pgc all green working and signpost with lettering new colour 2
pgc all green working and signpost with lettering new colour 2
facebook icon twitter icon


Share this article share on facebook share on twitter

As the deadline for submitting objections to the draft Enfield Local Plan approaches, the Enfield Society and Enfield RoadWatch have issued a jointly published leaflet, with the text shown below.

green belt under attack graphic

Enfield's Green Belt and historic character are under attack! from proposals in the revised Enfield Local Plan

The Consultation is live now.

We need your help - PLEASE ACT before it's too late!

Deadline 20 May 2024 Enfield's future is in YOUR hands.

For everything you need visit or

We will lose these precious places forever.

  • Enfield's historic Enfield Chase with its heritage landscape — gone.
  • Crews Hill Garden centres, golf course and open land — gone.
  • The open countryside on either side of Enfield Road will be replaced by housing and retail. Our 'breath of fresh air' along Enfield Road — gone.
  • Green areas in Hadley Wood - gone.
  • Prime habitat for wildlife and productive food growing areas — gone.

What is this Consultation?

The Local Plan is Enfield Council's vision for what Enfield will look like in the future. This is the Council's final version, which will go to the Planning Inspector. This consultation [known as Regulation 19] is our last chance to say NO to the destruction of our countryside, NO to tall buildings in inappropriate settings and to encourage regeneration with all the benefits it brings in the right places. Responding to this consultation needs to be precise so guidance is being provided by The Enfield Society and Enfield Road Watch. Follow the links above or overleaf. It is important that you HAVE YOUR SAY! — BY 20 MAY, 2024.

How much Green Belt does Enfield want to take?

The Local Plan documents identify prime areas of the Green Belt for housing, employment and industrial buildings. Vicarage Farm, the open countryside north of Enfield Road, and Crews Hill are the largest areas, but the list also includes the fields south of Enfield Road and areas in the east of the borough, where there are already insufficient green spaces.

Where will the houses go?

Enfield Council should be looking at ALL previously used land possibilities before facilitating development of Green Belt land. They have ignored sites with good potential that would bring homes, jobs and investment in public services, such as improved public transport and medical facilities, to urban areas. The Council should prioritise affordable homes for Enfield residents where they are needed most, and not encourage developers to get even richer building executive homes on the Green Belt that only a few can afford!

Who are we?

The Enfield Society was founded in 1936 and its priorities are conserving Enfield's heritage and environment.

Enfield RoadWatch is an Action Group fighting to protect Enfield's Green Belt which is severely threatened by the Council's Local Plan.

We all believe everyone across the Borough deserves a future that provides access to a healthier, green, safe and cleaner environment that retains its unique local character.

How do I make my voice heard?

Visit​local-plan or to find out how to take part in the consultation and see some ideas about what you can say.

elp qr codeThe QR code takes you to the Enfield Society website where you'll also find the Regulation 19 consultation form in a user-friendly format. Find out more on our websites.

Any questions? Please get in touch

Email: or

Call: The Enfield Society at 020 8363 9495



Log in to comment
Neil Littman posted a reply
02 May 2024 10:51
Enfield Society and Enfield Roadwatch seem to have got their act together better than the council who organised a series of consultation meetings to discuss the Local Plan. I attended the one at Enfield Library on Tuesday April 30 and it was very badly arranged taking place in the foyer (!) of the library with no sound protection from the rest of the building or other library users some with crying infants and constantly beeping security gates. The council officers were unable to answer most of the questions. It was so obviously a box-ticking exercise just to demonstrate they had 'consulted' with local residents. I was there with other members of WHRA and we left after half an hour. The council claimed that when they organised a similar meeting in a dedicated room at Edmonton Green nobody could find it! Hopefully the PG meeting was better organised. Be interested to hear from anyone who was at any of these meetings.
Darren Edgar posted a reply
02 May 2024 11:10
NIMBYs unite!!!

The hypocrisy is laughable. The level of misinformation borderline malignant.
PGC Webmaster posted a reply
02 May 2024 12:56
Darren Edgar wrote (message 7128) :

NIMBYs unite!!!

The hypocrisy is laughable. The level of misinformation borderline malignant.

Blunderbuss comments like this don't contribute to the debate. Give examples of hypocrisy. What parts of the statement are "misinformation"?
Darren Edgar posted a reply
02 May 2024 17:25
Where to start.... well for hypocrisy shall we point out despite the purported clamour for brownfield development not green belt (conflating greenfield in the process) when anyone has proposed brownfield development these same societies and so called civic groups funnily enough demonstrate against them too? Like Southgate Office Village or Anglo Aquatic or Palace Gardens or TFC Palmers Green for a few off the top of my head.

And as for misinformation, we could start with the constant deliberate conflation of greenfield and green belt to mislead people on the difference, or more blatantly the false claims that all the development considered by the draft LP will immediately commence upon it passing? Like Enfield Socs repeated social media claims that Comer homes are going to build 4k homes on Vic Farm? IMMEDIATELY!! Pretty sure they don't even own the land.....

Or that Morrisons in PG will be demolished. Ditto Sainsburys in WMH (something both local Lib Dems and Tories have falsely proclaimed).