• Tower blocks are not suitable on the site
• Key workers cannot afford the rents
• The flats are not truly affordable
• ‘Affordable flats’ are segregated from others.
• Does not reduce Enfield’s housing crisis.
• The development is too dense.
• Too little amenity space
• No upgrade to the local infrastructure.
• The car park is essential for vulnerable tube users
• Tenants will park on local streets
• Restricted site access will cause traffic chaos.
• 5 years’ disruption during construction.
• Out of character with Cockfosters.
• Permanent harm to the conservation area and heritage.
• Would dominate the Green Belt and local views.
And here are some more detailed objections:
The proposed four tower blocks are massive, all four much taller than the existing Blackhorse Tower. One is 14 storeys, two are 13, and one is 10 storeys high.
Market rents will be unaffordable for key workers. None of the rents are within the Mayor of London’s definition of what is ‘truly affordable’.
Tenants of ‘affordable’ units will be segregated in one tower and in half of a second, i.e. segregation based on ability to pay.
The development does not address Enfield’s housing needs. Three-bed family houses are needed but less than a tenth of the proposed housing units are family homes.
The proposed housing density is +7 times the norm for an outer suburb, indeed twice the norm for a city centre, and amenity space for residents and the public is inadequate.
There is no provision for upgrading local infrastructure, e.g. schools, GP surgeries and hospitals.
The existing ‘Park & Ride’ is essential to local residents, particularly disabled residents, and tube users from further afield.
Vulnerable, pregnant and women with children may not find parking and therefore will find difficulty using the Tube.
It is unrealistic to expect tenants in the development not to have cars.
There will be increased parking in already crowded local streets and probably a Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ), where you will have to pay to park outside your own house.
The access to the site from the heavily congested Cockfosters Road is wholly unsuitable.
Construction will bring up to 5 years of noise, dirt and disruption to the Cockfosters Road, harming local businesses and commuters.
The proposed design does not fit with the character of Cockfosters as a suburban area and the adjoining country park.
The site lies in Trent Park Conservation Area and is close to protected heritage assets that would be irreparably harmed.
The development is on the edge of the Green Belt and would dominate views from Trent Park and beyond.