Promise of 100 affordable new homes influences final go ahead for tower blocks at High Barnet tube station and loss of car parking

Approval has finally been given by the office of the Mayor of London for the redevelopment of land around High Barnet tube station with five blocks of flats despite warnings this would cause irreparable damage to an historic skyline.

A deputation from the town’s community groups told a hearing at City Hall that squeezing 328 new homes into a narrow strip of land between the tube line and the Barnet Hill trunk road was the “wrong scale in the wrong place”.

Objections were overruled by Jules Pipe, Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, who said that although three of the blocks would exceed the seven-storey limit agreed in the Barnet local plan – and one block would be 11 storeys – the impact of the height and massing of the flats would be negligible on the neighbourhood and no reason for refusal.

Building more affordable homes was the mayor’s priority and the High Barnet Place scheme would provide 100 new homes at low-cost rent or shared ownership.

“We must take advantage of sites which offer a high proportion of affordable homes and where the key travel infra-structure is in place,” said Mr Pipe.

“Inevitably schemes like High Barnet Place would be visible, including long range views…but the alternative would be to drive such schemes to the green belt and to less sustainable sites.”

Objections to the loss 160 spaces in the station car park – and the provision of only eight places for Blue Badge holders – were rejected by Mr Pipe on the grounds that encouraging tube passengers to walk to the station or take a bus would encourage “more sustainable means of travel and improve air quality”.

Developers Barratt and Transport for London’s investment subsidiary, Places for London, hope to start construction in February next year with the first affordable homes being available in February 2029 and the scheme completed by April 2030.

Simon Kaufman, a chartered architect (above, second from right), made a joint presentation on behalf of members of the Barnet Society and Barnet Residents Association.

He said many of the flats in the five tower blocks would be of poor quality, single aspect and reliant on mechanical ventilation.

The design of the scheme exemplified the social and management failures of high-density blocks of flats built across London in the 1960s and 1970s.

After Mr Pipe announced the scheme would go ahead, Mr Kaufman said the conscience of the objectors was clear.

“We listened to the lessons of history, and we are not prepared to see a repeat of the mistakes of the past. We did our best to prevent a development which we fear will become a disaster in years to come.”

Neil Smith, senior project planning officer for the Greater London Authority, opened the hearing by reminding the Deputy Mayor that Barnet Council had refused permission for the blocks of flats because of their excessive height and harm to the character of the surrounding area.

However, the GLA considered the height and massing of the blocks responded well to the immediate context and would make “a positive contribution to the local townscape”.

Given the loss of the car park, there would be nine drop off short-stay spaces and eight Blue Badge spaces, but otherwise the development would be car-free with an enhanced public footpath on the station approach.

A significant public benefit of the scheme would be 100 affordable new homes and there were “no material considerations of sufficient weight to justify refusal”.

In opening for the objectors Simon Kaufman said that when seen from the surrounding green belt countryside the proposed tower blocks harmed the historic skyline of High Barnet where the defining landmark on the hill had been the parish church.

“This is an over-scaled urban insertion imposed on to an historic hill town.”

An issue which eroded public confidence was that many residents were troubled by the fact Transport for London was effectively promoting development on its own land while the Greater London Authority and the Mayor of London were the decision-maker.

Mr Kaufman criticised the removal of the station car park without providing a realistic alternative and the steep topography of the station approach meant that women, older residents and disabled users would continue to face intimidating routes, particularly after dark.

Janet Littlewood of Barnet Residents Association said the blocks of flats on the site would add to the existing chaos on the station approach where there were often traffic jams.

The area around the station was isolated and many women would not leave the station unless they could exit by car.

Nick Saul, a retired civil engineer, warned that the loss of the car park and the failure to provide bus access to the station forecourt raised serious concerns for women and the disabled.

Serious assaults to passengers when on foot or on cycle were not uncommon where parking had already been lost at tube stations.

Flaws in the design and access in and around suburban stations were a key factor in the prevalence and location of attacks.

Dame Theresa Villiers, formerly MP for Chipping Barnet, who described herself as a resident and passenger, insisted that the loss of the station car park would damage the quality of life of many thousands of Barnet residents.

Anyone with impaired mobility would be at a disadvantage and the suggestion that more people might like to cycle to the station ignored the steepness of Barnet Hill – as she could testify personally it was “a tough climb for cyclists”.

“High Barnet station has been my station for 21 years. It is our get away to the world. Please don’t curtail the freedom of High Barnet people to live our lives the way we want to.”  

There was one speaker in support of the scheme, High Barnet student Yana Kostova, who said that given the pressure on local housing the only chance was to build upwards.

The prospect of more affordable homes was a relief. She thought High Barnet could “blossom and attract a younger generation with such schemes”.

In response to questions from the deputy mayor, Martin Scholar, head of planning for Places for London, said the developers Barratt Homes had maximised the number of affordable homes at High Barnet Place which would allow more people to get on the housing ladder.

“Forty per cent affordable homes at High Barnet is much higher than for most schemes in London” – a consideration that was given emphasis in the deputy mayor’s final decision.

In a statement issued after the hearing, Dan Tomlinson, MP for Chipping Barnet and Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury, criticised the go ahead for a scheme which was clearly not in line with the local plan.

“Planning decisions aren’t mine to make as the local MP, but Barnet Labour has made it views very clear on these proposals.

“It is in black and white in Barnet’s local plan that seven storeys is the maximum for housing on this site.

“It is not right for the GA to overrule elected councillors to approve a scheme with an 11-storey block that contravenes the plan.”