Guest Blog - The One Promise Barnet Council Won’t Make About Edgware’s Transport Hub - by Anuta Zack

 

The One Promise Barnet Council Won’t Make About Edgware’s Transport Hub

Barnet Council says safety is a priority.

So residents asked for a very simple reassurance.

Before demolishing Edgware’s transport hub — the bus station, the garage, the interchange used by thousands of passengers every day — confirm that the replacement infrastructure can actually be built safely. Not eventually. Not theoretically. Actually. It sounds like the easiest promise in the world to make. And yet Barnet Labour Council refuses to make it.

Planning Is Complicated. This Question Isn’t.

Planning debates are usually complicated.  People argue about density, housing numbers, transport capacity, retail space, sunlight, wind, viability and a hundred other things. The Broadwalk redevelopment proposal has triggered all of those debates. Reasonable people can disagree about them. But sometimes a planning question is extremely simple. Before demolishing Edgware’s transport hub, can the council demonstrate that the replacement they are proposing can actually be built safely? Not after demolition. Not “once the details are worked out”. Before. And yet that simple reassurance has not been given.

One Sentence Could Settle This

In meetings and conversations councillors and officers say what you would expect. Safety matters. Standards will be high. Nothing unsafe would ever be built. All comforting words. But words cost nothing. If safety really is the priority, the obvious step would be to put the principle into writing as a planning safeguard: 

Nothing is demolished until regulators confirm the replacement transport infrastructure can be built safely. One sentence. Thirty seconds of drafting. Problem solved. So why hasn’t it happened?

A Project With No Real Precedent

The replacement being proposed is extraordinary. It involves placing roughly 200 electric buses in a large underground depot, with high-density residential towers directly above it. Supporters call this innovation. Another word might be experiment. Electric bus depots exist, of course. But they are generally surface-level facilities serving operational sites. They are not large subterranean garages with thousands of residents living directly above them.

In the UK there are no clear precedents for dense housing built above a major underground electric bus depot. Internationally, the picture does not look much different. Electric bus depots can be found, but they are overwhelmingly ground-level facilities, not dense residential developments constructed over large subterranean fleets of electric buses. There are reasons why developments like this are rare. Large concentrations of electric vehicles introduce a known risk: lithium-ion battery fires and thermal runaway.

These incidents are uncommon, but when they occur they behave very differently from conventional fires. They burn hotter, they can reignite and they are notoriously difficult to control in enclosed spaces.  None of this proves the project cannot be engineered safely. But it does raise an obvious question.

If this really is pioneering infrastructure, shouldn’t the safety case be proven before demolishing the infrastructure that already exists?

After Grenfell, That Should Not Need Explaining

Britain has already learned what happens when safety assumptions run ahead of certainty. The Grenfell Tower fire showed what can happen when risks are treated as details that will somehow be resolved later. Edgware residents are not asking for impossible guarantees. They are asking for something much simpler. Before dismantling a transport hub that thousands of people rely on every day, confirm that the replacement can actually be built safely. That should be the starting point of any responsible planning decision.

Transparency Has Been Equally Enlightening

The same pattern appears when residents ask for basic transparency. Barnet has already sent documents to the Mayor of London as part of the Stage 2 planning process. Those documents underpin a decision that could permanently reshape Edgware’s transport infrastructure. Residents asked to inspect them. The council replied that it will consider the request in 20 days. The Mayor has 14 days to decide. In other words, the decision may be taken before residents are allowed to see the documents that informed it. If that sounds like transparency, it is a rather unusual version of it.

The Point of No Return

Large redevelopment projects rely on a simple fact. Once existing infrastructure is demolished, the pressure to complete whatever replaces it becomes overwhelming. At that point there is no going back. The town has already lost what it had. Which is exactly why the safeguard residents asked for matters so much. If the replacement infrastructure really can be built safely, confirming that before demolition should be straightforward. If it cannot yet be demonstrated, demolishing the transport hub first would leave Edgware taking a very large gamble indeed.

A Very Simple Question

Planning arguments about density and design will continue. But this issue is not complicated. Before demolishing infrastructure used by thousands of people every day, demonstrate that the infrastructure promised in its place can actually be built safely. At present that has not been done.  The London Fire Brigade has already raised concerns. There are currently no established building regulations for a development of this type.

Yet demolition of the existing transport hub is still on the table. Residents asked for one simple safeguard: do not demolish the hub until a safe, approved replacement is actually possible. It should have been the easiest promise in the world to make. The fact that Barnet Council still refuses to make it should worry anyone who assumes that common sense still plays some role in planning decisions. And it raises one final, uncomfortable question. If the replacement cannot yet be shown to be safely buildable, why is destroying the existing transport hub even being discussed?

Please sign the petition to stop it being demolished.

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/stop-edgware-s-bus-station-and-bus-garage-from-being-demolished

The Edgware Regeneration and the way politics works in The London Borough of Barnet

On Wednesday, Barnet Council will vote on whether to approve the massive Ballymore regeneration scheme in Edgware. This will change Edgware forever, if it is approved and comes to fruition. The developers, Ballymore will make a very large amount of money from the scheme. As for the existing residents of Edgware, the people who pay their council tax bills, lets be generous and say that the benefits will be far less obvious. Let me share with you the claimed benefits - My observations are in red italics

Town Centre

We intend to build a new Town Square - a destination where people can come together. It will form the centrepiece of the re-development, which will take its inspiration from local architecture, honouring Edgware’s character and heritage. - I am interested to see how shops underneath huge tower blocks 'honour Edgware's character and heritage'. I suppose you could claim that the large Green Sheild House has long been part of the Edgware landscape, but I am far from convinced that this rather dull piece of 1960's utilitarian design is necessarily something Edgware residents want to see used as a model for the rest of the town. I'm yet to be persuaded that this claim means anything beyond an idea in the mind of a marketing person, who obviously assumes the residents of Edgware are a bit dim and will fall for such old tosh.

Public Transport

To reduce congestion and to make crossings safer, we plan to move the bus garage underground, with the passenger terminal remaining at street level and sheltered bus stops dispersed along Station Road. This will support the future electrification of the bus network, reducing noise and pollution. There will also be new and improved connectivity to the Underground. - The idea of putting electric buses in an underground garage is insanity, given the problems with their batteries catching fire. The claim that the putting the gragae underground will reduce congestion is absolutely ridiculous. However you look at it, the existing garage is far safer. There is good interchange with the tube. Given the huge number of new flats, this scheme will clearly make congestion on the Northern Line worse, not better and to claim otherwise is simply dishonest. There are no new transport links.

Meanwhile, pedestrians will find it easier to get around with more paths and safer crossings. And those on bikes can look forward to over 500 short term cycle parking spaces across the scheme. - Given that the new 'safer' crossings are a key benefit, I am surprised that there is no real information on the website explaining how these will be safer. 

Homes

We want to deliver 3,365 new homes of different types and sizes. Up to 35% of homes will be affordable - subject to GLA grant funding - making a significant contribution to Barnet Council’s housing waiting list. These homes will be designed for everyone, from students, families, and those later in life, in an array of tenures including market sale, rental, shared ownership, and affordable rent. We also want our new homes to look contemporary while being sympathetic to other buildings in the area. - The wording here troubles me. It doesn't say 35% of homes will be affordable. It says "up to" meaning far less may be actually delivered, and this is contingent on public money supporting the scheme. Given that the developers will make a lot of money, I am not entirely comfortable with the fact they are getting a bung from taxpayers (most or whom are opposed to the scheme). Anyone familiar with other schemes in Barnet know what happens in the real world when the buildings start going up.

Shops & Restaurants

At the centre of the town will be a new, larger, Sainsbury’s (without a day of trading lost during construction), accessible by the new Sainsbury’s  car park and transport links. We'll have big high street brands plus independent shops and restaurants, so there is choice and variety for everyone. - When they talk about transport links, these are the buses and tubes that already exist. Sainsburys already has a car park. This is not a new benefit

Leisure

We’re pleased to announce that Edgware will get a new cinema. We have pop-ups and a food market planned. And there’ll be community leisure spaces to enjoy - including playgrounds, a new library, gym and swimming pool for families and beyond to enjoy the area. - Excuse my cynicism. I asked Google where the new swimming pool would be. The answer "The new swimming pool, part of the Edgware redevelopment project, will be located at the expanded leisure center near Edgware. The redevelopment plan also includes a gym and fitness studio according to Minuteman Press. The project will also deliver new homes and green spaces, including a nature park according to Ballymore. "

Healthcare

We’ve set aside 20,000 sq ft for health and wellbeing, which could include GP surgeries and dentists. We’re also talking to the NHS about their requirements. This will result in an offering bespoke to the needs of Edgware and its residents. - What exactly does this mean? I note the "could include GP Surguries and dentists" a long way from a firm commitment.This should be a ring-fenced condition of planning.

Open space

We want to make Edgware a greener place with better air quality. We will create 4.8 ha of open space, plant 400 more trees, introduce a new public park with pedestrian-friendly routes linking neighbourhoods, and reinvigorate the nearby Deans Brook Nature Park, opening up parts which have been closed for 100 years. - When they talk about 'creating 4.8ha of open space' this does not mean that there will be a net increase of 4.8ha in undeveloped land. I accept that there will be some improvement in quality and usability of some green space, but I am rather less convinced that this is actually what it is being sold as.

Office space

Besides being a great place to live, we want to make Edgware a great place to work. That’s why we are also planning a mixed-use building with over 50,000 ft sq of flexible offices, workspaces and hotel rooms - perfect for small businesses – right in the centre. - I know a fair few businesses owners in Edgware. They tell me that Edgware is a great place to live in and work in, but they are less than convinced that this will be improved for them, existing residents and business owners, who have paid their taxes for decades.

In short, many of the most important benefits, such as new affordable housing are not guaranteed. The underground bus station is a bonkers scheme that the Fire Brigade have expressed concerns about. I am not anti development. If this whole scheme wasn't riddled with if's, buts and convenient get outs for the developers for important commitments, I may support it. The truth is that if there own PR material is riddled with claims that don't stand up to scrutiny, what chance is there that this scheme will actually be good for Edgware?

But what concerns me more than the scheme is the way it has shown the uttwer hypocrisy of our local politicians. Prior to 2022, when Labour won in Barnet, they were very sceptical about this scheme. The Tories, on the other hand, where totally behind it. As soon as they lost, the position reversed. There has been absolutely no change in council policy towards the scheme and Ballymore as a result of regime change. 

Let me ask you this. Who elects our local politicians, who pays their 'allowances', who are they meant to serve? The answer is us, the voters. They are meant to be on our side, and they are meant to ensure that council officials work for us, as residents and tax payers. What we actually have is a bunch of people, who seemingly despise the voters. When I attended a recent Council cabinet meeting, I was truly shocked at the way things are under Labour. They are not rude and revolting to the public, as the Tories used to be. They are polite, but they made it absolutely clear that they had no interest at all in the views of the public. So who's views are they interested in? Well they seem very interested to cosy up to big developers. I do not think that the relationship should be hostile, we are all grown ups and we know that we need more housing. What, however, we should expect is for councillors to be our advocates. They should be on our side and be making sure that when developers submit schemes, they take account of existing residents and minimise impacts on them, as well as maximising benefits.

It's all rather sad. I won't be going to Wednesday's meeting. I have tickets for a concert. One thing I learned at the cabinet is that Labour 'sort business out' before the public are involved. 

The Edgware development will not be utopia for its residents and no one in the council cares

We are being told that the Edgware Broadwalk development will be a major contributor to solving London's housing crisis. I'm an engineer by trade and if I am asked to solve a problem, the first thing I do is look at what has caused the problem. For ordinary working Londoners, the root cause is that property is far too expensive for ordinary people to buy or rent. The answer that Sadiq Khan and both Barnet's Conservatives and Barnet Labour have proposed, are mega developments, where a majority of the dwellings are not for people who need affordable housing. 

Even where there are what are deemed officially 'affordable' they are still out of the reach of junior doctors, teachers, nurses, etc. To try and make them vaguely affordable, there are joint ownership schemes. The drawback for those who participate, is that you pay for decades for a property, which you will never actually own. It is not a  solution to the problem, it is a sticking plaster on a festering wound in our city, which is getting ever worse.

But lets take a second to consider what life will actually be like for the new tenants of the skryscrapers in Edgware. Of course the top story penthouse flats will be amazing with views of The Shard and the Chiltern Hills. I wouldn't mind one myself. There will be a gym for the tenants, a cinema and a few restaurants. The tube will be dead handy for trips to The West End and for those who can afford it, there will be a guaranteed parkins space, which the developers will sell at a handsome profit. There are 3365 homes,  and 465 student flats, with some 425 parking spaces for residents, so they will be at a premium. Maybe one in ten residents will get a parking space, which means that those with the deepest pockets will be fine. So there you go, if you are a rich resident, life will be good.

Now lets have a look at those struggling to get by, who end up in one of the not so luxury flats. They will effectively be excluded from car ownership. Once the blocks are built, the Northern Line will be full to capacity in busy times. Although being at the end of the line going to work may mean a seat, coming home will be a nightmare. One of the ironies of Sadiq Khan's ULEZ and mega development policy is that people are being forced to use the tube network, which has the worst air quality in the UK. I am a big supporter of clean air, but the fact Khan has done nothing to clean the air on the tube is a sign to me that he is not treating London with honesty. Ulez has done little to stop rush hour congestion and the buses are busier than ever. My son used to get the bus to school in Finchley, from Mill Hill. The 221 was packed with young people and he'd have to get up an hour early to be guaranteed to get to school and college on time. This will be true for all residents of the Broadwalk Towers who need to use the buses in rush hour. It is all very well for the YIMBY contingent to say that Edgware is well connected. If the buses and tubes are rammed, it means that journeys take far longer and are not conducive to good mental health (I know, I commuted on Thameslink for decades and often just went to the pub for hours, as there were no trains home). 

And when you are at home and want to chill out, what is there to do in Edgware? If you have kids, where are the local football fields, Netball and Basketball courts, swimming pools, Parks? You've got it, a busride away. Much is made in the plan of improving biodiversity, but this simply seems to be putting footpaths through existing nature reserves (presumably disturbing the wildlife). There is no proper provision for young teenagers to engage in sports in the scheme. 

The Ballymore pack states that there will be a  better cultural offering. They say residents asked the for the following

“We need more things to do in Edgware, like going to the cinema, and things for families and young people.”

Their response is. 

Our proposals are for a range of community and cultural uses which could include a new cinema and gym, in addition to a new library and a range of pubs, restaurants, cafés and an exciting new shopping district.

Whilst most people will be pleased to see a cinema in the plans, for those on low wages, this will be a rare treat. The less well off inmates of Ballymore Towers will not be going to the cinema more than for the odd treat. The talk of a new Library is rather misleading, as Edgware already has a good Library, that will simply be knocked down and moved. As for the new pubs, these are generally not designed for teenagers, who need to prove they are 21 to get in to many local pubs. I doubt that the less well off people struggling to pay their bills will have too much left to pay for the services of the restaurants and cafes and I do not personally see shops as being part of any sort of cultural offering.

So what will life be like for the less well off residents of Ballymore Towers in the dark winter months? If you look at the plans, around 35-40% of the buildings look out onto other towers. The view will be a pretty dismal view of other neighbours sitting in their flats. The expensive restaurants, cafe's and cinema will be a small luxury, to be enjoyed on occasion when the finances allow. Life will be be an endless trudge of crowded bus and tube journeys, passing the more well heeled residents enjoying the delights of the cafe's and restaurants. 

When the London County Council built the Watling Estate in the 1930's, a new tube line was put in with a station at Burnt Oak, to augment buses and trams. Parks were built, with football fields. The famous Watling Boys club ran football teams, boxing and other sports, for the children on the estate. Homes had gardens or communal greens out the front for the children. Doctors surgeries and Edgware General Hospital were developed. Everything was easily accessible and neighbours could have conversations over garden fences. When children broke their arm, the hospital was near and when they needed the doctor, the surgery was on the doorstep. In this scheme none of these things is true. Residents will face a long schlep on the 384 bus from Edgware to Barnet Hospital and no doctors surgeries are mentioned.

Whilst I am not at all against high rise builds for professional people, who have no children and can enjoy the cafe culture, these are not the people who are really suffering from the housing crisis. The people at the sharp end are trying to raise families and build lives on low wages. This plan fails them.  I don't really blame Ballymore. They are property developers and their sole aim is to make as much money as possible for their shareholders.

That is the truth. Barnet Conservatives who passed the SPD that allowed this, Barnet Labour are overseeing it and Sadiq Khan, who runs TFL that are Ballymore's partners, has facilitated this.  All three have failed the working families of London in allowing schemes like this to rise. 

Until we see a proper, mass council housing building scheme that is actuallly designed to give families good quality living accomodation that is fit for purpose,  nothing will improve in the real world, apart from Ballymore's shareholders bank balances and the highly paid consultants who put these schemes together and pay people to troll people who object on Twitter and Facebook. 

Ever wondered how decisions get made in the London Borough of Barnet?

 There is a big campaign at the moment to oppose the redevelopment of the Edgware Broadwalk centre. What many locals don't realise is that it the campaign is doomed to failure. In truth, the decision was made around two years ago, when the previous former Conservative administration approved the SPD (the area plan the decreed the local planning rules and priorities for Edgware). What we are now, in reality, arguing about, is the size of doors, finishes of windows and how many trees will be planted. It is a done deal. The only way that the Broadwalk will not be soon bristling with shiny towers, is if we have a UK wide economic collapse and a recesion. Careful what you wish for. 

What frustrates me is that many of the people who are now protesting, completely ignored the warnings I gave them in 2021 when I stood as a Lib Dem candidate in the by-election. I put all of the info on the blog here, but I was told time and again when canvassing, that it was Lib Dem scaremongering! They had all been reassurred by the friendly local Conservative Councillors that there were no plans for what we are now seeing. It is hilarious seeing some of the same people who screamed liar at me in 2021 on the doorsteps, shouting on Facebook about how terrible "Sadiq Khan's plan for Edgware is", when it was their own Tory Councillors Nick Mearing-Smith and Sarah Wardle who were championing the plan in 2020 and 2021. 

Some people have recently asked me how decisions are made at Barnet Council in regard to planning. I would say that in 99% of cases I've seen, the rules are followed and the concept that there is corruption would seem a bit silly. I have seen some rather perverse decisions over the years though, I'm sure it's all as above board. There are a few that there seemed to be cast iron planning reasons for rejection, but to everyones surprise they were passed (BTW rejection would be almost impossible in Edgware since the SPD was passed by the Conservatives in 2021 and proposals are only rejected on planning grounds). 

The talk of shenanigans that I've heard emerging,  reminds me of a story my mother told me back in 2008, when I first started ruffling feathers at the Council by writing a blog on the Barnet Times. She had a friend who was a very attractive lady, who was also a self made millionaire. My mum recounted a story when she was trying to get a business loan for the family business. She was chatting to her friend and saying how worried she was that her bank manager would turn down the proposition. Her friend enquired which bank my parents banked with. When my mum told her, she laughed and said "Don't take your husband to the meeting, and wear some flattering black boots". My mum told me she was shocked. Her friend said "Oh you won't have to do anything, just make sure he see's your legs, he's a foot fetishist and likes boots. He'll just sign anything then". They then started to discuss business and her friend confessed that she'd been sleeping with the chair of the planning committee for ages onthe sly and that ensured she got all manner of dodgy property schemes passed. Mum was even more shocked, much to her friends amusement. Her friend said "Oh, men are all the same, once you've got them interested, you'll get anything you want". My mum assurred me then that she never used her femine charms to secure any such deals. But she told me that if you want to understand how Barnet politics works, all you need to do is learn three things, who is sleeping with who, who is working for who and who makes money out of the decisions that are made.

Now all of these shenanigans my mum described happened decades ago and I am completely unaware of any such naughtiness these days. I am most sure that the current Labour administration and the previous Conservative one would not stand for any conflicts of interest where people personally benefit from decisons which they influenced. When we see odd decisions taken, I am completely satisfied, that no one was having a quickie behind the council office bins to ensure something they had a vested interest in was passed. 

I've concluded that the only reason that seemingly perverse decisions have, on occasion, been made is because I am far too thick to understand the real reasons, and having a smutty mind, I've drawn completely the wrong conclusion. I can say with 100% integrity that I've come to the conclusion that, by and large, the voters of Barnet have got exactly the Councillors they voted for and deserve. If people are too lazy to actually read the council papers and hold councillors to account, when the truth is staring them in the face, then why should I give a fig!