Gamston / Tollerton SUE
Disclosure Log - East of Gamston/North of Tollerton Sustainable Urban Extension
Environmental information
Reference: 3985565
Subject:
I am writing in connection with the ongoing consultation on the East Midlands Freeport Strategic Infrastructure and Contributions Supplementary Planning Document (SPD). I would be grateful if you could clarify the following points regarding potential commercial interests and conflicts of interest:
- East Midlands Pipeline (EMP) Involvement: Does Rushcliffe Borough Council hold information on whether the East Midlands Pipeline project is likely to be directly or indirectly referenced, considered, or supported in the SPD consultation process or associated strategic planning activities?
- Councillor Interests: Is the Council aware of any commercial or financial interest by serving councillors or their immediate family members in EMP, or in companies that could materially benefit from the SPD’s recommendations or infrastructure contributions?
- Conflict Management: Could you clarify the procedures Rushcliffe Borough Council has in place to identify and manage potential conflicts of interest where councillors may have commercial links to projects relevant to SPD consultations?
- Prior Discussions and Correspondence: We note that the SPD is due to be considered by Cabinet. Could you confirm whether there have been any prior discussions, briefings, or correspondence involving councillors relating to the SPD or EMP before this Cabinet consideration? If so, we would be grateful for the dates, recipients, and general nature of these communications, insofar as they are publicly available.
My request is made to ensure that all consultation processes are transparent and that any potential conflicts are appropriately disclosed and managed.
Response date: 23 April 2026
Response: Response to this request - 3985565.
Reference: 3985546
Subject:
I write in relation to the proposed Gamston Fields development and recent online correspondence regarding the underground pipeline noted within the site.
We wish to express support for the Council’s careful and evidence-based approach in considering all potential infrastructure constraints, including the pipeline referenced in the Council’s Supplementary Planning Document (SPD), which states:
“There is an underground pipeline running on a broadly north-south axis through the site, predominantly to the west of Tollerton Lane which has a 3 m easement either side, all development must be located outside of the easement.”
We note that the SPD identifies the presence of the easement and correctly advises that development should avoid this corridor. It is, however, important to clarify that the SPD does not confirm ownership or confer rights to any third party over the land or the pipeline itself.
Based on publicly available information, the pipeline is reported as being owned by Mainline Pipeline Limited, with a dedicated contact line (0800 7560804) for asset protection enquiries. Accordingly, any claims by East Midlands Pipeline (EMP) to ownership or easement rights over the pipeline at present appear prospective and contingent upon completion of a formal acquisition.
EMP has stated that it is “in the process of finalising purchase” of the pipeline asset and intends to repurpose it for hydrogen transportation.
This raises a significant inconsistency: EMP’s claims of ownership, easement rights, and stakeholder status appear contingent upon a future acquisition, yet correspondence suggests they are being treated as a party with established rights.
In the interests of transparency and proper planning procedure, we respectfully request clarification regarding the following:
- Whether EMP has provided documentary evidence confirming ownership of the pipeline asset;
- Whether EMP currently holds any easement rights over the land in question, or any legal authority to assert control;
- Whether EMP’s claims are based on anticipated future acquisition, and if so, whether any formal agreements with Mainline Pipeline Limited exist;
- How EMP’s claimed status as a stakeholder in the planning process is justified in the absence of demonstrated legal rights.
We recognise that it is routine for third parties to request engagement with developers; however, where ownership and legal rights are not yet established, it is essential that any requests are treated as preliminary and not as confirmation of enforceable constraints on development.
While engagement by third parties is routine and appropriate, it is crucial that claims of rights and ownership are verified. Given that the land in question is understood to be partly publicly / privately owned, clarity regarding the legal position of EMP’s claims will ensure decisions are based on evidence, not assertion, and help maintain public confidence in the planning process.
We trust that the Council will continue to adopt an evidence-based approach and seek appropriate verification before treating EMP’s claims as a confirmed constraint.
Response date: 23 April 2026
Response: Response to this request - 3985546.
Reference: 3906707
Subject:
I would like to make a polite request regarding the possibility of a new survey to be performed at the Nottingham Tollerton mobile park site, given the time that has elapsed since the original investigation was performed in 2008.
Response date: 11 March 2026
Response: Response to this request - 3906707.
Reference: 3896286
Subject:
I have been advised that during consultation on the SPD, Tollerton Parish Council was invited to meet with the Council, but a response from the Parish Council was not received.'
I would be grateful if you could tell me exactly when, by what means and by whom this invitation was issued to the Parish Council. Could you also tell me what steps you took when you did not receive a reply to ensure that the invitation had, in fact, been received.
I look forward to an early reply as this is an extremely important issue.
Response date: 17 February 2026
Response: Response to this request - 3896286.
Reference: 3856770
Subject:
Please supply a copy of the letter sent to Rushcliffe Borough Council dated 7 November 2025 by the UK Health Security Agency.
Response date: 24 November 2025
Response: Response to this request - 3856770.
Reference: 3835818
Subject:
I would like to access a copy of the report below - cited in the 25/02407/CONREQ Briefing Paper for Residents of Tollerton Park.
Radiation Protection Adviser Visit Report – Radiation Survey Tollerton Mobile Home Park (Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards, Radiation Protection Division Ref: RPD/RPA/VR/3/16308; dated 8 October 2008
Response date: 11 November 2025
Response: Response to this request - 3835818.
Reference: 3815874
Subject:
In the Council meeting tonight 18 September 2025 at 20 minutes before the end of the meeting, Cllr Inglis stated (in a response to a question by Cllr Chewings) that the safety of the site at the Tollerton Park Homes estate was reassessed, when further development took place on the site in 2017. Please provide a copy of this reassessment or evaluation. Please state by what means this reassessment or evaluation was carried out - what methods and tools were used. And also please provide details of where the results were published - and also please advise whether the residents of Tollerton Park were informed of the results of this reassessment or reevaluation.
Response date: 8 October 2025
Response: Response to this request - 3815874.
Reference: 3778974
Subject:
I cover the development of Nottingham City Airfield for Central Bylines and have just seem on your website that you have informed residents on Tollerton Park about contamination as below:
"However, as the Council is aware that media coverage has raised concerns amongst residents, officers sent correspondence to over 40 residents in early July 2025 based at the mobile home park site."
Could you please provide a copy of that correspondence to the residents please, as it is important to understand the wording used in this communication.
Response date: 28 July 2025
Response: Response to this request - 3778974.
Reference: 3770875
Subject:
I heard that there was an investigation into cases of acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) at Tollerton park that is adjacent to the airfield. A previous FoI request was made in 2008 apparently but the results cannot be located by RBC.
I need to know what investigations were undertaken and what conclusions were drawn. I'm particularly interested to know if any investigation into lead pollution was done. The proximity of the park to an airfield where the planes use leaded fuel, and have done for decades, would indicate that that would have been done.
Response date: 22 July 2025
Response: Response to this request - 3770875.
Reference: 3671481
Subject:
Please supply the dates of any visits to the Tollerton Park Homes, mobile home site, Tollerton Lane NG12 4GD that have been made by Environmental Health Officers of Rushcliffe Borough Council from 2008 until the present day. Please also supply any notes or reports from these visits.
Response date: 1 April 2025
Response: Response to this request - 3671481.
Reference: 3671476
Subject:
Please supply a copy of the minutes of the meeting held on 17th of December 2008 at the Civic Centre, between John Pembleton, Technical Officer and the Health Protection Agency, the PCT and the Environment Agency, with regards to the contamination investigation at Tollerton Park Homes.
Please also supply a copy of the Health Protection Agency's risk assessment of the Tollerton Park Homes radiation survey.
Response date: 1 April 2025
Response: Response to this request - 3671476.
Reference: 3671474
Subject:
Please supply the dates of any visits to the Tollerton Park Homes, mobile home site, Tollerton Lane NG12 4GD that have been made by Environmental Health Officers of Rushcliffe Borough Council from 2008 until the present day. Please also supply any notes or reports from these visits.
Also, please supply the dates of any visits by Planning Officers, or members of the Planning Departmental team, to the Tollerton Park Homes, mobile home site, Tollerton Lane NG12 4GD, from 2008 to the present day. Please also provide any notes or reports that have been logged from these visits.
Response date: 1 April 2025
Response: Response to this request - 3671474.
Planning information
Reference: 3963469
Subject:
I am writing to request information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 in relation to the Land East of Gamston / North of Tollerton Strategic Urban Extension (“SUE allocation”), including but not limited to planning applications 20/03244/OUT and 24/00347/HYBRID.
Please provide copies of all documents held by Rushcliffe Borough Council which contain, constitute, refer to, or summarise any of the following in connection with the SUE allocation or either of the above planning applications:
- Cost plans - Any cost plan or cost plans, whether prepared internally or by an external consultant, including drafts, partial costings, preliminary estimates, or updated iterations.
- Financial or development appraisals - Any:
- financial appraisal
- development appraisal
- residual land value appraisal
- costed development scenario
- financial modelling or spreadsheet-based calculations prepared for, by, or supplied to Rushcliffe Borough Council.
- Infrastructure cost estimates Any documents containing infrastructure cost schedules or estimates,
including:- highway and junction works
- Section 106 contribution calculations
- utilities or service upgrades
- land remediation
- abnormal development costs
- transport or access infrastructure cost forecasts
- Affordable housing assessments. Any document assessing:
- the relationship between development costs and affordable housing delivery
- the effect of infrastructure or abnormal costs on affordable housing provision
- Consultant correspondence and reports. Any correspondence, reports, advice, or meeting notes from or to external consultants, including but not limited to:
- Porter Planning Economics
- BNP Paribas Real Estate
- Arcadis
- Ward Williams
- Bruton Knowles
- any quantity surveying, cost consultancy, or development economics firm relating to development costs, infrastructure costs, cost assumptions, financial appraisals, or costed delivery of the SUE allocation or its component applications.
- Independent reviews or audits Any independent review, critique, audit, or appraisal of any of the documents described above, whether commissioned by Rushcliffe Borough Council or received from another public body or consultee. Clarification note the Council’s previous response to FOI 3671486, stating that no “viability assessment” had been submitted with the planning applications. For avoidance of doubt, this request:
- does not seek documents titled “viability assessment”;
- covers all cost-related documents of any type, regardless of the terminology used;
- includes documents not formally submitted through the planning portal;
- includes any documents held by officers, managers, external consultants, or partner bodies acting on behalf of the Council.
Response date: 20 April 2026
Response: Response to this request - 3963469.
Reference: 3862327
Subject:
I am writing to make a request under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004.
As part of an earlier FOI request (Ref – 3532068), the following response was received:
What information about possible radium contamination of the site of Nottingham City Airport was submitted by the council to the Planning Inspectorate during the consultation, public hearings and formal approval of the Local Plan 2014?
The attached information was made available to the Planning Inspector who examined the Local Plan Part 1.
The document attached was the BWB Geoenvironmental Report, that has a publication date of May 2014.
I note that the revised Local Plan was submitted for examination by the Planning inspector on the 3rd of March 2014.
In light of this, please provide the following information:
- The exact date on which Rushcliffe Borough Council sent or otherwise made available this BWB Geoenvironmental report to the Planning Inspector/Inspectorate for consideration during the Local Plan Part 1 examination.
- Copies of any covering letters, emails, or correspondence that accompanied the transmission of this report to the Planning Inspector or the Planning Inspectorate.
- If the report was not sent directly by Rushcliffe Borough Council, please confirm who provided it to the Inspector and when.
I believe this information falls under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 because it relates to land use planning and environmental considerations within the Local Plan process.
The Geoenvironmental report produced by BWB concerns environmental factors such as soil conditions, contamination, and ground stability, which directly affect decisions on development and land use. Regulation 2(1)(c) of the EIR defines environmental information to include measures and activities affecting or likely to affect the state of land and soil. Therefore, the date and manner in which this report was provided to the Planning Inspector is environmental information and should be disclosed under EIR.
Response date: 24 December 2025
Response: Response to this request - 3862327.
Reference: 3844543
Subject:
Please provide all documents that supported the decision-making regarding the arrangements for the Consultation on the ‘East of Gamston/North of Tollerton Development Framework Supplementary Planning Document’ that concluded on 5 November 2025.
In this instance documents means but is not limited to emails, formal proposals, discussion papers and notes of meetings.
In particular please provide documents which offer options and recommendations relating to any of;
- The commencement date of the consultation.
- The length of the consultation.
- The location and number of public meetings related to the consultation.
- The methods by which the consultation would be publicised to the residents of Tollerton Parish.
The format and style of the documents supporting the consultation, including any consideration of the production of “Easy Read”, simplified, Braille, video or recorded versions.
The mechanisms by which consultees could provide their feedback.
The identity of key stakeholders and consultees, including statutory consultees.
The techniques and strategies to reach and hear from residents with protected characteristics as defined under the Equality Act 2010.
Consideration of the Gunning Principles for consultations.
Other arrangements for the conduct of this consultation.
Response date: 11 November 2025
Response: Response to this request - 3844543.
Reference: 3829107
Subject:
Please provide all documents that supported the decision-making regarding the arrangements for the Consultation on the ‘East of Gamston / North of Tollerton Development Framework Supplementary Planning Document’ running until 5 November 2025.
In this instance documents means but is not limited to emails, formal proposals, discussion papers and notes of meetings.
In particular please provide documents which offer options and recommendations relating to any of:
- The commencement date of the consultation.
- The length of the consultation.
- The location and number of public meetings related to the consultation.
- The methods by which the consultation would be publicised to the residents of Tollerton Parish.
- The format and style of the documents supporting the consultation, including any consideration of the production of “Easy Read”, simplified, Braille, video or recorded versions.
- The mechanisms by which consultees could provide their feedback.
- The identity of key stakeholders and consultees, including statutory consultees.
- The techniques and strategies to reach and hear from residents with protected characteristics as defined under the Equality Act 2010.
- Consideration of the Gunning Principles for consultations.
- Other arrangements for the conduct of this consultation.
To be clear, this request is not related to the content of the SPD itself but rather the arrangements for the conduct of the consultation on the SPD.
Response date: 10 November 2025
Response: Response to this request - 3829107.
Reference: 3826761
Subject:
-
Could the Authority please outline and confirm to what extent the Vistry Group and their consultants were involved in the drafting of the "East of Gamston/North of Tollerton" SPD.
-
Could the Authority please outline and confirm to what extent Nottinghamshire County Council and their consultants were involved in the drafting of the "East of Gamston/North of Tollerton" SPD.
-
Have Nottingham City Council been consulted on the drafting of the "East of Gamston/North of Tollerton" SPD? Including, but not limited to, in relation to the 50% overage clause that Nottingham City Council had on the airfield land which they sold in 2006 and that has since been bought by Vistry with this overage registered in the title.
Response date: 4 November 2025
Response: Response to this request - 3826761.
Reference: 3824678
Subject:
- Please supply a copy of the minutes from the Development Committee meeting when the "East of Gamston/North of Tollerton" draft SPD was put forward for approval by the committee, and accepted for the public consultation.
Please see attached letter - Could the Authority please outline and confirm to what extent Barwood, Taylor Wimpey and their consultants were involved in the drafting of the "East of Gamston/North of Tollerton" SPD.
The consultants for Barwood and Taylor Wimpey hold the desktop publisher version of the SPD, with Borough Council officers directing what is included in the draft document and officers drafting text for inclusion in the document. Barwood, Taylor Wimpey and their consultants have been able to suggest what is included in the draft SPD but this must be agreed by Council officers. - Could the authority please explain why the viability assessments produced by Arcadis and Ward Williams, overseen by Bruton Knowles on behalf of the authority and presented to the key officers, are not included as part of the "East of Gamston/North of Tollerton" SPD presented to the public for consultation?
Any such information prepared by the consultants referred to is not relevant to the SPD in its current form. There is no requirement for the SPD to be supported by a viability appraisal.
Response date: 31 October 2025
Response: Response to this request - 3824678.
Reference: 3821983
Subject:
On page 227 of the Draft Greater Nottingham Strategic plan - paragraph 3.31.2, it states that for the strategic allocation of land East of Gamston /North of Tollerton "A broad assessment of viability has been completed for this site".
Response date: 8 October 2025
Response: Response to this request - 3821983.
Reference: 3787175
Subject:
I am writing to ask about future housing development.
Is there an amount of housing that has to be built in the Rushcliffe area?
If so what percentage of the target has been completed?
What short term future development is likely to happen, such as Tollerton to Gamston infill? With such a massive project that surely must go along long way to reaching the government target.
Response date: 7 August 2025
Response: Response to this request - 3787175.
Reference: 3671486
Subject:
Given the recent submission of the document reference: 20_03244_OUT-NOTTINGHAM_CITY_HIGHWAYS-1912655.pdf to the planning application 20/03244/OUT, which details a Section 106 contribution required of AT LEAST £200k for junction upgrades, please supply a copy of the viability proposal and assessments for the application.
Please also do the same for the linked application 24/00347/HYBRID, because there are questions about the viability of both developments given the S106 costs required to meet the infrastructure demands of a development of this site and the public need to know if the levels of affordable housing, for example are going to be reduced.
Response date: 18 March 2025
Response: Response to this request - 3671486.