Thursday, 13 June 2019 17:08

New housing planned for High Barnet tube station

Written by
Transport for London engagements spokesman Patrick Clark points to the blocks of flats that would be built alongside Barnet Hill on land both to the north and south of High Barnet tube station Transport for London engagements spokesman Patrick Clark points to the blocks of flats that would be built alongside Barnet Hill on land both to the north and south of High Barnet tube station
Transport for London has commissioned plans for the construction of over 450 new homes on land around High Barnet underground station.

Blocks of flats of perhaps five storeys, or even higher, would stretch down Barnet Hill from the wooded land at the junction with Meadway all the way to the storage and container yards where the underground bridge crosses the main road at Underhill.

Architects Scott Brownrigg say that public access to the tube station would be improved, but the car park would be dramatically reduced in size and would be left with only 25 per cent of its current capacity.
Similar plans are about to unveiled for developing land around Finchley Central tube station, where up to 700 homes are proposed, and at Cockfosters tube station car park, where a scheme is being developed to build homes to rent.

A planning application is about to be considered by Barnet Council for the redevelopment of Colindale tube station, together with the construction of 300 new homes.

Taylor Wimpey is the developer working with TFL for the developments at both High Barnet and Finchley Central; and 40 per cent of the new homes would be sold at affordable prices.

Transport for London has been asked by the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, to have plans in place by 2021 to build a total of 10,000 homes on car parks and other vacant land around London’s tube stations.

Reducing the size of car parks at tube stations is one of the Mayor’s priorities in line with the objective of increasing the use of public transport.

When asked by the Barnet Society whether the existing access road and narrow turning area would be enlarged to take small buses – a proposal that has been widely canvassed locally in the past – TFL’s engagement spokesman Patrick Clark said that this was an idea that might be considered.

High Barnet’s plans were unveiled at an exhibition in the station car park which opened on Thursday 13 June and which continues until Saturday 15 June.

An artist’s impression of the blocks of flats to be built on land around High Barnet tube station, alongside Barnet Hill, from the junction with Meadway to the bridge at UnderhillAn artist’s impression of the blocks of flats to be built on land around High Barnet tube station, alongside Barnet Hill, from the junction with Meadway to the bridge at Underhill

Representatives of the Barnet Society and Barnet Residents Association were among those briefed on the plans by TFL.

Local residents are holding a public meeting to discuss the plans at the St Marks church, at 19.50 on Monday 17 June.

TFL’s aim is to test local reaction and then prepare more detailed plans later in the summer so that firmer proposals can be presented at another public exhibition in the autumn.

The aim would be to have a scheme ready for submission for planning approval by the end of the year or early 2020 with the hope of starting construction in 2021 and the first homes being completed and ready for sale in 2022 or 2023.

The initial plan proposes the construction of around seven blocks of flats. One of the largest would be in the woodland facing on to the Meadway, opposite Queen Elizabeth’s Girls’ School; another block, on the other side of the existing station footpath, would face Barnet Hill.

An additional five blocks, facing Barnet Hill, would be built on the car park and the storage and container yards right up to the junction with Underhill.

The existing tube station footpath up to the junction of Barnet Hill and Meadway would be improved and well lit. Proposals for the land opposite the top entrance to the station include the construction of a cycle hub and coffee shop.

The cycle hub would offer secure bike parking, changing facilities, e-bike charging points and a café, with potential for affordable workspace.

TFL has commissioned a survey of the trees between the station and Barnet Hill and the Meadway. It says the wooded area is currently “inaccessible and under-utilised” and the aim would be to incorporate mature trees in the development with better public access.

A new public square would be created outside the lower station entrance with what TFL says would be a “pocket park that incorporates new play and amenity spaces”. The car park, although reduced in size, would ensure space for blue badge holders.

Another possible feature of the development would the provision of affordable workspaces to help business start-ups which could provide 40 new full-time jobs and create up to 50 jobs in the wider area.

  

Why not become a member of the Barnet Society
Join now online it's easy and quick

Join Now

Share this post

Submit to DeliciousSubmit to DiggSubmit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to StumbleuponSubmit to TwitterSubmit to LinkedIn

58 comments

  • Comment Link Thursday, 13 June 2019 17:42 posted by Stan

    If they reduce the number of flats, I think it's a good idea.

  • Comment Link Thursday, 13 June 2019 17:48 posted by Linda goldenstein

    This is a very bad idea.
    You are taking our underground parking away.
    We battle to park our cars in the small space provided.
    What are we supposed to do.
    More flats, more people, more cars!
    We can not get into our doctors, hospitals or other services.
    Do you even care about the people of Barnet.

  • Comment Link Thursday, 13 June 2019 18:25 posted by Jevon Ellis

    Reducing the car park to 1/4 of it's current size ???? and the statement "Reducing the size of car parks at tube stations is one of the Mayor’s priorities in line with the objective of increasing the use of public transport." CRAZY

    As it is commuters drive and park at barnet to then take a train.. filling the car park to capacity and the surrounding areas are controlled zones with mostly residents parking only.. so people who live beyond the tube, beyond LRT services who currently park then use the tube will be forced off public transport and increase the road congestion. Opposite of what the Mayor is trying to achieve .

  • Comment Link Thursday, 13 June 2019 19:02 posted by Pat Mott

    Another 'lung' gone! Those few trees at the top end of Meadway helps with the traffic fumes created by the queuing cars & buses both on Meadway & Barnet hill. This problem will be far worse because of all the new flats who's inhabitants will also have cars!

  • Comment Link Thursday, 13 June 2019 19:44 posted by Simon Kaufman

    I’m for housing density at tube stations but loss of parking will be an issue for many - where will people park? and the number of trees removed should be replaced like for like. The character of the development is also important - High Barnet is a historic village and the design should respond to it and improve the quality of the neighbourhood

  • Comment Link Thursday, 13 June 2019 19:58 posted by Gemma Bytheway

    So they are building tons of flats on the station car park, but where is the parking they need to provide for those flats then going to be? My understanding is that new builds such as this now have to be built with dedicated parking spaces? I do pray that they don’t do away with the entrance from by QE Girls / Meadway. I live up in the part of the town by the spires and to have to access the tube from the lower entrance only would make the journey to the tube even longer ?

  • Comment Link Thursday, 13 June 2019 19:59 posted by Huw Pryce

    The loss of the mature trees on Barnet Hill would change the landscape irrevocably. It's strip development that the infrastructure won't be able to cope with, particularly traffic and parking.

  • Comment Link Thursday, 13 June 2019 19:59 posted by Julie Skinner

    Disgusting ! Taking away Barnet's Skyline ?.

  • Comment Link Thursday, 13 June 2019 20:00 posted by Jolyon van Blankenstein

    I’m sorry, is it the 1st April ?.

  • Comment Link Thursday, 13 June 2019 20:00 posted by Linda Barnett Goldenstein

    It is ridiculous! What about a larger parking area around the Barnet Tube station. Think of the people who live here. It would be nice to park in our own Underground station, instead of selling all the land off.

  • Comment Link Thursday, 13 June 2019 20:00 posted by Elizabeth Burling

    And what about more doctors, schools etc for all these hundreds of houses?

  • Comment Link Thursday, 13 June 2019 20:01 posted by Siobhan Wilkins

    Awful

  • Comment Link Thursday, 13 June 2019 20:01 posted by Ann Page

    Is there land around there to build then?

  • Comment Link Thursday, 13 June 2019 20:03 posted by Linda Barnett Goldenstein

    Yes they are taking away the existing parking. Land acros the road from QE girls. Land across the road from the station.

  • Comment Link Thursday, 13 June 2019 20:03 posted by Linda Barnett Goldenstein

    Can you imagine the traffic.

  • Comment Link Thursday, 13 June 2019 20:04 posted by Mark Littlefield

    Again, 1,000,000 added to the population every 3 years, go figure

  • Comment Link Thursday, 13 June 2019 20:04 posted by Huw Pryce

    Not in the UK.

  • Comment Link Thursday, 13 June 2019 20:26 posted by Taz

    How are you meant to use public transport and encourage reduced car journeys if you can’t get to the tube station. Lots of people don’t live on a bus route. Also if we all have to then drive to our destinations instead of our tube station which might I add is a big draw to living in Barnet on the edge of London over other areas with no tube. More flats, more people, more cars. I don’t think the mayor of London has thought this through.

  • Comment Link Thursday, 13 June 2019 21:39 posted by Nick Saul

    There are three elephants in the room on this before we even get to whether it is a good idea in principle. To be clear we are talking about yet another development of hundreds of new homes and thousands of new residents in a town already starved of many of the facilities to support them.

    Before “going off on one” I just have to say when launched the website used a photograph of Finchley Central over the caption “Consultation for High Barnet launches!”. That rather confirms the impression these proposals have been result of a visit to Google and Google Maps, satellite view, rather than the site itself.

    I also note the website uses the exact shade of blue green for its branding as our local authority, Barnet Council. My understanding is this is purely a TFL and private business operation so I can’t see that can be justified.

    1) Put simply placing high rise flats around the junction between Barnet Hill and the Meadway could surely not be contemplated by any architect or engineer who had been anywhere near the town. That part of the site is not an inaccessible and underused woodland, it is an unstable early 19th century manmade embankment on one side and an artificially steepened hillside on the other. The cost of the special engineering required to build homes safely on that part of the site would make them completely uneconomic to build and sell.

    2) The suggestion of improved cycle and pedestrian access while completely ignoring desperately needed level access from the station to bus routes is similarly unimaginably naive. Now saying the latter is an idea that may be considered is simply not good enough. It should have been obvious to any town planner or architect on first stepping foot in Barnet. Pedestrian access south is good, albeit mainly to an excellent cinema, two pubs and a few local shops. Walking north to the town is another matter, up a very steep hill and nothing in the proposal can change that. The idea of improving cycle access hits the same steep hill. I say again, what High Barnet has needed for years is direct bus access to the station.

    3) Apart from the fantasy engineering on the steep slopes dropping into the station the rest of the proposal swallows the vast proportion of the station’s parking, in fact all of it looking at the drawings. I note how often respondents on this page have objected to this. Bear in mind if you live in the town you would only drive to the station when absolutely necessary, yet it is still what many people feel they must write about. Looking around at the shear number of cars on the roads shows culling vehicle usage in cities has a long way to go. In a future of zero emission transport it is debatable how desirable too large a reduction even is. Meanwhile (ie from 2023 until 2050) getting rid of carparks at suburban tube stations is premature and of dubious benefit in the future. It will result in less use of public transport rather than more and will threaten the viability of these stations. For the town it will put yet more pressure on what parking is left. And there is no parking at all for this 40% affordable housing project itself, which of course means the occupants of the 60% of unaffordable houses will be parking vehicles somehow, somewhere else. Somewhere in a town near you.

    My points 1) and 2) are surely indisputable, point 3) stands up to scrutiny.

    I have really tried to see the positive side of this but firmly in my mind’s eye is a row of seven–storey brutalist modernist blocks of flats stretching to the horizon and emblazoned with the name “Barnet Barbican” (I will claim that as copyright). Ok, Barnet may have surrendered its leafy market town epithet some time ago but surely such a vista on the main route into the historic old town can not be acceptable.

    Clearly London’s Mayor, with commendable good intentions, expects this to kill three birds with one stone not just in Barnet but throughout the capital’s suburbs. Cull car usage – tick, build affordable housing – tick, make money for TFL – tick. However only the third point withstands scrutiny. Sorry Mr Mayor, this is no fix for a housing crisis, transport in London or the environment. It doesn’t take a genius to work out building endless numbers of new homes in 21st century England to deal with a growing population is no more sustainable than telling people to emigrate to the Empire in the 19th.

    OK, something will be built, but this opening salvo is indescribably insensitive to the location. A proper look at the area is needed and a quick return to the drawing board with a blank sheet of paper.

  • Comment Link Thursday, 13 June 2019 22:37 posted by Alison Cousins

    Terrible idea. Barnet is already a half empty High street partly due to lack of parking. Building flats there is the wrong site and will cause even more traffic problems.

  • Comment Link Friday, 14 June 2019 10:35 posted by John Murphy

    The mind boggles! Supposedly trying to encourage public transport! Then removing car parking, making local parking impossible. It’s a stupid idea driven by greed as usual

  • Comment Link Friday, 14 June 2019 10:52 posted by Sue Matthews

    Absolutely horrendous, what next! Hadley Green, Ravenscroft Park or what about the big houses in Hadley wood giving up their back gardens so that seven or eight story flats can be built.

  • Comment Link Friday, 14 June 2019 10:54 posted by Eddie

    A football stadium should be incorporated into the development to bring Barnet FC back to where it belongs.

  • Comment Link Friday, 14 June 2019 11:04 posted by H

    Why only a 3 day display at the station for such a major project?
    This does not allow many people the opportunity to examine the plans or comment.
    Is this a deliberate ploy to minimise objections? If should be open for at least 4 weeks.
    I think this alone shows that TFL and the authorities know the public will be against the development and don't want many objections so as they can then push ahead with this.

  • Comment Link Friday, 14 June 2019 12:56 posted by Sue Scott

    We cannot afford to lose the car park as this is an end of line and would force drivers to bring their cars further into town. It could also affect willingness to work in London affecting unemployment. Some residences maybe but they need parking too. Needs a radical rethink.

  • Comment Link Friday, 14 June 2019 14:35 posted by Lockie Bramzell

    Building on every spare piece of land will prevent the open spaces being used to bring back more trees and the natural environment required to deal with pollution and carbon emissions. If these flats were built where is the infrastructure to support it i.e. Hospitals, Doctors surgeries, schools, police.
    Reducing car parking space does not help those who need to use car parks from areas that don't have adequate transport services. People who need to take their children to schools outside their local areas before going to work need to use these cars parks. Most schools do not take the majority of pupils from their surrounding areas. Pupils are forced to use parents or public transport to get to school.
    Passenger with mobility issues already have inadequate access to tube stations, removing car parking spaces will further reduce the accessibility of underground services to these passengers.
    The number of flats proposed will add to the congestion that already occurs in the area.

  • Comment Link Friday, 14 June 2019 16:05 posted by ckk

    "Reducing the size of car parks at tube stations is one of the Mayor’s priorities in line with the objective of increasing the use of public transport."

    So you remove the car park at the first station of the tube line, where people commuting from far away switch from their cars to public transport at first possible point, and claim it is "to increase the use of public transport?"

    This is an utterly stupid approach, basically telling people: instead of switching to public transport at the earliest possible point, you now have to drive into the city.

    Oh wait, this may well be the idea, forcing more people to drive into the city to increase revenues from ULEZ, parking etc.

    Madness. When are the next elections?

  • Comment Link Friday, 14 June 2019 18:20 posted by Maria Eleftheriou

    I think this is a really bad idea, reducing parking at stations is a terrible way to get people to use public transport. If anything, I would suggest increasing the parking at stations to get people out of their cars and onto public transport especially at the first station of the line.

  • Comment Link Friday, 14 June 2019 18:54 posted by Nat Dawbarn

    This'll sound a bit over the top , but what the hell. Each time you leave the station and walk up that path you step into a life-affirming, health-restoring pool of birdsong and trees. It's small, but it works. The diesel and dirt can't get through. Build on the car park (but there do need to be parking spaces) or build over the tracks (it can't cost more than building on the banks of the causeway), but don't build on our lungs. (And do give people time to see what you're planning - that was not a public consultation.)

  • Comment Link Saturday, 15 June 2019 00:31 posted by Marie Burguete

    Please make it easy for people to live a peaceful life and brearhe clean air!!

  • Comment Link Saturday, 15 June 2019 10:52 posted by David M

    A small (probably to many) but important concern for me, the stand of trees betwwen the A1000 (Barnet Hill) and the station itself, is home to many birds, and on early Spring mornings is alive with singing Song Thrushes and other birds.
    I understand thjs "mini nature reserve" will go and all this beauty will be lost....the trees which absorb pollution, give out oxygen and lessen the noise of the High Road.Not to mention the aesthetic quality...
    We need trees and greenery more than ever to stem climate change and moderate extreme heat.
    This is madness,greed and stupidity.
    This is not about housing shortage,this is about investors buying to let and making a nice profit. at the environment's expense.

  • Comment Link Sunday, 16 June 2019 19:13 posted by Rob Ward

    The public should see detailed parking and traffic plans. Assume 450 cars (in reality probably more) - where will they park and what happens to the traffic in that area which is on multiple school runs and access to the tube for people who work in town (even if taking public transport being able to reliably predict timings is important for working people). Or, if the mayor’s priorities are to be believed, maybe the development should come with a condition that none of the residents can own a car! Probably kills the ability to sell the flats then...

  • Comment Link Monday, 17 June 2019 11:18 posted by Rod Bentley (Meadway resident)

    I am sorry, but with Sadiq Khan as London Mayor, this sort of thing was bound to happen.
    I think it will be important to firmly establish whether TFL intend to keep ownership of the land or sell it to a developer. If it is the former, there is a chance (slim) that the views of the local residents will be taken account of to a certain degree on some issues, but generally the development will go ahead within the directive of the London Mayor. If it is the latter and the land is sold to a developer, he, she, or they will wish to squeeze every drop of blood out of it, which means local views will be largely ignored.

  • Comment Link Monday, 17 June 2019 21:40 posted by Craig Gillespie

    I was part of the staff group that made the car park garden from the litter and needle ridden wasteland. It won several awards, no one even bothered to tell us that it was going to be ripped up with flats built on it.

    Really sad. It’s all about ‘for profit’ housing.

  • Comment Link Tuesday, 18 June 2019 13:16 posted by Tricia Thompson

    I went along to the exhibition at Barnet tube, and like so many I was appalled at the proposed design for redeveloping the tube station. It is a gross over-development of the site squeezing in as many apartments as possible. When asked about resident parking I was told they do not have to include it in the plans and that "anyway no one buying these apartments will have cars" !! The blocks are proposed to be 6 stories high - completely out of scale with the local housing stock of 2 story houses and bungalows. The destruction of woodland is completely unacceptable because of the loss of health benefits that trees give and also for the visual impact. I agree with the need to utilize the land at the bottom of the hill and can see the benefit of putting apartment blocks there - but who on earth will buy them bounded by the rails on one side and a busy road on the other - oh I know they will be bought by private investors who will let them out at vast rents, also think of all the lovely council tax coming in. The lack of station parking will involve extending the CPZ - pity the poor residents of the streets directly adjoining it. I feel that this development is wrong on so many levels for Barnet and hope that as a local resident I will be able to offer my opinion and maybe influence the outcome - but I very much doubt it.

  • Comment Link Tuesday, 18 June 2019 17:43 posted by Karim Rasched (Finchley Central)

    I'm in agreement with most of the comments here, as they relate to commuters, the loss of open space, the increase in local population density and impacts on services and infrastructure. A similar proposal is also being made for Finchley Central Station (and several other suburban stations) - again removing the car park and developing up to 600 new residential units with virtually no parking for residents either. There is no proposal to provide alternative parking or parking options. I find the suggestion that the removal of parking at the tube stations will 'encourage the use of public transport' quite farcical when it is the very presence of the car park that encourages drivers to use the Tube. The car parks along the Northern line, in my experience certainly as far as Highgate, are choc-a-block during weekdays - what does TfL think is going to happen when this capacity is removed? The 'Domino Effect' will materially increase traffic volumes along the line together with all the issues for local residents. At the very least provide a viable cycling (path/way) solution with secure bike storage to alleviate some of it! I would also be interested to know how much TfL will have to pay NCP (the private operator of the car parks) for breaking the lease/acquiring the land. Why not build an underground facility while the whole lot is being dug up anyway?

  • Comment Link Tuesday, 18 June 2019 21:04 posted by WM

    Terrible idea. These people are after profit and have no care for our town and residents.

  • Comment Link Wednesday, 19 June 2019 12:08 posted by rob

    Great news, London has a housing crisis and we need more homes.
    Everyone on here is up in arms if there is any suggestion of using the industrial farmland on the greenbelt or any undeveloped space, often the argument is that we should use brownfield land.

    Most of the space is the brownest of brownfield - it's a car park and an area full of shipping containers. If we can't build here where can we build? - I presume you want the houses to be built in some one else's backyard.

    There's no reason the extra council tax paid by residents of these flats can't be used on local services and an extra 450 people in the area will help to revive the high st - more people shopping, eating in restaurants etc will go a long way to helping the high st.

    Young people who've been priced out or forced to rent have votes as well, the crisis will eventually get to a point where people will vote to build on the greenbelt, if you want to protect truly green land you should support building on brownfield.

  • Comment Link Thursday, 20 June 2019 09:40 posted by Local resident

    Lots of comments on here bemoaning the fact that profit is being prioritised over community and public services.

    Yet Barnet continues to return a Conservative MP and Conservative Council and we have a Conservative government.

    One has to assume that a fair proportion of dissenting voices here are Tory voters.

    Frankly, you reap what you sow.

  • Comment Link Tuesday, 25 June 2019 18:00 posted by Keith ward

    Astounding niavity by tfl who have done a lot of crazy schemes under the Khan creature , such as archway and Highbury corner where chaotic traffic conditions now apply affecting , yes you’ve guessed , the buses ! ,
    A good bus interchange is what’s needed at Barnet , at the entrance to car park with sloping full width acccess road enabling all buses on Barnet hill to call with level access to station , if all the people who now drive from potters bar and south mimms to get tube have no parking , the 84 bus needs more than 2 buses an hour as recently cut as debacle between herts and tfl who funds the cross border route !! As for the engineering challenge of flats on that site and of course you will have a load of social housing and sadly that will bring more crime and hoody families into Barnet , just as crime has increased at Mill Hill East station after the crazy over developed millbrook park

  • Comment Link Wednesday, 26 June 2019 10:57 posted by Jerry

    It is a shame that someone wants to blame the Tories when it is a Labour Mayor who thinks that building on station car parks will encourage use of public transport.

    Better to stick to the issue. This just does not make sense.

  • Comment Link Monday, 01 July 2019 15:48 posted by Martin Jacobs

    These plans smack of political engineering by a left wing Labour Mayor.
    Loss of parking at hub stations would be a disaster for commuters from outer London.
    If anything less housing with a multi-storey car park should be the only consideration.

  • Comment Link Tuesday, 02 July 2019 10:30 posted by David Smith

    Someone is being bribed or blackmailed either at TFL or at the Mayor's Office because using Tube Station car parks for building flats is just insanity on a gigantic scale and a very large bank balance as is TFL's Will Norman's stupidity set out in his vision for London.........

    https://www.newlondonarchitecture.org/docs/willnorman-walkingcyclingcommissioner.pdf

    Happy, healthy, cohesive communities and safe streets for all by cycling, walking and pedestrianisation is not even remotely in the realms of reality!

    There is a hidden agenda here to physically force Londoners onto buses or bicycles to fulfil Sadiq Khan's desire to get rid of cars in London.

  • Comment Link Tuesday, 02 July 2019 18:51 posted by Mark

    No one can stop it. It’s will happen no matter the objections.
    Apparently gerbil cages next to the hamster wheel of commuting is what London needs apparently.

    Housing crisis?
    No, population crisis.
    Invest in industry outside of London and create more business hubs that people will want to move to.

    I’ve broken my foot but I’d rather suffer than go and sit in the absolute hell hole that is Barnet A&E. Oversubscribed, underfunded, and frankly full of people I’d rather not spend 7 hours in the company of.

    Yes, let’s add hundreds of new homes and put further pressure on our broken infrastructure.

    But it will happen. And more and more green belt will be eaten up.

  • Comment Link Wednesday, 03 July 2019 12:16 posted by Rich

    "And more and more green belt will be eaten up."

    High Barnet station isn't green belt. Part of the problem is that we can't/won't build on our green belt. Another part of the problem is that house prices in London remain sky high, and beyond what could be reasonably expected for first-time buyers. I don't want these flats building in these places, but I recognise that a) there is a problem, and b) this is an attempt to solve said problem. The argument about surrounding infrastructure is a valid one, but that's for us to put pressure on politicians over and vote accordingly. Investing in industry outside London sounds great but in practice private companies want to be near the largest pool of customers and the largest pool of workers. Much of the public sector stuff has been or is being relocated to outside the capital, but there's not a great deal the government can do about what private companies do.

  • Comment Link Sunday, 07 July 2019 21:29 posted by David E

    This proposal is utterly ridiculous.

    The infrastructure in Barnet is poor, the parking facilities are poor, the Northern line is an absolute disgrace due to the amount of over-crowding at peak times. Therefore putting more strain on the infrastructure completely nonsensical.

    I fiercely oppose the proposal. How about doing something sensible like improving the infrastructure before even thinking about increasing the population density? Surely planning permission would not be granted for such a ridiculous proposal? Oh no wait, the council employ the planners.........what a completely corrupt and ludicrous system.

    I'm sure the residents will be completely ignored and the council will ride roughshod over us to get their way. The same thing has happened in New Barnet, several hundred flats are currently being built by New Barnet station also, has/will more parking be provided? NO. Have/will more trains been laid on? NO.

  • Comment Link Saturday, 27 July 2019 09:26 posted by Andrew Hutchings

    I also oppose this development, mainly for the reasons outlined by earlier correspondents. I would add that, in spite of these properties being adjacent to the tube station, 450 houses will mean 450 cars, all of which need to be parked somewhere! I listened with incredulity to the platitudinous comments from the developers, who said their expectation was that residents would use car-sharing as opposed to ownership outright. A supreme example of 0207 thinking being applied to 0208 areas!

    Another question we ought to ask ourselves is: for whom are these dwellings being built in the first place? By this I mean that a goodly proportion will be bought as investments, not as housing. The result will be swathes of empty properties, guarded by electronic security systems, standing gaunt against the skyline of our town.... a tribute to the madness of our planning system.

  • Comment Link Friday, 02 August 2019 15:28 posted by John Smith

    All of these plans will easily get through Barnet Planning because most if not all of the councillors on the committee are corrupt. Local people object sensibly to lots of plans but most are passed, esp projects the council itself is building.

  • Comment Link Monday, 05 August 2019 11:53 posted by Tom

    "esp projects the council itself is building."

    Or, to be more precise, projects that Capita is in some way linked with (see the Premier Inn on the market site for example)

  • Comment Link Saturday, 12 October 2019 22:48 posted by Nick Saul

    The proposals for a high rise housing estate at High Barnet Station are to be presented again in a second consultation early next month. Rumours they had been killed off have clearly been exaggerated. Unless the developers are being enigmatic in their newsletter this week it appears the proposals survived feedback from the previous consultation with hardly a scratch. Only the talk of a cyclists's cafe and maintenance shop appear to have succumbed to gravity, a fate apparently being shared by the road on Barnet Hill above it.

    To clarify – although the newsletter like the previous consultation uses the same blue green corporate branding as the London Borough of Barnet the council are not the developers. These are in fact Transport for London and Taylor Wimpey acting for the Mayor of London.

    This will be the biggest planning issue for High Barnet since the Spires shopping centre.

    Link to the newsletter below.

    https://mailchi.mp/de151a718014/high-barnet-newsletter-thank-you-and-project-update?e=abed648611

  • Comment Link Monday, 21 October 2019 23:13 posted by Nick Saul

    BIG news, the proposal to build in the north section of High Barnet Stations has been dropped. There had been suggestions this was a straw man feature of the plans to be withdrawn to take some heat from any opposition. Comments made by the developers at meetings with community groups after the initial consultation rather indicated this decision had been taken earlier.

    The information is contained in the 2nd “newsletter" released by the developers which also announces a second public consultation at the station on November, Thursday 7, Friday 8 and Saturday 9, from 2pm to 8, 6 and 4pm respectively.

    https://mailchi.mp/24e6983a5597/correction-high-barnet-newsletter-what-you-said-and-how-we-are-listening?e=69a8007661

    It says these blocks have been dropped in response to feedback on aesthetic and environmental grounds. However it was clear as a pike staff the ground conditions made it impossible to build the two blocks either economically or with any probability of them not suffering structural failure. Similar practical issues remain on the rest of the site. It was never demonstrated how any access other than steep footpaths could be arranged to the two abandoned buildings.

    The newsletter also states they have "substantially reduced the height and scale of the development". While this thankfully confirms they will not attempt to replace apartments lost in the two cancelled blocks it would be reasonable to predict the reduction in height will be achieved simply because the remaining structures will be further down the hill.

  • Comment Link Wednesday, 23 October 2019 00:26 posted by mike fanning

    If this re-development was for the Travelling Public and for the Local Community, then it would include :- Improvements to the Station, include a Bus Interchange, space for a Taxi Rank, another space for a Drop Off & Pick Up, for when one want’s to, drop of, or pick up, a friend at the Tube Station. Parking for Disabled People close to the entrance to the Station. The Car Park would be kept and slightly enlarged. Then add a Landscaped Public Open Space with a smallish Retail Development of Shops.

    Who's up for it, and to say to TFL, who are a Public Transport Organisation, proposing to build on Public Land, that this is what the Public of High Barnet, and the Travelling Public, would like, this is our choice, and not just have to take TFL's choice.

  • Comment Link Saturday, 26 October 2019 19:24 posted by Local resident

    Reducing the parking at the station is absolutely CRAZY what is Barnet council thinking. It’s all well to say that people should use the underground, but how do we get to the station? FLY - We need MORE PARKING!!!!!

  • Comment Link Wednesday, 30 October 2019 16:05 posted by Andy

    Khan will do anything to meet his targets for new housing including the quite astonishing decision to build on station car parks. I mean what next? building on school playgrounds? He really hates the suburbs doesn't he?

  • Comment Link Thursday, 31 October 2019 10:46 posted by Local resident

    Well he can't build on school playing fields. They all got sold off by the Tories.

  • Comment Link Friday, 08 November 2019 11:33 posted by Elizabeth Pendleton

    I am fiercely opposed to reducing the car park. Without it, my journey time to work is increased dramatically to around 1.5 hours each way. The bus service to the tube from my area is awful. It is infrequent and unreliable. I have had dire experiences with mini cabs to the point I am unwilling to take them. Reducing the size of the car park makes central London inaccessible. High Barnet has poor local facilities and shops.

  • Comment Link Monday, 11 November 2019 21:26 posted by Susan McCraith

    Still too many flats and my understanding of affordable is clearly at a different level to the builders. What about some major reductions for key workers? More houses? Keeping more open space? Instead of the no doubt highly profitable rat trap proposed.

    As for reducing the size of the car park all these notions about public transport are fine until you consider the state of public transport and its inaccessibility to elders and the disabled, not to mention the inconvenience of dealing with small children on and off busses and the extra time and stress placed on workers trying to get into London. And this is not to mention the dangers of oversized busses trundling along roads never meant to support them. Very dangerous. A bigger car park is needed not a smaller one. Incentives to have smaller cars with low levels of pollution would also help. But then thinking doesn't seem to be our Mayor's strong point.

  • Comment Link Tuesday, 12 November 2019 13:00 posted by Mike Fleming

    I have a major evidence based concern around the negative effect a reduction in station car parking will cause.

    As a resident living just off Mays Lane I see the congestion caused by traffic using this road to avoid driving through Barnet town centre every week day. It gridlocks in both the morning and evening rush hours. That is a statement of fact. To add to the misery, at several points on the newly widened Mays Lane people park (legally) on the roadside thus creating pinch points whereby the road essentially becomes single lane. Please note that this on a road that Barnet Council widened earlier this year at a cost of hundreds of thousands of pounds to the local tax payers. Add yet more drivers who have been displaced from the station car park and Mays Lane will cease to function as a viable traffic route. Not that traffic will stop using it, simply there will be more stationary traffic, longer travel times and significantly more particulate and noise pollution. At the end of Mays Lane is Underhill descent. Barnet Council currently allow free parking on a two lane road that is also a multiple bus route that again renders the road single lane. As this and the road widening exercise has demonstrated, Barnet Council do not foresee knock on effects of decisions they enact. Evidence shows they do not engage in joined up thinking.

    Given my experience of the situations I witness daily I firmly believe that a reduction in station parking will result in catastrophic overcrowding on roads leading to and surrounding High Barnet Station. I have no problem with developing the station. Anyone passing the current land will agree that it's not being put to best use but in the race to see more homes being built the wellbeing, health and quality of life of current residents are being sacrificed.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published
All comments are moderated so there is a delay before you see them on the site
The views expressed are not necessarily those of the Barnet Society