adverse effect of expanding the village and nearby areas, with actual measures put in place.

Thank you for conveying my concerns and objections to these plans to the council.

I would just like to register my objection to the GA1 and GA2 developments.

Whilst I do appreciate that NHDC must build new houses, and I myself would not have a house if Great Ashby had not been built, I feel that Great Ashby is now full.
There are constant issues with parking and access and Great Ashby Way is a road that never sleeps. The traffic levels are high already and inconsiderate speeding and parking make the side roads as well as Gt Ashby Way dangerous at times. Virtually every evening if there was a fire down one of the side streets the fire brigade would not get through. More cars and traffic simply cannot be absorbed in the current roads.
The local primary school is overflowing, and the residents are registered with doctors all around Stevenage. When Great Ashby was first proposed, there were plans for a doctors surgery on the development, but that has never materialised. It is desperately needed. The secondary schools in Stevenage are already at capacity, where are all the new families attracted to the area by the new houses going to get all the services from they require?
My other concern is the use of green belt land. There are other brown belt sites that should be used first. Green belt land by its own description is protected and should stay green.
The proposed development of GA2 is just too big, and I urge you to reconsider the implications it would have.

I am writing to place my objection about the GA2 development on land to the North of Great Ashby, Herts.

We urge North Hertfordshire District Council to remove GA1 and GA2 from the list of allocated sites for development in North Stevenage and consider the implications to all those involved/affected.

Objections/reasons against GA1/GA2 include:

Greenbelt is precious and should not be developed - building on these sites contravene protected status and this precedence must not be set. Greenbelt areas are important to prevent urban sprawl, stop towns from merging, protect the countryside and promote urban regeneration. The density of the proposed housing is of city nature and not suited to Greenbelt countryside, I believe it is not inline with the 2007 Urban design assessment report commissioned by NHDC.

The land in GA2 houses a rich and diverse amount of wildlife including endangered red kites, barn owls, bats and the currently protected badger. NHDC have a DUTY to conserve the biodiversity of this area. The muntjac deer population has already seriously decreased since Great Ashby was built. Further development would be catastrophic to our wildlife. GA2 would totally encompass ancient woodland and a natural spring, building in this area would destroy valuable wildlife habitats.

A development of this magnitude would be visibly intrusive and harm the character and appearance of an area of outstanding beauty scattered with listed buildings and villages, such as Graveley. This area is used and enjoyed by many people, footpaths and bridleways crossing the proposed sites GA1 & GA2 form part of the historic Hertfordshire way and are frequented by many ramblers, horse riders and dog walkers.

The infrastructure is not suitable for another 2000 homes. Traffic through Great Ashby is already at capacity and congested with many parked cars and can be quite dangerous at peak times.

Doctors surgeries in North Stevenage are struggling with the extra volume of patients already.

Proposed developments are remote from the retail and commercial centres of Stevenage and Hitchin, many businesses are already struggling in Stevenage and a number of shops have closed in the town centre. Extra housing would put severe pressure on an already lack of employment. For commuters, trains are already at full capacity during peak times and the A1 is congested.

Socially affordable housing is not mentioned within the proposals, surely local councils should be considering the needs of people already living in Stevenage & the huge waiting lists .

We understand that housing is needed but feel it would be more sensible to build a completely new settlement/garden city somewhere with reasonable transport links, but away from any towns or villages and NOT at the loss of important Green Belt or woodland. A new settlement that over time can grow to meet the needs of the people with the correct infrastructure designed into it from the beginning and would create thousands of jobs and new employment. We also urge local councils and government to build on brown field sites as an alternative and to look at the many thousands of boarded up council homes that lay dormant across the UK.

I would like to raise my concerns about the proposed developments at Great Ashby (GA1 and GA2) and the proposed site at Weston (WE1).

Regarding GA1 and GA2, I am most concerned about the readiness once again to build large developments on designated Green Belt land. As you will be aware, this was breached many years ago to allow the Great Ashby site to be built. Concerns were raised at the time about the Green Belt being broached and now it is planned to build further into it once again. This lack of regard for safeguarding areas of Green Belt will inevitably lead to the undesirable consequence of coalescence of villages with towns. Weston feels at threat in this regard as Stevenage grows ever closer.

You will also be aware of the problem of traffic congestion at peak times on the North Herts trunk road network. This leads to further congestion in the local towns and our country roads. With the extra houses being built on those sites, the traffic will become an even more serious problem and indeed a hazard.

With regard to the designated site in Weston, WE1, there was identified a need for 14 affordable houses and a site for 25 houses was accordingly planned on the site. In the Local Housing Plan the number of proposed houses has now increased significantly to 40 houses without apparent reason.. this is once again broaching the Green Belt and extending the village boundary further still and therefore causes concern.

Thank you for conveying my concerns and objections to these plans to the council.

I would like to raise my concerns about the proposed developments at Great Ashby (GA1 and GA2) and also the proposed site at Weston (WE1).

Regarding GA1 and GA2, I am most concerned about the readiness once again to build large developments on designated Green Belt land. As you will be aware, this was breached many years ago to allow the Great Ashby site to be built. Concerns were raised at the time about the Green Belt being broached and now it is planned to build further into it once again. This lack of regard for safeguarding areas of Green Belt will inevitably lead to the undesirable consequence of coalescence of villages with towns. Weston feels at threat in this regard as Stevenage grows ever closer.

You will also be aware of the problem of traffic congestion at peak times on the North Herts trunk road network. This leads to further congestion in the local towns and our country roads. With the extra houses being built on those sites, the traffic will become an even more serious problem and indeed a hazard.

With regard to the designated site in Weston, WE1, there was identified a need for 14 affordable houses and a site for 25 houses was accordingly planned on the site. In the Local Housing Plan the number of proposed houses has now increased significantly to 40 houses without apparent reason.. this is once again broaching the Green Belt and extending the village boundary further still and therefore causes concern.

Thank you for conveying my concerns and objections to these plans to the council.

I would like to lodge my objection to the plans for NHDC to build GA2, Great Ashby.

Great Ashby is a lovely community for families but is already blighted by traffic, poor parking and lack of infrastructure.

Whilst I appreciate the need for housing there are plenty of brown sites within Stevenage that should be used before building on green belt land.

Please think about the quality of life that Great Ashby residents will lose if these GA2 plans go ahead.

I would like to briefly lodge my objection to the proposed development on greenbelt land around Great Ashby for the following reasons:

1) Insufficient infrastructure - schools - one primary that is oversubscribed and no secondary school limited doctors spaces

2) Road infrastructure - there is not enough space for parking and driving as it is so more cars will compound the issue. Traffic will be unbearable through narrow streets - The A1 traffic is woeful in rush hour too.

3) Destruction of wildlife and Greenbelt land

4) Railway - the current train line cannot cope with existing commuters into London etc

5) This is not a special circumstance that requires development on Green Belt land just to fill the council requirements for housing numbers.

I am writing to object to the proposals of GA1 and GA2. I walk my dogs everyday on this beautiful land and would be devastated if it were to be destroyed for housing. The reason that we moved to Great Ashby was to be close to the beautiful woodland/farmland and be part of a nice, safe community for ourselves and our children.

Green Belt Land - The proposed development is on Green Belt land and as such is an inappropriate development. In your e-mail dated 19/4/2016 entitled 'pre-Application Advice' to Croudace you wrote 'As you know the site is located in the Metropolitan Green Belt and as such under current local and national planning policy I am unable to support the principle of development at this site. Housing represents inappropriate development in the Green Belt and despite the Council's absence of a five year land supply of deliverable housing sites 'housing need' is not in my view in of itself a very special circumstance which would pursued the Council to grant planning permission in advance of further progress with the current Local Plan (2011-2031).'

This stance is reinforced by the attached letter from Brandon Lewis, Minister of State for Housing and Planning dated 7/6/2016.

In light of this reaffirmation of the Government's strong stance against development of Green Belt 'unless exceptional circumstance exists and with the support of local people' which this proposed site clearly do not have, I disagree with your subsequent statement in that e-mail that following approval of the Local Plan and release of this site from Green Belt, subject to there being no unresolved technical planning issues, planning officers would be able in principle to support the application.


I appreciate that there is a shortage of housing, but does not think we should compromise safety of current Great Ashby residents to allow this inappropriate access arrangements as per the application. This is absolutely ludicrous to even think that the roads (Bray Drive, Mendip Way and Haybluff Drive) will cope with this small change to the existing roads to allow for more vehicles!

1. Section 2.1.7: Promises "safe and easy access for all sections of the community, including people with disabilities, the infirm and parents of young children" - I question how removing the grass verges and trees and widening the roads in Bray Drive, Mendip Way and Haybluff Drive is complying with this statement? - By removing the verges, not only do you allow the developer to take out the grass, but the environmental impact of losing what few trees have been planted, will have an adverse impact on the current ecosystem.
There is absolutely no way that a child walking to school can pass a parent with a double buggy safely without stepping in the road, if there are no grass verges. Keeping in mind that this is the main access to the current Great Ashby residents; and is also proposed to be the main access for the Roundwood development - this is totally unsafe and should not be allowed as an access route to this development. - Parked cars will be so closed to the boundaries of houses. If you walk with your children (I have seen parents walking with 4 children) and someone open the door of a parked car, a child (who might be on a scooter, or bicycle, or just walking) or adult can get seriously injured. Great Ashby's roads are already heavily filled with traffic and parked cars, this will be untenable if more houses are to be built!
Schooling and GP Facilities: In its conclusion to its Planning Application, Croudace describes the proposed development as being 'in a sustainable location, with good access to a range of facilities (11.5)'. This is incorrect. Local primary schools within walking distance are already heavily oversubscribed, with children having to travel to other schools within Stevenage and the surrounding villages. Also there is no secondary school provision within Great Ashby, and the current draft local plan does not indicate a provision of one.

Likewise despite having been established for over 15 years, Great Ashby still does not have its own GP surgery, again requiring existing residents to travel across Stevenage to other GP surgeries or to the Lister Hospital.

It is very concerning that the above errors relating to essential infrastructure requirements have been made, particularly given the close involvement Croudace and its employees have had in the development of Great Ashby over the years and raises questions as to the integrity of the information provided in the application.

Please listen to the people who are against the proposal these are all valid reasons to refuse the application for GA1 and GA2.

I wish to object to the Roundwood (GA 1) planning application and GA2 as part of the larger local plan due to:
1. Existing transport access is poor, via already congested residential roads (Mendip Way in Great Ashby). Large scale movements of construction traffic will not be suitable on these roads.
2. Proposals to widen Mendip Way by removing existing grass verges will reduce parking space on this road from around 100 to 55, a loss of 45 spaces. This will force traffic onto side streets (such as Nevis Road, Cheviot Way, Cotswold Drive, Snowdonia Way). These streets already have existing parking problems that will only be exacerbated with additional traffic from Mendip Way. The existing parking problems have been caused by previous planning laws allowing only 1.5 car spaces per property (now 2 cars). Also, previous planning laws allowed garage sizes to be built smaller 2.5m x 5m (vs current 3m x 7m). This directly impacts current parking congestion in Great Ashby by severely limiting the use of private garages for parking average size vehicles as they are too small.
3. Additional residential traffic from the new development will be forced onto already congested roads. Mendip Way and Great Ashby Way will be especially prone to this during morning and evening rush hours, with obvious safety implications for current residents.
4. Other smaller roads will become 'rat runs' as residential traffic moves during rush hour periods. Nevis Road and Snowdonia Way are examples.
5. Taking into account the increased traffic (both construction and eventually residential) that will be forced onto local roads, the existing public transport service will suffer at key times such as morning and evening rush hours, especially if the route is changed to include Mendip Way.
6. No consideration has been given to GA2 plans for a further 500 houses in Great Ashby. The original planned 3rd exit "link road" out of Great Ashby is very much needed.
7. The are no spaces available at local schools, with Round Diamond Primary school already turning down applications from large numbers of existing residents for places. This will lead to further traffic problems as parents are forced to drive their children to schools that are further away.
8. There do not appear to be any plans for the provision of additional amenities, such as places at doctors and dental surgeries. The Lister hospital is struggling to cope now, without all the extra residents the housing development will bring in. The Comet newspaper (11th March 2016) reported how A&E waiting time targets set by the government have not been met since emergency services were centralised at Lister following the closure of the emergency department at the QEII in Welwyn Garden City in October 2014. Adult minor injury services have been suspended twice this year at Lister's A&E due to the number of more serious cases.
9. The proposed development is not sustainable. There are no additional facilities proposed. Existing facilities are already stretched or non-existent, and will be further stretched by this proposed development.

I would like to object to the local plan, specifically the lack of justification for the excessive housing target, lack of associated infrastructure that a local plan of this size requires and further rolling back of the Green Belt (or land swaps) around the A1M towns of Stevenage, Hitchin, Baldock and Letchworth. Instead I would support that NHDC and Stevenage Borough Council deliver a sensitively designed new Garden city, to support additional and justified housing need in the area, local employment can be generated and where the local infrastructure is adequately considered and delivered.

There is an absence of justification for the excessive housing target that does not take into proper account of Green Belt constraints and in many cases. The current framework makes it very clear Green Belt boundaries should only be adjusted when very special circumstances exist, through the Local plan and with the support of local people. The need for additional housing alone does not constitute exceptional circumstances for rolling back further the green belt around the towns on the A1M corridor.
The North of Stevenage already had a large area removed from the green belt for Great Ashby as exceptional circumstances to meet Stevenage housing need during the last local plan, and now is expected to do so again. NS1, GA1 and GA2 will close the gap between Graveley and Stevenage with Weston and will fully immerse Chesfield losing the character of all villages and hamlets.
The development sites NS1 (900 dwellings), GA1 (330 dwellings), GA2 (600 dwellings) are to meet the needs of Stevenage which itself has a developing local plan for 7600 new homes during 2011 and 2031. There also plans for 600 dwellings to the East of Stevenage in East Herts local plan. This constitutes an increase of 10030 homes or 11% increase to meet the needs of Stevenage alone. This is a similar proposal to what was included in the now defunct SNAP, which indicated a relief road for a development of this size, yet this is not indicated in the local plan, and relies on funnelling traffic through existing roads not designed to cope with such an increase in traffic. All of these sites are away from the main town centre, public transport does not link these sites together so will increase car journeys and commuting outside of the town further exacerbating the daily issues on the A1M and rail network.

The principal concerns that my wife and I have relate to the road communications for areas GA1 & GA2.
The plans exhibited by the developer earlier in the year for the GA1 area were totally unrealistic in the manner that traffic was to enter and exit the estate. GA1 is completely isolated in a corner bounded by two country lanes. Each of these have significant lengths where it is difficult for vehicles to pass, yet these lanes are expected to bear the traffic generated by a significant housing development. Traffic heading north will either head for Gravely or Weston, neither routes can carry the significant traffic that may be anticipated and neither villages is capable of absorbing such a flow. We already know that Hatch Lane from Weston to the North Road in Baldock is hazardous, particularly at peak periods. Cars driven by members of the family have required two replacement external mirrors and a nearside front wheel during the past three years through encountering speeding oncoming traffic.
So far as GA2 is concerned, access and egress will have to be through the streets of the existing Great Ashby area which are not designed to carry any greater traffic flow than already exists. All traffic from GA2 will have to head for Stevenage town centre before being able to access the principal north - south routes.
And yet all this invasion of greenbelt, crowding of adjacent villages and their access roads and further traffic build up in the heart of Stevenage could be avoided if the land west of Stevenage, already identified and, for some mysterious reason, held in reserve, was to be used earlier. From there would be excellent and direct access to major road and rail links.

I am writing to strongly object to the proposed GA2 development plan. The proposed development of 600 homes is a very large development and I believe the negative impact on the quality of life of current residents of Great Ashby and the strain caused to both the roads and local services such as doctors is unacceptably high. I understand the need to provide additional housing throughout the UK but feel that the needs and concerns of current residents need to be given as much consideration as the needs of future residents.

The GA2 proposals remove nearly all the green field access close to my home. I use both Brooches Wood and the field walks beyond on a regular basis for exercise as do many other residence. If the development goes ahead as planned my direct access will be significantly reduced to just Brooches Wood. Moreover, Brooches Wood is an area of ancient woodland and is a lovely bluebell wood. I specifically purchased mu house for its location and access to countryside. Following the development of GA2, Brooches Wood will be almost completely surrounded by houses which seems inappropriate, and to detract significantly from the experience of walking in it and to threaten wildlife. This will leave my area of Great Ashby underprovided with open spaces for walks to the detriment of the health and quality of life of locals. GA2 will, however, border directly on to green fields seeming to create an unfair imbalance between the current residents, and their needs and quality of life, and the residents of the new development.

I am also concerned by the impact this will have on the traffic in Great Ashby. The roads of Great Ashby are already busy, relatively narrow and heavily parked on making negotiating them already difficult. I do not believe the current streets could cope with any additional traffic. There are currently often long queues at rush hour to get from Great Ashby to the A1 for commuting and the proposed large development would worsen this situation.

Finally, it seems like the plans should be reviewed in light of the Brexit decision. The government have indicated that its primary aim in the negotiations will be to limit immigration. This seems to mean that the number of houses required in the period to 2031 will be less than would previously have been required. If the proposed plan was prepared prior to the referendum decision, it would seem to need to be reviewed. Given this very significant uncertainty regarding the UK's future housing needs, now seems completely the wrong time to agree the house building plans for the next 15 years.

I do understand the need for additional housing in the Stevenage and Great Ashby area. The needs of, and impact on current residents, should however be given equal consideration. The current plans for the Stevenage and Great Ashby areas seem to be mainly based around building a small number of very large developments. This solution seems to give rise to an unacceptably large negative impact on residents in a small number of areas and to lead to the destruction of large areas of green field land. If instead a larger number of developments of 100 or so houses were planned, more evenly spread around Stevenage as a whole, this would have a much more limited impact on individual areas. More, smaller, developments would also seem to give the opportunity to keep the impact on green field sites to a minimum which should be a priority and minimise the impact on wildlife. I understand this would be more complex to plan but the benefits to current residents appear very significant and the proposals would be much easier for people to accept.

Taking the above in to account, I would have no objections to 100-150 houses being built rather than 600 with these being arranged so that a greater amount of direct access green field site would still be available to Great Ashby residence (ie not a thinner band of houses all spread adjacent to Great Ashby but with a smaller area directly connected to Great Ashby so more direct green field access is retained). I would also not object to a greater number of houses being built if an area of green field land was left between Great Ashby and GA2 (eg creating a new, separate GA2 community rather than an extension of current Great Ashby). This would seem to give a better quality of life to both Great Ashby and GA2 residents. This would also create a fairer solution where both GA2 and Great Ashby would have a shared area of green field land between them they could both access. This contrasts to the current proposal whereby my part of Great Ashby loses nearly all direct green field access while GA2 connects directly on to green fields giving residence of the new development a better quality of life than current residents of Great Ashby.

Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to contact you with my concerns. I hope you will consider them and potentially look to modify your proposals to have a less adverse affect on local residents of Great Ashby.

I'm writing this email to formally object to the proposed GA1 and GA2 developments.

INFRASTRUCTURE
The roads throughout Great Ashby are already under great pressure to cope with the number of vehicles using them on a daily basis and I see no new infrastructure being proposed to cope with the additional 1000+ vehicles using the existing infrastructure on a daily basis.

SCHOOLS
There are no plans for a secondary school which is desperately needed and only a 2FE primary school. All local primary schools are currently oversubscribed and there is currently limited public transport to the nearest secondary schools.

GP SURGERY
There are no plans for a doctors surgery. An extra 900+ homes being proposed and doctors surgeries already at capacity within Stevenage. How are the extra 2000-3000 residents going to find access to health care?

EMERGENCY RESPONSE VEHICLES
Emergency response vehicles already find it difficult to access parts of Great Ashby due to vehicle obstruction.

GREEN BELT LAND
The proposed development is on Green Belt land. Land has been defined as Green Belt to prohibit urban sprawl. GA1 and GA2 should not even be considered for development as it is inappropriate use of the specified land. There are no exceptional circumstances surrounding the development of this area and the local people do not support the proposals.

I believe that this area does not have sufficient infrastructure to allow the building of so many new homes. The roads are constantly congested and in the 7 years that I have lived here this has become significantly worse.
We have no local GP. No local dentist. Children that live here are already unable to get into the local school. Secondary school provision is already not adequate.

Mendip way where the construction traffic will drive along is constantly congested already and the proposed parking bays will only make matters worse.

Great Ashby is already full to bursting and when it was planned no provision was made for homes having several cars and emergency vehicles would not be able at this present time be able to get along most streets. To build more homes will be a disaster waiting to happen.

I would like to object to the local plan with particular respect to sites NS1, GA1 and GA2

There are significant access issues with regards to GA1 and also GA2. The roads are not suitable for the level of traffic proposed to be going down these roads and with respect to the planning application for GA1 the traffic survey conducted is flawed.

Some other residents and myself have conducted a more details traffic survey which shows that the development will result in severe parking issues and potentially be dangerous due to emergency vehicles being unable to get down the road.

I am unaware of what the access points for GA2 will be but if it is through existing roads then the problem will be the same.


Both of the proposed developments are on green belt land and in NHDC email dated 19/4/2016 they stated that the sites were located in metropolitan green belt and as such they were unable to support the principle of the development."

Development on green belt land as per government policy is only supposed to be under "exceptional circumstances and with the support of the local community" which is patently not true with regards to GA1 and GA2.

Building on NS1 along with development in SBC local will result in the effective destruction of forster country which is the last remaining farmland in Stevenage Borough was the inspiration for Howards End by EM Forster and should be protected.

I thank you for taking into account my submission and would like to be informed with regards to the local plan in future.

I wish to register my strong objection to the proposed plans to build on our lovely green belt land at great ashby (GA2) I am a resident homeowner in Ryder's Hill adjacent to the proposed development our surroundings at the moment are lovely with plenty of countywide walks and lots of wildlife to see it would be a crime to destroy this green belt land The access would be putting the roads around here under too much strain The schools and doctors etc would be overwhelmed House prices would be in decline We really must not let this happen.

I have been made aware of the NHDC's Roundwood Development plan to build 930 houses on Green Belt land between Great Ashby and Weston and I would like to register my objection (and that of my partner)
My objection is primarily based on the annual East of England population growth forecast from 2011-2031 of 0.32% from the ONS. As I understand it, to accommodate this requirement would take 3750 additional houses, however 4340 houses have already been built to meet and exceed this need.

I would request that the council reconsiders this plan and also that we are added to the distribution list for any updates on this project please.

We write to object strongly to building of more houses in this area.
Roads are already very busy and cannot cope with current capacity.
Holes etc. need repairing. This a big health and safety issue.
There are not enough shops/facilities to cope with anymore houses/flats in Stevenage.
New town is disgraceful and residents in Stevenage have been grossly let down by lack of development/improvement here.
You can't continue to build more houses/flats and not improve shopping facilities/leisure facilities in Stevenage.
Stevenage is big enough already. Leave the beautiful countryside/wildlife alone and go and build somewhere for a change!!!
Lots of lovely land in Welwyn, St. Albans, Hitchin, Knebworth etc. etc. etc.
It seems that good old Stevenage that everyone looks down on till they need to use cinema/leisure park needs some more houses-we don't think so!!
Let's get our town centre sorted out for all our currents residents.
Go and build your houses somewhere else for a change.
Who actually makes these decisions?!
Bet they wouldn't want all these houses in their back garden.
Great Ashby is already huge!
Come on. Let's be fair.
Please update us as necessary.

As a resident of Graveley village for more than twenty years I have reviewed the local plan by NHDC to intend build 1,700 houses on a new estate (NHDC 900/SBC 800) south of Graveley, and the creation by SBC of a proposed industrial estate next to the Stevenage Tennis Club on the North Road. I have several major concerns and objections as follows;

* This will be on 'Green Belt' and will effectively erode any remaining boundary that Graveley as a village has with Stevenage. The loss of identity and urbanisation goes against all principles of why 'Green Belt' legislation is in place to protect our already encroached village life.
* If approved this will lead to a further unacceptable increase in traffic congestion through Graveley, particularly at peak times, and with additional volume of commercial traffic that use Graveley (High Street/B197) as a means to avoid the already high levels of congestion on the A1(M).
* My drive leads directly onto the B197 and during peak times there is a high road accident risk as the traffic is either congested, or where free flowing it is often at high speeds as the vehicles fail to slow down to the 30 mph limit.
* The proposed developments in Great Ashby of 360 (GA1) and 600 (GA2) will if approved impact Graveley further by traffic using Church Lane to avoid congestion in Stevenage.
* These developments beyond the major traffic, pollution risk will lead to significant strain on already stretched local resources health, education etc.

In Graveley we have tolerated for too long the impact of unacceptably high traffic, congestion and pollution and these developments offer no protection to the long terms residents of this historical North Herts village. I urge you to re-consider and stop these plans.

I object to the concept of building on green belt land which by law should be protected unless there are exceptional reasons and I don't think it has been shown that these are exceptional circumstances.

Graveley has a unique character and is largely a conservation area. Building houses and extending Stevenage right up to our cricket field is going to change the character of the village for ever. We will effectively be joined to Stevenage.

The large number of houses planned in NS1, GA1 and GA2 are going to generate a lot of traffic on roads that are already overloaded. The A1M is congested every morning. The traffic diverts onto the B197 through the village and it can be very difficult to get out, especially turning right out of Oak Lane with the Primary School traffic.

Martins Way is extremely slow and so the additional traffic from Gt Ashby is going to slow everything down even further.
The roundabout at J8 is extremely difficult to get out onto as we don't have our own traffic light control and on busy mornings is close to gridlock, the traffic backs up from Stevenage blocking the roundabout or sometimes the traffic going to Hitchin becomes stationary and does the same.

See attachment

Environment Bank welcomes the opportunity to briefly respond to the Consultation for North Hertfordshire District Council's Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft. We support Policies SP12: Green infrastructure, biodiversity and landscape, SP14, SP18 and SP19, along with points 4.76, 4.185, 11.38, 11.39 and 11.48, and their requirements for No Net Loss / Net Gain of biodiversity, metric assessments of biodiversity impacts and offsetting to deliver compensation.

About us:
Environment Bank is a private company working to broker biodiversity compensation agreements - offsets - for developers and landowners. We act as impartial advisers to Local Planning Authorities and are experts in biodiversity impact assessment and No Net Loss (NNL) strategies. We have partnerships and support relationships with over 25 LPAs across 15 counties - providing advice on local policies, planning guidance and strategies, together with support in implementation and individual planning cases. We have seen biodiversity No Net Loss, Net Gain and offset policies be adopted in Local Plans across the country.

Working on individual developments on behalf of developers and planning authorities we calculate the biodiversity impacts and enhancements of development proposals using approved Government metrics, determining residual biodiversity losses, if any, and proposing offset solutions. Our ecological experts then match a developer's compensation requirement with sites put forward by landowners and conservationists who undertake biodiversity enhancements on their land to generate conservation credits available as compensation. Offset schemes must be the right type of site, of the right size, in the right place, at the right time, for the right cost. Credits are sold in exchange for the creation or enhancement of habitats, generating biodiversity gain. Thereafter, legal and fiscal systems assure planning authorities that such compensation measures have been arranged independently and delivery will be overseen and guaranteed in the long-term, providing net biodiversity gain across a district.

The badger group, together with colleagues from Beds Badger Group have visited all areas with proposed planning applications and found badger implications on many of them. On behalf of the committee of Herts and Middlesex Badger Group, I wish to inform you of our major concerns regarding areas within the current North Herts development plans.

As I am sure you are aware, badgers and their setts are protected by law in the UK by the Badger Act of 1992 and the Wildlife and Countryside Act of 1981.
It is illegal for any person to:
Kill or injure a badger
Dig or take a badger
Possess a dead badger or part thereof
Interfere with, or disturb, a sett.

The most worrying proposed plan is in the proposed GA2 especially Nine Acre Wood and surrounding areas, where there is a very active badger wood with 2 large setts, outlying holes nearby and signs of extensive badger activity. There is a wildlife corridor down the hedgerow to Longdell Wood where there are also active badger setts. If you are planning to close these setts you would need a licence from Natural England and be prepared to give somewhere for the badgers to relocate taking account of existing badger density. As you are proposing to build on all the fields in which they forage too, there is nowhere in your current plan to accommodate them. We are very concerned that the extensive development of this area could not be completed without severe damage to the large badger population. I am going to forward the details of this to the Badger Trust Crime team to keep them informed of this too.

Other areas with badger implications are as follows

a) The northern part of IC3 Ickleford has badger setts and badger activity
b) EL1 and EL2 Cockernhoe/Mangrove Green have signs of badger activity and therefore the development has badger implications, particularly Stubbocks Wood and Messina Plantation public footpath
Stubbocks Wood
1. Sett with four entrances : active TL13932398
2. Sett with two entrances : recent use TL13872400
3. Sett with two entrances: active TL13762401
4. Sett with seven entrances: active TL13762396
5. Sett with two entrance: not active TL13252369
Messina Plantation public footpath
6. Sett with single entrance: used recently with badger print on spoil. TL12742425 hedgerow
7. Sett with four entrances: active with latrine nearby TL12762427 hedgerow
c) North of Stevenager NS1: Very active sett with several fresh latrines, run to huge hole in field and bucket latrine. Also border with SB2 has snuffle holes and latrines showing badger implications.
d) RD1 Active badger sett (5+ holes) in scrub ~10m N of proposed site

We have sett records and grid references for all the setts we have found and will continue to add to this information as brambles and ground cover dies down over the next month. We would be very pleased to meet with yourselves and/or your ecological surveyors regarding these sites and any other areas where you have concerns, to discuss these issues.