Don't Let Crews Hill's Garden Centres be Bulldozed for Unaffordable Housing
- presenterscarlettred
- Sep 28
- 2 min read
Our government is now pushing to build 10,000 homes in Crews Hill, paving over the garden centres. But this isn’t a bold solution. It’s a slapdash shortcut that ignores the deeper housing crisis.
The “Affordable” Promise Is a Mirage
Every time a development like this is proposed, we hear the same promise: a share of the homes will be “affordable.” But in reality, developers are usually only required to set aside 10–15 percent of homes as “affordable,” a figure far too low to meet real need. Meanwhile, the rest of the homes fetch prices no one in the area can afford. In short, the numbers don’t stack up.
The Empty Homes Scandal
And here’s the part that makes my blood boil: there are already hundreds of thousands of empty homes across England.
• As of 2025, nearly 700,000 homes sit empty and unfurnished, with over 265,000 classed as “long-term vacant” (empty for six months or more).
• That’s roughly 1 in 25 homes unused. (bluedoorpropertyguardians.co.uk (https://www.bluedoorpropertyguardians.co.uk/blog/empty-homes-week-2025-the-role-of-blue-door-property-guardians-amp-revitalising-communities)
So before we obliterate more green space, why aren’t we first reclaiming those empty homes, renovating them, and putting them back into service for local people?
The Danger of Setting a Precedent
If Crews Hill is carved up for housing, it sends a green light to developers, not just here but across the county. It signals that protected land is no longer sacred. As critics warn, this risks opening floodgates from speculators and land-hungry developers, chipping away at our green belt piece by piece. (cprelondon.org.uk https://www.cprelondon.org.uk/news/enfield-application-could-trigger-wider-green-belt-destruction)
Indeed, this proposal may be even larger than first publicised. Some planning proposals speak of 5,500 homes just for Crews Hill, suggesting developers see potential to push further. (onlondon.co.uk https://www.onlondon.co.uk/enfield-should-the-council-build-homes-on-the-green-belt)
Local garden centres and nurseries, the backbone of Crews Hill’s identity, already face the threat of compulsory purchase. Their removal would harm local character and the local economy. (civilengineering.caboodleai.net https://civilengineering.caboodleai.net/article/337205/crews-hill-businesses-face-compulsory-purchase-by-council-amid-plans-for-5500-homes)
Alternatives We Must Demand
We don’t need to bulldoze our green belt to tackle the housing crisis. There are better paths:
1. Empty Homes First:
Force councils and government to prioritise reclaiming, renovating, and re-letting empty properties.
2. Stricter Affordability Rules: Raise the minimum percentage of affordable housing (to 30-40 percent or more), especially in new developments.
3. Brownfield Over Greenfield: Use derelict and brownfield sites before even considering protected land. In fact, across England there is capacity for around 1.4 million homes on brownfield sites. (theguardian.com https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/sep/24/almost-15m-homes-could-be-built-on-brownfield-sites-in-england-report-finds
4. Tighten Speculation Controls: Limit or tax heavily properties bought and left empty by wealthy investors abroad.
5. Community-Led Planning:
Empower residents to shape what is built locally, so it suits local needs (housing mix, infrastructure, transport).
We are at a crossroads. The choice is not between “no development” and “build whatever you like on green belt.” The real choice is between thoughtful, fair housing and opportunistic development that benefits speculators more than locals.
If our leaders want lasting solutions, they must stop treating the green belt as expendable. Fix what’s broken first. Reclaim the empty homes, make housing truly affordable, and invest in redevelopment where it makes sense. Only then might we responsibly expand housing without erasing what makes Crews Hill and its surroundings special.
Read more here:
