Turning golf course into housing is ‘disgraceful’

Well, we’re probably a year nearer to seeing Brexit done. That has been the question on so many people’s minds.

But, nearer to home, we are a year nearer to the implementation of one of the most appalling and disgraceful decisions ever taken by The Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead’s council – to destroy Maidenhead golf course and put in its place up to 2,300 dwellings.

The golf course has been in existence for well over 100 years since Lord Desborough, the owner of the land, granted a lease to the club.

Regretfully, on his death, much of his land, including that occupied by the golf course, was sold to pay death duties.

As the club were not able to find the money, the land was purchased by your council who granted a lease to the golf club. The lease expires in 2039.

Now, the council has persuaded the club to relinquish its lease early in exchange for a considerable sum of money.

In practice, the club has very little alternative.

To refuse to leave and wait until the end of their lease would have meant that the club would have finally left with nothing.

The golf club is considering the possibility of using the money to relocate the club by creating a new golf course, probably in Fifield. This will ultimately be decided by a democratic vote by the members of the club.

Whether you have any sympathy for the members of the golf club or not (amazingly, some still consider golf to be an elitist sport), it is indisputable that one of the last significant size parcels of greenbelt land close to the centre of the town, a home to a wonderful habitat of flora and fauna including beautiful wild deer, could be lost.

It has been said that the site will be developed sympathetically, it covers about 130 acres, so 2,300 new dwellings on a site of 130 acres works out at about 18 dwellings per acre.

That doesn’t leave much room, particularly after allowing for roads and the

proposed new school, for trees or fauna.

Will the animals that have lived in harmony with us for countless years survive? You don’t have to be a genius to work out the answer.

In what is frequently referred to by us as The Third World, in places such as Borneo, Madagascar, Sumatra, Brazil etc, it is recognised that the destruction of the habitat has to be stopped and their governments are finally taking steps to do so. Is it too much to hope that, in what is supposed to be a civilised country, your elected council cannot have the same foresight?

Or, in a very short time, and we are talking of as little as five years if the council have their way, will your children or grandchildren be asking; “Why didn’t you do something about it?”.

DAVID BURDON Ray Park Road

Maidenhead