Better Homes Enfield suggests certain details might be being withheld because of the local election, reports James Cracknell

The government has defended its decision not to reveal which areas will be included within the Enfield ‘new town’ ahead of this week’s local election.

Fears are growing locally over exactly how large the new town will be and which areas will be included within its boundaries – but so far no detailed map of the proposed 21,000-home settlement has been released by the government.

Instead only a broad circle has so far been published within a strategic environmental assessment (SEA), despite a public consultation now asking for local people’s views.

When the government’s New Towns Taskforce published its initial recommendation last September, it suggested that 884 hectares of land across both Crews Hill and ‘Chase Park’ – Enfield Council’s name for an area of farmland near World’s End – could be included within the new town site.

However, this figure was not mentioned in the March announcement, when the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) confirmed that Crews Hill and Chase Park had been shortlisted as one of the government’s seven preferred new town sites.

In a blog published over the weekend, local campaign group Better Homes Enfield (BHE) suggests this could be a deliberate tactic to avoid causing controversy ahead of the local election being held this Thursday (7^th May).

The BHE blog says: “If the plans are still too vague to show residents where development might happen, the consultation is premature.

“If the boundary exists but is being withheld, residents are being denied the basic information they need to respond properly.

“Either way, this is not good enough.

“The concern many residents will have is obvious. With local elections taking place on 7 May, is the true extent of the proposal being kept vague until after polling day?

“That question now needs a clear and urgent answer.”

Asked today (Monday 5th) for a response, a spokesperson for MHCLG insisted that “boundaries have not yet been determined” for the new town and that “in most instances development will not cover the entirety of the area assessed by the SEA”.

They add: “Proposals for new town locations will, where required, be subject to more detailed, site-level environmental assessment, with further place specific consultations and community engagement ahead of defining the precise area of development.”

BHE point out that the SEA’s circle area includes “major parks, sports grounds, golf courses, nurseries, garden centres, existing homes and local businesses” and “could result in the loss of large areas of greenfield land and, potentially, formal open space, sports and recreational facilities”.

Green Belt land west of Crews Hill Station, owned by developer Berkeley Homes — Extensive areas of Green Belt land in Enfield have been earmarked for thousands of new homes

Last year, during the public examination of Enfield Council’s draft Local Plan, a planning consultant for the local authority acknowledged that “in relation to Chase Park and Crews Hill, they are areas that are going to result in high harm to the Green Belt”.

The government’s SEA itself also recognises this harm, stating: “The potential impacts on the natural landscape could be significant given the site’s greenfield status. These will be mitigated wherever possible through comprehensive masterplanning and consideration of how the Enfield Chase Landscape Recovery project could support mitigation and nature recovery.

“Our view is that any remaining impacts would be outweighed by the need for housing delivery in London and low availability of land, especially as the existing greenfield land is low-quality agricultural use.”

The use of the term “low-quality” is also something that has been disputed by Action for Enfield’s Future (AfEF), a new coalition of local campaign groups and residents’ associations.

Carol Fisk and Vicki Pite, who help co-ordinate AfEF, say they are “shocked by the lack of both transparency and evidence throughout the new towns process”.

They add: “The fact that so much evidence, including the exact location, has been withheld during a time of critical local elections, is profoundly undemocratic, disrespectful of Enfield’s residents and putting political opportunism ahead of Enfield’s future.”

AfEF will this month be delivering a letter to Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, signed by hundreds of local people, urging him to withdraw his government’s support for the new town at Crews Hill and Chase Park.

The council’s draft Enfield Local Plan – drawn up long before the government’s new towns announcement – contains detailed proposals and maps for more than 9,000 new homes across 436 hectares of Metropolitan Green Belt land.

But this is less than half the number of homes being proposed for the new town.

Local political parties such as the Conservatives, Greens, Reform UK, Enfield Community Independents and Liberal Democrats have all pledged to “protect the Green Belt” should they win control of Enfield Civic Centre following this week’s election.

In contrast, Enfield Labour has defended both its Local Plan and the government’s new town, with council leader Ergin Erbil claiming in an interview ahead of the election that much of Enfield’s Green Belt “is not genuine Green Belt” and should be built on.

The local election takes place on Thursday, 7th May, with polling stations open from 7am until 10pm. All voters must bring valid photographic ID with them.

To take part in the government consultation on new towns:
Visit consult.communities.gov.uk/new-towns/new-towns-draft-programme-consultation

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.