Transport for London bans flats protest rally outside High Barnet station – but across the road residents launch their “New Battle of Barnet”

7 Sep 2025
Written by Nick Jones

A mass protest against plans for five high-rise blocks of flats on the car park at High Barnet tube station attracted over 250 residents who were greeted with toots of support from the horns of passing motorists.

London Transport moved swiftly to warn of prosecutions if protestors gathered around the station entrance, so the rally was switched to the other side of Barnet Hill.

Fifteen posters warning of the consequences of any “unauthorised protests or gathering or loitering” had been fixed to walls and fences all around the lower entrance.

A posse of four members of London Underground staff stood at the station forecourt and were on hand in case of any breach of Transport for London byelaws.

Despite the ban on meeting in the area around the station’s lower entrance, the groups organising the protest – Barnet Society, Barnet Residents Association and Hands Off high Barnet – were determined to show the strength of opposition to a redevelopment they argue is the “wrong scheme, in the wrong place”.

As supporters were marshalled back up the slope of the station entrance to cross the road to the grassy bank on the opposite side of Barnet Hill, there were muttered protests at what was seen as TfL’s high-handed approach in banning a rally on their land.

In particular, the wording of the notices – suggesting their presence might lead to prosecutions – led some residents to complain that TfL seemed to be turning High Barnet into a police state where free speech and protest were being suppressed.

While remaining friendly and approachable, the four London Underground staff on duty outside the station entrance were a clear indication that TfL meant business – the rally had apparently been banned on grounds of health and safety.

As the crowd of protestors continued to grow in size – approaching 250 people or more on some estimates – the organisers said they were delighted by the turn out.

Four thousand leaflets had been distributed calling for support, reminding residents they had until Friday 19 September to register their objections with Barnet Council.

Gordon Massey, who analysed the scheme on behalf of Barnet Residents Association, told the crowd they had to recognise that TfL – through its subsidiary Places for London – was determined to build as many homes as possible on spare land at London Underground stations.

“283 flats on this site are far too many and the design of them is absolutely dreadful. Just listen to the noise from the road and think what it will be like living there.”

He praised the joint effort there had been with the Barnet Society whose planning and environment spokesman Robin Bishop said the society’s team approach would allow them to present Barnet Council with “a substantial submission” detailing the faults in the scheme.

As the rally continued, hand-made posters held up by the grandchildren of Jane Ouseley (far left) amused passing motorists who tooted their horns in support of the message: “No tower blocks in High Barnet”.

Summing up the defiance of the crowd was a slogan on one of the posters: “The new Battle of Barnet”.

Another poster on the roadside at the entrance to the station left passers-by in no doubt about what the protest was all about.

Ken Rowland, chair of the residents’ association, said the size of the crowd showed why residents felt so strongly about an “appalling and monstrous” development.

“We need to stop this…the children living in homes in these blocks will not be able to open the windows…they will be overlooking an electricity sub station and railway tracks, and it is not the appropriate place for a development of this size.”

Kim Ambridge, a founder member of Hands-Off High Barnet which fought successfully against a 2019 plan – later withdrawn – for high-rise flats, deplored the loss of the station car park.

Her concern was reinforced by Barnet Vale Councillor David Longstaff who thought that by building over a well-lit car park, TfL was failing to acknowledge the fears of women arriving at the High Barnet station late at night.

At the end of the rally the crowd showed their contempt for TfL’s ban on the protest outside the tube station by marching up the High Street to the parish church of St John the Baptist.

Mass protest rally against tower blocks of flats at High Barnet tube station goes ahead despite Transport for London ban on gatherings outside the station entrance

A final photo-opportunity underlined another message of from the rally – that the proposed 11-storey block of flats at the station would break the historic skyline of High Barnet and compete with the commanding presence of the church tower.

6 thoughts on “Transport for London bans flats protest rally outside High Barnet station – but across the road residents launch their “New Battle of Barnet”

  1. It is a cynical profit over community scheme. Yes, London needs more housing and yes, the HB station site is in need of improvement. But surely a better, more considerate, scheme can be proposed?!

  2. This must not be allowed to go ahead. It is totally in the wrong place. The car park is always at capacity and this will cause a lot more cars on surrounding roads. Our road in particular is not covered by the CPZ and is only a short walk. It’s already used by commuters and this will cause more cars parking on side roads.

  3. I really think the way forward on this is too actively engage with the council and developers around what residents do want for this site. Barnet badly needs new homes and specifically affordable homes as the population ages and the proportion of working age people resident in Chipping Barnet falls. From experience, resident groups that just protest rather than to advocate alternatives, will be dismissed.
    It was shocking to see ‘Stop the Slum’ on a flyer which is wholly misleading. Similarly, subjective comments about the new homes/residents attracting anti-social behaviour or reducing house prices devalue the debate.
    There are clear benefits, but there need to be tweaks that add social value.
    * The station site is a brownfield site and development saves the green belt.
    * The number of apartments is suitable however there need to be design changes.
    * The public realm could be reduced to enable lower building heights.
    * Abrams House could be demolished and TfL accommodation incorporated into the residential blocks- this frees up space on the site.
    * The tallest building should be no more than 7-8 storeys (with underground levels) and should be sited at the lowest part of the site not the highest.
    * The loss of car parking needs to be addressed through a mix of solutions such as alternative park and ride sites, CPZs, short-stay and drop-off zones.
    * Create a safer walkway upto the Meadway exit
    * Some underground car parking can be integrated into the ground/basement levels of buildings.
    * Some buses should have a turning circle within the station square

    Let’s not turn this into a battle that will fuel bitterness.

  4. I completely agree with the residents, protestors, the other commenters on this and the other articles on Barnet Society about this plan, as well as the 293 (and counting) unanimous objections logged on the Planning Application site.

    Is there not also a bigger story here where this is yet another example of democracy being taken away from us by banning the public from protesting on public land? Because the last time I checked, I thought the TfL is a public body so surely the car park isn’t strictly private land that they have the authority to usher the protesters away from? Those geniuses at TfL probably shot themselves in the foot though by forcing the protestors to relocate to the other side of the hill, because they were probably far more visible over there!

  5. I completely agree with every resident that has concerns. Too large and too ugly, it will completely change the skyline and the surrounding area

  6. Do not let these flats be built – it’s completely the wrong place for such a development!

Write Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *