Lansdown Lawn Tennis & Squash Racquets Club, Northfields, BATH, BA1 5TN

Lansdown Lawn Tennis & Squash Racquets Club, Northfields, BATH, BA1 5TN — Bath and North East Somerset Council — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 12 April 2025 by A. J. Boughton MA (IPSD) Dip.Arch. Dip.(Conservation) RIBA MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 30 June 2025 Appeal Ref: APP/F0114/W/25/3358907 Lansdown Lawn Tennis & Squash Racquets Club Northfields Lansdown Bath BA1 5TN • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Ms Natalie Curtis against the decision of Bath and North East Somerset Council. • The application Ref is 24/00607/FUL. • The development proposed is Replacement of existing Tennis court with two Padel Tennis courts and Mini (juniors) Tennis court, including extended terrace, replacement lighting and associated works. Decisions 1. The appeal is dismissed. Main Issues 2. The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers with particular regard to noise disturbance. Reasons 3.

Lansdown Lawn Tennis & Squash Racquets Club, Northfields, BATH, BA1 5TN — Bath and North East Somerset Council — Appeal Decision The appeal site is a long-established tennis, squash and croquet club (The Club) within a part of the extensive Bath Conservation Area which is characterised by its high quality built environment and, in the residential area surrounding the appeal site, a tranquil and verdant setting for houses, many of which sit in large plots. The Club is provided with 11 tennis courts, a croquet lawn, indoor squash courts and related facilities including a club house and car park. It does not appear to be disputed that activity levels at the Club have intensified over the past two or three decades, marked by incremental changes to playing surfaces1. These changes have resulted in a proliferation of hard paved and other surfaces2 and of floodlighting. 4. The Club occupies little more than one hectare in area and is surrounded by established residential development on its northern, western and southern boundaries. The eastern perimeter of the Club is marked by a high wall along Richmond Road above which floodlights are visible, with residential property overlooking the courts from upper floor levels. Consequently, some surrounding 1 Including an increasing proportion of non-grass surfaces.

Lansdown Lawn Tennis & Squash Racquets Club, Northfields, BATH, BA1 5TN — Bath and North East Somerset Council — Appeal Decision 2 Which would include building materials such as stone and glass https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Lansdown Lawn Tennis & Squash Racquets Club, Northfields, BATH, BA1 5TN — Bath and North East Somerset Council — Appeal Decision 2 Which would include building materials such as stone and glass https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate Appeal Decisions APP/F0114/W/25/3358907 dwellings surrounding the Club perimeter may, I consider, have a high sensitivity to change in the acoustic environment due to proximity and outlook. 5. The current proposal intends to replace the existing ‘Centre Court’ with two ‘Padel Tennis’ courts and one Mini Tennis Court3. Padel Tennis is characterised as being more accessible than Lawn Tennis involving more players4 and a smaller court area. Whilst matters of sound and its effects can be highly subjective, it is generally understood that Padel Tennis involves noisier volleys and a faster cadence of ball impact compared to lawn tennis. 6. A particular feature of the proposal is the enclosure of the ends of the courts by high frameless glass screens which return along the sides for a distance of 4 metres and capture the balls within the court area. These enclosing surfaces are part of the game, similar to the game of Squash where balls remain in play when they bounce off enclosing surfaces.

Lansdown Lawn Tennis & Squash Racquets Club, Northfields, BATH, BA1 5TN — Bath and North East Somerset Council — Appeal Decision The appellant describes Padel Tennis as “ nestl(ing) perfectly between tennis and squash, with an amalgamation of the court surface, ball and tactical volleying of tennis alongside the movement and rally length of squash” an observation which aligns with points of concern raised by neighbouring users in that Padel Tennis results in noise generating rebounds that do not occur in lawn tennis as well as a higher frequency of ball strike. Squash is generally played on fully enclosed, roofed, courts which is not the case with the proposal. 7. The appellant refers to the Club’s evaluation of the location for the proposed courts in a document titled ‘Padel Tennis Proposal 2022’ referring to an ‘analysis of all viable locations …comparing several key criteria’ leading to a conclusion as to the ‘best location’ being the current centre court. Although referred to in the acoustic reports it is not clear what consideration was made, and therefore what weight was attached, to the potential impact upon neighbouring residents in this decision as the chosen location is plainly the most accessible and prominent position within the club perimeter but it is also very close to residential properties with windows overlooking the Club.

Lansdown Lawn Tennis & Squash Racquets Club, Northfields, BATH, BA1 5TN — Bath and North East Somerset Council — Appeal Decision Acoustic impact assessment 8. The appellant has submitted noise impact assessments and a subsequent rebuttal of the Council’s own, and third party, statements including a technical memo. I have considered these submissions and their competing assessments of the impact of the proposed change. It is acknowledged that without mitigation the introduction of the Padel courts would significantly increase the noise levels generated from the appeal site in relation to the identified receptor locations, a matter to which I will return subsequently. 9. The mitigation proposed would be the enclosure of the proposed pair of Padel courts on their northern and southern sides by a glass screen where there would otherwise be open mesh fencing. The effect of this enclosure of the two Padel courts would be located within an area approximately 25 metres by 20 metres surrounded by glass screens5 to a height of 3 metres, surmounted, in part, by open mesh panels.

Lansdown Lawn Tennis & Squash Racquets Club, Northfields, BATH, BA1 5TN — Bath and North East Somerset Council — Appeal Decision Plainly, this would not be a roofed enclosure and ball impact, 3 a version of tennis with reduced court sizes and ball bounce according to children’s age 4 As Padel Tennis is always played as ‘doubles’ in addition to the ‘Mini-Ten’ court each Padel court would have a capacity of 4 players replacing one existing tennis court with 2-4 players 5 Other than the central access aisle where mesh gates are accessed between the glass screen returns. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

Lansdown Lawn Tennis & Squash Racquets Club, Northfields, BATH, BA1 5TN — Bath and North East Somerset Council — Appeal Decision Plainly, this would not be a roofed enclosure and ball impact, 3 a version of tennis with reduced court sizes and ball bounce according to children’s age 4 As Padel Tennis is always played as ‘doubles’ in addition to the ‘Mini-Ten’ court each Padel court would have a capacity of 4 players replacing one existing tennis court with 2-4 players 5 Other than the central access aisle where mesh gates are accessed between the glass screen returns. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

Lansdown Lawn Tennis & Squash Racquets Club, Northfields, BATH, BA1 5TN — Bath and North East Somerset Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decisions APP/F0114/W/25/3358907 including sound reflected off, or originating from impact upon, these glass surfaces will tend to escape above, and not be contained wholly within, these screens. 10. The ball-strike character and frequency of Padel Tennis differs from that of lawn tennis although the parties dispute the nature of those differences and effect on the acoustic environment by reference to contrasting technical assessment and commentary. Nevertheless, it is likely that compared to the existing lawn tennis ‘centre’ court, there would be a significant increase in the number of ball strikes within any given period due to the containment by, and rebound off, the enclosing screens also that the level of activity would increase significantly due to the number of participants in the two courts combined with the popularity6 of the sport. 11. The appellant has assessed the prospective source noise by reference to an existing Padel court elsewhere (the Redland court) and supplied a technical memo7, however, the equivalence in terms of the number of players and therefore ball-strike events to the proposal is not explained8.

Lansdown Lawn Tennis & Squash Racquets Club, Northfields, BATH, BA1 5TN — Bath and North East Somerset Council — Appeal Decision The criteria applied in the methodology is comparative, based on Sport England guidance that there should be no more than a 3dB(A)increase in the existing ambient noise climate. 12. The overriding conclusion by the appellant9 points to a calculated (proposal) LAFmax value which would be below the measured baseline survey. This conclusion is achieved by reference to baseline noise monitoring positions a few metres to the east of the centre court within the car park area10 and presented as representing the two dwellings11 likely to be most sensitive to noise emanating from the development. In determining the prevailing ambient noise levels, the appellant suggests these are locations ‘representative of the nearest noise sensitive receptor’ (NSR) but it appears that the receptors are related to ground level and within the site area; I have significant concerns as to the methodology which has led to that conclusion. 13.

Lansdown Lawn Tennis & Squash Racquets Club, Northfields, BATH, BA1 5TN — Bath and North East Somerset Council — Appeal Decision My own observations suggest that noise sensitivity for surrounding dwellings is likely to be greater for bedroom windows and outdoor sitting area(s) at first floor level, (which is the case with The Cottage located to the north of the car park) and that the measurement locations are not appropriate to the specific circumstances of the site. In that regard I note evidence submitted by a third party (neighbour) as to an independent technical review by Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council into a proposal for Padel Tennis in that District, which provided a predicted dB(A) for receptors at both ground floor and first floor where, I note, predicted levels were generally higher. 14. If the ambient noise level were to be recorded at the Cottage itself, it would be at a lower dB(A) than that actually recorded due to the increased separation distance, and also the intervening perimeter wall which would mask, absorb or reflect some sound otherwise captured in the measurement taken. In addition, the environment for the chosen monitoring position was dominated by hard surfaces and some enclosing/reflective structures.

Lansdown Lawn Tennis & Squash Racquets Club, Northfields, BATH, BA1 5TN — Bath and North East Somerset Council — Appeal Decision 6 As identified by the appellant 7 In rebuttal appendix 8 the diagram included as appendix C indicates noise monitoring positions within 2-5 metres of one Padel court. but the calculation ‘assumes both courts would be used simultaneously’. 9 At page 9 of the rebuttal 10 As shown in appendix B of the noise Assessment dated 10 June 2024 11 Innisfree and The Cottage https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

Lansdown Lawn Tennis & Squash Racquets Club, Northfields, BATH, BA1 5TN — Bath and North East Somerset Council — Appeal Decision 6 As identified by the appellant 7 In rebuttal appendix 8 the diagram included as appendix C indicates noise monitoring positions within 2-5 metres of one Padel court. but the calculation ‘assumes both courts would be used simultaneously’. 9 At page 9 of the rebuttal 10 As shown in appendix B of the noise Assessment dated 10 June 2024 11 Innisfree and The Cottage https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

Lansdown Lawn Tennis & Squash Racquets Club, Northfields, BATH, BA1 5TN — Bath and North East Somerset Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decisions APP/F0114/W/25/3358907 15. Secondly and most significantly in relation to the calculated sound levels suggested by the appellant, the mitigation measures, namely the 3m high glass enclosure, would be only partially effective in reducing sound transmission to the actual points of sensitivity at The Cottage because these receptor points are well above ground level. My observations indicate there would be line-of-sight opportunities both from bedroom windows and the first floor terrace at The Cottage12 directly into the 500m2 active area13 enclosed by the glass screens. On that basis I consider there is a significant likelihood that noise generated within the Padel courts, including rebound from the internal surfaces and direct ball strikes, would be propagated directly towards these critical NSRs, and that this would occur, to a significant degree, without mitigation. It is not apparent that this factor has been addressed by the evidence provided, raising doubt as to the reliability of conclusions reached in the appellant’s submissions. 16.

Lansdown Lawn Tennis & Squash Racquets Club, Northfields, BATH, BA1 5TN — Bath and North East Somerset Council — Appeal Decision The degree of effect brought about by change in an acoustic environment, whilst subjective, depends on both the sensitivity of the receptor and the magnitude of change. Incremental improvement of facilities at the Club have, over time, cumulatively intensified the levels and duration of activity such that some surrounding dwellings will have become highly sensitive to any further increment particularly in regard to the use of rooms which directly overlook the proposed Padel courts. I have previously indicated that the appellant’s conclusions as to the magnitude of change are not supported by evidence appropriate to the circumstances. I consider there is unlikely to be a less than 3dB(A) scale of change in noise level at relevant NSR, potentially much more given my comments on the methodology adopted by the appellant. Such an increase in circumstances of high sensitivity that I have identified would result in a moderate - significant harmful impact upon nearby occupiers. 17. I also note that some representations to this appeal indicate a likelihood of adaptive behaviour14 when exposed to intrusive noise and floodlighting.

Lansdown Lawn Tennis & Squash Racquets Club, Northfields, BATH, BA1 5TN — Bath and North East Somerset Council — Appeal Decision Such a response would indicate a Significant Observed Adverse Effect Level (SOAEL) had resulted from the proposal15; given that the receptors are residential properties, such an outcome would be an unacceptable result of decision-taking. Overall, the appellant’s acoustic impact report and related documents do not convincingly demonstrate an absence of planning harm which, having regard to my conclusions as to the sensitivity of some surrounding housing to even minor change in the acoustic environment, must be a factor that attracts significant weight against the proposal. Other Matters 18. The Club occupies a discrete, well-enclosed location in an otherwise tranquil part of the Bath Conservation Area (BCA). The Council indicate, without further commentary, that the proposal would preserve the character of the BCA. Whilst I have not been provided with an appraisal of the relevant character area it is apparent that there has been, over a number of years, a gradual intensification of activity within the club grounds.

Lansdown Lawn Tennis & Squash Racquets Club, Northfields, BATH, BA1 5TN — Bath and North East Somerset Council — Appeal Decision This, and in particular the introduction of floodlighting to many of the courts which signifies an extension of activity beyond daylight hours, will have cumulatively changed the previously tranquil character of 12 and potentially from other surrounding properties 13 Approximately 500m2 including the two Padel courts and the ancillary space within the glass screen perimeter 14 Meaning discontinuing the use of rooms because residents cannot sleep with an open window, for instance. 15 Context planning report 5 March 2025 Para 1.36 https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4

Lansdown Lawn Tennis & Squash Racquets Club, Northfields, BATH, BA1 5TN — Bath and North East Somerset Council — Appeal Decision This, and in particular the introduction of floodlighting to many of the courts which signifies an extension of activity beyond daylight hours, will have cumulatively changed the previously tranquil character of 12 and potentially from other surrounding properties 13 Approximately 500m2 including the two Padel courts and the ancillary space within the glass screen perimeter 14 Meaning discontinuing the use of rooms because residents cannot sleep with an open window, for instance. 15 Context planning report 5 March 2025 Para 1.36 https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4

Lansdown Lawn Tennis & Squash Racquets Club, Northfields, BATH, BA1 5TN — Bath and North East Somerset Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decisions APP/F0114/W/25/3358907 the locality over time. However, in addressing the general duty set out in Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservations Areas) Act 1990, with regard to the current character and appearance of the site and its surroundings, the proposal would not cause discernible additional harm, and I conclude, on this point, that the proposal would thereby preserve the character and appearance of this designated heritage asset. 19. The papers before me also refer to an increase in ‘coming and goings’ as a source of disturbance, similarly I note that the development would also extend the terrace fronting the clubhouse adjacent to the proposed courts which would likely increase the sitting out capacity with its associated ‘social noise’. Whilst these may be considered as sources of additional disturbance, given my overall conclusion on the main issue it is not necessary to address these points. 20. Although the Council did not raise concerns about the change in floodlighting I consider the evolved presence of intense illumination of the courts, even if time- limited, has increased the sensitivity of surrounding residential users to activity at the club.

Lansdown Lawn Tennis & Squash Racquets Club, Northfields, BATH, BA1 5TN — Bath and North East Somerset Council — Appeal Decision I consider the proposed changes to mast height would tend to emphasise the presence of the Club in the wider location and draw attention to (or expectation of) increased activity levels whether or not the courts are in use at the time. This is a harmful aspect of the proposal as it would contribute to impacts on the sense of well-being for some neighbouring residents. Conclusion 21. I have concluded that the proposal would likely have a no-less-than moderate or a potentially significant adverse impact upon residential users of at least one dwelling16 in the area adjacent to the appeal site due to an intensification of activity (use) causing harmful changes in the acoustic environment. This approach accords with National Policy particularly Paragraph 198 of the Framework. Due to the high sensitivity of some receptors, not necessarily limited to those identified, significant weight should be attached to these harmful effects. I have also considered the benefits pointed to by the appellant but, irrespective of the numbers of people involved, these do not outweigh the harms identified. 22.

Lansdown Lawn Tennis & Squash Racquets Club, Northfields, BATH, BA1 5TN — Bath and North East Somerset Council — Appeal Decision I therefore conclude that the proposal conflicts with Policy D6 of the Bath and North East Somerset Placemaking Plan which advises that ‘development must not cause significant harm to the amenities of existing or proposed occupiers of, or visitors to, residential or other sensitive premises by reason of ….. increased noise, …….traffic or other disturbance’ such that the proposal would conflict with the development plan as a whole. Consequently, having taken all matters raised into account my reasoning directs that the appeal cannot succeed.

Lansdown Lawn Tennis & Squash Racquets Club, Northfields, BATH, BA1 5TN — Bath and North East Somerset Council — Andrew Boughton INSPECTOR 16 The Cottage https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 5