Minutes show councillors found very special circumstances for the Creswell Drive padel centre on protected land. It still needs a legal agreement and the Mayor.

Bromley councillors decided that “very special circumstances” justified a padel and tennis centre on protected open land in Beckenham. That is the test officers said the scheme failed. The reasons are now on the record.

The council has published the draft minutes of Plans Sub-Committee No. 1 for Thursday 8 October (minutes). The meeting approved application 26/00412/FPA for the old sports pavilion field off Creswell Drive, against the officers’ recommendation to refuse.

The approval is not yet a permission. The minutes record that it is “subject to prior completion of a S106 agreement”, with officers given authority to add conditions. The application also has to go back to the Greater London Authority.

What the scheme is

The minutes describe it as:

  • 4 enclosed tennis courts, 7 padel courts and 3 pickleball courts
  • a building with changing rooms, fitness rooms, a café and medical consulting rooms
  • 94 parking spaces: 66 general, 18 medical, 7 staff, 2 minibus and 1 ambulance
  • a nature area and a new access from South Eden Park Road

Why councillors said yes

The case for approval was led by the two Kelsey and Eden Park ward members on the committee. Councillor Mark Amis moved approval and Councillor Michael Doble seconded it. A third ward councillor, Chris Phillips, spoke in support as a visiting member.

The reasons recorded in the minutes include:

  • The field has been unused for about 15 years. Members said an unused former sports ground was well suited to a modern sports facility.
  • Openness. Councillor Phillips argued the scheme would keep “a substantial degree of openness”. He said Metropolitan Open Land was different from Green Belt.
  • Health rooms. The applicant offered two rent-free NHS consultation rooms and agreed to secure them in the S106 agreement.
  • Jobs. The council’s Head of Economic Development backed the scheme in principle. His statement cited more than 35 full-time equivalent jobs.
  • Pavements and traffic. A new zebra crossing, bus stop and footway work were seen as a gain, including for children walking to school.
  • Parking for neighbours. Councillor Doble said residents of the Cala Homes development at Langley Court had no spare street parking. He said they wanted the full number of spaces kept.

The committee’s formal finding was that very special circumstances “outweighed harm to MOL and other impacts”. The minutes do not record how many members voted each way. They say the motion to refuse “fell” and the motion to approve “was passed”.

Why some members agreed with officers

Officers told the meeting that national policy requires “substantial weight” to be given to harm to Metropolitan Open Land. They said the benefits “had not been secured through the application” and so did not outweigh that harm. They also said the applicant had not shown there were no better alternative sites.

Members who backed refusal raised three points:

  • Under London Plan policy G3, Metropolitan Open Land has the same protection as Green Belt.
  • Approving a scheme because land is unused could encourage similar bids elsewhere in the borough. Officers accepted future applicants “may cite the decision”, but said each case is judged on its merits.
  • The car park was too big for protected land, and new trees would take years to replace the category B trees lost, including an oak.

The chairman suggested deferring the decision to get more on parking, the NHS rooms and trees. That was not taken up.

Three details from the debate

The NHS rooms are not committed. The applicant said a GP linked to the Beckenham Trust was interested and that a letter of interest had been sent. Officers said the NHS had not confirmed it would use the rooms. They advised “caution” in giving them weight, because “the facilities might not ultimately be taken up”.

Where the support came from. The scheme drew 191 letters of support. The applicant said about 90% came from people who lived or worked nearby. The chairman told members that 22 of the supporting responses came from outside the borough, the furthest from Northern Ireland.

Parking could still shrink. The applicant, Craig Brunning, told the committee there “could be flexibility” to reduce the 94 spaces. Officers said a cut could not be made by condition: it would need new drawings and fresh consultation.

What happens next

  1. Officers and the applicant agree the S106 agreement, including the NHS rooms.
  2. The council refers the application back to the Mayor of London. Under the Mayor of London Order 2008, the Mayor then has 14 days to let the decision stand, direct refusal or take it over.
  3. Only then can the council issue a decision notice with conditions.

On Tuesday the planning register still listed the application as undecided.

What it means for you

  • If you live near South Eden Park Road: nothing can be built yet. Conditions on hours, noise and traffic will appear in the decision notice. Search 26/00412/FPA on the council’s planning register to see it.
  • If you objected: the legal agreement and the Mayor’s referral are the remaining stages.
  • If you play padel or tennis: no opening date has been given.

The minutes are still in draft. They will be confirmed at the committee’s next meeting.

Sources