Councillors told to approve Brent Cross Cricklewood scheme

COUNCILLORS have been advised to accept the controversial Brent Cross Cricklewood plans in a set of council papers released today.

Barnet Council's planning committee is due to meet next Wednesday to vote on the proposals, which include 98 new residential blocks, a waste handling plant, offices and shops and new roads.

The conclusion to the report reads: “This ambitious and exciting proposal is considered to be an exemplary way to create a new mixed use town centre for Barnet and North London.

“Around 25,000 new jobs and 7,550 homes will be created and the underused and disjointed parts of the regeneration area will be brought back into productive use in the most sustainable way.

“The proposal creates a coherent integrated town centre, which is well connected with the existing suburban area which surrounds it.”

Yesterday around 20 groups announced they had come together to form a coalition to formally oppose the proposal.

Objections have been received from Brent and Camden Councils, MPs Sarah Tether and Dawn Butler, who also submitted an 800 signature petition, and London Assembly members Navin Shah and Brian Coleman.

Around 800 letters have also been submitted by Bestway Cash and Carry customers, which will be knocked down if plans are approved, and more than a dozen residents' and campaign groups.

Objections range from the scale of the plans, the amount of extra traffic generated, the environmental impact and the impact of a new waste handling facility.

The group aims to have the scheme called in by the Secretary of State for communities to look at the plans more closely.

Brent MP Sarah Tether said: “This new coalition shows that the whole community are united in opposition to the Brent Cross Development in its current form..

"It simply isn't fair that Barnet gets the shiny new buildings and road improvements, while my constituents in Brent are lumbered with even more traffic and a huge rubbish dump right on their doorstep.

"With so many different groups coming together to fight these proposals, the Secretary of State simply cannot go on burying his head in the sand.  The Government must call in this disastrous scheme."

Jonathan Joseph from the Brent Cross Cricklewood Development Partners said: “We are pleased that officers have recommended approval of the Brent Cross Cricklewood regeneration.

“The scheme to create a new town centre fits within and fully complies with the most up-to-date local and London wide planning policy to achieve the lasting regeneration of the area.

“The sustainability of the scheme is second to none. The measures we propose will together achieve a carbon reduction of 50 to 60 per cent.

“The £500m of investment into transport meanwhile will connect an area currently cut off from its surroundings with communities around it and the wider capital.

“Now is the time to get on and deliver the 27,000 jobs, 7,500 homes, modern facilities for three local schools, new health facilities, exceptional parks and open spaces, new high street and the largest investment in transport and community infrastructure in the area’s history, all sorely needed.”

The plan is expected to cost £4.5bn and take about 20 years to complete.

Comments (3)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:50pm Tue 15 Sep 09

Jon10 says...

Nothing unexpected about Barnet recommend approval for what is, after all, their own scheme.

Six years ago, Ken Livingstone and the then Barnet Council Leader wrote the forward to Barnet's "Development Framework" document. They talked about a "partnership" with the developers. Unfortunately, that partnership seems to have got too close, with scepticism of their motives suspended.
Nothing unexpected about Barnet recommend approval for what is, after all, their own scheme. Six years ago, Ken Livingstone and the then Barnet Council Leader wrote the forward to Barnet's "Development Framework" document. They talked about a "partnership" with the developers. Unfortunately, that partnership seems to have got too close, with scepticism of their motives suspended. Jon10
  • Score: 0

5:37pm Wed 16 Sep 09

Ali H. says...

The Brent Cross "Regeneration" is misleading: it's destruction. The only
firm commitment is doubling Brent Cross retailing, the incineration
plant/dump and a mere 25 houses, whilst over 200 dwellings are destroyed.
Barnet rejected plans to double the size of Brent Cross in 2003, so
developers are cloaking their true motives in a cloud of spurious double
speak. And, why is it that only one proposal has been evaluated by Barnet? This goes against UK planning rules, let alone EU ones.

Brent and Barnet residents who are seriously disadvantaged by the proposal have been
minimally & misleadingly consulted. The dump/incinerator is carefully
positioned on the Barnet/Brent boundary, as far as possible from Brent Cross
& valuable development, and with the greatest damage to Brent. There are
several Brent schools within a few hundred yards, let alone the 1000s of
houses.

Changes to roads mean busy through routes will be removed, leading to rat
runs in quiet residential roads by those 29000 cars and 900 HGVs - the
developers own figures! Cycle lanes and pedestrian routes will be removed:
we won't even be able to walk north any more across the North Circular Road,
dividing communities.

As to jobs: those are in the final phase, not due for twenty years, and
there's no commitment to build the office space. Given how vastly over
provided we are with office space, and the lack of public transport unless
you happen to live on the Northern Line, what company will ever move there?
The proposed houses are mostly flats with a maximum 12 sq metres of outside
space. We need real regeneration, real thought, not this mess.

We need a proper independent and objective public enquiry to ensure that the public of ALL the boroughs affected are served properly, rather than sheer commercial or political interests.
The Brent Cross "Regeneration" is misleading: it's destruction. The only firm commitment is doubling Brent Cross retailing, the incineration plant/dump and a mere 25 houses, whilst over 200 dwellings are destroyed. Barnet rejected plans to double the size of Brent Cross in 2003, so developers are cloaking their true motives in a cloud of spurious double speak. And, why is it that only one proposal has been evaluated by Barnet? This goes against UK planning rules, let alone EU ones. Brent and Barnet residents who are seriously disadvantaged by the proposal have been minimally & misleadingly consulted. The dump/incinerator is carefully positioned on the Barnet/Brent boundary, as far as possible from Brent Cross & valuable development, and with the greatest damage to Brent. There are several Brent schools within a few hundred yards, let alone the 1000s of houses. Changes to roads mean busy through routes will be removed, leading to rat runs in quiet residential roads by those 29000 cars and 900 HGVs - the developers own figures! Cycle lanes and pedestrian routes will be removed: we won't even be able to walk north any more across the North Circular Road, dividing communities. As to jobs: those are in the final phase, not due for twenty years, and there's no commitment to build the office space. Given how vastly over provided we are with office space, and the lack of public transport unless you happen to live on the Northern Line, what company will ever move there? The proposed houses are mostly flats with a maximum 12 sq metres of outside space. We need real regeneration, real thought, not this mess. We need a proper independent and objective public enquiry to ensure that the public of ALL the boroughs affected are served properly, rather than sheer commercial or political interests. Ali H.
  • Score: 0

9:35pm Wed 16 Sep 09

dellertron says...

Well said Ali H. I couldn't agree more. What we really need is for Cricklewood to be taken out of Barnet's control as they have shown that all they are intersted in is cash not our community.

Why does Jonathan Joseph never mention the Westminster style housing plans that will see home owners compulsory purchased at the bottom of the market and told to pay additional premiums if they want to move back. This is quite aimply affluent Barnets way of ridding itself of people it doesn't want.
Well said Ali H. I couldn't agree more. What we really need is for Cricklewood to be taken out of Barnet's control as they have shown that all they are intersted in is cash not our community. Why does Jonathan Joseph never mention the Westminster style housing plans that will see home owners compulsory purchased at the bottom of the market and told to pay additional premiums if they want to move back. This is quite aimply affluent Barnets way of ridding itself of people it doesn't want. dellertron
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree