Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Proposed Plan for House Development in Knebworth

I wish to register my opposition to the above proposal to increase the size of Knebworth village by a further 598 homes as I believe it to be unsustainable for the following reasons.

There is a lack of joined up thinking in the NHDC planning department and other departments in respect to housing needs, traffic implications, general infrastructure and future needs of the area.

The plan as it stands does not include details of the massive amount of additional infrastructure needed. Changes to the infrastructure of this magnitude which would necessarily accompany a 30% increase in homes in Knebworth, would significantly change Knebworth's character for the worse. Sixty five more homes have already been built or granted planning permission since the census in 2011 when there were 2002 dwellings in the parish.

Irrespective of the Council's destruction of the greenbelt, they would also be acting against their own 2006 study which stated that "Knebworth is not suitable for further development as it would risk the sustainability of the village".

There are two Conservation Areas adjacent to the proposed development areas; Stockens Green & Deards End Lane, which NHDC is responsible for maintaining. Allowing dense house building so close to these areas would go against NHDC's own publicly stated policy regarding the sites' importance, which includes a section of Park Lane. Furthermore Core Strategy EN2 Covering Protection and Enhancement of Landscape and Settlement Character states that Development proposals should demonstrate that their location, scale, design, and materials will protect, conserve and, where possible enhance: The setting of, and views from Conservation areas. Therefore building a high density housing estate next to these conservation areas would contravene Core Strategy EN2 by ruining their setting and views.
The Strategic objectives ENV1, ENV2, ENV3 and ENV5 will also be contravened by such a huge scheme in relation to the present size of Knebworth.

Access to the sites, which have limited vision, has to be via one of 4 railway bridges which are pinch points and already cause congestion and accidents. Unless the railway bridges are widened the congestion will get worse.

Deards End Lane and Gypsy Lane are already too heavily used by traffic between Stevenage/Codicote and Welwyn/Stevenage. These roads are too narrow to accommodate 2-way traffic along much of their length. Erosion to the verges, drive entrances and the edge of the carriageway testify to this. Many of the entrances to these properties are blind making it difficult for residents to exit as well for cars using the road. The resulting increase in traffic on these roads would not only lead to further deterioration of these lanes (which are presently not adequately maintained by the Highways Department) but the lack of any pedestrian pathways would undoubtedly lead to increased pedestrian accidents.

Substantial alterations to and widening of Gypsy Lane and Deard's End Lane would be needed to allow two way traffic and a pedestrian footpath. Widening these roads, particularly Deard's End Lane, could only be undertaken by compulsory purchase of parts of many private, wooded front gardens. This would totally destroy the character of this conservation area. This would be totally unacceptable. The proposed developments would require new access points to be arranged off the A1M and the B197 south and north of Knebworth to provide a bypass for Knebworth and for access to the developments west of Deards End Lane and Gypsy Lane. This really needs to be completed before any development can begin.

Some of the low lying houses in Orchard Way and Broom Grove are already subject to flooding after heavy rain from excess run off from the fields to the west. Flooding is also a problem in the High Street where sandbags have to be used to block doorways during heavy rain. Some of the existing drains are blocked by stones and gravel. Covering those fields (052) with concrete would only make matters worse. No details are given of what type of Sustainable drainage systems would be needed for preventing flooding of parts of Knebworth are included. It would certainly have to be a large system such as a flood run-off storage reservoir near the middle of the new development where the ground slopes down, to control the flooding of parts of Knebworth including Orchard Way and Broom Grove.

The additional infrastructure and alterations needed to cope with over a 30% increase in the resident population includes extra car parks, expansion of Knebworth Station car park and ticket office, staff and opening times, a new school, library, a new larger village hall, a new doctors surgery with adequate free parking outside. Building houses on the Chas Lowe Site is really inappropriate as this site will be needed for a new doctor's surgery, as well as either a new library or larger village hall.

At present the plan contravenes Strategic objective ECON8 which requires all development to be supported by the necessary provision of improvements to infrastructure, services and facilities. It also contravenes SOC4 which enables rural communities to plan to meet their own local needs, especially through neighbourhood planning.

Many of the objections outlined above have been made to you by many people since early 2015 yet you appear to have ignored them. It is crystal clear that the proposed developments contravene many of your strategic objectives, as well as being out of all proportion to the size of the village and will create major congestion problems. You have also failed to explain how you have calculated the number of new houses needed in this area.

Now that we are leaving the EU the population growth should slow down and as a consequence your proposed developments what ever way you have calculated them should now be significantly reduced and delayed. To conform to SOC4 you need to be able to answer the concerns and objections you have received and provide detailed answers to accord with the provisions of ECON 8. Whilst you believe the developers will sort out all these issues raised, you need to be able to justify the housing need, answer concerns of residents over infrastructure etc or go back to the drawing board.

For the above reasons your proposed developments should not go ahead as they are presently drafted.