FAQs

• ​In early 2024 the government turned down the developer Redrow’s appeal to be allowed to build a massive development, “Marshcroft”, on the land to the east of Tring.

• Dacorum Borough Council, Grove Fields Residents Association, Tring Town Council and a number of other local organisations had successfully worked together at the appeal Inquiry to achieve this result.

• However, in autumn 2024 Dacorum Borough Council reversed its position. Local councils must have in place a Local Plan which sets out what housing will be built and where in their area. In its autumn 2024  draft Local Plan, Dacorum included the land to the east of Tring, as well as two other sites at New Mill and Dunsley Farm, as site allocations for massive development.

• Government Planning Inspectors will scrutinise this draft Local Plan at an Examination in Public at some point this year. If they pass it, these massive developments will go ahead. We can fight this at the Examination in Public.

• Dacorum claimed that the national government’s new, mandatory numbers for development in each local area gave Dacorum no choice but to plan massive development in Tring. But Dacorum have not done theirwork properly to find appropriate areas for development around the borough to meet the required numbers. They have panicked and seized the ‘easy’ option to find numbers – for them, but not for Tring.

• The size of the developments is disproportionate and unfair. These developments would result in a 45% increase in the size of Tring. This is completely out of proportion to the rest of Dacorum Borough – an average of 24% increase.

• Tring does not and will not have the infrastructure needed to support such an increase. Roads and parking will be under huge
  pressure, with Dacorum and developers claiming unrealistically that many more people will cycle. GPs and dentists do not have the spaces. Across the country, local residents complain that developers do not build even the limited additional infrastructure they promise.

• The development is planned on high-quality greenbelt land and will have a negative impact on the Chilterns National Landscape – when local councils are supposed to prioritise building on brownfield land. Once countryside is lost, it can’t be recovered. We need good quality agricultural land and green spaces to help fight the climate emergency, protect biodiversity and secure our future. The country needs to regenerate and invest in brownfield / previously developed land, and ensure properly affordable housing. Building large houses on green land is just easy and profitable for developers, not the right thing to do.

• Tring’s voice was not listened to. Dacorum has held four public consultations on a new draft Local Plan. In each of these, a huge number of residents of Tring and the villages told Dacorum not to build on prime greenbelt land, and expressed concerns about the inability of infrastructure to cope. Councillors representing Tring voted against the final draft Local Plan; but some were not allowed to vote. Tring councillors were outnumbered by councillors from other parts of the Borough. So a decision of such magnitude for Tring has been made entirely by those who do not represent Tring. Some of these were openly pleased that sacrificing Tring meant they could protect ‘their’ areas from development.

At the Examination in Public, we will:

• Argue that Tring’s allocation of development is unfair, completely disproportionate, does not meet local housing needs anyway, and does not have the necessary infrastructure.

• Show that Dacorum did not do the work they were supposed to do to find brownfield land first.

• Advocate for the local, national and long-term importance of our Green Belt land next to the Chilterns National Landscape.

• Demonstrate to the Planning Inspectors that we are not against housing development in Tring, and offer an alternative growth strategy that protects prime Green Belt land and actually works for Tring’s current and future residents.

The Inspector will have been given clear direction by the national government to do everything possible to enable house building at scale, here and in many other parts of the country, as that is what the government has promised to do. Simply arguing against that won’t help us. Instead, we should show that Dacorum’s plan is for too many houses in Tring. A smaller number would be better, for many reasons. 

​We want to show that other options exist for a smaller number of houses in Tring, that do not need building across a huge amount of high quality Green Belt land eg at Marshcroft and New Mill. The Inspector will not be able to “choose” these options over Dacorum’s plan: it is not an either / or situation. The Inspector’s job is to decide whether the draft Plan is “sound” (and can be passed) or “unsound”. If we can show the Inspector that Dacorum did not consider other options, as they should have done, then we hope Dacorum will be told that the draft is unsound, and that they must go back and do their work properly, listening to residents.

A plausible set of options would centre around:
    • Aiming for a smaller and fairer percentage of development for Tring, in line with the 24% average in the rest of the Borough;
    • Using more brownfield sites in Tring and the rest of the Borough;
    • Focusing the development in Tring on the Dunsley Farm site.

• It was included as the only major new housing site in the previous, largely un-controversial, draft Local Plan, supported by TTC, and
  continues to be listed in the current Draft Plan as TR01.

• It's a much more natural fit to the existing Town boundary than the currently proposed Marshcroft and New Mill sites that extend the Town to the East, that are distant from the town centre and that would occupy high quality agricultural, Green Belt land that forms a natural setting to the Chilterns National Landscape.

• A more developed Dunsley Farm site than that envisaged by the current draft plan could be very positive for the future of Tring:

  • With just over 700 new homes, a 22% increase for Tring is in line with the Dacorum average growth and avoids the disproportionate 46% increase currently proposed.

  • Such a development could provide genuinely affordable low rise apartments (2-3 storeys) on part of the site – a much needed resource for first-time buyers.

  • As a mixed use site with housing, a new Primary school & Nursery, employment and sports facilities, this could be a very rewarding place to live.

  • Its more central position in the town, in easy walking distance to the Supermarket and High Street shops, and easy access to the A41 minimises the number of resident car journeys, in marked contrast to the car dependent Marshcroft and New Mill sites.

• If Green Belt must be sacrificed, then the Dunsley site has consistently been suggested by the GFRA and Tring Town Council as the Green Belt site out of all the sites proposed by Dacorum that should be developed.

We have already put in summary written evidence for the Examination in Public.

You can see this at Dacorum's "Let's Talk" Page.
The next stage is to put in more detailed written evidence, and plan our in-person representations at the Examination in Public.
 

We need you – this is for all of Tring. You can:

​

• Donate

Your generous donations so far have enabled us to hire expert planning consultants, Varsity, and start developing our strategy to fight this. We need to reach our target of £20,000 to complete this work. Reaching a target of £60,000 would enable us additionally to hire planning barristers to arm us with legal advice and expertise for the Examination in Public.

​

• Spread the word

To family, friends, neighbours and colleagues in Tring. Tring’s voice should be heard.

• Join GFRA

GFRA has over 600 members and is growing. The more members we have, the stronger our case will be when we put it to the Planning Inspectors. Use this form or email the GFRA team to join. Anyone in your household who is 18 or older can join.