After winning a £5 million property dispute, Trent Alexander-Arnold reveals Liverpool’s future intentions

The local council has given Trent Alexander-Arnold retrospective permission to keep the padel tennis court he built at his Cheshire estate without authorisation.

The £5 million mansion of Liverpool player Trent Alexander-Arnold now boasts a £50,000 padel tennis court that he built, thanks to his victory in a planning dispute.

When Raheem Sterling moved from Manchester City to Chelsea in 2022, Alexander-Arnold bought the house from him. He then erected the court in his garden without obtaining parish council approval.

Council officials looked into the noise and potential effects the court could have on the surrounding countryside, and Alexander-Arnold might have been forced to tear down the court. On the other hand, the defender can now keep the court retroactively provided he agrees to take down four floodlights in order to “prevent light pollution.”

As he approaches the last year of his contract, Alexander-Arnold has been linked to a move away from Liverpool. Real Madrid has expressed interest in signing him, but the battle shows he might not be leaving after going to such lengths to retain the court that was constructed two years ago.

“In this instance the site is well enclosed by substantial existing boundary planting to the north, south and west, so is screened from public vantage points in all directions,” noted the case officer. Therefore, there would be no exterior viewing and the physical incursion into the open countryside would be visibly contained inside the property.

“The panel court’s 130 square metre footprint, 3 metre primary height, and 4 metre maximum height for the side panels—which are made of lightweight mesh above—are likewise deemed reasonable for private usage. Additionally aiding the proposal’s integration with the current boundary treatment is its black colour.

Therefore, it is not believed that the plan would create intolerable harm to the character and appearance of the surrounding area or the larger open countryside given its relatively small scale and public screening.

“The proposal for private use and its limited size is also not considered to cause significant harm to amenity through noise/disturbance and is not considered to be significantly different in these terms to other sport/recreational uses usually found within the open countryside.”

In addition, Alexander-Arnold has employed landscapers to plant trees and hedges to function as screening for the court, given the council’s decision that the construction will have “relatively low” environmental effects.