Your name

Your email

First Line of Address

Your Postcode

Subject

Message (Edit just as you wish)
Resident representation on Radlett sites proposed in Regulation 18 Consultation Document April 2026 Hertsmere Local Plan Dear Sir/Madam This is my separate and individual representation in response to the sites proposed in this draft Local Plan for Radlett and you are required to take account separately of any representation from any person in accordance with the Planning Authority’s obligations, including under its Statement of Community Involvement and under the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2026. This draft Local Plan proposes development in and around four urban locations in Hertsmere as a spatial strategy to protect the Green Belt. 1. Overall I do not consider there is a need for the scale of development proposed. Based on local knowledge and experience, on the record of the Local Planning Authority in delivering sustainable development, and on the draft Plan’s supporting information, I consider that the scale and number of sites proposed for Radlett are neither sustainable nor deliverable. 2. The presentation of overall housing targets is complex and confusing but appears the properly assessed housing target is around 16,000 homes over the 15-year Plan period, and these numbers include 2000 ‘windfall’ sites. 3. Table 12.1 in the Plan presents at least 21,400 potential sites across Hertsmere, but including these windfall sites, the likely inclusion of site ‘PB3’ follow an appeal, and the inclusion of more homes at Bowmans Cross, it appears with these opportunities and the actual housing need of 16,100 there is ample opportunity to reduce sites in and around main settlements, including Radlett. 4. The artificially low numbers at Bowmans Cross mean that Radlett’s Green Belt is being used to plug a gap that should instead be met at a purpose‑designed new settlement. Allowing at least 2,500 homes at Bowmans Cross in the plan period would enable more homes and affordable housing to come forward without further erosion of Radlett’s sensitive Green Belt surroundings. Failing to use Bowmans Cross to its proper strategic potential results in avoidable harm to the character and openness of land around Radlett that the Plan could and should protect. 5. As context for my feedback on the Radlett sites national Planning Policy generally prioritises development first on brownfield land, then on Green Belt that has been previously developed, then on Grey Belt, and only then on greenfield Green Belt. 6. In and around Radlett 7 sites are proposed. 6.1. Of these sites no.s 1 (Regency House, Land at 205 Watling Street) and 5 (Land South of Shenley Hill, Radlett) are sites with existing Planning Permission 6.2. Two sites, 1 (Regency House, Land at 205 Watling Street) and 2 (Radlett Car Park, Railway Cottages, Radlett) are within the existing urban boundaries of Radlett and are brownfield sites. 6.3. Parts of one site, 7, (Starveacres and land to the west of Starveacres, Radlett) is safeguarded land for housing in the existing Local Plan. 6.4. Sites 3 (Land North of Watford Road and East of Kemprow, Radlett), 4 (Land South of Watford Road and West of New Road, Radlett), 6 (Home Farm, Radlett), and 7 (Starveacres and land to the west of Starveacres, Radlett) are undeveloped sites within Green Belt in the existing Local Plan and overall have been provisionally identified as Grey Belt in the the 2026 Local Plan, but with parts of one site, 7, identified as Grey Belt. 7. I recognise that from a well attended meeting organised by the Parish Council, from comments from groups including the Radlett Society and Green Belt Association and the Letchmore Heath Village Trust and from individuals that there is a broad approach, whilst not a full consensus, that is the least unacceptable settlement wide response to the list of potential site allocations for Radlett in the 2026 draft Hertsmere Local Plan. 7.1. Based on local knowledge and experience, on the record of the Local Planning Authority in delivering sustainable development, the ‘valley’ topography of the settlement as a whole, and on the draft Plan’s supporting information, the scale and number of sites for Radlett are neither sustainable nor deliverable, especially for infrastructure and traffic given the cumulative constraints on the local road network. 7.2. As sites 1 (Regency House, Land at 205 Watling Street) and 5 (Land South of Shenley Hill, Radlett) are sites with existing Planning Permission, parts of one site, 7, (Starveacres and land to the west of Starveacres, Radlett) is safeguarded land for housing in the existing Local Plan, and 2 (Radlett Car Park, Railway Cottages, Radlett) is brownfield I recognise they are more likely to be developed. 7.3.I am concerned in respect of site 2 (Radlett Car Park, Railway Cottages, Radlett) with flooding and the loss of station car parking, key planning issues that must be, and could be, addressed. 7.4. The remaining sites fall into two groups, north and south of the Watford Road 7.4.1. Sites north of the Watford Road, 3 (Land North of Watford Road and East of Kemprow, Radlett) and 7 (Starveacres and land to the west of Starveacres, Radlett). Part of Site 7 is safeguarded land for housing in the existing Local Plan. These sites have some existing adjacent local facilities, shops and schools, and good connections to the Watford Road that could form the basis for a critical mass for investment for a more sustainable development as described in the draft plan; “…the appropriate mix of main town centre, social infrastructure and employment uses”. They are “good to moderate” grade 3 agricultural land (Natural England Classification). 7.4.2. Sites south of the Watford Road, 4 (Land South of Watford Road and West of New Road, Radlett), and 6 (Home Farm, Radlett) taken together have a greater spatial impact on the Green Belt around Radlett. These sites, especially site 6, have relatively less existing adjacent local facilities, shops and schools, and extended, narrow connections to the Watford Road and with split connections to Watling Street that could undermine the basis for a critical mass for investment for a more sustainable development. They are “very good” grade 2 agricultural land, on which proposed Local plan policy G16 states development should be avoided. As such I do not support these 2 sites being included in the Plan. 8. Therefore my individual representation on the Regulation 18 Consultation Document April 2026 Hertsmere Local Plan is that I support the above settlement-wide, planning-focused response, which provides a hierarchy of site acceptability in Radlett, and focusing major development in a sustainable strategic urban extension on the undeveloped sites 7 and then 3 if needed north of Watford Road, not accepting sites 4 and 6, this in the context of the stated wider concerns of myself and indeed many of Radlett’s residents. 9. My representation relates to the plan as consulted. Should there be any changes to the planning status of sites or to the supporting evidence base, it would be unreasonable to refuse acceptance of any further representation I may choose to submit. List of Radlett Sites 1. HRA SA1 Regency House, Land at 205 Watling Street 2. HRA SA2 Radlett Car Park, Railway Cottages, Radlett 3. HRA SA3 Land North of Watford Road and East of Kemprow, 4. HRA SA4 Land South of Watford Road and West of New Road, Radlett 5. HRA SA5 Land South of Shenley Hill, Radlett 6. HRA SA6 Home Farm, Radlett 7. HRA SA7 Starveacres and land to the west of Starveacres, Radlett Yours faithfully

I agree to the Privacy Policy