Two green spaces and a leisure centre had been earmarked for redevelopment but will not now be going ahead, reports James Cracknell

Brimsdown Sports Ground has been fenced off for years

The second stage of the Local Plan public examination concluded last week with a series of unexpected U-turns from Enfield Council.

After previous hearings this summer had spent several hours and even days discussing the largest housing allocations in the borough – such as the controversial Metropolitan Green Belt developments proposed for Crews Hill and ‘Chase Park‘ – the final week of second stage hearings focused on much smaller sites dotted around the borough.

These included Brimsdown Sports Ground and Albany Leisure Centre, which were allocated for 225 and 85 homes in the plan respectively. However, at the hearings last week the council revealed that it was ditching its plans for both of these sites.

As well as more than 33,000 homes across the borough, the Enfield Local Plan also allocates sites for employment and burial use, and Church Street Recreation Ground in Edmonton had previously been listed as being suitable for a new crematorium – but this plan has also now been ditched.

A third stage of hearings will now take place in October, with dates still to be confirmed. This will likely see several modifications to the Local Plan debated before a final decision is made by the inspector on whether or not to adopt it and make it official policy for the next 16 years.

At the second stage hearing on Tuesday, 12th August, government-appointed inspector Steven Lee quizzed council barrister Matthew Dale-Harris on the reasons for the U-turn on Brimsdown Sports Ground. The lawyer explained: “Essentially, the council has concluded that the allocation of the site is not sound.

“That decision has been reached following discussions with the property services department – the council is the land owner – regarding the likelihood of delivery.

“The council is not confident in that delivery, there are complicated leasehold implications, and there also significant national and local policy implications. It is local green space, and although it is disused at the present time as a sports facility, the council had thought that an allocation was the way to ensure some retention of community provision. It is now not confident of that position.”

Brimsdown Sports Ground has been fenced off for several years. It was once home to both Brimsdown Rovers and Enfield Town football clubs, which shared use of a small stadium within the ground known as Goldsdown Road. But the Towners left in 2011 and Rovers moved away to merge with another Enfield club at around the same time, leaving the stadium abandoned. As the pitches have deteriorated, the site has become a magnet for vandalism and antisocial behaviour, and the main clubhouse was destroyed by fire two years ago.

The council’s previous plan had been to fund a regeneration of the eight-hectare green space by allowing 225 new homes to be built, with “renewed community use” and “new and enhanced public spaces” provided as part of any development.

Reacting to the news that this plan was now being ditched, Lee told last week’s hearing: “We are not supposed to be rewriting the plan as we go through […] the position on the leases and national policy and so on, would have been understood when the site was allocated in the first place. So, what has changed?”

Dale-Harris responded: “There has been work on a playing pitch strategy, that is part of the ongoing consideration of need for playing pitches, and there have also been further discussions on the lease negotiations which have revealed further issues.”

Matt Burn, from campaign group Better Homes Enfield, later criticised the council’s decision. He said: “The site has been fenced off for many years and derelict. It is a site of antisocial behaviour, people do break in and burn things down from time to time, and it is not usable by the local community in any sense whatsoever.”

Burn explained that, unlike other parts of the borough such as Edmonton which his group had highlighted as needing more green space, Brimsdown was “particularly well serviced by parks and playing pitches” and that it wasn’t necessary to retain the whole site as a sports ground, as the council now seemed to suggest.

Burn concluded: “I find it very surprising that it it is coming out [of the Local Plan] because our view was, it could be redeveloped for reprovision of playing pitches and, actually, more like 500 homes, which is what the evidence says.

“I just don’t understand your [the council’s] position. We want to see the site brought back into use, it is a fantastic site of more than eight hectares, it has been closed off for years. We need more housing, we’re not making housing targets, I’m just knocked sideways by this not coming forward, because the benefits are so obvious.”

Lee added that “we may have to come back to this one at a future date”, suggesting it could be reassessed ahead of the third stage of Local Plan hearings.

On the same day, Church Street Recreation Ground was also briefly discussed. There had previously been criticism of the council’s decision to include the site in the Local Plan as a potential location for a new crematorium, including by opposition Conservative councillors. The council now appears to have listened to this criticism.

Dale-Harris told the hearing: “In the process of preparing for the hearing, further discussions were had […] and it was clear the site was no longer being pursued or promoted by property services, so we apologise for not picking that up earlier.”

The council barrister also admitted that a “burial needs assessment” for the borough had not looked at crematorium capacity and that there was “no evidence the council is aware of” to suggest the existing Enfield Crematorium “won’t have capacity by the end of the decade”. This meant there was “not a need case for a new crematorium”, especially since the site was designated as Metropolitan Open Land (MOL).

Lee again asked why this conclusion could not have been reached far earlier. “All of those factors – whether the site had been assessed, whether it was MOL – they were all in place when the site was allocated,” he said.

Dale-Harris responded: “It has a very different origin story, if I could put it like that. We wouldn’t accept the problems here read across to other parts of the plan and the site selection process.”

John James, a local resident who lives near Church Street Recreation Ground, welcomed the news the site was being ditched, but said: “If the council does ever approach the idea of having a crematoria again, you really do need to evidence the need for it. There is an excellent website produced by The Crematorium Society which gives you all the statistics – and it is suggested at that moment that Enfield Crematorium is only running at 54% capacity.”

At the final second stage hearing on Thursday (14^th), Albany Leisure Centre in Enfield Wash was discussed. The site had been allocated in the Local Plan for 85 homes and 30 extra care homes, plus the retention of the existing leisure centre.

But now, the council has again U-turned on the site and wants to remove it from the plan entirely. Dale-Harris said: “Since that time [when it was allocated in 2023] there has some significant extra investment in the leisure centre and it is now performing at the top of the council’s leisure centres.

“There is no longer a corporate plan to redevelop it and there is no real feasibility to redevelop it, as it would cost £10million and there simply isn’t the funding available to do that.”

Again sounding frustrated, Lee said: “I don’t know where these things leave me […] the question would be – is it unsound to have an allocation come forward that would at least provide the framework to consider an allocation, without relying on the 85 dwellings to be part of the supply?”

Dale-Harris said: “There is now no evidence that it is going to come forward, so we would say it is not justified in the circumstances, and that is why we suggest removing it.”

All of the Enfield Local Plan hearings remain available to rewatch via Enfield Council’s YouTube channel:
Visit youtube.com/@EnfieldCouncil

Read more in-depth coverage of the hearings via the Dispatch website:
Visit enfielddispatch.co.uk/tag/local-plan

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.