17,000sqm industrial space at Land On The South Side Of Dagger Lane, Elstree

What was proposed

The outline scheme proposed three B2/B8 industrial and distribution buildings up to 17,000 square metres, with access from Elstree Road.

“The scheme proposes the erection of three new buildings to provide industrial/distribution floorspace (Use Class B2/B8) with ancillary office space measuring up to 17,000 sqm. The proposal includes a new vehicular access from Elstree Road (A411).”

“This application is made in Outline only for the principle of the development with details of access to the site. All other matters including scale, appearance layout and landscaping are reserved for further approval.”

Officer report

The site

The 5.57-hectare site is undeveloped grassland and rough pasture in the Green Belt, between Bushey Heath and Elstree, beside major roads and nearby reservoirs.

“The application Site measures 5.57ha and sits within a wider 15.79ha parcel owned by the Applicant. The Site is located between the settlements of Bushey Heath and Elstree. It is currently bound by the A41 and M1 Motorway to the west, Dagger Lane to the north, and Elstree Road to the South. Neighbouring land uses to the east include the Aldenham Country Park, Farm Shop and Camping Site and the Aldenham Reservoir.”

“As well as being located within the Green Belt, the site falls within Flood Zone 1 (low risk of flooding). A site of archaeological interest lies on the north side of Dagger Lane. Two key water features are located nearby to the east at Aldenham Reservoir with Hillfield Park Reservoir located to the north of Dagger Lane adjacent to Elstree Aerodrome. Both are bordered by woodland and designated Local Wildlife Sites (LWS).”

Officer report

Planning history

A screening response found that an environmental impact assessment was not required, while a nearby industrial scheme had received outline permission.

“Reference number Description Date and outcome 25/1114/EI1 Request for screening opinion (Environmental Impact Assessment - Screening). November 2025 Response Given EIA not required.”

“Relevant nearby consented scheme: An outline planning application (ref. 22/2147/OUT) for industrial development of up to 18,409 sqm for B2/B8 use at Land South of Aldenham Reservoir on Watford Road (A411) (situated approximately 300m south east of the application site) was approved by the planning committee at the meeting held on 15 June 2023, subject to a legal agreement. The outline permission was issued on 3 July 2024 following completion of the legal agreement.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the site met the grey-belt definition, highways could accommodate the traffic, and the benefits outweighed landscape and agricultural land harm.

“The site is located within the Green Belt. Officers have concluded that the site meets the NPPF definition of grey belt (it and does not strongly contribute to purposes (a), (b) or (d). The proposal would not fundamentally undermine the remaining Green Belt across the area of the plan. There is a demonstrable unmet need for the type of development proposed and the development would be in a sustainable location.”

“In conclusion, whilst the development proposed would result in some harm to landscape and loss of agricultural land, the benefits substantially outweigh the harm. Overall, it would amount to sustainable development and Officers recommend approval subject to the legal agreement and conditions as set out at the end of the report.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Most consultees raised no objection or supported the scheme subject to conditions, contributions and mitigation, while the parish council and CPRE objected.

“Consultee Comment Additional comments following publication of the 2026 NPPF to follow. Parking Operations Have no comments on this application. Natural England Consultation Service No objection Uk Power Networks No objection Hertfordshire Fire & Rescue Service - Hydrants Only Require a condition for the provision and installation of fire hydrants, at no cost to the county council, or fire and rescue service.”

“Additional comments following publication of the 2026 NPPF to follow. HCC Archaeology No objection subject to conditions HCC Ecology No objection subject to s106 off-site BNG habitat units, monitoring fee, conditions and Informatives. Arboriculture- Place Services- Essex County Council Support subject to conditions. Conservation Advice-Place Services- Essex County Council Principle of development not considered harmful to setting of Caldecote Grade II listed building.”

Officer report

Local objections

Six neighbours objected, citing Green Belt loss, unsuitable rural development, trees, ecology, traffic, pollution, flooding, amenity and road safety concerns.

“Loss of Green Belt • Use unsuitable in rural location conflicting with Local Plan • Loss of trees and natural habitat harmful to ecology • Increase in commercial traffic and air pollution • Increase flood risk • Negative impact on neighbouring amenity through noise and disturbance, loss of privacy and daylight • Traffic congestion and road safety • Disruption to school and emergency access routes • Harm to local character and appearance…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The agent spoke in support of the application.

Members’ discussion

Members discussed the reserved-matters timetable, sustainability, strategic-road access, walking and cycling contributions, and a possible public-services contribution.

“A Member raised a concern over the sustainability of the location. Officers confirmed that they had afforded moderate weight to sustainability. The site had access to the strategic road network which was important for its logistics use. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2026 encouraged a proportionate approach to determining sustainability.”

“-PL 26- mitigation was needed to make the development acceptable. They asked for a contribution from the developer to the local walking and cycling infrastructure plan. Requesting financial contributions for other services or areas was not considered reasonable unless requested by relevant consultees. Officers could consider an informative to ask the Highways Authority for a contribution to the 306 bus service, however they would not be required to do so.”

Minutes

The vote

Thirteen members voted for the recommendation, with no votes against and no abstentions.

“It was proposed by: Councillor C Gray, seconded by Councillor P Morris that the recommendations as set out in the report be agreed, with the inclusion of an informative to request that HCC consider a financial contribution to public services.”

“For: (13 total) – Councillors L Silver, M Handley, A Kaza, P Morris, M Amron, G Briski, C Gray, H Green, D Lambert, M Allen, N Susman, B Rosehill, L Smith. Against: (0 total) – No votes. Abstain: (0 total) – No votes. Total votes cast: 13”

Minutes