Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence had been received from Councillor Michael Harrison.

Councillor Lacey declared that he had previously met with local residents who lived in his division in relation to an earlier planning application.  He confirmed that he did not attend the committee meeting for that application and took no part in the decision, and that he would consider the current application with an open mind.

The Head of Development Management, Community Development Services sought determination of a planning application for retrospective planning permission concerning two padel courts with ancillary social area with proposed acoustic barriers and lighting upgrades, on land at David Lloyd Harrogate, Oakdale Place, Harrogate, North Yorkshire, HG1 2LA.

The application had been reported to the Committee due to there being significant local public interest in the application such that it was appropriate for it to be considered by the Committee.

The Senior Planning Officer presented the report and highlighted the location, site description and the proposed mitigation measures including the addition of acoustic barriers, upgrades to the existing lighting and a reduction in the operating hours.  The Chair thanked the officer for organising the site visit held earlier that day, which Members had found informative.

Patrick Fitzgerald, spoke as Chairperson on behalf of Oak Beck Valley Residents Association, objecting to the application.

Councillor Josie Caven spoke on behalf of Harrogate Town Council, objecting to the application.

Division Councillor Monika Slater spoke, objecting to the application.

The agent, Ian Anderson spoke on behalf of the applicant, in support of the application.

During consideration of the application, the Committee discussed the following issues

· Members considered the noise information in the committee report to be comprehensive but noted that padel was a relatively new sport. While officers had applied relevant criteria in their assessment, Members queried whether there was established national experience, guidance, or case law, noting an apparent lack of consistency or objective standards.

· It was noted that the tennis courts had been in place for a number of years and Members queried whether the Council had received any noise complaints in relation to their use, and further if there had been any complaints in relation to use of the padel courts.

· The Chair highlighted that, although not part of this application, David Lloyd had been operating Battlebox classes which involved amplified music and queried whether the Council had received any complaints from residents in relation to this. 

· While Members welcomed the proposed lighting upgrade, concerns remained regarding noise.  It was suggested that noise levels could be around 70 decibels from balls striking the glass and up to 90 decibels from player shouting, and clarification was sought as to whether this was a reasonable assessment.

· Members queried why officers appeared to have focused on average noise levels rather than LAMax.

· Concerns were expressed about potential sleep disturbance from intermittent noise during evening play and it was queried whether the agreed mitigation measures would adequately address this.

· Members noted the limited real‑world experience in this situation and queried whether this could increase the potential impact or challenge for nearby residents.

· Clarification was sought on, if planning permission were approved, the Council would continue to monitor noise levels once the padel courts were back in operation.

· Members noted that padel was a highly social sport and queried whether the Environmental Health Officer’s (EHO) inspection had taken place only during matches or also during evening periods  ...  view the full minutes text for item 73.

Any other items which the Chair agrees should be considered as a matter of urgency because of special circumstances.

There were no items of urgent business.

Tuesday, 26 May 2026 at 2.00pm.

Tuesday, 26 May 2026 at 2.00 pm.