The proposed new town came from Enfield Council’s response to the New Towns Taskforce call for sites, which closed in December 2024, to “identify specific locations for new towns and to make recommendations on how they might be designed and delivered, with a particular focus on unlocking economic growth as well as making a significant contribution to meeting housing demand in England”.
Why were Crews Hill and Chase Park and all the countryside between them shortlisted for urban development as a New Town?
1. Enfield Council submitted them
2. Crews Hill horticultural centre has a station
That’s about it‘
In 2023 Enfield Council controversially proposed two Green Belt sites in its Local Plan as suitable locations for approx. 9000 new homes. These were called Crews Hill and Chase Park [Vicarage Farm]. This new Local Plan is still under examination, awaiting HM Planning Inspector’s report.
At the time, both the Mayor of London and Enfield North MP Feryal Clark publicly expressed their concerns and emphasised their commitment to conserving London’s (and Enfield’s) Green Belt.
In September 2025, the Government announced that, of the 12 New Town sites nationwide proposed by the New Towns Taskforce, “Crews Hill & Chase Park New Town” was amongst three that were “promising” and that it could accommodate 21,000 new homes.
The indicative site for Crews Hill and Chase Park New Town stretches across 884 hectares of Enfield’s Green Belt, about one-third of the total area. It straddles Enfield’s landmark Ridgeway [A1005] which overlooks the striking landscape of farmland, pasture and woodland, once the site of the ancient Enfield Chase.
How much is 884 hectares? More than 1000 football pitches – 3 times the size of the City of London
Marked by a round green blob, the exact location is vague, and may or may not include Chase Park [Vicarage Farm] and/or the area of the Enfield Chase Landscape Restoration. However, it could stretch from the M25, in the parliamentary constituency of Enfield North, to Oakwood Underground station in the parliamentary constituency of Southgate and Wood Green.
The proposed site of Crews Hill and Chase Park New Town is not the same as Crews Hill “Golden Mile” of garden centres – a long-established horticultural cluster, home to equine and small rural enterprises and valued for recreation and wellbeing – which is currently threatened with compulsory purchase by Enfield Council’s Local Plan proposals. It is also home to several hundred people in a small residential development and scattered throughout the settlement.
In order to make their case, politicians frequently conflate Crews Hill Golden Mile, which has a station on its perimeter, with the whole of the Crews Hill & Chase Park New Town site, most of which is immaculate countryside.
This historic and much-loved rolling countryside is characterised in the New Towns Taskforce report as low-quality and low value. We dispute much of what they say – see highlighted below – and you will find our arguments here.
EXTRACTS FROM THE TASKFORCE REPORT
“The new town proposal in Enfield offers a unique opportunity to create a new, family-centred community within the Greater London boundary; leading the way in releasing poor quality Green Belt land for sustainable, quality development. It has the potential for up to 21,000 homes, across c.884 hectares, with an ambition for 50% of those homes to be affordable, helping to address London’s acute housing need”.
“An expanded development bringing together Chase Park and Crews Hill, Enfield; delivering green development and helping address London’s acute housing need. The proposal brings together and expands two sites to the north of the borough at Chase Park and Crews Hill. It is supported by both the London Borough of Enfield and the GLA, and the Taskforce has been impressed by their collaborative approach.
“Much of the proposed site is currently low value land, comprising commercial nurseries, garden centres, a golf course and lower quality greenfield land”.
“Overall, the proposed new town in Enfield is a strong and exciting proposition that could lead the way in sustainable Green Belt development and provide homes that London desperately needs.”
This is neither poor quality nor low value land, but miles of countryside providing fresh air and food for Londoners, protecting them from urban sprawl and overheating.
BUILDING ON ENFIELD’S COUNTRYSIDE WILL NOT SOLVE ENFIELD’S HOUSING CRISIS
Enfield RoadWatch and our partner organisations challenge this government proposal. It is the wrong solution for thousands of families in Enfield who need affordable homes.
Enfield RoadWatch considers that there are realistic alternatives to building on our countryside that would deliver genuinely affordable homes to rent or buy, and with them decent jobs and sustainable transport, without sacrificing a unique environmental and economic asset.
The scheme will take many decades and will permanently destroy productive farmland, green space and woodland stretching from Oakwood, in Southgate, to Enfield’s Hertfordshire border.
And it will ruin Crews Hill “golden mile”, a successful cluster of garden centres and nurseries: a source of over 1000 skilled, sustainable jobs.
Will this scheme help thousands of families needing affordable homes now or developers land banking for future profit?
THE QUESTION IS NOT WHETHER ALTERNATIVES EXIST BUT WHETHER THE COUNCIL AND THE GOVERNMENT ARE WILLING TO PURSUE THEM
To find out why Crews Hill and Chase Park should not have been shortlisted, visit our Arguments section.