Posted on 6 Comments

Majority of Barnet Society members oppose new autistic school in Moxon Street

The Barnet Society has consulted its members about the current planning application to convert a former office block into a school for pupils with Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD). 83% of respondents opposed the application, and only 6% supported it. We have therefore decided to object to it.

The Society does so with some reluctance. We would welcome a new school of this kind in Chipping Barnet – but not on a site that’s so confined that the only playground for 90 pupils is on the roof and one small balcony. Torn between the undoubted needs of the pupils and the serious weaknesses in the design, we considered the case important enough to consult our membership.

The response rate was nearly 17%, unusually high for a survey of this kind. A total of 66 responded: 55 wanted us to object, and only 4 said we should support the application. With this clear mandate, therefore, the Society has submitted its objection to the proposal.

It is important that we explain our reasons to readers. They can be summarised as follows:

1. Vehicular movement is unsatisfactory. The school’s 9 buses and 9-10 parents’ cars would all arrive and depart at similar times. When school closes around 3-5pm, Moxon Street is busy with traffic. The additional vehicles would cause serious local congestion.

2. Minibuses and taxis would stack around the building’s single-lane slip road to drop off and pick up pupils, with private cars required to use Moxon Street car park. This management problem would be exacerbated by the very wide age range and sometimes challenging behaviours of pupils.

3. Permanent staff would use nearby public car parks. But staff visiting for only a few hours would find the shortage of on-site parking very inconvenient and time-wasting, especially for those needing to carry equipment.

4. The façade shows little of the colour and imagination expected of a 21st-century school. The proportions of the sloping rooftop and entrance are clumsy; features such as the sports hall “box” could have been treated with higher quality materials or colour; and materials generally are basic and cheap.

5. The external environment and facades would offer disappointingly little “greening”.

6. The long internal corridors with no natural daylight could be oppressive for children, and result in lights being on all day and high energy costs. The internal group rooms appear to have no glazed panels, which would be claustrophobic.

7. The area of the rooftop playground is only about 20% of the DfE’s minimum recommendation for a school of this size and type. This causes us great concern, particularly in a school with pupils whose ages range from 5 to 19 – and are therefore unable to share different-sized play facilities, and with behaviours that are often solitary and challenging – and so require more personal space than other children.

 

8. Not only is the outdoor play tiny for the number of pupils – even if they access it in shifts – it would be sadly short of greenery and views except of the sky. Given the proven benefits of a rich outdoor environment for all children, and especially for those with ASD, our concern is all the greater. Some wonderful outdoor environments have been created for schools and nurseries in recent years – and some imaginative rooftop playgrounds – but this would not be one of them.

9. There is no clear strategy for giving the children access to off-site green spaces and play facilities to supplement the shortage on site.

10. The school would overlook habitable rooms of nearby dwellings in Hornbeam Court & Laburnham Close.

11. We’re not convinced that the search for an alternative site has been sufficiently thorough or smart. To take just one example, Grasvenor Infant School, which we understand is closing soon and has good outdoor play space, has not been considered.

We believe the proposed site is fundamentally unsuitable for 90 all-age pupils with ASD. To succeed, substantial design improvements would be essential. Otherwise we’re concerned that the premises would become an enduring problem for staff, pupils and parents/carers, leading to high operating costs, unhappy users and ultimately failure.

You still have an opportunity to register your own comments: public consultation is open until Friday 28 January 2022. The planning application reference is 21/6488/FUL, and you can find it here .  On the Documents page, the Design and Access Statement gives an overview of the scheme.

Posted on 3 Comments

Barnet Hill cycle lanes are a Transport for London priority — but not for Barnet Council

Cyclists heading out of London have always enjoyed the challenge of riding up Barnet Hill — and a survey carried out exactly 100 years ago showed there was even greater enthusiasm for tackling the climb back in the 1920s.

Continue reading Barnet Hill cycle lanes are a Transport for London priority — but not for Barnet Council

Posted on

Surprise and delight at finding Barnet’s display of famous chewing gum paintings

Anyone walking along the footpath at the junction of Alston Road and Carnarvon Road should make the effort to search out a fascinating trail of 21 illustrations by a celebrated pavement artist who was brought up in Barnet and whose miniature paintings on blobs of chewing gum have gained international recognition.

Continue reading Surprise and delight at finding Barnet’s display of famous chewing gum paintings

Posted on 1 Comment

Alston Road threatened by new permitted development apartment block blight

Recent years have seen a wave of roof extensions across Barnet, usually providing extra space for existing homes. Richard Court in Alston Road (above) exemplifies a new variant of Permitted Development introduced by the government last year. You have until Thursday 23 December to oppose it, and below we tell you how to do so. 

Continue reading Alston Road threatened by new permitted development apartment block blight

Posted on 1 Comment

Improvements proposed for Barnet’s tennis courts — and then charging to use them

Plans are afoot to upgrade Barnet Council’s free-to-use tennis courts — which include six courts just off Mays Lane and others at Tudor Park Sports Ground, Victoria Recreation Ground, and Oak Hill Park — and then introduce a booking system and charges for playing tennis.

Continue reading Improvements proposed for Barnet’s tennis courts — and then charging to use them

Posted on

Children’s show rehearsals at The Bull — getting ready for bumper Barnet Christmas Fayre

Rehearsals are well underway for the children’s show at the annual Barnet Christmas Fayre on Sunday 5 December — a welcome return after the loss last year of the town’s festivities due to the Covid.19 lockdown restrictions.

Continue reading Children’s show rehearsals at The Bull — getting ready for bumper Barnet Christmas Fayre

Posted on

Mayor of London challenged by campaigners for saving tube station car parks

Campaigners against high-rise blocks of flats being built on tube station car parks — including High Barnet, Finchley Central, Cockfosters and Arnos Grove — staged a spirited protest during the last question time session for the Mayor of London at City Hall.

Continue reading Mayor of London challenged by campaigners for saving tube station car parks

Posted on

Neighbourhood police officers anxious to strengthen contact with the community

One of the top priorities for High Barnet’s dedicated team of police officers — the Safer Neighbourhood Team — is to respond to complaints about anti-social behaviour in the High Street including begging on the pavement and disturbances involving rowdy youngsters.

Continue reading Neighbourhood police officers anxious to strengthen contact with the community

Posted on 3 Comments

Goodbye to our Green Belt?

Above is the Green Belt between Barnet and St Albans. It’s the site of Bowmans Cross, a new settlement planned by Hertsmere Council. It will eventually have 6,000 homes for around 15,000 people – nearly as many as live in High Barnet ward. It will be a net-zero carbon, self-sustaining community, and the sketch above shows lots of trees. But if Hertsmere’s draft Local Plan is accepted, over 10% of Hertsmere’s (and also effectively Barnet’s) Green Belt will be lost forever.

Bowmans Cross is a showpiece of the Plan, which is currently out for public consultation. Another is a 63-hectare Media Quarter east of Borehamwood, which it is hoped will provide thousands of jobs. Other proposals include 2,770 houses in and around Borehamwood, 900 on the fields south of Potters Bar and 225 at South Mimms village (to list only those close to Barnet).

Good news for Barnet is that no new building is planned for the countryside south of the M25 and east of the A1. The media work opportunities will be welcome, to Barnet as much as to Hertsmere residents. But the Plan is vague about crucial details, and there’s much to cause concern:

  • Well over 10% of Hertsmere’s Green Belt will be built over.
  • At the low housing densities proposed, few homes are likely to be affordable.
  • About half of the new housing is to be built on brownfield land, but the proportion ought to be higher.
  • Little information is provided about Bowmans Cross, a new town half the size of Borehamwood and seven-tenths that of Potters Bar.
  • The economic case for a massive Media Quarter, or its long-term viability in a distributed digital age, is unexplained.
  • How Hertsmere residents will be prioritised for either housing or jobs isn’t stated.
  • Very little is said about transport, which will be vital to the Plan’s success, especially in semi-rural areas.
  • There is a potentially serious conflict with Enfield’s Local Plan over land use around M25 Junction 24.

We sympathise with Hertsmere’s predicament. It has to meet an ambitious government housing target, yet 79% of its area is designated as Metropolitan Green Belt, where development is only justifiable under very exceptional circumstances. But how hard has Hertsmere’s looked at its housing need and re-use of its brownfield land?

Its housing target is for a minimum of 760 new homes a year, or at least 12,160 homes by 2038. That’s based on the South West Herts Local Housing Needs Assessment, which appears not to have been challenged. Those who’ve been following the U-turns in the government’s proposed planning reforms will wonder how robust such figures are. The results of the 2021 Census are urgently needed to substantiate predictions of continuing population growth in the South-East, post-Brexit and post-Covid.

There’s also the question of whether Hertsmere’s houses will meet its own needs. It’s not explained how existing local residents will be prioritised. New homes near Barnet are almost certain to be cheaper and more spacious, internally and externally, than in Barnet itself. They’re bound to attract young couples and families struggling to afford property in our area. It would be ironic if much of Hertsmere’s new housing ended up benefitting Londoners at the expense of its own residents.

A further doubt surrounds affordability. The Plan says that 35% of new homes will be affordable, but CPRE research shows that only a tenth of homes built in the Green Belt are affordable, and these are rarely for social rent.

The Plan says, “The strategic green belt will be protected…and improvements made to the countryside and biodiversity to offset the impact of development.” That glosses over the fact that at least 10% of Hertsmere’s present Green Belt will be sacrificed to the developments listed above. Across the borough, the total will be greater, but the Plan is silent about the figure.

It‘s unclear how rigorously Hertsmere has investigated the alternative of re-using brownfield land. Table 3 in the Plan claims that 6,020 new homes – nearly half of its 15-year total requirement – would be on urban sites. According to its Table 2, 2,765 of such sites are available excluding smaller villages/hamlets, which seems scarcely credible. If true, it’s good news, but no brownfield register is mentioned to substantiate it.

If that brownfield land were to be redeveloped at densities equivalent to, say, the award-winning Newhall in Harlow – i.e. no more than four stories high, at 22 dwellings per hectare – even more of Hertsmere’s housing need could be met without resorting to Green Belt land. Alternatively, doubling the density currently proposed for Bowmans Cross (under 10 dwellings per hectare) would have a similar beneficial effect.

For Barnet residents, 900 homes on Green Belt separating Potters Bar from the M25 will be saddening. Not only do the present fields provide an attractive working agricultural landscape between Potters Bar and Barnet, they link visually with Bentley Heath, Dancers Hill, Wrotham Park, Dyrham Park and other greenery to create a panorama that’s much greater than the sum of its parts. The Baker Street and Barnet Road motorway bridges will make dismal southern gateways to the new housing, and it’s hard to imagine a pleasant life in the shadow of the M25.

For Hertsmere residents – and for Hertsmere Council – all this should be even more worrying. The London Green Belt Council’s report earlier this year ‘Safe Under Us’? revealed that 233,276 homes have already been given, or are seeking, planning permission in the Metropolitan Green Belt. Such has been local concern that several councils have been voted out of office or lost overall control, and the government has lost its parliamentary seat at Chesham & Amersham.

Another weakness of the planning process is illustrated by a potentially serious conflict with Enfield Council’s draft Local Plan. Hertsmere is designating land south-east of Junction 24 for wildlife. But Enfield’s Strategic Policy SP E1 allocates 11 hectares close by for industrial use. Furthermore, Enfield casually mentions that it would “seek to deliver the redevelopment of the wider site (in LB Hertsmere) to provide a coordinated employment offer”. This would detrimentally impact not only wildlife but also existing and proposed residents of Potters Bar.

 

The Media Quarter needs critical scrutiny. It will be vast – 63 hectares – and will have 34 sound stages, many times more than currently exist in Elstree & Borehamwood. The future for TV and film may look bright today, but for how long will digital industries continue to rely on centralised production? Unless the Mass Rapid Transport system tantalisingly mentioned in the Plan comes to pass, moreover, access will depend largely on two motorways, one of them notorious for traffic jams.

Transport is a major weakness of this and most of the Plan’s proposed developments. CPRE research shows that people living in Green Belt developments are tied to owning and using cars, as well as being stuck with the cost of commuting, creating further financial stress for families on low incomes. Hertsmere already suffers from poor public transport to and from its outlying estates and villages, but travel occupies only 10 out of 245 pages in its Plan.

A couple of final points from a neighbourly perspective. Firstly, Barnet already suffers from road and parking congestion caused at least partly by the rising number of commuters from Hertfordshire into London. Building new homes and workplaces near our border seems certain to exacerbate that.

Second and lastly, our Society was founded in 1945 specifically to protect the countryside around Chipping Barnet. In 1947-8, our then Treasurer E.H.Lucas researched and wrote Rambles Round Barnet & Rambles in South Hertfordshire, both of which were published by the Barnet Society. The majority of the walks follow public footpaths in Hertsmere, and have benefitted from its careful stewardship. Several generations of Barnet residents have learned to love countryside that is now planned for development. The footpaths may be safeguarded, but without their green environment they will offer a tragically diminished experience.

If residents of either Hertsmere or Barnet object to the draft Plan, it’s vital for them to do so by 6 December; after then, no changes of substance will be possible.

Hertsmere’s draft Local Plan can be found at:

https://www.hertsmerelocalplan.com/site/homePage

The deadline for public comments on it is 5pm on Monday 6 December.

The Barnet Society will be submitting a response, but you can also do so yourself as follows by:

  • completing an online survey under the Have Your Say tab on the plan’s bespoke website here
  • submitting comments via the consultation portal also available on the website
  • emailing local.plan@hertsmere.gov.uk
  • writing to Local Plan Consultation, Hertsmere Borough Council, Elstree Way, Borehamwood WD6 9SR.