Plans for extended sports facilities at Eltham College have been refused by Bromley Council's Plans Sub-Committee No. 2.
The committee met on Thursday, September 10, 2026, and decided to refuse permission for the extension of existing Multi-Use Games Area (MUGA) pitches, replacement fencing, and floodlighting at the college.
The proposal included the extension of existing MUGA pitches, replacement fencing, and floodlighting. The extension would increase the existing MUGA (approximately 2740sqm) by approximately 1150sqm to a total of approximately 3890sqm, increasing the effective pitch/court provision by 100% (from three to six courts). The floodlighting would replace the existing 8x 8m high floodlighting columns with 14x 8m high columns, increasing the total number of luminaires from 12 to 24.
The officer's recommendation for refusal was based on insufficient information regarding occupancy levels, parking demand, trip generation, and the likely intensity of use of the proposed extended facility. The report stated, In the absence of sufficient information and appropriate controls, the Local Planning Authority cannot be satisfied that the development would not result in unacceptable impacts in terms of parking demand, vehicle movements and highway safety, particularly when considered alongside the use of other sporting facilities within the wider college campus.
Insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate the likely level, intensity and pattern of use of the proposed development, including its relationship with the wider sports facilities across the site complex. In the absence of adequate information relating to parking demand, parking accumulation, trip generation and site management arrangements, and having regard to the increase in court provision from three to six courts, the Local Planning Authority cannot be satisfied that the proposal would not result in unacceptable impacts on parking provision, highway safety or the operation of the local highway network. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies T3 and T4 of the London Plan (2021) and Policies 30 and 32 of the Bromley Local Plan (2019).
While the proposal was considered acceptable in principle for Metropolitan Open Land and would not cause unacceptable harm to heritage assets, residential amenity, biodiversity, or drainage, the lack of detailed transport and parking impact assessments meant the council could not be satisfied that the development would not result in unacceptable impacts.
Concerns were also raised by the Mottingham Residents Association regarding noise and light pollution. The report notes that the Environmental Health Department had no objection, subject to conditions relating to the scheme of lighting, construction and environmental management, and compliance with relevant legislation. It was also suggested that it would be logical to limit the hours of use and control the hours of lighting. The report states, Having regard to the separation distances involved and the proposed hours of operation and lighting controls, the development is not considered to give rise to unacceptable light pollution or disturbance.
The planning permission for the existing MUGA (08/03244/FULL1) does not contain a condition specifying overall hours of use. However, Condition 9 restricts the use of floodlighting to between 15:00 and 21:00 Monday to Friday and between 15:00 and 18:00 on Saturdays, with no floodlighting permitted on Sundays. Condition 10 further restricts community use prior to 18:00 on weekdays. In practice, these restrictions have effectively governed the operation of the facility, particularly during evenings and winter months when use without lighting would not be feasible. The current application refers to the continuation of an operational curfew of 22:00. This would permit a greater level of evening activity than that previously assessed and controlled through the original planning permission. Although the submitted information advises that lighting impacts can be appropriately managed, the Applicant has not provided a clear justification for extending the hours of operation beyond those previously permitted, particularly given that the school has stated that it does not intend to significantly increase community use of the facility.
The Bromley Biodiversity Partnership Sub-group had concerns about the increased artificial surfaces in Metropolitan Open Land, stating it's not a positive change for the site.
They noted that amenity grassland may not have the highest value for wildlife, there are many soil dwelling creatures that will not live under the sealed surface, and birds and terrestrial insects will visit the grass to feed.
They also raised concerns about bats, mentioning that Local residents have commented on bats historically using the wider site and have raised concerns about significant light pollution across the site.
The report does not specify the types of wildlife present beyond mentioning soil dwelling creatures, birds, terrestrial insects, and bats.
The existing MUGA pitch at Eltham College is described as being designed and marked out for 3x tennis courts, 3x netball courts or 3x five aside football pitches, allowing for three separate games to take place simultaneously. The proposal aimed to reconfigure this space to allow for 4 netball courts within the current MUGA footprint (compared to 3 currently). The report also mentions existing separate tennis courts and MUGA pitches to the southwest providing two separate/self-contained pitches each providing 1x full size field hockey pitch and 2x training or junior size hockey pitches and/or 2x football pitches. The existing use is primarily by pupils during the school day, with existing limited use by a holiday club and community use outside school hours. The proposal creates space for 2 additional netball courts and a reconfiguration of the existing space by removal of internal fencing to allow for 4 netball courts within the current MUGA footprint (compared to 3 currently); The proposal is to improve the quality and layout of the existing courts, particularly to support more equal access to sport for girls, in line with Sport England objectives on equality of opportunity, rather than to increase overall use or capacity; The courts would continue to be used mainly by pupils during the school day, with no increase in peak use, and no change to how the site is supervised or managed; Existing limited use by a holiday club would continue during school holidays on a similar basis as at present; The facilities are already available for community use outside school hours (evenings, weekends and holidays), and this would continue
While the report does not explicitly state the next steps or the possibility of resubmission, the refusal was based on insufficient information. Typically, in such cases, applicants can resubmit a revised application addressing the identified deficiencies.