Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

The destruction of the green belt goes against national policy. Brownfield plots should be utilised for the unmet housing needs rather than breaking greenbelt and destroying rural communities. Attempting to offset by making the land between Cockernhoe and Hitchin green belt is preventing further development there, for example a new garden city, which go much further in meeting future housing requirements. The tenets of the NPPF do not seem to have been followed in either the proposal to destroy existing Green Belt or the proposal to create new Green Belt (e.g. consideration of the consequences the proposed new Green Belt would have on sustainable development).
I've also been informed a Luton councillor also objected to the proposal stating that it does not meet their housing requirements as any housing development would be on the wrong side of town.
Insufficient traffic infrastructure. Queues along Crawley Green have already notably increased in recent months (presumably as a result of ongoing works at the airport) to the point now leave additional time to get to the station on time. Airport queues having been backing up to the M1. Surveys not being carried out correctly, the current housing proposal for this land is based on a road that doesn't exist and hasn't been proposed while assumptions are being made on 1 car per household. The expansion of the airport and the additional traffic this will bring has not seemingly been taken into consideration either.
Public services are already overstretched. School children are being bused to Hitchin due to a lack of school places in Wigmore, policing is already inadequate as typically come from Hitchin rather than Luton due to council boundary. (Took over an hour for police to arrive to a call out witnessed). With just Asda nearby there are insufficient supermarket facilities to meet needs of new development. Queues back up traffic to the roundabouts, to enter the supermarket and buy fuel (blocking Wigmore lane) while queues at check-out take 20+ mins.
Our neighbour has recently been informed they will be required to install a water meter due to Cockernhoe being in a deprived water area, yet it can seemingly support another 660 (potentially 2,100) houses. Surely this will massively increase the risk of drought and water restrictions in the area.
All visitors comment on the area, the countryside and the wildlife. A walk with friends visiting the area for the first time were amazed by the wildlife, rabbits, pheasant, birds of prey and the 'largest herd of deer they'd seen outside of Richmond park'. All of this seen within an hour. Have even seen owls during the day while walking to the pub.
One of the nicest things about Cockernhoe and surrounding area is the village life and social aspects of the community. The pub and memorial hall run many social occasions and everyone has been very welcoming since moving into the village, with this community life now under threat if the number of houses rises by over 1,000%. The current Green belt is very effectively serving its purposes to maintain the character of Cockernhoe village (check restricted sprawl / prevent merging with neighbouring town / safeguarding the countryside from encroachment)
The single access road already gets cars waiting to pass, the country lanes are not suitable for so many more cars (there would be many more than 1 per house - conservatively from government statistics about 1.3 cars per household could be expected but from local experience in Cockernhoe it is over 2 cars per household)). The additional traffic would be a threat to the walkers and cyclists in the area, both activities we do regularly (this would affect both local cyclists and also those following the Chiltern Way). There are also horses and tractors regularly in the area.

The destruction of the green belt goes against national policy. Brownfield plots should be utilised for the unmet housing needs rather than breaking greenbelt and destroying rural communities. Attempting to offset by making the land between Cockernhoe and Hitchin green belt is preventing further development there, for example a new garden city, which go much further in meeting future housing requirements. The tenets of the NPPF do not seem to have been followed in either the proposal to destroy existing Green Belt or the proposal to create new Green Belt (e.g. consideration of the consequences the proposed new Green Belt would have on sustainable development).
I've also been informed a Luton councillor also objected to the proposal stating that it does not meet their housing requirements as any housing development would be on the wrong side of town.
Insufficient traffic infrastructure. Queues along Crawley Green have already notably increased in recent months (presumably as a result of ongoing works at the airport) to the point now leave additional time to get to the station on time. Airport queues having been backing up to the M1. Surveys not being carried out correctly, the current housing proposal for this land is based on a road that doesn't exist and hasn't been proposed while assumptions are being made on 1 car per household. The expansion of the airport and the additional traffic this will bring has not seemingly been taken into consideration either.
Public services are already overstretched. School children are being bused to Hitchin due to a lack of school places in Wigmore, policing is already inadequate as typically come from Hitchin rather than Luton due to council boundary. (Took over an hour for police to arrive to a call out witnessed). With just Asda nearby there are insufficient supermarket facilities to meet needs of new development. Queues back up traffic to the roundabouts, to enter the supermarket and buy fuel (blocking Wigmore lane) while queues at check-out take 20+ mins.
Our neighbour has recently been informed they will be required to install a water meter due to Cockernhoe being in a deprived water area, yet it can seemingly support another 660 (potentially 2,100) houses. Surely this will massively increase the risk of drought and water restrictions in the area.
All visitors comment on the area, the countryside and the wildlife. A walk with friends visiting the area for the first time were amazed by the wildlife, rabbits, pheasant, birds of prey and the 'largest herd of deer they'd seen outside of Richmond park'. All of this seen within an hour. Have even seen owls during the day while walking to the pub.
One of the nicest things about Cockernhoe and surrounding area is the village life and social aspects of the community. The pub and memorial hall run many social occasions and everyone has been very welcoming since moving into the village, with this community life now under threat if the number of houses rises by over 1,000%. The current Green belt is very effectively serving its purposes to maintain the character of Cockernhoe village (check restricted sprawl / prevent merging with neighbouring town / safeguarding the countryside from encroachment)
The single access road already gets cars waiting to pass, the country lanes are not suitable for so many more cars (there would be many more than 1 per house - conservatively from government statistics about 1.3 cars per household could be expected but from local experience in Cockernhoe it is over 2 cars per household)). The additional traffic would be a threat to the walkers and cyclists in the area, both activities we do regularly (this would affect both local cyclists and also those following the Chiltern Way). There are also horses and tractors regularly in the area.

See attached

See attached

The destruction of the green belt goes against national policy. Brownfield plots should be utilised for the unmet housing needs rather than breaking greenbelt and destroying rural communities. Attempting to offset by making the land between Cockernhoe and Hitchin green belt is preventing further development there, for example a new garden city, which go much further in meeting future housing requirements. The tenets of the NPPF do not seem to have been followed in either the proposal to destroy existing Green Belt or the proposal to create new Green Belt (e.g. consideration of the consequences the proposed new Green Belt would have on sustainable development).
I've also been informed a Luton councillor also objected to the proposal stating that it does not meet their housing requirements as any housing development would be on the wrong side of town.
Insufficient traffic infrastructure. Queues along Crawley Green have already notably increased in recent months (presumably as a result of ongoing works at the airport) to the point now leave additional time to get to the station on time. Airport queues having been backing up to the M1. Surveys not being carried out correctly, the current housing proposal for this land is based on a road that doesn't exist and hasn't been proposed while assumptions are being made on 1 car per household. The expansion of the airport and the additional traffic this will bring has not seemingly been taken into consideration either.
Public services are already overstretched. School children are being bused to Hitchin due to a lack of school places in Wigmore, policing is already inadequate as typically come from Hitchin rather than Luton due to council boundary. (Took over an hour for police to arrive to a call out witnessed). With just Asda nearby there are insufficient supermarket facilities to meet needs of new development. Queues back up traffic to the roundabouts, to enter the supermarket and buy fuel (blocking Wigmore lane) while queues at check-out take 20+ mins.
Our neighbour has recently been informed they will be required to install a water meter due to Cockernhoe being in a deprived water area, yet it can seemingly support another 660 (potentially 2,100) houses. Surely this will massively increase the risk of drought and water restrictions in the area.
All visitors comment on the area, the countryside and the wildlife. A walk with friends visiting the area for the first time were amazed by the wildlife, rabbits, pheasant, birds of prey and the 'largest herd of deer they'd seen outside of Richmond park'. All of this seen within an hour. Have even seen owls during the day while walking to the pub.
One of the nicest things about Cockernhoe and surrounding area is the village life and social aspects of the community. The pub and memorial hall run many social occasions and everyone has been very welcoming since moving into the village, with this community life now under threat if the number of houses rises by over 1,000%. The current Green belt is very effectively serving its purposes to maintain the character of Cockernhoe village (check restricted sprawl / prevent merging with neighbouring town / safeguarding the countryside from encroachment)
The single access road already gets cars waiting to pass, the country lanes are not suitable for so many more cars (there would be many more than 1 per house - conservatively from government statistics about 1.3 cars per household could be expected but from local experience in Cockernhoe it is over 2 cars per household)). The additional traffic would be a threat to the walkers and cyclists in the area, both activities we do regularly (this would affect both local cyclists and also those following the Chiltern Way). There are also horses and tractors regularly in the area.