Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

I have taken this opportunity to write to you to object to the proposed development detailed in paragraphs 13.183 to 13.202 in the local plan for Knebworth.
The objections that I have to the local plan are in relation to Knebworth and are as follows:
Firstly 600+ new residential units is an enormous increase on a village this represents approximately 35%. I do not believe this is a responsible increase. The plan does not address the current limitations on infrastructure, such as
* the roads are at peak times during the day are grid locked, this will get worse and there is no mitigation planned for this.
* lack of parking in the village is a known issue , there is currently not enough space, there is no plan for where additional vehicles will park
* the current primary school is at capacity, there is no plan for how the additional children locating into the village will be educated
* the drainage at the local treatment works is at capacity - there are no mitigating plans for this.
* the access roads to any proposed development to the land referred to as KB4 [ID278] does not have sufficient carriageway width for the increased number of vehicles, this has not been planned for.
My strong objection based upon the above is that this plan has not been thought through and appears to be revolving around more housing and little else that is needed alongside it for people to live.
As having been a commuter to London for the past 16 years, I have personally witnessed the train service going from a regular service where one was pretty much guaranteed a seat to and from Kings Cross to an overcrowded standing room only service.
Back in 2000 the platform at Knebworth in the morning was quiet by comparison to today. Over the past 16 years , the platforms are considerably busier, and to get a comfortable standing space is a luxury - a seat is a rareity indeed. We are told frequently that the network is at capacity, so more trains are not an option to solve this awful situation, adding 600 plus houses in Knebworth, and 150 in neighbouring Woolmer Green [who also use Knebworth station to commute from] will push the situation on the trains to a point where you physically will not be able to get on to trains. This is a very real and worrying prospect. The local plan does not account for this and will seriously impact on many people's ability to get to and from work, thereby affecting livelyhoods.
In addition to the operational side of the village and the associated infrastructure, the land that is being proposed for development is Green Belt. This Green Belt land protects the village and indeed its' identity by preventing it conjoining neighbouring towns and villages, namely Stevenage and Woolmer Green. I believe this is contrary to current Government Policy.
Also I think that bringing land, which could be hundreds of miles away into Green Belt to trade off Green Belt in Hertfordshire is flawed. This is nothing but a cheap conjouring trick to take land which works hard to protect villages in a very developed part of the country, make disappear and reappear hundreds on miles away where urban encroachment is not a risk or a threat. This land is in this current location for a reason which is applicable to its particular geography.
Once this land has been taken out of Green Belt, and is built upon there is no going back, ever.
There also does not appear to be any provision for the development of additional employment as part of the plan. On the contrary, the builders merchant Chas Lowe may be deducted from the community as part of this plan!
Again it just all seems to be residential and no retail / commercial. This also points to this development not having been thought through in a wholistic manner.
Personally I would be most affected by the development to the land known as KB4 [ID278]. With respect to this particular development my objections are as follows.
* This land is green belt - my objections are as mentioned above.
* Village identity will be lost as Stevenage [Bragbury End] will be brought closer to Knebworth
* The roads that would be used to access / egress this site are not currently suitable for 2 way traffic and are currently at over capacity at certain times of the day, additional traffic would merely increase this problem. These roads are Oakfields Road, Swangleys Lane and Watton Road.
* This land is good agricultural land, with the population of the country increasing we cannot afford to lose land such as this
Finally I am not against any development of housing in the Village, but it must be on a scale much smaller than what is currently in the plan. The plan should also be balanced to consider how the current village operates and should be sympathetic and positive to it The current plan is just to construct an enormous number of residential units to sort out one problem but in itself creates many many more.

I have taken this opportunity to write to you to object to the proposed development detailed in paragraphs 13.183 to 13.202 in the local plan for Knebworth.
The objections that I have to the local plan are in relation to Knebworth and are as follows:
Firstly 600+ new residential units is an enormous increase on a village this represents approximately 35%. I do not believe this is a responsible increase. The plan does not address the current limitations on infrastructure, such as
* the roads are at peak times during the day are grid locked, this will get worse and there is no mitigation planned for this.
* lack of parking in the village is a known issue , there is currently not enough space, there is no plan for where additional vehicles will park
* the current primary school is at capacity, there is no plan for how the additional children locating into the village will be educated
* the drainage at the local treatment works is at capacity - there are no mitigating plans for this.
* the access roads to any proposed development to the land referred to as KB4 [ID278] does not have sufficient carriageway width for the increased number of vehicles, this has not been planned for.
My strong objection based upon the above is that this plan has not been thought through and appears to be revolving around more housing and little else that is needed alongside it for people to live.
As having been a commuter to London for the past 16 years, I have personally witnessed the train service going from a regular service where one was pretty much guaranteed a seat to and from Kings Cross to an overcrowded standing room only service.
Back in 2000 the platform at Knebworth in the morning was quiet by comparison to today. Over the past 16 years , the platforms are considerably busier, and to get a comfortable standing space is a luxury - a seat is a rareity indeed. We are told frequently that the network is at capacity, so more trains are not an option to solve this awful situation, adding 600 plus houses in Knebworth, and 150 in neighbouring Woolmer Green [who also use Knebworth station to commute from] will push the situation on the trains to a point where you physically will not be able to get on to trains. This is a very real and worrying prospect. The local plan does not account for this and will seriously impact on many people's ability to get to and from work, thereby affecting livelyhoods.
In addition to the operational side of the village and the associated infrastructure, the land that is being proposed for development is Green Belt. This Green Belt land protects the village and indeed its' identity by preventing it conjoining neighbouring towns and villages, namely Stevenage and Woolmer Green. I believe this is contrary to current Government Policy.
Also I think that bringing land, which could be hundreds of miles away into Green Belt to trade off Green Belt in Hertfordshire is flawed. This is nothing but a cheap conjouring trick to take land which works hard to protect villages in a very developed part of the country, make disappear and reappear hundreds on miles away where urban encroachment is not a risk or a threat. This land is in this current location for a reason which is applicable to its particular geography.
Once this land has been taken out of Green Belt, and is built upon there is no going back, ever.
There also does not appear to be any provision for the development of additional employment as part of the plan. On the contrary, the builders merchant Chas Lowe may be deducted from the community as part of this plan!
Again it just all seems to be residential and no retail / commercial. This also points to this development not having been thought through in a wholistic manner.
Personally I would be most affected by the development to the land known as KB4 [ID278]. With respect to this particular development my objections are as follows.
* This land is green belt - my objections are as mentioned above.
* Village identity will be lost as Stevenage [Bragbury End] will be brought closer to Knebworth
* The roads that would be used to access / egress this site are not currently suitable for 2 way traffic and are currently at over capacity at certain times of the day, additional traffic would merely increase this problem. These roads are Oakfields Road, Swangleys Lane and Watton Road.
* This land is good agricultural land, with the population of the country increasing we cannot afford to lose land such as this
Finally I am not against any development of housing in the Village, but it must be on a scale much smaller than what is currently in the plan. The plan should also be balanced to consider how the current village operates and should be sympathetic and positive to it The current plan is just to construct an enormous number of residential units to sort out one problem but in itself creates many many more.