London’s emerging planning policy has put golf courses firmly in the spotlight. As part of the consultation on the new London Plan, the Mayor has suggested that some areas of Metropolitan Open Land, including certain golf courses with limited public access and low recorded biodiversity value, could be assessed for release for housing.

According to Barnett, this is not just a London issue. He believes it is a strong signal of how national policy could evolve and of the difficult choices that golf clubs across England may face in the years ahead.

The question for many owners is whether this represents a slow squeeze on courses at the edge of towns and cities, or a genuine opportunity to secure the long term future of their clubs.

A shift in thinking around open land

Golf courses have long occupied an uncertain position in planning policy. Many sit within the Green Belt or Metropolitan Open Land.

While they are clearly developed in practical terms, they often function and appear like open countryside. For decades this has resulted in strong policy protection and limited scope for change.

The London Plan consultation marks a subtle but important shift. While overall protection for Metropolitan Open Land remains, the Mayor is asking whether all such land is performing the function for which it was designated.

Some golf courses are not accessible to the wider public and some have relatively low recorded ecological value compared with other forms of open space.

These are the sites the Mayor has identified as potential candidates for redevelopment, subject to strict requirements around public access, biodiversity enhancement, high quality design and a significant proportion of affordable housing.

At a national level, changes to the National Planning Policy Framework introduce the concept of the grey belt within the Green Belt.

This refers to lower performing Green Belt land, often previously developed or compromised in character, where housing may be acceptable if clear rules are met on affordable housing delivery, infrastructure provision and public green space.

Taken together, Barnett sees a clear pattern emerging. Well located open land on the edge of settlements that performs poorly against policy objectives is now being actively reconsidered, provided development can deliver tangible public benefits. Many golf courses fall into this category.

What this means for golf club owners

Barnett says that clubs tend to react to this issue in one of two ways. Some see development as an existential threat to their club.

Others see headline land values and assume that securing planning permission will be straightforward and highly lucrative. In his view, both positions are overly simplistic.

The most realistic opportunities often sit between these extremes. For some clubs, full relocation from an increasingly urbanised site to a more suitable location on the edge of town or in a rural setting can be transformational.

Residential development on the original site can fund a new course with better facilities and a more sustainable long term future.

The debate is already playing out on the ground. Golf News recently reported on proposals affecting Ifield Golf Club in West Sussex, where land has been identified for potential housing of 3000 homes as part of wider local plan discussions.

Another example Barnett points to is Basingstoke Golf Club, where he advised on the planning, disposal and relocation of the club.

After exploring several options, the club successfully relocated to an existing course at Dummer on the opposite side of the M3. Housing development on the former site is now well underway.

Another example is Blue Mountain Golf Club in Bracknell Forest. Surrounded by housing and identified as having development potential, the site was redeveloped to include a Golfplex entertainment centre, driving range, clubhouse and parking, alongside 400 new homes, community sports facilities and a new school.

The club now has a viable long term base, the local authority has secured housing and infrastructure, and land value has been realised in a planned and structured way.

In other cases, partial redevelopment has been the preferred solution. At Maidenhead Golf Course, land has been allocated for around 2,000 homes while retaining a golf offer, and at the former Reading Golf Course, development and green space have been planned together.

In these situations, releasing part of the land has allowed clubs to reinvest in the remaining course and often improve the quality of the golfing experience.

The importance of site specific analysis

Barnett is clear that not every golf course is suitable for development. The starting point, he says, should never be land value assumptions, but a detailed understanding of planning policy as it applies to that specific site.

Key considerations include whether the course lies in the Green Belt, Metropolitan Open Land or open countryside, how the local plan treats that designation, the recorded biodiversity value of the land, levels of public access, proximity to services and transport, and the scale of local housing need.

In London in particular, the Mayor’s reference to limited biodiversity value has already prompted objections from environmental groups, many of whom point to the wildlife interest of golf courses.

As a result, Barnett stresses that robust ecological assessment is essential before any strategy is developed.

Early specialist advice can make a critical difference. A strong planning and land team will assess local plans, housing targets, infrastructure commitments and emerging policy changes.

They will identify constraints such as landscape, heritage or environmental designations and benchmark land values and delivery prospects to manage expectations among members or shareholders.

What we do know is at the planning map around golf courses is changing. London’s proposed approach to MOL and the national grey belt policy are part of a wider shift.

The post SPECIAL FEATURE: IS LONDON ABOUT TO LOSE GOLF COURSES appeared first on Golf News.

The government housing agency has owned the Crawley site since 2020 and has served notice requiring the club to vacate by April 2027, the year it marks its centenary.

The land forms part of a proposed development of 3,000 homes west of Ifield, an application that has yet to be determined by Horsham District Council.

A peaceful demonstration has been organised by residents’ group Save West of Ifield and will take place at 10.45am on Monday, January 5.

The protest is intended to give club members and local residents the opportunity to voice their opposition to what campaigners describe as a “premature decision to close the club”.

Group spokeswoman Cathy Durrant accused Homes England of pursuing an “aggressive and cynical strategy” to force the West of Ifield development through the planning process.

She said: “While Homes England has the legal right, as landlord, to serve notice, this action shows a blatant disregard for the views of those who object to the application and the resulting closure of the club, including consul-tees such as the government agency Sport England, as well as England Golf and Sussex Golf.”

Horsham District Council is not expected to reach a decision on the West of Ifield application for several months. Campaigners argue that Homes England should therefore withdraw its notice to quit until planning permission has been granted.

The post PROTEST TO SAVE SUSSEX GOLF CLUB appeared first on Golf News.

The club, which was founded in 1907, is located just three miles from Oxford city centre, and has been selected to be part of a development of 1,180 homes to help meet the city’s housing shortage.

The club’s 450 members were informed that the club will close a few weeks ago.

Ian Middleton, who represents Kidlington South on the district council, and is opposed to the housing development, said: “Even though I’m not a golfer, I appreciate how precious this course is to the members of the club.

It’s been maintained and nurtured for well over 100 years and provides a valuable resource for those seeking some gentle recreation.

This is especially important for older people, particularly women who I know regard the club and the course as a haven that allows them to exercise in a safe and secure environment.

He added: “Many of the trees have been there since the course was first laid and represent a vital carbon sink in an area surrounded by roads and other proposed developments that will generate harmful emissions.

A significant amount of this vital green infrastructure is likely to be lost during the development which I think would represent an act of wanton environmental vandalism.”

IMPACT OF CLOSURE

Jill Northover, who has been a member at North Oxford since 2001, says the closure of the club will have a devastating impact on many of the members, particularly the older ones.

She said: “We are going to close, we are accepting that, but there is an awful lot of sadness about the fact that they’re going to build houses and destroy the green land, but there is also a wider issue.

For a lot of people, coming here is a lifeline. It’s not just about houses, it’s about people and their lives. One member who is 90 comes here every day.

It’s people like him I just feel so sorry for. The loss of spaces like this can lead to increased isolation and a decline in physical and mental well-being.”

The post North Oxford Golf Club set to close appeared first on Golf News.