Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Search representations

Results for Mrs Anthea Riggall search

New search New search

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

KB1 Land at Deards End

Representation ID: 3215

Received: 30/11/2016

Respondent: Mrs Anthea Riggall

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Object to KB1:
- Current infrastructure requirements
- Highway infrastructure, safety and congestion
- Parking facilities
- Healthcare facilities
- Drainage and flood issues
- Pedestrian facilities
- Scale of development
- New Garden City/Settlement
- Not consistent with NPPF
- Green Belt
- Danger of coalescence with Stevenage

Full text:

Legally Compliant - No
I believe this does not comply with the regulations as this is the first time KB4 has been included in the Plan, so we have not had a reasonable amount of time to consider it.

Sound -
Positively prepared - No
I do not believe the infrastructure requirements for this new amount of development can be met because of the major unresolved problems in Knebworth, existing for donkey's years. These are chiefly the inadequate roads (including 3 dangerous railway bridges), traffic, parking, as well as poor medical facilities (NB the long-awaited current plans for rebuilding a new doctors' surgery, along with pharmacy and library, were designed to accommodate current needs only), and the known drainage/flooding issues. The main arterial roads in Knebworth, namely Stevenage/London Road (B197), and Watton Road/Station Road/Park Lane, come to a standstill twice a day, and Swangley's Lane (a narrow country lane without footpath beyond the school) jams twice a day at school times. The High Street, with vital parking on both sides, can scarcely allow two cars to pass, and buses and trucks have to wait, sometimes for 10 minutes or more, until someone at the far end selflessly decides not to enter the fray. This road cannot be widened, like many others in Knebworth. Swangley's Lane for example is narrow, and the lack of footpath means it is dangerous for children going to and from school. Also residents cannot safely back out into the road when cars are parked outside their drive, as without the vision of the road a footpath gives, drivers are blind to oncoming traffic which then travels down effectively a single lane. A guest of mine attempting to back out recently had his car virtually written off by a passing car, and dangerous incidents happen frequently. Yet this is yards from where the plan will site a new crossroad/roundabout to service the southern KB4 development.
Flooding is frequent in many places, including east of Knebworth, exacerbated by poor drainage - another major problem for any new development.

Justified - No
Effective - No
The plans are to increase Knebworth housing by 31%. Will the infrastructure also effectively increase by a third? It seems unlikely,
but if it does not the plan seems unworkable.
More specifically, if the plan is implemented as it stands this village, having accommodated considerable development over the years, will have finally overstretched its limitations. Chief among these is the problem of access via the High Street bottleneck, and the dangerous narrowness of the three railway tunnels/bridge, which appear to be insuperable problems. This in itself would make the plan unworkable.

We understand that the question of a new town/settlement after 2031 has been considered. Why is it not being considered now? With all the current problems of expansion of existing built up areas, the urgency of this would seem a no-brainer, and would help retain the semi-rural character of the North Herts area, especially our already over-populated southern section.

Consistent with national policy - No
The Green Belt - while this is now allowed to be eroded, we should still be aware of its aims and strive to keep these intact wherever possible.
One is to retain the rural character of villages. Despite considerable development in recent decades Knebworth, though now a large village, still manages to retain much of its rural character, for example its narrow lanes without footpaths, which traffic somehow manages overall to accommodate, e.g. Swangley's Lane, Old Lane, Deards End Lane. These will surely be rationalised into anonymous straightened and paved modern roads given the inevitable increase of traffic.
Another is to avoid merging with neighbouring towns and villages. However the new plans give the go-ahead to the real possibility of Knebworth coalescing with Stevenage, a purpose-built town with a totally different living environment. This is surely not justified.

Complies with the duty to cooperate - No
I don't believe the local plan fulfils the duty of cooperation to give Knebworth residents living in KB4 , especially those having been here for well over 40 years as I have, such a short time to make considered representations about the plan about to be decided.
Secondly, I don't think it is reasonable cooperation to expect one village, Knebworth, which has already accepted considerable expansion over the years, to accept such an additional proportion (31%) of new development - and probably unreasonably disproportionate to what has been allocated elsewhere.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

KB2 Land off Gypsy Lane

Representation ID: 3216

Received: 30/11/2016

Respondent: Mrs Anthea Riggall

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Object to KB2:
- Current infrastructure requirements
- Highway infrastructure, safety and congestion
- Parking facilities
- Healthcare facilities
- Drainage and flood issues
- Pedestrian facilities
- Scale of development
- New Garden City/Settlement
- Not consistent with NPPF
- Green Belt
- Danger of coalescence with Stevenage

Full text:

Legally Compliant - No
I believe this does not comply with the regulations as this is the first time KB4 has been included in the Plan, so we have not had a reasonable amount of time to consider it.

Sound -
Positively prepared - No
I do not believe the infrastructure requirements for this new amount of development can be met because of the major unresolved problems in Knebworth, existing for donkey's years. These are chiefly the inadequate roads (including 3 dangerous railway bridges), traffic, parking, as well as poor medical facilities (NB the long-awaited current plans for rebuilding a new doctors' surgery, along with pharmacy and library, were designed to accommodate current needs only), and the known drainage/flooding issues. The main arterial roads in Knebworth, namely Stevenage/London Road (B197), and Watton Road/Station Road/Park Lane, come to a standstill twice a day, and Swangley's Lane (a narrow country lane without footpath beyond the school) jams twice a day at school times. The High Street, with vital parking on both sides, can scarcely allow two cars to pass, and buses and trucks have to wait, sometimes for 10 minutes or more, until someone at the far end selflessly decides not to enter the fray. This road cannot be widened, like many others in Knebworth. Swangley's Lane for example is narrow, and the lack of footpath means it is dangerous for children going to and from school. Also residents cannot safely back out into the road when cars are parked outside their drive, as without the vision of the road a footpath gives, drivers are blind to oncoming traffic which then travels down effectively a single lane. A guest of mine attempting to back out recently had his car virtually written off by a passing car, and dangerous incidents happen frequently. Yet this is yards from where the plan will site a new crossroad/roundabout to service the southern KB4 development.
Flooding is frequent in many places, including east of Knebworth, exacerbated by poor drainage - another major problem for any new development.

Justified - No
Effective - No
The plans are to increase Knebworth housing by 31%. Will the infrastructure also effectively increase by a third? It seems unlikely,
but if it does not the plan seems unworkable.
More specifically, if the plan is implemented as it stands this village, having accommodated considerable development over the years, will have finally overstretched its limitations. Chief among these is the problem of access via the High Street bottleneck, and the dangerous narrowness of the three railway tunnels/bridge, which appear to be insuperable problems. This in itself would make the plan unworkable.

We understand that the question of a new town/settlement after 2031 has been considered. Why is it not being considered now? With all the current problems of expansion of existing built up areas, the urgency of this would seem a no-brainer, and would help retain the semi-rural character of the North Herts area, especially our already over-populated southern section.

Consistent with national policy - No
The Green Belt - while this is now allowed to be eroded, we should still be aware of its aims and strive to keep these intact wherever possible.
One is to retain the rural character of villages. Despite considerable development in recent decades Knebworth, though now a large village, still manages to retain much of its rural character, for example its narrow lanes without footpaths, which traffic somehow manages overall to accommodate, e.g. Swangley's Lane, Old Lane, Deards End Lane. These will surely be rationalised into anonymous straightened and paved modern roads given the inevitable increase of traffic.
Another is to avoid merging with neighbouring towns and villages. However the new plans give the go-ahead to the real possibility of Knebworth coalescing with Stevenage, a purpose-built town with a totally different living environment. This is surely not justified.

Complies with the duty to cooperate - No
I don't believe the local plan fulfils the duty of cooperation to give Knebworth residents living in KB4 , especially those having been here for well over 40 years as I have, such a short time to make considered representations about the plan about to be decided.
Secondly, I don't think it is reasonable cooperation to expect one village, Knebworth, which has already accepted considerable expansion over the years, to accept such an additional proportion (31%) of new development - and probably unreasonably disproportionate to what has been allocated elsewhere.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

KB3 Chas Lowe site, London Road

Representation ID: 3217

Received: 30/11/2016

Respondent: Mrs Anthea Riggall

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Object to KB3:
- Current infrastructure requirements
- Highway infrastructure, safety and congestion
- Parking facilities
- Healthcare facilities
- Drainage and flood issues
- Pedestrian facilities
- Scale of development
- New Garden City/Settlement
- Not consistent with NPPF
- Green Belt
- Danger of coalescence with Stevenage

Full text:

Legally Compliant - No
I believe this does not comply with the regulations as this is the first time KB4 has been included in the Plan, so we have not had a reasonable amount of time to consider it.

Sound -
Positively prepared - No
I do not believe the infrastructure requirements for this new amount of development can be met because of the major unresolved problems in Knebworth, existing for donkey's years. These are chiefly the inadequate roads (including 3 dangerous railway bridges), traffic, parking, as well as poor medical facilities (NB the long-awaited current plans for rebuilding a new doctors' surgery, along with pharmacy and library, were designed to accommodate current needs only), and the known drainage/flooding issues. The main arterial roads in Knebworth, namely Stevenage/London Road (B197), and Watton Road/Station Road/Park Lane, come to a standstill twice a day, and Swangley's Lane (a narrow country lane without footpath beyond the school) jams twice a day at school times. The High Street, with vital parking on both sides, can scarcely allow two cars to pass, and buses and trucks have to wait, sometimes for 10 minutes or more, until someone at the far end selflessly decides not to enter the fray. This road cannot be widened, like many others in Knebworth. Swangley's Lane for example is narrow, and the lack of footpath means it is dangerous for children going to and from school. Also residents cannot safely back out into the road when cars are parked outside their drive, as without the vision of the road a footpath gives, drivers are blind to oncoming traffic which then travels down effectively a single lane. A guest of mine attempting to back out recently had his car virtually written off by a passing car, and dangerous incidents happen frequently. Yet this is yards from where the plan will site a new crossroad/roundabout to service the southern KB4 development.
Flooding is frequent in many places, including east of Knebworth, exacerbated by poor drainage - another major problem for any new development.

Justified - No
Effective - No
The plans are to increase Knebworth housing by 31%. Will the infrastructure also effectively increase by a third? It seems unlikely,
but if it does not the plan seems unworkable.
More specifically, if the plan is implemented as it stands this village, having accommodated considerable development over the years, will have finally overstretched its limitations. Chief among these is the problem of access via the High Street bottleneck, and the dangerous narrowness of the three railway tunnels/bridge, which appear to be insuperable problems. This in itself would make the plan unworkable.

We understand that the question of a new town/settlement after 2031 has been considered. Why is it not being considered now? With all the current problems of expansion of existing built up areas, the urgency of this would seem a no-brainer, and would help retain the semi-rural character of the North Herts area, especially our already over-populated southern section.

Consistent with national policy - No
The Green Belt - while this is now allowed to be eroded, we should still be aware of its aims and strive to keep these intact wherever possible.
One is to retain the rural character of villages. Despite considerable development in recent decades Knebworth, though now a large village, still manages to retain much of its rural character, for example its narrow lanes without footpaths, which traffic somehow manages overall to accommodate, e.g. Swangley's Lane, Old Lane, Deards End Lane. These will surely be rationalised into anonymous straightened and paved modern roads given the inevitable increase of traffic.
Another is to avoid merging with neighbouring towns and villages. However the new plans give the go-ahead to the real possibility of Knebworth coalescing with Stevenage, a purpose-built town with a totally different living environment. This is surely not justified.

Complies with the duty to cooperate - No
I don't believe the local plan fulfils the duty of cooperation to give Knebworth residents living in KB4 , especially those having been here for well over 40 years as I have, such a short time to make considered representations about the plan about to be decided.
Secondly, I don't think it is reasonable cooperation to expect one village, Knebworth, which has already accepted considerable expansion over the years, to accept such an additional proportion (31%) of new development - and probably unreasonably disproportionate to what has been allocated elsewhere.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

KB4 Land east of Knebworth

Representation ID: 3218

Received: 30/11/2016

Respondent: Mrs Anthea Riggall

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

Representation Summary:

Object to KB4:
- No prior consultation of site
- Current infrastructure requirements
- Highway infrastructure, safety and congestion
- Parking facilities
- Healthcare facilities
- Drainage and flood issues
- Pedestrian facilities
- Scale of development
- New Garden City/Settlement
- Not consistent with NPPF
- Green Belt
- Danger of coalescence with Stevenage

Full text:

Legally Compliant - No
I believe this does not comply with the regulations as this is the first time KB4 has been included in the Plan, so we have not had a reasonable amount of time to consider it.

Sound -
Positively prepared - No
I do not believe the infrastructure requirements for this new amount of development can be met because of the major unresolved problems in Knebworth, existing for donkey's years. These are chiefly the inadequate roads (including 3 dangerous railway bridges), traffic, parking, as well as poor medical facilities (NB the long-awaited current plans for rebuilding a new doctors' surgery, along with pharmacy and library, were designed to accommodate current needs only), and the known drainage/flooding issues. The main arterial roads in Knebworth, namely Stevenage/London Road (B197), and Watton Road/Station Road/Park Lane, come to a standstill twice a day, and Swangley's Lane (a narrow country lane without footpath beyond the school) jams twice a day at school times. The High Street, with vital parking on both sides, can scarcely allow two cars to pass, and buses and trucks have to wait, sometimes for 10 minutes or more, until someone at the far end selflessly decides not to enter the fray. This road cannot be widened, like many others in Knebworth. Swangley's Lane for example is narrow, and the lack of footpath means it is dangerous for children going to and from school. Also residents cannot safely back out into the road when cars are parked outside their drive, as without the vision of the road a footpath gives, drivers are blind to oncoming traffic which then travels down effectively a single lane. A guest of mine attempting to back out recently had his car virtually written off by a passing car, and dangerous incidents happen frequently. Yet this is yards from where the plan will site a new crossroad/roundabout to service the southern KB4 development.
Flooding is frequent in many places, including east of Knebworth, exacerbated by poor drainage - another major problem for any new development.

Justified - No
Effective - No
The plans are to increase Knebworth housing by 31%. Will the infrastructure also effectively increase by a third? It seems unlikely,
but if it does not the plan seems unworkable.
More specifically, if the plan is implemented as it stands this village, having accommodated considerable development over the years, will have finally overstretched its limitations. Chief among these is the problem of access via the High Street bottleneck, and the dangerous narrowness of the three railway tunnels/bridge, which appear to be insuperable problems. This in itself would make the plan unworkable.

We understand that the question of a new town/settlement after 2031 has been considered. Why is it not being considered now? With all the current problems of expansion of existing built up areas, the urgency of this would seem a no-brainer, and would help retain the semi-rural character of the North Herts area, especially our already over-populated southern section.

Consistent with national policy - No
The Green Belt - while this is now allowed to be eroded, we should still be aware of its aims and strive to keep these intact wherever possible.
One is to retain the rural character of villages. Despite considerable development in recent decades Knebworth, though now a large village, still manages to retain much of its rural character, for example its narrow lanes without footpaths, which traffic somehow manages overall to accommodate, e.g. Swangley's Lane, Old Lane, Deards End Lane. These will surely be rationalised into anonymous straightened and paved modern roads given the inevitable increase of traffic.
Another is to avoid merging with neighbouring towns and villages. However the new plans give the go-ahead to the real possibility of Knebworth coalescing with Stevenage, a purpose-built town with a totally different living environment. This is surely not justified.

Complies with the duty to cooperate - No
I don't believe the local plan fulfils the duty of cooperation to give Knebworth residents living in KB4 , especially those having been here for well over 40 years as I have, such a short time to make considered representations about the plan about to be decided.
Secondly, I don't think it is reasonable cooperation to expect one village, Knebworth, which has already accepted considerable expansion over the years, to accept such an additional proportion (31%) of new development - and probably unreasonably disproportionate to what has been allocated elsewhere.

For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our help guide.