Kathrin Spinnler, a London resident, has responded to Polly Toynbee's recent article on the proposed new town in Enfield, arguing that local opposition is a rejection of poor planning, not nimbyism. Spinnler's letter, published in the Guardian, challenges the characterization of opponents and highlights practical alternatives to building on the green belt.
No Evidence to Alleviate Housing Crisis
Spinnler asserts that there is no evidence the new town would ease Enfield's housing crisis, which is primarily about affordability. She cites the Office for Budget Responsibility's estimate that proposed planning reforms would reduce house prices by just 0.8% by 2029-30. This modest impact, she argues, does not justify the risks associated with building on green belt land.
The risks include increased flooding, loss of access to nature, and high car-dependency. Spinnler notes that these outcomes contradict the objectives of both the government and the mayor of London. Contrary to Toynbee's description of the site as mainly golfing greens and "a cluster of glasshouses and garden centres, an unplanned sprawl," the new town would threaten 884 hectares of Enfield's green belt, including wooded land and farmland.
Infrastructure Concerns and Traffic Problems
Spinnler disputes the claim that Enfield is "the perfect borough for a new town, with excellent rail connections," pointing out that added traffic would cause major problems in the north of the borough. Crews Hill station, for instance, runs just two to four trains per hour, with few or no alternative connections available. The existing infrastructure, she argues, cannot cope with the additional 40,000-plus residents the new town would bring.
This infrastructure deficit is a key reason why Spinnler believes the proposal is flawed. The lack of transport links would likely increase car dependency, further exacerbating traffic congestion and environmental impacts.
Brownfield Sites as a Better Alternative
Instead of building on the green belt, Spinnler suggests that Enfield should focus on its capacity to build up to 37,000 brownfield homes—far more than the new town's proposed 21,000 homes. She highlights the 10,000-home Meridian Water development as an example, which has been in the making for 10 years but has so far delivered just 300 homes.
Spinnler argues that such brownfield developments must take priority over covering the green belt in concrete. By prioritizing these sites, Enfield could address its housing needs without sacrificing valuable green space or facing the infrastructure challenges of a new town.
