Planning application in to build a house in Christchurch spinney
Above is a visualisation of the new 6-bedroom house proposed by its designers, Alan Cox Architects, in secluded woodland barely 200 metres from Barnet High Street. The site is described by the applicants as ‘unkempt’, and by locals petitioning against development as a ‘wildlife haven’. The site is within the Monken Hadley Conservation Area and close to the Green Belt. Some trees have individual Tree Preservation Orders; however all the trees are protected by the conservation area status.
The application is a test of Barnet Council’s commitment to protecting the environment. You can comment on the proposals until Thursday 12 February – see below for details.
Barnet Council declared a Climate and Biodiversity Emergency in 2022. Barnet Labour’s Green Manifesto promised to ‘Protect ALL existing green spaces in the Borough’. And its recently-adopted Local Plan contains policies and supplementary planning documents specifically to protect green spaces. Mayor Khan has similar planning policies, and recently consulted on London’s first Nature Recovery Plan to reverse biodiversity loss.
The site is mainly established deciduous woodland. Although small in area its ecological value is great because it provides a vital undisturbed ‘green corridor’ for the transit of insects, animals and flying creatures between the Old Fold Manor golf course and Hadley Green, both of which are in the Green Belt. It is not managed, however, and its biodiversity is limited by the dominance of cherry laurel and bramble on the east side of the site.
In 2024 the Council authorised the sale of part of the spinney that it owns for £430,000, subject to the buyer obtaining planning consent.
The planning application is by Christchurchgrove Ltd, a developer in a joint venture with Barnet Recreation Trust (BRT), which owns the other part of the present site. BRT is a charity that supports ‘the provision of facilities in the interest of social welfare for recreational and leisure-time occupation’ locally.
Both organisations would profit from the sale of the substantial (567 sq m) new house and garden that would occupy about a third of the site. The house-owner would be responsible for the rest of the (0.4 hectare / 1 acre) site, which includes almost all the existing protected trees. (See plan below by Helene Landscape and Garden Design).
A public consultation on the proposals was held before Christmas, and Nick Jones’s report on that can be found here. You can also read my earlier post on the issues this project raises for nature protection.
Ideally, the Barnet Society would like to see Christchurch spinney and its wildlife conserved, enhanced and protected, with a minimum of landscaping to enable some public access. In practice, that would require funding and organisation that the Council can’t currently provide. It’s a pity no effort seems to have been made to find a community group or charity to take it on.
Although we’d prefer no house to be built at all, we wouldn’t object to permission being given for one on the least ecologically valuable part of the site on certain conditions:
- The house and garden must be in keeping with their natural setting.
- They must be built to high environmental standards.
- The site as a whole must be subject to a long-term management plan to safeguard and enhance the environment.
The scheme the Society was shown last year fell short on all these counts. To the developer’s credit, however, it has been improved in the light of our comments. Overall, therefore, we’re neutral about the application. But because we aren’t yet convinced about a number of critical details, we’ll submit a list of conditions that must be met before approval.
How you can comment
Have your say one of these ways:
- on the Council’s planning portal (ref. no. 26/0116/FUL) via the Comments tab;
- email comments direct to planning.consultation@barnet.gov.uk (cc tania.sacordeiro@barnet.gov.uk); or
- post your comments to the Planning Officer: Tania Sa Cordeiro, Planning and Building Control, Barnet Council, 2 Bristol Avenue, Colindale, NW9 4EW.
In the cases of 2 & 3, be sure to include:
- the application ref. no. (26/0116/FUL) clearly at the top
- the site address (Land Opposite 15 Sunset View Barnet EN5 4LB) and
- your name, address and postcode.
Sending a copy to our MP dan.tomlinson.mp@parliament.uk and to your local Councillors will increase the effectiveness of your comments.
Tags: #Barnet Council #Biodiversity #Chipping Barnet #Development #Ecology #Environment #High Barnet #Planning
7 thoughts on “Planning application in to build a house in Christchurch spinney”
Why not become a member? Receive our latest newsletter hot off the press four times a year, and support our work with a membership.
If you have some local news, history or want to bring something to our attention please email us.
📺 Our Sky Bet League Two fixture against Salford City on Saturday 7th March has been selected for coverage on Sky Sports+ and will now kick-off at the earlier time of 12:30pm.
#BarnetFC🐝
ℹ️ With the recent rainfall forecast to continue, a precautionary pitch inspection will take place at 9am tomorrow morning ahead of our meeting with Walsall at the Pallet-Track Bescot Stadium.
#BarnetFC🐝
NEW: The search for the actual location of the Battle of Barnet site continues
NEW: McMullen’s sells Barnet pubs
Orchard Matters: planting for the future on May’s Lane
The local resident who generously donated his estate to the BRT spent years directly opposing development on this site. That protection provided the untouched habitat that exists there now, the one the developer has ruthlessly decided is worthless and should be completely cleared for a mansion. They aren’t even going to build it, just sell the land on, and they found an ecologist they could pay to justify it based on a “net-biodiversity gain”… from clearing untouched woodland for a house?! Maybe the badgers and hedgehogs will be granted access to the swimming pool?
BRT have invested time and money in Christchurch Grove Ltd, and this development application – they should have sought to protect this woodland for future residents of Barnet, and used the money they have spent building this awful case to further their other causes. And they should urgently seek better advisors – anyone who thinks the developer has any motivation at all apart from a healthy “success related fee” is kidding themselves. At least he talks openly about this, and “asset maximisation” now, rather than making statements like “nature needs to be nurtured” in his previous comments. This is about only money, and he would happily destroy an acre of woodland for that.
This development application will reach over 150 objections, and the petition to save the woodland has over 2,500 signatures and climbing daily. The local community has clearly spoken. If anyone knows someone at BRT – please tell them this. Surely they can do better.
If you want a real view of the wildlife in the woodland, please take a look at this: https://www.barnetsociety.org.uk/if-you-go-down-in-the-woods-today-youre-sure-of-a-big-surprise/
Barnet Recreational Trust inherited over £8 million from the demise of a wealthy local resident who spent most of his life fighting such a development. They have no need for extra funds from a speculative property application. And there is no need to destroy valuable woodland for the sake of one luxury 6 bed house with cinema and swimming pool. Please join local residents in objecting to this unwanted and destructive development.
Regardless of what Andrew Robinson states – He and BRT Ltd and Barnet Recreational trust are robbing Peter to pay Paul. There will be catastrophic long term loss for future generations if there is any building put on this precious piece of land. This woodland for the wildlife, community enjoyment, Mental Health, Preventing Heating and cooling, and other science related reasons, can never be replaced or put elsewhere. A house is re-built or moved elsewhere in as little as a year. Andrew Robinson is instrumental in coming up with the idea for a project that is devastating to a large number of the community – as the people write in their objections to the planning application for anybody to read online. To date over 2250 signature to the petition objecting to the sale of the land and the subsequent development. It doesn’t matter what the development is. NO development should be build in the Woodland. There are over 100 objections on Barnet Planning from the community so far. Most of the objections relate to the impact on Wildlife and Nature and the amenity that will be lost. The deadline for objections is 12th February. I am sure there will be more objections. Here is the link for comments – https://publicaccess.barnet.gov.uk/online-applications/ ref:26/0116/FUL
Response to Communication in the Barnet Society newsletter.
The trustees of the Barnet Recreational Trust (BRT), a charity established in 1982, would like to clarify a clear misunderstanding of a posting contained within the Barnet Society newsletter dated 22nd of January 2026 relating to the development of a high-quality residential property on the land to the North of Hadley Grove, Barnet.
The BRT inherited the land from the estate of a local resident in 2017. The trustees are aware of their responsibility to maximise the assets held by the BRT in order to meet the objectives of the charity, namely to enhance recreational facilities in the local area with an emphasis on youth.
The BRT was advised to form a trading company, Barnet RT Ltd (BRTL) to undertake the development with the result that the inherited land was transferred to the company, BRTL. The two shareholders in BRTL are also trustees of the BRT & hold the shares on behalf and for the benefit of the BRT charity.
Christchurch Grove Ltd are managing the project on behalf of the BRT & BRTL and will receive a success related fee should the project reach a conclusion.
It must be stated that no individual directly connected to the charity or the trading company has in the past or will in the future stand to receive any benefit from the BRT or BRTL and that any gains accruing to the BRTL from the development will be donated to the BRT to add to its general charity fund to pursue its objectives.
The Charity Commission is in full possession of documentation supporting the above. It should also be pointed out that in addition to many youth and end of life charities supported by the BRT, they have also committed to assisting the redevelopment of St Mary the Virgin’s Church House on Hadley Common with grants exceeding £100k, the majority of which has already been gifted.
So in summary:
The BRTL is a trading subsidiary of the BRT
The Charity Commission is aware of & has sight of documents that confirm any funds arising within BRTL will be gifted to the BRT
Christchurchgrove Ltd is acting as manager of the project on behalf of the BRT & BRTL but has no financial interest in the BRT or BRTL
BRTLs share of any proceeds of the project with become part of the BRTs general charity fund to support local charities and organisations.
Dressing this proposal in the language of charity does not change its substance. This is a private development that would generate fees and profit for those involved while permanently damaging the character of the Monken Hadley Conservation Area. It would mean the loss of a cherished woodland, the removal of mature trees, and the destruction of habitat used by protected species. Attempts to minimise the site’s ecological importance only heighten concern and undermine trust. Conservation areas exist precisely to prevent this kind of harm.
The statement that “Barnet Recreation Trust (BRT), which owns the other part of the present site, is in a joint venture with Barnet Recreational Trust” is incorrect.
The other part of the site is owned by Barnet RT Ltd (Company Number 15336071), whose stated Nature of Business is “Buying and selling of own real estate.” There is no evidence from either Companies House or the Charity Commission or in their planning application, that any profits generated by Barnet RT Ltd are transferred to, or reinvested in, Barnet Recreational Trust to support “the provision of facilities in the interest of social welfare for recreational and leisure-time occupation” locally.
If Christchurchgrove Ltd are presenting an association with Barnet Recreational Trust as a community benefit in support of a planning application, this representation is misleading.
I am willing to publish the Land Registry documentation confirming the ownership of this land if required.
The information in question was taken from page 39 of the applicant’s Planning & Design Statement.