What DBC Planning Really Thinks?!!

James Doe is the Assistant Director for Planning, Development and Regeneration at Dacorum Borough Council.


(Full DeeTV article can be found here: http://www.deetv.tv/in-your-area/berkhamsted/#south-berkhamsted-concept)

Yes that is correct, you heard right – the man in charge of DBC planning believes that the numbers being proposed in the current consultation are “too much for the town“.

At least he did in 2012 when this video was made, so we ask the same question as we did to David Gauke:

So what has changed in five years?

In terms of infrastructure – NOTHING.

In terms of development – LOTS.

While Hemel Hemsptead has fallen 21% below the Core Strategy target, building in Berkhamsted has progressed at a rate 34% above the housing numbers set out in the current plan. All this with no improvement of infrastructure

Now James Doe’s department is proposing far more development. Logically Mr Doe’s views from 2012 hold good, so how have we got to a plan that proposes up to 2,850 new homes in Berkhamsted, destroying 100s of acres of Green Belt in the process?

5 Responses to “What DBC Planning Really Thinks?!!”
  1. William Frew says:

    I have no objection to Berkhamsted bearing its FAIR share of new housing but the infrasructure MUST be improved to match BEFORE any major development takes place.

  2. Pat Berkley says:

    I agree with William Frew. As to David Gauke I received a response to the email we all sent to him – with very, very non committal comments – if he cannot be constructive and proactive on this matter why waste House of Commons paper and postage? He is not helping our cause one iota. Lets hope Mr Doe sees sense after the structured protest by BRAG and other public minded residents of Berkhamsted

  3. john shipp says:

    Having been a Conservative voter(National& Local)for 61 years this WILL CEASE at the next election of either ilk unless theDacorum Councilplays fair and unbiased over the current proposals for the housing development .The shabby treatment of non-HEMEL districts is going to threaten the entire constituency–David Gauke–BEWARE. Respectfully, J.M.Shipp.

  4. Ken Smith says:

    In short, the bottom line is that the present infrastructure will not support all the proposed additional property. i.e.. Church’s, Doctors Dentists Schools, Carparks Road systems, Services:– Food shops Water Gas & Electricity.

  5. Goodwin says:

    Berkhamsted scarcely functions now. Without major infrastructure development the proposed development will disable the town. Senseless suggestion I’m afraid and very damaging.. Philip Goodwin

Leave A Comment