Barnet Council passed the controversial plans for the Brent Cross Cricklewood regeneration on 19 November 2009, claiming that neighbouring Brent had withdrawn their objections. The Coalition opposing the plans is now slating Barnet planners for misrepresenting Brent Council’s objections. [2014: Brent STILL opposes it!]
The Coalition for a Sustainable Brent Cross Cricklewood Plan, who represent residents, politicians and campaign groups across Barnet, Brent and Camden were astounded to hear Barnet planner Martin Cowie at the meeting saying that Brent had withdrawn their objections to the scheme. Letters from Brent Council’s Officer and Brent Council’s Leader, Paul Lorber show clearly that Brent continue to oppose the scheme as it currently stands.
Lia Colacicco, Coalition Co-ordinator and Mapesbury resident says:
“When contacted, Brent planning department said that the Planning Committee members had voted unanimously to formally object to the scheme. This objection stands and there are no plans to go back to Committee with a recommendation to change this stance.
“Letters from Chris Walker, Head of Brent Planning, to Barnet on October 20th, and again on November 27th, make Brent's objections quite clear. We are therefore mystified as to why Martin Cowie claimed that Brent has substantially withdrawn its objections. Brent base their objections on major traffic issues and the nature of the waste handling facility."
“Barnet Officers have not only misrepresented the views of Brent residents, but have now withheld the truth about Brent Council’s continuing position in order to push through these disastrous plans.”
Chris Walker, Head of Planning in Brent, in a letter to Barnet's Stewart Murray dated 27 November 2009 makes it clear that:
“….while significant moves have been made to address Brent’s concerns in the draft heads of terms and conditions, Brent has not withdrawn their objection to the proposed development.”
Brent Council Leader, Cllr Paul Lorber additionally wrote to the Secretary of State on 25th November reiterating his continued objections to the plans, and calling for a Public Inquiry.
The Coalition believes this means the Secretary of State John Denham must now call in the plans for Public Inquiry.
Link to HOME (see all posts).
I am a relatively new resident in the area, which I really love. However, one aspect is not pleasant and that is the volume of traffic. I live near Gladstone Park close to Dollis Hill Station. There are times when I feel trapped in because of the traffic tailbacks on just about every road. It is obvious that something has to be done about the shear volume of traffic in the area. Public transort has to be eincreased and improved as the only wat to get people out of their cars. Because of traffic congestion the bus services are unreliable and often subject to long delays. Before any borough propses population increases, it must consider the traffic impact. It is wholey wrong for Barbnet to have sole control of a planning decision that has an obvious impact on those of us living near in a neighbouring borough.
ReplyDelete