Agenda item

Council is asked to agree the Local Plan.

Cllr Nesil Caliskan moved, and Cllr Ergin Erbil seconded, the report.

 

The Leader stated that the Local Plan has been through six years of consultation, exploration and engagement and sets out the future intentions for the borough and how this will be achieved. The aim being to make Enfield a greener, vibrant, and well-connected borough where its young people will have a place of their own to call home.

 

In 2019, there was a 12-week consultation exceeding the minimum statutory requirement with local groups and the draft plan was agreed in 2021. Since then, the administration has honoured their commitment to deliver a pre-publication period that has allowed residents and councillors to read the final plan before it goes out to an additional statutory consultation and a review by the National Planning Inspector before it can be implemented.

 

By 2041, the population of Enfield will have grown by more than 50,000 people as people are living longer, and our young people today will have families of their own. If the demand for housing continues to rise without adequate housing being available, people will be forced to move out of the borough; additionally overpriced and overcrowded housing was becoming more prominent. The Local Plan allows the Council to control how this growth in the borough will occur.

 

The Leader acknowledged that there is no easy way to deal with the housing crisis as even if every brownfield site were exhausted, there would still not be enough supply to meet targets. The loss of green belt land will be compensated by major landscape restoration and a new country park which will improve public access in Enfield Chase, with a commitment to a 25% increase in green coverage by 2041. By using a limited amount of green belt which would be namely; disused carparks, garden centres and golf courses, would equate to adequate space to build affordable family homes which will see the sites better utilised to address the national housing crisis. The Crews Hill site will enable  5000 new homes to be built whilst Chase Park will have 3700 new homes built with both sites gaining crucial infrastructure, being close to transport links and access to gardens and public spaces with opportunities to walk and cycle through connected habitats and landscape corridors.

 

The Administration has provided a clear steer to officers that the Council must have a Local Plan that meets housing needs. The process to produce this plan has been meticulously detailed with an immense level of dedication and will produce a plan that is technically sound. The Leader expressed concerns by not having an up-to-date Local Plan leaves the Council open to the risk of developers putting in planning applications anywhere in the borough which will be agreed by the National Inspector due to the current framework being out of date.

 

The Leader expressed thanks to the Planning department, officers, elected members and residents who contributed and were involved with the development of the Local Plan.

 

The Opposition expressed concerns that social housing in high rise buildings leads to poverty with low educational attainment and poor health outcomes.The Plan does not consider building appropriate older people homes or take into account that the birth rate has been falling in London since 2016 which would suggest that growth will not be as significant as the administration suggest.

 

Tall buildings being proposed across the borough are not sites in the Council’s ownership or ones that can be easily developed. For example, in Angel Edmonton, the Joyce & Snells Estate  is being rebuilt with great intensification with great loss of green space. It is doubtful that this redevelopment will add to the quality of life of the residents who occupy homes within these tall buildings.

 

The Plan would open Crews Hill area to residential homes which would affect residents and businesses and the infrastructure is not sufficient enough to deal with what is being proposed. The benefits of being pro-cycling and walking were acknowledged, but not feasible in isolated parts of the borough such as Crews Hill with a limited bus service and only one train station in close proximity. It was reported that it would take between 30 minutes and 45 minutes to walk to the surrounding train stations which would force residents to use cars when roads are already at full capacity. It was argued that the green belt is an area of  character, and the proposed developments would dimmish this especially if 13% of the green belt which is protected by national and regional plans is to be built on.

 

Local Oakwood residents are opposed to the closure of the car park at Oakwood station which is the only station between Enfield and Finsbury Park that has level access from the street to train for disabled users. The plan is meant to encourage sustainable travel, but the abolition of this car park represents the denial of access to that sustainable travel not only to disabled users but the general travelling public. The proposal to develop the Alan Pullinger youth centre, Minchenden car park and Southgate Office Village in Southgate, which are valuable places which support the residents, and the youth of the borough were opposed by local residents.

 

The Opposition emphasised that only 20 homes have been built thus far on the Meridian Water site highlighting that the target of 5000 homes by this point had not been met which would have taken a lot of pressure of the Local Plan. It was argued that the justification for needing to declassify green belt to build more affordable family homes on the green belt in order to meet housing needs rather than doing more to allow building on industrial land was illogical as those families who are currently in private rented and overcrowded homes will not be able to afford these homes in Chase Park.

 

 

The Administration outlined the measures in place within this plan to support prudent economic growth in Enfield.

 

The Local Plan will allow the building of more family homes for Enfield residents with enhanced parks, woodlands, and green spaces therefore making the borough more biodiverse. There are also plans for new schools, GP surgeries, leisure centres and the creation jobs for local residents.

 

The housing crisis has significantly impacted residents with over 3000 homeless families living in temporary accommodation which are not suitable for their needs with 6000 families on the council’s housing waiting list. The average household who are renting privately are currently paying 45% of their income on rent. The target of building 34,000 new homes by 2041, will include 40% being affordable family homes, 10% will be wheelchair accessible and 197 specialist homes for older and disabled residents. There will be no difference in quality between the privately owned and affordable homes.

 

Town centres will accommodate employment, retail, leisure, housing and community and cultural spaces with 300,000sqm of industrial floor space, 40,000sqm of office space and the creation on 17,000 new jobs. Enfield is home to creative venues like Troubadour Studios, The Drumsheds, Millfield Theatre and Netflix. The Local Plan will build on existing creative industries in Enfield and support film and TV to become a creative hub in London and in doing so creating jobs for local people. A cultural fund will be established using funds from developers which will allow residents to have a say in future events they wish have in the borough.

 

 

The Opposition responded by stating that the Administration had failed to engage with the opposition and the public on the Local Plan and the Inspector will expect a degree of cross-party support. The public will need to have been properly consulted and the documentation to have shown an independent verification of the database that has been brough forward. 7000 people responded to the last consultation of which the majority opposed building on the green belt, and comments from public ward meetings that have been held on the local plan clearly suggest that residents do not support the Plan.

 

The borough in recent years has only been building 1-bedroom and 2-bedroom flats despite those who sit on the Planning committee, on both sides, having argued consistently about the need for family homes so this adds pressure to meet housing targets. The Transport strategy in the plan is negligible and will not provide the needed infrastructure to be able to take the weight of what is being proposed.

 

 

In summing up, the Leader noted that the Administration supported and had set out a clear proposal of their commitment around housing delivery as it recognised that the people of Enfield deserved a decent home, and that the social and transport infrastructure would be delivered alongside housing development.

 

It was reiterated that the cross-party working group had been set up, which the opposition members were invited to monthly meeting, but did not attend.

 

The Local plan is about tackling poverty, increasing the equality opportunity for the most disadvantaged and building a greener, safer, and cleaner borough.

 

Following the debate, Cllr Sabri Ozaydin moved, and Cllr Ergin Erbil seconded, a procedural motion under paragraph 13.20 (v) of the Council’s Procedure Rules that the question now be put, which was AGREED.

 

A recorded vote was requested by Cllr Dey, and another 11 members of the Council having stood in support of the request, the following votes were recorded:

 

For:

Cllr Abdul Abdullahi

Cllr Josh Abey

Cllr Nicki Adeleke

Cllr Gunes Akbulut

Cllr Mahmut Aksanoglu

Cllr Nawshad Ali

Cllr Kate Anolue

Cllr Chinelo Anyanwu

Cllr Mahym Bedekova

Cllr Sinan Boztas

Cllr Nesil Caliskan

Cllr Mustafa Cetinkaya

Cllr Hivran Dalkaya

Cllr Elif Erbil

Cllr Ergin Erbil

Cllr Susan Erbil

Cllr Thomas Fawns

Cllr Margaret Greer

Cllr Ayten Guzel

Cllr Nelly Gyosheva

Cllr Ahmet Hasan

Cllr Mohammad Islam

Cllr Chris James

Cllr Rick Jewell

Cllr Doris Jiagge

Cllr Destiny Karakus

Cllr Tim Leaver

Cllr Sabri Ozaydin

Cllr Bektas Ozer

Cllr George Savva

Cllr Nia Stevens

Cllr Doug Taylor

Cllr Eylem Yuruk

 

Against:

Cllr Chris Dey

Cllr Hannah Dyson

Cllr Peter Fallart

Cllr Reece Fox

Cllr Alessandro Georgiou

Cllr Pat Gregory

Cllr Adrian Grumi

Cllr James Hockney

Cllr Stephanos Ioannou

Cllr Joanne Laban

Cllr Elisa Morreale

Cllr Tom O’Halloran

Cllr Paul Pratt

Cllr Michael Rye

Cllr Julian Sampson

Cllr Ruby Sampson

Cllr David Skelton

Cllr Edward Smith

Cllr Jim Steven

Cllr Emma Supple

Cllr Andrew Thorp

 

The recommendations having been put to the vote were AGREED.