Watford's mayor has written to the Government calling for the town's housing targets to be reduced.
Peter Taylor says he and his Liberal Democrat colleagues believes the way housing targets are calculated need to be "reviewed" in order to make them more "achievable and realistic".
Mr Taylor has written to Housing Secretary Robert Jenrick where he says the Government's current approach means "no account is taken of the very limited space we have available".
His letter dated June 29 comes off the back off the Tory's defeat to the Lib Dems at a by-election in Chesham & Amersham in which new planning reforms have been said to have played a part in the shock defeat for Boris Johnson.
Watford's mayor told the Observer: "For a town such as Watford that is a relatively small size and already quite built up we are doing all we can to protect the green spaces we have. But the government continue to push for more housebuilding, telling us we need to ‘build, build, build’.
"They take no account of how built up we already are and how little space is available. To deliver the development that the government are demanding we will have to build upwards. I don’t want to see that and I’m sure many people in Watford don’t either."
In his letter to Mr Jenrick, the mayor wrote: "I hope the government can look again at how these targets are set. They must take account of local circumstances; such as existing densities and the availability of land to deliver new homes."
Watford has been set a target of delivering 787 homes per year over the next 15 years which is up from 313 in 2017-18.
Data has shown Watford Borough Council has been failing to meet its most recent targets but the council - and in particular its Lib Dem councillors - have come in for heavy criticism from residents over the last few years for its approval of large-scale developments, including tower blocks rising up to 28 storeys.
Mr Taylor added: "Development is a really big issue for people all across Watford and, like them, I despair at more high rise properties being forced upon the town in an attempt to meet the government’s arbitrary housing targets."
In the past, councillors have talked about the "threat of powers being taken away" from the council when asked why it has approved such huge schemes.
Former Watford councillor, Iain Sharpe, who led on planning and regeneration in the borough, wrote in the Observer last summer: "The Government’s approach includes increasing our housing targets from 260 to nearly 800 a year, letters sent from government ministers telling us off for building too few homes, the threat of powers being taken away if we don’t deliver more, and a seemingly endless stream of changes to the planning system that further tilt the rules in favour of developers."
These are claims that have been disputed by the town's Tory MP Dean Russell.
Earlier this year, M Russell said: "I don’t understand the comments that Government is responsible for imposing unpopular development on our town, given I am yet to see anything from government which insists on high-rises being given the green light.
"If the council has no power as they claim, then why were they able to refuse other planning applications such as one that would see 165 homes built on the former Arriva bus garage in Garston, or the application to build 21 flats on the former Lloyds bank site on the St Albans Road? If they have no voice, why do they wish to represent our town?
"Watford presents a unique challenge as it is one of the most densely populated, but geographically small areas in England. I have met with ministers and the Secretary of State many times since being elected to argue on behalf of residents that any increase in our housing targets would risk our town turning into little more than a commuter belt for London – and I am pleased this was listened to."
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel