Two covered padel courts at Campion Lawn Tennis Club, Crosby, Sefton

What was proposed

The application proposed replacing one tennis court with two covered padel courts, a canopy, entrance facilities, car park changes and associated works.

“Proposal: Proposed conversion of 1no. tennis court to 2no. padel courts with an overhead canopy structure including an entrance area to store vending machines and lockers…”

“This application seeks planning permission for the conversion of an existing tennis court to two covered padel courts, including the erection of a canopy structure, alterations to the existing car park and associated works at Crosby Lawn Tennis Club.”

Officer report

The site

The tennis club has operated since 1948 within a residential area, with access from Downhills Road and established trees near the proposed development.

“The application site comprises Campion Lawn Tennis Club, located at 1 Campion View, Crosby. The tennis club has been operational since 1948 and contains a number of existing outdoor tennis courts together with associated club facilities and infrastructure, including access and parking areas. The club is located within an established residential area and is surrounded by residential properties, backing onto the club.”

“Access to the site is taken from Downhills Road to the east of the application site.”

Officer report

Earlier permissions

Earlier permissions covered rebuilding the clubhouse and constructing three all-weather tennis courts with fencing and floodlighting columns.

“Planning permission has previously been granted for the rebuilding of the clubhouse with the addition of a rear store (ref. S/22823, approved 9 May 1984) and for the construction of three all-weather tennis courts, associated enclosure fencing and floodlighting columns (ref. S/1991/0309, approved 18 July 1991).”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Specialist consultees ultimately raised no objections subject to conditions, while residents expressed support and objections focused on noise, amenity, appearance, wildlife and highways.

“Highways Development Design initially raised concerns regarding pedestrian safety and parking provision. Following the submission of revised plans and supporting information, these concerns were addressed and no objections are raised subject to conditions requiring the provision of car parking and a Travel Plan.”

“Environmental Health Environmental Health initially raised concerns regarding the potential noise impacts arising from the proposed padel courts and recommended refusal. Following the submission of a Technical Design Note and amended plans, the objection was withdrawn. Subject to conditions regarding a condition relating to operating hours.”

Officer report

Residents’ views

The first consultation received 64 representations, including 46 in support and 13 objections; a further consultation received seven supporting statements and ten objections.

“A petition showing 28 names was received and endorsed by Councillor Howard and a total of 64 representations were received including 46 in support, 13 objections and 5 other representations.”

“A total of 17 representations were received comprising 7 statements of support and 10 objections. The statements of support largely cited similar benefits to those identified during the first round of consultation. The objections raised similar concerns to those previously submitted, together with assertions that: • The submitted acoustic information does not adequately account for player-related noise, including player activity and turnover between games.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The committee heard a petition on behalf of objectors, a response from the applicant’s agent and representations from the ward councillor.

Members’ concerns

Members were concerned about possible noise from the open canopy and suggested verifying noise levels before the development opened to the public.

“Arising from the discussion Members expressed concern regarding possible noise levels from the proposed development having particular regard to the open nature of the canopy structure. As there were no local examples of such a structure to enable likely noise levels to be…”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee approved the recommendation and granted permission with the report’s conditions, adding a condition requiring verification of noise levels from the development.

“That the recommendation be approved and the application be granted subject to the conditions and for the reasons stated or referred to in the report and subject to an additional condition requiring the verification of the noise levels from the new development.”

Minutes