Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

You have identified three sites within Codicote Parish for potential housing as part of the need to build additional housing to meet the strategic plan for the county.

I wish to express my views on the proposed sites.

I am not against the designation of areas within the village, previously seen as 'green belt', to be used for small scale developments which seek to provide housing opportunities for the young people of the village and those wishing to 'buy in' to village life.

Village life will mean consideration must be given to primary school places in the village for under 11's, minimising risks of the ever increasing through traffic, ensuring the remaining shops survive by improving parking opportunities, reducing the speed of traffic, etc. I understand from a recent presentation that it is too early for these issues to even be discussed.

Of the three sites for housing the two sites along the Welwyn- Hitchin roads (CD1 and CD2?) appear to offer the least environmental impact on the village, though they will require investment in upgrading the road layout around the village. Should CD2 be chosen, please consider purchasing the adjacent allotment area for the parish to stop the potential of further development.

The third site off the bottom of Valley Road has a greater impact, not in the reduction of green belt or village amenities, but in the positioning of housing in an area with no exit to the High Street other than via Valley Road to Bury Lane, then left to the Welwyn/Hitchin Road or right to Knebworth/ Stevenage, along a 3 mile country road which will also require upgrading along its whole length at considerable cost to the environment and community.

In agreeing that new housing is required, I feel that the additional community charge income and indeed the parish precept generated (compared to the profits generated to the land owners, property developers, builders, etc.) will not be adequate to meet the additional costs involved on the community. Again, I understand that no figures are available at this time. Points that need covering are:




Road network improvements- refer to above comments.

Additional school places within Codicote for children under 11. I understand that new buildings are already necessary but not approved , with 100-150 new properties this can only increase the overcrowding. This could be alleviated by committing funds to purchase the adjacent unused farm land as a sports field and building onto the existing footprint and into the existing sports field. This would have the additional benefit of securing this area as 'green' belt for the future.

Damage to the viability of the few remaining shops as the flow of traffic, additional parking, etc. will reduce the potential for customers to stop and make purchases.

Increase the environmental damage being caused to property along the High Street and St Albans Road by traffic, on top of the damage being done through the continued use of Codicote Quarry for material reclamation beyond the original agricultural reclamation it was historically authorised for.

The need to provide adequate parking for new households which will have 2-3 cars (the norm. these days ). To see this in practice I would suggest a visit to the last 'high density' project at the Paddocks at the bottom of Valley Road. Also along the High Street, where cars are parked obstructing the pavement due to the Welwyn/Hitchin (A1M 'rat run') on an evening or early morning. A public parking option is urgently needed.

In addition the proposed long term improvements to the A1M recently reported as close to being authorised will only increase the traffic through the village and require managed entry into the flow from the proposed housing developments as well as Bury Lane, changing the village significantly.

To sum up there is a need for 'affordable and mixed' housing for the existing population of the village, both for new families and for 'seniors' to downscale. The possible developments could assist this.

I realise that the final decisions are needed to house the growing populations of Hertfordshire. I can only hope that you look beyond the housing numbers and consider the other quality of life factors which makes village life so attractive,

You have identified three sites within Codicote Parish for potential housing as part of the need to build additional housing to meet the strategic plan for the county.

I wish to express my views on the proposed sites.

I am not against the designation of areas within the village, previously seen as 'green belt', to be used for small scale developments which seek to provide housing opportunities for the young people of the village and those wishing to 'buy in' to village life.

Village life will mean consideration must be given to primary school places in the village for under 11's, minimising risks of the ever increasing through traffic, ensuring the remaining shops survive by improving parking opportunities, reducing the speed of traffic, etc. I understand from a recent presentation that it is too early for these issues to even be discussed.

Of the three sites for housing the two sites along the Welwyn- Hitchin roads (CD1 and CD2?) appear to offer the least environmental impact on the village, though they will require investment in upgrading the road layout around the village. Should CD2 be chosen, please consider purchasing the adjacent allotment area for the parish to stop the potential of further development.

The third site off the bottom of Valley Road has a greater impact, not in the reduction of green belt or village amenities, but in the positioning of housing in an area with no exit to the High Street other than via Valley Road to Bury Lane, then left to the Welwyn/Hitchin Road or right to Knebworth/ Stevenage, along a 3 mile country road which will also require upgrading along its whole length at considerable cost to the environment and community.

In agreeing that new housing is required, I feel that the additional community charge income and indeed the parish precept generated (compared to the profits generated to the land owners, property developers, builders, etc.) will not be adequate to meet the additional costs involved on the community. Again, I understand that no figures are available at this time. Points that need covering are:




Road network improvements- refer to above comments.

Additional school places within Codicote for children under 11. I understand that new buildings are already necessary but not approved , with 100-150 new properties this can only increase the overcrowding. This could be alleviated by committing funds to purchase the adjacent unused farm land as a sports field and building onto the existing footprint and into the existing sports field. This would have the additional benefit of securing this area as 'green' belt for the future.

Damage to the viability of the few remaining shops as the flow of traffic, additional parking, etc. will reduce the potential for customers to stop and make purchases.

Increase the environmental damage being caused to property along the High Street and St Albans Road by traffic, on top of the damage being done through the continued use of Codicote Quarry for material reclamation beyond the original agricultural reclamation it was historically authorised for.

The need to provide adequate parking for new households which will have 2-3 cars (the norm. these days ). To see this in practice I would suggest a visit to the last 'high density' project at the Paddocks at the bottom of Valley Road. Also along the High Street, where cars are parked obstructing the pavement due to the Welwyn/Hitchin (A1M 'rat run') on an evening or early morning. A public parking option is urgently needed.

In addition the proposed long term improvements to the A1M recently reported as close to being authorised will only increase the traffic through the village and require managed entry into the flow from the proposed housing developments as well as Bury Lane, changing the village significantly.

To sum up there is a need for 'affordable and mixed' housing for the existing population of the village, both for new families and for 'seniors' to downscale. The possible developments could assist this.

I realise that the final decisions are needed to house the growing populations of Hertfordshire. I can only hope that you look beyond the housing numbers and consider the other quality of life factors which makes village life so attractive,

You have identified three sites within Codicote Parish for potential housing as part of the need to build additional housing to meet the strategic plan for the county.

I wish to express my views on the proposed sites.

I am not against the designation of areas within the village, previously seen as 'green belt', to be used for small scale developments which seek to provide housing opportunities for the young people of the village and those wishing to 'buy in' to village life.

Village life will mean consideration must be given to primary school places in the village for under 11's, minimising risks of the ever increasing through traffic, ensuring the remaining shops survive by improving parking opportunities, reducing the speed of traffic, etc. I understand from a recent presentation that it is too early for these issues to even be discussed.

Of the three sites for housing the two sites along the Welwyn- Hitchin roads (CD1 and CD2?) appear to offer the least environmental impact on the village, though they will require investment in upgrading the road layout around the village. Should CD2 be chosen, please consider purchasing the adjacent allotment area for the parish to stop the potential of further development.

The third site off the bottom of Valley Road has a greater impact, not in the reduction of green belt or village amenities, but in the positioning of housing in an area with no exit to the High Street other than via Valley Road to Bury Lane, then left to the Welwyn/Hitchin Road or right to Knebworth/ Stevenage, along a 3 mile country road which will also require upgrading along its whole length at considerable cost to the environment and community.

In agreeing that new housing is required, I feel that the additional community charge income and indeed the parish precept generated (compared to the profits generated to the land owners, property developers, builders, etc.) will not be adequate to meet the additional costs involved on the community. Again, I understand that no figures are available at this time. Points that need covering are:




Road network improvements- refer to above comments.

Additional school places within Codicote for children under 11. I understand that new buildings are already necessary but not approved , with 100-150 new properties this can only increase the overcrowding. This could be alleviated by committing funds to purchase the adjacent unused farm land as a sports field and building onto the existing footprint and into the existing sports field. This would have the additional benefit of securing this area as 'green' belt for the future.

Damage to the viability of the few remaining shops as the flow of traffic, additional parking, etc. will reduce the potential for customers to stop and make purchases.

Increase the environmental damage being caused to property along the High Street and St Albans Road by traffic, on top of the damage being done through the continued use of Codicote Quarry for material reclamation beyond the original agricultural reclamation it was historically authorised for.

The need to provide adequate parking for new households which will have 2-3 cars (the norm. these days ). To see this in practice I would suggest a visit to the last 'high density' project at the Paddocks at the bottom of Valley Road. Also along the High Street, where cars are parked obstructing the pavement due to the Welwyn/Hitchin (A1M 'rat run') on an evening or early morning. A public parking option is urgently needed.

In addition the proposed long term improvements to the A1M recently reported as close to being authorised will only increase the traffic through the village and require managed entry into the flow from the proposed housing developments as well as Bury Lane, changing the village significantly.

To sum up there is a need for 'affordable and mixed' housing for the existing population of the village, both for new families and for 'seniors' to downscale. The possible developments could assist this.

I realise that the final decisions are needed to house the growing populations of Hertfordshire. I can only hope that you look beyond the housing numbers and consider the other quality of life factors which makes village life so attractive,