Angela Evangelou from Green Lanes Business Association on what the fiasco over the Enfield Town Library mural reveals

Enfield Civic Centre and (inset) the Enfield Town Library mural

When Enfield Town Library unveiled its new mural earlier this year, the reaction was immediate and divided. Some people liked the bright colours. Others — more than 600 residents — signed a petition saying it looked wrong in a conservation area.

But then something far more serious emerged; the mural had been put up without planning permission. This shocked many residents.

The library sits inside Enfield Town Conservation Area where people are normally told they must get permission for very small changes — even repainting a door or replacing a window. Yet in this case, the council made a major change to an entire building wall and did not follow the same rules it expects everyone else to follow.

At last month’s planning committee meeting, council officers apologised for the “oversight”. Retrospective permission was then granted — all seven Labour councillors voted in favour, and all three Conservative councillors voted against.

A major point of discussion was the cost. Officers said the mural “didn’t cost taxpayers anything” because it was paid for through the community infrastructure levy (CIL). But this needs clear explanation: CIL is public money and it is paid by developers because new buildings increase pressure on local services. The law says CIL should support things the community genuinely needs, such as improvements to schools, parks, roads, transport and community facilities. CIL is not “extra money” and using it does not allow the council to avoid normal planning rules or procedures.

Another important detail came out during the meeting. The council’s own heritage advisor said the library wall was not a place he would have chosen for public art because of its conservation status. Even so, the committee approved it, saying the cultural benefit was greater than the harm.

Some people may agree with that judgement. Others may not. But the key question remains: why was the correct process not followed from the beginning? And why was the mural installed first, with the permission sorted out only after residents complained?

This is not the first time residents have raised these concerns. In recent years, many local decisions — from low-traffic neighbourhoods and controlled parking zones to the sale of community buildings and large development proposals — have left people feeling that rules are not always applied consistently, and that consultation does not always carry real weight.

The mural itself will always divide opinion. But the issue it reveals goes well beyond art; in a local democracy, process matters. Rules matter. Fairness matters. Trust matters.

And you would have thought that, with local elections coming up next year, the council would have tried a little harder to protect that trust — not weaken it.

No news is bad news

Independent news outlets like ours – reporting for the community without rich backers – are under threat of closure, turning British towns into news deserts.

The audiences they serve know less, understand less, and can do less.

If our coverage has helped you understand our community a little bit better, please consider supporting us with a monthly, yearly or one-off donation.

Choose the news. Don’t lose the news.

Monthly direct debit

Annual direct debit

£5 per month supporters get a digital copy of each month’s paper before anyone else, £10 per month supporters get a digital copy of each month’s paper before anyone else and a print copy posted to them each month. £50 annual supporters get a digital copy of each month's paper before anyone else.