2 August - Bexley Council prepares to whack its residents once more
It
was suggested that I break with tradition again and take a look at the Planning
Application for a Golf Pod at the Crook Log Leisure Centre and reluctant as I am
to cover sports facilities beginning with the letters G and O I did so. But first
some research. What the hell is a Golf Pod?
The image shown here is extracted from the applicant’s website and shows one of
their facilities buried deep in the countryside. As you can imagine,
would-be
golfers whack a ball towards a net. In this case up to ten whackers at a time.
Computers assess how far the ball might have travelled and where it might have
gone if it was not for the net. Me and balls have never got on well together so
why anyone would pay to swing a stick I have no idea but good luck to those who do.
As
you may see from the map, Bexley’s Golf Pod is not going to be buried deep in the
countryside but in a field adjacent to the Crook Log Leisure Centre which is
occasionally used as an overflow car park. I was ushered into it when attending
the 2014 election count. It was waterlogged at the time and took ages to get to the exit.
Council Officers were keen to get this facility approved. Local residents rather
less so. As a lady objector said, it is only 55 feet from back gardens and close
to children’s bedrooms to the rear of the houses in South Gipsy Road.
I took the opportunity to research how loud the thwack of club upon ball is and
found figures of around 100dB ranging to 120dB although one night hope that the
noisiest titanium clubs will not be used. All day submission to such noise
levels will damage hearing although the measuring distance was not specified. More
generally noise is usually measured at one metre distance.
As with the image above there will be ten bays 4·2 metres high. The net
would rise to 16·8 metres. (55 feet.) Councillor Terry Barcock
(Conservative, Sidcup) later said that as it was only netting and therefore
effectively transparent the height was not a concern. I don’t think he lives in
South Gipsy Road.
The Planning report said there would be no impact on local residents which
seemed more than a little glib and the residential objector felt the same way. Noise
reports referred to hourly averages, she said, but golf strikes are frequent and of high
intensity. “The applicant has accepted that the noise will be easily perceptible to
neighbouring residents. It is not a background hum, it is a repeated crack seven days a week until 9 p.m.”
The applicant’s website describes typical settings for pods which do not include
residential areas. Why would the Committee contemplate taking away the tranquility of a back garden?
The trees being relied upon for screening are deciduous and offer little
protection against noise and light pollution. Lighting levels have not yet been
decided and the Committee is being asked to approve the application in ignorance.
Independent Councillor Dave Curtois
(Falconwood & Welling) said that ward Councillors were not advised
of the application and neither were many of the local residents and that is unacceptable. Contrary to the claims in report,
the trees do not protect some of the adjacent properties at all.
The applicant’s representative did not in any way attempt to justify the
buildings but only pushed the benefits of relatively inexpensive additional
sports facilities. It will improve attendance at the Leisure Centre overall.
Councillor Terry Barcock said it was not right that residents
had to put up with noise pollution all day but he appeared to be satisfied when
told about an unspecified noise management plan.
Councillor Oscar Harrison (Conservative,
Longlands) also asked about specific noise issues
but his question could not be answered except by reference to a similar but larger
facility adjacent to the A20 in Chislehurst which allegedly does not generate noise
complaints. The Planning Officer was
consistently dismissive of noise concerns “they were acceptable”. The arrogance
shone through like a beacon.
Councillor Larry Ferguson (Labour, Thamesmead East) said he lives not far from a
football pitch but the noise is tolerable. I think he must have been confused by the difference between an
occasional 90 minutes of distant boot on leather against constant gunshot sounds
barely 50 metres from bedrooms.
At around this point there were interruptions from the floor
and threats of ejection but the webcast was
soon muted so exactly what happened is impossible to say.
Chairman Kurtis Cristoforides asked how far the previously approved Padel Court was
from residential property but the Planning Officer didn’t know. Kurtis was much more
apprehensive about sudden impact noise and felt he would like to go and listen
at a golf club. We don’t want to later find ourselves in a residential garden
and think “Gosh what have we done? If we get this wrong the impact will be very severe.”
His sensible view prevailed. No one supported the application so a deferral was approved.
The way that Planning Officers seem to be willing to impose constant noise on
residents with apparently no consideration for them at all is a worrying
phenomenon. Why?