Lessa Sports Ground, Grand Drive, Raynes Park - Merton Council

PLANNING APPLICATIONS COMMITTEE
12 th January 2012
Item No 03
UPRN APPLICATION NO. DATE VALID
Address/Site: 10/P2641 16/09/10
Lessa Sports Ground
Grand Drive
Raynes Park
SW20 9EB
Ward: West Barnes
Proposal: Application for the installation of floodlighting for five
tennis courts, with 6.7m high lighting columns.
Drawing Nos: Site plan,
ALX 3035-C Lux levels-contour plan
ALX 3035-D Lux levels-axiomatic plan ‘B’ Building
ALX 3035-E Lux levels-axiomatic plan ‘A’ Building
ALX 3035-F Light baffle designs
ALX 3035-G Light baffle dimensions
Contact Officer: Leigh Harrington (020 8545 3836)
RECOMMENDATION Grant permission subject to conditions.
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 This application is brought back before the Planning applications
Committee following deferral at the February, May and July 2011
meetings.
1.2 A decision on the application was deferred in order to obtain more
detailed information on the following;
(a) The submission of further details of light mitigation measures to
prevent light spillage into neighbouring properties.
(b) The provision of better plans showing the location of the lights on the
site and in relation to surrounding properties.
147

1.3 This information has been updated in the form of details of the light
control shields for the floodlighting and drawing ALX 3035-C that shows
the location of adjacent buildings, the location of the 30 floodlighting
columns and light spillage levels for properties in Blenheim close,
Blenheim Road and Westway.
1.4 A site visit has been arranged with the Club in order for members to see
their existing lights, similar to those that are proposed to be installed at
Grand Drive, in operation and in place of erecting temporary lights on
site.
2.0 CHECKLIST INFORMATION.
� Is a screening opinion required: No
� Is an Environmental Statement required: No
� Has an Environmental Impact Assessment been submitted – No
� Press notice – no
� Site notice – Yes.
� Design Review Panel consulted – No.
� Number of neighbours consulted – 45
� External consultations: Environment Agency and Thames Water.
� Internal consultations: Yes
3. SITE AND SURROUNDINGS
3.1 The application site is an area of land located in the northwest corner of
the former LESSA playing fields on Grand Drive in Raynes Park. The
tennis courts will be located adjacent to properties in Blenheim Road and
Westway. The site is not located within a Conservation Area.
4. CURRENT PROPOSALS
4.1 Application for the installation of floodlighting for the five tennis courts,
with 6.7m high lighting columns. The application has been submitted by
a local tennis club, the Raynes Park Tennis Club which proposes to
relocate from its existing site at 129 grand Drive, approximately 250
metre away.
4.2 The tennis courts and a club house are to be provided by the site
developer as part of a unilateral undertaking relating to a grant of
planning permission in October 2009 under LBM Ref 08/P1869 for the
redevelopment of site for the provision of houses, flats, sports pavilion
and playing fields.
4.3 This application seeks permission for the installation of 30 floodlights for
five tennis courts. The floodlighting proposals are as follows:
148

� The proposals incorporate a combination of five different designs of
floodlight head all using metal haline bulbs. The different types of light
fitting, denoted on the submitted plan ALX3035-F as A, B, C, D & J
would all be mounted on 6.7m high columns.
� The five different types of light baffles comprise;
� (A), a panel extending downwards and fitted to the rear of the light, a
side panel on the left hand side and a small rear triangular blind on the
right,
� (B) a panel extends downwards across the centre of the light with a
small rear triangular blind on the right
� (C) a panel extending downwards as with (A) but with a side panel on the
right hand and side a small rear triangular blind on the left
� (D) has an adjustable forward cut off shield
� (J) a panel extending downwards and fitted to the rear of the light as
with (A) but with side panels on each side.
� The applicant has confirmed in writing that baffling used for each light
source would be tailored individually to the requirements of that specific
location, so a light source close to residential would be much more
closely baffled than one which was further way. Drawing ALX3035-G
illustrates the dimensions of the lights and baffles as well as the
additional panels and baffles that can be added to ensure the best
possible control over light spillage.
� The drawing ALX3035-C shows how the lighting is to be arranged as
follows:
Floodlighting to the rear of 46-60 Blenheim Road and 110-120 Westway:
� Three courts proposed.
� Three flood lights to be located along the length of each of the
outer edges of the two end courts with Type J double baffles
� A floodlight is proposed either side of the net on each court with
Type D baffles.
� Two pairs of floodlights to be located north and south of the three
courts and positioned to align with the spaces between the courts.
� The pairs of floodlights at both the northern and southern ends of
the courts would be fitted with two baffles, Types A and C so as to
provide greater restriction to light spillage.
� The distance of the pair of floodlights from the rear of
neighbouring properties at 46-60 Blenheim Road is 13.5 metres
from 46/48 and 11.5 metres from the rear of 54/56.
� The nearest single floodlight to the rear of 46/48 Blenheim Road,
is located 29 metres away towards the side of the northern edge
of the westernmost court.
� The nearest single floodlight to the rear of 58/60 Blenheim Road,
is located 19 metres away towards the side of the northern edge
of the easternmost court.
� The distance of the nearest column to the rear of 118 Westway is
approximately 24 metres.
149

Floodlighting to the rear of 18-28 Blenheim Road and to the east of the
flank wall of 58-60 Blenheim Road.
� Two courts proposed.
� In contrast to those to the rear of 46-60 Blenheim Road they are
aligned so that the ends of the two courts face east west rather
than north south.
� Three flood lights to be located along the length of each of the
outer edges of the two courts and fitted with Type J baffles.
� A floodlight is proposed either side of the net on each court and
would be fitted with Type D baffles.
� Two pairs of floodlights to be located east and west of the two
courts and positioned to align with the spaces between the courts
and will be fitted with the Type A and Type C baffles.
� The distance of the nearest pair of columns from the flank of 58-
60 Blenheim Road is approximately 13 metres.
� The distance of the nearest column from the rear 26/28 Blenheim
Road is 27 metres.
� The flank wall of 1 Blenheim Close is over 50 metres from the
nearest floodlight.
4.4 The application is submitted with an assessment of light level values
arising from the operation of the floodlights which takes into account a
light loss factor at the playing surface. The data on the applicant’s plan
shows maximum light intensity along the net line of the centremost of the
three courts and, between the two courts aligned with the nets. The
applicant has confirmed that the readings provided were based on no
planting along the boundary.
4.5 The light levels data shows figures to diminish more rapidly beyond the
floodlights along the northern edge of the three courts than to the south.
This is as a result of the more restrictive baffles the applicant proposes
for the floodlights along this side.
4.6 The floodlighting data has been assessed by the Council’s
Environmental Health officers.
4.7 In support of the proposals the applicant has cited commentary on the
provision of floodlighting at the time of considering the appeal
application. Sport England were prepared to withdraw their objections to
the housing scheme on the basis of a number of conditions including the
provision of floodlighting to the tennis courts. The officer’s report to
Committee also required details of floodlighting. The applicant has stated
that without the provision of floodlighting it is extremely unlikely that the
Raynes Park Tennis Club would find it worthwhile relocating to the
LESSA site from its present site which already has two floodlit courts.
5. PLANNING HISTORY
5.1 2009 - 08/P1869 - Planning permission granted on appeal for
redevelopment of existing private sports ground to provide:
150

-44 residential units (20 semi detached [5 bedroom] houses & 24 flats [6
one bedroom, 12 two bedroom & 6 three bedroom] on 0.6 hectares of
the site;
-67 car parking places & 74 cycle parking spaces;
-the retention & re-use of 4.07 hectares of playing fields providing two
rugby/football pitches, cricket ground and tennis courts for community
use;
-erection of two sports pavilions (383 sq.m) and refuse store/cycle
parking building;
-formation of vehicular & pedestrian access from grand drive (with
demolition of existing property at 119 grand drive)
-provision of pedestrian and cycle access from Westway.
5.2 Condition 19 of the permission states that “The sports facilities shall not
be used outside the hours of 08.00 and 22.00 on any day”.
5.3 Permission has been implemented and Planning officers have been
engaged in discharging various conditions.
6. CONSULTATION
6.1 A site notice was posted outside the site and letters sent to 45
neighbours. The Raynes Park& West Barnes Residents Assoc and the
Residents Assoc of West Wimbledon along with Sport England, Natural
England and the Council’s Environmental Health and Greenspaces
Teams were also consulted.
4 objections were received from neighbours and the Raynes Park& West
Barnes Residents Association raising the following concerns:
� Challenging the classification of the playing fields as
Environmental Zone E2 stating that it is absolutely dark on site
and the classification should be E1.
� Inaccuracies on the plans relating to the height of the pylons with
lower pylons increasing reflected light levels.
� Light levels on the boundaries will be above acceptable levels and
would be 9 and not zero as stated by the applicant and queries
over which standards, UK or US will be applied.
� Excessive sky glow due to reflected light.
� Bats utilise the area and will be affected by floodlights.
� The floodlights will be visually obtrusive
� Loss of privacy during the hours of darkness as windows will be
illuminated by the floodlights.
� The application is premature and should await the construction of
the new flats near the site to allow consultation.
� The hours of operation should be limited to a 9pm curfew.
� The existing flood lights at the Raynes Park Tennis Club’s site
should be removed.
6.2 Environmental Health
151

Environmental Health Officers have engaged with the applicant to clarify
details regarding lighting fixtures and light level data. The officer had
observed that the lux readings for the playing area on the pair of courts
were initially higher than the recommended level. This has been
addressed via a change in the type of light baffle to be used with
changes made to the design of baffle A as shown on the Light Control
Shields drawing ALX3035-F
Officers acknowledge that the applicant’s light level readings are based
on no planting along the boundary. As the boundary planting matures the
effect of any floodlighting will diminish.
The plans show that the lux level of the light falling onto the elevations of
46-60 Blenheim Road are within the parameters recommended by the
Institute of Lighting engineers guidance for light trespass (Light trespass
occurs when unwanted light enters neighbouring property, for instance,
by shining over a neighbor's fence).
The light figures are based on an Environmental Zone classification of
E2 (low district brightness area). E.2 areas include relatively dark urban
locations. The Environmental Officer considers that the site should more
accurately be described as E3 due to its suburban London location which
requires less stringent light control measures.
Environmental Health officers raise no objections to this application
subject to the attachment of a planning condition to control the hours of
use of the floodlighting to the same hours as the hours of use of the
sports facilities (not to be used between 22:00 and 8:00).
6.3 Sport England; Supports the proposal.
6.4 Natural England; The proposal did not impact on any priority interests.
Natural England do not object to the proposal nor did they wish to offer
any further comments
6.5 Ecology Officer
The Council’s ecology officer has confirmed that there are no records of
Bats roosting in the area although they may well forage in the area and
any floodlights should be designed so as not to exclude bats from the
area. The design of the lighting cowls is such that the lighting is directed
onto the playing surfaces with as limited a spillage as possible. An
informative will be added that the development should be undertaken in
line with the Bat Conservation Trust and Institute of Lighting engineers
best practice guidance “Bats and Lighting in the UK”.
7. POLICY CONTEXT
7.1 The London Plan (February 2008).
152

The relevant policies in the London Plan (February 2008) are: - 3A.3
(Maximising the potential of sites); 3A.18 (Protection and enhancement
of community facilities); 3D.6 (Sports facilities) and 3D.14 (Biodiversity
and nature conservation).
7.2 Merton Local Development Framework – Core Strategy (2011).
The relevant policies in the Merton Local Development Framework –
Core Strategy are: CS.13 (Open Space conservation leisure and
culture), CS.14 (Design).
Merton Adopted Unitary Development Plan (October 2003):
7.3 The relevant policies in the UDP are:
L.5: Urban Green Space
BE.22 Design of New Development
BE.15 New Buildings and Extensions - Daylight, Sunlight, Privacy, Visual
Intrusion and Noise
PE.3 Light Pollution
8. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
Principle of floodlighting
8.1 The tennis courts and the pavilion have been previously approved with
Condition 19 attached to the planning permission granted on appeal for
the residential and sports proposals for the former LESSA Sports Ground
permitting use of sports facilities in general across the site until 10.00 on
any day. This proposal relates solely to the installation of floodlighting on
the tennis courts part of the site. The planning considerations in this case
relate to the principle of floodlighting, their design, height and position of
the lighting columns and their impact on neighbour amenity, including
hours of use, and wildlife.
8.2 Floodlighting would enable the Raynes Park Tennis Club to increase its
sports offer to the local community and would deliver a key objective that
Sport England had considered to be relevant to withdrawing its objection
to the 2008 housing and sports uses planning application. Core Strategy
policy CS.13(h) promotes opportunities in sport and recreation within the
borough and it is considered that this proposal will accord with that
policy.
Neighbour amenity – light levels
8.3 Policy PE.3 states that developments that would have a significantly
adverse effect on the amenities of nearby occupiers by reason of light
emissions will not be permitted unless the effect can be overcome by
mitigating measures.
8.4 The site for the courts has existing residential properties along two of the
boundaries, to the north and west, and new residential buildings
comprising flats, approved under the 2009 planning permission for the
overall LESSA site are to be built to the south and east.
153

8.5 Objections to the proposal claiming the land should be classified as E.1
“totally dark” have been reviewed. Environmental Zone E.1 is described
in the Institute of Lighting Engineers guidance as “intrinsically dark
landscapes”. Examples of such areas are said to be National Parks and
Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
8.6 Environmental Health officers have confirmed that the site would not fall
within zone E1 for the purposes of determining appropriate light levels
and that in fact the applicants were being generous in categorising the
land as E2 (relatively dark urban locations) when it is more closely E3
(medium district brightness area, which include urban locations). The
new flats will themselves increase light on site by virtue of the ambient
light they will emit.
8.7 After assessment of the light level information provided by the applicant
the Environmental Health Officer has confirmed that the level of light
falling onto the façade of the residential properties 46-80 Blenheim road
appears within that recommended by The Institute of Lighting Engineers
guidance for zone E.2. Given that the Environmental Health officers
consider that the site may more reasonably be treated as falling within
zone E.3 where thresholds are higher there would appear to be no sound
basis for resisting the proposals on the basis of light intrusion.
8.8 As part of the residential development a landscaping and planting
scheme has been approved. This scheme will provide a vegetation
screen between the courts and the existing residential properties.
Although this will be a native mix that is fairly slow growing this too will
diminish the impact of lighting on the surrounding houses.
Neighbour amenity – privacy.
8.9 The use of properly angled baffles and the significant contrast in light
levels between the illuminated court and the land around it is such that it
would impact upon players vision of building more remote from the
playing area and it is not considered that neighbouring occupiers will be
subject to a loss of privacy from people playing tennis under floodlights.
Neighbouring houses would readily be seen in daylight from the
approved tennis courts in any event.
Neighbour amenity – Hours of use
8.10 Policy PE 2 seeks to ensure that new developments do not have a
significantly adverse effect on neighbour amenity by reason of noise
generation or disturbance. The planning permission for the site permits
the sports uses to operate until 10.00 on any day. The permission was
however not based on proposals that included floodlighting and which
would have extended the use of playing areas after dark all year round.
154

8.11 The applicants applied for the use of the courts until 10p.m and objectors
have requested 9p.m. While Environmental Health officers do not object
to the operation of the lights until 10.00, it is a matter of judgment that a
curfew time for their operation until 9.30pm would keep within the
broader hours of use parameters envisaged by the condition whilst
providing a reasonable time by which local residents can expect the use
to cease in the evenings.
8.12 Core Strategy policy CS.13(h) promotes opportunities in sport and
recreation within the borough and it is considered that this proposal will
accord with that policy.
Design
8.13 The floodlights are to be mounted on 6.7m high light poles that will be
painted dark green so as to reduce their visual impact during daylight
hours. They will be sited at the end of each tennis court as well as at
each corner and along the touch lines with the light baffles angled down
towards the playing area. It is considered that their size and design
would not have a harmful impact on visual amenity.
Biodiversity and Trees.
8.14 Objectors consider the site was used by bats but neither Natural England
nor the Council’s Ecology Officer raised objections to the scheme and
have stated that there is no evidence of bats roosting on site. The Bat
conservation trust has developed a best practice guide for lighting and it
recommends that lighting does not shine onto possible roosting sites as
this effects bat feeding habits. The use of cowls to direct the light onto
the courts and not onto potential roosting sites such as trees or buildings
will not preclude bats from roosting in the newly landscaped areas
around the perimeter of the site should they seek to do so.
8.14 The proposal will not involve any works to or loss of any trees.
9. CONCLUSION
9.1 Suitably conditioned to ensure the installation of lighting shields, hours of
operation and to regulate the level of luminance of the existing lighting
fixtures, the installation of the floodlighting columns would not have an
undue impact on neighbour amenity.
155

RECOMMENDATION
Grant permission subject to and conditions:
1. A1 Commencement of development within 3yrs.
2. A.7 In accordance with approved plans.
3. The floodlighting hereby permitted shall only operate between the hours
of 08.00 and 21.30 on any day. Reason. To safeguard neighbour
amenity.
4. The floodlighting hereby approved shall be installed and operated in
accordance with the details shown on drawing ALX 3035-C and shall not
exceed the lux levels set out.
Reason: To safeguard the amenities of the area and
occupiers of neighbouring properties and ensure compliance with
policy PE.3 of the Adopted Merton Unitary Development plan 2003.
5. The floodlights and columns hereby permitted shall be finished in 'holly
bush' green - BS14C39 unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local
Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance of the
development.
INFORMATIVES:
(1) INF14 Tree felling, Birds and Bats
(2) In order to comply with the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 the applicant
should ensure that all trenches that are left open overnight should
include a means of escape for badgers; all large diameter pipes should
be closed off during the night and obvious badger pathways should be
left clear of obstruction and gaps in or under fences should be left to
unable animals to reach foraging areas.
Reasons for approval.
The design and siting of the floodlighting scheme are considered
acceptable and will not result in any harm to neighbour amenity. The
proposal accords with policies contained in the London Plan (June
2011), the Council’s Local Development Core Strategy (2011) and the
Council’s Adopted Unitary Development Plan (October 2003) as far as
are material to the proposals which are the subject of this approval. The
policies listed below were relevant to the determination of this proposal:
The London Plan (June 2011).
4.6 (Support for and enhancement of sports provision)
3.19 (Sports facilities)
7.19 (Biodiversity and access to nature)
156

Local Development Core Strategy (2011)
CS.13 Open space, nature conservation, leisure and culture.
CS.14 Design
London Borough of Merton Unitary Development Plan (2003)
L.5: Urban Green Space
BE.22 Design of New Development
BE.15 New Buildings and Extensions - Daylight, Sunlight, Privacy, Visual
Intrusion and Noise
PE.3 Light Pollution
157

158
London Borough of Merton
100 London Road
Morden
Surrey
SM4 5DX
Scale 1/1250
Lessa Site
This map is based on Ordnance Survey material with
the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of HMSO.
Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright
and may lead to prosecution or Civil procedings.
London Borough of Merton 100019259. 2009
Date 1/2/2011
Grand Drive

159

160

161

162

163

164