At the start of November, we were back at the inspectors’ examination of Barnet’s draft Local Plan. The Local Plan affects, among other things, how the council engages with developers and reacts to their ideas, and influences planning committee decisions. The draft says the “indicative capacity” of the site is 1,009 units.
We argued that’s absurdly high – we’ve seen the massive dense tower blocks it needs. At last the council revealed how they came to that figure; they’d categorised the centre of Cricklewood as not suburban or urban, but “central”, as if it was a bit of central London that was already dense with high-rise blocks, That’s not Cricklewood. The urban category describes us quite well – partly terraces and mansion blocks, two to four storeys high, and so on. But “urban” gets lower densities and would work out to about 650 or fewer units on the B&Q site – rather more sensible.
The council knew we’d challenge that categorisation but they didn’t explain it or defend it.
The inspectors have given Barnet a deadline of 30 November for all their proposed changes to the Local Plan and all sorts of supporting documents. After that’s been pulled together, there’s going to be another consultation on the plan, led by the inspectors this time.
So maybe the council will reduce that figure of 1,009 units. Or maybe they’ll try to justify it somehow. In that case, the residents of Cricklewood will have our chance to tell the inspectors, loud and clear, just how ridiculous, harmful and unacceptable it would be.
Then if we get the Local Plan changed and the inquiry goes our way and the Secretary of State turns down Montreaux’s application, whoever puts forward new plans for the site will know they’ll get no help from the council and no support if they try for that sort of development again.