Barnet Council's Finance and Growth Overview and Scrutiny Sub-Committee has voiced significant concerns over the proposed housing mix in the latest phases of the Dollis Valley Estate Regeneration Scheme, calling for enhanced scrutiny of the plans.
During a meeting on Monday, July 20, 2026, councillors debated the business case for Phases 4 and 5 of the regeneration programme. A key point of contention was the housing tenure mix. The original scheme proposed a balance of 60% private and 40% affordable housing. To date, 62% of completed homes are private and 38% are affordable. The current proposals for Phases 4 and 5 aim to deliver 187 social rented homes and 21 key worker rented homes, alongside 13 private homes provided by Vistry at no cost to the council. While the exact overall percentage of affordable housing for these phases is not explicitly stated, the breakdown indicates a substantial proportion.
Councillor Peter Zinkin argued that the chosen mix, which aims to balance stakeholder feedback, scheme viability, and funding requirements, was primarily selected to maximise grant funding from the Greater London Authority (GLA) and social housing provision. He expressed personal guilt that the development was not proceeding as homeowners had expected, noting that while the current tenure mix was not the preferred option expressed by residents during engagement,
it was presented as a balance. He proposed a recommendation to the Cabinet to be very, very careful
with the report, ensuring it is scrutinised in detail by lawyers to be legally sound and proof against judicial review.
This highlights potential legal risks that necessitate thorough scrutiny to prevent judicial review.
The committee also discussed Option D plus,
which offered a more favourable housing mix with 60% social rent, 15% London Living Rent, and 25% key worker housing. However, this option was deemed ineligible for GLA grant funding. The GLA ruled out this option as not being value for money because the required grant funding would exceed £380,000. The potential consequences for Barnet Council if the GLA grant application is unsuccessful include stalling the scheme, hoarding the site, or demolishing existing buildings and hoarding the site.
Concerns were also raised about the council's statutory duty to protect public funds when exposing taxpayer money to potential developer financial instability. Officers defended the proposals, citing financial viability and the need to preserve an acceptable level of affordable housing. They assured the committee that Vistry, the developer, had undergone financial restructuring and had available credit lines, stating, I don't accept that they're in poor position. I have confidence in them as a partner.
Issues in Vistry's financial performance were attributed to a 2024 downturn in the housing market and particularly nine schemes in southern England that had underestimated cost positions combined with slow market sales, high levels of standing stock, high work in progress, cash tie up.
The company's revised position is to build their cash reserves up.
Auditors' reports confirmed Vistry's financial statements give a true reflection of their performance up to 31st December 2025. Vistry brought in £36.5 million more cash during 2025 than the previous year
and has £1.13 billion available from its credit lines.
The council's contract is with Vistry's parent company, Countryside Properties UK Limited.
The current proposed housing mix for Phases 4 and 5 is considered the only financially viable option to allow the regeneration scheme to proceed while preserving an acceptable level of affordable housing.
The meeting documents can be found in the Agenda frontsheet and the Public reports pack.
