Watford & Edgware Railway

[R848]

On the subject of the Watford & Edgware Railway, it is known whereabouts the stops at Caldecott Hill, Old Bushey, and Heathbourne Road were to be located in relation to similar schemes up to the Northern Heights plan?

Because the stops in question do not to be in order with Caldecott Hill and Heathborne Road appearing to be too close to each other, as the old maps have Caldecott Hill roughly located at the junction where Elstree Road meets Heathbourne Road. Additionally how was the route to run parallel south of The Avenue and Bushey Hall Road towards the eastern side of Watford High Street? Other possibilities appear to include the originally proposed stop not far from the unbuilt Watford Central station by the Metropolitan Line as well as at Watford High Street (towards Rickmansworth Church Street, etc) along with a terminus at Watford Junction.

Also would it be correct to say there was to be more than one proposed route towards High Wycombe? Am aware of one proposal that was to make use of the Watford and Rickmansworth Railway towards Rickmansworth Church Street by way of the Watford & Edgeware Railway before traveling to Harefield, Chalfont St Giles and Beaconsfield.

However am unaware as to what the proposed route towards High Wycombe from Edgware via Pinner and Harefield stations would have entailed unless that is a completely separate scheme, particularly whether it was to travel through / interchange the LNWR roughly near Hatch End or Headstone Lane?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watford_and_Edgware_Railway

 

[R848]

Additionally the proposed route from Edgware to Caldecott Hill (for Bushey Heath) and beyond via Stanmore (London Road), Elstree (for Brockley Hill) and Heathbourne Road does not make sense, unless the planned stops at Stanmore (London Road) and Elstree (for Brockley Hill) were to be nearer to the later unbuilt Northern Heights stops at Brockley Hill and Elstree South respectively before heading to west to Heathbourne Road than north to Caldecott Hill (for Bushley Heath) roughly at the junction where Heathbourne Road and Elstree Road meet. With the proposed Stanmore stop at London Road being unrelated to the later stop currently used by the Jubilee Line.

If the above is anywhere close to accurate that just leaves the question where the proposed Old Bushey stop was to be located.

As for the High Wycombe route from Edgware via Pinner (later Hatch End) and Harefield, were any additional stops envisaged between Edgware and Hatch End? The same question goes for the route between Hatch End and Harefield that crosses the Metropolitan Railway (with Northwood station being one plausible candidate)?

 

[30907]

Unless there is better info out there than Wikipedia, I doubt your questions are answerable. I wonder how far the early schemes got beyond lines on a map?

Do you have a link for the High Wycombe idea?

 

[TrafficEng]

Additionally the proposed route from Edgware to Caldecott Hill (for Bushey Heath) and beyond via Stanmore (London Road), Elstree (for Brockley Hill) and Heathbourne Road does not make sense, unless the planned stops at Stanmore (London Road) and Elstree (for Brockley Hill) were to be nearer to the later unbuilt Northern Heights stops at Brockley Hill and Elstree South respectively before heading to west to Heathbourne Road than north to Caldecott Hill (for Bushley Heath) roughly at the junction where Heathbourne Road and Elstree Road meet. With the proposed Stanmore stop at London Road being unrelated to the later stop currently used by the Jubilee Line.

I've had a look in The Railways of Hertfordshire (FG Cockman, 1978) The schemes he lists stop at 1901, so predate what I think is the right date for the formation of the W&ER.

But Cockman does have details for the Watford and Edgeware [sic] Junction Railway (5 miles 6 furlongs (W&ER on wiki: 6.25 miles)) which suggests a previously approved route might have been more direct that the W&ER versions the Wikipedia article is based on.

He gives the date of deposit (of the Bill) as 29 November 1864 and says it passed 'easily' by March 1866. However, he says that as soon as the Bill was passed "Great Northern made moves to acquire the company to prevent drainage of the traffic to Euston". It was announced on 24 November 1866 that the GNR had taken over the W&EJR and the company was then dissolved.
(It looks like GNR sat on their hands to avoid provoking L&NWR and then snapped up the company as soon as the Bill passed, without much intention of building it.)

The Wikipedia article states -

The Watford and Edgware Railway (W&ER) was a company established in the 1860s

Which I suspect to be wrong if Cockman is correct. I.e. The W&EJR was established in the 1860's but was dissolved soon after.

If the W&ER (a different company) existed in the 1860's as well then you'd expect them to have been totally opposed to the 'rival' W&EJR company, which the easy passage of the Bill suggests wasn't the case.

Hansard has a reference to the "WATFORD AND EDGWARE RAILWAY BILL" in 1903 which states the purpose of the Bill was -

For incorporating the Watford and Edgware Railway Company, and for empowering them to construct a railway from Watford to Edgware; and for other purposes,

This suggests the W&ER wasn't established until 1903 or later, which might explain its absence from Cockman. It appears a further bill was deposited in 1905 or 1906 (not sure of the date), but I'm having trouble finding details until Hansard notes on 15 July 1909 that -
"The Chairman of Committees informed the House that the Promoters do not intend to proceed further with the Bill"

The answer to the question about route and station locations probably lies in the documents deposited with the 1903 Bill.

The National Archives has a "Map showing the proposed route according to the Watford & Edgware Railway Bill presented in the Parliamentary Session of 1903 and its connections..." in the RAIL 1030/78 series. It says the scale is 1 inch to 1 mile, so should be detailed enough to locate the required information.
https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C3468205

It would be very interesting to see what it shows!

 

[30907]

Given the similar names, it isn't surprising the Wikipedia article has conflated the two companies. The W&ER had presumably ceased to exist or was moribund by 1900. I would also hazard a guess that the station locations may come from two different proposals.
However, this is only (intelligent?) guesswork, and I don't know the area particularly well.

 

[edwin_m]

Bushey Heath (as it now is and always has been, not where the Northern Heights imagined it to be) sits on a plateau half a mile or so across with the summit around Windmill Lane, and once over the edge the land falls quite steeply in all directions. As we're talking a conventional railway not a Tube here, it's very unlikely that a stop on Heathbourne Road would be anywhere other than at its north eastern end. As mentioned this area is marked on both old and current maps as Caldecote Hill. Could these be alternative names for the same station?

A line here hits far more contours than it would have done by running a few hundred yards to the east, where the A41, proposed Northern Heights route and M1 later went (even the Northern Heights, probably with less concern about gradient, had to tunnel to get here from Edgware). But the map on NLS dated 1895 shows an estate to the north, probably called Hilfield Park as most of it is now occupied by a reservoir of that name plus the M1. This might have forced an earlier route to take the more difficult westerly course but might have gone by the time of later proposals.

The area to the east of Bushey station shows several streets of housing on the map of 1896 and is captioned "New Bushey". I would guess Old Bushey to be up the hill around the church, and indeed this would be a fairly level run from the Caldecote Hill site along the flanks of the Bushey Heath "massif". It could then follow London Road which is level for a bit before dropping into the Colne Valley, which would then require a long viaduct crossing the LNWR as well to land on the Watford side, probably in the vicinity of the extant High Street and proposed Metropolitan stations but most likely still above grade.

 

[TrafficEng]

A line here hits far more contours than it would have done by running a few hundred yards to the east, where the A41, proposed Northern Heights route and M1 later went (even the Northern Heights, probably with less concern about gradient, had to tunnel to get here from Edgware). But the map on NLS dated 1895 shows an estate to the north, probably called Hilfield Park as most of it is now occupied by a reservoir of that name plus the M1. This might have forced an earlier route to take the more difficult westerly course but might have gone by the time of later proposals.

I was having a look at the old contour maps earlier trying to work out if there was an obvious route. The two things that occurred to me were (a) the A41 and Spur Road didn't exist at the time and the land to the east of the A5 was almost entirely undeveloped, and (b) where the 1935 scheme crosses the A41 is close to the bottom of the Edgwarebury Brook valley.

Thinking about (a), if the 1903 scheme was planned without consideration for the development potential of the land to the East, then a logical place to put a station would be adjacent to the A5 opposite London Road (where the petrol station and McD's now are). The route from Edgware to here was fields with no road crossings required and by staying just to the East of the A5 a crossing of London Road wouldn't be needed.

Point (b) is not that strong, but possibly by taking a more easterly route to unlock the development potential of the land to the east, the 1935 route goes into an area which is lower to start with, albeit the railway was to be on viaduct over the A41. There is a fall of about 25' between ground level (250') at the A5 and ground level at the A41 viaduct.

Ground level around the A41/M1 junction is around 360' and being about 1.5km away from Spur Road that suggests an average gradient somewhere around 1:40 to 1:45 if the railway was to be at ground level near the M1.

The tunnel is interesting because the southern end was in the 275-300' contour, the northern end about 365' (road level, so rails probably a bit lower) and all the contour lines it crosses are increasing in height. So rather than passing through a ridge or a spur it seems to be simply maintaining the gradient as the surface level rises more steeply as you approach the M1.

It also looks like there is a route closer to the A5 where the 300 to 350 contour lines would be crossed more obliquely than the 1935 route. Unfortunately that's where the highway engineers decided to build the A41.

Good point about Hilfield Park.

 

[edwin_m]

I was having a look at the old contour maps earlier trying to work out if there was an obvious route. The two things that occurred to me were (a) the A41 and Spur Road didn't exist at the time and the land to the east of the A5 was almost entirely undeveloped, and (b) where the 1935 scheme crosses the A41 is close to the bottom of the Edgwarebury Brook valley.

Thinking about (a), if the 1903 scheme was planned without consideration for the development potential of the land to the East, then a logical place to put a station would be adjacent to the A5 opposite London Road (where the petrol station and McD's now are). The route from Edgware to here was fields with no road crossings required and by staying just to the East of the A5 a crossing of London Road wouldn't be needed.

Point (b) is not that strong, but possibly by taking a more easterly route to unlock the development potential of the land to the east, the 1935 route goes into an area which is lower to start with, albeit the railway was to be on viaduct over the A41. There is a fall of about 25' between ground level (250') at the A5 and ground level at the A41 viaduct.

Ground level around the A41/M1 junction is around 360' and being about 1.5km away from Spur Road that suggests an average gradient somewhere around 1:40 to 1:45 if the railway was to be at ground level near the M1.

The tunnel is interesting because the southern end was in the 275-300' contour, the northern end about 365' (road level, so rails probably a bit lower) and all the contour lines it crosses are increasing in height. So rather than passing through a ridge or a spur it seems to be simply maintaining the gradient as the surface level rises more steeply as you approach the M1.

It also looks like there is a route closer to the A5 where the 300 to 350 contour lines would be crossed more obliquely than the 1935 route. Unfortunately that's where the highway engineers decided to build the A41.

Good point about Hilfield Park.

To add to this: as you probably know but others may not, what is now the A41 was built in about 1930 so would not have constrained the earlier proposals. It might have constrained the Northern Heights route, although the Wikipedia link says it followed the route of the Watford and Edgware proposal which had been bought out by a predecessor of the Underground. If true this indicates that the A41 would have had to keep out of the way of the railway, not the other way round. The article also states that the listed stations were proposed at various times so they might not all have been as planned. If the routes are the same I would guess:

• Stanmore (London Road): Near the end of the Spur Road, probably the Northern Heights Brockley Hill site. London Road would have had to be projected eastwards if it was to reach this site (as was later done as Spur Road). Obvious move for the LPTB to change the name as they already had one station on London Road in Stanmore!
• Elstree for Brockley Hill: Near the northern tunnel portal, same site as the Northern Heights Elstree South. Brockley Hill (the road) approaches this site but most of the buildings on it are closer to the previous station.
  
• Caldecott Hill (for Bushey Heath): Close to the Northern Heights Bushey Heath.

Projecting the Northern Heights route towards Watford....

• Heathborne Road could have been at the crossing of what is now Hilfield Lane South. This continues the line of Heathbourne Road north of where it now ends, and doesn't have a name on the 1894 map, so could actually have had that name. Projecting the Northern Heights route in this direction puts it to the south of the Hilfield Park estate and just south of today's M1. It's only about 1000 yards along the railway from the previous station so may have been an alternative to it.
• Old Bushey: Somewhere near the church as I suggested above. This is about 100m altitude, 15 metres below the elevated Bushey Heath (Northern Heights) station and some 2000m away, so a reasonable average gradient of about 1 in 130, or 1 in 100 to get below grade at Old Bushey in preparation for...
• Watford: The current High Street is at about 60m elevation and 2.3km away, so to get to street level here from below grade at Old Bushey would be an average descent of 1 in 65, with the added complication of getting over the LNWR which itself is on embankment and the need for level track at the terminus. So probably still an elevated station here.

All this does include several extensions of development towards the railway from what was there in 1895, which suggests this line was proposed very much with new development in mind Metroland-style, rather than just linking existing communities (nothing larger than a farm between Edgware and Old Bushey).

 

[TrafficEng]

To add to this: as you probably know but others may not, what is now the A41 was built in about 1930 so would not have constrained the earlier proposals. It might have constrained the Northern Heights route, although the Wikipedia link says it followed the route of the Watford and Edgware proposal which had been bought out by a predecessor of the Underground. If true this indicates that the A41 would have had to keep out of the way of the railway, not the other way round.

That was partly why I'd been looking in Hansard.

The Wikipedia page for Edgware Tube station says

Much of the land for the railway's alignment had originally been bought by the W&ER in the 19th century, but it had not been able to raise the capital to fund the construction and its power's had expired in 1911...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgware_tube_station

The first part of that doesn't make sense if the company wasn't formed until 1903, unless land was purchased by others who were intending to form the railway company subsequently.

But significantly, if the powers expired in 1911 then presumably the A41 (built as the A5088) wasn't constrained by any active plans to build a railway here. I don't know when planning for this section of the A41 started, but the Watford Bypass was completed mid-1920's so I'd guess someone had at least drawn a line on a map about a decade before 1935.

I've not found anything to verify the 1911 date, but I did wonder if the 1905(06?) Bill had something to do with keeping the powers valid for longer to allow them time to raise capital but the company finally gave up as Hansard records in 1909.

 

[R848]

Do you have a link for the High Wycombe idea?

Outside of the wiki link the only other (admittingly passing) reference is in the By Tube Beyond Edgware book, one from Edgware towards Harefield by Pinner (now Hatch End) as well as from Edgware on to the Watford and Richmansworth Railway (presumably at Watford High Street from Old Bushey). The former would suggest the route after Edgware would have diverged westwards from around the Brockley Hill site towards Pinner / Hatch End.

I've had a look in The Railways of Hertfordshire (FG Cockman, 1978) The schemes he lists stop at 1901, so predate what I think is the right date for the formation of the W&ER.

But Cockman does have details for the Watford and Edgeware [sic] Junction Railway (5 miles 6 furlongs (W&ER on wiki: 6.25 miles)) which suggests a previously approved route might have been more direct that the W&ER versions the Wikipedia article is based on.

He gives the date of deposit (of the Bill) as 29 November 1864 and says it passed 'easily' by March 1866. However, he says that as soon as the Bill was passed "Great Northern made moves to acquire the company to prevent drainage of the traffic to Euston". It was announced on 24 November 1866 that the GNR had taken over the W&EJR and the company was then dissolved.
(It looks like GNR sat on their hands to avoid provoking L&NWR and then snapped up the company as soon as the Bill passed, without much intention of building it.)

The Wikipedia article states -


Which I suspect to be wrong if Cockman is correct. I.e. The W&EJR was established in the 1860's but was dissolved soon after.

If the W&ER (a different company) existed in the 1860's as well then you'd expect them to have been totally opposed to the 'rival' W&EJR company, which the easy passage of the Bill suggests wasn't the case.

Hansard has a reference to the "WATFORD AND EDGWARE RAILWAY BILL" in 1903 which states the purpose of the Bill was -


This suggests the W&ER wasn't established until 1903 or later, which might explain its absence from Cockman. It appears a further bill was deposited in 1905 or 1906 (not sure of the date), but I'm having trouble finding details until Hansard notes on 15 July 1909 that -
"The Chairman of Committees informed the House that the Promoters do not intend to proceed further with the Bill"

The answer to the question about route and station locations probably lies in the documents deposited with the 1903 Bill.

The National Archives has a "Map showing the proposed route according to the Watford & Edgware Railway Bill presented in the Parliamentary Session of 1903 and its connections..." in the RAIL 1030/78 series. It says the scale is 1 inch to 1 mile, so should be detailed enough to locate the required information.
https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C3468205

It would be very interesting to see what it shows!

Given the similar names, it isn't surprising the Wikipedia article has conflated the two companies. The W&ER had presumably ceased to exist or was moribund by 1900. I would also hazard a guess that the station locations may come from two different proposals.
However, this is only (intelligent?) guesswork, and I don't know the area particularly well.

Thought there was some overlap between the proposals (including variations).

The area to the east of Bushey station shows several streets of housing on the map of 1896 and is captioned "New Bushey". I would guess Old Bushey to be up the hill around the church, and indeed this would be a fairly level run from the Caldecote Hill site along the flanks of the Bushey Heath "massif". It could then follow London Road which is level for a bit before dropping into the Colne Valley, which would then require a long viaduct crossing the LNWR as well to land on the Watford side, probably in the vicinity of the extant High Street and proposed Metropolitan stations but most likely still above grade.

To add to this: as you probably know but others may not, what is now the A41 was built in about 1930 so would not have constrained the earlier proposals. It might have constrained the Northern Heights route, although the Wikipedia link says it followed the route of the Watford and Edgware proposal which had been bought out by a predecessor of the Underground. If true this indicates that the A41 would have had to keep out of the way of the railway, not the other way round. The article also states that the listed stations were proposed at various times so they might not all have been as planned. If the routes are the same I would guess:

• Stanmore (London Road): Near the end of the Spur Road, probably the Northern Heights Brockley Hill site. London Road would have had to be projected eastwards if it was to reach this site (as was later done as Spur Road). Obvious move for the LPTB to change the name as they already had one station on London Road in Stanmore!
• Elstree for Brockley Hill: Near the northern tunnel portal, same site as the Northern Heights Elstree South. Brockley Hill (the road) approaches this site but most of the buildings on it are closer to the previous station.
  
• Caldecott Hill (for Bushey Heath): Close to the Northern Heights Bushey Heath.

Projecting the Northern Heights route towards Watford....

• Heathborne Road could have been at the crossing of what is now Hilfield Lane South. This continues the line of Heathbourne Road north of where it now ends, and doesn't have a name on the 1894 map, so could actually have had that name. Projecting the Northern Heights route in this direction puts it to the south of the Hilfield Park estate and just south of today's M1. It's only about 1000 yards along the railway from the previous station so may have been an alternative to it.
• Old Bushey: Somewhere near the church as I suggested above. This is about 100m altitude, 15 metres below the elevated Bushey Heath (Northern Heights) station and some 2000m away, so a reasonable average gradient of about 1 in 130, or 1 in 100 to get below grade at Old Bushey in preparation for...
• Watford: The current High Street is at about 60m elevation and 2.3km away, so to get to street level here from below grade at Old Bushey would be an average descent of 1 in 65, with the added complication of getting over the LNWR which itself is on embankment and the need for level track at the terminus. So probably still an elevated station here.

All this does include several extensions of development towards the railway from what was there in 1895, which suggests this line was proposed very much with new development in mind Metroland-style, rather than just linking existing communities (nothing larger than a farm between Edgware and Old Bushey).

Makes sense Heathborne Road would likely have been an alternative to the nearby proposed stops at Caldecott Hill and Northern Height's Bushey Heath.

Would it be accurate to say the church in question for Old Bushey would be St James?

Unfortunately the By Tube Beyond Edgware book does not go into detail beyond mentioning the route was to turn through Caldecott Hill and the northern edge of Bushey (from south of the Aldenham Reservoir) before running parallel south of The Avenue and Bushey Hall Road towards the eastern side of Watford High Street?

 

[edwin_m]

Would it be accurate to say the church in question for Old Bushey would be St James?

Unfortunately the By Tube Beyond Edgware book does not go into detail beyond mentioning the route was to turn through Caldecott Hill and the northern edge of Bushey (from south of the Aldenham Reservoir) before running parallel south of The Avenue and Bushey Hall Road towards the eastern side of Watford High Street?

St James appears to be the only church in the area on the 1895 map, but I was thinking of the one by the bend in the High Street, which on Streetview appears not to be a church any longer. The Bushey Hall Road route is a few hundred metres to the east of where I was thinking so further from either of the churches, and fits with the objective I suspect of opening up new development rather than serving existing settlements. It also gives a somewhat easier crossing of the Colne Valley and evens out the gradients I mentioned previously, though still a bit on the steep side. If it can get down to below street level at Watford High Street then it is correctly aligned to continue towards Rickmansworth.

 

[John Webb]

St James appears to be the only church in the area on the 1895 map, but I was thinking of the one by the bend in the High Street, which on Streetview appears not to be a church any longer.....

St James is the oldest church - parts go back to C13. The church by the bend was, I believe, the Congregational chapel of 1904; it is now marked on some maps as a college. The RC church west of St James dates from 1958-9.

 

[DerekC]

Cockman's second edition also lists a "Watford, Edgware and London Railway" of 1878, which would appear to be yet another scheme. This ran from a junction with the Midland at Mill Hill via Edgware, Aldenham and Bushey to join the LNWR Rickmansworth branch (by the look of the map) at Watford. The GNR again killed it off, despite it having the support of the LNWR.

 

[mr_jrt]

Late to the party, but for what it's worth, I'm from Bushey, so know the area well, and obviously have had more than a passing interest in the railways in the area growing up. Old Bushey is indeed the area around St James', as the Heath itself was pretty desolate until relatively modern times, as I understand it. New Bushey is also the name used at various times for what is now known as Oxhey, so that may be worth bearing in mind. There is a map in By Tube Beyond Edgware showing the town planning intended for Bushey when the Aldenham extension was being planned. Not sure TPTB would appreciate me posting it here though.

 

[edwin_m]

St James is the oldest church - parts go back to C13. The church by the bend was, I believe, the Congregational chapel of 1904; it is now marked on some maps as a college. The RC church west of St James dates from 1958-9.

There is a chapel marked in this position on the 1895 map too, but perhaps it was replaced a few years later. However I was only really using the location to identify where Old Bushey might have been with a few hundred yards, and it seems the station was probably a bit further to the east in any case.

Old Bushey is indeed the area around St James', as the Heath itself was pretty desolate until relatively modern times, as I understand it. New Bushey is also the name used at various times for what is now known as Oxhey, so that may be worth bearing in mind.

Thanks for confirming the places I presumed in earlier posts. The 1895 map I mentioned shows quite a bit of housing in Bushey Heath, but still a relatively small settlement and due to the gradient approaching in any direction I don't think there has been any serious proposal for a train service (other than by relocating it to the bottom of the hill to be next to the station...).

 

[R848]

Cockman's second edition also lists a "Watford, Edgware and London Railway" of 1878, which would appear to be yet another scheme. This ran from a junction with the Midland at Mill Hill via Edgware, Aldenham and Bushey to join the LNWR Rickmansworth branch (by the look of the map) at Watford. The GNR again killed it off, despite it having the support of the LNWR.

Fascinating

Late to the party, but for what it's worth, I'm from Bushey, so know the area well, and obviously have had more than a passing interest in the railways in the area growing up. Old Bushey is indeed the area around St James', as the Heath itself was pretty desolate until relatively modern times, as I understand it. New Bushey is also the name used at various times for what is now known as Oxhey, so that may be worth bearing in mind. There is a map in By Tube Beyond Edgware showing the town planning intended for Bushey when the Aldenham extension was being planned. Not sure TPTB would appreciate me posting it here though.

Thanks for clearing things up regarding St James and Old Bushey.

 

[mr_jrt]

FWIW, I seem to recall one of the schemes I read about years ago as terminating at Watford Market, which was originally located roughly where the giant Tesco hypermarket now stands. IIRC, whoever it was I was reading seemed to think the station would have been located roughly where the Premier Inn car park is. I think this was then revised to having a junction with the LNWR line to Rickmansworth, but my memory is hazy beyond that.

 

[DerekC]

FWIW, I seem to recall one of the schemes I read about years ago as terminating at Watford Market, which was originally located roughly where the giant Tesco hypermarket now stands. IIRC, whoever it was I was reading seemed to think the station would have been located roughly where the Premier Inn car park is. I think this was then revised to having a junction with the LNWR line to Rickmansworth, but my memory is hazy beyond that.

That sounds like the 1878 proposal. Although Cockman doesn't say anything about a Watford Market terminus, the map shows the line running through that area to join what was then the Rickmansworth branch facing towards Watford Junction, roughly where the A411 (Beechen Grove) now crosses it. That could have been a useful route if it had been built and still existed!

 

[R848]

That sounds like the 1878 proposal. Although Cockman doesn't say anything about a Watford Market terminus, the map shows the line running through that area to join what was then the Rickmansworth branch facing towards Watford Junction, roughly where the A411 (Beechen Grove) now crosses it. That could have been a useful route if it had been built and still existed!

In other words had this route been built and remained in existence up to the present, this particular proposal from 1878 could have established an Overground route from St Pancras to Watford Junction?

 

[Andrew1395]

St James is the oldest church - parts go back to C13. The church by the bend was, I believe, the Congregational chapel of 1904; it is now marked on some maps as a college. The RC church west of St James dates from 1958-9.

The second oldest church I. Bushey was the Bushey United Reform church. Formed in 1809, closed 2910, and now a Drama school.

 

[DerekC]

In other words had this route been built and remained in existence up to the present, this particular proposal from 1878 could have established an Overground route from St Pancras to Watford Junction?

That's right. Or maybe another branch for Thameslink (not that it needs any more!)

 

[R848]

That's right. Or maybe another branch for Thameslink (not that it needs any more!)

Agreed regarding Thameslink, even if there appears to be a slight possibly for a route towards St Albans Abbey or an additional route to Bedford via Watford Junction.

 

[mr_jrt]

FWIW regarding the churches: https://hertfordshirechurches.wordpress.com/category/bushey/

 

[John Webb]

FWIW regarding the churches: https://hertfordshirechurches.wordpress.com/category/bushey/

Thanks for link - not a site I was aware of!