"Our aim is to preserve as much as possible of the peaceful green and pleasant countryside,
which has been left to us after the ravages of road and building developments."
Ann Goddard, President EBGBS
which has been left to us after the ravages of road and building developments."
Ann Goddard, President EBGBS
2026 AGM
Save The Date
Allum Manor
Tuesday 19th May 7pm for 7.30pm start
Save The Date
Allum Manor
Tuesday 19th May 7pm for 7.30pm start
Green Belt Review - What classification has our Green Belt land been given?
To find out more from the report released on 16/04/2026 click on this page
www.hertsmere.gov.uk/planning-building-control/planning-policy/hertsmere-local-plan/new-local-plan/supporting-studies
and scroll down to:
5.1 Green Belt Assessment
www.hertsmere.gov.uk/planning-building-control/planning-policy/hertsmere-local-plan/new-local-plan/supporting-studies
and scroll down to:
5.1 Green Belt Assessment
Latest Local Plan Reg 18 - Press Release from HBC 07/04/26
Hertsmere Borough Council has published its Local Plan Consultation Document setting out how future development across the borough could be managed and assessed, ahead of a formal public consultation.
The publication of these documents marks the next stage in the Local Plan process. It includes a long list of ‘candidate’ sites that could form part of the council’s response to the Government’s updated housing requirements. This stage of the process, known as a ‘Regulation 18’ consultation, is designed to enable residents to provide views on the suitability of those sites prior to a final list of sites being produced. The consultation is also an opportunity for local people to provide feedback on the spatial strategy and planning policies which will underpin the new plan.
The Local Plan process gives the council the ability to take control of how development comes forward across Hertsmere, identifying the most appropriate locations and ensuring that new homes are delivered alongside the infrastructure local communities need, including schools, healthcare, transport and green spaces.
Government planning policy requires all councils to plan for a set number of new homes, with targets determined at a national level rather than locally. While the council does not determine the overall level of development in Hertsmere, the Local Plan can determine where and how that development is delivered.
Without an up-to-date Local Plan, development would be more likely to come forward through speculative applications and the appeals process, reducing the community’s ability to influence where and how development comes forward.
The proposals published today have been informed by a borough-wide spatial strategy, which looks at how growth can be distributed in a coordinated way.
No decisions have yet been made about where development will take place. The publication of these documents is an opportunity for residents, businesses and community groups to review the proposals and to respond in the upcoming consultation.
We are required through government planning policy to plan for new homes. The Local Plan process is how we take control of where that development happens and ensure it is supported by the infrastructure our communities need.
Without a Local Plan, development will still come forward, but in a way that is less coordinated and with less opportunity for communities to influence the outcome.
This process is about making sure that, as a borough, we are planning positively for the future, and that development is delivered in a way that works for Hertsmere.
The council will shortly be launching a formal public consultation, giving residents and stakeholders the opportunity to have their say on the proposals. The consultation will include in-person events, an online engagement platform, and deposit locations for hard copies of the draft Local Plan to enable residents to submit questions and feedback.
Consultation feedback will help inform the further development of the Local Plan, ahead of subsequent public consultation and an independent examination.
The documents can be viewed at the agenda listings for Cabinet and Extraordinary Full Council on Wednesday, 15 April - Monthly meetings calendar - April 2026.
The publication of these documents marks the next stage in the Local Plan process. It includes a long list of ‘candidate’ sites that could form part of the council’s response to the Government’s updated housing requirements. This stage of the process, known as a ‘Regulation 18’ consultation, is designed to enable residents to provide views on the suitability of those sites prior to a final list of sites being produced. The consultation is also an opportunity for local people to provide feedback on the spatial strategy and planning policies which will underpin the new plan.
The Local Plan process gives the council the ability to take control of how development comes forward across Hertsmere, identifying the most appropriate locations and ensuring that new homes are delivered alongside the infrastructure local communities need, including schools, healthcare, transport and green spaces.
Government planning policy requires all councils to plan for a set number of new homes, with targets determined at a national level rather than locally. While the council does not determine the overall level of development in Hertsmere, the Local Plan can determine where and how that development is delivered.
Without an up-to-date Local Plan, development would be more likely to come forward through speculative applications and the appeals process, reducing the community’s ability to influence where and how development comes forward.
The proposals published today have been informed by a borough-wide spatial strategy, which looks at how growth can be distributed in a coordinated way.
No decisions have yet been made about where development will take place. The publication of these documents is an opportunity for residents, businesses and community groups to review the proposals and to respond in the upcoming consultation.
We are required through government planning policy to plan for new homes. The Local Plan process is how we take control of where that development happens and ensure it is supported by the infrastructure our communities need.
Without a Local Plan, development will still come forward, but in a way that is less coordinated and with less opportunity for communities to influence the outcome.
This process is about making sure that, as a borough, we are planning positively for the future, and that development is delivered in a way that works for Hertsmere.
The council will shortly be launching a formal public consultation, giving residents and stakeholders the opportunity to have their say on the proposals. The consultation will include in-person events, an online engagement platform, and deposit locations for hard copies of the draft Local Plan to enable residents to submit questions and feedback.
Consultation feedback will help inform the further development of the Local Plan, ahead of subsequent public consultation and an independent examination.
The documents can be viewed at the agenda listings for Cabinet and Extraordinary Full Council on Wednesday, 15 April - Monthly meetings calendar - April 2026.
26/0318/OUT Land North of Allum Lane 01/04/26
Outline plans have been submitted for the following development:
Outline planning application (with all matters reserved except access) for residential development of up to 136 dwellings, including affordable housing (Class C3), associated parking, infrastructure, landscaping and open space including allotments, and creation of new vehicular access from Allum Lane.
EBGBS are meeting with the developer to discuss this and will then prepare a response and share with members.
Outline planning application (with all matters reserved except access) for residential development of up to 136 dwellings, including affordable housing (Class C3), associated parking, infrastructure, landscaping and open space including allotments, and creation of new vehicular access from Allum Lane.
EBGBS are meeting with the developer to discuss this and will then prepare a response and share with members.
Neighbourhood Plan Regulation 16 consultation - see link below to respond by 29/4/26
Here is an update on the current position of the Elstree and Borehamwood Neighbourhood Plan following its formal submission to Hertsmere Borough Council.
Hertsmere have confirmed that the Regulation 16 consultation on the submitted Neighbourhood Plan will begin this week and will run until 29 April 2026. This is an important milestone for the project and reflects the significant amount of work that the Steering Group and others in the community have contributed over the past few years. The plan has now moved from the preparation stage with the Town Council and Steering Group into the formal statutory process managed by Hertsmere Borough Council.
During the six-week consultation period, residents, businesses, landowners, developers and statutory organisations are invited to review the submitted plan and provide comments directly to Hertsmere. Hertsmere will publish the documents on their website, notify consultees by email and make paper copies available locally, including at Borehamwood Library and the council offices.
Why this stage matters:
This consultation is the final opportunity for comments before the plan moves to independent examination. The examiner will review the plan and the consultation responses before deciding whether the plan can proceed to a local referendum.
If supported at referendum, the Neighbourhood Plan will become part of the statutory development plan, meaning it will carry real weight in future planning decisions affecting Elstree and Borehamwood.
How the Steering Group can help:
Members of the Steering Group have played a key role in shaping the plan and are also very well placed to help raise awareness of the consultation within the community.
If you are able to, it would be extremely helpful if you could:
The link to the consultation is here: Read the Plan and supporting documents
The more residents who engage with the consultation, the stronger the community voice behind the plan and the clearer the level of community support as the plan moves to examination.
What happens next:
Once the consultation closes on 29 April, Hertsmere Borough Council will review all responses and appoint an independent examiner to assess the plan.
The examiner will consider whether the plan meets the legal requirements for neighbourhood planning and may recommend modifications if necessary.
If the examiner confirms the plan can proceed, Hertsmere will organise a local referendum, giving residents the opportunity to vote on whether the plan should be adopted. If more than 50% of those voting support the plan, Hertsmere Borough Council will then formally “make” the plan, and it will become part of the statutory development plan for the area.
Hertsmere have confirmed that the Regulation 16 consultation on the submitted Neighbourhood Plan will begin this week and will run until 29 April 2026. This is an important milestone for the project and reflects the significant amount of work that the Steering Group and others in the community have contributed over the past few years. The plan has now moved from the preparation stage with the Town Council and Steering Group into the formal statutory process managed by Hertsmere Borough Council.
During the six-week consultation period, residents, businesses, landowners, developers and statutory organisations are invited to review the submitted plan and provide comments directly to Hertsmere. Hertsmere will publish the documents on their website, notify consultees by email and make paper copies available locally, including at Borehamwood Library and the council offices.
Why this stage matters:
This consultation is the final opportunity for comments before the plan moves to independent examination. The examiner will review the plan and the consultation responses before deciding whether the plan can proceed to a local referendum.
If supported at referendum, the Neighbourhood Plan will become part of the statutory development plan, meaning it will carry real weight in future planning decisions affecting Elstree and Borehamwood.
How the Steering Group can help:
Members of the Steering Group have played a key role in shaping the plan and are also very well placed to help raise awareness of the consultation within the community.
If you are able to, it would be extremely helpful if you could:
- Encourage residents to read the Neighbourhood Plan
- Share information about the consultation within local groups and networks
- Encourage people to submit comments to Hertsmere before 29 April
The link to the consultation is here: Read the Plan and supporting documents
The more residents who engage with the consultation, the stronger the community voice behind the plan and the clearer the level of community support as the plan moves to examination.
What happens next:
Once the consultation closes on 29 April, Hertsmere Borough Council will review all responses and appoint an independent examiner to assess the plan.
The examiner will consider whether the plan meets the legal requirements for neighbourhood planning and may recommend modifications if necessary.
If the examiner confirms the plan can proceed, Hertsmere will organise a local referendum, giving residents the opportunity to vote on whether the plan should be adopted. If more than 50% of those voting support the plan, Hertsmere Borough Council will then formally “make” the plan, and it will become part of the statutory development plan for the area.
Planning Application 25/1615/FUL Land to the Southwest of Vale Avenue, Borehamwood - to be heard at HBC Planning Meeting 19/03/2026
Update: GREEN BELT LOST - this application was approved for development
We have urged the Planning Committee to refuse permission for development of 98 homes on the Land Southwest of Vale Avenue. This site is within the Green Belt, and we believe the proposal is an inappropriate and harmful incursion onto it. While the planning officers’ report recommends approval, we believe this is based on a misinterpretation of national and local policy.
Please see
We understand the pressure to build more homes, but that must not come at the cost of our most important environmental protections. The officers’ report relies on a flawed "grey belt" classification and fails to give proper weight to the permanence of the Green Belt and the integrity of the Woodcock Hill Village Green.
Click here for our brief notes explaining this.
National Planning and Policy Framework (NPPF) 2025: Consultation March 2026
On 10th March 2026 the Consultation on the latest NPPF guidelines closed. EBGBS submitted their response as follows:
Question 56: Do you agree our proposed changes to the definition of designated rural areas will better support rural social and affordable housing? Strongly agree, partly agree, neither agree nor disagree, partly disagree, strongly disagree.
Answer: Strongly agree.
CPRE’s State of Rural Affordable Housing report in 2023 showed a strong need for more genuinely affordable housing in rural areas, which is not being met by current planning policies. CPRE also showed that only about half of rural England can be considered a ‘designated rural area’ in the terms set in this question, but the need for affordable housing is acute everywhere. If the change is brought in, it will help address the problem by making clear to landowners and developers that they should include affordable housing within the smallest sites of 10 homes or less, which isn’t the case in half of rural areas at present.
Question 60: Do you agree with our proposals to ask authorities to set out requirements for a broader mix of tenures to be provided on sites of 150 homes or more? Strongly agree, partly agree, neither agree nor disagree, partly disagree, strongly disagree. Please provide your reasons and indicate if an alternative site size threshold would be preferable?
Answer: Partly agree
I agree strongly with the principle of requiring a broader mix of housing tenures (such as social rent and low cost ownership) on large housing sites being set out in national planning policy. Sir Oliver Letwin’s review in 2018 made a powerful case for just this kind of policy. Currently, too many developments in rural areas simply consist of large, expensive 4 and 5 bedroom houses for sale which are out of reach for most average wage earners. CPRE research has also shown that only 14% of new housing in rural areas can be classed as social housing for example, despite the particular need for this kind of housing in rural areas due to average incomes being lower than in urban areas.
My main concern is that the policy doesn’t go far enough because it relies too heavily on local plans being in place. CPRE research also found that most current plans in rural areas are inadequate with only 1 in 5 having any kind of policy seeking more new social housing, and many supporting housing market assessments being out of date or (in the case of Cornwall) absent entirely. The NPPF should therefore set minimum expectations for at least 10% social housing in all major new housing developments of more than 100 homes until plans are updated, and I also believe that the threshold can be set much lower, indeed as low as 50 units.
Question 62: Are any changes to policy HO7 needed in order to ensure that substantial weight is given to meeting relevant needs?
Answer: Agree
The NPPF should set minimum expectations for at least 10% social housing in all major new housing developments of more than 100 homes until plans are updated, and I also believe that the threshold can be set much lower, indeed as low as 50 units. (for reasoning see response to question 60.)
Question 116: Do you agree policy L2 provides clear guidance on how development proposals should be assessed to ensure efficient use of land?
Partly agree
I agree that there should be a more efficient use of land in urban and suburban areas but that this intensification of land use should take priority over development on grey belt and Green Belt land. Otherwise residents in such areas could feel squeezed between more development within their area and loss of valued green space outside.
Question 121: Do you agree policy L3 provides clear guidance on achieving appropriate densities for residential and mixed-use schemes?
Partly agree
I agree that higher densities are appropriate for new developments in urban and suburban areas but that this should be set against reduced or no development on grey belt land in particular.
Question 133: Do you agree with proposals to better enable development opportunities around suitable stations to be brought forward? Strongly agree, partly agree, neither agree nor disagree, partly disagree, strongly disagree. Please provide your reasons, particularly if you disagree.
Answer: Strongly disagree.
I oppose changes to Green Belt policy contained in draft policy GB3 to enable more development on Green Belt land around any railway station. This would lead to more sprawling suburban development and increased car usage, as there is no guarantee that the development would be in or next to an existing town and connected social facilities. It would also contradict policy GB5 on beneficial uses of Green Belt land, as building on land near stations would lead to the loss of open countryside that would be easiest for people from towns and cities to reach by train.
I would support a policy that encouraged more housing development on previously developed or brownfield land close to railway stations in towns, as this would help regenerate existing towns.
Question 136: Do you agree policies GB6 and GB7 set out appropriate tests for considering development on Green Belt land? Strongly agree, partly agree, neither agree nor disagree, partly disagree, strongly disagree. Please provide your reasons, particularly if you disagree.
Answer: Strongly disagree.
I oppose changes to Green Belt policy contained in draft policy GB7 to allow more development on the basis that it is close to a railway station. This would lead to more sprawling suburban development and increased car usage, as there is no guarantee that the development would be in or next to an existing town and connected social facilities. It would also contradict policy GB5 on beneficial uses of Green Belt land, as building on land near stations would lead to the loss of open countryside that would be easiest for people from towns and cities to reach by train. I would support a policy that encouraged more housing development on previously developed or brownfield land close to railway stations in towns, as this would help regenerate existing towns.
Question 145: Do you agree that proposed changes to the grey belt definition will improve the operability of the grey belt definition, without undermining the general protections given to other footnote 7 areas? Strongly agree, partly agree, neither agree nor disagree, partly disagree, strongly disagree.
Answer: Strongly disagree.
I support the CPRE’s major concerns about the ‘grey belt’ provisions introduced into Green Belt policy in the December 2024 NPPF. Despite claims made by the Prime Minister and others that the policy would only lead to the loss of supposedly ‘poor quality’ Green Belt land, CPRE research has, in fact, found that government planning inspectors have used the policy to permit development on high quality farm land and recognised local wildlife sites. I believe that ‘grey belt’, rather than being widened, should be removed from national planning policy, with major development only being allowed in the Green Belt if it is agreed through the new spatial development strategies.
But if the policy is maintained, it should be narrowed to exclude high-quality farmland and local wildlife sites from being designated as grey belt, and grey belt development should not be allowed on appeal against local refusals of planning permission.
In areas where there is less Green Belt, higher priority should be given to its protection regardless of its quality, as green space itself has value for a community.
Grey belt is open to misinterpretation and the guidelines around it have been misinterpreted by local councils and planning officers. The use of the term grey belt is being used as a method of legitimising the depletion of Green Belt land, by redefining areas of Green Belt as grey belt, misleading local people and reducing green spaces in urban areas, where brownfield spaces are available, albeit much more costly to develop.
Question 181: Do you agree policy N2 sets sufficiently clear expectations for how development proposals should consider and enhance the existing natural characteristics of sites proposed for development? Strongly agree, partly agree, neither agree nor disagree, partly disagree, strongly disagree. Please provide your reasons, particularly if you disagree.
Answer: Partly agree and partly disagree
I am concerned that the new policy N2 will be insufficient to protect valued aspects of our rural landscapes, especially those outside nationally protected landscapes which are covered by Policy N4. Valued aspects of landscapes are currently protected under paragraph 187 of the current NPPF. I therefore ask for N2 paragraph 1(a) to be amended to refer to ‘landscape character and value’.
I also do not believe that protection for our highest quality farmland is strong enough. 2022 CPRE research found that in the past 12 years we have lost over 14,000 hectares of prime agricultural land to development, including 287,864 houses — equivalent to the productive loss of around 250,000 tonnes of vegetables and enough to provide nearly two million people with their 5-a-day for an entire year. I call for policy N2 paragraph 1(b) to be changed to state a firm presumption against development of the highest quality (grades 1-3) farmland.
I welcome the new policy protections for established trees and hedgerows in policy N2 paragraph (1) (d), but call for the words ‘wherever possible’ to be removed as this will encourage non-compliance. CPRE is contributing towards the Environmental Improvement Plan’s hedgerow planting target through our Hedgerow Heroes campaign. It is important that this work is backed up by commitments on developers to retain hedgerows where new development takes place.
Question 205: Existing Viability Planning Practice Guidance refers to developer return in terms a percentage of gross development value. In what ways might the continued use of gross development value be usefully standardised?
Click here for the London Green Belt Council's response.
January 15th - Planning Meeting
Elle Dani Farm and Battery Energy Storage System to be decided
Act Now!
If you haven't responded to either of these potential developments please do so NOW.
Click here to read more about Elle Dani Farm, Allum Lane
Click here to read more about BESS, Watling Street (Opposite Butterfly Lane)
If you haven't responded to either of these potential developments please do so NOW.
Click here to read more about Elle Dani Farm, Allum Lane
Click here to read more about BESS, Watling Street (Opposite Butterfly Lane)
25/1713/OUT Land north of Stapleton Road
ACT NOW - deadline 30th December 2025
The developer Fairfax has submitted its planning application 25/1713/OUT to build 292 new homes on the Green Belt land north of Stapleton Road.
Click here for more details
We must ACT NOW to ensure our voices are heard. DEADLINE is 30th December 2025. However, objections can be sent in up to the date of the planning meeting at which this application is heard, but this gives less time for planners to review and consider the objection points.
Why this matters:
Fairfax is trying to convince the Council that this open agricultural field is "grey belt"—meaning it’s of low value and should be built on. We know the truth. This land is a vital part of our town’s identity, a home to rare wildlife, and the final barrier stopping Borehamwood from sprawling endlessly into the countryside.
Key points for your objection:
ACTION REQUIRED:
Please send your objection to the Hertsmere Planning Department to reach them by Tuesday, December 30th, 2025.
Click here for more details
We must ACT NOW to ensure our voices are heard. DEADLINE is 30th December 2025. However, objections can be sent in up to the date of the planning meeting at which this application is heard, but this gives less time for planners to review and consider the objection points.
Why this matters:
Fairfax is trying to convince the Council that this open agricultural field is "grey belt"—meaning it’s of low value and should be built on. We know the truth. This land is a vital part of our town’s identity, a home to rare wildlife, and the final barrier stopping Borehamwood from sprawling endlessly into the countryside.
Key points for your objection:
- Green Belt Destruction: This development would permanently destroy 14.69 hectares of protected land.
- Infrastructure at Breaking Point: Our local services, especially GP surgeries are already full. Adding hundreds of new residents will make it impossible for locals to get the services they need.
- Flood Risk: The plans involve discharging water into the Tykes Water system, which already floods nearby areas.
- Wildlife Loss: 2025 surveys found rare bats and birds on this site. This is a Local Wildlife Site, not "waste ground".
ACTION REQUIRED:
Please send your objection to the Hertsmere Planning Department to reach them by Tuesday, December 30th, 2025.
- Online: Visit https://www.hertsmere.gov.uk/planning-building-control/planning-applications/search-and-comment-on-planning-applications and search for 25/1713/OUT.
- Email: Send your comments to [email protected]. Please quote the application reference 25/1713/OUT as well as your name and address.
- Post: Send your comments to Hertsmere Borough Council, Civic Offices, Shenley Road, Borehamwood, Hertfordshire, WD6 1WA. Please quote the application reference 25/1713/OUT as well as your name and address.
Rt Hon Sir Oliver Dowden raises deep concerns in Parliament regarding development in the Green Belt around Hertsmere train stations - December 2025
Oliver has expressed his concerns at the government’s proposals for development in the Green belt around Hertsmere train stations.
In response to the Ministerial Statement for Planning Reform, he asked a question to the Minister of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government.
He said: “Within a mile of the well-connected stations of Radlett, Cuffley, Borehamwood, Potters Bar and Bushey, there is pristine countryside that is treasured by local communities and prevents urban sprawl. Now the opening up of this Green belt to a development free-for-all runs totally contrary to the promises made by the party opposite at the last election. So, can he clarify what radius around those stations is envisioned by these proposals, and what he will do to protect the existing character and integrity of existing villages and towns in my constituency and others up and down the country?”
The Minister responded: “Well I have got a huge amount of respect for the Rt Hon Gentleman, but it is absolutely incorrect to say that the draft framework proposes a free for all around land around trains stations. We want to establish in principle as I said a default yes for dev around rail stations within existing settlements, and to extend this to well-connected stations outside. This will give clarity and confidence that these locations are suitable for growth with the potential to unlock land for up to 1.8 million homes over the decades ahead. Alongside this, as I said Madam Deputy Speaker, we are proposing minimum densities to ensure land is used effectively. He asked me for a specific radius, it is set out in the framework. The definition set out in the framework is within walking distance around 800m. But as with everything in this framework we are consulting on what is the appropriate distance around train stations and I am more than happy to take his views and any other honourable members view's into account.”
In response to the Ministerial Statement for Planning Reform, he asked a question to the Minister of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government.
He said: “Within a mile of the well-connected stations of Radlett, Cuffley, Borehamwood, Potters Bar and Bushey, there is pristine countryside that is treasured by local communities and prevents urban sprawl. Now the opening up of this Green belt to a development free-for-all runs totally contrary to the promises made by the party opposite at the last election. So, can he clarify what radius around those stations is envisioned by these proposals, and what he will do to protect the existing character and integrity of existing villages and towns in my constituency and others up and down the country?”
The Minister responded: “Well I have got a huge amount of respect for the Rt Hon Gentleman, but it is absolutely incorrect to say that the draft framework proposes a free for all around land around trains stations. We want to establish in principle as I said a default yes for dev around rail stations within existing settlements, and to extend this to well-connected stations outside. This will give clarity and confidence that these locations are suitable for growth with the potential to unlock land for up to 1.8 million homes over the decades ahead. Alongside this, as I said Madam Deputy Speaker, we are proposing minimum densities to ensure land is used effectively. He asked me for a specific radius, it is set out in the framework. The definition set out in the framework is within walking distance around 800m. But as with everything in this framework we are consulting on what is the appropriate distance around train stations and I am more than happy to take his views and any other honourable members view's into account.”
Pre-application for Land North of Stapleton Road
ACT NOW - deadline 9th November 2025
The developer Fairfax has launched a pre-application consultation for a major housing scheme on the Green Belt at Land North of Stapleton Road, Borehamwood.
They plan to build 292 new homes on a 14.69-hectare site that is currently protected Green Belt land. We must flood their consultation with individual objections to show the strength of local feeling before they submit their formal application. This is because they could otherwise use the lack of objections as an argument if they submit a formal planning application to the council.
ACTION: Write Your Own Personal Objection NOW
It is vital that you write an objection in your own words and submit it directly to the developer.
How to submit your objection:
Key Points to Include in Your Message (Please use your own phrasing):
When writing your objection, focus on how this development conflicts with Green Belt policy and affects you and the local area.
1. Green Belt Policy - The Core Objection (NPPF):
They plan to build 292 new homes on a 14.69-hectare site that is currently protected Green Belt land. We must flood their consultation with individual objections to show the strength of local feeling before they submit their formal application. This is because they could otherwise use the lack of objections as an argument if they submit a formal planning application to the council.
ACTION: Write Your Own Personal Objection NOW
It is vital that you write an objection in your own words and submit it directly to the developer.
How to submit your objection:
- Email: [email protected]
- Online Feedback Form: borehamwood.your-feedback.co.uk
Key Points to Include in Your Message (Please use your own phrasing):
When writing your objection, focus on how this development conflicts with Green Belt policy and affects you and the local area.
1. Green Belt Policy - The Core Objection (NPPF):
- Harmful by Definition: The proposal is "inappropriate development" in the Green Belt, which is automatically considered harmful under the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).
- "Very Special Circumstances": Developers must prove "Very Special Circumstances" (VSC) to outweigh the harm, but building houses or providing affordable housing is not usually enough on its own to meet this very high bar.
- Loss of Openness: The development will destroy the Green Belt's essential openness and permanently change the character of the countryside.
- Urban Sprawl and Encroachment: This development represents an unjustified encroachment into protected land and fails to check the sprawl of Borehamwood into the countryside.
- Adding to Pressure: Local services —including schools and GP surgeries— will be placed under greater strain.
- Biodiversity Loss: Object to the destruction of existing field and habitat, regardless of the promise of "biodiversity net gain." The loss of the current landscape and mature boundaries is irreversible.
- Flood Risk: Request more detailed information on the Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS). Question if the SuDS are truly sufficient given the increase in hard surfaces, the potential for maintenance failure, and the need to cope with future extreme rainfall (climate change). The risk of surface water flooding to existing nearby properties must be fully addressed.
Rt Hon Sir Oliver Dowden Campaigns with CPRE Hertfordshire Against the Government’s Threat to the Green Belt - July 2025
Following Sir Oliver Dowden calling out the government on its grey belt policy, he met with the Hertfordshire branch of CPRE, the Countryside Charity, to discuss the government’s threat to the green belt.
Oliver talked to Abby Coften, Chief Executive of CPRE Hertfordshire and Chris Berry, Planning Manager of CPRE Hertfordshire, about the revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the redesignation of green belt land as ‘grey belt’ land and its impact on planning applications in Hertsmere.
Since the revised NPPF has been brought in, nearly all major planning applications for development on the Green Belt in Hertfordshire has quoted “grey belt” as a reason to grant planning permission. This will likely continue in the future. Already, the effect on both local planning authorities and at planning appeals is reducing very significantly the protection afforded by the Green Belt designation.
Oliver and CPRE agreed to campaign against the government’s green belt as well as inappropriate developments in the local area.
Sir Oliver predicted at the election that the grey belt would be used as an excuse to tarmac over green belt land.
Sir Oliver said: ‘Following my question on the grey belt, I was pleased to meet with Abby Coften and Chris Berry from CPRE Hertfordshire.
‘We are working together to campaign against the government’s disastrous green belt reforms, specifically on the grey belt and the damaging impact it will have in Hertsmere.’
Abby Coften said: ‘We are delighted to be working with Sir Oliver on our campaign supporting CPRE Hertfordshire’s petition to protect Hertfordshire’s Green Belt from further destruction. With space for 29,580 homes on recycled land in Hertfordshire, the priority should be brownfield sites not our beautiful countryside. We have already gained over 7,000 signatures for our petition urging the Government to review the grey belt definition in the NPPF reflecting the strength of feeling from the general public.’
CPRE’s petition on their campaign to amend the ‘grey belt’ definition is available to sign here: Save our Green Belt - our campaign for amendment of ‘grey belt’ definition - CPRE Hertfordshire
Oliver talked to Abby Coften, Chief Executive of CPRE Hertfordshire and Chris Berry, Planning Manager of CPRE Hertfordshire, about the revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the redesignation of green belt land as ‘grey belt’ land and its impact on planning applications in Hertsmere.
Since the revised NPPF has been brought in, nearly all major planning applications for development on the Green Belt in Hertfordshire has quoted “grey belt” as a reason to grant planning permission. This will likely continue in the future. Already, the effect on both local planning authorities and at planning appeals is reducing very significantly the protection afforded by the Green Belt designation.
Oliver and CPRE agreed to campaign against the government’s green belt as well as inappropriate developments in the local area.
Sir Oliver predicted at the election that the grey belt would be used as an excuse to tarmac over green belt land.
Sir Oliver said: ‘Following my question on the grey belt, I was pleased to meet with Abby Coften and Chris Berry from CPRE Hertfordshire.
‘We are working together to campaign against the government’s disastrous green belt reforms, specifically on the grey belt and the damaging impact it will have in Hertsmere.’
Abby Coften said: ‘We are delighted to be working with Sir Oliver on our campaign supporting CPRE Hertfordshire’s petition to protect Hertfordshire’s Green Belt from further destruction. With space for 29,580 homes on recycled land in Hertfordshire, the priority should be brownfield sites not our beautiful countryside. We have already gained over 7,000 signatures for our petition urging the Government to review the grey belt definition in the NPPF reflecting the strength of feeling from the general public.’
CPRE’s petition on their campaign to amend the ‘grey belt’ definition is available to sign here: Save our Green Belt - our campaign for amendment of ‘grey belt’ definition - CPRE Hertfordshire
May 2025: CPRE Petition to amend definition of 'grey belt'
CPRE Hertfordshire is campaigning for an urgent change in the revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) published in December 2024.
"The specific definition of ‘grey belt’ – as per the revised NPPF – is hugely damaging to the continued existence of the Green Belt in England.
The establishment of the Green Belt, initially to control the unrestricted urban sprawl of London and subsequently applied to other conurbations, is widely regarded as the most successful planning policy since the introduction of the present statutory planning system in 1948. It has had the effect of maintaining open countryside with a host of benefits for both rural and urban communities and for nature and the environment.
But there is an inconsistency between the NPPF paragraphs on the Green Belt and the NPPF glossary definition of ‘grey belt’. This inconsistency could result in the loss of our Green Belt countryside forever as well as habitat loss for wildlife. We want the NPPF ‘grey belt’ definition to be amended so this inconsistency is removed, and Green Belt protections remain in place."
Please click here to read about and sign their petition calling on the Government to amend the definition of so-called ‘grey belt’ land in the Green Belt.
"The specific definition of ‘grey belt’ – as per the revised NPPF – is hugely damaging to the continued existence of the Green Belt in England.
The establishment of the Green Belt, initially to control the unrestricted urban sprawl of London and subsequently applied to other conurbations, is widely regarded as the most successful planning policy since the introduction of the present statutory planning system in 1948. It has had the effect of maintaining open countryside with a host of benefits for both rural and urban communities and for nature and the environment.
But there is an inconsistency between the NPPF paragraphs on the Green Belt and the NPPF glossary definition of ‘grey belt’. This inconsistency could result in the loss of our Green Belt countryside forever as well as habitat loss for wildlife. We want the NPPF ‘grey belt’ definition to be amended so this inconsistency is removed, and Green Belt protections remain in place."
Please click here to read about and sign their petition calling on the Government to amend the definition of so-called ‘grey belt’ land in the Green Belt.
EBGBS AGM
Wednesday 14th May 2025
Allum Lane Hall, Allum Lane, Elstree
Time : 7.00pm for 7.30pm start
Guest Speaker : Mr Simon Braidman,
Head Warden of Stanmore Common Nature Reserve
Allum Lane Hall, Allum Lane, Elstree
Time : 7.00pm for 7.30pm start
Guest Speaker : Mr Simon Braidman,
Head Warden of Stanmore Common Nature Reserve
February 2025: Land North of Barnet Lane, CALA Leaflet
|
|
February 2025 : Articles regarding BESS site
The Times, 17th February 2025
|
Countryside Voices, CPRE Spring Summer magazine 2025
|
24 March 2025: HBC 'Call for sites’ made after adoption of Local Plan timetable
Press Release by HBC:
We have issued a new ‘call for sites’ following the adoption of an updated Local Plan timetable earlier this month – with a survey now open.
Around 400 landowners, developers, agents and organisations have been contacted, by our planning policy team, to invite the submission for consideration of any sites which may have potential for housing and employment development, and environmental uses including energy and bio-diversity.
This is the next critical step to ensure that the future development of Hertsmere is managed in the most appropriate way, with the council keen to identify all potential brownfield sites within urban areas to support regeneration opportunities within the borough’s key settlements.
In December last year, the Government published a revised version of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) which aims to simplify the planning process, enable new development opportunities and make the delivery of housing, including social and affordable housing, a priority.
The changes mean that, across an 18-year period, the housing target in the borough has increased from just over 13,000 new homes to 18,612, which equates to 1,034 new homes per year – an increase of 43 per cent.
The Local Plan matters to all of the borough’s communities as it maps out the strategy and vision for Hertsmere until at least 2043.
To be eligible for consideration, housing sites should have the potential to accommodate five or more homes or have 500 square metres of floorspace, or 0.25 hectares available for economic development.
The ‘call for sites’ ends on Thursday 24 April 2025 at 5pm, and the survey can also be accessed via our website.
Take part in the survey
We have issued a new ‘call for sites’ following the adoption of an updated Local Plan timetable earlier this month – with a survey now open.
Around 400 landowners, developers, agents and organisations have been contacted, by our planning policy team, to invite the submission for consideration of any sites which may have potential for housing and employment development, and environmental uses including energy and bio-diversity.
This is the next critical step to ensure that the future development of Hertsmere is managed in the most appropriate way, with the council keen to identify all potential brownfield sites within urban areas to support regeneration opportunities within the borough’s key settlements.
In December last year, the Government published a revised version of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) which aims to simplify the planning process, enable new development opportunities and make the delivery of housing, including social and affordable housing, a priority.
The changes mean that, across an 18-year period, the housing target in the borough has increased from just over 13,000 new homes to 18,612, which equates to 1,034 new homes per year – an increase of 43 per cent.
The Local Plan matters to all of the borough’s communities as it maps out the strategy and vision for Hertsmere until at least 2043.
To be eligible for consideration, housing sites should have the potential to accommodate five or more homes or have 500 square metres of floorspace, or 0.25 hectares available for economic development.
The ‘call for sites’ ends on Thursday 24 April 2025 at 5pm, and the survey can also be accessed via our website.
Take part in the survey
March 2025: Woodcock Hill Village Green Committee Invitation
October 2024: EBGBS object to the BESS planning application
Click here to read the letter sent on behalf of EBGBS regarding the Battery Energy Storage System on 17th October 2024.
October 2024: Woodcock Hill Village Green request to go to Supreme Court rejected
September 2024: Government Consultation on proposed changes to NPPF
Deadline 11.45pm 24/09/2024
The Government have put forward changes to the NPPF (National Planning Policy Framework) to which you can respond. The deadline is 11.45pm on 24th September 2024.
CPRE (campaign for Rural England) have put provided details of the proposed amendments, their response and how a response can be made. Please do respond!
Click here for details
CPRE (campaign for Rural England) have put provided details of the proposed amendments, their response and how a response can be made. Please do respond!
Click here for details
August 2024: Woodcock Hill Village Green - last chance to save it!
We need your help - it will only take you 5 minutes.
We need your help on or before 19th August 2024 to register a statement on the Appeals Casework Portal stating the following:
Statement
I support Hertsmere Borough Council's rejection of the application on the grounds stated on the decision. In addition, the proposed development is an overdevelopment of the site.
The provision of vehicular access is inadequate and poorly positioned involving access into a road that is already congested in busy times and is close to a roundabout which is frequently gridlocked at the height of rush hour.
This can be done via the planning portal as follows (takes 5 minutes) or by sending a written response (see below)
Go to the site : https://acp.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/
Register
Log in
On the Appeals Casework Portal find the 'Search for Case / Submit Representation' box on right of screen
Enter 3346928 in the Application Number
Click 'Search'
Check it is the correct site (postcode WD6 2HB)
Click 'Make Representation"
Save and Continue
Choose 'Interested Party / Person"
Save and Continue
For Acting on Behalf - choose 'No'
Tick 'The box below' and a box will appear
Cut and paste the statement above into the box.
Save and Continue
Confirm you have 'Read the Above'
Submit
You should receive a confirmation on screen and an e-mail confirmation of your submission.
If you cannot use the portal you can cut, paste and send off the following statement with your details included:
I object to the Appeal by DWH Trading Ltd
App/N1920/W/24/3346928
to the Planning Inspectorate against HBC’ decision to reject the planning application
DC/23/0937/OUT.
Site Land at Barnet Lane Borehamwood WD6 2HB
Grid Ref: Easting 520171
Grid Ref: Westing 195569
Name:
Address:
Email:
Phone
I am an interested Party
Statement
I support Hertsmere Borough Council's rejection of the application on the grounds stated on the decision. In addition, the proposed development is an overdevelopment of the site.
The provision of vehicular access is inadequate and poorly positioned involving access into a road that is already congested in busy times and is close to a roundabout which is frequently gridlocked at the height of rush hour.
Regards
Post to: John Legg, The Planning Inspectorate, 3rd Floor Temple Quay House, 2 The Square Bristol, BS1 6PN
Statement
I support Hertsmere Borough Council's rejection of the application on the grounds stated on the decision. In addition, the proposed development is an overdevelopment of the site.
The provision of vehicular access is inadequate and poorly positioned involving access into a road that is already congested in busy times and is close to a roundabout which is frequently gridlocked at the height of rush hour.
This can be done via the planning portal as follows (takes 5 minutes) or by sending a written response (see below)
Go to the site : https://acp.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/
Register
Log in
On the Appeals Casework Portal find the 'Search for Case / Submit Representation' box on right of screen
Enter 3346928 in the Application Number
Click 'Search'
Check it is the correct site (postcode WD6 2HB)
Click 'Make Representation"
Save and Continue
Choose 'Interested Party / Person"
Save and Continue
For Acting on Behalf - choose 'No'
Tick 'The box below' and a box will appear
Cut and paste the statement above into the box.
Save and Continue
Confirm you have 'Read the Above'
Submit
You should receive a confirmation on screen and an e-mail confirmation of your submission.
If you cannot use the portal you can cut, paste and send off the following statement with your details included:
I object to the Appeal by DWH Trading Ltd
App/N1920/W/24/3346928
to the Planning Inspectorate against HBC’ decision to reject the planning application
DC/23/0937/OUT.
Site Land at Barnet Lane Borehamwood WD6 2HB
Grid Ref: Easting 520171
Grid Ref: Westing 195569
Name:
Address:
Email:
Phone
I am an interested Party
Statement
I support Hertsmere Borough Council's rejection of the application on the grounds stated on the decision. In addition, the proposed development is an overdevelopment of the site.
The provision of vehicular access is inadequate and poorly positioned involving access into a road that is already congested in busy times and is close to a roundabout which is frequently gridlocked at the height of rush hour.
Regards
Post to: John Legg, The Planning Inspectorate, 3rd Floor Temple Quay House, 2 The Square Bristol, BS1 6PN
July 2024: HBC respond to Central Government Planning Reforms 30/07/24
Cllr Jeremy Newmark and Cllr Nik Oakley published an article regarding their response to the Planning Reforms and new housing need numbers put forward by the new Labour government on 30th July 2024.
It states "Cllr Nik Oakley, is now reviewing that draft to assess the implications of the proposed changes, which includes an updated housing need number of 959 new homes per year - up from 731".
"Key to our focus will be identifying opportunities to develop on ‘grey belt’ land to meet local housing needs."
Cllr Nik Oakley, added: “We must meet the challenges of delivering the decent and affordable homes that our communities and future generations need and deserve, whilst doing all we can to preserve the rural nature of our countryside.”
EBGBS very much hope they can find a way to build the truly affordable homes Hertsmere need whilst protecting our countryside.
Click here to find out more.
It states "Cllr Nik Oakley, is now reviewing that draft to assess the implications of the proposed changes, which includes an updated housing need number of 959 new homes per year - up from 731".
"Key to our focus will be identifying opportunities to develop on ‘grey belt’ land to meet local housing needs."
Cllr Nik Oakley, added: “We must meet the challenges of delivering the decent and affordable homes that our communities and future generations need and deserve, whilst doing all we can to preserve the rural nature of our countryside.”
EBGBS very much hope they can find a way to build the truly affordable homes Hertsmere need whilst protecting our countryside.
Click here to find out more.
EBGBS at the July 2024 NSPCC Summer Fair
We had a well attended stand at the NSPCC Summer Fair in July. We had the chance to speak to many local residents and Councillors. We also signed up some new members.
Thank you to everyone who took the time to chat with us!
The event, organised by our President Ann Goddard and her team, raised £2,457 for the Charity.
Thank you to everyone who took the time to chat with us!
The event, organised by our President Ann Goddard and her team, raised £2,457 for the Charity.
HBC Councillors Approve Plans to develop Cecils Horse Sanctuary Site
On 11th July 2024 at the HBC Planning Meeting the development to build elderly residence in Elstree Village on the Celics Horse Sanctuary site was almost unanimously approved by Councillors and Planners. Although weight is given to Green Belt, much weight was also given to providing accommodation for the older population. This is in line with HBC's housing targets from Central Government but not in line with rules for Green Belt for which housing does not constitute Very Special Circumstances.
For more details of the plans see Retirement Village Groups website
For more details of the plans see Retirement Village Groups website
Elle Dani Farm - amendment to original plans
Plans to be reviewed at Planning Meeting 11/7/24.
Click here for further details.
Plans to be reviewed at Planning Meeting 11/7/24.
Click here for further details.
Heathbourne Green - Land South Of Elstree Road And East Of Heathbourne Road Bushey Heath
Planning application: 24/0692/OUTEI
Outline application comprising of:
- a range of types and tenures of C2 and C3 residential units;
- C2 care facilities;
- clubhouse building;
- other buildings and lifestyle facilities providing a range of Class E, F1, F2 and sui generis uses;
- open spaces, park and natural green spaces, play and outdoor sports facilities, community growing facilities and ancillary Class E and F2 amenities;
- a new transport hub and related transport facilities, together with associated vehicular means of access, parking, cycle routes and footpaths;
- infrastructure works to provide drainage, utilities and associated services.
Click here for further details
Planning application: 24/0692/OUTEI
Outline application comprising of:
- a range of types and tenures of C2 and C3 residential units;
- C2 care facilities;
- clubhouse building;
- other buildings and lifestyle facilities providing a range of Class E, F1, F2 and sui generis uses;
- open spaces, park and natural green spaces, play and outdoor sports facilities, community growing facilities and ancillary Class E and F2 amenities;
- a new transport hub and related transport facilities, together with associated vehicular means of access, parking, cycle routes and footpaths;
- infrastructure works to provide drainage, utilities and associated services.
Click here for further details
New Development Proposed on Green Belt land on Barnet Lane!
ACT NOW - Responses required by 13th June 2024!
Have your say today by providing feedback on the consultation by Inspired Villages for a large Integrated Retirement Community on Green Belt land on Barnet Lane, Elstree.
They say they have Very Special Circumstances to build on Green Belt Land but they don't - we must respond.
Click here for further details
Have your say today by providing feedback on the consultation by Inspired Villages for a large Integrated Retirement Community on Green Belt land on Barnet Lane, Elstree.
They say they have Very Special Circumstances to build on Green Belt Land but they don't - we must respond.
Click here for further details
Hertsmere Local Plan
Respond by the deadline
29th May 2024 12 noon!
Objections to the Green Belt sites:
HEL 218 Organ Hall Farm 6.60 hectares, 195 homes
Click here
HEL 152 Lyndhurst Farm 5.20 hectares, 200 homes
Click here
HEL 274 Edgwarebury Farm 7.52 hectares, 100 homes
HEL 1011 Edgwarebury House 0.56 hectares 20 homes
Click here
HEL 212 Land off Watford Road (Cecils Horse Sanctuary), 2.28 hectares, 140 homes - Click here
HEL 197 Barnet Lane (West)(Hartfield Ave)
3.00 hectares, 75 homes - Click here
HEL 209 Land off Barnet Lane (East), 12.63 hectares, 250 homes - Click here
22/1526/FULE1 Adjacent to Sky Studios 15.39 hectares, employment
Plans in for development on Allum Lane Fields including 150 homes, a leisure/community centre and Schopwick Surgery relocation.
Note: this IS NOT in the Hertsmere Local Plan - its an extra threat to Green Belt!
Object by 23rd May 2024
The Allum Lane Green Belt fields are once again under threat from property developers, Endurance Estates, Rangeford Villages and Bidwells.
Their proposal is for the relocation of Schopwick Surgery with expansive medical facilities and a Care Community, comprising 20 bungalows, 130 apartments (2/3 levels) plus a large building housing a swimming pool, studio, gym, 3 treatment rooms, dining room, activity room, salon etc. plus extensive parking. The development is for high end senior accommodation, under leasehold with service charges.
Click here to find out more
Their proposal is for the relocation of Schopwick Surgery with expansive medical facilities and a Care Community, comprising 20 bungalows, 130 apartments (2/3 levels) plus a large building housing a swimming pool, studio, gym, 3 treatment rooms, dining room, activity room, salon etc. plus extensive parking. The development is for high end senior accommodation, under leasehold with service charges.
Click here to find out more
Woodcock Hill Village Green
Last Chance to Appeal to The Supreme Court is available
Deadline is 16th May 2024 - Please donate before this date!
Lawyers working on the WHVG Appeal have put forward a last chance to save the Village Green by going to the Supreme Court.
Click here to find out more.
Deadline is 16th May 2024.
Click here to find out more.
Deadline is 16th May 2024.
Woodcock Hill Village Green Appeal is lost
The Court of Appeal have dismissed the Appeal
We are very sad to hear on 25th April 2024 that WHVG have lost their appeal.
Please click here to read about the decision by the Court of Appeal which was:
1. The Appeal is dismissed.
2. The Appellant do pay the Respondent’s costs of the appeal, to be assessed if not agreed, and capped at £7,500 in accordance with the order of Singh LJ of 7 June 2023.
3. The Appellant’s application for permission to appeal to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom is refused.
Please click here to read about the decision by the Court of Appeal which was:
1. The Appeal is dismissed.
2. The Appellant do pay the Respondent’s costs of the appeal, to be assessed if not agreed, and capped at £7,500 in accordance with the order of Singh LJ of 7 June 2023.
3. The Appellant’s application for permission to appeal to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom is refused.
What's happening NOW in your local area?
How can YOU help?
Hertsmere Local Plan is now published - HAVE YOUR SAY
You must reply before noon on 29th May 2024
Click here for the Local Plan on the HSB website
The promoted housing and employment sites include the required release of 6.25% of Green Belt land, more than the 'less than 1%' promised prior to the local elections in 2023.
A number of engagement events were held across the borough while the consultation is open(all events 2.30pm to 8pm):
Tuesday 16 April: The Bushey Centre, Bushey.
Thursday 18 April: Shenley Park Chapel, Shenley.
Wednesday 24 April: Wyllyotts Centre, Potters Bar.
Thursday 25 April: South Mimms Village Hall, South Mimms.
Wednesday 1 May: The Radlett Centre, Radlett.
Thursday 2 May: Manor Hotel, Elstree.
Tuesday 7 May: Imperial Place (opposite Civic Offices), Borehamwood.
Click here for more details on this website
Sky Studios - SUCCESS!!
Plans were submitted for a further development on green belt land.
These plans were refused on 21st April 2024.
Click here for more details.
Hartfield Avenue / Barnet Lane - LOSS OF GREEN BELT
The plans to build on the site were refused.
The Appeal by the developers was granted so developers can build 75 houses.
A very bad result for Green Belt.
This site is in the Local Plan 2024.
Click here for further details.
BE6 Barnet Lane - SUCCESS!!!
Planning permission submitted for 220 homes by Barratt homes off Barnet Lane was refused at the HBC Planning Meeting on 11th March 2024.
We expect the developers to go to Appeal.
This site is in the Local Plan 2024
Click here for more information.
Solar Plant - SUCCESS!!
The Solar Plant Appeal turned down by the Planning Inspectorate. Click here for more details
Woodcock Hill Village Green - AWAITING OUTCOME
Court hearing took place on 24th January 2024. Click here for more details.
Organ Hall - AWAITING OUTCOME
Awaiting outcome of revised plans.
Elle Dani Farm, Allum Lane, Elstree - AWAITING OUTCOME
Plans for the development of Elle Dani Farm on Allum Lane, Elstree were published on 23/8/23.
UPDATE: Planning permission pending.
This site IS NOT in the Local Plan 2024.
Click here for more details.
Cecils Horse Sanctuary, Watford Road, Elstree - IN HERTSMERE LOCAL PLAN
Plans for a proposed retirement scheme on the site of Cecils Horse Sanctuary have been submitted by Retirement Villages Group. Cecils Horse Sanctuary have to be out by April 2024 but have not found a local relocation option.
This site is in the Local Plan 2024.
Click here for more information.
Large scale planning application to construct a major Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) on the outskirts of Radlett by the developer Chiltern Green Energy. Click here for details from the public meeting on 24th August 2023.
How can YOU help?
Hertsmere Local Plan is now published - HAVE YOUR SAY
You must reply before noon on 29th May 2024
Click here for the Local Plan on the HSB website
The promoted housing and employment sites include the required release of 6.25% of Green Belt land, more than the 'less than 1%' promised prior to the local elections in 2023.
A number of engagement events were held across the borough while the consultation is open(all events 2.30pm to 8pm):
Tuesday 16 April: The Bushey Centre, Bushey.
Thursday 18 April: Shenley Park Chapel, Shenley.
Wednesday 24 April: Wyllyotts Centre, Potters Bar.
Thursday 25 April: South Mimms Village Hall, South Mimms.
Wednesday 1 May: The Radlett Centre, Radlett.
Thursday 2 May: Manor Hotel, Elstree.
Tuesday 7 May: Imperial Place (opposite Civic Offices), Borehamwood.
Click here for more details on this website
Sky Studios - SUCCESS!!
Plans were submitted for a further development on green belt land.
These plans were refused on 21st April 2024.
Click here for more details.
Hartfield Avenue / Barnet Lane - LOSS OF GREEN BELT
The plans to build on the site were refused.
The Appeal by the developers was granted so developers can build 75 houses.
A very bad result for Green Belt.
This site is in the Local Plan 2024.
Click here for further details.
BE6 Barnet Lane - SUCCESS!!!
Planning permission submitted for 220 homes by Barratt homes off Barnet Lane was refused at the HBC Planning Meeting on 11th March 2024.
We expect the developers to go to Appeal.
This site is in the Local Plan 2024
Click here for more information.
Solar Plant - SUCCESS!!
The Solar Plant Appeal turned down by the Planning Inspectorate. Click here for more details
Woodcock Hill Village Green - AWAITING OUTCOME
Court hearing took place on 24th January 2024. Click here for more details.
Organ Hall - AWAITING OUTCOME
Awaiting outcome of revised plans.
Elle Dani Farm, Allum Lane, Elstree - AWAITING OUTCOME
Plans for the development of Elle Dani Farm on Allum Lane, Elstree were published on 23/8/23.
UPDATE: Planning permission pending.
This site IS NOT in the Local Plan 2024.
Click here for more details.
Cecils Horse Sanctuary, Watford Road, Elstree - IN HERTSMERE LOCAL PLAN
Plans for a proposed retirement scheme on the site of Cecils Horse Sanctuary have been submitted by Retirement Villages Group. Cecils Horse Sanctuary have to be out by April 2024 but have not found a local relocation option.
This site is in the Local Plan 2024.
Click here for more information.
Large scale planning application to construct a major Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) on the outskirts of Radlett by the developer Chiltern Green Energy. Click here for details from the public meeting on 24th August 2023.
Your Green Belt needs you!
Join Elstree and Borehamwood Green Belt Society TODAY
From 1st April 2023 membership is only £5 per annum per individual or household (same price but increases our member numbers), although an additional donation is always welcome.
EBGBS are a non political, non profit making society that works to protect the Green Belt land in Elstree and Borehamwood from development, communication with and working in conjunction with local and national like minded organisations.
As a member you will receive regular updates regarding our Green Belt at this critical time.
Click here to JOIN US or RENEW YOUR MEMBERSHIP
Meet the Committee:
President: Dr. Ann Goddard
Acting Chair: Dr. Ann Goddard
Treasurer and Web: Ms. Helen Stammers ([email protected])
Secretary: Ms. Marjorie Davies ([email protected])
Membership: Mrs. Karen Forrester ([email protected])
Planning: Mr. Martin Doe ([email protected])
Member: Mr. Clive Butchins
President: Dr. Ann Goddard
Acting Chair: Dr. Ann Goddard
Treasurer and Web: Ms. Helen Stammers ([email protected])
Secretary: Ms. Marjorie Davies ([email protected])
Membership: Mrs. Karen Forrester ([email protected])
Planning: Mr. Martin Doe ([email protected])
Member: Mr. Clive Butchins
UK Green Belt
The UK Green Belt was formed by law in 1949 to prevent speculative ribbon development around London and other large cities in the United Kingdom. The first records of EBGBS date from 1959 when the battles against building on Woodcock Hill on the south side of Borehamwood started. We have been contesting Green Belt and conservation issues ever since.
If you care about your environment please join us today.