Category: Planning & Environment

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

Campaign underway to secure long-term future for highly successful on-site school farm at Totteridge Academy

A bumper summer crop of pumpkins, tomatoes, cucumbers and other produce is another illustration of the continuing success of GROW, the school and community farm which has been created on a six-acre field next to The Totteridge Academy in Barnet Lane.

Visitors were welcomed at an open day by the farm’s managing director Lucy Hollis (above, far right) who is encouraging local residents to give their opinions on whether GROW should be granted a ten-year lease of the land.

There was nothing but praise for the way this educational charity has encouraged pupils at The Totteridge Academy to get involved in the planting and growing of vegetables, fruit and flowers.

A fascinating look back at the inspiration behind the development of an innovative school farm – and GROW’s success over the last six years – has been prepared by Anna Robins (see her text below).

Some of the produce from the farm goes straight to the school kitchen for seasonal meals for pupils and surplus is sold at a farm shop at the school entrance.

GROW’s contribution to the community has expanded since it opened in 2019 with the introduction of raised-bed gardens for use by families who have no outdoor space and through the organisation of regular gardening clubs for children on Saturdays and in school holidays.

GROW’s aim is to gain security of tenure of its site with a ten-year lease and ensure community support for any future planning applications.

The open day marked the start of a month-long consultation to test public support for the farm and to gain approval for a lease agreement with United Learning Trust (on behalf of Totteridge Academy) and the Department of Education.

For Rob and Yvonne Verrill – above with Lucy Hollis – the chance to be shown around the farm brought back family memories.

“Our son went to The Totteridge Academy, and it is great to see how the school is now offering local children the chance to learn how to cultivate and grow food.

“It is so beneficial to get children involved out-of-doors activities. It is great for their self-esteem.”

Another first-time visitor Nick Gagen was shown the raised beds where families without gardens can grow produce.

“I live in Manor Road and have walked past the farm lots of times but never been inside. It’s great to see what GROW does for the school and local community.

“I grew up in the Cambridge Fens, so I know how important is to understand all about nature and plants.

“My family used to say that when children who were evacuated from London during the last war arrived to stay, they had no idea that food was grown out in fields. They thought it all came in tins and boxes.”

For farm manager Chis Haigh the tomato crop has exceeded expectations with lots of varieties doing well – heritage tomatoes, Roma, gourmand and gardener’s delight.  

He says that securing a long lease on their field – which was previously unused by the school – would assist in planning future cultivation and make it worthwhile to plant more fruit trees such as apple, pear, quince, plum and mulberry.

GROW has already planted over 60 fruit trees and around 500 hedge-row trees around the perimeter of the farm.

In her history about the development of GROW, Anna Robins (above) – chair of the Byng Road Allotment Committee – explains that this initiative was part of a recovery plan for The Totteridge Academy after several troubled years and a falling school roll.

In 2016, Chris Fairbairn was appointed the new head teacher by United Learning Trust, which had taken over the management of the school, and he set about a five-plan to make Totteridge the “most improved school in London”.

Anna – who said Mr Fairbairn knocked his promise “out of the park within two years” – takes up GROW’s story:

“While Mr Fairbairn and his team steadied the ship and set it on a course to success, the school was also moving up the social ladder. The school’s hall was featured in a 2018 John Lewis advertisement and Mr Fairbairn’s invited his university friends to deliver assemblies and classes – radio and television presenter Rick Edwards, historian Dan Jones, and television presenter George Lamb.

“According to George Lamb’s interview with the Harmony Project, he was having his own crisis that mirrored The Totteridge Academy.  While he achieved success as a radio and television presenter, he ‘felt empty’ and his achievements were ‘pointless and did not know what to do with himself’ – a fact echoed by his dad: ‘a game show host […] Not a very serious guy in the scheme of things’. 

“Affected by the 2011 riots, George Lamb threw himself into volunteer and community work focussing on disenfranchised and disengaged people.  In 2016, like The Totteridge Academy, in times of turmoil, George Lamb also turned to Mr Fairbairn.  Over the next few years, George Lamb became a regular visitor at Totteridge because he “liked the energy that his friend brought to the school”. 

“He was looking ahead to the next generation, realising that raising young people’s environmental IQ was important as ‘there will be no human rights, if there is no planet’.  On his next visit to TTA, George Lamb spotted a derelict six-acre field next to the school’s old car park that was supposed to be redeveloped into football pitches.  Due to a lack of funding and declining pupil numbers, this was never actualised, and so these six acres were dedicated to GROW.

“In December 2019, GROW submitted a planning application to change the use of these six-acres from school playing field to a City Farm with educational farming.  Officially launched in 2019 by George Lamb, the school grounds started their transformation into a community farm. In June 2021 it featured in the Evening Standard, on BBC’s Gardeners World in October 2021, and Children in Need in 2024. 

WHAT DOES GROW DO?

“By far the main beneficiary of GROW is the Academy itself. The initiative’s biggest achievement is connecting the school kitchen to GROW’s food to create seasonal dishes for pupils and staff.  Pupils can see the journey of their food from field to fork. Over the past six years, GROW has provided food for over 100,000 school lunch plates for the Totteridge Academy community.

“Also, GROW’s aim is to integrate itself with the entire school curriculum and to apply the subject knowledge on the farm. While some subjects are easily applied to the GROW farm, like science and the recently revived Food Technology, GROW’s challenge is to support all subjects across the curriculum so all pupils can access and learn from GROW.  Other subjects that have used the GROW farm are photography, English, and geography – most of which were re-introduced to the Academy’s curriculum due to its academic success.

BENEFITS FOR LOCAL COMMUNITY

“The local community can access GROW: by a community stall in the academy’s car park, where fresh food is affordable and accessible for all ( Wednesday 3pm-6pm. from November 3pm-5pm); Grow-Cook-Share which provides local families with no outdoor space with a raised bed to grow fruit and vegetables; and BUNCH an AQA qualification in floristry for people aged between 13-16 years old. 

“GROW also provides after-school programmes and holiday clubs for free school meal recipients. 

“In the last few years GROW has spread its initiative across the London Borough of Barnet.  They are working with Underhill School & Children’s Centre and Whitings Hill Primary School by supporting them to set up their own farms to help their communities access fresh food and enhance their wellbeing through farming.

“Grahame Park now has its own community garden welcoming local residents to grow food, learn new skills, and connect with their neighbours. It is a thriving hub with over 550 visitors joining the community garden. 

“Together with Live Unlimited, GROW runs two additional clubs on Saturdays.  Live Unlimited was set up in 2018 for children who are or have been Looked After by the London Borough of Barnet.  Its aim is to help children gain life skills, build relationships and networks, reduce isolation and providing them with the best opportunities possible.  Live Unlimited ensures that all care-experienced children and young people reach their potential and lead happy and fulfilling lives. 

VOLUNTEERING OPPORTUNITIES

“Residents of London Borough of Barnet can also access GROW by volunteering to help grow food and flowers, learn how to farm their own food as well as help with their mental health.  It is available to anyone over the age of 16 years old and takes place on Wednesday morning from 10.00am – 4.00pm.  Wellies, waterproofs, gloves, and tools are also available for volunteers to use. If that is not enticing enough GROW also provides a vegan lunch made from GROW farm produce and offers a 20% discount at their community stall. 

“Adults who need additional support are not forgotten either.  They are invited to volunteer at GROW Friday from 10.00am to 1.00pm.  Volunteers will work in a group of no more than five adults and will get involved in a range of activities that best suit their individual needs and interests.

“Since January 2025, GROW has sown over 25,000 seeds – 1,200 pumpkins, 5,000 leeks and 450 tomatoes and are on target to sow a total of 64,500 seeds by the end of August.  It has sold a half a tonne of food to the community, had 153 people participate in their various programmes and had another 48 volunteers join GROW.” 

For further information, please visit their website:  https://www.wearegrow.org/.  Or if you have any questions or would like to volunteer at GROW please contact:  hello@wearegrow.org

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 — 1 Comment

Work underway to stabilise precarious brickwork in fire-ravaged Hadley Green house before reconstruction starts

A massive crane has been brought in by contractors to help install scaffolding and internal braces to stabilise the walls of a large Georgian house on Hadley Green which was gutted in a disastrous fire over the May bank holiday.

Seventy firefighters supported by ten fire engines fought the blaze at Hollybush House, but the roof collapsed and all that was left was the shell of the Grade II listed building and its chimney stack.

Plans are now being prepared for the repair and restoration of the house, which was built in around 1790 and which the owners say they recognise is an important part of the historic heritage of Monken Hadley.

An application has been submitted to Barnet Council for the post-fire reconstruction, including repairs to the walls, high-level masonry, windows, doors and roofs and the reinstatement of historic stairs and rooms.

Work starts on reconstructing Hollybush House, a Georgian property on Hadley Green which was gutted in dramatic May bank holiday fire.

A report to the council by architects and historic building consultants Donald Insall Associates says masonry at a high level and in some areas at the rear of the property was left structurally unstable and needed to be stabilised.

Work is due to start on the reconstruction in October and should be completed by March 2027.

Because the internal floors and fabric of the building were totally destroyed, the architects say it will only be possible to recreate the original appearance of the house.

The rebuilding would go “as far as it is possible” to restore the significance of the Grade II listed building and its contribution to the character and appearance of the Monken Hadley Conservation Area.

Hollybush House is one of several Grade II-listed buildings along the east side of Hadley Green, including Wilbraham Almshouses and Grandon to the north-

east, and Livingstone Cottage, Monken Cottage, Monkenholt, and Fairholt to the south-west.

The houses along Hadley Green Road are all located within the registered battlefield for the 1471 Battle of Barnet, a defining conflict of the Wars of the Roses.

Hollybush House is described in the consultants’ report as a modest country house formed of an amalgamation of 18th century domestic buildings and later additions.

It is thought that the site began as an early-18th century cottage, which was extended in the late-18th century with a classic Georgian country house façade.

The main house, which retained the majority of the historic features and decoration, suffered the worst damage.

However, there are some surviving historic items – a few sashes, shutters, and doors – which were temporarily removed for repair and refurbishment, but the loss of original historic fabric meant that the significance of the house had been permanently diminished.

Soon after the current owners purchased Hollybush House in 2020, they applied for planning permission to restore the building.

After 18 months of restoration work, which included installing a new roof and windows, the refurbishment was due to have been completed sometime in early 2026 – until fire broke out in one of the rooms in the early hours of Bank holiday Monday and spread to the roof.

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 — 6 Comments

Landing on Barnet Hill soon – unless the Council can be persuaded to refuse it

This development would permanently alter the identity of Chipping Barnet. If approved by the Planning Committee, it would set an extremely damaging precedent for the town centre and neighbouring areas. We have until Friday 19 September to comment on it – see how to do so at the end of this post.

The planning application

Places for London (PfL, a partnership between Transport for London & Barratt London) want to build 283 flats over the whole of the present car park in blocks of 5 to 11 storeys high. You can see the full application at https://publicaccess.barnet.gov.uk/online-applications/ (reference no. 25/2671/FUL).

At a public meeting on 20 March Dan Tomlinson MP was neutral about the scheme, but asked PfL to deliver more benefits for the community. Examples suggested were moving the northbound bus stop closer to Station Approach and providing bus access to the station forecourt. Frustratingly, the application offers only some benches and better lighting to the pedestrian ramp and a couple of extra disabled car bays.

Mr Tomlinson has told the Society that he is reviewing the application and will reassess his position.

The Barnet Society’s response

The Barnet Society strongly objects to the application.

We do so with regret because we respect Barnet’s need for new homes and support good design. We also accept the principle of building at transport hubs, and would welcome improvements to this prominent site.

But the designs submitted are not appropriate for this location. They amount to massive overdevelopment, to the great detriment of the character of Chipping Barnet and with almost no compensating benefits to the local community. Our main objections are summarised below.

An alien imposition

The designs are entirely out of scale and character with our green and historic neighbourhood.

At the top and bottom of Barnet Hill, few buildings exceed three storeys, but those proposed would rise over three times as high. They would totally dominate the existing townscape and greenery that make High Barnet, Underhill and Barnet Vale special. They would break the historic skyline from several viewpoints.

Two of the published visualisations are particularly misleading. View 2 (from Underhill) shows only three of the five blocks. Our own version (above) shows a truer picture.

View 14 (from Pricklers Hill) hides St John the Baptist’s church, which currently dominates the skyline, behind a tree. Below, our version demonstrates how the development would compete with – and detract from – the traditional preeminence of the church.

We do not object to gentle densification of our neighbourhood, but this would be a brutal and irreversible step-change.

It would also be a clear breach of Barnet Council’s own recently-adopted Local Plan, which expressly rules out buildings over 7 storeys at High Barnet Station.

The developers’ claim that ‘the tallest building serves [as] a welcoming and attractive gateway from the Station’ is a sublime example of marketing oversell. The trees lining both sides of Barnet Hill already provide a distinctive and beautiful southern ‘gateway’ to our town. The Station needs no such a grandiose landmark: its reticence is part of its charm.

An unsustainable neighbourhood

The applicants and their designers describe their proposals as an ‘exciting well-connected and highly sustainable residential neighbourhood’ (Planning Statement 2.6). On the contrary, it is disconnected and unsustainable at almost every level.

The constraints of the A1000, Northern Line, TfL structures, unstable geology and sloping topography force the applicants to propose a height and density that would be expensive to build, service and maintain for decades to come.

Squeezed between the busy, noisy and polluted road and railway, the new homes could not economically provide healthy environments internally or externally. The promised Passivhaus standards require levels of construction skill and expenditure that we doubt would be attainable.

Flat layouts are often poor.  Some are only single-aspect and, facing north-east, would have very poor sunlight and natural ventilation. A high proportion face south-west with potential to over-heat in summer. Expensive acoustic mitigation and mechanical ventilation (costly to run) would be necessary.

Only 35% of the total number of flats would be ‘affordable’. No guarantees are provided to restrict buy-to-let or overseas investors. At least some of the flats would probably become over-occupied, resulting in a population of nearly 1,000 with no gardens and minimal amenity space.

It would have a high proportion of children but only token outdoor play space. Outdoor play and social space for older children, young adults and the elderly would be negligible. Family stress would increase.

A truly sustainable scheme would place public health, community energy and low waste at its heart. It would be complemented on-site by a rich range of habitats and community gardening, and supported by excellent public transport connections and cycleways. None of these are on offer. Biodiversity net gain could only be achieved by substantial off-site provision. Residents would lack most of the physical, social and economic infrastructure necessary for a settled, inclusive and intergenerational neighbourhood.

An unsafe environment

We are unconvinced that there would be a net improvement in safety. Removal of all general car parking spaces would increase risks to women and other travellers with concerns for their personal safety, especially in late evening and early morning.

Although the ‘woodland walk’ would get an upgrade, the new recessed benches are likely to encourage misuse. The long and contorted strip between the new flats and the tube tracks would invite anti-social behaviour. With its many dark recesses and corners, the project would rely heavily on CCTV cameras and external lighting to meet Secure by Design standards.

Lack of community benefits

Connectivity between tube, buses, taxis and private vehicles would remain poor. Direct bus access to the Station forecourt is ruled out. TfL make no commitment to moving the northbound bus stop closer, or to a cycle lane on Barnet Hill. Pedestrian and wheelchair accessibility would be only slightly improved. Congestion would worsen.

New demand for local surgeries, nurseries and schools would be significant, with no certainty of the developer’s contribution to meeting it.

Loss of car parking

We are unconvinced by the rationale for removing the car park. The only spaces left would be a few disabled bays and (ironically) those for TfL staff. Yet park-and-ride is an option highly valued by residents on the fringes of Barnet and Hertfordshire and boosts tube use. Without improved public transport and connectivity to the Station consequences would be severe, both for travellers and for residents near the Station.

The inconvenience and distress caused by CPZs has lately been illustrated at Underhill South. Similar protests can be expected from residents in the proposed Zones E (Barnet Lane & Sherrards Way) and F (Meadway, Kingsmead, Potters Lane, Prospect Road, Leicester Road & King Edward Road) as well as others affected in Barnet Vale and parents of pupils at St Catherine’s RC Primary School, many of whom have to drive considerable distances due to its wide catchment area.

Postwar mistakes repeated

The mistakes of postwar estate planning – not least in the nearby Dollis Valley Estate – have been forgotten. If approved, in a few years’ time future Barnet residents, politicians and planners will wonder how this development was allowed to happen.

Above: proposed view from King George’s Fields

How you can comment

Have your say one of these ways:

  1. on the Council’s planning portal (ref. no. 25/2671/FUL) via the Comments tab;
  2. email comments direct to planning.consultation@barnet.gov.uk;
  3. post your comments to the Planning Officer: Sam Gerstein, Planning and Building Control, Barnet Council , 2 Bristol Avenue, Colindale, NW9 4EW.

In the cases of 2 & 3, be sure to include the application reference no. (25/2671/FUL) clearly at the top plus your name, address and postcode.

Increase the effectiveness of your objection by sending a copy of your comments to our MP dan.tomlinson.mp@parliament.uk and to your local Councillors.

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 — 1 Comment

Work well underway on Victoria Quarter flats at New Barnet…but uncertainty over much-used footpath and tunnel

A long-established footpath under the main railway line at New Barnet faces an uncertain future after being deemed unsafe during redevelopment of the former gas works site off Victoria Road.

Victoria Quarter – a massive new complex of 420 flats in eleven blocks of up to eight storeys in height – is rapidly taking shape after finally securing planning approval last year.

Save New Barnet mounted a sustained campaign to try to ensure improvements and safeguards during lengthy appeals and legal challenges over a succession of applications to develop the vacant site which lies between the main line and Victoria Park recreation ground and leisure centre.

Developers Citystyle Fairview promised that as part of the scheme it would install a well-lit new footpath to a tunnel which provides a right way connecting Victoria Park and its surrounding roads with streets on the other side of the main line around Cromer Road and Tudor Park.

But there is uncertainty now because Network Rail has detected structural faults in the railway embankment and tunnel which forced the closure of the footpath last year soon after construction work started.

East Barnet councillor Simon Radford (above) has taken up complaints made by residents and the Save New Barnet campaign about the continued closure of the existing overhead walkway leading to the tunnel, and the resulting loss of a much-used public right of way.

“Unfortunately, there is no indication yet as to what work is needed to stabilise the embankment and tunnel or how much it will cost,” said Councillor Radford.

“The footpath should have re-opened in July. We hope it might be sorted out by the end of the year, but who knows now.”

At his request there will be regular joint meetings between Network Rail, Fairview and Barnet Council and he has promised to keep the community informed.

“The trouble will probably be sorting out who should pay for any remedial work that is needed to the tunnel.

“Clearly the developers have a responsibility as they promised a new footpath, but it is complicated now Network Rail and Barnet Council are involved.”

The uncertainty has been criticised by John Dix of the Save New Barnet campaign who agreed with Councillor Radford that the re-opening of the footpath might take “significantly longer” than the target date of November.

“Apparently the embankment is already subject to cracking and instability at track level, and this has necessitated a redesign of the works.

“Sadly, this is something we specifically warned the council about before they granted permission to close the public right of way, but when do they ever listen to residents.”

The frontage to the Victoria Quarter redevelopment off Albert Road has been transformed by the completion of the new Park Quarter flats which front on to Victoria Road. Many are now fully occupied.

A start has already been made to marketing homes in the larger Victoria Quarter complex – as seen in the image above from the housing association Sovereign Network Group which is promoting the sale of some of the flats on a shared ownership basis.

SNG, which started promotion in June of the sale of a group of 22 one-, two- and three-bedroom flats in an area to be known as Quartoria, says that priority for the shared-ownership homes will be given to people who live or work in Barnet.

Its website says that based on a 25 per cent shared ownership one-bedroom apartments will be available from £91,250; two-bedroom from £113,750; and three-bedroom from £142,500.

There will be one parking space per apartment, either off-street or under croft parking.

There has been a succession of applications to redevelop the cleared site of the former New Barnet gas works in a long-running saga dating back over 16 years.

Residents and amenity group mounted fierce opposition fearing developers would cram in too many high-rise blocks.

It started when ASDA dropped their 2008 plan to build a new supermarket on the 7.5-acre site.

In 2017 approval was given for 317 flats but this was increased to 652 in a subsequent application proposing ten-storey blocks.

After local criticism this was reduced to 554 and finally Citystyle Fairview gained permission last year for 420 flats in blocks ranging from four to eight storeys with an undertaking to ensure the “removal of the existing elevated footbridge (leading to the tunnel) and creation of new pedestrian routes”.

A separate development is proposed by Berkeley Homes for the northern section of the gasworks site.

Victoria Quarter complex of 420 flats in New Barnet is well underway but residents fear for future of pedestrian tunnel under main railway line.

Late last year, it unveiled a plan to build 200 homes – a scheme which would result in the demolition of the 90-year-old gasometer, a well-known local landmark.

National Grid Property Holdings said the 38-metre-high frame of what was originally known as a column guided gasholder had “no particular historic or architectural merit” and “little, if any heritage value”.

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 — 3 Comments

Bees stay in Hive for now: Council rejects Barnet FC plans for new Underhill stadium

A 100+ crowd packed planning committee rooms at Barnet Town Hall last night for the big match – Barnet Football Club v defenders of Barnet Playing Fields, the proposed site of a new 7,000-seat stadium. After more than two hours of impassioned debate, the result was announced: 6-0 against the Bees.

Barnet FC left its traditional home turf at Underhill for The Hive in Harrow in 2013, selling its site for the Ark Pioneer academy. Ever since, fans have pined for its return to the Borough, and the Club’s recent promotion to English Football League 2 has exacerbated pressures on The Hive. Design began on a new stadium, culminating last December in the outline planning application that was now to be determined by Barnet’s Strategic Planning Committee (visualisation by And Architects below).

There have been vigorous campaigns both for and against the proposal. Barnet FC’s Bring Barnet Back (BBB) claimed 9,500+ supporters. Save Barnet Playing Fields (SBPF – see photograph above) asserted that 90% of local residents opposed the development, and CPRE London said that almost 19,000 had signed a petition against it. The Council received 1,274 online comments plus 72 letters supporting the proposal (35%), as against 1,162 online and about 1,308 paper objections to it (64%). The numbers can be disputed, but division was clearly deep.

The Planning Officer’s report, which recommended refusal, ran to 120 pages – unusually thorough for a project of this size. For comparison, the report last year on the Whalebones application was a mere 103 pages. It reflected local sensitivity, especially around development in the Green Belt. As Committee Chairman Councillor Nigel Young noted, approval could set a precedent for building on other Barnet green spaces.

The significance of the matter was demonstrated by no fewer than five local politicians addressing the meeting in person (in addition to the nine Councillors on the Committee itself). Cllrs Zahra Beg (Underhill), Paul Edwards (High Barnet), David Longstaff (Barnet Vale) and London Assembly Member Anne Clarke all wished to see Barnet FC return to the Borough, but opposed a stadium on Barnet Playing Fields. Only Cllr Tim Roberts supported it.

They were followed by Robert Verrall representing opponents of the scheme, and by Ian Botterill and Sean McGrath representing BBB and the Club’s design team respectively.

All spoke with passion, occasionally interrupted by bursts of audience applause and heckling despite the Chairman’s repeated requests for quiet.

Committee members then discussed the proposal between themselves. Most reiterated support for Barnet FC’s return, just not to this particular location. Several called for consideration of alternative sites, but as the Chairman pointed out, the Committee could only decide on the application in front of them.

In the end, the outcome was decisive. Three members abstained but the others were unanimous in denying planning permission.Their key reasons for refusal were that

‘the proposed development would result in substantial and irreversible harm to the openness and function of the Green Belt, and…the applicant has failed to demonstrate the very special circumstances necessary to justify such harm. The proposal would also result in the loss of valued public open space…’

Other reasons for refusal were insufficient information to safeguard protected species; insufficient information on archaeology; inadequate assessment of on-street parking impacts; unacceptable site access and junction design; and lack of a Section 106 Agreement (detailing the applicant’s financial contribution towards community infrastructure costs).

Barnet Society position

Consultation with our members last February indicated that they were roughly evenly split over the scheme.

Our Committee agreed that we wholeheartedly support the principle of Barnet FC returning closer to its historic roots. And a building and landscape design of exceptional quality could enhance Barnet Playing Fields, which make only a limited contribution to local biodiversity and are little used for sport. But we had severe reservations about key aspects of the Club’s case with regard to the Green Belt and the environment; transport and parking; community uses and benefits; and economic value.

We therefore took a neutral stance but submitted detailed comments that you can read on our website.

What will happen next?

Barnet FC has the right to appeal to the Planning Inspectorate against the Council’s refusal, but its chances of overturning the decision are not great – and will involve yet more expense.

A better way forward would be to build on the constructive discussions that its team held with the Barnet Society and Barnet Residents Association, and to engage more closely with the Council and other stakeholders about alternative sites.

Although disappointed, Bees fans remain defiant. As BBB organiser Keith Doe (seen below with Ian Botterill) said after the meeting, ‘One way or another, we’ll bring Barnet back!’

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 — 8 Comments

With a decision likely within weeks, BringBarnetBack step up their campaign for Barnet Football Club to return to Underhill

In advance of a key meeting which campaigners understand will be held in mid-July, BringBarnetBack have launched a last-minute appeal to Barnet Council to give the go-ahead for a new football stadium at Underhill.

From their own extensive soundings, they believe that there is a 50/50 chance of the council’s strategic planning committee granting planning approval for a 7,000-seat stadium at Barnet Playing Fields.

If the application is rejected, they are confident that the club will launch an appeal and they think it could become a test case in the push by the government to free up some Green Belt land for redevelopment.

However, BringBarnetBack warn that if the playing fields are redesignated as Grey Belt and freed for development, there is a danger the open space might be lost to make way for new housing.

At issue is the argument between many local residents who want to preserve the playing fields as a vital open space and Barnet FC supporters who are fully behind the offer of the club chairman Tony Kleanthous to move the club from The Hive at Harrow to a new £14 million stadium at Underhill.

BringBarnetBack have issued a 14-page dossier examining the arguments for and against the application which ends with a plea to the council to vote for a project that would be a sustainable development; enhance the surrounding Green Belt land; and bring back a football club that has “never stopped believing in coming home”.

(Bring Barnet Back – The Case http://eepurl.com/jhcTaU )

The proposed stadium would take up 22 per cent of the southern section of the playing fields – see above – which BringBarnetBack argue is in effect a “de-facto abandoned field with a monoculture of weeds and grass”.

Campaigners have visited the site at “hundreds of different times and in all weather conditions and claim there were “no people” on the proposed site, beyond the odd dog and its owner.

They believe the case for it becoming the new home of Barnet FC is strengthened by the fact that under a previous plan Barnet Council had proposed redeveloping the playing fields with a new 10,000 square foot destination sports hub that would have included two multi-purpose activity spaces, a cafe, six changing rooms and 55 new car parking spaces.

Because of severe funding restraints the council has not proceeded with its own plan and the reality is that all these facilities – and more – could be included in the new Barnet FC stadium “at no cost to the council”.

 Included in the new stadium would be medical facilities, which could be used by NHS patients; new public toilets which could encourage more use of the existing children’s playground and basketball courts; and community space for local food hubs and other charitable organisations.

One issue not addressed in the BringBarnetBack dossier is the wider use of the playing fields for large public events.

Last minute appeal by BringBarnetBack campaign to persuade Barnet Council to give go ahead for a new football stadium at Barnet Playing Fields

In May the playing fields hosted a five-day visit by Zippos Circus and other events are planned for later in the summer.

Organisers who have previously presented music and community festivals at other nearby sites such as Trent Park and Oak Hill Park, are switching to the playing fields at Underhill because of what they say is excellent access to public transport.

Other events being advertised at the playing fields are the Eagle Festival of Music over the weekend of June 21-22; the Ghana Party in the Park festival and the Mauritius open air festival which will be staged separately on the Saturday and Sunday of July 12 and July 13.

BringBarnetBack underline the urgency of the application: currently Barnet FC is loss-making and kept afloat at Harrow by Mr Kleanthous who is “willing to subsidise the club at a personal loss”.

Since moving to The Hive from Underhill in 2013 the club has lost between 25 per cent and 30 per cent of its core support and despite its promotion to the League Two of the English Football League, Barnet’s future is “unsustainable away from its home”.

Securing a return to Underhill – its home of 107 years — represents in planning terms “very special circumstances” to justify building a stadium on Green Belt land.

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

Community gardens developed over 70 years ago together with meadows and hedgerows are now a wildlife haven

Tucked away at a wildlife site in the Barnet green belt is an enchanting array of community gardens which were developed in the 1950s, and which played a part in the early development of organic gardening.

Brookdale Wildlife Garden Community was established in 1951 when a group of a wartime allotment holders from Islington secured the lease of a ten-acre field on farmland owned by the Byng family at Wrotham Park.

Together with her friends who were also keen gardeners, Hilda Brooke, had grown fruit and vegetables on Hampstead Heath on what were known as “Dig for Victory” allotments.

When Hampstead Heath was reinstated after World War Two, they had to find a new site.

They moved to Barnet with the help and support of the Soil Association which was founded in 1946 to campaign for sustainable food production because of concern about the impact of intensive farming and resulting soil erosion and depletion.

An entire ten-acre field – which had formed part of a wartime decoy airfield to the north of Barnet — was leased to the exiled group of gardeners by Lady Elizabeth Byng for a first annual rent of £20.

Today, rather than concentrating on cultivation of produce, the Brookdale plot holders cherish their cluster of community gardens which have become a haven for wildlife.

Their individual gardens, community meadows and an ancient hedgerow — which are a designated wildlife site and are protected by an area tree preservation order — were visited recently (see above) by members of the Barnet Environment Centre who maintain the nature reserve in Byng Road.

During a tour of the gardens, they admired several of the small clay-lined ponds which are ideal for aquatic plants, attract dragon flies and provide a home for among others for frogs and great crested newts.  

After so many years of care and attention each plot is distinctive and in the case of Michael Bruce – who has the distinction of being Brookdale’s longest tenant – his garden is a much-cherished refuge from the hustle and bustle of everyday life in Islington.

Michael has a much-loved summer house, well-tended borders and numerous features which he has developed during 33 years at Brookdale.

An archway at the end of his plot looks out onto a community meadow. Just visible in the far distance is an obelisk, which Michael made from wood and which he brings in each winter to avoid unnecessary wear and tear during bad weather.

Christine Klein, who is a member of the Barnet Society and has been a plot holder since 2017, enjoys her personal haven of tranquillity and encourages the growth of wildflowers and shrubs.

“Unfortunately, I find it too difficult to grow vegetables. We get rabbits, muntjac and foxes visiting the plots and it would be hard work keeping them at bay.”

Just a step away from one of the community meadows is a former World War Two control bunker, a relic of the days when the site was a one of the decoy airfields intended to attract enemy bombers destined for the RAF Fighter Station at Northolt.

John Nicholls, a former vice chair of the group’s organising committee, seen above with his daughter Becky Nicholls, Brookdale’s membership secretary, said the bunker would have been a centre of operations for the decoy airfield.

“Dummy planes and painted canvases would have been laid out on the grass. We know that at night there were lights laid out to make it look like a landing strip.

“One story which we have been told is that the Germans found out it was a dummy airfield and even dropped a wooden bomb on the field to let everyone know.”

An official history of the decoy airfields says that the fuselages of about half a dozen Hurricanes mounted on wheels and with engines removed were used at Barnet.

Airmen moved about the field periodically at night riding bicycles fitted with lights to imitate aircraft movements.

Wartime gardeners from Hampstead Heath set up a group of community gardens at Barnet in the early 1950s which are now a wildlife haven.

The challenge today for Becky Nicholls is to ensure the long-term future of their garden community after all the efforts over the years by her father and her mother Anna (above).

Whatever the pressures might be on the green belt, the group believe their wildlife credentials and charitable status should give them an assured future.

Brookdale was awarded “wildlife site” status within the Hertsmere local development plan in 1997 and the gardens are covered by an area tree protection order.    

Currently Brookdale has 60 full members and eight associates.    

“We are open to new members and in recent years more of the plots have been taken by people living in and around Barnet,” said Becky.

“This does ensure the gardens are used more regularly than is sometimes the case with those members who still live in Islington or further afield.

“We are happy to welcome volunteers, especially young people doing the Duke of Edinburgh award scheme, to help with the management of the habitat which takes a lot of effort.”

For further information contact Becky Nicholls at email bmnicholls101@gmail.com        

Posted on by — 1 Comment

Amid East Barnet’s Edwardian houses is an amazing new self-build home – an ideal solution for downsizing to a smaller property

Being able to downsize to a smaller property – and a chance to stay in the same locality – is an aspiration shared by many of the established residents who have homes in and around High Barnet.

Kathryn Finlayson, a long-time resident of East Barnet, has pulled off this feat in style.

She has moved to a new, smaller, eco-friendly house which is next door to what had been a family home for 60 years, midway between Church Hill Road and Oakleigh Park Station.

She readily acknowledges her good fortune.

Kathryn did have a house to sell and space alongside large enough for a new architect-designed property complete with a bedroom, living area and the facilities she needs all on the ground floor, with two bedrooms above.

Her achievement, at the age of 83, has won national acclaim.

Her ambitious, high spec self-build won glowing praise from television presenter Kevin McCloud when he visited the house for his programme Grand Designs, which was followed by an expansive feature spread in House Beautiful.

Kathryn decided to see if she could downsize – and still live nearby – after the death of her husband Jon, who was a prominent East Barnet architect.

He designed St John’s United Reform Church at the corner of Somerset and Mowbray Roads, New Barnet, which was opened in 1968 and won a Civic Trust award.

“After Jon died in 2022, I decided with the family to see if we could build a new house on our plot next door.

“Our family house was too big for me, expensive to run, and needed a lot of improvement like a new boiler and electrics.

“Jon had built a music room on the plot, and I knew it was big enough for a house as developers searching Google earth were always wanting to buy it.”

Kathryn’s son introduced her to architect James Mak who came up with the idea of a living area and bedroom on one level with two bedrooms above for family members.

“His drawings and design for the house were lovely. It seemed like the dream solution as I would end up living in the same street in a new super-efficient, low-cost home.”

Built London Ltd started construction in September 2023 and Kathryn moved in in November last year.

“Here I am living in an ideal position close to so many friends, near the station, and just a short walk to East Barnet village and lots of bus routes, which will be so important if I have to give up my car.”

The construction costs of over £800,000 were met from the sale of the family home next door, a four-bedroom Edwardian house built in 1908.

Kathryn was rather pensive for a moment when asked whether the whole exercise had all been a little daunting for an 80-year-old.

“Yes, I would do it again. The new house is so well insulated, with triple-glazed windows, and the energy use is so much more efficient, and I am delighted with the result.

“Perhaps if I was starting out again, I would think carefully as to whether it should all have been to such high spec.

“But then I did want it all to be as eco-friendly as possible and to save what material we could from Jon’s music room.

“He put down a wonderful elm floor and that wood has been used again in fitting out the kitchen and in building a new bookcase so that gives me real pleasure.”

Down sizing to a smaller eco-friendly property has been achieved in style by long-standing East Barnet resident still in same street after 60 years.

“I suppose my experience is an example as to how it is possible to downsize if you are fortunate enough to already own a property which can be sold to finance a new build.”

“I never thought we would attract the attention of Grand Designs but appearing on television has really raised my profile.

“I am very amused by the number of people who now say, ‘I’ve seen you on tv’ and who like to stand and admire the house.”

Posted on by — 2 Comments

Summer events planned at Barnet playing fields at Underhill include a circus and music and community festivals   

Zippos Circus will be at Barnet playing fields for five days in mid-May – one of several attractions to be staged this summer at a much-prized open space where Barnet Football Club has applied to build a new stadium.

Organisers who have previously presented music and community festivals at other nearby sites such as Trent Park and Oak Hill Park, are switching to the playing fields at Underhill because of what they say is excellent access to public transport.

Other events already being advertised at the playing fields for later in the summer are the Eagle Festival of music over the weekend of June 21-22; the Ghana Party in the Park festival and the Mauritius open air festival which will be staged separately on the Saturday and Sunday of July 12 and July 13.

So far there is no indication when Barnet Council will make a decision on the application to build a new football stadium at Underhill.

Opinion is divided with Bring Barnet Back campaigning for the club’s return but with equally strong opposition being voiced by those against the loss of such a large open space which is within the Green Belt and beside the Dollis Valley green walk.

Barnet Playing Fields to host summer events including a circus, music festival and community fairs

The potential appeal of the playing fields as a location for music festivals and large community events might well be one of the considerations that the planners take into account when deciding whether the site should be redeveloped.

Advertisements promoting events at Underhill – previously held at Trent Park and Oak Hill Park – say the playing fields off Barnet Lane are an ideal location with excellent public transport nearby including eight bus routes, High Barnet tube station and New Barnet rail station.  

Zippos Circus is currently touring locations in and around London with its new show Bravo!

It will be at Acton Green from April 30 to May 6 and East Ham from May 9 to May 12 before moving to Barnet Playing Fields for five days – May 15 to 19.

The Eagle Festival (June 21-22, from 12noon to 10pm) is billed as a two-day celebration of “music, community and unforgettable events” with 20 “incredible artists”.

Facilities installed at the playing fields for the weekend of July 12 and 13 are to be shared between the Ghana Party in the Park on the Saturday (12noon to 8pm) and the Mauritius Open Air Festival on the Sunday.

The Ghana Party claims to be the biggest gathering of Ghanaians in the diaspora and attracts support from across the UK and Europe.

The Mauritius Open Air Festival offers the best of “Mauritius culture, music and flavour”.

Posted on by

Changing face of Barnet town centre with refurbishment of historic premises and creation of flats above High Street shops

Planning applications have been approved for changes to several of the iconic buildings at the historic heart of High Barnet’s conservation area.

Work is to start in late April on a “makeover” at the town’s oldest coaching inn, The Mitre.

Further up the High Street, closer to the town centre, approval has been given to build a flat above the traditional sweet shop, Hopscotch.

Work has already started converting the first and second floors of the former Barnet Press office – now a Costa Coffee shop – into five self-contained flats.

Refurbishment of the Costa Coffee premises has also resulted – at long last — in the clock at the front of the building telling the right time.

Another very noticeable change is at the Mama Fifi restaurant — at the entrance to The Spires shopping centre – which is now resplendent with a full-length spring display of Sicilian lemon blossom.

Hopscotch, a single-storey shop constructed in the 1930s, is like a missing tooth along the High Street but, under a design approved by the council, the gap – as seen above – would be filled by the addition of a one-bedroom home over the sweet shop.

Simon Kaufman Architects say the scheme has been carefully designed to preserve the character of the Wood Street Conservation Area and will provide a high-quality living space above the existing retail unit.

The project embraces a lightweight construction approach with only minimal internal strengthening to provide “a cost-effective and sustainable alternative to rebuilding from scratch” which is in full compliance with heritage and conservation policies.

Michael and Alice Kentish, proprietors of Hopscotch, say they are thrilled that planning approval had been given as they believe providing homes above High Street shops is one way of revitalising town centres.

“There are so many under-developed properties along Barnet High Street and there is so much residential accommodation which could be provided within existing buildings.

“What we need is for the government and Barnet Council to adopt a regime which encourages the use of empty space above shops. It would provide much needed homes and help increase business along the High Street.”

Hopscotch and its rear garden are a designated area of archaeological significance as the previous medieval buildings on the site formed part of the narrow street of shops and inns beside Barnet Parish Church which was known as The Squeeze.

Until its demolition in 1933 – and the construction of the present single-storey shop – 88 High Street was a Dutch-style timber building with a gabled façade and distinctive Oriel windows.

Work has already started on the refurbishment of the upper floors of the Costa Coffee shop which will provide five self-contained flats.

P2M Coffee, which has the High Barnet franchise, says the frontage of the building will be repainted. It promised that the clock, which dates back to the days when it was the home of the Barnet Press, would be repaired as soon as scaffolding was in place to allow access for a clock repairer.

True to their word, the clock was telling the right time within days — although when this picture was taken, the clock face, just visible behind the scaffolding, was still stuck at 12.34 as it had been for several years!

What is described by brewers Greene King as a “makeover” to give The Mitre a “fresh look” will result in the pub being closed from Monday 28 April to Friday 23 May.

Several suggestions made by the Barnet Society regarding the refurbishment were accepted by Greene King and the company’s willingness to engage with local groups was welcomed by Robin Bishop who leads for the society on planning and the environment.

Etched glass bay windows which were going to be removed will now be retained. Although only 20th century, the etched glass is attractive in its own right and illustrates the “fascinating evolution of High Barnet’s oldest inn”.

An investigation to date the timbers in the ceiling and roof has now been conducted by Historic England. If the tests indicate the timbers date from around 1360 — similar to those discovered in the neighbouring building, Elisana Florist — it could be that together with the Mitre, they represent the oldest group of timber-framed buildings in London, predating Westminster Hall.

Enfield and Barnet Campaign for Real Ale has announced that The Mitre has been voted pub of the year for 2025 – and will present the award in May.

Mama Fifi restaurant – which won the 2024 prize for the best High Barnet Christmas window competition – is again attracting plaudits for its latest display.

Mural artist Alessandra Tortone has decorated the side windows in the entrance to The Spires shopping centre with a spring design of Sicilian lemon blossom.

Alessendra is seen with her team after the competition of the mural – from left to right, Alessandra, Roberta Piras, Kateryna Vilkul, and Radhika Ganapathe Ulluru.

Posted on by — 3 Comments

 Emerging from behind hoardings on the Great North Road will be new premises for what is said to be Barnet’s oldest cafe

Barnet’s popular roadside cafe, The Hole in the Wall, will have a prominent position on the Great North Road (A1000) if Barnet Council approves plans for redevelopment of the Meadow Works industrial estate at Pricklers Hill.

Instead of being hidden behind a line of hoardings, the cafe would be at the road frontage a new self-storage depot which will replace a group of workshops and other industrial and commercial premises.

An application by Compound Real Estate to regenerate the Meadow Works site with what it says will be a state-of-the-art self-storage facility, co-working spaces, and new premises for the Hole in the Wall Cafe, is now open for comment on the council’s planning website.

Support for the project has been indicated by the Barnet Society.

Robin Bishop, lead on planning and the environment, described the contemporary style of the new structure as “refreshingly restrained” for a self-storage facility, which was “nicely landscaped” along the A1000.

Although the original Meadow Works, midway between High Barnet and Whetstone – which started life as the Meadow Hand Laundry – was of historical interest, the society welcomed the improvement the project would deliver to the Pricklers Hill neighbourhood.

In seeking planning approval, Compound Real Estate say the replacement of a cluster of ageing and dilapidated light industrial buildings with a new self-storage facility and flexible co-working spaces will support local small businesses and entrepreneurs.

It calculates that the scheme will support the creation of up to 140 local jobs and deliver an annual financial uplift of £2.4 million to the local economy.

Compound say their scheme reflects the interests of surrounding residents and businesses by “replacing low-quality, temporary structures with a high-quality permanent development that addresses ground contamination, improves safety and enhances the environment.”

One immediate improvement for nearby residents will be the closure of the Dale Close access to Meadow Works, removing commercial service vehicles, to create a residential cul-de-sac.

Residents and interested parties can comment on the application until late April via the council’s planning portal (planning reference 25/1262/FUL) or by emailing planning.consultation@barnet.gov.uk

Planning application for new self-storage facility on Great North Road now open for comments on Barnet Council website

Kevin Callaghan, owner of the Hole in the Wall – established in 1935 as a popular stop off for traffic heading out of London — says he is delighted that the cafe will have a new permanent home.

“This is a real vote of confidence in small, local businesses. The site needs to be regenerated, and it is great that Meadow Works will be given a new lease of life.”

The switch to a self-storage depot was welcomed by the former owners of Meadow Works, James and Duncan Morris.

“We are pleased that the site will continue its industrial heritage and continue to support small and medium enterprises within Barnet.”

Jo Winter, development manager at Compound which specialises in developing and operating self-storage facilities integrated with co-working light industrial, said the company was committed to working with the local community and Barnet Council.

Posted on by — 2 Comments

Transport for London grilled at public meeting on its proposals for High Barnet Station car park

Chipping Barnet constituents filled most of the pews in St John the Baptist’s Church on Thursday evening, 20 March 2025, to tell Transport for London (TfL) what they thought about their proposal to build 300 flats next to High Barnet Station. After a passionate and occasionally acrimonious meeting, the TfL team will have no illusions about local opposition to their development. But the audience were also left in no doubt that – barring unforeseen constructional challenges or political events – we have little chance of securing more than a few tweaks to the design of the buildings or their outdoor spaces.

The plans were exhibited for public consultation at the end of February and presented at a TfL webinar on 4 March. They can be viewed online here, as can the Barnet Society’s response to them.

Dan Tomlinson MP called this meeting on The future of High Barnet station car park to give residents another chance to ask questions and pass their comments on the scheme directly to the developers. These are TfL’s property company Places for London and their house-building partner Barratt London. Patrick Clark headed their panel, which included members of their design team.

Opening the meeting, Mr Tomlinson explained that he himself is neutral about the scheme. Barnet’s recently adopted Local Plan designates the site for 292 homes, and the Labour Government and Mayor of London are committed to delivering much-needed new housing. If the Council refuses the scheme it will go to the Planning Inspectorate, who are almost certain to approve it.

But Mr Tomlinson wanted to ensure that, if it is approved by Barnet’s planning committee, the developers will have listened directly to people who live in Chipping Barnet, and the designs made as good as they can be. As an example, he pointed to the public footpath ramp that he has insisted must be improved with better lighting and benches. He also said that TfL has agreed in principle to move the northbound bus stop closer to Station Approach.

During a brief overview of the scheme by Patrick Clark, the mood of the audience quickly became apparent. His remark, ‘This will be a car-free scheme’ was greeted by hollow laughter and his promise of ‘four drop-off points’ by ironic applause.

Mr Tomlinson then invited questions from the audience around three topics: transport and connectivity, the design (particularly its height) and other issues including car parking.

A question about the impact of building work on the neighbourhood was answered by reassurance that a Construction Management Plan would be agreed with the Council, and that ‘just-in-time’ management of construction vehicles would minimise disruption. The added difficulties if Barnet Football Club stadium is built nearby at the same time were not addressed, however.

Members of the audience commented that the six proposed Blue Badge bays are not enough for current, let alone future, needs.

The panel was asked where residents of new flats will park. The reply that they will not be allowed to apply for Resident Parking Permits did not go down well.

A questioner noted that the Northern Line links High Barnet to many hospitals, and many nurses and other staff members use the tube early or return late after night shifts. Women in particular need the security of using their own cars at those times of the day. 

Another questioner deplored TfL’s reluctance to embrace any of the wider opportunities offered by the project such as improving cycling experience and safety.

Gordon Massey asserted that the current proposals ‘will take us back to 1872’ when there was no car park. It was in 1934 that the Barnet Residents Association first called for the lack of a bus stop on the station forecourt to be remedied.

A member of the audience speculated that TfL’s ruling out of buses on the station forecourt was driven not so much by technical constraints but by their wish to protect the bus schedules. That prompted a burst of clapping.

An even bigger round of applause followed another speaker’s observation that ‘It’s clear to me that this is a done deal.’

Regarding design, Mr Tomlinson and others pointed out that the Local Plan states that seven storeys is the maximum height for this location in Barnet. The planning consultant on the panel replied that London Plan Policy D9 allows greater height if certain criteria are satisfied.

There was universal agreement that TfL’s team must supply visualisations to prove their contention that the buildings would not interrupt key views. Mr Tomlinson strongly supported this request.

Katy Staton, a landscape architect, said the drawings were not adequate for this stage; more detail is essential. She also asked if the designs take into account the new building safety requirements such as for two staircases. The panel’s architect assured everyone that the buildings would comply with the latest Building Regulations.

Under other matters, a questioner asked what would be done to relieve pressure on local services. Mr Tomlinson said that he had already asked the Council for, and had been given, data on pupil numbers and the ability of local schools to accommodate them. Due mainly to the decline in the local birth-rate, there would be spare capacity. He reminded the audience that the Government is already investing heavily in the NHS. He is in regular dialogue with local GPs and assured us that additional funding would be available. If health services don’t improve by the next election, he quipped, ‘I’m a goner’.

Another questioner was worried about the safety risks to the 200 or so children likely to be living in the flats, especially from vehicles, since the plans showed no provision for emergency access, deliveries or visitors.

Nick Saul, a retired civil engineer, drew the panel’s attention to the fact that most of Barnet hillside was an artificial construct, and that the best structural advice should be obtained before a final commitment was made to proceed with the project.

The biggest boo of the evening followed a comment from the floor that TfL had admitted that a proportion of the flats could be sold to overseas investors. But 90 minutes was up and no time was left for a satisfactory answer to this or many other questions, though Mr Tomlinson invited the audience to let him know about any other concerns.

Additional reporting by Frances Wilson

Posted on by — 2 Comments

The designs for High Barnet Station car park are entirely out of scale and character with our neighbourhood. In return for such disruption, we deserve an accessible and environmentally enhancing transport hub

Following the recent public consultation about proposals for this highly prominent site, Dan Tomlinson MP is holding a meeting for residents to share their thoughts with the landowner, Transport for London (TfL), at 7pm on Thursday 20 March.

Chipping Barnet constituents can register here. Registered attendees will receive details of the location 24 hours before the event.

The designs exhibited earlier this month are still vague in important respects, but at present our community stands to gain very little from such a disruptive development. The Barnet Society has submitted the comments below to the developers, Places for London & Barratt London, on the issues that matter most to us.

Scale and character

The designs are entirely out of scale and character with our green and historic neighbourhood. At the top and bottom of Barnet Hill, few buildings exceed three storeys, but the new ones would rise over three times as high. They would totally dominate the existing townscape and greenery that makes High Barnet, Underhill and Barnet Vale special.

The use of red brick throughout is misplaced respect for local precedents. Queen Elizabeth’s Girls’ School, the Old Courthouse and Tudor Hall are dainty in contrast to the giant scale of the proposed buildings. Less uniform colour might lessen their overbearing impact.

Massing

The 8 & 10-storey blocks proposed contradict Barnet Council’s new Local Plan regarding tall buildings, which indicates a maximum height of seven storeys for this location. Therefore those proposed are too tall, and if approved, the Local Plan would fail at its first test.

While there could be a case for a larger building at the foot of the hill, alongside the railway bridge that already provides a ‘gateway’ to Barnet Hill, we are opposed to anything so tall as being proposed at the northern end of the site, where it would be visible from the historic town centre, the Green Belt of the Dollis valley and elsewhere.

Access

As a development led by TfL, which has direct interests in both the site and the transport and highway arrangements immediately outside it, it is reasonable for the local community to expect an exemplary and holistic approach to the designs worthy of the 21st century.

Considering the size and location of the development and its potential to enhance the neighbourhood, more must be done to remove danger and improve pedestrian and wheelchair connectivity between the tube, buses, taxis and private vehicles. Outside the station building itself, High Barnet is one of the least accessible stations on the network. The nearest southbound bus stop is more than 100 metres away, and the northbound bus (including ones to Barnet Hospital) double that – both up steep pedestrian slopes with narrow footways and problems crossing Barnet Hill.

We have been shown no evidence that buses cannot divert into the station forecourt, as they sometimes do at Finchley Central. The new bus lanes in the Lower High Street will speed up bus travel. Bus-activated traffic lights at the new Barnet Hill/A1000 pedestrian crossing could obviate the need for northbound buses to wait to cross. At the very least, a northbound stop must be provided as close as possible to Station Approach (i.e. the southern vehicle ramp). For certain services e.g. the 234 & 384, an additional step-free stop should be provided on the station forecourt.

Despite the proposed new pedestrian crossing lower down Barnet Hill, access to and from Greenhill Parade and Station Road would be tortuous and frustrating. The distance to bus stops would be especially so for residents at the southern end of the development wanting to reach shops and services in New Barnet, Whetstone and Finchley.

Car parking

We are unconvinced by the rationale for removing the car park leaving only disabled parking. Many Barnet residents, and those in nearby Hertfordshire, live far from a tube or railway station. There are many reasons why people will continue to drive to the station in the future, particularly as this is the end of the line where people come from further afield. Maybe they would or should use buses instead, but front door-to-station door trip time can exceed an hour so this is not realistic in many cases.

The car park at the station allows interchange between different transport modes, and discourages people driving further into London (and taking advantage of cheaper travel zones). Without it, many vehicles will be displaced onto local residential streets, despite the proposed CPZs, or will add pressure to existing town car parks.

Abolition of commuter parking is also likely to lead to more dropping off, waiting and picking-up on an access road already congested at peak times.

Lack of spaces for residents, visitors and 24/7 deliveries would exacerbate this. National guidelines are that 300 new flats would generate an additional 18 parking spaces.

For these reasons we are surprised that proposals did not include a reduced car park, for example in a semi-basement underneath the flats, as has been provided at Colindale and elsewhere in both Barnet and across London.

Housing mix and quality

We need clarity on the mix of housing size and tenure types, their internal planning, aspect and measures to combat noise, poor air quality and overheating.

We also wish to see more detailed floor plans, building sections and landscape proposals to enable us to assess the quality of the development as a whole and its connectivity with neighbouring streets and local amenities. This information also needs to show how a good range of outdoor play would be possible for children of all ages and abilities, that any potential risk of harm to health and safety caused by the electricity transformer in the centre of the site will be adequately mitigated, and that the outdoor realm on the trackside of the housing blocks would not be conducive to anti-social behaviour.

Finally, TfL’s admission (in their 4 March webinar) that overseas marketing of units has not been ruled out undermines a fundamental justification for the development: London’s dire housing needs.

Conclusion

We are unconvinced that this project is economically and socially viable. It is halfway up the steep and unstable Barnet Hill, and based on the Barnet Society’s knowledge of the geology of the area, we do not feel adequate engineering infrastructure has been accounted for.

The housing is also squeezed between the noisy, polluted railway line and the equally polluted Great North Road, meaning that the scheme would offer an unhealthy built environment with unacceptable access for residents and station users alike. 

The prospect of new shops and cafés by the station is unfortunately belied by the decades of economic precarity of similar businesses in the Lower High Street. The investment would be better spent reviving existing premises.

We should also point out that if the current planning application for a new Barnet FC stadium is approved, there could be an unacceptable increase in construction traffic on roads in and around the town centre.

Unless the above matters can be addressed, at present the Barnet Society is minded to oppose the proposals.

Posted on by — 6 Comments

The Barnet Society supports Barnet FC returning closer to its historic roots. But we have severe reservations about aspects of the Club’s case

We wholeheartedly support the principle of Barnet Football Club returning closer to its historic roots, and we can see some potential benefits for Chipping Barnet as well as the Club. But we have severe reservations about key aspects of the Club’s case.

We’ve submitted our comments on the Club’s outline planning application to Barnet Council planners, and you can read a slightly abbreviated version below. We’ve focused on four key aspects of the Club’s case: Green Belt and environment, transport and parking, community benefit and economic value.

Green Belt and environment

We oppose building on the Green Belt as a matter of principle. Numerous Green Belt sites in our area have recently been, or currently are, threatened by development. For the Council to approve such a major development on one of Chipping Barnet’s most visible open spaces would set a deeply damaging precedent.

If approved, permission should be subject to a guarantee that, should the football use fail and the site become vacant, the club could not sell the site as brownfield or grey belt and realise a gain in land value. It should revert to Barnet Council or the site be remediated. This must be enforced by a robust legal agreement and/or lease with the Council (both as planning authority and landowner).

We’re not opposed to change of any kind. Although Barnet Playing Fields is a vital link in the lovely chain of greenery along the Dollis valley, its main contribution is its openness and as a popular resource for the leisure and wellbeing of local residents and their dogs. Its contribution to local biodiversity is quite limited, comprising mainly a large grass sward that is unsuitable and little used for the team games for which it was originally intended.

If designed to the latest best practice, new landscaping would support a markedly richer range of plants and wildlife. And it should be perfectly possible to design a range of spaces for exercise, contemplation and socialising, linked by walking, wheelchair, jogging and cycling routes that would be at least as attractive as the present Playing Fields.

The application documents are, however, light on information demonstrating that the new facility would be set within meaningful landscape design, embedded in its context.  With such a sensitive site it is imperative that this level of detail is considered, designed and demonstrated.  

While we welcome the applicants’ commitment to meeting the Mayor of London’s Biodiversity Net Gain and Urban Greening Factor standards, for such a sensitive site we’d expect higher aspirations.

We also have more detailed concerns including the need for a landscape statement, less hardscape, more biodiversity, a drainage strategy and a link with the Dollis Valley Greenwalk. Careful attention would be essential to lighting, waste disposal and site security

Although the stadium design employs various green strategies, it appears to fall short of net zero standards. Its claims to be fully recyclable must be substantiated robustly, since if the Club fails in its Football League ambitions it would otherwise become a white elephant in the Green Belt.

Transport and parking

We’re aware of historic local concerns about traffic congestion and on-street parking on match days, so we’re puzzled by the Planning Statement’s claim (in paragraph 12.2.10) that ‘The impact of matchday movement will be more significant [than non-matchdays] but will take place infrequently’ – as if that would allay residents’ concerns. It also claims to identify mitigation measures in the Transport Assessment, but we cannot find these in the documents. Information about, and marshalling of, travel routes would be critical, not least for visiting fans travelling via car or public transport.

We’d also expect analysis of the effect on bus services, especially for mid-week games that could affect local schools. The location of a Superloop stop also needs careful consideration (in association with Ark Pioneer Academy).

We can’t find the basis for the quantity of onsite parking of cars and coaches. Although these may be adequate for present attendances at The Hive – and it would be wasteful to leave empty parking spaces for most of the year – we’d expect to see a strategy for future expansion in the event of 7,000-capacity crowds.

How have the levels of bicycle parking been calculated? There doesn’t appear to be adequate provision close to the stadium. 

We’d also point out that if the current proposal to build 300 flats on High Barnet Station car park proceeds, there could be an unacceptable increase in construction traffic on roads in and around the town centre.

Community uses & benefits

Our view is that there would be social value in rebuilding a sense of identity of this part of Barnet which older members feel has been lost. But Barnet Community Stadium must bring benefits to the wider community, not just football fans.

The Planning Statement says (in paragraph 1.1.2) that ‘community space’ and a ‘community diagnostic health centre’ will be provided and (in para 10.3.5) that the Club’s Charitable Foundation aims ‘to bring the local community together to encourage participation in sport with a particular focus on promoting physical exercise with older adults, disadvantaged young people and supporting girls into football’.

These all sound splendid, but the plans are diagrammatic and unclear as to how those aims would be delivered. For example, would fully accessible changing rooms be provided for young and old members of the public as well as for the professional footballers? What sort of community activities would be possible, eg playgroups, youth clubs, meetings and parties? And would adequate storage for chairs, tables and equipment be available for different user groups?

Economic value

The Planning Statement states (in para 10.4.4) that the project would deliver £6.0 million Gross Value Added impact, approximately 85 FTE net additional jobs and £350,000 per annum of social value (in addition to construction phase economic impacts). Apparently these calculations are based on standard methodology, but we question whether sufficient local commercial analysis has been carried out.

We accept that match days would generate some additional demand for eating and drinking, but since we understand that franchises would be accommodated in or adjacent to the ground, we doubt that much of fans’ spend would benefit local business.

Conclusion

If we could be satisfied that the matters the Society has raised above have been properly addressed, we would be pleased to support this application.

You can submit your own comments here. The deadline for online comments is Wednesday 19 March.

Posted on by

Compost bins and another bug hotel are all on the itinerary when visiting New Barnet’s innovative community garden

A guided tour of New Barnet’s much-cherished community garden by Wendy Alcock, founder of the Incredible Edible campaign, was a highlight of the group’s annual seed swap at St John’s United Reformed Church.

Wendy (above) gave gardening demonstrations as she went along – all part of her aim to encourage residents to make 2025 the year to grow more of their own food.

The seed swap is a chance to come along with seeds, small plants, tools, pots etc. and to swap them for free with someone else.

An extension to the community garden and green space – along three sides of the church at the junction of Somerset Road and Mowbray Road — was officially opened last year.

Incredible Edible was started by Wendy to encourage home cultivation in gardens and unused land.

The community garden around St John’s demonstrates what can be achieved by clearing and preparing what was previously an unusable rubble-strewn area.

A second bug hotel has been created in the corner of the newly cleared land with the aim of encouraging more insect life.

Another recent innovation – now in its second year – are the compost bins which were installed to produce leaf mould.

When Barnet Council ground staff collect leaves from the borough’s parks, the community garden is an eager recipient.

New Barnet community garden leading the way in campaign to encourage more home cultivation

Rotting leaves from last year were displayed by Dave McCormick, an Incredible Edible volunteer, and long-standing member Barnet Friends of the Earth and Barnet Clean Air.

An extra compost bin was added last autumn when the council delivered a total of 50 bags of green leaves swept up from parks around the borough.

“After rotting down for a year those 50 bags will produce ten bags of leaf mould which is so important in adding structure to the soil.

“We could take many more leaves from the council and what our community garden demonstrates is the great potential there is.

“We hope more groups can establish composting arrangements in the hope the council can be encouraged to give us even more of the leaves that have to be swept up each autumn.”   

Posted on by — 3 Comments

MP says Barnet’s councillors should take final decisions on blocks of flats at High Barnet tube station car park and possible new football stadium  

When responding to the debate over the two most controversial development applications to have emerged since he was elected Labour MP for Chipping Barnet seven months ago, Dan Tomlinson is insisting he will maintain his neutrality.

He says final decisions on whether to construct blocks of flats at High Barnet tube station car park or build a new stadium for Barnet Football Club at Underhill should be taken by Barnet Council on the advice of its planning officers and committee.

When members of the Barnet Society discussed the two projects – immediately before hearing Mr Tomlinson’s response – there was a unanimous vote against Transport for London’s bid to build flats on the tube station car park and a split vote over a possible new stadium.

In reply, Mr Tomlinson – seen above with Robin Bishop (left) and chair John Hay (right) — was adamant that as the town’s MP he believed his duty was to address the concerns of residents and try to secure for them the best possible outcomes.

Personally, he thought a ten-storey block of flats at the tube station was too high.

He felt the football stadium was unlikely to get planning approval from the council because it would mean taking Green Belt land.

But he would not be intervening directly himself either in support or against the two projects.

“It is up to the elected Barnet Council to decide whether these schemes are in accordance with the local plan and whether or not they should be approved.”

He acknowledged that his predecessor, the former Conservative MP Theresa Villiers, had taken firm positions either for or against certain planning applications in the past, but this had resulted in local residents being “marched up the hill and down again” only to see schemes being approved in the end.

He believed his task was to help ensure that the views of his constituents were expressed to Barnet Council and to the developers and that he worked in conjunction with them and the residents to see how such schemes could be improved for the benefit of the community.

When it came to the blocks of flats at the tube station, he was keen to persuade TfL to keep much more space for car parking.

He would be following up ideas to see if underground car parking spaces could be provided beneath the development.

Mr Tomlinson was also in full agreement with tube passengers on the importance of providing a bus service direct to the station entrance and moving the north bound bus stop on Barnet Hill closer to the pedestrian crossing at the station approach road.

He was challenged over why he had not been influenced by the fact that no one in the room at the society’s meeting had voted in favour.

MP says Barnet’s councillors should take final decisions on blocks of flats at High Barnet tube station car park and possible new football stadium

An outline of the scheme had been given earlier by committee member Nick Saul (above) who said the development was unacceptable. The blocks of flats would utterly dominate the town, and he doubted whether the project was viable.

Mr Tomlinson reminded his audience that the land at the station was already allocated for 292 homes in Barnet Council’s local plan.

Building on station car parks was also included in the London plan, so there was a strong presumption in favour of the High Barnet scheme, but a ten-storey block of flats was too high and was not in keeping with the local plan’s recommendation of more than seven storeys.

“But if we can’t build flats for young people here on this site, where are we are going to put them?

“As your MP I will try to make the scheme as good as possible.”

When it came to the controversial application to build a new football stadium at Underhill, he was personally split 50/50 over whether it should be approved.

When discussing a return of the club with residents of the Dollis Valley estate he found there was strong support among some of those he spoke to.

Nevertheless, it was one of the few large open play spaces in the town and he did not think it likely Barnet Council would give approval because it was a site within the Green Belt.

If Barnet FC was refused permission, he undertook to work with the club and the Bring Barnet Back campaign to see if an alternative site could be found.

Green Belt land should be protected and if the housing target could be met with developments such as High Barnet station, then the council would not be under pressure to encroach on the green belt.

When challenged by one questioner over whether his stance of being neither for or against planning applications – and leaving it to the elected councillors – would protect the Green Belt, he gave this assurance:

“If there is a really abhorrent scheme, I won’t be agnostic.”

In his opening remarks, he said he had been working members of Chipping Barnet Town Team and Love Barnet to see whether more could be done to improve Barnet High Street.

One idea being explored with the Greater London Authority was to have a rental auction of empty High Street shops.

Under such a scheme, if a property had been left vacant for more than 12 months, Barnet Council could auction off a rental so that empty retail premises could be brought back into use.

An earlier discussion at the meeting had explored ideas for rejuvenating The Spires shopping centre.

As a previous redevelopment scheme was now in abeyance because of the financial difficulties facing the owners of the centre, Mr Tomlinson said he would be delighted to work with community groups to bring forward alternative proposals.

Barnet Council owned the freehold of the shopping centre site and there was every reason to open a discussion about the future of The Spires.    

Posted on by — 1 Comment

Planning surprise from Transport for London: construction of ten storey high block of flats next to entrance to High Barnet tube station

Revised plans for blocks of flats to be built over the car park at High Barnet tube station show that the highest would be ten storeys in height.

A total of five blocks ranging from eight to ten storeys would be constructed alongside Barnet Hill with the tallest opposite the lower entrance to the tube station.

There would be a new re-aligned approach road to the station and the siting of the ten-storey block (see above), positioned below Barnet Hill, was said to compensate for the extra height.

Transport for London’s property company Places for London and developers Barratt say the scheme will provide 300 new homes of which a minimum of 40 per cent will be affordable either through social rents or shared ownership.

A planning application for the development is due to be submitted by April or May with the hope that approval might be gained by the end of the year so that construction could start in 2026.

The revised plans were on show at a public exhibition at Tudor Hall which will be repeated on Saturday 1 March (11am to 3pm) followed by an online webinar on Tuesday 4 March from 6.30pm to 7.30pm (contact HighBarnet@fieldconulsting.co.uk)

A visual representation showed a new look bus stop on the station side of Barnet Hill.

A new pavement, which would be created beside the flats after the removal of the existing retaining wall, would extend down Barnet Hill with a new pedestrian crossing at the junction with Underhill.

Another illustration showed the position of the new flats when viewed from Underhill.

The proposed height of the blocks was criticised by Robin Bishop, who leads on planning for the Barnet Society. He considered the development was “entirely out of character” with the existing neighbourhood where most of the houses were of two to three storeys.

“These proposed blocks are three times taller than is normal for housing in the area and if the development goes ahead, it will alter the identity of the neighbourhood.”

Gordon Massey, planning officer for Barnet Residents Association, shared the society’s concern about the proposed height of the blocks.

Under Barnet Council’s local plan for the car park site, buildings of eight storeys or more would not be acceptable.

“This is an elevated site on Barnet Hill and if blocks of eight to ten storeys are approved this will drive a coach and horses through the local plan.

“The station site application is the first big scheme since the local plan was developed so this scheme is a real challenge for Barnet Council.

“If this development is approved it will set a real precedent. What would stop developers trying to build blocks of flats all along the Dollis Valley?”

Brendan Hodges, Places for London planning manager (above left) defended the proposed height of the blocks. He said the developers’ argument would be that local plans allowed for a case to be made and for flexibility.

“This development ticks all the boxes. It is a brown-field site with 300 homes, 40 per cent of them affordable, going to be built next to a tube station.

“It is a scheme which takes the pressure off surrounding land in the Green Belt and meets the government’s objective of building new homes.

“I think the fact that we have a local council, the Mayor of London and a government which are all aligned in wanting to achieve the same objective means the wind is blowing in our direction.”

When Places for London and Barratt held their first consultation on the plan in November last year the issue that caused the greatest concern was the confirmation that if the flats are built the tube station will lose all its 160 car park spaces.

A survey conducted since that exhibition disputed the contention that the loss of a car park would cause considerable inconvenience for passengers. It showed that the car park accounted for only eight per cent of the total daily entries to the station.

The survey showed that 42 per cent of those drivers who used the car park had a walking time of less than 30 minutes to the station and that 89 per cent of the drivers started their journey within 500 metres of a bus stop.

Gordon Massey dismissed these findings. Removal of all car parking spaces at High Barnet would have a detrimental impact on the town because more drivers would try to park within the town centre which would in turn cut the number of spaces for shoppers.

Despite the developers’ intention to create a dedicated drop off point outside the tube station entrance, he feared the loss of the car park would lead to even more congestion in the station approach road.

Posted on by

Barnet Society responses to consultations on the Green Belt

The Barnet Society’s 75th birthday in 2020 was a timely moment to celebrate, in three recent Website articles, the local Green Belt that was the original reason for our existence. In recent years, the Society has submitted responses to public consultations regarding the Green Belt by the All Party Parliamentary Group, the London Assembly, Hertsmere Council and the London Borough of Enfield.

Continue reading Barnet Society responses to consultations on the Green Belt