Agenda item - BH2023/00643 - Pavilion and Avenue Tennis Club, 19 The Droveway, Hove - Full Planning

1.         The Planning Manager introduced the application to the committee.

Speakers

2.         James McGuigan addressed the committee as an objecting resident who considered the application information to be incorrect. The bushes and shrubs along the boundary are not light blocking and the glare from current flood lights is very visible as it reflects off the court surface. The bushes and shrubs do not screen all year round as they are thick in summer and thin in winter. It would appear that the heights of the neighbouring properties are wrong in the assessments submitted with the application. The noise from the courts is disturbing for the residents, especially with young families. The practice wall is especially noisy, and complaints have been submitted.

3.         Ward Councillor Bagaeen addressed the committee and stated that they urged Members to reject the application which presented undue harm to neighbours. The support for the application seems to have come largely from the members of the club. The councillor did not support the application as there would be hours of noise and disturbance causing harm to residents. The ward councillors have not been consulted by the applicant. The additional lighting should not be allowed at the expense of the neighbour amenities. The councillor requested that the committee reject the application and the applicant should come back with a better scheme.

4.         Simon Bareham addressed the committee as the agent and stated that the application refused in 2017 was for 8m high support poles. This application has reduced the poles to 6.7m with new LED bulbs to be more efficient. The club wanted to put safety first. The club is part of the All-England Lawn Tennis Association and gives free lessons to children. The lighting will give a great opportunity for more time to play tennis. A welfare officer will be available at all times. The proposals will be a great asset to the community. The committee were requested to support the application.

Answers to Committee Member Questions

5.         Councillor Shanks was informed by the agent that Sunday evening had an earlier finish time as the weekend evenings had less demand than weekday evenings. It was noted that the application was minor and had the followed the statutory process with regard to consultations. The LED lights have been proposed in light of the neighbours’ concerns.

6.         Councillor Sheard was informed that the photos submitted by the resident to the committee Members were taken around 8.30pm.

7.         Councillor Theobald was informed by the agent that the application had been submitted to reflect the concerns previously raised by residents.

8.         Councillor Hamilton was informed that the conditions limiting hours were seasonal.

Debate

9.         Councillor Nann considered the proposals were better than the existing and the LED were a good idea.

10.      Councillor Theobald was concerned for the neighbouring houses and considered the photos submitted by the resident showed high levels of light. The councillor considered there were sound and lighting issues for those living near tennis courts. The councillor was against the application.

11.      Councillor Shanks considered more consultation would have been good and noted it was a well-used club. The councillor supported the application.

12.      Councillor Loughran considered the details regarding the lighting in the report were good. The councillor supported the application.

Vote

13.      A vote was taken, and by 7 to 1 the committee agreed to grant planning permission.

14.      RESOLVED: That the Committee has taken into consideration and agrees with the reasons for the recommendation set out in the report and resolves to GRANT planning permission subject to the Conditions and Informatives in the report.