The following assumes that the reader wishes to object. In the interests of fairness if anyone wishes to present the case for supporting the proposal I will add it to the website.
Local Development Plan - Possible grounds for objection and how to submit yours.
NHDC have stated that they want as much response as possible, for or against - that is the point of the consultation.
They want to know whether you think that the development would be a good idea or a bad idea, but for your views to count they have to relate to material planning matters. Some possibilities are given below, but I am not a planning expert and would welcome comments and suggestions.
Numbers count
In order of effectiveness:
- Individual, personalised representations.
- Individually signed standard letters (an example may be provided by the Parish Council and given in this website, if there is time).
- A standard letter with multiple signatures.
- A petition.
You can, if you wish suggest other sites from the 125 listed that are more suitable for development, but you must give reasons.
Without detailed design, the arguments should generally be related to sustainability, environment and impact. Although these descriptions can be confusing I think that this generally include the following:
Sustainability:
Infrastructure and its ability to cope, i.e.
 | Roads local (within the village) |
| Roads local (outside the village) |
| Transport, i.e. public buses and trains |
| Schools |
| Other facilities, including shops, doctors surgeries etc |
Impact (on the existing village):
The planners may also call this sustainability, but I prefer to separate this
out, and by impact I mean the impact on the village, its character and quality
of life, i.e. the impact of the following over a relatively short length of time
(see general background below for information on estimated numbers – that is if
you agree with my estimates!)
| Increase in housing |
| Increase in population |
| Increase in car numbers |
Environment
The potential impact of the proposals on:
| The general environment within the village. |
| The general environment outside the village. |
| Existing planning restrictions. |
Timescale
Interestingly it seems that in this case there is another criterion for
objecting and that is the site’s ability to provide housing by 2021. If it
cannot be developed within that timescale then the site will be excluded,
however we should try to get additional protection.
Below are the areas, which hopefully relate to the above and which I am going to cover in my submission. Please feel free to cut and paste those that you agree with, but put them in to your own words and personalise them to your own views not mine! In each case I give a summary first (mine will be afterwards) in case that is all you wish to consider and then I provide some details as I see them. They are quite length so use, change or summarise to suit what you decide. Please note these are my own thoughts (together with any suggestions provided to me) you do not have to agree!
********
The following represent my objections to the inclusion of site 64 at Pirton, into the North Herts. District Council proposed land allocation for development.
General Background
Summary – a development of this site would
significantly increase of numbers of houses, people and cars, which would
obviously have large and detrimental impact on the existing village.
In respect of the proposed development, I assume the following approximate numbers, which I believe to be conservative:
| Houses - 145, an increase of 31% over the current number. |
| Built area - 7.32 hectares represents an increase of 20% over the current built area. |
| Population - 435, an increase of 35% over the current number. |
| Cars - 290 additional cars. |
These figures are based on 40 houses per hectare after subtracting its ‘on site’ infrastructure (roads, verges, play areas), an occupancy of 3 people per house and 2 cars per household.
Local Roads (within the village)
Summary – there would be a detrimental impact
from the additional cars and car movements on the existing roads within the
village to the safety of pedestrians, cyclists and existing road users. Many of
the roads have no footways, suffer from speeding vehicles and already have a
poor accident record.
I consider the following to be existing issues which would become exacerbated by any development of the site. They cannot be easily solved and therefore the proposed development is not sustainable.
The local roads:
| Are not built for modern traffic volumes and parked cars make traffic movements slower and less effective. | ||||
| The route from this site to the main conurbation of
Hitchin and other main shopping and work locations, would be via Priors
Hill, Hitchin Road (within Pirton), Hitchin Road (outside Pirton), and B655
Pirton Road.
|
Local Roads (outside the village)
Summary – some of the roads have no footways,
suffer from speeding vehicles. The roads into Hitchin are already congested with
daily queuing traffic at all busy times. The junction of the Hitchin Road with
the B655 already has a poor accident record.
| Hitchin Road (outside Pirton), has no footways and already has a significant number of walkers and cyclists. Speeding is an issue and, outside the village boundary, this is even more of a problem to control. The situation is already dangerous. |
| B655 Pirton Road - anyone who travels through Hitchin at peak times experiences the daily traffic congestion. |
Site Access
Summary – the access to this site is generally
poor with difficult sight lines and no footways.
| Pollards Way is unsuitable, it is too narrow, parked cars interrupt traffic flows and this route would take the extra traffic through the heart of the village which would be detrimental and unacceptable. |
| Shillington Road is narrow with blind bends and therefore poor sight lines and is without a footway on the side of the site. |
| Priors Hill is a hill, it is also narrow and has established trees, hedges and vegetation which restrict sight lines and it has no footway on either side of the road. It already suffers from speeding traffic and the proposed development would exacerbate the problems. |
Sewers
Summary – the
existing sewers are not capable of taking additional flows.
| It is common knowledge the foul sewers struggle to cope. Flooding has been experienced in Shillington Road and the adjacent properties, at the bottom of the High Street and around the pump station in Burge End Lane - this would be the route that would drain the proposed site. |
Schools
Summary – the school in Pirton and many Hitchin
schools are operating at or very close to capacity.
| Pirton School is operating at very near capacity and could not cope with the demand from a site as large as that proposed. |
| Hitchin secondary schools are all over-subscribed. Parents of children in Year 6 are now being asked to choose 3 schools when they apply, which means 1 would have to be outside of Hitchin, e.g. Letchworth or Stevenage. |
Shops
Summary – the
single existing shop within the village cannot expand to cope with any increased
demand.
| Pirton has a single shop/post office, which can just about cope with the casual shopping needs of general population and the needs of those who find travel to other shops difficult – as the bus services are poor. It has no potential for expansion of the shop and it could not provide the additional facilities required by a significant increase in the population. |
Transportation
Summary –
Existing roads are poor, bus services are inadequate and parking at Hitchin
Station is already close to capacity.
| Local roads are poor as previously detailed. |
| Buses are Pirton’s only mode of public transport. The service to the nearesr conurbation where most services and community facilities of any real significance can be found is Hitchin. On Mondays to Fridays there are only 8 bus services in each direction, to Hitchin between 07:03 and 14:33 and from Hitchin 09:00 and 18:30. On Saturdays this reduces to 6 services between 08:33 - 14:33 and 09:18 – 17:32 respectively. There are no bus services on Sundays or Bank Holidays. |
| Trains, although the train service from Hitchin is good, its car parking facilities are at or very close to capacity. |
Impact
Summary – The
impact of a development of this potential size on Pirton, even in the medium to
long term would have dramatic and unacceptable detrimental impact on the
village.
| Pirton is a special village and is a special place to live. The impact of any significant number if houses would be dramatic and severely detrimental to its character. |
| At present the village has coped reasonably well with infill and has a good and interesting mixed of property type and age, but a development of the area proposed would spoil that at a stroke. |
| The timescale for development is 2021, it would be impossible to integrate such numbers into the village, to the existing residents’ satisfaction, at all let alone in this timescale. |
Environmental
Summary – the
area is question is on a slope and is highly visible from the surrounding areas
including the Chilterns AONB (Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The
development would be adjacent or close to, a conservation area, an ancient
monument, listed buildings and is within an area of archaeological interest.
| This area of land is on the edge of the area designated
as an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (ANOB). On the whole Pirton generally nestles in the countryside and has little visual impact on its surroundings, but the land in question is exposed and elevated - rising from the north-west to the south-east. Any development would be clearly visible from the ANOB and from other directions. |
| The site borders a conservation area. |
| The site is close to an Ancient Monument. |
| The site close listed buildings. |
| The site is in an area of archaeological interest. |
General Planning Matters
Summary – the
village boundary is intended to protect the village from undesirable
development. The proposal to include this site should be resisted as it is
outside the village boundary.
| On numerous occasions villagers have been reassured by planning officers that having the land outside the village boundary is the best way of protecting the village from undesirable development. This should remain the case and the proposed inclusion of the land dismissed accordingly. |
| The site is immediately adjacent to land that was designated as V2 land - land of visual impact, intended to be a transition between the built area of the village and the countryside. I am unsure of its current designation, however its purpose remains. The development of the site would undermine the position of this land and would almost certainly lead to its development, possibly as an additional area added on to site 64. This would bring development even further into the village. |
| The above area of land would probably increase the area of development by approximately 10%, which would add 10% to the numbers of house, cars and population considered above and increase the detrimental impact. |
In Conclusion:
For all of the reasons given above, the inclusion of this land and its
allocation to development in NHDC’s land allocations should not be accepted by
the Council.
The impact on Pirton of its inclusion would be dramatic and entirely detrimental and is therefore unacceptable.
Given its location and the potential impact to the Area of
Outstanding National Beauty, on the conservation area, its proximity to an
ancient monument, listed buildings and the fact that it is an area
archaeological interest, it is unlikely that the land could be developed in a
timescale which would satisfy the time constraints imposed on NHDC. The proposal
to include this land should therefore be dismissed for this reason alone,
however I would ask that it be dismissed for all the reasons given above and not
just its inability to meet the time constraints imposed.
