Brent Cross (From Times Series)

Brent Cross

4:43pm Tuesday 24th November 2009

• Print
• Email
• Comments(0)

Years ago, A Conservative Government, I believe it was commissioned an Inquiry into The Planning System. A report was produced by The Nuffield Foundation. Amongst the recommendations was one which said objectors should have the right of appeal in major planning applications. The Report was quietly shelved.

So, we have the present system where only the applicant has the right of appeal against a Local Planning Authority’s refusal to grant planning consent. I think it is correct that objectors are not even a party in the appeal, but are allowed to voice their objections at an appeal hearing.

No doubt the recent Brent Cross planning application was the kind of proposal that the Nuffield Foundation had in mind. I have just about recovered from the meeting which carried over from the Wednesday to the Thursday evening.

No need to dwell on the outcome but the process was fascinating. Committee rooms one and two were packed out. The overflow in Committee room three actually had a live visual feed. I hope I got that correct, as I noted a camera filming us. At times the atmosphere was electric (well not quite).

Politicians from the three main Political Parties addressed the Committee. The Leader of Barnet Council gave an upbeat speech in favour of the Development. His colleague the GLA member for Camden and Barnet (and also the Ceremonial Mayor of Barnet) excelled himself. In a tour de force he “damned “previous planning colleagues who gave permission for Grahame Park (how many years ago was that?). He poured scorn on the new Beaufort Park Development. He wanted a Garden Suburb development.

The Labour GLA Member for Brent and Harrow spoke out on behalf of his constituents. Sarah Teather Lib Dem MP voiced the concerns of her residents in Brent. The Conservative Ward Member for Golders Green gave a speech of Ministerial eloquence in favour of the development.

Objectors and those in favour took it in turn to try to persuade the Committee. One speaker waved a magic wand in a desperate attempt to win us over. A speaker in favour must have felt he was doing well, until he told us to hoots of derision from objectors that he lived on the Isle of Dogs.

I did my best to ask for more protection for existing residents. I was not convinced that the traffic figures added up. I did not like the proposal to build on the green space outside Band Q on Cricklewood Broadway. I was concerned about density and the lack of usable green space and play areas. I was unsure about the combined heat and power plant.

The majority of my colleagues on the Committee thought the application good enough to vote in favour. I listened with interest to some of them who said because the application was in accordance with all the Social and National Statutory Rules and Guidance it had to be approved. Well as most (if not all) applications that are recommended for approval meet the guidelines other wise the planning officers would not be in favour, what is the purpose of the Planning Committee? I shall watch future Planning Committee discussions with interest.

So what comes next? We can expect a legal challenge from objectors. The developer will have to provide more details as each stage progresses. Residents will have further opportunities to comment. The Developer has agreed to work with local people. There is a long way to go. Meanwhile normal service will resume at the Finchley and Golders Green Planning Sub Committee next week.