Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

I am writing to object to the proposed development for Knebworth in the local plan, as detailed in paragraphs 13.183-13.202.
My general objections to the local plan as it affects Knebworth are as follows:
1. Lack of a cohesive strategy which means the plan is not effective. There is no correlation or cohesion between the additional housing and the infrastructure needed to support sustainable growth.

2. The number of houses proposed. The plan proposes 663 dwellings, which would be a 30+% increase in the size of the village. There are existing issues with traffic flow, parking, train and school capacities which would be negatively impacted by an increase in population. In addition, the extra impact of a further 150 homes proposed for Woolmer Green has not been considered.

The negative impact that this additional development would have on the village cannot be justified when the land west of Stevenage is reserved for 3,100 homes.

3. The removal of significant sites of green belt from around Knebworth, contrary to government policy. There are no demonstrable exceptional circumstances detailed that justify the removal of land from the green belt. The green belt contributes significantly to protecting the space between Knebworth and surrounding towns and villages, thereby maintaining the separate identity of Knebworth as a village. With the removal of land from the green belt, there would be increased coalescence between Woolmer Green to the south, Bragbury end to the east and Stevenage to the north.

The impact on the countryside and landscape would be detrimental, and would change Knebworth and its surroundings for ever.

4. The negative impact on highways and other transport. The B197 is used as an overflow for the A1M, and at certain times during the day is already congested. Further development would increase the number of cars on the road and journeys taken, thereby adding to the congestion. As mentioned above, the train capacity at peak times is already compromised, cuts to the service are being proposed by the train company and so an increase in population will inevitably have a negative impact on the service available.

5. Drainage issues. There are already major capacity issues at Rye Meads Sewage Treatment Works. Additional development would add to the capacity issues, not alleviate them.

6. A negative impact on the local economy. There does not appear to be any consideration of the local economy in the Local Plan; there is no proposal for job creation and none of the land proposed for removal from green belt is a set aside or allocated for commercial development. In fact, a significant site in the middle of the village currently used for commercial purposes (KB3 Chas Lowe) is being reallocated to housing, which is the reverse of a local economy or commercial development.

In addition to my general objections above, I will be most affected by development of land at KB4, land east of Knebworth (ID278). I object to the development in this area on the following grounds:

1. First and foremost, the land is green belt. As mentioned above there are no exceptional circumstances that justify the removal of this land from green belt. If it were removed, there would be significant danger of coalescence with Bragbury End and Stevenage. In addition, it would have a very negative impact on the open, picturesque landscape in that area of Knebworth.

2. The road network around the proposed development is insufficient and inappropriate to cope with the increased traffic flow. The roads that would most impacted by the development, namely Watton Road and Swangleys Lane (both restricted width country lanes), St Martins Road (private road) and possibly Oakfields Road are all minor roads, most of which already struggle to cope with modern traffic flows. Additional development would inevitably result in additional vehicles and journeys, thereby compromising the routes further.

3. The land is currently agricultural. If the land were to be removed from the green belt there would be a loss of productive agricultural land, with no proposals to replace this productivity elsewhere.

Knebworth is a thriving village with a strong community spirit. Please don't destroy it.

I am writing to object to the proposed development for Knebworth in the local plan, as detailed in paragraphs 13.183-13.202.
My general objections to the local plan as it affects Knebworth are as follows:
1. Lack of a cohesive strategy which means the plan is not effective. There is no correlation or cohesion between the additional housing and the infrastructure needed to support sustainable growth.

2. The number of houses proposed. The plan proposes 663 dwellings, which would be a 30+% increase in the size of the village. There are existing issues with traffic flow, parking, train and school capacities which would be negatively impacted by an increase in population. In addition, the extra impact of a further 150 homes proposed for Woolmer Green has not been considered.

The negative impact that this additional development would have on the village cannot be justified when the land west of Stevenage is reserved for 3,100 homes.

3. The removal of significant sites of green belt from around Knebworth, contrary to government policy. There are no demonstrable exceptional circumstances detailed that justify the removal of land from the green belt. The green belt contributes significantly to protecting the space between Knebworth and surrounding towns and villages, thereby maintaining the separate identity of Knebworth as a village. With the removal of land from the green belt, there would be increased coalescence between Woolmer Green to the south, Bragbury end to the east and Stevenage to the north.

The impact on the countryside and landscape would be detrimental, and would change Knebworth and its surroundings for ever.

4. The negative impact on highways and other transport. The B197 is used as an overflow for the A1M, and at certain times during the day is already congested. Further development would increase the number of cars on the road and journeys taken, thereby adding to the congestion. As mentioned above, the train capacity at peak times is already compromised, cuts to the service are being proposed by the train company and so an increase in population will inevitably have a negative impact on the service available.

5. Drainage issues. There are already major capacity issues at Rye Meads Sewage Treatment Works. Additional development would add to the capacity issues, not alleviate them.

6. A negative impact on the local economy. There does not appear to be any consideration of the local economy in the Local Plan; there is no proposal for job creation and none of the land proposed for removal from green belt is a set aside or allocated for commercial development. In fact, a significant site in the middle of the village currently used for commercial purposes (KB3 Chas Lowe) is being reallocated to housing, which is the reverse of a local economy or commercial development.

In addition to my general objections above, I will be most affected by development of land at KB4, land east of Knebworth (ID278). I object to the development in this area on the following grounds:

1. First and foremost, the land is green belt. As mentioned above there are no exceptional circumstances that justify the removal of this land from green belt. If it were removed, there would be significant danger of coalescence with Bragbury End and Stevenage. In addition, it would have a very negative impact on the open, picturesque landscape in that area of Knebworth.

2. The road network around the proposed development is insufficient and inappropriate to cope with the increased traffic flow. The roads that would most impacted by the development, namely Watton Road and Swangleys Lane (both restricted width country lanes), St Martins Road (private road) and possibly Oakfields Road are all minor roads, most of which already struggle to cope with modern traffic flows. Additional development would inevitably result in additional vehicles and journeys, thereby compromising the routes further.

3. The land is currently agricultural. If the land were to be removed from the green belt there would be a loss of productive agricultural land, with no proposals to replace this productivity elsewhere.

Knebworth is a thriving village with a strong community spirit. Please don't destroy it.