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 21^st 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.