The Planning Committee of Barnet Council met on 21 July 2025, to discuss several planning and advertisement applications. The committee refused an application relating to tree preservation, but approved, with conditions, applications for a rear extension, and for the installation of electric vehicle (EV) charging points with LCD advertising screens. They also refused two applications for roof extensions.

EV Charging Points and Advertising

The committee considered applications for the installation of electric vehicle charging points with double-sided LCD screens at 828-830 High Road and 862-868 High Road. Both applications included a feeder pillar and associated electrical connection works. The primary function of the units is electric vehicle charging, with a secondary function of digital advertising, which the applicant stated would pay for the daily free charge.

The committee voted to approve both applications, subject to conditions. The conditions included that the developments must be begun within three years, that the materials used must match those set out in the approved documents, and that the EV charging units must comply with 'The Electric Vehicles (Smart Charging Points) Regulations 2021' for the lifetime of the unit.

During the discussion of the application for 862-868 High Road, objectors raised concerns about the loss of parking spaces, the impact on local businesses, the potential for driver distraction, light pollution, and the lack of a guarantee for low-cost EV charging. One objector, Michael Levitsky of the Ravensdale Avenue Residents Association and the Finchley Society, argued that the application was based on an outdated 2012 local plan, and that the council should be laughing them out of court, not approving their applications. He also raised concerns about the council's contract with JOLT, the applicant, and the potential for them to raise tariffs. In response, the planning officer stated that the assessment was based on the correct planning framework, and that pricing transparency was covered by alternative regulations.

12-18 High Road, East Finchley

The committee considered an application for the use of the basement and ground floor at 12-18 High Road as Class E retail, office, or financial/professional services. Councillor Alison Moore, Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Health, addressed the committee to object to the application, raising concerns about the impact of delivery vehicles on traffic and pedestrian safety, as well as waste management issues. She noted that residents had limited trust in how the site would operate, given its history. Ed Kemsley, the agent for the applicant Peacock and Smith, said that Tesco wished to occupy the vacant unit as a local convenience store, creating up to 20 jobs and improving convenience for local residents. He added that the delivery arrangements would use the existing unloading provision on High Road, and that waste and recycling would be backloaded into the delivery trucks. The committee voted to approve the application, subject to conditions.

38 and 40 Golders Manor Drive

The committee considered a joint application for roof extensions, first floor rear infill, and new front porches at 38 and 40 Golders Manor Drive. The planning officer stated that the proposed roof alterations would result in a bulky, box-like structure that would subsume the characteristics of the semi-detached properties. Joey Ben Yoav, the agent for the applicant, argued that the proposed extensions were modest and neighbourly, and that similar extensions had already been approved at neighbouring properties. He also stated that the extensions were needed to provide adequate space for a family with four children, including a daughter with health needs. The committee voted to refuse the application.

16 Hillside Gardens, Edgware

The committee considered an application for a roof extension at 16 Hillside Gardens. The planning officer stated that similar proposals had been refused four times previously, and that the current proposal was unacceptable because of its scale and the additional gable roof on top of the side extension. Emily Benedek, the agent for the applicant, argued that a certificate of lawfulness had already been granted for a similar extension, and that the only amendment was a design improvement to replace a flat roof with a gable-ended pitched roof. She also stated that the proposal would provide essential storage space for a family with five young children. The committee voted to refuse the application.

83 Marsh Lane, London NW7

The committee considered an application relating to 83 Marsh Lane, and voted to refuse consent for the proposed felling of an oak tree, citing that the loss of the tree was not justified based on the information provided.

87 Birkbeck Road, London NW7

The committee considered an application relating to 87 Birkbeck Road, and voted to approve the application for a single storey side/rear extension with rooflights, delegating authority to the Service Director to make minor alterations to the conditions.

5 Llanvanor Road London NW2

The committee considered an application relating to 5 Llanvanor Road, and voted to refuse the application on the grounds that the proposed self-contained ground floor flats would fail to provide adequate light provision, resulting in substandard accommodation.

40 Temple Fortune Parade Finchley Road London NW11

The committee considered an application relating to 40 Temple Fortune Parade Finchley Road London NW11, and voted to approve the application subject to conditions, delegating authority to the Service Director to make minor alterations to the conditions.

11 Prospect Road, Barnet, EN5

The committee considered an application relating to 11 Prospect Road, Barnet, EN5, and voted to approve the application subject to conditions, delegating authority to the Service Director to make minor alterations to the conditions.

33 and 33A Renters Avenue London NW4

The committee considered an application relating to 33 and 33A Renters Avenue London NW4, and voted to approve the application subject to conditions, delegating authority to the Service Director to make minor alterations to the conditions.