At the full council meeting, held on 2 March 2021, Councillor Geoff Hill of Oldfield Ward urged the Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead to agree to a motion, “not to build on Maidenhead Golf Course and to keep our green lung, with its trees and wildlife for the continued benefits to our community and future generations.”
Cllr Hill then asked:
“Mr Mayor, what price, the health of the children of the borough?
“What price, our physical and mental health?
“What price, clean air?
“What price, the oxygen we breathe? Trees and green plants are our oxygen factories!!
“What price, our countryside and green space.
What price, the Environment, the planet – our survival as a species?
“All the above are more precious than money ever can be. There’s always a way to fix the money.
“The sale of Maidenhead Golf Course isn’t about housing, it’s about money and nothing else!
“The Inspector for the Borough Local Plan in a letter of 13 July 2020, clearly states that the Objectively Assessed Need between 2013-2033 has halved from 12,691 households, to 6,382.
“FOI (freedom of information request) Number 75675 states that between 1 April 2013 and 31 March 2020, 3,762 dwellings were completed.
“A further FOI 75771 states that as of 31 March 2020, 2,830 dwellings have planning permission, but are unimplemented.
“These two figures combine to give 6,592 dwellings, and exceed the need detailed by the Inspector. I suggest there are more than enough planning applications in the current pipeline to satisfy the Objectively Assessed Need, without building on Maidenhead Golf Course.
“Mr Mayor, I believe I have illustrated that we already have enough housing supply to satisfy the need, and there is no need to build on Maidenhead Golf Couse.
“Mr Mayor, I raise a critical and key question to the Officers and Cabinet. Sections 4.6 and 5.4 of the paper state that should RBWM breach its development agreement with CALA Homes to develop the site South West Maidenhead, or should the Borough Local Plan not be adopted, or if site AL13 is removed from the Borough Local Plan, the Council will incur cost for breach of this agreement.
“This is the first I’ve heard of any such penalty clause and I wish for Council to know before they vote tonight the details of the penalty clause, and the cost to RBWM and the tax payer. Councillors must be clear on the consequences of any vote they take tonight.
“I ask on behalf of the 4,448 residents who signed the petition just what has taken place in the negotiations with CALA Homes, and just how did we end up with a potentially penal contract, when it is by no means certain that the BLP will be approved, that the Golf Club will vacate the site, or that planning permission will be granted?
“Mr Mayor, this vote is a fundamental question of the democratic representation of the people. 4,448 residents have put their names to the petition (the third largest ever recorded in RBWM). This was in the midst of global pandemic when they had many more immediate concerns on their minds.
“If we vote this motion down, we are going against the will of people. I urge you to vote in favour of this motion.”