More expansion!

Local ‘spatial’ planning is coming along nicely and everyone is running around like headless chickens. The planners are currently looking at bits of land suggested by both public and officers for building the ‘required’ homes for the future (see above). Youth clubs, garages, football grounds (no golf clubs?), open spaces, agricultural land with growing crops (transition town?) - you name it, it’s on the list (even the cemetery). The town is expected to expand to the line of the by-pass for some reason. Just think about your street, and how you would fit another 10% in as that’s the sort of number we are talking about.
My road has 17 homes so fitting another 2 in (for example) should be easy. The electricity supply is shaky at best ( power cuts, a monthly occurrence), the water, gas and telephone aren’t bad, but the sewage system is well loaded. I’m on the edge of town and the planners are suggesting the edge should be moved half a mile as the crow flies further out. I haven’t even thought about where these two homes would go as all the ‘spaces’ were built on years ago (it’s a nice place!). This is the problem all around our town. Look at your road, think of the money you could make as you make a killing - and move somewhere else. You may be surprised how difficult it is as we have already been infilled and extended beyond the capabilities of existing services and available ground area.

By the time you read this, you can still make a comment to the County Council and the regional lot (I can’t keep up with all this democracy and consultation), if you are quick. Don’t forget we have to leave space for the new General Hospital in Hemel Hempstead and more open space in Berkhamsted (planners live elsewhere, ya know!) as we already have a shortage.

Does the line of the 'by-pass' really mean the town has to expand?

And it goes on!
By now you will all have made your comments and suggestions regarding the Borough Councils 1st draft regarding meeting the targets made by the East of England mob in response to the governments idea that the population needs more property to buy and live in.
I say the 1st draft, as our very own Borough Council will now consider all the responses made, discard the ones it doesn't like, ones that might find favour will be developed into a form that the public might be able to take a shine to and we must not forget the odd additional proposal suggested during this 'consultation'.
It will all come round again in 2010, when the 'final' plan will be produced and out for final consultation before going to Councillors for final ratification – so you know who to blame! This is a far cry from events in the past.

I was watching the 1973 John Betjeman documentary 'Metroland', which looked at the Metropolitan Railways' idea of linking Manchester and Paris via London and the Channel Tunnel – this was the turn of the century (the 19th/20th one) the other day and marvelled at how simple and logical it was.
You start by building a railway from just where your headquarters are, in this case, Baker Street, and head north to start with as 'johnny foreigner' might prove awkward to deal with. Once you have gone a mile or two you find yourself in open country. This suggests that you actually run out of passengers to pay for the line. The answer is simple, suggest to a few builders that it it could be good to expand London and so the likes of Neasden and Wembley appeared. As you get further out, the builders are not so keen, so why not buy the land up and promote it yourself? Metroland is formed and places such as Rayners Park, Harrow, Pinner and Moor Park appear with other areas expanded once the benefits are realised. Sadly, the line only got as far as Amersham, although work did start just the other side of Aylesbury.

This idea continued right through to the 1950's where one body promoted a large development and planned/installed the infrastructure. Even our beloved Hemel Hempstead was planned with work/industry built before the houses were ready. It was so well planned that it's difficult to in-fill in any quantity. Open spaces abound and located handily as are local shopping areas.
Berkhamsted started along the same lines, with the coming of transport links such as the toll pike road, the canal and the railway. Later, houses were built for workers employed by the several large employers in the town and between the wars, large areas developed up the slopes, once the little problem of stopping houses sliding down to the bottom had been solved. This was the period when planning went out of the window in the quest to house the increasing local population who not only found employment but wanted to commute from the nice country town we all know and love.

So, the demand for new homes means that the south-east has to lose some of the very green belt created to prevent this happening, the shortage of public open space in urban areas means prime building land must be used and the suggestion that nearly a 1,000,000* homes nationally are  standing empty and could be brought back into use if modernised (and employ quite a few unemployed construction workers into the bargain) means that although alternatives are available, new housing must be built to meet to perceived demand no matter what. Decisions can be defended when you hold all the political cards it just needs the ability to question the basis of those decisions.

Here for Telegraph article - Just 500,000 homes empty

Here for Telegraph article - another 750,000 homes empty