Fellowship House, 136a Willifield Way NW11 6YD

Have your say at the Residents Association's next Open Forum. 

MIKE FREER MP – former leader of Barnet Council - now the MP representing you to Barnet ! 

Questions/Answers after Mike’s opening. 

Another in the RA's series of Open Meetings to hear your views and to help represent you to Barnet and the Trust.

HGS Residents Association Enquiry

Do you have evidence re the RA’s role in approval of Henrietta Barnett building extensions ? (The report will respect the anonymity of individuals)

 At the RA’s AGM in 2011, a resolution critical of the RA Council and relevant committees was passed by RA members. The RA Council has now commissioned an independent enquiry that aims to answer three questions about the RA’s role and actions:

 1 - Who knew what and when?

 2 - Given 1, above, what should have been done with the information?

 3 - What beyond those measures already adopted, should be done to achieve a good provision of information and action for Suburb residents in respect of major issues in the future?”

As many are aware, there have been disagreements among HGS residents regarding the performance of the RA in relation to the new buildings of the Henrietta Barnett School. After the above resolution at the AGM, the RA Council, after discussion, responded by commissioning an independent enquiry and is grateful to the John S. Cohen Foundation for a grant to enable this.

Please note that the enquiry is not about the aesthetics of the building, or whether or not the buildings could have been prevented or significantly modified, or about what steps might now be taken in relation to them. Nor will it comment on the behaviour of individuals.  The focus is the RA as an organisational entity.

The RA is pleased that Dr Margaret Harris has agreed to conduct the enquiry. Dr Harris is Professor Emeritus of Voluntary Sector Organisations at Aston University, and Visiting Professor at Birkbeck, University of London. She has more than thirty years’ experience of working in and with the voluntary sector and she has published widely on topics concerning the organisation and management of voluntary associations and community groups.  (You can see more at www.margaretharris.org.uk).  Dr Harris moved to the Suburb two years ago  but she has not, until now, had any involvement in the activities of the RA.  Thus she brings to the enquiry, academic professionalism combined with a sensitivity to the complexities of HGS living.

The enquiry is being carried out during December 2011, January, and February 2012. The intention is to have a fairly short report produced in the first instance for the RA Council, followed by publication of the report or a summary for the use of Suburb residents. The report will respect the anonymity of individuals.  In preparing her report, Dr Harris will draw on a range of evidence including RA papers, written submissions and some interviews.  Evidence collected will be treated as confidential in the sense that Dr Harris will not share with individuals information or viewpoints provided by other individuals. 

If you would like to submit written evidence to the enquiry, please send an email to Dr Harris and she will send you some guidelines about how you might frame your evidence.  Her email address is m.e.harris@aston.ac.uk     For more information contact:  abbott.s@virgin.net

The second of the RA’s new series of Open Meetings.

• Richard Wiseman welcomed  Neil Richardson (NR), Highways Manager for Traffic and Development at LB Barnet.
• Ward Councillors had been invited to attend but they all had Borough meetings to attend. 

This report sets out the matters discussed of general interest.  Some residents used the meeting as an opportunity to bring up issues relating to particular streets; these were taken up by Mr Richardson who will be responding to the people who raised them.  For the sake of brevity they are not reported here. 

Gary Shaw, for the RA's R&T committee, gave a brief overview of the new restrictions and parking regulations.  He gave three examples of overregulation and inept enforcement by LBB regarding parking tickets unfairly or incorrectly issued where he had been able to help the residents and had their tickets cancelled. NR said that cases like these should be taken up with the local Councillors.  

Gary also noted:

• The recent increase in parking charges together with the introduction of a policy of providing only cashless meters which, he said, were creating a decline in business in Temple Fortune. Traders used the Finchley and Golders Green Forum (provided by LBB) to present a petition to LB Barnet. To alleviate the problem LBB were introducing scratch cards for purchase in some local shops in denominations of £1 and £2.  It was pointed out that similar cards, issued in the neighbouring borough, required 13 pieces of information every time they are used.
• Councillors are given permits to park at any time in the Borough without payment (when on Council business). They operate outside the regulations that they impose on all residents.
• With regard to the speed limit being reduced on the Suburb, a compromise between safety and convenience was necessary. The accident rate on the Suburb is low although the perception may be different. Gary did not consider that reducing speed would make a difference to safety.

A resident, who had been an ambulance driver, said that while speed humps slow down the traffic they create problems for emergency services.

A resident of Willifield Way pointed out that speed tables had been removed and a petition he had presented to LBB had been ignored. 

Speeding buses were also an issue in Willifield Way and elsewhere. 

The chairman asked if the recent 20pmh speed limit in LB Islington would be looked at by Barnet; NR said that there were no plans to do so. Residents pointed out that much of the Suburb is subject to a 20 mph speed limit which was not enforced; NR would look into this. 

NR confirmed that it was Council policy to take out road humps when roads are resurfaced and he was not in a position to comment on policy.  He also reminded the meeting that financial resources are directed to areas where there are accidents.  He expressed some reservations about the long term effectiveness of vehicle activated signs. 

CPZs were discussed at length.  The issues complained of were:

• that they simply displaced parking from controlled areas to non-controlled areas;
• that the charges kept climbing.  NR acknowledged that parking revenue was used for other highway purposes and thus indirectly reduced Council Tax. 

It was suggested the CPZ be suspended for a week and the effects be monitored by independent observers.  NR said that this would not happen. 

NR said that LBB has no plan to extend the CPZ in the area. However, LBB listens to residents’ concerns.  A petition  had been presented by residents about parking restrictions in Hampstead Way.   Displacement parking is an inevitable consequence of a CPZ.  

A review had recently been conducted into the CPZ, and Temple Fortune residents had not stated that they do not want the CPZ in their area.  When responding to a request for a CPZ, his department takes access and sight lines into account in making their recommendation. 

Residents referred to the problems of (a) people going on holiday for up to three weeks and leaving their cars on unrestricted roads and (b) a car repair company leaving cars in some locations.  NR said that there is nothing that LBB can do about legally parked cars.

It was suggested that LBB should allow 30 minutes free parking as:

• This would help residents and shop keepers.   
• It could help LBB, as empty shops do not pay business rates. 

NR said that:

• a pay and display scheme tailored for the shopping area was introduced successfully in Edgware;
• LBB could look at options to encourage a rapid turnover of parking in Temple Fortune with appropriate enforcement. The CPZ must be self financing.  Residents who live in a non CPZ area would probably not want to financially support residents who do. 

A resident said that physical changes were made after a report in 1971 regarding rat runs on the Suburb and asked what alternatives to speed humps are available for traffic calming.  Neil Richardson said that everyone ‘rat runs’ to a certain extent.  The answer is that traffic should be encouraged to flow efficiently on the main roads. 

A one-way system was suggested for Asmuns Hill/Temple Fortune Hill.  NR said that this would encourage speeding, carried other safety risks and would be expensive to introduce. 

The obstruction caused by basement development was discussed.  There is a major development at the corner of Hampstead Way/Meadway.  The building contractors had been allowed to take up space on the public highway, part of which is being used as an office.  When the contractor empties the skip, the road is blocked for about 15 minutes, obstructing the H2 bus and all traffic. NR would look into this case which appeared to be a particularly bad example of disruption caused by development of this sort. 

It was pointed out that:

• consent had just been given by LBB to a basement in Erskine Hill.  Developers should pay for a licence and enforcement officials should check that conditions were being complied with and the traffic management issues addressed.
• LBB could, a residenty suggested, develop a licencing policy for skips, to restrict basement development where there was no room on the property for the skip. 

The chairman said that the RA is happy to help residents with traffic/parking issues and if anyone would like to volunteer their services to assist the R&T Committee, they would be very welcome.

After establishing Residents' views at an open meeting held on 7 December 2011, the RA concluded that the interests of the residents and the protection of the physical amenities of the Playing Fields make them unsuitable for events requiring a marquee. On 6th January, the RA submitted a response to LB Barnet's consultation, requesting that the policy specifically identifies Lyttelton as “unsuitable for private events”. The 18 adverse points listed in our December entry below were annexed, and the RA particularly drew attention to:

• noise pollution for surrounding houses

• health and safety (the unfenced stream and inevitable broken glass adjacent to the children’s playground)

• the sheer impracticality (no toilets or electricity, no proper roadway or parking for contractors) 

• inevitable damage by vehicles at the two right-angle bends on the footpath access.

For the map of Barnet's proposed marquee site & parking on Lyttelton Playing Fields, scroll down to the foot of the December entry below. 

If you have views on the Barnet proposal to permit private events in parks, including Lyttelton Playing Fields, email e&o.consultation@barnet.gov.uk  before 16 January - to be effective, identify 3 or 4 that really matter to you and give reasons in your own words.

The RA learned about the proposal towards the end of November, and delivered flyers to houses and flats adjacent to Lyttelton Playing Fields convening an open meeting at HGS Synagogue on 7 December (see Events, December, and RA e-News of 1st Dec). 43 people attended (39 households) and found 18 points against the proposal, and a possible 2 in favour if the permitted events were small and without sound systems or vehicles in the fields - see table below.

At that time, the deadline for responses was 16 December, but having obtained an extension to 16 January, the wider Suburb should consider the proposal. Cllr Marshall proposed the extension to the Area Environment Committee, as did the RA in its initial response.

On 6th January, the RA full response concluded that the interests of the residents and the protection of the physical amenities of the Playing Fields make them unsuitable for events requiring a marquee, and requested that the policy specifically identifies it as “unsuitable for private events”. The 18 adverse points listed below were annexed, and the RA particularly drew attention to:

• noise pollution for surrounding houses
• health and safety (the unfenced stream and inevitable broken glass adjacent to the children’s playground)
• the sheer impracticality (no toilets or electricity, no proper roadway or parking for contractors)
• inevitable damage by vehicles at the two right-angle bends on the footpath access.

For the map of Barnet's proposed marquee site & parking on Lyttelton Playing Fields, scroll down below the following table. For more information see http://engage.barnet.gov.uk/  and click on Events in Parks (affecting 8 of Barnet's 16 parks).

Barnet's proposed marquee site & parking on Lyttelton Playing Fields

Please help save an oak tree by 39 Willifield Way. Insurers have applied to fell - without proof of damage or consideration of other solutions. This is one of a group of fine, characterful mature trees that contribute immensely to the street scene.

The charming crescent below pavement level is enormously enhanced by these trees - see photo on this website home page. From a 1911 plan, it seems quite clear that the houses were set back to preserve these great trees. Please look at the trees, particularly the central pair as the application is to fell one of those (it's the one to the right of the central path, as seen from the street).

Please send emails/letters of objection, stressing the beauty of the tree, and how it adds to the pleasure of walking by, and how its removal would be disastrous for the pair and for the whole group of trees, to Ann Currell (ann.currell@barnet.gov.uk). The deadline for objections is very soon: 15 December, and the reference number is TPO/00661/11/F.

Please do ask friends/neighbours to write too! The number of emails/letters makes a big difference to decisions by the councillors.

Thanks and all good wishes 

Deborah Calland

RA Trees and Open Spaces Committee

RA Publications Committee has been planning e-News for some months. If your email address is registered with the RA, you will have received the launch edition on 1st December. If you are an RA member and need to register (or update) your email address you can do it online (see June letter for your password) or to ratreasurer@hgs.org.uk 

On 2nd December, the Residents Association formally registered with LB Barnet our "Expression of Interest" describing our "organisation" for the purpose of the Market Place library community bid.

This is just a formal step in the process, but as LBB has published its Invitation for "Expressions of Interest" we have had enquiries from members asking where this fits in the process. The key information is:

• The RA has been in talks with LBB since 2nd August regarding our volunteer-led library proposal.
• LBB have been encouraging (and while they have a different view from us on use of the library computer system, nothing is ruled out by their bid process).
• They told us that they hoped to get out a form for "Expression of Interest" by early October but this was delayed in their legal department until 24th November.
• To ensure that the delay did not prevent LBB from seeing our full proposal, we submitted a detailed "outline" on 1 November, as fully reported in the Ham & High.
• We ticked all the required boxes in the "Expression of Interest" (we have a constitution etc) and have made clear that the proposal is to run the library through a newly incorporated company with its own accounts and liabilities. Our proposal does not look to a material financial spend - we want LBB to continue to order books while we organise volunteers. Their model had been to award annual grants for book spend - but they have a clear understanding of our proposal, and remain encouraging.
• Our three Ward Councillors have been very supportive, and Cllr Marshall attended with us a key meeting with LBB in September, and has helped with guidance on subsequent issues.

Timescale:

Originally LBB had wanted to seek formal proposals by 31 October, but this will now be by 8 January (with decisions on qualifying organisations by 6 December, and LBB information packs issued by 12 December). Happily the Library remains open in the meanwhile.

Officials will assess proposals, and dialogue re details, leading to Cabinet Resources Committee on 28 February. However, provisional transition will be worked up with "successful organisations" from January to March 2012 - presumably where officials consider a likely chance of success (we will enquire, as this aspect has only recently been published).

Criteria:

The three key areas for assessing proposals will be:

• Financial, organisational, property
• Strategic and community - local support and local needs
• Services and sustainability - realistic, adequately resourced, forward planned.

The issued paper can be seen at http://www.barnet.gov.uk/community-library-expressions-of-interest.pdf , and (in section 4) enlarges on these three bullet points.

Have your say at the Residents Association's next Open Forum on: 

Parking and Traffic on the Suburb 

Tuesday 6th December, 8pm at Fellowship House, 136a Willifield Way 

Parking, congestion and other road problems are becoming a growing issue on the Suburb 

The RA is holding another in its series of Open Meetings to hear residents' views and to help represent residents to the London Borough of Barnet and others

The RA now has sufficient volunteers (almost 40 - plus 20 observers at a recent meeting) to run the Suburb Library after appropriate training, following Barnet’s closure plan for savings (principally staff costs) - see extract 26 July posting below for background.

An outline of a ‘proposed bid’, approved on 1 November by the RA Council, has been submitted to LB.Barnet (the formal bid awaits their legal forms). The bid will go to Councillors for consideration - likely to be a six-week process starting after formal bids. The RA working group is co-chaired by Jeremy Clynes (RA Hon Treasurer) and Jonathan Seres (RA Council member).

The volunteers are ready and wish to start training. Delay will squeeze that training period as LBB wish savings to start in the coming financial year from 1 April.

The Ham & High of 3rd November (page 16) has written this up.

Barnet Council's words were "breathing space to....31 October", but they have kept the branch open as their bids procedure is not yet ready.

Our 26 July posting (extract):

At Barnet Council on 26 July the library strategy report was adopted (close Friern Barnet & HGS) "subject to consideration of the feasibility of any community initiatives that come forward from residents on or before 31 October 2011". This was a result of former RA Secretary Neville Silver's hard work analysing figures and forwarding confirmation that HGS Lists had produced, in 36 hours, 15 volunteers (ie release of one of the 2 staff members at the HGS library). While this was not an RA initiative [it became an RA project in August], 2 Consam members have been heavily involved in recent weeks, and will continue to liaise with Neville and with Deborah Warland who has led the campaign and organised the 2,500 signature petition.

Basements - RA Open meeting - 100 residents - HGS Trust responses - diverse views

The open meeting held by the HGS Residents' Association on 4th October 2011, attended by nearly 100 people, enabled:

• residents to put their views
• HGS Trust, invited by the RA, to explain its position and the limits on its powers under the Scheme of Management. 

The views expressed will help reinforce the dialogue which has been under way for some time between the RA's CONSAM (Conservation & Amenities) committee, the Trust, and the London Borough of Barnet.

Background 

The creation and extension of basements is a growing phenomenon in the Suburb and elsewhere. The majority of applications have until recently related to basements to be constructed beneath new, larger houses.   Applications in the Suburb are growing from a relatively low level and there is a detectable trend towards applications relating to smaller houses in smaller roads, which could soon reach the “Artisans” quarter (one is under consideration). 

Development Nuisance - traffic, disturbance - succession of nearby developments

A great deal of disquiet was expressed about the traffic nuisance and other disturbance generated by basement works which were often prolonged.  The nuisance is exacerbated when the work is being carried out in narrow Suburb roads and closes.  Furthermore, when permission for development is granted there is no mechanism allowing the Trust or LBB to take account of the particular difficulty of the cumulative effect of a succession of developments in the same road. 

Technical Issues - limited Trust powers - Trees - Independent Structural Reports - Party Wall Agreements

The Scheme of Management under which covenants are imposed on freehold properties in the Suburb gives the Trust control over any change to the external appearance of buildings and their gardens, including forming sky lights and light wells, but only the visual “character” of the Suburb.  While a number of residents expressed their own views on what is meant by character, legal advice obtained from time to time by the Trust confirms that this relates to character manifested by external appearance and does not have a social element.  Accordingly, the Trust has limited control over a proposal for a basement development which leaves the external appearance of a property unchanged, irrespective of the use to which the basement is to be put.  However, control over leasehold properties depends on the terms of the individual leases. 

The hydrology of the Suburb is not homogenous.  The Trust requires applicants to commission independent hydrogeological surveys which are taken into account in reaching a decision on any application.  No adverse effect on trees on the property or nearby is allowed and reports are required to ensure this. 

Similarly, independent structural surveys are required to avoid subsidence and similar problems.  Some residents expressed concern that where a basement is to be constructed beneath a semi-detached house, the adjacent undeveloped house will be put at particular risk, either because of the disturbance of the development itself or because improving the foundations of the house with the basement will leave the other half of the semi more vulnerable to subsidence. 

• The Trust has subsequently advised that this is a matter that should be addressed in the engineering reports and through Party Wall Agreements. Where work is close to an adjoining or neighbouring property Party Wall regulations provide for a party wall surveyor to be appointed (at the cost of the person instigating the work) to protect the interests of the adjoining owner.
• Under Party Wall legislation the adjoining owner can require that an independent surveyor be appointed; and there are arrangements for settling any failure to agree, by appeal to a third surveyor.
• Measures that could be considered under a party wall agreement might include: an insurance bond to cover any failure to complete the work satisfactorily - or an agreement to monitor the neighbouring property to check for movement. 

Scheme of Management 

Some residents have suggested that steps be taken to apply to the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal to amend the Scheme of Management to give the Trust control over basement development.  The Trust’s view is that while this is theoretically possible, given sufficient support from residents, it is an inauspicious time for such an application taking into account the government’s policy to free up development and reduce restrictions.  An application might (unintentionally) result in the relaxation of some of the Trust’s current controls. 

Alternatives 

Several residents voiced the need for more space as an alternative to moving out of the Suburb. Some thought basements a parallel to loft rooms in  their reflection of changing times. One resident suggested that in some cases the cost and trouble of the construction of basements and loft extensions could be avoided if the Trust Design Guidance on the size and type of garden buildings were more lenient (subject to suitable screening and landscaping). 

Other Boroughs 

It has been suggested that other London boroughs, including Camden, currently exercise stricter controls.  However recent consents granted by Camden indicate that once engineering questions are answered, there is little scope for restricting the development of basements under existing planning legislation.

Following the Public Enquiry on 27 September the Planning Inspector has upheld Barnet's refusal to allow the felling of a large oak tree on the EDF site, opposite Central Square, on the corner of Northway adjacent to the Tea House.  

The campaign to save the tree involved the Residents Association and in particular its Trees and Open Spaces Committee, the HGS Trust and many individuals.  Strong support was given all along by Councillor John Marshall.  At the Public Enquiry, those opposed to the felling were well represented and the Inspector was able to gauge the strength of public feeling on this matter - he then made a site visit.

At the core of the Inspector's decision was his view the tree is an important and irreplaceable element in the landscape, and that there are other ways of dealing with the real or supposed damage caused by large trees.   It is to be hoped that the implications of this judgment will be considered in relation to other possible applications made to fell our trees, which is so often the destructive way in which insurance companies try to deal with the problem of subsidence here, and anyway often causes other problems such as 'heave'.

Greater London Authority (GLA) is consulting on whether community involvement in some planning issues can be effective, through a local Order giving some powers to a community body.

Consam met tonight and is recommending to Tuesday (6th September)'s RA Council that we respond that the existence of the RA and the Trust indicates that localism can be effective.  We are not proposing any local Order as (a) the Suburb's Scheme of Management is in place (b) the Bill is not yet through Parliament (c) we await the outcome of the GLA's deliberations.

More volunteers needed ! We want to reach 40 so we can have an easy rota for use after 1st November. Please email ratreasurer@hgs.org.uk or contact Jonathan/Jeremy (see below).

Since our 26 July posting (below) an RA working group (Jeremy Clynes and Jonathan Seres) has been formed, and on 2 August met with LB Barnet's Head of Libraries and Neville Silver of Action Group [and on 15 September with others from LBB]. On 24 August [and again on 15 Sepember] they briefed the initial volunteers on a proposed 'bid' in response to the "breathing space". The volunteers include Cllr John Marshall who has taken forward with Barnet some transition and other points, and a representative from the Action Group.

The RA involvement has had a very positive impact on Barnet's willingness to consider continued location of the library in its present premises (with a community initiative to reduce costs). As noted in the Ham & High on 18 August, Barnet's negotiation with the Institute for a pick-up point came to nought. This increases the interest in the RA proposal which is being worked up, taking into account grants that may be available from other LB Barnet funds.

Our 26 July posting:

At Barnet Council on 26 July the library strategy report was adopted (close Friern Barnet & HGS) "subject to consideration of the feasibility of any community initiatives that come forward from residents on or before 31 October 2011". This was a result of former RA Secretary Neville Silver's hard work analysing figures and forwarding confirmation that HGS Lists had produced, in 36 hours, 15 volunteers (ie release of one of the 2 staff members at the HGS library). While this was not an RA initiative [it became an RA project in August], 2 Consam members have been heavily involved in recent weeks, and will continue to liaise with Neville and with Deborah Warland who has led the campaign and organised the 2,500 signature petition. Thanks too to the RA Events and Publication teams for their work on posters.

A lot more work to do, particularly on the "volunteers" proposal that would relieve one of the 2 library staff members, as Barnet Council's words are "breathing space to....31 October".

Publications Committee is planning an emailed monthly newsletter, mainly automated from the many RA News items on the website, but with some editorial input where needed. It will be brief – a reminder to members of what RA does, and probably a reminder to many that the website exists where more information is available. It will only reach those whose email addresses we have so:

• The June mailing informed members of the new personal codes for entering or correcting email details via the website
• Suburb News will continue its full coverage so those not on email will not lose out.

The RA welcomed the HGS Trust upgrade of the Willifield allotments and has made a grant to supplement Trust funds to enable a water supply to the Asmuns Place allotments. Start date is hoped for this autumn, dependent on completing a party wall agreement for the path beneath the existing archway. 

Background: HGS Trust owns the allotments and receives rents. It began ploughing back the rents, with a supplement from its own funds, two years ago when it laid a new path, plus water supply, through the Willifield allotments. Asmuns Place is the second project. The RA grant of £2,700 includes £300 for a new gate. HGS Trust is laying out a substantially larger sum.