Unsupported browser

For a better experience please update your browser to its latest version.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

CABE rounds on PRP's Barnet scheme

  • Comment

CABE has raised concerns that PRP Architects’ huge housing-led plans for the Inglis Barracks development in North London may not fit into the surrounding area 

It is the second time within a month that CABE has hit the practice, following its criticism of PRP and Scott Brownrigg’s Kidbrooke, South London, masterplan Phase 2 on the Ferrier Estate site.

Having reviewed the Barnet plans, which include 2,174 new homes, a primary school, GP surgery and a district energy centre in Mill Hill East, CABE said it was not convinced the taller buildings in the scheme’s so-called ‘southern hub’ would ‘relate appropriately to the scale of the buildings outside the site’.

The watchdog’s design review panel went on to say it was unsure how the study of the barracks and the surrounding area had shaped PRP’s design of the development and that before any planning application was decided, the council should request sections to display the height and scale of the proposed buildings in relation to the scheme’s neighbours.

CABE also queried how successfully a community would develop when the school and other facilities in the southern half of the site were phased a ‘long way from, and some time after,‘ the phases to the north of the site

Click here to read the full design review.

In response, PRP said it was ‘happy’ to produce the section drawings requested, to illustrate the height and scale of its proposals in relation to the context. But it added that it was important to recognise that Mill Hill East station, adjacent to the application site, was likely to be brought forward for development as part of the adopted AAP; and the present proposals should be reviewed against what will be adjacent to the site in the future rather than what is actually there now.

  • Comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.