HIGH BARNET STATION CAR PARK
PLANNING APPLICATION 25/2671/FUL
This is an OBJECTION on behalf of Barnet Residents Association
The Local Plan
A starting point for this development is the Local Plan which sets out parameters for this site. There are two key elements: that the site is suitable for up to 300 homes and the site is not appropriate for tall buildings (over seven storeys). On the first point, it is evident from this and the previous abandoned scheme that 300 has been regarded as a target to be achieved if at all possible, but is evidently impossible. From what we say below it should be evident that the proposed 283 flats cannot be delivered except at the expense of sub-standard living conditions and building to an unacceptable height.
The Design
Several of the application documents make the claim that this is a ‘design led’ scheme offering high quality architecture. It is nothing of the sort. It is evidently a numbers led scheme. The five blocks are featureless rectangles displaying a large expanse of red brick, small windows and dominant external ‘clip-on’ balconies. There is an institutional look about the development more like a barracks or even a prison than attractive homes. As the flats are so small the balconies will inevitably be used for storage, adding to the ugliness.
In such a prominent location a high quality development is essential. The applicant claims the design references other buildings in the locality. This is nonsense. Almost all buildings within sight of the development and most of High Barnet Town centre are 1930s or earlier and almost all are no more than four storeys. The architectural contrast is stark. The applicant argues that the eleven storey building will be positive addition to the locality with claims such as “a key marker building to improve existing challenges of wayfinding along Barnet Hill” and be a “distinctive building of civic character” takes us into the realms of fantasy. Several new attractive or at least acceptable developments around Whetstone town centre indicate what could and should be done – a light palette, extensive use of glass with windows of variable sizes, evident features to the frontages and recessed balconies, and all lower than eight storeys
The Height
The developer quotes instances in other Boroughs where variations to the Local Plan have permitted tall buildings in locations where the Plan did not allow them. The arguments are complex, but we believe that there is nowhere else where tall buildings been allowed for a site specifically assessed in a Local Plan as being unsuitable, and that conclusion endorsed in examination by the Planning Inspectorate. The eleven storey block will rise above the skyline, compromising the view of the tower of Barnet Church which has dominated the skyline for nearly two hundred years. If this building is allowed then this precedent will be used by developers to justify tall buildings anywhere in the Borough. The credibility of the Local Plan will be destroyed and result in a complete lack of public trust in its purpose as a blueprint for development in the Borough.
The applicant cites the successful appeal decision on the Arnos Grove development as justification for the tall buildings. However, unlike Barnet, Enfield Council had not identified anywhere in the Borough where tall building might be appropriate, leaving the Borough more vulnerable to tall building proposals. Also, the Arnos Grove scheme was for just two blocks of six and seven storeys, therefore not strictly tall buildings and with far less visual impact than the High Barnet site which, being elevated, will have the appearance of being even higher when viewed across Dollis Valley and from neighbouring streets to the west. The Planning Inspector considered the Arnos Grove scheme did satisfy the object of optimising site capacity through a design led scheme, which would deliver buildings that positively respond to local distinctiveness, be of high architectural quality and would be a relatively small element in a panoramic view. The circumstances at High Barnet station are quite the opposite.
The Flats
All the flats are between one and four sqm above minimum space standards with some 50% being just one sqm above, and several are not compliant with standards for internal layout and other features. The applicants own documentation identifies that all flats will be subject to medium risk noise during the day and high risk at night, with some flats vulnerable to excessive heat gain, especially those which are single aspect south-west facing or on higher floors. The proposed solution is that windows should remain closed and reliance placed on a mechanical ventilation heat recovery system with cooling, with flats on upper floors having larger ventilation units and perhaps external shading.
.
These are not living condition that people should be expected to tolerate. Given the evident problems, the assessment of the risks and proposed solutions are far too superficial. A much more rigorous impact analysis should be provided. The affordability of continuous running of a mechanical ventilation unit should additionally be considered.
Residents’ facilities
The applicant claims this will be “an exciting, well-connected, sustainable residential neighbourhood”. But this is nothing more than hyperbole as they also say “due to separation from the town centre created by topography and infrastructure, and green spaces, the site has the potential to create its own identity” (Design and Access Pt 1). This is an unwitting admission that the site will indeed be isolated, whilst the Transport Assessment Pt I argues that many residents will be categories defined as ‘students and graduates’ and ‘family challenged’. Accessing the nearest shops at Greenhill Parade will necessitate crossing four roads. None of this, plus the poor living conditions in the flats points to a stable, settled, successful community. More likely is an estate that is deeply disliked as somewhere to live and as a result will experience a high turnover of residents.
Station Access
Leaving High Barnet station by foot has always been a challenge for the elderly or those with mobility impairment, and being relatively isolated has also been regarded by many as a threatening environment during the quieter dark evenings. The concerns were ameliorated when the former goods yard was converted to a car park.
With the car park removed the problems will return unless significant improvements are made to the access/egress arrangements. But what is proposed offers little more that cosmetic changes. Requests for fundamental improvements such as an escalator to Meadway, a bus to the station forecourt, and making the slip road two-way have all been refused, and TfL has even refused to commit to moving the northbound bus stop on the A1000 closer to the pedestrian crossing at the top of the slip road. In addition, the existing drop off waiting area on the slip road currently gets congested, with vehicles occasionally stacking back onto the A1000. This congestion will inevitably increase if other means of egress are not improved. High Barnet has the largest population of elderly people in the Borough and the development must include meaningful measures to improve station access before the car park is allowed to be closed.
Conclusion
We are not against the principle of closing the car park for redevelopment for housing. But this should be done in a way that ensures good living conditions for the new residents, does not scar the environment with a highly visible ugly, dense development, and does not worsen the ability of residents of the area to access and leave the station.
The fundamental problem is the desire to maximise the number of flats on the site. The number proposed is unachievable unless build quality and living conditions are compromised. The applicant notes that reducing the eleven storey block to seven would lose 28 flats. That would be a good start, but more important is a redesign that reduces the number of flats to maybe 200 to 250 maximum, and genuinely reflects a design led approach resulting in high quality architecture and decent living conditions that this most prominent site deserves.