Barnet (Parliament Politics Magazine) – Barnet Council has rejected proposals for nearly 1,800 new homes across two development schemes, raising concerns over planning, infrastructure and impact.
The same architect created the Barratt and Regal projects, which were turned down due to their size and height.
In less than a week, Barnet Council rejected two significant residential plans created by the same architect on the grounds that the structures would be too tall.
Between them, the two plans, created by JTP for developers Regal and Barratt, would offer close to 1,800 residences in blocks up to 25 stories high. For a final decision, they will now be sent to the mayor of London.
In the first of two separate planning committee sessions last Thursday, council members rejected Regal’s mixed-use redevelopment of Great North Leisure Park in Finchley, despite the planning officers’ recommendation to accept the plan.
The plans included 1,485 residences spread over 20 structures, including a 25-story tower, a single-story sports pavilion, a two-story replacement public recreation center owned by the council, flexible commercial space, and about 400 parking places.
The plan was rejected, according to Nigel, chair of the Strategic Planning Committee, because the “high density proposal would result in overdevelopment of the site, which has a poor public transport accessibility level.”
“Height mass and bulking would be inappropriate in this suburban setting and would cause harm to that setting,”
he continued.
Yesterday evening, the same committee convened once more and issued a second rejection for the reconstruction of the High Barnet station parking lot for Barratt London, Places for London, and Transport for London’s development business.
The plan, which had also been suggested for approval, included five buildings ranging in height from five to eleven stories, with 283 residences and 567 square meters of commercial space.
Young once more cited the scheme’s height and
“The harm that that would cause to the surrounding context”
as justifications for his rejection.
Barratt and Places for London’s plan had more than 800 objections against 104 in favor, while Regal’s plans received 333 objections against 28 in favor. Both plans were met with significant criticism from the local population.
For both sets of proposals, JTP served as the principal architect and master planner. BMD served as the landscape architect for the Regal scheme, Avison Young handled planning, Montagu Evans handled townscape, and Ashton Fire handled fire.
What changes would satisfy the council for approval?
Barnet Council refused the two casing schemes primarily due to inordinate structure heights, overdevelopment, and detriment to original character and structure. Both JTP- designed proffers were rejected for featuring halls up to 25 storeys, supposedly too altitudinous and intrusive, violating programs like DM01 and CS5 in Barnet’s Original Plan and clashing with the suburban streetscene.
The North Finchley scheme (1,485 homes) was blamed for overwhelming the point, poor transport links, and environmental impacts, with commission members noting” detriment” from viscosity despite casing requirements.
Declinations stressed parking, business strain, and detriment to bordering views, aligning with NPPF guidelines against dominating developments. Revising designs for lesser perceptivity to original character, with enhanced environmental mitigation and community benefits, might satisfy commission preferences despite officer recommendations for approval.
