A council has sought to quash concerns over the potential environmental impacts of a proposed development of hundreds of homes on a Nottinghamshire golf course.
Local residents in Broxtowe and the area’s Member of Parliament have expressed their concerns online over the local council’s decision not to require an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the proposed redevelopment of Beeston Fields Golf Course.
The aim of an EIA is to protect the environment by assessing the potential impacts a development could have on the surrounding area, which a local authority will take into account when deciding whether to grant planning permission to a developer.
EIAs apply only to certain developments – those that could have a ‘significant’ effect on the area.
Beeston Fields Golf Club and its attached wedding venue, which were founded in 1923, were sold to Warwickshire-based property developer Cilldara Group in November 2024.
While reassurance was given to members at the time that the site would continue to operate as it had been, Cilldara has since submitted its preliminary plans to Broxtowe Borough Council to build up to 500 homes, a 60-bed care home, a mobility hub, a café, and a park on the course. However, the developer has not yet formally submitted the outline plans for the scheme.
The developer launched a consultation on the plans, and Broxtowe Borough Council recently determined, on its planning portal, that a full EIA was not required for the plans on 6 July.
The decision has been met with criticism online over the welfare of wildlife and biodiversity on the site and has led to confusion over how, and whether, environmental issues will be protected under future plans, and whether residents will have a say in this.
Broxtowe’s Labour MP, Juliet Campbell, posted on Facebook on 7 July that she ‘shared’ residents’ concerns over the council not requiring an EIA and said she had written to the authority’s chief executive regarding the decision.
On Thursday (9 July), the council shared its latest position on Facebook regarding the plans and concerns, saying there had been “some misunderstanding” online over its EIA decision.
Its post read: “Developments of this size naturally attract more views from residents and interested parties. Unfortunately, in this case, there has been some misunderstanding.
“The listing on our website refers to the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and the associated screening processes, which we are legally required to undertake. During this process, the council consults with various national bodies to determine whether an EIA is necessary before making a decision.”
The authority clarified that it has to publicise the EIA process on its website but that there is “no requirement” for a public consultation on the EIA decision.
On its decision, the council said: “We have determined that a full EIA is not required. This is primarily because the development is too small, and some elements that would be required as part of that assessment would be irrelevant, as they are more suited to larger development schemes.”
It also added that its decision does not mean that further “comprehensive” environmental surveys, such as those on ecology, open spaces, and trees, will not be needed. These types of surveys are required under national criteria to accompany planning applications.
It continued: “We accept that the wording on our website may have been confusing and are working to improve our processes for future screening stages.”
Councillor Teresa Cullen (Brox Alliance) said: “We recognise the general concern that’s been caused by the consultation on the development at Beeston Fields Golf Club, but it’s the owners of the golf club who want to develop it.
“When they bring forward a formal planning application, that’s the point at which the council will decide whether we think it’s an appropriate development. At this point, we don’t know.
“Any large-scale planning application has to undergo all sorts of assessments to determine the effects on biodiversity, roads, and school places.”
By Lauren Monaghan, Local Democracy Reporter
