A resident has launched a blistering attack on the University of Bedfordshire’s proposed 3G pitch at Polhill, accusing it of “arrogance” and branding its revised plans “insulting.”
But the university says it takes concerns seriously and is ‘committed’ to working with residents.
In additional comments submitted on 26 January, following the planning committee’s decision to defer the application, the objector says the changes offer “no material improvement to the unacceptable seven days per week intolerable disruption for local residents.”
“The reports supporting the application, particularly related to noise, are deeply flawed,” the submission states.
The resident says that despite “the vast number of detailed objections”, the University has failed to “placate residents and directly address their concerns.”
“Indeed, to provide a revision that seems more concerned with hedge trimming than addressing the numerous and wide-ranging concerns of neighbours is somewhat insulting,” the objection continues.
“This arrogance is a clear demonstration of how they will no doubt ignore any complaints and concerns raised downstream if, by some horror, the application is approved.”
Revised hours
In an Operational Statement (dated 12 February) submitted after discussions with officers, the University set out revised hours:
- Monday–Friday: 9am–9pm
- Saturdays: 9am–3pm (extendable to 6pm on up to five occasions per year)
- Sundays and Bank Holidays: 9am–3pm (extendable to 6pm on up to five occasions per year)
The University says these hours represent “the ‘windows’ of possible use” and are “considerably narrower than the permitted hours of use at the adjacent pitch at Goldington Academy.”
It has also proposed free evening and weekend parking, subject to approval of a Parking Management Strategy, and committed that no “hard ball sports, such as hockey, will be played on the pitches at any time.”
The objector claims there have been “zero supporting comments for the application” and concludes that the council has “no option other than to reject the application.”
Noise is described as the central issue. The resident says existing campus activity already reaches “intolerable levels” and warns a 3G pitch would generate “far more noise, continuously… for longer and from closer.”
Concerns listed include “foul and abusive language”, “balls hitting side fencing”, spectators, and “whistles for referees etc, piercing and can make you jump.”
The objection also attacks the proposed floodlighting as “Too bright, too close”, describes the development as “ugly, plain and simple,” and calls the proposed tree planting “laughingly inadequate.”
Particular concern is raised about vulnerable adults at Poplar Tree Court, with the resident stating that placing the pitch near their boundary is “bordering on cruelty.”
Site visit
In a separate comment submitted the same day, the resident invited councillors to visit during a live match with “referee whistles being blown and foul and abusive language… not a staged, unrealistic quiet match organised by the University, but a dose of reality.”
The application’s design and access statement said a noise impact assessment concluded that predicted levels would remain below Sports England’s external amenity threshold, helped by a 1.5m earth bund and the restricted hours of use.
The threshold relates to the average noise level over an hour. It does not mean the noise will not go over 50dB – short bursts such as whistles and shouting could be louder.
A University of Bedfordshire spokesperson said: “We understand that some residents have concerns and we take those views seriously.
“The revised proposals include reduced and clearly defined hours of use, on-site parking to minimise disruption in surrounding streets, additional landscaping, and mitigation measures informed by an independent noise assessment.
“This project will deliver much-needed, high-quality sports facilities for our students and the wider local community, including schools and grassroots teams, in a safe and well-managed environment.
“We remain committed to ongoing dialogue with neighbours and to ensuring the facility is operated responsibly and in line with approved conditions, should consent be granted.”
More information can be found on the council’s planning portal, reference 25/00250/MAF. The overall consultation expiry date is Wednesday, March 4, 2026.
The application is due to return to the planning committee for a decision.
By John Guinn
Local Democracy Reporter
