Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Knebworth Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 0398 9 Knebworth Estates Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Comment This letter is my response, on behalf of Knebworth Estates, to the Local Development Framework's Additional Suggested Sites Consultation. I appreciate you prefer to receive responses in electronic form, therefore I have also separately emailed the text of this letter. Much of what is relevant to our representation has been made in previous representations by Knebworth Estates to previous LDF Consultations, including the 'Core Strategy and Development Control Polices, Preferred Options' Consultation (Oct '07) and the 'Land Allocations: Issues and Options' Consultation (March '08). Rather than repeat the evidence previously submitted, I ask that this representation is read in conjunction with these previous responses. Regarding all 126 additional sites - Knebworth Estates asks Council to be led by the key principal of Ebenezer Howard that Hertfordshire's urban spaces should be a blend of city and nature. Although Greenbelt is much valued, our urban communities should not be sacrificed at its expense. Turning every garden into a house and every house into flats, and clogging up our town centres, is too great a price to pay for protecting Greenbelt ¿ and I suspect, in the future, will be seen as the great planning disaster of our generation. Much better for our towns, villages, hamlets and countryside to all play a part, and evolve in a balanced way. Regarding the Knebworth village-edge sites (52, 53, 55, 57 & 58), it is disappointing that officers have chosen to consult on village-edge sites only to the east and the west, and not on village-edge sites to the north and south, which, as put forward in the 'Knebworth Sites Appraisal Report' (Dec '07 & previously submitted) are better connected to the B197 and would require less access through the middle of the village. If Site 57 is chosen, we ask that consideration is given to the possible future need to enlarge Knebworth Junior school, which would become development landlocked were this site to be re-designated for residential use. Regarding Sites 52 & 53, we ask Council to consider the unique opportunity presented by Knebworth Estates' published offer (Knebworth Parish Council's 'Knebworth Sites Appraisal Report' - Dec '07, paragraph 3.10, p.10) that 'if residential development was required at Knebworth's village edge by the LDF, it would look to donate the proceeds to Parish Charities as long as the Knebworth House Education and Preservation Trust was a priority.' Knebworth Estates remains committed to donating 100% of any proceeds from either or both of these two sites resultant from residential re-designation by the LDF. Any residential re-designation of these sites would produce substantial charitable sums for, not only the Knebworth House Education and Preservation Trust, which is critically under-endowed and has previously established itself as a 'very special circumstance' in Enabling Development and Greenbelt policy; but also for the benefit of Knebworth Village, which faces serious challenges highlighted by its Parish Plan (April '07) which are (and are likely to remain) beyond local authority budgets, and yet which will threaten the village's sustainability (the loss of its doctors, shops and services). This is a unique opportunity to solve long-term community problems, whilst at the same time answer district and regional needs within the Local Development Framework. Paragraph 3.64 of the LDF'S Core Strategy Preferred Options document of September '07 states: 'Knebworth is probably the most sustainable village in the district and therefore should be allowed to grow a modest amount to take advantage of the existing facilities. This may require additional investment, notably in the village school, which is operating close to capacity.' The offer mentioned in the above paragraph provides possible 'additional investment ' way in excess of Section 106 or other standard developer contributions, and can easily be imagined to solve any other arising infrastructure issues, including sewage (mentioned as a concern elsewhere in the September '07 document). Beyond a local self-sustaining sewage system, sewage is a district-wide issue and not Knebworth specific. If only a section of Sites 52 & 53 is thought necessary or appropriate for re-designation, Knebworth Estates favours re-designation at the southern end of the combined sites, for reasons given in the last paragraph of our March '08 representations on Land Allocations, that put forward the South Knebworth Field site (Site 5 in the 'Knebworth Sites Appraisal Report' - Dec 07) as the best option should village-edge development be required. Regarding the non-village-edge Knebworth sites, if Site 54 is chosen, Knebworth Estates strongly supports the moving of the site entrance from Old Knebworth Lane to the B197. 0964 2 Cousins Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object Please find below my comments on the North Herts District Council land allocations additional suggested sites dated July 2009 specifically in connection with the promotion of seven Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Knebworth Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent green belt sites located on the edge of Knebworth (sites 52-58 inclusive). Please note I have no over-riding objection to the allocation of site 54 in view of the leisure and recreation use being promoted particularly as it is a brownfield site with established built form.

I am however, concerned at the additional sites proposed for housing on Green Belt land.

National Planning Guidance (PPG2: Green Belts) states in paragraph 1.4 the fundamental aim of Green Belts is to prevent urban sprawl, therefore without exception all these sites, as they are located outside the defined settlement boundary of Knebworth would extend the village.

Paragraph 1.5 indicates the purpose of land in the Green Belt is to prevent neighbouring towns from merging. Knebworth is located less than a mile from Stevenage in a southly and westerly direction with Woolmer Green less than half a mile to the south . Any extension of Knebworth would erode the gap with Stevenage and Woolmer Green and create coalescence diminishing the open nature of the countryside around the village. (Paragraph 1.4 states the most important attribute of Green Belts is their openness).

Paragraph 1.6 promotes the positive role of Green Belts to retain land in agricultural use. All these sites are for such use and there is no justification provided to support their loss.

Paragraph 2.9 notes Green Belts should be several miles wide to ensure an appreciable open zone around built up areas. The Green Belt is already less than one mile wide and therefore no development should take place on the edge of Knebworth as the gap between settlements would inevitably be narrowed even further.

There is a general acceptance the Council will need to release some land located in the district from the Green Belt to meet future housing needs and due consideration will need to be given as to where this is located. Other towns located in the district are characterised by a wider range of facilities and services that can be more readily be extended to cope with additional demands imposed by development. The site descriptions within the sustainability appraisal note the identified constraints on utilities and schooling in the village, therefore promotion of Knebworth for extension by way of Green Belt release is a flawed concept.

Stevenage with its extensive range of services and community facilities offers the opportunity to consider urban extension and initiatives being actively promoted by North Herts District Council e.g The Stevenage and North Herts Area Action Plan (SNAP) provide a much more sustainable approach to the release of Green Belt land than any extension of Knebworth.

The additional Knebworth sites offer no justification as to how a number of constraints will be overcome:

1. The free and easy flow of traffic along the 'High Street' including the resolution of issues related to commercial traffic created by Chas Lowe's operation which is in the process of extending to additional premises. 2. Location of development immediately adjacent to the A1 (M). 3. The rural nature of roads that serve the village from easterly direction e.g Swangleys Lane which is wholly unsuitable for additional traffic, being narrow and barely capable of permitting two cars to pass each other and importantly a primary school close to its junction with London Road.

In summary, I oppose the extension of Knebworth through the release of Green Belt land. 0985 5 Trotman Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object Thank you for your letter of 16 July 2009 requesting my views on the above reference sites. The following comments refer to the seven Knebworth sites with particular emphasis on those five sites surrounding the village.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Knebworth Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 1. General

Knebworth is already a well established balanced sustainable village with shops, schools, services, infrastructure and a good mix of social, affordable, mid and upper priced homes. Any significant additional developemnt would jeopardise and destabilise the community with pressure on schools, services , infrastructutre e'g sewers, roads (parking already a nightmare). The suggested five greenfield sites surrounding thr village, if developed with the potential of some 1300 dwellings, would totally devastate and change the character of Knebworth from a village to a small urban town and to paraphrase Prince Clarles "be disfigured by five carbuncles on the face of an old friend". I therefore support the current NHDC planning Policy for Knebworth theat there should be no incursions into the green belt surrounding Knebworth. The NHDC cooporate plan states "that it will protect the environment by vigorously challenging airport and green-field housing development".

In conculsion I believe that the West of Stevenage expansion would have an impact on Knebworth and must be considered in any proposals for changes to the village boundaries. 3952 57 Hertfordshire County Council - Passenger Transport Unit Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Comment In terms of public transport, most parts of Plots 52,53,55,56 and 58 are over 400m of a bus stop. The main bus corridor in Knebworth is the B197 Stevenage Rd which is the route for the 44/45 Stevenage-Luton (Mon-Sat 2 hourly), 300/301 (Mon-Fri every 15 mins, Sat every 20 mins, Sun hourly), and 379 Hertford-Stevenage (limited services). The 44/45 also goes along Station Rd. These sites do not score highly in terms of sustainability due to their distance from existing bus services and from existing services within the town centre. These sites are of a significant size and developer contributions would be necessary in order to ensure that these sites are better served by passenger transport. 4201 1 Bland Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object I have received your mail shop today and looked at the proposals for Knebworth. It is a prespostious development in an all ready overcrowded village. The infrastructure just would not accommodate, Schools medical services. sewage, etc. It is just the sort of piece meal thoughts from folk with no 'on the ground' experience. We will all be a concrete jungle if this happens. I have lived in Knebworth for over 50 years and have seen an enormous increase in number of houses. This would be the final nail to destroy the village and lead to it being a part of Stevenage. A disaster which no residents want. At least Great Ashby was planned as a whole but even this is 'miss mash' with half in North Herts and half in Stevenage. You have asked for comments and I am sure that if most residents knew of this there would be a huge public outcry. I will urge all my elected representatives to throw out this whole ridiculous suggestion. We have had many like this before and no doubt will get more in the future and we must fight to preserve our green and pleasant VILLAGE. We do not want to be incorporated into a Town. 4438 1 Platt Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object I object to the development of this greenbelt land for the following reasons:

It is green belt land - what is the point of greenbelt if its status can be ignored in favour of profit for Knebworth Estate? It is a beautiful rural piece of land - not brownfield - and must be protected.

It is bordered on two sides by conservation areas - it will be damaging to appearence of the conservation area; it will add traffic and noise pollution to the area that has been designated

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Knebworth Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent as important to conserve the status quo. This development will have a serious negative impact on a conservation area.

In addition, this is an enormous area - it will mean that a significant housing development will take place; again it will have a high impact on the surrounding area in terms of visibilty, noise etc...Such a large development will put significant strain on local services eg The Primary School which is already at full capacity, the Doctors' Sugery and the dentists. A smaller development on a smaller site may well be more sustainable and have less impact on the village amenities overall.

The access to the site is on a dangerous bend with limited visability along Park Lane when approaching it from Old Knebworth over the motorway bridge and from Knebworth Village itself past West barn. NB: We were refused planning permission for access to a site opposite this land due to it being considered by NHDC as a dangerous road with poor visibility.

It will increase traffic flow along Park Lane which already suffers from parking issues and speeding cars.

There is a drainage/sewerage problem along Park Lane with the system being at capacity - our house is on Park Lane and our drainage goes into Orchard Way because if this issue.

I am puzzled as as to who this development will benefit - other than of course Knebworth Estates. There is a good deal of housing available in the village, from starter homes, retirement homes, council property, family homes and large properties

Who is going to live in these houses - people from the village or outsiders? knebworth is a village - not a new town - but a community that has developed significantly over the past 30 years and which is in danger of being over developed by NHDC and spoiled for the people who already live here, who make contributions to the local community and economy and who do not want to see their village ruined.

In conclusion, I strongly object to the development identified.

Wendy Platt 15 August 2009 4450 7 Laing Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object This is in green belt and in a crowded county like Hertfordshire we need as much open countryside as possible to maintain quality of life. This speculative proposal would mark a further coalescence with Stevenage.

Knebworth does not have sufficient infrastructure to support further housing. 4453 1 Leather Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object All the proposed sites use valuable green belt land, reducing the space between our village & Stevenage. The Land is used for farming and food production.

The increase in the size of the village would put a great strain on existing services eg school, surgery, shops and station. Roads are too narrow or congested for inevitable increase in traffic.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Knebworth Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent We found out about this only because a local shopkeeper put up a notice. The original plan of the proposed sites was so poor as to make them unidentifiable. Not everyone has access tot he internet. Consultation was during the holiday period and not widely publicised. Any meeting will only be held at the end of the period - all very unsatisfactory. 4505 1 Ker-Reid Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object The question of development in the green belt in Knebworth has been an on going problem throughout the 50 years I have lived in Knebworth. The village is surrounded on 3 sides by larger areas of population- namely Stevenage and Woolmer Green/Mardley Hill/ Welwyn. Great care has to be taken with development towards those centres of population since otherwise there will be a continuous built up area from Stevenage right through to Hatfield. It is for this reason that the development at 55and 58 is not suitable at all. There is no natural boundary to either of those sites and the result will eventually be that there will be development from Knebworth right down to the Stevenage to Hertford North railway line since once development starts it will continue until that line is reached. Site 57 is also in the same catefgory since development will eventually fill in the fields between Woolmer Green and Knebworth. I do not support development in Sites 52 and 53 BUT at least the A1(M) provides a natural boundary which will stop further creeping development. If therefore these sites have to be used that would at least prevent yet further deveolopment. However the drainage system and sewerage system is totally inadequate for the scale of development proposed and the school is full to bursting point. Since these 2 sites make up 65 acres the village cannot possible accommodate that sort of development with pressures on school, parking, traffic and utilities. I am therefore against all the sites at 52, 53, 55, 57 and 58.

As far as 54 and 56 are concerned I believe that once development is allowed to the west of the Stevenage to Hertford railway line a precedent for deveopment will be set and it will be used by developers anxious to develop sites 55, 57 and 58. I therefore oppose it on that ground.

I hope my views will be taken into account. 4532 2 Channing Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object UPDATE ON PREVIOUS FORM END AUGUST. A lot of us regard Knebworth as a VILLAGE and moved here because we like the way of life as a village and its rural aspect. We know that there is a School Campaign which added to the site for 200+ houses, turns us into a suburb - think of the traffic involved for a 900 pupil secondary school in the midst of tone of the most used and populated walks to the roads in this area. This is extending Knebworth boundaries onto GREEN BELT land, and will reach almost to Woolmer Green. This is bad for both villages. We have infilled in Knebworth to its full extent and have had the A1 through our countryside. We've done our share of building. Knebworth High Street is already a bottleneck. Green Belt was created so that those in towns can have somewhere to relax in from hectic life-styles. Is there vested interests here? - it makes one think. 4563 1 Smith Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object I have lived in Knebworth for 10 years, and development on the green belt/agricultural land surrounding the village is an issue that has been raised on several occasions during my time here. I am opposed to development on the newly proposed sites in the village, with the exception of 54 and 56, for the following reasons:

1. The drainage and sewerage systems have already been identified as having reached their capacity limit. Any further development would overburden this infrastructure.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Knebworth Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 2. The primary school is already full, with no ability to expand. Any further development of the village would overburden the existing education provision, and could mean existing village children having to go further afield to begin their early years education. As the school is the heart of the village, this could divide the community.

3. Traffic flow through the village is already compromised at certain times of the day due to a busy builders merchants, commuters, school runs and through traffic. Additional cars that development would inevitably bring would only add to the issues.

4. Parking is a already a recognised problem in the village, due to the train station, a busy high street with many popular facilities and the school. Again, additional vehicles in and around the village would only add to this problem.

5. Knebworth is already close to Stevenage to the north and Woolmer Green to the south. Any development on boundary land separating the village from these two areas must be avoided to prevent Knebworth being swallowed and losing its village status.

6. If there has to be some development, of all the sites identified, then I believe that sites 54 and 56 may have some merit. 54 is a brownfield site and I believe that wherever possible, brownfield land should always be used before greenfield. Site 56 is an adjoining piece of land, albeit greenfield, and as both sites are bounded on one side by the railway and on the other by the B197, then it would be seem to make sense for these two parcels of land to be developed together, as development can be contained.

I do hope that the above will be given serious consideration when deciding whether any of the newly identified sites are to be built on. 4653 1 Mayfield Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object I do NOT support the expansion of Knebworth into green belt land. I understood that previous plans advocated not expanding Knebworth in this way. I purchased my home with the expectation of not needing to move again and because the village is just that a village. My home currently allows me the luxury of a view over open fields and easy access into the surrounding pleasant countryside.

I believe that the village is at the limits of what it can support in terms of transport and infrastructure and I believe, sewerage and water. I feel that there are many brownfield sites within Hertfordshire that should be developed before any green belt development is considered.

However I am given to understand that at some point expansion MAY become inevitable. Therefore this feedback is within that framework. I feel that any building development should be as small scale as possible and not to create something resembling a village version of Great Ashby on the outskirts of Stevenage. It should also be easily accessible and have as little impact on current residents as possible.

Hence if I had to choose from the proposed sites for green belt development it would be Sites 54 and 56 as these would impact least on the village. The expansion of Odyssey would have benefits for residents of a wider surrounding area, which would be accessible at all times. It would also create safe accommodation for the increasing number of elderly people whilst allowing easy access to the facilities of Stevenage .

If yet further development were required, sites 55, 58 and 57 would be my next preferred options in that order.These are small and I assume have less dwellings and are closer to the main routes in the village and will be closer for residents to walk to the shops hopefully decreasing the proportion of extra vehicles in and through the village.

Sites 52 and particularly 53 are much larger and have greater access issues with few options, particularly as they are bordered on one side by the motorway.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Knebworth Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent I am well aware that this may be seen as NIMBYism but feel that as general principles, brownfield sites should be used first. Also that towns which have a more resilient infrastructure should be expanded in preference to villages and countryside. IF development has to occur within Knebworth itself, I believe that it should only be at one of the smaller sites. 4758 1 Young Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object 1. Constraints on the utilities in the area especially water, sewage, and waste disposal. 2. Capacity of Primary School at it's upper limit for size of buildings, playing fields and especially parking. 3. Congestion on the village roads from parking, through traffic and delivery of children to school. 4. Sites 54 and 56 much too far from village centre, shops, doctors etc. 5. Overload of Surgery and Medical facilities. Having lived in Knebworth for the past 53 years and seen the population double its numbers in that time, I feel that the size of the present community gives just the right numbers for a good community spirit. 5006 1 Norman Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object The infrastructure in Knebworth is incapable of supporting any material additional housing. The roads are already crowded and dangerous, the school is full and the utilisation of Green Belt land will destroy the character of the village. Approval of any of these schemes will set a precedent for other land owners. 5020 1 Hemingway Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Comment Knebworth simply lacks the road capacity for any new development sites. The B197 to Stevenage and Welwyn are clogged for extended periods during weekdays. Watton Road, which runs between sites 55 and 58 is a narrow country lane which is quite unsuited to the current volume of traffic which uses it.

Park Lane, which would presumably be the access to sites 52 and 53 is better, but fundamentally another 180 homes would result in probably in excess of 300 vehicles all trying to get into and out of the village at peak times.

Most cars parked around the station originate in Knebworth or surrounding villages - Woolmer Green, Datchworth, Codicote, even the Bragbury End district of Stevenage. More houses would be more parking and congestion around the station; moreover all rush hour trains to London now are standing room only if you get on at Knebworth .

Furthermore many parents of young children in the village have to drive to Stevenage, WGC and beyond to find a primary school that will take their children. More houses means more disappointed parents.

Knebworth has already exceeded its capacity limits. Either there must be a major upgrade of roads, schools, parking, and other facilities or residents of Knebworth will endure more rationing of these over-extended publicly funded facilities.

I recently attended a public meeting in Knebworth Village Hall, and not a single resident had a positive word to say about any of the proposed sites with the exception of the owners of these sites and their representatives. There is absolutely no public support for expansion of this village.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Knebworth Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent I have lived in Knebworth since 1984 and my wife has lived here since 1963. She is strongly opposed to yet further moves to destroy Knebworth's character as a village. 5021 1 The Really Easy Imaging Co Limited Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Comment If non-coalescence is sustained (56 is non-compliant and ruled out,it seems inevitable that a large village like Knebworth will grow steadily E and W over decade(s) timescales. Whilst landowners/developers and investors do the promotion and planners assess sustainabilty, residents seem to polarise into unresolvable grow or no-grow positions. I'd like our village to grow to sustain our shops, business and services. Sites 52 53, 55, 57, 58 however, suffer from a fundamental problem that the links to the main B197 artery are severely constricted by the two narrow roadways under the railway from the W and dangerous already crowded junctions (Watton Road and Swangleys Lane-St Martins Road) from the E. Furthermore the traffic-clogged B197/High Street and lack of parking is already a dis-incentive, if not danger, to use the shops and businesses in the village centre. The issue of the sustainability of the proposed E and W sites cannot be resolved until these access points are substantially re-modelled. Any development of these sites for business or residence should not be admitted unless simultaneous solutions to the cross railway routes (e.g. two widened roads and a new route(s), at least pedestrian, and B197 access (? roundabouts, traffic lights)are included. Therefore, one particularly sustainable E and W growth scenario, that also involves proactive planning, is to build now an eastern bypass, and new adjacent sewer, to Knebworth (probably through 56, 57 and 58) and plan to gradually grow to "populate" this road.

I can't imagine that the cross-railway routes will ever get off the ground quickly (although we desperately need a safer pedestrian route now) so any development of 52 and 53 should have low priority, and who would want to live along the A1(M)? So may be these two sites should only ever be for business use (Knebworth needs the buiness park that our short-sighted PC plus a grasping developer made sure we didn't get at the railway sidings site, now a patch of dense little houses and ugly flats). I trust that development resulting from adopting these sites would be screened for the impact on schools, parking, traffic et al.and especially to manage their scenic, "green" and leisure resource on the attractive E side of the village. For me, it is only the early by-pass solution that has any chance of any growth being planned sustainably. Not to do so would push me into the "no-growth" camp, and that's a recipe of despair for the village's future. The early eastern by-pass is a bold step and requiring relentess persuasion and daunting close co-operation of local and central government agencies. Its very boldness, with matching vision from the land owners and developers, might even lay the foundation of a new "garden city" that Henry Cobbold's ancestor wanted for Knebworth one hundred years ago. 5083 1 Meredith Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object My principal interests are sites 52 and 53, although I make general objections to sites 55, 57 and 58; I make no representations on sites 54 and 56.

Knebworth House Education and Preservation Trust, Knebworth House and the Knebworth Estate are, for all practical purposes, one and the same; I have used the term Knebworth Estate to include all of these.

Site 52 has been the subject of planning applications in the past, which were always resisted by local residents and refused by the planning authority. The owners of this land have perceived there to be an opportunity of enhancing the value of the land through this current consultation, where the more usual route has failed. Whilst I can understand their motive (the land is, after all, some distance from their own home, which would be unaffected by any development), the fundamental reasons for refusal in the past still apply.

The site abuts the Deards End Lane Conservation Area which, contrary to the consultants' report, contains five listed buildings (2 residential, 2 agricultural, 1 leisure). All of these, together with one property recommended recently for scheduling as being of significant local interest, immediately adjoin site 52. The presence of a large housing estate with a common Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Knebworth Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent boundary would seriously affect the setting of these buildings.

Deards End Lane itself is one of very few lanes in the built area of Knebworth which retains much of its rural character. The lane suffers already from the impact of traffic from and to the residential estate built in recent years also on Knebworth Estate land, to the east of site 53. Virtually every household on that estate uses Deards End Lane as the preferred route between Knebworth and Stevenage. The potential traffic from sites 52 and 53 - both during construction and subsequently - would use Deards End Lane as a natural through road, completely overwhelming the 'conservation area' concept. Any traffic from site 53 which did not use Deards End Lane for access and egress would instead use the Stockens Green Conservation Area for the same purposes. The whole of both conservation areas would be overwhelmed by sites 52 and 53.

The A1(M) motorway was consructed away from the built area of the village (so far as was possible). The proposals for sites 52 and 53 would bring the built area up to the motorway, which the original planners sought to avoid .

I do not have personal knowledge of any planning history of sites 55, 57 and 58 but again, they would enlarge the built area of the village and destroy the country lane atmosphere of the eastern side of it, notably Watton Road and Old Lane. Development on these sites would reduce the rural belt between Knebworth and Stevenage; if this were permitted, it would be naieve to believe that the land owners would not seek to close the gap entirely in the future.

NHDC has conducted its own investigation into suitable sites for house building and has concluded that no such sites exist in Knebworth. It has given reasons which I need not repeat here but which I support.

I object to the promotion of sites 52, 53, 55, 57 and 58. 5090 1 Calver Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Comment All sites identified in and around Knebworth are currently protected Green Belt land. The village of Knebworth has previously been identified by NHDC as not capable of sustaining any further development due to constraints of the current facilities and infrastructure. In particular the transport both road and rail currently are overloaded at peak times both morning and evening. The 2 lane section of the A1(M) originally built as a bypass for Knebworth and Stevenage is at a standstill Southbound every weekday morning and Northbound every weekday evening resulting in the B197 being used as a rat run. I understand that the volume of traffic using the B197 is now greater than when it was part of the A1 Great North Road before the A1(M) was built Network Rail have identified that it will be necessary to expand the East Coast Main Line in the section from Welwyn Garden City to Woolmer Green to 4 tracks to increase capacity. This will be a major project which will take years to complete even if it were sanctioned at this time. Currently there are no additional peak time train paths available through this section of the ECML. In order to increase capacity First Capital Connect are introducing longer 12 coach services to call at stations where the platform lengths will allow. This does not include Knebworth or its southerly neighbour Welwyn North. Currently most peak time services calling at Knebworth are standing room only or indeed difficult to board. Knebworth does not have any large scale oportunities for employment so any expansion would inevitably mean that the occupants of any additional housing would be commuters North or South increasing the load on the already overloaded transport infrastructure. I also understand that the services to Knebworth in particular Sewage, mains water and electricity supply are already at their full capacity and therefore would require substantial upgrading. The village primary school has had several extensions in past years to cope with the demands of 3 previous developments within the confines of Knebworth and is the largest Primary school in the County. Further development of the identified sites close to or adjacent to Knebworth must be rejected.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Knebworth Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 5097 1 Hewitt Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object I object to all developments on Green Belt Land around Knebworth. We (my partner and I) attended the meeting at Knebworth Village Hall and it was apparent that this is purely a business enterprise by the landowner, although he has tried to present it as in the best interest of the village because profits will go back to the village - however he means that they will go to support the Trust which maintains Knebworth House.

Knebworth village is already very congested with all of the roads used as rat runs at rush hour - it is very difficult to drive through the village at peak times. We, and many other residents enjoy the close access to the countryside on the outskirts of Knebworth and this is just one of the proposed sites on the outskirts which will spoil the pleasure of our walks. 5117 2 Lynch Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object Proposed Secondary School and Housing Development on the site South of Knebworth I object to the proposed housing and secondary school development , in the South of Knebworth, adjoining the cemetery with the mainline railway, boundary of Wych Lane and Gypsy Lane. These are my objections: 1. I object to the proposed vehicle traffic entry and exit from B197 under the main rail line embankment and also the additional traffic movement into Wadnall Way. 2. The traffic density at peak times on the B197 is already considerable. 3. Risk Assessment The frequent closure of any lane on the A1(M) results in serious traffic blocking on the B197 from Welwyn to Knebworth and reverse order. Knebworth is a controlled bottleneck with a Primary School, two pedestrian crossings, parking on both sides of the road, Chas. Lowe, with lorries and trailers and their fork lift truck back and forth from their gravel and sand pit. There is already considerable problems caused for the buses which pass through the High street without school coaches adding to the problem. 4. It is problematic that the infrastructure to support this development would involve two councils - North Herts.and Welwyn Hatfield and two parish councils of Knebworth and Woollmer Green. It would also involve the main rail company and sewerage, drainage, water supply, gas and electrics. The recovery costs of the proposed housing development would not justify the costs involved. 5163 7 The Fairfield Partnership JB Planning Associates - TW Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object Development in and around Knebworth 1. We believe that all of the sites around Knebworth included in the Land Allocations consultation would harm the character of the village, and would be inappropriate for residential allocations. These sites are either too large to be assimilated into the village, or are on prominent sites which would harm its setting and character. They would also be likely to exacerbate the current congestion at the centre of the village. 2. A holistic approach should be taken to identifying development opportunities on suitable sites around Knebworth. This should include the land immediately to the south of the village, which is more appropriate for a sensitive development in terms of its character and relationship to the built area of the village . Reasons for Objection 3. We believe that Knebworth can sustainably absorb a limited scale of development, which will help to support local services. However, we are concerned that some of the proposed development sites around the village are out of scale with the historic settlement pattern, and would damage the character of the village. More detailed representations are made on the individual sites. Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Knebworth Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 4. The central area of the village suffers from acute traffic congestion, and we are concerned that large development sites of several hundred dwellings, or smaller sites which would feed directly onto the congested ends of the High Street, would exacerbate this problem. 5. We also believe that any new development should be located so as to complement the built form of the village. The various sites suggested in the Land Allocations consultation are on prominent sites which relate more to the rural landscape which surrounds Knebworth than to its built form. They are generally open sites, with clear views across them, and would be sensitive in landscape terms. 6. A holistic approach should be taken to locating new development in and around the village. We believe that the land immediately adjoining the village's southern boundary would be entirely acceptable for a residential development which rounded off the built edge of the village, and formed a robust new Green Belt boundary. We have made representations to this effect to the recent Welwyn Hatfield Core Strategy consultation, copies of which have been enclosed for information. 7. This land and several of the sites suggested in the current Land Allocations consultation have been considered in a Landscape Assessment carried out by CSa Environmental Planning. This Assessment concluded that the land to the immediate south of the village, adjacent to London Road, was well contained visually, and divorced from the rural hinterland which surrounds Knebworth. This land was found to relate well to the built form of the village, and its development would not extend development any further south than the present extent of the housing on London Road; as such, it would have no material impact on the gap between Knebworth and Woolmer Green to the south. The same Assessment held contrasting views of several of the sites considered in the current Land Allocations consultation, and a copy of the full assessment has also been included with these representations for information. 5184 1 Ding Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Support I feel a secondary school is a good idea - interested to hear that it will have a pool and facilities for public use. Pleased that local children can walk to school for youth social reasons and for 'green' reasons, also good because of the jobs it would generate for local people.

Our concern for further residential dwellings are primarily traffic. The High Street already struggle, how on earth will it cope with further traffic.

I have very real concerns about Knebworth getting nearer and nearer Stevenage. We paid and premium to live in Knebworth and do not want to become an extension of Stevenage. I moved from a town to a village on purpose and love village life.

Does this area really need another care home? If statistics show that there is a need the positive points are that it generates jobs for the local community. It also helps families keep partners/parents locally so this is a bonus. 5184 2 Ding Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object I strongly oppose the plans to build a senior school in the village of Knebworth. It concerns me that the school would endanger the lives of students because of its close proximity to the railway line. People that live in the village are aware that students will have to travel to senior schools and we don't appear to have a mass exedus of families of senior school age children. We are a village, not a town so do not need or want a senior school. I also oppose the building of further homes in Knebworth. I do not want our village to become an extension of Stevenage. I chose village life and would be upset if this changed. England needs and wants villages. What a sad place it would be if our choices were limited to towns and cities. The village is a vibrant place to live and already has considerable traffic and parking issues. To add to this by adding many more vehicles seems rather ridiculous. I am not opposed to change and realise that places will evolve but please do not upset the equilibrium of Knebworth by adding a senior school and more homes. There are many more suitable locations for expansion. People need homes, affordable homes. If further properties are built in Knebworth they will likely be out of the reach for many young couples. Do our younger generation a favour and build them affordable homes. Thank you. Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Knebworth Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 5184 3 Ding Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object I am strongly opposed to the building of a senior school in Knebworth. I am concerned about the close proximity to the railway line and the potential hazard this may cause young people. I am concerned about the further traffic it will generate as families from Datchworth and Codicote transport their young people into Knebworth. I am also concerned about the vandalism that often occurs around schools. I am also strongly opposed to the building plans for Knebworth. The traffic in Knebworth is already an issue. Adding many more cars would seem ludicrous to an infrastructure that is already struggling. We chose to live in a village. Knebworth consequently does not want a senior school, we are not a town. People are not leaving Knebworth in large numbers as their children reach senior school age so where is the need for the school. If further homes are added we will loose our village and simply become an extension of Stevenage. Residents of Knebworth chose village life. What a sad place the world would be if we could only choose town or city life. Places evolve and change and that is acceptable. But to add a senior school and high numbers of new homes would completely change the equilibrium of the village. Knebworth can not cope with the number of proposed homes and must not be forced into coping. Please respect that we love our village and do not want such radical changes as planned. Leave Knebworth to be a village to be proud of. 5204 1 Wilson Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object Knebworth is already the largest village in North Hertfordshire, whilst retaining a rural environment. It is already having pressure on the various services including medical, sewage, traffic and despite promises over the years to ease these various problem, little or nothing has been achieved.

We are destroying the green belt, with possible increased risks of flooding, CO2 emissions and seeing the surrounding roads gridlocked a peak periods.

This proposed expansion isn't about more services for the community, its more about landowners raising cash. 5238 1 Gallafent Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Comment I have been a resident of Knebworth for almost 10 years and the reason I moved to Knebworth in the first place was because I liked the Vilage status that went with it. I AM TOTALLY OPPOSED TO ANY NEW DEVELOPMENT on green belt land in the areas surrounding the village and I want Knebworth to remain a village,not a small town or a suburb of Stevenage. With any of the developments would come a huge increase in traffic and polution and the population would obviously increase. The Village primary school is full at the moment, so any new children in the area would have to travel to Stevenage. The High street is normally congested during normal working hours and any addition development would only increase congestion in that area.Parking is currently difficult at the best of times and any more developmentin the close vicinity would make it nigh on impossible to park in the village. It seems to me that the only people who would gain anything from any such development would be the current owners of the land that was successful in being chosen. Any development in the area,be it housing,a school or even both, will only increase traffic and polution. For these reasons,I am totally against any new development in the areas surrounding Knebworth village. 5368 2 Aknai Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Knebworth Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Comment I have concerns about any of the allocated sites in Knebworth due to: lack of space at the already oversubscribed Primary School, where there is no space for significant expansion without encroaching onto the playing field; and the extra traffic movements this will bring to a village centre which is already severely congested . However, if very limited development (i.e. ONE of the allocated sites) is sufficient to provide capital for community facilities such as a purpose-built GP surgery/health centre, then I may support it depending on the site proposed. 5427 1 Quinlan Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object In my view, Knebworth has reached the size at which its village character is challenged, so I am against all plans to extend it. Villages only function up to a certain size, beyond which they become impersonal and the attractions of living in a village are lost. I am particularly opposed the the idea of building a school, to be paid for by a large housing development, to the south of Knebworth. This would, with other inevitable developments, virtually merge Knebworth with Woolmer Green. 5441 1 Simson Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Comment None of these sites appears necessary or desirable, with the exception of No 54, with which I have no particular problem. I understand that the infrastructure in Knebworth has been previously said to be inadequate to support any further housing. In this regard, nothing has changed to my knowledge. Those who have proposed these sites can best explain their motivation, but it seems to me, having attended the public meeting organised by the Parish Council on 9 September and heard what the landowners had to say, that they are primarily interested in making a profit. There was a degree of distancing even from certain of their own projects, certainly in the case of Henry Cobbold, which may (or may not) have been disingenuous. In any event, the arguments for encroaching on Green Belt land were less than convincing. I hope that the sites, 54 excepted, are rejected. 5443 1 Garrick Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object We object to building on the green fields around Knebworth. Knebworth is big enough already and would struggle to support a larger population. Knebworth is a village. The Primary School wouldn't have enough places and the High Street would be clogged up even more. Parking in the village is inadequate and would be made worse. Other services such as sewerage and water were not designed to cope with such a large population. 5474 1 Michaelson Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object Re: Sites 58 & 56 most importantly but also sites 52,53,54,55,57. 1) Most important issue is that Knebworth should retain its individual identity. Sites 58 & 56 both encroach on the already far too small open space that keeps Knebworth and Stevenage separate. This retention of individual identity was in fact one of the raisons d'etre for the creation of green belts in the first place. 2) Services both physical (sewerage, roads etc) and social (NHS dental care, traffic etc.) are already stretched in Knebworth. Any increase in housing will only worsen this. I chose to move here (from Hertsmere) because of the village identity of Knebworth. I do not wish Knebworth to become part of Stevenage's urban sprawl.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Knebworth Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent N.B. Finding this page to "have my say" was extremely difficult and took about 30 minutes despite the fact it is the second item on the home page. Surely a click on link could have been put in place. 5522 1 Mitchell Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Comment re Knebworth additional suggested sites. We have lived in Knebworth for 30 years. In this time the village has practically doubled in size. It is rapidly losing its 'village' characteristics, largely because of the good commuting facility attracting more people to live here. The sort of problems that are arising relate to the infrastructure - sewerage, schools, parking etc, and in our view Knebworth has already done more than its fair share to accomodate increased housing requirements. Knebworth is still a village, just, but once we start to erode the boundaries and talk about building secondary schools etc, then that village characteristic will be lost forever. It seems to us that this is a vicious circle where the infrastructure is under strain, and so new funds are generated by the sale of land for new houses. Some of this money is then put back into the community in an effort to prop up the infrastructure but the people living in the new houses then place further strain on the infrastructure. 200 new houses would represent perhaps 400 additional cars, and perhaps another 200-300 children who would need places at the junior school, which is already over-subscribed; regardless of the requirement for further secondary education places. If some of these proposed plans go ahead, Knebworth will effectively become a small town. Why do we need to do that when we have towns all around us, and if people wanted to live in a town that would be their choice. This is not NIMBYism. Knebworth has done more than many other villages to absorb more people, to the extent that it is at breaking strain now. 5524 5 Lund Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Comment I have commented/objected on each site specifically but have some points which I would like to raise about developing Knebworth which pertain to all of the sites earmarked for Knebworth. When one eneters Knebworth, one is aware of a village nestling in the valley. The proposals will extend the village to either the east or the west and the effect will be to have an urban sprawl rather than a village. Infact, I was surprised to read on the north herts website that Knebworth is now considered a town : "The most recently developed area has grown into a residential town with shops, schools and other amenities". It is a surprise as we are all under the impression that we live in a village.

Increasing the number of dwellings in Knebworth will mean that we need more places at our primary school which is already fit to bursting in the reception and year 1 classes.

The transport infrastructure is just about suitable for its current vehicle capacity. Many of the sites that have been put forward are accessed by small lanes, which are dangerous as they are, without increased traffic volume and many lack footpaths into the centre. You couldn't just append housing, you would have to do a full scale road improvement too. Many children use their bikes to get around the village. It is already quite scary for them (many selecting to do cycling proficiency before they venture out alone)as it is. Increase the traffc and increase the problems of walking / cycling around the vicinity.

In August,the head of eductaion for North Herts Council apologised to parents that whilst 97 % of people in North Herts got one of their choices for secondary schools, unfortunately it was us, from the villages (Knebworth and surrounding villages) who was the 3% that didn't get their choices. With it being so hard to get into a secondary school from Knebworth, it will be much harder when the poplution increases.

What I suggest, is that we shelve the seven sites and review another site. Identified to the south of Knebworth, between Knebworth and Woolmer Green, is a field which could be used to build houses. Whilst the roads are small, access would not need to be via the village roads which are already busy. I have also heard that there is a campaign to build a secondary Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Knebworth Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent school on that site which would take the pressure off North Herts Council to find places in already over-stretched Stevenage Schools. It could then accomodate residents of the new housing and provide improved sports and leisure facilities for the village which you said site 54 would do.

In all, I feel that this is a much better option than appending to Knebworth at either the east or the west. I also undertand that Woolmer Green parish are in favour of the houses and school at the South Knebworth site. Some Knebworth residents have objected that the field is used to walk their dogs on, but, in my opinion, the site is suitable as it ticks many boxes - easy access already there, doesn't stand out like a sore thumb (if built sympathetically) and would provide a secondary school which could provide eduction for the children of the surrounding villages.

Why build ONLY houses when you can build houses AND get a school and leisure facilities ? This makes perfect sense to me !

Thank you for your time. 5565 1 Patterson Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object We strongly object to all the sites proposed no's 52-58 in Knebworth. My husband and I moved to Knebworth with our young family in 2004 as we liked the character of the village, but with the convenience of commuting by train into London for our work . We believe that the increase of properties in this area would destroy this balance of village life, the village would become too large. The volume of residential properties proposed will have a detrimental effect on the roads, nurserys, school, facilities, utilities etc. The main road already through Knebworth (B197) the High Street is already straining under the heavy traffic load on a daily basis, if there is any kind of incident on the A1 (M) this has a knock on effect on our village. Looking at the sites on the plan immediately around Knebworth we are very concerned that some of the beautiful country lanes around Knebworth would be carved up to accomodate these properties. The lanes are already extremely narrow and could certainly not accomodate a steady flow of traffic. One of these lanes is Swangleys Lane where I live, it is already extremely dangerous for the children who go to Knebworth school, I dread to think what would happen if this lane got any busier. We are extremely unhappy and disappointed that these sites are even being considered. 5592 1 Watson Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object As a resident of Woolmer Green I wish to object to all the identified sites in Knebworth for the following reasons:

1. They are all in the Green Belt.

2. The sites immediately adjacent to Knebworth Village will contribute to coalescence between the villages of Knebworth, Woolmer Green and Welwyn, contrary to the principles outlined in the East of England Plan.

3. As stated in your document, there is considerable strain on water and sewage resources in this area and any additional housing will put an intolerable strain on these resources; I have not seen any proposals as yet for this to be addressed.

4. The traffic, both rail and road, is already at capacity in this area - any additional usage would not be tolerated. 6290 1 Callaghan Document Section :Knebworth

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Knebworth Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Representation : Object In response to the proposed development of sites in and around Knebworth as tabled at the meeting in Knebworth on 9 September, please note that I oppose all currently proposed sites as being of little benefit to the community. I would rather see an alternative site considered, namely that in Knebworth south. I am aware of a proposal to build a secondary school and houses there, which seems to be a far more sensible proposal as the community would benefit directly from the sale of the houses, and not developers. The community would also benefit from the school and its additional facilities available to the community. The current LDF proposals would benefit only the developers financially whilst having a negative impact on the village, in terms of the proposed locations, which are unacceptable. 6317 1 Griffiths Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object I realise the plots of land in the greenbelt at Knebworth were plots put forward by landowners and developers for house building. Already the streets are full of parked vehicles which allow only one line of traffic through. These are Park Lane, Gun Lane, Milestone Road, Station Road, Watton Road, Pondcroft Road, Lytton Fields etc. The Primary school already is over subscribed. Please do no allow anymore development - WE ARE FULL. 6319 1 Venn Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object I would like to convey my objection to the development of land in and around Knebworth. I have lived in the Village for over 30 years and watched infill, loss of beautiful healthy trees unnecessarily and feel the village is in danger of losing its 'Village' status if any more development is allowed. The village has become more and more congested over the years, parking is a nightmare. I cannot begin to think how extra housing would impede further to this situation. Currently it is very difficult to get doctors/dentists appointments and I understand that village parents are not always guaranteed a place at the village school for their primary school age children. If development is allowed this current situation will become a 'melt down' scenario. Apart from the above there is also the question of water supply, power, sewage etc resources. Please please please save our village from suburbia! 6322 1 Harris Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object I do not support the development of any of the suggested sites in and around Knebworth. I believe that Knebworth has reached its effective maximum capacity, and additional development will cause too much strain on facilities and infrastructure, congestion etc. People choose to live in Knebworth because it is small and surrounded by greenfield sites. Modest development will make little difference to a sizeable town, but will have a huge negative impact on a village. I believe that if the district needs more housing it should be centred on towns. At a public meeting in Knebworth the suggestion has been made that there should also be the development of a new secondary school near Knebworth. I oppose this, despite being a parent of young children, as I believe that equivalent and improving schools are available in Stevenage and Welwyn Garden City. It is precisely the absence of large facilities and infrastructure that attracts people to a place such as Knebworth; I do not support any move to turn Knebworth into a larger town, and I do not believe there is a real appetite for this on the part of any significant number of residents. 6363 1 Allibon Document Section :Knebworth

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Knebworth Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Representation : Comment Development in Villages

Reasons for objection

. Lead to unsympathetic and unsustainable communities

. Past experience shows incremental expansion of allocations not sustainable in transport terms

. No critical mass to provide physical and social infrastructure

. Damage character of villages

. Long term burden on schools transport budget

General observations

. General concern about impact of scale of development on services/infrastructure

. Need to preserve character of existing settlements

Water Resources

. Water supply and sewage are important factors for consideration.

. Water cycle studies study would help inform the development plan process, as well as firm up on the phasing of development to match the timing of increases in capacity at existing sewage treatment works

Highway Network

. Increased congestion are important factors for consideration. New roads would have to be made available leading to what is already a lane

To support the well being of Knebworth residents by making sure enough health services and other community facilities e.g. for parking are provided to meet current needs and the additional requirements arising from any new developments.

To protect and enhance the natural environment including it's biodiversity and the historic built environment through positive improvement.

Councils need to work with bus companies to improve services (not just pay lip service to providing better services to reduce car use).

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Knebworth Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Inadequate local employment therefore lead to increased journeys

Problematic to deliver and implement health infrastructure.

In short, we are very concerned about the assessment growth options and after effects on our small and tranquil village. 6370 1 Baxter Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object I am writing to advise that we are against any Housing Developers building on Green belt land in Knebworth. We are aware that due to population increases that more houses will have to be built at some stage and would definitely by in support of the profits from any house sales being used to build a much needed secondary school along with much needed recreation and social facilities for our village which would benefit our children and us alike. The We need a school campaign for Knebworth has produced an excellent alternative proposal that should definitely be included in the LDF 6377 1 Hook Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object As residents of Knebworth we strongly object to the development of the Green Belt. We understand that no sites within Knebworth were suggested as part of the East of England Plan and that these additional sites are only being put forward by landowners, developers and individuals for personal gain at the expense of green belt and the environment. We believe the development of these sites compromise Knebworth's village status and are not sustainable with the current education, transport and sewerage infrastructure. Due to the time constraints we have only had time to send objections to LDF Consultations on the one site which effects us the most, site 53 , but support objections of development of all green belt sites surrounding the village. Having spoken with representatives of Knebworth School, we also oppose the building of a new Secondary school. 6379 1 Wildish Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object I will keep my observations on these suggestions brief and to the point.RRAren't these suggestions putting the cart before the horse?RRIt is a well documented fact that currently Knebworth is full to bursting point. Surely the infrastructure should be upgraded to take into account any additonal dwellings and the possibility of an 800/900 pupil secondary school?RRSewage and drainage would appear to be at its maximum capacity. When it rains either heavily or for prolonged periods, the two lowest areas of Orchard Way and Broom Grove flood with water that has run off from site 53.RRAll roads into and out of Knebworth are congested for most of the day with parking both on and off - street at a premium.RRThe rail service cannot be increased because of the flow restrictions caused by the Digswell Viaduct. The only way to intensify the train service is to lengthen the trains which in turn would mean lengthening the platforms at Knebworth. I cannot see Rail Track doing this just for one community although in more affluent times and under another guise, they did actually re-instate Watton at Stone Station and completely build a new station at Welham Green.RRAs a Knebworth resident for 32 years, my big fear is that currently the priorites are wrong. Get the basics right then look at adding dwellings and a school. Without wishing to appear facetious, why doesn't Knebworth House sell off some of Knebworth Park for the housing? It has motorway access as well as access to and from Knebworth with public transport services easily accessible as well. This would provide the money that Henry needs for the upkeep of his "crumbling pile" as he referred to it and it would help protect our precious green belt areas. 6380 1 Carey Document Section :Knebworth

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Knebworth Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Representation : Support I am in support of the We need a School Campaign and if there has to be some houses built in Knebworth to comply with the growing population then I feel that the proposed site for the school should be included in the LDF . The community would benefit from the house sales as this would then pay for a school to be built with social and recreational facilities that the community would all benefit from. This would make Knebworth a much more sustainable village to want to live in, as I Know many people move or consider moving to be near a Good school so they can guarantee a place. Knebworth and the surrounding villages have always had problems getting there first,second or even third choice of School. 6381 1 Callaghan Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object In relation to the proposed sites for consideration of development currently in the LDF plans for Knebworth, please note that I am against all of the proposed sites, barring perhaps the Odyssey land development. Sites to the north of Knebworth bordering on the Roebuck would destroy the clear division, however small it may be, between Knebworth and Stevenage, virtually joining us to a large town. Similarly proposed sites to the east would virtually join us to Bragbury End, again therefore joining us to Stevenage. It is my view that what would be the most sensible and beneficial option for the village is if a further proposal be put on the table now, namely to build to the south of Knebworth. Whilst there are arguments against coalescence with Woolmer Green, this is at least another village and would be less damaging than the other proposed sites. I understand that there is a campaign to support the building of a secondary school at this location, along with up to 200 houses, the sale of which would finance the building of the school and also the preservation of Knebworth House. I see this as being far more beneficial to the community than the building of houses on the current proposed sites which would produce little tangible financial or social benefit for the community, but huge financial benefits for the developers. I am realistic about the likelihood of further development in and around Knebworth, but I would obviously prefer to see this done in the most sympathetic and beneficial way possible vis a vis the local community. 6389 3 Goodhew Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Comment In General. The Parish Council Meeting was very constructive, but provided mixed and slighting confusing information. On one hand we were informed that North Hertfordshire District Council did not need to include Knebworth as part of their requirement to meet Government housing requirements. However, instead of celebrating with us that this would continue to protect the village status of Knebworth and its surrounding green belt lands, the different parties involved that we expected to be protecting these aims on our behalf appeared to be the same that were directly or indirectly involved in actually promoting sites for development and directly harming these aims. On a personal front, a number of years ago we applied to purchase some of the land behind our property (a small part of site 52 in your report) with the open and declared aim of part planting it with trees to help maintaining and protect the rural environment and provide additional noise protection from the A1M. Part of the refusal was that we would not be allowed to carry out these aims as it was grazing land, and yet has subsequently been put forward firstly as a station car park, and then as housing development. There is obviously a conflict of aims and loyalties, and we think it therefore important that North Hertfordshire District Council retains the full responsibility for protecting Knebworth and its village and surrounding green belt environment. 6444 1 Tooth Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object I was appalled to read of the proposals from "land owners & property developers" for residential development on Green Belt land adjoining the village of Knebworth. Particularly sites 52, 53, 55, 57, & 58. Despite NHDC's opinion, expressed earlier in this consultation,that Green Belt development around the village is inappropriate because of infrastructure limitations, e.g.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Knebworth Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent educational & sewage facilities. Any resident will immediately identify serious existing traffic density & car parking problems throughout much of the village which are certain to be exacerbated if any of these sites are developed. I can comment from personal knowledge of the areas most disrupted if sites 55 or 58 were developed as I have lived, worked from & raised a family at 7, Bell Close, SG3 6AJ since 1966. Site 55. Size 10.35 acres. In 2008 the average density of new housing developments was approx 18.6 /acre. (46/hectare) so this site might accommodate 192 homes. Maybe 400 people 150 cars. Access could only be via Watton Rd, restricted in width by residential property at the village end & a narrow railway underpass the other end. (Exit to the B197 is already often almost grid-locked at busy times) Swangleys Lane, tortuous, residential, village school at the B197 end, or St Martins Rd, a private residential road not paved to the standard of adopted roads. Site 58. Size 14.9 acres. Possible dwellings 277, 600 people, 200+ cars. Access as above, plus Old Lane & Oakfields Rd. Another residential area not at present having through traffic. This site is crossed, north- south, by a large pipeline; it carries water I believe. To the east it is bounded by an electrify sub-station, the high voltage overhead power cables supplying it, & a microwave transmitting tower. All facilities believed by many health experts to be a health hazard to people living nearby. Knebworth is not well served by surrounding free-flowing main roads to which the sites could be directly linked to reduce at least the access difficulties they pose. The sites, if developed, will require water, sewage. gas & electricity supplies, & probably enlargement of existing underground systems with which they will need to connect. The installation of these services, & the construction traffic , will cause immense inconvenience to residents & businesses in the village, & particularly the access roads, throughout the years of site development. The enlarged population of people & cars will further exceed village facilities thus encouraging more peripheral development to provide such with the inevitable erosion of village identity &, ultimately,a merging with Stevenage. If the sanctity of Village Green Belt is broken on the scale any of these sites require a highly undesirable precedent will be established. Most of these thoughts apply to all the proposed sights. It is instructive to ponder upon the difference in attitudes towards expansion of the village by NHDC; primarily concerned with social & life quality issues, & those of land owners & developers, quite logically concerned with financial gain. I beg you to give serious consideration to all objections, & do all in your power to prevent any development on these village sites. 6492 1 Scott Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object We would urge to NHDC on all of the sites eventually selected to develope and implement policies that promote high quality design including an emphasis on green spaces and non-motor traffic. Whilst we acknowledge the importance of the Green Belt we strongly urge NHDC to take a more mature approach to development on it. There is increasing evidence that in the pursuit of protecting the Green Belt at all costs we a slowly but surely killing out towns from the inside out as existing building plots are cut and carved to allow greater densities. As residents of Knebworth we will confine our specific comments to sites 52, 53, 55, 57 & 58. Firstly we are surprised and disappointed that you have only chosen to seek consultation on sites located to the east and west and not included those on the north and south as previously proposed in the 'Knebworth Sites Appraisal Report' publish in December 2007. Unlike the north and south sites, the east and west sites are located on extremely poorly situated with regards to travel. Taking the sites in numerical order we comment as follows: Sites 52 & 53 We ask NHDC to investigate the excellent opportunity that Knebworth Estates have previously offered (refer to the Knebworth Parish Council's 'Knebworth Site Appraisal Report' ¿ published in Dec' '07). It seems to us that the offer from Knebworth Estates could provide excellent opportunities to the local and wider community and also help preserve a unique building. Our understanding is that the community benefit that could be gained from Knebworth Estates would be significantly greater than would be normally gained from any 106 agreements. Site 54 Whilst technically this site is within Knebworth we feel that is too far from what is considered the actual village. This sites will effectively link Stevenage to Knebworth and as such it should be discounted Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Knebworth Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Site 55 As stated earlier this site will place even further strain on what is already a poorly served east / west transport network. Site 56 See comments on site 54 Site 57 This site would land-lock the existing village school. The school as is currently does not have playing field to meet legal requirements and is dependant upon having access to the recreation ground of Watton Road. As such this site should be resisted for residential use. 6495 1 Knebworth Youth FC Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Comment Knebworth Youth Football Club run boys and girls football for any boy and girl in Knebworth and the surrounding area. The club has recently been granted FA Charter Standard Development status, the first Village Club, in Hertfordshire to achieve the 2nd tier of the FA's Charter Standard Programme. We were voted the Hertfordshire FA's Charter Standard Club of the Year in 2006 and again in 2008. The kudos that all this brings the village is above being quantified. We are an expanding club, with a growing reputation, with a medium to long term aim of being able to provide football at each single age group for boys and girls. However, we are restrained by availability of facilities. We play all our games at Knebworth Recreation Ground, Watton Road, where there is also Saturday morning training for the youngest teams and summer training for all teams. Due to the lack of facilities within the Parish Boundaries we are unfortunately unable to have any winter training in the village, having to use floodlit all-weather facilities in Stevenage. Within 5 years there will be insufficient match facilities at the Recreation Ground. The club is investigating our options for training and match facilities through a Working Party headed up by myself. We had identified several possible locations that may be suitable of which 3 are in your plans - namely plot 54 - Odyssey, plot 57 - next to the JMI School (and possibly a joint partner) and plot 58 - next to the Recreation Ground. We have also been in discussion with the two major land owners of the land around the village and within the Parish Boundaries. We accept that any project would probably have to be a joint project with others and may need to be both sporting and leisure. As the consultation process continues we wish to request that in addition to any possible housing development, that the Council also looks at the provision of sporting and leisure facilities, even more relevant if the village grows, within the Parish, which in comparison to Stevenage and Welwyn Garden City, the two nearest towns, is fairly poor. We are not necessarily suggesting that these 3 plots are the only sites for extra sporting facilities, it is possible that the Council may have alternate better suggestions and if any of those, were to preserve encroachment from Stevenage I believe that the Parish Council could well be supportive. Please can we request that in addition to looking at the extra housing. that the Council feels is needed, that the Council also addresses the issue of sporting and leisure facilities with the obvious social and reduction in crime benefits that would no doubt follow should extra facilities be introduced. We are happy to be part of any discussion the Council wished to have in respect of sporting and leisure facilities within the Parish of Knebworth. 6874 1 Antonel Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Object Coalescence with Woolmer Green. Non-essential use of Green Belt Land. Problems with infrastructure with a development here: traffic, road capacity and parking- - sewerage. Issues with county boundary. Loss of 'amenity' and agricultural land (productive) which flies in the face of environmental drivers and policies. Green belt land should be kept green and we should be seeking to build and redevelop brownfield sites only. Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Knebworth Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 6878 1 Payne Document Section :Knebworth Representation : Comment I am writing about the Knebworth Parish Council Meeting which I attended last Wednesday 9 September during which proposals were submitted regarding seven potential housing sites and a secondary school on the southern edge of Knebworth.

There were indeed some very strong views expressed in opposition to the proposed secondary school, which would occupy only one piece of greenbelt land on the edge of Knebworth. And yet, criticism of proposals earlier in the evening to build many hundreds of houses on up to seven other chunks of greenbelt was remarkably muted.

I assume the opposition decided to concentrate its firepower on the school proposal, despite it being in its infancy, whereas the house-building plans are at an advanced stage. No doubt the North Herts District Council representative will have been delighted: 'No, virtually no opposition at all to the housing sites. Shall we just build on all seven, then?'

I can't help feeling that all sorts of people missed an opportunity that night; opponents for picking the wrong fight, and of course the children of Knebworth if the school does not get built. But those of us in favour of the school also missed a chance; to raise awareness of the serious issues which prompted the campaign in the first place.

The first of these is that a significant number of families do move away from Knebworth because of inadequate secondary school options. I personally know of four families who have done so in the last year and two others who left the year before. I have also heard many other parents say it will, reluctantly, be an option for them too.

Even if parents' concerns are overdone, as was suggested last week, there is no doubt that the secondary schools available to Knebworth children consistently underperform, especially when compared to Monks Walk in WGC, or the excellent schools in Harpenden . One only has to move to Codicote to virtually guarantee a place at a much better option than any of those currently on offer. It is an easy move to make. 'Let them!' said the man standing next to me at the meeting. Well, if the citizens of Knebworth really are content to see that brain-drain continue, not to mention a youth-and-vitality drain, then that sounds like another good reason to move away. Personally, I don't believe they are.

By telling parents just to live with what they consider poor options, you are demanding they settle for second best. That might be ok for some, though not for any parents I know, but the problem really comes to the fore when, having selected their preferred option (which to them is second-best anyway), there is a high chance they will end up with third or fourth best. Knebworth parents have a very low success rate when it comes to their first choice of secondary school being met.

The school system in Stevenage undoubtedly has its problems, and future plans to knock eight existing schools into four mega-schools do not raise hopes of any improvement in standards. Furthermore, with the prospect of a great number of houses being built in the area, pressures can only build. The likelihood is that, at some point in the future, a secondary school will be imposed on Knebworth. Great Ashby, a similar village in many ways, has just had a massive 1500-pupil school imposed on it. Surely it is better for us to control our own growth and to come together to discuss how we want it to proceed, than to have it decided for us.

And growth will happen. We cannot stop it completely, as NHDC's house-building plans show. But a new school for 800-900 does not mean that the village would become a town, as some people fear. Those numbers would be almost entirely filled by the proposed catchment area in and around Knebworth. The need for the school already exists and the local population would not have to expand much, if at all, to fill the places. Just because a new school is built, it does not mean planning procedures are suddenly done away with and the floodgates to new housing developments open. Anyway, there is not much room for Knebworth to expand, at least without the village joining up with other population centres, and coalescence is something NHDC says it is very much against.

I have a lot of sympathy with many of the views expressed at the meeting last week. Most of them were valid and need to be discussed. But it seemed to me there was a concerted Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Knebworth Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent campaign to safeguard some sort of ideal 'future', when actually what opponents were protecting was their current situation. Sadly, they might not even have saved that. Because of the attempt to suffocate the school proposal at birth, there is a possibility the house-building plans will have been allowed to sneak in the back door.

Meanwhile, other people have current situations too, including those children approaching secondary school age in Knebworth, and theirs unquestionably needs improving.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 52 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 0077 10 Knebworth Parish Council Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object Development of site 52-58 would result in growth which Knebworth village cannot take. The sites identified have the following problems:

Site 52 Deards End Lane This is located near a Conservation area. It is also adjacent to the A1 (M) with associated noise and there is extremely poor access onto Park Lane. 0347 13 Brookes Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object General Comments:

I oppose development on all five of the suggested sites abounding Knebworth village (52, 53, 55, 57 and 58). I also oppose sites 54 and 56 which represent expansion of Stevenage.

Whilst acknowledging that Knebworth is a 'sustainable hub' in terms of its transport links and local facilities and that some limited expansion may, in the long term, be the key to it retaining its independence as a thriving village community rather than becoming a satellite or suburb of Stevenage, there are serious infrastructure constraints which preclude consideration of even minor expansion at the present time. These constraints relate to the provision of primary and secondary school places, lack of capacity and suitable 'future proof' premises for the GP surgery, parking and congestion/traffic issues, water supply and sewerage.

Suggestions that mitigation of these constraints could be achieved by 'improving the schools and social infrastructure' are unrealistic. There is no easy way to expand the primary school which is already one of the biggest in Hertfordshire . Parents are likely to strongly resist the notion of a super-primary school with a 3-form intake. Secondary school provision is a contentious issue for many Knebworth families with no obvious solution, other than to move away.

Likewise, there are no obvious solutions to the parking, congestion and rat-run problems which would be compounded by the provision of more housing around the village.

There are possible options for resolving the provision of a new GP surgery in the medium term but this would be subject to adequate funding. There is no apparent source of funds at present.

Sewerage and water constraints will no doubt be resolved at some point in the future but possibly not within the next ten years.

All 7 proposed sites in Knebworth Parish are in the Green Belt where housing development would be contrary to current local and national planning policy.

Site specific comments (in addition to points made in the North Herts site analysis):

Site 52 Land at Deards End, Knebworth

Traffic and pedestrian access onto Park Lane dangerous at this point. Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 52 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Relatively distant from village centre. Any development would severely impact on the Deards End Conservation Area Unsuitable for provision of community facilities*. 0459 102 CPRE - The Hertfordshire Society Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object This site is in the Green Belt outside the Excluded Village of Knebworth. It would be a major extension of the village into the Green Belt and countryside, and would contravene some of the purposes of including land in green belts. Excluded Village policy already allows for some development within the village boundary that would assist the vitality and viability of the settlement. 0904 11 Knebworth House Education Nathaniel Lichfield & & Preservation Trust Partners Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Support We are writing on behalf of Knebworth House Education and Preservation Trust (KHEPT), to make representations to the document. These representations should be read in conjunction with representations previously submitted on behalf of KHEPT to put forward suggested sites for allocation in the emerging Local Development Framework including the Core Strategy and Development Policies, Preferred Options document, dated October 2007; the Land Allocations: Issues and Options document, dated March 2008 and the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment Update, dated April 2009.

Additional Suggested SItes. KHEPT has previously put forward two sites for residential designation in previous representations to the Core Strategy and Land Allocation Documents. These are identified as sites 52 and 53 in the consultation document. A further five sites were proposed in representations to the SHLAA update of April 2009. Plan 1 in appendix 1 identifies these sites.

KHEPT strongly support suggested allocations of site 52 (Land at Deards End, Knebworth) and site 53 (Land at Gypsy Lane, Knebworth) for residential development in the consultation document and requests that these sites are taken forward to the preferred Options Version of the Land Allocations development plan document. We understand this document will be published for consultation in early 2010.

Thee Council has previously identified a number of potential issues for sites 52 and 53. KHEPT do not consider that any of these are so significant that they should prohibit future residential land allocations or development of either site and that they can be addressed as part of new development as it comes forward. KHEPT's news on these issues are set out below:

Utilities In relation to any constraints on utilities Hertfordshire County Council is imminently to publish the Hertfordshire Infrastructure and Investment Strategy which will address these matters and provide clearer guidance. Initial discussions with the utilities companies suggests that a full assessment of potential development sites to determine the capacity of utilities can only be undertaken when a proposed development scheme has been brought forward. Any works to increase capacity would most likely have to be funded as part of any development. It is therefore clear that further investigation into utilities will be required but this should not be an absolute constraint on land at Knebworth being developed for residential use and hence being allocated in the LDF.

School Provision

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 52 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent In terms of the identified constraint on th capacity of the primary school in Knebworth our earlier representations explained that any additional school places can only be calculated once a scheme has been fixed and discussions have been undertaken with the Education Authority to identify the need for additional capacity. Having established this need any new development would be required to make a financial contribution to increasing provision. Both sites 52 and 53 are of sufficient size that they could, if required, accommodate a new school. We understand that locally support exists for such a provision.

Effect on Conservation area and adjacent to A1 (M) KHEPT do not consider that the location of both sites adjoining a conservation area and next to the A1 (M) are matters which would prohibit future residential development and these matters would be considered in the overall design of new development as would any potential contamination of site 53.

In additional to site 52 and 53 we also request that the additional five sites put forward by KHEPT in the representations to the SHLAA update are taken as KHEPT believe all are suitable for residential development. 0985 6 Trotman Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object Site 52 Land at Deards End, Knebworth This is highly sensitive good quality pasture/agricultural land abutting a large conservation area. It is high profile land with the highest point in Knebworth located at the "Black Pits" pond shown on the site map. Any housing built on this land would be visable across the skyline from miles around and would have a detrimental impact on the landscape character and visual amenity. * Housing would be close to the A1M motorway and would suffer from noise, light and fumes pollution. Traffic from the large area would exit onto Park Lane with the potential for congestion and safety problems on this narrow road. 2959 41 English Heritage Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Comment Sites 52 and 53 have the potential to harm the setting of the two conservation areas within Knebworth given their overall size. However, much will depend on the final design, which reinforces the needs for a development brief. Another issue is the scheduled 19th century railway bridge off Stevenage Road on the northern edge of the settlement. Works to the deck have been undertaken in recent years, although the increased amount and weight of traffic (including construction vehicles) might need to be explored. 3950 28 Hertfordshire County Council - Historic Environment Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Comment Requirement for Pre-application or Pre-determination Archaeological Assessment

The sites below have known archaeological remains within them or have archaeological potential. We would therefore wish that - in accordance with Government policy in PPG 16 and the current draft PPS 15 - the LPA requests that pre-application or pre-determination archaeological assessments should be included within all development briefs and other proposals for the sites, if they are formally adopted as development sites in the local development plan. Such assessment would, depending upon the size and location of the proposals, range in scope from additional desk-based research to more extensive archaeological field survey and evaluation. The purpose of the archaeological assessment would be to provide sufficient information about the archaeological resource and in particular the extent of archaeological remains worthy of preservation in situ, to enable the LPA to determine any specific

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 52 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent application for development. 3952 50 Hertfordshire County Council - Passenger Transport Unit Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Comment Plot 52: Vehicle access to this plot is from Park Lane, which would be considered acceptable if the access to the plot was located centrally along the frontage to take advantage of maximising the vehicle to vehicle inter visibility. The applicant would have control of the land to each side of the proposed junction this would have to meet the safety requirements of Manual for Streets. This site of this size is considered as a large development the application should be supported by a Transport Assessment, which sets out the transport implications of the development proposals and identify measures required to overcome any transport impact of the proposal. The scoping of the assessment should extend to the junctions within the villages of Knebworth and Codicote. 3963 1 Welwyn and Hatfield District Council Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Comment * Development on the edges of the village of Knebworth would be contrary to the aim of the North Hertfordshire Core Strategy Preferred Options Paper (September 2007) for the following reasons:

It would undermine the spatial strategy which seeks to locate growth in accordance with the settlement hierarchy. Within the settlement hierarchy, the village of Knebworth is identified as a larger village where development only within the boundary of the settlement is allowed.

The additional suggested sites are outside of the boundary of the village of Knebworth and their development would therefore be contrary to the spatial strategy as set out in Core Policies C and F.

* The analysis for Knebworth at paragraph 3.64 of the Core Strategy Preferred Options paper identifies that there are infrastructure constraints notably the primary school which is operating close to capacity.

* In addition, sewage capacity at Rye Meads is constrained. The East of England Capacity Study identifies significant capacity difficulties at Rye Meads sewage treatment works which serves much of the north of Welwyn Hatfield, as well as Knebworth and Codicote, and other areas proposed for new housing developments within the East of England .

* Development of the five sites promoted around the edge of Knebworth would erode the very narrow bands of countryside which separate Knebworth from surrounding settlements. All the sites are open and exposed where development would be highly visible.

* Sequentially preferable sites were identified within the boundary of Knebworth in the land allocations issues and options paper (January 2008).

The SA/SEA identified that sites 52, 53, 55, 57 and 58: * Do not meet SA objective 2(a) to minimise development of greenfield land and other land with high environmental and amenity value. The sites are all green field and agricultural land grade 3.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 52 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent * Do not meet SA objective 3(d) to reduce pollution from any source. The sites are all situated in a source protection zone.

* Do not meet SA objective 6(a) to use natural resources efficiently.

* There is uncertainly regarding the sites ability to meet objective 2(c), to deliver more sustainable location patterns and reduce the use of motor vehicles. This is due to capacity constraints at the primary school, resulting in additional trips to other schools.

* In addition there is uncertainty regarding objective 5(a), to share the benefits of prosperity fairly. Due to constraints on schools and social infrastructure.

The SA for site 58, objective 2(c) on page 183 appears to have a typo in the classification, it shows a v and the others are ?/v. 4033 1 Simson Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object My understanding was that in a previous exercise NHDC established that Knebworth did not have the infrastructure to support expansion. The only thing which appears to have changed is that people with land would like to sell it for development. We are a village with a sense of community and a distinct settlement. The Green Belt surrounding us serves as an amenity which enhances the quality of life of both Knebworth residents and those who live in neighbouring settlements . It also includes agricultural land, at a premium for our food security. It further separates us from other settlements and other settlements from us. Expansion of Knebworth endangers it into growing into a town. The people who live here, many of whom have lived here all their lives, do so because they wish to live in a village which is sustainable as a village and not in a town. 4439 7 Kirk Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object Encroaching into Green Belt. 4450 1 Laing Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object Knebworth does not have the infrasructure to support further development. Local roads are congested at peak periods and the Primary School is oversubscribed.In principle I object to all greenbelt development. We cannot afford the steady erosion of such land and coallescence with neighbouring towns in an overcrowded county like Herts. If it`s status is to mean anything the tide of speculative applications must be strongly resisted. 4483 2 Loach Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object Changing the designation of this land makes no sense in the context of the overall village development for several reasons: i)Existing road access to this site from Knebworth village is by a fairly narrow but well used road and the scope for road widening is limited by existing properties). The road can often be difficult to navigate at times because of heavy parking (see below). In practical terms therefore traffic would bottleneck at certain points which would be detrimental to the village as a whole and create additional traffic nuisance /hazard;

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 52 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent ii)Large residential development at this end of the village will inevitably lead to significantly increased use of the BR Station where parking is already wholly inadequate with cars barked back along the whole of Park Lane creating hazard in particular for those wishing to turn out of Deards End Lane onto Park Lane. Further residential development would severely exacerbate the existing problem; iii) whilst development may be superficially attractive in terms of providing affordable housing there is little reference to the impact on village amenities/infrastructure and in particular on school provision (which is not particularly well sited in terms of traffic flow and risk to children).

Whilst I am not qualified to comment on other environmental impacts (e.g impact on wildlife) the proposal to allow a switch from agricultural use to residential building does not appear to have been thought through in terms of its substantial impact on the village. 4871 67 Smith Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object I object to all sites that alter the Green Belt boundary. I object to the loss of agricultural land for the following reasons: Food security is now a national priority; Open green spaces are a valuable amenity for all; This country has been in breach of European bio-diversity regulations for the past six years; A survey of rare and endangered species needs to be undertaken; Fields are necessary for water management. 5024 1 Fairclough Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object This site is unsuitable for the reasons outlined in the comments given in the description of its unsuitability. Further to this the access to the site would need to come of an existing road, probably Park Lane. This road is narrow and dangerous from where the point of access would be right down to the village centre. The junction with Gypsy Lane is a hazzard, Deards End Lane is a well known danger spot. The rest of Park Lane is taken up with parked vehicles. Also, motorists travel down that stretch of road at unsuitable speeds. At a recent village meeting Henry Cobbold indicated that the site was not one he really preferred to develop. 5042 7 Richardson Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object The site is outside the 'Excluded Village' boundary and within the Green Belt.

There is no facility for access save to Park Lane onto which it would emerge wither opposite Gipsy Lane, or on the corner opposite the Deards End Farm building and adjacent the junction with Deards End Lane .

Vehicles leaving the site to travel in an easterly direction must negotiate either Deards End Lane - narrow and winding - to cross the railway bridge - weight restricted with sharp corners & nil visibility; or Park Lane to Station Approach, under the narrow railway bridge on a bend with limited visibility and a junction with Gun Lane. Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 52 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent

Park Lane is a 'commuter' car park for the whole of the north side; subject to heavy traffic flows and has three road junctions. Deards End Lane is also subject to heavy volumes of traffic from and to Stevenage Road, B197 especially so when that road is congested rejoining the B197 either at Station Road or Gun Lane/Road as well as to Old Knebworth & Codicote along Park Lane in a westerly direction.

Properties in Deards End Lane are within a Conservation area.

There is a lack of adequate infrastructure to accommodate any development in Knebworth at all; whether road, water, sewerage or amenity.

There is already over abstraction of water in this part of the County.

The B197 is the diversionary route whenever the A1 (M) is closed or restricted. 5046 7 Bantick Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object Greenfield Site. 5047 1 Bantick Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object Adjoins a conservation area. Very poor road access. Constraints already identified relating to both. Primary school and some utilities. A definite no. 5109 1 Joyce Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Comment The proposed site is clearly unsuitable for development for the following reasons:

The road infrastructure is not able to sustain such a large development - nor does the current roads particulary Gyspy Lane lend itself to such a project. Gyspy Lane itself is one of the villages narrowest roads and requires drivers to show good road sense as two cars cannot pass together. As increase in volume will only lead to RTA.

Drainage, sewage, gas, electric, and water supplies would also cause a huge and unsustainable demand on the residents in that area. 5143 1 Swann Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object I most strongly object to this site as completely unsuitable. The attached document with which I agree absolutely supports the idea that this choice is wrong.

The proposal put forward by land owners and developers for the inclusion of additional sites on the periphery of the village boundary in the Local Development Plan fill me with deep concern. As their motive is so doing can only be for financial gain, and not for the benefit of the existing residents, I am amazed how they ever came to be included in the above document.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 52 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent

It is acknowledged that the village within its present boundaries has already reached its maximum size. Its population has more than trebled in the fifty years. Its services are overloaded. the sewerage system is working to capacity and cannot be extended without a major reconstruction. The main water supply system, which already takes its water from the Ouse at Bedford and the River Lea, has no spare reservoir on which to draw. power supply already suffers breakdown at peak periods, and although another substation can be tacked on to the existing network Knebworth, being a commuter village, will be low on the priority list for power in the future. Railway commuters from Stevenage and surrounding villages pack the roads and streets near the station because there are no adequate parking facilities. Bearing in mind that every new household will posses one or more cars, the extra vehicles will add to the already intolerable car parking problem which the Parish Council is at a loss to solve.

Residential development in the past has been piecemeal without any overall plan, and in-filling has taken place on every piece of ground that comes available. often before village residents are aware of what is happening. An example of this latest building is Robert Ellis Court - an attractive building buried behind the main village street, with its only access at the bottom of St Martins Road car park and with practically no outlook. Most of the larger developments have fitted in fairly well, but Kerr Close, with its huge blocks of flats alongside the railway line (which quake every time a 100 mph express thunders through) is appalling. At one time it was considered that this piece of land beyond the old coal yard would be suitable for Chas Lowe's new site but once again money talked.

Now we have the grotesque situation of landowners and developers putting forward their own ideas for developing land in the Green Belt with no regard to the local infrastructure and the quality of life of the existing residents. Quite frankly it is an outrage.

Site 52 and 53 were put forward as possible development areas at the time when the motorway was being considered for widening from six lanes to eight. those building sites were rejected then by North Herts and the Parish Council for precisely the same reasons that makes them unsuitable today. The 500 houses to be built on those two sites would require an average water supply of 50,000 gallons per day, most of which would be discharged into an already over-loaded sewer system. Access to site 52 is very bad. At the north end it can only exit onto Deards End Lane and across the railway line onto Stevenage Road via the narrow brick arch bridge which has a blind corners at each end. At the south end it can only exit onto Park Lane opposite Gipsy Lane midway between two blind corners at West Barn and the motorway bridge.

Access to site 53 is equally bad, and will require major widening and straightening of Gipsy Lane, particularly at the north end where it joins Park lane, and Stockens Green. Another exit at the extreme southern end at Wych Elm Lane, just before the Rabley Heath motorway bridge goes nowhere, except to Woolmer Green.

Sewage and storm water disposal from site 53 will be a major problem as a sewer will have to be run across Gipsy Lane at its low point into the Orchard Way/Broom Grove system. Storm water run off has caused flooding in the past, and this will be multiplied many times when the natural soak-away system is destroyed.

A major problem with site 53, which must rule it out for serious consideration, is MOTORWAY NOISE, which is continuous day and night, seven days a week, summer and winter (except when foggy or snowing!). As most of the houses will lie below the embankment, they will be drenched with sound, already close to the legal limit. Added to this will be motorway dirt and air pollution, which will be a health hazard particularly for young children. Noise and air pollution will make it impossible for residents to open their windows at night, or to enjoy their gardens at the weekend. And it will get worse!

I have no detailed knowledge of the other three sites glued on to the present village boundary on the east side, but apart from noise, the same objections will apply, namely access, water and sewage services, and yet more cars . So I will confine my remarks to the above and conclude by emphasizing that the village cannot take any further expansion, not even the extra 200 houses slipped in south east of Gipsy Lane as part of the secondary school development in Woolmer Green territory. As for the overall scheme, in all my 589 years residence in the village never have I seen such a bad, ill thought-out proposal by landowners and developers, and no amount of 'planning gain' and financial inducements should be considered by NHDC and the Parish Council for a single minute. 5163 2 The Fairfield Partnership JB Planning Associates - TW

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 52 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object Site 52, 07/0904/7, Land at Deard End, Knebworth 1. We object to this site, and believe that it would be an inappropriate allocation for residential development because it is out of scale with the village of Knebworth. It would have a detrimental effect on the character and setting of the village, and would seriously exacerbate existing congestion, particularly on the High Street. Grounds for Objection 2. Site 52 covers more than 11 Ha, an area which at a modest development density of 35 dwellings per hectare would deliver around 400 dwellings. This would be a very significant extension to the village of Knebworth, which would have a negative impact on its character. Scale of Development 3. We believe that a smaller level of development, which complemented the existing settlement, would be acceptable. We are concerned that the scale of development which Site 52 represents would be unacceptable in Knebworth. 4. The roads at the centre of the village, particularly the narrow High Street, currently suffer from severe congestion at peak periods, to which there is no obvious solution. A development of 400 dwellings would be likely to significant exacerbate current problems. Conservation Area 5. Site 52 adjoins the Knebworth Conservation Area at Deard's End Lane. This is an attractive, loose-knit part of the village. The loss of this land would harm the character of the western edge of the village, from where this open landscape is visible. The Deard's End Lane Conservation Area Appraisal notes the visual links to open countryside from Park Lane, which forms part of its setting. Landscape Character 6. An independent Landscape Assessment was carried out by CSa Environmental Planning in January 2009. This considered the potential impact that residential development would have on various sites around Knebworth, including this one. With regard to the area covered by Site 52, the Assessment concluded: 'The site is large and has a character typical of the wider countryside. It lies outside the settlement boundary, in a prominent location, adjacent to the A1(M). The site and adjoining land to the north and south form an important swathe of open countryside which wraps around the western edge of Knebworth. Development in this location would represent a major incursion into the open countryside, severing this important tract of open countryside.' 7. It is clear from this comment that site 52 forms part of an important open area to the west of Knebworth, the development of which would have a significant effect on the settlement's character. 5172 1 Meredith Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object I feel that any further development on the green belt, in and around Knebworth, would destroy its rural character. Deards End Lane is already despoiled by erosion of the verges due to heavy traffic using the lane as a short out to the Rialto and Wimpey estates - both built on Knebworth Estate land. 5183 1 Elliott Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object Most have similar general problems regarding utilities a. water supply water table falling in Hertfordshire rivers drying up b. Sewage, existing arrangements in Lea Valley approaching limits. Still residential development in process of completion outstanding in Stevenage. c. Capacity of educational facilities firstly on the primary school currently located in Swangleys Lane. Will add to pressure on secondary places, which are not currently satisfactory.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 52 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent (Depends on density of proposed buildings) d. Road facilities most sites will add to current peak hour problems site 54 near an inadequate roudabout and proposal to extend Tesco supermarket. 5194 2 Sprigge Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Comment Lacks road names. No mention of lack of secondary school. Nor lack of doctors surgery when current one closes. 5216 1 Carpenter Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object The consequences of overcoming the limitations of local services, eg roads, sewers, schools, water supply, gas supply would be extremely disruptive and damaging to the local environment. Increased traffic congestion being of an ongoing nature raises the probability of future road improvement schemes further damaging the local environment in future. 5220 1 Harris Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object Knebworth is already a "big" village. We don't want it to be a town. This is GREEN BELT land and provides a buffer to the A1(M). NHDC has already accepted that the local infrastructure won't support a higher population here. Looking at the position of the proposed site, it is difficult to see how sensible road access can be provided either for construction traffic or for final residents. Deards End Lane is lethally narrow with a weight restriction on the bridge, and access from Park Lane would be almost equally dangerous and constricted. 5422 1 Haigh Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object Knebworth should not be expanded - we have not go the infrastructure to support it and we are in the green belt. 5434 1 Weaver Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object My objections to this site are as follows: 1. the continued growth in Knebworth is changing its character for the worse and turning it from a village into a small town; 2. growing the boundaries of Knebworth increase the risk of coallescence and becoming a suburb of Stevenage; 3. The infrastructure including roads, water, drains and the primary school are already overwhelmed and any further development should not take place without the infrastructure upgrades being made first;

However, if there must be expansion, then this site (along with Site 53), would cause me the least concern. 5444 1 May Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Comment Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 52 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent I am concerned about any building on greenfield sites, whether this one or any of the other rural locations. I am not convinced that it is absolutely necessary to build on this plot, but if building does go ahead will it be houses that local people can actually afford? The "weaknesses" are already listed and I would have though these would be enough to discourage development of this site. 5464 1 Daldorph Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Comment I am concerned that: - this will put strain on the already stretched road and general support infrastructure of Knebworth - the very local roads will not be able to cope with the increased traffic - Knebworth is already a large village, adding more housing could lead to it losing its identiy. 5468 1 Onyett Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object I do not agree to the proposed additional housing to be built on this land because: - it is green field land - I do not believe the local infrastructure (eg roads, sewerage etc) will support the increased load due to the extra housing - the village primary school is already over-subscribed - it will fundamentally change the nature of the village, making it less like the village which we chose to live in 5469 1 Onyett Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object I do not agree to the proposed additional housing to be built on this land because: - it is green field land - I do not believe the local infrastructure (eg roads, sewerage etc) will support the increased load due to the extra housing - the village primary school is already over-subscribed - it will fundamentally change the nature of the village, making it less like the village which we chose to live in 5473 1 Goldby Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object This development would involve use of green belt land. I do not think it warrants releasing the land from this status. It would adjoin a conservation area, containing several buildings of historic interest and many protected trees.

The site is just over 28 acres. The owner has publicly stated that they would expect to build dwellings to a density of at least 20 houses per acre. This could result in an additional 200 400 new dwellings, with associated inhabitants. The road infrastructure of the area does not support the existing traffic levels; adding more houses and traffic movements will make the problem more acute. The local JMI School is already running to its class intake capacity and as a governor, I can state that we have no plans or desires to increase its cohort. The local doctors' surgery appears also to be running to capacity, with appointments being very difficult to achieve. Similarly I believe that both dental practises in the village are not Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 52 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent taking on additional NHS patients. Would the landowner be prepared to carry the cost of improving the sewage systems for the whole of the village in order to add these and other extra homes? I doubt it very much. Would the appearance of this development at the top of the village affect the drainage for the village as a whole, as it would replace open fields with tarmac and concrete? This development would add significant population to the village, to no visible local benefit, other than the obvious financial one for the existing land owner.

I believe that NHDC has previously stated that Knebworth does not have the infrastructure to support large scale housing developments, what has changed in the actual site to now consider such developments viable?

Many of the above points could be associated with other LDF proposals in this tranche. With specific regard to site 52 I am concerned that the land owner has tried to get houses built on this site previously and has not been successful due to correct observation of the planning regulations. I see no new facts emerging that would indicate a change of policy is needed. This development should not proceed. 5480 1 Haller Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object Of the possible sites for development around Knebworth site 52 offers the opportunity for development that is of least effect to adjacent residents and the best position, elevated and with open aspect, for residents on the newly developed site.

It is however restricted by realistically offering only a single access point onto Park Lane at a point in the road where it is narrow and with restricted views.

Nevertheless, whilst it is argued that Knebworth, as North Herts largest village offers the best facilities (train station, shops, primary school) and thus it should be allowed to grow to a modest degree, I believe that for these reasons it should not.

My reasons succinctly for this are;

1. The rails station is oversubscribed with insufficient parking 2. The Primary school is bursting and oversubscribed with even village children being unable to get place. 3. The road structure of the village is even insufficient for current traffic levels with, particularly at rush hours there being jams along London Road/Stevenage Road and long queues along Watton Road. 4. As NHDCs largest village any further expansion may well result in Knebworth being a small town and thus loose its village feel.

Finally and most importantly, all of the presently proposed sites (52, 53, 55, 57 & 58) are presently Green Belt land and should be allowed to remain so, for the reasons that the designation of Green Belt was originally created. 5483 1 Haller Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object Of the possible sites for development around Knebworth site 52 offers the opportunity for development that is of least effect to adjacent residents and the best position, elevated and with open aspect, for residents on the newly developed site.

It is however restricted by realistically offering only a single access point onto Park Lane at a point in the road where it is narrow and with restricted views. Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 52 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent

Nevertheless, whilst it is argued that Knebworth, as North Herts largest village offers the best facilities (train station, shops, primary school) and thus it should be allowed to grow to a modest degree, I believe that for these reasons it should not.

My reasons succinctly for this are;

1. The rails station is oversubscribed with insufficient parking 2. The Primary school is bursting and oversubscribed with even village children being unable to get place. 3. The road structure of the village is even insufficient for current traffic levels with, particularly at rush hours there being jams along London Road/Stevenage Road and long queues along Watton Road. 4. As NHDCs largest village any further expansion may well result in Knebworth being a small town and thus loose its village feel.

Finally and most importantly, all of the presently proposed sites (52, 53, 55, 57 & 58) are presently Green Belt land and should be allowed to remain so, for the reasons that the designation of Green Belt was originally created. 5524 1 Lund Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object Limited Access to this site would necessitate new roads to access the site. The new roads would be hard build into the existing roads and I am presuming that access would be from Deards End which is narrow and dangerous as it is with no footpaths. Knebworth appears to be a small village nestled in a valley. Building here would extend the building views and ruin what is, essentially, the edge of the village. 5570 3 Bedford Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object Knebworth is a village and should remain as one.

The primary school is full, as with the doctors.

The sewage is not suitable

The roads can't support more traffic, and the lanes are not suitable.

Knebworth is a lovely village and surrounded by beautiful country side - if any development happens we will end up as South Stevenage. The residents choose to live here as it is, it is also the largest village in Herts, so the development would turn into a town.

Tanya Bedford 5571 2 Ryan Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 52 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Site is on greenbelt land - we must conserve our countryside. The countryside around Knebworth is one of the main reasons many people choose to live in the village and increases the quality of life of the residents. RRThis land is part of a popular country route from the edge of the village to Rabley Heath used by walkers/cyclists/runners etc, At this time of year there are bushes laden with blackberries and visited by birds and butterflies.RRGypsy Lane and Bridge Rd would not support an increase in traffic. Furthermore, Stockens Green and the village centre would suffer increased traffic. All this will make life worse for the present residents.RRThe local school is already full to capacity. RRParking in the village is inadequate for the current population let alone an increase.RRLocal services ie Dentist and Doctor cannot support current population let alone an increase. 5571 4 Ryan Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object An additional objection to this site being built on for housing is that the site is unsafe for children to live on, being next to motorway. Safety fencing would need to be erected which would be unsightly. 5577 1 Laing Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object This precious Green Belt which the village cannot sustain.Deards End Lane is already a rat run and cannot take expansion. 6065 1 Norman Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object I strongly object to any major development in the area as the infrastructure is already being threatened. Knebworth could not and should not accept any major housing developments as the influx of families would necessitate the building of more schools, which in turn would require more families to justify its existence. The roads are hardly able to cope with the traffic presently and this particularly applies to Watton Road, which is used as the only practicable way from the A602 to the A1M for many people. 6279 1 Morris Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Comment On reviewing the additional proposed sites in and around Knebworth, I wish to make the following comments:- 1. Knebworth is a village. If the proposed expansion takes place, this will join Knebworth to Stevenage in the north and Woolmer Green in the south. 2. The roads which run in and around Knebworth are already extremely busy, any expansion in any direction would put more pressure on the already congested village centre. 3. The Doctors Surgery in Knebworth is already busy. I do not believe that this surgery could take any more patients, as it is very difficult to get an appointment with the number of patients it has now. 4. I have no school age children of my own, but I understand that the school is well oversubscribed and even if you live in the village of Knebworth it is no guarantee that your children will get into the village school. More houses being built would apply more pressure to this problem. In short, I believe that any development, which expands on the boundary of Knebworth would be detrimental to Knebworth village. On top of these points these sites are GREEN BELT, this should mean they stay GREEN. 6298 1 Charter Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 52 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent I would like to submit an objection to the the proposed land allocation of additional sites numbered 52, 53, 55, 56, 57 and 58 on the following grounds;RR1. First and foremost that each of these sites are designated Green Belt land and should not be developed on unless 'exceptional circumstances' prevail. I can not imagine such a circumstance existing to support residential or any other form of development.RR2. Knebworth is already the largest of the villages in the District and many of it's existing services could not support a significant increase in population resulting from further residential development. Most notably, Knebworth Primary School which is already large for a village school (with a 2 class intake per year) and has limited scope for expansion without further proposed encroachment onto Green Belt land.RR3. I am surprised that the appraisals concerning the suitability of each of these sites for development has not yet considered the issues of access, highways and traffic impact. I would object to each of these sites being developed on the grounds of poor access, insufficient highways capacity and on a negative traffic impact particularly, with regard to an increase in traffic numbers and safety issues.RRAs a general comment, I would add that future residential development should be focused on infill development sites, brownfield sites or on sites allocated for the expansion of the Districts towns whose facilities and services can sustain such development. Villages should be protected and not converted into towns or annexed to existing towns. Development on Green Belt land should be avoided at all cost as per Government policy. 6318 1 Wall Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Comment Before providing our comments we have one question that we would appreciate an answer to. Could you please explain the exact nature of the blue line on the map of Site 52 as it appears to run through a number of peoples gardens. In addition to the weaknesses identified in the Sustainability Appraisal Summary we wish to make the following comments: - Knebworth is not equipped to handle the additional traffic, parking and other infrastructure essentials that such proposed development would require. Knebworth is already over stretched as evidenced by the lack of parking for commuters and the other services such as rubbish disposal, schools, medical and other social facilities that would not be able to service the proposed development. - The conservation area of Deards End Lane already sees too much traffic for its width and is used as a cut through which substantially adds volume to a road that is not equipped to handle it. As many people have identified in the past this makes for a dangerous situation particularly for pedestrians and any proposed development would place impossible additional capacity on this country lane and we believe lead to serious accidents between vehicles and between vehicles and pedestrians. The same comments apply to Park Lane and Gypsy Lane. We, and other residents, have raised issues around traffic flow and parking in the past. - As is identified, the sites are both adjacent to conservation areas and these areas would alter to such a significant extent that they would be robbed of their conservation attraction and status. This would be a very distressing result. - As is also identified the proximity of such proposed development to the A1(M) would make for a very uncomfortable living environment for residents. The noise impingement from the A1(M) to where we live in Knebworth is considerable and we would not wish higher levels of noise on new residents who would live closer to the motorway. - Further development will also add to the already stretched transport infrastructure between Knebworth and access to the A1(M). Such proposed development would clearly impinge on previously designated green belt and fundamentally alter the attractions to many people of living in this beautiful part of Hertfordshire. We appreciate the need for additional housing in the country and county but have to register our strong objection to using sites 52 and 53. Proposed development of previously designated greenbelt, coupled with the alteration forever of a conservation area is, we believe, a very disturbing precedent for the county. 6324 1 Sprigens Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object I am writing in relation to the additional sites numbers 52 Land at Deards end Lane and 53 Land at Gypsy Lane. I am opposed to these two sites which have been put forward by Knebworth House Education And Preservation Trust being considered for development for the following reasons: In a previous independent review of suitable locations for development by Knebworth House in 2007 both sites had been dismissed as being suitable for development due to them being near conservation areas and the current road infrastructure around the sites. No apparent reasons have been given as to what has changed to make either site suitable for development.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 52 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent At a recent Parish meeting Henry Cobald when making representation in the meeting admitted that he personally believed the site 53 to be one which would be low on the suitability for development. The current road infrastructure around Park Lane and Deards End lane are already stretched to capacity as Gypsy Lane and Deards End lane are both used as cut through to avoid the High Street which is a major traffic black spot. In addition Park Lane is used as an 'overflow' for the station which means traffic is heavier than in surrounding areas and has been highlighted as a problem area with current plans to introduce yellow lines at the intersection of Deards End Lane and Park Lane. Any further development would only exacerbate this serious situation and would require major changes to the current quality and size of the roads in and around the location of both of the sites. The quality of the independent report is questionable as it highlights none of these issues as weaknesses. In addition any further development in around Knebworth needs serious thought for the following reasons. -All the site locations give potential danger of co-alesance with Stevenage and Woolmer Green. -The infrastructure within Knebworth cannot support its current population let alone an increase in relation to shops, traffic congestion and is environmental impacts (I suspect if carbon monoxide readings where taken in the high street they would be at London Levels), health service, schooling provision (threat of closure for the local surgery and insufficient primary school places) and general amenities. - As the largest village in North Herts any further increase in it size and population must bring into question its status as a village and turn it into a town. 6378 3 Bland Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object All the other sites, 52 53 55 57 and 58 have been put forward by developers for their own fiscal gain and not enhance the village. Many times this expansion has been on the cards and all have been carefully examined by experts. The conclusion by the local authority NHDC is that it is not neccessary or sustainable and so they have not supported or endorsed a 'special case'. In fact it has said said that sufficient sites are available in existing plans without looking further. 6382 1 Milne Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object We have been resident in Wadnall Way since October 1998 and moved to Knebworth from Stevenage because of its beautiful village status and amenities. Firstly, we would like to register our deep concerns re. possible residential development of greenbelt land on sites 52. 53., 55., 56., 57., and 58. Our reasons include; 1, the constraints new homes would make on the existing sewerage system, the local infrastructure, transport links, the limited health facilities and the already oversubscribed Knebworth Primary School. 2, The reasons for green belt land is to separate encroaching development from neighbouring Towns / Villages. We want to remain a village and not a town. Secondly, we would like to our register our deep concerns about the possible development of a Secondary School for eight to nine hundred pupils and 180 houses on land adjacent to Wadnall Way and Woodstock. Our reasons include; 1, We do not want to look out onto a sixty acre site of a school and houses .This development would encroach on our beautiful view of green belt land to the right of the front of our home. 2, We do not want to have our peaceful existence interrupted by the noise and a heavy increase of transport from the development of a school and 180 new houses. 3. The green belt land proposed for this site has a beautiful path which leads up to Mardley Woods and is enjoyed by us as and numerous others as a glorious country walk. We do not want to see this destroyed . 4. The proposed development has not considered the cost or impact on the local infra structure. 5. The proposal does not take into account of the local safety implications of eight to nine hundred pupils near the railway line adjacent to the land. Who will pay for safety measures such as fencing? 6. One Stevenage Secondary Schools has been closed and another is due for closure next year. A large amount of money has been put into the remaining Secondary Schools to Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 52 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent upgrade them. Surely this is where the investment should be? Also our two daughters attend The Heathcote School and have done very well. We were aware of the fact that when we moved into the village there was no local provision of a Secondary School and they would have to travel. 7. The local church graveyards have been closed as they are full. The small Knebworth Cemetery at the end of Wadnall Way will surely have to be eventually expanded to cope with requirements in the future? 8. The planned large catchment area of Knebworth, Oaklands, Woolmer Green and Codicote area for the school means there would be no guarantee of an automatic position and could backfire as applicants from Stevenage and Welwyn Garden City could apply. 9. We are concerned that having such a development at the end of our road would decrease our current village property value. 6383 3 Plester Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object I wish to submit the following representations against the adoption of certain of the suggested sites for development in the settlement of Knebworth.RR1) Development of any or all of the sites on the edge of the village (nos 52, 53, 55, 57 & 58) would exacerbate the already serious traffic overload. A bypass is an essential prerequisite. 6385 4 Howarth Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object I hope you will accept this email to register my opposition to the proposed sites for development in Knebworth, particularly those currently serving as agricultural land, sites 52,53, 55,57 and 58. All these proposals are likely to provide additional housing at the detriment to the environment within which the housing is proposed. Agriculutural land helps sustain the rural nature of our region, and keeps the green belt and green space of North Hertfordshire, something vital to its character. I would also object to development on these sites because, as you are well aware, the infrastructure of Knebworth, would not support further, heavy capacity, development. Whilst the sites are within some reach of the village centre, I would stress that the current shops in the village are unlikely to be supported by additional occupants, and there is no capacity for parking for extra residents, should they wish to visit the local retailers. Some of the developments also are on the very boundaries of the village (especially 53 and 52) and my concern here would be that residents wouldn't choose to walk to the village, but drive (as happens now from these further reaches of the village,) again adding to infrastructure problems. 6389 1 Goodhew Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object Site 52, Land at Deards End Lane, Knebworth. As you know, Deards End Lane is a Conservation Area as covered in the North Hertfordshire District Council report dated 8 April 2008; in the report stating ¿ 'The conservation area comprises Deards End Lane and a short section of Park Lane, where the two lanes meet. Park Lane runs east west, connecting Knebworth to the village of Old Knebworth. The conservation area has a rural setting to the west, of open fields'. 'The character of the area becomes more open at each end of the lane ¿. and the buildings associated with Deards End Farm at the southern end ranged on both sides of Park Lane and grouped around former farmyards'. Any development plans for this area would therefore be in direct conflict. We believe the weaknesses associated with this proposal should have included ¿ a) Not just that it adjoins a conservation area, but that its existing form has an important direct association with the conservation area, b) That the site is fronted by a fairly narrow a narrow twisting road (part of the village and area character) with already existing parking problems (some station users even park in Park Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 52 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Lane on the west side of Deards End Lane). The road and part of the land would presumably need major changes to allow entry to the site and the additional new volume of traffic involved from the site; even further damaging the character of the conservation area. As owners of a home in this conservation area we are subjected to sometimes burdensome controls and constraints often resulting in significantly higher repair and alteration costs than normal; particularly those of us with listed buildings. This we accept as a necessary and important constraint and obligation to ensure the aims of the conservation area are maintained. In turn therefore we think it only right that the North Hertfordshire District Council helps protect the area, particularly where the motive of those involved in the development appears to be purely financial and not honouring their own conservation responsibilities to the conservation and green belt environment. 6404 1 Beeby Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object Development in any of these sites would result in far more traffic than any of the adjoining roads could cope with.

In the case of 55-58 both Watton Road and OAKFIELD's Road are difficult to negotiate by two cars already, because of road and the cars parked.

Knebworth village centre is often booked by traffic already, any additional would make it worse. Apart from anything else it is not good to see more greenbelt disappear. 6494 1 Stainforth Document Section :Site 52 Representation : Object I have lived in Knebworth for 59 years, 55 at the present address, so I have seen all the major developments, some good, some bad, which have more than trebled the village's population over that period. During my 30-year career as an engineer with ICI Plastics Division I have been in charge of the design of major chemical plants at Fleetwood, Lancs., and in South Africa and Argentina. Therefore, I have some knowledge of the infrastructure involved in major construction projects. It is acknowledged that the village within its present boundaries has already reached its maximum size. Its services are overloaded. The sewage system is working to capacity and cannot be extended without a major reconstruction. The main water supply system, which already takes its water from the rivers, has no spare reservoir on which to draw. Power supply already suffers breakdown at peak periods, and Knebworth, being a commuter village, will be low on the priority list for power in the future. Railway commuters from Stevenage and surrounding villages pack the roads and streets near the station because there are no adequate parking facilities. Bearing in mind that every new household will possess one or more cars, the extra vehicles will add to the already intolerable car parking problem which the Parish Council is at a loss to solve. Now we have the grotesque situation of landowners and developers putting forward their own ideas for developing land in the Green Belt with no regard to the local infrastructure and the quality of life of the existing residents. Sites 52 and 53 were put forward as possible development areas at the time when the motorway was being considered for widening from six lanes to eight. Those building sites were rejected then by North Herts and the Parish Council for precisely the same reasons that make them unsuitable today. SITE 52. Access is very bad. At the north end the site can only be exited on to Deards End Lane and across the railway line on to Stevenage Road via tha narrow brick arch bridge which has a blind corner at each end. At the south end the only exit is on to Park Lane opposite Gipsy Lane, midway between two blind corners at West Barn and the motorway bridge. Water supply. The original proposal was for 200 houses on this site, which would require an average supply of 20,000 gallons of water daily, most of which will be discharged into the overloaded sewer system from toilets, baths, kitchens, and from washing machines. Sewage disposal. The existing sewer from Old Knebworth can be accessed, but this lies upstream of the overloaded village system and may cause problems downstream. Cars. As the residents of these houses will probably commute to work elsewhere, each house may possess more than one car, which will add considerably to the village car parking problem. SITE 53. Access is equally bad, and will require major widening and straightening of Gipsy Lane, particularly at the north end where it joins Park Lane, and at Stockens Green. Another exit at the extreme southern end at Wych Elm Lane, just before that motorway bridge, goes nowhere except to Woolmer Green. Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 52 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Water supply. Originally 300 houses were to be built on this site, and these would require 30,000 gallons of water daily, discharging, like Site 52, into the village sewer system. Sewage and storm water disposal from this site would be a major problem as the main sewer pipe would have to run across Gipsy Lane at its low point into the Orchard Way/Broom Grove system. Storm water run off from this site has caused flooding in the past, and this would be multiplied many times when the natural soak-away system is destroyed. Cars. As for Site 52, all these houses will probably possess one or more cars, thereby agravating the village car parking problem. MOTORWAY NOISE must rule out this site from serious consideration because it is now continuous day and night, 24/7, summer and winter throughout the year. As most of the houses will lie below the embankment, they will be drenched with sound, already close to the legal limit . Added to this will be motorway dirt and air pollution which will be a health hazard, particularly for young children. Noise and air pollution will make it impossible for residents to open their windows at night, or to enjoy their gardens at the weekend. Twenty years ago, when this site was being considered for development, a professional sound engineer took sound level measurements at peak times at the bottom of Gipsy Lane and found then that the noise level approached the legal limit. Since then the flow of traffic has steadily increased, and it will get much worse in the future with the expansion of Stevenage west of the motorway. SITE 56. Some fifteen years ago land to the south of this site, east of Stevenage Road, was used illegally as a landfill area on which rubbish was dumped over a large area to the depth of four to five feet. When consolidated it was covered over with a depth of topsoil and turned into agricultural land. No doubt North Herts will have a record of what action was taken at the time. I would have thought that this would make this plot unsuitable for residential purposes for health reasons . I have no detailed knowledge of the other three sites glued on to the present village boundary on the east side, but apart from noise, the same objections would apply, namely access, water and sewage services, and yet more cars . I trust this information will be helpful in rejecting all the above sites as being totally unsuitable for further housing development. The village has already reached its maximum housing capacity for maintaining a reasonable quality of life for its present residents.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 0077 11 Knebworth Parish Council Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object Development of site 52-58 would result in growth which Knebworth village cannot take. The sites identified have the following problems:

Site 53 Gypsy Lane This is undulating land adjacent to the A1 (M). Access to the site is poor and all traffic would have to go under the two narrow railway bridges. This is also adjacent to a conservation area and would have a significant impact of Stockens Green. There is also possible contamination of the site. 0347 14 Brookes Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object General Comments:

I oppose development on all five of the suggested sites abounding Knebworth village (52, 53, 55, 57 and 58). I also oppose sites 54 and 56 which represent expansion of Stevenage.

Whilst acknowledging that Knebworth is a 'sustainable hub' in terms of its transport links and local facilities and that some limited expansion may, in the long term, be the key to it retaining its independence as a thriving village community rather than becoming a satellite or suburb of Stevenage, there are serious infrastructure constraints which preclude consideration of even minor expansion at the present time. These constraints relate to the provision of primary and secondary school places, lack of capacity and suitable 'future proof' premises for the GP surgery, parking and congestion/traffic issues, water supply and sewerage.

Suggestions that mitigation of these constraints could be achieved by 'improving the schools and social infrastructure' are unrealistic. There is no easy way to expand the primary school which is already one of the biggest in Hertfordshire . Parents are likely to strongly resist the notion of a super-primary school with a 3-form intake. Secondary school provision is a contentious issue for many Knebworth families with no obvious solution, other than to move away.

Likewise, there are no obvious solutions to the parking, congestion and rat-run problems which would be compounded by the provision of more housing around the village.

There are possible options for resolving the provision of a new GP surgery in the medium term but this would be subject to adequate funding. There is no apparent source of funds at present.

Sewerage and water constraints will no doubt be resolved at some point in the future but possibly not within the next ten years.

All 7 proposed sites in Knebworth Parish are in the Green Belt where housing development would be contrary to current local and national planning policy.

Site 53 Land at Gypsy Lane, Knebworth

Traffic and pedestrian access onto Park Lane dangerous at this point Site slopes steeply from Park Lane Access from Gypsy Lane would channel traffic into Stockens Green Conservation Area and other village roads which already suffer from rat-run problems Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Relatively high landscape value - views in and out of the village valued by residents. Relatively distant from village centre. Unsuitable for provision of community facilities*. 0459 103 CPRE - The Hertfordshire Society Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object This site is in the Green Belt and would extend the village right up to the A1(M) motorway. Together with the nearby Site 52, it would have a capacity of at least 800 dwellings, and there is no justification or requirement for such a large increase in the size of Knebworth. 0904 12 Knebworth House Education Nathaniel Lichfield & & Preservation Trust Partners Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Support We are writing on behalf of Knebworth House Education and Preservation Trust (KHEPT), to make representations to the document. These representations should be read in conjunction with representations previously submitted on behalf of KHEPT to put forward suggested sites for allocation in the emerging Local Development Framework including the Core Strategy and Development Policies, Preferred Options document, dated October 2007; the Land Allocations: Issues and Options document, dated March 2008 and the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment Update, dated April 2009.

Additional Suggested SItes. KHEPT has previously put forward two sites for residential designation in previous representations to the Core Strategy and Land Allocation Documents. These are identified as sites 52 and 53 in the consultation document. A further five sites were proposed in representations to the SHLAA update of April 2009. Plan 1 in appendix 1 identifies these sites.

KHEPT strongly support suggested allocations of site 52 (Land at Deards End, Knebworth) and site 53 (Land at Gypsy Lane, Knebworth) for residential development in the consultation document and requests that these sites are taken forward to the preferred Options Version of the Land Allocations development plan document. We understand this document will be published for consultation in early 2010.

Thee Council has previously identified a number of potential issues for sites 52 and 53. KHEPT do not consider that any of these are so significant that they should prohibit future residential land allocations or development of either site and that they can be addressed as part of new development as it comes forward. KHEPT's news on these issues are set out below:

Utilities In relation to any constraints on utilities Hertfordshire County Council is imminently to publish the Hertfordshire Infrastructure and Investment Strategy which will address these matters and provide clearer guidance. Initial discussions with the utilities companies suggests that a full assessment of potential development sites to determine the capacity of utilities can only be undertaken when a proposed development scheme has been brought forward. Any works to increase capacity would most likely have to be funded as part of any development. It is therefore clear that further investigation into utilities will be required but this should not be an absolute constraint on land at Knebworth being developed for residential use and hence being allocated in the LDF.

School Provision In terms of the identified constraint on th capacity of the primary school in Knebworth our earlier representations explained that any additional school places can only be calculated once Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent a scheme has been fixed and discussions have been undertaken with the Education Authority to identify the need for additional capacity. Having established this need any new development would be required to make a financial contribution to increasing provision. Both sites 52 and 53 are of sufficient size that they could, if required, accommodate a new school. We understand that locally support exists for such a provision.

Effect on Conservation area and adjacent to A1 (M) KHEPT do not consider that the location of both sites adjoining a conservation area and next to the A1 (M) are matters which would prohibit future residential development and these matters would be considered in the overall design of new development as would any potential contamination of site 53.

In additional to site 52 and 53 we also request that the additional five sites put forward by KHEPT in the representations to the SHLAA update are taken as KHEPT believe all are suitable for residential development. 0985 7 Trotman Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object Site 53 Land at Gypsy Lane The site is the buffer area between the A1M Motorway and the western fringe of Knebworth. Although the north of the site is of low sensitivity, the south is high profile land and housing here would have a detrimental impact on landscape, character and visual amenity. Housing being close to the A1M would suffer from low tranquility, noise, fumes and light pollution. Traffic from the site would exit onto Park Lane and Stockens Green and create congestion and safety problems. 2959 42 English Heritage Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Comment Sites 52 and 53 have the potential to harm the setting of the two conservation areas within Knebworth given their overall size. However, much will depend on the final design, which reinforces the needs for a development brief. Another issue is the scheduled 19th century railway bridge off Stevenage Road on the northern edge of the settlement. Works to the deck have been undertaken in recent years, although the increased amount and weight of traffic (including construction vehicles) might need to be explored. 3950 12 Hertfordshire County Council - Historic Environment Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Comment Requirement for Pre-allocation Archaeological Assessment

The sites below have known archaeological remains within them or have significant archaeological potential by reason of their size and situation, such that there is a risk that archaeology could be a constraint on any development. We would therefore recommend that - in accordance with Government policy in PPG 16 and the current draft PPS 15 ¿ the LPA requests that archaeological assessments should be included within all development briefs and other proposals for the sites, before they are formally adopted as development sites in the local development plan. Such assessment would, depending upon the size and location of the sites, range in scope from additional desk-based research to more extensive archaeological field survey and evaluation. The purpose of the archaeological assessment would be to provide sufficient information about the archaeological resource and in particular the extent of archaeological remains that might be a constraint upon the principle of development of these sites.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 3952 51 Hertfordshire County Council - Passenger Transport Unit Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Comment Plot 53: One of the suitable vehicle accesses to this plot is from Park Lane, which could be considered acceptable if the access to the plot was located centrally along the frontage to take advantage of maximising the vehicle to vehicle inter visibility. The applicant would have control of the land to each side of the proposed junction this would have to meet the safety requirements of Manual for Streets. Another feasible vehicle access could be from Gypsy Lane. Some widening along this Lane would be required. This site of this size is considered as a large development. The application should therefore be supported by a Transport Assessment, which sets out the transport implications of the development proposals and identify measures required to overcome any transport impact of the proposal. The scoping of the assessment should extend to the junctions within the villages of Knebworth and Codicote. 3963 2 Welwyn and Hatfield District Council Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Comment * Development on the edges of the village of Knebworth would be contrary to the aim of the North Hertfordshire Core Strategy Preferred Options Paper (September 2007) for the following reasons:

It would undermine the spatial strategy which seeks to locate growth in accordance with the settlement hierarchy. Within the settlement hierarchy, the village of Knebworth is identified as a larger village where development only within the boundary of the settlement is allowed. The additional suggested sites are outside of the boundary of the village of Knebworth and their development would therefore be contrary to the spatial strategy as set out in Core Policies C and F.

* The analysis for Knebworth at paragraph 3.64 of the Core Strategy Preferred Options paper identifies that there are infrastructure constraints notably the primary school which is operating close to capacity.

* In addition, sewage capacity at Rye Meads is constrained. The East of England Capacity Study identifies significant capacity difficulties at Rye Meads sewage treatment works which serves much of the north of Welwyn Hatfield, as well as Knebworth and Codicote, and other areas proposed for new housing developments within the East of England.

* Development of the five sites promoted around the edge of Knebworth would erode the very narrow bands of countryside which separate Knebworth from surrounding settlements. All the sites are open and exposed where development would be highly visible.

* Sequentially preferable sites were identified within the boundary of Knebworth in the land allocations issues and options paper (January 2008).

The SA/SEA identified that sites 52, 53, 55, 57 and 58: * Do not meet SA objective 2(a) to minimise development of greenfield land and other land with high environmental and amenity value. The sites are all green field and agricultural land grade 3.

* Do not meet SA objective 3(d) to reduce pollution from any source. The sites are all situated in a source protection zone.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent * Do not meet SA objective 6(a) to use natural resources efficiently.

* There is uncertainly regarding the sites ability to meet objective 2(c), to deliver more sustainable location patterns and reduce the use of motor vehicles. This is due to capacity constraints at the primary school, resulting in additional trips to other schools.

* In addition there is uncertainty regarding objective 5(a), to share the benefits of prosperity fairly. Due to constraints on schools and social infrastructure.

The SA for site 58, objective 2(c) on page 183 appears to have a typo in the classification, it shows a v and the others are ?/v. 4033 2 Simson Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object My understanding was that in a previous exercise NHDC established that Knebworth did not have the infrastructure to support expansion. The only thing which appears to have changed is that people with land would like to sell it for development. We are a village with a sense of community and a distinct settlement. The Green Belt surrounding us serves as an amenity which enhances the quality of life of both Knebworth residents and those who live in neighbouring settlements . It also includes agricultural land, at a premium for our food security. It further separates us from other settlements and other settlements from us. Expansion of Knebworth endangers it into growing into a town. The people who live here, many of whom have lived here all their lives, do so because they wish to live in a village which is sustainable as a village and not in a town. 4439 6 Kirk Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object Encroaching into Green Belt. Road Access to Knebworth almost impossible. 4450 2 Laing Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object As for 52, Knebworth does not have the infrastructure to support such development. I oppose grenbelt development on principle, it exists to prevent coallescence and urban sprawl, neither of which we can afford in a crowded county like Hertfordshire. 4483 1 Loach Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object Changing the designation of this land makes no sense in the context of the overall village development for several reasons: i)Existing road access to and through this site is by very narrow country lane (Gipsy Lane is particularly narrow at the Park Lane end and the scope for road widening is limited by existing properties). In practical terms therefore traffic would bottleneck at certain points which would be detrimental to the village as a whole and create traffic hazards; ii)Large residential development at this end of the village will inevitably lead to increased use of the BR Station where parking is already wholly inadequate with cars barked back along the whole of Park Lane creating hazard in particular for those wishing to turn out of Deards End Lane onto Park Lane. Further residential development would simply exacerbate the existing problem;

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent iii) whilst development may be superficially attractive in terms of providing affordable housing there is no reference to the impact on village amenities/infrastructure and in particular on school provision (which is not particularly well sited in terms of traffic flow and risk to children).

Whilst I am not qualified to comment on other environmental impacts (e.g impact on wildlife) the proposal to allow a switch from agricultural use to residential building does not appear to have been thought through in terms of its substantial impact on the village. 4526 1 Saylor Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object The reasons that I object to the above site apart from the fact that I don't think Knebworth can cope with any more enlargement as the village is already more of a commuter dormitory than a village and has lost a lot of community spirit and character. I have lived in Knebworth over 54 years. My objections to site no 53 are mainly flooding and the lack of the sewage system to cope with any extra buildings, as it can't cope now. An example of this happened a few weeks ago when we had torrential rain and the road and both pavements outside my bungalow at the top of Meadway were flooded, and the 2 storm drains outside and across the road from me could not take the amount of water and had miniature 'fountains' coming from both of them (they are cleaned fairly regularly)/ Some years ago one of the bungalows in the other end block of these 12 bungalows was flooded twice during heavy rain and the water was pouring down the oaths to the road. Extra drainage both there and in Stockens Green were laid in order to cope with this, but even so there is always a large area of standing water at the bottom of the Green in Stockens Green, and flooding at the junction of Gun Road and Pondcroft Road after any reasonably heavy rain as there is often a lot of running water down Stockens Green. If this happens now with normal rainfall, what will happen if as the forecasters say we are likely to get much more torrential Rain? I am disabled as are others in Meadway who couldn't cope with flooding. 4532 1 Channing Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object I'm very concerned about the proposed residential properties for this area. I understand it is a fairly large plot and this will extend bout half way along the line bank towards Woolmer Green. Do you know that this walk towards W. Green and the woods, is one of the most popular and used walks for refreshment in and around Knebworth. I thought the idea of a green belt is to enable people in built up areas to enjoy the countryside. If you allow this project to go ahead, Knebworth will almost join W. Green which is defeating the object of greenbelt. This would cause great sadness for Knebworth and W. Green folk who also use this walk to Knebworth. We have already had Stevenage brought to our doorstep at the Roebuck and this will be another blow to Knebworth residents. People move to Knebworth to enjoy the country surrounds. We have already had infilling to its capacity and we really don't want its boundaries extended. I've lived here since 1939 - and I'm sure many people will support its protection! Please think again. 4628 1 Mullin Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object I should like to respond to your consultation on the identification of additional sites for building dwellings. My comments relate to Site 53: Gypsy Lane, Knebworth but many of the comments apply to the other Knebworth sites.

Infrastructure

Traffic

Knebworth is a village situated between the AI(M) and the B197. Because the B197 is the only large road giving access to the village, it is already very congested at peak times, and if Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent there is a problem on the A1(M) the traffic jams are extensive. Building extra houses in the village will significantly increase this congestion to a point where it will become untenable.

It is always difficult to drive through the village because of parking on either side of the road.

The site chosen is at the back of the village. I note you say that parts of the site are within 800 m of the centre of the village. Living at that side of the village myself, I think that it is likely that only those on the North-eastern border of the new site are at a minimum of 800 m from the very edge of the centre. Even if you increase public transport on the main road, it is unrealistic to suppose that residents will use it for doing their shopping at local supermarkets or going to nearby towns for other reasons. If they are in a hurry they will also use their cars to go to the village to pick up goods, see the doctor, collect children, use the station etc.

I do not know how many houses are intended for the site but many will have more than one car. This means there will be a large number of extra cars travelling down narrow residential roads which will be danger to the young children and elderly who live in those roads.

This goes against your aim of decreasing traffic pollution in North Herts.

Facilities

The primary school is already near capacity. Where will the children from the new houses go to school?

The doctors surgery is full and likely to be moved to Stevenage. This is already causing concern for parents of young children and the elderly and is likely to be of concern for new residents.

The village is very congested. There is not enough parking, particularly on Saturday mornings. And driving through the village is hazardous.

The station car park is full to capacity. Those commuting from the new houses are likely to want to drive to the station (it is ¾ of a mile to a mile from the e new site). Where will everyone park?

You stated in 2007 that the sewage system could not cope with additional houses. How has this now changed?

Quality of life and wellbeing

People live in Knebworth because it is quiet and surrounded by greenery. This would change significantly with the proposed building. And the village would become congested causing danger to the elderly and young children who live in the area (many in the area that would be affected).

Do people really want to live that close to the A1? You can hear the traffic clearly from Woodstock and the top of Wadnall Way. It would be very noising for houses at the far end of the site. And how will the building fit in the proposals to widen the A1(M) at that point? The lack of green space

The quality of life of those living next to the site would be horrendous during the building phase. Some of the houses on the edge of the site actually face it, so there would not even be a garden between them and the building works.

I would urge you to reconsider using this site to build further housing.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 4871 66 Smith Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object I object to all sites that alter the Green Belt boundary. I object to the loss of agricultural land for the following reasons: Food security is now a national priority; Open green spaces are a valuable amenity for all; This country has been in breach of European bio-diversity regulations for the past six years; A survey of rare and endangered species needs to be undertaken; Fields are necessary for water management. 5024 2 Fairclough Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Comment I believe the weeknesses for this site are accurate. In addition, this site has no suitable road access. The current road structure is a mixture of narrow country lanes and residental roads, at times used as a rat run for traffic avoiding Knebworth centre. Road access to this site is therefore limited by the current housing provision. The only access point would seem to be from Park Lane adjacent to the A1M bridge. This access would be opposite a possible access point to site 52 should that be developed. The noise from the motorway would be unacceptable to residents. There is considerable run off of water from this field because of the motorway and the way the land lies. This does cause problems periodically to Gypsy Lane, Orchard Way and Broom Grove by flooding. Any building will take away the natural draining into the subsoil causing a increased chance of major flooding taking place lower down. Knebworths infrastructure could not sustain the increase in population of a housing development of this size. 5031 1 Williams Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object I have only just learnt of a proposal for a possible large housing development in the Knebworth area. Perhaps I should have known before, but I didn't! This may well be remote at this stage, but nonetheless is a matter of concern. I am the unpaid Chairman of the Lytton Lodge Management Company. I represent 34 owners of flats/maisonettes in Wadnall Way and Woodstock. This land was formerly part of the Knebworth Estate and hence the name. If correct, the land in question directly adjoins these homes and is also owned by Lytton/Cobbold family. I find it hard to believe such a development can seriously be being considered. The traffic passing through Knebworth village already comes to a standstill. Buses cannot get through because of the parking in the High Street. Emergency access could be a problem. Gridlock already takes place if the A1(M) is closed or affected in some way. I am unfamiliar with the process but register my concerns on behalf of, as I say, 34 homeowners. 5042 6 Richardson Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object The site is outside the 'Excluded Village' Boundary and within the Green Belt.

The area of this site is nearly double that previously proposed by Knebworth Estates/Preservation Trust in that it now includes land to the south of Gipsy Lane (that part of the road

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent leading to Wych Elm Lane).

At the time of the Public Enquiry into the proposed development by 'Wimpy' of Orchard Way the Inspector conducting that enquiry gave assurance that Gipsy Lane (that part to Park Lane) would remain a lane!

Excessive vehicular use has resulted in the banks being eroded by vehicles attempting to pass each other. It has become dangerous for pedestrians and pedal cyclists to use.

The Village cannot sustain any development on this or any other site around it. The infrastructure is already inadequate. Sewerage frequently 'backs up' in Gipsy Lane/Stockens Green with effluent egressed through the storm water drains . Special arrangements had to be made at the time of construction of Woodstock and Wadnall Way extension.

In times of heavy rain or snow thaw flooding has occurred in the valley of Gipsy Lane, and onwards through houses in Broom Grove and beyond. A situation not helped by the overflows from the motorway on the western boundary of the site. All that despite the over abstraction of water by the water companies!

As to access to and from the site there is no indication of how that could be achieved south of Gipsy lane at the southern end where there is no road adjacent, therefore all traffic would have to use Gipsy Lane, a narrow winding road. To travel westwards Wych Elm Lane and Spinny Lane are the only options. The eastern boundary may abut to Woodstock and Wadnall Way. Both at that point being cul-de-sacs. Existing traffic is heavy and all has to join Stockens Green to join the B197 requiring negotiation of the railway bridge on the blind corner of Gun Road/Lane or alternatively to the north via Gun Lane and the Bridge at Station Road/Approach, also 'blind'...

Current traffic levels are high and most drivers travel too fast. Development will only exacerbate the hazards. With the B197 being the diversionary route when the motorway is closed/blocked such problems are the more compounded. 5046 6 Bantick Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object Greenfield Site. 5047 2 Bantick Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object Constraints on utilities. Primary school will not cope. Adjoins conservation area. 5072 1 Walters Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object 1. Proposed development for 900 cap school and 200 dwellings would add at least 750-850 extra vehicles moving around at peak times on B197 and Stockens Green area which is already at breaking point. The slightest problem on A1 (M) gridlocks area now without adding more traffic. 2. Proposed tunnel under railway would not only be very expensive but would cause complete chaos on road structure as it stands and also severe problems for the mainline railway link. 3. Construction vehicles would have difficulty accessing site under existing railway bridges and Lanes. 4. The school site is proposed on the boundary of Woolmer Green. Welwyn Hatfield District Council. The housing site is proposed on the boundary of Knebworth, North Herts District Council thus joining the two villages together. Concerns for two parish councils, two district councils and two villages. 5. Supplies of water are already causing problems in Local area. Remove of sewage - rubbish etc will be enormous. Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 6. Highways agency would have problems organising traffic flow on lanes and existing roads including major bus routes for surrounding areas. 7. Major footpath used by residents from Woolmer Green and Knebworth and Welwyn. 5082 1 Booth Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object I am strongly opposed in principle to the exploitation of greenbelt sites for profit.

The proposed school nearby, which I will assume to be a sincere proposal motivated by what is felt, rightly or wrongly, to be a lack of secondary school places for Knebworth children in reasonable proximity, seems to me to have been blatantly hijacked for financial gain by estate agents, Mather Marshall and Putterills, Building Supplies Merchants, Chas Lowe, and Knebworth House Education and Preservation Trust. All have a great deal to gain in crude money terms from the plan to build 200 houses, and their backing for the weneedschools project seems to me motivated largely if not entirely by greed.

The offer (relayed to the Parish Council by Mrs Pomerance) from KHEPT to "contribute funds to village charities" if they get the green light to build these houses at huge profit, is in my view a sop to us as Knebworth residents in exchange for giving them the chance to make a great deal of money. There is a word for this kind of arrangement, and it certainly isn't "charity". 5087 1 Hook Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object As a resident of Knebworth I strongly object with the development of the Green Belt.

I understand that no sites within Knebworth were suggested as part of the East of England Plan and that these additional sites are only being put forward by landowners, developers and individuals for personal gain at the expense of green belt and the environment.

I believe the development of this site compromises Knebworth's village status and is not sustainable with the current education, transport and sewerage infrastructure. 5110 1 Titmarsh Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object 1. Site is within greenbelt. 2. It has been a floodplain and I have photographic evidence of run off to Orchard Way estate in 1987. 3. Continual noise from motorway 4. On 28/11/74, The Inspector reported in respect of the public enquiry held on 18/07/1974 regarding what is now known as the Orchard Way (Wimpey built) estate on the eastern side of Gipsy Lane. I make following comments from the report:- a. Gipsy Lane would form a clear physical boundary/limit to further urban sprawl in a westerly direction. This would form a defensible boundary and it has. b. Education at Primary level. Insufficient capacity. 2.1 acres were set aside for extra primary capacity, as required by the county council. c. The education department of the county council reneged and allowed houses to be built on the reserved site. d. The primary school has had insufficient capacity for at least 35 years; some young children go out of Knebworth for primary education. e. Gipsy Lane is already damaged by volume of traffic. 5112 1 Johnson Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object I've lived here 18 years and I brought this house because of its quiet location added to which the outlook and privacy. All this will be taken away from me now I've retired and can really enjoy it. I want to live at the edge of the village not inside it. I've worked hard to pay off my mortgage and now I'm going to see it's value decrease due to someone else's greed. Add to this the proposed school, I feel a great sense of despair as I may have to move away from the home I love - driven away! And what of the roads they are already very busy and congested at times, parking will also be a great problem. 5114 1 Collings Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object For residential use We wish to OBJECT MOST STRONGLY to the proposal . The development of this site in the field directly adjacent to our house will DEVALUE our property. Why should we , after years of paying off our mortgage ,improving our home for our retirement, have to put up with OUTSIDE INTERVENTION dictating whether we can even stay now in this area! It will result in the loss of our outlook, privacy ,peace and quiet. The house was bought solely due to its location on the outskirts of the village ,for its quietness ,view and the fact it is not overlooked. Our lifestyle at home is built around these factors, It is our place to escape. It will also lose valuable agricultural land in a time we're supposed to reduce our food imports and increase our own food production. It will increase congestion on our already crowded roads , reduce parking spaces , increase noise and pollution in a so called village location. The main road through the village is very often congested during morning and evening rush hour , additional homes will only exacerbate the problem.Add to this motorway problems diverted through the street results in gridlock. The traffic lights at Tesco , Roebuck cause tailbacks into the village even now. Local utilities and amenities will surely not cope even with suggested improvements. Add to the above ,the potential widening of the A1M and the proposed building of a school also in the field , the additional sites put forward for Knebworth it will no longer be the desirable place it is now to live in . 5114 2 Collings Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object It will devalue our property due to the loss of our peace, quiet, outlook and privacy. The property was brought solely for the above reasons on the outskirts of the village. Add to this the extra traffic of an already gridlocks street at times, compounded by problems on the A1(M) and Tesco's traffic lights at the Roebuck. Local utilities and amenities are inadequate and the proposed improvements have also got to be found locations - where? Add to this proposed school in the field also the extra noise and pollution from houses and school will no doubt cause its own problems. 5117 1 Lynch Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object 1. Objections to the housing and secondary school development; adjoining the Knebworth cemeteries and the mainline railway, boundary of Wych Lane and Gipsy Lane. 2. Object to the proposed vehicle traffic entry and exit from the B197 under the main rail line embankment, also additional traffic movement into Wadnall Way. 3. The traffic density at peak times on the B197 is already considerable. 4. Risk assessment - with the frequent closure of any lane on the A1M results serious traffic blocking on the B197 from Welwyn to Stevenage.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Knebworth is a controlled 'Bottleneck@ with a primary school, two pedestrian crossings, parking on both sides of the road, Chas Lowe with lorries and trailers and their park truck back and forth from their gravel and sand. Also the difficult journeys of the bus route. 5. The infrastructure to support this development will involve North Herts, Welwyn Hatfield Councils and two parish councils Knebworth and Woolmer Green. And the not considerable main rail company and sewerage, drainage, water supply, gas, electricity. 5119 1 Tomlinson Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object I was born in Knebworth in 1934 and have lived in Watton Road, St Martins Road and Gipsy Lane - next to several sites. All have severe problems. Water, sewerage, infrastructure. Lack of primary schooling. Knebworth children cannot all get into the enlarged school. Parking is unbelievably horrendous, especially with outsiders coming to park in Knebworth - cheaper to go to the train. As regards to 53, this site suffers from the fact that all access (3) bridges through the railway line are very narrow. The brick bridge at Deards End Lane has a weight limit and the road is at an acute angle to the bridge. The bridges at Station Road and Gun Lane are also as said narrow and at a sharp angle to the road. 5122 1 Cooke Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object To prevent the further incursion of the green belt around Knebworth and try to retain the village atmosphere and community of Knebworth. The existing infrastructure in respect of sewerage, traffic and other essential services in already being stretched and before any further development, long term solution for their improvement must be implemented. 5143 2 Swann Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object As with site 52 I most heartily concur with my neighbours views as shown in the enclosed document and object most strongly.

The proposal put forward by land owners and developers for the inclusion of additional sites on the periphery of the village boundary in the Local Development Plan fill me with deep concern. As their motive is so doing can only be for financial gain, and not for the benefit of the existing residents, I am amazed how they ever came to be included in the above document.

It is acknowledged that the village within its present boundaries has already reached its maximum size. Its population has more than trebled in the fifty years. Its services are overloaded. the sewerage system is working to capacity and cannot be extended without a major reconstruction. The main water supply system, which already takes its water from the Ouse at Bedford and the River Lea, has no spare reservoir on which to draw. power supply already suffers breakdown at peak periods, and although another substation can be tacked on to the existing network Knebworth, being a commuter village, will be low on the priority list for power in the future. Railway commuters from Stevenage and surrounding villages pack the roads and streets near the station because there are no adequate parking facilities. Bearing in mind that every new household will posses one or more cars, the extra vehicles will add to the already intolerable car parking problem which the Parish Council is at a loss to solve.

Residential development in the past has been piecemeal without any overall plan, and in-filling has taken place on every piece of ground that comes available. often before village residents are aware of what is happening. An example of this latest building is Robert Ellis Court - an attractive building buried behind the main village street, with its only access at the bottom of St Martins Road car park and with practically no outlook. Most of the larger developments have fitted in fairly well, but Kerr Close, with its huge blocks of flats alongside the railway line (which quake every time a 100 mph express thunders through) is appalling. At one time it was considered that this piece of land beyond the old coal yard would be suitable for Chas Lowe's new site but once again money talked. Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent

Now we have the grotesque situation of landowners and developers putting forward their own ideas for developing land in the Green Belt with no regard to the local infrastructure and the quality of life of the existing residents. Quite frankly it is an outrage.

Site 52 and 53 were put forward as possible development areas at the time when the motorway was being considered for widening from six lanes to eight. those building sites were rejected then by North Herts and the Parish Council for precisely the same reasons that makes them unsuitable today. The 500 houses to be built on those two sites would require an average water supply of 50,000 gallons per day, most of which would be discharged into an already over-loaded sewer system. Access to site 52 is very bad. At the north end it can only exit onto Deards End Lane and across the railway line onto Stevenage Road via the narrow brick arch bridge which has a blind corners at each end. At the south end it can only exit onto Park Lane opposite Gipsy Lane midway between two blind corners at West Barn and the motorway bridge.

Access to site 53 is equally bad, and will require major widening and straightening of Gipsy Lane, particularly at the north end where it joins Park lane, and Stockens Green. Another exit at the extreme southern end at Wych Elm Lane, just before the Rabley Heath motorway bridge goes nowhere, except to Woolmer Green.

Sewage and storm water disposal from site 53 will be a major problem as a sewer will have to be run across Gipsy Lane at its low point into the Orchard Way/Broom Grove system. Storm water run off has caused flooding in the past, and this will be multiplied many times when the natural soak-away system is destroyed.

A major problem with site 53, which must rule it out for serious consideration, is MOTORWAY NOISE, which is continuous day and night, seven days a week, summer and winter (except when foggy or snowing!). As most of the houses will lie below the embankment, they will be drenched with sound, already close to the legal limit. Added to this will be motorway dirt and air pollution, which will be a health hazard particularly for young children. Noise and air pollution will make it impossible for residents to open their windows at night, or to enjoy their gardens at the weekend. And it will get worse!

I have no detailed knowledge of the other three sites glued on to the present village boundary on the east side, but apart from noise, the same objections will apply, namely access, water and sewage services, and yet more cars . So I will confine my remarks to the above and conclude by emphasizing that the village cannot take any further expansion, not even the extra 200 houses slipped in south east of Gipsy Lane as part of the secondary school development in Woolmer Green territory. As for the overall scheme, in all my 589 years residence in the village never have I seen such a bad, ill thought-out proposal by landowners and developers, and no amount of 'planning gain' and financial inducements should be considered by NHDC and the Parish Council for a single minute. 5163 3 The Fairfield Partnership JB Planning Associates - TW Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object Site 53, 07/0904/7, Land at Gypsy Lane, Knebworth 1. We object to this site, and believe that it would be an inappropriate allocation for residential development because it is out of scale with the village of Knebworth. It would have a detrimental effect on the character and setting of the village, and would seriously exacerbate existing congestion, particularly on the High Street. Grounds for Objection 2. Site 53 covers more than 15 Ha, an area which at a modest development density of 35 dwellings per hectare would deliver around 530 dwellings. This would be a very significant extension to the village of Knebworth, which would have a negative impact on its character. Scale of Development 3. We believe that a smaller level of development, which complemented the existing settlement, would be acceptable. We are concerned that the scale of development which Site 53 represents would be unacceptable in Knebworth. 4. The roads at the centre of the village, particularly the narrow High Street, currently suffer from severe congestion at peak periods, to which there is no obvious solution. A development of 530 dwellings would be likely to significant exacerbate current problems. Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Conservation Area 5. Site 53 adjoins the Knebworth Conservation Area at Stockens Green. This is an attractive, loose-knit part of the village. The loss of this land would harm the character of the western edge of the village, from where this open landscape is visible. The Stockens Green Conservation Area Appraisal notes the visual links to open countryside, and the accompanying map defines the view from the end of the road, across Site 53, as being of particular importance. Site 53 forms part of the setting for the Conservation Area. Landscape Character 6. An independent Landscape Assessment was carried out by CSa Environmental Planning in January 2009. This considered the potential impact that residential development would have on various sites around Knebworth, including this one. With regard to the area covered by Site 53, the Assessment concluded: 'The site is large and has a character typical of the wider countryside. It lies outside the settlement boundary, in a prominent location, adjacent to the A1(M). The site and adjoining land to the north and south form an important swathe of open countryside which wraps around the western edge of Knebworth. Development in this location would represent a major incursion into the open countryside, severing this important tract of open countryside.' 7. It is clear from this comment that site 53 forms part of an important open area to the west of Knebworth, the development of which would have a significant effect on the settlement's character. 5172 2 Meredith Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object I feel that any further development on the green belt, in and around Knebworth, would destroy its rural character. Deards End Lane is already despoiled by erosion of the verges due to heavy traffic using the lane as a short out to the Rialto and Wimpey estates - both built on Knebworth Estate land. 5181 1 Ansell Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object As a resident of Knebworth, who has a child unable to gain a place in Knebworth School. Anymore building would put even more strain on our village and amenities. I chose to stay in Knebworth as an adult because it was a village surrounded by green fields not tarmac and more cars. 5183 2 Elliott Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object Most have similar general problems regarding utilities a. water supply water table falling in Hertfordshire rivers drying up b. Sewage, existing arrangements in Lea Valley approaching limits. Still residential development in process of completion outstanding in Stevenage. c. Capacity of educational facilities firstly on the primary school currently located in Swangleys Lane. Will add to pressure on secondary places, which are not currently satisfactory. (Depends on density of proposed buildings) d. Road facilities most sites will add to current peak hour problems site 54 near an inadequate roudabout and proposal to extend Tesco supermarket. 5194 3 Sprigge Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Comment Map lacks road names. No mention of secondary school. No mention of doctors surgery once current one closes. 5215 1 Chalkley

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object I moved to Knebworth 6 years ago from Hatfield which had become a horrible place to live. Knebworth is a lovely place to live, quiet and lovely open spaces to walk, view and enjoy. This is now under threat and gradually all our lovely countryside will be a concrete jungle. I object most strongly to this development in particular to the increase in traffic which creates noise and pollution. There is only one main road in and out of village and there are traffic jams constantly and when the A 1M has problems, traffic through the village becomes virtually gridlocked. The open fields around Knebworth are a haven for wildlife which will be forced out causing a lot to die on the surrounding busy roads. The extra street lighting, parked cars, rubbish will also destroy the village and it will be in danger of losing its identity and become just park of Stevenage or Welwyn. I thought Green Belt land could not be developed unless there were very special circumstances. I do not call building more houses 'very special circumstances'. There is a recent development of 24 flats in the village which has been finished for a considerable time. Only 3 of the flats are occupied! Brown Field sites should be developed and empty disused houses should be refurbished before new houses are built. 5216 2 Carpenter Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object The consequences of overcoming the limitations of local services, eg roads, sewers, schools, water supply, gas supply would be extremely disruptive and damaging to the local environment. Increased traffic congestion being of an ongoing nature raises the probability of future road improvement schemes further damaging the local environment in future. 5220 2 Harris Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object Knebworth is already a "big" village. We don't want it to be a town. This is all GREEN BELT land. NHDC has already accepted that the local infrastructure won't support a higher population. Has something changed? Looking at the position of the proposed site, it is difficult to see how sensible road access can be provided either for construction traffic or for final residents. 5227 1 Osborne Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object This suggestion implies a major development on important green belt in a situation in which it is recognised there is not the necessary infrastructure support. The "Sustainability Appraisal" states this site is "Not affected by landscape designations". I consider it deserves some landscape designation: "Area of Landscape Value /Merit/Significance" ? Thank you. 5245 1 Page Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object NO future development around Knebworth (not just Site 53) should occur.

Knebworth is the largest village in North Herts and, thankfully, still maintains a great rural atmosphere with a long traditional village history which should be preserved due to its close

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent proximity to both Stevenage and Welwyn Garden City.

Knebworth's population is already large enough as the existing infra-structure is struggling to cope with present volumes of sewage and traffic. Further expansion, with the increased infra-structure (which experience has shown, despite assurances to the contrary, is never adequate), coupled with the loss of prime agricultural land, would destroy the village atmosphere and surrounding environment. People who choose a village life should be allowed to remain to do so.

Continued destruction of rural areas, by development, has shown to have a detrimental effect on the environment because of marked increases in: 1. Pollution (Emission of CO2 and other gases, waste, light and noise) 2. Flood Risk (Increased areas of tarmac and concrete forces surface water into the sewers and rivers instead of being absorbed into the ground to drain slowly) 3. Water Shortages (Displacement of local sources, due to point 2, and extra demand from residential development) 4. Sewage Treatment & Pollution (Increased volume) 5. Traffic Congestion & Pollution (Increased volume) 6. Potential Food Shortages (Many sites are on prime agricultural land)

Points 1 to 5 above cause considerable damage to local eco-systems, wildlife and communities. Point 6 has a potentially very disturbing consequence for our future especially when considering destruction of such land on a national scale. Agricultural and rural land should be protected at all costs, NOT destroyed.

Therefore destruction of Green Belt land as a whole should cease because it was created for the good reason to maintain necessary rural environments and farming capabilities, for all to enjoy, around the overcrowded areas within the UK. Space is becoming more important to us all.

If we have to build, then regeneration of the vast number of "Brownfield" sites within the UK's cities and towns should be the first option. Development within urban areas is much more economical, sustainable and "Environmentally Friendly" as most of the necessary infra-structure is already in place, with the added benefit of greatly relieving dependence on private transport.

With a changing world and uncertainty about global finances there is a very strong possibility that the UK will need to be a lot more self-sufficient in the future. Many tough decisions have to be made, but once agricultural land has gone we will then become dependent upon "Volatile" imports for our very existence. 5422 2 Haigh Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object Knebworth should not be expanded - we do not have the infrastructure to support it and we are in the green belt. 5430 1 Bell Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object The lanes surrounding site 53 in Knebworth are very narrow and already there is a great deal of traffic using them.

Many years ago there was bad flooding because of rain water coming off the motorway - houses in Orchard Way and Meadway were flooded, and cars had to be destroyed. Just recently Gipsy Lane was badly flooded following heavy rain. If houses were built on this farmland there would be even more rain unable to soak into the land causing more flooding.

The village of Knebworth junior school and nursery schools are already full to capacity, and even over subscribed - where would even more children be educated? It is a real pity that Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent village children are unable to attend school in their own locality, but have to go elsewhere where there happens to be room.

Parking and through traffic in Knebworth is horrendous - we don't want any more vehicles please!

The doctors' surgery already struggles to cope with its number of village patients.

Site 53 is Green Belt land - please can we preserve it as this. It is enjoyed by many folk out walking and cycling. Please may this continue. The government are wanting this country to be more self-sufficient in growing food - surely farm-land should be preserved as much as possible. 5434 2 Weaver Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object My objections to this site are as follows: 1. the continued growth in Knebworth is changing its character for the worse and turning it from a village into a small town; 2. growing the boundaries of Knebworth increases the risk of coallescence with Woolmer Green; 3. The infrastructure including roads, water, drains and the primary school are already overwhelmed and any further development should not take place without the infrastructure upgrades being made first;

However, if there must be expansion, then this site (along with Site 52), would cause me the least concern. 5464 2 Daldorph Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Comment I am concerned that: - this will put strain on the already stretched road and general support infrastructure of Knebworth - the very local roads will not be able to cope with the increased traffic - Knebworth is already a large village, adding more housing could lead to it losing its identiy. 5468 2 Onyett Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object I do not agree to the proposed additional housing to be built on this land because: - it is green field land - I do not believe the local infrastructure (eg roads, sewerage etc) will support the increased load due to the extra housing - the village primary school is already over-subscribed - it will fundamentally change the nature of the village, making it less like the village which we chose to live in 5469 2 Onyett Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object I do not agree to the proposed additional housing to be built on this land because:

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent - it is green field land - I do not believe the local infrastructure (eg roads, sewerage etc) will support the increased load due to the extra housing - the village primary school is already over-subscribed - it will fundamentally change the nature of the village, making it less like the village which we chose to live in 5480 2 Haller Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object Of the possible sites for development around Knebworth site 53 offers the opportunity for development that is of only moderate effect to adjacent residents and is in a reasonable position, albeit adjacent to the A1(M) and with a majority of the site in a hollow, for residents on the newly developed site. It also has the potential of only being partially used as it is naturally split by Gypsy Lane.

Nevertheless, whilst it is argued that Knebworth, as North Herts largest village offers the best facilities (train station, shops, primary school) and thus it should be allowed to grow to a modest degree, I believe that for these reasons it should not.

My reasons succinctly for this are;

5. The rails station is oversubscribed with insufficient parking 6. The Primary school is bursting and oversubscribed with even village children being unable to get place. 7. The road structure of the village is even insufficient for current traffic levels with, particularly at rush hours there being jams along London Road/Stevenage Road and long queues along Watton Road. 8. As NHDCs largest village any further expansion may well result in Knebworth being a small town and thus loose its village feel.

Finally and most importantly, all of the presently proposed sites (52, 53, 55, 57 & 58) are presently Green Belt land and should be allowed to remain so, for the reasons that the designation of Green Belt was originally created. 5483 2 Haller Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object Of the possible sites for development around Knebworth site 53 offers the opportunity for development that is of only moderate effect to adjacent residents and is in a reasonable position, albeit adjacent to the A1(M) and with a majority of the site in a hollow, for residents on the newly developed site. It also has the potential of only being partially used as it is naturally split by Gypsy Lane.

Nevertheless, whilst it is argued that Knebworth, as North Herts largest village offers the best facilities (train station, shops, primary school) and thus it should be allowed to grow to a modest degree, I believe that for these reasons it should not.

My reasons succinctly for this are;

1. The rails station is oversubscribed with insufficient parking 2. The Primary school is bursting and oversubscribed with even village children being unable to get place. 3. The road structure of the village is even insufficient for current traffic levels with, particularly at rush hours there being jams along London Road/Stevenage Road and long queues Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent along Watton Road. 4. As NHDCs largest village any further expansion may well result in Knebworth being a small town and thus loose its village feel.

Finally and most importantly, all of the presently proposed sites (52, 53, 55, 57 & 58) are presently Green Belt land and should be allowed to remain so, for the reasons that the designation of Green Belt was originally created. 5493 1 Sugden Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object I wish to make an objection to the planed development of green belt land adjacent to Gypsy Lane in Knebworth (site 53). I live in Orchard Way and my property backs onto Gypsy lane and the arable fields beyond. One of my reasons for purchasing my house was the fact that it backed onto open countryside and was not overlooked. Therefore I would object to housing of any kind being built. In addition, I object to the fact that green belt land is being proposed for development, when I thought the whole idea of green belts was that they were protected! 5496 1 Hook Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object As a resident of Knebworth I strongly object with the development of the Green Belt. I understand that no sites within Knebworth were suggested as part of the East of England Plan and that these additional sites are only being put forward by landowners, developers and individuals for personal gain at the expense of green belt and the environment. We believe the development of this site compromises Knebworth's village status and is not sustainable with the current education, transport and sewerage infrastructure. 5524 2 Lund Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object Site 53 would appear to be the largest of the sites propsed for development. It would join Knebworth to the A1. The number of vehicles using the small lanes and roads surrounding this site are already full and at times dangerous. Any development would increase the traffic and make the roads even more dangerous. The site would jut up against most of the west of Knebworth and make what appears to be a village a huge sprawling urbia. Please reconsider. 5562 1 McGlinchey Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Comment SAVE KNEBWORTH VILLAGE TO ENSURE QUALITY IN THE COUNTRYSIDE I am passionately opposed to the Green Belt Development and the addition of the Knebworth Site 53 for land allocation. I strongly object to the manner in which the campaign proposal for the development of this site has been handled and I consider the generation of support from local landowners and local business (with vested interests) to be both worrying and very hard to stomach. The 'WENEEDASCHOOL' campaign kept the Parish Council in the dark until the very last moment - it was embarrassing to note they were not provided with any financial breakdown prior to the meeting in the Village Hall on 9th September 2009. The generation of material to create awareness and support this development campaign has been handled badly. The underhanded manner deployed is alarming and should act as a warning of any promise to refrain from additional green belt development to finance the future village infrastructures that will inevitably be required . The above mentioned actions of the 'WENEEDASCHOOL' group have deliberately placed the Knebworth Village Community at a complete disadvantage and as a result we need to generate a great deal of support to enable us to retain the very precious nature of the Knebworth Village that we all cherish and love.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent

I object to the proposed development on Site 53 Gypsy Lane for the following reasons:

* Green Belt Land should only be released in exceptional circumstances. This area should be retained as agricultural land because its loss to development would erode the definition of Knebworth as a village and the loss of this particular greenbelt would be unacceptable to a major portion of the local community.

* Sufficient land was previously identified by North Herts District Council to accommodate the number of houses required to be built within North Hertfordshire by 2021.

* The Regional Strategy is to align Housing with job prospects.Employment Forecasts estimate a rise of 1% (less than 1000 jobs) to 2021. It is therefore difficult to see how the increase in housing development in Knebworth can be justified.

* The scale of job growth is an important and a major determining factor of Housing Growth. This Housing Development will create an imbalance between employment and housing growth.

* The 'weneedaschoolcampaign' is an exaggerated requirement because previous difficulties have been addressed by the fact that there will be an increased intake at Barnwell School to accommodate students at year 6 for 2010.

* 'The Building of Schools for the Future' is an issue that has already been identified by NHDC. This process will change the distribution of Secondary School places across the town. More placements will be available in Southern Stevenage for children from Knebworth, Datchworth,Oaklands and Woolmer Green.

* Barnwell and Nobel Schools will both be extended as part of 'The Building of Schools for the Future' so this will alleviate the need to fund the construction of a new school and to disrupt the village of Knebworth .

* The 'weneedaschoolcampaign' and associated housing development is an ill conceived proposal: Health and Safety would view the building of a school and the placement of 900 children in such close proximity to a Main Railway as absurd.

* The 'weneedaschoolcampaign' and associated housing development is an ill conceived proposal because: The infrastructure and transportation issues would be significant and this would have an adverse impact on a transport network that is already operating over capacity .

* The 'weneedaschoolcampaign' and associated housing development is an ill conceived proposal because: Green Belt Development in Knebworth would require additional capacity on the A1M and this would add to the present congestion problems.

* The 'weneedaschoolcampaign' and associated housing development is an ill conceived proposal because: The 197 would be unable to handle the level of increased traffic.

* The 'weneedaschoolcampaign' and associated housing development is an ill conceived proposal because: There would be a significant increase in demand for rail travel and this would place additional pressures on Knebworth Station. The two track section between Knebworth and WGC across the Viaduct would prevent the ability to provide any additional service.

* The 'weneedaschoolcampaign' and associated housing development is an ill conceived proposal because: The existing local infrastructure (sewerage etc) will not be in a position to cope with the proposed level of development.

Based on the above listed objections I request that NHDC abandon the Development Proposal to: Site 53 Gypsy Lane. Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 5570 2 Bedford Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object Knebworth is a village and should remain as one.

The primary school is full, as with the doctors.

The sewage is not suitable

The roads can't support more traffic, and the lanes are not suitable.

Knebworth is a lovely village and surrounded by beautiful country side - if any development happens we will end up as South Stevenage. The residents choose to live here as it is, it is also the largest village in Herts, so the development would turn into a town.

Tanya Bedford 5571 6 Ryan Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object Site is on greenbelt land - we must conserve our countryside. The countryside around Knebworth is one of the main reasons many people choose to live in the village and increases the quality of life of the residents.

The surrounding roads are small narrow lanes that are dangerous and unsuitable for an increase in traffic.

The local school is already full to capacity.

Parking in the village is inadequate for the current population let alone an increase.

Local services ie Dentist and Doctor cannot support current population let alone an increase. 5577 2 Laing Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object This is Green Belt and should be preserved as such.Area not sustainable for housing.Precious shield between west of Knebworth and A1M 5584 1 Calver Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object I object to the proposal to allocate site 53 land at Gypsy Lane for future development for the following reasons:

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent

Expansion of the village of Knebworth: Key Issue 12 of the Core Strategy recognises that Knebworth has a number of amenities and is already one of the largest villages in the area. It is proposed that Knebworth could expand by a 'modest amount'. The proposed site of some 15.6 ha borders roughly 1/6 of the village perimeter and could accommodate hundreds of houses and therefore potential thousands of residents. In a village of roughly 1800 houses this is far more than a modest amount. The expansion along the village perimeter will adversely affect the outlook and house prices of a number of residents bordering the proposed site. The utilities and amenities for Knebworth are already recognised as being at capacity, meaning that sewerage, water etc is under strain, the village school is one of largest in the county and already brimming with pupils and other local facilities such as doctors, dentists and retail outlets could not cope with the demand. Roads are already busy and saturated with traffic at peak times, and the proposed site would have poor links with the current road infrastructure, choking the south west of the village and increasing congestion.For all of these reasons, the development of the proposed site would cause unacceptable detrimental levels of harm to existing residents. The development would conflict with the proposed development policies DP4- Protecting amenity, DP5- Design, safety and sustainability, DP9- Sewerage infrastructure and DP20- Facilities.

Environmental concerns: The proposed site is currently greenbelt land classified as Grade3 agricultural land and in use. It provides a barrier between the village of Knebworth and the A1(m). Unless there is an absolute lack of suitable alternative sites, there is no justification for considering the site for development. The use of the site will have a detrimental affect on the rural landscape of the village and remove valuable habitats. The site is also classified as a Source Protection Zone 3, part of the total catchment required to support the removal of water. Development of this area could affect groundwater flow and pollute the groundwater source. It also means it cannot be used to provide further water for future development.Some of the surrounding area is known to be former landfill and it is not known what extent remediation is required for this area which may mean the site is requires high levels of contaminant removal or washing, proving to be unsustainable. The proximity of the development to the A1(m) would also mean that future residents would experience poor air quality. The development of this site would therefore conflict with proposed development policies DP1- affect on landscape, DP12- agriculture. 6065 2 Norman Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object I strongly object to any major development in the area as the infrastructure is already being threatened. Knebworth could not and should not accept any major housing developments as the influx of families would necessitate the building of more schools, which in turn would require more families to justify its existence. The roads are hardly able to cope with the traffic presently and this particularly applies to Watton Road, which is used as the only practicable way from the A602 to the A1M for many people. 6094 1 Timms Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object I was very distressed to hear of the proposed plans to put 200 houses onto the gypsy lane field (site 53) I am a Knebworth resident and in fact I moved away from Hatfield to live in a nice village, but these houses would make Knebworth a town! I often walk my dog in this field and I think it is atrocious that they want to spoil such beautiful countryside, what gives the landowners and the contractors the right to build on green belt land?! 6097 1 Armstrong Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object We are residents of Woodstock, Knebworth for 6 years, and Deanscroft, Knebworth 5 years prior. We regret that a development for residential use is being considered so close to our property. We bought our property because of it close proximity to greenbelt land and regularly use all land surrounding Knebworth village for recreational use. We enjoy our view of the Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent greenbelt land and do not wish to look across a property development.

Please take time to consider the current infrastructure and the effect this will have on all residents of west Knebworth. The current traffic allowances will be greatly affected.

Overall we are upset that you would consider building on any of the greenbelt land surrounding Knebworth and wonder if you start to do so - where you may stop? Does Knebworth need any more homes? Our current primary school is already greatly oversubscribed and traffic through the high street at maximum capacity.

As residents of Knebworth we live here because it is a village and fear it is drawing ever closer to the town of Stevenage. Please be advised our objection stretches to all land proposed for development in Knebworth not only those that border our property. 6152 1 More Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object General Observations: Timing of consultations: a number of public meetings relating to these consultations were organised during the summer holiday period, which does not allow for the maximum consultation on a topic that is of relevance to every resident in Knebworth and the surrounding communities. Information to date does not indicate the potential beneficiaries of such development. While some potential beneficiaries, e.g. home builders, may not have been identified at this stage, clearly whoever owns the land would stand to benefit if the land is sold. Such information should be made available immediately, as well as any other potential direct or indirect vested interest within the affected communities. What is the demographic trend forecast for Hertfordshire? What is the basis for planning such further residential development when the population overall is aging and the birth rate falling? Site 53 / Gypsy Lane: The report does not cover the impact on the current residential or agricultural areas, nor does it comment on the infrastructural needs that would accompany such additional development, e.g. access roads, sewage, gas and electricity. Access roads in the locality are either old and narrow (Gypsy Lane itself) or already congested (Knebworth High Street/London Road) and not suitable to take additional traffic that would arise from additional residential development. 6215 1 Baczynska Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object The green belt should be mentained as it is. It is the reason why many people choose to leave here.RRAny further developments will make also comuting even harder. The vilage is already strugling with the amount of cars and traffic in the morning.RRAnd a definite NO to any hight school in the area with the catchment proposed. We do not want the noice, the traffic and angry teenages in this pieceful area. 6258 1 Beevor Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object 1) The land is green belt, the purpose of which has been since its inception to prevent urban sprawl. This should be sacrosanct. Knebworth is already the largest village in Hertfordshire and its services are ill equipped to cope with more expansion.RR2)It is currently good agricultural land which use needs to be protected in a time of global food shortages.RR3)The surrounding roads are inadequate to access a site of this size, and any upgrading (particularly of Gipsy Lane) would change its character totally. Deards End Lane which would provide the natural link to the North is already a 'rat-run' nightmare.RR4) That part of the site north of Gipsy Lane as a history of flooding in extreme weather conditions, with overflow nto Orchard Way, Broom Grove and on one occasion in the late 1980's all the way to a shop basement in the London Road. Developing the area can only be detrimental to its ability to soak Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent up excess rainfall, and a future flood could lead to some expensive claims against the Council that approved such a development.RR5)It is common knowledge that a number of village services are already at or near capacity, such as drainage in general, and the village school. Picking site 53, one of the biggest options would create the greatest pressure on these services. This would also apply to the village's parking problems.RR6)There would be a potential loss of value of properties on the western sides of Orchard Way, Meadway, that part of Gipsy Lane joining them, and Wadnall Way/Woodstock which would lose their 'semi-rural aspect'.RR7)If any expansion of Knebworth is deemed necessary I consider site 55 which I understand may include a new village surgery to be the most suitable and to have an adverse effect on the fewest people. 6279 2 Morris Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Comment On reviewing the additional proposed sites in and around Knebworth, I wish to make the following comments:- 1. Knebworth is a village. If the proposed expansion takes place, this will join Knebworth to Stevenage in the north and Woolmer Green in the south. 2. The roads which run in and around Knebworth are already extremely busy, any expansion in any direction would put more pressure on the already congested village centre. 3. The Doctors Surgery in Knebworth is already busy. I do not believe that this surgery could take any more patients, as it is very difficult to get an appointment with the number of patients it has now. 4. I have no school age children of my own, but I understand that the school is well oversubscribed and even if you live in the village of Knebworth it is no guarantee that your children will get into the village school. More houses being built would apply more pressure to this problem. In short, I believe that any development, which expands on the boundary of Knebworth would be detrimental to Knebworth village. On top of these points these sites are GREEN BELT, this should mean they stay GREEN. 6298 2 Charter Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object I would like to submit an objection to the the proposed land allocation of additional sites numbered 52, 53, 55, 56, 57 and 58 on the following grounds;RR1. First and foremost that each of these sites are designated Green Belt land and should not be developed on unless 'exceptional circumstances' prevail. I can not imagine such a circumstance existing to support residential or any other form of development.RR2. Knebworth is already the largest of the villages in the District and many of it's existing services could not support a significant increase in population resulting from further residential development. Most notably, Knebworth Primary School which is already large for a village school (with a 2 class intake per year) and has limited scope for expansion without further proposed encroachment onto Green Belt land.RR3. I am surprised that the appraisals concerning the suitability of each of these sites for development has not yet considered the issues of access, highways and traffic impact. I would object to each of these sites being developed on the grounds of poor access, insufficient highways capacity and on a negative traffic impact particularly, with regard to an increase in traffic numbers and safety issues.RRAs a general comment, I would add that future residential development should be focused on infill development sites, brownfield sites or on sites allocated for the expansion of the Districts towns whose facilities and services can sustain such development. Villages should be protected and not converted into towns or annexed to existing towns. Development on Green Belt land should be avoided at all cost as per Government policy. 6310 1 Bell Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object Roads for access and approach are completely unsuitable, and are lovely country lanes. They are busy enough now in everyday use anyway. Greenbelt land would be destroyed to build on this site. Flooding has historically been a problem in the past, and recently. Last month Gypsy Lane was completely flooded across in a heavy shower. So the loss of more land that is as a field capable of absorbing rain would be very counter productive. With water run off from housing the flooding would become far more serious. 6318 2 Wall Document Section :Site 53 Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Representation : Comment Before providing our comments we have one question that we would appreciate an answer to. Could you please explain the exact nature of the blue line on the map of Site 52 as it appears to run through a number of peoples gardens. In addition to the weaknesses identified in the Sustainability Appraisal Summary we wish to make the following comments: - Knebworth is not equipped to handle the additional traffic, parking and other infrastructure essentials that such proposed development would require. Knebworth is already over stretched as evidenced by the lack of parking for commuters and the other services such as rubbish disposal, schools, medical and other social facilities that would not be able to service the proposed development. - The conservation area of Deards End Lane already sees too much traffic for its width and is used as a cut through which substantially adds volume to a road that is not equipped to handle it. As many people have identified in the past this makes for a dangerous situation particularly for pedestrians and any proposed development would place impossible additional capacity on this country lane and we believe lead to serious accidents between vehicles and between vehicles and pedestrians. The same comments apply to Park Lane and Gypsy Lane. We, and other residents, have raised issues around traffic flow and parking in the past. - As is identified, the sites are both adjacent to conservation areas and these areas would alter to such a significant extent that they would be robbed of their conservation attraction and status. This would be a very distressing result. - As is also identified the proximity of such proposed development to the A1(M) would make for a very uncomfortable living environment for residents. The noise impingement from the A1(M) to where we live in Knebworth is considerable and we would not wish higher levels of noise on new residents who would live closer to the motorway. - Further development will also add to the already stretched transport infrastructure between Knebworth and access to the A1(M). Such proposed development would clearly impinge on previously designated green belt and fundamentally alter the attractions to many people of living in this beautiful part of Hertfordshire. We appreciate the need for additional housing in the country and county but have to register our strong objection to using sites 52 and 53. Proposed development of previously designated greenbelt, coupled with the alteration forever of a conservation area is, we believe, a very disturbing precedent for the county. 6324 2 Sprigens Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object I am writing in relation to the additional sites numbers 52 Land at Deards end Lane and 53 Land at Gypsy Lane. I am opposed to these two sites which have been put forward by Knebworth House Education And Preservation Trust being considered for development for the following reasons: In a previous independent review of suitable locations for development by Knebworth House in 2007 both sites had been dismissed as being suitable for development due to them being near conservation areas and the current road infrastructure around the sites. No apparent reasons have been given as to what has changed to make either site suitable for development. At a recent Parish meeting Henry Cobald when making representation in the meeting admitted that he personally believed the site 53 to be one which would be low on the suitability for development. The current road infrastructure around Park Lane and Deards End lane are already stretched to capacity as Gypsy Lane and Deards End lane are both used as cut through to avoid the High Street which is a major traffic black spot. In addition Park Lane is used as an 'overflow' for the station which means traffic is heavier than in surrounding areas and has been highlighted as a problem area with current plans to introduce yellow lines at the intersection of Deards End Lane and Park Lane. Any further development would only exacerbate this serious situation and would require major changes to the current quality and size of the roads in and around the location of both of the sites. The quality of the independent report is questionable as it highlights none of these issues as weaknesses. In addition any further development in around Knebworth needs serious thought for the following reasons. -All the site locations give potential danger of co-alesance with Stevenage and Woolmer Green. -The infrastructure within Knebworth cannot support its current population let alone an increase in relation to shops, traffic congestion and is environmental impacts (I suspect if carbon monoxide readings where taken in the high street they would be at London Levels), health service, schooling provision (threat of closure for the local surgery and insufficient primary school places) and general amenities. - As the largest village in North Herts any further increase in it size and population must bring into question its status as a village and turn it into a town.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 6378 4 Bland Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object All the other sites, 52 53 55 57 and 58 have been put forward by developers for their own fiscal gain and not enhance the village. Many times this expansion has been on the cards and all have been carefully examined by experts. The conclusion by the local authority NHDC is that it is not neccessary or sustainable and so they have not supported or endorsed a 'special case'. In fact it has said said that sufficient sites are available in existing plans without looking further. 6382 2 Milne Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object We have been resident in Wadnall Way since October 1998 and moved to Knebworth from Stevenage because of its beautiful village status and amenities. Firstly, we would like to register our deep concerns re. possible residential development of greenbelt land on sites 52. 53., 55., 56., 57., and 58. Our reasons include; 1, the constraints new homes would make on the existing sewerage system, the local infrastructure, transport links, the limited health facilities and the already oversubscribed Knebworth Primary School. 2, The reasons for green belt land is to separate encroaching development from neighbouring Towns / Villages. We want to remain a village and not a town. Secondly, we would like to our register our deep concerns about the possible development of a Secondary School for eight to nine hundred pupils and 180 houses on land adjacent to Wadnall Way and Woodstock. Our reasons include; 1, We do not want to look out onto a sixty acre site of a school and houses .This development would encroach on our beautiful view of green belt land to the right of the front of our home. 2, We do not want to have our peaceful existence interrupted by the noise and a heavy increase of transport from the development of a school and 180 new houses. 3. The green belt land proposed for this site has a beautiful path which leads up to Mardley Woods and is enjoyed by us as and numerous others as a glorious country walk. We do not want to see this destroyed . 4. The proposed development has not considered the cost or impact on the local infra structure. 5. The proposal does not take into account of the local safety implications of eight to nine hundred pupils near the railway line adjacent to the land. Who will pay for safety measures such as fencing? 6. One Stevenage Secondary Schools has been closed and another is due for closure next year. A large amount of money has been put into the remaining Secondary Schools to upgrade them. Surely this is where the investment should be? Also our two daughters attend The Heathcote School and have done very well. We were aware of the fact that when we moved into the village there was no local provision of a Secondary School and they would have to travel. 7. The local church graveyards have been closed as they are full. The small Knebworth Cemetery at the end of Wadnall Way will surely have to be eventually expanded to cope with requirements in the future? 8. The planned large catchment area of Knebworth, Oaklands, Woolmer Green and Codicote area for the school means there would be no guarantee of an automatic position and could backfire as applicants from Stevenage and Welwyn Garden City could apply. 9. We are concerned that having such a development at the end of our road would decrease our current village property value. 6383 4 Plester Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object I wish to submit the following representations against the adoption of certain of the suggested sites for development in the settlement of Knebworth.RR1) Development of any or all of the Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent sites on the edge of the village (nos 52, 53, 55, 57 & 58) would exacerbate the already serious traffic overload. A bypass is an essential prerequisite. 6385 5 Howarth Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object I hope you will accept this email to register my opposition to the proposed sites for development in Knebworth, particularly those currently serving as agricultural land, sites 52,53, 55,57 and 58. All these proposals are likely to provide additional housing at the detriment to the environment within which the housing is proposed. Agriculutural land helps sustain the rural nature of our region, and keeps the green belt and green space of North Hertfordshire, something vital to its character. I would also object to development on these sites because, as you are well aware, the infrastructure of Knebworth, would not support further, heavy capacity, development. Whilst the sites are within some reach of the village centre, I would stress that the current shops in the village are unlikely to be supported by additional occupants, and there is no capacity for parking for extra residents, should they wish to visit the local retailers. Some of the developments also are on the very boundaries of the village (especially 53 and 52) and my concern here would be that residents wouldn't choose to walk to the village, but drive (as happens now from these further reaches of the village,) again adding to infrastructure problems. 6404 2 Beeby Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object Development in any of these sites would result in far more traffic than any of the adjoining roads could cope with.

In the case of 55-58 both Watton Road and OAKFIELD's Road are difficult to negotiate by two cars already, because of road and the cars parked.

Knebworth village centre is often booked by traffic already, any additional would make it worse. Apart from anything else it is not good to see more greenbelt disappear. 6490 1 Mensah Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Support I would like to support site 53 although there would be some issues, as the profits would go towards the village I would be willing to rough out in minor issues for the greater good. I am aware of the WE NEED A SCHOOL campaign and feel that such plans demonstrate positive development. Is it possible for this site should be considered for development as it is better situated than site 53? 6491 1 Pomerance Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Support As the LDF is a living document, and should represent the most viable options available, I urge you to reconsider the current proposal out for consultation, and include the Knebworth South site the school campaign has identified as a proposal. This site would be viable for both homes and a school, and has extra public interest, as all profit would go directly back to the community. Another site I would be willing to support is the Gypsy Lane site (53), as the profit from that would also be used for the good of the community. This site is slightly less preferential, as this site would be more likely to add to the congestion of the village, and also backs on to the A1, so is less desirable, but if chosen as a result of the LDF, would enable the village and increase community benefits, including hopefully, a secondary school. I enclose a copy for your records of the Knebworth Estates statement regarding the LDF, for your records, explaining their charitable donation in more detail.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 6494 2 Stainforth Document Section :Site 53 Representation : Object I have lived in Knebworth for 59 years, 55 at the present address, so I have seen all the major developments, some good, some bad, which have more than trebled the village's population over that period. During my 30-year career as an engineer with ICI Plastics Division I have been in charge of the design of major chemical plants at Fleetwood, Lancs., and in South Africa and Argentina. Therefore, I have some knowledge of the infrastructure involved in major construction projects. It is acknowledged that the village within its present boundaries has already reached its maximum size. Its services are overloaded. The sewage system is working to capacity and cannot be extended without a major reconstruction. The main water supply system, which already takes its water from the rivers, has no spare reservoir on which to draw. Power supply already suffers breakdown at peak periods, and Knebworth, being a commuter village, will be low on the priority list for power in the future. Railway commuters from Stevenage and surrounding villages pack the roads and streets near the station because there are no adequate parking facilities. Bearing in mind that every new household will possess one or more cars, the extra vehicles will add to the already intolerable car parking problem which the Parish Council is at a loss to solve. Now we have the grotesque situation of landowners and developers putting forward their own ideas for developing land in the Green Belt with no regard to the local infrastructure and the quality of life of the existing residents. Sites 52 and 53 were put forward as possible development areas at the time when the motorway was being considered for widening from six lanes to eight. Those building sites were rejected then by North Herts and the Parish Council for precisely the same reasons that make them unsuitable today. SITE 52. Access is very bad. At the north end the site can only be exited on to Deards End Lane and across the railway line on to Stevenage Road via tha narrow brick arch bridge which has a blind corner at each end. At the south end the only exit is on to Park Lane opposite Gipsy Lane, midway between two blind corners at West Barn and the motorway bridge. Water supply. The original proposal was for 200 houses on this site, which would require an average supply of 20,000 gallons of water daily, most of which will be discharged into the overloaded sewer system from toilets, baths, kitchens, and from washing machines. Sewage disposal. The existing sewer from Old Knebworth can be accessed, but this lies upstream of the overloaded village system and may cause problems downstream. Cars. As the residents of these houses will probably commute to work elsewhere, each house may possess more than one car, which will add considerably to the village car parking problem. SITE 53. Access is equally bad, and will require major widening and straightening of Gipsy Lane, particularly at the north end where it joins Park Lane, and at Stockens Green. Another exit at the extreme southern end at Wych Elm Lane, just before that motorway bridge, goes nowhere except to Woolmer Green. Water supply. Originally 300 houses were to be built on this site, and these would require 30,000 gallons of water daily, discharging, like Site 52, into the village sewer system. Sewage and storm water disposal from this site would be a major problem as the main sewer pipe would have to run across Gipsy Lane at its low point into the Orchard Way/Broom Grove system. Storm water run off from this site has caused flooding in the past, and this would be multiplied many times when the natural soak-away system is destroyed. Cars. As for Site 52, all these houses will probably possess one or more cars, thereby agravating the village car parking problem. MOTORWAY NOISE must rule out this site from serious consideration because it is now continuous day and night, 24/7, summer and winter throughout the year. As most of the houses will lie below the embankment, they will be drenched with sound, already close to the legal limit . Added to this will be motorway dirt and air pollution which will be a health hazard, particularly for young children. Noise and air pollution will make it impossible for residents to open their windows at night, or to enjoy their gardens at the weekend. Twenty years ago, when this site was being considered for development, a professional sound engineer took sound level measurements at peak times at the bottom of Gipsy Lane and found then that the noise level approached the legal limit. Since then the flow of traffic has steadily increased, and it will get much worse in the future with the expansion of Stevenage west of the motorway. SITE 56. Some fifteen years ago land to the south of this site, east of Stevenage Road, was used illegally as a landfill area on which rubbish was dumped over a large area to the depth of four to five feet. When consolidated it was covered over with a depth of topsoil and turned into agricultural land. No doubt North Herts will have a record of what action was taken at the time. I would have thought that this would make this plot unsuitable for residential purposes for health reasons . I have no detailed knowledge of the other three sites glued on to the present village boundary on the east side, but apart from noise, the same objections would apply, namely access, water and sewage services, and yet more cars . I trust this information will be helpful in rejecting all the above sites as being totally unsuitable for further housing development. The Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 53 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent village has already reached its maximum housing capacity for maintaining a reasonable quality of life for its present residents.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 54 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 0077 12 Knebworth Parish Council Document Section :Site 54 Representation : Object Development of site 52-58 would result in growth which Knebworth village cannot take. The sites identified have the following problems:

Sites 54 and 56 Odyssey Health Centre and Land East of Stevenage Road Both sites are located on the northern Parish boundary, adjacent to the Roebuck. Stevenage has built up to its southern boundary and any development here breaches the natural boundary of the railway and would potentially result in Stevenage expanding even further south towards Knebworth. Development of either site would not be associated with Knebworth because it is approximately a mile away from its centre. 0347 18 Brookes Document Section :Site 54 Representation : Object General Comments:

I oppose development on all five of the suggested sites abounding Knebworth village (52, 53, 55, 57 and 58). I also oppose sites 54 and 56 which represent expansion of Stevenage.

Whilst acknowledging that Knebworth is a 'sustainable hub' in terms of its transport links and local facilities and that some limited expansion may, in the long term, be the key to it retaining its independence as a thriving village community rather than becoming a satellite or suburb of Stevenage, there are serious infrastructure constraints which preclude consideration of even minor expansion at the present time. These constraints relate to the provision of primary and secondary school places, lack of capacity and suitable 'future proof' premises for the GP surgery, parking and congestion/traffic issues, water supply and sewerage.

Suggestions that mitigation of these constraints could be achieved by 'improving the schools and social infrastructure' are unrealistic. There is no easy way to expand the primary school which is already one of the biggest in Hertfordshire . Parents are likely to strongly resist the notion of a super-primary school with a 3-form intake. Secondary school provision is a contentious issue for many Knebworth families with no obvious solution, other than to move away.

Likewise, there are no obvious solutions to the parking, congestion and rat-run problems which would be compounded by the provision of more housing around the village.

There are possible options for resolving the provision of a new GP surgery in the medium term but this would be subject to adequate funding. There is no apparent source of funds at present.

Sewerage and water constraints will no doubt be resolved at some point in the future but possibly not within the next ten years.

All 7 proposed sites in Knebworth Parish are in the Green Belt where housing development would be contrary to current local and national planning policy.

Site 54 Odyssey Health Centre, Old Knebworth Lane Knebworth

I feel that the description of this site as a 'health centre' is misleading ¿ it is a commercial sport and leisure centre with function rooms.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 54 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent I would support the upgrading of the existing sport and leisure facility, particularly if some sort of community sports facilities could be made available - Knebworth Football Club and Knebworth Youth Football Club are both actively seeking all-weather training grounds close to the village.

I would strongly oppose any residential development on the site as it would represent an expansion of Stevenage into the North Herts Green Belt, breaching the all important boundary of the railway line, thus setting a precedent for residential development west of the railway. Once the residential use is established on the site (albeit for retirement homes), should the leisure use fail in the future, it seems inevitable that the remainder of the site would fall to residential development. Any development west of the railway line increases coalescence between Stevenage and Knebworth.

In my opinion, the need to raise funds to upgrade the leisure centre does not constitute a case for Very Special Circumstances to allow the building of retirement homes in the Green Belt. The proposal appears to be straightforward 'enabling development' to support a commercial enterprise.

Current access to the site is from Old Park Lane via a steep embankment. Pedestrian access is difficult, especially for the elderly and there is no pavement from the B197. There would be serious highway implications if alternative access is taken directly from the B197 ¿ this is a fast and busy stretch of road unsuitable for turning in or out of a side road.

Complications would arise on boundary issues as to whether residents would be living in North Herts or Stevenage.

N.B. It appears that the analysis of this site in the 'Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment of Land Allocations Additional Suggested Sites Report on Appraisal Options' is flawed as it assumes the site is aligned to Knebworth whereas transport, utilities and school issues should relate to Stevenage. 0459 104 CPRE - The Hertfordshire Society Document Section :Site 54 Representation : Object This site is in the Green Belt. Its development for housing would extend the built-up area of Stevenage beyond the railway line and could set a precedent for further development in this direction. 0985 8 Trotman Document Section :Site 54 Representation : Object Site 54 Odyssey Health Centre, Old Knebworth Lane As a brownfield site it would be suitable for high quality retirement homes , for which there is a shortage of in the Knebworth area. 3950 69 Hertfordshire County Council - Historic Environment Document Section :Site 54 Representation : Comment Requirement for Pre-application or Pre-determination Archaeological Assessment

The sites below have known archaeological remains within them or have archaeological potential. We would therefore wish that - in accordance with Government policy in PPG 16 and the current draft PPS 15 - the LPA requests that pre-application or pre-determination archaeological assessments should be included within all development briefs and other proposals

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 54 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent for the sites, if they are formally adopted as development sites in the local development plan. Such assessment would, depending upon the size and location of the proposals, range in scope from additional desk-based research to more extensive archaeological field survey and evaluation. The purpose of the archaeological assessment would be to provide sufficient information about the archaeological resource and in particular the extent of archaeological remains worthy of preservation in situ, to enable the LPA to determine any specific application for development. 3952 52 Hertfordshire County Council - Passenger Transport Unit Document Section :Site 54 Representation : Comment Plot 54: Vehicle access to this plot is from Old Knebworth Lane, would be considered acceptable. Any new access from the B197 may have policy objections as this section of 'B' road is a traffic sensitive road. This site of this size is considered as a large development the application should be supported by a Transport Assessment, which sets out the transport implications of the development proposals and identify measures required to overcome any transport impact of the proposal. The scoping of the assessment should extend to the junctions within the villages of Knebworth and Codicote .

PTU; Plots 54 and 56. These sites would be within 400m of bus stops on London Rd, served by the 300/301 (Mon-Fri every 15 mins, Sat every 20 mins, Sun hourly), 379 Hertford-Stevenage (limited services), 44/45 Stevenage-Luton (Mon-Sat 2 hourly). The presence of major roads surrounding the sites may present barriers to pedestrian/cycle movement. Links to the pedestrian/cycle network within Stevenage would be necessary in order to promote the use of sustainable modes of transport. 4033 3 Simson Document Section :Site 54 Representation : Comment This is not a particularly attractive area and anything which is done which will improve the ambience would be welcome 4439 5 Kirk Document Section :Site 54 Representation : Support Support 4450 3 Laing Document Section :Site 54 Representation : Object Knebworth does not have the instracture to absorb further development, for example local roads are heavily congested at peak periods and the school is oversubscribed. Greenbelt exists to prevent sprawl and coallescence with surrounding towns/villages. I object on principle to greenbelt development, we cannot afford the steady erosion of it`s status, particularly In Herts. 5042 5 Richardson Document Section :Site 54 Representation : Object The site is outside the 'Excluded Village' boundary and within the Green Belt.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 54 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Whilst improvement to the facilities at the Heath Centre would of itself be beneficial for its users access to the site via the Old Knebworth Lane is restricted. Requests to improve the condition of the roadway appear to have been ignored.

It will be the same difficult access. An earlier application to create a vehicular access to the B197 has been refused, presumably on 'Highway' grounds.

Any Residential Home at the site will increase traffic flows with consequent increase in risks. A new 'Care Home' has just been constructed adjacent to the Roadbuck Motel on the north east side of the railway bridge.

Development of any description on the northern boundary of the Parish increases the prospect of coalescence with Stevenage. Knebworth wishes to remain a village and not become a suburb of the urban town.

The present limitations of infrastructure, water, swereage and roads apply to this site as much as to any other in Knebworth. Compounded as to roads by the B197 being the diversionary route when the A1 (M) is closed. 5046 5 Bantick Document Section :Site 54 Representation : Object Coalescence 5047 3 Bantick Document Section :Site 54 Representation : Support I only support this if a reasonable solution can be found for access to the site. Stevenage Road access is poor solution. 5119 2 Tomlinson Document Section :Site 54 Representation : Object The least unsuitable site is Site 54. 5183 3 Elliott Document Section :Site 54 Representation : Object Most have similar general problems regarding utilities a. water supply water table falling in Hertfordshire rivers drying up b. Sewage, existing arrangements in Lea Valley approaching limits. Still residential development in process of completion outstanding in Stevenage. c. Capacity of educational facilities firstly on the primary school currently located in Swangleys Lane. Will add to pressure on secondary places, which are not currently satisfactory. (Depends on density of proposed buildings) d. Road facilities most sites will add to current peak hour problems site 54 near an inadequate roudabout and proposal to extend Tesco supermarket. 5216 3 Carpenter Document Section :Site 54 Representation : Comment Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 54 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Development of this site may deprive local clubs and groups of scarce sports facilities. These fasilities are important as they offer an alternative to the near monopoly offered by NHDC. 5368 1 Aknai Document Section :Site 54 Representation : Support I support proposals to upgrade sports facilites at this site, with the provisos that: a more frequent and reliable bus service is provided; safer and better maintained cycle route is provided, to encourage individuals to access the facilities without the use of private cars. The current cycleway is poorly maintained, with vegetation and trees/shrubery growing onto the path, and too narrow for pedestrians and cycles to pass each other safely. I have no opinion either way on the residential home. 5422 3 Haigh Document Section :Site 54 Representation : Object Knebworth should not be expanded - we do not have the infrastructure to support it and we are in the green belt. 5434 3 Weaver Document Section :Site 54 Representation : Support This seems to be sensible use of the plot and subject to the appropriate infrastructure upgrades, I have no objections. 5497 3 Packman Document Section :Site 54 Representation : Support While I am in opposition to any development of Knebworth and the loss of green belt land separating Knebworth and Stevenage this site may well be the "least worst option". It doesn't impact directly on any other residents, would be of benefit to the community and because of its location wouldn't exacerbate the major problems with Knebworth i.e the constraints of the village such as congestion and sewerage. In addition this site has existing infrastructure in place and the full support of its owners to redevelop it potentially including a health centre for the local community. 5524 3 Lund Document Section :Site 54 Representation : Comment Whilst I feel that this is probably the best of the sites for Knebworth, it really is more Stevenage than Knebworth. I fear that we will be merging Knebworth into Stevenage by calling it Knebworth. There is already "knebworth Gate" - is this Knebworth ? Also, by stating that it will have improved sports and leisure facilities it sound like it would be used by residents of Knebworth. Its location would be such that a minority of Knebworth residents would utilise the facilities (as it is so far away) and it would be used, instead, by people living more locally in the Roebuck area. This is fine, but why call it Knebworth ? 6065 3 Norman Document Section :Site 54 Representation : Object I strongly object to any major development in the area as the infrastructure is already being threatened. Knebworth could not and should not accept any major housing developments as the influx of families would necessitate the building of more schools, which in turn would require more families to justify its existence. The roads are hardly able to cope with the traffic presently and this particularly applies to Watton Road, which is used as the only practicable way from the A602 to the A1M for many Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 54 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent people. 6279 3 Morris Document Section :Site 54 Representation : Comment On reviewing the additional proposed sites in and around Knebworth, I wish to make the following comments:- 1. Knebworth is a village. If the proposed expansion takes place, this will join Knebworth to Stevenage in the north and Woolmer Green in the south. 2. The roads which run in and around Knebworth are already extremely busy, any expansion in any direction would put more pressure on the already congested village centre. 3. The Doctors Surgery in Knebworth is already busy. I do not believe that this surgery could take any more patients, as it is very difficult to get an appointment with the number of patients it has now. 4. I have no school age children of my own, but I understand that the school is well oversubscribed and even if you live in the village of Knebworth it is no guarantee that your children will get into the village school. More houses being built would apply more pressure to this problem. In short, I believe that any development, which expands on the boundary of Knebworth would be detrimental to Knebworth village. On top of these points these sites are GREEN BELT, this should mean they stay GREEN. 6378 1 Bland Document Section :Site 54 Representation : Support I have no objection to site 54 which is already used for recreation. 6490 2 Mensah Document Section :Site 54 Representation : Support The proposed odyssey site is on brown belt and some considerable distance from the hart of the village so would limit any affect.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 0046 19 Tubb-Wallace D H Turner Consultancy Ltd Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Comment We refer to our representations on 29 October 2007 and 16 March 2008 on the Core Strategy and Development Policies Preferred Options Consultation and the Land Allocations - Issues and Options Consultations respectively. These representations were summarised and distributed, by you, under reference 05/0046. However, we would wish to highlight the following:- Knebworth is the largest village in North Hertfordshire District (NHD) with over 5,000 population and in line with Government policy should meet its own affordable housing needs. 2. Knebworth is the most sustainable village in NHD with station, shops, library, post office, doctor's surgery, primary school and many other facilities. 3. Additional investment is urgently needed to improve and maintain all of the existing the facilities and to maintain the vitality and sustainability of the community. 4. Knebworth should be allowed to grow a modest amount to take advantage of the existing facilities. 5. Knebworth's estimate for proportional growth within the plan period requires 178 dwellings on greenfield sites. 6. Sites 55, 57 and 58 are those, which are least constrained and such constraints as do exist can be readily overcome with the appropriate investment by improving the primary school and drainage infrastructure. All our earlier representations still apply but we hope the above is helpful by way of summary. 0077 14 Knebworth Parish Council Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object Development of site 52-58 would result in growth which Knebworth village cannot take. The sites identified have the following problems:

Site 55 Land North of Old Lane Watton Road is a narrow road with significant east-west traffic during rush hour and is also used for parking, leaving only room for single file traffic. There are also major problems with the sewerage system along this road. In heavy rainfall sewage floods some properties. The site is therefore not suitable for housing but might accommodate a doctor's surgery. 0347 15 Brookes Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object General Comments:

I oppose development on all five of the suggested sites abounding Knebworth village (52, 53, 55, 57 and 58). I also oppose sites 54 and 56 which represent expansion of Stevenage.

Whilst acknowledging that Knebworth is a 'sustainable hub' in terms of its transport links and local facilities and that some limited expansion may, in the long term, be the key to it retaining its independence as a thriving village community rather than becoming a satellite or suburb of Stevenage, there are serious infrastructure constraints which preclude consideration of even minor expansion at the present time. These constraints relate to the provision of primary and secondary school places, lack of capacity and suitable 'future proof' premises for the GP surgery, parking and congestion/traffic issues, water supply and sewerage.

Suggestions that mitigation of these constraints could be achieved by 'improving the schools and social infrastructure' are unrealistic. There is no easy way to expand the primary school which is already one of the biggest in Hertfordshire . Parents are likely to strongly resist the notion of a super-primary school with a 3-form intake. Secondary school provision is a contentious issue for many Knebworth families with no obvious solution, other than to move away. Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent

Likewise, there are no obvious solutions to the parking, congestion and rat-run problems which would be compounded by the provision of more housing around the village.

There are possible options for resolving the provision of a new GP surgery in the medium term but this would be subject to adequate funding. There is no apparent source of funds at present.

Sewerage and water constraints will no doubt be resolved at some point in the future but possibly not within the next ten years.

All 7 proposed sites in Knebworth Parish are in the Green Belt where housing development would be contrary to current local and national planning policy.

Site 55 Land North of Old Lane, Knebworth

Significant impact on coalescence with Stevenage. Pedestrian and traffic access dangerous onto Watton Road at this point. Although not a formal Right of Way, there is a pathway along the western boundary (between Watton Road and Old Lane) which has been used by locals for many years. It also provides access to the allotments. This is not shown on the map. Relatively high landscape value - views in and out of the village valued by residents. Possible potential for provision of community facilities*. 0459 105 CPRE - The Hertfordshire Society Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object This site is in the Green Belt on the edge of the village. It is grade 3 agricultural land, in use for agricultural purposes. 0985 9 Trotman Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object Site 55 Land North of Old Lane, Knebworth The weaknesses shown on the site map are paramount. Development of the site would impose traffic problems onto Watton Road and into the village. Watton Road to Bragbury is already a 'rat-run' for commuters and others from Stevenage, increasing parking problems for Knebworth. 3950 71 Hertfordshire County Council - Historic Environment Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Comment Requirement for Pre-application or Pre-determination Archaeological Assessment

The sites below have known archaeological remains within them or have archaeological potential. We would therefore wish that - in accordance with Government policy in PPG 16 and

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent the current draft PPS 15 - the LPA requests that pre-application or pre-determination archaeological assessments should be included within all development briefs and other proposals for the sites, if they are formally adopted as development sites in the local development plan. Such assessment would, depending upon the size and location of the proposals, range in scope from additional desk-based research to more extensive archaeological field survey and evaluation. The purpose of the archaeological assessment would be to provide sufficient information about the archaeological resource and in particular the extent of archaeological remains worthy of preservation in situ, to enable the LPA to determine any specific application for development. 3952 53 Hertfordshire County Council - Passenger Transport Unit Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Comment Plot 55: One of the suitable vehicle accesses to this plot is from Watton Road, which would be considered acceptable if the access to the plot was located centrally along the frontage to take advantage of maximising the vehicle to vehicle inter visibility. The applicant would have control of the land to each side of the proposed junction. This however would have to meet the safety requirements of Manual for Streets. Another feasible vehicle access could be from Old Lane. Some widening along this Lane would be required. This site of this size is considered as a large development the application should be supported by a Transport Assessment, which sets out the transport implications of the development proposals and identify measures required to overcome any transport impact of the proposal. The scoping of the assessment should extend to the junctions within the villages of Knebworth and Hertford Road in Stevenage. 3963 3 Welwyn and Hatfield District Council Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Comment * Development on the edges of the village of Knebworth would be contrary to the aim of the North Hertfordshire Core Strategy Preferred Options Paper (September 2007) for the following reasons:

It would undermine the spatial strategy which seeks to locate growth in accordance with the settlement hierarchy. Within the settlement hierarchy, the village of Knebworth is identified as a larger village where development only within the boundary of the settlement is allowed. The additional suggested sites are outside of the boundary of the village of Knebworth and their development would therefore be contrary to the spatial strategy as set out in Core Policies C and F.

* The analysis for Knebworth at paragraph 3.64 of the Core Strategy Preferred Options paper identifies that there are infrastructure constraints notably the primary school which is operating close to capacity.

* In addition, sewage capacity at Rye Meads is constrained. The East of England Capacity Study identifies significant capacity difficulties at Rye Meads sewage treatment works which serves much of the north of Welwyn Hatfield, as well as Knebworth and Codicote, and other areas proposed for new housing developments within the East of England.

* Development of the five sites promoted around the edge of Knebworth would erode the very narrow bands of countryside which separate Knebworth from surrounding settlements. All the sites are open and exposed where development would be highly visible.

Sequentially preferable sites were identified within the boundary of Knebworth in the land allocations issues and options paper (January 2008).

The SA/SEA identified that sites 52, 53, 55, 57 and 58: Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent * Do not meet SA objective 2(a) to minimise development of greenfield land and other land with high environmental and amenity value. The sites are all green field and agricultural land grade 3.

* Do not meet SA objective 3(d) to reduce pollution from any source. The sites are all situated in a source protection zone.

* Do not meet SA objective 6(a) to use natural resources efficiently.

* There is uncertainly regarding the sites ability to meet objective 2(c), to deliver more sustainable location patterns and reduce the use of motor vehicles. This is due to capacity constraints at the primary school, resulting in additional trips to other schools.

* In addition there is uncertainty regarding objective 5(a), to share the benefits of prosperity fairly. Due to constraints on schools and social infrastructure.

The SA for site 58, objective 2(c) on page 183 appears to have a typo in the classification, it shows a v and the others are ?/v. 4033 4 Simson Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object My understanding was that in a previous exercise NHDC established that Knebworth did not have the infrastructure to support expansion. The only thing which appears to have changed is that people with land would like to sell it for development. We are a village with a sense of community and a distinct settlement. The Green Belt surrounding us serves as an amenity which enhances the quality of life of both Knebworth residents and those who live in neighbouring settlements . It also includes agricultural land, at a premium for our food security. It further separates us from other settlements and other settlements from us. Expansion of Knebworth endangers it into growing into a town. The people who live here, many of whom have lived here all their lives, do so because they wish to live in a village which is sustainable as a village and not in a town. 4196 1 Davey Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object Knebworth is already too congested and any development will exacerbate the traffic problem further. The B197 already comes to a standstill when there is a bus or heavy vehicle travelling in either direction. Watton Road is always slow moving and congested and as a result both Swangleys Lane and St Martins Road are used as a ratrun to and from Stevenage via Old Lane. The fact that vehicles are precluded from turning from Old Lane into Watton Road and vice versa is habitually ignored making Old Lane dangerous to walk along for adults let alone children. Ther is only access to site 55 via Old Lane and Watton Road and these are totally unsuitable for any increase in traffic. The village school is already filled to capacity and some children now have to be transported to schools further away. At the moment Knebworth is surrounded by greenbelt and this prevents encroachment from Stevenage and Welwyn Hatfield and this situation represents one of the main assets of the village. 4439 4 Kirk Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object Use of Greenbelt. Danger of linkage to Datchworth. 4450 4 Laing Document Section :Site 55 Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Representation : Object I object on principle to green belt development. It exists to prevent sprawl and coalescence with nearby towns/villages, in this case Stevenage. We cannot in this County afford it`s steady erosion.

Knebworth does not have the infrastructure to support additional housing. For example it`s roads are heavily congested particularly at rush hour and the school is oversubscribed. 4524 1 Johnson Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object The three weaknesses listed on your proposal are reasons enough to reject this site. However, there is one other of which you should be aware. Our property borders on the north-west corner of site 55 and has been flooded 3 times in the last 10 month. For verification, contact Thames Water to whom all incidents were reported. Does this not make it unsuitable for sustainable urban drainage systems? I whole heartedly oppose this suggestion. 4701 1 Sleator Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Comment Developing on this land will be a major step toward merging Knebworth with Stevenage . This Green Belt land acts as an effective rural break between the two towns, protecting Knebworth's distinct identity from it's bigger, sprawling neighbour. As a relative newcomer to the area, I have often been struck by how fiercely Knebworth residents insist upon maintaining their village identity. Even the Knebworth signs on the roads into the village are built from stout brick ¿ not the usual metal or wood place name signs normally found in surrounding areas. Residents tell me that they feel a very strong sense of heritage and pride at coming from Knebworth. I often see it expressed clearly during social events in the Village Hall when many people go to great lengths to make it clear that they live in Knebworth, not Stevenage. It's not snobbery. Nor do they dislike the bigger town. It's just that they love the close community, friendly, village feel to Knebworth and want to do all that they can to protect such a rare commodity. Building on Green Belt land between the two towns will inevitably make Knebworth's chances of survival virtually impossible. Despite developers claims it is certain that further development along the same line will quickly follow and Knebworth will swiftly become a mere suburb of Stevenage, probably within the next 10 years. 4702 1 Dyster Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object General I am far from satisfied that there is a need for new housing developments in Stevenage and North Herts on the scale envisaged in the Government targets. Water supplies in the area are already under great pressure and this must be a severe obstacle militating against development in this area - please refer to the article on page 3 of the Comet newspaper of 3 September. Developments in Knebworth Knebworth already has a severe traffic and parking problem which remains unresolved. Any new residential development will make the situation worse still. Before any new housing sites were to be agreed traffic issues must be resolved . Site 55 I object to this site being developed for the following reasons: Loss of open greenfield land and further urbanisation of Knebworth

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Water supply problems as above. Severe problems for road traffic access. Tendency towards linking built up areas of Knebworth and Stevenage. Loss of rural outlook for residents of Watton Road, Old Lane and St. Martin's Road. Site 58 I object to this site being developed for the following reasons: Loss of open greenfield land and further urbanisation of Knebworth Water supply problems as above. Problems for road traffic access. Would radically reduce the gap between the built up areas of Knebworth and Stevenage. Loss of rural outlook for residents of Watton Road, Oakfields Road and Oakfields Avenue. 4806 1 Grainger Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object I oppose this site being considered for several reasons : 1. I object to houses being built on Green Belt land 2. This development would start the encroachment of Knebworth into Bragbury End and ultimately Stevenage. 3. Watton Road is unsuited to the volume of traffic it carries at the moment. 4. The exit to London Road/Stevenage Road would I predict become blocked constantly. The road cannot be widened because of the existing housing. 5. This site would mean many houses being built and people living near to the electricity substation and mast. 6. The JMI school does not have the capacity to take more local children. 7. There is a very large deep water supply pipe running through this field (from Stevenage to Datchworth) - can this be built on? 8. This land is privately owned and would profit the Wallace family. This contrasts with Knebworth Estates proposed sites, which if chosen 100% of the proceeds would go to Parish Charities. 9. Education, sewerage, healthcare, parking are all major issues for the village and any increase in housing will greatly affect the pressure on the limited services. 4869 1 Haller Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object I contend that there is already too much traffic on Watton Road (especially large vehicles) going to and from Bragbury End and Poplars area of Stevenage, and with the Pumping Station, electricity area and especially the Crematorium, it makes further development in area 55 unsuitable. At peak times the road is gridlocked and in winter frequent accidents are caused on the bends and junction with Old Lane. Old Lane is only a single track. The field (55) has a hollow and with heavy rain is flooded. There used to be a stream running into the next field, and therefore making the area unsuitable for building I would think. Knebworth is no longer a village because of traffic problems, and people go to Stevenage for convenience - I have lived here in the same house for over 50 years! 4870 1 Haller Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object Knebworth was originally a pleasant village, and should be kept as such, and the Green belt retained. Don't let it become another Stevenage! 4871 65 Smith Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object I object to all sites that alter the Green Belt boundary. I object to the loss of agricultural land for the following reasons: Food security is now a national priority; Open green spaces are a valuable amenity for all; This country has been in breach of European bio-diversity regulations for the past six years; A survey of rare and endangered species needs to be undertaken; Fields are necessary for water management. 5024 3 Fairclough Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object There is flooding on this site causing run off to adjcent properties. Tubb-Wallace has put this site forward but appears to have little desire to develop it. Access is Watton Road which is a narrow lane with existing traffic problems including those associated with the Crematorium. 5042 4 Richardson Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object The site is outside the 'Excluded Village' boundary and within the Green Belt.

The site is bounded by the narrowest of lanes. Old Lane, which is partly 'One Way' to the south and east and by a slightly wider road to the north.

Watton Road is already heavily used, despite 'sleeping policemen' to the west of the Bell Close turning, by commuters to and from Stevenage and significantly by funeral cortege and other visitors to the Crematorium.

This area envelopes the water pumping station in Watton Road. For that reason alone no development should be permitted. With the present excessive abstraction of water there is insufficient for current purposes therefore none to supply additional properties.

The present sewerage system is also inadequate.

If site 58 were to be developed the problems with 55 would be increased!

This site is wholly inappropriate for development of any kind.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 5046 4 Bantick Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object Greenfield Site. 5047 4 Bantick Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object Massive constraints on utilities - sewerage especially. Lack of capacity for primary school. Greenfield site. 5109 3 Joyce Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Comment Again for the same reasons raised against site 58 - see below:

The proposed site is clearly unsuitable for development for the following reasons:

The road infrastructure is not able to sustain such a large development - Watton Road itself has both speed humbs, and directional control. As increase in volume would be ill advised. Again, as the road continues away from the village, it becomes more a winding country lane, which is manageable at present, but further volume would be sustainable, and lead to accidents.

Drainage, sewage, gas, electric, and water supplies would also cause a huge and unsustainable demand on the residents in that area. 5134 2 Aldrich Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object We moved to Knebworth ONE MONTH AGO, from the Great Ashby end of Stevenage (Shells Manor). Having lived there 8 years we watched Great Ashby grow into the unattractive 'concrete jungle' that it now is. Greasley Way, along which we lived, WAS a quiet road when we moved in, but is now a constant stream of traffic - a very busy road due to the Great Ashby housing. We moved to Knebworth to escape the building site that is Great Ashby. I wanted to be able to leave my windows open at night and be able to sleep in peace, something we could never do before . Having spent hundreds of thousands of pounds moving to our house in St Martins Road, Knebworth, I am HORRIFIED to hear you proposal to turn Knebworth into a mini Great Ashby. I would never have moved here if I had known this, and will be investigating why our search didn't show this up. Our house is our investment for the future, our pension. If this development is allowed to happen, house prices will fall. We moved here precisely for the fields, and the landscapes, which are being taken away from Stevenage, and to get away from all the new housing estates, the social housing (and the problems which always comes with that). We want to live in an old, established, reputable village with surrounding fields.

Living in St MArtins Road, we will be directly affected by proposed sites 55 and 58. (Not that I want Knebworth developed on at all.) The country road (Watton Road), along which you plan to build, is an over used 'cut through' from Bragbury End to Knebworth, and isn't designed to cope with the traffic currently using it! I don't imagine expanding/improving the roads features in you plans, they never are. You are happy to throw up as many houses as you can squeeze onto a field but you never improve the facilities which need to go with all the extra people you bring to an area - mainly the roads. Our road is a PRIVATE road, which WE have to contribute to the upkeep of. I take it that means I, and my neighbours, can refuse to let our road become a 'rat run', which of course it would be if these ludicrous plans were granted?? I certainly would not pay for the wear and tear caused by hundreds of cars that would

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent use our road every day. I would fight for gates (or some other obstruction) to be erected at either end of the road.

The village school is currently oversubscribed, I can't even get my younger children in and I live across the road from it. The traffic through the parade of shops is a nightmare most of the time, so I shudder to think what the extra traffic would do to the village. It would bring the village to complete gridlock. These proposals would kill this lovely village and will turn it into a 'Supervillage'. I for one cannot let this village become 'Knebbury End'. If, god forbid, you are given permission to build on these proposed sites around Knebworth, this will pave the way for further fields to be put forward for development proposals and so on and so on, thus spreading like a disease and eventually joining Knebworth to Stevenage which cannot happen. KEEP YOUR DEVELOPING TO GREAT ASHBY AND STEVENAGE (YOUR SUPERTOWNS!). 5163 4 The Fairfield Partnership JB Planning Associates - TW Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object Site 55, 05/0046, Land North of Old Lane, Knebworth 1. We object to this site, and believe that it would be an inappropriate allocation for residential development because it would have a detrimental effect on the character and setting of the village, and would represent an incursion into open countryside which is not currently related to the built form of the village. It also has the potential to exacerbate traffic congestion around the High Street. Grounds for Objection 2. Site 55 covers more than 4.19 Ha, an area which at a modest development density of 35 dwellings per hectare would deliver almost 150 dwellings, close to the centre of the village. This would be a significant extension to the village of Knebworth, which would be likely to exacerbate congestion within the village centre. The site is also located in a sensitive part of the landscape which surrounds the village . Scale of Development 3. While the scale of development, at around 150 dwellings, may not be too large for the village as a whole, we are concerned about the suitability of Site 55 due to its location. Development in this location would be very close to the High Street, and it will be necessary to demonstrate that the junction between Watton Road and the High Street is adequate to accommodate such a level of additional traffic. 4. The roads at the centre of the village, particularly the narrow High Street, currently suffer from severe congestion at peak periods, to which there is no obvious solution. A development of 150 dwellings on a site very close to this would be likely to exacerbate the current problems. Landscape Character 5. An independent Landscape Assessment was carried out by CSa Environmental Planning in January 2009. This considered the potential impact that residential development would have on various sites around Knebworth, including this one. With regard to the area covered by Site 55, the Assessment concluded: 'The site lies in a prominent, highly visible location with widespread views from the surrounding countryside. The gently undulating landform of the site is typical of the wider countryside and development on this site would be intrusive.' 6. It is clear from this comment that the development of Site 55 would be a significant incursion into the open countryside which surrounds Knebworth, and would also harm the character and setting of the village. 5183 4 Elliott Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object Most have similar general problems regarding utilities a. water supply water table falling in Hertfordshire rivers drying up Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent b. Sewage, existing arrangements in Lea Valley approaching limits. Still residential development in process of completion outstanding in Stevenage. c. Capacity of educational facilities firstly on the primary school currently located in Swangleys Lane. Will add to pressure on secondary places, which are not currently satisfactory. (Depends on density of proposed buildings) d. Road facilities most sites will add to current peak hour problems site 54 near an inadequate roudabout and proposal to extend Tesco supermarket. 5194 1 Sprigge Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Comment The plan fails to show road names. There is not mention of lack of secondary school provision. Nor the lack of a doctors surgery when the current one closes. 5201 1 Game Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object 1. The green-belt site is accessed by 2 lanes. Watton Road (a country windy lane) is narrow, unlit, without pavements and totally unsuitable for the amount of traffic it now carries - especially with the extra burden of several large funeral processions each day. There is also very poor drainage and the field/road flood each time there is a heavy down pour.

2. Old lane is even narrower and was made one-way due to the danger of anything more than light traffic using it. Though every day several drivers endanger lives by making illegal turns out of the road. This too floods heavily due to there being a positive stram there many years ago.

3. Both lanes are now used as rat runs as people traverse hertfordshire due to the inefficient A1M. Several near misses and accidents happen each year and further developments would cause chaos . Heavey lorries bringing building materials in and out would be hazordous.

4. The field had a path which crosses it and is walked,jogged and cycled every day by several families. It is a retreat to relieve stresses from the every-day hustle of life and promotes physical and mental well being.

5.The field has a main sewage pipe which runs across it up towards Datchworth - this facility is already at capacity and being at a shallow depth and is not able to take developmental weight .

6. Any new build won't blend with the area of the current detached houses which date back to Edwardian times, losing the character of an old village - already the largest in Herts - when does it become a town? Any development should reflect the character of the settlement it adjoins.

7. The field supports a diverse range of wildlife - families of pheasants/ badgers/foxes and bats roost in the trees on the edge of the pumping station/field. Natural England protect bats and their environment for good reason.

8. Knebworth is currently at capacity - the school is full, the doctors are full, the sewers are full and the roads are congested.

9. The B197 through the village is the main A1M relief road and any accidents on it causes major congestion within the village and the same for the A602 from Stevenage. A gridlock ensues. There are already tailbacks in all direction for two hours each day.

10. Knebworth is currently as safe village to bring up a family and a sudden influx of people will change that, possibly increasing crime and anti-socail behaviour.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 11. The village currently has it's own identity as a village and many residents chose to live here because of those qualities - the potential development expands towards the borders of Stevenage. Soon Knebworth will become a suburb of another town.

12. A large part of the site is surrounded by mature trees which would all be lost during substantail developments.

13. Any major development would kill the High Street as huge lorries and builders vehicles will further clog the congested roads and passing trade will not stop and use the shops.

14.The potential site is unsuitable, overbearing, threatens road safety, endangers wildlife, creates drainage problems, increases noise and light pollution, puts added pressure on the already stretched amenities such as schools, doctors, sewers and electrical sub-station.

Knebworth is an historic village that should be preserved. 5216 4 Carpenter Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Comment The consequences of overcoming the limitations of local services, eg roads, sewers, schools, water supply, gas supply would be extremely disruptive and damaging to the local environment. Increased traffic congestion being of an ongoing nature raises the probability of future road improvement schemes further damaging the local environment in future. 5220 3 Harris Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object Knebworth is already a "big" village. We don't want it to be a town. This is all GREEN BELT land. NHDC has already accepted that the local infrastructure won't support a higher population. Looking at the position of the proposed site, it is difficult to see how sensible road access can be provided either for construction traffic or for final residents. 5247 1 Game Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object Knebworth is already a hugely populated and heavily constrained village that does not need further pressure putting on its facilities.

1. This green-belt site is accessed by 2 lanes. Watton Road is a narrow country winding lane and totally unsuitable for the amount of traffic it now carries and has cars parked on both sides near the congested High Street. The area has poor drainage and floods easily.

2. Old lane is even narrower and was made one-way due to the danger of anything more than light traffic using it. Every day several drivers endanger lives by making illegal turns out of and into the road. This too floods heavily due to there being a positive stream at one end many years ago.

3. Both lanes are now used as rat runs as people traverse Hertfordshire due to the current congestion. Several near misses and accidents happen each year and further developments would cause chaos . Heavy lorries bringing building materials in and out would be hazardous and further congestion.

4. The field has a path which crosses it and is walked, jogged and cycled every day by several families. It is a retreat to relieve stresses from the every-day hustle of life and promotes Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent physical and mental well being. Many people chose to live in a village so they can enjoy this kind of benefit.

5.The field has a main sewage pipe which runs across it up towards Datchworth - this facility is already at capacity and being at a shallow depth is not able to take developmental weight.

6. Any new build would not blend with the area of the current detached houses which date back to Edwardian times, losing the character of an old village - already the largest in Herts - when does it become a town? Any development should reflect the character of the settlement it adjoins .

7. The field supports a diverse range of wildlife.

8. Knebworth is currently at capacity - the school is full, the doctors are full, the sewers are full and the roads are congested.

9. The B197 through the village is the main A1M relief road and any accidents on it causes major congestion within the village and the same goes for the A602 from Stevenage. A gridlock ensues. There are already tailbacks in all direction for two hours each day.

10. Knebworth is currently a safe village to bring up a family and a sudden influx of people could change that.

11. The village currently has it's own identity as a village and many residents chose to live here because of those qualities - the potential development expands towards the borders of Stevenage. Are we prepared for coalescence with Stevenage? NO we are a village and should remain as one. 5415 1 Poole Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object Knebworth facilities are already overstretched. The school is full, the doctors' surgery is at capacity and traffic congestion is a huge problem.

The proposed development would necessitate using narrow lanes, as well as a private road with no pavements, for lorries to reach the site.

The sewerage system would need to be updated to accommodate the extra capacity.

Old Lane has a problem with flooding. It was made one-way several years ago because of the danger of accessing Watton Road and this has never been satisfactory as many motorists ignore the "no left turn" and "no right turn" signs.

It would appear that the proposed development is being driven by landowners who are anxious to obtain some financial gain with total disregard to the detrimental effect on village life. 5422 4 Haigh Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object Knebworth should not be expanded - we do not have the infrastructure to support it and we are in the green belt. 5431 1 Stringer Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 1. The site is currently Green belt and the only access is via two very narrow country lanes

The first of these, Watton Road, is an extremely narrow country lane which, for many years, has been used by people from the South of Stevenage who want to gain access to the B197 and thus to Welwyn Garden City and the A1(M). It is unsuitable for the current level of traffic, let alone any increase to this level. Once it enters the village there is parking on both sides of the road, right up to the extremely congested High Street.

The other, Old Lane, is a classic country lane, access to which was closed (from Watton Road) a few years ago as it too was being used as a cut-through by high levels of traffic, wishing to avoid Knebworth village centre. This took the traffic down a road past the local primary school, just at a time when children were arriving for school.

Even with existing levels of traffic, both lanes are extremely dangerous and construction traffic (in the short term) and additional traffic from housing (in the longer term) would merely add to this problem. Drivers, still wishing to use the rat run regularly make illegal U-turns to access Old Lane.

2. The additional development would not blend in with the current village character of Knebworth, which is why most residents choose to live here. Knebworth is already a densely populated village and residents do not want to the village being absorbed into Greater Stevenage.

3. The proposed site contains a range of different wildlife. 4. Local residents use the proposed site for walking, jogging, cycling and other leisure activities. The ability to enjoy these activities is one of the reasons most people moved into the village.

5. The village is already at full capacity. The doctors and dentists list are full and the village primary and infant school is full.

6. The High Street is regularly congested every morning and evening with traffic streaming South towards Welwyn Garden City and North towards Stevenage. In addition, it is the main designated relief road in the event of any problems on the A1(M) and is regularly used by traffic wishing to avoid the motorway.

7. Some years ago a major sewage pipe was sunk across the field, at a shallow depth and it would not take heavy construction plant and additional long-term traffic.

8. The importance of village life is an important aspect of rural life in Britain and the people of the village do not want to see the continued encroachment of Stevenage.

9. The fact that the site is within 800m of the centre of the village has been cited as an advantage. In our opinion for the reasons given above this is a distinct weakness. 5434 6 Weaver Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object My objections to this site are as follows: 1. the continued growth in Knebworth is changing its character for the worse and turning it from a village into a small town; 2. growing the boundaries of Knebworth and reducing the green belt separation from Stevenage increases the risk of coallescence and becoming a suburb of Stevenage; 3. The infrastructure including roads, water, drains and the primary school are already overwhelmed and any further development should not take place without the infrastructure upgrades being made first; 4. Watton Road is already congested during rush hour, as is the junction with the High Street (London Road) and increasing the traffic flow will be detrimental to the character of the village and for those residents currently living in Watton Road.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 5442 1 Jefferies Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object This site encroaches on the narrow green belt around Knebworth.

The available vehicular access is onto either a narrow and fast main road (Watton Road)or onto a much narrower lane with high banks accessed through narrow residential roads.

Knebworth High Street is frequently blocked due to the high volume of traffic using it.

Knebworth Primary School is at capacity. Further residential development means that in future children would have to travel out of the village for primary education adding to the traffic congestion.

The rural views and peaceful environment currently enjoyed by residents on St Martins Road will be seriously affected by development of this site. 5455 2 Harrison Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object Consider the road sitatuation of this site: to the east is the A602 in Stevenage - often blocked with long queues particularly in rush hour times - and to the west, the High Street of Knebworth - almost always congested with cars/lorries/buses having to crawl along sometimes not being able to pass safely.

Add to that the inadequacy of Watton Road which already has calming measures and severe parking issues.

Then why would anybody want to live in new houses between these two bottlenecks?

Electricity substations are generally not considered good for the health of the population. There is one adjacent to this land.

Whether other infrastructure services are adequate, no doubt the authorities providing those can explain the implications.

There is no advantage to Knebworth in increasing its size. It would however contribute to the loss of identity within the village community. It is also a step towards integrating the village into Stevenage - denied on the website but even that denial suggests that is on the agenda somewhere.

This is not about numbers and theories but people and the quality of their lives within a community. 5455 3 Harrison Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object I write to oppose vigorously the proposals to develop the "land north of Old Lane Knebworth" (55) and "land north of Watton Road Knebworth" (58). Knebworth is a village striving to retain its identity. These proposed site developments (and the other 5 sites) threaten this community. Destroying community life and identity should be a major consideration. The road network is incapable of taking more traffic. Watton Road already has calming measures and, in the mornings especially, is a bottleneck. It is not possible to move the houses to Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent create wider roads. Cars are usually parked along the length of the road - mostly, I understand, for commuters using the station. At weekends, the situation becomes much worse at the Bell Close end through users of the excellent recreation ground facility parking or dropping/collecting people. Looking at the wider picture these sites are situated between the A602 and the Knebworth High Street. The A602 is blocked with long queues at certain times, mostly rush-hour. The High Street in Knebworth is normally congested during the day with cars, lorries and buses often having to crawl along or wait because there is not enough room for them to pass. Knebworth is already close to Bragbury End/Stevenage and either of these proposed developments would narrow that gap and possibly make a seamless join more likely in the future. This is not in either community's interests. It would add to the burden of the Stevenage authorities and diminish the identity of the Knebworth community as discussed above. On the website, there is a reference saying that "this consultation [does not] include any sites related to any potential growth of Stevenage". That would strongly suggest that such growth is anticipated. At that point, it will be too easy a step to cover the last area of clear ground. The proposed development would remove Green Belt land. This is always highly regrettable. At some point there were good reasons why it was designated as Green Belt. Why those reasons are no longer considered relevant should be made clear. Why this number of houses is needed in this area is cleverly shrouded in a degree of mystery. Perhaps there would be more support if that was made clear - and just saying "the government says so" is useless and guaranteed to increase antagonism. It needs to be related to the needs of those who are trying to make a life for themselves. May reason prevail and these proposals be abandoned. 5460 1 Dickson Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object The proposed development of this agricultural land (site 55) for residential purposes would encroach on green belt land an represents a significant encroachment of Knebworth towards Bragbury End. This would remove a valuable open space resource. The local road supporting this site is inadequate for the extra traffic that would be produced by additional housing. There is an electricity sub-station within the proposed area. The extra housing would have a significant adverse effect on the quality of life of the existing local residents. 5462 1 Norman Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object I object strongly to any plans to build on this site.

Access to the area would be by only two lanes, Watton Road and St Martins Road. These are linked only by Old Lane which is a narrow winding lane where minor accidents occur on a regular basis and serious accidents are a potential risk. Watton Road is already a congested road with parking on both sides and traffic calming in place. It is already used as a "rat run" by people from S.Stevenage wishing to use Knebworth to access the A1(M) and the Station. St Martins Road is used similarly by people from Datchworth to access the village and the Station. At School time and well into the morning Knebworth village becomes heavily congested and already presents dangers to children on their way to school. Buses struggle to pass between the parked vehicles and Lowe's customers cause similar obstructions. During the evening rush hour vehicles are tailed back as far as Woolmer Green and the village is almost impassable. To allow more housing on this field would increase the congestion to an unacceptable level.

The B197 is the only diversion route when there is an accident or traffic problem on the A1(M) When this occurs the High Street becomes grid-locked and this would escalate enormously were there to be even more people living in the village and, in particular, on this Site.

The field has a footpath which is used by walkers, joggers and dog-walkers so is, in effect, a place of pleasurable leisure relaxation and activity, as well as a natural habitat for much wildlife . It also has a shallowly laid main sewage pipe which would not take the weight of construction machinery or buildings.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent The houses in both Watton Road and St Martins Road are old and full of character. Building new homes would destroy the character of this area and detract from these properties.

We do not need more people in Knebworth. It is a village to which many people have moved many years ago in search of a peaceful village way of life. It has already grown to its full capacity over recent years with various small housing estate having been added. The School, the Doctors' Surgery and the Dentists' Surgeries are full to capacity but Knebwroth remains sustainable as it is and has much history which would disappear with the addition of more housing. We do not want to live in a Town! We chose Knebworth because it is a village and that is what it should remain! 5468 3 Onyett Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object I do not agree to the proposed additional housing to be built on this land because: - it is green field land - I do not believe the local infrastructure (eg roads, sewerage etc) will support the increased load due to the extra housing - the village primary school is already over-subscribed - it will fundamentally change the nature of the village, making it less like the village which we chose to live in 5469 3 Onyett Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object I do not agree to the proposed additional housing to be built on this land because: - it is green field land - I do not believe the local infrastructure (eg roads, sewerage etc) will support the increased load due to the extra housing - the village primary school is already over-subscribed - it will fundamentally change the nature of the village, making it less like the village which we chose to live in 5480 3 Haller Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object Of the possible sites for development around Knebworth site 55 whilst offering a pleasant position for residents on the newly developed site, it is however severely restricted by realistically offering only a single access point onto Watton Road, a road that is already overused by local traffic with long queue regularly occurring in rush hour.

Nevertheless, whilst it is argued that Knebworth, as North Herts largest village offers the best facilities (train station, shops, primary school) and thus it should be allowed to grow to a modest degree, I believe that for these reasons it should not.

My reasons succinctly for this are;

1. The rails station is oversubscribed with insufficient parking 2. The Primary school is bursting and oversubscribed with even village children being unable to get place. 3. The road structure of the village is even insufficient for current traffic levels with, particularly at rush hours there being jams along London Road/Stevenage Road and long queues along Watton Road. 4. As NHDCs largest village any further expansion may well result in Knebworth being a small town and thus loose its village feel. Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent

Finally and most importantly, all of the presently proposed sites (52, 53, 55, 57 & 58) are presently Green Belt land and should be allowed to remain so, for the reasons that the designation of Green Belt was originally created. 5483 3 Haller Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object Of the possible sites for development around Knebworth site 55 whilst offering a pleasant position for residents on the newly developed site, it is however severely restricted by realistically offering only a single access point onto Watton Road, a road that is already overused by local traffic with long queue regularly occurring in rush hour.

Nevertheless, whilst it is argued that Knebworth, as North Herts largest village offers the best facilities (train station, shops, primary school) and thus it should be allowed to grow to a modest degree, I believe that for these reasons it should not.

My reasons succinctly for this are;

1. The rails station is oversubscribed with insufficient parking 2. The Primary school is bursting and oversubscribed with even village children being unable to get place. 3. The road structure of the village is even insufficient for current traffic levels with, particularly at rush hours there being jams along London Road/Stevenage Road and long queues along Watton Road. 4. As NHDCs largest village any further expansion may well result in Knebworth being a small town and thus loose its village feel.

Finally and most importantly, all of the presently proposed sites (52, 53, 55, 57 & 58) are presently Green Belt land and should be allowed to remain so, for the reasons that the designation of Green Belt was originally created. 5497 1 Packman Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object I read with considerable alarm plans to develop this site in Knebworth. The Village is already the largest in North Hertfordshire and is seriously constrained by the sewage system, the primary school which is full and a gridlocked road system. The site in question has a number of major drawbacks: 1. The country lane that services this site from Watton Road in Knebworth to Bragbury End is very narrow, dangerous, unsighted, unlit and without any pavements. It was never designed to carry the current volume of traffic let alone a huge increase from a large number of new dwellings or indeed the heavy traffic of a multi year building site. 1b. The lane is already a "no left turn" from Stevenage providing further access constraints. 1c. Old Lane is even narrower and even less suited to anything more than very occasional light traffic. 2. Knebworth comes to a complete standstill with substantial tailbacks in each direction for two hours twice a day. The narrow high street and Watton Road means two cars are unable to pass at many points. Adding further volume to this would cause chaos and turn what is meant to be a Village into something more gridlocked than most of our town centres. 3. These fields are green belt land. They are with little doubt the most scenic part of Knebworth and are hugely popular with both walkers using the public right of way through the field and nature lovers. During the winter this is also where the whole Village heads to go tobogganing. While the steep hill is great for tobogganing it is not as well suited to building houses. 3b. Another consequence of this is that both the lane and the lower part of the field are prone to flooding during periods of heavy rain fall. 4. Knebworth has its own unique identity as a Village, the vast majority of residents chose to live here because of this and actively chose not to live in a town. This site, unlike some of the others, is not infill and as such expands the borders of Knebworth (through the green belt) towards Bragbury End and ultimately Stevenage. If this is allowed Knebworth is very Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent quickly going to get swallowed up by Stevenage and lose its identity, uniqueness and desirability. 5. I will reiterate again, this is green belt land. To quote wikipedia "A green belt or greenbelt is a policy and land use designation used in land use planning to retain areas of largely undeveloped, wild, or agricultural land surrounding or neighbouring urban areas. A green belt is basically an invisible line that goes around a certain area, stopping people from building there so that some of the wild and agricultural land can be saved." 6. It is well known that Knebworth is seriously constrained by its utilities, principally the sewage system. It is my understanding that there is also a mains pipe running at a shallow depth through this field. As such it is not possible to build on top of this as it was never designed to carry any weight. It also has a series of access hatches across the field that would need to be completely redesigned to be safe in a residential setup. 7. A substantial part of this site is taken up by the pumping station, not only does this reduce the size of the site but living next to a sewage pumping station is going to be very undesirable and will considerable constrain what can be done with the site. 8. A large part of the site is surrounded with a perimeter of mature trees, to the best of my knowledge these are protected and cannot be cut down. 9. If this site was built on it would be almost bordering the crematorium, again this must be a constraint to its desirability as a residential site. 10. Any new development is likely to be very high density. While certain sites in Knebworth could just about get away with flats and tightly packed houses it seems completely illogical to site this sort of development in an area comprised of detached Edwardian houses. The whole ethos of Knebworth has always been as a "Garden Village" as such this site is simply incompatible with modern high density housing. Surely there must be some sort of continuity of layout? 11. Local residents were only made aware of the plans right at the end of the summer holidays, a few days before comments had to be submitted. This has not given adequate time for everyone to respond. 12. Other proposed sites in Knebworth put forward by Knebworth Estates will donate all proceeds to Parish Charities. This site will instead be a windfall for the land owner. 5524 4 Lund Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object This site is tucked at the eastern side of Knebworth. The roads leading to old lane and old lane itself, are narrow and there would appear little opportunity to widen any of the accesses. I know there are allotments in this area, and wondered if these would be relocated, though by the time we have finished building all of these houses there will be no room for allotments. Watton Road is a main through way at the moment and I worry that increased traffic would make this raod more impassable than it currently is. 5533 1 Connor Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object My objections to both Site 55 and 58 are as follows:-

1. There are significant infrastructure issues in relation to both sites and it seems strange that these have not been fully outlined in the environmental appraisal that has already been done e.g.

1.a) Watton Road leading onto Knebworth High Street is already unsuitable for the current volume of traffic and would not be able to cope with the additional traffic resulting from further residential development (both during the construction phase and upon completion). There is already heavy congestion at peak times in the morning and early evening. Old Lane is currently not designed for traffic and even if it was re-built, it still would act merely as a feeder road to the already heavily congested High Street.

There is well documented problems in relation to the congestion of the High Street, parking issues, the problems relating to the Chas Lowe site etc. The further development of Sites 55 and 58 to provide additional housing (and associated traffic)will only exasipate the problem further.

1b) There are known issues with the Primary School already being at full capacity. Any of the proposed Knebworth developments will clearly impact on this situation further. At the Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Parish Council meeting, it was implied that various solutions for the school are being considered. Having a better understanding of those options would help to inform any proposal for additional housing in and around Knebworth.

1c) We understand that there are existing issues in relation to the Utilities infrastructure as provision is at its optimum level currently. Although not fully up to speed on this, I understand there is a particular problem in relation to sewerage.

2. The development of Sites 55 and 58 would in my view represent an ill thought through, bolt-on approach which would further encroach on the border with Bragbury End/Stevenage - (chipping away at Knebworth's status as a village.

3. Sites 55 & 58 (and 57)represent a commercial opportunity for the Landowner rather than the provision of a workable solution to any requirement for additional housing. Mr Tubb spoke at the recent Parish Council meeting and offered to make a sizeable donation to the village if his development sites were selected. Any financial donation to the village will be little compensation for the destruction of green belt land and the erosion of village life.

4. Our key criteria for selecting Knebworth as our home 3 years ago was that we wanted to live in a village on the edge of green belt land. We currently have a view of the fields at the north end of Watton Road. Clearly, a new housing development on both sides of the road adjacent to our house takes away our whole reason for being here and would force us to relocate. The approval of any such development would inevitably reduce the value of our properties, as we would no longer enjoy the outskirts of the village location/view that we bought originally. Instead, we would be one step closer to living in a suburb of Stevenage. 5538 2 Connor Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Comment My objections to both Sites 55 and 58 in Knebworth are as follows:-

1. There are significant infrastructure issues in relation to both the sites above, and it seems odd that these have not been fully outlined in the environmental appraisal that has already been completed. e.g. a. Watton Road is currently over-used as a route between Bragbury End and Knebworth, in both directions. This is acknowledged by the traffic calming implemented in recent years. Increasing the volume of traffic along this route will further exacerbate the traffic problem and cause residents of Watton Road further annoyance and access problems. b. At peak times, Watton Road access to Knebworth High Street is impossible and is therefore already unsuitable for the current volume of traffic. Fact: Watton Road at the Knebworth High Street end can not be widened and clearly would not be able to cope with the additional traffic resulting from further residential development (both during the construction phase and upon completion). These traffic issues can not be resolved without significant redesign of the wider Knebworth area; any proposals suggesting such would be met be equally and vehement objection.

2. There are already well documented problems in relation to the congestion of the High Street, on street parking issues, and the access problems relating to the Chas Lowe site etc. The further development of Sites 55 and 58 to provide additional housing (and associated traffic) will only exacerbate the problem further.

3. There are known issues with the Primary School already being at full capacity. Any of the proposed Knebworth developments will clearly impact on this situation further. At the Parish Council meeting, it was implied that various solutions for the school are being considered. Having a better understanding of those options would help to inform any proposal for additional housing in and around Knebworth.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 4. It is understood that there are existing issues in relation to the utilities infrastructure, as provision is at its optimum level currently. The issues in relation to drainage and sewerage have been well documented by the Parish Council.

5. I moved to Knebworth with my wife to enjoy the benefits of village life and by virtue of this accept its limitations in terms of education and facilities expected when living in a large town. We currently have a view of the fields at the north end of Watton Road. Clearly, a new housing development on one or both sides of the road adjacent to our house takes away our whole reason for being here and would force us to relocate.

6. The development of Sites 55 and 58 would in my view represent a bolt-on approach which would reduce further the distance between Knebworth and Stevenage at the Bragbury End side of Watton Road. Why dont you simply rename Knebworth, Stevenage South this is after all what the village is being turned into.

7. Sites 55 & 58 (and 57) represent a commercial opportunity for the Landowner rather than the provision of a workable solution to any requirement for additional housing. Mr Tubb spoke at the recent Parish Council meeting and offered to make a sizeable donation to the village if his development sites were selected. Any financial donation (inducement) to the village will be little compensation for the destruction of green belt land and the erosion of village life. 5568 2 Weaver Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object This plot is at the end of the road I live in and I foresee the following problems/objections to its' use as affordable housing, in addition to the already identified weaknesses: 1) Extension of house building on this site will effectively make Knebworth a suburb of Stevenage further eroding the village concept of Knebworth which was a reason for moving to Knebworth in the first place. 2) Watton Road at the site of the proposed new build would require considerable widening to accommodate increased traffic, thereby destroying one of the countryside cycling routes available around Knebworth (which in conjunction with other proposed developments would make safe and beautiful cycling routes a rare commodity). 3) There would be additional conjestion along Watton Road especially during morning rush hours. It can already take up to 10 minutes to get out of our house into traffic flow and onto Stevenage Road in the rush hour, and our house is only 50 yards from Stevenage Road. 4) There is currently some illegal parking along the road leading to further congestion during the day, this would seem likely to increase if more people are wanting to visit village shops. 5570 1 Bedford Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object Knebworth is a village and should remain as one.

The primary school is full, as with the doctors.

The sewage is not suitable

The roads can't support more traffic, and the lanes are not suitable.

Knebworth is a lovely village and surrounded by beautiful country side - if any development happens we will end up as South Stevenage. The residents choose to live here as it is, it is also the largest village in Herts, so the development would turn into a town.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Tanya Bedford 5571 5 Ryan Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object Site is on greenbelt land - we must conserve our countryside. The countryside around Knebworth is one of the main reasons many people choose to live in the village and increases the quality of life of the residents.

The surrounding roads are small narrow lanes that are dangerous and unsuitable for an increase in traffic.

The local school is already full to capacity.

Parking in the village is inadequate for the current population let alone an increase.

Local services ie Dentist and Doctor cannot support current population let alone an increase.

Knebwortn has already suffered considerable expansion in the last 30 years - Kerr Close and Peters Close/ Woodstock and Wadnall way/ Orchard Way and Broom Grove. Some ogf these are built on fields I played in as a child. It is in danger of loosing all the surrounding fields if sites 52,53,55, 57 and 58 are considered and will loose its semi rural identity. 5577 3 Laing Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object It is Greenbelt and village cannot sustain more housing. 5580 1 Turnbull Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object My comments regarding this site are the same as those already noted for Site ref 58. Frankly if this greenfield site at the boundary of the village, on greenbelt land can in any way be considered for development, the whole definition of Knebworth as a village must be called into question. The logical next step would be to infill all the land to Bragbury End and form a new South Stevenage area. Wedges with thin ends spring to mind. Putting my inate 'NIMBY-ism to one side however, we have a rural community whose infrastructure and resources barely cope with the current levels of population. Residential developments of this scale and predictable mediocrity should not be considered appropriate in this location. The council has alrady identified sufficient sites closer to urban hubs to meet the questionable housing targets. This should be adequate justification to discount sites such as this for future development, safeguarding the local rural environment. 6063 1 Aldrich Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object We moved to Knebworth one month ago, from the Great Ashby end of Stevenage (Chells Manor). Having lived there 8 years we watched Great Ashby grow into the unattractive 'concrete jungle' that it now is. Gresley Way, along which we lived, WAS a quiet road when we moved in, but is now a constant stream of traffic ¿ a very busy road due to the Great Ashby housing. We moved to Knebworth to escape the building site that is Great Ashby. I wanted to be able to leave my windows open at night and be able to sleep in peace, something

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent we could never do before . Having spent hundreds of thousands of pounds moving to our house in St Martins Road, Knebworth, I am HORRIFIED to hear you propose to turn Knebworth into a mini Great Ashby. I would never have moved here if I had known this, and will be investigating why our search didn't show this up. Our house is our investment for the future, our pension. If this development is allowed to happen, house prices will fall. We moved here precisely for the fields, and the landscapes, which are being taken away from Stevenage, and to get away from all the new housing estates, the social housing (and the problems which always comes with that). We want to live in an old, established, reputable village with surrounding fields. Living in St Martins Road, we will be directly affected by proposed sites 55 and 58. (Not that I want Knebworth developed on at all.) The country road (Watton Road), along which you plan to build, is an over used 'cut through' from Bragbury End to Knebworth, and isn't designed to cope with the traffic currently using it! I don't imagine expanding/improving the roads features in your plans, they never are. You are happy to throw up as many houses as you can squeeze onto a field but you never improve the facilities which need to go with all the extra people you bring to an area ¿ mainly the roads. Our road is a PRIVATE road, which WE have to contribute to the upkeep of. I take it that means I, and my neighbours, can refuse to let our road become a 'rat run', which of course it would be if these ludicrous plans were granted?? I certainly would not pay for the wear and tear caused by hundreds of cars that would use our road every day. I would fight for gates (or some other obstruction) to be erected at either end of the road. The village school is currently oversubscribed, I can't even get my younger children in and I live across the road from it. The traffic through the parade of shops is a nightmare most of the time, so I shudder to think what the extra traffic would do the village. It would bring the village to complete gridlock. These proposals would kill this lovely village and will turn it into a 'Supervillage'. I for one cannot let this village become 'Knebbury End'. If, god forbid, you are given permission to build on these proposed sites around Knebworth, this will pave the way for further fields to be put forward for development proposals and so on and so on, thus spreading like a disease and eventually joining Knebworth to Stevenage which cannot happen. KEEP YOUR DEVELOPING TO GREAT ASHBY AND STEVENAGE (YOUR SUPERTOWNS!). I believe in improving the facilities of a village for the people currently living there, ie. secondary school if there isn't one, or improving medical and health faciliies ie doctors, but I don't agree with adding housing estates. New houses wouldn't be in keeping with the old houses and old feel of the village. 6065 4 Norman Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object I strongly object to any major development in the area as the infrastructure is already being threatened. Knebworth could not and should not accept any major housing developments as the influx of families would necessitate the building of more schools, which in turn would require more families to justify its existence. The roads are hardly able to cope with the traffic presently and this particularly applies to Watton Road, which is used as the only practicable way from the A602 to the A1M for many people. 6095 1 Thurgood Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object My husband and I were absolutely delighted when we moved to Old Lane, Knebworth September 2008, a few weeks before the birth of our first daughter. Although the standard of houses was better elsewhere in the village, we decided to purchase Old Lane because of its location. The house we bought needs considerable work and we spent much of our savings and took out a large mortgage to purchase our property on Old Lane, because we felt assured of peace and quiet (something which we had moved from London to acquire), and safe, beautiful country lanes where we could take our baby for walks. We were therefore devastated to learn that building planning had been proposed on Site 55 to the North of Old Lane. It is our understanding that only recently heavy traffic has been deterred from cutting through Old Lane from parts of Stevenage by stopping access to this route at the north end of Old Lane. Local residents have told me that traffic used to be a nightmare along this route, as people used it at a cut through from Stevenage to London Road, Knebworth and vice versa. Since a blockage was put in place allowing access to Old Lane only from Watton Road coming out of Knebworth and not from Stevenage, residents around the Old Lane, St. Martin's Road and Swangleys Lane have been much happier with the state of the traffic. There is no pavement on Old Lane, but at the moment I have the pleasure of being able to take my daughter out for walks in her pushchair in relative safety along Old Lane and the local roads. She will also be able to play on our front lawn, and in time walk to the local school around the corner on Swangley's Lane. If planning is given for site 55, traffic along Old Lane will severely increase and will ruin our quality of life in this house. We do not want the noise of traffic every few seconds going past the front of our house day and night. Also, if planning is given, our daughter will not be able to play in our front garden, neither will she be able to walk to Knebworth Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Primary School around the corner when she is old enough, neither will I be able to continue taking her for walks in her pushchair in relative safety. In fact, access from Old Lane to even Swangley's Lane and St. Martin's Road will become hazardous. Our short driveway slopes immediately onto Old Lane Road and getting our own car or that of visitors in and out of our driveway would become a big safety hazard, as Old Lane road is already narrow and winding. If planning on site 55, we may as well have spent a lot less of our hard earned money on a house somewhere else in the village or even in another town or village entirely. Everyone knows that housing in our part of the village is expensive because of its beautiful and peaceful surroundings (probably the most peaceful part of the village). You cannot hear the A1 traffic from Old Lane and the surrounding roads. Please don't ruin this very peaceful and beautiful location by building on site 55. We are a young family who have been prepared to plough our hard earned money into the village of Knebworth by renovating an old house in an expensive part of the village, because we believed we were buying into an area where we could raise our family in an idyllic setting . I will feel badly let down if this is not the case and planning is granted on site 55. 6098 1 Livesey Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object A) Building on site 55 will take away greenbelt land between Knebworth and Stevenage and increase the likely coalescence of Knebworth with South Stevenage. The distance between Knebworth and Stevenage via Watton Road is already a very short car journey of approx two minutes. Furthermore, the current greenbelt land separating Knebworth and Stevenage already accommodates a crematorium; therefore development on site 55 will reduce even further the apparent separation between the village and town. B) Although Watton Road is a residential street, with several families with young children, it is already a very busy road as it is used as a cut through from Bragbury End in Stevenage to Knebworth, Welwyn and the A1M. This is exacerbated during weekdays as it is also used heavily for commuter parking. I am very concerned that development on site 55 will substantially increase the amount of traffic through what is already a very busy residential road. C) Between Knebworth and Bragbury End, Watton Road is a small, twisting country lane. If housing development is allowed on site 55 then either Watton Road will need to be widened and/or other access roads will need to be constructed. This will again lead to increased traffic levels through the residential part of Watton Road and Knebworth High Street. D) Facilities in Knebworth such as the Primary School are already heavily oversubscribed. Housing development on site 55, with the corresponding increase in families with young children, will increase pressure on what is already a much stretched resource, with some families in Knebworth already unable to get their children into the local primary school. 6105 2 Lee Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object Site 55 this site also would cause traffic chaos in this area, it would also change the village as we know it again the road could not withstand any more traffic this site is between the A 602 and B197 both subject to heavy traffic and at a standstill in the mornings and evenings but busy at other times during the day there are yellow lines and traffic calming in Watton Road and it gets block up as it is with out any more traffic. 6181 1 Hughes Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object The development of this site and that of Site 58 will not only erode valuable green belt around the village, it will also encroach further towards Stevenage, reducing the areas of separation. Knebworth is one of the largest villages in Hertfordshire and should not be developed into an urban sprawl, trapped by a limited infrastructure, facilities and services. Watton Road is unsuitable to carry the level of additional traffic arising from the proposed residential development. Traffic has to stop if any vehicle larger than a medium box van approaches from the opposite direction. The road has a series of sharp blind bends which drivers have to approach with caution. During heavy and persistent rain, the road regularly floods at three locations; between Bell Close and the water service station, approximately 150 metres north of the electricity sub-station and under the railway bridge at Bragbury End. The north-eastern and southern sections of Old Lane that border the proposed site are also subject to flooding during heavy rain at two locations; approximately 75 metres from it's junction with Watton Road, and adjacent to Old Lane House where the water is known to wash into the field (Site 55) and run down towards Watton Road for at least one third of the central area of the field. Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent At all five of these local flood locations it takes 12 to 18 hours for the rain water to drain away. The overall sewage system that serves Knebworth is known to already be at full capacity and considerable investment will be required to increase capacity further at additional expense to existing residents. Knebworth Primary School is currently operating a full capacity to the extent that children who are resident within the designated area cannot obtain admission, with or without siblings already there. Whilst it is recognised that the admissions policy continues to produce difficulties for parents, the school cannot physically accommodate more children. Should Site 55 progress to the next stage of planning, the following points need consideration; The Sustainability Appraisal Summary states that the site is "not affected by wildlife designations". However, the site has a small colony of pipistrelle bats that visit nightly. A large water main approximately 40 to 60 cms diameter crosses the site north to south between Stevenage and Datchworth. Provision of protection to the residents of St Martins Road against the potential development of a traffic rat-run from Watton Road through to Swangleys Lane and/or London Road. It should be noted that planning restrictions placed upon Harwood Park crematorium approval to not allow funeral corteges to use Watton Road have not been exercised or controlled, neither has the 'no-right turn' out of Old Lane onto Watton Road (in a northerly direction). An unrecorded footpath exists within the site between Watton Road and Old Lane. This closely follows the plot boundaries of houses on the northern side of St Martins Road. It existed when we purchased our house in 1984, it still exists today and is used regularly by dog walkers and those who enjoy open-air recreation. No restriction or exclusion notices have been erected by the land owner, nor have there been any blocking of access. 6186 1 Hughes Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object Site 55 is linked by narrow country lanes, with poor visibility on twisting and turning bends, particularly Old Lane which is only one-car wide. The added traffic caused by such a vast development would be a hugh burden not only on these lanes but the surrounding roads as well - the centre of the village already has parking problems and the high street is conjested for much of the day time.RRThe primary school is oversubscribed and has had to turn away children from the village. There would also be the added pressure on the doctors surgery.RRI feel the Knebworth has expanded enough in the 25 years I have lived here with the Wimpey and Rialto Estate, the large fill-in developments of Peter's Way and Kerr Close, and the many other smaller developments. Knebworth has become a very large village and I fear it could lose it's village status if it continues to expand. 6260 1 Thurgood Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object I wish to object in the strongest terms to any proposed development on site 55.

The photograph below looks out from our house directly onto farmland south of Old Lane,Knebworth. It is absolutely beautiful countryside, with old oak trees, coppices and bay hales dotting the landscape. It would be criminally destructive to permit any development around here whatsoever. The road directly north of this field, which borders our front garden, is scarcely 2 ½ metres across, just enough for one car, but not enough for two to pass comfortably. Building close to this site would mean having to widen the road, entailing the uprooting of the hedgerow pictured, which contains a diverse range of plants, including wild blackberries. We would suffer enormously as a result of any development here, which would bring severely increased noise and traffic. We have a young daughter and it would make playing out the front, or indeed just walking out of our driveway, a dangerous and hazardous affair. We have only just bought our house and would be devastated by any development in such a lovely area. The first photograph below, taken in the snows in February 2009, shows the edge of the lovely agricultural north of Old Lane, Knebworth. The camera is facing east, with Old Lane on the right-hand side. It is an outstandingly beautiful area, and a truly peaceful habitat. It is calm and tranquil, perfect for walks in all seasons, and really makes you feel out in the country. The photograph below shows the same land, looking in the opposition direction, towards St. Martin's Road. Building on this land would be devastating to nature, wildlife and the area's residents who truly value this lovely spot. Once built on, these lovely views would disappear forever. This land should not be built on. 6279 4 Morris Document Section :Site 55 Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Representation : Comment On reviewing the additional proposed sites in and around Knebworth, I wish to make the following comments:- 1. Knebworth is a village. If the proposed expansion takes place, this will join Knebworth to Stevenage in the north and Woolmer Green in the south. 2. The roads which run in and around Knebworth are already extremely busy, any expansion in any direction would put more pressure on the already congested village centre. 3. The Doctors Surgery in Knebworth is already busy. I do not believe that this surgery could take any more patients, as it is very difficult to get an appointment with the number of patients it has now. 4. I have no school age children of my own, but I understand that the school is well oversubscribed and even if you live in the village of Knebworth it is no guarantee that your children will get into the village school. More houses being built would apply more pressure to this problem. In short, I believe that any development, which expands on the boundary of Knebworth would be detrimental to Knebworth village. On top of these points these sites are GREEN BELT, this should mean they stay GREEN. 6298 3 Charter Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object I would like to submit an objection to the the proposed land allocation of additional sites numbered 52, 53, 55, 56, 57 and 58 on the following grounds;RR1. First and foremost that each of these sites are designated Green Belt land and should not be developed on unless 'exceptional circumstances' prevail. I can not imagine such a circumstance existing to support residential or any other form of development.RR2. Knebworth is already the largest of the villages in the District and many of it's existing services could not support a significant increase in population resulting from further residential development. Most notably, Knebworth Primary School which is already large for a village school (with a 2 class intake per year) and has limited scope for expansion without further proposed encroachment onto Green Belt land.RR3. I am surprised that the appraisals concerning the suitability of each of these sites for development has not yet considered the issues of access, highways and traffic impact. I would object to each of these sites being developed on the grounds of poor access, insufficient highways capacity and on a negative traffic impact particularly, with regard to an increase in traffic numbers and safety issues.RRAs a general comment, I would add that future residential development should be focused on infill development sites, brownfield sites or on sites allocated for the expansion of the Districts towns whose facilities and services can sustain such development. Villages should be protected and not converted into towns or annexed to existing towns. Development on Green Belt land should be avoided at all cost as per Government policy. 6320 1 Keeling Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object For our own benefit AND that of the village we seek the preservation of the existing green belt boundaries. We understood, after the most recent planning review, that expansion of Knebworth was rejected because of infrastructural inadequencies and other factors, including the capacity of the school. We therefore hope that these conclusions will prevail in face of the purely financial ambitions of the adjacent landowners. 6336 1 Skone Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object We would like to give our comments regarding land allocations 55 (land north of Old Lane, Knebworth) and 58 (land north of Watton Road, Knebworth). 1. Traffic. a. The volume traffic using Watton Road is already very high. The traffic feeds into the high street that already has recognised issues of congestion. The congestion is much worse when there is a problem on the A1(M) - this is a fairly regular occurence.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent b. The residents of Bell Close have priority over oncoming traffic from Watton Road when turning into Watton Road. However, many drivers on Watton Road ignore this fact and there are regular near misses with Bell Close residents turning into Watton Road. This is even more dangerous when the Bell Close resident is cycling. Both of these problems would be made much worse with the proposed developments. 2. Encroachment of Knebworth on Stevenage. There is currently only a narrow strip of land between Knebworth and Stevenage. The proposed development would further encroach on Stevenage. Knebworth could lose its identity as a village (the population is currently at the upper limit for classification as a village) and become a suburb of Stevenage. 3. Safety. Both sites would have concerns about safety; the electricty sub-station for site 55 and the mobile phone mast for site 58. 4. Knebworth Junior School. Knebworth Junior School is already over suscribed. Any future developments would only add to this problem. 5. Green Belt Land. All proposed developments are on Green Belt land. This sets a precedent for any future developments and suggests that it would only be a matter of time before Knebworth was swallowed up by Stevenage as outlined in item 2. 6378 5 Bland Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object All the other sites, 52 53 55 57 and 58 have been put forward by developers for their own fiscal gain and not enhance the village. Many times this expansion has been on the cards and all have been carefully examined by experts. The conclusion by the local authority NHDC is that it is not neccessary or sustainable and so they have not supported or endorsed a 'special case'. In fact it has said said that sufficient sites are available in existing plans without looking further. 6382 3 Milne Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object We have been resident in Wadnall Way since October 1998 and moved to Knebworth from Stevenage because of its beautiful village status and amenities. Firstly, we would like to register our deep concerns re. possible residential development of greenbelt land on sites 52. 53., 55., 56., 57., and 58. Our reasons include; 1, the constraints new homes would make on the existing sewerage system, the local infrastructure, transport links, the limited health facilities and the already oversubscribed Knebworth Primary School. 2, The reasons for green belt land is to separate encroaching development from neighbouring Towns / Villages. We want to remain a village and not a town. Secondly, we would like to our register our deep concerns about the possible development of a Secondary School for eight to nine hundred pupils and 180 houses on land adjacent to Wadnall Way and Woodstock. Our reasons include; 1, We do not want to look out onto a sixty acre site of a school and houses .This development would encroach on our beautiful view of green belt land to the right of the front of our home. 2, We do not want to have our peaceful existence interrupted by the noise and a heavy increase of transport from the development of a school and 180 new houses. 3. The green belt land proposed for this site has a beautiful path which leads up to Mardley Woods and is enjoyed by us as and numerous others as a glorious country walk. We do not want to see this destroyed . 4. The proposed development has not considered the cost or impact on the local infra structure. 5. The proposal does not take into account of the local safety implications of eight to nine hundred pupils near the railway line adjacent to the land. Who will pay for safety measures such as fencing? 6. One Stevenage Secondary Schools has been closed and another is due for closure next year. A large amount of money has been put into the remaining Secondary Schools to Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 55 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent upgrade them. Surely this is where the investment should be? Also our two daughters attend The Heathcote School and have done very well. We were aware of the fact that when we moved into the village there was no local provision of a Secondary School and they would have to travel. 7. The local church graveyards have been closed as they are full. The small Knebworth Cemetery at the end of Wadnall Way will surely have to be eventually expanded to cope with requirements in the future? 8. The planned large catchment area of Knebworth, Oaklands, Woolmer Green and Codicote area for the school means there would be no guarantee of an automatic position and could backfire as applicants from Stevenage and Welwyn Garden City could apply. 9. We are concerned that having such a development at the end of our road would decrease our current village property value. 6383 2 Plester Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object I wish to submit the following representations against the adoption of certain of the suggested sites for development in the settlement of Knebworth.RR1) Development of any or all of the sites on the edge of the village (nos 52, 53, 55, 57 & 58) would exacerbate the already serious traffic overload. A bypass is an essential prerequisite.RR2) The access roads neighbouring the sites 55, 55 & 58 are unsuitable for increased use. Swangleys Lane and Old Lane are narrow and without footpaths. St Martins Road is unadopted.RR3) Sites 55 & 58 surround a water resource and being in a groundwater protection zone1 are unsuitable for residential development. 6385 3 Howarth Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object I hope you will accept this email to register my opposition to the proposed sites for development in Knebworth, particularly those currently serving as agricultural land, sites 52,53, 55,57 and 58. All these proposals are likely to provide additional housing at the detriment to the environment within which the housing is proposed. Agriculutural land helps sustain the rural nature of our region, and keeps the green belt and green space of North Hertfordshire, something vital to its character. I would also object to development on these sites because, as you are well aware, the infrastructure of Knebworth, would not support further, heavy capacity, development. Whilst the sites are within some reach of the village centre, I would stress that the current shops in the village are unlikely to be supported by additional occupants, and there is no capacity for parking for extra residents, should they wish to visit the local retailers. Some of the developments also are on the very boundaries of the village (especially 53 and 52) and my concern here would be that residents wouldn't choose to walk to the village, but drive (as happens now from these further reaches of the village,) again adding to infrastructure problems. Sites 55,57 and 58 are all within the main 'exit' to Stevenage and Hertford, and I would feel that the small country lane is already at capacity for traffic flow, and could not support the additional transport requirements of housing development should these sites be considered. 6404 3 Beeby Document Section :Site 55 Representation : Object Development in any of these sites would result in far more traffic than any of the adjoining roads could cope with.

In the case of 55-58 both Watton Road and OAKFIELD's Road are difficult to negotiate by two cars already, because of road and the cars parked.

Knebworth village centre is often booked by traffic already, any additional would make it worse. Apart from anything else it is not good to see more greenbelt disappear.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 56 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 0077 13 Knebworth Parish Council Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Object Development of site 52-58 would result in growth which Knebworth village cannot take. The sites identified have the following problems:

Sites 54 and 56 Odyssey Health Centre and Land East of Stevenage Road Both sites are located on the northern Parish boundary, adjacent to the Roebuck. Stevenage has built up to its southern boundary and any development here breaches the natural boundary of the railway and would potentially result in Stevenage expanding even further south towards Knebworth. Development of either site would not be associated with Knebworth because it is approximately a mile away from its centre. Site 56 has also been subject to unregistered land fill and could be contaminated. 0347 19 Brookes Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Object General Comments:

I oppose development on all five of the suggested sites abounding Knebworth village (52, 53, 55, 57 and 58). I also oppose sites 54 and 56 which represent expansion of Stevenage.

Whilst acknowledging that Knebworth is a 'sustainable hub' in terms of its transport links and local facilities and that some limited expansion may, in the long term, be the key to it retaining its independence as a thriving village community rather than becoming a satellite or suburb of Stevenage, there are serious infrastructure constraints which preclude consideration of even minor expansion at the present time. These constraints relate to the provision of primary and secondary school places, lack of capacity and suitable 'future proof' premises for the GP surgery, parking and congestion/traffic issues, water supply and sewerage.

Suggestions that mitigation of these constraints could be achieved by 'improving the schools and social infrastructure' are unrealistic. There is no easy way to expand the primary school which is already one of the biggest in Hertfordshire . Parents are likely to strongly resist the notion of a super-primary school with a 3-form intake. Secondary school provision is a contentious issue for many Knebworth families with no obvious solution, other than to move away.

Likewise, there are no obvious solutions to the parking, congestion and rat-run problems which would be compounded by the provision of more housing around the village.

There are possible options for resolving the provision of a new GP surgery in the medium term but this would be subject to adequate funding. There is no apparent source of funds at present.

Sewerage and water constraints will no doubt be resolved at some point in the future but possibly not within the next ten years.

All 7 proposed sites in Knebworth Parish are in the Green Belt where housing development would be contrary to current local and national planning policy.

Site 56 Land east of Stevenage Road Knebworth

I oppose development of any type on this Green Belt site which represents an expansion of Stevenage into the North Herts Green Belt and would result in greater coalescence with Knebworth. Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 56 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent

The site is very prominent as you approach Stevenage and any development would impact on the openness of the Green Belt. The railway line is regarded as an important boundary protecting the narrow band of open countryside between Knebworth and Stevenage. Building on this site would set a precedent for further development west of the railway.

Vehicular and pedestrian access could only come from the B 197 which would have major safety implications along this busy road.

My understanding (but not substantiated) is that the site was used for some years for removing and tipping of spoil which could affect suitability for building and possible contamination.

Complications would arise on boundary issues as to whether residents would be living in North Herts or Stevenage.

N.B. It appears that the analysis of this site in the 'Sustainability Appraisal and Strategic Environmental Assessment of Land Allocations Additional Suggested Sites' is flawed as it assumes the site is aligned to Knebworth whereas transport, utilities and school issues should relate to Stevenage. 0459 106 CPRE - The Hertfordshire Society Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Object This site is in the Green Belt. Its development for housing would extend the built-up area of Stevenage beyond the railway line and could set a precedent for further development in this direction. 0985 10 Trotman Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Object Site 56 Land East of Stevenage Road This site should not be developed because it would have a detrimental impact on the landscape character and visual amenity. This site is clearly visible from the top of Knebworth Hill. It's development would create a precedent for incursion into the green-belt and eventual coalescence with Stevenage.* 3950 26 Hertfordshire County Council - Historic Environment Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Comment Requirement for Pre-application or Pre-determination Archaeological Assessment

The sites below have known archaeological remains within them or have archaeological potential. We would therefore wish that - in accordance with Government policy in PPG 16 and the current draft PPS 15 - the LPA requests that pre-application or pre-determination archaeological assessments should be included within all development briefs and other proposals for the sites, if they are formally adopted as development sites in the local development plan. Such assessment would, depending upon the size and location of the proposals, range in scope from additional desk-based research to more extensive archaeological field survey and evaluation. The purpose of the archaeological assessment would be to provide sufficient information about the archaeological resource and in particular the extent of archaeological remains worthy of preservation in situ, to enable the LPA to determine any specific application for development.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 56 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 3952 54 Hertfordshire County Council - Passenger Transport Unit Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Comment Plot 56: Vehicle access to this plot is from the B197 London Road, which is a main distributor road. Any new access from the B197 may have policy objections as this section of 'B' road is a traffic sensitive road. This site of this size is considered as a large development. The application should therefore be supported by a Transport Assessment, which sets out the transport implications of the development proposals and identify measures required to overcome any transport impact of the proposal. The scoping of the assessment should extend to the junctions within the village of Knebworth and junction of Hertford Road Stevenage.

PTU; Plots 54 and 56. These sites would be within 400m of bus stops on London Rd, served by the 300/301 (Mon-Fri every 15 mins, Sat every 20 mins, Sun hourly), 379 Hertford-Stevenage (limited services), 44/45 Stevenage-Luton (Mon-Sat 2 hourly). The presence of major roads surrounding the sites may present barriers to pedestrian/cycle movement. Links to the pedestrian/cycle network within Stevenage would be necessary in order to promote the use of sustainable modes of transport. 4033 5 Simson Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Comment This particular piece of land does not appear to be particularly valuable agriculturally. I am not sure how suitable it is for an old people's home 4439 3 Kirk Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Object Closing to gap between Knebworth and Stevenage. Road access problem. 4450 5 Laing Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Object I object because this is a further and speculative infringement of green belt and the gradual colescence with Stevenage. We cannot afford further green belt loss in Hertfordshire. Additionally it will create further road congestion on the B197. 4871 64 Smith Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Object I object to all sites that alter the Green Belt boundary. I object to the loss of agricultural land for the following reasons: Food security is now a national priority; Open green spaces are a valuable amenity for all; This country has been in breach of European bio-diversity regulations for the past six years; A survey of rare and endangered species needs to be undertaken; Fields are necessary for water management.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 56 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 5042 3 Richardson Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Object The site is outside the 'Excluded Village' boundary and within the Green BElt. It is on the Parish boundary and if developed could lead to coalescence with Stevenage.

The property is the site of land fill, filled too recently to be considered settled to safely permit housing construction. The first landfill was only short term being a temporary site to receive spoil from excavations of a development. The first fill was removed.

Subsequently it was again used as a dump but not just for top soil. Frequently machinery and vehicles were stored and presumably repaired.

That raises the question of contamination.

Access to the site can only be via the B197, a gateway already exists. this is a few yards to the south of the railway bridge and creates a hazard to road users, particularly those travelling south as visibility if restricted by the brow of the bridge. Any vehicles intending to turn north are immediately at risk from southbound traffic, mostly intent on acceleration as they approach the de-restriction sign. Much worse when the motorway is closed!

Water and sewerage limitations affect this site as much as any other in Knebworth. 5046 3 Bantick Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Object Coalescence 5047 5 Bantick Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Object Its location, near railway is poor. It will be the start of creeping coalescence with Stevenage. 5163 5 The Fairfield Partnership JB Planning Associates - TW Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Object Site 56, 05/0046, Land East of Stevenage Road, Knebworth 1. We object to this site, and believe that it would be an inappropriate allocation for residential development because it would have a detrimental effect on the character and appearance of the strategic Green Belt gap which separates Knebworth from Stevenage. It would represent an incursion into open countryside which is not currently related to the built form of Stevenage. Grounds for Objection 2. This would be a significant extension to the village of Knebworth, not so much due to its scale, but more because of its inappropriate location, which is prominent in the landscape. It would represent a highly visible incursion into the Green Belt gap between Knebworth and Stevenage, which would not relate to any other built development, but rather to open countryside. Landscape Character

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 56 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 3. Site 56 is located in open countryside on the edge of Stevenage. However, it is separated from Stevenage by the railway line, which also restricts any views of the town beyond the site. the site is in fact framed by the railway line to the north and Stevenage Road to the west, and related only to the open countryside which forms the strategic Green Belt gap between Knebworth and Stevenage. As such, its development would undermine one of the five functions of Green Belt land, as defined in PPG2. 5183 5 Elliott Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Object Most have similar general problems regarding utilities a. water supply water table falling in Hertfordshire rivers drying up b. Sewage, existing arrangements in Lea Valley approaching limits. Still residential development in process of completion outstanding in Stevenage. c. Capacity of educational facilities firstly on the primary school currently located in Swangleys Lane. Will add to pressure on secondary places, which are not currently satisfactory. (Depends on density of proposed buildings) d. Road facilities most sites will add to current peak hour problems site 54 near an inadequate roudabout and proposal to extend Tesco supermarket. 5220 4 Harris Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Comment Doesn't the huge amount of subsoil and general rubble used to infill this site make it a "weakness"? 5368 3 Aknai Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Object Development of This site effectively breaches the boundary of the railway line between Knebworth and Stevenage. Whether this was regarded as Knebworth parish development or Stevenage District development, it paves the way for creeping urbanisation from Stevenage resulting in coalescence with Knebworth. We already have the psychological threat of "Knebworth Gate" in Roebuck that was sneaked in very quietly. I object 100% to development of this site. 5422 5 Haigh Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Object Knebworth should not be expanded - we do not have the infrastructure to support it and we are in the green belt. 5434 4 Weaver Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Object My objections to this site are as follows: 1. this location will be more like a suburb of Stevenage than Knebworth; 2. this plot reducec the green belt separation from Stevenage and increases the risk of coallescence and of Knebworth becoming a suburb of Stevenage; 3. The infrastructure including roads, water, drains and the primary school are already overwhelmed and any further development should not take place without the infrastructure upgrades being made first. 5524 7 Lund Document Section :Site 56 Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 56 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Representation : Comment Again, more Stevenage than Knebworth, but haven't there just been new houses built adjacent to this site ? I worry that we will merge into Stevenage, but maybe that is the plan ? 5577 4 Laing Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Object This is precious Greenelt despite the owners` obvious attempt over last few years to make it look as unattractive and scrubby as possible! 6065 5 Norman Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Object I strongly object to any major development in the area as the infrastructure is already being threatened. Knebworth could not and should not accept any major housing developments as the influx of families would necessitate the building of more schools, which in turn would require more families to justify its existence. The roads are hardly able to cope with the traffic presently and this particularly applies to Watton Road, which is used as the only practicable way from the A602 to the A1M for many people. 6279 5 Morris Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Comment On reviewing the additional proposed sites in and around Knebworth, I wish to make the following comments:- 1. Knebworth is a village. If the proposed expansion takes place, this will join Knebworth to Stevenage in the north and Woolmer Green in the south. 2. The roads which run in and around Knebworth are already extremely busy, any expansion in any direction would put more pressure on the already congested village centre. 3. The Doctors Surgery in Knebworth is already busy. I do not believe that this surgery could take any more patients, as it is very difficult to get an appointment with the number of patients it has now. 4. I have no school age children of my own, but I understand that the school is well oversubscribed and even if you live in the village of Knebworth it is no guarantee that your children will get into the village school. More houses being built would apply more pressure to this problem. In short, I believe that any development, which expands on the boundary of Knebworth would be detrimental to Knebworth village. On top of these points these sites are GREEN BELT, this should mean they stay GREEN. 6298 4 Charter Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Object I would like to submit an objection to the the proposed land allocation of additional sites numbered 52, 53, 55, 56, 57 and 58 on the following grounds;RR1. First and foremost that each of these sites are designated Green Belt land and should not be developed on unless 'exceptional circumstances' prevail. I can not imagine such a circumstance existing to support residential or any other form of development.RR2. Knebworth is already the largest of the villages in the District and many of it's existing services could not support a significant increase in population resulting from further residential development. Most notably, Knebworth Primary School which is already large for a village school (with a 2 class intake per year) and has limited scope for expansion without further proposed encroachment onto Green Belt land.RR3. I am surprised that the appraisals concerning the suitability of each of these sites for development has not yet considered the issues of access, highways and traffic impact. I would object to each of these sites being developed on the grounds of poor access, insufficient highways capacity and on a negative traffic impact particularly, with regard to an increase in traffic numbers and safety issues.RRAs a general comment, I would add that future residential development should be focused on infill development sites, brownfield sites or on sites allocated for the expansion of the Districts towns whose facilities and services can sustain such development. Villages should be protected and not converted into towns or annexed to existing towns. Development on Green Belt land should be avoided at all cost as per Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 56 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Government policy. 6378 2 Bland Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Object I have a strong objection to site 56 as this breaches the northern boundary of the Green Belt and is quite a dangerous place to site housing which must exit onto the busy main road. 6382 4 Milne Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Object We have been resident in Wadnall Way since October 1998 and moved to Knebworth from Stevenage because of its beautiful village status and amenities. Firstly, we would like to register our deep concerns re. possible residential development of greenbelt land on sites 52. 53., 55., 56., 57., and 58. Our reasons include; 1, the constraints new homes would make on the existing sewerage system, the local infrastructure, transport links, the limited health facilities and the already oversubscribed KnebworthPrimary School. 2, The reasons for green belt land is to separate encroaching development from neighbouring Towns / Villages. We want to remain a village and not a town. Secondly, we would like to our register our deep concerns about the possible development of a Secondary School for eight to nine hundred pupils and 180 houses on land adjacent to Wadnall Way and Woodstock. Our reasons include; 1, We do not want to look out onto a sixty acre site of a school and houses .This development would encroach on our beautiful view of green belt land to the right of the front of our home. 2, We do not want to have our peaceful existence interrupted by the noise and a heavy increase of transport from the development of a school and 180 new houses. 3. The green belt land proposed for this site has a beautiful path which leads up to Mardley Woods and is enjoyed by us as and numerous others as a glorious country walk. We do not want to see this destroyed . 4. The proposed development has not considered the cost or impact on the local infra structure. 5. The proposal does not take into account of the local safety implications of eight to nine hundred pupils near the railway line adjacent to the land. Who will pay for safety measures such as fencing? 6. One Stevenage Secondary Schools has been closed and another is due for closure next year. A large amount of money has been put into the remaining Secondary Schools to upgrade them. Surely this is where the investment should be? Also our two daughters attend The Heathcote School and have done very well. We were aware of the fact that when we moved into the village there was no local provision of a Secondary School and they would have to travel. 7. The local church graveyards have been closed as they are full. The small Knebworth Cemetery at the end of Wadnall Way will surely have to be eventually expanded to cope with requirements in the future? 8. The planned large catchment area of Knebworth, Oaklands, Woolmer Green and Codicote area for the school means there would be no guarantee of an automatic position and could backfire as applicants from Stevenage and Welwyn Garden City could apply. 9. We are concerned that having such a development at the end of our road would decrease our current village property value. 6389 2 Goodhew Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Comment Site 56 Our only concern over this site is that this may be the start of the rot of destroying the countryside between town and village. It is only a small site, but it starts the development this side Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 56 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent of the railway and could then be used as an excuse to develop it further towards Knebworth. Secondary School Transfer We attended the meeting with an open view to listen to both sides argument. Having listened, we think the most balanced views were .. a) That the inclusions of a secondary school would seriously jeopardise a village environment. Those of us who choose to live in a village do so precisely as it does not include large schools, sports and leisure centres, supermarkets, shopping centres, etc., and their associated environmental requirements and problems more appropriately handled by a town. b) That the proposal was being out forward by people who had chosen to live in a village and then appeared to be complaining that it's a village ¿ you can't have both.RWe chose a rural home, which included finding ways of transporting children to schools, and ourselves to shops, sport and leisure centres; but then being able to return to the village environment ¿ our choice and we accepted the advantages and disadvantages, There was an attempt to link this with protecting the Doctor's surgery as if they were the same problem and part of a village community. A village Doctor's surgery addressing the village requirements is totally different to a large secondary school meeting the requirements of a much wider area. 6494 3 Stainforth Document Section :Site 56 Representation : Object I have lived in Knebworth for 59 years, 55 at the present address, so I have seen all the major developments, some good, some bad, which have more than trebled the village's population over that period. During my 30-year career as an engineer with ICI Plastics Division I have been in charge of the design of major chemical plants at Fleetwood, Lancs., and in South Africa and Argentina. Therefore, I have some knowledge of the infrastructure involved in major construction projects. It is acknowledged that the village within its present boundaries has already reached its maximum size. Its services are overloaded. The sewage system is working to capacity and cannot be extended without a major reconstruction. The main water supply system, which already takes its water from the rivers, has no spare reservoir on which to draw. Power supply already suffers breakdown at peak periods, and Knebworth, being a commuter village, will be low on the priority list for power in the future. Railway commuters from Stevenage and surrounding villages pack the roads and streets near the station because there are no adequate parking facilities. Bearing in mind that every new household will possess one or more cars, the extra vehicles will add to the already intolerable car parking problem which the Parish Council is at a loss to solve. Now we have the grotesque situation of landowners and developers putting forward their own ideas for developing land in the Green Belt with no regard to the local infrastructure and the quality of life of the existing residents. Sites 52 and 53 were put forward as possible development areas at the time when the motorway was being considered for widening from six lanes to eight. Those building sites were rejected then by North Herts and the Parish Council for precisely the same reasons that make them unsuitable today. SITE 52. Access is very bad. At the north end the site can only be exited on to Deards End Lane and across the railway line on to Stevenage Road via tha narrow brick arch bridge which has a blind corner at each end. At the south end the only exit is on to Park Lane opposite Gipsy Lane, midway between two blind corners at West Barn and the motorway bridge. Water supply. The original proposal was for 200 houses on this site, which would require an average supply of 20,000 gallons of water daily, most of which will be discharged into the overloaded sewer system from toilets, baths, kitchens, and from washing machines. Sewage disposal. The existing sewer from Old Knebworth can be accessed, but this lies upstream of the overloaded village system and may cause problems downstream. Cars. As the residents of these houses will probably commute to work elsewhere, each house may possess more than one car, which will add considerably to the village car parking problem. SITE 53. Access is equally bad, and will require major widening and straightening of Gipsy Lane, particularly at the north end where it joins Park Lane, and at Stockens Green. Another exit at the extreme southern end at Wych Elm Lane, just before that motorway bridge, goes nowhere except to Woolmer Green. Water supply. Originally 300 houses were to be built on this site, and these would require 30,000 gallons of water daily, discharging, like Site 52, into the village sewer system. Sewage and storm water disposal from this site would be a major problem as the main sewer pipe would have to run across Gipsy Lane at its low point into the Orchard Way/Broom Grove system. Storm water run off from this site has caused flooding in the past, and this would be multiplied many times when the natural soak-away system is destroyed. Cars. As for Site 52, all these houses will probably possess one or more cars, thereby agravating the village car parking problem. Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 56 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent MOTORWAY NOISE must rule out this site from serious consideration because it is now continuous day and night, 24/7, summer and winter throughout the year. As most of the houses will lie below the embankment, they will be drenched with sound, already close to the legal limit . Added to this will be motorway dirt and air pollution which will be a health hazard, particularly for young children. Noise and air pollution will make it impossible for residents to open their windows at night, or to enjoy their gardens at the weekend. Twenty years ago, when this site was being considered for development, a professional sound engineer took sound level measurements at peak times at the bottom of Gipsy Lane and found then that the noise level approached the legal limit. Since then the flow of traffic has steadily increased, and it will get much worse in the future with the expansion of Stevenage west of the motorway. SITE 56. Some fifteen years ago land to the south of this site, east of Stevenage Road, was used illegally as a landfill area on which rubbish was dumped over a large area to the depth of four to five feet. When consolidated it was covered over with a depth of topsoil and turned into agricultural land. No doubt North Herts will have a record of what action was taken at the time. I would have thought that this would make this plot unsuitable for residential purposes for health reasons . I have no detailed knowledge of the other three sites glued on to the present village boundary on the east side, but apart from noise, the same objections would apply, namely access, water and sewage services, and yet more cars . I trust this information will be helpful in rejecting all the above sites as being totally unsuitable for further housing development. The village has already reached its maximum housing capacity for maintaining a reasonable quality of life for its present residents.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 57 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 0046 20 Tubb-Wallace D H Turner Consultancy Ltd Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Comment We refer to our representations on 29 October 2007 and 16 March 2008 on the Core Strategy and Development Policies Preferred Options Consultation and the Land Allocations ¿ Issues and Options Consultations respectively. These representations were summarised and distributed, by you, under reference 05/0046. However, we would wish to highlight the following:- Knebworth is the largest village in North Hertfordshire District (NHD) with over 5,000 population and in line with Government policy should meet its own affordable housing needs. 2. Knebworth is the most sustainable village in NHD with station, shops, library, post office, doctor's surgery, primary school and many other facilities. 3. Additional investment is urgently needed to improve and maintain all of the existing the facilities and to maintain the vitality and sustainability of the community. 4. Knebworth should be allowed to grow a modest amount to take advantage of the existing facilities. 5. Knebworth's estimate for proportional growth within the plan period requires 178 dwellings on greenfield sites. 6. Sites 55, 57 and 58 are those, which are least constrained and such constraints as do exist can be readily overcome with the appropriate investment by improving the primary school and drainage infrastructure. All our earlier representations still apply but we hope the above is helpful by way of summary. 0077 15 Knebworth Parish Council Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object Development of site 52-58 would result in growth which Knebworth village cannot take. The sites identified have the following problems:

Site 57 Land south of Swangleys Lane. This site shows access onto Swangleys Lane which is a narrow lane passing places. The school is located on Swangleys Lane and traffic comes to a stand still at the start and end of a school day. 0347 16 Brookes Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object I oppose development on all five of the suggested sites abounding Knebworth village (52, 53, 55, 57 and 58). I also oppose sites 54 and 56 which represent expansion of Stevenage.

Whilst acknowledging that Knebworth is a 'sustainable hub' in terms of its transport links and local facilities and that some limited expansion may, in the long term, be the key to it retaining its independence as a thriving village community rather than becoming a satellite or suburb of Stevenage, there are serious infrastructure constraints which preclude consideration of even minor expansion at the present time. These constraints relate to the provision of primary and secondary school places, lack of capacity and suitable 'future proof' premises for the GP surgery, parking and congestion/traffic issues, water supply and sewerage.

Suggestions that mitigation of these constraints could be achieved by 'improving the schools and social infrastructure' are unrealistic. There is no easy way to expand the primary school which is already one of the biggest in Hertfordshire . Parents are likely to strongly resist the notion of a super-primary school with a 3-form intake. Secondary school provision is a contentious issue for many Knebworth families with no obvious solution, other than to move away.

Likewise, there are no obvious solutions to the parking, congestion and rat-run problems which would be compounded by the provision of more housing around the village. Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 57 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent

There are possible options for resolving the provision of a new GP surgery in the medium term but this would be subject to adequate funding. There is no apparent source of funds at present.

Sewerage and water constraints will no doubt be resolved at some point in the future but possibly not within the next ten years.

All 7 proposed sites in Knebworth Parish are in the Green Belt where housing development would be contrary to current local and national planning policy.

Site 57 Land South of Swangleys Lane, Knebworth

Relatively high landscape value - views in and out of the village valued by residents. Traffic access onto Swangleys Lane (narrow country lane) not viable ¿ site would need to have direct access onto London Road (possibly via the North Herts Homes Hostel site) Possible potential for provision of community facilities*. Long term, could provide opportunity to improve the primary school facilities and resolve school traffic and parking issues if road access could be provided from London Road. 0459 107 CPRE - The Hertfordshire Society Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object This site is in the Green Belt on the edge of the village. It is grade 3 agricultural land, in use for agricultural purposes. 0985 11 Trotman Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object Site 57 Land South of Swangley's Lane, Knebworth The weaknesses shown on the site map are paramount. It is a totally 'unnatural site' at the back of exisitng housing with all traffic exiting onto narrow Swangley's Lane. 3950 70 Hertfordshire County Council - Historic Environment Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Comment Requirement for Pre-application or Pre-determination Archaeological Assessment

The sites below have known archaeological remains within them or have archaeological potential. We would therefore wish that - in accordance with Government policy in PPG 16 and the current draft PPS 15 - the LPA requests that pre-application or pre-determination archaeological assessments should be included within all development briefs and other proposals for the sites, if they are formally adopted as development sites in the local development plan. Such assessment would, depending upon the size and location of the proposals, range in scope from additional desk-based research to more extensive archaeological field survey and evaluation. The purpose of the archaeological assessment would be to provide sufficient information about the archaeological resource and in particular the extent of archaeological remains worthy of preservation in situ, to enable the LPA to determine any specific application for development.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 57 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 3952 55 Hertfordshire County Council - Passenger Transport Unit Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Comment Plot 57: One of the suitable vehicle accesses to this plot is from the north side of Swanleys Lane, which is a local access road. This would be considered acceptable if the access to the plot was located centrally along the frontage to take advantage of maximising the vehicle to vehicle inter visibility. The applicant would have control of the land to each side of the proposed junction. However, it would have to meet the safety requirements of Manual for Streets. Another feasible vehicle access could be from the east side of Swanleys Lane. Some widening along this Lane would be required . This site of this size is considered as a large development. The application should therefore be supported by a Transport Assessment, which sets out the transport implications of the development proposals and identify measures required to overcome any transport impact of the proposal . The scoping of the assessment should extend to the junctions within the villages of Knebworth and Codicote. 3963 4 Welwyn and Hatfield District Council Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Comment * Development on the edges of the village of Knebworth would be contrary to the aim of the North Hertfordshire Core Strategy Preferred Options Paper (September 2007) for the following reasons:

It would undermine the spatial strategy which seeks to locate growth in accordance with the settlement hierarchy. Within the settlement hierarchy, the village of Knebworth is identified as a larger village where development only within the boundary of the settlement is allowed. The additional suggested sites are outside of the boundary of the village of Knebworth and their development would therefore be contrary to the spatial strategy as set out in Core Policies C and F.

* The analysis for Knebworth at paragraph 3.64 of the Core Strategy Preferred Options paper identifies that there are infrastructure constraints notably the primary school which is operating close to capacity.

*In addition, sewage capacity at Rye Meads is constrained. The East of England Capacity Study identifies significant capacity difficulties at Rye Meads sewage treatment works which serves much of the north of Welwyn Hatfield, as well as Knebworth and Codicote, and other areas proposed for new housing developments within the East of England.

* Development of the five sites promoted around the edge of Knebworth would erode the very narrow bands of countryside which separate Knebworth from surrounding settlements. All the sites are open and exposed where development would be highly visible.

* Sequentially preferable sites were identified within the boundary of Knebworth in the land allocations issues and options paper (January 2008).

The SA/SEA identified that sites 52, 53, 55, 57 and 58: * Do not meet SA objective 2(a) to minimise development of greenfield land and other land with high environmental and amenity value. The sites are all green field and agricultural land grade 3.

* Do not meet SA objective 3(d) to reduce pollution from any source. The sites are all situated in a source protection zone.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 57 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent * Do not meet SA objective 6(a) to use natural resources efficiently.

* There is uncertainly regarding the sites ability to meet objective 2(c), to deliver more sustainable location patterns and reduce the use of motor vehicles. This is due to capacity constraints at the primary school, resulting in additional trips to other schools.

* In addition there is uncertainty regarding objective 5(a), to share the benefits of prosperity fairly. Due to constraints on schools and social infrastructure.

The SA for site 58, objective 2(c) on page 183 appears to have a typo in the classification, it shows a 'tick' and the others are ?/'tick'. 4033 6 Simson Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object My understanding was that in a previous exercise NHDC established that Knebworth did not have the infrastructure to support expansion. The only thing which appears to have changed is that people with land would like to sell it for development. We are a village with a sense of community and a distinct settlement. The Green Belt surrounding us serves as an amenity which enhances the quality of life of both Knebworth residents and those who live in neighbouring settlements . It also includes agricultural land, at a premium for our food security. It further separates us from other settlements and other settlements from us. Expansion of Knebworth endangers it into growing into a town. The people who live here, many of whom have lived here all their lives, do so because they wish to live in a village which is sustainable as a village and not in a town. 4439 2 Kirk Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object Rear access problem unless out onto London Road by hostel. Danger to school in Swangleys Lane. 4450 6 Laing Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object I object to green belt development. Hertfordshire is already one of the most populous counties in England and the pressure is acutely felt. We need all the open countryside we have to maintain some of life. Knebworth does not have sufficient infrastructure for further housing 4871 63 Smith Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object I object to all sites that alter the Green Belt boundary. I object to the loss of agricultural land for the following reasons: Food security is now a national priority; Open green spaces are a valuable amenity for all; This country has been in breach of European bio-diversity regulations for the past six years; A survey of rare and endangered species needs to be undertaken; Fields are necessary for water management. 4951 1 Sage Document Section :Site 57 Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 57 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Representation : Object I am most concerned with this proposal to build a residential development on the land south of Swangleys Lane. Knebworth JMI is currently at capacity therefore how would the additional families in the proposed new housing be schooled. Currently Swangleys Lane becomes extremely congested with traffic and pedestrians during the dropping off and collection of children to the school and further the nursery`s pick up mid way through the day . There is at present a very narrow pavement which runs from London Road to the end of the school only, this is the only pavement in Swangleys Lane which is insufficient and provides concerns for safety, these will be intensified should this be an access to the development. Throughout the year farm machinery and articulated lorries use the lane to access Swangleys Farm, this activity is already compromised by the cars parked for school, and will be further by greater volumes of traffic and pedestrians created by any development. With regard to the plot itself, the sloping site will present surface water drainage issues. It is also of course currently Green Belt Agricultural land. The high street is renowned for its difficulties with the extra traffic generated by Chas Lowes, exacerbated when Knebworth is used to cut off a portion of the narrowed and therefore sluggish A1 at peak times. To add further housing in such close proximity to London Road and the high street will create busier junctions thus increasing the risk of accidents. Whilst we have particular concerns regarding this proposed site, ANY residential expansion poses considerable threat to Knebworth`s village identity. We are all too aware of the expansion of Stevenage and are already in grave danger of merging with and indeed becoming a suburb of Stevenage. The proposed site for a Secondary school put forward by KHEPT has an area allocated for housing which could be considered a suitable compromise. It would allow an element of control over both the site selection and the actual development. This would provide both the housing stock deemed necessary, together with a desperately needed educational facility to serve Knebworth and it`s surrounding villages. 5042 2 Richardson Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object The site is outside the 'Excluded Village' boundary and within the Green Belt.

Access to the site appears to be shown only by means of an entrance from Swangleys Lane. This is immediately to the west of the Farm at which point there is a sharp, blind bend severely restricting visibility in with directions. Further any such access will be close to the opposite junction with Old Lane.

That constraint would remain if a new access were created to the east of the farm cottages.

There is unlikely to be any means of access through the internal 'roads' in Haygarth to the London Road, B197. Without demolishing a property in the London Road there seems little likelihood of any other.

The Junior and Nursery School is situate in the west end of Swangleys Lane, adjacent to the junction with the London Road, and during term time the roads are extensively used by parents bringing and collecting children to and from the school. Any development will introduce a heavy additional traffic flow which cannot safely be accommodated.

That difficulty is made worse when the B197 is used for diversion when the motorway is closed.

This location, as with all the others, is subject tot he significant constraints of the water and sewerage systems which cannot properly cope even now. 5046 2 Bantick Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 57 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Greenfield Site. 5047 6 Bantick Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object Lack of Primary School capacity. Massive current sewage problems. Greenfield site. 5109 4 Joyce Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Comment The proposed site is clearly unsuitable for development for the following reasons:

The proximity of the site to Knebworth primary school is of concern - particularly the suggested size of the development, of nearly 14 acres. The increase of traffic would not only be undesirable, but a potential danger (to pupils) as well. The only access to the building work for heavy vehicles would be Swangleys Lane as the other access routes would be inappropriate for this traffic; due to their winding country lane nature. This again would be a potential hazard. In fact Swangleys Lane becomes congested enough due to school traffic, so to add to this would be short sighted.

Drainage, sewage, gas, electric, and water supplies would also cause a huge and unsustainable demand on the residents in that area. 5134 3 Aldrich Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object I do not support the development of this for residential purposes. If the proposal for this site was for the expansion of the school and improvement of the facilities, and expansion of the nursery block in particular, I would support that. The roads around the school site are congested enough. I understand no provisions are being made for extra schools to accommodate all the extra children these housing proposals would bring to the village. An already Over subscribed school. 5163 6 The Fairfield Partnership JB Planning Associates - TW Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object Site 57, 05/0046, Land South of Swangley's Lane, Knebworth 1. We object to this site, and believe that it would be an inappropriate allocation for residential development because it would have a detrimental effect on the character and setting of the village, and would represent an incursion into open countryside which is not currently related to the built form of the village. It also has the potential to exacerbate traffic congestion around the High Street. Grounds for Objection 2. Site 57 covers more than 5.5 Ha, an area which at a modest development density of 35 dwellings per hectare would deliver almost 200 dwellings, close to the centre of the village. This would be a significant extension to the village of Knebworth, which would be likely to exacerbate congestion within the village centre. The site is also located in a sensitive part of the landscape which surrounds the village. Scale of Development 3. While the scale of development, at around 200 dwellings, may not be too large for the village as a whole, we are concerned about the suitability of Site 57 due to its location. Swangley's Lane itself does not appear to be suitable to accommodate such a large development, due to its narrow and winding nature. However, development in this location would Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 57 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent also be very close to the High Street, and it will be necessary to demonstrate that the junction between Swangley's Lane and London Road is adequate to accommodate such a level of additional traffic. 4. The roads at the centre of the village, particularly the narrow High Street, currently suffer from severe congestion at peak periods, to which there is no obvious solution. A development of 200 dwellings on a site very close to this would be likely to exacerbate the current problems. Landscape Character 5. An independent Landscape Assessment was carried out by CSa Environmental Planning in January 2009. This considered the potential impact that residential development would have on various sites around Knebworth, including this one. With regard to the area covered by Site 57, the Assessment concluded: 'The site lies outside the settlement boundary of the village and the character of the site is typical of the wider countryside, comprising gently undulating arable farmland. The relationship to the existing urban area is poor and development of this site would result in an expansion of the village out into the open countryside towards the neighbouring village of Datchworth. Development of the site would also result in Swangley's Farm merging with the existing village, to the detriment of the character of the area.' 6. It is clear from this comment that the development of Site 57 would be a significant incursion into the open countryside which surrounds Knebworth, and would also harm the character of the village. 5183 6 Elliott Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object Most have similar general problems regarding utilities a. water supply water table falling in Hertfordshire rivers drying up b. Sewage, existing arrangements in Lea Valley approaching limits. Still residential development in process of completion outstanding in Stevenage. c. Capacity of educational facilities firstly on the primary school currently located in Swangleys Lane. Will add to pressure on secondary places, which are not currently satisfactory. (Depends on density of proposed buildings) d. Road facilities most sites will add to current peak hour problems site 54 near an inadequate roudabout and proposal to extend Tesco supermarket. 5185 1 Ross-Langley Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object It's green belt land, access is restricted and disgorges onto London Road, Knebworth, already a bottleneck, or Watton Road which is narrow, or Swangleys Lane/Old Lane which are narrow and often overrun by traffic for the primary school in Swangleys Lane.

To increase population density, it might be more efficient to build blocks of apartments with good insulation, common facilities and storage in the lower floors, good public transport links to reduce the need for private transport. 5216 5 Carpenter Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Comment The consequences of overcoming the limitations of local services, eg roads, sewers, schools, water supply, gas supply would be extremely disruptive and damaging to the local environment. Increased traffic congestion being of an ongoing nature raises the probability of future road improvement schemes further damaging the local environment in future. Proximity to the village school may limit events at the school which help rasie funds for the school particularly those that rely on the surrounding space being empty, eg Archery on gala day. 5220 5 Harris Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 57 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object Knebworth is already a "big" village. We don't want it to be a town. This is all GREEN BELT land. NHDC has already accepted that the local infrastructure won't support a higher population. This site has no obvious access. 5422 6 Haigh Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object Knebworth should not be expanded - we do not have the infrastructure to support it (traffic, schools, drainage systems etc) and we are in the green belt. This site proposal is particularly bad. 5434 5 Weaver Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object My objections to this site are as follows: 1. the continued growth in Knebworth is changing its character for the worse and turning it from a village into a small town; 2. growing the boundaries of Knebworth increases the risk of coallescence with Woolmer Green; 3. The infrastructure including roads, water, drains and the primary school are already overwhelmed and any further development should not take place without the infrastructure upgrades being made first; 4. The High Street (London Road) is already congested and increasing the traffic flow will be detrimental to the character of the village. 5442 2 Jefferies Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object This site encroaches on the narrow green belt around Knebworth.

The available vehicular access is onto a narrow lane with high banks accessed through narrow residential roads.

Knebworth High Street is frequently blocked due to the high volume of traffic using it.

Knebworth Primary School is at capacity. Further residential development means that in future children would have to travel out of the village for primary education adding to the traffic congestion.

The rural views and peaceful environment currently enjoyed by residents on the west side of Knebworth will be seriously affected by development of this site. 5468 4 Onyett Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 57 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent I do not agree to the proposed additional housing to be built on this land because: - it is green field land - I do not believe the local infrastructure (eg roads, sewerage etc) will support the increased load due to the extra housing - the village primary school is already over-subscribed - it will fundamentally change the nature of the village, making it less like the village which we chose to live in 5469 4 Onyett Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object I do not agree to the proposed additional housing to be built on this land because: - it is green field land - I do not believe the local infrastructure (eg roads, sewerage etc) will support the increased load due to the extra housing - the village primary school is already over-subscribed - it will fundamentally change the nature of the village, making it less like the village which we chose to live in 5480 4 Haller Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object Whilst it is argued that Knebworth, as North Herts largest village offers the best facilities (train station, shops, primary school) and thus it should be allowed to grow to a modest degree, I believe that for these reasons it should not.

My reasons succinctly for this are;

1. The rails station is oversubscribed with insufficient parking 2. The Primary school is bursting and oversubscribed with even village children being unable to get place. 3. The road structure of the village is even insufficient for current traffic levels with, particularly at rush hours there being jams along London Road/Stevenage Road and long queues along Watton Road. 4. As NHDCs largest village any further expansion may well result in Knebworth being a small town and thus loose its village feel.

Finally and most importantly, all of the presently proposed sites (52, 53, 55, 57 & 58) are presently Green Belt land and should be allowed to remain so, for the reasons that the designation of Green Belt was originally created. 5483 4 Haller Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object Whilst it is argued that Knebworth, as North Herts largest village offers the best facilities (train station, shops, primary school) and thus it should be allowed to grow to a modest degree, I believe that for these reasons it should not.

My reasons succinctly for this are;

1. The rails station is oversubscribed with insufficient parking Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 57 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 2. The Primary school is bursting and oversubscribed with even village children being unable to get place. 3. The road structure of the village is even insufficient for current traffic levels with, particularly at rush hours there being jams along London Road/Stevenage Road and long queues along Watton Road. 4. As NHDCs largest village any further expansion may well result in Knebworth being a small town and thus loose its village feel.

Finally and most importantly, all of the presently proposed sites (52, 53, 55, 57 & 58) are presently Green Belt land and should be allowed to remain so, for the reasons that the designation of Green Belt was originally created. 5524 8 Lund Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object I firmly believe that this is one of the worst sites identified. Whilst it verges on in-fill, it is really at the most sleepy edge of the village and as such access to the site would be really difficult. The lane from Datchworth it dangerous when it is icy and the visiblity of oncoming traffic is very hard. There are also no walk ways into the village from that site until you get to the footpath outside the primary school. The primary school would be totally disrupted during building and the ongoing noise of a residential site would be disruptive to the life at the primary school. 5542 1 Worthington Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object This development together with site 58 would dramatically change the nature and evironment of Knebworth as a village. We moved here some 20 years ago because we wanted access to the countryside and to live in a village community.This development would start to erode these benefits.

Some time ago the village indicated as part of a consultation process on the future planning for the village that they did not want any expansion of the existing boundaries and this would go against the wishes of the majority who live in the village.

The village at present cannot cope with the amount of traffic, and the car parking is totally inadequate.

Knebworth Primary School is already over-subscribed and any expansion would not be possible on the existing site.

Not sure about the comment that the site would support the local economy since a) you have difficulty parking near the shops,and the limited car parking will get worse with the recent introduction of housing off St Martin 's Road this will not encourage people to visit the village by car b) the High Road being the alternative to the A1 is already heavily used and more houses would put an even greater strain on the through traffic.

To cope with the additional houses Swangleys Lane would need to be widened which would alter the whole character of the Lane and and make it even more of a danger than it is at present..

Finally the existing Lane network was not built to carry the amount of trafic that already uses them. The additonal traffic would mean a dramatic change to the whole road network which would further take away the concept of Knebworth has a village !! 5568 3 Weaver Document Section :Site 57 Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 57 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Representation : Object This plot is in an area approx. a quarter of a mile from where I live in and I foresee the following problems/objections to its' use as affordable housing, in addition to the already identified weaknesses : 1) Extension of house building on this site with the current trend of 'in-filling' will further erode the village concept of Knebworth which was a reason for moving to Knebworth in the first place. 2) At the site of the proposed new build considerable road widening would be necessary to accommodate increased traffic, thereby destroying one of the safer countryside cycling routes available around Knebworth (which in conjunction with other proposed developments would make safe and beautiful cycling routes a rare commodity). 3) There would be additional conjestion leading into Stevenage Road in the rush hour which is already conjested in the morning due to children being dropped off at the Primary School. 5570 4 Bedford Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object Knebworth is a village and should remain as one.

The primary school is full, as with the doctors.

The sewage is not suitable

The roads can't support more traffic, and the lanes are not suitable.

Knebworth is a lovely village and surrounded by beautiful country side - if any development happens we will end up as South Stevenage. The residents choose to live here as it is, it is also the largest village in Herts, so the development would turn into a town.

Tanya Bedford 5571 3 Ryan Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object Site is on greenbelt land - we must conserve our countryside. The countryside around Knebworth is one of the main reasons many people choose to live in the village and increases the quality of life of the residents.

The views from the top of Swangleys lane across the countryside are particularly beautiful and should be preserved - they should not be sacrificed for housing (or profitable gain of a local landowner) when there are other sites availble.

The surrounding roads are small narrow lanes that are dangerous and unsuitable for an increase in traffic.

The local school is already full to capacity.

Parking in the village is inadequate for the current population let alone an increase.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 57 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Local services ie Dentist and Doctor cannot support current population let alone an increase. 5577 5 Laing Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object Restricts school expansion and is valuable Greenbelt and needed green countryside for school and nearby houses,especially council flats. 6065 6 Norman Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object I strongly object to any major development in the area as the infrastructure is already being threatened. Knebworth could not and should not accept any major housing developments as the influx of families would necessitate the building of more schools, which in turn would require more families to justify its existence. The roads are hardly able to cope with the traffic presently and this particularly applies to Watton Road, which is used as the only practicable way from the A602 to the A1M for many people. 6095 2 Thurgood Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object My husband and I were absolutely delighted when we moved to Old Lane, Knebworth September 2008, a few weeks before the birth of our first daughter. Although the standard of houses was better elsewhere in the village, we decided to purchase Old Lane because of its location. The house we bought needs considerable work and we spent much of our savings and took out a large mortgage to purchase our property on Old Lane, because we felt assured of peace and quiet (something which we had moved from London to acquire), and safe, beautiful country lanes where we could take our baby for walks. We were therefore devastated to learn that building planning had been proposed on Site 57 behind Knebworth Primary School. It is our understanding that only recently heavy traffic has been deterred from cutting through Old Lane from parts of Stevenage by stopping access to this route at the north end of Old Lane. Local residents have told me that traffic used to be a nightmare along this route, as people used it at a cut through from Stevenage to London Road, Knebworth and vice versa. Since a blockage was put in place allowing access to Old Lane only from Watton Road coming out of Knebworth and not from Stevenage, residents around the Old Lane, St. Martin's Road and Swangleys Lane have been much happier with the state of the traffic. There is no pavement on Old Lane, but at the moment I have the pleasure of being able to take my daughter out for walks in her pushchair in relative safety along Old Lane and the local roads. She will also be able to play on our front lawn, and in time walk to the local school around the corner on Swangley's Lane. If planning is given for site 57, traffic along Old Lane will severely increase and will ruin our quality of life in this house. We do not want the noise of traffic every few seconds going past the front of our house day and night. Also, if planning is given, our daughter will not be able to play in our front garden, neither will she be able to walk to Knebworth Primary School around the corner when she is old enough, neither will I be able to continue taking her for walks in her pushchair in relative safety . In fact, access from Old Lane to even Swangley's Lane and St. Martin's Road will become hazardous. Our short driveway slopes immediately onto Old Lane Road and getting our own car or that of visitors in and out of our driveway would become a big safety hazard, as Old Lane road is already narrow and winding. If planning on site 57 is given, we may as well have spent a lot less of our hard earned money on a house somewhere else in the village or even in another town or village entirely. Everyone knows that housing in our part of the village is expensive because of its beautiful and peaceful surroundings (probably the most peaceful part of the village). You cannot hear the A1 traffic from Old Lane and the surrounding roads. Please don't ruin this very peaceful and beautiful location by building on site 57. We are a young family who have been prepared to plough our hard earned money into the village of Knebworth by renovating an old house in an expensive part of the village, because we believed we were buying into an area where we could raise our family in an idyllic setting . I will feel badly let down if this is not the case and planning is granted on site 57. 6279 6 Morris Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 57 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent On reviewing the additional proposed sites in and around Knebworth, I wish to make the following comments:- 1. Knebworth is a village. If the proposed expansion takes place, this will join Knebworth to Stevenage in the north and Woolmer Green in the south. 2. The roads which run in and around Knebworth are already extremely busy, any expansion in any direction would put more pressure on the already congested village centre. 3. The Doctors Surgery in Knebworth is already busy. I do not believe that this surgery could take any more patients, as it is very difficult to get an appointment with the number of patients it has now. 4. I have no school age children of my own, but I understand that the school is well oversubscribed and even if you live in the village of Knebworth it is no guarantee that your children will get into the village school. More houses being built would apply more pressure to this problem. In short, I believe that any development, which expands on the boundary of Knebworth would be detrimental to Knebworth village. On top of these points these sites are GREEN BELT, this should mean they stay GREEN. 6298 5 Charter Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object I would like to submit an objection to the the proposed land allocation of additional sites numbered 52, 53, 55, 56, 57 and 58 on the following grounds;RR1. First and foremost that each of these sites are designated Green Belt land and should not be developed on unless 'exceptional circumstances' prevail. I can not imagine such a circumstance existing to support residential or any other form of development.RR2. Knebworth is already the largest of the villages in the District and many of it's existing services could not support a significant increase in population resulting from further residential development. Most notably, Knebworth Primary School which is already large for a village school (with a 2 class intake per year) and has limited scope for expansion without further proposed encroachment onto Green Belt land.RR3. I am surprised that the appraisals concerning the suitability of each of these sites for development has not yet considered the issues of access, highways and traffic impact. I would object to each of these sites being developed on the grounds of poor access, insufficient highways capacity and on a negative traffic impact particularly, with regard to an increase in traffic numbers and safety issues.RRAs a general comment, I would add that future residential development should be focused on infill development sites, brownfield sites or on sites allocated for the expansion of the Districts towns whose facilities and services can sustain such development. Villages should be protected and not converted into towns or annexed to existing towns. Development on Green Belt land should be avoided at all cost as per Government policy. 6378 6 Bland Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object All the other sites, 52 53 55 57 and 58 have been put forward by developers for their own fiscal gain and not enhance the village. Many times this expansion has been on the cards and all have been carefully examined by experts. The conclusion by the local authority NHDC is that it is not neccessary or sustainable and so they have not supported or endorsed a 'special case'. In fact it has said said that sufficient sites are available in existing plans without looking further. 6382 5 Milne Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object We have been resident in Wadnall Way since October 1998 and moved to Knebworth from Stevenage because of its beautiful village status and amenities. Firstly, we would like to register our deep concerns re. possible residential development of greenbelt land on sites 52. 53., 55., 56., 57., and 58. Our reasons include; 1, the constraints new homes would make on the existing sewerage system, the local infrastructure, transport links, the limited health facilities and the already oversubscribed Knebworth Primary School. 2, The reasons for green belt land is to separate encroaching development from neighbouring Towns / Villages. We want to remain a village and not a town. Secondly, we would like to our register our deep concerns about the possible development of a Secondary School for eight to nine hundred pupils and 180 houses on land adjacent to Wadnall Way Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 57 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent and Woodstock. Our reasons include; 1, We do not want to look out onto a sixty acre site of a school and houses .This development would encroach on our beautiful view of green belt land to the right of the front of our home. 2, We do not want to have our peaceful existence interrupted by the noise and a heavy increase of transport from the development of a school and 180 new houses. 3. The green belt land proposed for this site has a beautiful path which leads up to Mardley Woods and is enjoyed by us as and numerous others as a glorious country walk. We do not want to see this destroyed . 4. The proposed development has not considered the cost or impact on the local infra structure. 5. The proposal does not take into account of the local safety implications of eight to nine hundred pupils near the railway line adjacent to the land. Who will pay for safety measures such as fencing? 6. One Stevenage Secondary Schools has been closed and another is due for closure next year. A large amount of money has been put into the remaining Secondary Schools to upgrade them. Surely this is where the investment should be? Also our two daughters attend The Heathcote School and have done very well. We were aware of the fact that when we moved into the village there was no local provision of a Secondary School and they would have to travel. 7. The local church graveyards have been closed as they are full. The small Knebworth Cemetery at the end of Wadnall Way will surely have to be eventually expanded to cope with requirements in the future? 8. The planned large catchment area of Knebworth, Oaklands, Woolmer Green and Codicote area for the school means there would be no guarantee of an automatic position and could backfire as applicants from Stevenage and Welwyn Garden City could apply. 9. We are concerned that having such a development at the end of our road would decrease our current village property value. 6383 5 Plester Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object I wish to submit the following representations against the adoption of certain of the suggested sites for development in the settlement of Knebworth.RR1) Development of any or all of the sites on the edge of the village (nos 52, 53, 55, 57 & 58) would exacerbate the already serious traffic overload. A bypass is an essential prerequisite.RR2) The access roads neighbouring the sites 55, 57 & 58 are unsuitable for increased use. Swangleys Lane and Old Lane are narrow and without footpaths. St Martins Road is unadopted. 6385 2 Howarth Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object I hope you will accept this email to register my opposition to the proposed sites for development in Knebworth, particularly those currently serving as agricultural land, sites 52,53, 55,57 and 58. All these proposals are likely to provide additional housing at the detriment to the environment within which the housing is proposed. Agriculutural land helps sustain the rural nature of our region, and keeps the green belt and green space of North Hertfordshire, something vital to its character. I would also object to development on these sites because, as you are well aware, the infrastructure of Knebworth, would not support further, heavy capacity, development. Whilst the sites are within some reach of the village centre, I would stress that the current shops in the village are unlikely to be supported by additional occupants, and there is no capacity for parking for extra residents, should they wish to visit the local retailers. Some of the developments also are on the very boundaries of the village (especially 53 and 52) and my concern here would be that residents wouldn't choose to walk to the village, but drive (as happens now from these further reaches of the village,) again adding to infrastructure problems. Sites 55,57 and 58 are all within the main 'exit' to Stevenage and Hertford, and I would feel that the small country lane is already at capacity for traffic flow, and could not support the additional transport requirements of housing development should these sites be considered. 6404 4 Beeby Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 57 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Document Section :Site 57 Representation : Object Development in any of these sites would result in far more traffic than any of the adjoining roads could cope with.

In the case of 55-58 both Watton Road and OAKFIELD's Road are difficult to negotiate by two cars already, because of road and the cars parked.

Knebworth village centre is often booked by traffic already, any additional would make it worse. Apart from anything else it is not good to see more greenbelt disappear.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 58 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 0046 21 Tubb-Wallace D H Turner Consultancy Ltd Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Comment We refer to our representations on 29 October 2007 and 16 March 2008 on the Core Strategy and Development Policies Preferred Options Consultation and the Land Allocations - Issues and Options Consultations respectively. These representations were summarised and distributed, by you, under reference 05/0046. However, we would wish to highlight the following:- Knebworth is the largest village in North Hertfordshire District (NHD) with over 5,000 population and in line with Government policy should meet its own affordable housing needs. 2. Knebworth is the most sustainable village in NHD with station, shops, library, post office, doctor's surgery, primary school and many other facilities. 3. Additional investment is urgently needed to improve and maintain all of the existing the facilities and to maintain the vitality and sustainability of the community. 4. Knebworth should be allowed to grow a modest amount to take advantage of the existing facilities. 5. Knebworth's estimate for proportional growth within the plan period requires 178 dwellings on greenfield sites. 6. Sites 55, 57 and 58 are those, which are least constrained and such constraints as do exist can be readily overcome with the appropriate investment by improving the primary school and drainage infrastructure. All our earlier representations still apply but we hope the above is helpful by way of summary. 0057 34 Stevenage Borough Council Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object Site 58 proposes the development of a 6.03 hectare greenfield site to the north east of Knebworth. Development of this site would bring the built envelope of Knebworth closer to that of Stevenage and hence reduce the separation between the two settlements. We consider that the allocation of site 58 compromise any further development that may come forward beyond the south western fringe of Stevenage beyond the existing plan period to 2026, for example, on the grounds of coalescence. 0077 16 Knebworth Parish Council Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object Development of site 52-58 would result in growth which Knebworth village cannot take. The sites identified have the following problems:

Site 58 Land north of Watton Road This site builds up to the Parish Boundary towards Stevenage leaving a narrow strip of Green Belt between Knebworth and Stevenage. Access onto Watton Road would have a similar effect to Site 55. Provision of an access to Oakfields Road would require compulsory purchase of land to ensure adequate access.

Knebworth has grown by 30% over the last 30 years without any improvement in the infrastructure. This has resulted in a sewerage system which is currently working beyond its capacity and significant traffic problems within the village.

The B197 is the relief road for the A1 (M) and so large volumes of traffic pass through the village everyday. The East of England Plan considers that the A1 (M) southbound around junctions 6 & 7 will have reached their maximum capacity by 2021, which will put greater demands on the B197.

Stevenage Borough Council has also permitted two retail parks, a large B&Q and supermarket on the B197 just north of Knebworth with a fourth planned. This has also added to the congestion through the village. Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 58 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent

The increased car park charges and reduced number of spaces at Stevenage Station has brought more commuter parking into the village adding to congestion.

The development of Orchard Way and Broom Grove set aside land for a second junior school. Hertfordshire County Council however decided not to build a school; instead it was replaced with an additional 21 houses. The result of this lack of planning has put pressure on the existing school. It is one of the largest in Hertfordshire with a two form intake and nursery school. It is one of the largest in Hertfordshire with a two form intake and nursery school. Knebworth residents cannot guarantee that their children are allocated a place at Knebworth JMI.

At present there are no NHS dentists available and the doctors patient list is high. There is also the threat that the village might lose its doctors' surgery.

The constraints of the infrastructure and the junior school were raised in the Local Development Framework in 2008. The constraints still exist and the village is at capacity. Any further development must therefore be prevented. 0347 17 Brookes Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object General Comments:

I oppose development on all five of the suggested sites abounding Knebworth village (52, 53, 55, 57 and 58). I also oppose sites 54 and 56 which represent expansion of Stevenage.

Whilst acknowledging that Knebworth is a 'sustainable hub' in terms of its transport links and local facilities and that some limited expansion may, in the long term, be the key to it retaining its independence as a thriving village community rather than becoming a satellite or suburb of Stevenage, there are serious infrastructure constraints which preclude consideration of even minor expansion at the present time. These constraints relate to the provision of primary and secondary school places, lack of capacity and suitable 'future proof' premises for the GP surgery, parking and congestion/traffic issues, water supply and sewerage.

Suggestions that mitigation of these constraints could be achieved by 'improving the schools and social infrastructure' are unrealistic. There is no easy way to expand the primary school which is already one of the biggest in Hertfordshire . Parents are likely to strongly resist the notion of a super-primary school with a 3-form intake. Secondary school provision is a contentious issue for many Knebworth families with no obvious solution, other than to move away.

Likewise, there are no obvious solutions to the parking, congestion and rat-run problems which would be compounded by the provision of more housing around the village.

There are possible options for resolving the provision of a new GP surgery in the medium term but this would be subject to adequate funding. There is no apparent source of funds at present.

Sewerage and water constraints will no doubt be resolved at some point in the future but possibly not within the next ten years.

All 7 proposed sites in Knebworth Parish are in the Green Belt where housing development would be contrary to current local and national planning policy.

Site 58 Land north of Watton Road, Knebworth (yes this site is in my back yard but I have tried to remain impartial!) Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 58 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent

Significant impact on coalescence Pedestrian and traffic access dangerous onto Watton Road at this point. Opening up access from Oakfields Road/Avenue would have a significant impact on what is currently a quiet residential road. Development would enclose the recreation ground, the openness and views from which are valued by residents. It would also preclude future expansion of the recreation/sports ground - there is pressure to improve existing sports facilities for local clubs. The footpaths in this area are well used and valued by local residents (and dogs!) from both Stevenage and Knebworth. Possible potential for provision of community facilities*.

* The Knebworth Parish Plan ( 2007) identified various community needs which include: A new GP surgery A small community sports hall (similar to the one at Barnwell School) Possible new library to release the existing library site for alternative use ( e.g GP surgery) Long term parking for local businesses and commuters to alleviate parking problems in the village centre 0459 108 CPRE - The Hertfordshire Society Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object This site is in the Green Belt on grade 3 agricultural land. Its development would be a significant extension of the village into the countryside and would enclose the recreation ground within the urban area . 0985 12 Trotman Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object Site 58 Land North of Watton Road Redevelopment of this site would impose traffic problems onto Watton road and into the village. Watton Road to Bragbury is already a 'rat-run' for commuters and others from Stevenage increasing parking problems for Knebworth. Also access to the site from Oakfiels Avenue would open up a cul-de-sac to through traffic. 3950 72 Hertfordshire County Council - Historic Environment Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Comment Requirement for Pre-application or Pre-determination Archaeological Assessment

The sites below have known archaeological remains within them or have archaeological potential. We would therefore wish that - in accordance with Government policy in PPG 16 and the current draft PPS 15 - the LPA requests that pre-application or pre-determination archaeological assessments should be included within all development briefs and other proposals for the sites, if they are formally adopted as development sites in the local development plan. Such assessment would, depending upon the size and location of the proposals, range in scope from additional desk-based research to more extensive archaeological field survey and evaluation. The purpose of the archaeological assessment would be to provide sufficient information about the archaeological resource and in particular the extent of archaeological remains worthy of preservation in situ, to enable the LPA to determine any specific

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 58 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent application for development. 3952 56 Hertfordshire County Council - Passenger Transport Unit Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Comment Plot 58: The vehicle access to this plot is from Watton Road that is a local access road, would be considered acceptable if the access to the plot was located centrally along the frontage to take advantage of maximising the vehicle to vehicle inter visibility. The applicant would have control of the land to each side of the proposed junction this would have to meet the safety requirements of Manual for Streets. Another feasible vehicle access could be from Oakfield Road. This may be unsuitable for large scale development as it is through a residential area. This site of this size is considered as a large development. The application should therefore be supported by a Transport Assessment, which sets out the transport implications of the development proposals and identify measures required to overcome any transport impact of the proposal. The scoping of the assessment should extend to the junctions within the villages of Knebworth and Hertford Road in Stevenage . 3963 5 Welwyn and Hatfield District Council Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Comment * Development on the edges of the village of Knebworth would be contrary to the aim of the North Hertfordshire Core Strategy Preferred Options Paper (September 2007) for the following reasons:

It would undermine the spatial strategy which seeks to locate growth in accordance with the settlement hierarchy. Within the settlement hierarchy, the village of Knebworth is identified as a larger village where development only within the boundary of the settlement is allowed. The additional suggested sites are outside of the boundary of the village of Knebworth and their development would therefore be contrary to the spatial strategy as set out in Core Policies C and F.

* The analysis for Knebworth at paragraph 3.64 of the Core Strategy Preferred Options paper identifies that there are infrastructure constraints notably the primary school which is operating close to capacity.

* In addition, sewage capacity at Rye Meads is constrained. The East of England Capacity Study identifies significant capacity difficulties at Rye Meads sewage treatment works which serves much of the north of Welwyn Hatfield, as well as Knebworth and Codicote, and other areas proposed for new housing developments within the East of England .

* Development of the five sites promoted around the edge of Knebworth would erode the very narrow bands of countryside which separate Knebworth from surrounding settlements. All the sites are open and exposed where development would be highly visible.

* Sequentially preferable sites were identified within the boundary of Knebworth in the land allocations issues and options paper (January 2008).

The SA/SEA identified that sites 52, 53, 55, 57 and 58: * Do not meet SA objective 2(a) to minimise development of greenfield land and other land with high environmental and amenity value. The sites are all green field and agricultural land grade 3.

* Do not meet SA objective 3(d) to reduce pollution from any source. The sites are all situated in a source protection zone. Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 58 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent

* Do not meet SA objective 6(a) to use natural resources efficiently.

* There is uncertainly regarding the sites ability to meet objective 2(c), to deliver more sustainable location patterns and reduce the use of motor vehicles. This is due to capacity constraints at the primary school, resulting in additional trips to other schools.

* In addition there is uncertainty regarding objective 5(a), to share the benefits of prosperity fairly. Due to constraints on schools and social infrastructure.

The SA for site 58, objective 2(c) on page 183 appears to have a typo in the classification, it shows a 'tick' and the others are ?/'tick'. 4033 7 Simson Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object My understanding was that in a previous exercise NHDC established that Knebworth did not have the infrastructure to support expansion. The only thing which appears to have changed is that people with land would like to sell it for development. We are a village with a sense of community and a distinct settlement. The Green Belt surrounding us serves as an amenity which enhances the quality of life of both Knebworth residents and those who live in neighbouring settlements . It also includes agricultural land, at a premium for our food security. It further separates us from other settlements and other settlements from us. Expansion of Knebworth endangers it into growing into a town. The people who live here, many of whom have lived here all their lives, do so because they wish to live in a village which is sustainable as a village and not in a town. This particular piece of land appears to be one which is widely used by walkers on the footpath nearby, and development on it would ruin its amenity value . The enhancement of the quality of life which walking in the countryside gives to people, not only in their physical health but in their mental wellbeing, is immeasurable. Once our countryside is gone, its gone. We really do value it. 4439 1 Kirk Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Comment Encroachment into Green Belt. Watton Road already overloaded at peak times over road humps. 4701 2 Sleator Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Comment Developing on this land will be a major step toward merging Knebworth with Stevenage . This Green Belt land acts as an effective rural break between the two towns, protecting Knebworth's distinct identity from it's bigger, sprawling neighbour. As a relative newcomer to the area, I have often been struck by how fiercely Knebworth residents insist upon maintaining their village identity. Even the Knebworth signs on the roads into the village are built from stout brick ¿ not the usual metal or wood place name signs normally found in surrounding areas. Residents tell me that they feel a very strong sense of heritage and pride at coming from Knebworth. I often see it expressed clearly during social events in the Village Hall when many people go to great lengths to make it clear that they live in Knebworth, not Stevenage. It's not snobbery. Nor do they dislike the bigger town. It's just that they love the close community, friendly, village feel to Knebworth and want to do all that they can to protect such a rare commodity. Building on Green Belt land between the two towns will inevitably make Knebworth's chances of survival virtually impossible. Despite developers claims it is certain that further development along the same line will quickly follow and Knebworth will swiftly become a mere suburb of Stevenage, probably within the next 10 years. 4702 2 Dyster Document Section :Site 58 Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 58 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Representation : Object General I am far from satisfied that there is a need for new housing developments in Stevenage and North Herts on the scale envisaged in the Government targets. Water supplies in the area are already under great pressure and this must be a severe obstacle militating against development in this area - please refer to the article on page 3 of the Comet newspaper of 3 September. Developments in Knebworth Knebworth already has a severe traffic and parking problem which remains unresolved. Any new residential development will make the situation worse still. Before any new housing sites were to be agreed traffic issues must be resolved . Site 55 I object to this site being developed for the following reasons: Loss of open greenfield land and further urbanisation of Knebworth Water supply problems as above. Severe problems for road traffic access. Tendency towards linking built up areas of Knebworth and Stevenage. Loss of rural outlook for residents of Watton Road, Old Lane and St. Martin's Road. Site 58 I object to this site being developed for the following reasons: Loss of open greenfield land and further urbanisation of Knebworth Water supply problems as above. Problems for road traffic access. Would radically reduce the gap between the built up areas of Knebworth and Stevenage. Loss of rural outlook for residents of Watton Road, Oakfields Road and Oakfields Avenue. 4806 2 Grainger Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object I wish to comment on Site 58 Land North of Watton Road to Oakfields Road which is part of the LDP. I oppose this site being considered for several reasons : 1. I object to houses being built on Green Belt land. 2. This development would start the encroachment of Knebworth into Bragbury End and ultimately Stevenage. 3. Watton Road is unsuited to the volume of traffic it carries at the moment. 4. The exit to London Road/Stevenage Road would I predict become blocked constantly. The road cannot be widened because of the existing housing. 5. This site would mean many houses being built and people living near to the electricity substation and mast. 6. The JMI school does not have the capacity to take more local children. 7. There is a very large deep water supply pipe running through this field - can this be built on? 8. This land is privately owned and would profit the Wallace family. This contrasts with Knebworth Estates proposed sites, which if chosen 100% of the proceeds would go to Parish Charities.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 58 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 9. Education, sewerage, healthcare, parking are all major issues for the village and any increase in housing will greatly affect the pressure on the limited services. 4871 62 Smith Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object I object to all sites that alter the Green Belt boundary. I object to the loss of agricultural land for the following reasons: Food security is now a national priority; Open green spaces are a valuable amenity for all; This country has been in breach of European bio-diversity regulations for the past six years; A survey of rare and endangered species needs to be undertaken; Fields are necessary for water management. 5012 1 Berry Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object The following are the reasons for my objections to the proposal regarding Site 58, land north of Watton Road, Knebworth.

Building large quantities of additional residential properties is contrary to conserving the heritage of our historic towns and rural settlements. The quantities proposed are huge in proportion to the current size of the village. In order to maintain the diversity of sizes and personalities of towns and villages in the area, Knebworth is stretched to the limit regarding size. It is currently a large village and I'm convinced that most residents do not want it to become another town within the area.

Far from helping to achieve sustainable levels of prosperity and economic growth, too large an increase in the population of the village would not only destroy its identity, but also put additional strains on local amenities and utilities.

The report highlights concerns over constraints with utilities and schooling. The primary school, while the largest in the area at currently double the size of most others, ie two-form entry, is not big enough to accommodate current requirements for Knebworth residents. There are several local families who have to travel to other villages for primary schooling, this impacts on family life and increased car travel as the alternatives are not within reasonable walking distances.

There is currently a doctors' surgery in Knebworth, but it has been proposed that this is relocated somewhere in Stevenage. This will mean increased travel for health matters for current residents, let alone any additional demands that would arise from additional population increases.

Regarding other utilities within the village, the water pressure to houses to the north of Site 58 is already very, very low for quite a lot of the time. We have real concerns that additional demands on the already overstretched water supply could mean that our water pressure falls even further to an unacceptable level. Also, the sewage facilities are not only old, but are prone to blocking.

The report states that Site 58 is not within a flood plain, however, during periods of heavy rain there is a large area across one of the public footpaths to Stevenage, slightly higher up the hill to the site, that regularly retains water and there is frequently a large "puddle" across the path and surrounding field area. I'm not qualified to say whether this shows that it does indeed border a watercourse or whether this is relevant to being a groundwater protection zone 1, or whether the water table is high there, or whether it is because the whole area is clay soil, with some local subsidence, leading to underpinning. I do, however, think there are potential problems relating to these issues and I do know that our soil is heavy clay and some Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 58 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent houses nearby have definitely been underpinned.

The plot in question is in grade 3 agricultural land and therefore should not be built on. The village has already seen its green belt boundary moved in the past to accommodate residential developments, eg the "Rialto" estate, and this is worrying enough, but to propose to build on agricultural land when we currently see and hear concerns expressed about the possibility that there will not be enough food for everyone within the next 20 years, then that is very worrying indeed. Food shortages are apparently a reality and therefore all current agricultural land should be preserved for that purpose.

While there appear to be many reasons for rejecting this building proposal, the two main issues in Knebworth (and this applies to all the proposed sites within the village) are traffic and parking.

Traffic problems: There is a large quantity of commuter traffic through the village causing delays and disruptions at peak times. This is exacerbated whenever there is an accident or closure of the A1(M), quite a frequent occurrence. Local residents are often unable to even get out of side roads to join the main road. During a very recent A1(M) road closure, when traffic through the village was at a standstill, drivers from Stevenage were advised to go via Hertford in order to get to the QEII hospital. Hardly either environmentally friendly or desirable under any circumstances. Too far to walk or cycle and lengthy and costly to access by public transport. Any increase in the volume of commuter or social traffic due to an increase in population can only make these situations more likely and last longer. Any suggestions that new residents can be bribed with bus passers, new bikes and car pooling ignores the only too human traits of not wanting to take hours to go anywhere by infrequent public transport; not wanting to balance their weekly shopping and children on bikes; not wanting to go anywhere by bike or car sharing due to the restrictions of clothing, weather, incompatible working hours, etc. I'm sure that most people could be tempted by the offer of a free bike, perhaps to be used occasionally for leisure purposes or be sold off to buy something else (perhaps some more petrol for their cars). The reality is that the amount of traffic already going through the village makes cycling quite dangerous and is therefore an unrealistic suggestion.

The proposal to move the doctors' surgery to Stevenage will also impact on traffic volume.

Parking problems, which are already under discussion as a large problem within Knebworth, particularly due to the train station. Local residents are having their roads blocked with cars that drive into Knebworth to make use of the train station. Sometimes this is to take advantage of fares that would be lower than, say, Stevenage. Any proposal to introduce parking fees could have a detrimental effect on local businesses that rely on passing trade for their custom. 5042 1 Richardson Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object The site is outside the 'Excluded Village' Boundary and within the green Belt.

Development of this site could adversely affect the water supply systems, being opposite the pumping station in Watton Road and the water course beneath.

Any access to Watton Road exerbates the problems which it already suffers: excessive traffic of commuters to and from Stevenage; access tot he Creamatoruim of Cortege and visitors - notwithstanding the speed inhibitors in the western, residential part of the road.

Oakfields Road, to the north is a cul-de-sac leading to Oakfields Avenue and Badger Close, any new road would have to join on the corner of the Road and Avenue creating an exceptional hazard. Both Watton Road and Oakfields Road lead on to the B197, motorway diversionary route, which is extensively used at all times in its own 'right'.

Any development on site 55 as well could only result in excessive congestion in all areas. Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 58 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent

The additional difficulties of inadequate infrastructure; water and sewerage supply and service make any development impracticable.

Any development to the north and east of the 'Excluded Village' has the potential to encourage coalescence with Stevenage. 5046 1 Bantick Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object Greenfield Site. 5047 7 Bantick Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object Potential for encroachment onto Recreation Ground Site. Greenfield Site. Massive utilities problems - particularly sewage. Lack of primary school places. 5109 2 Joyce Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Comment The proposed site is clearly unsuitable for development for the following reasons:

The road infrastructure is not able to sustain such a large development - Watton Road itself has both speed humbs, and directional control. As increase in volume would be ill advised. Again, as the road continues away from the village, it becomes more a winding country lane, which is manageable at present, but further volume would be sustainable, and lead to accidents.

Drainage, sewage, gas, electric, and water supplies would also cause a huge and unsustainable demand on the residents in that area. 5134 1 Aldrich Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object We moved to Knebworth ONE MONTH AGO, from the Great Ashby end of Stevenage (Shells Manor). Having lived there 8 years we watched Great Ashby grow into the unattractive 'concrete jungle' that it now is. Greasley Way, along which we lived, WAS a quiet road when we moved in, but is now a constant stream of traffic - a very busy road due to the Great Ashby housing. We moved to Knebworth to escape the building site that is Great Ashby. I wanted to be able to leave my windows open at night and be able to sleep in peace, something we could never do before . Having spent hundreds of thousands of pounds moving to our house in St Martins Road, Knebworth, I am HORRIFIED to hear you proposal to turn Knebworth into a mini Great Ashby. I would never have moved here if I had known this, and will be investigating why our search didn't show this up. Our house is our investment for the future, our pension. If this development is allowed to happen, house prices will fall. We moved here precisely for the fields, and the landscapes, which are being taken away from Stevenage, and to get away from all the new housing estates, the social housing (and the problems which always comes with that). We want to live in an old, established, reputable village with surrounding fields.

Living in St MArtins Road, we will be directly affected by proposed sites 55 and 58. (Not that I want Knebworth developed on at all.) The country road (Watton Road), along which you plan to build, is an over used 'cut through' from Bragbury End to Knebworth, and isn't designed to cope with the traffic currently using it! I don't imagine expanding/improving the roads features in you plans, they never are. You are happy to throw up as many houses as you can squeeze onto a field but you never improve the facilities which need to go with all the extra

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 58 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent people you bring to an area - mainly the roads. Our road is a PRIVATE road, which WE have to contribute to the upkeep of. I take it that means I, and my neighbours, can refuse to let our road become a 'rat run', which of course it would be if these ludicrous plans were granted?? I certainly would not pay for the wear and tear caused by hundreds of cars that would use our road every day. I would fight for gates (or some other obstruction) to be erected at either end of the road.

The village school is currently oversubscribed, I can't even get my younger children in and I live across the road from it. The traffic through the parade of shops is a nightmare most of the time, so I shudder to think what the extra traffic would do to the village. It would bring the village to complete gridlock. These proposals would kill this lovely village and will turn it into a 'Supervillage'. I for one cannot let this village become 'Knebbury End'. If, god forbid, you are given permission to build on these proposed sites around Knebworth, this will pave the way for further fields to be put forward for development proposals and so on and so on, thus spreading like a disease and eventually joining Knebworth to Stevenage which cannot happen. KEEP YOUR DEVELOPING TO GREAT ASHBY AND STEVENAGE (YOUR SUPERTOWNS!). 5163 1 The Fairfield Partnership JB Planning Associates - TW Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object Site 58, 05/0046, Land North of Watton Road, Knebworth 1. We object to this site, and believe that it would be an inappropriate allocation for residential development because it would have a detrimental effect on the character and setting of the village, and would represent an incursion into open countryside which is not currently related to the built form of the village. It also has the potential to exacerbate traffic congestion around the High Street. Grounds for Objection 2. Site 55 covers more than 6 Ha, an area which at a modest development density of 35 dwellings per hectare would deliver around 210 dwellings, close to the centre of the village. This would be a significant extension to the village of Knebworth, which would be likely to exacerbate congestion within the village centre . The site is also located in a sensitive part of the landscape which surrounds the village. Scale of Development 3. While the scale of development, at around 210 dwellings, may not be too large for the village as a whole, we are concerned about the suitability of Site 58 due to its location. Development in this location would be very close to the High Street, and it will be necessary to demonstrate that the junction between Watton Road and the High Street is adequate to accommodate such a level of additional traffic. 4. The roads at the centre of the village, particularly the narrow High Street, currently suffer from severe congestion at peak periods, to which there is no obvious solution. A development of 210 dwellings on a site very close to this would be likely to exacerbate the current problems. Landscape Character 5. Site 58 is located in open countryside on the edge of Knebworth. It is on high ground, relative to Watton Road, and development on this site would be highly visible at this entrance to the village, and from Oakfields Road. 6. The development of this land would also result in the recreation ground to the north of Watton Road being encircled by development. This would significantly extend the built form of the village into the open countryside, and hence change the character and setting of the village. 5182 1 Davey Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object There is no safe access to the site bordered by old lane and Watton Road. ie south of Old Lane.

St Martins Road is used as a cut through via Old Lane (an illegal right turn) and Watton Road for Stevenage.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 58 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent The reverse journey involving an illegal left turn into Old Lane is common place. It is unsafe to walk on Old Lane due to this activity despite several approaches to the police. This practise is very common.

The existing, if unenforced, restriction on turns into/out of Old Lane is because Watton Road is not suitable for even existing traffic there is therefore no safe access from this part of site 58.

I believe Bats nest on the site. Furthermore there is insufficient capacity at the primary school even now. 5194 4 Sprigge Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Comment The plan deliberately leaves off the road names and the proposals for the rest of the field. There is no mention of secondary school provision. Nor the lack of doctors surgery when the existing one closes. 5201 2 Game Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object

Knebworth is already the biggest village in Hertfordshire.

1. This green-belt site is accessed by 2 lanes. Watton Road (a country windy lane) is narrow, unlit, without pavements and totally unsuitable for the amount of traffic it now carries - especially with the extra burden of several large funeral processions each day. There is also very poor drainage and the field/road flood each time there is a heavy down pour.

2. Old lane is even narrower and was made one-way due to the danger of anything more than light traffic using it. Though every day several drivers endanger lives by making illegal turns out of the road. This too floods heavily due to there being a positive stream there many years ago.

3. Both lanes are now used as rat runs as people traverse Hertfordshire due to the inefficient A1M. Several near misses and accidents happen each year and further developments would cause chaos . Heavy lorries bringing building materials in and out would be hazardous.

4. The field has a path which crosses it and is walked every day by several families. It is a retreat to relieve stresses from the every-day hustle of life and promotes physical and mental well being .

5. Any new build won't blend with the area of the current detached houses which date back to Edwardian times, losing the character of an old village - already the largest in Herts - when does it become a town? Any development should reflect the character of the settlement it adjoins.

6. Knebworth is currently at capacity - the school is full, the doctors are full, the sewer capacity is constrained and the roads are congested.

7. The B197 through the village is the main A1M relief road and any accidents on it causes major congestion within the village and the same for the A602 from Stevenage. A gridlock ensues. There are already tailbacks in all direction for two hours each day.

8. Knebworth is currently a safe village to bring up a family and a sudden influx of people will change that, possibly increasing crime and anti-social behaviour. Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 58 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent

9. The village currently has it's own identity as a village and many residents chose to live here because of those qualities - the potential development expands towards the borders of Stevenage. Soon Knebworth will become a suburb of another town.

10. The perimeter of the site is edged by mature and I believe protected trees.

11. Most residents choose to live here as it is a village and not a town. This area through the green belt borders the neighbouring town of Stevenage and is the last stop before we become part of a large town.

12. The potential site is unsuitable, overbearing, threatens road safety, create huge drainage problems, increase the already growing noise and light pollution, put added pressure on the already stretched local amenities such as the doctors, school and sewerage plant and electrical sub-station. 5216 6 Carpenter Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Comment The consequences of overcoming the limitations of local services, eg roads, sewers, schools, water supply, gas supply would be extremely disruptive and damaging to the local environment. Increased traffic congestion being of an ongoing nature raises the probability of future road improvement schemes further damaging the local environment in future. 5220 6 Harris Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Comment Knebworth is already a "big" village. We don't want it to be a town. This is all GREEN BELT land. NHDC has already accepted that the local infrastructure won't support a higher population. Looking at the position of the proposed site, it is difficult to see how sensible road access can be provided either for construction traffic or for final residents. 5247 2 Game Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object Knebworth is already a hugely populated and heavily constrained village that does not need further pressure putting on its facilities.

1. This green-belt site is accessed by 2 lanes. Watton Road is a narrow country winding lane and totally unsuitable for the amount of traffic it now carries and has cars parked on both sides near the congested High Street. The area has poor drainage and floods easily.

2. Old lane is even narrower and was made one-way due to the danger of anything more than light traffic using it. Every day several drivers endanger lives by making illegal turns out of and into the road. This too floods heavily due to there being a positive stream at one end many years ago.

3. Both lanes are now used as rat runs as people traverse Hertfordshire due to the current congestion. Several near misses and accidents happen each year and further developments would cause chaos . Heavy lorries bringing building materials in and out would be hazardous and further congestion.

4. The field has a path which crosses it and is walked, jogged and cycled every day by several families. It is a retreat to relieve stresses from the every-day hustle of life and promotes Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 58 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent physical and mental well being. Many people chose to live in a village so they can enjoy this kind of benefit.

5.The field has a main sewage pipe which runs across it up towards Datchworth - this facility is already at capacity and being at a shallow depth is not able to take developmental weight.

6. Any new build would not blend with the area of the current detached houses which date back to Edwardian times, losing the character of an old village - already the largest in Herts - when does it become a town? Any development should reflect the character of the settlement it adjoins .

7. The field supports a diverse range of wildlife.

8. Knebworth is currently at capacity - the school is full, the doctors are full, the sewers are full and the roads are congested.

9. The B197 through the village is the main A1M relief road and any accidents on it causes major congestion within the village and the same goes for the A602 from Stevenage. A gridlock ensues. There are already tailbacks in all direction for two hours each day.

10. Knebworth is currently a safe village to bring up a family and a sudden influx of people could change that.

11. The village currently has it's own identity as a village and many residents chose to live here because of those qualities - the potential development expands towards the borders of Stevenage. Are we prepared for coalescence with Stevenage? NO we are a village and should remain as one. 5415 2 Poole Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object Knebworth facilities are already overstretched. The school is full, the doctors' surgery is at capacity and traffic congestion is a huge problem.

The sewerage system would need to be updated to accommodate the extra capacity.

Additional traffic joining Watton Road from this site would be extrememly dangerous. Watton Road at this point is very narrow and already overburdened with traffic.

Old Lane has a problem with flooding. It was made one-way several years ago because of the danger of accessing Watton Road and this has never been satisfactory as many motorists ignore the "no left turn" and "no right turn" signs.

It would appear that the proposed development is being driven by landowners who are anxious to obtain some financial gain with total disregard to the detrimental effect on village life. 5422 7 Haigh Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object Knebworth should not be expanded - we do not have the infrastructure to support it (traffic, schools, drainage systems etc) and we are in the green belt. 5431 2 Stringer Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 58 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 1. The site is currently Green belt and the only access is via two very narrow country lanes

The first of these, Watton Road, is an extremely narrow country lane which, for many years, has been used by people from the South of Stevenage who want to gain access to the B197 and thus to Welwyn Garden City and the A1(M). It is unsuitable for the current level of traffic, let alone any increase to this level. Once it enters the village there is parking on both sides of the road, right up to the extremely congested High Street.

The other, Old Lane, is a classic country lane, access to which was closed (from Watton Road) a few years ago as it too was being used as a cut-through by high levels of traffic, wishing to avoid Knebworth village centre. This took the traffic down a road past the local primary school, just at a time when children were arriving for school.

Even with existing levels of traffic, both lanes are extremely dangerous and construction traffic (in the short term) and additional traffic from housing (in the longer term) would merely add to this problem. Drivers, still wishing to use the rat run regularly make illegal U-turns to access Old Lane.

2. The additional development would not blend in with the current village character of Knebworth, which is why most residents choose to live here. Knebworth is already a densely populated village and residents do not want to the village being absorbed into Greater Stevenage.

3. The proposed site contains a range of different wildlife.

4. Local residents use the proposed site for walking, jogging, cycling and other leisure activities. The ability to enjoy these activities is one of the reasons most people moved into the village.

5. The village is already at full capacity. The doctors and dentists list are full and the village primary and infant school is full.

6. The High Street is regularly congested every morning and evening with traffic streaming South towards Welwyn Garden City and North towards Stevenage. In addition, it is the main designated relief road in the event of any problems on the A1(M) and is regularly used by traffic wishing to avoid the motorway.

7. Some years ago a major sewage pipe was sunk across the field, at a shallow depth and it would not take heavy construction plant and additional long-term traffic.

8. The importance of village life is an important aspect of rural life in Britain and the people of the village do not want to see the continued encroachment of Stevenage.

9. The fact that the site is within 800m of the centre of the village has been cited as an advantage. In our opinion for the reasons given above this is a distinct weakness.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 58 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 5434 7 Weaver Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object My objections to this site are as follows: 1. the continued growth in Knebworth is changing its character for the worse and turning it from a village into a small town; 2. growing the boundaries of Knebworth and reducing the green belt separation from Stevenage increases the risk of coallescence and becoming a suburb of Stevenage; 3. The infrastructure including roads, water, drains and the primary school are already overwhelmed and any further development should not take place without the infrastructure upgrades being made first; 4. Watton Road is already congested during rush hour, as is the junction with the High Street (London Road) and increasing the traffic flow will be detrimental to the character of the village and for those residents currently living in Watton Road. 5442 3 Jefferies Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object This site encroaches on the green belt around Knebworth at probably its narrowest point from Stevenage affecting the unique village environment.

Available vehicular access is onto a narrow and fast main road (Watton Road).

Knebworth High Street is already frequently blocked due to the high volume of traffic using it.

Knebworth Primary School is at capacity. Further residential development means that in future children would have to travel out of the village for primary education adding to the traffic congestion.

The rural views and peaceful environment currently enjoyed by residents on the west side of Knebworth will be seriously affected by development of this site. 5455 1 Harrison Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object The roads are inadequate to take more traffic. Already Watton road is a "rat run" for people coming from Stevenage heading for the A1 and beyond. The road already has traffic calming measures. The parking makes progress down the road difficult. This therefore becomes dangerous because people's patience is stretched waiting for cars to come and go down what is, in effect, a one-way situation.

The wider road network is already over-stretched. The A 602 into Stevenage is heavily blocked especialy during rush hours. Knebworth High Street is usually congested with cars having to crawl along. Making a new source of traffic between those two roads would be unpleasant for new as well as current residents.

Encroaching on Green Belt land is to be deplored. Why are the reasons for it being designated as Green Belt no longer applicable?

There is an electricity substation adjacent to the site which can cause health hazards for people.

Clear space is precious enough but covering some of the ground between Knebworth and Stevenage would be too easily a first step to losing it entirely. Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 58 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 5455 4 Harrison Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object I write to oppose vigorously the proposals to develop the "land north of Old Lane Knebworth" (55) and "land north of Watton Road Knebworth" (58). Knebworth is a village striving to retain its identity. These proposed site developments (and the other 5 sites) threaten this community. Destroying community life and identity should be a major consideration. The road network is incapable of taking more traffic. Watton Road already has calming measures and, in the mornings especially, is a bottleneck. It is not possible to move the houses to create wider roads. Cars are usually parked along the length of the road - mostly, I understand, for commuters using the station. At weekends, the situation becomes much worse at the Bell Close end through users of the excellent recreation ground facility parking or dropping/collecting people. Looking at the wider picture these sites are situated between the A602 and the Knebworth High Street. The A602 is blocked with long queues at certain times, mostly rush-hour. The High Street in Knebworth is normally congested during the day with cars, lorries and buses often having to crawl along or wait because there is not enough room for them to pass. Knebworth is already close to Bragbury End/Stevenage and either of these proposed developments would narrow that gap and possibly make a seamless join more likely in the future. This is not in either community's interests. It would add to the burden of the Stevenage authorities and diminish the identity of the Knebworth community as discussed above. On the website, there is a reference saying that "this consultation [does not] include any sites related to any potential growth of Stevenage". That would strongly suggest that such growth is anticipated. At that point, it will be too easy a step to cover the last area of clear ground. The proposed development would remove Green Belt land. This is always highly regrettable. At some point there were good reasons why it was designated as Green Belt. Why those reasons are no longer considered relevant should be made clear. Why this number of houses is needed in this area is cleverly shrouded in a degree of mystery. Perhaps there would be more support if that was made clear - and just saying "the government says so" is useless and guaranteed to increase antagonism. It needs to be related to the needs of those who are trying to make a life for themselves. May reason prevail and these proposals be abandoned. 5468 5 Onyett Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object I do not agree to the proposed additional housing to be built on this land because: - it is green field land - I do not believe the local infrastructure (eg roads, sewerage etc) will support the increased load due to the extra housing - the village primary school is already over-subscribed - it will fundamentally change the nature of the village, making it less like the village which we chose to live in 5469 5 Onyett Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object I do not agree to the proposed additional housing to be built on this land because: - it is green field land - I do not believe the local infrastructure (eg roads, sewerage etc) will support the increased load due to the extra housing - the village primary school is already over-subscribed - it will fundamentally change the nature of the village, making it less like the village which we chose to live in 5480 5 Haller Document Section :Site 58 Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 58 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Representation : Object Of the possible sites for development around Knebworth site 58 whilst offering a pleasant position for residents on the newly developed site, it is however restricted by offering only access points onto Watton Road, a road that is already overused by local traffic with long queue regularly occurring in rush hour and Oakfields Aveune.

Nevertheless, whilst it is argued that Knebworth, as North Herts largest village offers the best facilities (train station, shops, primary school) and thus it should be allowed to grow to a modest degree, I believe that for these reasons it should not.

My reasons succinctly for this are;

1. The rails station is oversubscribed with insufficient parking 2. The Primary school is bursting and oversubscribed with even village children being unable to get place. 3. The road structure of the village is even insufficient for current traffic levels with, particularly at rush hours there being jams along London Road/Stevenage Road and long queues along Watton Road. 4. As NHDCs largest village any further expansion may well result in Knebworth being a small town and thus loose its village feel.

Finally and most importantly, all of the presently proposed sites (52, 53, 55, 57 & 58) are presently Green Belt land and should be allowed to remain so, for the reasons that the designation of Green Belt was originally created. 5483 5 Haller Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object Of the possible sites for development around Knebworth site 58 whilst offering a pleasant position for residents on the newly developed site, it is however restricted by offering only access points onto Watton Road, a road that is already overused by local traffic with long queue regularly occurring in rush hour and Oakfields Aveune.

Nevertheless, whilst it is argued that Knebworth, as North Herts largest village offers the best facilities (train station, shops, primary school) and thus it should be allowed to grow to a modest degree, I believe that for these reasons it should not.

My reasons succinctly for this are;

1. The rails station is oversubscribed with insufficient parking 2. The Primary school is bursting and oversubscribed with even village children being unable to get place. 3. The road structure of the village is even insufficient for current traffic levels with, particularly at rush hours there being jams along London Road/Stevenage Road and long queues along Watton Road. 4. As NHDCs largest village any further expansion may well result in Knebworth being a small town and thus loose its village feel.

Finally and most importantly, all of the presently proposed sites (52, 53, 55, 57 & 58) are presently Green Belt land and should be allowed to remain so, for the reasons that the designation of Green Belt was originally created. 5497 2 Packman Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 58 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent I read with considerable alarm plans to develop this site in Knebworth. The Village is already the largest in North Hertfordshire and is seriously constrained by the sewage system, the primary school which is full and a gridlocked road system.RRThe site in question has a number of major drawbacks:RR1. The country lane that services this site from Watton Road in Knebworth to Bragbury End is very narrow, dangerous, unsighted, unlit and without any pavements. It was never designed to carry the current volume of traffic let alone a huge increase from a large number of new dwellings or indeed the heavy traffic of a multi year building site.RR1b. The lane is already a "no left turn" from Stevenage providing further access constraints.RR2. Knebworth comes to a complete standstill with substantial tailbacks in each direction for two hours twice a day.The narrow high street and Watton Road means two cars are unable to pass at many points. Adding further volume to this would cause chaos and turn what is meant to be a Village into something more gridlocked than most of our town centres.RR3. These fields are green belt land. They are with little doubt the most scenic part of Knebworth and are hugely popular with both walkers using the public right of way through the field and nature lovers. Both the lane and the lower part of the field are prone to flooding during periods of heavy rain fall.RR4. Knebworth has its own unique identity as a Village, the vast majority of residents chose to live here because of this and actively chose not to live in a town. This site, unlike some of the others, is not infill and as such expands the borders of Knebworth (through the green belt) towards Bragbury End and ultimately Stevenage. If this is allowed Knebworth is very quickly going to get swallowed up by Stevenage and lose its identity, uniqueness and desirability.RR5. I will reiterate again, this is green belt land. To quote wikipedia "A green belt or greenbelt is a policy and land use designation used in land use planning to retain areas of largely undeveloped, wild, or agricultural land surrounding or neighbouring urban areas. A green belt is basically an invisible line that goes around a certain area, stopping people from building there so that some of the wild and agricultural land can be saved."RR6. It is well known that Knebworth is seriously constrained by its utilities, principally the sewage system. It is my understanding that there is also a mains pipe running at a shallow depth through this field. As such it is not possible to build on top of this as it was never designed to carry any weight. It also has a series of access hatches across the field that would need to be completely redesigned to be safe in a residential setup.RR7. Any new development is likely to be very high density. While certain sites in Knebworth could just about get away with flats and tightly packed houses it seems completely illogical to site this sort of development in an area comprised of detached Edwardian houses and the Village park. The whole ethos of Knebworth has always been as a "Garden Village" as such this site is simply incompatible with modern high density housing. Surely there must be some sort of continuity of layout?RR8. Local residents were only made aware of the plans right at the end of the summer holidays, a few days before comments had to be submitted. This has not given adequate time for everyone to respond.RR9. Other proposed sites in Knebworth put forward by Knebworth Estates will donate all proceeds to Parish Charities. This site will instead be a windfall for the land owner. 5524 9 Lund Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object My family and I are regular users of the recreation ground in Knebworth; we use it at least twice a week. I was there with the children yesterday and stood looking at the field where the propsed development might occur. The though of looking over at houses from the recreation ground is horrible. When Knebworth was first designed, it was as a garden village with lots of green spaces and open land. To take the openness away from the centre of recreation for the village would be scandalous. The field is behind the rec is also used as a cut through to Bragbury end by cylists and walkers. With no pathways on the road between bragbury end and Knebworth, this is the safest route when not in a car. Now, to Watton Road. The road is really busy and difficult to get through at the best of busy times. Make a connection from it into a new estate and the road will be pretty much impassable. The rec is home to Knebworth Fottball club. Each Saturday lots of people use the rec (via Watton Road) for playing football. It is very busy at these times and important that the visiors think of Knebworth as a lovely green place to visit. Please do NOT put houses on this site. 5533 2 Connor Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object My objections to both Site 55 and 58 are as follows:-

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 58 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 1. There are significant infrastructure issues in relation to both sites and it seems strange that these have not been fully outlined in the environmental appraisal that has already been done e.g.

1.a) Watton Road leading onto Knebworth High Street is already unsuitable for the current volume of traffic and would not be able to cope with the additional traffic resulting from further residential development (both during the construction phase and upon completion). There is already heavy congestion at peak times in the morning and early evening. Old Lane is currently not designed for traffic and even if it was re-built, it still would act merely as a feeder road to the already heavily congested High Street.

There is well documented problems in relation to the congestion of the High Street, parking issues, the problems relating to the Chas Lowe site etc. The further development of Sites 55 and 58 to provide additional housing (and associated traffic)will only exasipate the problem further.

1b) There are known issues with the Primary School already being at full capacity. Any of the proposed Knebworth developments will clearly impact on this situation further. At the Parish Council meeting, it was implied that various solutions for the school are being considered. Having a better understanding of those options would help to inform any proposal for additional housing in and around Knebworth.

1c) We understand that there are existing issues in relation to the Utilities infrastructure as provision is at its optimum level currently. Although not fully up to speed on this, I understand there is a particular problem in relation to sewerage.

2. The development of Sites 55 and 58 would in my view represent an ill thought through, bolt-on approach which would further encroach on the border with Bragbury End/Stevenage - (chipping away at Knebworth's status as a village.

3. Sites 55 & 58 (and 57)represent a commercial opportunity for the Landowner rather than the provision of a workable solution to any requirement for additional housing. Mr Tubb spoke at the recent Parish Council meeting and offered to make a sizeable donation to the village if his development sites were selected. Any financial donation to the village will be little compensation for the destruction of green belt land and the erosion of village life.

4. Our key criteria for selecting Knebworth as our home 3 years ago was that we wanted to live in a village on the edge of green belt land. We currently have a view of the fields at the north end of Watton Road. Clearly, a new housing development on both sides of the road adjacent to our house takes away our whole reason for being here and would force us to relocate. The approval of any such development would inevitably reduce the value of our properties, as we would no longer enjoy the outskirts of the village location/view that we bought originally. Instead, we would be one step closer to living in a suburb of Stevenage. 5538 1 Connor Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object My objections to both Sites 55 and 58 in Knebworth are as follows:-

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 58 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 1. There are significant infrastructure issues in relation to both the sites above, and it seems odd that these have not been fully outlined in the environmental appraisal that has already been completed. e.g. a. Watton Road is currently over-used as a route between Bragbury End and Knebworth, in both directions. This is acknowledged by the traffic calming implemented in recent years. Increasing the volume of traffic along this route will further exacerbate the traffic problem and cause residents of Watton Road further annoyance and access problems. b. At peak times, Watton Road access to Knebworth High Street is impossible and is therefore already unsuitable for the current volume of traffic. Fact: Watton Road at the Knebworth High Street end can not be widened and clearly would not be able to cope with the additional traffic resulting from further residential development (both during the construction phase and upon completion). These traffic issues can not be resolved without significant redesign of the wider Knebworth area; any proposals suggesting such would be met be equally and vehement objection.

2. There are already well documented problems in relation to the congestion of the High Street, on street parking issues, and the access problems relating to the Chas Lowe site etc. The further development of Sites 55 and 58 to provide additional housing (and associated traffic) will only exacerbate the problem further.

3. There are known issues with the Primary School already being at full capacity. Any of the proposed Knebworth developments will clearly impact on this situation further. At the Parish Council meeting, it was implied that various solutions for the school are being considered. Having a better understanding of those options would help to inform any proposal for additional housing in and around Knebworth.

4. It is understood that there are existing issues in relation to the utilities infrastructure, as provision is at its optimum level currently. The issues in relation to drainage and sewerage have been well documented by the Parish Council.

5. I moved to Knebworth with my wife to enjoy the benefits of village life and by virtue of this accept its limitations in terms of education and facilities expected when living in a large town. We currently have a view of the fields at the north end of Watton Road. Clearly, a new housing development on one or both sides of the road adjacent to our house takes away our whole reason for being here and would force us to relocate.

6. The development of Sites 55 and 58 would in my view represent a bolt-on approach which would reduce further the distance between Knebworth and Stevenage at the Bragbury End side of Watton Road. Why dont you simply rename Knebworth, Stevenage South this is after all what the village is being turned into.

7. Sites 55 & 58 (and 57) represent a commercial opportunity for the Landowner rather than the provision of a workable solution to any requirement for additional housing. Mr Tubb spoke at the recent Parish Council meeting and offered to make a sizeable donation to the village if his development sites were selected. Any financial donation (inducement) to the village will be little compensation for the destruction of green belt land and the erosion of village life. 5542 2 Worthington Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object Please could include the objections that I have made for site 57 for this site also. 5568 1 Weaver Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 58 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent This plot is at the end of the road I live in and I foresee the following problems/objections to its' use as affordable housing, in addition to the already identified weaknesses: 1) Extension of house building on this site will effectively make Knebworth a suburb of Stevenage further eroding the village concept of Knebworth which was a reason for moving to Knebworth in the first place. 2) Watton Road at the site of the proposed new build would require considerable widening to accommodate increased traffic, thereby destroying one of the countryside cycling routes available around Knebworth (which in conjunction with other proposed developments would make safe and beautiful cycling routes a rare commodity). 3) There would be additional conjestion along Watton Road especially during morning rush hours. It can already take up to 10 minutes to get out of our house into traffic flow and onto Stevenage Road in the rush hour, and our house is only 50 yards from Stevenage Road. 4) There is currently some illegal parking along the road leading to further congestion during the day, this would seem likely to increase if more people are wanting to visit village shops. 5570 5 Bedford Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object Knebworth is a village and should remain as one.

The primary school is full, as with the doctors.

The sewage is not suitable

The roads can't support more traffic, and the lanes are not suitable.

Knebworth is a lovely village and surrounded by beautiful country side - if any development happens we will end up as South Stevenage. The residents choose to live here as it is, it is also the largest village in Herts, so the development would turn into a town.

Tanya Bedford 5571 1 Ryan Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object Site is on greenbelt land - we must conserve our countryside. The countryside around Knebworth is one of the main reasons many people choose to live in the village and increases the quality of life of the residents.

The views from Swangleys lane across the countryside are particularly beautiful and should be preserved - they should not be sacrificed for housing (or profitable gain of a local landowner) when there are other sites availble.

The surrounding roads are small narrow lanes that are dangerous and unsuitable for an increase in traffic.

The local school is already full to capacity.

Parking in the village is inadequate for the current population let alone an increase.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 58 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Local services ie Dentist and Doctor cannot support current population let alone an increase. 5577 6 Laing Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object GREENBELT! LEAVE IT!!!! This is a village and cannot sustain housing expansion in all areas. 5580 2 Turnbull Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object My concerns relate to access requirements to the site and the resultant additional traffic necessitating significant upgrade works to the existing local highway network, the erosion of green space surrounding the village, the erosion of the natural boundary between the village and Bragbury End, the ability of local infrastructure to cope with additional dwellings, the adverse visual impact of development on the site, the closing in of existing properties at the boundary of the village and their loss of visual amenity. My view is that there are far more appropriate brownfield sites suitable for residential development within the village with significantly less environmental impact. The council should encourage developers to exercise their skills and realise the potential of these sites as opposed to accepting the easy option of allowing greenfield sites on greenbelt land to become yet more mediocre residential enclaves. 6063 2 Aldrich Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object We moved to Knebworth one month ago, from the Great Ashby end of Stevenage (Chells Manor). Having lived there 8 years we watched Great Ashby grow into the unattractive 'concrete jungle' that it now is. Gresley Way, along which we lived, WAS a quiet road when we moved in, but is now a constant stream of traffic ¿ a very busy road due to the Great Ashby housing. We moved to Knebworth to escape the building site that is Great Ashby. I wanted to be able to leave my windows open at night and be able to sleep in peace, something we could never do before . Having spent hundreds of thousands of pounds moving to our house in St Martins Road, Knebworth, I am HORRIFIED to hear you propose to turn Knebworth into a mini Great Ashby. I would never have moved here if I had known this, and will be investigating why our search didn't show this up. Our house is our investment for the future, our pension. If this development is allowed to happen, house prices will fall. We moved here precisely for the fields, and the landscapes, which are being taken away from Stevenage, and to get away from all the new housing estates, the social housing (and the problems which always comes with that). We want to live in an old, established, reputable village with surrounding fields. Living in St Martins Road, we will be directly affected by proposed sites 55 and 58. (Not that I want Knebworth developed on at all.) The country road (Watton Road), along which you plan to build, is an over used 'cut through' from Bragbury End to Knebworth, and isn't designed to cope with the traffic currently using it! I don't imagine expanding/improving the roads features in your plans, they never are. You are happy to throw up as many houses as you can squeeze onto a field but you never improve the facilities which need to go with all the extra people you bring to an area ¿ mainly the roads. Our road is a PRIVATE road, which WE have to contribute to the upkeep of. I take it that means I, and my neighbours, can refuse to let our road become a 'rat run', which of course it would be if these ludicrous plans were granted?? I certainly would not pay for the wear and tear caused by hundreds of cars that would use our road every day. I would fight for gates (or some other obstruction) to be erected at either end of the road. The village school is currently oversubscribed, I can't even get my younger children in and I live across the road from it. The traffic through the parade of shops is a nightmare most of the time, so I shudder to think what the extra traffic would do the village. It would bring the village to complete gridlock. These proposals would kill this lovely village and will turn it into a 'Supervillage'. I for one cannot let this village become 'Knebbury End'. If, god forbid, you are given permission to build on these proposed sites around Knebworth, this will pave the way for further fields to be put forward for development proposals and so on and so on, thus spreading like a disease and eventually joining KnebwortH to Stevenage which cannot happen. KEEP YOUR DEVELOPING TO GREAT ASHBY AND STEVENAGE (YOUR SUPERTOWNS!). 6065 7 Norman Document Section :Site 58 Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 58 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent Representation : Object I strongly object to any major development in the area as the infrastructure is already being threatened. Knebworth could not and should not accept any major housing developments as the influx of families would necessitate the building of more schools, which in turn would require more families to justify its existence. The roads are hardly able to cope with the traffic presently and this particularly applies to Watton Road, which is used as the only practicable way from the A602 to the A1M for many people. 6098 2 Livesey Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object A) Building on site 58 will take away greenbelt land between Knebworth and Stevenage and increase the likely coalescence of Knebworth with South Stevenage. The distance between Knebworth and Stevenage via Watton Road is already a very short car journey of approx two minutes. Furthermore, the current greenbelt land separating Knebworth and Stevenage already accommodates a crematorium; therefore development on site 58 will reduce even further the apparent separation between the village and town. B) Although Watton Road is a residential street, with several families with young children, it is already a very busy road as it is used as a cut through from Bragbury End in Stevenage to Knebworth, Welwyn and the A1M. This is exacerbated during weekdays as it is also used heavily for commuter parking. I am very concerned that development on site 58 will substantially increase the amount of traffic through what is already a very busy residential road. C) Between Knebworth and Bragbury End, Watton Road is a small, twisting country lane. If housing development is allowed on site 58 then either Watton Road will need to be widened and/or other access roads will need to be constructed. This will again lead to increased traffic levels through the residential part of Watton Road and Knebworth High Street. D) Facilities in Knebworth such as the Primary School are already heavily oversubscribed. Housing development on site 58, with the corresponding increase in families with young children, will increase pressure on what is already a much stretched resource, with some families in Knebworth already unable to get their children into the local primary school. 6105 1 Lee Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object With regards to site 58 north of old Knebworth Road I strongly object to this, the proposals for this development if used it will cause a complete standstill for traffic in this area, the infant and junior schools full, And to use green belt land when there is loads in what I believe are brown sites it will increase the size of Knebworth and just about join it to Stevenage. 6149 1 Austin Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object I would like to strongly object to the potential residential development of this green belt site. Watton Road is already carrying far more traffic than it can cope with and the lane to Bragbury End is dangerous at the best of times.

This site forms part of what is a small but vital strip of green belt separating Knebworth from Stevenage / Brabury End. It is serviced by a narrow lane that is already a major rat run during rush hour. In addition this site has several major issues. It has an electricity sub station, mobile phone mast, overhead power cabling and shallow depth water pipe all located on the site.

Knebworth as a whole is already bursting at the seems, the largest village in Hertfordshire is well known to have a lack of infrastructure capacity, in particular constraints on sewage and the village primary school. Quite how building 100+ houses on one of the most congested roads in the village will improve this I don't know.

The entire village is up in arms about these proposals and all of the residents nearby the field will fight any proposals to build on this land to the bitter end.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 58 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent

I also find it concerning that at the recent Parish Council meeting Mr Tubb, the landowner, attempted to mislead those there by saying that the site had been selected by NHDC when in fact it had been put forward by him and his agent. 6279 7 Morris Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object On reviewing the additional proposed sites in and around Knebworth, I wish to make the following comments:- 1. Knebworth is a village. If the proposed expansion takes place, this will join Knebworth to Stevenage in the north and Woolmer Green in the south. 2. The roads which run in and around Knebworth are already extremely busy, any expansion in any direction would put more pressure on the already congested village centre. 3. The Doctors Surgery in Knebworth is already busy. I do not believe that this surgery could take any more patients, as it is very difficult to get an appointment with the number of patients it has now. 4. I have no school age children of my own, but I understand that the school is well oversubscribed and even if you live in the village of Knebworth it is no guarantee that your children will get into the village school. More houses being built would apply more pressure to this problem. In short, I believe that any development, which expands on the boundary of Knebworth would be detrimental to Knebworth village. On top of these points these sites are GREEN BELT, this should mean they stay GREEN. 6298 6 Charter Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object I would like to submit an objection to the the proposed land allocation of additional sites numbered 52, 53, 55, 56, 57 and 58 on the following grounds;RR1. First and foremost that each of these sites are designated Green Belt land and should not be developed on unless 'exceptional circumstances' prevail. I can not imagine such a circumstance existing to support residential or any other form of development.RR2. Knebworth is already the largest of the villages in the District and many of it's existing services could not support a significant increase in population resulting from further residential development. Most notably, Knebworth Primary School which is already large for a village school (with a 2 class intake per year) and has limited scope for expansion without further proposed encroachment onto Green Belt land.RR3. I am surprised that the appraisals concerning the suitability of each of these sites for development has not yet considered the issues of access, highways and traffic impact. I would object to each of these sites being developed on the grounds of poor access, insufficient highways capacity and on a negative traffic impact particularly, with regard to an increase in traffic numbers and safety issues.RRAs a general comment, I would add that future residential development should be focused on infill development sites, brownfield sites or on sites allocated for the expansion of the Districts towns whose facilities and services can sustain such development. Villages should be protected and not converted into towns or annexed to existing towns. Development on Green Belt land should be avoided at all cost as per Government policy. 6336 2 Skone Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object We would like to give our comments regarding land allocations 55 (land north of Old Lane, Knebworth) and 58 (land north of Watton Road, Knebworth). 1. Traffic. a. The volume traffic using Watton Road is already very high. The traffic feeds into the high street that already has recognised issues of congestion. The congestion is much worse when there is a problem on the A1(M) - this is a fairly regular occurence. b. The residents of Bell Close have priority over oncoming traffic from Watton Road when turning into Watton Road. However, many drivers on Watton Road ignore this fact and there are regular near misses with Bell Close residents turning into Watton Road. This is even more dangerous when the Bell Close resident is cycling. Both of these problems would be made much worse with the proposed developments. Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 58 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent 2. Encroachment of Knebworth on Stevenage. There is currently only a narrow strip of land between Knebworth and Stevenage. The proposed development would further encroach on Stevenage. Knebworth could lose its identity as a village (the population is currently at the upper limit for classification as a village) and become a suburb of Stevenage. 3. Safety. Both sites would have concerns about safety; the electricty sub-station for site 55 and the mobile phone mast for site 58. 4. Knebworth Junior School. Knebworth Junior School is already over suscribed. Any future developments would only add to this problem. 5. Green Belt Land. All proposed developments are on Green Belt land. This sets a precedent for any future developments and suggests that it would only be a matter of time before Knebworth was swallowed up by Stevenage as outlined in item 2. 6378 7 Bland Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object All the other sites, 52 53 55 57 and 58 have been put forward by developers for their own fiscal gain and not enhance the village. Many times this expansion has been on the cards and all have been carefully examined by experts. The conclusion by the local authority NHDC is that it is not neccessary or sustainable and so they have not supported or endorsed a 'special case'. In fact it has said said that sufficient sites are available in existing plans without looking further. 6382 6 Milne Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object We have been resident in Wadnall Way since October 1998 and moved to Knebworth from Stevenage because of its beautiful village status and amenities. Firstly, we would like to register our deep concerns re. possible residential development of greenbelt land on sites 52. 53., 55., 56., 57., and 58. Our reasons include; 1, the constraints new homes would make on the existing sewerage system, the local infrastructure, transport links, the limited health facilities and the already oversubscribed Knebworth Primary School. 2, The reasons for green belt land is to separate encroaching development from neighbouring Towns / Villages. We want to remain a village and not a town. Secondly, we would like to our register our deep concerns about the possible development of a Secondary School for eight to nine hundred pupils and 180 houses on land adjacent to Wadnall Way and Woodstock. Our reasons include; 1, We do not want to look out onto a sixty acre site of a school and houses .This development would encroach on our beautiful view of green belt land to the right of the front of our home. 2, We do not want to have our peaceful existence interrupted by the noise and a heavy increase of transport from the development of a school and 180 new houses. 3. The green belt land proposed for this site has a beautiful path which leads up to Mardley Woodsand is enjoyed by us as and numerous others as a glorious country walk. We do not want to see this destroyed . 4. The proposed development has not considered the cost or impact on the local infra structure. 5. The proposal does not take into account of the local safety implications of eight to nine hundred pupils near the railway line adjacent to the land. Who will pay for safety measures such as fencing? 6. One Stevenage Secondary Schools has been closed and another is due for closure next year. Alarge amount of money has been put into the remaining Secondary Schools to upgrade them. Surely this is where the investment should be? Also our two daughters attend The Heathcote School and have done very well. We were aware of the fact that when we moved into the village there was no local provision of a Secondary School and they would have to travel. 7. The local church graveyards have been closed as they are full. The small Knebworth Cemetery at the end of Wadnall Way will surely have to be eventually expanded to cope with Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01 Representation for Land Allocations: Additional Suggested Sites July 2009

Site 58 Ref . Rep No . Applicant Agent requirements in the future? 8. The planned large catchment area of Knebworth, Oaklands, Woolmer Green and Codicote area for the school means there would be no guarantee of an automatic position and could backfire as applicants from Stevenage and Welwyn Garden City could apply. 9. We are concerned that having such a development at the end of our road would decrease our current village property value. 6383 1 Plester Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object I wish to submit the following representations against the adoption of certain of the suggested sites for development in the settlement of Knebworth.RR1) Development of any or all of the sites on the edge of the village (nos 52, 53, 55, 57 & 58) would exacerbate the already serious traffic overload. A bypass is an essential prerequisite.RR2) The access roads neighbouring the sites 55, 55 & 58 are unsuitable for increased use. Swangleys Lane and Old Lane are narrow and without footpaths. St Martins Road is unadopted.RR3) Sites 55 & 58 surround a water resource and being in a groundwater protection zone1 are unsuitable for residential development. 6385 1 Howarth Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object I hope you will accept this email to register my opposition to the proposed sites for development in Knebworth, particularly those currently serving as agricultural land, sites 52,53, 55,57 and 58. All these proposals are likely to provide additional housing at the detriment to the environment within which the housing is proposed. Agriculutural land helps sustain the rural nature of our region, and keeps the green belt and green space of North Hertfordshire, something vital to its character. I would also object to development on these sites because, as you are well aware, the infrastructure of Knebworth, would not support further, heavy capacity, development. Whilst the sites are within some reach of the village centre, I would stress that the current shops in the village are unlikely to be supported by additional occupants, and there is no capacity for parking for extra residents, should they wish to visit the local retailers. Some of the developments also are on the very boundaries of the village (especially 53 and 52) and my concern here would be that residents wouldn't choose to walk to the village, but drive (as happens now from these further reaches of the village,) again adding to infrastructure problems. Sites 55,57 and 58 are all within the main 'exit' to Stevenage and Hertford, and I would feel that the small country lane is already at capacity for traffic flow, and could not support the additional transport requirements of housing development should these sites be considered. 6404 5 Beeby Document Section :Site 58 Representation : Object Development in any of these sites would result in far more traffic than any of the adjoining roads could cope with.

In the case of 55-58 both Watton Road and OAKFIELD's Road are difficult to negotiate by two cars already, because of road and the cars parked.

Knebworth village centre is often booked by traffic already, any additional would make it worse. Apart from anything else it is not good to see more greenbelt disappear.

Printed: 01/03/2010 12:25:01