Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

KB4 was not included in previous plans therefore the plan does not comply with the duty to co-operate.
The plan includes releasing for residential development green belt land (SHLAA sites 55, 56 and 58 which are part of KB4) categorised as 'Site makes a significant contribution to Green Belt' while other sites (RG and WS sites in Langley) with the lower category 'The site makes a moderate contribution to Green Belt' have not been allocated for residential development. This indicates that the process of allocating land for development has not fully taken into account the North Hertfordshire Green Belt Review dated July 2016. The use of this green belt land for housing is unjustified as it will have an adverse impact on the open landscape and lead to coalescence between Knebworth and the edge of Stevenage.
The plan is not effective because it has not adequately considered the impact of additional traffic on local roads. Hertford Road, Stevenage was closed as a through road. This has meant that traffic has used Watton Road in Knebworth to access the B197 at the roundabout at the northern end of the High Street. Watton Road is a country lane, with no provision for pedestrians or cyclists for much of its length and quite unsuitable for the volume and nature of the traffic. Watton Road would be one possible access route to the B197 from KB4. Another possible access route, for traffic from KB4 on the south side of Watton Road, is St Martin's Road, which is a private, unadopted road with no footpath on either side and, as such, is quite unsuitable as an access route to a new development of 200 homes. The maintenance of the road is paid for by residents. The road mouth to the B197 is within 10 m of a pedestrian crossing and, when parents deliver/collect their children to/from the school in Swangley's Lane there is already substantial congestion. Swangleys Lane is the only other alternative route to access the B 197. This is a very narrow country lane with no footpath after the JMI School. Parking is already an issue on the road and severely restricts the flow of traffic along the road, particularly at start and end of the school day. The road mouth onto the B 197 is within 20 m of a pedestrian crossing and there is already congestion at this junction.

The planned increase of 663 dwellings in Knebworth is not justified when the land west of Stevenage is better suited. Whilst none of the individual sites within Knebworth involve over 500 dwellings, the aggregate is 663 dwellings and it is clear that all of the sites are interrelated in that each will require access to the B197 and will increase the already congested High Street. Access from the sites to the West of the village will also increase the amount of traffic using the three narrow crossings over/under the railway line. It is, therefore, contested that there should be a Strategic Policy covering all of the proposed sites in Knebworth; this should include road access to the sites and traffic implications for the centre of the village, education requirements and parking implications for people using the railway.
The two 'under' bridges and one bridge over the main East Coast railway line are not wide enough to take existing levels of traffic, let alone the increased volumes that would result from sites KB1 and KB2. The road alignment on the approaches to the bridges restricts forward visibility. On Station Road the road width at the underbridge is 4.5 m, which is insufficient for 2 large vehicles to pass. There are height restrictions on the underbridges and a weight restriction on the overbridge. The existing footway, at both underbridges, is along one side of the road only; the footways are just over 1 m wide. This is not wide enough for two pedestrians to pass and so pedestrians must step into the road to pass. The footway at the Station Road bridge is the main pedestrian thoroughfare to the railway station and thus is the main link between the parts of the village on either side of the railway line. The existing situation for pedestrians is inadequate and unsafe. An increase in both vehicular and pedestrian traffic as a result of the proposed development is unacceptable.
Parking is already a serious issue in the village. There is a small car park at the station but many commuters park their cars in roads throughout the village where there are no parking restrictions, which displaces congestion, causing greater problems throughout the village. There are no large employers in the village and few jobs in Stevenage. This will mean that, if the housing proposals proceed, the people buying the houses will probably commute to work in London by train and this will only add to an already overburdened demand on parking.
The only doctors' surgery in Knebworth is inadequate for existing volumes of patients and, as a result, they are looking for new premises with planning permission applied for. Even if this were successful, the new premises would not be adequate to cope with a 31% increase in the population of the village.
The plan is not effective as there are no proposals for job creation within Knebworth.
The plan calls for the release of Green Belt land around Knebworth. If the proposed plan is allowed to proceed, there would be almost continuous housing between Stevenage and Welwyn/Hatfield.
This is the first time that proposed site KB4 has ever been included in any Local Plan as a preferred site for development and so to include it in this iteration, with only limited time for consideration/comment, is out of line with standard national planning cycles and processes.

The plan is unjustified because it includes releasing for residential development green belt land (SHLAA sites 55, 56 and 58 which are part of KB4) categorised as 'Site makes a significant contribution to Green Belt' while other sites (RG and WS sites in Langley) with the lower category 'The site makes a moderate contribution to Green Belt' have not been allocated for residential development. This indicates that the process of allocating land for development has not fully taken into account the North Hertfordshire Green Belt Review dated July 2016.