Tennis centre shocked by Building Control fee

The planning application to install a canopy over two new courts at the St Sampson's site was approved last month.

But centre managing director Mike Watt said their celebrations were short-lived, after discovering Building Control wanted £8,000 to approve the scheme.

'They charge per square metre and this is a large enclosure – more than 500sq. m. – so it's about £8,000,' he said.

A Building Control spokesman said the fees charged were prescribed in law, so there was no discretion over what they could charge.

'The application in question relates to a commercial entity and the structure is classified, under legislation, as a building,' he said.

'The structure is not temporary in nature and involves a structural steel frame on an engineered foundation slab.'

The centre has already paid a £3,000 planning application fee.

'The Building Control fee only came to light after getting planning consent,' Mr Watt said.

'The architect was preparing the plans for Building Control, which is really a box-ticking exercise, and he asked what the fee would be. It was a bit of a surprise. So we are clearly very unhappy about the fee and they won't move on it. It's Building Control holding us up and it's very frustrating.'

He said he understood that Building Control fees did not have a separate category for recreational buildings, which has resulted in the centre facing the same charges as commercial projects.

'Clearly there's a gap somewhere in their fee structure,' he said.

'I'm sure at some point they will review it, but in the meantime it does not help us.'

The entire project is costing around £180,000, meaning the Building Control fee will be nearly 5% of the budget. Mr Watt said they simply could not justify such an expenditure and they were now appealing the charge. But the appeal will take time.

Building Control laws state that any commercial buildings, which are not storage, must be charged at £14 per sq. m.

'The fees quoted in this case are prescribed in law and we have no discretion to reduce them,' the spokesman said.

However, the project manager, chartered surveyor Gary Naftel, said he had looked into the matter and the fees were not set in stone.

'The fees were first implemented in 2009 and they have already changed them twice,' he said.

'I'm disappointed by their approach. It's a massive problem, which needs to be corrected.'

Mr Watt said they had hoped to start work in March, ready for the new facilities to open in June for the summer season. But that is looking increasingly unlikely.

He added that as the canopy was basically a rain cover, the things that Building Control would normally check, such as fire escapes and heating issues, were not applicable on this project.

'It's effectively a fabric canopy stretched over a steel frame,' he said. 'It's such a simple structure. This is rather silly.'