Travel and Transport


Click here for Thameslink – Travel information and timetables

Click here for Thameslink – Live Arrivals and Departures Board


Click here for Arriva Service 42 (one bus, 4:02am from Radlett Recreation       Ground to Borehamwood, Elstree, Bushey, South Oxhey, Rickmansworth, Croxley       Green, Watford, Abbots Langley, Garston (5:27am))

Click here for Arriva Service 724 (Harlow (connect with 510 for Stansted Airport), Hertford, WGC, Hatfield, St Albans, Watford, Denham, Uxbridge, Heathrow Airport). PLEASE NOTE: You will need to travel to St Albans City Station in order to catch this bus.

Click here for Uno Service 602 (Hatfield, St Albans, London Colney, Shenley, Borehamwood, Radlett, Aldenham, Bushey, Watford)

Click here for Uno Service 632 (Hatfield, London Colney, Shenley, Radlett, Aldenham, Bushey, Watford)

Click here for Uno Service 655 (Borehamwood, Shenley, Radlett, Park Street, St Albans, Hatfield)

PLUSBUS – Train and Bus

Click here for fares and links to the zone map and bus times.

If you’re travelling by train and need the bus at either end of the journey, ask for PLUSBUS. It’s a simple, easy-to-use bus add-on to your rail ticket and lets you travel on most buses within the local PLUSBUS area as many times as you like. It’s quicker and cheaper than stopping to buy tickets for each leg of your journey. Buy your PLUSBUS ticket in advance from any staffed rail station. No more queues, simply show your ticket on the bus and off you go!

Radlett PLUSBUS tickets are valid for use within an area that includes Aldenham, Batlers Green, Shenley, Porters Park, Bricket Wood, How Wood, Chiswell Green, Park Street and London Colney.

The participating operators and services are:

Arriva (42, W1), Centrebus (320, 359), Metroline (84, 84X), Sullivan Buses (656) and Uno (602, 622, 632, 655, 656)

Click here for the full leaflet on PLUSBUS in Harpenden, St Albans, Radlett and Elstree & Borehamwood.


EERA Draft Plan


CHAPTER 3 VISION & OBJECTIVES States: ‘that spatial planning is intended to sustain and improve                 the quality of life for all people who live in the region’ RSGBA SUPPORTS CPRE COMMENT:                 OBSERVATION: In Hertfordshire, the plan involves widespread development                 on green fields, loss of countryside, urbanisation of country                 villages together with increased congestion and pollution. This                 represents substantial reduction in the quality of life for thousands                 of people.
CHAPTER 4 POLICY No SS1 CORE SPATIAL STRATEGY States: ‘ …there will still need to be significant investment                 in infrastructure because parts of the region already have deficits                 that need to be rectified’ RSGBA SUPPORTS CPRE COMMENT:                 OPPOSE: In Hertfordshire, the level of housing and other development                 proposed cannot be accommodated without massive government investment                 in the infrastructure which, so far, has not been be provided.
CHAPTER 4 POLICY No SS1 URBAN EXPANSION Development in and adjoining                 urban areas States: ‘Greenfield land releases should be appropriate in scale                 to the adjoining urban area.’ RSGBA SUPPORTS CPRE COMMENT:                 OPPOSE: Large Greenfield releases within the London Arc north                 of Harlow and north and west of Stevenage will become London commuter                 suburbs, increasing congestion.
CHAPTER 4 POLICY No SS4 Use of Land States: “At least 60% of all new development in the region                 will take place in or using previously used land or buildings” RSGBA SUPPORTS CPRE COMMENT:                 OBSERVATION: The target for previously used land or buildings                 should be at least 70%, as has already been achieved in Hertfordshire.
CHAPTER 4 POLICY No SS7 GREEN BELT States: ‘…reviews of Green Belt boundaries are needed as part                 of an appraisal to identify the most sustainable locations for                 new development..’ RSGBA SUPPORTS CPRE COMMENT:                 OPPOSE: There is no justification for house building in the Green                 Belt north of Harlow, around Stevenage and in other parts of Hertfordshire.                 It destroys the purpose of the Green Belt and does not meet the                 criteria for removal of land from it. It will adversely affect                 the rural of life of those living in and near the threatened locations-.                 In the context of the London Arc, we are unhappy with the idea                 of ‘compensating additions’ to the Green Belt because once ‘lost’,                 it is lost from the location where it was designated as protection                 against merging of settlements. This defeats the basic aim of                 the policy – to stop expansion – and the compensating ‘new’ land                 may not need the protection anyway.
CHAPTER 4 POLICY No SS8 Land in the Urban Fringe We wish to see the highest level of protection of land in the                 urban fringe against housing development in particular; such sites                 afford peace and space for prayer & contemplation for the                 adjoining settlements.
CHAPTER 4 POLICY No SS9 Development in Rural Areas We are concerned about the viability of agriculture in the urban                 fringe; consideration should be given to the amount of land that                 could be needed by future generations for growing energy crops.
CHAPTER 4 POLICY No SS13 Overall Housing Provision States: ‘In the East of England as a whole, provision will be                 made for an annual average rate of completion of 23,900 net additional                 dwellings over the period 2001–2021, a total of 478,000 dwellings…’ RSGBA SUPPORTS CPRE COMMENT:                 OPPOSE: The case has not been made for the large figures for additional                 housing in Hertfordshire, the most crowded county in the country.                 The scale of building proposed cannot be supported by the infrastructure,                 will not solve the problems of affordability and key worker housing,                 but will result in crowding, congestion and reduction in quality                 of life.
CHAPTER 4 POLICY No SS16 Quality of the Build Environment                 Depending on how ‘net density’ is measured, we do not support                 30dph; there are many areas where this would be totally inappropriate                 and the requirement would be at odds with criterion set out in                 the first bullet point.
CHAPTER 5 POLICY No LA1 Para1, Bullet 1 ‘urban renaissance’ We fully support the protection of open land between settlements                 through green belt policy and other policies of restraint.
CHAPTER 5 POLICY No LA1 Para 1,Bullet 2 ‘economic prosperity’ While there are conflicting requirements in the Policy, we support                 this bullet point.
CHAPTER 5 POLICY No LA1 Para 1, Bullet 3 ‘affordable housing’ We give qualified support to this Policy; we suggest that a                 fund is created for affordable housing with financial contributions                 from all development of land.
CHAPTER 5 POLICY No LA1 Para 1,Bullet 4 ‘transport management                 measures’ We are concerned that ‘transport demand management measures’                 to imply restriction to freedom of surface movement hitherto enjoyed                 by the population in general.                 We would suggest that the Policy should include: for cyclists                 and pedestrians the provision of safe routes to employment and                 shopping and improvement of facilities.                 The Policy should include the provision of school bus service                 for all pupils; this would make a positive contribution to transport                 demand management measures
CHAPTER 5 POLICY No LA1 Para 1, Bullet 5 ‘land between settlements’ SUPPORT
CHAPTER 5 POLICY No LA1 Para 2: Substantial new development States: ‘Sustainable Development: meets the needs of the present                 without compromising the ability of future generations to meet                 their own needs. It means meeting four objectives at the same                 time, in the UK and the world as a whole:                 o social progress which recognises the needs of everyone                 o effective protection of the environment                 o prudent use of natural resources                 o maintenance of high and stable levels of economic growth and                 employment’ We find the use of the widespread use of the word ‘sustainable’                 in this document very worrying. There are 244 uses of ‘Sustainable’                 and 54 uses of ‘Sustainable Development’ in the RSS. Because ‘sustainability’                 cannot be measured and ‘meeting the objectives’ would be subject                 to a consensus, it would tend to renders the policies open to                 continual land speculation and argument. This uncertainty would                 seriously undermine confidence.
CHAPTER 5 POLICY No LA1 Para 2, Bullet 3 ‘sustainable dev. SUPPORT
CHAPTER 7 POLICY No H1 Dwellings: Hertfordshire Annual Average:                 3,980 Total: 79,600 RSGBA SUPPORTS CPRE COMMENT:                 OPPOSE: The housing numbers for Hertfordshire are excessive, especially                 in the predominantly rural districts of East Herts and North Herts.                 Building on this scale will entail unacceptable loss of Green                 Belt, added congestion and strain on the infrastructure with the                 consequent substantial deterioration in quality of life for residents                 of and visitors to the County.
CHAPTER 8 POLICY No T1 Regional transport strategy                 There are six policy objectives aimed at supporting the vision                 and objectives of the spatial and economic strategies. RSGBA SUPPORTS CPRE COMMENT:                 OPPOSE: The apparent lack of commitment by central government                 to provide the funds required to remedy even the existing infrastructure                 deficit, let alone that required for the excessive house building                 proposed in the plan, makes the policy objectives unattainable.                 The plan proposes what will undoubtedly become London commuter                 suburbs to the north of Harlow and the west of Stevenage, feeding                 traffic on to the already seriously congested road systems in                 those areas.
CHAPTER 8 POLICY No T5 Airports States: ‘Access to regional airports, particularly by rail and                 bus/coach, will be managed and enhanced to suppor1 development                 as it is approved and enable the airports to contribute to national                 and regional objectives in relation to economic growth, regeneration                 and sustainable transport.’ RSGBA SUPPORTS CPRE COMMENT:                 OPPOSE: ‘The policy makes no mention of the adverse effects of                 airport expansion on congestion, noise and climate change, all                 of which would result in lowered quality of life for residents                 across Hertfordshire. Nor does it consider the adverse economic                 effects on local food producers of cheap imports of unseasonable                 food by air or of the net outflow of holiday travellers on local                 tourism.
CHAPTER 9 POLICY No Box 9.1 Environmental resources This table sets out 8 principles including:- ‘protect, for their                 own sake, all important aspects of the countryside, including                 individual features, special sites and the wider landscape’ RSGBA SUPPORTS CPRE COMMENT:                 SUPPORT: the principles for management of the environment,                 but REGRET: the departure from those principles in Hertfordshire.
CHAPTER 9 POLICY No ENV9 [Para 9.39 map 9.4] Water supply States: ‘The East of England is the driest region in England,                 and one of the fastest growing. Water resources are limited and                 there are already supply-demand issues in parts of the Region.’ RSGBA SUPPORTS CPRE COMMENT:                 OBSERVATION: The area around Stevenage proposed for major housing                 development lies in an area with unsuitable or unacceptable abstraction                 regime’ as shown in Map 9.4
CHAPTER 11 POLICY No IMP3 Implementation & Delivery                 Establishment of local deliverable LDVs: RSGBA SUPPORTS CPRE COMMENT:                 OPPOSE: The plan has been produced via the unaccountable, undemocratic                 system of Regional Government which is unacceptable to the vast                 majority of people in the region, as shown in opinion polls. The                 imposition of Iocal quangos to force through unwanted and damaging                 development compounds this democratic deficit.


Radlett Society Membership Survey Results


Protecting the Green Belt around Radlett against development
Monitoring and commenting on planning applications
Monitoring the state of roads, verges, and parking
Trying to ensure the regular removal of litter and rubbish (including visible rubbish on private land)
Monitoring Radlett and Letchmore Heath’s Conservation Areas and sites of historical interest
Monitoring the state of the footpaths around Radlett and Aldenham
Representing the views of members in connection with the train service to and from Radlett
Monitoring and trying to safeguard protected trees
Representing the views of members on Radlett’s Crime Prevention Group
Representing the views of members on Elstree Aerodrome’s Consultative Committee