Category: Consultations

Posted on by — 7 Comments

Barnet Hospital said to be in “constructive discussions” with Barnet Council over car parking pressure on nearby roads

Community organisations have welcomed assurances that Barnet Hospital will try to reduce the pressure which car parking by hospital staff, patients and visitors is placing on surrounding residential roads.

Plans for a further expansion of the ever-widening controlled parking zones around the hospital are meeting a barrage of criticism from householders who are forced to pay for parking permits.

Barnet Council officials are understood to have suggested to the Royal Free Hospital Trust that the management at Barnet should look for ways to alleviate the problem.

Nearby residents could not be expected to acquiesce as more and more local streets become a parking lot for the hospital, necessitating the introduction of an ever-expanding CPZ.

Residents’ associations understand that the trust will now examine what more can be done to increase the capacity of the hospital’s own car parks off Wellhouse Lane – by making better use of the space available – and by taking over vacant sites.

Currently Barnet Hospital has insufficient parking space for its own staff and a request for yet another increase in the undisclosed number of on-street parking permits – which are already issued for staff use – has apparently been refused.

News of what are said to be “constructive discussions” between the council and the hospital follow in the wake of further expansion of Barnet Hospital CPZ.

This has recently been extended – despite strong local resistance – to take in seven roads around Ryecroft Crescent, on the Arkley side of Quinta Drive.

Almost 80 per cent of the residents who replied to a consultation were against the introduction of a CPZ extension, but the council has gone ahead with a widening of the zone on what officials say is “an experimental basis”.

There was further uproar last month when the council held consultations on the proposed Underhill South CPZ – a new CPZ which would introduce restrictions and permits in 29 roads, including several cul-de-sacs, which are on either side of Mays Lane, extending from the junction with Manor Road all the way westwards to the junction with Shelford Road.

A council survey was said to have shown that there were “extremely high levels of parking stress” in most of the roads surrounding Mays Lane caused by the extra demand for spaces from hospital staff, patients and visitors.

But residents say a CPZ over such a wide area – extending to the Dollis Valley riverside walk – is completely unnecessary and would become extremely expensive for residents.

The Quinta Green Residents Association and the Underhill Residents Association – which are both claiming there is overwhelming opposition to a new CPZ – said they had been urging strategic solutions to the problems caused by the hospital.

Community groups welcome assurances that Barnet Hospital will take steps to try alleviate car parking pressure on surrounding streets.

They believed the hospital’s existing car parks could be reconfigured to take more vehicles and that vacant land around the hospital – such as the site above at the Wellhouse Lane-Wood Street junction – should be brought into use.

The two associations say one option might be for the hospital to reach agreements with local organisations including schools and clubs to see whether it was possible to rent additional parking spaces.

Posted on by — 20 Comments

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

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.

Posted on by — 2 Comments

From toy shop to branch Post Office – another franchised business moves into Barnet High Street

Barnet’s Crown Post Office, which is about to become a franchise operation, will move across the High Street at some point in November to new premises in a former toy shop.

Once it becomes a franchise – as from Thursday 11 September – the branch will offer customers longer opening hours to include Saturday afternoons and Sundays (11am to 4pm).

Toy Galaxy, at 112 High Street, which closed some months ago, is to be refitted as a Post Office branch and stationery store.

It will have two open plan serving positions, four self-service machines and, initially, two additional counters.

There will be level access to the new Post Office through an automatic entrance. Inside there will be low-level serving counters, a low-level writing desk and hearing loops.

The new branch will be managed by the UOE store group (Universal Office Equipment UK) which already operates a chain of franchised Post Offices around London and the Home Counties, including Potters Bar and East Finchley.

Elliott Jacobs, who is chief executive of UOE and Postmaster for the franchised business, told the Barnet Society that the empty Toy Galaxy shop would be undergoing a “major refurbishment”.

His company was proud to be enhancing the delivery of an essential service with a seven-day a week Post Office and retail stationery store.

As part of the closure process, the Post Office is to carry out a six-week consultation exercise during which customers can give their opinions on the siting of the new location, ease of access, and any other feedback. 

After always having had its own Post Office – trading for more than a century from an imposing Edwardian building close to the parish church – Barnet is one of the last 108 town centres across the country to lose its Crown office.

This follows the Post Office’s decision to cease all retail operations and offer redundancy payments to existing staff – all of whom at the Barnet Crown Office, said to number around nine, are thought to have accepted the offer.

Barnet Post Office, which was rebuilt during the reign of King Edward VII, re-opened in 1905.

It was designed by the architect Jasper Wagner and displays – right at the top – the King’s motif ER.

An early post card illustrates the prominent position of the building in the High Street and hints at its significance as the town’s Post Office.

Barnet had a distinguished history having been a regular stopping off point for mail coaches heading out of London for Scotland and the north.

Set in the wall, just to the right of the letter box, is one of the original boundary stones of the ancient parish of Chipping Barnet.

Barnet's Crown Post Office becomes a franchise business and is to move across the High Street to a vacant toy shop and offer a seven-day service.

Its massive wooden front door also has a story to tell – set within the frame is a small grille and window.

Local folk lore has it that police constables patrolling the High Street sometimes popped into the Post Office late in the evening and at night – and could peep through it unobserved to keep an eye out for any nefarious activity.    

Posted on by

Barnet Council goes to High Court to challenge a planning inspector’s go ahead for a travellers’ caravan site in Mays Lane

An application has been made to the High Court to challenge the go ahead for a travellers’ caravan site on a field in Green Belt land off Mays Lane, Barnet, on the grounds that the decision was inaccurate.

A planning inspector approved the plan for pitches for two travellers’ caravans because the needs of two gypsy families with seven young children “tipped the balance” in their favour.

Barnet Council had previously refused permission but after a lengthy planning inquiry, the inspector, Graham Chamberlain, decided that the “very special circumstances” of the two families outweighed any harm to the Green Belt.

In seeking to reverse the decision through a judicial review, the council will have to indicate why it believes the inspector’s conclusion was factually flawed.

Mr Chamberlain had concluded that the best interests of the “seven young children” in case would be served by “establishing a secure permanent home” for them at the appeal site”.

But in challenging the decision, the council is expected to argue that the evidence showed that in fact only four or five children would live on the site, with just one of them enrolled in school.

Therefore, the council could insist that the inspector’s decision was legally unsound.

Quinta Village Green Residents’ Association – which opposed the caravan site, and which was disappointed by the go ahead given by the inspector – has welcomed the council’s High Court challenge.

When he overturned the council’s refusal to grant planning permission, Mr Chamberlain acknowledged that a travellers’ caravan site on a two-acre paddock, previously used for grazing horses, would result in “some modest harm to the character and appearance” of the Mays Lane area.

However, he concluded that the balance in favour of the scheme changed significantly when the personal circumstances of the two gypsy families were factored in, especially the best interests of the seven children.

“Indeed, personal circumstances tip the balance in favour of the scheme when all other considerations are contemplated cumulatively…It follows that the very special circumstances necessary to justify the development have been demonstrated.”

Members of the residents’ association have now been told of the legal challenge which is being made by the council close to what would have been the end of the six-week period for a judicial review.

In going to the High Court, the association hopes the council will emphasise that Green Belt protections carried substantial weight under national planning policy.

Inappropriate development of the kind proposed, should only be allowed in “very special circumstances”.

While the welfare of children was rightly a primary consideration, it had to be based on accurate evidence.

The inspector had relied on the advice of the barrister for the brothers Patrick and J Casey, who had made the planning application, but by seeking a judicial review the council implies these submissions were incorrect and failed to consider the actual circumstances of the children involved.

Posted on by — 5 Comments

Co-ordinated fight back by community groups organising a united front against plans for high rise flats at High Barnet station

Community groups are presenting a united front in objecting to Transport for London’s planning application to build five high-rise blocks of flats on a car park and strip of land alongside the London Underground station for High Barnet.

To highlight the strength of opposition to the “wrong scheme in the wrong place” a rally is to be held on the morning of Sunday 7 September at the lower entrance to the tube station starting at 11.30 am.

Barnet Council has extended until Friday 19 September the deadline for residents to respond to the scheme.

After widespread complaints about the decision to organise public consultation during the summer holidays when so many people were likely to be away, the council acknowledged extra time should be given to ensure residents understood the full impact of the application being made by TfL’s property subsidiary, Places for London.

Leading the way in opposing the scheme are the Barnet Society and the Barnet Residents Association which have both been preparing a detailed list of objections to the application to provide 283 flats in five high storey blocks, one of which would be 11 storeys high.

They say the five blocks of flats are “unattractive and overbearing” and completely out of scale and character for the locality with the eleven-storey block rising above the skyline.

Gordon Massey, who prepared a point-by-point summary of the association’s objections, says the proposed development is a “poorly designed blot on the landscape” with the expectation that the flats would be overwhelmingly purchased by buy-to-let landlords.

Living conditions on the new estate would be poor as 75 of the flats would be single aspect facing west, raising issues of noise, heat and ventilation with the likelihood that with all windows having to remain closed, they would rely on mechanical ventilation.

“We are not opposed to the redevelopment of this site for housing, but the people of High Barnet and future residents of this development deserve something much better than this.”

Mr Massey’s conclusions are in line with those of Robin Bishop, who leads for the Barnet Society on planning and the environment, and who thinks the scheme would have a brutal impact on the existing townscape and greenery of High Barnet, Underhill and Barnet Vale.

“Our main objections to the scheme are to the alien scale and character of the designs; its unsustainability as a neighbourhood; its unsafe environment; and the lack of community benefits.”  

Other community groups warn of grave consequences if the development goes ahead with the danger that sandwiching high-rise blocks of tiny flats onto a strip of land between the tube line and Barnet Hill would, in their opinion, be destined to create the slum housing of tomorrow.

Hands Off High Barnet, a campaign group which co-ordinated objections to a 2019 scheme to build seven blocks on the site – a plan which was later reduced and withdrawn – fears the same mistakes are being made once again.

Of the 283 flats being proposed, 68 would be of only one bedroom when High Barnet desperately needed more family homes.

The loss of a well-lit station car park would pose a particular danger for women returning to High Barnet late at night.

“After all the objections we made to the last application, TfL are still not making it any easier for disabled passengers who need to be dropped off or collected at the station,” said Kim Ambridge, one of the founders of Hands-Off High Barnet.

John Dix of the Save New Barnet Campaign – which fought long and hard trying to prevent too many new flats being squeezed into the Victoria Quarter site – said he thought the station scheme was “really shocking”.

The children’s play space in the new development was the “absolute bare minimum” for under 11s.

“One of the children’s play spaces is a steep slope – it drops by 3.3 metres from top to bottom – with steps down the middle underneath one of the blocks.

“They call it the ‘undercroft’ play area, but the wind assessment says it is a problem area and is not for lingering.

“How any human being could classify this dark, draughty underpass as a play area is beyond me.

“The children’s play area for the 12-18-year-olds is, wait for it…500 metres away on Barnet playing fields.”

Mr Dix said he hoped Barnet Councillors read the details of the application, refuse to give approval, and tell the developers to go back to the drawing board.

To raise awareness of TfL’s application and publicise the rally on Sunday 7 September volunteers hope to distribute a leaflet – see below – to around 4,000 households in High Barnet.

Community groups across High Barnet organising co-ordinated fight back against plans for high rise blocks of flats at High Barnet tube station
Posted on by

Race is on for community groups rallying opposition to “massive” high-rise redevelopment around High Barnet tube station

Overwhelming local opposition is emerging to Transport for London’s latest application to build five high-rise blocks of flats on a car park and land alongside High Barnet tube station.

Since plans were published four weeks ago, the response has been heavily against the scheme for being a “massive overdevelopment” with the tallest 11-storey block being described as “horrendous” and “overbearing”.

But the race is now on among community groups to raise public awareness and marshal their case against the plan before the September 2 deadline for registering comments with Barnet Council.

Ward councillors and High Barnet MP Dan Tomlinson are to be briefed by the Barnet Society and Barnet Residents Association as the two organisations finalise their detailed responses.

There have been some complaints of underhand tactics: Why is a consultation on such a significant application being conducted during the summer holidays when so many residents are likely to be away? 

Some of the comments posted so far online have been in favour arguing that 283 new flats would provide “much-needed housing” and “smarten up” the area.

But comments posted on the Barnet Society website since 23 July – and direct responses to the society’s draft of its own objections to the plan – indicate mounting opposition.

Issues of greatest concern are the potential harm a massive development might have on the historic character of High Barnet; the loss of the station car park; the smallness of the flats (68 of 283 would be one-bedroom); the lack of community benefit or support for a new neighbourhood of nearly 1,000 people; and the failure to make substantial improvements to public access to the station and connections for bus passengers.

A fuller understanding of the implications of the development by TfL’s subsidiary Places for London is generating additional criticism.

To offset the loss of the station car park – and prevent commuters parking in nearby roads – new controlled parking zones are being proposed for Underhill (Barnet Lane/Sherrards Way) and Barnet Vale (Meadway, Kingsmead, Potters Lane, Prospect Road, Leicester Road and King Edward Road).

There are also increasing doubts about the poor layout inside the blocks and fears that a high proportion of the flats facing south-west could probably overheat in the summer.

Robin Bishop, who leads for the Barnet Society on planning and environment, says the five blocks of flats would have a brutal impact on the existing townscape and greenery of High Barnet, Underhill and Barnet Vale.

The tallest block of 11 storeys – seen superimposed in orange on the photograph above of the view taken from Pricklers Hill –would “break the historic skyline from several viewpoints and compete with, and detract from, the traditional pre-eminence of St John the Baptist parish church”.

“Our main objections to the scheme are to the alien scale and character of the designs; its unsustainability as a neighbourhood; its unsafe environment; and the lack of community benefits.”

Under the approved Barnet local plan, land around the tube station is earmarked for the construction of up to 300 homes but with a height limit of seven storeys.

Breaking that undertaking by approving the plan would be regarded by the scheme’s opponents as a grave betrayal by Barnet Council.

Community groups marshalling opposition to massive high rise flats at High Barnet tube station before deadline for comments on 2 September.

If the application is approved, it would mean the closure of the container yard operated by Container Safe Ltd which rents out around 120 self-storage containers on what was originally the station coal yard.

Paul and Bev Meehan, who run Container Safe, say that under the terms of their lease for the site from TfL they are subject to six months’ notice.

The couple faced the same uncertainty in 2020 when an application was made to build 292 flats on the site – a plan that was subsequently withdrawn.

They point to the fact that they do provide a vital service for many small businesses and traders in and around High Barnet who store equipment and supplies inside the containers.

Storage space has become increasingly expensive for small businesses which find the rents being demanded on new industrial units are prohibitive.

Comments on the plan can be made via the Barnet Council website quoting reference no. 25/2671/FUL.

Alternatively, you can email comments direct to planning.consultation@barnet.gov.uk or post your comments to the Planning Officer: Sam Gerstein, Planning and Building Control, Barnet Council , 2 Bristol Avenue, Colindale, NW9 4EW. In both cases you must also include the application number (25/2671/FUL) and address (High Barnet Underground Station Station Approach Barnet EN5 5RP) plus your name, address and postcode.

The Barnet Society recommends that views should also be forwarded to your local councillors.

Posted on by — 8 Comments

Plans for the introduction of yet another CPZ for High Barnet has provoked furious response among Mays Lane residents

A mass protest is being organised by residents of Mays Lane and surrounding roads in opposition to the introduction of a new and additional controlled parking zone which is being proposed by Barnet Council.

A campaign to force the council to abandon the idea was launched at a public meeting attended by around 170 residents.

Organisers and over 50 supporters of the protest met again at the junction of Mays Lane and Mayhill Road – see above – to discuss how best to rally further support and keep up the pressure.

The proposed Underhill South CPZ would take in 29 roads – including several cul-de-sacs – which are on either side of Mays Lane, extending from the junction with Manor Road all the way westwards to the junction with Shelford Road.

Residents say a CPZ over such a wide area – extending south from Barnet town centre to the Dollis Valley riverside walk – is completely unnecessary and would become extremely expensive for residents.

Barnet Council’s highways department says it began consultations over a new CPZ for Underhill South because of complaints from residents and businesses about excessive parking in the roads south of Barnet Hospital.

A survey had shown that there were “extremely high levels of parking stress” in most of the roads surrounding Mays Lane caused by the extra demand for spaces caused by hospital staff, patients and visitors.

The new CPZ would operate at the same time – Monday to Saturday, between 8am and 6.30pm – as the existing and much larger Barnet Hospital CPZ which takes in roads in the hospital’s immediate vicinity.

Feedback from the initial consultation is due to be considered in September.

The two leading organisers of the protest – Gina Theodorou, chair of the Quinta Village Green Residents Association and Jon Woolfson, founder of the Underhill Residents Group – said opposition to a new CPZ was overwhelming.

“There might be some residents who might have an issue with hospital parking but the vast majority of people who live either side of Mays Lane do not experience any difficulty in parking and have not complained to the council.

“We are very concerned about the accuracy of the council’s claim that there are ‘extremely high levels of parking stress in most roads within the proposed area’ and we care calling on the council’s highway department to publish details of their survey.”

After conducting his own street-by-street by inquiries, Mr Woolfson was convinced the council’s survey findings were flawed and that there was no evidence to support their assertions about extreme parking stress. Of equal concern, he said, was the evidence he had found suggesting many residents had not received any official notification from the council.

Dan Tomlinson, MP for Chipping Barnet, has told the campaign that he will be submitting an objection given the clear strength of feeling among the residents.

He intends to support Underhill ward councillor Zahra Beg who is hoping to arrange a meeting to see if the Royal Free Hospital Trust will examine possibilities for a multi-storey car park at Barnet Hospital.

“If Barnet Hospital could be persuaded to take some responsibility and invest in a pop up multi storey it would do so much to relieve parking pressures around the hospital,” said Ms Theodorou.    

Opponents of the scheme include Whitings Hill Primary School and Underhill Primary School which both say teaching and support staff often commute from outside the area and many rely on nearby on-street parking.

Underhill had a particularly wide catchment area and public transport was inadequate. Families would be inconvenienced and both schools feared that a CPZ would have an adverse impact on support for after-school and community events.

Barnet Smiles Dental Care feared that staff and patients at their dental practice in Cedar Lawn Avenue would face unnecessary expense if the CPZ went ahead.

“We have never experienced any parking difficulties that would justify a CPZ. There is sufficient turnover and availability of parking spaces through the day for residents, visitors and local businesses.”

The prospect of the expense of parking permits and vouchers for visitors was a source of considerable anguish.

Richard Hockings ( above,far right) proprietor of a small business, said that to park his van outside his house would cost him £243 a year – a considerable financial burden. Charges for commercial vehicles depended on emissions – hence the height of the charge for van with a two-litre diesel engine.

Another angry resident, Gloria Jones (above), said the introduction of a CPZ on her road would just add to the additional expense she was already having to face.

“This will be the fourth CPZ around here and it’s already a nightmare.

“I have to pay when I park outside my parents in the hospital CPZ; then outside my sister’s house in the town CPZ; and at the doctor’s surgery in another zone – and now this will be the fourth.

“Barnet Council are just out for the money. Why can’t you park in all the CPZ areas once you have signed up for a permit.”

Jenny Pymont, who lives in a warden assisted property in Mayhill Road, said that she and the other residents in the flats and bungalows believed the CPZ would be very unfair on their visitors and carers.

“We rely on people coming to see us – and now they are going to be clobbered with a parking charge.”

Residents living around Mays Lane organise mass protest at plans for a new controlled parking zone in local roads

Gina Cornock thought the wide sweep of the CPZ was quite unnecessary. “We live in a cul-de-sac and there is no problem with parking. This is just a money- making exercise for the council.”

Posted on by

Family needs for travellers’ caravan site outweighs Green Belt protection for Mays Lane countryside says planning inspector

Spirited opposition by a residents’ association has failed to prevent the go ahead for the development of a site for pitches for two travellers’ caravans and other buildings on a field in Green Belt land off Mays Lane, Barnet.

An application for permission was rejected by Barnet Council but this has now been overruled by a planning inspector who said the needs of two gypsy families with seven young children “tipped the balance” in their favour.

Quinta Village Green Residents Association, which had argued that a travellers’ site would harm the openness of the Green Belt and the character of Mays Lane, expressed their “deep disappointment”.

After a lengthy inquiry, the inspector Graham Chamberlain acknowledged there would be “some modest harm to the character and appearance of the area” but there were “very special circumstances” which outweighed the harm to the Green Belt.

The application to station caravans for residential use with hardstanding and dayrooms was made by Patrick Casey who appealed against the council’s refusal to grant planning permission on the grounds that it breached the Green Belt.

Mr Chamberlain said that he understood Mr Casey, who was currently living at the Barley Mow site near Hatfield, and his brother J Casey, were both “unlawfully doubling up as a temporary measure” and needed a secure and settled site.

“The Casey brothers are gypsies, and they want to follow a traditional lifestyle that involves living in culturally appropriate accommodation, this being a caravan on a pitch.”

There were seven young children in the case and their best interests would be served by “establishing a secure permanent home at the appeal site given the lack of suitable alternatives, including where they currently live unlawfully”.

Mr Chamberlain did conclude that a travellers’ site was inappropriate development; would harm the Green Belt; and that the unmet need for caravan pitches in the London Borough of Barnet was not extensive.

However, the balance in favour of the scheme changed significantly when personal circumstances were factored in, especially the best interests of the children.

“Indeed, personal circumstances tip the balance in favour of the scheme when all other considerations are contemplated cumulatively…It follows that the very special circumstances necessary to justify the development have been demonstrated.”

In expressing their frustration at Mr Chamberlain’s go-ahead for the site, the residents’ association said that during the inquiry “no robust evidence of these personal or accommodation circumstances was provided by the appellant, despite repeated requests, and yet these claims were given decisive weight by the inspector.

“The decision overrides local and national planning safeguards, potentially setting a concerning precedent for Green Belt protection.”

Much of the inquiry revolved around whether establishing a site for travellers’ caravans on a two-acre paddock which had been used for grazing horses would extend urban sprawl along Mays Lane and encroach the countryside.

Planning inspector agrees to site for pitches for two travellers' caravans in Green Belt land off Mays Lane, Barnet, despites residents' opposition.

The field is next door to the Mays Lane car park of the Centre for Islamic Enlightening (formerly a Brethren Gospel Hall).

In his report allowing Mr Casey’s appeal, Mr Chamberlain agreed that the paddock had an open rural character free from development, and it was open land that one would expect to “strongly contribute to restricting the urban sprawl of Barnet”.

Accordingly, he recognised that a caravan site next to the Islamic Centre and opposite the Partridge Close estate, would “compound an incongruous finger of development in the countryside” – a factor which was outweighed by the “very special circumstances” he subsequently outlined.

Concerns about the impact on great crested newts and bats were among the issues raised by the residents’ association, but these were not upheld by Mr Chamberlain.

He said a survey showed there were no great crested newts present on the site, and he did not believe either that travellers’ caravans would have an adverse impact on the bat population.

When Mr Casey made his application in 2023, after purchasing the field at auction, the residents’ association raised objections with Barnet Council and welcomed the refusal to grant permission.

The association, which is named after Quinta Village Green and represents 150 families living nearby, succeeded in raising only half of the £15,000 needed for legal representation at the inquiry after already securing a barrister.

“Without access to the council’s expert evidence, the association was left to try to continue contesting the issues alone and under-resourced.

“Adding further controversy, the inspector rejected Barnet Council’s request to limit the planning permission to a five-year temporary term, instead granting permanent consent.

“Residents fear this undermines policy safeguards and opens the door to piecemeal development across London’s Green Belt.

“This is a disappointing outcome for our community, and a worrying moment for Green Belt protections in Barnet.

“Residents engaged in good faith, supported their council, and upheld planning policy – but this decision shows how fragile these protections can be when decision-makers prioritise unevidenced claims over adopted policy.”   

Posted on by — 6 Comments

Setback for Barnet Football Club as planning officials recommend refusal of plan for a new football stadium at Underhill

Barnet Council’s planning department has come down firmly against Barnet Football Club’s application to build a new 7,000-seat stadium on Barnet Playing Fields at Underhill.

A decision on whether or not the council should give its support is in the hands of its strategic planning committee whose members meet at Hendon Town Hall at 7pm on Monday 14 July.

So far there has been little advance indication of how the committee might respond but the planning department could not be clearer in recommending refusal.

It says the plan to build a new stadium on a “valued local park” would result in “substantial and irreversible harm to the openness and function of the green belt”.

BringBackBarnet, the group which has been campaigning in support of the club returning to Underhill from its existing stadium at The Hive, Harrow, says it is disappointed by the recommendation against the application.

Whatever the outcome of Monday’s meeting, the campaign says it will not give up.

If the plan is rejected, the supporters’ group is convinced that Barnet FC will appeal against the decision and ask for a planning inquiry.

They believe government policy is moving in favour of releasing some green belt land for development and that Barnet Council should take advantage of the offer by the Barnet FC chairman Tony Kleanthous to invest £14 million in constructing a new stadium.

Disappointment for Barnet Football Club as council planners recommend refusal of bid for new stadium at Underhill on Barnet Playing Fields

Since Barnet’s success in gaining promotion next season to League Two of the English Football League, BringBackBarnet have made much of the boost which they believe the club’s return could deliver for Barnet town centre and the local economy.

However, that argument is dismissed by the planners who say any possible “socio-economic” benefits from Barnet’s return to its historic home at Underhill – which it left in 2013 – would not outweigh the significant harm that would result from the “permanent loss of a significant portion of this protected open space”.

The club had failed to demonstrate “very special circumstances” and had failed to address the impact of displaced spectator car parking on the surrounding highway network.

Barnet FC’s full application is for a stadium, with ancillary uses including food and beverage outlets, office and community space, a club shop, a diagnostic centre, an on-site car park for 165 vehicles and parking space for five coaches.

The proposed site is within the Metropolitan Green Belt and the loss of playing field land would be in conflict with national, regional and local planning policy.

An application of such strategic importance to London — and its location within the green belt – would necessitate it being referred to the Mayor of London.  

Currently under the Barnet Local Plan, Barnet Playing Fields and the adjoining King George V Playing Fields immediately to the south of Dollis Brook, are designated as a sports hub site.

There was an earlier proposal by Barnet Council for the construction of new central facilities for the playing fields – including changing rooms and a cafe – but no detailed plan has been submitted and one of the arguments of BringBackBarnet is that a new football stadium could provide amenities for the community which Barnet Council simply cannot afford.

One issue not addressed in the club’s application is the question of whether ownership of a new stadium site would be transferred to club chairman Tony Kleanthous.

The playing fields are currently the subject of a restrictive covenant between the National Playing Fields Association and the Mayor and Councillors of Barnet which requires them to be preserved as a charitable trust in perpetuity as a memorial to King George V and the King George’s Field Foundation.

Posted on by — 2 Comments

More stolen vehicles being recovered but Barnet residents urge MP to press for tougher police action against organised car theft gangs

Police failures which have led to the Borough of Barnet becoming a London hot spot for gangs stealing cars provoked a heated debate at a summit on car theft held by the Chipping Barnet MP Dan Tomlinson.

A line-up of speakers which included a government minister, police inspector, Barnet councillor and specialists in tackling crime was accused of offering little more than platitudes and excuses.

A show of hands had indicated that a high proportion of the audience had been the victims of car theft.

They queued up to complain about what they judged was a lack of interest and an inadequate response by the authorities.

Mr Tomlinson (above, far right) acknowledged the anger of aggrieved constituents despite assurances from the government, police, local councils and car manufacturers they were increasing cooperation to co-ordinating their response.

As a result, more stolen cars were now being recovered.

“But I understand the strength of feelings about the police not tackling these organised crime gangs,” said Mr Tomlinson, who faced a line of audience members demanding answers.

When several of those who spoke out said that all they had been offered at the summit were the same lame excuses, their rebuke was greeted with jeers and applause in support.

Mr Tomlinson faced his critics head on.

“I know how aggrieved you are, and I hear your complaint that not enough is being done to go after these gangs. I take that flack. We must push the government, and the agencies involved to do much more.

“There is currently no nationally scaled task force to match the organised crime groups and that is what we need to go after the car thieves.”

He said his aim for the constituency was to achieve a 25 per cent reduction in car theft by 2028 – and he would be checking the statistics every six months.

Mr Tomlinson’s car theft summit, held at the Jewish Community Secondary School in New Barnet (7.7.2025), opened with his presentation of a stark statistic: 574 cars were stolen in the eight wards of the Chipping Barnet constituency during 2023, that meant ten or so were being stolen every week.

This was one of the highest rates for car theft in London.

He had been made aware of the extent of this organised crime when canvassing to become MP as in street after street people told him about their cars being stolen.

Barnet, as an outer London suburb, was particularly susceptible to car thefts because of its proximity to the M25 and other main roads which made it easier move stolen vehicles.

Many were taken to what were known as chop shops where they were broken down into sections and parts and then exported in containers for re-assembly in Africa, the Middle East or countries like Russia.

Inspector Kem Ofo, (above with Councillor Sara Conway) — who is responsible for car theft prevention and investigation in the eastern half of the borough — said the police believed there were currently no chop shops within Barnet although one in Edgware was discovered and closed last year.

He reminded the audience that in 50 per cent of thefts the vehicle had been left unlocked, and he urged the installation of steering wheel immobilisers and disc locks

Recently there had been funding for a week of targeted action on car thefts which had resulted in 40 arrests and the recovery of 20 stolen vehicles – an operation which Mr Tomlinson hoped could be repeated if funding could be found.

After an explanation from Inspector Ofo as to how the police were making better use of tracker devices, Mr Tomlinson said it was clear more needed to be done to speed up the sharing of information about stolen vehicles within the force.

Often stolen vehicles were parked nearby for a day or so while the thieves waited to see if they were being tracked and were then driven away with cloned number plates.

When challenged as to why the police often failed to follow up householders’ door cam footage of cars being stolen, the head of the National Vehicle Crime Intelligence Service, Sharon Naughton, said the tough reality was that there was not the manpower to go through all the CCTV and door cam footage being offered by members of the public.

“This is all about the level of policing which the country can afford. Threats to life, risk, harm and vulnerability especially to women and children – these threats all come above vehicle crime.”

Councillor Sara Conway, who is Barnet council member for community safety and chair of the safer communities partnership, said that in the last two years since Labour took control the council had spent £3million improving the borough’s CCTV infrastructure to strengthen support for the police in tackling vehicle-related criminal activity.

In 2023, Barnet’s CCTV cameras were not working for 70 per cent of the time. Only 27 out of 127 cameras were operational.  Now there were over 700 operational CCTV cameras across the borough and extensive coverage around transport hubs.

MP Dan Tomlinson calls for more police action against gangs stealing vehicles because Chipping Barnet constituency has become a London hot spot for car theft.

The opening speaker at the summit was Dame Diana Johnson, minister for crime and policing, who said the government hoped new legislation would be in place by the end of the year.

Electronic devices used to unlock cars – which were used in 40 per cent of thefts – would be banned and become illegal. The police would be able to take action against people supplying or using such equipment.

There would also be a quicker recovery power to allow police to enter and search premises without a warrant if they believed vehicles or parts were being hidden.

The government had established a national vehicle crime reduction partnership to tackle what she described as these “ruthless, sophisticated, and professional organised crime groups” and funding had been provided to increase the interception of stolen vehicles at the ports.

PC Adam Gibson, who is assigned to the National Vehicle Crime Intelligence Service – which is funded by finance and leasing companies – described his work at ports such as Felixstowe and Harwich intercepting containers packed with stolen vehicles heading overseas.

Four or five suspect containers were stopped every week. There could be as many as five cars packed in one container. Sometimes there might be as many as 18, all broken up into parts. One container had contained three cars stolen from the same street.

Last year they had recovered 427 whole cars and 105 chopped up cars, together worth £22 million.

To help protect constituents with valuable cars, Mr Tomlinson had arranged for a 25 per cent discount on the cost of high radio frequency trackers supplied by the Tracker technology network whose managing director Mark Rose described the success of the latest technology.

Unlike most existing trackers which could be jammed – and which had an average car recovery rate of 30 per cent – the high radio frequency technology was producing a 95 per cent rate of recovery.

In the first six months of the year, Tracker had recovered 835 vehicles worth £25 million.  Police cars were connected to the new tracking system and 50 per cent of cars were being recovered in four hours and 80 per cent within 24 hours.

Greg Culshaw, general manager of customer support at Toyota, said that since 2021 their cars had been fitted with new software which could be updated remotely, and which was reducing car theft.

Toyota had installed Tracker devices free of charge in 50,000 cars and was working in partnership with Tracker and the police.

The 25 per cent discount for Chipping Barnet constituents for the installation of Tracker technology is available at www.tracker.co.uk using code TRACKER25.

Posted on by — 1 Comment

Mays Lane residents are increasingly concerned about the continuing failure to restore the derelict Quinta Youth Club building

After being boarded up for the last 20 years a fresh attempt is about to be made to see whether it might be possible to get the abandoned Quinta Youth Club in Mays Lane, Barnet, refurbished or rebuilt and returned to community use.

After their success in obtaining and maintaining protected status for Quinta Village Green — which adjoins the derelict clubhouse — residents are increasingly concerned about continuing vandalism and anti-social behaviour.

Barnet Council and representatives of other local groups are to be sounded out by the Quinta Village Green Residents Association to see what could be done to restore a sadly neglected building.

Planning approval was given in 2021for use of the clubhouse to be changed from community use to become a store for the library service for schools in the Borough of Barnet.

Although said to be “derelict and in a poor condition” and vacant since 2006, the council proposed to refurbish the existing single-storey building, install new doors and windows, and use it for the storage, archiving and dispatching of library books as part of the borough’s Schools Library Resource Service.

But nothing further has happened to the building in the intervening four years, prompting residents’ concerns about continuing vandalism, resulting in their appeal for more thought to be given as to its future use. 

After the being re-established and named after Quinta Village Green, the residents’ association has been engaged in several campaigns against threats to the Green Belt and is seeking better consultation on road safety schemes in Mays Lane.

Residents to launch fresh attempt to see whether derelict former Quinta Youth Club in Mays Lanes can be restored for community use.

Gina Theodorou, the first chair of the newly formed association, promoted their work with a stall at the Arkley Village Fayre.

“Given all that we have been doing to strengthen the Quinta village community, we do think it is perhaps time to see whether something can be done about the abandoned youth club.

“As it has been boarded up for the last 20 years, we are now reaching out to Barnet Council, who own the building, and to other local partners to explore opportunities for restoring it and bringing it back into community use.”

Currently the association is crowdfunding for the cost of legal representation at a public inquiry into an application for a travellers’ caravan site on Green Belt land in Mays Lane.

So far, a crowdfunded appeal has raised half the cost, but the association still needs to raise almost £7,000.

After getting the village green registered as a public open space, the association liaises with the council to ensure maintenance of the green and to ensure that fly tipping is removed.    

Posted on by — 6 Comments

Plans to speed up introduction of 20mph speed limits prompting complaints about lack of enforcement of existing restrictions

Barnet Council is preparing a new procedure to allow residents to apply for a 20mph speed limit on side roads where they think driving is too fast and poses a danger to pedestrians and a risk of traffic accidents.

Stapylton Road – see above – and Salisbury Road are two residential streets close to High Barnet town centre which are thought to be at the top of the list for a reduction in the limit from 30mph to 20mph following speed surveys conducted last year.

A draft policy to allow residents to apply for lower speed limits has been agreed at a council cabinet meeting and is about to go out for public consultation.

While the council’s recognition of the need for more speed limits has been welcomed, residents in some roads where there is already a 20mph limit or traffic calming measures complain bitterly about a lack of enforcement.

Householders in Mays Lane, which is covered by a 20mph limit from the bottom of Barnet Hill and on through Underhill, complain regularly on social media about how many drivers take no notice.

They say that before the council agrees to any further 20mph zones it should install more repeater signs; more illuminated warnings of excessive speed; and investigate the possibility of installing speed cameras.   

Once the new procedure for 20mph zones is in place, residents will be able to make an application via the council’s website as is already the case when people report potholes, damaged pavements or abandoned vehicles.

East Barnet councillor Simon Radford – cabinet member for finance – said the new process would finally give Barnet residents the ability to ask — and outline the case — for a 20mph zone in the roads where they live.

He had been working with residents to reduce speeding in East Barnet, and he hoped their concerns could now be addressed with an assessment by council staff as to where there should be signs and road markings or perhaps additional traffic calming measures such as a road narrowing or speed hump.

Speed humps have recently been installed on Mays Lane (at the junction with Manor Road) where for many years previously there had been a metal barrier enforcing a width restriction.

Removal of the width restriction has angered some householders who say large vans and small lorries — which had previously been prevented from using that section of Mays Lane – are again travelling too fast and posing a danger to pedestrians, especially to customers using the Mays Lane parade of shops.

There are two sets of illuminated speed warning signs along Mays Lane but for much of its length there are few if any reminders of the 20mph limit – except for the freshly-painted signs on the road outside Underhill School and Children’s Centre.

Queens Road – leading to Queen Elizabeth’s Boys’ School and the Queen’s Road Estate – is another road where residents complain about the lack of enforcement of a 20mph speed limit.

There is only one reminder sign halfway along the road and a 20mph sign painted on the road which is so worn down it is barely visible.

Salisbury Road and Stapylton Road are likely to be prioritised by the council for a 20mph zone because of long-standing concern about speeding.

Stapylton Road by-passes Barnet High Street and is a heavily used link between the roundabout at the Black Horse public house and St Albans Road.

When parking spaces are full, the curve on the carriageway makes it difficult to see fast approaching vehicles on what is a popular cut through.

Plans for more 20mph speed limits in side roads but Barnet Council criticised for lack of enforcement of existing restrictions.

The lower section of Salisbury Road – from Stapylton Road to High Street – is largely one way but busier than the upper section because it is on the route for five bus services – 234 (Spires-Archway); 326 (Spires-Brent Cross); 383 (Finchley Memorial Hospital); 384 (Edgware-Cockfosters); and 399 (Hadley Wood).

Lowering the existing 30mph limit on Salisbury and Stapylton Roads would extend the 20mph limit which already applies in Alston Road (from the junction with Marriott Road to Salisbury Road) and the 20mph limits on Wentworth Road and Byng Road which serve Foulds and Christ Church primary schools and the Noah’s Ark Children’s Hospice.

Posted on by — 20 Comments

Barnet Football Club’s supporters hoping their team’s top-of-the table position in the National League bodes well for a return to Underhill

Leaflets promoting Bring Barnet Back are being distributed across the town as the campaign hots up to persuade Barnet Council to approve plans for a new football stadium at Underhill.

If playing form is any guide, the club might be hoping for a warm welcome: Barnet is currently top of the National League and well placed for promotion to League Two of the English Football League.

Barnet haven’t been beaten in their last 21 National League fixtures. The Bees have now established an nine-point lead at the top of the table after their stunning mid-week 5-0 defeat of Yeovil Town at The Hive (4.3.2025).

However promising their performances on the pitch, the chances of Barnet playing again at Underhill are finely balanced.

The outcome depends on whether Barnet Council can be persuaded that there is a special case for a new stadium to be built within the Green Belt on playing fields at Underhill, close to the site of the original stadium which was demolished to make way for the Ark Pioneer Academy.

Opponents to the project, who are against the loss of Green Belt land and who fear traffic congestion generated by a new stadium, are rallying support around a petition which has attracted over 18,800 signatures.  

A strong case is being made for the new site on the grounds that careful landscaping would reduce the visual impact of the stadium, and that the environment and biodiversity would be greatly improved with extensive tree planting and the creation of a pond between the stadium and the Dollis Valley green walk.

Supporters hope Barnet Football Club's top of the table position boosts chances of return to Underhill

Seen above with an artist’s impression of the site are Sean McGrath (left) of consultants WSP and architect Manuel Nogueira of AndArchitects

Much of the emphasis in the club’s campaign to play again at Underhill is based on the economic impact.

Club chairman Tony Kleanthous has promised to finance the building of the new stadium, at a cost of around £14 million, and the estimate is that it should sustain the equivalent of 78 full-time jobs when taking into account all those working part time on match days.

On some estimates the return of the club could add £6 million a year to the Barnet economy, including £2.1 million from extra business for the town’s traders over a 23-week season.

If the application for a new stadium fails to get approval – and Barnet are denied a chance to rebuild the strong local support which they once enjoyed – there are stark warnings that the club’s long-term future is in grave doubt.

Representatives from community groups including the Barnet Society, Barnet Residents Association and Love Barnet have been advised that attendances at the club’s current base at The Hive Football Centre are not sufficient for long-term financial viability.

What was described as “a considerable financial shortfall” is having to be made up by Mr Kleanthous, the Barnet FC chairman and owner.

The Hive, midway between Edgware and Standmore, which is also owned by Mr Kleanthous, is a separate financial entity.

Its pitch, training facilities and diagnostic centre are used by a range of other clubs as well as Barnet and because of its proximity to Wembley it is often used as a training camp by visiting teams.

Since moving to The Hive in 2013, Barnet have failed to match the attendances at Underhill.

Currently the average gate is around 1,800. A move back to Underhill could increase that to around 3,500 given the strength of local support with the new stadium having a maximum capacity of 7,000 spectators.

Additional revenue from ticket sales could bring in an extra £500,000 a season and that could be matched by an equivalent amount in sponsorship which together would be make up the current shortfall which on some estimates is around £1 million a year.

If the club fails to get approval for a new stadium there are doubts as to whether Mr Kleanthous would be prepared to make a fresh attempt to return to Barnet.

His view is that if the community are against the club’s return and there is not the support which Bring Barnet Back believe there is, then there is little more that he can do.

But without the injection of additional revenue, the fear is that within four to five years’ time Barnet might no longer be sustainable financially.

With help from the distribution of funds from the Premier League, the club says it would establish a new charitable foundation at Barnet which would offer a range of activities with an outreach to local schools and support for local clubs.

Once back in Barnet, the club’s aim would be to establish community initiatives and there any number of possibilities, including, for example, the possibility of providing space for a local foodbank or other projects.

The club would open a new diagnostics and imaging centre at the new stadium in line with the facilities provided at The Hive which a said to be recognised as one of the best screening facilities at a football club.    

Posted on by — 4 Comments

Concerns re new academy school

Ark Pioneer Academy, built on the site of the Underhill football stadium, opens in September

Ark Pioneer Academy, High Barnet’s new secondary school opening in September, has started holding drop in sessions for potential parents and pupils – heightening the debate about its impact on other nearby schools.

Continue reading Concerns re new academy school
Posted on by — 4 Comments

Why no bus from tube to hospital?

A long-running campaign by the Barnet Society to persuade Transport for London to run a bus service from High Barnet tube station to Barnet Hospital and the Spires shopping centre has won the support of Councillor Richard Cornelius, leader of Barnet Council.

Continue reading Why no bus from tube to hospital?

Posted on by

Barnet Council to change decision process

The council is proposing to change the way that decisions are taken and introduce a Committee System form of governance.   Barnet are currently operating an Executive System of governance. 

Under this system, the majority of decisions in the council are taken by the single-party Executive (or Cabinet) either in the Cabinet meeting or by individual Cabinet Members.

Continue reading Barnet Council to change decision process