MM 216 / FM 112

My reasons for objection to the NHDC Local Plan are:
Lack of transparency in the process
Unapproved enlargement of site BK3 to include Herts County Council owned land
Lack of detail or explanation on numbers of housing requirements
Proposal of S106 contributions from developments being shared unfairly with Barley

I object to the Further Main Modifications to the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011 - 2031 (the Plan), May 2021.

My objection comes from the lack of transparency to several Further Modifications, including housing numbers for Barkway and contributions from development in Barkway towards sustainable travel to school. I also object to the justification for the integration of the Reserve School Site into BK3; and the lack of transparency in the process that has denied the Parish Council the opportunity to support the removal of BK3 from the Plan as requested by North Hertfordshire District Council (NHDC), or to object to a Further Modification not to remove BK3 from the Plan

I object to parts or the whole of the content of the following Further Modifications, including aspects of the justification put forward to support them.
MM010/FM039, p.32, Policy SP2, Settlement Hierarchy and Spatial Distribution
MM012/FM041, p.33, New paragraph after paragraph 4.12
MM217/FM113, p.144, Table after Policy BK3
MM215/FM111, p.144, Policy BK2
MM216/FM112, p.144, Policy BK3
MM219/FM114, p.144, Paragraph 13.39

I also object to the following Examination Documents which have been submitted to the Examination between November 2019 and March 2021:
ED170 Council's further response to Inspector’s Letter of 9 August (EX168)
ED 175 Council’s response to Inspector 9 July 2019

Finally, I object to the lack of transparency over this most recent part of the Examination process that has not provided the opportunity for the Parish Council to fairly state its case in relation to BK3, and the omission of a Further Modification refusing NHDC’s request to exclude BK3 from their Local Plan.

My reasons for objection to the NHDC Local Plan are:
Lack of transparency in the process
Unapproved enlargement of site BK3 to include Herts County Council owned land
Lack of detail or explanation on numbers of housing requirements
Proposal of S106 contributions from developments being shared unfairly with Barley

I object to the Further Main Modifications to the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011 - 2031 (the Plan), May 2021.

My objection comes from the lack of transparency to several Further Modifications, including housing numbers for Barkway and contributions from development in Barkway towards sustainable travel to school. I also object to the justification for the integration of the Reserve School Site into BK3; and the lack of transparency in the process that has denied the Parish Council the opportunity to support the removal of BK3 from the Plan as requested by North Hertfordshire District Council (NHDC), or to object to a Further Modification not to remove BK3 from the Plan

I object to parts or the whole of the content of the following Further Modifications, including aspects of the justification put forward to support them.
MM010/FM039, p.32, Policy SP2, Settlement Hierarchy and Spatial Distribution
MM012/FM041, p.33, New paragraph after paragraph 4.12
MM217/FM113, p.144, Table after Policy BK3
MM215/FM111, p.144, Policy BK2
MM216/FM112, p.144, Policy BK3
MM219/FM114, p.144, Paragraph 13.39

I also object to the following Examination Documents which have been submitted to the Examination between November 2019 and March 2021:
ED170 Council's further response to Inspector’s Letter of 9 August (EX168)
ED 175 Council’s response to Inspector 9 July 2019

Finally, I object to the lack of transparency over this most recent part of the Examination process that has not provided the opportunity for the Parish Council to fairly state its case in relation to BK3, and the omission of a Further Modification refusing NHDC’s request to exclude BK3 from their Local Plan.

My reasons for objection to the NHDC Local Plan are:
Lack of transparency in the process
Unapproved enlargement of site BK3 to include Herts County Council owned land
Lack of detail or explanation on numbers of housing requirements
Proposal of S106 contributions from developments being shared unfairly with Barley

I object to the Further Main Modifications to the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011 - 2031 (the Plan), May 2021.

My objection comes from the lack of transparency to several Further Modifications, including housing numbers for Barkway and contributions from development in Barkway towards sustainable travel to school. I also object to the justification for the integration of the Reserve School Site into BK3; and the lack of transparency in the process that has denied the Parish Council the opportunity to support the removal of BK3 from the Plan as requested by North Hertfordshire District Council (NHDC), or to object to a Further Modification not to remove BK3 from the Plan

I object to parts or the whole of the content of the following Further Modifications, including aspects of the justification put forward to support them.
MM010/FM039, p.32, Policy SP2, Settlement Hierarchy and Spatial Distribution
MM012/FM041, p.33, New paragraph after paragraph 4.12
MM217/FM113, p.144, Table after Policy BK3
MM215/FM111, p.144, Policy BK2
MM216/FM112, p.144, Policy BK3
MM219/FM114, p.144, Paragraph 13.39

I also object to the following Examination Documents which have been submitted to the Examination between November 2019 and March 2021:
ED170 Council's further response to Inspector’s Letter of 9 August (EX168)
ED 175 Council’s response to Inspector 9 July 2019

Finally, I object to the lack of transparency over this most recent part of the Examination process that has not provided the opportunity for the Parish Council to fairly state its case in relation to BK3, and the omission of a Further Modification refusing NHDC’s request to exclude BK3 from their Local Plan.

Please see below my objections regarding the above:

1. Transparency of the Process

• There has been no public correspondence between the Inspector and NHDC on the Draft Schedule of Further Modifications, only NHDC’s assertion that the Inspector has agreed the Schedule of Further Modifications.
• The reasons for the Inspector’s decision not to accept NHDC’s request to exclude BK3 from the Local Plan has not been published.
• We have not had a fair or proportionate opportunity to put our case against the inclusion of Site BK3. We support NHDC’s request to remove site BK3 from their Local Plan.

2. Enlarging BK3 to Include Hertfordshire Country Council’s (HCC) School Site

Examination Document ED175. This document says that including the school site in the housing allocation site BK3 is pragmatic. HCC have not requested this amendment. This decision may be practical for NHDC but if BK3 includes HCCs land, then there is a risk that more homes than the 140 allocated will be built on this site. The land is not required by HCC for a school. The HCC school site should not be part of housing site BK3.

3. Figures for Housing Allocations, Completions, and Permissions

MM010/FM039 says the number of homes expected to be delivered in Barkway village in the Local Plan period is 208. There is no evidence given for this figure. The figure is critical because Barkway is identified as suitable to support higher levels of housing that Category A villages on the basis that the number of homes expected to be delivered is ‘more than 200’. The figures need to be justified.

MM217/FM113 is a table showing new homes for the parish. The table is wrong and the figures need to be justified.

4. S106 Contributions to Provide School Transport

The contribution from construction of new homes in Barkway is mentioned three times in the Schedule of Further Proposed Main Modifications. School transport is already provided, and BPC have been consulted on how S106 money should be spent for the benefit of the parish. If this modification was to remain in the Local Plan for a bus service between Barkway and Barley schools, Barley would be benefiting from development in Barkway.

MM215/FM111 (in relation to Policy BK2): “Contribution towards travel by sustainable modes of transport between Barley and Barkway schools”. We suggest this is deleted.

MM216/FM112 (in relation to Policy BK3): “Contribution towards travel by sustainable modes of transport between Barley and Barkway schools.” We suggest this is deleted.

MM219/FM114 (in relation to Paragraph 13.39): “Contributions to support sustainable travel between the two sites should be secured from new developments.” There are no developments proposed in Barley, only in Barkway and we suggest this is deleted.

Please see below my objections regarding the above:

1. Transparency of the Process

• There has been no public correspondence between the Inspector and NHDC on the Draft Schedule of Further Modifications, only NHDC’s assertion that the Inspector has agreed the Schedule of Further Modifications.
• The reasons for the Inspector’s decision not to accept NHDC’s request to exclude BK3 from the Local Plan has not been published.
• We have not had a fair or proportionate opportunity to put our case against the inclusion of Site BK3. We support NHDC’s request to remove site BK3 from their Local Plan.

2. Enlarging BK3 to Include Hertfordshire Country Council’s (HCC) School Site

Examination Document ED175. This document says that including the school site in the housing allocation site BK3 is pragmatic. HCC have not requested this amendment. This decision may be practical for NHDC but if BK3 includes HCCs land, then there is a risk that more homes than the 140 allocated will be built on this site. The land is not required by HCC for a school. The HCC school site should not be part of housing site BK3.

3. Figures for Housing Allocations, Completions, and Permissions

MM010/FM039 says the number of homes expected to be delivered in Barkway village in the Local Plan period is 208. There is no evidence given for this figure. The figure is critical because Barkway is identified as suitable to support higher levels of housing that Category A villages on the basis that the number of homes expected to be delivered is ‘more than 200’. The figures need to be justified.

MM217/FM113 is a table showing new homes for the parish. The table is wrong and the figures need to be justified.

4. S106 Contributions to Provide School Transport

The contribution from construction of new homes in Barkway is mentioned three times in the Schedule of Further Proposed Main Modifications. School transport is already provided, and BPC have been consulted on how S106 money should be spent for the benefit of the parish. If this modification was to remain in the Local Plan for a bus service between Barkway and Barley schools, Barley would be benefiting from development in Barkway.

MM215/FM111 (in relation to Policy BK2): “Contribution towards travel by sustainable modes of transport between Barley and Barkway schools”. We suggest this is deleted.

MM216/FM112 (in relation to Policy BK3): “Contribution towards travel by sustainable modes of transport between Barley and Barkway schools.” We suggest this is deleted.

MM219/FM114 (in relation to Paragraph 13.39): “Contributions to support sustainable travel between the two sites should be secured from new developments.” There are no developments proposed in Barley, only in Barkway and we suggest this is deleted.

My reasons for objection to the NHDC Local Plan are:
Lack of transparency in the process
Unapproved enlargement of site BK3 to include Herts County Council owned land
Lack of detail or explanation on numbers of housing requirements
Proposal of S106 contributions from developments being shared unfairly with Barley

I object to the Further Main Modifications to the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011 - 2031 (the Plan), May 2021.

My objection comes from the lack of transparency to several Further Modifications, including housing numbers for Barkway and contributions from development in Barkway towards sustainable travel to school. I also object to the justification for the integration of the Reserve School Site into BK3; and the lack of transparency in the process that has denied the Parish Council the opportunity to support the removal of BK3 from the Plan as requested by North Hertfordshire District Council (NHDC), or to object to a Further Modification not to remove BK3 from the Plan

I object to parts or the whole of the content of the following Further Modifications, including aspects of the justification put forward to support them.
MM010/FM039, p.32, Policy SP2, Settlement Hierarchy and Spatial Distribution
MM012/FM041, p.33, New paragraph after paragraph 4.12
MM217/FM113, p.144, Table after Policy BK3
MM215/FM111, p.144, Policy BK2
MM216/FM112, p.144, Policy BK3
MM219/FM114, p.144, Paragraph 13.39

I also object to the following Examination Documents which have been submitted to the Examination between November 2019 and March 2021:
ED170 Council's further response to Inspector’s Letter of 9 August (EX168)
ED 175 Council’s response to Inspector 9 July 2019

Finally, I object to the lack of transparency over this most recent part of the Examination process that has not provided the opportunity for the Parish Council to fairly state its case in relation to BK3, and the omission of a Further Modification refusing NHDC’s request to exclude BK3 from their Local Plan.

To my surprise I have received correspondence in respect of a planning application/proposal for a development in Barkway which is back on the agenda. I understood this was to be removed from the local plan as Barkway was no longer seen as a 'village for growth' as suggested by an NHDC Planning Officer in 2020.

I would like to register my objection to this proposed development.

Reason for objection:

1. Transparency of the Process
• There has been no public correspondence between the Inspector and NHDC on the Draft Schedule of Further Modifications, only NHDC’s assertion that the Inspector has agreed the Schedule of Further Modifications.
• The reasons for the Inspector’s decision not to accept NHDC’s request to exclude BK3 from the Local Plan has not been published.
• We have not had a fair or proportionate opportunity to put our case against the inclusion of Site BK3. We support NHDC’s request to remove site BK3 from their Local Plan

2. Enlarging BK3 to Include Hertfordshire Country Council’s (HCC) School Site
Examination Document ED175. This document says that including the school site in the housing allocation site BK3 is pragmatic. HCC have not requested this amendment. This decision may be practical for NHDC but if BK3 includes HCCs land, then there is a risk that more homes than the 140 allocated will be built on this site. The land is not required by HCC for a school. The HCC school site should not be part of housing site BK3.

3. Figures for Housing Allocations, Completions and Permissions
MM010/FM039 says the number of homes expected to be delivered in Barkway village in the Local Plan period is 208. There is no evidence given for this figure. The figure is critical because Barkway is identified as suitable to support higher levels of housing that Category A villages on the basis that the number of homes expected to be delivered is ‘more than 200’. The figures need to be justified. MM217/FM113 is a table showing new homes for the parish. The table is wrong. Red type shows the figures given in the modification. Blue shows a simple correction. However, the detail of how the figures were arrived at is not available so the figures need to be justified. Total allocated sites 173 160 homes Completions and permissions 31 57 homes Total allocated, completed and permitted 204 230 217 homes

4. S106 Contributions to Provide School Transport
The contribution from construction of new homes in Barkway is mentioned three times in the Schedule of Further Proposed Main Modifications. School transport is already provided, and BPC have been consulted on how S106 money should be spent for the benefit of the parish. If this modification was to remain in the Local Plan for a bus service between Barkway and Barley schools, Barley would be benefiting from development in Barkway.
MM215/FM111 (in relation to Policy BK2): “Contribution towards travel by sustainable modes of transport between Barley and Barkway schools”. We suggest this is deleted.
MM216/FM112 (in relation to Policy BK3): “Contribution towards travel by sustainable modes of transport between Barley and Barkway schools.” We suggest this is deleted.
MM219/FM114 (in relation to Paragraph 13.39): “Contributions to support sustainable travel between the two sites should be secured from new developments.” There are no developments proposed in Barley, only in Barkway and we suggest this is deleted.

To my surprise I have received correspondence in respect of a planning application/proposal for a development in Barkway which is back on the agenda. I understood this was to be removed from the local plan as Barkway was no longer seen as a 'village for growth' as suggested by an NHDC Planning Officer in 2020.

I would like to register my objection to this proposed development.

Reason for objection:

1. Transparency of the Process
• There has been no public correspondence between the Inspector and NHDC on the Draft Schedule of Further Modifications, only NHDC’s assertion that the Inspector has agreed the Schedule of Further Modifications.
• The reasons for the Inspector’s decision not to accept NHDC’s request to exclude BK3 from the Local Plan has not been published.
• We have not had a fair or proportionate opportunity to put our case against the inclusion of Site BK3. We support NHDC’s request to remove site BK3 from their Local Plan

2. Enlarging BK3 to Include Hertfordshire Country Council’s (HCC) School Site
Examination Document ED175. This document says that including the school site in the housing allocation site BK3 is pragmatic. HCC have not requested this amendment. This decision may be practical for NHDC but if BK3 includes HCCs land, then there is a risk that more homes than the 140 allocated will be built on this site. The land is not required by HCC for a school. The HCC school site should not be part of housing site BK3.

3. Figures for Housing Allocations, Completions and Permissions
MM010/FM039 says the number of homes expected to be delivered in Barkway village in the Local Plan period is 208. There is no evidence given for this figure. The figure is critical because Barkway is identified as suitable to support higher levels of housing that Category A villages on the basis that the number of homes expected to be delivered is ‘more than 200’. The figures need to be justified. MM217/FM113 is a table showing new homes for the parish. The table is wrong. Red type shows the figures given in the modification. Blue shows a simple correction. However, the detail of how the figures were arrived at is not available so the figures need to be justified. Total allocated sites 173 160 homes Completions and permissions 31 57 homes Total allocated, completed and permitted 204 230 217 homes

4. S106 Contributions to Provide School Transport
The contribution from construction of new homes in Barkway is mentioned three times in the Schedule of Further Proposed Main Modifications. School transport is already provided, and BPC have been consulted on how S106 money should be spent for the benefit of the parish. If this modification was to remain in the Local Plan for a bus service between Barkway and Barley schools, Barley would be benefiting from development in Barkway.
MM215/FM111 (in relation to Policy BK2): “Contribution towards travel by sustainable modes of transport between Barley and Barkway schools”. We suggest this is deleted.
MM216/FM112 (in relation to Policy BK3): “Contribution towards travel by sustainable modes of transport between Barley and Barkway schools.” We suggest this is deleted.
MM219/FM114 (in relation to Paragraph 13.39): “Contributions to support sustainable travel between the two sites should be secured from new developments.” There are no developments proposed in Barley, only in Barkway and we suggest this is deleted.

See Attached

See Attached

See Attached

See Attached

See Attached

HCC welcomes the opportunity to provide comment on the Schedule of Further Proposed Modifications to the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011-2031.

HCC wishes to make the following comments which are in chronological order, mirroring the organisation of the document itself.

• MM043/FM065 - HCC welcomes the commitment to review the plan by the end of 2023.
• MM045/FM001 - HCC welcomes the added detail included in Policy SP9.
• FM067 - HCC welcomes the specific reference to secondary education provision for the Stevenage area requiring monitoring of demand to inform the local plan review.
• MM215/FM111 and MM216/FM112 - HCC acknowledges the modification in response to the hearing sessions and welcomes the need for a sustainable travel solution between the federated schools in Barley and Barkway to support these developments.
• MM219/FM114 - HCC agrees with the updated wording.
• MM227/FM123 - HCC considers that added wording included in modifications MM224 through MM226 of ‘Contribution towards expansion of Codicote Primary School’ ought to also be included for this modification in relation to Policy CD5.
• MM286/FM145 - HCC welcomes the removal of the wording ‘1FE’ to enable effective school planning based on the most up-to-date data available.
• FM 173 (para 13.300) - The policy should reference the west of the town rather the east in terms of new school provision
• FM190 - HCC welcomes Policy IMR2 and the commitment to an early Local Pan review.

See Attached

This email is a written objection statement to the Further Modification to the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011 - 2031 (the Plan), May 2021.

As a resident of Barkway village, I am extremely concerned by the clear lack of transparency of the process relating to the schedule of Further Modifications. This lack of transparency has meant that we (residents) have not had a fair or proportionate opportunity to put our case against the inclusion of site BK3 to the plan.

I very much support NHDC's previous request to remove site BK3 from their Local Plan. It is shocking therefore to see the draft schedule for Further Modifications. There has been no public correspondence between the Inspector and NHDC on the draft schedule for Further Modifications, only NHDC's assertion that the Inspector has agreed the schedule for Further Modifications!

To add to this, there has also been no public correspondence explaining the reasons as to why the Inspectors decision not to accept NHDCs request to exclude BK3 from the Local Plan.

I also object to the proposed enlarged of BK3 to include Hertfordshire County Council's School Site. BK3 land is not required nor has been requested by Hertfordshire County Council. Therefore the inclusion of the School Site within the Examination Document ED175 in unjustified and should be removed.

It is stated numerous times in the Schedule of Further Modifications that the development of new homes in Barkway will provide contribution to school transport. School transport already exists. If this modification to introduce a bus service between Barley and Barkway was to remain, Barley would clearly be benefiting from the (over)development in Barkway.

Due to this I recommend that the following statements are deleted from the following documents, along with any reference to sharing contributions from development in Barkway with Barley:

MM215/FM111 "Contribution towards travel by sustainable modes of transport between Barley and Barkway schools”

MM216/FM112 "Contribution towards travel by sustainable modes of transport between Barley and Barkway schools”

MM219/FM114 "Contributions to support sustainable travel between the two sites should be secured from new developments.”

Finally the figures stated for Housing Allocations, Completions and Permissions are unjustified. MM217/FM113 states figures which have been given in the modification along with subsequent correction for these figures. However, no justification is provided for how the figures have been derived.
Please also note that MM010/FM039 states the homes expected to be delivered in Barkway village through the local plan period is 208. No evidence is given for this figure, nor has any justification been provided as to why Barkway has been identified as suitable to support housing levels higher than other Category A villages.

On a personal note, I am extremely concerned about the proposed development of new homes on the BK3 site. As a family we recently moved to Barkway from Royston for a quieter and more intimate village life within a beautiful and historic setting. We identified Barkway as a village where we felt it safe for our young children to grow up, knowing the quiet and safe nature of the local environment. A development such as the proposed BK3 would, without doubt, majorly impact this. The noise, traffic and pollution that a development like BK3 would be truly devastating for a village like Barkway, and an impact on a historic village which would be completely irreversible.

A development of 140 new homes in a small village which does not even possess a local shop seems completely irrational. The amount of increased traffic generated as new residents move in and out of the area would choke the village and key routes both in and out of Royston and Buntingford. Towns already under intense development themselves.

I sincerely hope that the technical challenges to the Local Plan listed above are appropriately responded to. I also hope that the personal plea to protect and preserve Barkway and the local area is positively considered.

See Attached

Please note my objections to the inclusion of the bk3 site to the local plan (yet again) as follows.

-I object because it’s in an inappropriate development in an area that cannot support it.

-A development as large as this in a rural village will have a detrimental effect on the character of Barkway both in terms of how it will physically change the landscape, and the strain it will put on an already strained infrastructure not just in Barkway but Barley too with the increase in traffic in particular - something we already have a rather large problem with as it is in barley without any real solution in sight.

- if you’ve been through Barkway at school drop off time, you’ll note the high probability of possible accidents on the junction that leads to this very site. It’s a surprise it hasn’t happened already let alone with a further 300 odd car movements happening in the early morning around the same location, same time.

- I’m not even sure why a development of this size in a rural village is being considered given how badly it is supported in all the necessary infrastructure factors required.

After much time and expense I thought that BK3 had been fully discussed and resolved: the Planning Officer at NHDC wrote to the Inspector requesting BK3 to be taken out of the Plan. Now I hear that it most certainly has not. BK3 is back on the agenda. Why?

1. Transparency of the Process
• There has been no public correspondence between the Inspector and NHDC on the Draft Schedule of Further Modifications, only NHDC's assertion that the Inspector has agreed the Schedule of Further Modifications
• The reasons for the Inspector's decision not to accept NHDC's request to exclude BK3 from the Local Plan has not been published.
• We have not had a FAIR or PROPORTIONATE opportunity to put our case against the inclusion of Site BK3. We support NHDC's request to remove site BK3 from their Local Plan.
2. ENLARGING BK3 to include Herts CC School site
• Examination Document ED17.This document says that including the school site in the housing allocation site BK3 is pragmatic. HCC has NOT requested this amendment. This decision may be practical for NHDC but if BK3 includes HCC's land, then there is a risk that more homes that the 140 allocated will be built on this site. The land is not required by HCC for a school and so it should NOT be part of housing site BK3.
3. Figures for Housing Allocations, Completions, and Permissions
• MM010/FM039 says the number of homes expected to be delivered in Barkway village in the Local Plan time span is 208. There is NO evidence given for this figure. The figure is critical because Barkway is identified as suitable to support higher levels of housing than Category A villages on the basis that the number of homes expected to be delivered is 'more than 200'. THE FIGURES NEED TO BE JUSTIFIED.
• MM217/FM113 is a table showing new homes for the parish . THE TABLE IS WRONG. Red shows the figures given in the modification. Blue shows a simple correction. HOWEVER the detail of HOW the figures were arrived at is not available so the figures need to be JUSTIFIED:
o Total allocated sites: 173 corrected to 160 homes
o completions and permissions: 31 changed to 57 homes
o Total allocated/completed/permitted: 204 changed to 230 changed to 217 homes
4. S106 Contributions to Provide School Transport
• The contribution from construction to new homes in Barkway is mentioned 3 times in the Schedule of Further Proposed Main Modifications. School transport is already provided and BPC have been consulted on how S106 money should be spent for the benefit of the parish. If this modification was to remain in the Local Plan for a bus service between Barkway and Barley schools, Barley would be benefiting from development in Barkway.
• MM215/FM111 (in relation to Policy BK2): "Contribution towards travel by sustainable modes of transport between Barley and Barkway schools". Suggest this is deleted.
• MM216/FM112 (in relation to Policy BK3: "Contribution towards travel by sustainable modes of transport between Barley and Barkway schools". Suggest this is deleted.
• MM219/FM114 (in relation to Paragraph 13.39): "Contribution to support sustainable travel between the two sites should be secured from new developments." There are NO developments proposed in Barley, only in Barkway. Suggest this is deleted.
It is very worrying that lack of TRANSPARENCY and lack of JUSTIFICATION are very much at the heart of BK3. It does not engender trust in North Herts and Hertfordshire County Councils' planning procedures.
I hope you will investigate this thoroughly and TRANSPARENTLY and ensure that we are dealt with fairly.
In addition to the above there are very real problems relating to an inadequate infrastructure (sewage etc) and inadequate country roads which would not be able to cope safely with the number of houses proposed.
Thank you for giving this your full attention.

The saga of Barkway Site BK3 within NHDC Local Plan 2011 - 2031 continues.

The inappropriate nature of this large development in a tiny village has been clear from the outset.

In late 2020, a Planning Officer at NHDC wrote to the Inspector to request that BK3 was taken out of the plan and that Barkway was no longer to be shown as a ‘village for growth’.

However, in February of this year, when the Schedule of Further Main Modifications was published, BK3 was still in the plan.

I strongly object to the ongoing inclusion of BK3 within this plan, and I support NHDC’s request to remove site BK3 from their Local Plan.

In particular, I have issues with the transparency of the process, especially:

• There has been no public correspondence between the Inspector and NHDC on the Draft Schedule of Further Modifications, only NHDC’s assertion that the Inspector has agreed the Schedule of Further Modifications.
• The reasons for the Inspector’s decision not to accept NHDC’s request to exclude BK3 from the Local Plan has not been published.
• The public has not had a fair or proportionate opportunity to put the case against the inclusion of Site BK3.

I trust that fairness and common sense will prevail and that the development of BK3 will not be approved.

See Attached

See Attached

See Attached

See Attached

See Attached

Transparency of the Process is the most important issue.
.There has been no public correspondence between the Inspector and NHDC on the Draft schedule of Further Modifications,
only NHDC's assertion that the Inspector has agreed the schedule of Further Modifications.
.The reasons for the Inspector's decision not to accept NHDC's request to exclude BK3 from the Local Plan has not been published.
.We have not had a fair or proportionate opportunity to put our case against the inclusion of Site BK3. We support NHDC's request to remove site BK3 from their local plan.

I am writing to object to the above planning application on a number of grounds.

1. I understand that late last year, an NHDC Planning Officer wrote to the Inspector requesting that Barkway be no longer classified as a “Village for Growth”. This would presumably have had the effect of halting BK3 development at source. However, we now discover that BK3 is still included in the Schedule of Further Main Modifications, without any reason being given - nor an opportunity to make the case against the inclusion. Any final approval should be delayed until local bodies have been given the chance to make their case, if the process is to be seen as fair and transparent. I would most emphatically support NHDC’s request to remove site BK3 from the Local Plan.

2. Barkway is surely one of the least suitable sites in the county for such a hugely disproportionate addition to its housing stock. There are virtually no opportunities for employment, implying that residents will need to travel at least as far as Royston (and probably further) to find jobs. There is no doctor’s surgery, no shop, and extremely limited public transport.

3. If 140 houses are built, therefore, each household will need to possess at least one car (probably more, especially where young adults living in parental homes are concerned). I understand that planning applications for 25 homes at land next to Royston Road have already been turned down on the grounds that local roads are insufficient to handle the increased traffic. What, then, is the logic in allowing an even larger number of houses to be built? I would suggest that planning officials visit Barkway at peak periods - rush hours, the beginning and end of the school day, for example - and see for themselves the congestion that already exists on the High Street and on the road into Royston.

4. The application would appear to go against several widely-publicised governmental objectives - for example, the requirement that new developments should be “sustainable”. The lack of employment referred to above means that the damaging effects of the development will far outbalance the benefits of creating new homes. Affordable housing, for instance, is pointless if the costs of commuting make them impracticable for the people most in need of such accommodation, which should be built where amenities like public transport, schools, surgeries etc. are more conveniently available.

5. There are also substantial environmental considerations, and it would be good to know that these had been addressed. The additional emissions of (say) 200 extra cars to the environs of a small village will be considerable and will militate against a number of planning guidelines concerning pollution and sustainability.

Please consider my objections seriously.

See Attached

See Attached

This email is a written objection statement to the Further Modification to the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011 - 2031 (the Plan), May 2021.

As a resident of Barkway village, I am concerned by the clear lack of transparency of the process relating to the schedule of Further Modifications. This lack of transparency has meant that we (residents) have not had a fair or proportionate opportunity to put our case against the inclusion of site BK3 to the plan.

I fully support NHDC's previous request to remove site BK3 from their Local Plan. It is therefore extremely disappointing to see the draft schedule for Further Modifications. There has been no public correspondence between the Inspector and NHDC on the draft schedule for Further Modifications, only NHDC's assertion that the Inspector has agreed the schedule for Further Modifications.

To add to this, there has also been no public correspondence outlining the reasons why the Inspectors did not accept NHDCs request to exclude BK3 from the Local Plan.

I also object to the proposed enlarged of BK3 to include Hertfordshire County Council's School Site. BK3 land is not required nor has it been requested by Hertfordshire County Council. Therefore the inclusion of the School Site within the Examination Document ED175 in unjustified and should be removed. There are sufficient lower and primary schools within the area but little consideration appears to have been given to the increasing pressure this proposal will place on secondary/upper schools and the increased traffic in/out of Royston and Buntingford (to reach these schools), which are already heavily congested routes.

I would strongly dispute any traffic survey that has been carried out as part of the proposal, which does not recognise two key factors when reviewing the volume of traffic - 1) impact of Covid (heavily reduced traffic as many work from home and schools are closed or on staggered start/finish times) and 2) the impact of the other proposed housing development south side of Royston (for 300 new homes). Looking ahead 24-36 months, both proposals for additional housing will seriously and negatively impact in particular the two key routes in and out of Royston, the Barkway Road and A10. An additional lower/primary school in Barkway will not address this issue nor the need for children to receive a secondary education, which is currently via the nearest catchment school in Royston or alternatively, Buntingford. I drive along these roads daily, minimum 4 times to travel to work and to take children to school and even with the current reduced traffic (and without the additional housing) these routes can quickly become very congested due to the one way system in Royston.

It is stated numerous times in the Schedule of Further Modifications that the development of new homes in Barkway will provide contribution to school transport. School transport already exists. If this modification to introduce a bus service between Barley and Barkway was to remain, Barley would clearly be benefiting from the (over)development in Barkway. For the reasons highlighted above, the proposed contribution to the school transport between Barkway and Barley will have absolutely no impact on the real issues created by 140 extra houses being placed in a small villages i.e. the two main roads in and out of the nearest town Royston, which can not support the additional traffic.

Due to this I recommend that the following statements are deleted from the following documents, along with any reference to sharing contributions from development in Barkway with Barley:

MM215/FM111 "Contribution towards travel by sustainable modes of transport between Barley and Barkway schools”

MM216/FM112 "Contribution towards travel by sustainable modes of transport between Barley and Barkway schools”

MM219/FM114 "Contributions to support sustainable travel between the two sites should be secured from new developments.”

Finally the figures stated for Housing Allocations, Completions and Permissions are unjustified. MM217/FM113 states figures which have been given in the modification along with subsequent correction for these figures. However, no justification is provided for how the figures have been derived.
Please also note that MM010/FM039 states the homes expected to be delivered in Barkway village through the local plan period is 208. No evidence is given for this figure, nor has any justification been provided as to why Barkway has been identified as suitable to support housing levels higher than other Category A villages.

I am extremely concerned about the proposed development for new homes on the BK3 site. We have recently made the decision to move to Barkway to improve our quality of life. Our primary focus was to improve our health and wellbeing and provide a safe environment for our children to grow up in with lower volumes of traffic and pollution. A development such as the proposed BK3 would, without doubt negatively impact this and have a destructive impact on the environment. The noise, traffic and pollution that a development like BK3 would be truly devastating for a village like Barkway, and an impact on a historic village which would be completely irreversible.

A development of 140 new homes in a small village which does not even possess a local shop seems completely irrational and one I can not comprehend. The amount of increased traffic generated as new residents move in and out of the area would choke the village and key routes both in and out of Royston and Buntingford. Towns already under intense development themselves.

I sincerely hope that the technical challenges to the Local Plan listed above are appropriately responded to. I also hope that the personal plea to protect and preserve Barkway and the local area is positively considered.