Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

I enclose my comments on the North Herts Plan (for Knebworth )-Paragraphs (13.183-13.202 of the local plan).

I object to the plans for Knebworth as outlined in the Local plan for reasons of Soundness.

The Green Belt policy serves 5 purposes
* to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas;
* to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another;
* to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment;
* to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and
* to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land

These plans recommendation do neither of the above.

A local planning authority should regard the construction of new buildings as inappropriate in Green Belt. Exceptions to this are:
* buildings for agriculture and forestry;
* provision of appropriate facilities for outdoor sport, outdoor recreation and for cemeteries, as long as it preserves the openness of the Green Belt and does not conflict with the purposes of including land within it;
* the extension or alteration of a building provided that it does not result in disproportionate additions over and above the size of the original building;
* the replacement of a building, provided the new building is in the same use and not materially larger than the one it replaces;
* limited infilling in villages, and limited affordable housing for local community needs under policies set out in the Local Plan; or
* limited infilling or the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed sites (brownfield land), whether redundant or in continuing use (excluding temporary buildings), which would not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt and the purpose of including land within it than the existing development.

And falls foul of the above exceptions

I also include General and Site(KB1-4) related observations and comments .

General: Knebworth is a natural conurbation existing between hills to the west, north and south East. All traffic radiates through the centre of Knebworth either down the north south conduit (B197) or the east west conduit via Watton road/Station road. At peak times 7-9 am, 4-6.30 pm these roads are very busy and congested leading to tailbacks on all roads. There is not enough provision or evidence of provision for infrastructure to cope with the increase in traffic caused by 600 new homes and not sure how any improvement can be achieved. It will be grid lock.
General :The plan talks about an inadequate car parking management policy in the high street. Car parking is allowed in the High street to make ease of access to shops but also to actually slow the traffic down. We don't want traffic hurtling through the village.
General: There is no provision in the plans for the increased rail usage and therefore additional parking capability required in Knebworth. Currently all roads local to the Station are rammed with commuter cars.This will only increase with the additional 600 homes in , the 150 in Woolmer Green and the 3100 west of Stevenage. Currently a lot of Stevenage people drive to the village in the morning so that they don't have to pay car parking at Stevenage station.
General: Knebworth is a large village. The proposed development will turn Knebworth into a small town but without the facilities of a small town. The village will lose its openness and valuable agricultural land will be lost.
General: The doctors surgery struggles to cope with local demand. It currently can take 2 weeks just to get regular appointment. This will be exasperated by the increase in the number of people. The latest planning application from the Surgery has been rejected by North Herts.
General: The proposed schooling provision has not been syndicated or agreed by County. The figures don't lie, 600 homes means 600 kids which means 20 classes of 30 ( Year 1-13) which means you need more than 1 form entry for the new primary school.
General: It is not clear how the through school site on KB4 is going to operate. Will it be in addition to the existing provision or replace the existing provision. What traffic increase has been taken into consideration in the infrastructure to cope with this new school or the traffic flow that will result. Particularly increased flow from Stevenage as a result.
General: Current educational policy states that there is a nearest to school policy when assessing prioritisation. It will be ironic that Bragbury end will be closer to the new through school on KB4 than the west of Knebworth , thus precluding those children from the west of Knebworth from places at this school.
General: There is no provision for additional local employment in the plan
General: There is no provision for additional sporting facilities in the plan.
General: There is no evidence of land being set aside within these development locations for leisure usage.
General: There are no hard facts on the amount of low cost housing that will be set aside.
General: There is no mitigation in the plan for the number of houses being built at nearby Woolmer Green(150) or the those being built West of Stevenage (3100).
General: There has been no consultation with the the village with regard to educational provision. Did the residents ask for an 'all through' school. What process had been followed to get that conclusion and where is the transparency to that process.
General: The plan cannot be sustained without major investment in infrastructure. I cannot see any evidence in the wider county budget for this.
General: What benefits does this plan bring to Knebworth-that has never been articulated. Where are the local needs reflected in the plan.
General: No Resource planning has been given to the additional levels of Policing and other essential services that these developments will bring. Will this plan plus others in adjoining towns and villages take this beyond was has currently be budgeted for of forecasted for.
General: What studies and modelling has been used to predict increase in road/rail usage and where is the transparency to those artefacts.
General: This plan removes huge swathes of green belt to the west and east of Knebworth. What other options have been considered and where is the transparency to that process.

KB3:The Chas Lowe site is a valuable employer in the village (in fact the largest employer).This employment is not being replaced.
KB3:This has badged as a Retail only site. This is ridiculous ..at very least it should be mixed. Thus providing residents with additional shop or even a location for the surgery. The unit on the east side of the high street is currently a small yard between 2 commercial units and the plan is showing residential development-this is ludicrous. Where are these new residents supposed to park a car ?

KB4:The due diligence on this site has not been undertaken. This option game late to the table and has not been given the same level of scrutiny as the other sites and equally not the same level of scrutiny by the community.
KB4: the proximity of the development to Stevenage increases coalescence between and urban area and a small village. This must be avoided at all costs as Knebworth will lose its identity.
KB4:Any development here will reduces the open landscape currently enjoyed by the village community
KB4: Any infrastructure that causes traffic to ingress/egress through Oakfields road/avenue into KB4 and out into Watton road will turn a quiet residential area into a rat run and a dangerous road for all users.
KB4:The land here is constantly farmed, with multiple crops rotations per year-This will be a valuable asset lost. A wide variety of birds use this area as nesting site- both local and migrational.
KB4:Swangles lane is a nightmare at school times, with one lane traffic movement only at peak times. The additional homes in this area will increase this issue.
KB4:Watton Road is regularly flooded both at the junction with the railway bridge near Bragbury end and halfway down Watton Road close to the junction with old lane. There have been many accidents along this road , with many cars ending up in adjacent fields. This development will increase this issue as run off will be exasperated.
KB4:This Is NO footpath provision along the busy Watton road beyond Bell close.
KB4: Damage to the look and feel of the Picton built houses and road vista in Oakfields Avenue/Road .
KB4:Any entrance to site KB4 from the junction of Oakfields ave/road will mean compulsory purchase of land from properties adjacent to that site. It would not be possible to get traffic in and out without doing so.
KB4:I have seen no evidence that suggest that County have agreed to the Schooling proposals.

KB2:Building up close to the A1(M) would seem unwise considering the noise and population from the road. Putting a school here contravenes planning law of not building a school within 150 metres of a major road (A1M). Better off developing existing school site.
KB2:I have seen no evidence that suggest that County have agreed to the Schooling proposals.
KB2:The green belt buffer will be removed by this development thus removing the open nature of this part of Knebworth.
KB2:Orchard Way suffers from flash flooding. This will be exasperated by this new development as water will have even less ways of dispersing.


KB1:The design of the Bridge @ Gypsy Lane and the narrowness of approach to it from both ends will become a major bottleneck because of the extra traffic that needs to go through it. Extra infrastructure needs to be factored into the cost of developing the bridge further to support this site.
KB1:Deards End lane in parts is suitable for single file traffic only. This road will have to be upgraded to support the extra traffic...and will have to involve compulsory purchase of land.
KB1:The closeness of this development close to the A1M raises issues on whether the pollution and noise generated by the A1M would be tolerable. Tests would have to be undertaken to understand emission levels.
KB1:This development will affect the look and feel of the conservation area in Deards end.

Design: Knebworth retains its rural garden village feel because many of the houses have boundaries formed of natural hedges rather than wooden fences .It would seem prudent that if this awful development went ahead that this design feature was enshrined in local covenants within the new development.
Design: Knebworth also benefits from its association with Lutyens , which is reflected in both local housing, the church and the golf club. It would be beneficial for those design concepts to be reflected in any new development.

I enclose my comments on the North Herts Plan (for Knebworth )-Paragraphs (13.183-13.202 of the local plan).

I object to the plans for Knebworth as outlined in the Local plan for reasons of Soundness.

The Green Belt policy serves 5 purposes
* to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas;
* to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another;
* to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment;
* to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and
* to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land

These plans recommendation do neither of the above.

A local planning authority should regard the construction of new buildings as inappropriate in Green Belt. Exceptions to this are:
* buildings for agriculture and forestry;
* provision of appropriate facilities for outdoor sport, outdoor recreation and for cemeteries, as long as it preserves the openness of the Green Belt and does not conflict with the purposes of including land within it;
* the extension or alteration of a building provided that it does not result in disproportionate additions over and above the size of the original building;
* the replacement of a building, provided the new building is in the same use and not materially larger than the one it replaces;
* limited infilling in villages, and limited affordable housing for local community needs under policies set out in the Local Plan; or
* limited infilling or the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed sites (brownfield land), whether redundant or in continuing use (excluding temporary buildings), which would not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt and the purpose of including land within it than the existing development.

And falls foul of the above exceptions

I also include General and Site(KB1-4) related observations and comments .

General: Knebworth is a natural conurbation existing between hills to the west, north and south East. All traffic radiates through the centre of Knebworth either down the north south conduit (B197) or the east west conduit via Watton road/Station road. At peak times 7-9 am, 4-6.30 pm these roads are very busy and congested leading to tailbacks on all roads. There is not enough provision or evidence of provision for infrastructure to cope with the increase in traffic caused by 600 new homes and not sure how any improvement can be achieved. It will be grid lock.
General :The plan talks about an inadequate car parking management policy in the high street. Car parking is allowed in the High street to make ease of access to shops but also to actually slow the traffic down. We don't want traffic hurtling through the village.
General: There is no provision in the plans for the increased rail usage and therefore additional parking capability required in Knebworth. Currently all roads local to the Station are rammed with commuter cars.This will only increase with the additional 600 homes in , the 150 in Woolmer Green and the 3100 west of Stevenage. Currently a lot of Stevenage people drive to the village in the morning so that they don't have to pay car parking at Stevenage station.
General: Knebworth is a large village. The proposed development will turn Knebworth into a small town but without the facilities of a small town. The village will lose its openness and valuable agricultural land will be lost.
General: The doctors surgery struggles to cope with local demand. It currently can take 2 weeks just to get regular appointment. This will be exasperated by the increase in the number of people. The latest planning application from the Surgery has been rejected by North Herts.
General: The proposed schooling provision has not been syndicated or agreed by County. The figures don't lie, 600 homes means 600 kids which means 20 classes of 30 ( Year 1-13) which means you need more than 1 form entry for the new primary school.
General: It is not clear how the through school site on KB4 is going to operate. Will it be in addition to the existing provision or replace the existing provision. What traffic increase has been taken into consideration in the infrastructure to cope with this new school or the traffic flow that will result. Particularly increased flow from Stevenage as a result.
General: Current educational policy states that there is a nearest to school policy when assessing prioritisation. It will be ironic that Bragbury end will be closer to the new through school on KB4 than the west of Knebworth , thus precluding those children from the west of Knebworth from places at this school.
General: There is no provision for additional local employment in the plan
General: There is no provision for additional sporting facilities in the plan.
General: There is no evidence of land being set aside within these development locations for leisure usage.
General: There are no hard facts on the amount of low cost housing that will be set aside.
General: There is no mitigation in the plan for the number of houses being built at nearby Woolmer Green(150) or the those being built West of Stevenage (3100).
General: There has been no consultation with the the village with regard to educational provision. Did the residents ask for an 'all through' school. What process had been followed to get that conclusion and where is the transparency to that process.
General: The plan cannot be sustained without major investment in infrastructure. I cannot see any evidence in the wider county budget for this.
General: What benefits does this plan bring to Knebworth-that has never been articulated. Where are the local needs reflected in the plan.
General: No Resource planning has been given to the additional levels of Policing and other essential services that these developments will bring. Will this plan plus others in adjoining towns and villages take this beyond was has currently be budgeted for of forecasted for.
General: What studies and modelling has been used to predict increase in road/rail usage and where is the transparency to those artefacts.
General: This plan removes huge swathes of green belt to the west and east of Knebworth. What other options have been considered and where is the transparency to that process.

KB3:The Chas Lowe site is a valuable employer in the village (in fact the largest employer).This employment is not being replaced.
KB3:This has badged as a Retail only site. This is ridiculous ..at very least it should be mixed. Thus providing residents with additional shop or even a location for the surgery. The unit on the east side of the high street is currently a small yard between 2 commercial units and the plan is showing residential development-this is ludicrous. Where are these new residents supposed to park a car ?

KB4:The due diligence on this site has not been undertaken. This option game late to the table and has not been given the same level of scrutiny as the other sites and equally not the same level of scrutiny by the community.
KB4: the proximity of the development to Stevenage increases coalescence between and urban area and a small village. This must be avoided at all costs as Knebworth will lose its identity.
KB4:Any development here will reduces the open landscape currently enjoyed by the village community
KB4: Any infrastructure that causes traffic to ingress/egress through Oakfields road/avenue into KB4 and out into Watton road will turn a quiet residential area into a rat run and a dangerous road for all users.
KB4:The land here is constantly farmed, with multiple crops rotations per year-This will be a valuable asset lost. A wide variety of birds use this area as nesting site- both local and migrational.
KB4:Swangles lane is a nightmare at school times, with one lane traffic movement only at peak times. The additional homes in this area will increase this issue.
KB4:Watton Road is regularly flooded both at the junction with the railway bridge near Bragbury end and halfway down Watton Road close to the junction with old lane. There have been many accidents along this road , with many cars ending up in adjacent fields. This development will increase this issue as run off will be exasperated.
KB4:This Is NO footpath provision along the busy Watton road beyond Bell close.
KB4: Damage to the look and feel of the Picton built houses and road vista in Oakfields Avenue/Road .
KB4:Any entrance to site KB4 from the junction of Oakfields ave/road will mean compulsory purchase of land from properties adjacent to that site. It would not be possible to get traffic in and out without doing so.
KB4:I have seen no evidence that suggest that County have agreed to the Schooling proposals.

KB2:Building up close to the A1(M) would seem unwise considering the noise and population from the road. Putting a school here contravenes planning law of not building a school within 150 metres of a major road (A1M). Better off developing existing school site.
KB2:I have seen no evidence that suggest that County have agreed to the Schooling proposals.
KB2:The green belt buffer will be removed by this development thus removing the open nature of this part of Knebworth.
KB2:Orchard Way suffers from flash flooding. This will be exasperated by this new development as water will have even less ways of dispersing.


KB1:The design of the Bridge @ Gypsy Lane and the narrowness of approach to it from both ends will become a major bottleneck because of the extra traffic that needs to go through it. Extra infrastructure needs to be factored into the cost of developing the bridge further to support this site.
KB1:Deards End lane in parts is suitable for single file traffic only. This road will have to be upgraded to support the extra traffic...and will have to involve compulsory purchase of land.
KB1:The closeness of this development close to the A1M raises issues on whether the pollution and noise generated by the A1M would be tolerable. Tests would have to be undertaken to understand emission levels.
KB1:This development will affect the look and feel of the conservation area in Deards end.

Design: Knebworth retains its rural garden village feel because many of the houses have boundaries formed of natural hedges rather than wooden fences .It would seem prudent that if this awful development went ahead that this design feature was enshrined in local covenants within the new development.
Design: Knebworth also benefits from its association with Lutyens , which is reflected in both local housing, the church and the golf club. It would be beneficial for those design concepts to be reflected in any new development.

I enclose my comments on the North Herts Plan (for Knebworth )-Paragraphs (13.183-13.202 of the local plan).

I object to the plans for Knebworth as outlined in the Local plan for reasons of Soundness.

The Green Belt policy serves 5 purposes
* to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas;
* to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another;
* to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment;
* to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and
* to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land

These plans recommendation do neither of the above.

A local planning authority should regard the construction of new buildings as inappropriate in Green Belt. Exceptions to this are:
* buildings for agriculture and forestry;
* provision of appropriate facilities for outdoor sport, outdoor recreation and for cemeteries, as long as it preserves the openness of the Green Belt and does not conflict with the purposes of including land within it;
* the extension or alteration of a building provided that it does not result in disproportionate additions over and above the size of the original building;
* the replacement of a building, provided the new building is in the same use and not materially larger than the one it replaces;
* limited infilling in villages, and limited affordable housing for local community needs under policies set out in the Local Plan; or
* limited infilling or the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed sites (brownfield land), whether redundant or in continuing use (excluding temporary buildings), which would not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt and the purpose of including land within it than the existing development.

And falls foul of the above exceptions

I also include General and Site(KB1-4) related observations and comments .

General: Knebworth is a natural conurbation existing between hills to the west, north and south East. All traffic radiates through the centre of Knebworth either down the north south conduit (B197) or the east west conduit via Watton road/Station road. At peak times 7-9 am, 4-6.30 pm these roads are very busy and congested leading to tailbacks on all roads. There is not enough provision or evidence of provision for infrastructure to cope with the increase in traffic caused by 600 new homes and not sure how any improvement can be achieved. It will be grid lock.
General :The plan talks about an inadequate car parking management policy in the high street. Car parking is allowed in the High street to make ease of access to shops but also to actually slow the traffic down. We don't want traffic hurtling through the village.
General: There is no provision in the plans for the increased rail usage and therefore additional parking capability required in Knebworth. Currently all roads local to the Station are rammed with commuter cars.This will only increase with the additional 600 homes in , the 150 in Woolmer Green and the 3100 west of Stevenage. Currently a lot of Stevenage people drive to the village in the morning so that they don't have to pay car parking at Stevenage station.
General: Knebworth is a large village. The proposed development will turn Knebworth into a small town but without the facilities of a small town. The village will lose its openness and valuable agricultural land will be lost.
General: The doctors surgery struggles to cope with local demand. It currently can take 2 weeks just to get regular appointment. This will be exasperated by the increase in the number of people. The latest planning application from the Surgery has been rejected by North Herts.
General: The proposed schooling provision has not been syndicated or agreed by County. The figures don't lie, 600 homes means 600 kids which means 20 classes of 30 ( Year 1-13) which means you need more than 1 form entry for the new primary school.
General: It is not clear how the through school site on KB4 is going to operate. Will it be in addition to the existing provision or replace the existing provision. What traffic increase has been taken into consideration in the infrastructure to cope with this new school or the traffic flow that will result. Particularly increased flow from Stevenage as a result.
General: Current educational policy states that there is a nearest to school policy when assessing prioritisation. It will be ironic that Bragbury end will be closer to the new through school on KB4 than the west of Knebworth , thus precluding those children from the west of Knebworth from places at this school.
General: There is no provision for additional local employment in the plan
General: There is no provision for additional sporting facilities in the plan.
General: There is no evidence of land being set aside within these development locations for leisure usage.
General: There are no hard facts on the amount of low cost housing that will be set aside.
General: There is no mitigation in the plan for the number of houses being built at nearby Woolmer Green(150) or the those being built West of Stevenage (3100).
General: There has been no consultation with the the village with regard to educational provision. Did the residents ask for an 'all through' school. What process had been followed to get that conclusion and where is the transparency to that process.
General: The plan cannot be sustained without major investment in infrastructure. I cannot see any evidence in the wider county budget for this.
General: What benefits does this plan bring to Knebworth-that has never been articulated. Where are the local needs reflected in the plan.
General: No Resource planning has been given to the additional levels of Policing and other essential services that these developments will bring. Will this plan plus others in adjoining towns and villages take this beyond was has currently be budgeted for of forecasted for.
General: What studies and modelling has been used to predict increase in road/rail usage and where is the transparency to those artefacts.
General: This plan removes huge swathes of green belt to the west and east of Knebworth. What other options have been considered and where is the transparency to that process.

KB3:The Chas Lowe site is a valuable employer in the village (in fact the largest employer).This employment is not being replaced.
KB3:This has badged as a Retail only site. This is ridiculous ..at very least it should be mixed. Thus providing residents with additional shop or even a location for the surgery. The unit on the east side of the high street is currently a small yard between 2 commercial units and the plan is showing residential development-this is ludicrous. Where are these new residents supposed to park a car ?

KB4:The due diligence on this site has not been undertaken. This option game late to the table and has not been given the same level of scrutiny as the other sites and equally not the same level of scrutiny by the community.
KB4: the proximity of the development to Stevenage increases coalescence between and urban area and a small village. This must be avoided at all costs as Knebworth will lose its identity.
KB4:Any development here will reduces the open landscape currently enjoyed by the village community
KB4: Any infrastructure that causes traffic to ingress/egress through Oakfields road/avenue into KB4 and out into Watton road will turn a quiet residential area into a rat run and a dangerous road for all users.
KB4:The land here is constantly farmed, with multiple crops rotations per year-This will be a valuable asset lost. A wide variety of birds use this area as nesting site- both local and migrational.
KB4:Swangles lane is a nightmare at school times, with one lane traffic movement only at peak times. The additional homes in this area will increase this issue.
KB4:Watton Road is regularly flooded both at the junction with the railway bridge near Bragbury end and halfway down Watton Road close to the junction with old lane. There have been many accidents along this road , with many cars ending up in adjacent fields. This development will increase this issue as run off will be exasperated.
KB4:This Is NO footpath provision along the busy Watton road beyond Bell close.
KB4: Damage to the look and feel of the Picton built houses and road vista in Oakfields Avenue/Road .
KB4:Any entrance to site KB4 from the junction of Oakfields ave/road will mean compulsory purchase of land from properties adjacent to that site. It would not be possible to get traffic in and out without doing so.
KB4:I have seen no evidence that suggest that County have agreed to the Schooling proposals.

KB2:Building up close to the A1(M) would seem unwise considering the noise and population from the road. Putting a school here contravenes planning law of not building a school within 150 metres of a major road (A1M). Better off developing existing school site.
KB2:I have seen no evidence that suggest that County have agreed to the Schooling proposals.
KB2:The green belt buffer will be removed by this development thus removing the open nature of this part of Knebworth.
KB2:Orchard Way suffers from flash flooding. This will be exasperated by this new development as water will have even less ways of dispersing.


KB1:The design of the Bridge @ Gypsy Lane and the narrowness of approach to it from both ends will become a major bottleneck because of the extra traffic that needs to go through it. Extra infrastructure needs to be factored into the cost of developing the bridge further to support this site.
KB1:Deards End lane in parts is suitable for single file traffic only. This road will have to be upgraded to support the extra traffic...and will have to involve compulsory purchase of land.
KB1:The closeness of this development close to the A1M raises issues on whether the pollution and noise generated by the A1M would be tolerable. Tests would have to be undertaken to understand emission levels.
KB1:This development will affect the look and feel of the conservation area in Deards end.

Design: Knebworth retains its rural garden village feel because many of the houses have boundaries formed of natural hedges rather than wooden fences .It would seem prudent that if this awful development went ahead that this design feature was enshrined in local covenants within the new development.
Design: Knebworth also benefits from its association with Lutyens , which is reflected in both local housing, the church and the golf club. It would be beneficial for those design concepts to be reflected in any new development.

I enclose my comments on the North Herts Plan (for Knebworth )-Paragraphs (13.183-13.202 of the local plan).

I object to the plans for Knebworth as outlined in the Local plan for reasons of Soundness.

The Green Belt policy serves 5 purposes
* to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas;
* to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another;
* to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment;
* to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and
* to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land

These plans recommendation do neither of the above.

A local planning authority should regard the construction of new buildings as inappropriate in Green Belt. Exceptions to this are:
* buildings for agriculture and forestry;
* provision of appropriate facilities for outdoor sport, outdoor recreation and for cemeteries, as long as it preserves the openness of the Green Belt and does not conflict with the purposes of including land within it;
* the extension or alteration of a building provided that it does not result in disproportionate additions over and above the size of the original building;
* the replacement of a building, provided the new building is in the same use and not materially larger than the one it replaces;
* limited infilling in villages, and limited affordable housing for local community needs under policies set out in the Local Plan; or
* limited infilling or the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed sites (brownfield land), whether redundant or in continuing use (excluding temporary buildings), which would not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt and the purpose of including land within it than the existing development.

And falls foul of the above exceptions

I also include General and Site(KB1-4) related observations and comments .

General: Knebworth is a natural conurbation existing between hills to the west, north and south East. All traffic radiates through the centre of Knebworth either down the north south conduit (B197) or the east west conduit via Watton road/Station road. At peak times 7-9 am, 4-6.30 pm these roads are very busy and congested leading to tailbacks on all roads. There is not enough provision or evidence of provision for infrastructure to cope with the increase in traffic caused by 600 new homes and not sure how any improvement can be achieved. It will be grid lock.
General :The plan talks about an inadequate car parking management policy in the high street. Car parking is allowed in the High street to make ease of access to shops but also to actually slow the traffic down. We don't want traffic hurtling through the village.
General: There is no provision in the plans for the increased rail usage and therefore additional parking capability required in Knebworth. Currently all roads local to the Station are rammed with commuter cars.This will only increase with the additional 600 homes in , the 150 in Woolmer Green and the 3100 west of Stevenage. Currently a lot of Stevenage people drive to the village in the morning so that they don't have to pay car parking at Stevenage station.
General: Knebworth is a large village. The proposed development will turn Knebworth into a small town but without the facilities of a small town. The village will lose its openness and valuable agricultural land will be lost.
General: The doctors surgery struggles to cope with local demand. It currently can take 2 weeks just to get regular appointment. This will be exasperated by the increase in the number of people. The latest planning application from the Surgery has been rejected by North Herts.
General: The proposed schooling provision has not been syndicated or agreed by County. The figures don't lie, 600 homes means 600 kids which means 20 classes of 30 ( Year 1-13) which means you need more than 1 form entry for the new primary school.
General: It is not clear how the through school site on KB4 is going to operate. Will it be in addition to the existing provision or replace the existing provision. What traffic increase has been taken into consideration in the infrastructure to cope with this new school or the traffic flow that will result. Particularly increased flow from Stevenage as a result.
General: Current educational policy states that there is a nearest to school policy when assessing prioritisation. It will be ironic that Bragbury end will be closer to the new through school on KB4 than the west of Knebworth , thus precluding those children from the west of Knebworth from places at this school.
General: There is no provision for additional local employment in the plan
General: There is no provision for additional sporting facilities in the plan.
General: There is no evidence of land being set aside within these development locations for leisure usage.
General: There are no hard facts on the amount of low cost housing that will be set aside.
General: There is no mitigation in the plan for the number of houses being built at nearby Woolmer Green(150) or the those being built West of Stevenage (3100).
General: There has been no consultation with the the village with regard to educational provision. Did the residents ask for an 'all through' school. What process had been followed to get that conclusion and where is the transparency to that process.
General: The plan cannot be sustained without major investment in infrastructure. I cannot see any evidence in the wider county budget for this.
General: What benefits does this plan bring to Knebworth-that has never been articulated. Where are the local needs reflected in the plan.
General: No Resource planning has been given to the additional levels of Policing and other essential services that these developments will bring. Will this plan plus others in adjoining towns and villages take this beyond was has currently be budgeted for of forecasted for.
General: What studies and modelling has been used to predict increase in road/rail usage and where is the transparency to those artefacts.
General: This plan removes huge swathes of green belt to the west and east of Knebworth. What other options have been considered and where is the transparency to that process.

KB3:The Chas Lowe site is a valuable employer in the village (in fact the largest employer).This employment is not being replaced.
KB3:This has badged as a Retail only site. This is ridiculous ..at very least it should be mixed. Thus providing residents with additional shop or even a location for the surgery. The unit on the east side of the high street is currently a small yard between 2 commercial units and the plan is showing residential development-this is ludicrous. Where are these new residents supposed to park a car ?

KB4:The due diligence on this site has not been undertaken. This option game late to the table and has not been given the same level of scrutiny as the other sites and equally not the same level of scrutiny by the community.
KB4: the proximity of the development to Stevenage increases coalescence between and urban area and a small village. This must be avoided at all costs as Knebworth will lose its identity.
KB4:Any development here will reduces the open landscape currently enjoyed by the village community
KB4: Any infrastructure that causes traffic to ingress/egress through Oakfields road/avenue into KB4 and out into Watton road will turn a quiet residential area into a rat run and a dangerous road for all users.
KB4:The land here is constantly farmed, with multiple crops rotations per year-This will be a valuable asset lost. A wide variety of birds use this area as nesting site- both local and migrational.
KB4:Swangles lane is a nightmare at school times, with one lane traffic movement only at peak times. The additional homes in this area will increase this issue.
KB4:Watton Road is regularly flooded both at the junction with the railway bridge near Bragbury end and halfway down Watton Road close to the junction with old lane. There have been many accidents along this road , with many cars ending up in adjacent fields. This development will increase this issue as run off will be exasperated.
KB4:This Is NO footpath provision along the busy Watton road beyond Bell close.
KB4: Damage to the look and feel of the Picton built houses and road vista in Oakfields Avenue/Road .
KB4:Any entrance to site KB4 from the junction of Oakfields ave/road will mean compulsory purchase of land from properties adjacent to that site. It would not be possible to get traffic in and out without doing so.
KB4:I have seen no evidence that suggest that County have agreed to the Schooling proposals.

KB2:Building up close to the A1(M) would seem unwise considering the noise and population from the road. Putting a school here contravenes planning law of not building a school within 150 metres of a major road (A1M). Better off developing existing school site.
KB2:I have seen no evidence that suggest that County have agreed to the Schooling proposals.
KB2:The green belt buffer will be removed by this development thus removing the open nature of this part of Knebworth.
KB2:Orchard Way suffers from flash flooding. This will be exasperated by this new development as water will have even less ways of dispersing.


KB1:The design of the Bridge @ Gypsy Lane and the narrowness of approach to it from both ends will become a major bottleneck because of the extra traffic that needs to go through it. Extra infrastructure needs to be factored into the cost of developing the bridge further to support this site.
KB1:Deards End lane in parts is suitable for single file traffic only. This road will have to be upgraded to support the extra traffic...and will have to involve compulsory purchase of land.
KB1:The closeness of this development close to the A1M raises issues on whether the pollution and noise generated by the A1M would be tolerable. Tests would have to be undertaken to understand emission levels.
KB1:This development will affect the look and feel of the conservation area in Deards end.

Design: Knebworth retains its rural garden village feel because many of the houses have boundaries formed of natural hedges rather than wooden fences .It would seem prudent that if this awful development went ahead that this design feature was enshrined in local covenants within the new development.
Design: Knebworth also benefits from its association with Lutyens , which is reflected in both local housing, the church and the golf club. It would be beneficial for those design concepts to be reflected in any new development.

I enclose my comments on the North Herts Plan (for Knebworth )-Paragraphs (13.183-13.202 of the local plan).

I object to the plans for Knebworth as outlined in the Local plan for reasons of Soundness.

The Green Belt policy serves 5 purposes
* to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas;
* to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another;
* to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment;
* to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and
* to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land

These plans recommendation do neither of the above.

A local planning authority should regard the construction of new buildings as inappropriate in Green Belt. Exceptions to this are:
* buildings for agriculture and forestry;
* provision of appropriate facilities for outdoor sport, outdoor recreation and for cemeteries, as long as it preserves the openness of the Green Belt and does not conflict with the purposes of including land within it;
* the extension or alteration of a building provided that it does not result in disproportionate additions over and above the size of the original building;
* the replacement of a building, provided the new building is in the same use and not materially larger than the one it replaces;
* limited infilling in villages, and limited affordable housing for local community needs under policies set out in the Local Plan; or
* limited infilling or the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed sites (brownfield land), whether redundant or in continuing use (excluding temporary buildings), which would not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt and the purpose of including land within it than the existing development.

And falls foul of the above exceptions

I also include General and Site(KB1-4) related observations and comments .

General: Knebworth is a natural conurbation existing between hills to the west, north and south East. All traffic radiates through the centre of Knebworth either down the north south conduit (B197) or the east west conduit via Watton road/Station road. At peak times 7-9 am, 4-6.30 pm these roads are very busy and congested leading to tailbacks on all roads. There is not enough provision or evidence of provision for infrastructure to cope with the increase in traffic caused by 600 new homes and not sure how any improvement can be achieved. It will be grid lock.
General :The plan talks about an inadequate car parking management policy in the high street. Car parking is allowed in the High street to make ease of access to shops but also to actually slow the traffic down. We don't want traffic hurtling through the village.
General: There is no provision in the plans for the increased rail usage and therefore additional parking capability required in Knebworth. Currently all roads local to the Station are rammed with commuter cars.This will only increase with the additional 600 homes in , the 150 in Woolmer Green and the 3100 west of Stevenage. Currently a lot of Stevenage people drive to the village in the morning so that they don't have to pay car parking at Stevenage station.
General: Knebworth is a large village. The proposed development will turn Knebworth into a small town but without the facilities of a small town. The village will lose its openness and valuable agricultural land will be lost.
General: The doctors surgery struggles to cope with local demand. It currently can take 2 weeks just to get regular appointment. This will be exasperated by the increase in the number of people. The latest planning application from the Surgery has been rejected by North Herts.
General: The proposed schooling provision has not been syndicated or agreed by County. The figures don't lie, 600 homes means 600 kids which means 20 classes of 30 ( Year 1-13) which means you need more than 1 form entry for the new primary school.
General: It is not clear how the through school site on KB4 is going to operate. Will it be in addition to the existing provision or replace the existing provision. What traffic increase has been taken into consideration in the infrastructure to cope with this new school or the traffic flow that will result. Particularly increased flow from Stevenage as a result.
General: Current educational policy states that there is a nearest to school policy when assessing prioritisation. It will be ironic that Bragbury end will be closer to the new through school on KB4 than the west of Knebworth , thus precluding those children from the west of Knebworth from places at this school.
General: There is no provision for additional local employment in the plan
General: There is no provision for additional sporting facilities in the plan.
General: There is no evidence of land being set aside within these development locations for leisure usage.
General: There are no hard facts on the amount of low cost housing that will be set aside.
General: There is no mitigation in the plan for the number of houses being built at nearby Woolmer Green(150) or the those being built West of Stevenage (3100).
General: There has been no consultation with the the village with regard to educational provision. Did the residents ask for an 'all through' school. What process had been followed to get that conclusion and where is the transparency to that process.
General: The plan cannot be sustained without major investment in infrastructure. I cannot see any evidence in the wider county budget for this.
General: What benefits does this plan bring to Knebworth-that has never been articulated. Where are the local needs reflected in the plan.
General: No Resource planning has been given to the additional levels of Policing and other essential services that these developments will bring. Will this plan plus others in adjoining towns and villages take this beyond was has currently be budgeted for of forecasted for.
General: What studies and modelling has been used to predict increase in road/rail usage and where is the transparency to those artefacts.
General: This plan removes huge swathes of green belt to the west and east of Knebworth. What other options have been considered and where is the transparency to that process.

KB3:The Chas Lowe site is a valuable employer in the village (in fact the largest employer).This employment is not being replaced.
KB3:This has badged as a Retail only site. This is ridiculous ..at very least it should be mixed. Thus providing residents with additional shop or even a location for the surgery. The unit on the east side of the high street is currently a small yard between 2 commercial units and the plan is showing residential development-this is ludicrous. Where are these new residents supposed to park a car ?

KB4:The due diligence on this site has not been undertaken. This option game late to the table and has not been given the same level of scrutiny as the other sites and equally not the same level of scrutiny by the community.
KB4: the proximity of the development to Stevenage increases coalescence between and urban area and a small village. This must be avoided at all costs as Knebworth will lose its identity.
KB4:Any development here will reduces the open landscape currently enjoyed by the village community
KB4: Any infrastructure that causes traffic to ingress/egress through Oakfields road/avenue into KB4 and out into Watton road will turn a quiet residential area into a rat run and a dangerous road for all users.
KB4:The land here is constantly farmed, with multiple crops rotations per year-This will be a valuable asset lost. A wide variety of birds use this area as nesting site- both local and migrational.
KB4:Swangles lane is a nightmare at school times, with one lane traffic movement only at peak times. The additional homes in this area will increase this issue.
KB4:Watton Road is regularly flooded both at the junction with the railway bridge near Bragbury end and halfway down Watton Road close to the junction with old lane. There have been many accidents along this road , with many cars ending up in adjacent fields. This development will increase this issue as run off will be exasperated.
KB4:This Is NO footpath provision along the busy Watton road beyond Bell close.
KB4: Damage to the look and feel of the Picton built houses and road vista in Oakfields Avenue/Road .
KB4:Any entrance to site KB4 from the junction of Oakfields ave/road will mean compulsory purchase of land from properties adjacent to that site. It would not be possible to get traffic in and out without doing so.
KB4:I have seen no evidence that suggest that County have agreed to the Schooling proposals.

KB2:Building up close to the A1(M) would seem unwise considering the noise and population from the road. Putting a school here contravenes planning law of not building a school within 150 metres of a major road (A1M). Better off developing existing school site.
KB2:I have seen no evidence that suggest that County have agreed to the Schooling proposals.
KB2:The green belt buffer will be removed by this development thus removing the open nature of this part of Knebworth.
KB2:Orchard Way suffers from flash flooding. This will be exasperated by this new development as water will have even less ways of dispersing.


KB1:The design of the Bridge @ Gypsy Lane and the narrowness of approach to it from both ends will become a major bottleneck because of the extra traffic that needs to go through it. Extra infrastructure needs to be factored into the cost of developing the bridge further to support this site.
KB1:Deards End lane in parts is suitable for single file traffic only. This road will have to be upgraded to support the extra traffic...and will have to involve compulsory purchase of land.
KB1:The closeness of this development close to the A1M raises issues on whether the pollution and noise generated by the A1M would be tolerable. Tests would have to be undertaken to understand emission levels.
KB1:This development will affect the look and feel of the conservation area in Deards end.

Design: Knebworth retains its rural garden village feel because many of the houses have boundaries formed of natural hedges rather than wooden fences .It would seem prudent that if this awful development went ahead that this design feature was enshrined in local covenants within the new development.
Design: Knebworth also benefits from its association with Lutyens , which is reflected in both local housing, the church and the golf club. It would be beneficial for those design concepts to be reflected in any new development.