Garden village proposal considered for site with existing permission for strategic rail freight interchange

HCC is opposed to the development of the site of the former Radlett Aerodrome in the Hertfordshire green belt. In 2009, the county council refused permission for the construction of a 331,665 square metre strategic rail freight interchange (SRFI) at the site.

Developer HelioSlough's appeal against the decision was recovered for determination by then communities secretary Eric Pickles, who decided that the benefits of the proposal outweighed the harm it would cause, including harm to the green belt.

At a meeting of a panel of HCC's cabinet last week, it was confirmed (11-page / 102 KB) that whilst HelioSlough still intends to develop the site, the council does not wish to remove it from the green belt or dispose of it for development. However, the panel acknowledged that HCC "could be legally obliged to dispose of the land" and said it therefore welcomed "alternative uses for the site which would secure value at least equivalent to the value of the land if used for a SRFI".

According to minutes of the meeting, both Taylor Wimpey Homes North and Harrow Estates have expressed interest in the residential-led development of the Radlett Aerodrome site.

Taylor Wimpey Homes North has submitted a vision document (43-page / 7.5 MB PDF) to HCC proposing a 2,000-home urban extension with three neighbourhoods, a local centre, a new train station and a park and ride facility. The house builder has proposed to contact St Albans City and District Council (SACDC) with a view to jointly applying for central government support to develop the site as a "locally-led garden village".

Harrow Estates wrote to HCC at the end of last month to say that it is also interested in developing the site. A letter from the development company (2-page / 155 KB PDF)said it had "an interest in the site from a residential-led, mixed-use perspective".

The aerodrome site has not been allocated for development in SACDC's emerging local plan. The draft plan for 2011 to 2031 makes clear that SACDC is opposed to the development of the SRFI, but that the communities secretary had deemed it necessary "on the basis of national need". The document, which has been recommended for submission to the communities secretary with only minor changes (9-page / 310 KB PDF) includes only a policy committing to a partial review of the local plan "following any possible completion of development of the proposed SRFI".

Planning expert Sophie Walter of Pinsent Masons, the law firm behind Out-Law.com, said: "This is an interesting conundrum.  The SRFI will provide a much needed transfer point enabling more freight to be transferred from road to rail reducing road congestion, damage, pollution and risk of accidents. The development would also bring about local benefits by way of a new country park, bypass and improvements to footpaths and bridleways."

"On the other hand, a 2,000-home urban extension will provide much needed high-quality sustainable residential development, with the potential to bring about extensive local benefits including new communities services, train station and park and ride," said Walter. "With the Council reluctant to release the site from greenbelt, any alternative use would need to pass the 'very special circumstances' test.  Time will tell as to which route is taken with this greenbelt site. "