As a general over view, the following are deemed as possible legitimate reasons for objections to planning applications -
- Loss of light or overshadowing
- Overlooking/loss of privacy
- Visual amenity (but not loss of private view)
- Adequacy of parking/loading/turning
- Highway safety
- Traffic generation
- Noise and disturbance resulting from use
- Hazardous materials
- Smells
- Loss of trees
- Effect on listed building and conservation area
- Layout and density of building
- Design, appearance and materials
- Landscaping
- Road access
- Local, strategic, regional and national planning policies
- Government circulars, orders and statutory instruments
- Disabled persons' access
- Compensation and awards of costs against the Council at public enquiries
- Proposals in the Development Plan
- Previous planning decisions (including appeal decisions)
- Nature conservation
- Archaeology
- Solar panels
However, these aren't
- The perceived loss of property value
- Private disputes between neighbours
- The loss of a view
- The impact of construction work or competition between firms
- Restrictive covenants
- Ownerships disputes over rights of way
- Fence lines etc
- Personal morals or views about the applicant.
As I suspect most of the objections would be around "Personal morals or views about the applicant" then these points/comments would not impact on the process.
As the site is already used for sports and so there wouldn't be need for a change of use on the site, it would be difficult to demonstrate the proposed development is detrimental (in the wider sense - not specify towards the academy).
With regards making noise, they do form part of the papers linked with the application but if it went before the Planning Committee they'd only get an abridged overview of the comments and only the points of objection that fall within the list of relevant objections would be included.