Jonathan’s Objection

Dear Sir/Madam

I am writing to lodge my objection to your proposal to build a large number of homes on the green space along Bow lane at the site of the old Finchley Memorial Hospital.Although I fully support the objective of building more homes, and in particular providing housing to NHS staff (who include several members of my family), I do not believe this is an appropriate site given the wide availability of brownfields sites nearby. 

The park in front of Finchley Memorial is a  much-needed green space that is accessible to the public, It is very regularly used by people taking exercise and relaxing. It is particularly needed right now as the nearest other green space, Victoria Park, is absolutely jammed on sunny days making it difficult for vulnerable people to maintain social distancing.

Moreover, when the old hospital was demolished and the new one was built it used land that had previously been playing fields. At the time (2010) the planning consent from the Mayor’s office was unequivocal that permission was being granted because it would lead to additional green space being made available to the public.

The planning report by the GLA ( PDU/2488/02) noted in paragraph 11 that: 

“The site of the demolished hospital would become a publically accessible open space and the redundant Bow Lane Playing Fields, occupying the site’s southern area, would be developed asgrass playing fields comprising two five a-side and one junior pitch, to be used by Our Lady of Lourdes Primary School.”

It further noted in paragraph 22 that:

“In summary, there would be a 9% loss of redundant playing field on the site, however the proposal would create a 100% increase in public access to the remaining space. Furthermore, this remaining space which would be actively managed for enjoyment by the local community, including a primary school that currently has no access to playing fields. The principle is therefore supported.”

I do not believe that the current proposal to develop 130 housing units on this open space is in keeping with the previous commitments.

Kind regards

Jonathan

Ruth’s Objection

Dear Oliver, Mike and councillors,

I am writing to object to the proposed development for Finchley Memorial Hospital for many reasons.

1. This is a private property development that will mean a loss of extensive public green space to our local community. 

From my kitchen window I see so many people use that area day in, day out. Although there are other parks nearby, the green space in front of Finchley Memorial Hospital is quite unique in that it’s very flat and completely accessible. We love it. 

It’s a wonderful, exercise space, much used and appreciated by many elderly and disabled people and families with young children who appreciate the easy circular path and expansive grassy area. 

Heavily pregnant, I waddled around those paths, I pushed my crying babies around – as do many other new parents, I started my couch to 5k…. my kids and all their local friends have learnt to scoot and cycle there, play football, just go for a quick runaround before dinner,,, we’ve got to know all of our neighbours, dog walkers and dogs… thanks to having an open green space so close by. 

If only all neighbourhoods were so fortunate. The proposed ‘Granville Green’ sounds like a miserable substitute.

2. The proposal is for 130 homes – specifically flats, for rent. This is a huge, high density development, completely out of keeping with the immediate local area which is predominantly semi-detached family houses, mainly owner occupied.

3. Buildings are proposed to be ‘up to 6 stories’ high. Again, this makes for a very large-scale development, completely out of keeping with the streets around it. Even the hospital is only 3 stories, and that’s set low down and way back, away from people’s houses. The nearest flats on the High Road are only 3 stories. 

Regardless of the lower facades, the size of the blocks of flats would dwarf the surrounding houses and buildings – in a completely inappropriate way.

4. There would be just 38 car parking spaces. Of course, bike stores are part of the proposal because this is a legal requirement for new builds. It’s irrelevant. People drive in this area – Finchley residents really love their cars… And these are rental flats which means likely many will be multiple occupancy, not single families. That means even more people and more cars driving on our already busy streets.

5. The claim of homes for NHS staff is disingenuous and has no meaning. You say there will be 50% ‘affordable’ homes- these are rental properties, so affordable to who – the landlord or the tenant? There’s no guarantee to provide those homes to the NHS. We don’t even know who will build the homes so it’s entirely speculative.

This claim is at best, hopeful. At worst, and I’m sad to say this is really how it seems – it’s a shameful, cheap marketing ploy that takes advantage of this miserable coronavirus pandemic and the public’s desire to support of the NHS (and conversely, lack of willing to object to anything that appears to be ‘good’ for NHS staff).

6. It will add even more pressure on our local roads, schools and public services. I live opposite the proposed development site. Schools are heavily oversubscribed already. My own children didn’t get a place at either of our (first and second choice) closest primary schools and therefore go to school 1.5 miles away, in East Finchley. We drive there – so that’s more traffic. 

The nearest local doctor’s surgery at Squires Lane is tiny and completely stretched. It’s impossible to get an appointment. 

And Granville Road is often a bottleneck, Bow Lane is already a rat run for traffic avoiding the High Road. Only last month, a car ran off the street speeding around the corner of the proposed development site. This development will make the traffic far worse.

Please reconsider developing on this site. For all the reasons above, let us keep our community’s green space instead.

Kind regards,

Ruth

Tom’s Objection

I wish to strongly object to your proposals regarding the Finchley
Memorial Hospital grounds as I cannot see how developing on a
pleasant, serene open space that provides therapeutic value to the
patients, staff and visitors to the Hospital can in any way enhance
the neighbourhood or the surrounding community.

Since the 1990s large areas of green space have been eliminated in
England leading to a deterioration in environmental facilities and
permanent loss of biodiversity with consequent disappearance of birds,
insects and wild animals. Your proposed development can only add to
this sorry saga and I would suggest is totally at odds with what is
required in the area.

Tom

Chris’s Objections

Hello,

I live on [HIDDEN] and object to the proposed development for the following reasons:

  1. Overlooking & Loss of Privacy: The proposed buildings are way too high and don’t echo the height distribution / profile of either the previous site or the two story houses all round the perimeter of the green space. The Granville place flats on the high road which overlook the car park and one, set back, three story building as part of the previous site doesn’t warrant the, roof line breaching, overbearing presence, of four story buildings right up to the kerbside. 
  2. Inadequate Parking: The current proposal has insufficient parking spaces. It will cause excessive pressure in surrounding streets and be a constant cause of friction.
  3. Traffic Generation: Increased traffic in the area, from new residents and their visitors, will exacerbate flow issues surrounding streets already suffer from. This is clear to anyone who lives here and evidenced during works on surrounding streets which results in numerous altercations as streets are more congested with no areas to pull over into.
  4. Safety: Many houses around the perimeter do not have driveways. It is already challenging and dangerous getting a family into a car that is parked on the street. 
  5. Design and appearance: The block like design shown on the presentation is totally out of character with the current Edwardian streets and houses.
  6. Loss of communal green space: Why take away a space that is being used in the way that was envisaged as part of the planning application for the new hospital (F/03573/09 document 035): 

“The grounds of the existing Finchley Memorial Hospital will be retained as a green space for the local community. We envisage the character of this lawn area as a meeting place and somewhere to go to enjoy a sunny summer’s day. This is the ideal space to have a picnic with friends but can also be used for larger community events and more informal sporting activities”

I moved out of central London to this area to start a family and benefit from more green spaces and avoid all the other adverse aspects listed above. 

Finally, I have to say that it is a real ‘low blow’ to conduct a community engagement process during a global pandemic which doesn’t allow the people to meet, talk and formulate a joined up community response. If you do actually care about community engagement then why don’t you at least extend this consultation process for some more weeks beyond the 19th July? 

Regards,

Chris.

Jacob’s objections

To whom it may concern,

As a proud resident of Finchley, having lived here in N3 my whole life, I am writing to strongly object to the proposed development on the grounds of Finchley Memorial Hospital.

  • The land for proposed development was promised to the community when the new hospital was built on community playing fields.
  • The development will lead to the loss of extensive public green parkland to our local community.
  • The developers plan to build 130 homes with only 38 car parking spaces — this will lead to unmanageable congestion in our area.
  • The proposed buildings are up to 6 stories high, which would cause a huge amount of visual disruption to the area. The large-scale noise pollution this scale would cause would be majorly disruptive to the peace and quiet of Finchley residents.
  • The development would put even more pressure on our local roads, schools and public services.
  • Most of all, the marketing is strongly misleading – there is no guarantee of homes for NHS staff. This planning makes sense on no grounds.

I am speaking up voice alongside what I know to be a strong movement of opposition from so many of us who live in this neighbourhood.

Please do all you can to prevent these plans from going ahead! 

Thanks for your time and careful consideration.

Jacob

Lynn’s objections

Dear Developer

I am lodging my objection to the proposal for building homes for NHS on the Finchley Memorial Hospital site.  I do not have any objection with NHS staff but I do with your current proposal.  The only gain from the current plans that I can see will be you, the developer. 

What guarantee can you offer to the local residents that the properties are for NHS staff only and will never be sold off by someone to make a quick profit??

The residential area surrounding the hospital is 2 storey high so to propose 4 – 6 storeys will totally envelope our skyline and will be overbearing and oppressive.  This cannot be allowed.

The green space that is currently provided by the hospital is used by many local people and is well respected by them.  It is a safe space for all ages and during lockdown, it have proved invaluable for people to use for their daily exercise.

What additional infrastructure are you offering with your plans and are you going to provide them? 

I do hope you are not trying to emotionally manipulate the locals during this pandemic by using the NHS which is the most loved and respected organisation for your own good.

Yours sincerely

Lynn

Katja’s objections

Hello,

I live on [HIDDEN] and would like to strongly voice my opposition to the proposed development at the Finchley Memorial Hospital Grounds for a number of reasons:

  1. The scale of the buildings are far too large and the style is not in keeping with the Victorian homes in the neighbourhood. My understanding is that Barnet’s planning policy says that “development proposals should be based on an understanding of local characteristics. Proposals should preserve or enhance local character and respect the appearance, scale, mass, height and pattern of surrounding buildings, spaces and streets.” The proposed buildings do not do this in any way.
  2. The lack of parking and the impact that this will have on the surrounding roads which already suffer from too many cars and not enough parking spaces
  3. The increased traffic that these additional homes will bring
  4. The impact that these additional houses will have on local services including schools
  5. The loss of green space. The neighbourhood already suffers from a lack of open green spaces and this proposed development will remove a significant area which is vitally important for residents’ wellbeing.
  6. I would like to see more evidence that these homes really are for NHS staff. Where is the research and evidence to support this proposal? To me, it seems like an opportunistic development that is taking advantage of the current goodwill and gratitude towards the NHS.
  7. I’m also concerned that this proposal has been rolled out at a time when the community cannot gather to discuss it properly.

Many thanks in advance.

Katja

Yuko’s objections

Hi, 

Re: Development of the green space at Finchley Memorial Hospital

I am writing as an resident on [HIDDEN] to object strongly to above development on the following grounds.

1. This proposed development would have 130 new houses with only 38 car parks. It will cause traffic problems and create a safety hazards. Surrounding streets already suffers from severe traffic congestion and I see often people get frustrated and yelling or beeping each other. There is a primary school on Bow Lane and I’m sure you can easily imagine the situation gets worse at school run times and on rainy days. We can’t take more traffic for safty reason and we need to secure parking spaces for current residents who majority don’t have car park on their own premisis. 

2. I understand that CHP is claiming that 50% of homes are for NHS staff. But that’s only their ‘aspiration’ and not guaranteed. Yet how it sounds mislead people as if this is solely for NHS staff and it’s guaranteed (In fact, I saw such comments on FB). In this global pandemic, when people appreciate NHS staff, this is deliberate false marketing to get local support. I think that’s totally disrespectful to local residents.

3. Also starting this proposal in this lockdown period exempts them holding face-to-face meeting. That makes local people difficult to know each other, exchange each other’s opinion or discuss together. If they have a bit of courtesy to local residents, they could wait until lockdown finished to start or extend consultation period.   

4. Proposed buildings are too high and seems too ‘block’ like. It is an inappropriate for the area. They will overlook our houses. They would completely alter the character of our Edwardian houses area and will lead to a loss of privacy and impact on sunlight. 

5. There are so many new buildings are in the same area. I have read there is another ‘affordable’ housing proposal which is for 7 buildings with 300 homes on the site where currently Homebase is (679 High road). In this lockdown period, I realised how people embrace green open spaces, just like one at Finchley Memorial Hospital. Despite having lots of ‘affordable’ housing in the same area, protecting of green space must be paramount for people’s mental health. Surely, any new buildings, if needed, should be built without loosing green space. The loss of green space would be the detriment of us and our future generations. 

I trust that the above objections will be taken fully into account in determining this proposal. 

Yours sincerely, 

Yuko

Robert’s objections

Dear finchley@homesforNHSstaff.co.uk,

Please find my feedback on the proposal for development of the green and open space at Finchley memorial Hospital (FMH) below .

My concerns with the proposal are as follows :

Does the developer have the right to build on this land ?. The original FMH Planning pledged : 

“The site of the demolished hospital would become a publically accessible open space and the redundant Bow Lane Playing Fields, occupying the site’s southern area, would be developed as grass playing fields comprising two five a-side and one junior pitch, to be used by Our Lady of Lourdes Primary School.”  So, is this development allowed under the current planning provisions for the site ?

Loss of green space, which is in short supply and belongs to us all. The proposed landscaped garden in between blocks of flats in no way compensates for the loss of a large open space.

Adequacy of parking and impact on surrounding roads which are already full. Granville Road, Bow Lane and Holdenhurst Avenue are already saturated with parking, and cannot tolerate additional weight.

Increased traffic to a residential area and impact on highway safety.

Absolutely no guarantee this will be used for NHS staff. Feels like NHS staff are being used as a marketing tool for what will effectively be a commercial development.  This cynical manipulation is in itself disgraceful, but also raises a wider concern of the amount of trust the community can have in the developer.

4 and 6 storey blocks adjacent and opposite to 2 storey Victorian houses does not adhere to Policy DM01 of Barnet’s planning policy :

Page 11 

“b. Development proposals should be based on an understanding of local characteristics. Proposals should preserve or enhance local character and respect the appearance, scale, mass, height and pattern of surrounding buildings, spaces and streets.”

Strong likelihood this will become a rental block, with the consequential impact on community foundations.

Pushing the consultation through during a pandemic which diminishes the community’s ability to discuss. 

Impact to daylight on surrounding area.

I confirm I live in the FGG constituency and my MP is Mike Freer.

Thanks,

Robert

Andrew’s objections

Dear Oliver, Barnet Councillers and Mike,

I live on [HIDDEN] and am writing to strongly oppose this development in all its forms.

The streets surrounding the development are already congested and are a rat run between Granville Road, Ballards Lane, The High Road and Squires Lane. Cars already travel through these narrow roads at high speeds causing risks to the dozens and dozens of young children living There. This proposed development will add the following issues to the area:

1) Addition of enormous stresses of parking:
130 apartments could conceivably add over 130 additional vehicles to the surrounding streets. 38 proposed parking spaces is wholly inadequate for the conception of the development let alone for future proofing as these properties change hands. Owing to the distance to the tube every households are already car owners in the area.

2) Additional stresses on the local amenities: Doctors Surgeries, dentists, local shops, and the already limited public transport.

3) Loss of valuable green space, putting further stresses on the already crowded Victoria Park

4) The development is completely out of character with the local Edwardian properties and is trying to turn an Edwardian suburb into a densely populated central London borough. The neighbouring properties are houses, not flats, date from the early 20th centuryand absolutely no attempt has been made to at least make the proposal sympathetic to these points and does not comply at all with Barnet’s Planning policy DM01.

I believe the development to be disingenuous and cynical at best. The proposal that this development is for NHS and key workers is unsubstantiated, unaffordable to them and has no validation that there will be a clear process to ensure the properties are delivered to those workers. It is a cynical proposal based on the current goodwill that the NHS enjoys to push this development through.

For these reasons I strongly object to this development.

Yours Sincerely

Andrew

Maryam’s objections

Dear All

Please note that these plans as they stand are not acceptable.

They would mean we in Finchley will lose a lot of precious green space.
It will adversely affect the views of the surrounding properties. The local community will lose playing fields for their young ones. It means that the already very congested local roads will become so much worse. There is no evidence whatsoever that any properties built on this site will indeed be solely for the NHS staff. The plans are weak and arguments for building on this open space lack much clarity and substance.

We hope that the above points can be appreciated and considered.

Best Regards

Maryam

Julia’s objections

Hi all,

I live on Road and am surprised to see this as a proposal.
It is totally unworkable to have that many homes built in that site.

We all love and value the NHS Staff and know that they need affordable
accomodation… but that many homes on this site is not the answer.

Also we need to know that those homes built there if it gets the green
light will be for those people and not just general public.

So I object to this proposal …there must be better space for those
homes …that green space is valuable to the area and people who live near it.

Regards
Julia

Jon’s objections

Dear all,

I am writing to put my concerns and opposition on record regarding the proposed development on the existing parkland in front of Finchley Memorial Hospital. My objections are as follows:

  • Parking provision is too low and will cause increases in parking demand and traffic on local roads that are poorly equipped to meet it
  • The size of the buildings proposed is disproportionately large when compared to the surrounding buildings, including the hospital itself
  • There is no formal mechanism or policy that will ensure the housing is used for NHS keyworkers, or that it will be affordable for them

The development does not appear to respect the mass, height or pattern of local buildings which, when combined with the loss of green space, seems at odds with Barnet’s planning policy. 

Regards

Jon

Mei’s objections

To those concerned with the proposed building works on Finchley Memorial hospital green space,

I live near Finchley Memorial hospital (FMH) and use the green space, where the building works are proposed, on a daily basis with my husband and three children. This is where my kids learnt to scoot and ride their bikes, and where they go to let off steam, particularly under the recent pressures of lockdown. There are always loads of young kids playing, riding bikes and running about, as well as older groups of people, including NHS patients, enjoying this precious green space. When the current FMH was built, this space was clearly promised to the community as a green space to enjoy. It has been serving this purpose very well. However, our family and many others would be shut out of using this space should the development take place. 

The current proposition of an ugly 6 storey block of flats is entirely unacceptable. It is outrageously big and totally out of keeping with the surrounding Edwardian buildings. It would block the light, the view would be lost and our green space would be replaced by a towering block of concrete.

There are simply too many flats! They are packed into such a high density configuration that the surrounding area would be subjected to much unwanted noise and disturbance from the extra residents. There would certainly not be enough parking. The increase in traffic pollution and general congestion would put huge pressure on our daily commutes to work and school. 

So I object in the strongest possible terms. The current green space should remain as promised for the community. We need green spaces as a refuge of calm in our busy city. The recent lockdown has brought home how important such spaces are for us and for the mental wellbeing of generations to come. Pouring concrete on them would be a terrible mistake. 

Yours faithfully

 Mei

Matt’s objections

Hi,

As a local family for whom the memorial green space has been a godsend and oasis during Lockdown for our kids to play and us to walk and decompress I and my family are very keen that any building undertaken should only be with an exceptionally clear and robust justification as the loss of open space to locals will have a significant impact.


I just watched the webinar presentation from CHP for the finchley memorial development and was struck by the lack of concrete evidence they could provide for the actual demand from NHS staff in the local area, assurance that the properties will not just be sold into private ownership if there is insufficient demand from key workers, or mitigation for the likely large increase in impact on local parking roads and amenities. To me, whilst I sympathise with the need to provide affordable housing and monetise NHS real estate at this time, it sounds like a disingenuous and opportunist attempt to secure planning permission on a contentious site leaving it very open for commercialisation by those who stand to benefit at a later date.   


In particular I would like to see detailed evidence of actual demand from surrounding NHS Trusts and workers for housing of this nature to confirm it is in line with their needs, budget and preferences? Without this you are relying on generic regional data which provides no guarantee of actual demand locally. For a project of this scale it is surely inconceivable that you would not want to first be as certain as you can be you are building the right accommodation, in the right location with the right purchase/ rental models to address the need you claim to be addressing, but CHP’s answers on the webinar and FAQs are strangely vague and sound like you are either building and hoping for the best, or deliberately keeping your options open for what happens to the development in the future.  

In terms of the planned buildings they do seem very high density and unsympathetic to the scale and character of the surrounding area which is cherished for its consistent Edwardian character.

I hope you will take my comments into consideration and keep us informed of how you plan to take account of this and other concerns about the motivations and 

plans for the project.

Yours sincerely 

Matthew

Hannah’s objections

I am writing as I am very concerned about the proposed development for part of the Finchley Memorial green space. The plans as they are now seem ill devised and risk taking away an important source for exercise and general well-being for the people of this particular neighbourhood. 

My concerns are as follows:

First, I am opposed to using this green space. There is not much green space in Finchley and what is there should be cherished. This space is used extensively by local people. 

Secondly, the plan does not suit the street. The buildings are ugly, too big and stick out stylistically. This is a beautiful neighbourhood and the developers should take a closer look at the existing houses. 

Thirdly, there is no consideration for the already deeply problematic traffic in Bow Lane. I urge the developers to walk the street during daytime, especially when we are back to normal. Even when quiet, there are too many cars in the road and too many cases of road rage. 

Lastly, there is no guarantee that these houses are indeed for NHS staff or that NHS can actually afford to live there. The highly rhetorical questioning (are you supportive of delivering ore homes for NHS staff?) suggests strongly that the developers cannot deliver on that issue. Why is this brought up in this particular development but not in other developments in Barnet? The proposal speaks of aspiration, but does not guarantee anything. This may it difficult to believe that this is anything but a cynical devise to sidestep genuine concerns.  

I am sorry to say that, while I am in favour of affordable housing, I have yet to be convinced that this plan promises anything like that. 

With best wishes

Hannah

Colette’s objections

Dear All

I live on [HIDDEN] and I am contacting you regarding my concerns about the proposed development at Finchley Memorial Hospital.

As a resident I cannot believe that a development of the nature proposed is even being considered. The existing infrastructure cannot cope as it is – for example parking is already an issue on the road and the double parking causes significant issues for traffic as Bow Lane is a busy road with the school, hospital and people using it as a short cut. It is not usual for there to be quite heated discussions and horns beeping as cars struggle to pass each other. The situation on surrounding roads is not any better. How will highway safety therefore be addressed? In addition the nearby schools do not have sufficient places to offer places to the children within their catchment as it is and I am sure it is the same with other key services too – so how will this be addressed? Also has the potential impact on air quality been considered/assessed?

My understanding is that when the new hospital was built this land was promised to the community and anyone observing it during lockdown will have seen that it was a lifeline for the local community – both young and old. What has happened to this promise?

The proposed development is also completely out of character with the surrounding area and would be an eye sore. How is this aligned with Barnet’s planning policy? In addition it is likely to significantly impact on the daylight in the surrounding area by causing overshadowing. In addition there is also a risk of loss of privacy.

Also the proposed development is far too big for the space available.

I am also extremely concerned about the process ie making proposals during lockdown when it is difficult for people to come together and object collectively and then submitting the application during the summer holidays when a significant number of people are likely to be away. In addition I think it is disingenuous to promote the development as being for NHS staff, particularly at this time, when actually reading the small print this is not guaranteed.

Please do not allow this proposal to progress.

Kind regards

Colette

Christina’s Objections

Dear All,

Firstly, I would like to raise my concern that the pre consultation was held during a national pandemic.  The local community has not been able to meet in person to discuss and the only opportunity we have been given to voice our grave concern was in a zoom meeting, where we were all muted.  I strongly believe this consultation should be extended to allow the community to meet in person and I formally request an extension to the consultation period with the website updated accordingly​.

Please see below my main objections to the proposed development of the Finchley Memorial Community Green space; 

1. Loss of community green space

  • Why has this green space been deemed ‘surplus’ by CHP when the local community use it? The use for this land was discussed in length during the redevelopment of FMH back in 2010 and there are documents detailing this space’ continued use for the local community with the addition of a children’s play area and adult gym.  These promised amenities would have further enhanced an already very popular and frequently used space.  Unfortunately, this proposal has not been provided even though the approved landscaping details show these anticipated facilities. 
  • The proposed landscaping in the development is not adequate or comparable with the current use as a large open green space. This space is imperative to the community’s mental health and wellbeing, especially in light of the current circumstances.  The maintenance and protection of green spaces is mentioned regularly in the London Plan and also Barnet’s own Local Plan, so it is clearly very important and the proposed development completely violates this ethos.

2. Design and Character of the area, Scale and Massing 

  • The development would be contrary to Barnet’s Development Plan. The Core Strategy specially states: 

Most residential streets in Barnet, including Victorian and Edwardian terraces and interwar suburbs, follow a conventional perimeter block structure…This structure is a proven model of urban development and a fundamental element of good design….Infill development and flatted schemes in particular can weaken this relationship between building and street

In addition, the development would be overbearing and out of character 4 & 6 story blocks adjacent and opposite to 2 story Edwardian houses. How does this adhere to Policy DM01 of Barnet’s Local Plan (Core Strategy) planning policy – 

b. Development proposals should be based on an understanding of local characteristics. Proposals should preserve or enhance local character and respect the appearance, scale, mass, height and pattern of surrounding buildings, spaces and streets.

According to Barnet council, ‘ the Voice of the suburbs’, their aim is to’To protect and enhance the suburbs – to respect and enrich Barnet’s distinctive historic environment by protecting and enhancing heritage assets such as the high quality suburban character of townscapes and conservation areas’ (Barnet’s Local Plan, Core Strategy). This proposal does not enhance the high-quality character of our suburban street. 

The adopted brief for the site reinforces this design requirement and sets out specifically;

Low density family houses are considered the most compatible form of development given the character of the surrounding area.  Flatted development is unlikely to be considered favourably given the nature of Bow Lane.

3. Impact on Neighbouring Amenity 

  • The architect has not carried out daylight/sunlight testing and I am concerned that the scale of these buildings, in a suburban street, would result in a loss of daylight and sunlight as well as being visually intrusive and unduly dominant to surrounding residential properties. It is difficult to understand how detailed plans have been drawn up without any BRE daylight/sunlight and overshadowing reports being undertaken? 

4. Parking and Traffic

  • 130 flats with just 38 car park spaces is a huge concern. This will negatively impact on surrounding roads, which are already full. I understand that the RCN research shows that Nurses have low car ownership, however these flats are not guaranteed for Nurses, so these statistics are irrelevant.
  • The scale of this proposal will increase traffic to a residential area and impact on highway safety, which is already dangerous with Bow Lane being used as a cut through for local traffic. 

5. False Branding and Affordability Issues 

  • I am concerned these are being branded as ‘Homes for NHS’, when these are not guaranteed for Nurses and the affordability levels were unclear,  which is worrying given that this seems to be the whole premise of the proposal. Nurses will be given first refusal and I highly doubt there will be much uptake for these ‘affordable’ rented units. According to the planner’s vague quote of ‘£200 and something per week’ to rent a room in a 3-bed flat- this equates to at least 52% of a newly qualified nurse salary. 
  • The site brief also states that any enabling development must be fully justified in terms of necessity in enabling the delivery of health, community or public open space/sports facilities only. Enabling development must pass strict tests of viability in terms of supporting the ‘public benefit’ accruing from the site, this has not been demonstrated.

Yours sincerely,

Christina

Jesse’s Objections

Hello Oliver, Barnet Councillors and MP.

I live on Bow Lane (N12 0JL) and I would like to strongly voice my opposition to the proposed development of the green space in front of Finchley Memorial Hospital.
I object on the following grounds:

  1. The scale of the buildings on Bow Lane is too large and the style is out of keeping with the Edwardian street.
  2. Too few parking spaces will be provided on site causing parking to spill over to the neighborhood streets which do not have capacity to accomodate them
  3. The increase of traffic on Bow Lane, as well as the reduction in pull over spaces due to increased use of parking spaces will cause a traffic blockage. We had an example of this when they recently blocked parking on Granville Road during pavement repairs. There were several near fist fights on Bow Lane as people were unable to pass each other on the street.

Finally, I would like to state that the pre-consultation process has been ineffective if not disingenuous. Interested parties were unable to engage in a real discussion within the highly controlled Zoom meetings. Similarly, the surveys on the website use misleading design patterns which invalidate any statistics collected — for example, the question “Which range of building heights would you be happy with? A. 3 to 6 storeys. B. 3 to 5 storeys, C. No higher than 4 storeys, D. Don’t know” does not allow for an answer “none of the above” or “only houses in keeping with the streetscape”.

Regards.

-Jesse