Welcome to Engage Barnet. This site will help you find and participate in consultations that interest you. Recently updated consultations are displayed below; alternatively, search for consultations by keyword, postcode, interest etc.
You can also find out how we are using the results from consultations to inform decisions.
Featured Consultation: Children and Young People's Plan 2016-2020 Consultation
We are currently consulting on our Children and Young People's Plan 2016 - 2020.
For more information on how to take part in the consultation please click on the title above.
Consultation ends in 26 days (26/05/2016)
Events See All Events
No upcoming events at this time.
Open Consultations RSS Feed for open consultations
Title Date Ends SEN Future Needs 1 May 2016 Residents’ Perception Survey Spring 2016 17 May 2016 Proposed Extension of Totteridge & Whetstone Station Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) 19 May 2016 Children and Young People's Plan 2016-2020 Consultation 26 May 2016 Proposal to Expand Childs Hill Primary School 6 Jun 2016
Closed Consultations RSS Feed for closed consultations
Title Date Closed Customer Access Strategy 14 Mar 2016 Recycling and Waste Strategy and Future Delivery 13 Mar 2016 Parks and Open Spaces draft strategy consultation 13 Mar 2016 Barnet Safer Communities Partnership 2016/17 Priorities Consultation 29 Feb 2016 Lyttelton Playing Fields sports courts refurbishment consultation 29 Feb 2016
We Asked, You Said, We Did
Below are some of the issues we have recently consulted on and their outcomes.
- We Asked:
- We asked for your views on the National Institute of Medical Research Planning Brief that took place over six weeks until 17th February 2016. This included a presentation to the Mill Hill Neighbourhood Forum and an evening drop in session at Mill Hill Library.Consultation involved letters that were e-mailed to stakeholders on the Local Plan consultation database as well as posted to residents living next to NIMR area. A Public Notice was published in the Barnet Press to publicise the consultation.
- You Said:
- There was concern locally that any development on the site should have a beneficial effect on the setting and outlook to the green belt. This was a mixed response, with notable support for the development’s impact, but concern that new development could be overbearing. Overall it seemed the Planning Brief had struck the right tone in this regard.There was particular concern with the potential impact of construction traffic on the Ridgeway, amid reports that previous developments had impacted negatively on this issue. A certain amount of construction traffic is inevitable with any development, but that the effects can be managed by appropriate use of a construction management plan, which will be required alongside a planning application.There is generally support for the “main building” within the NIMR campus. There was concern from the potential developer that this building may be beyond repair and conversion. The Council is clear that if the building is to be removed, it will expect a faithful replica to be rebuilt. A new building that differs from the original, but maintains the same height will not be acceptable.In addition to expressing concern about the potential to retain the main building on the campus, developers consider that the development does not need to expressly identify “very special circumstances” as it can be demonstrated through the Planning Brief, and subsequent application that the redevelopment will have a beneficial effect on the openness of the green belt setting. The Council agrees this position, but feel that there needs to be a rigorous set of criteria that the development needs to be assessed against in order for it to fulfil this.You can read the responses in more detail here.
- We Did:
All the comments were taken into account and National Institute of Medical Research Planning Brief was approved by the Policy and Resources Committee on 22 March 2016.
- We Asked:
- We asked for your views on the North London Business Park Planning Brief that took place over six weeks until 17th February 2016.Consultation involved letters that were e-mailed to stakeholders on the Local Plan consultation database as well as posted to residents living next to NLBP. A Public Notice was published in the Barnet Press to publicise the consultation. Further publicity included a drop-in session at Building 2 of the North London Business Park on 9th February.
- You Said:
- Local residents expressed concerns about the proposal to re-open an access route between the north of the NLBP site and Russell Lane through Ashbourne Avenue and Weirdale Avenue. The prospective developer Comer Homes has confirmed that access to Russell Lane by car from the NLBP site is not necessary from a commercial point of view. In terms of the fear of crime issue the Council will require the development to be appropriately designed so that it can positively affect perceptions of safety. A “Secured by Design” statement will be required to accompany the planning application, reviewed by the Metropolitan Police, to ensure that development is suitably designed to address this issue. In terms of the increased pressure on car parking spaces issues the Council considers that with redevelopment the nature of the site will change. The site will change from an employment use to a residential led mixed use scheme including employment uses and a secondary school. The Transport Assessment that is required as part of the planning application will consider that journeys to and from the site will be different, and what provisions are required to mitigate the new trip pattern.There was support for the retention of the pond on the site, both from a wildlife perspective, and as well as the perception that it acts as a ‘balancing pond’, providing a flood mitigation measure. The Council agree that such purposes is make it a positive feature of the site, and that in some way it should be incorporated into the design of the new site.There has been some concern over the impact of the development on local infrastructure School Place Planning benchmarking shows that the development has the potential to create a need for 1.1 to 1.8 forms of primary school entry, and 0.3 to 0.8 forms of secondary entry. The expansion of the secondary school on the NLBP site will accommodate the additional secondary need arising. The NHS Clinical Commissioning Group will be consulted upon receipt of any planning application for the site, and will be expected to notify the Council whether additional health infrastructure is required to be provided on the site, or whether existing capacity can acceptably meet emerging need.Concerns were raised about the changing nature of the area, increasing densities; and the potential impact of new development on adjoining properties and views across the site. Given the pressures for new housing any redevelopment of the site is expected to generate new homes. Given the size of the site there are opportunities for higher densities in those parts furthest from existing residential properties. Regarding the maximum height permissible on the site, the Local Plan Policy DM5 is clear that development classified as “tall” (8 storeys or more) will only be permissible in strategic locations as set out in the Core Strategy. As the NLBP site is not a strategic location, development of 8 storeys or more will be in conflict with the Local Plan.You can read the responses in more detail here.
- We Did:
All the comments were taken into account and North London Business Park Planning Brief was approved by the Policy and Resources Committee on 22 March 2016.
- We Asked:
We asked for your views on the draft Discretionary Relief Policy - the revised scheme to assist businesses wishing to seek a reduction in their Business Rates.
- You Said:
There were nine responses to the consultation, but only five responders went on to make a comment. In summary these responses were largely in favour of the principles. Comments were received around the extension on offer to CASCs, the turnover threshold, and the exclusion of not for profit organisations from having a licenced bar. One respondent welcomed the limit to charity shops, but sought further assistance for local high street shops. You can read the responses in more detail here.
- We Did:
All the comments were taken into acccount and the Discretionary Rate Relief Policy was approved by the Policy and Resources Committee on 22 March 2016.
During the consultation process, we ask for your feedback, you tell us and then we make positive changes. Public participation is key to our work. See what happens with We Asked, You Said, We Did.