Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
Search representations
Results for Mr I Washington search
New searchObject
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
KB1 Land at Deards End
Representation ID: 1837
Received: 30/11/2016
Respondent: Mr I Washington
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
Objection to KB1 on the grounds of:
-Site should not be removed from the Green Belt. Development should not be permitted.
- risk of further Green Belt erosion
- access is via narrow roads and under rail bridges - would need widening for construction traffic and residential use after development
- existing traffic at busy times, when problems on the A1(M) - would exacerbate
- noise and pollution from the A1(M)
- impact on conservation areas
- impact on SSSI
Site KB1 involves erosion of the Green Belt - this should not be permitted. The Green Belt was created for a reason. If this and other areas are removed under this consultation what will stop further erosion under future proposals?
Access to KB1 is via narrow roads and under bridges under the East Coast Main Rail Line. These roads and bridges would need to be widened to cope with construction traffic during building and residential traffic after building.
Knebworth is already choked with traffic at busy times, particularly when there are problems on the A1(M). Development of the village would exacerbate the situation.
Any development would be adversely impacted by noise and pollution from the A1(M).
Any development could impact on conservation areas and SSSI.
Object
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
KB2 Land off Gypsy Lane
Representation ID: 1843
Received: 30/11/2016
Respondent: Mr I Washington
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
Objection to KB2 on the grounds of:
- No erosion of the Green Belt should be allowed and no expansion of the village should be permitted.
- risk of future Green Belt erosion
- access is via narrow roads and under rail bridges - need widening for construction traffic and residential use following development
- existing traffic at busy times, when problems on the A1(M) - would be exacerbated
- noise and air pollution from A1(M)
- proposed primary school provision most likely insufficient, no secondary provision
- conservation areas
- surface water drainage from A1(M)
Site KB2 involves erosion of the Green Belt - this should not be permitted. The Green Belt was created for a reason. If this and other areas are removed under this consultation what will stop further erosion under future proposals?
Access to KB2 is via narrow roads and under bridges under the East Coast Main Rail Line. These roads and bridges would need to be widened to cope with construction traffic during building and residential traffic after building.
Knebworth is already choked with traffic at busy times, particularly when there are problems on the A1(M). Development of the village would exacerbate the situation.
Any development would be adversely impacted by noise and pollution from the A1(M).
An additional single form primary school is mentioned but not guaranteed. This would most likely be insufficient to cope with the numbers of extra children in the village. There is no secondary education provision.
Any development could impact on conservation areas and surface water drainage from the A1(M).
Object
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
KB3 Chas Lowe site, London Road
Representation ID: 1846
Received: 30/11/2016
Respondent: Mr I Washington
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
Objection to KB3 on the grounds of:
- removes valuable employment
- no proposed mixed use
- no development of the site or expansion of the village should be permitted.
Site KB3 removes valuable employment from the village. There is no proposed mixed use for the site.
Object
Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft
KB4 Land east of Knebworth
Representation ID: 1849
Received: 30/11/2016
Respondent: Mr I Washington
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
Objection to KB4 on the grounds of:
- erosion of the Green Belt and risk of further erosion
- access is via narrow roads: need for widening for construction traffic and for after residential development
- traffic: at busy times and when problems on the A1(M) - would be exacerbated
- valuable and productive farmland
Site KB4 involves erosion of the Green Belt - this should not be permitted. The Green Belt was created for a reason. If this and other areas are removed under this consultation what will stop further erosion under future proposals?
Access to KB4 is via narrow roads. These roads would need to be widened to cope with construction traffic during building and residential traffic after building.
Knebworth is already choked with traffic at busy times, particularly when there are problems on the A1(M). Development of the village would exacerbate the situation.
Any development would be on valuable and productive farmland.
