Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

The proposal to move Green Belt boundaries from their current long established position solely because there is an equally or more defensible location elsewhere is contrary to national Green Belt policy. The availability of land, offered to meet a perceived housing need, is not an exceptional circumstance, and is not justified. The removal of Green Belt status from the land affected would be likely to cause significant harm to the Green Belt and its purposes, and requires fuller explanation and justification in the Local Plan.

The 'transport' bullet point in the DPD refers only to the Deards End Lane railway bridge. This would apply only to the proportion of traffic passing to and from Stevenage and beyond.
Traffic passing from KB2 to or from the South of Knebworth (e.g. Welwyn and the A1(M) junction), will tend to try to pass under either of the Gun Lane or the Bridge Rd (Woolmer Green) railway bridges, both narrow single track, with narrow pedestrian pathways. Wych Elm Lane, which borders the proposed KB2 site to the west, and leads into Bridge Rd., is a single track road with passing places, unlikely to be suitable for the expected increased traffic flow. Bridge Rd, from the railway bridge to the junction with the B197, is a narrow residential road with necessary on-street parking that is already difficult to transit through. Increased traffic from KB2 would present a considerable safety issue. The junction with the B197 would be a major problem, as this is a very busy road at commuter times, and turning right from Bridge Road will be very difficult.

The northerly part of KB2 has, after prolonged rainfall, become waterlogged, causing surface water to flow eastward onto Gypsy Lane, blocking road drainage and overflowing into gardens and houses in Orchard Way, across Orchard Way and pooling into Broom Grove, to a depth sufficient to flow into some of the houses. Development of the KB2 site, will decrease the absorption area of the site, increasing the potential frequency for this flooding.

The proposal to move Green Belt boundaries from their current long established position solely because there is an equally or more defensible location elsewhere is contrary to national Green Belt policy. The availability of land, offered to meet a perceived housing need, is not an exceptional circumstance, and is not justified. The removal of Green Belt status from the land affected would be likely to cause significant harm to the Green Belt and its purposes, and requires fuller explanation and justification in the Local Plan.

The proposal to move Green Belt boundaries from their current long established position solely because there is an equally or more defensible location elsewhere is contrary to national Green Belt policy. The availability of land, offered to meet a perceived housing need, is not an exceptional circumstance, and does not justify the removal of Green Belt status.
The removal of Green Belt status from the land affected would be likely to cause significant harm to the Green Belt and its purposes, and requires fuller explanation and justification in the Local Plan.