Barnet Unison mental health social workers remain in year-long dispute after talks with Barnet Council break down. 50% of permanent workforce have left since January

 

Photo: Barnet Unison

Mental health work is one of the most under-funded and under-valued part of the public sector. Here Barnet Unison explain what their year-long dispute is all about.

Barnet UNISON mental health social workers dispute with Barnet Council since 1 September 2023 has been over the failure to agree a recruitment and retention payment due to high turnover of staff across three mental health social worker teams.

On Monday 15 July 2024 UNISON wrote to Barnet Council suspending strike action and agreeing to go into talks to try and resolve the dispute.

Unfortunately talks broke down as it became clear in the meeting that Barnet Council was not prepared to reconsider their position.

The following facts provide a glimpse of the scale of the crisis facing Barnet Council.

• 50% of the permanent workforce will have left one of the three mental health social work team workforce since 1 January 2024.
• 31 mental health social workers will have left one of the three mental health social work teams in the last two years.
• 12 mental health social workers have left the mental health social work team North in the last two years.
• 19 mental health social workers have left the mental health social work team South in the last two years.
• Did you know that 40% of AMHPs have left the AMHP team in the last two months.
• 100% of AMHPs across the North and South mental health teams resigned and left the Council by the end of August 2024.
• In July 2023 Barnet Council informed UNISON that they had a budget of £266k to resolve this dispute.
• In a meeting with Acas in March 2024 with UNISON they doubled their budget to £532k.
• It would cost £150k to settle this dispute

You can read more facts about this dispute here on our website h

At our last meeting with Barnet Council our reps informed senior management that they were leaving because it had become clear that Barnet Council does not value their staff or service users. Our members strongly believe that it is not safe to practice as a mental health social worker in the three frontline mental health teams.

 John Burgess, Branch Secretary, Barnet UNISON said:

It has become apparently clear that Barnet Council has chosen confrontation rather than negotiation to resolve this high-profile dispute. It is not about the money because we know there is a pot three times bigger than what would be needed to bring this dispute to a close. The sheer scale of the numbers of social workers leaving these three teams should have set alarm bells ringing with senior management. The fact that they appear unconcerned about the risks of the chronic levels of turnover has left mental health social workers feeling deeply unsafe. We still have some members who are currently still working but feeling very scared about what could happen in terms of risks. Failure to end this dispute will leave Barnet Council exposed as an uncaring and unsafe workplace for mental health social workers.

I have recently reached out to the Chief Executive and Leader of Barnet Council to come back with a revised offer which may be able to retain some of the current staff and encourage experienced mental health social workers to come and work for Barnet.

Until there is a credible offer the Barnet UNISON mental health social worker dispute remains live and we will continue to report on the dispute. It is our duty to advocate for a safe working environment for our members and no one will silence our voice for our members.

 

Consultation meeting at Birchen Grove Garden Centre on Barnet's West Hendon Playing Fields plans - Saturday 18th November 2023

 

 

 

From COMMON PLACE CONSULTATION

 

Barnet Council wants to transform West Hendon Playing Fields into an exciting new park and we want your views on how it should be improved. The new park proposals will include new play areas, recreational spaces, sports facilities, improved infrastructure, and expanded leisure amenities.

Your input is vital to creating a thriving destination that is inclusive and accessible. We are planning engagement opportunities where we would love to hear from you.

1- You can join us in person at our drop-in events to meet the project team, learn more about the project proposal and share your aspirations for the park:

• Session 1: Wednesday, 15 th of November 2023 at Barnet Multicultural Community Centre, NW4 3TA from 3:00pm – 7:30pm.
• Session 2: Saturday, 18 th of November at Birchen Grove Garden Centre, NW9 8RY from 10:00am – 3:00pm.

Both venues have accessible wheelchair entry and toilets.

2- For those who are unable to attend in person, we are running two online webinars on 21st of November for you to learn more about the project proposal and ask any questions that you may have:

• Session 1: 6:00pm – 6:45pm. Register here.
• Session 2: 6:45pm – 7:30pm. Register here.

3- Take part in our survey by 17th of December. This will help us understand how you currently use the park, and your vision and aspirations of the West Hendon Playing Fields.

 

 

Our emerging project vision is to breathe new life into the site, turning West Hendon Playing Fields into a thriving destination that puts People, Place, and the Planet at the core of improvement efforts. The park will be inclusive to all ages and abilities, enhance local wildlife and biodiversity, and offer ample opportunities for physical activity and recreation.

We came up with this vision based on Barnet Council's aspirations for West Hendon Playing Fields, past engagement exercises, and what we know about the area. We need your input to make sure the final vision captures what the community wants. Complete our survey to share how you experience the park, your feedback on the vision and your ideas for improvement. We will use your feedback to design a park that you will enjoy.

 

Who will we be engaging?

We are committed to broad-reaching engagement with a diverse range of communities. We will be engaging with a wide range of groups, including: 

• West Hendon Residents
• Tenants of West Hendon Playing Fields
• Conservation and Nature Groups
• Accessibility-focused groups
• Sports Groups
• Schools in the area
• Voluntary, Community and Faith (VCF) groups
• Local councillors

We will also be consulting with the following organisations to ensure that our proposals meet statutory requirements. They include: 

• Brent Council
• Sport England
• Greater London Authority
• Canal and River Trust
• Metropolitan Police 
• Environment Agency
• Natural England
• Thames Water
• UK Power Networks

How will we be engaging?

We are committed to engaging with residents and stakeholders in a way that is: 

• Resident-first: We put residents first and emphasise the importance of the local community in shaping our proposals.
• Existing Knowledge: We leverage existing knowledge bases and networks from voluntary organisations and other groups to ensure that all communities, especially under-represented groups, have an opportunity to participate. 
• Transparent: We establish clear parameters of engagement from the beginning to promote honesty and transparency.
• Innovative: We use best practices and innovative approaches, both online and in person, to engage with the community.
• Engaging: We raise awareness of West Hendon Playing Fields and generate excitement for our proposals to ensure early activation.
• Tailored: We tailor our engagement topics to the specific aspirations and needs of the community and stakeholders.
• Ongoing: We engage and communicate throughout the project lifecycle to keep you updated and involved.

We believe that these principles will help us to build strong relationships with you and your community, ensuring all voices are heard as we develop the proposals for West Hendon Playing Fields. 

Our Promise of Feedback - Your voice matters!

We will listen to and record every comment you make. Our communication channels will be open, consistent, and transparent. We offer both offline and online communication channels to ensure accessibility for everyone. At the end of each key stage, we will tell you how we incorporated your input into the design of the Playing Fields. Where feedback has not been incorporated, we will clearly explain why. 

 

 

LINK TO KNOWLEDGE MAP to comment on different aspects of the park.

 There was a Master Plan for the area back in a 2018 consultation that includes various proposals LINK

 

Residents urged to write opposing threat to Welsh Harp SSSI

  Route of new bridge across north marsh wetlands as they were in 1990s (IMAGE: COOL OAK)

Ben Watt, founder of the the Cool Oak group (Welsh Harp) has written a disturbing blog post LINK about the proposed 200 metre long steel and concrete footbridge across the Welsh Harp from the private estate that has replaced the West Hendon estate. 

This goes straight through the north marsh threatening breeding species and may also endanger the area's  SSSI (Site of Special Scientic Interest Status).

Ben Watt points out that this undermines the Joint Vision for the Welsh Harp that Barnet Council and Brent Council and other agencies have recently signed.

Brent Parks Forum is urging everyone to write to Barnet Council along the lines below:

Email Councillor Alan Schneiderman, Cabinet Member for Environment & Climate Change for Barnet Council at cllr.a.schneiderman@barnet.gov.uk, and Anne Clarke,  London Assembly Member for Barnet and Camden at anne.clarke@london.gov.uk

Dear Cllr Schneiderman and Cllr Clarke,

We object to the new bridge due to be built over the North Marsh of the Welsh Harp by Barratt PLC. We understand Barnet Council has statutory powers under s.97 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to stop this. The Wildlife and Countryside Act of 1981 clearly states: "It is an offence to intentionally or recklessly destroy or damage the listed features of a SSSI or disturb its listed fauna, without reasonable excuse".

Unless the bridge is cancelled or the route altered, all of the signatories to the newly published Joint Vision for the Welsh Harp - which includes Barnet Council - will be party to the partial destruction of one of the oldest and most famous SSSIs in the UK.

Sign off with full address for your objections to be lodged with the Councillor.  Keep a record of the email. 

It is also important that Brent Council, as a signatory to the Joint Vision, also opposes the plans.

LETTER: Kilburn Square Housing: Brent Labour vs Barnet Labour…

 The Kilburn Square Development (Photo: Brent Council)

Dear Editor,

  

Remember Alice through the Looking Glass…? Here’s an Open Question to the Brent Housing team, as they press on to an imminent Planning Application with a scheme the local community strongly believes is still too big…

 

PRE-ELECTION

https://www.times-series.co.uk/news/19937298.residents-lose-latest-fight-save-east-finchley-green-spaces/

• Conservative Barnet council wants to build houses on green space
• Labour opposition backs residents’ objections

 

POST-ELECTION 

https://www.hamhigh.co.uk/news/east-finchley-green-space-saved-from-development-9241434

• Labour gains control
• The scheme is cut back to preserve the green space

 

IF BARNET LABOUR CAN DO THIS… WHY CAN’T BRENT LABOUR DROP BLOCK C-D ON KILBURN SQUARE? 

 

Feel free to comment on here!

 

Details of the scheme heading towards a Planning Application:  https://legacy.brent.gov.uk/media/16420412/kilburn-square-final-exhibition.pdf

 

For more background see https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2022/05/letter-brent-is-prioritisng-housing.html  . To join our campaign please email savekilburnsquare@gmail.com

 

Keith Anderson.

NW6 6QA

We need to firm up proposals for the future of the Welsh Harp Environmental Education Centre or it will be our children's loss

 

Representations were made both by councillors and the public at the last meeting of the Welsh Harp Joint Consultative Committee about the Welsh Harp Environmental Education Centre (WHEEC)  and its future.

The Committee covers both Barnet Council and Brent Council and the chairing alternates between the two. This year Barnet chairs.

The Centre has been a well-used resource for educating primary school children about the environment for decades. Thames21 was chosen to take it over when Brent Council stopped funding as a result of government funding cuts. However, after operating the Centre for a few years they decided they could not continue. Following local campaigning they decided to continue for a year, albeit with a reduced offer, while a long-term solution was found to ensure the future viability of the resource.

At the Committee's March 10th meeting it was recorded:

..it had been agreed for Thames 21 to continue activities  [at WHEEC] for a further year, with a full programme to be confirmed. It was noted that the centre required some infrastructure work in order to make the centre viable, which would incur a revenue cost. The Committee would continue to be kept updated regarding progress on the ongoing discussions regarding the future of the Welsh Harp Environmental Education Centre. 

Questions and comments were then invited on the update, with the following issues raised:
· It was noted that expressions had been raised to extend the remit of classes at the Welsh Harp Environmental Education Centre, including sessions for secondary schools and evening classes for adults. It was asked if these plans were still in place to be explored. It was explained that this was still being explored and had worked in other similar centres in London, but would rely on a viable consortium to bring people, resources and organisations together to make it happen.

Brent Council's report to last last week's meeting indicated little progress:

Welsh Harp Environmental Education Centre:

Discussions have continued between Brent Council and external partner organisations who have or may have an interest in creating a viable environmental education centre. Thames 21 have agreed to provide some services for another year while discussions continue for a longer-term solution for the future of the Centre.

Committee members asked for further information stressing the importance of the Centre in the context of the Council's declaration of a climate emergency. No details were available of the organisations that had expressed an interesting in forming a Consortium to run the Centre, the reduced programme that will be offered by Thames21, whether local firm Carey's an original bidder to run the Centre had been approached again, or the status of the former chapel, known as Planet House, which shares the site. 

When passing the Centre's classrooms and toilet block on the way to the Garden Centre it is easy to discount the Centre's most important resource. This is the extensive woodland (see photograph above) that stretches to the Barnet border north of the classrooms and the woodland on the other side of the access road that  abuts the Welsh Harp Open Space. The towering mature trees and shrubs beneath  provide an amazing unspoilt habitat for wildlife and add to Brent's quota of green space.

When I tweeted about the Centre yesterday these were some of the responses:

 

 Any organisations or projects interested in joining a consortium should write to  brent.parks.services@brent.gov.ukwith a brief summary of their interest/proposal.

Barnet Council's £18.8m plans for West Hendon Playing Fields at the Welsh Harp

Barnet Council have approved a scheme to go to Planning Committee in 2022 for the transformation of the West Hendon Playing Fields at the Barnet end of the Welsh Harp. 

 

Satellite image of the area as it is at present

The Welsh Harp is within the boundaries of both Barnet and Brent Councils and is jointly managed by them and the Canal and Rivers Trust.

In a Press Release LINK  Barnet Council said:

New facilities will include tennis courts, 3G artificial turf pitches, a high ropes course, bowling green, multi-use games area, outdoor gym, play area, skate park and more. There will be a Hub building with a café, indoor climbing, activity studio, nursery, soft play, community rooms, changing rooms and toilets.

Councillor Dean Cohen, Chair of the Environment Committee, said: 

It’s great to see Barnet reaping the benefits of growth in our borough. This has included vast improvements to our parks and green spaces. This latest investment comes on top of the £5million regeneration of Silkstream Park and Montrose Playing Fields, and £1.1million put into the ongoing refurbishment of Colindale Park. This will benefit the borough’s residents, businesses and visitors, and I look forward to seeing our vision become a reality.

Work on the sports hub project will continue after an outline business case for its development was approved at a recent meeting of Barnet Council’s Policy & Resources Committee. Funding for the project will come from a range of sources including the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). The Community Infrastructure Levy is money collected from new development which is used to fund infrastructure to support development. Part of the CIL funding from the scheme will be generated from the West Hendon estate, providing 2,194 properties – including 1,553 new homes including 543 affordable homes.

The development follows a £5million investment in the regeneration of Silkstream Park and Montrose Playing Fields, between Colindale and Burnt Oak, which was completed last year. It will follow a £1.1million regeneration of Colindale Park, which is currently in progress.

Construction of the new facilities in West Hendon is expected to begin after an outline planning application has been submitted in 2022.

Has tonight's Cricklewood Broadway/Hassop Road planning application slipped under the radar?

 

View on Cricklewood Broadway (existing and proposed)

A major development on Cricklewood Broadway and Hassop Road appears to have slipped under the radar of local residents. The application LINK will be decided at tonight's Planning Committee. 448 letters were sent out by Brent Council and there were only four responses. One in favour and three objections. Opposite the site, actual in the London Brough of Barnet, is the Railway Terraces Conservation Area. Barnet is listed as a consultee but, along with all the other consultees, their submission is not published on the Brent Planning portal.

 

To attend meeting on BrentLive CLICK HERE

Hassop Road - front view (existing and proposed)

The Planners' report summarises:

Retention and refurbishment of buildings at 42-56 Hassop Road, demolition of buildings at 32-40 and 60-74 Hassop Road and replacement with 3 storey building accommodating 2,679 sqm of floorspace (Use Class E) and 8 self-contained flats, refurbishment of ground floor retail at 249-289 Cricklewood Broadway including creation of retail arcade between Cricklewood Broadway and Hassop Road, change of use of 1st floor of 249-283 Cricklewood Broadway and creation of 2 to 3additional storeys above 249-289 Cricklewood Broadway accommodating a 157 unit co-living scheme and ancillary facilities including laundries, cinema, shared living/kitchen/dining rooms, storage and shared workspace and new facade to front and rear of 249-289 Cricklewood Broadway

 

The two existing floors of the Cricklewood Broadway building will be re-furbished, with the ground floor retained in retail use and the first floor converted to shared living/co-working accommodation. The building will be extended upwards by three additional floors, each providing additional co-living accommodation. An arcade will be provided, linking Cricklewood Broadway to Hassop Road, and will have shops on its southern side, and some ancillary accommodation for the co-living units (gym and concierge) on its northern side. The units are laid out at a ratio of just under 7 rooms per shared kitchen, dining and living room and small kitchenettes are also provided within the rooms. Other communal facilities will include co-working spaces, lounges, gym, cinema, external amenity space, managers office, concierge, and storage areas. Floors three to four will be stepped back from its front and rear elevations and the maximum height of this building will be approximately 17m at its southern end and 20m at its northern end.

 

The Hassop Road building will involve the refurbishment of Nos.42-56 and its upward extension by an additional floor, and the redevelopment of 32-40 and 60-74 Hassop Road to provide a three-storey building. Due to the gradient of the road, maximum height will range between approximately 9m and 12m.The ground floor will continue to be in employment use whilst the upper floors will accommodate 8no. self-contained flats.

 

Public realm improvements between the two buildings are proposed to make the street more pedestrian-friendly. This will be achieved through the provision of a shared surface, the planting of trees (approximately 23no.), the removal of the ad hoc parking and their replacement with two dedicated parking bays and two loading bays, and cycle parking. Catenary lighting is also proposed. Improvements are also proposed along the Cricklewood Broadway frontage with additional plantings, seating, and cycle parking.

 

Regarding the Railway Terraces Conservation Area they say:

Although the proposed development will be visible from the Conservation Area and will directly face the listed Milestone LINK , it must also be viewed within the context of the existing developments external to those heritage assets. 

 

Visibility does not necessarily equate to being harmful because it could be argued that views from the Conservation Area, such as along Kara Way, towards the site will be enhanced due to a replacement building, albeit larger, that is more sympathetic in terms of its overall design and materials. At worse, the impact of the development is considered neutral.

 

 On the 157 unit co-living block the planners state:

PolicyH16 of the London Plan acknowledges that co-living is a type of housing that will help to meet a particular need, that is, single person households who cannot or choose to not live-in self-contained homes or HMOs. The policy does not restrict the accommodation to particular groups by occupation or specific need (e.g., for students, nurses, temporary/emergency accommodation) but such schemes must be of at least 50 units.

 

Given the density of living accommodation in that block and the fact that it has lifts for disabled people who will require PEEPs (personal emergency evacuation plans) councillors will be keen to look at fire safety. I have embedded the report below - it is worth looking at page 9.

Click bottom right for full page.

Please support campaigners' vision for the Welsh Harp

 

A group of campaigners for the Welsh Harp (Brent Reservoir)  have published a 15 point vision for its future. There has been a problem with littering around the Welsh Harp for a long time   but the recent lowering of the waterline, so that dam repairs could take place,  have revealed what was in the water itself. A truly shocking revelation.

 

Only one metre below the surface. Debris and contaminated alluvium build-up on the protected East Marsh, revealed during lowering of water levels, January 2021
© Ben Watt

 

The vision for the 170 acres of the area and its Site of Special Scientic Interest would require the Canal and River Trust (owners of the reservoir and shoreline), Brent and Barnet Councils (owners of the open areas), Environment Agency (overseers of the two inflowing rivers and the reservoir's flood control function, and Natural England (who advise on environmental issues and adjudicate on SSSI status), to work together. 

 

That is a tall order but if anyone can achieve that it will be this band of determined, hands on campaigners.

 

Please get behind them by reading the full vision, written by Ben Watt, and making your voice heard. LINK

We wish them well and ultimate success so that a healthy and thriving natural resource will be available for future generations to treasure.

Barnet Library Service premiere new video on the Golden Age of the Welsh Harp

 

Barnet Council today premiered a video about the history of the Welsh Harp made be their Local Studies Department:

The Golden Age of the Welsh Harp – continues the series of descriptions of the 1st edition 25 inch to mile ordnance surveys from the London Borough of Barnet’s library service local history collection by examining sheet 11/10. At first it looks as if there is very little on the map, but film explores the rich history of the Brent Reservoir (universally known as the Welsh Harp), during it’s golden age in the mid 19th century from the building of the lake, to the building of the railways and the coming of the suburbs. Stories include, monks, floods, drownings, pumps and propellers. Most interesting of all is the story of William Perkins Warner, and his endeavour to create London’s foremost holiday and visitor attraction.

Barnet Council turn down another planning application for Woodfield Nursery at the Welsh Harp

 

The site (outlined in red) in context

The plans

Street elevation

The latest planning application for the redevelopment of the Woodfield Nursery site in Cool Oak Lane, near the Welsh Harp, fronted by Taylor Wimpey has been turned down by Barnet Council.  LINK There have been other applications for this site which at present is occupied by greenhouses and polytunnels in poor condition and some brickbuilt offices, alongside a landscaping business.  It is close to the Brent border and not far from the huge controversial private development, formerly West Hendon social housing,  on the other bank across Cool Oak Bridge.

Some years ago there were applications by the owner of this site and the then Greenhouse Garden Centre in Birchen Grove for housing estates at both locations.  Brent Council turned down the application. LINK  It is now Birchen Grove Garden Centre under new management - I do not have details of the freehold ownership.

Barnet Council found that the proposed development would have a detrimental impact on Metropolitan Open Land and rejected the developer's claim that the greenhouses and polytunnels were permanent structures allowing development. The planners ruled that it did not meet the exemptions test for such developments.

In addition officers said that the proposal did not secure the affordable housing, delivery of employment skills and enterprise, or carbon off-setting required. It was a long way from public transport which would increase car ownership.

There were 139 comments on the Barnet planning portal of which 137 were against, one in support and one a general comment. Preservation of the Metropolitan Open Land and the Site of Special Scientific Interest, the importance of a 'green lung' in an over-crowded city, and defence of nature were all prominent. Among the objectors were Hendon Rifle Club, Silver Jubilee Residents Association, the RSPB and Brent Parks Forum. Brent Council also made a submission but it was not available on the portal.

It is unlikely that this is the end of the story!

NW2 Residents' Association's objection to the 'over-bearing' B&Q Cricklewood development

Beware of the tendency to cut off height in development illustrations

 

An idea of the footprint

'Ghost' blocks

I am grateful to North West TWO Residents' Association for permission to repost this very useful article from their website LINK

We strongly object to this planning application. Many of our reasons have already been well expressed by our fellow residents’ associations, our individual members and many others; we won’t repeat them all.

We note that much of the application is speculative, conditional and non-committal (“should be provided”, “should be designed”). It avoids saying that things will be done in accordance with the application, and the only assurances are that the development will be a fine thing for Cricklewood. These assurances are not well-founded and only bolster the impression that this developer is not committed to the project.

The application seeks to justify excessive height, massing and density by claiming the proposal solves trivial or non-existent problems.

Repeatedly, the 25-storey tower is described as an aid to wayfinding and legibility. No evidence is presented that people are having trouble finding their way. Central Cricklewood is highly legible with one main road, the A5, and one significant crossroads leading to Cricklewood Station on one side and Willesden Green Station on the other. Finding the way from Cricklewood Station is helped by Legible London signage and if finding the station were a problem, more signs could be provided. They would be cheaper and far less obtrusive than a 25-storey tower block. All this self-serving justification does is emphasise how starkly visible the development would be from all around.

The application makes much of providing a public pedestrian and cycling route between Depot Approach and Cricklewood Lane.

– It would not serve pedestrians coming to or from the Railway Terraces via Kara Way; that route is already blocked at Kara Way.

– It would not serve cyclists travelling between Cricklewood Lane and the A5 junction with Depot Approach. The concept fails to meet Transport for London’s London Cycling Design Standards. Diverting off straight roads to cycle up and down sharp inclines and in amongst pedestrians fails to satisfy the core outcomes of directness, comfort, coherence and adaptability to increasing volumes, and breaches the principle that bicycles must be treated as vehicles, not pedestrians.

– It would bring pedestrians and cyclists into conflict with each other.

– The traffic and transport sections of the application make no attempt to evaluate likely use or benefits of this feature.

A pedestrian route would have to be provided so residents of the development can move around it, and it cannot reasonably be gated. It’s not a community benefit and declaring it a cycle route only benefits the applicant.

The application criticises Cricklewood for not having a library or a town hall, but does not say it will rectify this or offer any other community facilities, with the exception of public access to the spaces between building plots. It calls one of these spaces a Town Square, though it would sit apart from the roads, and shows it with a brightly lit cinema or advertising screen shining into the windows of the residents across Cricklewood Lane (no assessment of this impact is offered).

The developers have no clear ideas on how the ground-floor commercial spaces would be used, and no strategy for encouraging appropriate uses, let alone allocation to develop the community. There is no policy to ensure they are let and do not remain empty as at nearby Fellows Square.

No social housing is offered and there is only an “aspiration” to provide the minimum of 35% “affordable” units. This fails to meet London’s needs and it fails to meet the needs of our community. The application should be rejected for this reason alone.

The statement of community engagement makes it clear that the developers have not consulted Cricklewood residents so that our views will be taken into account. The statement ends with a brief series of rejections of every criticism, and the plans have not been modified to take any concern into account. That was not engagement.

The open space in the development is not commensurate with the increase in population, which would increase demand on existing and prospective open spaces. The application avoids quantifying this.

The impact of the development on its surroundings would be significant and adverse, as the report from Montague Evans states repeatedly. That report hopes that good design might somewhat mitigate the significant adverse impacts. This does not address the fundamental problem.

Whether 15-storey or 25-storey, these blocks are not appropriate for this area. The tallest buildings around or in process of gaining approval are 9-storey, and they are the exception. Most of the entire neighbourhood is 2-storey or 3-storey. Not even the blocks of Brent Cross South, at some distance, are so high. These blocks would dominate the area. They would be overbearing, far too high and excessively massive. They would be detrimental to the neighbourhood and incoherent with it. Barnet, Brent and Camden still have no joint plan or co-ordinated approach to Cricklewood’s development, but it is clear that there is no prospect of similar development in the Brent and Camden parts of central Cricklewood.

The application states “There will be significant changes to some local views as a result of the regeneration of the Site. These changes and the visibility of the tallest elements on the Site signal the regeneration of the Site and the positive changes brought to the neighbourhood in returning the Site back into active use.” The current residents of Cricklewood and anyone that comes to live on the site would have to live with the permanent changes this development would make and their direct and lasting impact on our lives. These tower blocks cannot be justified by being called a “signal”.

More about this planning application

Our quick guide to making objections

Make your own objection – or say more

GLA say Woodfield Nursery development at Welsh Harp does not conform with the London Plan

The GLA have raised objections to the controversial plan LINK to build on the Woodfield Nursery site, Cool Oak Lane, Barnet, near the Welsh Harp Metropolitan Open Land. This means that if Barnet Council make a draft decision in favour of the planning application they have to give 14 days to allow the Deputy Mayor for Planning, Jules Pipe, to decide whether to allow the application to proceed unchanged, direct the Council to refuse the application, or to take over as planning authority himself.

The conclusions of a much longer report (available BELOW) are:
 

London Plan and the Mayor’s Intend to Publish London Plan policies on Metropolitan Open Land is the key strategic issue relevant to this planning application. The development constitutes inappropriate development on Metropolitan Open Land and very special circumstances have not been demonstrated in this case. The application therefore does not comply with the London Plan as set out below:

• Principle of development: The proposed residential development in an inaccessible location constitutes unsustainable development contrary to London Plan and intend to publish London Plan
  
• Metropolitan Open Land: The development would have a substantial impact on the openness of the MOL and would be inappropriate development; the development does not therefore meet the NPPF exceptions tests and no very special circumstances have been demonstrated. The proposals thus fail the requirements of Policy 7.17 of the London Plan, Policy G3 of the Intend to Publish London Plan and the NPPF.
  
• Housing and affordable housing: 41 units proposed. Notwithstanding the objection to the unsustainable location of the housing proposals, the principle of 35% affordable housing is supported, but this provision does not constitute ‘very special circumstances’ that would justify the development with substantial impact on MOL. The application currently does not fully comply with Policy H5 to be eligible for a Fast Track Route. The applicant should clarify the affordable housing offer by habitable room, and appropriate tenure split in favour of affordable rent. The on-site playspace provision should be appropriately demonstrated and secured by condition.
  
• Urban design: The development would significantly reduce the openness of MOL and is thus inappropriate in principle. Notwithstanding this, the applicant should provide information on equal distribution of affordable and market units within the site to avoid segregation. The application should re-consider the positioning of single aspect north facing units.
  
• Climate change: Further information has been requested on the energy strategy, urban greening and air quality.
  
• Transport: An entirely car dependent development in a PTAL 0 area is unsustainable and contrary to London Plan and Intend to Publish London Plan policy. 

Click on bottom right corner to enlarge document